critical thinking goal setting

Critical Thinking: 15 Examples for Setting Performance Goals

Critical Thinking: Use these examples for setting employee performance goals. Help your employees master this skill with 5 fresh ideas that drive change.

Critical Thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally while understanding the logical connection between ideas in a reflective and independent thinking.

Critical Thinking: Set Goals for your Employees. Here are some examples:

Undertake more research on issues by seeking to find accurate and factual information
To carefully analyze and interpret information collected to draw reasonable inferences.
Learn to figure out different possible options of solving problems on a short, medium and long-term range.
Develop a strategic approach to solving problems and following through with the strategy to the end.
Properly evaluate my options by looking into all possible outcomes.
To be prepared at all times to change strategy or tact when things seem not to work.
Show more assertiveness and decisiveness when dealing with problems and coming up with solutions.
Show willingness to improve on critical thinking skill by learning new techniques.
Learn always to try to find alternative solutions to solving a particular problem.
To continue researching and studying more to get more factual facts and figures that will guide my thinking.

Critical Thinking: Improve and master this core skill with these ideas

Think clearly about a topic or issue in a more critical and objective way
Understand implications that might be part of a statement or an argument.
Distinguish any negative points or weaknesses that are part of an argument or evidence
Identify different reasons that are about a particular issue and work on them to see the results.

These articles may interest you

Critical Thinking

Developing the right mindset and skills.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

We make hundreds of decisions every day and, whether we realize it or not, we're all critical thinkers.

We use critical thinking each time we weigh up our options, prioritize our responsibilities, or think about the likely effects of our actions. It's a crucial skill that helps us to cut out misinformation and make wise decisions. The trouble is, we're not always very good at it!

In this article, we'll explore the key skills that you need to develop your critical thinking skills, and how to adopt a critical thinking mindset, so that you can make well-informed decisions.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the discipline of rigorously and skillfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions, and beliefs. You'll need to actively question every step of your thinking process to do it well.

Collecting, analyzing and evaluating information is an important skill in life, and a highly valued asset in the workplace. People who score highly in critical thinking assessments are also rated by their managers as having good problem-solving skills, creativity, strong decision-making skills, and good overall performance. [1]

Key Critical Thinking Skills

Critical thinkers possess a set of key characteristics which help them to question information and their own thinking. Focus on the following areas to develop your critical thinking skills:

Being willing and able to explore alternative approaches and experimental ideas is crucial. Can you think through "what if" scenarios, create plausible options, and test out your theories? If not, you'll tend to write off ideas and options too soon, so you may miss the best answer to your situation.

To nurture your curiosity, stay up to date with facts and trends. You'll overlook important information if you allow yourself to become "blinkered," so always be open to new information.

But don't stop there! Look for opposing views or evidence to challenge your information, and seek clarification when things are unclear. This will help you to reassess your beliefs and make a well-informed decision later. Read our article, Opening Closed Minds , for more ways to stay receptive.

Logical Thinking

You must be skilled at reasoning and extending logic to come up with plausible options or outcomes.

It's also important to emphasize logic over emotion. Emotion can be motivating but it can also lead you to take hasty and unwise action, so control your emotions and be cautious in your judgments. Know when a conclusion is "fact" and when it is not. "Could-be-true" conclusions are based on assumptions and must be tested further. Read our article, Logical Fallacies , for help with this.

Use creative problem solving to balance cold logic. By thinking outside of the box you can identify new possible outcomes by using pieces of information that you already have.

Self-Awareness

Many of the decisions we make in life are subtly informed by our values and beliefs. These influences are called cognitive biases and it can be difficult to identify them in ourselves because they're often subconscious.

Practicing self-awareness will allow you to reflect on the beliefs you have and the choices you make. You'll then be better equipped to challenge your own thinking and make improved, unbiased decisions.

One particularly useful tool for critical thinking is the Ladder of Inference . It allows you to test and validate your thinking process, rather than jumping to poorly supported conclusions.

Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset

Combine the above skills with the right mindset so that you can make better decisions and adopt more effective courses of action. You can develop your critical thinking mindset by following this process:

Gather Information

First, collect data, opinions and facts on the issue that you need to solve. Draw on what you already know, and turn to new sources of information to help inform your understanding. Consider what gaps there are in your knowledge and seek to fill them. And look for information that challenges your assumptions and beliefs.

Be sure to verify the authority and authenticity of your sources. Not everything you read is true! Use this checklist to ensure that your information is valid:

Are your information sources trustworthy ? (For example, well-respected authors, trusted colleagues or peers, recognized industry publications, websites, blogs, etc.)
Is the information you have gathered up to date ?
Has the information received any direct criticism ?
Does the information have any errors or inaccuracies ?
Is there any evidence to support or corroborate the information you have gathered?
Is the information you have gathered subjective or biased in any way? (For example, is it based on opinion, rather than fact? Is any of the information you have gathered designed to promote a particular service or organization?)

If any information appears to be irrelevant or invalid, don't include it in your decision making. But don't omit information just because you disagree with it, or your final decision will be flawed and bias.

Now observe the information you have gathered, and interpret it. What are the key findings and main takeaways? What does the evidence point to? Start to build one or two possible arguments based on what you have found.

You'll need to look for the details within the mass of information, so use your powers of observation to identify any patterns or similarities. You can then analyze and extend these trends to make sensible predictions about the future.

To help you to sift through the multiple ideas and theories, it can be useful to group and order items according to their characteristics. From here, you can compare and contrast the different items. And once you've determined how similar or different things are from one another, Paired Comparison Analysis can help you to analyze them.

The final step involves challenging the information and rationalizing its arguments.

Apply the laws of reason (induction, deduction, analogy) to judge an argument and determine its merits. To do this, it's essential that you can determine the significance and validity of an argument to put it in the correct perspective. Take a look at our article, Rational Thinking , for more information about how to do this.

Once you have considered all of the arguments and options rationally, you can finally make an informed decision.

Afterward, take time to reflect on what you have learned and what you found challenging. Step back from the detail of your decision or problem, and look at the bigger picture. Record what you've learned from your observations and experience.

Critical thinking involves rigorously and skilfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions and beliefs. It's a useful skill in the workplace and in life.

You'll need to be curious and creative to explore alternative possibilities, but rational to apply logic, and self-aware to identify when your beliefs could affect your decisions or actions.

You can demonstrate a high level of critical thinking by validating your information, analyzing its meaning, and finally evaluating the argument.

Critical Thinking Infographic

See Critical Thinking represented in our infographic: An Elementary Guide to Critical Thinking .

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Book Insights

Extreme Teaming: Lessons in Complex, Cross-Sector Leadership

Amy Edmondson and Jean-François Harvey

Who's in the Room?: How Great Leaders Structure and Manage the Teams Around Them

Add comment

Comments (1)

priyanka ghogare

Team Management

Learn the key aspects of managing a team, from building and developing your team, to working with different types of teams, and troubleshooting common problems.

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Discover something new today

Top tips for delegating.

Delegate work to your team members effectively with these top tips

Ten Dos and Don'ts of Change Conversations

Tips for tackling discussions about change

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Starting a new job: three tips for success.

Taking the stress out of settling in

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

The Science & Psychology Of Goal-Setting 101

How would you feel?

Goal-setting in psychology is an essential tool for self-motivation and self-drivenness – both at personal and professional levels. It gives meaning to our actions and the purpose of achieving something higher.

By setting goals, we get a roadmap of where we are heading to and what is the right way that would lead us there. It is a plan that holds us in perspective – the more effectively we make the plan, the better are our chances of achieving what we aim to. Rick McDaniel (2015) had quoted,

“ Goal-setters see future possibilities and the big picture. ”

Setting goals are linked with higher motivation, self-esteem, self-confidence, and autonomy (Locke & Latham, 2006), and research has established a strong connection between goal-setting and success (Matthews, 2015).

This post is all about understanding the benefits of goal-setting and implementing that knowledge in our day-to-day lives. In the following sections, we will take an in-depth look into how goal-setting influences the mind to change for the better, and contribute to making smarter decisions for ourselves.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques to create lasting behavior change.

This Article Contains:

What is goal setting a psychological definition.

The Psychology of Goal Setting

How is Goal Setting Used in Psychology?

Goal setting and positive psychology.

A Look at Goal Setting Theory
Psychological Studies and Research on Goal Setting

3 Interesting Research Findings

3 goal setting case studies, goal setting and the brain: a look at neuroscience, a take-home message.

Goal setting in psychology refers to a successful plan of action that we set for ourselves. It guides us to choose the right moves, at the right time, and in the right way. In a study conducted on working professionals, Edwin A. Locke, a pioneer in the field of goal-setting, found that individuals who had highly ambitious goals had a better performance and output rate than those who didn’t (Locke, 1996).

Frank L. Smoll , a Ph.D. and a working psychologist at the University of Washington emphasized on three essential features of goal-setting, which he called the A-B-C of goals. Although his studies focused more on athletic and sports-oriented goal-setting, the findings held for peak performers across all professions.

ABC of Goals

Smoll said that effective goals are ones that are:

A – Achievable
B – Believable
C – Committed

Goal-setting as a psychological tool for increasing productivity involves five rules or criterion, known as the S-M-A-R-T rule. George T. Doran coined this rule in 1981 in a management research paper of the Washington Power Company and it is by far one of the most popular propositions of the psychology of goals.

SMART Goals

S-M-A-R-T goals stand for:

S (Specific) – They target a particular area of functioning and focus on building it.
M (Measurable) -The results can be gauged quantitatively or at least indicated by some qualitative attributes. This helps in monitoring the progress after executing the plans.
A (Attainable/Achievable) – The goals are targeted to suitable people and are individualized. They take into account the fact that no single rule suits all, and are flexible in that regard.
R (Realistic) – They are practical and planned in a way that would be easy to implement in real life. The purpose of a smart goal is not just providing the plan, but also helping the person execute it.
T (Time-bound) – An element of time makes the goal more focused. It also provides a time frame about task achievement.

SmartER Goals

While this was the golden rule of goal-setting, researchers have also added two more constituents to it, and call it the S-M-A-R-T-E-R rule.

The adjacents include:

E (Evaluative/ethical) – The interventions and execution follow professional and personal ethics.
R (Rewarding) – The end-results of the goal-setting comes with a positive reward and brings a feeling of accomplishment to the user.

Cecil Alec Mace was the first person to carry out empirical studies on goal-setting (Carson, Carson, & Heady, 1994). His work emphasized the importance of willingness to work and indicated that the right plans could be a sure shot predictor of professional success (Mace, 1935).

Locke continued his research on goal-setting from there, and in the 1960s, came up with the explanation of the usefulness of goals for a happier and more content life (Locke, 2002).

Today, planning goals is an essential part of educational and organizational psychology. Many organizations encourage employees to undergo screening for goal-setting and use the resources to measure their productivity at work (Kleingeld, van Mierlo, & Arends, 2011).

The Psychology Of Goal Setting

Tony Robbins, a world-famous motivational speaker, and coach had said that “ Setting goals is the first step from turning the invisible to visible. ”

Studies have shown that when we train our mind to think about what we want in life and work towards reaching it, the brain automatically rewires itself to acquire the ideal self-image and makes it an essential part of our identity. If we achieve the goal, we achieve fulfillment, and if we don’t, our brain keeps nudging us until we achieve it.

Psychologists and mental health researchers associate goals with a higher predictability of success, the reasons being:

Goals involve values

Effective goals base themselves on high values and ethics. Just like the S-M-A-R-T-E-R goals, they guide the person to understand his core values before embarking upon setting goals for success. Studies have shown that the more we align our core values and principles, the more likely we are to benefit from our goal plans (Erez, 1986).

Goals bind us to reality

A practical goal plan calls for a reality check. We become aware of our strengths and weaknesses and choose actions that are in line with our potentials. For example, a good orator should set goals to flourish as a speaker, while an expressive writer must aim to succeed as an author.

Realizing our abilities and accepting them is a vital aspect of goal-setting as it makes room for introspection and helps in setting realistic expectations from ourselves.

Goals call for self-evaluation

Download 3 Free Goals Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques for lasting behavior change.

Download 3 Free Goals Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

Email Address *
Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

4 Steps To Successful Goal-Setting

To break down goal setting, start with these four steps.

1. Make a plan

The first step to successful goal-setting is a brilliant plan.

Chalking out our goals by our strengths, aspirations, and affinities is an excellent way to build a working program. The plan makes habit formation easier – we know where to focus and how to implement the actions.

2. Explore resources

The more we educate ourselves about goal-setting and its benefits, the easier it becomes for us to stick to it. We can start building our knowledge base by taking expert advice, talking to supervisors at the workplace, or participating in self-assessments.

Assessments and interactions help us realize the knowledge gaps and educate ourselves in the areas concerned.

3. Be accountable

A crucial requisite of goal-setting is accountability. We tend to perform better when someone is watching over us, for example, it is easier to cheat on a diet or skip the gym when we are doing it alone.

But the moment we pair up with others or have a trainer to guide us through the process, there are increased chances of us sticking to the goals and succeeding in them.

4. Use rewards and feedbacks

Rewarding ourselves for our efforts and achievements makes sticking to the plan more comfortable for us. Managers who regularly provide feedback to their employees and teammates have better performance in their teams than ones who don’t interact with employees about their progress.

Setting goals gives our mind the power to imagine our ideal future, the way we want to see ourselves in years to come. By gaining insight into our wants and needs, we become aware of our reality and can set reasonable expectations.

Goal-setting impacts both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and this is why most successful athletes and business professionals rely on a sound plan of action before diving into any work.

There are many instances of how goal-setting is effectively used as a psychological intervention.

For example:

Popular therapeutic practices like the CBT or Anger Management often use weekly goal planners or charts to record the progress of the clients and help them keep track of the exercises they are supposed to practice at home. Even in child therapies, counselors often use mood charts or set weekly exercises for the kid, and provide positive reinforcements to the child on accomplishing them.
Almost all educational institutions today agree that setting clear goals makes it easier for the students to realize their strengths and work on building them. It boosts their self-confidence and lets them identify the broader targets in life .
Goal-setting as a personal habit is also beneficial to hold ourselves in perspective. Personal goal-setting may be as simple as maintaining a daily to-do list or planning our career moves beforehand. As we have a clear vision of the end-goals, it becomes easier for us to advance towards them.

Types of goals

There are three main types of goals in psychology:

The Process Goals These are the ones involving the execution of plans. For example, going to the gym in the morning or taking the health supplements on time, and repeating the same action every day is a process goal. The focus is to form the habit that will ultimately lead to achievement.
The Performance Goals These goals help in tracking progress and give us a reason for continuing the hard work. For example, studying for no less than 6 hours a day or working out for at least 30 minutes per day can help us in quantifying our efforts and measuring the progress.
The Outcome Goals Outcome goals are the successful implementations of process and performance goals. They keep us in perspective and help to stay focused on the bigger picture. Examples of outcome goals may include winning a sport, losing the desired amount of weight, or scoring a top rank in school.

The E-E-E Model Of Goal-Setting

The E-E-E Model of goal-setting was mentioned in a journal published by the American Psychological Association (APA, 2017). It is a person-centered approach that describes the way a successful roadmap contributes to bringing about the change.

Author Nowack (2017). stated that goal-setting ensures success by serving three purposes:

Enlightening Us Providing meaningful insight into our abilities and weaknesses, and by helping us prioritize our goals depending on our needs.
Encouraging Us It provides the motivation and courage to implement the goals and execute the plans efficiently.
Enabling Us Goal-setting enables us to achieve the balance between our real and ideal self. By implementing the goals and succeeding from it, we regain self-confidence, social support, and can evaluate our achievements.

Goals direct our actions and open us to a host of new possibilities. They help us stick to the relevant activities and get rid of what is irrelevant for goal-satisfaction.

Martin Seligman ’s research and findings on positive psychology aimed to shift the focus of psychology from problems to solutions. His works emphasized on interventions that would increase managerial productivity and help leaders enhance their performance holistically (Luthans, 2002).

Positive psychology incorporates the principles of goal-setting in several ways:

It commits to a specific set of actions for goal-setting.
It considers individual ethics and core values before setting goals.
It aligns actions to individual capacities and character strengths.
It has space for introspection and insight into one’s thoughts, emotions, and perceptions.
It helps in setting realistic goals and expectations, thereby aiming to boost self-confidence and energy by task accomplishments.

Professor Gary P. Latham (University of Toronto) emphasized the role of positive psychology and the interconnection of it to goal-setting in his groundbreaking work on life goals and psychology. He mentioned that optimistic people have a strong sense of self, which helps them derive the motivation to set goals and extend them for self-improvement.

Positive psychology, according to Latham, intersects with goal-setting in the sense that it calls for building self-efficacy and create a sense of mastery over our internal and external environments.

Author Doug Smith (1999), in his famous book “ Make Success Measurable! A Mindbook For Setting Goals And Taking Actions ” mentioned that successful goal-setting mainly involves asking three questions to the self:

How important is the goal for us?
How confident are we about reaching and accomplishing the goal?
How consistent is the goal with our core values and beliefs?

Smith said that successful leaders and management professionals use this systematic approach when striving for goal accomplishments and use threads of positive psychology such as optimism, thought replacement, strength , and resilience .

The emerging field of positive psychology provides a stronger base for effective goal-setting and management.

A Look At Goal Setting Theory

Locke’s prime concern was to establish the power of setting accurate and measurable goals.

He believed that rather than focusing on general outcomes, professional goal-setting and management should focus on meticulousness of the tasks and address specific goals for each area of accomplishment. The goal-setting theory Locke designed, set an impetus to increased productivity and achievement.

Principles Of Locke’s Theory

Locke’s theory of goal-setting is the roadmap to today’s workplace motivation and skills to build it. In his argument, he mentioned that effective goal-setting directly contributes to productivity and increases employee satisfaction at all professional levels.

Locke believed that there are five key principles of goal-setting:

Clarity – How specific and comprehensive the goal is.
Challenge – How difficult the goal is and the degree to which it requires us to extend our abilities.
Commitment – How dedicated we are to reach the goal and what value it renders to us.
Feedback – How our achievements are perceived and recognized by others. Positive feedback increases satisfaction after achieving the target.
Complexity – The difficulty of the tasks that we need to accomplish for reaching the ultimate goal.

Core Concepts Of Goal-Setting Theory

Locke said that there are four core components of a goal that makes it useful. These are the key aspects that we should keep in mind before committing to a plan.

1. Difficulty

Difficult goals imply more significant achievements. Easy and comfortable goals are seldom productive, as we don’t have to exploit much of our abilities to achieve them.

Although while selecting a target, we may tend to shun away from choosing the harder ones, difficult goals are undoubtedly more motivating, energizing, and satisfying after accomplishment.

2. Specificity

Specific goals imply more certain task regulation. Before setting a goal plan, we must be clear to ourselves about the outcomes and which part of our personal or professional lives will the target achievement improve.

Having a vision of the result strengthens our intentions and helps to sustain focus.

3. Reward reminders

Locke emphasized the importance of following inspirational musings and motivational speeches for goal accomplishments. He said that the human mind is too used to getting reminders from its internal or external environment when it faces a lack of something.

For example, lack of food or water is triggered by feelings of hunger and thirst that motivates us to achieve the equilibrium again. But with professional targets or life goals, it is not absurd to lose motivation unless we keep reminding ourselves of why we should attain it.

4. Goal efficacy

The success of Locke’s theory owes to its cut-throat practical approach. While mentioning about optimism bias in his opinion, Locke said that we often tend to select goals that excite us temporarily.

For example, we may choose a profession by getting lured about the financial benefits of it, failing to notice the hard work that we will need to put in for enjoying the benefits. As a result, we are likely to fail motivation and lose commitment after delving into the reality of the work.

Thus, before setting goals, it is vital that we choose only the ones that are truly rewarding to us, no matter how much we need to push ourselves to achieve it.

Why the secret to success is setting the right goals – John Doerr

Psychological Studies And Research On Goal Setting

Goal-setting is an area in psychology whose roots lie in scientific data and empirical evidence. It is a flexible theory which is open to modifications according to the changing times, and yet serve the purpose of:

Maximizing success.
Minimizing failures and disappointments.
Optimizing personal abilities (Latham & Locke, 2007)

A study on the effects of goal-setting on athletic rehabilitation and training revealed that groups that followed a solid plan of action were more prepared, had higher self-efficacy, and were more organized in their approach (Evans & Hardy, 2002).

The experimental population had three groups, only one of which received the goal-setting intervention. Post-experimental measures showed there was a significant difference in the levels of spirit and motivation among the group that received the goal-setting interventions and the other two groups.

George Wilson’s study on “ Value-Centred Approach To Goal-Setting And Action Planning ” also put forth some groundbreaking revelations. He based the survey of the seven practices Seligman had mentioned in his research on positive psychology and goal-setting (Kerns, 2005).

Wilson called them ‘key takeaways’ and urged organizations to consider these seven highlights while setting up their goal-management programs:

1. Values Commitment

Wilson coined five core values using a value-based checklist . His study showed that when goal-setting focus on the core values, it increased the likelihood of achieving success from the target plan.

The five core values he mentioned were – integrity, responsibility, fairness, hope, and achievement.

2. Goals and Values Alignment

Wilson set the goals in his study based on the core values, such that each goal satisfies at least one or more of the purposes mentioned above. Results showed that the goals which were associated with the values gave more satisfaction to the participants than the ones which were not.

3. Character Strengths and Actions

Seligman’s findings strongly stated that goal-setting and achievements must take into account the character strengths of the individual.

In the absence of character alignment, there will remain a chance of selecting actions that are too easy or way too complicated for the person to accomplish. Wilson extended his study based on this finding and used the Values in Action (VIA) inventory to rule out the strengths and abilities of the participants before choosing the right goals for them.

4. Self-confidence

Positive psychology research on goal-setting spoke about how confidence and goals tend to complement each other. Wilson’s study incorporated regular self-checks for one year post the survey to examine the level of self-confidence of the respondents and determine its influences on their achievements.

5. Persistence

Frequent investigations in the form of self-assessments, interviews, or feedbacks are essential in gauging whether the participants are consistent with their targets. Seligman and his colleagues considered perseverance and consistency hugely critical for ensuring successful execution of the target plans.

6. Realistic outlook

The importance of setting realistic expectations cannot be stressed enough when talking of successful goal-setting. Wilson’s research on goal-setting encouraged participants to take the Seligman Optimism Test for gaining insight into the self-perceptions and followed three approaches to maintain an optimistic perspective in the participants:

Separating facts from negative thoughts and ruminations.
Encouraging positive self-talk among the groups.
Using at least one positive statement in each of the weekly reports where he mentioned the target plans and goals associated with it.

7. Self-resilience

Wilson suggested that measuring the Resilience Quotient ( RQ ) of participants before assigning goals to them is a great idea for optimizing success and promoting happiness (Kerns, 2005). On administering resilience scales to the respondents, the goal-setting and task assignment be came more accessible and guaranteed better outcomes.

There are even more interesting studies, and we share three interesting findings here.

1. A Study On The Interrelationships Among Employee Participation, Individual Differences, And Goal-Setting

Yukl and Latham published this research in 1978 where they explored the interconnections between goal-setting and individual personality factors.

For 10 weeks, 41 participants received goal plans that were either set by supervisors or chosen by the participants themselves, and the results revealed that:

Participants with difficult goals achieved greater success than others.
Participants with higher self-esteem did better on task accomplishments.
Participants with a greater understanding of why the goal was necessary for them had more chances of being successful with the target plans.

2. Dr. Gail Matthews’ (2015) Study On Goal-Setting

A study conducted by Dr. Gail Matthews at Dominican University sought to find evidence for claims coming out of Harvard Business School that well-planned and well-written goals impact students’ performance and achievements.

In this study, 267 participants were recruited from businesses and professional networking groups to take part. These participants were then divided into five groups:

The first group set no goals and had no concrete plans.
The second group set goals but did not prepare a plan to execute them.
The third group prepared well-defined goals and plans of action to achieve them.
The fourth group prepared well-defined goals and plans of action, then sent these to a supportive friend.
The fifth group prepared well-defined goals and plans of action, then sent these to a supportive friend, together with weekly progress reports.

Results revealed that the fifth group, who had their goals written with concrete plans of action and drew on the support of a friend to hold them accountable, accomplished significantly more than all the other groups. This study serves to highlight the benefits of writing down goals and action plans, as well as the benefits of public commitment and accountability as drivers of goal achievement and success in life.

3. A Study On Success And Goals

This was a small enterprise-oriented study that explored how goal-setting and entrepreneurial qualities affected the productivity of the employees and the overall success of the organization. Results indicated the importance of marketing abilities of the organizational head to be a significant influence in the company’s goal-setting plans (Ioniţă, 2013).

1. A Case Study By Emily van Sonnenberg

Emily VanSonnenberg (2011), a psychologist specializing in positive psychology and happiness coach, presented her case study on undergraduates to explain the importance of having goals in life.

The target group of her research was young adults who came from a non-psychology background. She mentioned about starting each session with positive interventions like brief meditation, mindfulness, and task planning, and urged her subjects to journal the tidbits of these positive interventions daily.

Over a while, Emily found that individuals who kept a detailed record of their daily goals and planned their tasks accordingly were more productive, less bored, and showed signs of higher self-contentment than others.

She further mentioned that asking questions to the self like “ What do you intend to do today? ”, or “ What do you want to achieve in life? ”, etc., can clarify our motivations and help in setting our goals more effectively.

Although her study targeted only a particular age-group, the findings are valid for people across different ages and professional backgrounds.

2. A Goal-Setting Case Study By Redmond

This case study was based on professional goal-setting and the use of S-M-A-R-T-E-R goals in achieving success (Redmond, 2011). Following the critical findings of the book ‘ Contemporary Management ’ by Jones and George, researcher Brian F. Redmond suggested the participants create smart goals for them and report their progress to the supervisors regularly (Redmond, 2011).

One participant of the study, John, received a Professional Development Plan (PDP) intending to build his potentials and maximize his achievements. The PDP allowed him to evaluate his character strengths closely and identify the areas that needed improvement.

John set his goals based on his powers and kept reporting his progress and task accomplishments to his supervisors, who kept extending and modifying the targets based on whether or not they were achieved.

This individualized case study asserted the role of setting smart goals in achieving success and building personal skills.

3. Goal-Setting Case Study By Hardin

Deedra Hardin had published a valuable collection of fascinating case studies on goal-setting and success at different organizational levels.

Out of the series of studies, one case research on the effectiveness of goal-setting in the military service is noteworthy to mention here (Hardin, 2013).

A group leader of a commander team, who was in charge of training over a hundred soldiers, had the responsibility of ensuring that his team members met the physical, systematic, and operational requirements of the top in their field. The goals that the commander set for his army focused a lot on physical fitness and set smart goals that would help his team achieve the same.

Hardin said that the reason why the commander succeeded in creating quick goals for his teams was his intuition and insight into the exact requirements for the team.

Extending the study from there, authors of the research stated that for successfully building a goal plan that can guarantee satisfaction for both the administrator and the respondent, it is vital to understand what the team precisely needs and how the goals can help them achieve so.

Furthermore, the study also indicated that goal-setting could only become successful after the results were reviewed and monitored by the authorities or the participants themselves (Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987).

17 Tools To Increase Motivation and Goal Achievement

These 17 Motivation & Goal Achievement Exercises [PDF] contain all you need to help others set meaningful goals, increase self-drive, and experience greater accomplishment and life satisfaction.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Goal-setting gives a boost to our Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) which makes us readily act on it (Granot, Stern, & Balcetis, 2017). When the goal is tricky and yet achievable, the SBP gets an enhanced spike that increases our zeal to act and achieve it.

Impossible or challenging goals, or the ones that make us question our abilities, are linked with low systolic thrust and they do not provide the spike for ready action. Extensive studies have shown how neural connections and the brain activities pump up our motivation to set and achieve goals.

For example, the Medial Prefrontal Cortex (MPFC) deals with the present orientation of the goal-setting process. The MPFC activation allows us to think about what we need to do right now to achieve our goals, and we set the targets accordingly.

If the goal seems too distant or is too future-oriented, the MPFC activation lowers significantly which is why we may lose interest in sticking to the goals or lose the vision of what might be the best ways to achieve them.

Usually, goals are the incidents that have not yet happened to us, but we want to make them happen. And since they cannot occur on their own, we follow a set of rules or a plan to ensure achievement (Balcetis & Dunning, 2010).

The sense of struggle and power testing that involves the goal-setting process is what makes it so engaging to us. For example, a primary drive or intrinsic motivation that forces us to do well on a new or challenging assignment is the ability to demonstrate and validate our skills (McClelland, 1985).

The underlying neurochemical changes that cause this motivation to keep burning is therefore vital to understand before we embark on setting the goals.

RAS And Goal Setting

Reticular Activating System (RAS) is a part of the brain that plays a crucial role in regulating our goal-setting actions. The RAS is a cluster of cells located at the base of the brain that processes all the information and sensory channels related to the things that need our attention right now.

An exciting fact about RAS activation is that it gives us signs. For example, a person whose goal is to start a family, is likely to see more couples and families around him.

This happens because of RAS activation. The RAS is aware that this is what the person is paying attention to at this very moment, and hence he chooses to register only the information related to it.

Before deciding to start a family, the RAS would naturally have filtered out any such information. The person may have seen so many couples walking past him earlier, but never really paid attention to them, until the time he decided to get married himself (Alvarez & Emory, 2006).

The reticular activation functions in two ways when it comes to goal-setting:

1. Writing goals

RAS gets activated by the simple act of putting our goals in pen and paper. Seeing our aims written in clear words before us, feeling the touch of the pen, or engaging in the thinking process of writing the targets trigger the RAS functions and ensures that we go for it.

2. Planning goals

The art of imagination is essential when it comes to goal-setting. Studies have shown that people who have the power to visualize their goals before setting their actions have a higher activation at the brain level.

Repeatedly imagining success and reminding ourselves of our targets maintains a steady stimulation in the RAS and promotes effective goal-setting (Berkman & Lieberman, 2009).

The RAS activation helps in focusing the mind to attend to only those pieces of information that are related to the goals we seek to achieve.

Neurologists working on the science of goal-setting have proved that the brain cannot distinguish between reality and imagined reality. So, when we give ourselves a picture of the goal we want to achieve, the mind starts believing it to be real.

Eventually, the brain begins driving us to take actions for making the state and hence, the goal-setting becomes a success (Berkman, 2018).

As the famous saying goes, “ Begin with the end in mind. ” The most crucial aspect of goal-setting is to build an effective plan.

If we set goals by our character strengths, core values, level of motivation, and pledge on sticking to the plan until we reach the aim, there is no way that we won’t get there.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free .

Alvarez, J. A., & Emory, E. (2006). Executive function and the frontal lobes: a meta-analytic review. Neuropsychology Review , 16 (1), 17-42.
American Psychological Association. (2017, September 27). Beyond goal setting to goal flourishing. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/pubs/highlights/spotlight/issue-101
Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2010). Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science , 21 (1), 147-152.
Berkman, E. T. (2018). The neuroscience of goals and behavior change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 70 (1), 28-44.
Berkman, E. T., & Lieberman, M. D. (2009). Using neuroscience to broaden emotion regulation: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass , 3 (4), 475-493.
Carson, P. P., Carson, K. D., & Heady, R. B. (1994). Cecil Alec Mace: The man who discovered goal-setting. International Journal of Public Administration , 17 (9), 1679-1708.
Doran, G. T. (1981). There’sa SMART way to write management’s goals and objectives. Management Review , 70 (11), 35-36.
Erez, M. (1986). The congruence of goal-setting strategies with socio-cultural values and its effect on performance. Journal of Management , 12 (4), 585-592.
Evans, L., & Hardy, L. (2002). Injury rehabilitation: A goal-setting intervention study. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport , 73 (3), 310-319.
Granot, Y., Balcetis, E., & Stern, C. (2017). Zip code of conduct: Crime rate affects legal punishment of police. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3 (2), 176-186.
Hardin, D. L. (2013). Case studies using goal-setting theory. Retrieved from https://wikispaces.psu.edu/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=118882898
Hollenbeck, J. R., & Klein, H. J. (1987). Goal commitment and the goal-setting process: Problems, prospects, and proposals for future research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72 (2), 212–220.
Ioniţă, D. (2013). Success and goals: An exploratory research in small enterprises. Procedia Economics and Finance , 6 , 503-511.
Kerns, C. D. (2005). The positive psychology approach to goal management. Graziadio Business Report , 8 (3).
Kleingeld, A., van Mierlo, H., & Arends, L. (2011). The effect of goal setting on group performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology , 96 (6), 1289-1304.
Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (2007). New developments in and directions for goal-setting research. European Psychologist , 12 (4), 290-300.
Locke, E. A. (1968). Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance , 3 (2), 157-189.
Locke, E. A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied and Preventive Psychology , 5 (2), 117-124.
Locke, E. A. (2002). Setting goals for life and happiness. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 299–312). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal-setting theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15 (5), 265-268.
Luthans, F. (2002). The need for and meaning of positive organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 23 (6), 695-706.
Mace, C. A. (1935). Incentives: Some experimental studies (Report No. 72). London, UK: Industrial Health Research Board.
Matthews, G. (2015). Goal research summary. Paper presented at the 9th Annual International Conference of the Psychology Research Unit of Athens Institute for Education and Research (ATINER) , Athens, Greece.
McClelland, D. C. (1985). How motives, skills, and values determine what people do. American Psychologist, 40 (7), 812-825.
McDaniel, R. (2015, June 30). Goal setter or problem solver? HuffPost . Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/goal-setter-or-problem-so_b_7543084
Nowack, K. (2017). Facilitating successful behavior change: Beyond goal setting to goal flourishing. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 69 (3), 153-171.
Redmond, B. F. (2011). Goal setting case study. Retrieved from https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/PSYCH484/Goal+Setting+Case+Study
Smith, D. K. (1999). Make success measurable! A mindbook-workbook for setting goals and taking action . New York, NY: Wiley.
VanSonnenberg, E. (2011, January 3). Ready, set, goals! Positive Psychology News . Retrieved from https://positivepsychologynews.com/news/emily-vansonnenberg/2011010315821
Yukl, G. A., & Latham, G. P. (1978). Interrelationships among employee participation, individual differences, goal difficulty, goal acceptance, goal instrumentality, and performance. Personnel Psychology , 31 (2), 305-323.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

It was super useful. I used this article as a reference. Thanks a lot

Incredible article! Such powerful insight on goal setting and achieving. Saving this one everywhere with reminders to review each year.

This is such a great article. I have written a concise summary of this and that shall definitely help me set up for the future. “The brain cannot distinguish between reality and imagined reality”, I Have read that many times but for the first time understood its meaning.

Awesome article, very informative reasearch behind it. This is gonna be helpful to set my goals in a better way. Thankyou.

Great article. Thanks so much.

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation

Motivation is vital to beginning and maintaining healthy behavior in the workplace, education, and beyond, and it drives us toward our desired outcomes (Zajda, 2023). [...]

SMART Goals, HARD Goals, PACT, or OKRs: What Works?

Goal setting is vital in business, education, and performance environments such as sports, yet it is also a key component of many coaching and counseling [...]

How to Assess and Improve Readiness for Change

Clients seeking professional help from a counselor or therapist are often aware they need to change yet may not be ready to begin their journey. [...]

Phone This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

3 Goal Achievement Exercises Pack

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

A Short Guide to Building Your Team’s Critical Thinking Skills

Matt Plummer

Critical thinking isn’t an innate skill. It can be learned.

Most employers lack an effective way to objectively assess critical thinking skills and most managers don’t know how to provide specific instruction to team members in need of becoming better thinkers. Instead, most managers employ a sink-or-swim approach, ultimately creating work-arounds to keep those who can’t figure out how to “swim” from making important decisions. But it doesn’t have to be this way. To demystify what critical thinking is and how it is developed, the author’s team turned to three research-backed models: The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, Pearson’s RED Critical Thinking Model, and Bloom’s Taxonomy. Using these models, they developed the Critical Thinking Roadmap, a framework that breaks critical thinking down into four measurable phases: the ability to execute, synthesize, recommend, and generate.

With critical thinking ranking among the most in-demand skills for job candidates , you would think that educational institutions would prepare candidates well to be exceptional thinkers, and employers would be adept at developing such skills in existing employees. Unfortunately, both are largely untrue.

Matt Plummer (@mtplummer) is the founder of Zarvana, which offers online programs and coaching services to help working professionals become more productive by developing time-saving habits. Before starting Zarvana, Matt spent six years at Bain & Company spin-out, The Bridgespan Group, a strategy and management consulting firm for nonprofits, foundations, and philanthropists.

Partner Center

Our Mission

Thinking Critically About Goal Setting

A five-step process can help teachers and administrators collaborate effectively with students on setting and achieving goals.

As educators, our efforts center on helping others grow and develop. This means that we have ambitious goals for our students, colleagues, and communities. While we often have more direct control over making progress on our personal goals, helping others achieve ambitious goals is often part of what makes our experiences as teachers and leaders impactful and meaningful.

Just because we dream big for others doesn’t mean those dreams will become a reality. Ambitious goals require strategic plans. When our work is centered on the development of others, we can fall into the trap of being too narrowly guided by our own values and perspectives, and, as a result, fail to acknowledge and honor the very people we’re trying to serve.

The WOOP framework—wish, outcome, obstacle, plan—is a psychologically grounded strategy for setting and working towards goals. Inspired by this strategy as well as continuous improvement processes and critical perspectives, we propose a five-step process to show how educators and leaders can turn their goals into action, while also thinking more strategically and critically about decisions along the way.

Step 1: Set the Goal

Educators constantly set different types of goals for students, colleagues, and communities, including academic and social and emotional goals for students or professional goals for colleagues. For example, as teachers, we may have a goal for students to build their collaborative mindsets and skills. As leaders, we may aim to cultivate a more collaborative culture among our teaching staff.

When setting a goal, it’s important to consider the “why” behind it. Why is collaboration important? Whose perspectives and priorities does this goal reflect, and whose does it overlook? Nobody appreciates having goals forced upon them. We feel respected and seen when we feel ownership over goals as well as the process through which they were established. Therefore, as teachers and leaders, we can work to co-construct goals with those whom they directly affect.

Step 2: Visualize the Outcome

While our goals may start off broad, it’s important to eventually get more specific. Visualize how the goal is to be achieved. What do you see and hear? Returning to the example in Step 1, what does it look and sound like for students to collaborate, or for teachers to embrace a collaborative culture?

It’s also important to investigate where our visions of success come from. Consider, for instance, how your own identities, background, and experiences shape how you think about collaboration. For some, collaboration may look like efficient delegation of tasks where every student carries their own weight. For others, it may be more about disrupting inequitable patterns of participation by creating opportunities for everyone to contribute their unique perspectives and experiences in service of generating new ideas and insights. Engaging in clarifying discussions with students and colleagues helps build a common vision.

Step 3: Identify the Successes and Obstacles

To turn your vision into reality, begin by looking for the bright spots. Recognizing existing successes not only honors the efforts and strides that have already been made but also boosts motivation and confidence in our ability to achieve goals. Ask yourself: Which student or teacher groups are successfully navigating the challenges of collaboration, and what, specifically, has helped them do so?

Next, identify the obstacles. They might be personal or interpersonal, such as nervousness about sharing an opinion in a group setting, and also structural, like physical or technical constraints that make it difficult for people to find time and space to work together. Be sure to ask others what obstacles they’re seeing and experiencing, too. Different people are likely to have different ideas about what’s really getting in the way.

Consider how you yourself—as a teacher and leader—may be both a support and an obstacle to the goal, as well. You may realize, for instance, that your own discomfort with uncertainty and giving students choice often leads you to design teacher-led rather than student-centered, collaborative activities. While it can take courage to explore how you might be an obstacle, it’s an essential step if you are serious about helping facilitate real change.

Step 4: Create a Plan

Effective plans include strategies for building on existing successes as well as addressing the barriers that get in the way.

To build on successes, consider the conditions that supported them and how you can replicate or scale those factors. For example, for a particular teaching team that has a rich history of engaged and equitable collaboration, explore ways to re-create the conditions that made it possible. You might discover that these teachers share a common planning period, have had opportunities to build trust and relationships over time, or have classrooms that are physically close to each other.

At the same time, consider how to effectively address the barriers. You may, for instance, discover that your students’ perceptions of each other—who is “smart” and who is a “leader”—are preventing effective collaboration and equitable participation. To address these obstacles, you can create a plan to design group-worthy tasks that provide students with multiple entry points to learning and implement status interventions to actively disrupt status hierarchies in your classroom.

Step 5: Collect Data, Reflect, and Try Again

Your plan is like a hypothesis; it’s your best guess about what will get you and others closer to the established goal. As you implement your plan, treat it like an experiment. How do things begin to unfold? Think about data that you can collect along the way to round out your observations and check your own perceptions of what is happening. For example, you might create a survey asking your students or teachers how effectively they feel their teams are collaborating and how respected they feel by their peers.

With the data in hand, take time to reflect on what you’ve learned. What worked well, and where did your plan fall short? Adjust your plan based on what you’ve learned and try again.

While these steps are laid out in a linear fashion, you’re likely to jump back and forth through this process as you clarify or redefine your goal, gain more perspectives from those experiencing successes or challenges, and try out different plans.

Developing Critical Thinking

Posted January 10, 2018
By Iman Rastegari

In a time where deliberately false information is continually introduced into public discourse, and quickly spread through social media shares and likes, it is more important than ever for young people to develop their critical thinking. That skill, says Georgetown professor William T. Gormley, consists of three elements: a capacity to spot weakness in other arguments, a passion for good evidence, and a capacity to reflect on your own views and values with an eye to possibly change them. But are educators making the development of these skills a priority?

"Some teachers embrace critical thinking pedagogy with enthusiasm and they make it a high priority in their classrooms; other teachers do not," says Gormley, author of the recent Harvard Education Press release The Critical Advantage: Developing Critical Thinking Skills in School . "So if you are to assess the extent of critical-thinking instruction in U.S. classrooms, you’d find some very wide variations." Which is unfortunate, he says, since developing critical-thinking skills is vital not only to students' readiness for college and career, but to their civic readiness, as well.

"It's important to recognize that critical thinking is not just something that takes place in the classroom or in the workplace, it's something that takes place — and should take place — in our daily lives," says Gormley.

In this edition of the Harvard EdCast, Gormley looks at the value of teaching critical thinking, and explores how it can be an important solution to some of the problems that we face, including "fake news."

About the Harvard EdCast

The Harvard EdCast is a weekly series of podcasts, available on the Harvard University iT unes U page, that features a 15-20 minute conversation with thought leaders in the field of education from across the country and around the world. Hosted by Matt Weber and co-produced by Jill Anderson, the Harvard EdCast is a space for educational discourse and openness, focusing on the myriad issues and current events related to the field.

An education podcast that keeps the focus simple: what makes a difference for learners, educators, parents, and communities

Roots of the School Gardening Movement

Student-centered learning, reading and the common core.

Thinking About Kahneman’s Contribution to Critical Thinking

A nobel laureate on the importance of 'thinking slow.'.

Updated April 11, 2024 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

Kahneman won a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for his work.
He found that people are often irrational about economics.

During my Ph.D. studies, I recall focusing on reconceptualising what we know of as critical thinking to include reflective judgment (not jumping to conclusions and taking your time in your decision-making to consider the nature limits, and certainty of knowing) on par with the commonly accepted skills and dispositions components. The importance of reflective judgment wasn’t a particularly novel idea – a good deal of research on reflective judgment and similar processes akin to critical thinking had already been conducted (see King and Kitchener, 1994; Kuhn, 1999; 2000; Stanovich, 1999). However, reflective judgment – as opposed to intuitive judgment – didn’t seem to have ‘the presence’ in the discussion of critical thinking that it does today.

The same month I submitted my Ph.D. back in 2011, a book was released that massively helped to accomplish what I had been working to help facilitate – changing the terrain of thought surrounding critical thinking: Thinking, Fast, and Slow . Its author, Daniel Kahneman, passed away a couple of weeks ago at age 90. Psychology students will likely recognise the name associated with Amos Tversky and their classic work together in the 1970s on the availability, representativeness, and anchoring and adjustment heuristics (for example, Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). Indeed, such heuristics, alongside the affect heuristic (Kahneman and Frederick, 2002; Slovic and colleagues, 2002) play a large role in how we think about thinking and barriers to critical thought. In 2002, Kahneman won a Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics for his work on prospect theory concerning loss aversion and people’s often irrational approach to economics. Indeed, Kahneman’s resume is full of awards and achievements.

However, the accomplishment I will remember him best for is the publication of Thinking, Fast, and Slow and its contribution to the field of critical thinking. Funny enough, I don’t recall the term, critical thinking being used very often in the book, if at all – and I read it two or three times. No, critical thinking was not the focus of his book; rather system 1 (fast) and 2 (slow) thinking (see also Stanovich, 1999) – intuitive and reflective judgment. Not only did this book put into the spotlight many of the mechanics of reflective judgment for fellow academics and researchers of cognitive psychology, it also did so l for non-academic audiences – becoming a New York Times bestseller. Moreover, it won the Los Angeles Times Book Award for Current Interest, and the National Academy of Sciences Communication Award for Best Book (both in 2011). Good thinking was cool again in popular culture.

In the critical thinking literature, reflective judgment – regardless of what you want to call it (for example, system 2 thinking, epistemological understanding, ‘taking your time’) – is becoming more accepted as a core component of critical thinking. The field of critical thinking research and psychology more broadly, owes Kahneman a debt of gratitude for his contributions in helping shine a light on the importance of ‘thinking slow’. Thank you .

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow . 2UK: Penguin.

Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics and biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment , 49 (49-81), 74.

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults. CA: Jossey-Bass.

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist, 39 (1), 5–15.

Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher , 28 (2), 16-46.

Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 9 (5), 178-181.

Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). Rational actors or rational fools: Implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics. The Journal of Socio-economics , 31 (4), 329-342.

Stanovich, K.E. (1999) Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, Erlbaum.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science , 185 (4157), 1124-1131.

Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Technological University of the Shannon in Athlone, Ireland.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Teletherapy
United States
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Therapy Center NEW
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

Coronavirus Disease 2019
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

Search Search Search …
Search Search …

Strategic Thinking and Goal Setting: A Clear Path to Success

Strategic thinking and goal setting are crucial skills in today’s fast-paced business world. The ability to look at the big picture, analyze internal and external factors, and set clear objectives that drive an organization forward can significantly improve performance and overall success. Developing these skills involves understanding the processes of strategic planning and goal setting, as well as consistently implementing these practices in daily operations.

Given the ever-changing landscape of global markets, it is essential for leaders to adapt and be proactive in their planning. A well-designed strategic plan can help businesses remain competitive by identifying new opportunities, anticipating potential challenges, and devising strategies to address them. Goal setting, on the other hand, provides a clear path for teams to follow, ensures that resources are allocated efficiently, and enables progress tracking.

By incorporating strategic thinking and goal setting into daily operations, business leaders and teams can more effectively navigate the complexities of their industries and make informed decisions that align with their overall mission and values. Doing so will ultimately contribute to the long-term growth and success of an organization.

Key Takeaways

Strategic thinking and goal setting are essential skills for business leaders
A well-designed strategic plan helps identify opportunities and anticipate challenges
Incorporating these practices in daily operations leads to better decision-making and long-term growth.

Understanding Strategic Thinking and Goal Setting

What is Strategic Thinking?

Strategic thinking is a process that involves analyzing situations, creating insights, and developing plans to achieve long-term objectives. It is a critical skill for leaders, as it enables them to identify opportunities, anticipate challenges, and craft approaches that can drive their organization’s effectiveness and success. Strategic thinking involves communicating complex ideas , collaborating with internal and external stakeholders, building consensus, and ensuring everyone is aligned and working toward shared goals.

Some qualities of strategic thinkers include:

Long-term focus
Creative problem solving
Adaptability
Analytical skills
Effective communication

Defining Strategic Goals

Strategic goals are the specific objectives that an organization, team, or individual sets to guide their actions towards achieving a vision or desired outcome. These goals should be quantifiable or qualitative , meaning they can be measured and tracked using various data points, such as financial figures or productivity rates. Defining strategic goals involves considering the organization’s mission, vision, values, and current position, as well as external factors that may impact future success.

When setting strategic goals, it’s essential to consider the following elements:

Relevance: Goals must align with the organization’s mission, vision, and values.
Specificity: Goals should be clear and well-defined, addressing particular areas for improvement or growth.
Measurable: It should be possible to track progress and success using defined metrics.
Time-bound: Goals should have a specific time frame for completion, allowing for assessment and adjustments as needed.
Challenging: Goals should push the organization, team, or individual to overcome obstacles and achieve growth.

By developing strategic thinking skills and setting strategic goals, leaders can enhance their effectiveness, foster a culture of continuous improvement, and navigate their organization towards a successful future.

The Importance of Strategic Thinking in Business

Driving Organization’s Growth

Strategic thinking plays a crucial role in driving an organization’s growth. By applying innovative and forward-focused approaches to business planning, companies can develop strategies with a higher chance of success . It enables them to identify areas for improvement, expand into new markets, and cultivate a strong organizational culture. A well-thought-out strategy can foster long-term growth and help achieve the company’s objectives.

Enabling Effective Communication

An essential aspect of strategic thinking is its ability to improve communication across the organization. By creating a single, forward-focused vision , employees and shareholders can better understand the company’s goals and their role in achieving them. With a clear strategy in place, leaders can articulate their expectations and align the workforce with the organization’s mission. Moreover, effective communication promotes collaboration and teamwork, empowering employees to contribute their ideas and skills towards the company’s success.

Leveraging Opportunities and Threats

Strategic thinking involves analyzing a wide range of information, including market conditions, emerging trends, and internal resource allocation. This analysis allows organizations to identify opportunities and threats and adapt their strategies accordingly. By anticipating potential challenges and leveraging opportunities, businesses can make informed decisions, maximize resources, and build resilience.

To better illustrate the connection between strategic thinking and organizational success, consider the following table:

In conclusion, strategic thinking is a vital skill for businesses, as it drives growth, enhances communication, and empowers organizations to navigate opportunities and threats effectively. By incorporating strategic thinking into their processes, companies can increase their chances of success, secure a competitive edge, and maintain a strong position in the market.

The Process of Setting Strategic Goals

Identifying vision and mission.

Before diving into the process of setting strategic goals, it is crucial to establish a clear vision and mission for the organization. The vision serves as the ultimate destination or aspiration that an organization seeks to achieve, while the mission outlines the purpose and core values that will guide the organization on its journey. These two elements are the foundation of a solid strategic plan and will shape the direction and priorities moving forward.

Establishing Priorities

After the vision and mission are defined, the next step is to prioritize the issues and areas that need to be addressed. This can be done by conducting a thorough analysis of the organization’s current state, challenges, and available resources . The analysis will help determine which areas require the most immediate attention, and which are secondary or long-term concerns. Once the priorities are set, they will guide the development of the strategic goals and objectives.

Creating Actionable and Measurable Goals

The final step in setting strategic goals is to create actionable and measurable objectives that are directly related to the established priorities. These goals should be specific, attainable, and time-bound, with clear metrics to track progress and success.

A useful method for developing actionable and measurable goals is the SMART criteria:

S pecific: Goals should be clear, concise, and targeted.
M easurable: Goals should have quantifiable metrics that allow for tracking progress and evaluating success.
A ttainable: Goals should be realistic and achievable, considering the available resources and constraints.
R elevant: Goals should align with the organization’s vision, mission, and priorities.
T ime-bound: Goals should have a defined timeframe for completion.

An example of a SMART goal for a company looking to expand its market reach could be: “Increase market share in X, Y, and Z markets by 15% within three years by leveraging targeted marketing campaigns and strategic partnerships.” This goal is specific, measurable, attainable, directly aligned with the company’s growth priorities, and time-bound.

It’s important to involve key stakeholders and team members during the process of setting strategic goals, as they can provide valuable insights and contribute to creating a well-rounded strategic plan. Once the goals are set, the organization should work towards achieving them in a systematic manner, consistently reviewing and adjusting the plan as needed to ensure continued success.

Implementing Strategic Thinking in Daily Operations

Application in hr and marketing.

Incorporating strategic thinking into daily operations can significantly impact the success of Human Resources (HR) and Marketing departments. For HR, it ensures that the organization attracts and retains top talent, aligns employee goals with the company’s vision, and fosters a culture of innovation. In marketing, a strategic mindset helps create targeted campaigns, identify market trends, and tailor messaging to the appropriate audience.

HR Strategy:

Talent Acquisition : Develop a plan to attract high-quality candidates with required skillsets.
Performance Management : Align employee goals with organizational objectives.
Organizational Culture : Foster an environment that encourages creative thinking and innovation.

Marketing Strategy:

Targeted Campaigns : Design marketing initiatives to engage the right audience.
Market Trends Analysis : Evaluate emerging patterns and anticipate changes in consumer preferences.
Message Tailoring : Customize communications to align with audience needs and interests.

New Projects and Innovation

Strategic thinking also plays a crucial role in New Projects and Innovation . Following a structured approach for innovation ensures that the organization continues to stay relevant and competitive in the market:

Idea Generation : Encourage employees to suggest innovative solutions and approaches.
Project Prioritization : Evaluate and prioritize projects based on their potential impact.
Resource Allocation : Assign necessary resources, including budgets and personnel, to the selected projects.
Project Execution : Implement the chosen projects and monitor progress.

Online Strategy Courses and Coaching

To facilitate the development of strategic thinking skills, organizations can invest in Online Strategy Courses and Coaching for their employees. These educational resources offer practical insights and guidance on nurturing a strategic mindset:

Online courses : Enroll employees in online courses focusing on strategic thinking, planning, and implementation.
Webinars : Participate in industry-specific webinars to gain insights into strategic trends and best practices.
Workshops : Organize workshops with expert facilitators to provide hands-on guidance and feedback to employees.
Coaching : Engage external consultants or in-house coaches to help employees develop and refine their strategic thinking abilities.

By integrating strategic thinking into daily operations, organizations can better navigate challenges and thrive in a competitive marketplace. Implementing these approaches across HR, marketing, new projects, and innovation enables companies to realize their full potential while fostering a culture of strategic excellence.

Evaluating Progress and Success of Strategic Goals

To ensure the success and effectiveness of strategic goals, it is essential to evaluate progress regularly. This evaluation can be achieved through the use of key performance indicators (KPIs) and objectives & key results (OKRs), financial statements analysis, and assessing feedback and employee satisfaction.

Use of KPIs and OKRs

KPIs are quantifiable measurements that show how well a company is achieving its strategic goals. They provide insight into the company’s progress by tracking performance in various areas. OKRs, on the other hand, are a management framework that defines objectives and aligns key results to measure the achievement of those objectives. By implementing KPIs and OKRs , companies can track their progress and make adjustments as needed. These metrics can be organized into a table for easy reference:

Financial Statements

Financial statements provide an excellent resource for evaluating a company’s success in achieving its strategic goals. Balance sheets, income statements, and cash flow statements can all be used to gauge the financial health of a business and its progress towards specific objectives. By analyzing these various components, companies can determine whether their strategic goals are contributing to growth, profitability, and overall financial stability.

Feedback and Employee Satisfaction

Lastly, feedback and employee satisfaction play essential roles in evaluating the success of strategic goals. By soliciting feedback from employees, customers, and stakeholders, organizations can identify areas for improvement and gain insights into the effectiveness of their strategies. Moreover, employee satisfaction can serve as a barometer for the overall health of the organization. A company with satisfied employees is more likely to be successful in achieving its strategic objectives and maintaining a positive work environment. Organizations can regularly conduct surveys and focus group discussions to gather qualitative data on employee sentiment and adjust their strategies accordingly.

By employing these evaluation methods, businesses can effectively monitor their progress towards strategic goals and make necessary adjustments for continued growth and success.

Strategic Thinking vs Non-Strategic Thinking: Understanding the Key Differences

Strategic thinking and non-strategic thinking are two different approaches that individuals and organizations can adopt in their decision-making processes. While they each […]

Why is Strategic Thinking Important for Effective Decision-Making?

Strategic thinking is the process of developing a vision for the future and understanding the steps necessary to achieve that vision. It […]

What Why How: A Framework for Strategic Thinking Unveiled

Strategic thinking is an invaluable skill set in the business world, allowing individuals to plan effectively, foresee obstacles, and create opportunities that […]

How to Make Strategic Thinking a Habit: A Concise Guide for Success

Strategic thinking is an essential skill that enables professionals to make informed decisions, navigate the complexities of their industries, and adapt to […]

Critical and creative thinking (executive functioning)

Goal setting

Goals help students to understand expectations and plan where to focus their time and attention. Setting manageable goals creates an opportunity for achievement and can be used to break up a larger task.

Explore Practices

Paying attention.

Division: Junior / Intermediate

Purpose: To help students become better problem solvers and become better judges of what and how they learn

Small goals

Division: Primary / Junior / Intermediate

Purpose: To help students develop goal-setting skills and understand that goals have lots of smaller steps

Or, view all practices and use filters to find what you need

What can we help you find?

Critical & Creative Thinking - OER & More Resources: Creating goals

Self evaluation
Creating goals
Creating personal mission statement
Creative Thinking
Problem Solving
IDEAL problem solving
CRITICAL THINKING
Critical Thinking Tips
Logic Terms
Logic Traps
Free OER Textbooks
More Thinking: OER
Ethics - OER Textbooks
Evidence-Based Critical Thinking
BELIEFS & BIAS
Limits of Perception
Reality & Assumptions
Stereotypes & Race
MAKING YOUR CASE
Argument (OER)
Inductive Arguments
Information Literacy: Be Savvy about your Sources
Persuasive Speaking (OER)
Philosophy & Thinking
WiPhi Philosophy Project
Browse All Guides
SMART Goals - Quick Overview

Compose personal goals for - thinking skills improvement

S pecific M easurable A chievable R ealistic T ime-based

Creating SMART Goals (umassd.edu)
Setting “SMART” Goals and Brainstorming an Action Plan
Writing S.M.A.R.T. Goals

Formulate a set of customized personal goals for - life and work

Goal Setting and Timelines
Personal Goal Setting Planning to Live Your Life Your Way

Films on Demand: Goal Setting and Action Planning - Full Video (28:19)

<< Previous: Self evaluation
Next: Creating personal mission statement >>
Last Updated: Mar 13, 2024 3:04 PM
URL: https://library.fvtc.edu/Thinking

About Us • Contact Us • FVTC Terms of Service • Sitemap FVTC Privacy Statement • FVTC Library Services Accessibility Statement DISCLAIMER: Any commercial mentions on our website are for instructional purposes only. Our guides are not a substitute for professional legal or medical advice. Fox Valley Technical College • Library Services • 1825 N. Bluemound Drive • Room G113 Appleton, WI 54912-2277 • United States • (920) 735-5653 © 2024 • Fox Valley Technical College • All Rights Reserved.

The https://library.fvtc.edu/ pages are hosted by SpringShare. Springshare Privacy Policy.

High School Admission Test: Parenting Tips After Postponement

by Lemi-Ola Erinkitola | Oct 20, 2023 | Academic Goal Setting , Academic Support , HSAT Test , Test Preparation , Test Strategies , tutoring

Puzzle Play: Playing with Palindromes

by Lemi-Ola Erinkitola | Feb 2, 2022 | Academic Goal Setting , spelling , Uncategorized , Vocabulary

How to Measure Your Child’s Success Without Testing

by Lemi-Ola Erinkitola | Oct 11, 2021 | Academic Achievement , Academic Goal Setting , Kindergarten Readiness , Parent tips , Standardized Testing , Test Preparation , Test Strategies

How to Improve Your Child’s Handwriting Skills

by Lemi-Ola Erinkitola | Jan 22, 2021 | Academic Achievement , Academic Goal Setting , handwriting , Homework Help , Learning Styles , Test Preparation , Test Strategies

Academic Goal Setting by Grade Level

by Lemi-Ola Erinkitola | Jan 15, 2021 | Academic Achievement , Academic Goal Setting , Gifted & Talented

Table of Contents
New in this Archive
Chronological
Editorial Information
About the SEP
Editorial Board
How to Cite the SEP
Special Characters
Support the SEP
PDFs for SEP Friends
Make a Donation
SEPIA for Libraries
Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms for thinking carefully, and the thinking components on which they focus. Its adoption as an educational goal has been recommended on the basis of respect for students’ autonomy and preparing students for success in life and for democratic citizenship. “Critical thinkers” have the dispositions and abilities that lead them to think critically when appropriate. The abilities can be identified directly; the dispositions indirectly, by considering what factors contribute to or impede exercise of the abilities. Standardized tests have been developed to assess the degree to which a person possesses such dispositions and abilities. Educational intervention has been shown experimentally to improve them, particularly when it includes dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring. Controversies have arisen over the generalizability of critical thinking across domains, over alleged bias in critical thinking theories and instruction, and over the relationship of critical thinking to other types of thinking.

2.1 Dewey’s Three Main Examples

2.2 dewey’s other examples, 2.3 further examples, 2.4 non-examples, 3. the definition of critical thinking, 4. its value, 5. the process of thinking critically, 6. components of the process, 7. contributory dispositions and abilities, 8.1 initiating dispositions, 8.2 internal dispositions, 9. critical thinking abilities, 10. required knowledge, 11. educational methods, 12.1 the generalizability of critical thinking, 12.2 bias in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, 12.3 relationship of critical thinking to other types of thinking, other internet resources, related entries.

Use of the term ‘critical thinking’ to describe an educational goal goes back to the American philosopher John Dewey (1910), who more commonly called it ‘reflective thinking’. He defined it as

active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it, and the further conclusions to which it tends. (Dewey 1910: 6; 1933: 9)

and identified a habit of such consideration with a scientific attitude of mind. His lengthy quotations of Francis Bacon, John Locke, and John Stuart Mill indicate that he was not the first person to propose development of a scientific attitude of mind as an educational goal.

In the 1930s, many of the schools that participated in the Eight-Year Study of the Progressive Education Association (Aikin 1942) adopted critical thinking as an educational goal, for whose achievement the study’s Evaluation Staff developed tests (Smith, Tyler, & Evaluation Staff 1942). Glaser (1941) showed experimentally that it was possible to improve the critical thinking of high school students. Bloom’s influential taxonomy of cognitive educational objectives (Bloom et al. 1956) incorporated critical thinking abilities. Ennis (1962) proposed 12 aspects of critical thinking as a basis for research on the teaching and evaluation of critical thinking ability.

Since 1980, an annual international conference in California on critical thinking and educational reform has attracted tens of thousands of educators from all levels of education and from many parts of the world. Also since 1980, the state university system in California has required all undergraduate students to take a critical thinking course. Since 1983, the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking has sponsored sessions in conjunction with the divisional meetings of the American Philosophical Association (APA). In 1987, the APA’s Committee on Pre-College Philosophy commissioned a consensus statement on critical thinking for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (Facione 1990a). Researchers have developed standardized tests of critical thinking abilities and dispositions; for details, see the Supplement on Assessment . Educational jurisdictions around the world now include critical thinking in guidelines for curriculum and assessment. Political and business leaders endorse its importance.

For details on this history, see the Supplement on History .

2. Examples and Non-Examples

Before considering the definition of critical thinking, it will be helpful to have in mind some examples of critical thinking, as well as some examples of kinds of thinking that would apparently not count as critical thinking.

Dewey (1910: 68–71; 1933: 91–94) takes as paradigms of reflective thinking three class papers of students in which they describe their thinking. The examples range from the everyday to the scientific.

Transit : “The other day, when I was down town on 16th Street, a clock caught my eye. I saw that the hands pointed to 12:20. This suggested that I had an engagement at 124th Street, at one o'clock. I reasoned that as it had taken me an hour to come down on a surface car, I should probably be twenty minutes late if I returned the same way. I might save twenty minutes by a subway express. But was there a station near? If not, I might lose more than twenty minutes in looking for one. Then I thought of the elevated, and I saw there was such a line within two blocks. But where was the station? If it were several blocks above or below the street I was on, I should lose time instead of gaining it. My mind went back to the subway express as quicker than the elevated; furthermore, I remembered that it went nearer than the elevated to the part of 124th Street I wished to reach, so that time would be saved at the end of the journey. I concluded in favor of the subway, and reached my destination by one o’clock.” (Dewey 1910: 68-69; 1933: 91-92)

Ferryboat : “Projecting nearly horizontally from the upper deck of the ferryboat on which I daily cross the river is a long white pole, having a gilded ball at its tip. It suggested a flagpole when I first saw it; its color, shape, and gilded ball agreed with this idea, and these reasons seemed to justify me in this belief. But soon difficulties presented themselves. The pole was nearly horizontal, an unusual position for a flagpole; in the next place, there was no pulley, ring, or cord by which to attach a flag; finally, there were elsewhere on the boat two vertical staffs from which flags were occasionally flown. It seemed probable that the pole was not there for flag-flying.

“I then tried to imagine all possible purposes of the pole, and to consider for which of these it was best suited: (a) Possibly it was an ornament. But as all the ferryboats and even the tugboats carried poles, this hypothesis was rejected. (b) Possibly it was the terminal of a wireless telegraph. But the same considerations made this improbable. Besides, the more natural place for such a terminal would be the highest part of the boat, on top of the pilot house. (c) Its purpose might be to point out the direction in which the boat is moving.

“In support of this conclusion, I discovered that the pole was lower than the pilot house, so that the steersman could easily see it. Moreover, the tip was enough higher than the base, so that, from the pilot's position, it must appear to project far out in front of the boat. Morevoer, the pilot being near the front of the boat, he would need some such guide as to its direction. Tugboats would also need poles for such a purpose. This hypothesis was so much more probable than the others that I accepted it. I formed the conclusion that the pole was set up for the purpose of showing the pilot the direction in which the boat pointed, to enable him to steer correctly.” (Dewey 1910: 69-70; 1933: 92-93)

Bubbles : “In washing tumblers in hot soapsuds and placing them mouth downward on a plate, bubbles appeared on the outside of the mouth of the tumblers and then went inside. Why? The presence of bubbles suggests air, which I note must come from inside the tumbler. I see that the soapy water on the plate prevents escape of the air save as it may be caught in bubbles. But why should air leave the tumbler? There was no substance entering to force it out. It must have expanded. It expands by increase of heat, or by decrease of pressure, or both. Could the air have become heated after the tumbler was taken from the hot suds? Clearly not the air that was already entangled in the water. If heated air was the cause, cold air must have entered in transferring the tumblers from the suds to the plate. I test to see if this supposition is true by taking several more tumblers out. Some I shake so as to make sure of entrapping cold air in them. Some I take out holding mouth downward in order to prevent cold air from entering. Bubbles appear on the outside of every one of the former and on none of the latter. I must be right in my inference. Air from the outside must have been expanded by the heat of the tumbler, which explains the appearance of the bubbles on the outside. But why do they then go inside? Cold contracts. The tumbler cooled and also the air inside it. Tension was removed, and hence bubbles appeared inside. To be sure of this, I test by placing a cup of ice on the tumbler while the bubbles are still forming outside. They soon reverse” (Dewey 1910: 70–71; 1933: 93–94).

Dewey (1910, 1933) sprinkles his book with other examples of critical thinking. We will refer to the following.

Weather : A man on a walk notices that it has suddenly become cool, thinks that it is probably going to rain, looks up and sees a dark cloud obscuring the sun, and quickens his steps (1910: 6–10; 1933: 9–13).

Disorder : A man finds his rooms on his return to them in disorder with his belongings thrown about, thinks at first of burglary as an explanation, then thinks of mischievous children as being an alternative explanation, then looks to see whether valuables are missing, and discovers that they are (1910: 82–83; 1933: 166–168).

Typhoid : A physician diagnosing a patient whose conspicuous symptoms suggest typhoid avoids drawing a conclusion until more data are gathered by questioning the patient and by making tests (1910: 85–86; 1933: 170).

Blur : A moving blur catches our eye in the distance, we ask ourselves whether it is a cloud of whirling dust or a tree moving its branches or a man signaling to us, we think of other traits that should be found on each of those possibilities, and we look and see if those traits are found (1910: 102, 108; 1933: 121, 133).

Suction pump : In thinking about the suction pump, the scientist first notes that it will draw water only to a maximum height of 33 feet at sea level and to a lesser maximum height at higher elevations, selects for attention the differing atmospheric pressure at these elevations, sets up experiments in which the air is removed from a vessel containing water (when suction no longer works) and in which the weight of air at various levels is calculated, compares the results of reasoning about the height to which a given weight of air will allow a suction pump to raise water with the observed maximum height at different elevations, and finally assimilates the suction pump to such apparently different phenomena as the siphon and the rising of a balloon (1910: 150–153; 1933: 195–198).

Diamond : A passenger in a car driving in a diamond lane reserved for vehicles with at least one passenger notices that the diamond marks on the pavement are far apart in some places and close together in others. Why? The driver suggests that the reason may be that the diamond marks are not needed where there is a solid double line separating the diamond line from the adjoining lane, but are needed when there is a dotted single line permitting crossing into the diamond lane. Further observation confirms that the diamonds are close together when a dotted line separates the diamond lane from its neighbour, but otherwise far apart.

Rash : A woman suddenly develops a very itchy red rash on her throat and upper chest. She recently noticed a mark on the back of her right hand, but was not sure whether the mark was a rash or a scrape. She lies down in bed and thinks about what might be causing the rash and what to do about it. About two weeks before, she began taking blood pressure medication that contained a sulfa drug, and the pharmacist had warned her, in view of a previous allergic reaction to a medication containing a sulfa drug, to be on the alert for an allergic reaction; however, she had been taking the medication for two weeks with no such effect. The day before, she began using a new cream on her neck and upper chest; against the new cream as the cause was mark on the back of her hand, which had not been exposed to the cream. She began taking probiotics about a month before. She also recently started new eye drops, but she supposed that manufacturers of eye drops would be careful not to include allergy-causing components in the medication. The rash might be a heat rash, since she recently was sweating profusely from her upper body. Since she is about to go away on a short vacation, where she would not have access to her usual physician, she decides to keep taking the probiotics and using the new eye drops but to discontinue the blood pressure medication and to switch back to the old cream for her neck and upper chest. She forms a plan to consult her regular physician on her return about the blood pressure medication.

Candidate : Although Dewey included no examples of thinking directed at appraising the arguments of others, such thinking has come to be considered a kind of critical thinking. We find an example of such thinking in the performance task on the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+), which its sponsoring organization describes as

a performance-based assessment that provides a measure of an institution’s contribution to the development of critical-thinking and written communication skills of its students. (Council for Aid to Education 2017)

A sample task posted on its website requires the test-taker to write a report for public distribution evaluating a fictional candidate’s policy proposals and their supporting arguments, using supplied background documents, with a recommendation on whether to endorse the candidate.

Immediate acceptance of an idea that suggests itself as a solution to a problem (e.g., a possible explanation of an event or phenomenon, an action that seems likely to produce a desired result) is “uncritical thinking, the minimum of reflection” (Dewey 1910: 13). On-going suspension of judgment in the light of doubt about a possible solution is not critical thinking (Dewey 1910: 108). Critique driven by a dogmatically held political or religious ideology is not critical thinking; thus Paulo Freire (1968 [1970]) is using the term (e.g., at 1970: 71, 81, 100, 146) in a more politically freighted sense that includes not only reflection but also revolutionary action against oppression. Derivation of a conclusion from given data using an algorithm is not critical thinking.

What is critical thinking? There are many definitions. Ennis (2016) lists 14 philosophically oriented scholarly definitions and three dictionary definitions. Following Rawls (1971), who distinguished his conception of justice from a utilitarian conception but regarded them as rival conceptions of the same concept, Ennis maintains that the 17 definitions are different conceptions of the same concept. Rawls articulated the shared concept of justice as

a characteristic set of principles for assigning basic rights and duties and for determining… the proper distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation. (Rawls 1971: 5)

Bailin et al. (1999b) claim that, if one considers what sorts of thinking an educator would take not to be critical thinking and what sorts to be critical thinking, one can conclude that educators typically understand critical thinking to have at least three features.

It is done for the purpose of making up one’s mind about what to believe or do.
The person engaging in the thinking is trying to fulfill standards of adequacy and accuracy appropriate to the thinking.
The thinking fulfills the relevant standards to some threshold level.

One could sum up the core concept that involves these three features by saying that critical thinking is careful goal-directed thinking. This core concept seems to apply to all the examples of critical thinking described in the previous section. As for the non-examples, their exclusion depends on construing careful thinking as excluding jumping immediately to conclusions, suspending judgment no matter how strong the evidence, reasoning from an unquestioned ideological or religious perspective, and routinely using an algorithm to answer a question.

If the core of critical thinking is careful goal-directed thinking, conceptions of it can vary according to its presumed scope, its presumed goal, one’s criteria and threshold for being careful, and the thinking component on which one focuses As to its scope, some conceptions (e.g., Dewey 1910, 1933) restrict it to constructive thinking on the basis of one’s own observations and experiments, others (e.g., Ennis 1962; Fisher & Scriven 1997; Johnson 1992) to appraisal of the products of such thinking. Ennis (1991) and Bailin et al. (1999b) take it to cover both construction and appraisal. As to its goal, some conceptions restrict it to forming a judgment (Dewey 1910, 1933; Lipman 1987; Facione 1990a). Others allow for actions as well as beliefs as the end point of a process of critical thinking (Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b). As to the criteria and threshold for being careful, definitions vary in the term used to indicate that critical thinking satisfies certain norms: “intellectually disciplined” (Scriven & Paul 1987), “reasonable” (Ennis 1991), “skillful” (Lipman 1987), “skilled” (Fisher & Scriven 1997), “careful” (Bailin & Battersby 2009). Some definitions specify these norms, referring variously to “consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (Dewey 1910, 1933); “the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning” (Glaser 1941); “conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication” (Scriven & Paul 1987); the requirement that “it is sensitive to context, relies on criteria, and is self-correcting” (Lipman 1987); “evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations” (Facione 1990a); and “plus-minus considerations of the product in terms of appropriate standards (or criteria)” (Johnson 1992). Stanovich and Stanovich (2010) propose to ground the concept of critical thinking in the concept of rationality, which they understand as combining epistemic rationality (fitting one’s beliefs to the world) and instrumental rationality (optimizing goal fulfillment); a critical thinker, in their view, is someone with “a propensity to override suboptimal responses from the autonomous mind” (2010: 227). These variant specifications of norms for critical thinking are not necessarily incompatible with one another, and in any case presuppose the core notion of thinking carefully. As to the thinking component singled out, some definitions focus on suspension of judgment during the thinking (Dewey 1910; McPeck 1981), others on inquiry while judgment is suspended (Bailin & Battersby 2009), others on the resulting judgment (Facione 1990a), and still others on the subsequent emotive response (Siegel 1988).

In educational contexts, a definition of critical thinking is a “programmatic definition” (Scheffler 1960: 19). It expresses a practical program for achieving an educational goal. For this purpose, a one-sentence formulaic definition is much less useful than articulation of a critical thinking process, with criteria and standards for the kinds of thinking that the process may involve. The real educational goal is recognition, adoption and implementation by students of those criteria and standards. That adoption and implementation in turn consists in acquiring the knowledge, abilities and dispositions of a critical thinker.

Conceptions of critical thinking generally do not include moral integrity as part of the concept. Dewey, for example, took critical thinking to be the ultimate intellectual goal of education, but distinguished it from the development of social cooperation among school children, which he took to be the central moral goal. Ennis (1996, 2011) added to his previous list of critical thinking dispositions a group of dispositions to care about the dignity and worth of every person, which he described as a “correlative” (1996) disposition without which critical thinking would be less valuable and perhaps harmful. An educational program that aimed at developing critical thinking but not the correlative disposition to care about the dignity and worth of every person, he asserted, “would be deficient and perhaps dangerous” (Ennis 1996: 172).

Dewey thought that education for reflective thinking would be of value to both the individual and society; recognition in educational practice of the kinship to the scientific attitude of children’s native curiosity, fertile imagination and love of experimental inquiry “would make for individual happiness and the reduction of social waste” (Dewey 1910: iii). Schools participating in the Eight-Year Study took development of the habit of reflective thinking and skill in solving problems as a means to leading young people to understand, appreciate and live the democratic way of life characteristic of the United States (Aikin 1942: 17–18, 81). Harvey Siegel (1988: 55–61) has offered four considerations in support of adopting critical thinking as an educational ideal. (1) Respect for persons requires that schools and teachers honour students’ demands for reasons and explanations, deal with students honestly, and recognize the need to confront students’ independent judgment; these requirements concern the manner in which teachers treat students. (2) Education has the task of preparing children to be successful adults, a task that requires development of their self-sufficiency. (3) Education should initiate children into the rational traditions in such fields as history, science and mathematics. (4) Education should prepare children to become democratic citizens, which requires reasoned procedures and critical talents and attitudes. To supplement these considerations, Siegel (1988: 62–90) responds to two objections: the ideology objection that adoption of any educational ideal requires a prior ideological commitment and the indoctrination objection that cultivation of critical thinking cannot escape being a form of indoctrination.

Despite the diversity of our 11 examples, one can recognize a common pattern. Dewey analyzed it as consisting of five phases:

suggestions , in which the mind leaps forward to a possible solution;
an intellectualization of the difficulty or perplexity into a problem to be solved, a question for which the answer must be sought;
the use of one suggestion after another as a leading idea, or hypothesis , to initiate and guide observation and other operations in collection of factual material;
the mental elaboration of the idea or supposition as an idea or supposition ( reasoning , in the sense on which reasoning is a part, not the whole, of inference); and
testing the hypothesis by overt or imaginative action. (Dewey 1933: 106–107; italics in original)

The process of reflective thinking consisting of these phases would be preceded by a perplexed, troubled or confused situation and followed by a cleared-up, unified, resolved situation (Dewey 1933: 106). The term ‘phases’ replaced the term ‘steps’ (Dewey 1910: 72), thus removing the earlier suggestion of an invariant sequence. Variants of the above analysis appeared in (Dewey 1916: 177) and (Dewey 1938: 101–119).

The variant formulations indicate the difficulty of giving a single logical analysis of such a varied process. The process of critical thinking may have a spiral pattern, with the problem being redefined in the light of obstacles to solving it as originally formulated. For example, the person in Transit might have concluded that getting to the appointment at the scheduled time was impossible and have reformulated the problem as that of rescheduling the appointment for a mutually convenient time. Further, defining a problem does not always follow after or lead immediately to an idea of a suggested solution. Nor should it do so, as Dewey himself recognized in describing the physician in Typhoid as avoiding any strong preference for this or that conclusion before getting further information (Dewey 1910: 85; 1933: 170). People with a hypothesis in mind, even one to which they have a very weak commitment, have a so-called “confirmation bias” (Nickerson 1998): they are likely to pay attention to evidence that confirms the hypothesis and to ignore evidence that counts against it or for some competing hypothesis. Detectives, intelligence agencies, and investigators of airplane accidents are well advised to gather relevant evidence systematically and to postpone even tentative adoption of an explanatory hypothesis until the collected evidence rules out with the appropriate degree of certainty all but one explanation. Dewey’s analysis of the critical thinking process can be faulted as well for requiring acceptance or rejection of a possible solution to a defined problem, with no allowance for deciding in the light of the available evidence to suspend judgment. Further, given the great variety of kinds of problems for which reflection is appropriate, there is likely to be variation in its component events. Perhaps the best way to conceptualize the critical thinking process is as a checklist whose component events can occur in a variety of orders, selectively, and more than once. These component events might include (1) noticing a difficulty, (2) defining the problem, (3) dividing the problem into manageable sub-problems, (4) formulating a variety of possible solutions to the problem or sub-problem, (5) determining what evidence is relevant to deciding among possible solutions to the problem or sub-problem, (6) devising a plan of systematic observation or experiment that will uncover the relevant evidence, (7) carrying out the plan of systematic observation or experimentation, (8) noting the results of the systematic observation or experiment, (9) gathering relevant testimony and information from others, (10) judging the credibility of testimony and information gathered from others, (11) drawing conclusions from gathered evidence and accepted testimony, and (12) accepting a solution that the evidence adequately supports (cf. Hitchcock 2017: 485).

Checklist conceptions of the process of critical thinking are open to the objection that they are too mechanical and procedural to fit the multi-dimensional and emotionally charged issues for which critical thinking is urgently needed (Paul 1984). For such issues, a more dialectical process is advocated, in which competing relevant world views are identified, their implications explored, and some sort of creative synthesis attempted.

If one considers the critical thinking process illustrated by the 11 examples, one can identify distinct kinds of mental acts and mental states that form part of it. To distinguish, label and briefly characterize these components is a useful preliminary to identifying abilities, skills, dispositions, attitudes, habits and the like that contribute causally to thinking critically. Identifying such abilities and habits is in turn a useful preliminary to setting educational goals. Setting the goals is in its turn a useful preliminary to designing strategies for helping learners to achieve the goals and to designing ways of measuring the extent to which learners have done so. Such measures provide both feedback to learners on their achievement and a basis for experimental research on the effectiveness of various strategies for educating people to think critically. Let us begin, then, by distinguishing the kinds of mental acts and mental events that can occur in a critical thinking process.

Observing : One notices something in one’s immediate environment (sudden cooling of temperature in Weather , bubbles forming outside a glass and then going inside in Bubbles , a moving blur in the distance in Blur , a rash in Rash ). Or one notes the results of an experiment or systematic observation (valuables missing in Disorder , no suction without air pressure in Suction pump )
Feeling : One feels puzzled or uncertain about something (how to get to an appointment on time in Transit , why the diamonds vary in frequency in Diamond ). One wants to resolve this perplexity. One feels satisfaction once one has worked out an answer (to take the subway express in Transit , diamonds closer when needed as a warning in Diamond ).
Wondering : One formulates a question to be addressed (why bubbles form outside a tumbler taken from hot water in Bubbles , how suction pumps work in Suction pump , what caused the rash in Rash ).
Imagining : One thinks of possible answers (bus or subway or elevated in Transit , flagpole or ornament or wireless communication aid or direction indicator in Ferryboat , allergic reaction or heat rash in Rash ).
Inferring : One works out what would be the case if a possible answer were assumed (valuables missing if there has been a burglary in Disorder , earlier start to the rash if it is an allergic reaction to a sulfa drug in Rash ). Or one draws a conclusion once sufficient relevant evidence is gathered (take the subway in Transit , burglary in Disorder , discontinue blood pressure medication and new cream in Rash ).
Knowledge : One uses stored knowledge of the subject-matter to generate possible answers or to infer what would be expected on the assumption of a particular answer (knowledge of a city’s public transit system in Transit , of the requirements for a flagpole in Ferryboat , of Boyle’s law in Bubbles , of allergic reactions in Rash ).
Experimenting : One designs and carries out an experiment or a systematic observation to find out whether the results deduced from a possible answer will occur (looking at the location of the flagpole in relation to the pilot’s position in Ferryboat , putting an ice cube on top of a tumbler taken from hot water in Bubbles , measuring the height to which a suction pump will draw water at different elevations in Suction pump , noticing the frequency of diamonds when movement to or from a diamond lane is allowed in Diamond ).
Consulting : One finds a source of information, gets the information from the source, and makes a judgment on whether to accept it. None of our 11 examples include searching for sources of information. In this respect they are unrepresentative, since most people nowadays have almost instant access to information relevant to answering any question, including many of those illustrated by the examples. However, Candidate includes the activities of extracting information from sources and evaluating its credibility.
Identifying and analyzing arguments : One notices an argument and works out its structure and content as a preliminary to evaluating its strength. This activity is central to Candidate . It is an important part of a critical thinking process in which one surveys arguments for various positions on an issue.
Judging : One makes a judgment on the basis of accumulated evidence and reasoning, such as the judgment in Ferryboat that the purpose of the pole is to provide direction to the pilot.
Deciding : One makes a decision on what to do or on what policy to adopt, as in the decision in Transit to take the subway.

By definition, a person who does something voluntarily is both willing and able to do that thing at that time. Both the willingness and the ability contribute causally to the person’s action, in the sense that the voluntary action would not occur if either (or both) of these were lacking. For example, suppose that one is standing with one’s arms at one’s sides and one voluntarily lifts one’s right arm to an extended horizontal position. One would not do so if one were unable to lift one’s arm, if for example one’s right side was paralyzed as the result of a stroke. Nor would one do so if one were unwilling to lift one’s arm, if for example one were participating in a street demonstration at which a white supremacist was urging the crowd to lift their right arm in a Nazi salute and one were unwilling to express support in this way for the racist Nazi ideology. The same analysis applies to a voluntary mental process of thinking critically. It requires both willingness and ability to think critically, including willingness and ability to perform each of the mental acts that compose the process and to coordinate those acts in a sequence that is directed at resolving the initiating perplexity.

Consider willingness first. We can identify causal contributors to willingness to think critically by considering factors that would cause a person who was able to think critically about an issue nevertheless not to do so (Hamby 2014). For each factor, the opposite condition thus contributes causally to willingness to think critically on a particular occasion. For example, people who habitually jump to conclusions without considering alternatives will not think critically about issues that arise, even if they have the required abilities. The contrary condition of willingness to suspend judgment is thus a causal contributor to thinking critically.

Now consider ability. In contrast to the ability to move one’s arm, which can be completely absent because a stroke has left the arm paralyzed, the ability to think critically is a developed ability, whose absence is not a complete absence of ability to think but absence of ability to think well. We can identify the ability to think well directly, in terms of the norms and standards for good thinking. In general, to be able do well the thinking activities that can be components of a critical thinking process, one needs to know the concepts and principles that characterize their good performance, to recognize in particular cases that the concepts and principles apply, and to apply them. The knowledge, recognition and application may be procedural rather than declarative. It may be domain-specific rather than widely applicable, and in either case may need subject-matter knowledge, sometimes of a deep kind.

Reflections of the sort illustrated by the previous two paragraphs have led scholars to identify the knowledge, abilities and dispositions of a “critical thinker”, i.e., someone who thinks critically whenever it is appropriate to do so. We turn now to these three types of causal contributors to thinking critically. We start with dispositions, since arguably these are the most powerful contributors to being a critical thinker, can be fostered at an early stage of a child’s development, and are susceptible to general improvement (Glaser 1941: 175)

8. Critical Thinking Dispositions

Educational researchers use the term ‘dispositions’ broadly for the habits of mind and attitudes that contribute causally to being a critical thinker. Some writers (e.g., Paul & Elder 2006; Hamby 2014; Bailin & Battersby 2016) propose to use the term ‘virtues’ for this dimension of a critical thinker. The virtues in question, although they are virtues of character, concern the person’s ways of thinking rather than the person’s ways of behaving towards others. They are not moral virtues but intellectual virtues, of the sort articulated by Zagzebski (1996) and discussed by Turri, Alfano, and Greco (2017).

On a realistic conception, thinking dispositions or intellectual virtues are real properties of thinkers. They are general tendencies, propensities, or inclinations to think in particular ways in particular circumstances, and can be genuinely explanatory (Siegel 1999). Sceptics argue that there is no evidence for a specific mental basis for the habits of mind that contribute to thinking critically, and that it is pedagogically misleading to posit such a basis (Bailin et al. 1999a). Whatever their status, critical thinking dispositions need motivation for their initial formation in a child—motivation that may be external or internal. As children develop, the force of habit will gradually become important in sustaining the disposition (Nieto & Valenzuela 2012). Mere force of habit, however, is unlikely to sustain critical thinking dispositions. Critical thinkers must value and enjoy using their knowledge and abilities to think things through for themselves. They must be committed to, and lovers of, inquiry.

A person may have a critical thinking disposition with respect to only some kinds of issues. For example, one could be open-minded about scientific issues but not about religious issues. Similarly, one could be confident in one’s ability to reason about the theological implications of the existence of evil in the world but not in one’s ability to reason about the best design for a guided ballistic missile.

Critical thinking dispositions can usefully be divided into initiating dispositions (those that contribute causally to starting to think critically about an issue) and internal dispositions (those that contribute causally to doing a good job of thinking critically once one has started) (Facione 1990a: 25). The two categories are not mutually exclusive. For example, open-mindedness, in the sense of willingness to consider alternative points of view to one’s own, is both an initiating and an internal disposition.

Using the strategy of considering factors that would block people with the ability to think critically from doing so, we can identify as initiating dispositions for thinking critically attentiveness, a habit of inquiry, self-confidence, courage, open-mindedness, willingness to suspend judgment, trust in reason, wanting evidence for one’s beliefs, and seeking the truth. We consider briefly what each of these dispositions amounts to, in each case citing sources that acknowledge them.

Attentiveness : One will not think critically if one fails to recognize an issue that needs to be thought through. For example, the pedestrian in Weather would not have looked up if he had not noticed that the air was suddenly cooler. To be a critical thinker, then, one needs to be habitually attentive to one’s surroundings, noticing not only what one senses but also sources of perplexity in messages received and in one’s own beliefs and attitudes (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
Habit of inquiry : Inquiry is effortful, and one needs an internal push to engage in it. For example, the student in Bubbles could easily have stopped at idle wondering about the cause of the bubbles rather than reasoning to a hypothesis, then designing and executing an experiment to test it. Thus willingness to think critically needs mental energy and initiative. What can supply that energy? Love of inquiry, or perhaps just a habit of inquiry. Hamby (2015) has argued that willingness to inquire is the central critical thinking virtue, one that encompasses all the others. It is recognized as a critical thinking disposition by Dewey (1910: 29; 1933: 35), Glaser (1941: 5), Ennis (1987: 12; 1991: 8), Facione (1990a: 25), Bailin et al. (1999b: 294), Halpern (1998: 452), and Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo (2001).
Self-confidence : Lack of confidence in one’s abilities can block critical thinking. For example, if the woman in Rash lacked confidence in her ability to figure things out for herself, she might just have assumed that the rash on her chest was the allergic reaction to her medication against which the pharmacist had warned her. Thus willingness to think critically requires confidence in one’s ability to inquire (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
Courage : Fear of thinking for oneself can stop one from doing it. Thus willingness to think critically requires intellectual courage (Paul & Elder 2006: 16).
Open-mindedness : A dogmatic attitude will impede thinking critically. For example, a person who adheres rigidly to a “pro-choice” position on the issue of the legal status of induced abortion is likely to be unwilling to consider seriously the issue of when in its development an unborn child acquires a moral right to life. Thus willingness to think critically requires open-mindedness, in the sense of a willingness to examine questions to which one already accepts an answer but which further evidence or reasoning might cause one to answer differently (Dewey 1933; Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b; Halpern 1998, Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). Paul (1981) emphasizes open-mindedness about alternative world-views, and recommends a dialectical approach to integrating such views as central to what he calls “strong sense” critical thinking.
Willingness to suspend judgment : Premature closure on an initial solution will block critical thinking. Thus willingness to think critically requires a willingness to suspend judgment while alternatives are explored (Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Halpern 1998).
Trust in reason : Since distrust in the processes of reasoned inquiry will dissuade one from engaging in it, trust in them is an initiating critical thinking disposition (Facione 1990a, 25; Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001; Paul & Elder 2006). In reaction to an allegedly exclusive emphasis on reason in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, Thayer-Bacon (2000) argues that intuition, imagination, and emotion have important roles to play in an adequate conception of critical thinking that she calls “constructive thinking”. From her point of view, critical thinking requires trust not only in reason but also in intuition, imagination, and emotion.
Seeking the truth : If one does not care about the truth but is content to stick with one’s initial bias on an issue, then one will not think critically about it. Seeking the truth is thus an initiating critical thinking disposition (Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). A disposition to seek the truth is implicit in more specific critical thinking dispositions, such as trying to be well-informed, considering seriously points of view other than one’s own, looking for alternatives, suspending judgment when the evidence is insufficient, and adopting a position when the evidence supporting it is sufficient.

Some of the initiating dispositions, such as open-mindedness and willingness to suspend judgment, are also internal critical thinking dispositions, in the sense of mental habits or attitudes that contribute causally to doing a good job of critical thinking once one starts the process. But there are many other internal critical thinking dispositions. Some of them are parasitic on one’s conception of good thinking. For example, it is constitutive of good thinking about an issue to formulate the issue clearly and to maintain focus on it. For this purpose, one needs not only the corresponding ability but also the corresponding disposition. Ennis (1991: 8) describes it as the disposition “to determine and maintain focus on the conclusion or question”, Facione (1990a: 25) as “clarity in stating the question or concern”. Other internal dispositions are motivators to continue or adjust the critical thinking process, such as willingness to persist in a complex task and willingness to abandon nonproductive strategies in an attempt to self-correct (Halpern 1998: 452). For a list of identified internal critical thinking dispositions, see the Supplement on Internal Critical Thinking Dispositions .

Some theorists postulate skills, i.e., acquired abilities, as operative in critical thinking. It is not obvious, however, that a good mental act is the exercise of a generic acquired skill. Inferring an expected time of arrival, as in Transit , has some generic components but also uses non-generic subject-matter knowledge. Bailin et al. (1999a) argue against viewing critical thinking skills as generic and discrete, on the ground that skilled performance at a critical thinking task cannot be separated from knowledge of concepts and from domain-specific principles of good thinking. Talk of skills, they concede, is unproblematic if it means merely that a person with critical thinking skills is capable of intelligent performance.

Despite such scepticism, theorists of critical thinking have listed as general contributors to critical thinking what they variously call abilities (Glaser 1941; Ennis 1962, 1991), skills (Facione 1990a; Halpern 1998) or competencies (Fisher & Scriven 1997). Amalgamating these lists would produce a confusing and chaotic cornucopia of more than 50 possible educational objectives, with only partial overlap among them. It makes sense instead to try to understand the reasons for the multiplicity and diversity, and to make a selection according to one’s own reasons for singling out abilities to be developed in a critical thinking curriculum. Two reasons for diversity among lists of critical thinking abilities are the underlying conception of critical thinking and the envisaged educational level. Appraisal-only conceptions, for example, involve a different suite of abilities than constructive-only conceptions. Some lists, such as those in (Glaser 1941), are put forward as educational objectives for secondary school students, whereas others are proposed as objectives for college students (e.g., Facione 1990a).

The abilities described in the remaining paragraphs of this section emerge from reflection on the general abilities needed to do well the thinking activities identified in section 6 as components of the critical thinking process described in section 5 . The derivation of each collection of abilities is accompanied by citation of sources that list such abilities and of standardized tests that claim to test them.

Observational abilities : Careful and accurate observation sometimes requires specialist expertise and practice, as in the case of observing birds and observing accident scenes. However, there are general abilities of noticing what one’s senses are picking up from one’s environment and of being able to articulate clearly and accurately to oneself and others what one has observed. It helps in exercising them to be able to recognize and take into account factors that make one’s observation less trustworthy, such as prior framing of the situation, inadequate time, deficient senses, poor observation conditions, and the like. It helps as well to be skilled at taking steps to make one’s observation more trustworthy, such as moving closer to get a better look, measuring something three times and taking the average, and checking what one thinks one is observing with someone else who is in a good position to observe it. It also helps to be skilled at recognizing respects in which one’s report of one’s observation involves inference rather than direct observation, so that one can then consider whether the inference is justified. These abilities come into play as well when one thinks about whether and with what degree of confidence to accept an observation report, for example in the study of history or in a criminal investigation or in assessing news reports. Observational abilities show up in some lists of critical thinking abilities (Ennis 1962: 90; Facione 1990a: 16; Ennis 1991: 9). There are items testing a person’s ability to judge the credibility of observation reports in the Cornell Critical Thinking Tests, Levels X and Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005). Norris and King (1983, 1985, 1990a, 1990b) is a test of ability to appraise observation reports.

Emotional abilities : The emotions that drive a critical thinking process are perplexity or puzzlement, a wish to resolve it, and satisfaction at achieving the desired resolution. Children experience these emotions at an early age, without being trained to do so. Education that takes critical thinking as a goal needs only to channel these emotions and to make sure not to stifle them. Collaborative critical thinking benefits from ability to recognize one’s own and others’ emotional commitments and reactions.

Questioning abilities : A critical thinking process needs transformation of an inchoate sense of perplexity into a clear question. Formulating a question well requires not building in questionable assumptions, not prejudging the issue, and using language that in context is unambiguous and precise enough (Ennis 1962: 97; 1991: 9).

Imaginative abilities : Thinking directed at finding the correct causal explanation of a general phenomenon or particular event requires an ability to imagine possible explanations. Thinking about what policy or plan of action to adopt requires generation of options and consideration of possible consequences of each option. Domain knowledge is required for such creative activity, but a general ability to imagine alternatives is helpful and can be nurtured so as to become easier, quicker, more extensive, and deeper (Dewey 1910: 34–39; 1933: 40–47). Facione (1990a) and Halpern (1998) include the ability to imagine alternatives as a critical thinking ability.

Inferential abilities : The ability to draw conclusions from given information, and to recognize with what degree of certainty one’s own or others’ conclusions follow, is universally recognized as a general critical thinking ability. All 11 examples in section 2 of this article include inferences, some from hypotheses or options (as in Transit , Ferryboat and Disorder ), others from something observed (as in Weather and Rash ). None of these inferences is formally valid. Rather, they are licensed by general, sometimes qualified substantive rules of inference (Toulmin 1958) that rest on domain knowledge—that a bus trip takes about the same time in each direction, that the terminal of a wireless telegraph would be located on the highest possible place, that sudden cooling is often followed by rain, that an allergic reaction to a sulfa drug generally shows up soon after one starts taking it. It is a matter of controversy to what extent the specialized ability to deduce conclusions from premisses using formal rules of inference is needed for critical thinking. Dewey (1933) locates logical forms in setting out the products of reflection rather than in the process of reflection. Ennis (1981a), on the other hand, maintains that a liberally-educated person should have the following abilities: to translate natural-language statements into statements using the standard logical operators, to use appropriately the language of necessary and sufficient conditions, to deal with argument forms and arguments containing symbols, to determine whether in virtue of an argument’s form its conclusion follows necessarily from its premisses, to reason with logically complex propositions, and to apply the rules and procedures of deductive logic. Inferential abilities are recognized as critical thinking abilities by Glaser (1941: 6), Facione (1990a: 9), Ennis (1991: 9), Fisher & Scriven (1997: 99, 111), and Halpern (1998: 452). Items testing inferential abilities constitute two of the five subtests of the Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser 1980a, 1980b, 1994), two of the four sections in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005), three of the seven sections in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005), 11 of the 34 items on Forms A and B of the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992), and a high but variable proportion of the 25 selected-response questions in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017).

Experimenting abilities : Knowing how to design and execute an experiment is important not just in scientific research but also in everyday life, as in Rash . Dewey devoted a whole chapter of his How We Think (1910: 145–156; 1933: 190–202) to the superiority of experimentation over observation in advancing knowledge. Experimenting abilities come into play at one remove in appraising reports of scientific studies. Skill in designing and executing experiments includes the acknowledged abilities to appraise evidence (Glaser 1941: 6), to carry out experiments and to apply appropriate statistical inference techniques (Facione 1990a: 9), to judge inductions to an explanatory hypothesis (Ennis 1991: 9), and to recognize the need for an adequately large sample size (Halpern 1998). The Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005) includes four items (out of 52) on experimental design. The Collegiate Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017) makes room for appraisal of study design in both its performance task and its selected-response questions.

Consulting abilities : Skill at consulting sources of information comes into play when one seeks information to help resolve a problem, as in Candidate . Ability to find and appraise information includes ability to gather and marshal pertinent information (Glaser 1941: 6), to judge whether a statement made by an alleged authority is acceptable (Ennis 1962: 84), to plan a search for desired information (Facione 1990a: 9), and to judge the credibility of a source (Ennis 1991: 9). Ability to judge the credibility of statements is tested by 24 items (out of 76) in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005) and by four items (out of 52) in the Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005). The College Learning Assessment’s performance task requires evaluation of whether information in documents is credible or unreliable (Council for Aid to Education 2017).

Argument analysis abilities : The ability to identify and analyze arguments contributes to the process of surveying arguments on an issue in order to form one’s own reasoned judgment, as in Candidate . The ability to detect and analyze arguments is recognized as a critical thinking skill by Facione (1990a: 7–8), Ennis (1991: 9) and Halpern (1998). Five items (out of 34) on the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992) test skill at argument analysis. The College Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017) incorporates argument analysis in its selected-response tests of critical reading and evaluation and of critiquing an argument.

Judging skills and deciding skills : Skill at judging and deciding is skill at recognizing what judgment or decision the available evidence and argument supports, and with what degree of confidence. It is thus a component of the inferential skills already discussed.

Lists and tests of critical thinking abilities often include two more abilities: identifying assumptions and constructing and evaluating definitions.

In addition to dispositions and abilities, critical thinking needs knowledge: of critical thinking concepts, of critical thinking principles, and of the subject-matter of the thinking.

We can derive a short list of concepts whose understanding contributes to critical thinking from the critical thinking abilities described in the preceding section. Observational abilities require an understanding of the difference between observation and inference. Questioning abilities require an understanding of the concepts of ambiguity and vagueness. Inferential abilities require an understanding of the difference between conclusive and defeasible inference (traditionally, between deduction and induction), as well as of the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions. Experimenting abilities require an understanding of the concepts of hypothesis, null hypothesis, assumption and prediction, as well as of the concept of statistical significance and of its difference from importance. They also require an understanding of the difference between an experiment and an observational study, and in particular of the difference between a randomized controlled trial, a prospective correlational study and a retrospective (case-control) study. Argument analysis abilities require an understanding of the concepts of argument, premiss, assumption, conclusion and counter-consideration. Additional critical thinking concepts are proposed by Bailin et al. (1999b: 293), Fisher & Scriven (1997: 105–106), and Black (2012).

According to Glaser (1941: 25), ability to think critically requires knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning. If we review the list of abilities in the preceding section, however, we can see that some of them can be acquired and exercised merely through practice, possibly guided in an educational setting, followed by feedback. Searching intelligently for a causal explanation of some phenomenon or event requires that one consider a full range of possible causal contributors, but it seems more important that one implements this principle in one’s practice than that one is able to articulate it. What is important is “operational knowledge” of the standards and principles of good thinking (Bailin et al. 1999b: 291–293). But the development of such critical thinking abilities as designing an experiment or constructing an operational definition can benefit from learning their underlying theory. Further, explicit knowledge of quirks of human thinking seems useful as a cautionary guide. Human memory is not just fallible about details, as people learn from their own experiences of misremembering, but is so malleable that a detailed, clear and vivid recollection of an event can be a total fabrication (Loftus 2017). People seek or interpret evidence in ways that are partial to their existing beliefs and expectations, often unconscious of their “confirmation bias” (Nickerson 1998). Not only are people subject to this and other cognitive biases (Kahneman 2011), of which they are typically unaware, but it may be counter-productive for one to make oneself aware of them and try consciously to counteract them or to counteract social biases such as racial or sexual stereotypes (Kenyon & Beaulac 2014). It is helpful to be aware of these facts and of the superior effectiveness of blocking the operation of biases—for example, by making an immediate record of one’s observations, refraining from forming a preliminary explanatory hypothesis, blind refereeing, double-blind randomized trials, and blind grading of students’ work.

Critical thinking about an issue requires substantive knowledge of the domain to which the issue belongs. Critical thinking abilities are not a magic elixir that can be applied to any issue whatever by somebody who has no knowledge of the facts relevant to exploring that issue. For example, the student in Bubbles needed to know that gases do not penetrate solid objects like a glass, that air expands when heated, that the volume of an enclosed gas varies directly with its temperature and inversely with its pressure, and that hot objects will spontaneously cool down to the ambient temperature of their surroundings unless kept hot by insulation or a source of heat. Critical thinkers thus need a rich fund of subject-matter knowledge relevant to the variety of situations they encounter. This fact is recognized in the inclusion among critical thinking dispositions of a concern to become and remain generally well informed.

Experimental educational interventions, with control groups, have shown that education can improve critical thinking skills and dispositions, as measured by standardized tests. For information about these tests, see the Supplement on Assessment .

What educational methods are most effective at developing the dispositions, abilities and knowledge of a critical thinker? Abrami et al. (2015) found that in the experimental and quasi-experimental studies that they analyzed dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring each increased the effectiveness of the educational intervention, and that they were most effective when combined. They also found that in these studies a combination of separate instruction in critical thinking with subject-matter instruction in which students are encouraged to think critically was more effective than either by itself. However, the difference was not statistically significant; that is, it might have arisen by chance.

Most of these studies lack the longitudinal follow-up required to determine whether the observed differential improvements in critical thinking abilities or dispositions continue over time, for example until high school or college graduation. For details on studies of methods of developing critical thinking skills and dispositions, see the Supplement on Educational Methods .

12. Controversies

Scholars have denied the generalizability of critical thinking abilities across subject domains, have alleged bias in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, and have investigated the relationship of critical thinking to other kinds of thinking.

McPeck (1981) attacked the thinking skills movement of the 1970s, including the critical thinking movement. He argued that there are no general thinking skills, since thinking is always thinking about some subject-matter. It is futile, he claimed, for schools and colleges to teach thinking as if it were a separate subject. Rather, teachers should lead their pupils to become autonomous thinkers by teaching school subjects in a way that brings out their cognitive structure and that encourages and rewards discussion and argument. As some of his critics (e.g., Paul 1985; Siegel 1985) pointed out, McPeck’s central argument needs elaboration, since it has obvious counter-examples in writing and speaking, for which (up to a certain level of complexity) there are teachable general abilities even though they are always about some subject-matter. To make his argument convincing, McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way that does not permit useful abstraction of its components from the subject-matters with which it deals. He has not done so. Nevertheless, his position that the dispositions and abilities of a critical thinker are best developed in the context of subject-matter instruction is shared by many theorists of critical thinking, including Dewey (1910, 1933), Glaser (1941), Passmore (1980), Weinstein (1990), and Bailin et al. (1999b).

McPeck’s challenge prompted reflection on the extent to which critical thinking is subject-specific. McPeck argued for a strong subject-specificity thesis, according to which it is a conceptual truth that all critical thinking abilities are specific to a subject. (He did not however extend his subject-specificity thesis to critical thinking dispositions. In particular, he took the disposition to suspend judgment in situations of cognitive dissonance to be a general disposition.) Conceptual subject-specificity is subject to obvious counter-examples, such as the general ability to recognize confusion of necessary and sufficient conditions. A more modest thesis, also endorsed by McPeck, is epistemological subject-specificity, according to which the norms of good thinking vary from one field to another. Epistemological subject-specificity clearly holds to a certain extent; for example, the principles in accordance with which one solves a differential equation are quite different from the principles in accordance with which one determines whether a painting is a genuine Picasso. But the thesis suffers, as Ennis (1989) points out, from vagueness of the concept of a field or subject and from the obvious existence of inter-field principles, however broadly the concept of a field is construed. For example, the principles of hypothetico-deductive reasoning hold for all the varied fields in which such reasoning occurs. A third kind of subject-specificity is empirical subject-specificity, according to which as a matter of empirically observable fact a person with the abilities and dispositions of a critical thinker in one area of investigation will not necessarily have them in another area of investigation.

The thesis of empirical subject-specificity raises the general problem of transfer. If critical thinking abilities and dispositions have to be developed independently in each school subject, how are they of any use in dealing with the problems of everyday life and the political and social issues of contemporary society, most of which do not fit into the framework of a traditional school subject? Proponents of empirical subject-specificity tend to argue that transfer is more likely to occur if there is critical thinking instruction in a variety of domains, with explicit attention to dispositions and abilities that cut across domains. But evidence for this claim is scanty. There is a need for well-designed empirical studies that investigate the conditions that make transfer more likely.

It is common ground in debates about the generality or subject-specificity of critical thinking dispositions and abilities that critical thinking about any topic requires background knowledge about the topic. For example, the most sophisticated understanding of the principles of hypothetico-deductive reasoning is of no help unless accompanied by some knowledge of what might be plausible explanations of some phenomenon under investigation.

Critics have objected to bias in the theory, pedagogy and practice of critical thinking. Commentators (e.g., Alston 1995; Ennis 1998) have noted that anyone who takes a position has a bias in the neutral sense of being inclined in one direction rather than others. The critics, however, are objecting to bias in the pejorative sense of an unjustified favoring of certain ways of knowing over others, frequently alleging that the unjustly favoured ways are those of a dominant sex or culture (Bailin 1995). These ways favour:

reinforcement of egocentric and sociocentric biases over dialectical engagement with opposing world-views (Paul 1981, 1984; Warren 1998)
distancing from the object of inquiry over closeness to it (Martin 1992; Thayer-Bacon 1992)
indifference to the situation of others over care for them (Martin 1992)
orientation to thought over orientation to action (Martin 1992)
being reasonable over caring to understand people’s ideas (Thayer-Bacon 1993)
being neutral and objective over being embodied and situated (Thayer-Bacon 1995a)
doubting over believing (Thayer-Bacon 1995b)
reason over emotion, imagination and intuition (Thayer-Bacon 2000)
solitary thinking over collaborative thinking (Thayer-Bacon 2000)
written and spoken assignments over other forms of expression (Alston 2001)
attention to written and spoken communications over attention to human problems (Alston 2001)
winning debates in the public sphere over making and understanding meaning (Alston 2001)

A common thread in this smorgasbord of accusations is dissatisfaction with focusing on the logical analysis and evaluation of reasoning and arguments. While these authors acknowledge that such analysis and evaluation is part of critical thinking and should be part of its conceptualization and pedagogy, they insist that it is only a part. Paul (1981), for example, bemoans the tendency of atomistic teaching of methods of analyzing and evaluating arguments to turn students into more able sophists, adept at finding fault with positions and arguments with which they disagree but even more entrenched in the egocentric and sociocentric biases with which they began. Martin (1992) and Thayer-Bacon (1992) cite with approval the self-reported intimacy with their subject-matter of leading researchers in biology and medicine, an intimacy that conflicts with the distancing allegedly recommended in standard conceptions and pedagogy of critical thinking. Thayer-Bacon (2000) contrasts the embodied and socially embedded learning of her elementary school students in a Montessori school, who used their imagination, intuition and emotions as well as their reason, with conceptions of critical thinking as

thinking that is used to critique arguments, offer justifications, and make judgments about what are the good reasons, or the right answers. (Thayer-Bacon 2000: 127–128)

Alston (2001) reports that her students in a women’s studies class were able to see the flaws in the Cinderella myth that pervades much romantic fiction but in their own romantic relationships still acted as if all failures were the woman’s fault and still accepted the notions of love at first sight and living happily ever after. Students, she writes, should

be able to connect their intellectual critique to a more affective, somatic, and ethical account of making risky choices that have sexist, racist, classist, familial, sexual, or other consequences for themselves and those both near and far… critical thinking that reads arguments, texts, or practices merely on the surface without connections to feeling/desiring/doing or action lacks an ethical depth that should infuse the difference between mere cognitive activity and something we want to call critical thinking. (Alston 2001: 34)

Some critics portray such biases as unfair to women. Thayer-Bacon (1992), for example, has charged modern critical thinking theory with being sexist, on the ground that it separates the self from the object and causes one to lose touch with one’s inner voice, and thus stigmatizes women, who (she asserts) link self to object and listen to their inner voice. Her charge does not imply that women as a group are on average less able than men to analyze and evaluate arguments. Facione (1990c) found no difference by sex in performance on his California Critical Thinking Skills Test. Kuhn (1991: 280–281) found no difference by sex in either the disposition or the competence to engage in argumentative thinking.

The critics propose a variety of remedies for the biases that they allege. In general, they do not propose to eliminate or downplay critical thinking as an educational goal. Rather, they propose to conceptualize critical thinking differently and to change its pedagogy accordingly. Their pedagogical proposals arise logically from their objections. They can be summarized as follows:

Focus on argument networks with dialectical exchanges reflecting contesting points of view rather than on atomic arguments, so as to develop “strong sense” critical thinking that transcends egocentric and sociocentric biases (Paul 1981, 1984).
Foster closeness to the subject-matter and feeling connected to others in order to inform a humane democracy (Martin 1992).
Develop “constructive thinking” as a social activity in a community of physically embodied and socially embedded inquirers with personal voices who value not only reason but also imagination, intuition and emotion (Thayer-Bacon 2000).
In developing critical thinking in school subjects, treat as important neither skills nor dispositions but opening worlds of meaning (Alston 2001).
Attend to the development of critical thinking dispositions as well as skills, and adopt the “critical pedagogy” practised and advocated by Freire (1968 [1970]) and hooks (1994) (Dalgleish, Girard, & Davies 2017).

A common thread in these proposals is treatment of critical thinking as a social, interactive, personally engaged activity like that of a quilting bee or a barn-raising (Thayer-Bacon 2000) rather than as an individual, solitary, distanced activity symbolized by Rodin’s The Thinker . One can get a vivid description of education with the former type of goal from the writings of bell hooks (1994, 2010). Critical thinking for her is open-minded dialectical exchange across opposing standpoints and from multiple perspectives, a conception similar to Paul’s “strong sense” critical thinking (Paul 1981). She abandons the structure of domination in the traditional classroom. In an introductory course on black women writers, for example, she assigns students to write an autobiographical paragraph about an early racial memory, then to read it aloud as the others listen, thus affirming the uniqueness and value of each voice and creating a communal awareness of the diversity of the group’s experiences (hooks 1994: 84). Her “engaged pedagogy” is thus similar to the “freedom under guidance” implemented in John Dewey’s Laboratory School of Chicago in the late 1890s and early 1900s. It incorporates the dialogue, anchored instruction, and mentoring that Abrami (2015) found to be most effective in improving critical thinking skills and dispositions.

What is the relationship of critical thinking to problem solving, decision-making, higher-order thinking, creative thinking, and other recognized types of thinking? One’s answer to this question obviously depends on how one defines the terms used in the question. If critical thinking is conceived broadly to cover any careful thinking about any topic for any purpose, then problem solving and decision making will be kinds of critical thinking, if they are done carefully. Historically, ‘critical thinking’ and ‘problem solving’ were two names for the same thing. If critical thinking is conceived more narrowly as consisting solely of appraisal of intellectual products, then it will be disjoint with problem solving and decision making, which are constructive.

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives used the phrase “intellectual abilities and skills” for what had been labeled “critical thinking” by some, “reflective thinking” by Dewey and others, and “problem solving” by still others (Bloom et al. 1956: 38). Thus, the so-called “higher-order thinking skills” at the taxonomy’s top levels of analysis, synthesis and evaluation are just critical thinking skills, although they do not come with general criteria for their assessment (Ennis 1981b). The revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al. 2001) likewise treats critical thinking as cutting across those types of cognitive process that involve more than remembering (Anderson et al. 2001: 269–270). For details, see the Supplement on History .

As to creative thinking, it overlaps with critical thinking (Bailin 1987, 1988). Thinking about the explanation of some phenomenon or event, as in Ferryboat , requires creative imagination in constructing plausible explanatory hypotheses. Likewise, thinking about a policy question, as in Candidate , requires creativity in coming up with options. Conversely, creativity in any field needs to be balanced by critical appraisal of the draft painting or novel or mathematical theory.

Abrami, Philip C., Robert M. Bernard, Eugene Borokhovski, David I. Waddington, C. Anne Wade, and Tonje Person, 2015, “Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research , 85(2): 275–314. doi:10.3102/0034654314551063
Aikin, Wilford M., 1942, The Story of the Eight-year Study, with Conclusions and Recommendations , Volume I of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers. [ Aikin 1942 available online ]
Alston, Kal, 1995, “Begging the Question: Is Critical Thinking Biased?”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 225–233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00225.x
–––, 2001, “Re/Thinking Critical Thinking: The Seductions of Everyday Life”, Studies in Philosophy and Education , 20(1): 27–40. doi:10.1023/A:1005247128053
American Educational Research Association, 2014, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing / American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education , Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airiasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer, Paul R. Pintrich, James Raths, and Merlin C. Wittrock, 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , New York: Longman, complete edition.
Bailin, Sharon, 1987, “Critical and Creative Thinking”, Informal Logic , 9(1): 23–30. [ Bailin 1987 available online ]
–––, 1988, Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity , Dordrecht: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2780-3
–––, 1995, “Is Critical Thinking Biased? Clarifications and Implications”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00191.x
Bailin, Sharon and Mark Battersby, 2009, “Inquiry: A Dialectical Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking”, in Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09 , CD-ROM (pp. 1–10), Windsor, ON: OSSA. [ Bailin & Battersby 2009 available online ]
–––, 2016, “Fostering the Virtues of Inquiry”, Topoi , 35(2): 367–374. doi:10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6
Bailin, Sharon, Roland Case, Jerrold R. Coombs, and Leroi B. Daniels, 1999a, “Common Misconceptions of Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124
–––, 1999b, “Conceptualizing Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 285–302. doi:10.1080/002202799183133
Berman, Alan M., Seth J. Schwartz, William M. Kurtines, and Steven L. Berman, 2001, “The Process of Exploration in Identity Formation: The Role of Style and Competence”, Journal of Adolescence , 24(4): 513–528. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0386
Black, Beth (ed.), 2012, An A to Z of Critical Thinking , London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, Max D. Engelhart, Edward J. Furst, Walter H. Hill, and David R. Krathwohl, 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , New York: David McKay.
Casserly, Megan, 2012, “The 10 Skills That Will Get You Hired in 2013”, Forbes , Dec. 10, 2012. Available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancasserly/2012/12/10/the-10-skills-that-will-get-you-a-job-in-2013/#79e7ff4e633d ; accessed 2017 11 06.
Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning, 2017, Critical Thinking Assessment Test , Cookeville, TN: Tennessee Technological University.
Cohen, Jacob, 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2nd edition.
College Board, 1983, Academic Preparation for College. What Students Need to Know and Be Able to Do , New York: College Entrance Examination Board, ERIC document ED232517.
Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association, 1943, Thirty Schools Tell Their Story , Volume V of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
Council for Aid to Education, 2017, CLA+ Student Guide . Available at http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Student_Guide_Institution.pdf ; accessed 2017 09 26.
Dalgleish, Adam, Patrick Girard, and Maree Davies, 2017, “Critical Thinking, Bias and Feminist Philosophy: Building a Better Framework through Collaboration”, Informal Logic , 37(4): 351–369. [ Dalgleish et al. available online ]
Dewey, John, 1910, How We Think , Boston: D.C. Heath. [ Dewey 1910 available online ]
–––, 1916, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education , New York: Macmillan.
–––, 1933, How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process , Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
–––, 1936, “The Theory of the Chicago Experiment”, Appendix II of Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 463–477.
–––, 1938, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry , New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Dominguez, Caroline (coord.), 2018a, A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century , Vila Real, Portugal: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO1 ; accessed 2018 04 09.
––– (coord.), 2018b, A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO2 ; accessed 2018 04 14.
Dumke, Glenn S., 1980, Chancellor’s Executive Order 338 , Long Beach, CA: California State University, Chancellor’s Office. Available at https://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-338.pdf ; accessed 2017 11 16.
Ennis, Robert H., 1958, “An Appraisal of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal”, The Journal of Educational Research , 52(4): 155–158. doi:10.1080/00220671.1958.10882558
–––, 1962, “A Concept of Critical Thinking: A Proposed Basis for Research on the Teaching and Evaluation of Critical Thinking Ability”, Harvard Educational Review , 32(1): 81–111.
–––, 1981a, “A Conception of Deductive Logical Competence”, Teaching Philosophy , 4(3/4): 337–385. doi:10.5840/teachphil198143/429
–––, 1981b, “Eight Fallacies in Bloom’s Taxonomy”, in C. J. B. Macmillan (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1980: Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Bloomington, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 269–273.
–––, 1984, “Problems in Testing Informal Logic, Critical Thinking, Reasoning Ability”. Informal Logic , 6(1): 3–9. [ Ennis 1984 available online ]
–––, 1987, “A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities”, in Joan Boykoff Baron and Robert J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice , New York: W. H. Freeman, pp. 9–26.
–––, 1989, “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher , 18(3): 4–10. doi:10.3102/0013189X018003004
–––, 1991, “Critical Thinking: A Streamlined Conception”, Teaching Philosophy , 14(1): 5–24. doi:10.5840/teachphil19911412
–––, 1996, “Critical Thinking Dispositions: Their Nature and Assessability”, Informal Logic , 18(2–3): 165–182. [ Ennis 1996 available online ]
–––, 1998, “Is Critical Thinking Culturally Biased?”, Teaching Philosophy , 21(1): 15–33. doi:10.5840/teachphil19982113
–––, 2011, “Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective Part I”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 26(1): 4–18. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613
–––, 2013, “Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(2): 25–45. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20132828
–––, 2016, “Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis with Bearing on Key Concepts”, in Patrick Bondy and Laura Benacquista (eds.), Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18–21 May 2016 , Windsor, ON: OSSA, pp. 1–19. Available at http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/105 ; accessed 2017 12 02.
–––, 2018, “Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision”, Topoi , 37(1): 165–184. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
Ennis, Robert H., and Jason Millman, 1971, Manual for Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X, and Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z , Urbana, IL: Critical Thinking Project, University of Illinois.
Ennis, Robert H., Jason Millman, and Thomas Norbert Tomko, 1985, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publication, 3rd edition.
–––, 2005, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Seaside, CA: Critical Thinking Company, 5th edition.
Ennis, Robert H. and Eric Weir, 1985, The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: Test, Manual, Criteria, Scoring Sheet: An Instrument for Teaching and Testing , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Facione, Peter A., 1990a, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction , Research Findings and Recommendations Prepared for the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association, ERIC Document ED315423.
–––, 1990b, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, CCTST – Form A , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
–––, 1990c, The California Critical Thinking Skills Test--College Level. Technical Report #3. Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the CCTST , ERIC Document ED326584.
–––, 1992, California Critical Thinking Skills Test: CCTST – Form B, Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
–––, 2000, “The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill”, Informal Logic , 20(1): 61–84. [ Facione 2000 available online ]
Facione, Peter A. and Noreen C. Facione, 1992, CCTDI: A Disposition Inventory , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Facione, Peter A., Noreen C. Facione, and Carol Ann F. Giancarlo, 2001, California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: CCTDI: Inventory Manual , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Facione, Peter A., Carol A. Sánchez, and Noreen C. Facione, 1994, Are College Students Disposed to Think? , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Document ED368311.
Fisher, Alec, and Michael Scriven, 1997, Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment , Norwich: Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.
Freire, Paulo, 1968 [1970], Pedagogia do Oprimido . Translated as Pedagogy of the Oppressed , Myra Bergman Ramos (trans.), New York: Continuum, 1970.
Glaser, Edward Maynard, 1941, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking , New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Halpern, Diane F., 1998, “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring”, American Psychologist , 53(4): 449–455. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449
–––, 2016, Manual: Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , Mödling, Austria: Schuhfried. Available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzUoP_pmwy1gdEpCR05PeW9qUzA/view ; accessed 2017 12 01.
Hamby, Benjamin, 2014, The Virtues of Critical Thinkers , Doctoral dissertation, Philosophy, McMaster University. [ Hamby 2014 available online ]
–––, 2015, “Willingness to Inquire: The Cardinal Critical Thinking Virtue”, in Martin Davies and Ronald Barnett (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–87.
Haynes, Ada, Elizabeth Lisic, Kevin Harris, Katie Leming, Kyle Shanks, and Barry Stein, 2015, “Using the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) as a Model for Designing Within-Course Assessments: Changing How Faculty Assess Student Learning”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 30(3): 38–48. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201530316
Hitchcock, David, 2017, “Critical Thinking as an Educational Ideal”, in his On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking , Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 477–497. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3_30
hooks, bell, 1994, Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom , New York and London: Routledge.
–––, 2010, Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom , New York and London: Routledge.
Johnson, Ralph H., 1992, “The Problem of Defining Critical Thinking”, in Stephen P, Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 38–53.
Kahane, Howard, 1971, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kahneman, Daniel, 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kenyon, Tim, and Guillaume Beaulac, 2014, “Critical Thinking Education and Debasing”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 341–363. [ Kenyon & Beaulac 2014 available online ]
Krathwohl, David R., Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia, 1964, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain , New York: David McKay.
Kuhn, Deanna, 1991, The Skills of Argument , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571350
Lipman, Matthew, 1987, “Critical Thinking–What Can It Be?”, Analytic Teaching , 8(1): 5–12. [ Lipman 1987 available online ]
Loftus, Elizabeth F., 2017, “Eavesdropping on Memory”, Annual Review of Psychology , 68: 1–18. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044138
Martin, Jane Roland, 1992, “Critical Thinking for a Humane World”, in Stephen P. Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 163–180.
Mayhew, Katherine Camp, and Anna Camp Edwards, 1936, The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 , New York: Appleton-Century. [ Mayhew & Edwards 1936 available online ]
McPeck, John E., 1981, Critical Thinking and Education , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Nickerson, Raymond S., 1998, “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises”, Review of General Psychology , 2(2): 175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
Nieto, Ana Maria, and Jorge Valenzuela, 2012, “A Study of the Internal Structure of Critical Thinking Dispositions”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 27(1): 31–38. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20122713
Norris, Stephen P., 1985, “Controlling for Background Beliefs When Developing Multiple-choice Critical Thinking Tests”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice , 7(3): 5–11. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1988.tb00437.x
Norris, Stephen P. and Robert H. Ennis, 1989, Evaluating Critical Thinking (The Practitioners’ Guide to Teaching Thinking Series), Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Norris, Stephen P. and Ruth Elizabeth King, 1983, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
–––, 1984, The Design of a Critical Thinking Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland. ERIC Document ED260083.
–––, 1985, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
–––, 1990a, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
–––, 1990b, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
Obama, Barack, 2014, State of the Union Address , January 28, 2014. [ Obama 2014 available online ]
OCR [Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations], 2011, AS/A Level GCE: Critical Thinking – H052, H452 , Cambridge: OCR. Information available at http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/as-a-level-gce-critical-thinking-h052-h452/ ; accessed 2017 10 12.
OECD [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development] Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, 2018, Fostering and Assessing Students’ Creative and Critical Thinking Skills in Higher Education , Paris: OECD. Available at http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Fostering-and-assessing-students-creative-and-critical-thinking-skills-in-higher-education.pdf ; accessed 2018 04 22.
Ontario Ministry of Education, 2013, The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9 to 12: Social Sciences and Humanities . Available at http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/ssciences9to122013.pdf ; accessed 2017 11 16.
Passmore, John Arthur, 1980, The Philosophy of Teaching , London: Duckworth.
Paul, Richard W., 1981, “Teaching Critical Thinking in the ‘Strong’ Sense: A Focus on Self-Deception, World Views, and a Dialectical Mode of Analysis”, Informal Logic , 4(2): 2–7. [ Paul 1981 available online ]
–––, 1984, “Critical Thinking: Fundamental to Education for a Free Society”, Educational Leadership , 42(1): 4–14.
–––, 1985, “McPeck’s Mistakes”, Informal Logic , 7(1): 35–43. [ Paul 1985 available online ]
Paul, Richard W. and Linda Elder, 2006, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools , Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 4th edition.
Payette, Patricia, and Edna Ross, 2016, “Making a Campus-Wide Commitment to Critical Thinking: Insights and Promising Practices Utilizing the Paul-Elder Approach at the University of Louisville”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 31(1): 98–110. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20163118
Possin, Kevin, 2008, “A Field Guide to Critical-Thinking Assessment”, Teaching Philosophy , 31(3): 201–228. doi:10.5840/teachphil200831324
–––, 2013a, “Some Problems with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) Test”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(3): 4–12. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201328313
–––, 2013b, “A Serious Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) Test”, Informal Logic , 33(3): 390–405. [ Possin 2013b available online ]
–––, 2014, “Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 393–416. [ Possin 2014 available online ]
Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762, Émile , Amsterdam: Jean Néaulme.
Scheffler, Israel, 1960, The Language of Education , Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Scriven, Michael, and Richard W. Paul, 1987, Defining Critical Thinking , Draft statement written for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Available at http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766 ; accessed 2017 11 29.
Sheffield, Clarence Burton Jr., 2018, “Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology”, Topoi , 37(1): 155–163. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9392-1
Siegel, Harvey, 1985, “McPeck, Informal Logic and the Nature of Critical Thinking”, in David Nyberg (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1985: Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Normal, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 61–72.
–––, 1988, Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education , New York: Routledge.
–––, 1999, “What (Good) Are Thinking Dispositions?”, Educational Theory , 49(2): 207–221. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1999.00207.x
Simpson, Elizabeth, 1966–67, “The Classification of Educational Objectives: Psychomotor Domain”, Illinois Teacher of Home Economics , 10(4): 110–144, ERIC document ED0103613. [ Simpson 1966–67 available online ]
Skolverket, 2011, Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and the Recreation Centre , Stockholm: Ordförrådet AB. Available at http://malmo.se/download/18.29c3b78a132728ecb52800034181/pdf2687.pdf ; accessed 2017 11 16.
Smith, B. Othanel, 1953, “The Improvement of Critical Thinking”, Progressive Education , 30(5): 129–134.
Smith, Eugene Randolph, Ralph Winfred Tyler, and the Evaluation Staff, 1942, Appraising and Recording Student Progress , Volume III of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
Splitter, Laurance J., 1987, “Educational Reform through Philosophy for Children”, Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children , 7(2): 32–39. doi:10.5840/thinking1987729
Stanovich Keith E., and Paula J. Stanovich, 2010, “A Framework for Critical Thinking, Rational Thinking, and Intelligence”, in David D. Preiss and Robert J. Sternberg (eds), Innovations in Educational Psychology: Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Human Development , New York: Springer Publishing, pp 195–237.
Stanovich Keith E., Richard F. West, and Maggie E. Toplak, 2011, “Intelligence and Rationality”, in Robert J. Sternberg and Scott Barry Kaufman (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3rd edition, pp. 784–826. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511977244.040
Tankersley, Karen, 2005, Literacy Strategies for Grades 4–12: Reinforcing the Threads of Reading , Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Thayer-Bacon, Barbara J., 1992, “Is Modern Critical Thinking Theory Sexist?”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 10(1): 3–7. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199210123
–––, 1993, “Caring and Its Relationship to Critical Thinking”, Educational Theory , 43(3): 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1993.00323.x
–––, 1995a, “Constructive Thinking: Personal Voice”, Journal of Thought , 30(1): 55–70.
–––, 1995b, “Doubting and Believing: Both are Important for Critical Thinking”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 15(2): 59–66. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199515226
–––, 2000, Transforming Critical Thinking: Thinking Constructively , New York: Teachers College Press.
Toulmin, Stephen Edelston, 1958, The Uses of Argument , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Turri, John, Mark Alfano, and John Greco, 2017, “Virtue Epistemology”, in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition). URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/epistemology-virtue/ >
Warren, Karen J. 1988. “Critical Thinking and Feminism”, Informal Logic , 10(1): 31–44. [ Warren 1988 available online ]
Watson, Goodwin, and Edward M. Glaser, 1980a, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form A , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
–––, 1980b, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: Forms A and B; Manual , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation,
–––, 1994, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form B , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Weinstein, Mark, 1990, “Towards a Research Agenda for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking”, Informal Logic , 12(3): 121–143. [ Weinstein 1990 available online ]
–––, 2013, Logic, Truth and Inquiry , London: College Publications.
Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus, 1996, Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139174763

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up this entry topic at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking (AILACT)
Center for Teaching Thinking (CTT)
Critical Thinking Across the European Higher Education Curricula (CRITHINKEDU)
Critical Thinking Definition, Instruction, and Assessment: A Rigorous Approach (criticalTHINKING.net)
Critical Thinking Research (RAIL)
Foundation for Critical Thinking
Insight Assessment
Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21)
The Critical Thinking Consortium
The Nature of Critical Thinking: An Outline of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities , by Robert H. Ennis

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Stanford Center for the Study of Language and Information

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

IMAGES

Critical_Thinking_Skills_Diagram_svg
Critical Thinking
How to Improve Critical Thinking
CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS. 1. Analytical Part of critical thinking…
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking Skills

VIDEO

Goal Setting Theory
Why You Should Think Plan And Strategize
Art of Critical Thinking
BRIAN TRACY
The Right Questions Framework for Decision-Making, Coaching and Achieving Goals #shorts
What does critical thinking involve? #literacy #criticalthinking

COMMENTS

9 SMART Goals Examples for Developing Critical Thinking
Attainable: This goal can be met by changing how you approach decision-making. Relevant: This is relevant to critical thinking because it requires you to think from different perspectives. Time-based: There is a two-month timeline for meeting this particular goal. 7. Reflect on Your Beliefs and Values.
What is Goal Setting and How to Do it Well
Schunk (1985) found that participation in goal setting encourages a search for new strategies to aid success. Finding novel ways to utilize our skills and push our abilities increases task-relevant knowledge while enhancing self-efficacy and self-confidence. Goal setting involves planning for the future.
A Crash Course in Critical Thinking
Here is a series of questions you can ask yourself to try to ensure that you are thinking critically. Conspiracy theories. Inability to distinguish facts from falsehoods. Widespread confusion ...
Critical Thinking: 15 Examples for Setting Performance Goals
Critical Thinking: Set Goals for your Employees. Here are some examples: To carefully analyze and interpret information collected to draw reasonable inferences. Learn to figure out different possible options of solving problems on a short, medium and long-term range. Develop a strategic approach to solving problems and following through with ...
Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is the discipline of rigorously and skillfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions, and beliefs. You'll need to actively question every step of your thinking process to do it well. Collecting, analyzing and evaluating information is an important skill in life, and a highly ...
Being A Critical Thinker
Critical thinking is the process of actively analyzing, assessing, synthesizing, evaluating and reflecting on information gathered from observation, experience, or communication. The ultimate goal of critically thinking is to solve problems or make decisions. This is achieved by mentally processing information in a clear, logical, reasoned, and ...
The Science & Psychology Of Goal-Setting 101
Goal-setting is an area in psychology whose roots lie in scientific data and empirical evidence. It is a flexible theory which is open to modifications according to the changing times, and yet serve the purpose of: Maximizing success. Minimizing failures and disappointments.
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking. Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms ...
A Short Guide to Building Your Team's Critical Thinking Skills
A Short Guide to Building Your Team's Critical Thinking Skills. by. Matt Plummer. October 11, 2019. twomeows/Getty Images. Summary. Most employers lack an effective way to objectively assess ...
Critical thinking and Goal setting
Critical thinking is a key life skill, and it's a very important aspect of goal setting. Critical thinking involves and hones a whole variety of tactics that you can use when setting goals, including: Finding evidence that the goal will be beneficial to you and your life. Recognizing the arguments for and against a particular goal you are ...
What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?
It makes you a well-rounded individual, one who has looked at all of their options and possible solutions before making a choice. According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [ 1 ]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills.
How Critical Thinking Boosts Your Goal-Setting
Critical thinking can be a powerful tool to help you set SMART goals. Through critical thinking, you can ask yourself meaningful questions about what you want to achieve, why, and how. You can ...
5 Steps for Collaborative Goal Setting in K-12 Schools
Step 1: Set the Goal. Educators constantly set different types of goals for students, colleagues, and communities, including academic and social and emotional goals for students or professional goals for colleagues. For example, as teachers, we may have a goal for students to build their collaborative mindsets and skills.
Developing Critical Thinking
In a time where deliberately false information is continually introduced into public discourse, and quickly spread through social media shares and likes, it is more important than ever for young people to develop their critical thinking. That skill, says Georgetown professor William T. Gormley, consists of three elements: a capacity to spot ...
5 Top Critical Thinking Skills (And How To Improve Them)
Top 5 critical thinking skills. Here are five common and impactful critical thinking skills you might consider highlighting on your resume or in an interview: 1. Observation. Observational skills are the starting point for critical thinking. People who are observant can quickly sense and identify a new problem.
Thinking About Kahneman's Contribution to Critical Thinking
No, critical thinking was not the focus of his book; rather system 1 (fast) and 2 (slow) thinking (see also Stanovich, 1999) - intuitive and reflective judgment. ... Goal Setting; Happiness ...
13 Easy Steps To Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills
6. Ask lots of open-ended questions. Curiosity is a key trait of critical thinkers, so channel your inner child and ask lots of "who," "what," and "why" questions. 7. Find your own reputable ...
6 Main Types of Critical Thinking Skills (With Examples)
Critical thinking skills examples. There are six main skills you can develop to successfully analyze facts and situations and come up with logical conclusions: 1. Analytical thinking. Being able to properly analyze information is the most important aspect of critical thinking. This implies gathering information and interpreting it, but also ...
Strategic Thinking and Goal Setting: A Clear Path to Success
Strategic thinking and goal setting are crucial skills in today's fast-paced business world. The ability to look at the big picture, analyze internal and external factors, and set clear objectives that drive an organization forward can significantly improve performance and overall success. Developing these skills involves understanding the ...
Goal setting
Critical and creative thinking (executive functioning) Goal setting. Goals help students to understand expectations and plan where to focus their time and attention. Setting manageable goals creates an opportunity for achievement and can be used to break up a larger task.
Creating goals
Critical & Creative Thinking - OER & More Resources: Creating goals Understanding, for better or worse, starts with entertaining the idea that something is true. The brain tries to make thinking easier by creating heuristics, but sometimes these are inaccurate.
Thinking Critically About Goal Setting
Another critical aspect of goal setting is ensuring the goals align with one's values and interests. Goals not aligned with one's values can lead to dissatisfaction and lack of motivation, as they may not be fulfilling or meaningful. ... Thinking critically about goal setting is important in ensuring the goals are meaningful, achievable ...
Academic Goal Setting Archives
Academic Goal Setting by Grade Level. Goal Setting for Grades K-2 Students in this age range will need more support thinking of goals to set, so guiding them to concrete goals is best. Think specific, numerical achievements or easily trackable behavioral goals. To guide your child in goal setting, you...
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking. First published Sat Jul 21, 2018. Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the ...

Critical Thinking: 15 Examples for Setting Performance Goals

Critical Thinking: Set Goals for your Employees. Here are some examples:

Critical Thinking: Improve and master this core skill with these ideas

These articles may interest you

Critical Thinking

What Is Critical Thinking?

Key Critical Thinking Skills

Logical Thinking

Self-Awareness

Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset

Gather Information

Critical Thinking Infographic

Discover more content

Extreme Teaming: Lessons in Complex, Cross-Sector Leadership

Who's in the Room?: How Great Leaders Structure and Manage the Teams Around Them

Team Management

Discover something new today

Ten Dos and Don'ts of Change Conversations

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

What's Your Leadership Style?

Recommended for you

The Science & Psychology Of Goal-Setting 101

This Article Contains:

How is Goal Setting Used in Psychology?

3 Interesting Research Findings

ABC of Goals

SMART Goals

SmartER Goals

The Psychology Of Goal Setting

Goals involve values

Goals bind us to reality

Goals call for self-evaluation

Download 3 Free Goals Exercises (PDF)

Download 3 Free Goals Pack (PDF)

4 Steps To Successful Goal-Setting

1. Make a plan

2. Explore resources

3. Be accountable

4. Use rewards and feedbacks

Types of goals

The E-E-E Model Of Goal-Setting

A Look At Goal Setting Theory

Principles Of Locke’s Theory

Core Concepts Of Goal-Setting Theory

1. Difficulty

2. Specificity

3. Reward reminders

4. Goal efficacy

Why the secret to success is setting the right goals – John Doerr

Psychological Studies And Research On Goal Setting

1. Values Commitment

2. Goals and Values Alignment

3. Character Strengths and Actions

4. Self-confidence

5. Persistence

6. Realistic outlook

7. Self-resilience

1. A Study On The Interrelationships Among Employee Participation, Individual Differences, And Goal-Setting

2. Dr. Gail Matthews’ (2015) Study On Goal-Setting

3. A Study On Success And Goals

1. A Case Study By Emily van Sonnenberg

2. A Goal-Setting Case Study By Redmond

3. Goal-Setting Case Study By Hardin

17 Tools To Increase Motivation and Goal Achievement

RAS And Goal Setting

1. Writing goals

2. Planning goals

Article feedback

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Related articles

Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation

SMART Goals, HARD Goals, PACT, or OKRs: What Works?

How to Assess and Improve Readiness for Change

Read other articles by their category

A Short Guide to Building Your Team’s Critical Thinking Skills

Partner Center

Thinking Critically About Goal Setting

Step 1: Set the Goal

Step 2: Visualize the Outcome

Step 3: Identify the Successes and Obstacles