The continuing rise of misinformation has sparked renewed calls for critical thinking to be at the heart of the national curriculum. Andrew Jones considers what exactly critical thinking is and how best it might be ‘taught’
Image: Adobe Stock

In August, education secretary Bridget Phillipson proposed that children in England should be taught to identify extremist content and misinformation online.

This would be part of a broader effort to embed “critical thinking” throughout the curriculum. The aim is to counteract what she referred to as "putrid conspiracy theories" (see Cutteridge, 2024).

This idea faced scepticism from educational influencers, such as science teacher Adam Boxer, who stated on X: "Reasonably confident that beyond a few very basic heuristics this isn't possible."

There were also more general comments on critical thinking from figures like ResearchED founder Tom Bennett, who remarked, also on X: "A few assemblies on fake news won’t cut it. The best way to nurture generations of informed critical thinkers is by teaching them acres of knowledge-rich domain content and how reasoning works. Critical thinking isn’t a skill separate from these things; it is composed of them."

Critical thinking, then, is clearly a topic of debate – especially in light of the new government’s Curriculum and Assessment Review (DfE, 2024).

Critics argue that it cannot be taught explicitly, as it is too abstract or context-dependent to be effectively integrated into the curriculum. However, supporters believe that critical thinking can and should be taught as a signposted component of modern education, provided it is contextually embedded.

 

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is about thoughtful analysis and reasoned judgement, requiring a deep understanding of the subject.

While there is debate on what it is, with Derridean deconstructuralist and Foucaultian poststructuralist views out there (Abrami et al, 2015), the Cambridge Life Competencies Framework, which integrates critical thinking into English lessons, defines it as analysing and evaluating ideas, solving problems, and making informed decisions (Silver, 2021). This involves assessing the validity of arguments, discerning biases, and considering alternative perspectives.

In the 21st century, where students are bombarded with information from various sources – some reliable, some not – these skills are more important than ever.

This is particularly crucial given the harmful information exacerbated by artificial intelligence and algorithms, which potentially disseminate one-sided arguments, extremist rhetoric, and conspiracy theories, as referenced by the education secretary.

 

Standalone subject vs domain-specific skills

One of the central debates, however, is whether critical thinking should be taught as a standalone subject or embedded within other disciplines.

Proponents of the standalone approach argue that critical thinking encompasses a set of generalisable skills that can be applied across various contexts, making it suitable for dedicated courses (Ennis, 2011; Royalty, 1995).

For example, courses that focus exclusively on logical reasoning, argumentation, and the evaluation of evidence can equip students with tools they can use in any subject.

On the other hand, critics of this approach, such as McPeck (1981) and Willingham (2008), argue that critical thinking is inherently context-dependent.

They believe that critical thinking cannot be divorced from the content it is applied to and that teaching it as a standalone subject risks reducing it to a set of abstract skills with limited real-world applicability.

Instead, they advocate for embedding critical thinking instruction within specific subjects, where it can be taught in conjunction with domain-specific knowledge.

 

Explicit vs discreet instruction

Another layer of debate concerns whether critical thinking should be taught explicitly or more subtly integrated into everyday classroom activities.

Explicit instruction involves direct teaching of critical thinking skills, often through exercises that focus on identifying logical fallacies, analysing arguments, and drawing inferences (Facione, 1990). This approach ensures that students are aware of the skills they are developing and can consciously apply them in different contexts, as they are signposted by teachers in different subject areas.

Conversely, discreet instruction incorporates critical thinking into regular lessons without overtly labelling it as such. For example, a history teacher might encourage students to evaluate the reliability of different sources without explicitly framing the activity as a lesson in critical thinking.

This method can be effective, particularly in helping students see the relevance of critical thinking to their everyday learning, but it risks leaving some students unaware of the skills they are developing (Paul & Elder, 2008).

 

How critical thinking can work within subjects

Subsequently, there are three positions on critical thinking.

  1. To teach it discretely within subjects.
  2. To teach it explicitly within subjects, which entails identifying cognitive activities such as reasoning, making judgements and decisions, and problem-solving.
  3. To teach it as a standalone subject.

Overall, the research suggests that all three have an impact, although the latter has the least impact (Abrami et al, 2015).

Therefore, despite the debates, there is a consensus that critical thinking can and should be developed within subject-specific contexts as explicit “critical thinking” strategies.

When taught alongside subject matter, critical thinking can deepen students' understanding and enhance their ability to apply knowledge critically.

For example, in a science class, students can learn to “critically evaluate” experimental design and analyse data. In English, they can be taught to “critically assess” the strength of arguments in persuasive texts and to consider multiple interpretations of a literary work (see, for instance, meta-analyses by Abrami et al, 2008, 2015; as well as Halpern, 1998; Ennis, 2011; Heijltjes et al, 2014, for similar examples).

 

Evidence-based strategies for teaching critical thinking

While most aspects of critical thinking will be contextual to the content taught, researchers such as Halpern and Dunn (2022) and Abrami et al (2015) have suggested that a number of critical thinking strategies show evidence of impact across most curriculum subjects, as well as in standalone critical thinking programmes.

Even Willingham (2008, see appendix C) suggests some of these, albeit with reservations in terms of labelling them as critical thinking skills per se. Here are some examples:

Encourage questioning: One of the most effective ways to foster critical thinking is by encouraging students to ask questions. Open-ended questions that require more than a simple yes or no answer can stimulate deeper thinking. For example, instead of asking, "Did this experiment work?" a teacher might ask, "What variables could have influenced the outcome of this experiment, and how might they be controlled in future studies?" Of course, the importance of questioning, whether closed for factual recall or open for procedural explanations and critical discussion, is well established (see Chiles, 2024).

Teach metacognition: Helping students become aware of their own thinking processes can significantly enhance their critical thinking abilities. This involves teaching them to reflect on how they come to conclusions, identify potential biases, and assess the strength of their arguments. According to Halpern and Dunn (2022), metacognitive strategies are crucial for developing critical thinking because they help students regulate their thinking and approach problems more systematically.

Use real-world problems: Applying critical thinking to real-world problems makes the learning experience more engaging and relevant. When students are tasked with solving real-life issues, they must analyse information, weigh options, and make decisions based on evidence. This process naturally develops critical thinking skills. Abrami et al (2015) found that problem-based learning, which involves real-world problem-solving, significantly improves students' critical thinking and problem-solving abilities.

Debate and discussion: Structured debates and discussions are effective ways to encourage critical thinking. These activities require students to consider multiple viewpoints, develop arguments, and defend their positions. Moreover, they teach students to listen to and critique the arguments of others, which is a critical component of thinking critically (Nisbett, 2015). Kuhn (1999) also supports this approach, arguing that argumentative discourse is central to the development of critical thinking skills.

Integrate technology thoughtfully: Technology can be a powerful tool in teaching critical thinking, but it must be used thoughtfully. Digital platforms that allow students to explore simulations, engage in interactive problem-solving, and collaborate with peers can enhance critical thinking. However, it is important to guide students in distinguishing credible sources from unreliable ones – a skill crucial in the digital age (McDougall, 2023).

 

Final thoughts

The proliferation of social media, AI, and online misinformation highlights the importance of teaching critical thinking as an explicit, though multi-faceted, skill. However, evidence suggests that critical thinking is most effective when taught within subject domains.

This presents a challenge, as it may be difficult to find space within an already packed curriculum to transfer these skills to address these everyday issues directly, making it clear to students why they need them outside of subject-domains.

Unless schools are already teaching citizenship as required by law – or offering another avenue for media literacy – implementing this may be easier said than done.

Perhaps the Curriculum and Assessment Review will address this? Or perhaps the education secretary should be considering how we improve media literacy, as opposed to critical thinking, in order to combat the issues we are all concerned about.

 

Further information & resources

Related articles

Critical thinking activities and ideas

Critical thinking in practice

Critical pedagogy: Empowering minds, transforming classrooms