what is the role of the teacher in critical thinking

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

(This is the first post in a three-part series.)

The new question-of-the-week is:

What is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom?

This three-part series will explore what critical thinking is, if it can be specifically taught and, if so, how can teachers do so in their classrooms.

Today’s guests are Dara Laws Savage, Patrick Brown, Meg Riordan, Ph.D., and Dr. PJ Caposey. Dara, Patrick, and Meg were also guests on my 10-minute BAM! Radio Show . You can also find a list of, and links to, previous shows here.

You might also be interested in The Best Resources On Teaching & Learning Critical Thinking In The Classroom .

Current Events

Dara Laws Savage is an English teacher at the Early College High School at Delaware State University, where she serves as a teacher and instructional coach and lead mentor. Dara has been teaching for 25 years (career preparation, English, photography, yearbook, newspaper, and graphic design) and has presented nationally on project-based learning and technology integration:

There is so much going on right now and there is an overload of information for us to process. Did you ever stop to think how our students are processing current events? They see news feeds, hear news reports, and scan photos and posts, but are they truly thinking about what they are hearing and seeing?

I tell my students that my job is not to give them answers but to teach them how to think about what they read and hear. So what is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom? There are just as many definitions of critical thinking as there are people trying to define it. However, the Critical Think Consortium focuses on the tools to create a thinking-based classroom rather than a definition: “Shape the climate to support thinking, create opportunities for thinking, build capacity to think, provide guidance to inform thinking.” Using these four criteria and pairing them with current events, teachers easily create learning spaces that thrive on thinking and keep students engaged.

One successful technique I use is the FIRE Write. Students are given a quote, a paragraph, an excerpt, or a photo from the headlines. Students are asked to F ocus and respond to the selection for three minutes. Next, students are asked to I dentify a phrase or section of the photo and write for two minutes. Third, students are asked to R eframe their response around a specific word, phrase, or section within their previous selection. Finally, students E xchange their thoughts with a classmate. Within the exchange, students also talk about how the selection connects to what we are covering in class.

There was a controversial Pepsi ad in 2017 involving Kylie Jenner and a protest with a police presence. The imagery in the photo was strikingly similar to a photo that went viral with a young lady standing opposite a police line. Using that image from a current event engaged my students and gave them the opportunity to critically think about events of the time.

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

In the first picture, you see a strong and courageous black female, bravely standing in front of two officers in protest. She is risking her life to do so. Iesha Evans is simply proving to the world she does NOT mean less because she is black … and yet officers are there to stop her. She did not step down. In the picture below, you see Kendall Jenner handing a police officer a Pepsi. Maybe this wouldn’t be a big deal, except this was Pepsi’s weak, pathetic, and outrageous excuse of a commercial that belittles the whole movement of people fighting for their lives.

I - Identify a word or phrase, underline it, then write about it for two minutes

A white, privileged female in place of a fighting black woman was asking for trouble. A struggle we are continuously fighting every day, and they make a mockery of it. “I know what will work! Here Mr. Police Officer! Drink some Pepsi!” As if. Pepsi made a fool of themselves, and now their already dwindling fan base continues to ever shrink smaller.

R - Reframe your thoughts by choosing a different word, then write about that for one minute

You don’t know privilege until it’s gone. You don’t know privilege while it’s there—but you can and will be made accountable and aware. Don’t use it for evil. You are not stupid. Use it to do something. Kendall could’ve NOT done the commercial. Kendall could’ve released another commercial standing behind a black woman. Anything!

Exchange - Remember to discuss how this connects to our school song project and our previous discussions?

This connects two ways - 1) We want to convey a strong message. Be powerful. Show who we are. And Pepsi definitely tried. … Which leads to the second connection. 2) Not mess up and offend anyone, as had the one alma mater had been linked to black minstrels. We want to be amazing, but we have to be smart and careful and make sure we include everyone who goes to our school and everyone who may go to our school.

As a final step, students read and annotate the full article and compare it to their initial response.

Using current events and critical-thinking strategies like FIRE writing helps create a learning space where thinking is the goal rather than a score on a multiple-choice assessment. Critical-thinking skills can cross over to any of students’ other courses and into life outside the classroom. After all, we as teachers want to help the whole student be successful, and critical thinking is an important part of navigating life after they leave our classrooms.

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

Patrick Brown is the executive director of STEM and CTE for the Fort Zumwalt school district in Missouri and an experienced educator and author :

Planning for critical thinking focuses on teaching the most crucial science concepts, practices, and logical-thinking skills as well as the best use of instructional time. One way to ensure that lessons maintain a focus on critical thinking is to focus on the instructional sequence used to teach.

Explore-before-explain teaching is all about promoting critical thinking for learners to better prepare students for the reality of their world. What having an explore-before-explain mindset means is that in our planning, we prioritize giving students firsthand experiences with data, allow students to construct evidence-based claims that focus on conceptual understanding, and challenge students to discuss and think about the why behind phenomena.

Just think of the critical thinking that has to occur for students to construct a scientific claim. 1) They need the opportunity to collect data, analyze it, and determine how to make sense of what the data may mean. 2) With data in hand, students can begin thinking about the validity and reliability of their experience and information collected. 3) They can consider what differences, if any, they might have if they completed the investigation again. 4) They can scrutinize outlying data points for they may be an artifact of a true difference that merits further exploration of a misstep in the procedure, measuring device, or measurement. All of these intellectual activities help them form more robust understanding and are evidence of their critical thinking.

In explore-before-explain teaching, all of these hard critical-thinking tasks come before teacher explanations of content. Whether we use discovery experiences, problem-based learning, and or inquiry-based activities, strategies that are geared toward helping students construct understanding promote critical thinking because students learn content by doing the practices valued in the field to generate knowledge.

An Issue of Equity

Meg Riordan, Ph.D., is the chief learning officer at The Possible Project, an out-of-school program that collaborates with youth to build entrepreneurial skills and mindsets and provides pathways to careers and long-term economic prosperity. She has been in the field of education for over 25 years as a middle and high school teacher, school coach, college professor, regional director of N.Y.C. Outward Bound Schools, and director of external research with EL Education:

Although critical thinking often defies straightforward definition, most in the education field agree it consists of several components: reasoning, problem-solving, and decisionmaking, plus analysis and evaluation of information, such that multiple sides of an issue can be explored. It also includes dispositions and “the willingness to apply critical-thinking principles, rather than fall back on existing unexamined beliefs, or simply believe what you’re told by authority figures.”

Despite variation in definitions, critical thinking is nonetheless promoted as an essential outcome of students’ learning—we want to see students and adults demonstrate it across all fields, professions, and in their personal lives. Yet there is simultaneously a rationing of opportunities in schools for students of color, students from under-resourced communities, and other historically marginalized groups to deeply learn and practice critical thinking.

For example, many of our most underserved students often spend class time filling out worksheets, promoting high compliance but low engagement, inquiry, critical thinking, or creation of new ideas. At a time in our world when college and careers are critical for participation in society and the global, knowledge-based economy, far too many students struggle within classrooms and schools that reinforce low-expectations and inequity.

If educators aim to prepare all students for an ever-evolving marketplace and develop skills that will be valued no matter what tomorrow’s jobs are, then we must move critical thinking to the forefront of classroom experiences. And educators must design learning to cultivate it.

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

To understand critical thinking, educators need to first unpack and define its components. What exactly are we looking for when we speak about reasoning or exploring multiple perspectives on an issue? How does problem-solving show up in English, math, science, art, or other disciplines—and how is it assessed? At Two Rivers, an EL Education school, the faculty identified five constructs of critical thinking, defined each, and created rubrics to generate a shared picture of quality for teachers and students. The rubrics were then adapted across grade levels to indicate students’ learning progressions.

At Avenues World School, critical thinking is one of the Avenues World Elements and is an enduring outcome embedded in students’ early experiences through 12th grade. For instance, a kindergarten student may be expected to “identify cause and effect in familiar contexts,” while an 8th grader should demonstrate the ability to “seek out sufficient evidence before accepting a claim as true,” “identify bias in claims and evidence,” and “reconsider strongly held points of view in light of new evidence.”

When faculty and students embrace a common vision of what critical thinking looks and sounds like and how it is assessed, educators can then explicitly design learning experiences that call for students to employ critical-thinking skills. This kind of work must occur across all schools and programs, especially those serving large numbers of students of color. As Linda Darling-Hammond asserts , “Schools that serve large numbers of students of color are least likely to offer the kind of curriculum needed to ... help students attain the [critical-thinking] skills needed in a knowledge work economy. ”

So, what can it look like to create those kinds of learning experiences?

Designing experiences for critical thinking

After defining a shared understanding of “what” critical thinking is and “how” it shows up across multiple disciplines and grade levels, it is essential to create learning experiences that impel students to cultivate, practice, and apply these skills. There are several levers that offer pathways for teachers to promote critical thinking in lessons:

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

A key Common Core State Standard asks for students to “write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.” That might not sound exciting or culturally relevant. But a learning experience designed for a 12th grade humanities class engaged learners in a compelling topic— policing in America —to analyze and evaluate multiple texts (including primary sources) and share the reasoning for their perspectives through discussion and writing. Students grappled with ideas and their beliefs and employed deep critical-thinking skills to develop arguments for their claims. Embedding critical-thinking skills in curriculum that students care about and connect with can ignite powerful learning experiences.

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

At The Possible Project , an out-of-school-time program designed to promote entrepreneurial skills and mindsets, students in a recent summer online program (modified from in-person due to COVID-19) explored the impact of COVID-19 on their communities and local BIPOC-owned businesses. They learned interviewing skills through a partnership with Everyday Boston , conducted virtual interviews with entrepreneurs, evaluated information from their interviews and local data, and examined their previously held beliefs. They created blog posts and videos to reflect on their learning and consider how their mindsets had changed as a result of the experience. In this way, we can design powerful community-based learning and invite students into productive struggle with multiple perspectives.

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

At Big Picture Learning schools, students engage in internship-based learning experiences as a central part of their schooling. Their school-based adviser and internship-based mentor support them in developing real-world projects that promote deeper learning and critical-thinking skills. Such authentic experiences teach “young people to be thinkers, to be curious, to get from curiosity to creation … and it helps students design a learning experience that answers their questions, [providing an] opportunity to communicate it to a larger audience—a major indicator of postsecondary success.” Even in a remote environment, we can design projects that ask more of students than rote memorization and that spark critical thinking.

Our call to action is this: As educators, we need to make opportunities for critical thinking available not only to the affluent or those fortunate enough to be placed in advanced courses. The tools are available, let’s use them. Let’s interrogate our current curriculum and design learning experiences that engage all students in real, relevant, and rigorous experiences that require critical thinking and prepare them for promising postsecondary pathways.

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

Dr. PJ Caposey is an award-winning educator, keynote speaker, consultant, and author of seven books who currently serves as the superintendent of schools for the award-winning Meridian CUSD 223 in northwest Illinois. You can find PJ on most social-media platforms as MCUSDSupe:

When I start my keynote on student engagement, I invite two people up on stage and give them each five paper balls to shoot at a garbage can also conveniently placed on stage. Contestant One shoots their shot, and the audience gives approval. Four out of 5 is a heckuva score. Then just before Contestant Two shoots, I blindfold them and start moving the garbage can back and forth. I usually try to ensure that they can at least make one of their shots. Nobody is successful in this unfair environment.

I thank them and send them back to their seats and then explain that this little activity was akin to student engagement. While we all know we want student engagement, we are shooting at different targets. More importantly, for teachers, it is near impossible for them to hit a target that is moving and that they cannot see.

Within the world of education and particularly as educational leaders, we have failed to simplify what student engagement looks like, and it is impossible to define or articulate what student engagement looks like if we cannot clearly articulate what critical thinking is and looks like in a classroom. Because, simply, without critical thought, there is no engagement.

The good news here is that critical thought has been defined and placed into taxonomies for decades already. This is not something new and not something that needs to be redefined. I am a Bloom’s person, but there is nothing wrong with DOK or some of the other taxonomies, either. To be precise, I am a huge fan of Daggett’s Rigor and Relevance Framework. I have used that as a core element of my practice for years, and it has shaped who I am as an instructional leader.

So, in order to explain critical thought, a teacher or a leader must familiarize themselves with these tried and true taxonomies. Easy, right? Yes, sort of. The issue is not understanding what critical thought is; it is the ability to integrate it into the classrooms. In order to do so, there are a four key steps every educator must take.

• Integrating critical thought/rigor into a lesson does not happen by chance, it happens by design. Planning for critical thought and engagement is much different from planning for a traditional lesson. In order to plan for kids to think critically, you have to provide a base of knowledge and excellent prompts to allow them to explore their own thinking in order to analyze, evaluate, or synthesize information.
• SIDE NOTE – Bloom’s verbs are a great way to start when writing objectives, but true planning will take you deeper than this.

QUESTIONING

• If the questions and prompts given in a classroom have correct answers or if the teacher ends up answering their own questions, the lesson will lack critical thought and rigor.
• Script five questions forcing higher-order thought prior to every lesson. Experienced teachers may not feel they need this, but it helps to create an effective habit.
• If lessons are rigorous and assessments are not, students will do well on their assessments, and that may not be an accurate representation of the knowledge and skills they have mastered. If lessons are easy and assessments are rigorous, the exact opposite will happen. When deciding to increase critical thought, it must happen in all three phases of the game: planning, instruction, and assessment.

TALK TIME / CONTROL

• To increase rigor, the teacher must DO LESS. This feels counterintuitive but is accurate. Rigorous lessons involving tons of critical thought must allow for students to work on their own, collaborate with peers, and connect their ideas. This cannot happen in a silent room except for the teacher talking. In order to increase rigor, decrease talk time and become comfortable with less control. Asking questions and giving prompts that lead to no true correct answer also means less control. This is a tough ask for some teachers. Explained differently, if you assign one assignment and get 30 very similar products, you have most likely assigned a low-rigor recipe. If you assign one assignment and get multiple varied products, then the students have had a chance to think deeply, and you have successfully integrated critical thought into your classroom.

Thanks to Dara, Patrick, Meg, and PJ for their contributions!

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email (The RSS feed for this blog, and for all Ed Week articles, has been changed by the new redesign—new ones won’t be available until February). And if you missed any of the highlights from the first nine years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below.

• This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts
• Race & Racism in Schools
• School Closures & the Coronavirus Crisis
• Classroom-Management Advice
• Best Ways to Begin the School Year
• Best Ways to End the School Year
• Student Motivation & Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementing the Common Core
• Facing Gender Challenges in Education
• Teaching Social Studies
• Cooperative & Collaborative Learning
• Using Tech in the Classroom
• Student Voices
• Parent Engagement in Schools
• Teaching English-Language Learners
• Reading Instruction
• Writing Instruction
• Education Policy Issues
• Differentiating Instruction
• Math Instruction
• Science Instruction
• Advice for New Teachers
• Author Interviews
• Entering the Teaching Profession
• The Inclusive Classroom
• Learning & the Brain
• Administrator Leadership
• Teacher Leadership
• Relationships in Schools
• Professional Development
• Instructional Strategies
• Best of Classroom Q&A
• Professional Collaboration
• Classroom Organization
• Mistakes in Education
• Project-Based Learning

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Primary School Teachers’ Understanding of Critical Thinking in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development

• First Online: 28 February 2022

Cite this chapter

• Eli Munkebye 20 &
• Niklas Gericke 20 , 21  

Part of the book series: Contributions from Biology Education Research ((CBER))

764 Accesses

4 Citations

Critical thinking (CT) has been defined as an important goal in education for sustainable development (ESD). In recent curricula, reform for primary education CT has been reinforced as a new key competence. Primary school teachers are struggling to enact CT in their classrooms, and previous research cannot provide the answers to this problem because it has focused on higher education. To implement CT in ESD, first, more must be known about primary school teachers’ understanding and teaching practices of CT. In this study, 10 Norwegian fifth- to seventh-grade teachers were interviewed to capture these aspects. The interview transcripts were subject to thematic analysis. The findings show that the primary school teachers view CT as a cognitive strategy aimed at outlining the multidimensional aspect of ESD, but they leave out many aspects of CT relating to the disciplinary, multidisciplinary, and emotional factors of ESD. Furthermore, they do not teach CT in a way that facilitates the overarching goal of ESD, which is to promote action competence for sustainability. Therefore, suggestions about how to organize teacher professional development are discussed.

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

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Alazzi, K. F. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of critical thinking: A study of Jordanian secondary school social studies teachers. The Social Studies, 99 (6), 243–248.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ampuero, D., Miranda, C. E., Delgado, L. E., Goyen, S., & Weaver, S. (2015). Empathy and critical thinking: Primary students solving local environmental problems through outdoor learning. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 15 (1), 64–78.

Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31 (3), 285–302.

Beilin, R., & Bender, H. (2010). The getting of interdisciplinarity: The everyday practice of environmental curriculum design. In Interdisciplinary higher education: Perspectives and practicalities (pp. 181–193). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Boeve-de Pauw, J. B. D., Gericke, N., Olsson, D., & Berglund, T. (2015). The effectiveness of education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 7 (11), 15693–15717.

Bråten, I., Brante, E. W., & Strømsø, H. I. (2019). Teaching sourcing in upper secondary school: A comprehensive sourcing intervention with follow-up data. Reading Research Quarterly, 54 (4), 481–505.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77–101.

Britt, M. A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ ability to identify and use source information. Cognition and Instruction, 20 (4), 485–522.

Choy, S. C., & Cheah, P. K. (2009). Teacher perceptions of critical thinking among students and its influence on higher education. International Journal of teaching and learning in Higher Education, 20 (2), 198–206.

Google Scholar  

Davies, M., & Barnett, R. (2015). Introduction. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 1–25). Springer.

Eilam, E., & Trop, T. (2010). ESD pedagogy: A guide for the perplexed. The Journal of Environmental Education, 42 (1), 43–64.

Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 43 (2), 44–48.

Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18 (3), 4–10.

European Commission. (2016). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: EU Action plan against wildlife trafficking . European Commission.

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

Gericke, N., & Ottander, C. (2016). On the issue of ‘research in didactics of biology’: Definitions and demarcations. In T. Tal & A. Yarden (Eds.), The future of biology education research; A selection of papers presented at the 10th conference of European Researchers in Didactics of Biology (pp. 155–162). The Technion Israel Institute of Technology and The Weitzmann Institute of Science.

Gericke, N., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Berglund, T., & Olsson, D. (2019). The Sustainability Consciousness Questionnaire: The theoretical development and empirical validation of an evaluation instrument for stakeholders working with sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 27 (1), 35–49.

Gericke, N., Huang, L., Knippels, M. C., Christodoulou, A., Van Dam, F., & Gasparovic, S. (2020). Environmental citizenship in secondary formal education: The importance of curriculum and subject teachers. In A. C. Hadjichambis, P. Reis, D. Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, J. Činčera, J. Boeve-de Pauw, N. Gericke, & M. C. Knippels (Eds.), Conceptualizing environmental citizenship for 21st century education (pp. 193–212). SpringerOpen.

Gough, S. (2002). Right answers or wrong problems? Towards a theory of change for environmental learning. The Trumpeter, 18 (1), 1.

Gough, S., & Scott, W. (2003). Sustainable development and learning: Framing the issues . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hopkins, C., & McKeown, R. (2002). Education for sustainable development: An international perspective. In Education and sustainability: Responding to the global challenge (p. 13). IUCN.

Howe, E. R. (2004). Canadian and Japanese teachers’ conceptions of critical thinking: A comparative study. Teachers and Teaching, 10 (5), 505–525.

Jickling, B., & Wals, A. E. (2012). Debating education for sustainable development 20 years after Rio: A conversation between Bob Jickling and Arjen Wals. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6 (1), 49–57.

Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing . Sage.

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson’s Research Reports, 6 , 40–41.

Lijmbach, S., Van Arcken, M. M., Van Koppen, C. A., & Wals, A. E. (2002). ‘Your view of nature is not mine!’: Learning about pluralism in the classroom. Environmental Education Research, 8 (2), 121–135.

McPeck, J. E. (1981). Critical thinking and education-issues and ideas in education . Martin Robertson Co.

Minestry of Education. (2017). Overordnet del – verdier og prinsipper for grunnopplæringen [Overarching part – Values and principles of primary and secondary education]. https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/53d21ea2bc3a4202b86b83cfe82da93e/overordnet-del%2D%2D-verdier-og-prinsipper-for-grunnopplaringen.pdf

Minestry of Education. (2020). Facts and analysis of kindergarten, primary and secondary education in Norway . http://utdanningsspeilet.udir.no/2016/en/

Mogensen, F., & Schnack, K. (2010). The action competence approach and the ‘new’ discourses of education for sustainable development, competence and quality criteria. Environmental Education Research, 16 (1), 59–74.

Moore, T. (2013). Critical thinking: Seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies in Higher Education, 38 (4), 506–522.

Munkebye, E., Scheie, E., Gabrielsen, A., Jordet, A., Misund, S., Nergaard, T., & Øyehaug, A. B. (2020). Interdisciplinary primary school curriculum units for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 26 (6), 795–811.

Ojala, M. (2013). Emotional awareness: On the importance of including emotional aspects in education for sustainable development (ESD). Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 7 (2), 167–182.

Olsson, D., Gericke, N., Sass, W., & Boeve-de Pauw, J. (2020). Self-perceived action competence for sustainability: The theoretical grounding and empirical validation of a novel research instrument. Environmental Education Research, 26 (5), 742–760.

Sass, W., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Olsson, D., Gericke, N., De Maeyer, S., & Van Petegem, P. (2020). Redefining action competence: The case of sustainable development. The Journal of Environmental Education , 1–14.

Sund, P., & Gericke, N. (2020). Teaching contributions from secondary school subject areas to education for sustainable development—A comparative study of science, social science and language teachers. Environmental Education Research, 26 (6), 772–794.

UNESCO. (2018). Issues and trends in education for sustainable development. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000261445

Vare, P., & Scott, W. (2007). Learning for a change: Exploring the relationship between education and sustainable development. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 1 (2), 191–198.

Vieira, R. M., Tenreiro-Vieira, C., & Martins, I. P. (2011). Critical thinking: Conceptual clarification and its importance in science education. Science Education International, 22 (1), 43–54.

Wiek, A., Withycombe, L., & Redman, C. L. (2011). Key competencies in sustainability: A reference framework for academic program development. Sustainability Science, 6 (2), 203–218.

Willingham, D. T. (2008). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review, 109 (4), 21–32.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted within the project CriThiSE ( https://www.ntnu.no/ilu/crithise ), which is supported by The Research Council of Norway, project number 302774.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Teacher Education, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, NTNU, Trondheim, Norway

Eli Munkebye & Niklas Gericke

Department of Environmental and Life Sciences, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden

Niklas Gericke

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eli Munkebye .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Facultade Ciencias da Educación, Universidade de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Blanca Puig

María Pilar Jiménez-Aleixandre

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Munkebye, E., Gericke, N. (2022). Primary School Teachers’ Understanding of Critical Thinking in the Context of Education for Sustainable Development. In: Puig, B., Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.P. (eds) Critical Thinking in Biology and Environmental Education. Contributions from Biology Education Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92006-7_14

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92006-7_14

Published : 28 February 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-92005-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-92006-7

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Departments, units, and programs
• College leadership
• Diversity, equity, and inclusion
• Faculty and staff resources
• LAS Strategic Plan

• Apply to LAS
• Liberal arts & sciences majors
• LAS Insider blog
• Admissions FAQs
• Parent resources
• Pre-college summer programs

Quick Links

Request info

• Academic policies and standing
• Advising and support
• College distinctions
• Dates and deadlines
• Intercollegiate transfers
• LAS Lineup student newsletter
• Programs of study
• Scholarships
• Certificates
• Student emergencies

Student resources

• Access and Achievement Program
• Career services
• First-Year Experience
• Honors program
• International programs
• Internship opportunities
• Paul M. Lisnek LAS Hub
• Student research opportunities
• Expertise in LAS
• Research facilities and centers
• Dean's Distinguished Lecture series
• Alumni advice
• Alumni award programs
• Get involved
• LAS Alumni Council
• LAS@Work: Alumni careers
• Study Abroad Alumni Networks
• Update your information
• Nominate an alumnus for an LAS award
• Faculty honors
• The Quadrangle Online
• LAS News email newsletter archive
• LAS social media
• Media contact in the College of LAS
• LAS Landmark Day of Giving
• About giving to LAS
• Building projects
• Corporate engagement
• Faculty support
• Lincoln Scholars Initiative
• Impact of giving

Why is critical thinking important?

What do lawyers, accountants, teachers, and doctors all have in common?

What is critical thinking?

The Oxford English Dictionary defines critical thinking as “The objective, systematic, and rational analysis and evaluation of factual evidence in order to form a judgment on a subject, issue, etc.” Critical thinking involves the use of logic and reasoning to evaluate available facts and/or evidence to come to a conclusion about a certain subject or topic. We use critical thinking every day, from decision-making to problem-solving, in addition to thinking critically in an academic context!

Why is critical thinking important for academic success?

You may be asking “why is critical thinking important for students?” Critical thinking appears in a diverse set of disciplines and impacts students’ learning every day, regardless of major.

Critical thinking skills are often associated with the value of studying the humanities. In majors such as English, students will be presented with a certain text—whether it’s a novel, short story, essay, or even film—and will have to use textual evidence to make an argument and then defend their argument about what they’ve read. However, the importance of critical thinking does not only apply to the humanities. In the social sciences, an economics major , for example, will use what they’ve learned to figure out solutions to issues as varied as land and other natural resource use, to how much people should work, to how to develop human capital through education. Problem-solving and critical thinking go hand in hand. Biology is a popular major within LAS, and graduates of the biology program often pursue careers in the medical sciences. Doctors use critical thinking every day, tapping into the knowledge they acquired from studying the biological sciences to diagnose and treat different diseases and ailments.

Students in the College of LAS take many courses that require critical thinking before they graduate. You may be asked in an Economics class to use statistical data analysis to evaluate the impact on home improvement spending when the Fed increases interest rates (read more about real-world experience with Datathon ). If you’ve ever been asked “How often do you think about the Roman Empire?”, you may find yourself thinking about the Roman Empire more than you thought—maybe in an English course, where you’ll use text from Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra to make an argument about Roman imperial desire.  No matter what the context is, critical thinking will be involved in your academic life and can take form in many different ways.

The benefits of critical thinking in everyday life

Building better communication.

One of the most important life skills that students learn as early as elementary school is how to give a presentation. Many classes require students to give presentations, because being well-spoken is a key skill in effective communication. This is where critical thinking benefits come into play: using the skills you’ve learned, you’ll be able to gather the information needed for your presentation, narrow down what information is most relevant, and communicate it in an engaging way. 

Typically, the first step in creating a presentation is choosing a topic. For example, your professor might assign a presentation on the Gilded Age and provide a list of figures from the 1870s—1890s to choose from. You’ll use your critical thinking skills to narrow down your choices. You may ask yourself:

• What figure am I most familiar with?
• Who am I most interested in? 
• Will I have to do additional research? 

After choosing your topic, your professor will usually ask a guiding question to help you form a thesis: an argument that is backed up with evidence. Critical thinking benefits this process by allowing you to focus on the information that is most relevant in support of your argument. By focusing on the strongest evidence, you will communicate your thesis clearly.

Finally, once you’ve finished gathering information, you will begin putting your presentation together. Creating a presentation requires a balance of text and visuals. Graphs and tables are popular visuals in STEM-based projects, but digital images and graphics are effective as well. Critical thinking benefits this process because the right images and visuals create a more dynamic experience for the audience, giving them the opportunity to engage with the material.

Presentation skills go beyond the classroom. Students at the University of Illinois will often participate in summer internships to get professional experience before graduation. Many summer interns are required to present about their experience and what they learned at the end of the internship. Jobs frequently also require employees to create presentations of some kind—whether it’s an advertising pitch to win an account from a potential client, or quarterly reporting, giving a presentation is a life skill that directly relates to critical thinking. 

Fostering independence and confidence

An important life skill many people start learning as college students and then finessing once they enter the “adult world” is how to budget. There will be many different expenses to keep track of, including rent, bills, car payments, and groceries, just to name a few! After developing your critical thinking skills, you’ll put them to use to consider your salary and budget your expenses accordingly. Here’s an example:

• You earn a salary of $75,000 a year. Assume all amounts are before taxes.
• 1,800 x 12 = 21,600
• 75,000 – 21,600 = 53,400
• This leaves you with $53,400
• 320 x 12 = 3,840 a year
• 53,400-3,840= 49,560
• 726 x 12 = 8,712
• 49,560 – 8,712= 40,848
• You’re left with $40,848 for miscellaneous expenses. You use your critical thinking skills to decide what to do with your $40,848. You think ahead towards your retirement and decide to put $500 a month into a Roth IRA, leaving $34,848. Since you love coffee, you try to figure out if you can afford a daily coffee run. On average, a cup of coffee will cost you $7. 7 x 365 = $2,555 a year for coffee. 34,848 – 2,555 = 32,293
• You have $32,293 left. You will use your critical thinking skills to figure out how much you would want to put into savings, how much you want to save to treat yourself from time to time, and how much you want to put aside for emergency funds. With the benefits of critical thinking, you will be well-equipped to budget your lifestyle once you enter the working world.

Enhancing decision-making skills

Choosing the right university for you.

One of the biggest decisions you’ll make in your life is what college or university to go to. There are many factors to consider when making this decision, and critical thinking importance will come into play when determining these factors.

Many high school seniors apply to colleges with the hope of being accepted into a certain program, whether it’s biology, psychology, political science, English, or something else entirely. Some students apply with certain schools in mind due to overall rankings. Students also consider the campus a school is set in. While some universities such as the University of Illinois are nestled within college towns, New York University is right in Manhattan, in a big city setting. Some students dream of going to large universities, and other students prefer smaller schools. The diversity of a university’s student body is also a key consideration. For many 17- and 18-year-olds, college is a time to meet peers from diverse racial and socio-economic backgrounds and learn about life experiences different than one’s own.

With all these factors in mind, you’ll use critical thinking to decide which are most important to you—and which school is the right fit for you.

Develop your critical thinking skills at the University of Illinois

At the University of Illinois, not only will you learn how to think critically, but you will put critical thinking into practice. In the College of LAS, you can choose from 70+ majors where you will learn the importance and benefits of critical thinking skills. The College of Liberal Arts & Sciences at U of I offers a wide range of undergraduate and graduate programs in life, physical, and mathematical sciences; humanities; and social and behavioral sciences. No matter which program you choose, you will develop critical thinking skills as you go through your courses in the major of your choice. And in those courses, the first question your professors may ask you is, “What is the goal of critical thinking?” You will be able to respond with confidence that the goal of critical thinking is to help shape people into more informed, more thoughtful members of society.

With such a vast representation of disciplines, an education in the College of LAS will prepare you for a career where you will apply critical thinking skills to real life, both in and outside of the classroom, from your undergraduate experience to your professional career. If you’re interested in becoming a part of a diverse set of students and developing skills for lifelong success, apply to LAS today!

Read more first-hand stories from our amazing students at the LAS Insider blog .

• Privacy Notice
• Accessibility

Translate this page from English...

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

The Role of Socratic Questioning in Thinking, Teaching, and Learning

UGC NET 2024 Paper 1: List of topics you must prepare for

Apr 26, 2024

Teaching Aptitude

Teaching methods encompass various strategies such as lectures, discussions, and demonstrations, each suited to different learning objectives and audiences. A good teacher possesses qualities like patience, effective communication skills, and adaptability to engage and inspire learners.

Image Source: Canva

Classroom Management

Effective classroom management techniques are essential for maintaining a productive learning environment. This includes establishing clear expectations, managing behavior, and fostering positive relationships among students.

Evaluation Methods

Assessment methods such as assignments and tests are crucial for measuring students' understanding and progress. Choosing appropriate evaluation techniques aligned with learning objectives ensures fair and accurate assessment.

Learner's Characteristics

Understanding Piaget's stages of cognitive development helps educators tailor instruction to meet students' cognitive abilities. Recognizing diverse learning styles, including auditory, visual, and kinesthetic, allows for differentiated instruction to cater to individual needs.

Individual Differences

Every learner is unique, with varying abilities, backgrounds, and motivations. Acknowledging and addressing these differences is vital for creating inclusive learning environments and fostering student success.

Factors Affecting Teaching

Effective curriculum design is fundamental to facilitating meaningful learning experiences. Integrating teaching aids and technology enhances engagement and understanding, while the learning environment and external influences like parental involvement play significant roles in shaping learning outcomes.

You may also like

Infrastructure & learning environment.

The physical and social environment in which learning occurs significantly impacts student engagement and achievement. Providing adequate infrastructure and cultivating a supportive learning atmosphere are essential for maximizing learning potential

Teaching Methods

Utilising e-learning platforms like SWAYAM and MOOCs expands access to educational resources and promotes self-directed learning. Group discussions and collaborative learning activities foster critical thinking, communication skills, and peer interaction.

Problem-Solving and Critical Thinking

Encouraging problem-solving methods and critical thinking skills development empowers learners to analyze situations, explore alternatives, and make informed decisions. Balancing learner-centered and teacher-centered approaches fosters active engagement and deep understanding.

Research Aptitude

Differentiating between quantitative and qualitative research methodologies informs effective research design and data collection techniques. Upholding research ethics and avoiding plagiarism ensures the integrity and credibility of scholarly inquiry.

Thanks For Reading!

Next: Meet Nilkrishna Gajare: A Farmer's Son Who Topped JEE Main 2024

The University of Chicago The Law School

Geoffrey stone marks a half century of teaching.

When Geoffrey R. Stone, ’71, started his senior year at the University of Pennsylvania in 1967, he had no idea what he would do next. It was the height of the Vietnam War and like many of his male classmates, he thought about attending graduate school. But he was not sure what he wanted to study. Anthropology seemed to pull him, but he ultimately chose the law because he felt it could be used as a vehicle for social change.

Fast forward to today, and Stone, the Edward H. Levi Distinguished Professor of Law, is a preeminent authority on civil rights and constitutional law and one of the nation’s best-respected civil libertarians.

The impact he has had in the world of academia and beyond cannot be overstated. In just the past ten years, Stone was called on by President Obama to examine the country’s national security policy in the wake of the Edward Snowden leak, helped guide the White House in addressing sexual violence on college campuses, and coauthored an amicus brief in the historic Obergefell v. Hodges case.

His influence stretches far and wide, but throughout his career Stone has remained steadfastly committed to the Law School and the University that he has called home for the last fifty years. Over the decades, he has taught an estimated 8,000 students, served as Law School Dean, served as University Provost, and led many committees that have shaped key University policies and initiatives, including, most notably, the Chicago Principles. The American Constitution Society duly named him a “legal legend” in 2012, which he surely remains to this day.

Finding His Calling

Originally from the East Coast, Stone had never been to the Midwest before enrolling at the Law School. He had turned down acceptances to Harvard, Yale, and Columbia, starting himself down a path that back then he could have scarcely imagined. When he arrived at the Law School, his uncertainty about his vocation quickly disappeared. He thrived during his years as a student, serving as editor in chief of the Law Review before graduating cum laude.

Stone went on to clerk for US Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr. and Judge J. Skelly Wright on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Afterward, he found himself at another crossroads: continue working or teach. He was unsure about a career in academia, but one of his favorite professors, Owen Fiss, insisted that Stone interview for a faculty position at the Law School.

He finally relented, and to his surprise enjoyed the interview. (Wanting to challenge the faculty, in true Geof Stone fashion, he had given a presentation on how heroin addicts have a constitutional right to purchase and possess heroin.)

In 1973, Stone joined the faculty.

“It seems like only yesterday when I taught my first course, Civil Procedure, in the fall of 1973. I still vividly remember the students in that class and am still in touch with more than a few of them,” said Stone. “I still love teaching, interacting with students, and having them to my home for dinner (occasionally). Like my remarkable colleagues, our students are smart, curious, hard-working, and challenging. Teaching is a joy.”

In his early years of teaching, Stone describes himself as a hippie. He had long hair and a beard and was the only faculty member who didn’t wear a tie. He rose through the ranks and had several title changes, starting with “the Harry Kalven, Jr. Professor of Law” in 1984. It seemed fitting, as Stone says many of his ideas at the time were inspired by Kalven, with whom he’d worked closely and looked up to when he first joined the faculty.

Evolving as a teacher, Stone soon established himself as a great innovator in the classroom. One of his lasting legacies is his seminar on constitutional decision-making, which he designed to give students a deeper understanding of the judicial process. The seminar became hugely popular and eventually made its way to other schools, often carried over by former students who became law professors themselves. It continues to captivate new generations of students at the Law School.

“Professor Stone made incredibly complex, nuanced, and frustrating areas of law enjoyable learning experiences,” said Jimmie Zahn, ’17. “What made the greatest impression on me as his student, however, was not his intellectual horsepower and scholarship, but his patience and kindness. In an industry where ability is often correlated with arrogance, I have only grown more appreciative of the traits that Stone possesses.”

His passion for transformative instruction did not go unnoticed. In 2006, he received the University’s Provost Award for Outstanding Teaching. In 2021, he was recognized with the University’s Norman Maclean Award, which honors senior faculty for extraordinary contributions to teaching and to the student experience. Even while serving as dean of the Law School and provost for the University, Stone was in the classroom.

“Professor Stone clearly drew energy from his students. No one left his classes unchallenged,” said Bjarne P. Tellmann, ’95. “His class on the First Amendment profoundly impacted my thinking about free speech because he taught us to think deeply about the amendment’s limits along with our values and all the assumptions and prejudices that America continues to confront.”

A Visionary Dean and Devoted Mentor

Outside the classroom, Stone began to get more involved in administrative responsibilities at the Law School and the University. In the 1980s, he chaired nearly every major committee at the Law School, from the Faculty Appointments Committee to the Admissions Committee. He grew particularly invested in attracting the most dynamic and promising young scholars to the faculty—a pursuit he continued to champion when he became the Law School’s ninth dean from 1987 to 1993.

Stone oversaw the hiring of many prominent faculty during his time as dean. He brought on future President Barack Obama and future US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, as well as commercial law scholar Randal C. Picker and criminal and juvenile law expert Herschella Conyers, who this year celebrated a 30-year teaching milestone. But his efforts to recruit brilliant faculty didn’t end there; Stone was a devoted mentor. He took time to show young faculty the ropes.

“Geof has had a tremendous impact on my career. He convinced me to be a Bigelow Fellow,” Genevieve Lakier, Professor of Law and Herbert & Marjorie Fried Teaching Scholar, said. “He mentored me, respectfully but effectively, during my first few years of teaching, urging me to not be afraid to add to the conversation. Face-to-face, he can be very tough. But he is also supportive. I am sure he brings this same amazing double-edged mentorship to students.”

As dean, Stone nurtured a supportive and collegial environment for both faculty and students. He enabled students to have direct input on faculty committees, implemented quarterly town halls, and ushered in new academic and social organizations, like the Law School’s Public Service Program and the Law and Government Program, the latter of which promoted joint faculty appointments with other schools across the University.

Deeply committed to academic enterprise and encouraging a spirit of collaboration, Stone established the Law School’s celebrated Work-in-Progress (WIP) workshop for faculty. Convening weekly, WIP provides a space for faculty to present their papers to their colleagues and engage in lively discussions. The tradition continues to be a vital part of the Law School’s culture to this day.

“Stone is a most worthy successor to many legendary figures from the Law School’s rich past,” said Douglas Baird, the Harry A. Bigelow Distinguished Service Professor of Law, who is also a former dean of the Law School. “He instilled the same passion for teaching in generations of his colleagues and his insights into constitutional law have reshaped the way we think about free speech. His commitment to robust, honest, and civilized discourse epitomizes what is special about the University of Chicago.”

A Strategic University Leader

During his seventh year as dean, Stone was tapped to serve as provost from 1994 to 2002, expanding his impact within the UChicago community even further.

In what was perhaps one of his most important contributions, Stone chaired the University’s Committee on Freedom of Expression, which in 2014 issued the seminal statement on academic free expression and from which the Chicago Principles were born. Stone’s role in drafting the principles is a lasting part of his legacy and has made him an icon in the world of academic free expression.

Yet just as significantly, though not as widely known, Stone successfully navigated the University through two major events during his seven years as provost.

He guided the University through one of its most tumultuous budget challenges in the 1990s, when financial trends at the time had plunged UChicago into the red. Restructuring the budget process to strengthen the University’s financial position for the short term and long term was his focus during his first years as provost.

Beyond that, as chair of the University’s Planning and Budget Committee, Stone was diligent and strategic in his allocation of resources. He paid special attention to bolstering funds for faculty salaries and scholarship, increasing stipends for graduate assistants, and improving the overall quality of student life across all areas of the University.

The second major event he led the University through was its two-year Campus Master Planning Process in the late 1990s, which culminated in the creation and revitalization of several areas around campus, including the Max Palevsky Residential Commons, the Bartlett Dining Commons, the Ratner Athletics Center, the Interdivisional Research Building, and improvements on the Midway Plaisance. He was also instrumental in establishing the Biopsychological Sciences Building, which opened in 1998.

Strategic in his leadership, Stone as provost worked tirelessly to ensure the University was positioned for continued success for every member of its community. When he finally stepped down to return to teaching and research, he was, at that point, the longest-serving provost in the history of the University.

“Geof’s contributions to the Law School, the University, and the legal academy are towering,” said Dean Thomas J. Miles, the Clifton R. Musser Professor of Law and Economics. “He is a distinguished scholar who has expanded the understanding of the Constitution, especially the First Amendment. As dean, he built the eminence of the Law School and inspired an enduring commitment to teaching. As provost during a critical moment, he set the University on a trajectory of unprecedented success. He led a highly influential affirmation of the University’s commitment to free inquiry, and he is a fearless and irreplaceable advocate for the freedom to speak and discuss.”

A Scholarly Giant

Looking at the breadth of his career, Stone’s teaching and leadership are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to his accomplishments.

A prolific scholar, Stone has written more than 20 books, contributed chapters to 100 more, and served as the lead editor for 35. He has authored 117 law review articles and served as chief editor for ten editions of one of our nation’s leading constitutional law casebooks and seven editions of a leading casebook on the First Amendment. As if these were not enough, he has written almost 500 news articles and editorials.

During his time as provost, Stone coedited eight volumes of the Supreme Court Review , the leading journal of constitutional law read by academics, judges, and practitioners the world over since 1991. He continues to hold the coeditor role today. He has also edited a 25-volume series on constitutional law, known as Inalienable Rights , which includes books by such authors as Richard Posner, Laurence Tribe, Martha Minow, and Owen Fiss, to name just a few. And he has served on the editorial advisory board of Political Science Quarterly since 2005.

Stone’s publications have won many national awards, and over his lengthy career, he has weighed in on some of the highest-profile issues of our time at the highest levels of all three branches of government.

Lee C. Bollinger, president emeritus of Columbia University, who has written and edited six books with Stone, with another two in the works, noted that Stone has provided the historical and general context for why the First Amendment has been interpreted in the ways it has over the last half century: “His books, essays, and law review articles bring to life how the nation has at times gone astray and let the mind of censorship punish dissent and stunt public discussion.”

Both Bollinger and Lakier point out that Stone was the first to recognize the significance of the Burger Court’s discovery of a content neutrality principle in the First Amendment. He plumbed the principle’s complexities and depths, and his arguments continue to significantly shape the conversation.

These days, Stone is concerned about American democracy and politics, which is evident in his latest two books with Bollinger, one about the decisions in Roe and Dobbs published earlier this year and another about the constitutionality of affirmative action, published earlier last year.

But what is also evident is his unwavering determination to continue to ask questions, challenge ideas, and have the conversations necessary to analyze current issues and find ways to move forward. As a scholar, Stone has made a profound impact on the legal world. And as the world continues to evolve, so too do Geof Stone’s ideas which keep him very busy. He currently has two book projects in the works, one on the future of free speech and another on campaign finance and the First Amendment.

“It is quite astonishing to think that I have been on the faculty for more than half a century,” reflected Stone. “I have loved the University and the Law School throughout these years, most of all because of our distinctive commitment to free and open intellectual discourse and disagreement. No other law school or university is so deeply committed to these values. This is what makes us special, and what makes us truly the nation’s champion of academic freedom. This is what I most admire about this institution. We constantly and courageously question and challenge one another in a vigorous and never-ending quest to learn.”

Claire L. Parins is the Senior Director of Academic Publications at the Law School.

Nadia Alfadel Coloma is the Associate Director of Content at the Law School.