improving critical thinking skills in history

NPP > JOURNALS > NETWORKS > Vol. 11 (2009) > Iss. 2

Improving Critical Thinking Skills in History

Carl Kosta Savich Follow

This action research project, conducted by a classroom teacher, investigated strategies and techniques to improve critical thinking skills and engagement in a high school history classroom. The research methods involved comparing quiz, test, and essay scores as well as student surveys, interviews and teacher-created field notes from inquiry-based and lecturebased classrooms. The inquiry classroom involved role-playing, simulations, re-enactments, multiple text analysis, and oral/visual presentations. Students engaged in analyzing bias, examining different viewpoints and perspectives, and analyzing documents. The findings indicate that when critical thinking skills were emphasized and integrated in lesson planning, students achieved higher scores on tests, quizzes, and assignments and gained a deeper and more meaningful understanding of history.

Recommended Citation

Savich, Carl Kosta (2009) "Improving Critical Thinking Skills in History," Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research : Vol. 11: Iss. 2. https://doi.org/10.4148/2470-6353.1106

Since July 26, 2017

Included in

Teacher Education and Professional Development Commons

Rights Statement

In Copyright. URI: http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ This Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).

• Editorial Board
• Information for Authors
• Submit Article
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

ISSN: 2470-6353

NPP Home | About NPP | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Advertisement

Explicitly Teaching Critical Thinking Skills in a History Course

• Published: 20 March 2017
• Volume 26 , pages 93–105, ( 2017 )

Cite this article

• Anne Collins McLaughlin 1 &
• Alicia Ebbitt McGill 2  

6524 Accesses

27 Citations

202 Altmetric

25 Mentions

Explore all metrics

Critical thinking skills are often assessed via student beliefs in non-scientific ways of thinking, (e.g, pseudoscience). Courses aimed at reducing such beliefs have been studied in the STEM fields with the most successful focusing on skeptical thinking. However, critical thinking is not unique to the sciences; it is crucial in the humanities and to historical thinking and analysis. We investigated the effects of a history course on epistemically unwarranted beliefs in two class sections. Beliefs were measured pre- and post-semester. Beliefs declined for history students compared to a control class and the effect was strongest for the honors section. This study provides evidence that a humanities education engenders critical thinking. Further, there may be individual differences in ability or preparedness in developing such skills, suggesting different foci for critical thinking coursework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Effect of Critical Thinking Education on Epistemically Unwarranted Beliefs in College Students

TLO 8: Identify and Reflect Critically on the Knowledge and Skills Developed in the Study of History

Teaching Science as a Process, Not a Set of Facts

Aarnio, K., & Lindeman, M. (2005). Paranormal beliefs, education, and thinking styles. Personality and Individual Differences, 39 , 1227–1236.

Article   Google Scholar  

Abrami, P. C., et al. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: a stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78 (4), 1102–1134.

Allchin, D. (2004). Pseudohistory and pseudoscience. Science & Education, 13 , 179–195.

Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: limited learning on college campuses . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar  

Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: a taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128 (4), 612–637. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612 .

Boudry, M. (2013). Loki’s wager and Laudan’s error: on genuine and territorial demarcation. In M. Pigliucci & M. Boudry (Eds.), Philosophy of pseudoscience: reconsidering the demarcation problem (pp. 79–100). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bridgstock, M. (2003). Paranormal beliefs among science students. Australasian Science, 24 (4), 33–35.

Bunge, M. (2010). Knowledge: genuine and bogus. Science & Education, 20 (5–6), 411–438.

Davies, M. (2013). Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. Higher Education Research & Development, 32 (4), 529–544.

DeRobertis, M. M., & Delaney, P. A. (1993). A survey of the attitudes of university students to astrology and astronomy. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 87 (1), 34–50.

Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed . New York: Penguin Group.

Dougherty, M. J. (2004). Educating believers: research demonstrates that courses in skepticism can effectively decrease belief in the paranormal. Skeptic, 10 (4), 31–35.

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction . Millbrae: The California Academic Press.

Feder, K. (1984). Irrationality and archaeology. American Antiquity, 49 (3), 525–541.

Feder, K. (1995). Ten years after: surveying misconceptions about the human past. Cultural Resource Management, 18 (3), 10–14.

Feder, K. (2010). Frauds, myths, and mysteries: science and pseudoscience in archaeology (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Fitzgerald, J., & Baird, V. A. (2011). Taking a step back: teaching critical thinking by distinguishing appropriate type of evidence. Political Science and Politics, 44 (3), 619–624.

Franz, T. M., & Green, K. H. (2013). The impact of an interdisciplinary learning community course on pseudoscientific reasoning in first-year science students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13 (5), 90–105.

Freidel, D. (2007). Betraying the Maya. Archaeology Magazine, 60 (2), 36–41.

Goode, E. (2002). Education, scientific knowledge, and belief in the paranormal. Skeptical Inquirer, 26 (1), 24–27.

Gray, T. (1985). Changing unsubstantiated belief: testing the ignorance hypothesis. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 17 , 263–270.

Harrold, F. B., & Eve, R. A. (Eds.). (1987). Cult archaeology and creationism: understanding pseudoscientific beliefs about the past . Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.

Holtorf, C. (2005). From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: archaeology as popular culture . Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Johnson, M., & Pigliucci, M. (2004). Is knowledge of science associated with higher skepticism of pseudoscientific claims? The American Biology Teacher, 66 (8), 536–548.

Kane, M. J., Core, T. J., & Hunt, R. R. (2010). Bias versus bias: harnessing hindsight to reveal paranormal belief change beyond demand characteristics. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17 (2), 206–212. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.2.206 .

Karimi, F., & Sutton, J. (2014). Maryland mom kills two of her children during attempted exorcism . CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/19/justice/maryland-exorcism-deaths/ . Accessed 20 Feb.

Lobato, E., Mendoza, J., Sims, V., & Chin, M. (2014). Examining the relationship between conspiracy theories, paranormal beliefs, and pseudoscience acceptance among a university population. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28 , 617–625.

Losh, S. C., & Nzekwe, B. (2011). Creatures in the classroom: preservice teacher beliefs about fantastic beasts, magic, extraterrestrials, evolution and creationism. Science & Education, 20 , 473–489.

McAnany, P. A., & Negrón, T. G. (2009). Bellicose rulers and climatological peril? Retrofitting 21st century woes on 8th century Maya society. In In questioning collapse: human resilience, ecological vulnerability, and the aftermath of empire . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McAnany, P. A., & Yoffee, N. (Eds.) (2010). Questioning collapse: human resilience, ecological vulnerability, and the aftermath of empire . New York: Cambridge University Press.

Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9 , 114–128.

NSF. (2014). Chapter 7: Science and technology: public attitudes and understanding. In Science and Engineering Indicators 2014. National Science Foundation, 7–1–7-37.

Pascarella, E. T., Blaich, C., Martin, G. L., & Hanson, J. M. (2011). How robust are the findings of academically adrift? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 43 (3), 20–24.

Paul, R. (1995). Critical thinking: how to prepare students for a rapidly changing world . Rohnert Park: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Pew (2013). Public’s knowledge of science and technology. Pew Research Center, Washington, D.C. (April). http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/04-22-13%20Science%20knowledge%20Release.pdf . Accessed 23 Nov 2014.

Pyburn, A. (2006). The politics of collapse. Archaeologies, 2 (1), 3–7.

Ren, A. C. (2006). Maya archaeology and the political and cultural identity of contemporary Maya in Guatemala. Archaeologies, 2 (1), 8–19.

Rice, T. W. (2003). Believe it or not: religious and other paranormal beliefs in the United States. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42 , 95–106.

Ryan, T. J., Brown, J., Johnson, A., Sanburg, C., & Schildmeier, M. (2004). Science literacy and belief in the paranormal—an empirical test. Skeptic, 10 (4), 12–13.

Sagan, C. (1996). The demon-haunted world: science as a candle in the dark . New York: Ballantine Books.

Smith, M. U., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding: what goals for science education? Science & Education, 13 , 553–582.

Tobacyk, J. (2004). A revised paranormal belief scale. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 23 , 94–98.

Turgut, H. (2011). The context of demarcation in nature of science teaching: the case of astrology. Science & Education, 20 (5–6), 491–515.

Wesp, R., & Montgomery, K. (1998). Developing critical thinking through the study of paranormal phenomena. Teaching of Psychology, 25 , 275–278.

Wood, M. J., Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2012). Dead and alive: beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3 (6), 767–773.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, North Carolina State University, Box 7650, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

Anne Collins McLaughlin

Department of History, North Carolina State University, Box 8108, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

Alicia Ebbitt McGill

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Collins McLaughlin .

Ethics declarations

This research was approved by the North Carolina State University IRB and informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflict of interest regarding this project.

Appendix 1: Pew test of science knowledge

All radioactivity is man-made. Is this statement true or false?

Correct Answer: False

Electrons are smaller than atoms. Is this statement true or false?

Correct Answer: True

Lasers work by focusing sound waves. Is this statement true or false?

The continents on which we live have been moving their location for millions of years and will continue to move in the future. Is this statement true or false?

Which one of the following types of solar radiation does sunscreen protect the skin from?

Correct Answer: Ultraviolet

Does nanotechnology deal with things that are extremely...

Correct Answer: small

Which gas makes up most of the Earth’s atmosphere?

Correct Answer: Nitrogen

Carbon Dioxide

What is the main function of red blood cells?

Correct Answer: Carry oxygen to all parts of the body

Help the blood to clot

Fight disease in the body

Which of these is a major concern about the overuse of antibiotics?

Correct Answer: It can lead to antibiotic-resistant bacteria

People will become addicted to antibiotics

Antibiotics are very expensive

Which is an example of a chemical reaction?

Correct Answer: Nails rusting

Water boiling

Sugar dissolving

Which is the better way to determine whether a new drug is effective in treating a disease? If a scientist has a group of 1000 volunteers with the disease to study, should she...

Correct Answer: Give the drug to half of them but not to the other half, and compare how many in each group get better

Give the drug to all of them and see how many get better

What gas do most scientists believe causes temperatures in the atmosphere to rise?

Correct Answer: Carbon dioxide

Which natural resource is extracted in a process known as “fracking”?

Correct Answer: Natural gas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

McLaughlin, A.C., McGill, A.E. Explicitly Teaching Critical Thinking Skills in a History Course. Sci & Educ 26 , 93–105 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9878-2

Download citation

Published : 20 March 2017

Issue Date : March 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9878-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Critical Thinking
• Demand Characteristic
• Belief Change
• Critical Thinking Skill
• Conspiracy Theory
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Student LMS
• “The Beacon” Student Newspaper
• Merchandise

Using History to Teach Critical Thinking Skills

Feb 26, 2019

Exploring Historical Perspectives for Critical Thinking Development

One of the most important tools we can give our students is the ability to think critically.  In this age of unlimited social media sharing, fake news, and hidden agendas, it has never been more important to be able to look at information and its source and determine if the information is accurate and true.  Dictionary.com defines critical thinking as clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence.  In a good history class, one that moves beyond the textbook, thinking critically is part of the package.

Students of history look at an event from many different perspectives.  The use of both primary (first-hand accounts) and secondary (recounting with interpretation and analysis) sources helps students see an event from many different angles.  Imagine an event like the Boston Massacre.  The account of the British soldier involved would be very different from the patriot on the street. Likewise, Paul Revere, Thomas Jefferson, and King George III would all see the Boston Massacre from a different place.  A twenty-first century historian would add another view of the event. A British historian and an American historian would likely see the event in two different lights.  A student of history learns to read all the accounts and make judgments about the event.  Were the patriots justified in their actions?  Were the soldiers?  Why did Paul Revere refer to the event as a massacre?  How did the event contribute to the tensions between the colonies and the crown leading up to the American Revolution?

Looking at different sources, the perspective of the author, and the bias brought to the event help students learn to discern and think critically.  This important skill can be extrapolated to their non-academic life to determine if a news article, tweet, or report is valid or bait.

Becky Frank has been steeped in American History from her early days growing up on the family farm in Northeastern North Carolina. Although Barrow Creek Farm has been in her family since the 1680s, her parents were the first to live on it in three generations. On the farm she learned to milk cows, sheer sheep, and drive a tractor.

After an internship at Historic Edenton, she received a B.S. in Public History from Appalachian State University in 1992. Answering God’s call to teach in a classroom setting, she added teacher certification from East Carolina University to her degree in 1998. Becky then taught social studies in Gates County, North Carolina where her classes included U.S. History, World History, Economics, Government, and Humanities. In 2003 she married her husband John and left the classroom to start a family.

Becky has been teaching online for more than 10 years.  She also homeschools her three children and is an active leader in the Children’s and Youth’s ministry at her church. She also enjoys gardening, cooking, scrapbooking and long walks with her kids and the family dog. Sharing the heritage of our great country is one of her passions as well. Her lifelong dream is to return to the family farm and make a portion of the acreage a living history site.

Parents must first create a family membership account in order to purchase classes.

Parents should purchase classes for one student at a time in the shopping cart. This will allow the registrar to appropriately place your students in the correct classes.

See  How to Register  for more details.

• DOI: 10.2307/1555655
• Corpus ID: 156772468

The Idea of History Teaching: Using Collingwood's Idea of History to Promote Critical Thinking in the High School History Classroom

• Anthony Pattiz
• Published 1 February 2004
• History, Education
• The History Teacher

17 Citations

Narrative and history, the city and public history, constructing historical profiles with digital natives., from living under attap to residing in the sky: imagination and empathy in source-based history education in singapore., reflections on teaching the history of early modern european law, crime, and punishment to undergraduates, history education at the crossroads: challenges and prospects in a lesotho context, why historical thinking skills was not there, dewey and standardization: a philosophical look at the implications for social studies, improving critical thinking 1 running head: improving critical thinking improving critical thinking skills in history, 16 references, re-enacting the past: using r. g. collingwood at the secondary level, the idea of history..

• Highly Influential

The Principles of History: And Other Writings in Philosophy of History

History that never happened : a treatise on the question, what would have happend if..., the closing of the american mind: how higher education has failed democracy and impoverished the souls of today's students, the right to learn: a blueprint for creating schools that work. the jossey-bass education series., higher order thinking in teaching social studies: a rationale for the assessment of classroom thoughtfulness, critical thinking: what every person needs to survive in a changing world, an exchange: the unschooled mind: how children think and how schools should teach., the effects of high-stakes testing on student motivation and learning, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• International Network
• Policy Papers
• Opinion Articles
• Historians' Books
• History of Government Blog
• Editorial Guidelines
• Case Studies
• Consultations
• Hindsight Perspectives for a Safer World Project
• Global Economics and History Forum
• Trade Union and Employment Forum
• Parenting Forum

Historical content matters: a response to the critical thinking skills agenda

Katie barclay | 06 november 2019.

Executive Summary

• Historical knowledge is a significant form of ‘common sense’ knowledge that shapes decision-making
• Academic histories play a key role in shaping this ‘common sense’ knowledge
• As a result, academic historical scholarship plays a significant and undervalued role in producing social, economic and political outcomes in all areas
• Universities, policymakers and society should take greater heed of historical research as vital to the healthy functioning of societies, economies and polities
• The value of history degrees is not just an important skillset in critical thinking, but the historical content that it provides students

Introduction

History is regularly deployed by people from all walks of life for all sorts of purposes. Pro-Brexit campaigners have variously called upon Britain’s imperial heritage or nostalgic imaginings of whiter British past to justify their retreat from the European Union. Remainers have responded with their own histories of Empire and migration. Both sides have wielded experts in universities to support their points, or posed with historical writings in piles behind them as they make political arguments. The Christchurch shooter carved the dates of Crusade battles into his weapon, locating his action – he claimed – in a long history of Christian-Muslim conflict. Recent debates around sex education in schools have deployed arguments about ‘traditional’ family structures , that LGBT families are meant to sit outside. More benignly, journalists and the public display surprise when they encounter academic scholarship that sheds light on contemporary issues, claiming these ‘hidden’ histories have been withheld from them. It is a degree of surprise, sometimes outrage, that is suggestive that the public recognise that history does important work in shaping how we feel about the world, and that gaps in knowledge are somehow unjust or designed to deceive the public.

For all these people, history matters. And it matters to historians that the public has access to the best and most cutting-edge histories to help inform these discussions. One of the key purposes of History & Policy is to direct the knowledge and findings produced by historians towards those addressing similar problems in the present. Historians, deeply appreciative of the importance of context, are loathe to suggest that ‘lessons from the past’ can be directly applied to a new set of circumstances. But equally we argue that understanding the past can help people make better decisions when encountering similar circumstances today. It can be particularly useful for highlighting how a specific problem has arisen, and for offering an appreciation of the scope of an impact of a choice and the variety of dimensions that need to be considered. Thus, for example, research on children and institutions illuminates why institutions have repeatedly failed many of the children that have been brought into them and why these same problems continue into the present. Historical knowledge, however, is also significant because it shapes our understanding of who we are, our identities, and our potential as people. It is important not just where it can be directly applied but as a source of general information that informs how we engage with the world. That it plays this role ensures that we should not only consider historical research and teaching critical when it has an instrumental and applied value but also because of its role in producing people, inclusive democracies, and nations.

Histories and the everyday

Historical knowledge is all around us. It is transmitted through families, fact and fiction books, television, museums and heritage sites, in language, and as ‘common sense’ information that we use to make decisions. Our first encounters with the past are often in the stories told about own ancestors – parents and grandparents – designed to help us understand what is valued in our family or how our childhood experience might have differed in a previous era. These stories offer a set of common sense information that help us locate our own experiences in relation to time and place, to significant events, and to other people. They can be incredibly varied, ranging across histories of childhood, school, workplaces and occupations, political parties and geopolitics, climate and environment, arts and culture, love and friendship, science, medicine and technology to name a few. As we age and encounter other histories, perhaps at school or in books, our knowledge of the world expands and we learn both about diversity and how historical events have differential impacts on groups.

As the histories that help us make sense of our experiences, these accounts become central to how we understand our personal identity, that of others, and our role in the nation. Given our investments in our identity and attachments to our pasts, these stories also ensure that history becomes politically significant in the public sphere. That the public intuitively recognises this can be seen in the debates, protests and highly emotive engagements with public statues associated with controversial figures, such as the imperialist Cecil Rhodes or US confederate leader Robert E. Lee , or in museum displays associated with local conflicts, such as The Troubles in Northern Ireland or Aboriginal-settler conflict in Australia. What is represented in public histories becomes central to debates about who we are, who is included and excluded, who holds power, and the production of contemporary values and rights.

These ‘everyday histories’ are related to academic scholarship in important ways. The popular histories that are taught at school and museums and appear on television, in children’s books, even fiction, typically draw on academic research. If they are sometimes less rigorous or flatten complex arguments, they nonetheless draw on a body of research conducted by professional historians. Increasingly academics also produce public-facing historical writing to aid with this process. The histories that shape identities grow from academic scholarship. Historians play a significant role in determining what is important to remember. A move from histories of monarchs and diplomacy to that of women and workers may have been encouraged by grassroots civil rights movements in the middle of the twentieth century, but it was historians who determined the key features of the new social histories that emerged.

Historical research is often considered an art because the historian plays such a key role in shaping their accounts of the past. It is the questions that they consider to be important that determine what they look for in the archive. It is their sifting and selection from often sizeable collections of material that determine what makes it into history books and what is forgotten. It is these choices, and that others might make different choices, that produce historical debate and argument, and which informs the evolution of the field as a new generation of scholars bring a different set of concerns to the material that survives from the past. Thus the knowledges that we grow up with and that shape our understanding of ourselves and identities reflect the trends and critical questions within the historical discipline in our formative years. It is perhaps natural then that new histories produced by a new generation of scholars can be challenging to those whose identities were shaped by older understandings of the past, just as those same histories have been liberating for many – such as women, the LGBT community, or ethnic minorities – who lacked stories of people like them when they were growing up. Yet this evolution is critical in producing history that remains relevant to our contemporary experience and identity-making, and to answering questions raised by new circumstances and contexts.

Research and teaching history

In recent years, the value of historical research, and indeed humanities research in general, has been questioned. Right-wing commentators have suggested that universities are increasingly driven by ‘identity politics’ . Critics fear that the history curriculum has fragmented into a wide range of modules driven by the politics of their teachers. Others have questioned the value of research that is not seen to hold a direct and measurable social, but especially economic, impact. This has become particularly significant for the student market where degrees are increasingly promoted with claims of a direct and obvious employment route. Both criticisms demand a straightforward account of what a history degree teaches, and a single type of job that those with history degrees take up. Without this, critics argue, history is useless knowledge. Universities have sought to counter such claims by locating the value of history not in historical knowledge – the content of what was learned – but in ‘critical thinking’, ‘writing and communication’ and similar important but generic skills . For such commentators, the historical content is of less significance than the opportunity to read widely, think deeply, research, and solve problems, a skillset that can be applied in any context.

No one would contest that a history degree offers these benefits, but it is an account that fails to recognise the importance of historical knowledge in the everyday. The histories we use are significant in interpreting everyday experiences and identity. Indeed, critical thinking requires historical knowledge. What we determine to be ‘common sense’, how we understand the world to operate, does not arise naturally but is based upon the everyday histories that we are taught in childhood and across our lives. This is the case when we, for example, make an assumption about normative family forms in the past, or when we draw on an interpretation of the causes of the First World War when producing foreign policy. Such ‘common sense’ histories are always partial, reflective of our experience and our encounters with the historical knowledge available to us. Access to a broader, more sophisticated body of historical research counters these ‘common sense’ accounts by offering a firmer grounding for decision-making and critical analysis. This can be seen in the now famous example of the US Supreme Court decision for marriage equality, that referenced the scholarship of key marriage and sexuality historians , and transformed the legal rights of LGBT individuals across the US.

New histories are therefore important for the work they do in shaping individuals and society. A democratic society – one where all members of the polity have a place – requires inclusive accounts that acknowledge and recognise all parts of the community. This is even more critical for groups who have been subject to disadvantage, harm or exploitation, where their histories act as an acknowledgement and first step in redress for past wrongs. It is vital for minorities who need histories of others like them to explain their experience and role in the world. New histories are also important in giving us accounts of art, culture, science, technology, business, economy and more that help us interpret the present, much as History & Policy promotes. Importantly, for a rich account of the past to emerge, a variety of topics and perspectives becomes critical.

In the present moment, a popular television show such as Downton Abbey, exploring changing social relations in early twentieth-century Britain, can draw on histories of war, economy, society, fashion, popular culture, material culture, accent and language use, technology, medicine and more, in its rich ‘world-building’. This is possible due to the work of dozens of scholars and years of effort, which itself builds upon generations of earlier work, though this work is usually unacknowledged within television credits. Such a history is richer, more interesting, perhaps a fuller capture of the past. Its strength lies in collaboration and the representation of a diversity of perspectives. With significant viewing figures both in the UK and internationally, Downton Abbey is an account of the past that will inform how many of us interpret our present experiences. Yet it is an account that is not usually acknowledged as either ‘history’ that people will use in making sense of themselves, nor as rooted in academic historical research – despite it being both. Remarkably, despite the fact that governments and increasingly university campaigns targeting students have sought to instrumentalise historical knowledge by emphasising its benefits for public policy , for productivity and growth, and for future employment, the important and everyday impacts of history – the ways that it is used by ordinary people in their own lives – is rarely considered as a domain shaped by historical research.

For an informed and productive society, the historical knowledge disseminated to the public must be broad, diverse and evolving to reflect new research. Universities are a key space where new accounts of the past can be taught and disseminated. That there is not a core history curriculum taught at every university, as some conservatives suggest there should be, is not a flaw, but a feature. It is not possible for every member of society, nor every historian, to know everything about the past. History courses thus specialise, and disseminate diverse accounts of the past. As history students from different institutions spread outwards, taking their specialist knowledges to an array of workplaces nationally and internationally, they share their educations with others, increasing the opportunity for knowledge to reach those that will find it most useful. Acknowledging the significance of the historical content of degrees may also offer opportunities for individuals to be targeted by employers or communities for historical learning that gives them expertise and critical thinking in specific areas.

Importantly, this is not an account of historical knowledge that attends only to the modern histories that explain the immediate experiences of those in the polity. Historical knowledges have long legacies in culture and society, requiring investment and dissemination in histories both deep and wide. This can be seen most recently in the use of crusading history both by the Christchurch shooter and by conservative political parties in Australia  (where Senator Cori Bernardi recently tabled a motion asking the Senate to note the anniversary of the breaking of the siege of Vienna in 1529), to promote a right-wing agenda. But it can also be seen in our contemporary understanding of love and sex that was first forged in conflicts within the medieval church. Knowing this – like our more well-known modern histories of sex and gender – may well open up new ways of thinking about something so central to our everyday lives. A successful and inclusive democratic state requires not just research skills, but historical knowledge.

Historical knowledge shapes how people interpret their experiences, and those of others. It aids critical thinking and decision-making. Providing people with richer, more sophisticated, and up to date historical content therefore contributes not only to a better educated public but one that can make better decisions in a vast array of areas of life. Acknowledging this requires a move from promoting history degrees for their generic critical thinking and communication skillset to celebrating historical knowledge as a key form of information required by productive members of society. This has implications for how universities promote their history research and teaching, but also for policymakers as they seek to produce the best outcomes in areas as diverse as education, health, industry, politics, economy, technology, arts, and society.

• Barclay, Katie
• History in practice

Further Reading

Anna Green, ‘Intergenerational Family Stories: Private, Parochial, Pathological?,’ Journal of Family History 38, no. 4 (2013): 387-402

Shurlee Swain and Nell Musgrove, ‘We are the Stories We Tell About Ourselves: Child Welfare Records and the Construction of Identity among Australians who, as Children, Experienced Out-of-Home “Care”,’ Archives and Manuscripts 40, no. 1 (2012): 4-14

Penny Summerfield, ‘Culture and Composure: Creating Narratives of the Gendered Self in Oral History Interviews,’ Cultural and Social History 1 (2004): 65-93

Jay Winter, Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995)

About the author

Katie Barclay is Deputy-Director of the ARC Centre for Excellence in the History of Emotions and Associate Professor in History, University of Adelaide. Her research explores the transmission of knowledge across generations within families and the implications for self, identity and nation.

Related Policy Papers

How history matters now, ludmilla jordanova | 27 november 2008, in defence of applied history: the history and policy website, john tosh | 10 february 2006, why history matters, john tosh | 20 november 2008, why history matters - and why medieval history also matters, john arnold | 28 november 2008, related opinion articles, back to the past for the school history curriculum, nicola sheldon | 20 february 2013, papers by author, papers by theme, digital download.

Download and read with you anywhere!

• Download Kindle Version
• Visit Apple iBooks Store

Popular Papers

• 1 Why Thames Water is Top of Sue Gray’s Risk Register

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER!

Sign up to receive announcements on events, the latest research and more!

To complete the subscription process, please click the link in the email we just sent you.

We will never send spam and you can unsubscribe any time.

H&P is based at the Institute of Historical Research, Senate House, University of London.

We are the only project in the UK providing access to an international network of more than 500 historians with a broad range of expertise. H&P offers a range of resources for historians, policy makers and journalists.

Publications

Policy engagement, news & events.

Keep up-to-date via our social networks

• Follow on Twitter
• Like Us on FaceBook
• Watch Us on Youtube
• Listen to us on SoundCloud
• See us on flickr
• Listen to us on Apple iTunes

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser.

• Order Tracking
• Create an Account

200+ Award-Winning Educational Textbooks, Activity Books, & Printable eBooks!

• Compare Products

Reading, Writing, Math, Science, Social Studies

• Search by Book Series
• Algebra I & II  Gr. 7-12+
• Algebra Magic Tricks  Gr. 2-12+
• Algebra Word Problems  Gr. 7-12+
• Balance Benders  Gr. 2-12+
• Balance Math & More!  Gr. 2-12+
• Basics of Critical Thinking  Gr. 4-7
• Brain Stretchers  Gr. 5-12+
• Building Thinking Skills  Gr. Toddler-12+
• Building Writing Skills  Gr. 3-7
• Bundles - Critical Thinking  Gr. PreK-9
• Bundles - Language Arts  Gr. K-8
• Bundles - Mathematics  Gr. PreK-9
• Bundles - Multi-Subject Curriculum  Gr. PreK-12+
• Bundles - Test Prep  Gr. Toddler-12+
• Can You Find Me?  Gr. PreK-1
• Complete the Picture Math  Gr. 1-3
• Cornell Critical Thinking Tests  Gr. 5-12+
• Cranium Crackers  Gr. 3-12+
• Creative Problem Solving  Gr. PreK-2
• Critical Thinking Activities to Improve Writing  Gr. 4-12+
• Critical Thinking Coloring  Gr. PreK-2
• Critical Thinking Detective  Gr. 3-12+
• Critical Thinking Tests  Gr. PreK-6
• Critical Thinking for Reading Comprehension  Gr. 1-5
• Critical Thinking in United States History  Gr. 6-12+
• CrossNumber Math Puzzles  Gr. 4-10
• Crypt-O-Words  Gr. 2-7
• Crypto Mind Benders  Gr. 3-12+
• Daily Mind Builders  Gr. 5-12+
• Dare to Compare Math  Gr. 2-7
• Developing Critical Thinking through Science  Gr. 1-8
• Dr. DooRiddles  Gr. PreK-12+
• Dr. Funster's  Gr. 2-12+
• Editor in Chief  Gr. 2-12+
• Fun-Time Phonics!  Gr. PreK-2
• Half 'n Half Animals  Gr. K-4
• Hands-On Thinking Skills  Gr. K-1
• Inference Jones  Gr. 1-6
• James Madison  Gr. 10-12+
• Jumbles  Gr. 3-5
• Language Mechanic  Gr. 4-7
• Language Smarts  Gr. 1-4
• Mastering Logic & Math Problem Solving  Gr. 6-9
• Math Analogies  Gr. K-9
• Math Detective  Gr. 3-8
• Math Games  Gr. 3-8
• Math Mind Benders  Gr. 5-12+
• Math Ties  Gr. 4-8
• Math Word Problems  Gr. 4-10
• Mathematical Reasoning  Gr. Toddler-11
• Middle School Science  Gr. 6-8
• Mind Benders  Gr. PreK-12+
• Mind Building Math  Gr. K-1
• Mind Building Reading  Gr. K-1
• Novel Thinking  Gr. 3-6
• OLSAT® Test Prep  Gr. PreK-K
• Organizing Thinking  Gr. 2-8
• Pattern Explorer  Gr. 3-9
• Practical Critical Thinking  Gr. 8-12+
• Punctuation Puzzler  Gr. 3-8
• Reading Detective  Gr. 3-12+
• Red Herring Mysteries  Gr. 4-12+
• Red Herrings Science Mysteries  Gr. 4-9
• Science Detective  Gr. 3-6
• Science Mind Benders  Gr. PreK-3
• Science Vocabulary Crossword Puzzles  Gr. 4-6
• Sciencewise  Gr. 4-12+
• Scratch Your Brain  Gr. 2-12+
• Sentence Diagramming  Gr. 3-12+
• Smarty Pants Puzzles  Gr. 3-12+
• Snailopolis  Gr. K-4
• Something's Fishy at Lake Iwannafisha  Gr. 5-9
• Teaching Technology  Gr. 3-12+
• Tell Me a Story  Gr. PreK-1
• Think Analogies  Gr. 3-12+
• Think and Write  Gr. 3-8
• Think-A-Grams  Gr. 4-12+
• Thinking About Time  Gr. 3-6
• Thinking Connections  Gr. 4-12+
• Thinking Directionally  Gr. 2-6
• Thinking Skills & Key Concepts  Gr. PreK-2
• Thinking Skills for Tests  Gr. PreK-5
• U.S. History Detective  Gr. 8-12+
• Understanding Fractions  Gr. 2-6
• Visual Perceptual Skill Building  Gr. PreK-3
• Vocabulary Riddles  Gr. 4-8
• Vocabulary Smarts  Gr. 2-5
• Vocabulary Virtuoso  Gr. 2-12+
• What Would You Do?  Gr. 2-12+
• Who Is This Kid? Colleges Want to Know!  Gr. 9-12+
• Word Explorer  Gr. 4-8
• Word Roots  Gr. 3-12+
• World History Detective  Gr. 6-12+
• Writing Detective  Gr. 3-6
• You Decide!  Gr. 6-12+

Critical Thinking in United States History

Colonies to constitution • new republic to civil war • reconstruction to progressivism • spanish-american war to vietnam war.

Grades: 6-12+

Social Studies

Critical Thinking in United States History uses fascinating original source documents and discussion-based critical thinking methods to help students evaluate conflicting perspectives of historical events. This process stimulates students’ interest in history, improves their historical knowledge, and develops their analytical skills for assessment tests. For each lesson, students examine two or more perspectives of an event using analysis and evaluation skills such as identifying types of reasoning and evaluating sources. Through debating historians’ evidence, inferences, analogies, and assumptions, students come away with a deeper understanding of specific events. They also learn to examine any historical, or current, event with a more critical mind. Instruction/Answer Guides - (included) A separate Instruction/Answer Guide is included and contains objectives, teaching suggestions, focus questions, and answers. Use of the guide is highly recommended.

Description and Features

All products in this series.

    • Our eBooks digital, electronic versions of the book pages that you may print to any paper printer.     • You can open the PDF eBook from any device or computer that has a PDF reader such as Adobe® Reader®.     • Licensee can legally keep a copy of this eBook on three different devices. View our eBook license agreement details here .     • You can immediately download your eBook from "My Account" under the "My Downloadable Product" section after you place your order.

• Add to Cart Add to Cart Remove This Item
• Special of the Month
• Sign Up for our Best Offers
• Bundles = Greatest Savings!
• Sign Up for Free Puzzles
• Sign Up for Free Activities
• Toddler (Ages 0-3)
• PreK (Ages 3-5)
• Kindergarten (Ages 5-6)
• 1st Grade (Ages 6-7)
• 2nd Grade (Ages 7-8)
• 3rd Grade (Ages 8-9)
• 4th Grade (Ages 9-10)
• 5th Grade (Ages 10-11)
• 6th Grade (Ages 11-12)
• 7th Grade (Ages 12-13)
• 8th Grade (Ages 13-14)
• 9th Grade (Ages 14-15)
• 10th Grade (Ages 15-16)
• 11th Grade (Ages 16-17)
• 12th Grade (Ages 17-18)
• 12th+ Grade (Ages 18+)
• Test Prep Directory
• Test Prep Bundles
• Test Prep Guides
• Preschool Academics
• Store Locator
• Submit Feedback/Request
• Sales Alerts Sign-Up
• Technical Support
• Mission & History
• Articles & Advice
• Testimonials
• Our Guarantee
• New Products
• Free Activities
• Libros en Español

• < Previous

Home > Theses and Dissertations > 6322

Theses and Dissertations

Thinking like an historian: improving engagement through project-based learning in a united states history classroom.

George Gray

Date of Award

Spring 2021

Document Type

Open Access Dissertation

Educational Studies

First Advisor

The purpose of this action research study is to determine the efficacy of project-based learning activities for improving students’ critical thinking skills and engagement in the classroom. South Carolina’s creation of the United States History end-of-course assessment has led many social studies teachers to design ‘teach to the test’ lesson plans, which this researcher’s students seem to find mundane and uninspiring. Although these teaching methods have helped some students perform well on the end-of-course test, these tactics have sapped their interest in social studies and have not prepared them to be responsible citizens in an active democracy. The social studies project-based learning curriculum is designed to use a student-centered instructional approach that allows the students to investigate historical events through a series of problem-solving activities, with the intention of increasing their critical thinking skills and intrinsic motivational levels in the classroom. The action research took place over a six-week period in the spring of 2020 in an AP United States History classroom with twenty-three participants at an urban high school in South Carolina. A mixed-methods approach of quantitative and qualitative data collection techniques was used throughout the research process to determine the success of the PBL curriculum. These data collection methods included pre and post intervention assessments, teacher observational notes, questionnaires, and student interviews.

© 2021, George Gray

Recommended Citation

Gray, G.(2021). Thinking Like an Historian: Improving Engagement Through Project-Based Learning in a United States History Classroom. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/6322

Since November 11, 2021

Included in

Curriculum and Instruction Commons

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines

Submissions

• Give us Feedback
• University Libraries

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy. Click Here for our professional translations.

A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Back to Entry
• Entry Contents
• Entry Bibliography
• Academic Tools
• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Supplement to Critical Thinking

This supplement elaborates on the history of the articulation, promotion and adoption of critical thinking as an educational goal.

John Dewey (1910: 74, 82) introduced the term ‘critical thinking’ as the name of an educational goal, which he identified with a scientific attitude of mind. More commonly, he called the goal ‘reflective thought’, ‘reflective thinking’, ‘reflection’, or just ‘thought’ or ‘thinking’. He describes his book as written for two purposes. The first was to help people to appreciate the kinship of children’s native curiosity, fertile imagination and love of experimental inquiry to the scientific attitude. The second was to help people to consider how recognizing this kinship in educational practice “would make for individual happiness and the reduction of social waste” (iii). He notes that the ideas in the book obtained concreteness in the Laboratory School in Chicago.

Dewey’s ideas were put into practice by some of the schools that participated in the Eight-Year Study in the 1930s sponsored by the Progressive Education Association in the United States. For this study, 300 colleges agreed to consider for admission graduates of 30 selected secondary schools or school systems from around the country who experimented with the content and methods of teaching, even if the graduates had not completed the then-prescribed secondary school curriculum. One purpose of the study was to discover through exploration and experimentation how secondary schools in the United States could serve youth more effectively (Aikin 1942). Each experimental school was free to change the curriculum as it saw fit, but the schools agreed that teaching methods and the life of the school should conform to the idea (previously advocated by Dewey) that people develop through doing things that are meaningful to them, and that the main purpose of the secondary school was to lead young people to understand, appreciate and live the democratic way of life characteristic of the United States (Aikin 1942: 17–18). In particular, school officials believed that young people in a democracy should develop the habit of reflective thinking and skill in solving problems (Aikin 1942: 81). Students’ work in the classroom thus consisted more often of a problem to be solved than a lesson to be learned. Especially in mathematics and science, the schools made a point of giving students experience in clear, logical thinking as they solved problems. The report of one experimental school, the University School of Ohio State University, articulated this goal of improving students’ thinking:

Critical or reflective thinking originates with the sensing of a problem. It is a quality of thought operating in an effort to solve the problem and to reach a tentative conclusion which is supported by all available data. It is really a process of problem solving requiring the use of creative insight, intellectual honesty, and sound judgment. It is the basis of the method of scientific inquiry. The success of democracy depends to a large extent on the disposition and ability of citizens to think critically and reflectively about the problems which must of necessity confront them, and to improve the quality of their thinking is one of the major goals of education. (Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association 1943: 745–746)

The Eight-Year Study had an evaluation staff, which developed, in consultation with the schools, tests to measure aspects of student progress that fell outside the focus of the traditional curriculum. The evaluation staff classified many of the schools’ stated objectives under the generic heading “clear thinking” or “critical thinking” (Smith, Tyler, & Evaluation Staff 1942: 35–36). To develop tests of achievement of this broad goal, they distinguished five overlapping aspects of it: ability to interpret data, abilities associated with an understanding of the nature of proof, and the abilities to apply principles of science, of social studies and of logical reasoning. The Eight-Year Study also had a college staff, directed by a committee of college administrators, whose task was to determine how well the experimental schools had prepared their graduates for college. The college staff compared the performance of 1,475 college students from the experimental schools with an equal number of graduates from conventional schools, matched in pairs by sex, age, race, scholastic aptitude scores, home and community background, interests, and probable future. They concluded that, on 18 measures of student success, the graduates of the experimental schools did a somewhat better job than the comparison group. The graduates from the six most traditional of the experimental schools showed no large or consistent differences. The graduates from the six most experimental schools, on the other hand, had much greater differences in their favour. The graduates of the two most experimental schools, the college staff reported:

… surpassed their comparison groups by wide margins in academic achievement, intellectual curiosity, scientific approach to problems, and interest in contemporary affairs. The differences in their favor were even greater in general resourcefulness, in enjoyment of reading, [in] participation in the arts, in winning non-academic honors, and in all aspects of college life except possibly participation in sports and social activities. (Aikin 1942: 114)

One of these schools was a private school with students from privileged families and the other the experimental section of a public school with students from non-privileged families. The college staff reported that the graduates of the two schools were indistinguishable from each other in terms of college success.

In 1933 Dewey issued an extensively rewritten edition of his How We Think (Dewey 1910), with the sub-title “A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process”. Although the restatement retains the basic structure and content of the original book, Dewey made a number of changes. He rewrote and simplified his logical analysis of the process of reflection, made his ideas clearer and more definite, replaced the terms ‘induction’ and ‘deduction’ by the phrases ‘control of data and evidence’ and ‘control of reasoning and concepts’, added more illustrations, rearranged chapters, and revised the parts on teaching to reflect changes in schools since 1910. In particular, he objected to one-sided practices of some “experimental” and “progressive” schools that allowed children freedom but gave them no guidance, citing as objectionable practices novelty and variety for their own sake, experiences and activities with real materials but of no educational significance, treating random and disconnected activity as if it were an experiment, failure to summarize net accomplishment at the end of an inquiry, non-educative projects, and treatment of the teacher as a negligible factor rather than as “the intellectual leader of a social group” (Dewey 1933: 273). Without explaining his reasons, Dewey eliminated the previous edition’s uses of the words ‘critical’ and ‘uncritical’, thus settling firmly on ‘reflection’ or ‘reflective thinking’ as the preferred term for his subject-matter. In the revised edition, the word ‘critical’ occurs only once, where Dewey writes that “a person may not be sufficiently critical about the ideas that occur to him” (1933: 16, italics in original); being critical is thus a component of reflection, not the whole of it. In contrast, the Eight-Year Study by the Progressive Education Association treated ‘critical thinking’ and ‘reflective thinking’ as synonyms.

In the same period, Dewey collaborated on a history of the Laboratory School in Chicago with two former teachers from the school (Mayhew & Edwards 1936). The history describes the school’s curriculum and organization, activities aimed at developing skills, parents’ involvement, and the habits of mind that the children acquired. A concluding chapter evaluates the school’s achievements, counting as a success its staging of the curriculum to correspond to the natural development of the growing child. In two appendices, the authors describe the evolution of Dewey’s principles of education and Dewey himself describes the theory of the Chicago experiment (Dewey 1936).

Glaser (1941) reports in his doctoral dissertation the method and results of an experiment in the development of critical thinking conducted in the fall of 1938. He defines critical thinking as Dewey defined reflective thinking:

Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. (Glaser 1941: 6; cf. Dewey 1910: 6; Dewey 1933: 9)

In the experiment, eight lesson units directed at improving critical thinking abilities were taught to four grade 12 high school classes, with pre-test and post-test of the students using the Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Test and the Watson-Glaser Tests of Critical Thinking (developed in collaboration with Glaser’s dissertation sponsor, Goodwin Watson). The average gain in scores on these tests was greater to a statistically significant degree among the students who received the lessons in critical thinking than among the students in a control group of four grade 12 high school classes taking the usual curriculum in English. Glaser concludes:

The aspect of critical thinking which appears most susceptible to general improvement is the attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one’s experience. An attitude of wanting evidence for beliefs is more subject to general transfer. Development of skill in applying the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, however, appears to be specifically related to, and in fact limited by, the acquisition of pertinent knowledge and facts concerning the problem or subject matter toward which the thinking is to be directed. (Glaser 1941: 175)

Retest scores and observable behaviour indicated that students in the intervention group retained their growth in ability to think critically for at least six months after the special instruction.

In 1948 a group of U.S. college examiners decided to develop taxonomies of educational objectives with a common vocabulary that they could use for communicating with each other about test items. The first of these taxonomies, for the cognitive domain, appeared in 1956 (Bloom et al. 1956), and included critical thinking objectives. It has become known as Bloom’s taxonomy. A second taxonomy, for the affective domain (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia 1964), and a third taxonomy, for the psychomotor domain (Simpson 1966–67), appeared later. Each of the taxonomies is hierarchical, with achievement of a higher educational objective alleged to require achievement of corresponding lower educational objectives.

Bloom’s taxonomy has six major categories. From lowest to highest, they are knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Within each category, there are sub-categories, also arranged hierarchically from the educationally prior to the educationally posterior. The lowest category, though called ‘knowledge’, is confined to objectives of remembering information and being able to recall or recognize it, without much transformation beyond organizing it (Bloom et al. 1956: 28–29). The five higher categories are collectively termed “intellectual abilities and skills” (Bloom et al. 1956: 204). The term is simply another name for critical thinking abilities and skills:

Although information or knowledge is recognized as an important outcome of education, very few teachers would be satisfied to regard this as the primary or the sole outcome of instruction. What is needed is some evidence that the students can do something with their knowledge, that is, that they can apply the information to new situations and problems. It is also expected that students will acquire generalized techniques for dealing with new problems and new materials. Thus, it is expected that when the student encounters a new problem or situation, he will select an appropriate technique for attacking it and will bring to bear the necessary information, both facts and principles. This has been labeled “critical thinking” by some, “reflective thinking” by Dewey and others, and “problem solving” by still others. In the taxonomy, we have used the term “intellectual abilities and skills”. (Bloom et al. 1956: 38)

Comprehension and application objectives, as their names imply, involve understanding and applying information. Critical thinking abilities and skills show up in the three highest categories of analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The condensed version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom et al. 1956: 201–207) gives the following examples of objectives at these levels:

• analysis objectives : ability to recognize unstated assumptions, ability to check the consistency of hypotheses with given information and assumptions, ability to recognize the general techniques used in advertising, propaganda and other persuasive materials
• synthesis objectives : organizing ideas and statements in writing, ability to propose ways of testing a hypothesis, ability to formulate and modify hypotheses
• evaluation objectives : ability to indicate logical fallacies, comparison of major theories about particular cultures

The analysis, synthesis and evaluation objectives in Bloom’s taxonomy collectively came to be called the “higher-order thinking skills” (Tankersley 2005: chap. 5). Although the analysis-synthesis-evaluation sequence mimics phases in Dewey’s (1933) logical analysis of the reflective thinking process, it has not generally been adopted as a model of a critical thinking process. While commending the inspirational value of its ratio of five categories of thinking objectives to one category of recall objectives, Ennis (1981b) points out that the categories lack criteria applicable across topics and domains. For example, analysis in chemistry is so different from analysis in literature that there is not much point in teaching analysis as a general type of thinking. Further, the postulated hierarchy seems questionable at the higher levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. For example, ability to indicate logical fallacies hardly seems more complex than the ability to organize statements and ideas in writing.

A revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson et al. 2001) distinguishes the intended cognitive process in an educational objective (such as being able to recall, to compare or to check) from the objective’s informational content (“knowledge”), which may be factual, conceptual, procedural, or metacognitive. The result is a so-called “Taxonomy Table” with four rows for the kinds of informational content and six columns for the six main types of cognitive process. The authors name the types of cognitive process by verbs, to indicate their status as mental activities. They change the name of the ‘comprehension’ category to ‘understand’ and of the ‘synthesis’ category to ’create’, and switch the order of synthesis and evaluation. The result is a list of six main types of cognitive process aimed at by teachers: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create. The authors retain the idea of a hierarchy of increasing complexity, but acknowledge some overlap, for example between understanding and applying. And they retain the idea that critical thinking and problem solving cut across the more complex cognitive processes. The terms ‘critical thinking’ and ‘problem solving’, they write:

are widely used and tend to become touchstones of curriculum emphasis. Both generally include a variety of activities that might be classified in disparate cells of the Taxonomy Table. That is, in any given instance, objectives that involve problem solving and critical thinking most likely call for cognitive processes in several categories on the process dimension. For example, to think critically about an issue probably involves some Conceptual knowledge to Analyze the issue. Then, one can Evaluate different perspectives in terms of the criteria and, perhaps, Create a novel, yet defensible perspective on this issue. (Anderson et al. 2001: 269–270; italics in original)

In the revised taxonomy, only a few sub-categories, such as inferring, have enough commonality to be treated as a distinct critical thinking ability that could be taught and assessed as a general ability.

A landmark contribution to philosophical scholarship on the concept of critical thinking was a 1962 article in the Harvard Educational Review by Robert H. Ennis, with the title “A concept of critical thinking: A proposed basis for research in the teaching and evaluation of critical thinking ability” (Ennis 1962). Ennis took as his starting-point a conception of critical thinking put forward by B. Othanel Smith:

We shall consider thinking in terms of the operations involved in the examination of statements which we, or others, may believe. A speaker declares, for example, that “Freedom means that the decisions in America’s productive effort are made not in the minds of a bureaucracy but in the free market”. Now if we set about to find out what this statement means and to determine whether to accept or reject it, we would be engaged in thinking which, for lack of a better term, we shall call critical thinking. If one wishes to say that this is only a form of problem-solving in which the purpose is to decide whether or not what is said is dependable, we shall not object. But for our purposes we choose to call it critical thinking. (Smith 1953: 130)

Adding a normative component to this conception, Ennis defined critical thinking as “the correct assessing of statements” (Ennis 1962: 83). On the basis of this definition, he distinguished 12 “aspects” of critical thinking corresponding to types or aspects of statements, such as judging whether an observation statement is reliable and grasping the meaning of a statement. He noted that he did not include judging value statements. Cutting across the 12 aspects, he distinguished three dimensions of critical thinking: logical (judging relationships between meanings of words and statements), criterial (knowledge of the criteria for judging statements), and pragmatic (the impression of the background purpose). For each aspect, Ennis described the applicable dimensions, including criteria. He proposed the resulting construct as a basis for developing specifications for critical thinking tests and for research on instructional methods and levels.

In the 1970s and 1980s there was an upsurge of attention to the development of thinking skills. The annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Educational Reform has attracted since its start in 1980 tens of thousands of educators from all levels. In 1983 the College Entrance Examination Board proclaimed reasoning as one of six basic academic competencies needed by college students (College Board 1983). Departments of education in the United States and around the world began to include thinking objectives in their curriculum guidelines for school subjects. For example, Ontario’s social sciences and humanities curriculum guideline for secondary schools requires “the use of critical and creative thinking skills and/or processes” as a goal of instruction and assessment in each subject and course (Ontario Ministry of Education 2013: 30). The document describes critical thinking as follows:

Critical thinking is the process of thinking about ideas or situations in order to understand them fully, identify their implications, make a judgement, and/or guide decision making. Critical thinking includes skills such as questioning, predicting, analysing, synthesizing, examining opinions, identifying values and issues, detecting bias, and distinguishing between alternatives. Students who are taught these skills become critical thinkers who can move beyond superficial conclusions to a deeper understanding of the issues they are examining. They are able to engage in an inquiry process in which they explore complex and multifaceted issues, and questions for which there may be no clear-cut answers (Ontario Ministry of Education 2013: 46).

Sweden makes schools responsible for ensuring that each pupil who completes compulsory school “can make use of critical thinking and independently formulate standpoints based on knowledge and ethical considerations” (Skolverket 2018: 12). Subject syllabi incorporate this requirement, and items testing critical thinking skills appear on national tests that are a required step toward university admission. For example, the core content of biology, physics and chemistry in years 7-9 includes critical examination of sources of information and arguments encountered by pupils in different sources and social discussions related to these sciences, in both digital and other media. (Skolverket 2018: 170, 181, 192). Correspondingly, in year 9 the national tests require using knowledge of biology, physics or chemistry “to investigate information, communicate and come to a decision on issues concerning health, energy, technology, the environment, use of natural resources and ecological sustainability” (see the message from the School Board ). Other jurisdictions similarly embed critical thinking objectives in curriculum guidelines.

At the college level, a new wave of introductory logic textbooks, pioneered by Kahane (1971), applied the tools of logic to contemporary social and political issues. Popular contemporary textbooks of this sort include those by Bailin and Battersby (2016b), Boardman, Cavender and Kahane (2018), Browne and Keeley (2018), Groarke and Tindale (2012), and Moore and Parker (2020). In their wake, colleges and universities in North America transformed their introductory logic course into a general education service course with a title like ‘critical thinking’ or ‘reasoning’. In 1980, the trustees of California’s state university and colleges approved as a general education requirement a course in critical thinking, described as follows:

Instruction in critical thinking is to be designed to achieve an understanding of the relationship of language to logic, which should lead to the ability to analyze, criticize, and advocate ideas, to reason inductively and deductively, and to reach factual or judgmental conclusions based on sound inferences drawn from unambiguous statements of knowledge or belief. The minimal competence to be expected at the successful conclusion of instruction in critical thinking should be the ability to distinguish fact from judgment, belief from knowledge, and skills in elementary inductive and deductive processes, including an understanding of the formal and informal fallacies of language and thought. (Dumke 1980)

Since December 1983, the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking has sponsored sessions at the three annual divisional meetings of the American Philosophical Association. In December 1987, the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association invited Peter Facione to make a systematic inquiry into the current state of critical thinking and critical thinking assessment. Facione assembled a group of 46 other academic philosophers and psychologists to participate in a multi-round Delphi process, whose product was entitled Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (Facione 1990a). The statement listed abilities and dispositions that should be the goals of a lower-level undergraduate course in critical thinking. Researchers in nine European countries determined which of these skills and dispositions employers expect of university graduates (Dominguez 2018 a), compared those expectations to critical thinking educational practices in post-secondary educational institutions (Dominguez 2018b), developed a course on critical thinking education for university teachers (Dominguez 2018c) and proposed in response to identified gaps between expectations and practices an “educational protocol” that post-secondary educational institutions in Europe could use to develop critical thinking (Elen et al. 2019).

Copyright © 2022 by David Hitchcock < hitchckd @ mcmaster . ca >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

mySmowltech

Critical thinking: definition and how to improve its skills

Recruitment

Discover our proctoring plans

Receive an ebook on proctoring solutions. SMOWL is the most complete and customizable proctoring software.

Recent posts

HR technology trends: the future landscapes

Ghosting after interviews: tips and ideas to avoid it

Proctoring and sustainability: A Winning team

Critical thinking is based on the observation and analysis of facts and evidences to return rational, skeptical and unbiased judgments.   

This type of thinking involves a series of skills that can be created but also improved, as we will see throughout this article in which we will begin by defining the concept and end with tips to build and improve the skills related to critical thinking.

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is a discipline based on the ability of people to observe, elucidate and analyze information, facts and evidences in order to judge or decide if it is right or wrong.

It goes beyond mere curiosity, simple knowledge or analysis of any kind of fact or information.

People who develop this type of outlook are able to logically connect ideas and defend them with weighty opinions that ultimately help them make better decisions.

How to build and improve critical thinking skills?

Building and improving critical thinking skills involves focusing on a number of abilities and capacities .

To begin the critical thinking process all ideas must be open and all options must be understood as much as possible.

Even the dumbest or craziest idea can end up being the gateway to the most intelligent and successful conclusion.

The problem with having an open mind is that it is the most difficult path and often involves a greater challenge and effort. It is well known that the easy thing to do is to go with the obvious and the commonly accepted but this has no place in critical thinking.

By contrast, it is helpful not to make hasty decisions and to weigh the problem in its entirety after a first moment of awareness.

Finally, practicing active listening will help you to receive feedback from others and to understand other points of view that may help you as a reference.

Impartiality

An important point in the critical thinking process is the development of the ability to identify biases and maintain an impartial view in evaluations.

To improve this aspect it is advisable to have tools to be able to identify and recognize the prejudices and biases you have and try to leave them completely aside when thinking about the solution.

Subscribe today to SMOWL’s weekly newsletter!

Discover the latest trends in eLearning, technology, and innovation, alongside experts in assessment and talent management. Stay informed about industry updates and get the information you need.

Simply fill out the form and stay up-to-date with everything relevant in our field.

Observation

Observation allows you to see each and every detail , no matter how small, subtle or inconsequential they may be or seem to be.

Behind the superficial information hides a universe of data, sources and experiences that help you make the best decision.

One of the pillars of critical thinking is objectivity. This forces you to base your value judgments on established facts that you will have gathered after a correct research process. 

At this point in the process you should also be clear about the influencing factors to be taken into account and those that can be left out.

Remember that your research is not only about gathering a good amount of information that puts the maximum number of options, variables or situations on the table. 

For the information to be of quality, it must be based on reliable and trustworthy sources.

If the information you have to collect is based on the comments and opinions of third parties, try to exercise quality control but without interference. 

To do this, ask open-ended questions that bring all the nuances to the table and at the same time serve to sift out possible biases.

With the research process completed, it is time to analyze the sources and information gathered.

At this point, your analytical skills will help you to discard what does not conform to unconventional thinking, to prioritize among the information that is of value, to identify possible trends and to draw your own conclusions.

One of the skills that characterize a person with critical thinking is their ability to recognize patterns and connections between all the pieces of information they handle in their research.

This allows them to draw conclusions of great relevance on which to base their predictions with weighty foundations.

Analytical thinking is sometimes confused with critical thinking. The former only uses facts and data, while the latter incorporates other nuances such as emotions, experiences or opinions.

One of the problems with critical thinking is that it can be developed to infinity and beyond. You can always keep looking for new avenues of investigation and new lines of argument by stretching inference to limits that may not be necessary.

At this point it is important to clarify that inference is the process of drawing conclusions from initial premises or hypotheses.

Knowing when to stop the research and thinking process and move on to the next stage in which you put into practice the actions considered appropriate is necessary.

Communication

The information you collect in your research is not top secret material. On the contrary, your knowledge sharing with other people who are involved in the next steps of the process is so important.

Think that your analytical ability to extract the information and your conclusions can serve to guide others .

Problem solving

It is important to note at this point that critical thinking can be aimed at solving a problem but can also be used to simply answer questions or even to identify areas for improvement in certain situations. 

At Smowltech, our proctoring plans help with the creation of objective, respectful and innovative exchange and evaluation spaces.Request us a free demo in which we display all the remote supervision solutions we can offer you, as personalized and detailed reports on remote activities’ progress.

Download now!

8 interesting

about proctoring

Discover everything you need about online proctoring in this book to know how to choose the best software.

Fill out the form and download the guide now.

And subscribe to the weekly SMOWL newsletter to get exclusive offers and promotions .

You will discover all the trends in eLearning, technology, innovation, and proctoring at the hands of evaluation and talent management experts .

Discover how SMOWL works

• Register in mySmowltech indicating your LMS.
• Check your email and follow the steps to integrate the tool.
• Enjoy your free trial of 25 licenses.

Request a free demo with one of our experts

In addition to showing you how SMOWL works, we will guide and advise you at all times so that you can choose the plan that best suits your company or institution.

• Copyright © 2024 all rights reserved SMOWLTECH

Write below what you are looking for

Proceedings of the 9th Mathematics, Science, and Computer Science Education International Seminar (MSCEIS 2023)

Flipped Classroom Model to Improve Students’ Critical Thinking Skills

Today's students have a characteristic interest in technology. Flipped Classroom is a technology-savvy learning app. Flipped classroom for access to material for more flexibility. The teacher's primary role shifts from the lesson source to the role of the student learning guide. The problem discussed is the difficulty of understanding basic network learning by class XI RPL students at SMKN 2 Cimahi. Learning difficulties include hard-to-understand material, unattractive instruction, abstract material, lack of media, and no preparation for learning. The solution that students want is an LMS-based learning model flipped classroom. The research objective is to develop a flipped classroom model to improve students’ critical thinking skills. A flipped classroom model is designed to increase student involvement and the effectiveness of teacher guidance in learning. Moodle Learning Environment is used as an environment for implementing the flipped classroom learning model. Mixed method is a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods used for data analysis. The success of the model is measured based on functional LMS for the flipped classroom, students’ critical thinking skills, and students’ learning outcomes. The test results show an increase in value of the LMS function for the flipped classroom, students’ critical thinking skills, and students’ learning outcomes. So, it can be concluded that the flipped classroom learning model can improve students’ critical thinking skills.

Download article (PDF)

Cite this article

[email protected]

The Logic of Finance, Enhancing Decision Quality through Critical Thinking  

In corporate finance, CFOs are often required to make decisions that impact their organizations. The quality of these decisions largely depends on one key skill: the ability to think critically. Critical thinking in finance isn’t just about crunching numbers—it’s about using a clear, logical approach to solve problems and make better decisions. In this article, we’ll discuss how CFOs can improve their critical thinking skills to make more informed decisions, with practical examples you can apply in your daily work.  

Understand the Problem Before Jumping to Solutions  

The first step in critical thinking is to fully understand the problem before trying to fix it. Often, CFOs are under pressure to make quick decisions, which can lead to poor results if the problem isn’t fully understood.  

Example: Imagine your company’s profit margins are shrinking. Instead of immediately cutting costs, which might seem like the obvious solution, take the time to analyze why this is happening. Is it because production costs are rising, sales are dropping, or maybe the supply chain is inefficient? By understanding the real cause, you can create a plan that solves the problem, not just the symptoms.  

Practical Tip: Before making any major decision, ask yourself, “Do I really understand the problem? What information do I need to make a smart decision?” Make sure your team provides complete reports that cover all aspects of the issue, not just the most obvious ones.  

Challenge Assumptions and Biases  

Every financial decision is influenced by assumptions and biases, even if we don’t always notice them. Critical thinking involves recognizing and questioning these assumptions to make sure they don’t lead you astray.  

Example: Suppose your company is considering merging with a smaller firm. You might assume that the merger will automatically increase your market share. But a critical thinker would question this assumption by considering potential risks, such as whether the two companies’ cultures will clash or if there will be integration issues that could harm the business.  

Practical Tip: Regularly check the assumptions behind your decisions. For each major decision, list the key assumptions and ask, “What if this assumption is wrong? What proof do we have to support it?” This can help you avoid costly mistakes and ensure a more solid decision-making process.  

Use a Structured Decision-Making Process  

To improve the quality of your decisions, it’s helpful to use a structured process that guides you through each step. One such process is the OODA Loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act), which is used in both military and business settings.  

Example: Let’s say you need to decide whether to invest in a new technology platform. By using the OODA Loop:  

• Observe: Gather data about the platform’s features, costs, and benefits.  
• Orient: Think about how this technology fits with your company’s goals and current systems.  
• Decide: Weigh the pros and cons and make your decision based on the evidence.  
• Act: Implement your decision and monitor its impact, being ready to make changes if needed.  

Practical Tip: Include the OODA Loop or a similar decision-making process in your regular financial planning meetings. This will help you and your team stay focused and ensure that decisions are made logically and based on facts, not just gut feelings.  

Bring in Different Perspectives  

Getting different viewpoints is important for critical thinking because it helps you see the full picture and avoid “groupthink.” Encouraging input from different parts of the company can lead to better, more innovative decisions.  

Example: If you’re considering a major investment, like opening a new production facility, don’t just rely on financial data. Get input from operations, marketing, and HR to understand the broader implications, such as potential production challenges or the availability of talent in the new area.  

Practical Tip: Create a culture of collaboration by holding cross-functional meetings for big financial decisions. Encourage open discussions where team members feel comfortable challenging ideas and offering different viewpoints. This will lead to more informed and balanced decisions.  

Keep Learning and Adapting  

The business world is always changing, so your approach to decision-making should evolve too. Continuous learning is a key part of critical thinking, allowing you to adjust your strategies based on new information and changing circumstances.  

Example: During the COVID-19 pandemic, many CFOs had to quickly adapt to remote work and changing customer behaviors. Those who critically assessed the situation, learned from new trends, and adjusted their strategies were better able to navigate the crisis.  

Practical Tip: Make continuous learning a priority for yourself and your team. Stay up to date on industry trends, attend relevant seminars, and encourage your team to do the same. Regularly review past decisions to understand what worked, what didn’t, and why. This will help you make better decisions in the future.  

Conclusion  

Critical thinking is a must-have skill for CFOs who want to excel in today’s complex financial landscape. By taking the time to fully understand problems, questioning assumptions, using structured decision-making processes, bringing in different perspectives, and committing to continuous learning, you can improve the quality of your decisions and drive better results for your company. As you go about your daily tasks, remember that the best financial decisions are those made with a clear, logical, and critical mindset. Implement these strategies, and you’ll be well-equipped to handle whatever challenges and opportunities come your way.  

The Logic of Finance, Enhancing Decision Quality through Critical Thinking

The role of networking in corporate success, the essentials of treasury management in modern businesses, navigating south africa’s reporting maze: what every cfo needs to know, the cfo’s guide to smoothly managing performance, negotiation skills for leaders: building consensus.

ELEVATE YOUR BUSINESS WITH

Become part of a international community of finance executives.