apa itu critical thinking and problem formulation

Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, dan Contoh Penerapannya

Azzahra Ilka Aulia
October 6, 2023
Artikel , Business

Critical thinking adalah sebuah skill yang perlu dimiliki oleh setiap orang agar dapat membuat keputusan dan menyelesaikan masalah dengan baik. Skill ini biasanya ditandai dengan orang yang mampu berpikiran secara cermat dalam segala situasi.

Kemampuan ini tentu akan sangat berguna bagi seseorang dalam menjalankan pekerjaannya. Lalu, bagaimana cara berpikir kritis dengan baik?

Artikel di bawah ini akan menjelaskan tentang critical thinking dengan secara jelas. Simak artikel berikut ini sampai selesai, ya!

Apa itu Critical Thinking ?

Critical thinking adalah sebuah cara untuk berpikir dan mengkritik sesuatu dengan mempertanyakan suatu ide atau permasalahan.

Lebih lanjut, critical thinking artinya berpikir kritis atau dapat dipahami sebagai pola pikir yang tidak menerima informasi secara mentah.

Berpikir kritis umumnya melibatkan kemampuan untuk mengambil keputusan dengan cara yang bijak. Selain itu, berdasarkan definisi tersebut, berpikir kritis juga suatu pemahaman untuk menghasilkan keputusan yang paling optimal.

Critical thinking dapat dipahami sebagai salah satu soft skill yang sangat penting dalam membantu seseorang berorganisasi dan karyawan dalam perusahaan. Dengan memiliki pikiran yang kritis, suatu permasalahan dan keputusan dapat diselesaikan dengan tepat.

Manfaat Critical Thinking

Dengan kemampuan berpikir kritis, tentu banyak manfaat yang didapat bagi diri sendiri dan golongan. Berikut ini adalah beberapa manfaat berpikir kritis.

1. Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Kreatif Meningkat

Dari berpikir kritis, Anda dapat melatih diri sendiri dengan menyelidiki dan mengajukan pertanyaan terhadap lingkungan di sekitar. Berpikir kritis dapat meningkatkan sisi kreatif dalam diri sendiri.

2. Kemampuan Problem Solving Meningkat

Skill pemecahan masalah sangat penting bagi diri sendiri dan juga bagi perusahaan. Dengan kemampuan problem solving dapat memungkinkan seseorang untuk mengidentifikasi, menganalisis, dan mencari solusi yang efektif terhadap suatu masalah.

3. Membuat Keputusan dengan Tepat

Membuat keputusan yang tepat melibatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis. Sebelum memutuskan sesuatu dengan tepat, kemampuan untuk mengevaluasi informasi, mempertimbangan opsi, dan memilih tindakan yang paling sesuai dengan tujuan yang dihadapi

4. Komunikasi yang Efektif Meningkat

Komunikasi yang efektif merupakan salah satu skill yang yang penting bagi pribadi dan profesional. Komunikasi yang efektif memungkinkan seseorang untuk menyampaikan pesan dengan jelas sehingga pesan yang disampaikan dapat dipahami oleh orang lain.

Baca Juga: Leadership: Pengertian, Gaya, Jenis-Jenis, dan Contohnya

Komponen Critical Thinking

Berpikir kritis melibatkan beberapa komponen yang penting untuk membantu individu dalam menganalisis informasi dengan kritis.

Berikut ini adalah beberapa komponen berpikir kritis.

Observing adalah proses mengamati sebuah objek, kejadian, atau informasi secara seksama dan kemudian memahami atau mencari pola hubungannya.
Feeling adalah perasaan respons emosional atau perasaan yang timbul dari hasil suatu pengalaman atau situasi.
Wondering berarti proses bertanya-tanya atau ingin tahu lebih tentang suatu fenomena yang mendorong eksplorasi lebih lanjut.
Imagining berarti membayangkan atau membentuk gambaran tentang sesuatu yang belum terjadi atau digunakan untuk mengembangkan kreativitas dan inovasi.
Inferring adalah menyimpulkan dengan logis berdasarkan bukti atau petunjuk yang tersedia.
Knowledge adalah informasi atau pengetahuan yang dimiliki oleh seseorang mengenai sebuah topik atau bidang tertentu.
Consulting adalah mencari atau meminta saran, pandangan, dan nasihat kepada orang yang memiliki pengetahuan dan pengalaman tentang suatu bidang.
Identifying and analyzing adalah proses mengidentifikasi dan menganalisis sebuah elemen atau komponen untuk memahami strukturnya dalam pemecahan masalah.
Judging berarti memberikan penilaian atau evaluasi terhadap sesuatu berdasarkan kriteria tertentu.
Deciding adalah mengambil keputusan setelah mempertimbangkan berbagai informasi yang ada.

Indikator Critical Thinking

Critical thinking yang diperlukan dalam individu

Kemampuan berpikir kritis memiliki indikator menjadi klarifikasi dasar untuk memberikan alasan dari sebuah kesimpulan. Berikut ini adalah beberapa indikator dari critical thinking .

1. Menyimpulkan ( Inference )

Menyimpulkan berarti adalah kemampuan untuk membuat kesimpulan atau asumsi berdasarkan bukti atau informasi yang ada.

2. Klarifikasi Lebih Lanjut ( Advanced Clarification )

Klarifikasi lebih lanjut adalah kemampuan untuk memperjelas atau menjelaskan informasi yang kurang jelas atau ambigu dengan bertanya pertanyaan yang tepat atau mencari klarifikasi tambahan.

3. Dugaan dan Keterpaduan ( Supposition and Integration )

Dugaan dan keterpaduan adalah kemampuan untuk membuat asumsi atau dugaan yang rasional, kemudian mengintegrasikan informasi tersebut ke dalam pemahaman atau penalaran yang lebih besar.

Cara Membentuk Kemampuan Critical Thinking

Dalam membentuk kemampuan berpikir kritis, tidak hanya dibentuk begitu saja. Namun, perlu mengembangkan kemampuan lainnya agar seimbang.

Berikut ini adalah cara melatih agar dapat berpikir dengan kritis.

Memahami konsep dari berpikir kritis.
Mengembangkan sikap yang terbuka.
Melatih analisis secara kritis.
Menggunakan keterampilan berpikir yang bijak.
Melibatkan debat dan diskusi pada setiap kesempatan.
Mempraktikkan pemecahan masalah.
Memperdalam materi dan wawasan mengenai cara mendorong berpikiran kritis.
Mengelola manajemen waktu.
Menerima kritik dan saran dari setiap orang untuk membangun diri sendiri.

Contoh Critical Thinking

Berpikir kritis dalam tim yang harus dimiliki setiap orang

Skill critical thinking dapat memberikan kemungkinan seseorang untuk menganalisis, menilai, dan membuat keputusan dengan baik. Oleh karena itu, berpikir kritis harus diterapkan dalam segala bidang.

Berikut ini adalah beberapa contoh berpikir kritis yang dapat diterapkan dalam kehidupan sehari-hari.

Ketika terdapat berita heboh yang muncul di internet, pembaca tentu akan langsung terpengaruh dan mungkin saja terpicu emosi. Orang yang memiliki pikiran kritis tentu tidak akan langsung percaya dengan berita yang tersebar karena bisa saja berita tersebut hoax.
Ketika guru menerangkan pelajaran di kelas, murid yang berpikiran kritis akan mengajukan pertanyaan terkait pelajaran yang belum mereka belum pahami.
Ketika pemerintahan mengesahkan sebuah peraturan, seseorang yang memiliki pikiran kritis tidak langsung menolak atau setuju. Mereka akan memahami isi peraturan tersebut apakah memberikan manfaat atau tidak bagi masyarakat.
Ketika merencanakan perjalanan, seseorang akan berpikir kritis untuk mempertimbangkan rute terbaik, biaya, akomodasi, dan kebutuhan perjalanan lainnya, serta membuat rencana yang efisien dan menyeluruh.
Seorang siswa akan berpikir kritis untuk memprioritaskan tugas, memperkirakan waktu yang diperlukan untuk masing-masing, dan memutuskan urutan yang paling efisien untuk menyelesaikan pekerjaan.
Seseorang yang memiliki konflik pribadi akan mencoba berpikir kritis untuk memahami perspektif orang lain, menganalisis akar permasalahan, dan mencari solusi yang adil dan menguntungkan semua pihak yang terlibat.

Baca Juga: Engineering adalah: Skill, Jenis, Gaji & Jurusan Kuliahnya

Itulah penjelasan mengenai critical thinking dan penerapannya pada kehidupan sehari-hari yang perlu Anda ketahui.

Dengan menerapkan critical thinking pada kehidupan sehari-hari, akan memberikan keuntungan dalam termasuk dalam pengambilan keputusan, berinteraksi dengan orang lain, mengelola waktu, serta menghadapi dan memecahkan masalah.

Lingkungan yang baik juga akan dapat meningkatkan cara berpikir dengan kritis. Sekawan Media adalah salah satu industri di bidang teknologi yang membutuhkan critical thinking.

Sekawan Media terus mengembangkan sudut pandang dan cara kerja dalam melihat tantangan teknologi dan industri sehingga kami dapat terus memberikan hasil yang terukur, aplikatif, dan terbaik untuk klien.

Terakhir Diperbarui: 6 October 2023
Pengembangan Karir
Digital Marketing
Programming

Apa itu IT Support? Pengertian, Tugas, Skill, dan Gaji

Rekrutmen adalah: Pengertian, Tujuan, Proses, dan Contohnya

Account Officer: Definisi, Gaji, Tugas, Skill, & Kualifikasi

React Developer: Karir, Gaji, dan Perbedaan Full Stack vs Front-end

Data Engineer: Pengertian, Tugas, Skill, dan Tanggung Jawab

Seputar Business Analyst, 5 Tanggung Jawab, Skill, dan Jenjang Karir

Sekawan Media merupakan perusahaan IT yang berfokus pada pembuatan aplikasi dan website. Didirikan pada tahun 2013, Sekawan Media telah memberikan solusi yang terbaik kepada ratusan klien dari berbagai industri.

Berita & Informasi
2024 Sekawan Media Group
Syarat & Ketentuan
Ketentuan Layanan
Kebijakan Privasi
Cookie Policy

Copied To Clipboard

Bagikan Ke:

Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, Cara Membentuk, dan Contohnya

Accidentally learning SEO, and want to learn more about Google algorithm, optimization and still trying to see another magic from content.

Kamu pasti sudah tidak asing dengan istilah critical thinking . Sebuah pola pikir yang banyak direkomendasikan untuk diasah ketika kamu akan bekerja atau menempuh pendidikan. Namun, tahukah kamu apa arti critical thinking sebenarnya? Apakah hanya sekedar berpikir kritis saja dan apakah bedanya dengan analytical thinking ?

Nah , agar kamu lebih jelas dalam kedua pola pikir tersebut, pastikan kamu membaca artikel ini hingga selesai, ya. Akan dijelaskan mengenai pengertian hingga apa saja contoh critical thinking yang bisa kamu kenali. Selamat membaca!

Apa itu critical thinking ?

Arti critical thinking adalah berpikir kritis di bahasa Indonesia. Secara mendetail, critical thinking artinya sebuah kemampuan berpikir secara rasional, menghubungkan antara ide dengan pemikiran logis sehingga menghasilkan keputusan terbaik. Pola pikir ini tidak hanya berfokus pada satu pemikiran saja.

Seseorang yang memiliki pola pikir satu ini akan mempertanyakan berbagai macam kemungkinan yang terjadi sehingga menimbulkan solusi-solusi baru. Secara tidak langsung, critical thinking memungkinkan kamu melakukan identifikasi, berargumen, dan menyelesaikan masalah sekaligus.

Baca juga: Mengenal Design Thinking: 4 Elemen dan Cara Mengaplikasikan

Bedanya critical thinking dengan analytical thinking

Selain berpikir kritis, ada juga istilah analytical thinking . Meski kebanyakan orang menganggap keduanya merupakan hal yang sama, namun ternyata kedua pola pikir ini memiliki sisi yang berbeda. Perbedaan critical thinking dan analytical thinking yang paling dasar adalah tujuan dari masing-masing pola pikir.

Critical thinking adalah pola pikir yang digunakan untuk meyakinkan apakah sebuah keputusan telah sesuai dan rasional. Pola pikir ini akan membuka kemungkinan-kemungkinan lain sehingga akan lebih selektif dalam mencermati sebuah keputusan. Sedangkan analytical thinking adalah pola pikir yang menganalisis sebuah fakta hingga mendetail. Pemikiran ini akan meneliti lebih jauh mengenai satu keputusan saja, misalnya dengan mempertimbangkan baik dan buruknya sebuah keputusan tanpa mengeksplor keputusan lain.

Baca juga: 6 Contoh analytical skills dan cara meningkatkannya

Manfaat critical thinking

Critical thinking memiliki beberapa manfaat bagi individu yang memilikinya maupun perusahaan yang memiliki karyawan dengan kompetensi ini. Simak selengkapnya berikut ini.

Menggali berbagai kemungkinan untuk mendapatkan hal terbaik
Meningkatkan kreativitas tiap individu
Keputusan yang ditentukan punya alasan yang sagat kuat
Keputusan yang tepat akan membawa perkembangan yang baik bagi perusahaan
Menekan kemungkinan buruk yang terjadi karena sudah dipertimbangkan secara matang
Dapat menyelesaikan masalah yang kompleks dengan keputusan yang singkat

Baca juga: Computational Thinking: Pengertian, 4 Landasan, Manfaat, dan Contohnya

Cara membentuk critical thinking

Melihat bagaimana pola pikir ini bisa membawa manfaat bagi tiap individu maupun lingkup secara besar, tidak ada salahnya kamu mencoba membentuk critical thinking mulai sekarang. Bagaimana caranya? Cek beberapa tahap berikut ini, yuk !

1. Analisis 5W + 1H

Ketika kamu mendapatkan sebuah kasus atau fakta, coba telaah pernyataan tersebut dengan 5W + 1H, yang terdiri dari what , why , when , who , where , dan how . Misalkan ada sebuah perusahaan yang akan melakukan ekspansi ke sebuah daerah, dan ditentukanlah daerah A. Nah , kamu bisa jabarkan topik tersebut menjadi seperti ini:

Who (Siapa). Siapa yang memberikan ide tersebut? Siapa yang akan bertanggung jawab terhadap project ini?
When (Kapan). Kapan ekspansi akan dilakukan? Apakah momennya tepat atau tidak?
Where (Dimana). Dimana letak kantor cabang akan dibangun? Apakah sudah strategis?
Why (Mengapa). Mengapa tempat dan momen tersebut harus dipilih untuk ekspansi?
What (Apa). Apa tantangan yang akan dihadapi? Misal lokasi tersebut rawan banjir, dan lain-lain. Apakah bisa digunakan untuk berkembang dalam jangka panjang?
How (Bagaimana). Bagaimana cara mengatasi tantangan yang ada di tempat tersebut? Bagaimana cara mengembangkan kantor cabang dalam jangka pendek?

2. Buka kesempatan untuk menerima pemikiran lain

Terkadang setiap orang punya ide atau pendapat yang berbeda dengan keputusan yang ada. Coba beri ruang untuk menyampaikan ide dan pendapat dari orang lain. Agar lebih efisien, tentukan batas waktu kapan keputusan harus segera didapatkan sehingga orang-orang yang berada di tim kamu akan lebih kritis untuk segera mengumpulkan idenya.

3. Coba identifikasi argumen yang berbeda denganmu

Dari ide yang telah terkumpul, tidak semua bisa digunakan. Pilih beberapa ide yang berbeda serta paling memungkinkan untuk dipertimbangkan. Kemudian identifikasi menggunakan cara yang sama atau mintalah timmu untuk menjelaskan mengapa mengutarakan ide tersebut.

4. Kenali kelebihan dan kekurangan tiap keputusan

Setiap keputusan tentu memiliki kelebihan dan kekurangannya. Maka, jangan lupa untuk menimbang apa kelebihan dan kekurangan yang akan didapatkan jika menggunakan keputusan tersebut. Semakin mendetail kamu bisa menghitung kelebihan dan kekurangan yang dimiliki, maka akan semakin baik. Namun pastikan masih dalam satu pembahasan yang sama, ya.

5. Berikan pendapat dan fakta yang mendukung

Untuk menguatkan sebuah keputusan, cobalah untuk memberi pendapat serta fakta yang mendukung. Mungkin jika strategi tersebut sudah pernah dilakukan, carilah data pendukung di internet berupa berita atau kumpulan statistik yang berkaitan dengan permasalahan yang kamu bahas.

Baca juga: 12 Cara berpikir positif di tempat kerja yang penting untuk diterapkan

Nah , sekarang kamu sudah memahami arti hingga perbedaan critical thinking dengan analytical thinking . Dengan pola pikir ini, kamu bisa lebih terbuka dalam menerima pendapat dan lebih kritis dengan perkembangan yang bisa memajukan bisnis kamu. Selain itu, critical thinking juga akan meningkatkan value kamu sebagai individu.

Kalau kamu ingin mendapatkan informasi serupa yang menarik, baca artikel lainnya di EKRUT Media atau tonton video menarik yang ada di YouTube official EKRUT. Dan, jika kamu sedang mencari informasi lowongan kerja di perusahaan atau startup ternama di Indonesia, klik sign up di EKRUT sekarang juga!

skillsyouneed.com
phylosophy.hku.hk

Apakah Kamu Sedang Mencari Pekerjaan?

5 Contoh Biografi Diri Sendiri untuk Peluang dan Perkembangan Karier

Alvina Vivian

H1_1._Cara_Menulis_Artikel_yang_Baik_Untuk_Pemula.jpg

10 Cara Menulis Artikel yang Baik dan Benar untuk Pemula

Anisa Sekarningrum

Tips Menyampaikan Kata-kata Perpisahan Kerja yang Berkesan beserta Contohnya

Maria Tri Handayani

Apa Itu Critical Thinking dan Mengapa Penting bagi Orang Indonesia?

Apa itu critical thinking? Mengapa critical thinking penting bagi para pelajar di Indonesia? Berikut ini penjelasannya.

tirto.id - Kemampuan critical thinking atau berpikir kritis penting dimiliki bagi manusia Indonesia. Dengan berpikir secara logis, rasional, serta dapat menganalisis fakta dan data, seseorang tidak mudah tersesat dalam menghadapi arus informasi data seperti sekarang ini.

Apa itu critical thinking ? Mengapa kemampuan critical thinking penting bagi orang Indonesia?

Definisi Critical Thinking

Sebenarnya tidak ada definisi tunggal tentang critical thinking . Para akademisi punya definisi berbeda tentang critical thinking .

Monash University dalam publikasi di situs resminya, menjelaskan bahwa berpikir kritis ( critical thinking ) adalah jenis pemikiran di mana seseorang mempertanyakan, menganalisis, menafsirkan, dan membuat penilaian tentang sesuatu yang dibaca, didengar, dikatakan atau ditulis. Definisi ini berangkat dari asal kata “kritis” dalam Bahasa Yunani disebut “kritikos” yang berarti “mampu menilai atau membedakan.”

Critical thinking sebenarnya sudah sudah dilakukan sejak di era filsuf Yunani Kuno, tetapi istilah ini baru populer di dunia akademik pada 1987. Michael Scriven dan Richard Paul mempopulerkan istilah tersebut pada Konferensi Internasional Tahunan ke-8 tentang Pemikiran Kritis dan Reformasi Pendidikan, Musim Panas 1987. Keduanya adalah profesor dan peneliti di bidang critical thinking .

Kedua ahli ini mendefinisikan berpikir kritis adalah proses intelektual mengkonseptualisasikan, menganalisis, mensitesis dan atau menghasilkan informasi sebagai panduan keyakinan atau tindakan. Informasi ini dikumpulkan dari hasil pengamatan, pengalaman, refleksi, penalaran, atau komunikasi.

Dalam tesaurus Bahasa Indonesia, kata “kritis” bermakna; bersifat tidak lekas percaya, bersifat selalu berusaha menemukan kesalahan atau kekeliruan, atau tajam dalam penganalisisan.

Kendati ada perbedaan definisi tentang berpikir kritis, ada beberapa inti utama dari metode berpikir ini, antara lain:

1. Memperjelas tujuan dan konteks pemikiran

Memperjelas tujuan dan konteks pemikiran ini maksudnya adalah memilah dan memilih informasi yang sesuai dengan kebutuhan.

2. Mempertanyakan sumber informasi

Setelah informasi yang sesuai dikumpulkan, tahapan selanjutnya adalah mempertanyakan sumber informasi apakah punya kredibilitas atau orisinalitas. Pendek kata, kritik terhadap sumber.

3. Mengidentifikasi argumen

Setelah informasi valid didapatkan, langkah berikutnya adalah mengambil poin utama dari informasi tersebut yang akan menjadi bahan argumentasi.

4. Menganalisis sumber dan argumen

Bahan informasi ini kemudian diolah dengan teori untuk menjadi sebuah konstruksi argumen yang kuat.

5. Mengevaluasi argumen orang lain

Di tahap evaluasi ini, seseorang yang berpikir kritis perlu melihat klaim, bukti, dan alasan yang diajukan oleh orang lain.

6. Membuat atau mensintesis argumen sendiri

Setelah mempunyai bahan argumentasi dan mengevaluasi argumen orang lain, selanjutnya seseorang yang berpikir kritis membentuk argumennya sendiri.

Mengapa Berpikir Kritis itu Penting bagi Pelajar Indonesia?

Kemampuan berpikir kritis penting buat manusia Indonesia terutama bagi pelajar sebagai generasi penerus. Metode critical thinking akan membantu seseorang untuk mengobservasi masalah yang dimiliki dengan kemampuan analisis. Hal ini dibutuhkan dalam proses belajar maupun di dunia kerja.

Selain itu, dengan berpikir kritis juga dapat meningkatkan kreativitas seseorang serta mengasah cara berkomunikasi dan menyampaikan ide secara terstruktur dan informatif. Dengan kemampuan tersebut, seseorang dapat menemukan solusi terbaik ketika menghadapi berbagai permasalahan dalam kehidupannya.

Menurut Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), kemampuan critical thinking merupakan satu dari lima soft skills utama yang harus dimiliki individu pada 2030.

Dengan alasan itu, maka berpikir kritis sangat penting bagi pelajar saat ini yang kelak menjadi pemimpin di Indonesia. Di Indonesia sendiri sebenarnya gerakan berpikir kritis ini sudah dikembangkan dan disebarluaskan.

Intellectual Academy (IIA) yang berdiri sejak tahun 2018 telah memelopori gerakan berpikir kritis ini. Selain bergerak di bidang strategi belajar, daya ingat, dan growth mindset , lembaga ini fokus pada pengembangan critical thinking bagi para pemuda di Indonesia.

IIA pun memiliki berbagai platform pembelajaran yang bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemampuan intelektualitas masyarakat Indonesia, khususnya pelajar, melalui platform dan aplikasi pendidikan seperti Mind Academy dan MindX Memory Games.

Dalam pengembangannya, IIA saat ini didukung oleh para pakar di bidang pendidikan dan neurosains. Mereka mengembangkan riset-risetnya dan berkomitmen memberikan pendidikan berkualitas guna mempersiapkan generasi muda. Tujuannya agar kelak para pelajar Indonesia siap memimpin Indonesia Emas di tahun 2045.

Sejalan dengan upaya menyebarluaskan gerakan berpikir kritis, IAA menggelar Critical Thinking Championship 2022. Kompetisi ini terbuka bagi para pelajar Indonesia dari jenjang SD hingga perguruan tinggi.

Untuk informasi jadwal dan cara pendaftaran kompetisi dapat dibaca pada artikel " Jadwal dan Cara Daftar Critical Thingking Championship 2022. "

Bibliography

Academic tools.

Friends PDF Preview
Author and Citation Info
Back to Top

Critical Thinking

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

2.1 Dewey’s Three Main Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. Examples and Non-Examples

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

If the core of critical thinking is careful goal-directed thinking, conceptions of it can vary according to its presumed scope, its presumed goal, one’s criteria and threshold for being careful, and the thinking component on which one focuses. As to its scope, some conceptions (e.g., Dewey 1910, 1933) restrict it to constructive thinking on the basis of one’s own observations and experiments, others (e.g., Ennis 1962; Fisher & Scriven 1997; Johnson 1992) to appraisal of the products of such thinking. Ennis (1991) and Bailin et al. (1999b) take it to cover both construction and appraisal. As to its goal, some conceptions restrict it to forming a judgment (Dewey 1910, 1933; Lipman 1987; Facione 1990a). Others allow for actions as well as beliefs as the end point of a process of critical thinking (Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b). As to the criteria and threshold for being careful, definitions vary in the term used to indicate that critical thinking satisfies certain norms: “intellectually disciplined” (Scriven & Paul 1987), “reasonable” (Ennis 1991), “skillful” (Lipman 1987), “skilled” (Fisher & Scriven 1997), “careful” (Bailin & Battersby 2009). Some definitions specify these norms, referring variously to “consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (Dewey 1910, 1933); “the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning” (Glaser 1941); “conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication” (Scriven & Paul 1987); the requirement that “it is sensitive to context, relies on criteria, and is self-correcting” (Lipman 1987); “evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations” (Facione 1990a); and “plus-minus considerations of the product in terms of appropriate standards (or criteria)” (Johnson 1992). Stanovich and Stanovich (2010) propose to ground the concept of critical thinking in the concept of rationality, which they understand as combining epistemic rationality (fitting one’s beliefs to the world) and instrumental rationality (optimizing goal fulfillment); a critical thinker, in their view, is someone with “a propensity to override suboptimal responses from the autonomous mind” (2010: 227). These variant specifications of norms for critical thinking are not necessarily incompatible with one another, and in any case presuppose the core notion of thinking carefully. As to the thinking component singled out, some definitions focus on suspension of judgment during the thinking (Dewey 1910; McPeck 1981), others on inquiry while judgment is suspended (Bailin & Battersby 2009, 2021), others on the resulting judgment (Facione 1990a), and still others on responsiveness to reasons (Siegel 1988). Kuhn (2019) takes critical thinking to be more a dialogic practice of advancing and responding to arguments than an individual ability.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

8. Critical Thinking Dispositions

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

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

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

Facione (1990a: 25) divides “affective dispositions” of critical thinking into approaches to life and living in general and approaches to specific issues, questions or problems. Adapting this distinction, one can usefully divide critical thinking dispositions into initiating dispositions (those that contribute causally to starting to think critically about an issue) and internal dispositions (those that contribute causally to doing a good job of thinking critically once one has started). The two categories are not mutually exclusive. For example, open-mindedness, in the sense of willingness to consider alternative points of view to one’s own, is both an initiating and an internal disposition.

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

Attentiveness : One will not think critically if one fails to recognize an issue that needs to be thought through. For example, the pedestrian in Weather would not have looked up if he had not noticed that the air was suddenly cooler. To be a critical thinker, then, one needs to be habitually attentive to one’s surroundings, noticing not only what one senses but also sources of perplexity in messages received and in one’s own beliefs and attitudes (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
Habit of inquiry : Inquiry is effortful, and one needs an internal push to engage in it. For example, the student in Bubbles could easily have stopped at idle wondering about the cause of the bubbles rather than reasoning to a hypothesis, then designing and executing an experiment to test it. Thus willingness to think critically needs mental energy and initiative. What can supply that energy? Love of inquiry, or perhaps just a habit of inquiry. Hamby (2015) has argued that willingness to inquire is the central critical thinking virtue, one that encompasses all the others. It is recognized as a critical thinking disposition by Dewey (1910: 29; 1933: 35), Glaser (1941: 5), Ennis (1987: 12; 1991: 8), Facione (1990a: 25), Bailin et al. (1999b: 294), Halpern (1998: 452), and Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo (2001).
Self-confidence : Lack of confidence in one’s abilities can block critical thinking. For example, if the woman in Rash lacked confidence in her ability to figure things out for herself, she might just have assumed that the rash on her chest was the allergic reaction to her medication against which the pharmacist had warned her. Thus willingness to think critically requires confidence in one’s ability to inquire (Facione 1990a: 25; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001).
Courage : Fear of thinking for oneself can stop one from doing it. Thus willingness to think critically requires intellectual courage (Paul & Elder 2006: 16).
Open-mindedness : A dogmatic attitude will impede thinking critically. For example, a person who adheres rigidly to a “pro-choice” position on the issue of the legal status of induced abortion is likely to be unwilling to consider seriously the issue of when in its development an unborn child acquires a moral right to life. Thus willingness to think critically requires open-mindedness, in the sense of a willingness to examine questions to which one already accepts an answer but which further evidence or reasoning might cause one to answer differently (Dewey 1933; Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Bailin et al. 1999b; Halpern 1998, Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). Paul (1981) emphasizes open-mindedness about alternative world-views, and recommends a dialectical approach to integrating such views as central to what he calls “strong sense” critical thinking. In three studies, Haran, Ritov, & Mellers (2013) found that actively open-minded thinking, including “the tendency to weigh new evidence against a favored belief, to spend sufficient time on a problem before giving up, and to consider carefully the opinions of others in forming one’s own”, led study participants to acquire information and thus to make accurate estimations.
Willingness to suspend judgment : Premature closure on an initial solution will block critical thinking. Thus willingness to think critically requires a willingness to suspend judgment while alternatives are explored (Facione 1990a; Ennis 1991; Halpern 1998).
Trust in reason : Since distrust in the processes of reasoned inquiry will dissuade one from engaging in it, trust in them is an initiating critical thinking disposition (Facione 1990a, 25; Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001; Paul & Elder 2006). In reaction to an allegedly exclusive emphasis on reason in critical thinking theory and pedagogy, Thayer-Bacon (2000) argues that intuition, imagination, and emotion have important roles to play in an adequate conception of critical thinking that she calls “constructive thinking”. From her point of view, critical thinking requires trust not only in reason but also in intuition, imagination, and emotion.
Seeking the truth : If one does not care about the truth but is content to stick with one’s initial bias on an issue, then one will not think critically about it. Seeking the truth is thus an initiating critical thinking disposition (Bailin et al. 1999b: 294; Facione, Facione, & Giancarlo 2001). A disposition to seek the truth is implicit in more specific critical thinking dispositions, such as trying to be well-informed, considering seriously points of view other than one’s own, looking for alternatives, suspending judgment when the evidence is insufficient, and adopting a position when the evidence supporting it is sufficient.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

We can derive a short list of concepts whose understanding contributes to critical thinking from the critical thinking abilities described in the preceding section. Observational abilities require an understanding of the difference between observation and inference. Questioning abilities require an understanding of the concepts of ambiguity and vagueness. Inferential abilities require an understanding of the difference between conclusive and defeasible inference (traditionally, between deduction and induction), as well as of the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions. Experimenting abilities require an understanding of the concepts of hypothesis, null hypothesis, assumption and prediction, as well as of the concept of statistical significance and of its difference from importance. They also require an understanding of the difference between an experiment and an observational study, and in particular of the difference between a randomized controlled trial, a prospective correlational study and a retrospective (case-control) study. Argument analysis abilities require an understanding of the concepts of argument, premiss, assumption, conclusion and counter-consideration. Additional critical thinking concepts are proposed by Bailin et al. (1999b: 293), Fisher & Scriven (1997: 105–106), Black (2012), and Blair (2021).

According to Glaser (1941: 25), ability to think critically requires knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning. If we review the list of abilities in the preceding section, however, we can see that some of them can be acquired and exercised merely through practice, possibly guided in an educational setting, followed by feedback. Searching intelligently for a causal explanation of some phenomenon or event requires that one consider a full range of possible causal contributors, but it seems more important that one implements this principle in one’s practice than that one is able to articulate it. What is important is “operational knowledge” of the standards and principles of good thinking (Bailin et al. 1999b: 291–293). But the development of such critical thinking abilities as designing an experiment or constructing an operational definition can benefit from learning their underlying theory. Further, explicit knowledge of quirks of human thinking seems useful as a cautionary guide. Human memory is not just fallible about details, as people learn from their own experiences of misremembering, but is so malleable that a detailed, clear and vivid recollection of an event can be a total fabrication (Loftus 2017). People seek or interpret evidence in ways that are partial to their existing beliefs and expectations, often unconscious of their “confirmation bias” (Nickerson 1998). Not only are people subject to this and other cognitive biases (Kahneman 2011), of which they are typically unaware, but it may be counter-productive for one to make oneself aware of them and try consciously to counteract them or to counteract social biases such as racial or sexual stereotypes (Kenyon & Beaulac 2014). It is helpful to be aware of these facts and of the superior effectiveness of blocking the operation of biases—for example, by making an immediate record of one’s observations, refraining from forming a preliminary explanatory hypothesis, blind refereeing, double-blind randomized trials, and blind grading of students’ work. It is also helpful to be aware of the prevalence of “noise” (unwanted unsystematic variability of judgments), of how to detect noise (through a noise audit), and of how to reduce noise: make accuracy the goal, think statistically, break a process of arriving at a judgment into independent tasks, resist premature intuitions, in a group get independent judgments first, favour comparative judgments and scales (Kahneman, Sibony, & Sunstein 2021). It is helpful as well to be aware of the concept of “bounded rationality” in decision-making and of the related distinction between “satisficing” and optimizing (Simon 1956; Gigerenzer 2001).

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

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

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

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

12. Controversies

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

McPeck (1981) attacked the thinking skills movement of the 1970s, including the critical thinking movement. He argued that there are no general thinking skills, since thinking is always thinking about some subject-matter. It is futile, he claimed, for schools and colleges to teach thinking as if it were a separate subject. Rather, teachers should lead their pupils to become autonomous thinkers by teaching school subjects in a way that brings out their cognitive structure and that encourages and rewards discussion and argument. As some of his critics (e.g., Paul 1985; Siegel 1985) pointed out, McPeck’s central argument needs elaboration, since it has obvious counter-examples in writing and speaking, for which (up to a certain level of complexity) there are teachable general abilities even though they are always about some subject-matter. To make his argument convincing, McPeck needs to explain how thinking differs from writing and speaking in a way that does not permit useful abstraction of its components from the subject-matters with which it deals. He has not done so. Nevertheless, his position that the dispositions and abilities of a critical thinker are best developed in the context of subject-matter instruction is shared by many theorists of critical thinking, including Dewey (1910, 1933), Glaser (1941), Passmore (1980), Weinstein (1990), Bailin et al. (1999b), and Willingham (2019).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Abrami, Philip C., Robert M. Bernard, Eugene Borokhovski, David I. Waddington, C. Anne Wade, and Tonje Person, 2015, “Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research , 85(2): 275–314. doi:10.3102/0034654314551063
Aikin, Wilford M., 1942, The Story of the Eight-year Study, with Conclusions and Recommendations , Volume I of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers. [ Aikin 1942 available online ]
Alston, Kal, 1995, “Begging the Question: Is Critical Thinking Biased?”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 225–233. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00225.x
–––, 2001, “Re/Thinking Critical Thinking: The Seductions of Everyday Life”, Studies in Philosophy and Education , 20(1): 27–40. doi:10.1023/A:1005247128053
American Educational Research Association, 2014, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing / American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education , Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Anderson, Lorin W., David R. Krathwohl, Peter W. Airiasian, Kathleen A. Cruikshank, Richard E. Mayer, Paul R. Pintrich, James Raths, and Merlin C. Wittrock, 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , New York: Longman, complete edition.
Bailin, Sharon, 1987, “Critical and Creative Thinking”, Informal Logic , 9(1): 23–30. [ Bailin 1987 available online ]
–––, 1988, Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity , Dordrecht: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-2780-3
–––, 1995, “Is Critical Thinking Biased? Clarifications and Implications”, Educational Theory , 45(2): 191–197. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1995.00191.x
Bailin, Sharon and Mark Battersby, 2009, “Inquiry: A Dialectical Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking”, in Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09 , CD-ROM (pp. 1–10), Windsor, ON: OSSA. [ Bailin & Battersby 2009 available online ]
–––, 2016a, “Fostering the Virtues of Inquiry”, Topoi , 35(2): 367–374. doi:10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6
–––, 2016b, Reason in the Balance: An Inquiry Approach to Critical Thinking , Indianapolis: Hackett, 2nd edition.
–––, 2021, “Inquiry: Teaching for Reasoned Judgment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 31–46. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_003
Bailin, Sharon, Roland Case, Jerrold R. Coombs, and Leroi B. Daniels, 1999a, “Common Misconceptions of Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124
–––, 1999b, “Conceptualizing Critical Thinking”, Journal of Curriculum Studies , 31(3): 285–302. doi:10.1080/002202799183133
Blair, J. Anthony, 2021, Studies in Critical Thinking , Windsor, ON: Windsor Studies in Argumentation, 2nd edition. [Available online at https://windsor.scholarsportal.info/omp/index.php/wsia/catalog/book/106]
Berman, Alan M., Seth J. Schwartz, William M. Kurtines, and Steven L. Berman, 2001, “The Process of Exploration in Identity Formation: The Role of Style and Competence”, Journal of Adolescence , 24(4): 513–528. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0386
Black, Beth (ed.), 2012, An A to Z of Critical Thinking , London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Bloom, Benjamin Samuel, Max D. Engelhart, Edward J. Furst, Walter H. Hill, and David R. Krathwohl, 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , New York: David McKay.
Boardman, Frank, Nancy M. Cavender, and Howard Kahane, 2018, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Boston: Cengage, 13th edition.
Browne, M. Neil and Stuart M. Keeley, 2018, Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking , Hoboken, NJ: Pearson, 12th edition.
Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning, 2017, Critical Thinking Assessment Test , Cookeville, TN: Tennessee Technological University.
Cleghorn, Paul. 2021. “Critical Thinking in the Elementary School: Practical Guidance for Building a Culture of Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessmen t, Leiden: Brill, pp. 150–167. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_010
Cohen, Jacob, 1988, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2nd edition.
College Board, 1983, Academic Preparation for College. What Students Need to Know and Be Able to Do , New York: College Entrance Examination Board, ERIC document ED232517.
Commission on the Relation of School and College of the Progressive Education Association, 1943, Thirty Schools Tell Their Story , Volume V of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
Council for Aid to Education, 2017, CLA+ Student Guide . Available at http://cae.org/images/uploads/pdf/CLA_Student_Guide_Institution.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Dalgleish, Adam, Patrick Girard, and Maree Davies, 2017, “Critical Thinking, Bias and Feminist Philosophy: Building a Better Framework through Collaboration”, Informal Logic , 37(4): 351–369. [ Dalgleish et al. available online ]
Dewey, John, 1910, How We Think , Boston: D.C. Heath. [ Dewey 1910 available online ]
–––, 1916, Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education , New York: Macmillan.
–––, 1933, How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process , Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
–––, 1936, “The Theory of the Chicago Experiment”, Appendix II of Mayhew & Edwards 1936: 463–477.
–––, 1938, Logic: The Theory of Inquiry , New York: Henry Holt and Company.
Dominguez, Caroline (coord.), 2018a, A European Collection of the Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions Needed in Different Professional Fields for the 21st Century , Vila Real, Portugal: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO1 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
––– (coord.), 2018b, A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http://bit.ly/CRITHINKEDUO2 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
––– (coord.), 2018c, The CRITHINKEDU European Course on Critical Thinking Education for University Teachers: From Conception to Delivery , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU03; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Dominguez Caroline and Rita Payan-Carreira (eds.), 2019, Promoting Critical Thinking in European Higher Education Institutions: Towards an Educational Protocol , Vila Real: UTAD. Available at http:/bit.ly/CRITHINKEDU04; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Ennis, Robert H., 1958, “An Appraisal of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal”, The Journal of Educational Research , 52(4): 155–158. doi:10.1080/00220671.1958.10882558
–––, 1962, “A Concept of Critical Thinking: A Proposed Basis for Research on the Teaching and Evaluation of Critical Thinking Ability”, Harvard Educational Review , 32(1): 81–111.
–––, 1981a, “A Conception of Deductive Logical Competence”, Teaching Philosophy , 4(3/4): 337–385. doi:10.5840/teachphil198143/429
–––, 1981b, “Eight Fallacies in Bloom’s Taxonomy”, in C. J. B. Macmillan (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1980: Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Bloomington, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 269–273.
–––, 1984, “Problems in Testing Informal Logic, Critical Thinking, Reasoning Ability”, Informal Logic , 6(1): 3–9. [ Ennis 1984 available online ]
–––, 1987, “A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities”, in Joan Boykoff Baron and Robert J. Sternberg (eds.), Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice , New York: W. H. Freeman, pp. 9–26.
–––, 1989, “Critical Thinking and Subject Specificity: Clarification and Needed Research”, Educational Researcher , 18(3): 4–10. doi:10.3102/0013189X018003004
–––, 1991, “Critical Thinking: A Streamlined Conception”, Teaching Philosophy , 14(1): 5–24. doi:10.5840/teachphil19911412
–––, 1996, “Critical Thinking Dispositions: Their Nature and Assessability”, Informal Logic , 18(2–3): 165–182. [ Ennis 1996 available online ]
–––, 1998, “Is Critical Thinking Culturally Biased?”, Teaching Philosophy , 21(1): 15–33. doi:10.5840/teachphil19982113
–––, 2011, “Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective Part I”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 26(1): 4–18. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613
–––, 2013, “Critical Thinking across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(2): 25–45. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20132828
–––, 2016, “Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis with Bearing on Key Concepts”, in Patrick Bondy and Laura Benacquista (eds.), Argumentation, Objectivity, and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 18–21 May 2016 , Windsor, ON: OSSA, pp. 1–19. Available at http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/105 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
–––, 2018, “Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision”, Topoi , 37(1): 165–184. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
Ennis, Robert H., and Jason Millman, 1971, Manual for Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X, and Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z , Urbana, IL: Critical Thinking Project, University of Illinois.
Ennis, Robert H., Jason Millman, and Thomas Norbert Tomko, 1985, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publication, 3rd edition.
–––, 2005, Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X & Level Z: Manual , Seaside, CA: Critical Thinking Company, 5th edition.
Ennis, Robert H. and Eric Weir, 1985, The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: Test, Manual, Criteria, Scoring Sheet: An Instrument for Teaching and Testing , Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Facione, Peter A., 1990a, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction , Research Findings and Recommendations Prepared for the Committee on Pre-College Philosophy of the American Philosophical Association, ERIC Document ED315423.
–––, 1990b, California Critical Thinking Skills Test, CCTST – Form A , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
–––, 1990c, The California Critical Thinking Skills Test--College Level. Technical Report #3. Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-Esteem, and the CCTST , ERIC Document ED326584.
–––, 1992, California Critical Thinking Skills Test: CCTST – Form B, Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
–––, 2000, “The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and Relationship to Critical Thinking Skill”, Informal Logic , 20(1): 61–84. [ Facione 2000 available online ]
Facione, Peter A. and Noreen C. Facione, 1992, CCTDI: A Disposition Inventory , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Facione, Peter A., Noreen C. Facione, and Carol Ann F. Giancarlo, 2001, California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: CCTDI: Inventory Manual , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Facione, Peter A., Carol A. Sánchez, and Noreen C. Facione, 1994, Are College Students Disposed to Think? , Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Document ED368311.
Fisher, Alec, and Michael Scriven, 1997, Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment , Norwich: Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.
Freire, Paulo, 1968 [1970], Pedagogia do Oprimido . Translated as Pedagogy of the Oppressed , Myra Bergman Ramos (trans.), New York: Continuum, 1970.
Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2001, “The Adaptive Toolbox”, in Gerd Gigerenzer and Reinhard Selten (eds.), Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox , Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 37–50.
Glaser, Edward Maynard, 1941, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking , New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Groarke, Leo A. and Christopher W. Tindale, 2012, Good Reasoning Matters! A Constructive Approach to Critical Thinking , Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, 5th edition.
Halpern, Diane F., 1998, “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring”, American Psychologist , 53(4): 449–455. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449
–––, 2016, Manual: Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment , Mödling, Austria: Schuhfried. Available at https://pdfcoffee.com/hcta-test-manual-pdf-free.html; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Hamby, Benjamin, 2014, The Virtues of Critical Thinkers , Doctoral dissertation, Philosophy, McMaster University. [ Hamby 2014 available online ]
–––, 2015, “Willingness to Inquire: The Cardinal Critical Thinking Virtue”, in Martin Davies and Ronald Barnett (eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 77–87.
Haran, Uriel, Ilana Ritov, and Barbara A. Mellers, 2013, “The Role of Actively Open-minded Thinking in Information Acquisition, Accuracy, and Calibration”, Judgment and Decision Making , 8(3): 188–201.
Hatcher, Donald and Kevin Possin, 2021, “Commentary: Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking Assessment”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 298–322. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_017
Haynes, Ada, Elizabeth Lisic, Kevin Harris, Katie Leming, Kyle Shanks, and Barry Stein, 2015, “Using the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) as a Model for Designing Within-Course Assessments: Changing How Faculty Assess Student Learning”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 30(3): 38–48. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201530316
Haynes, Ada and Barry Stein, 2021, “Observations from a Long-Term Effort to Assess and Improve Critical Thinking”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 231–254. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_014
Hiner, Amanda L. 2021. “Equipping Students for Success in College and Beyond: Placing Critical Thinking Instruction at the Heart of a General Education Program”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 188–208. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_012
Hitchcock, David, 2017, “Critical Thinking as an Educational Ideal”, in his On Reasoning and Argument: Essays in Informal Logic and on Critical Thinking , Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 477–497. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3_30
–––, 2021, “Seven Philosophical Implications of Critical Thinking: Themes, Variations, Implications”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 9–30. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_002
hooks, bell, 1994, Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom , New York and London: Routledge.
–––, 2010, Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom , New York and London: Routledge.
Johnson, Ralph H., 1992, “The Problem of Defining Critical Thinking”, in Stephen P, Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 38–53.
Kahane, Howard, 1971, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life , Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kahneman, Daniel, 2011, Thinking, Fast and Slow , New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kahneman, Daniel, Olivier Sibony, & Cass R. Sunstein, 2021, Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment , New York: Little, Brown Spark.
Kenyon, Tim, and Guillaume Beaulac, 2014, “Critical Thinking Education and Debasing”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 341–363. [ Kenyon & Beaulac 2014 available online ]
Krathwohl, David R., Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram B. Masia, 1964, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain , New York: David McKay.
Kuhn, Deanna, 1991, The Skills of Argument , New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511571350
–––, 2019, “Critical Thinking as Discourse”, Human Development, 62 (3): 146–164. doi:10.1159/000500171
Lipman, Matthew, 1987, “Critical Thinking–What Can It Be?”, Analytic Teaching , 8(1): 5–12. [ Lipman 1987 available online ]
–––, 2003, Thinking in Education , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition.
Loftus, Elizabeth F., 2017, “Eavesdropping on Memory”, Annual Review of Psychology , 68: 1–18. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044138
Makaiau, Amber Strong, 2021, “The Good Thinker’s Tool Kit: How to Engage Critical Thinking and Reasoning in Secondary Education”, in Daniel Fasko, Jr. and Frank Fair (eds.), Critical Thinking and Reasoning: Theory, Development, Instruction, and Assessment , Leiden: Brill, pp. 168–187. doi: 10.1163/9789004444591_011
Martin, Jane Roland, 1992, “Critical Thinking for a Humane World”, in Stephen P. Norris (ed.), The Generalizability of Critical Thinking , New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 163–180.
Mayhew, Katherine Camp, and Anna Camp Edwards, 1936, The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 , New York: Appleton-Century. [ Mayhew & Edwards 1936 available online ]
McPeck, John E., 1981, Critical Thinking and Education , New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Moore, Brooke Noel and Richard Parker, 2020, Critical Thinking , New York: McGraw-Hill, 13th edition.
Nickerson, Raymond S., 1998, “Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises”, Review of General Psychology , 2(2): 175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
Nieto, Ana Maria, and Jorge Valenzuela, 2012, “A Study of the Internal Structure of Critical Thinking Dispositions”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 27(1): 31–38. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20122713
Norris, Stephen P., 1985, “Controlling for Background Beliefs When Developing Multiple-choice Critical Thinking Tests”, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice , 7(3): 5–11. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.1988.tb00437.x
Norris, Stephen P. and Robert H. Ennis, 1989, Evaluating Critical Thinking (The Practitioners’ Guide to Teaching Thinking Series), Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Norris, Stephen P. and Ruth Elizabeth King, 1983, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
–––, 1984, The Design of a Critical Thinking Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland. ERIC Document ED260083.
–––, 1985, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
–––, 1990a, Test on Appraising Observations , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
–––, 1990b, Test on Appraising Observations: Manual , St. John’s, NL: Institute for Educational Research and Development, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 2nd edition.
OCR [Oxford, Cambridge and RSA Examinations], 2011, AS/A Level GCE: Critical Thinking – H052, H452 , Cambridge: OCR. Past papers available at https://pastpapers.co/ocr/?dir=A-Level/Critical-Thinking-H052-H452; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Ontario Ministry of Education, 2013, The Ontario Curriculum Grades 9 to 12: Social Sciences and Humanities . Available at http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/ssciences9to122013.pdf ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Passmore, John Arthur, 1980, The Philosophy of Teaching , London: Duckworth.
Paul, Richard W., 1981, “Teaching Critical Thinking in the ‘Strong’ Sense: A Focus on Self-Deception, World Views, and a Dialectical Mode of Analysis”, Informal Logic , 4(2): 2–7. [ Paul 1981 available online ]
–––, 1984, “Critical Thinking: Fundamental to Education for a Free Society”, Educational Leadership , 42(1): 4–14.
–––, 1985, “McPeck’s Mistakes”, Informal Logic , 7(1): 35–43. [ Paul 1985 available online ]
Paul, Richard W. and Linda Elder, 2006, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools , Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 4th edition.
Payette, Patricia, and Edna Ross, 2016, “Making a Campus-Wide Commitment to Critical Thinking: Insights and Promising Practices Utilizing the Paul-Elder Approach at the University of Louisville”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 31(1): 98–110. doi:10.5840/inquiryct20163118
Possin, Kevin, 2008, “A Field Guide to Critical-Thinking Assessment”, Teaching Philosophy , 31(3): 201–228. doi:10.5840/teachphil200831324
–––, 2013a, “Some Problems with the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) Test”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 28(3): 4–12. doi:10.5840/inquiryct201328313
–––, 2013b, “A Serious Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) Test”, Informal Logic , 33(3): 390–405. [ Possin 2013b available online ]
–––, 2013c, “A Fatal Flaw in the Collegiate Learning Assessment Test”, Assessment Update , 25 (1): 8–12.
–––, 2014, “Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score”, Informal Logic , 34(4): 393–416. [ Possin 2014 available online ]
–––, 2020, “CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test”, Informal Logic , 40 (3): 489–508. [Available online at https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/6243]
Rawls, John, 1971, A Theory of Justice , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rear, David, 2019, “One Size Fits All? The Limitations of Standardised Assessment in Critical Thinking”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 44(5): 664–675. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1526255
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 1762, Émile , Amsterdam: Jean Néaulme.
Scheffler, Israel, 1960, The Language of Education , Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Scriven, Michael, and Richard W. Paul, 1987, Defining Critical Thinking , Draft statement written for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Available at http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766 ; last accessed 2022 07 16.
Sheffield, Clarence Burton Jr., 2018, “Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology”, Topoi , 37(1): 155–163. doi:10.1007/s11245-016-9392-1
Siegel, Harvey, 1985, “McPeck, Informal Logic and the Nature of Critical Thinking”, in David Nyberg (ed.), Philosophy of Education 1985: Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society , Normal, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, pp. 61–72.
–––, 1988, Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education , New York: Routledge.
–––, 1999, “What (Good) Are Thinking Dispositions?”, Educational Theory , 49(2): 207–221. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1999.00207.x
Simon, Herbert A., 1956, “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment”, Psychological Review , 63(2): 129–138. doi: 10.1037/h0042769
Simpson, Elizabeth, 1966–67, “The Classification of Educational Objectives: Psychomotor Domain”, Illinois Teacher of Home Economics , 10(4): 110–144, ERIC document ED0103613. [ Simpson 1966–67 available online ]
Skolverket, 2018, Curriculum for the Compulsory School, Preschool Class and School-age Educare , Stockholm: Skolverket, revised 2018. Available at https://www.skolverket.se/download/18.31c292d516e7445866a218f/1576654682907/pdf3984.pdf; last accessed 2022 07 15.
Smith, B. Othanel, 1953, “The Improvement of Critical Thinking”, Progressive Education , 30(5): 129–134.
Smith, Eugene Randolph, Ralph Winfred Tyler, and the Evaluation Staff, 1942, Appraising and Recording Student Progress , Volume III of Adventure in American Education , New York and London: Harper & Brothers.
Splitter, Laurance J., 1987, “Educational Reform through Philosophy for Children”, Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children , 7(2): 32–39. doi:10.5840/thinking1987729
Stanovich Keith E., and Paula J. Stanovich, 2010, “A Framework for Critical Thinking, Rational Thinking, and Intelligence”, in David D. Preiss and Robert J. Sternberg (eds), Innovations in Educational Psychology: Perspectives on Learning, Teaching and Human Development , New York: Springer Publishing, pp 195–237.
Stanovich Keith E., Richard F. West, and Maggie E. Toplak, 2011, “Intelligence and Rationality”, in Robert J. Sternberg and Scott Barry Kaufman (eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3rd edition, pp. 784–826. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511977244.040
Tankersley, Karen, 2005, Literacy Strategies for Grades 4–12: Reinforcing the Threads of Reading , Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Thayer-Bacon, Barbara J., 1992, “Is Modern Critical Thinking Theory Sexist?”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines , 10(1): 3–7. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199210123
–––, 1993, “Caring and Its Relationship to Critical Thinking”, Educational Theory , 43(3): 323–340. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5446.1993.00323.x
–––, 1995a, “Constructive Thinking: Personal Voice”, Journal of Thought , 30(1): 55–70.
–––, 1995b, “Doubting and Believing: Both are Important for Critical Thinking”, Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines , 15(2): 59–66. doi:10.5840/inquiryctnews199515226
–––, 2000, Transforming Critical Thinking: Thinking Constructively , New York: Teachers College Press.
Toulmin, Stephen Edelston, 1958, The Uses of Argument , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Turri, John, Mark Alfano, and John Greco, 2017, “Virtue Epistemology”, in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition). URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/epistemology-virtue/ >
Vincent-Lancrin, Stéphan, Carlos González-Sancho, Mathias Bouckaert, Federico de Luca, Meritxell Fernández-Barrerra, Gwénaël Jacotin, Joaquin Urgel, and Quentin Vidal, 2019, Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What It Means in School. Educational Research and Innovation , Paris: OECD Publishing.
Warren, Karen J. 1988. “Critical Thinking and Feminism”, Informal Logic , 10(1): 31–44. [ Warren 1988 available online ]
Watson, Goodwin, and Edward M. Glaser, 1980a, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form A , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
–––, 1980b, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: Forms A and B; Manual , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation,
–––, 1994, Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Form B , San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
Weinstein, Mark, 1990, “Towards a Research Agenda for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking”, Informal Logic , 12(3): 121–143. [ Weinstein 1990 available online ]
–––, 2013, Logic, Truth and Inquiry , London: College Publications.
Willingham, Daniel T., 2019, “How to Teach Critical Thinking”, Education: Future Frontiers , 1: 1–17. [Available online at https://prod65.education.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/main-education/teaching-and-learning/education-for-a-changing-world/media/documents/How-to-teach-critical-thinking-Willingham.pdf.]
Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus, 1996, Virtues of the Mind: An Inquiry into the Nature of Virtue and the Ethical Foundations of Knowledge , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139174763

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

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

Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

Info about mirror sites

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts

January 2015

Measured Reasons LLC & Insight Assessment

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations
Lisnawati Rusmin
Yuni Misrahayu
Fien Pongpalilu
Dwiyanto Dwiyanto
Kavita Pradhan

Camila Muñoz-Fritis
Emilio Rodríguez-Ponce
David Laroze
Marwa Merabti
Mohamed Benmhamed

Edi Istiyono
Amir Syamsudin
Nor Hasnida Md. Ghazali

Sarah Anabarja
Probo Darono Yakti
Annisa Pratamasari

Haneen Hamed Kamel
Dr.Ibtisam Ja'afar Jawad Al-Khafaji
Vinay Sharma
Dr. Ajay Singh
Mutindi Ndunda

Felix Kioko Kasing’a
Int J Appl Philos

Arthur L Costa
Lawrence F. Lowery
Amos Tversky
Daniel Kahneman

Gaie M. Rubenfeld
Barbara K. Scheffer
Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Belajar Tiada Henti

Apa itu Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking adalah satu dari 3 istilah 4 C yang digadang-gadang sebagai keterampilan abad 21. Selain critical thinking, ada communication, collaboration, creativity. Dan ditambah dengan problem solving. Ke-4 keterampilan di atas adalah kemampuan yang ingin dituju dalam kurikulum 2013. Namun apa sih sesungguhnya critical thinking itu?

Sebelum menyimpulkan apa itu critical thinking, coba amati hal-hal kecil di sekitar kita. Pernah melihat seseorang tak acuh ketika ada orang tua dengan susah payah membuka pintu supermarket? Atau sekelompok orang yang asyik berjalan beriringan tanpa menyadari menutup jalan orang lain? Dan banyak kasus lainnya. Barangkali juga tanpa disadari, seseorang itu adalah diri kita sendiri. Kita telah tumbuh menjadi masyarakat yang abai terhadap kepatutan. Mengapa kita tumbuh menjadi orang yang tak peduli kepada orang lain?

Sebelum melimpahkan kesalahan kepada orang lain, mari kita bercermin bersama-sama. Kita sesungguhnya tidak tahu. Kita tidak tahu bahwa orang tua yang sedang kesusahan membuka pintu membutuhkan bantuan. Kita tidak tahu bahwa berjalan beriringan dapat menyebabkan penutupan jalan bagi orang lain, dan lain-lain. Sejak kecil kita tidak pernah diajarkan untuk berpikir kritis (critical thinking). Jika seorang anak dibiasakan berpikir kritis, maka setiap tindakannya akan didasarkan pada analisa. Sebelum melakukan sesuatu ia akan selalu bertanya kepada dirinya, apakah dampaknya jika ia melakukan ini? Apakah betul yang akan ia lakukan, bagaimana dampaknya kepada orang lain? dan sebagainya. Ia tumbuh menjadi anak yang tidak sekedar ikut-ikutan, ia akan meneliti setiap masalah yang dihadapinya.

Proses berpikir kritis memang harus dilatih sejak dini. Dikutip dari Parents Guide Magazine. Berpikir kritis adalah cara berpikir logis, dimana kita memecah-belah suatu masalah menjadi bagian-bagian yang lebih kecil serta menganalisanya. Bagian dari berpikir kritis adalah: kemampuan menggolongkan, memilah, membandingkan persamaan dan perbedaan (Church, 1993). Beberapa ciri anak yang berpikir kritis adalah: penuh rasa ingin tahu dan ingin menjelajah/bereksplorasi.

Berpikir kritis penting bagi setiap manusia karena itulah modal untuk pemecahan masalah, dimana masalah adalah hal yang pasti dihadapi manusia sepanjang hidupnya. Kemampuan menganalisa masalah membantu kita meneliti penyebab masalah, kemudian mencari solusinya.

Anak-anak yang sejak dini diajarkan keterampilan berpikir kritis akan tumbuh menjadi problem solver bagi masalah-masalah yang ada disekitarnya. Mereka optimis dan penuh rasa peduli terhadap lingkungan dan sekitarnya. Untuk itu, mari kita mulai dengan mempraktikkan pola pikir kritis dalam diri sendiri.

Critical Thinking dan Problem Solving untuk Milenial

Artikel Untuk Kamu

Saran untuk kamu.

Tentang Kami

Unduh aplikasi di.

Get started with computers
Learn Microsoft Office
Apply for a job
Improve my work skills
Design nice-looking docs
Getting Started
Smartphones & Tablets
Typing Tutorial
Online Learning
Basic Internet Skills
Online Safety
Social Media
Zoom Basics
Google Docs
Google Sheets
Career Planning
Resume Writing
Cover Letters
Job Search and Networking
Business Communication
Entrepreneurship 101
Careers without College
Job Hunt for Today
3D Printing
Freelancing 101
Personal Finance
Sharing Economy
Decision-Making
Graphic Design
Photography
Image Editing
Learning WordPress
Language Learning
Critical Thinking
For Educators
Translations
Staff Picks
English expand_more expand_less

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making - What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking and decision-making -, what is critical thinking, critical thinking and decision-making what is critical thinking.

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making: What is Critical Thinking?

Lesson 1: what is critical thinking, what is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is a term that gets thrown around a lot. You've probably heard it used often throughout the years whether it was in school, at work, or in everyday conversation. But when you stop to think about it, what exactly is critical thinking and how do you do it ?

Watch the video below to learn more about critical thinking.

Simply put, critical thinking is the act of deliberately analyzing information so that you can make better judgements and decisions . It involves using things like logic, reasoning, and creativity, to draw conclusions and generally understand things better.

illustration of the terms logic, reasoning, and creativity

This may sound like a pretty broad definition, and that's because critical thinking is a broad skill that can be applied to so many different situations. You can use it to prepare for a job interview, manage your time better, make decisions about purchasing things, and so much more.

The process

illustration of "thoughts" inside a human brain, with several being connected and "analyzed"

As humans, we are constantly thinking . It's something we can't turn off. But not all of it is critical thinking. No one thinks critically 100% of the time... that would be pretty exhausting! Instead, it's an intentional process , something that we consciously use when we're presented with difficult problems or important decisions.

Improving your critical thinking

illustration of the questions "What do I currently know?" and "How do I know this?"

In order to become a better critical thinker, it's important to ask questions when you're presented with a problem or decision, before jumping to any conclusions. You can start with simple ones like What do I currently know? and How do I know this? These can help to give you a better idea of what you're working with and, in some cases, simplify more complex issues.

Real-world applications

illustration of a hand holding a smartphone displaying an article that reads, "Study: Cats are better than dogs"

Let's take a look at how we can use critical thinking to evaluate online information . Say a friend of yours posts a news article on social media and you're drawn to its headline. If you were to use your everyday automatic thinking, you might accept it as fact and move on. But if you were thinking critically, you would first analyze the available information and ask some questions :

What's the source of this article?
Is the headline potentially misleading?
What are my friend's general beliefs?
Do their beliefs inform why they might have shared this?

illustration of "Super Cat Blog" and "According to survery of cat owners" being highlighted from an article on a smartphone

After analyzing all of this information, you can draw a conclusion about whether or not you think the article is trustworthy.

Critical thinking has a wide range of real-world applications . It can help you to make better decisions, become more hireable, and generally better understand the world around you.

illustration of a lightbulb, a briefcase, and the world

/en/problem-solving-and-decision-making/why-is-it-so-hard-to-make-decisions/content/

Translate this page from English...

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

Defining Critical Thinking




Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated. Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or problem - in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press, 2008) Teacher’s College, Columbia University, 1941)

Campus Life
...a student.
...a veteran.
...an alum.
...a parent.
...faculty or staff.
Mocs Go Vote
Class Schedule
Crisis Resources
People Finder
Change Password

UTC RAVE Alert

Critical thinking and problem-solving, jump to: , what is critical thinking, characteristics of critical thinking, why teach critical thinking.

Teaching Strategies to Help Promote Critical Thinking Skills

References and Resources

When examining the vast literature on critical thinking, various definitions of critical thinking emerge. Here are some samples:

"Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action" (Scriven, 1996).
"Most formal definitions characterize critical thinking as the intentional application of rational, higher order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, problem recognition and problem solving, inference, and evaluation" (Angelo, 1995, p. 6).
"Critical thinking is thinking that assesses itself" (Center for Critical Thinking, 1996b).
"Critical thinking is the ability to think about one's thinking in such a way as 1. To recognize its strengths and weaknesses and, as a result, 2. To recast the thinking in improved form" (Center for Critical Thinking, 1996c).

Perhaps the simplest definition is offered by Beyer (1995) : "Critical thinking... means making reasoned judgments" (p. 8). Basically, Beyer sees critical thinking as using criteria to judge the quality of something, from cooking to a conclusion of a research paper. In essence, critical thinking is a disciplined manner of thought that a person uses to assess the validity of something (statements, news stories, arguments, research, etc.).

Back

Wade (1995) identifies eight characteristics of critical thinking. Critical thinking involves asking questions, defining a problem, examining evidence, analyzing assumptions and biases, avoiding emotional reasoning, avoiding oversimplification, considering other interpretations, and tolerating ambiguity. Dealing with ambiguity is also seen by Strohm & Baukus (1995) as an essential part of critical thinking, "Ambiguity and doubt serve a critical-thinking function and are a necessary and even a productive part of the process" (p. 56).

Another characteristic of critical thinking identified by many sources is metacognition. Metacognition is thinking about one's own thinking. More specifically, "metacognition is being aware of one's thinking as one performs specific tasks and then using this awareness to control what one is doing" (Jones & Ratcliff, 1993, p. 10 ).

In the book, Critical Thinking, Beyer elaborately explains what he sees as essential aspects of critical thinking. These are:

Dispositions: Critical thinkers are skeptical, open-minded, value fair-mindedness, respect evidence and reasoning, respect clarity and precision, look at different points of view, and will change positions when reason leads them to do so.
Criteria: To think critically, must apply criteria. Need to have conditions that must be met for something to be judged as believable. Although the argument can be made that each subject area has different criteria, some standards apply to all subjects. "... an assertion must... be based on relevant, accurate facts; based on credible sources; precise; unbiased; free from logical fallacies; logically consistent; and strongly reasoned" (p. 12).
Argument: Is a statement or proposition with supporting evidence. Critical thinking involves identifying, evaluating, and constructing arguments.
Reasoning: The ability to infer a conclusion from one or multiple premises. To do so requires examining logical relationships among statements or data.
Point of View: The way one views the world, which shapes one's construction of meaning. In a search for understanding, critical thinkers view phenomena from many different points of view.
Procedures for Applying Criteria: Other types of thinking use a general procedure. Critical thinking makes use of many procedures. These procedures include asking questions, making judgments, and identifying assumptions.

Oliver & Utermohlen (1995) see students as too often being passive receptors of information. Through technology, the amount of information available today is massive. This information explosion is likely to continue in the future. Students need a guide to weed through the information and not just passively accept it. Students need to "develop and effectively apply critical thinking skills to their academic studies, to the complex problems that they will face, and to the critical choices they will be forced to make as a result of the information explosion and other rapid technological changes" (Oliver & Utermohlen, p. 1 ).

As mentioned in the section, Characteristics of Critical Thinking , critical thinking involves questioning. It is important to teach students how to ask good questions, to think critically, in order to continue the advancement of the very fields we are teaching. "Every field stays alive only to the extent that fresh questions are generated and taken seriously" (Center for Critical Thinking, 1996a ).

Beyer sees the teaching of critical thinking as important to the very state of our nation. He argues that to live successfully in a democracy, people must be able to think critically in order to make sound decisions about personal and civic affairs. If students learn to think critically, then they can use good thinking as the guide by which they live their lives.

Teaching Strategies to Help Promote Critical Thinking

The 1995, Volume 22, issue 1, of the journal, Teaching of Psychology , is devoted to the teaching critical thinking. Most of the strategies included in this section come from the various articles that compose this issue.

CATS (Classroom Assessment Techniques): Angelo stresses the use of ongoing classroom assessment as a way to monitor and facilitate students' critical thinking. An example of a CAT is to ask students to write a "Minute Paper" responding to questions such as "What was the most important thing you learned in today's class? What question related to this session remains uppermost in your mind?" The teacher selects some of the papers and prepares responses for the next class meeting.
Cooperative Learning Strategies: Cooper (1995) argues that putting students in group learning situations is the best way to foster critical thinking. "In properly structured cooperative learning environments, students perform more of the active, critical thinking with continuous support and feedback from other students and the teacher" (p. 8).
Case Study /Discussion Method: McDade (1995) describes this method as the teacher presenting a case (or story) to the class without a conclusion. Using prepared questions, the teacher then leads students through a discussion, allowing students to construct a conclusion for the case.
Using Questions: King (1995) identifies ways of using questions in the classroom:
Reciprocal Peer Questioning: Following lecture, the teacher displays a list of question stems (such as, "What are the strengths and weaknesses of...). Students must write questions about the lecture material. In small groups, the students ask each other the questions. Then, the whole class discusses some of the questions from each small group.
Reader's Questions: Require students to write questions on assigned reading and turn them in at the beginning of class. Select a few of the questions as the impetus for class discussion.
Conference Style Learning: The teacher does not "teach" the class in the sense of lecturing. The teacher is a facilitator of a conference. Students must thoroughly read all required material before class. Assigned readings should be in the zone of proximal development. That is, readings should be able to be understood by students, but also challenging. The class consists of the students asking questions of each other and discussing these questions. The teacher does not remain passive, but rather, helps "direct and mold discussions by posing strategic questions and helping students build on each others' ideas" (Underwood & Wald, 1995, p. 18 ).
Use Writing Assignments: Wade sees the use of writing as fundamental to developing critical thinking skills. "With written assignments, an instructor can encourage the development of dialectic reasoning by requiring students to argue both [or more] sides of an issue" (p. 24).
Written dialogues: Give students written dialogues to analyze. In small groups, students must identify the different viewpoints of each participant in the dialogue. Must look for biases, presence or exclusion of important evidence, alternative interpretations, misstatement of facts, and errors in reasoning. Each group must decide which view is the most reasonable. After coming to a conclusion, each group acts out their dialogue and explains their analysis of it.
Spontaneous Group Dialogue: One group of students are assigned roles to play in a discussion (such as leader, information giver, opinion seeker, and disagreer). Four observer groups are formed with the functions of determining what roles are being played by whom, identifying biases and errors in thinking, evaluating reasoning skills, and examining ethical implications of the content.
Ambiguity: Strohm & Baukus advocate producing much ambiguity in the classroom. Don't give students clear cut material. Give them conflicting information that they must think their way through.
Angelo, T. A. (1995). Beginning the dialogue: Thoughts on promoting critical thinking: Classroom assessment for critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 6-7.
Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Center for Critical Thinking (1996a). The role of questions in thinking, teaching, and learning. [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univlibrary/library.nclk
Center for Critical Thinking (1996b). Structures for student self-assessment. [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univclass/trc.nclk
Center for Critical Thinking (1996c). Three definitions of critical thinking [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univlibrary/library.nclk
Cooper, J. L. (1995). Cooperative learning and critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 7-8.
Jones, E. A. & Ratcliff, G. (1993). Critical thinking skills for college students. National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 358 772)
King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum: Inquiring minds really do want to know: Using questioning to teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1) , 13-17.
McDade, S. A. (1995). Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking. Teaching Psychology, 22(1), 9-10.
Oliver, H. & Utermohlen, R. (1995). An innovative teaching strategy: Using critical thinking to give students a guide to the future.(Eric Document Reproduction Services No. 389 702)
Robertson, J. F. & Rane-Szostak, D. (1996). Using dialogues to develop critical thinking skills: A practical approach. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(7), 552-556.
Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1996). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univlibrary/library.nclk
Strohm, S. M., & Baukus, R. A. (1995). Strategies for fostering critical thinking skills. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 50 (1), 55-62.
Underwood, M. K., & Wald, R. L. (1995). Conference-style learning: A method for fostering critical thinking with heart. Teaching Psychology, 22(1), 17-21.
Wade, C. (1995). Using writing to develop and assess critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 24-28.

On the Internet

Carr, K. S. (1990). How can we teach critical thinking. Eric Digest. [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/digests/1990/carr90.html
The Center for Critical Thinking (1996). Home Page. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/
Ennis, Bob (No date). Critical thinking. [On-line], April 4, 1997. Available HTTP: http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/teach/for442/ct.htm
Montclair State University (1995). Curriculum resource center. Critical thinking resources: An annotated bibliography. [On-line]. Available HTTP: http://www.montclair.edu/Pages/CRC/Bibliographies/CriticalThinking.html
No author, No date. Critical Thinking is ... [On-line], April 4, 1997. Available HTTP: http://library.usask.ca/ustudy/critical/
Sheridan, Marcia (No date). Internet education topics hotlink page. [On-line], April 4, 1997. Available HTTP: http://sun1.iusb.edu/~msherida/topics/critical.html

Walker Center for Teaching and Learning

433 Library
Dept 4354
615 McCallie Ave
423-425-4188

Critical Thinking Adalah: Cara Mengasah dan Contoh

Critical thinking disebut juga berpikir kritis. Proses berpikir sendiri dibentuk dengan melibatkan gagasan dan proses mental. Sementara itu, dalam critical thinking ini keduanya berkaitan untuk mencapai pemikiran yang jernih, rasional, dan mandiri. Padahal, proses berpikir seseorang pasti berbeda-beda, mulai dari yang dangkal, sedang, kritis bahkan terlalu kritis dan peka terhadap perubahan sekitar yang terjadi.

Namun, pernah terpikirkan nggak sih, kenapa ya kita perlu memiliki kemampuan critical thinking ini? Adapun dalam artikel ini akan dibahas mengenai critical thinking. Yuk, simak pemaparannya berikut ini.

Apa itu Critical Thinking ?

Mudahnya, critical thinking merupakan kemampuan untuk bisa berpikir lebih jernih dan lebih rasional, baik terhadap apa yang harus dilakukan maupun terhadap apa yang harus dipercaya. Individu dengan critical thinking memiliki karakteristik seperti terbuka, rasa keingintahuannya tinggi, kreatif, mandiri, tekun, berpengetahuan luas, objektif, dan tingkat kefokusannya tinggi.

Individu yang memiliki pola pikir ini dalam menerima informasi tidak secara mentah-mentah alias mencari kevalidannya terlebih dahulu. Ia juga akan melihat apa yang dipikirkan itu dari berbagai perspektif. Dalam proses berpikir itu tentu juga akan menimbangkan faktor-faktor lain yang berhubungan dengan apa yang dipikirkan tersebut.

Lalu, adakah hal khusus yang bisa membedakan antara yang memiliki critical thinking dan yang tidak? Ada dong pastinya. Bagi mereka yang memiliki critical thinking biasanya dapat melakukan hal-hal seperti berikut ini.

Memahami hubungan antara logika dan gagasan
Mengidentifikasi relevansi dan pentingnya gagasan
Mengetahui banyak fakta
Menyelesaikan masalah secara sistematis
Mendeteksi adanya ketidakkonsistenan dan kesalahan umum dalam berlogika
Menyimpulkan dari apa yang diketahuinya dari banyak perspektif
Mengidentifikasi, membangun bahkan mengevaluasi argumen
Merenungkan pembenaran keyakinan dan nilai-nilai dalam diri seseorang

Perbedaan Problem Solving dan Critical Thinking

Problem solving dan critical thinking adalah dua hal yang perlu dikuasai setiap individu. Kedua softskill ini menjadikan pola pikir seseorang dalam memandang dan menerima suatu hal menjadi lebih beragam karena lebih terbuka dan melihat banyak sudut pandang. Meskipun demikian, kedua hal tersebut tetap memiliki perbedaan.

Problem solving adalah sikap penyelesaian masalah. Sikap ini berfokus pada bagaimana masalah bisa selesai (solusi), bukan fokus pada masalahnya. Hal ini berarti problem solving memikiran solusi apa saja yang mungkin bisa digunakan dan baik untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan yang sedang dihadapi.

Permasalahan yang tidak segera diselesaikan akan menjadi bom waktu. Maka dari itu, adanya problem solving ini kita menjadi mengenal manajemen penyelesaian masalah sehingga dalam menghadapi masalah mereka tidak akan menghindar.

Sementara itu, critical thinking adalah sikap berpikir kritis. Orang-orang yang menerapkan softskill ini akan melibatkan dirinya sendiri dalam pemikiran yang reflektif. Mereka akan mengutamakan penalaran dan pemikiran yang jauh dan mendalam. Namun, tetap mengutamakan logis dan masalah rasional.

Melalui sikap berpikir kritis ini kamu juga dituntut untuk memahami perspektif orang lain, tidak berpaku pada pendapat sendiri, dan menjadi lebih terbuka, lho. Alhasil, sikap tenggang rasa dan pikiran kreatifmu pun ikut berkembang.

Manfaat Critical Thinking

Tidak ada salahnya menerapkan critical thinking karena sikap ini memiliki banyak manfaat, baik untuk diri sendiri maupun orang di sekitar. Ini dia manfaat-manfaat yang bisa kamu peroleh dari critical thinking .

1. Menunjang penyesuaian diri

Orang yang berpikir kritis akan lebih cepat dalam beradaptasi dengan situasi dan kondisi yang baru. Dia akan cepat menganalisis informasi dan mengintegrasikan berbagai pengetahuan untuk memecahkan masalah kemudian mulai menyelaraskan apa yang sesuai dengan perubahan dan perbedaan yang ada.

2. Meningkatkan kinerja tim

Pengaruh critical thinking terhadap kinerja tim terlihat pada produktivitas anggotanya. Meningkatnya produktivitas tersebut sejalan dengan pola pikir yang kritis. Alhasil, kinerja tim juga ikut meningkat.

3. Merupakan aset yang tidak akan habis

Memiliki critical thinking tidak ada salahnya. Semakin dewasa seseorang, pola pikirnya juga akan semakin kritis. Critical thinking juga berguna dalam segala hal. Selain digunakan dalam dunia kerja, dalam kehidupan sehari-hari skill ini juga banyak penerapannya.

4. Tidak mudah tertipu

Mereka yang memiliki critical thinking berpotensi kecil untuk ditipu. Hal ini karena mereka dalam menerima informasi baru pasti tidak akan diterima begitu saja. Mereka akan mengecek kebenaran dan kerasionalitasannya terlebih dahulu.

5. Menjadi rekan kerja yang baik

Untuk kamu yang memiliki kemampuan critical thinking , kamu mampu menjadi rekan kerja yang baik untuk rekanmu. Apabila rekanmu sedang kebingungan dan tidak yakin dengan sesuatu yang baru, maka kamu tentu akan membantu menjelaskannya dengan berbagai perspektif. Jadi, kamu bisa dengan tepat mengetahui kebenaran dan kerasionalannya.

6. Meningkatkan kreativitas

Pemikiran yang kritis akan menjadikan seseorang menjadi lebih produktif. Pemikiran mereka juga menjadi lebih kreatif. Alhasil, produk atau kegiatan yang kreatif dan inovatif dapat dikembangkan.

7. Meningkatkan kepercayaan diri

Bagi kamu yang memiliki pemikiran yang kritis, kamu akan menjadi lebih berani dalam berargumentasi karena kamu telah mendalami hal yang kamu dapatkan dari berbagai perspektif. Pada akhirnya, kamu menjadi lebih percaya diri dengan kemampuanmu ketika berargumen di depan orang banyak.

Biar makin percaya diri, biasakan juga untuk mencoba yang namanya self affirmation. Apa itu? Bisa kalian bisa baca pada artikel Mengenal Self Affirmation dan Contoh

8. Memudahkan dalam menyelesaikan masalah

Pemikiran yang kritis menjadikanmu lebih banyak mengetahui hal-hal secara mendalam. Permasalahan yang terjadi dapat diselesaikan dengan mudah lewat pemikirannya yang kritis dan menimbangkan kemungkinan faktor yang menyebabkan masalah sehingga solusi yang relevan bisa dipikirkan.

Tujuan Critical Thinking

Seseorang menggunakan kemampuan critical thinking tentu ada tujuan yang hendak dicapainya. Nah, berikut ini tujuan dari menerapkan critical thinking .

1. Mempertahankan argumen

Pada umumnya critical thinking ini dipakai sebagai alat untuk mempertahankan argumen yang berbeda dengan sudut pandang tertentu. Kemampuan ini akan mempermudah kamu dalam memahami motivasi dan menentukan tujuan apa yang hendak dicapai oleh lawannya.

2. Mempermudah dalam memberikan motivasi dan tujuan hidup

Critical thinking dapat digunakan untuk merenungkan pembenaran keyakinan atau nilai-nilai yang ada pada diri seseorang. Jadi, dengan critical thinking seseorang akan lebih mudah untuk memberikan motivasi dan tujuan hidup kepada orang lain yang tentunya dengan pembawaan dan perkataan yang tepat serta mengenakkan.

3, Mempermudah menemukan ide baru

Keterbukaan terhadap hal-hal baru menjadikan seorang critical thinking menjadi lebih terasah pemikirannya. Alhasil, ide-ide baru bahkan yang kreatif dan inovatif muncul saat mereka memikirkan hal-hal tersebut secara terus-menerus.

4. Membentuk opini

Critical thinking bertujuan untuk membentuk opini lewat pemikiran yang terus-menerus dan pengungkapan banyak fakta. Fakta tersebut nantinya menjadi dasar individu dalam berargumen. Jadi, muatan opini yang diujarkan tidak sembarangan, ya.

5. Menentukan apakah ide masuk akal atau tidak

Seseorang yang memiliki critical thinking tentu dapat merasakan adanya keganjilan dalam suatu hal, seperti ide baru. Nah, lewat critical thinking inilah kita dapat menguji kerasionalan ide tersebut.

Cara Mengasah Critical Thinking

Kemampuan critical thinking tidak terbentuk begitu saja, perlu proses untuk mengasahnya. Berikut cara untuk mengasah critical thinking.

1. Mengenali pokok permasalahan

Sebelum mengasah kemampuan berpikir kritis, kamu bisa mengenali dahulu pokok permasalahan yang ada. Di tahap ini kamu harus bisa mengenali dan memahami dirimu sendiri. Setelah itu, mulailah dengan mengidentifikasi faktor penyebab dan dampak yang ditimbulkan dari permasalahan tersebut. Dari kedua hal itu selanjutnya kamu bisa memposisikan dirimu sebagai apa. Hal ini perlu karena akan menentukan pengambilan keputusan.

2. Menentukan skala prioritas

Kamu bingung menentukan permasalahan mana yang harus diselesaikan terlebih dahulu? Tenang, tidak usah khawatir. Dalam hal ini kamu sepertinya perlu nih untuk mengenal skala prioritas, Ya, skala prioritas adalah cara untuk mengumpulkan hal-hal dari yang terpenting hingga yang dapat ditunda pemenuhannya.

Dengan skala prioritas, kamu bisa menentukan mana saja permasalahan yang mendesak dan perlu diselesaikan segera, permasalahan yang penting, tetapi tidak harus diselesaikan segera, serta permasalahan ringan yang bisa ditunda penyelesaiannya.

3. Mengumpulkan informasi

Pengumpulan informasi mengenai permasalahan berkaitan dengan fakta dan bukti yang kemudian ini menjadi dasar kita dalam berpikir lebih jauh lagi. Carilah informasi sebanyak mungkin. Kamu bisa nih cari informasi dari buku, internet, studi kasus, jurnal, pengalaman, wawancara dengan ahli, dan sebagainya. Semakin banyak informasi yang diperoleh, maka semakin banyak pemahamanmu terhadap sesuatu yang kamu cari itu. Risiko tertipu pun dapat diminimalisir.

4. Mengenali persepsi orang lain

Masalah dapat terjadi karena adanya perbedaan pandangan. Demikian pula dalam penyelesaiannya. Pemberian argumen dari setiap orang jangan diterima begitu saja. Cobalah untuk mengujinya dengan memberikan sedikit rasa tidak setuju dan curiga. Dari situlah kita bisa menganalisis sikap dan jawabannya, baru kemudian persepsi orang tersebut dapat kita kenali dengan baik.

5. Melakukan analisis terhadap setiap data

Upaya analisis setiap data ini dapat menunjang kamu untuk lebih berpikir kritis lagi. Hal ini juga bisa sebagai upaya untuk mengecek kebenaran informasinya. Selain itu, kamu juga mungkin saja bisa menemukan informasi baru yang belum ada dalam data tersebut sehingga data tersebut bisa lebih optimal dan berkualitas.

6. Menentukan keputusan

Cara yang terakhir dalam mengasah critical thinking adalah menentukan keputusan. Tahapan-tahapan yang sudah dilalui membuat pikiran terhadap suatu masalah menjadi lebih kritis dan terbuka. Informasi dan data yang telah diperoleh akan memudahkanmu dalam mengambil keputusan.

Kemampuan critical thinking yang sudah dimiliki ini selanjutnya bisa kamu terapkan untuk diri sendiri. Selain itu, kamu juga bisa menerapkannya ke orang lain dengan membantu mereka menyelesaikan masalah dan turut serta berpikir kritis opsi solusi yang mungkin bisa sebagai jalan keluar permasalahan.

Baca juga: Pentingnya Manajemen Waktu, Masa Depan Aman!

Contoh Critical Thinking dalam Pembelajaran

Sikap critical thinking perlu diajarkan sejak dini di sekolah. Berikut beberapa contoh yang bisa digunakan untuk mengajarkan critical thinking dalam pembelajaran sekolah.

1. Kerja kelompok berbasis pembuatan produk

Dalam kegiatan ini anak-anak akan mengkolaborasikan ide dan menemukan kemungkinan apa saja yang timbul dari produknya.

2. Lomba debat

Argumen dalam debat tidak diujarkan begitu saja, perlu fakta dan data yang jelas untuk mendukungnya, Pencarian fakta dan data inilah yang menjadikan mereka berpikir kritis.

3. Menjawab pertanyaan secara esai

Jawaban pertanyaan yang panjang menunjang anak-anak untuk lebih kritis. Penyelesaian masalah menjadikan mereka perlu memikiran faktor, dampak, risiko yang mungkin terjadi.

4. Membuat sumber referensi

Dengan cara ini, anak-anak dituntut untuk membaca informasi dari berbagai referensi. Semakin banyak yang dibaca, maka pemahaman mereka akan meningkat, begitu pula dengan kemampuan critical thinking -nya.

5. Menciptakan permainan sketsa

Permainan sketsa ini bisa dibuat dengan tema, misalnya menjadi lingkup negara di mana harus ada presiden, menteri, penegak hukum, dan rakyat. Posisikan anak-anak dalam tiga jabatan itu dan berikan permasalahan. Bagaimana mereka bertindak akan menggambarkan kemampuan critical thinking -nya terhadap posisi yang sedang didapatkan.

Baca artikel penting sukes: Apakah Menjadi Orang Sukses Harus Kuliah? Bisa!

Nah, itulah informasi mengenai critical thinking. Kemampuan ini perlu dikembangkan dan diterapkan dalam setiap tindakan, penerimaan informasi, hingga pembuatan keputusan. Jadi, keputusan atau tindakan yang diperbuat selanjutnya telah dipikirkan matang-matang segala resikonya. Rasa kecewa atau rugi yang mungkin saja ditimbulkan dari keputusannya tersebut akhirnya dapat diminimalisir.

Semoga bermanfaat, ya! Penulis: Ninik Pratiwi/UNS Ilustrasi : Yusuf Abdhul Azis

Sebagai seorang SEO Spesialis, telah berpengalaman dalam membantu berbagai bisnis meningkatkan visibilitas online mereka melalui optimasi mesin pencari. Dengan keahlian dalam riset kata kunci, optimasi konten, dan strategi backlink, berfokus pada peningkatan trafik organik dan peringkat situs web di mesin pencari

Tinggalkan komentar Batalkan balasan

Simpan nama, email, dan situs web saya pada peramban ini untuk komentar saya berikutnya.

Pengertian Critical Thinking dan Bedanya Dengan Analytical Thinking

Critical Thinking – Salah satu kemampuan penting yang harus dimiliki oleh setiap individu adalah critical thinking atau yang kerap disebut dengan sebuah proses berpikir kritis dalam setiap keadaan yang ada. Mungkin Grameds bertanya-tanya, apa pentingnya seseorang memiliki kemampuan berpikir kritis. Atau mungkin pertanyaan lain seperti apakah perlu menerapkan kemampuan berpikir ini dalam kehidupan sehari-hari?

Nah, secara umumnya ketika seseorang memiliki kemampuan berpikir kritis, maka orang tersebut bisa menjadi lebih pandai dalam mengambil keputusan, penerima informasi, pemecahan masalah, dan hal lain. Perlu diketahui juga jika setiap orang memiliki kemampuan berpikir yang berbeda-beda. Maka dari itu terkadang ada istilah beda sudut pandang atau beda pemikiran antara satu orang dengan lainnya.

Agar Grameds juga semakin paham tentang kemampuan berpikir ini, maka tak ada salahnya untuk membaca penjelasan seputar critical thinking pada artikel ini. Semua tentang berpikir kritis akan dijelaskan lebih dalam pada artikel ini.

Table of Contents

Pengertian Critical Thinking

Secara garis besar, critical thinking adalah sebuah kemampuan untuk bisa berpikir lebih jernih dan lebih rasional terhadap apa yang harus dilakukan maupun terhadap apa yang harus dipercaya.

Bisa juga critical thinking dimaknai sebagai sebuah pola pikir yang dimiliki oleh individu agar tidak menerima informasi secara mentah-mentah.

Diperlukan sebuah pola pikir untuk mengevaluasi dan menganalisis kebenaran dari informasi tersebut. Tentunya mereka yang sudah bisa berpikir kritis juga akan lebih tepat dalam mengambil keputusan terhadap masalah yang sedang dialami.

Selain itu ada beberapa kemampuan lain ketika seseorang bisa menerapkan keterampilan critical thinking dalam kehidupannya. Berikut ini adalah beberapa di antaranya.

Bisa lebih mudah memahami hubungan antara logika dan gagasan.
Bisa melakukan identifikasi, membangun, sekaligus melakukan evaluasi terhadap argumen.
Bisa melakukan deteksi terhadap ketidak kositenan dan kesalahan umum dalam bernalar.
Mampu menyelesaikan sebuah permasalahan yang dihadapi secara sistematis.
Bisa melakukan identifikasi relevansi dan pentingnya sebuah gagasan.
Mampu merenungkan sebuah pembenaran terhadap keyakinan sekaligus nilai-nilai yang ada dalam diri seseorang.

Kemampuan berpikir kritis bukanlah tentang seberapa banyak informasi yang dimiliki oleh seseorang. Bahkan belum tentu seseorang yang memiliki ingatan yang begitu baik dan tahu begitu banyak fakta memiliki critical thinking dalam dirinya. Namun critical thinking adalah sebuah pola pikir untuk mengetahui bagaimana konsekuensi terhadap apa yang mereka tahu.

Mereka yang memiliki kemampuan berpikir ini biasanya akan lebih tahu bagaimana memanfaatkan informasi yang diterima sebagai metode penyelesaian sebuah masalah. Selain itu mereka juga bisa mencari informasi yang relevan.

Perbedaan Critical Thinking dan Analytical Thinking

Setelah tahu apa itu critical thinking, berikutnya adalah penjelasan tentang critical thinking dengan analytical thinking. Meski keduanya tampak sama, namun sebenarnya kedua kemampuan tersebut memiliki perbedaan satu sama lain, lho.

Agar Grameds lebih paham lagi tentang perbedaan antara keduanya, maka penjelasan yang ada di bawah ini akan mempermudah kamu untuk mengetahui perbedaan dari kedua kemampuan tersebut.

1. Pemanfaatan Fakta yang Ada

Baik itu critical thinking maupun analytical thinking sama-sama menggunakan fakta untuk proses evaluasi terhadap informasi yang ada. Meski begitu metode yang digunakan keduanya sangatlah berbeda.

Dimana critical thinking akan menggunakan fakta sebagai bantuan membentuk opini sekaligus menentukan apakah ide yang ada memang benar-benar masuk akal. Sedangkan untuk analytical thinking adalah menggunakan fakta sebagai pendukung bukti.

Dari dua penjelasan tersebut sudah bisa diambil kesimpulan jika kedua jenis kemampuan berpikir ini memiliki dua metode yang berbeda dalam pemanfaatan fakta yang ada.

2. Tujuan yang Berbeda

Berikutnya adalah dari segi tujuan, dimulai dari critical thinking yang memiliki tujuan untuk individu dalam mempertahankan argumen yang bisa menjadi dukungan terhadap sudut pandang tertentu.

Critical thinking juga akan mempermudah seseorang dalam memberikan motivasi kepada orang lain dan juga tujuan hidupnya. Sedangkan tujuan dari analytical thinking terbilang cukup berbeda dari critical thinking.

Dimana tujuan dari analytical thinking adalah untuk menyelesaikan sebuah masalah yang begitu kompleks. Selain itu analytical juga bisa membantu seseorang dalam melakukan analisis terhadap situasi yang sedang terjadi.

Adanya critical thinking juga bisa membuat individu menemukan ide-ide baru. Selain itu analytical thinking juga bisa membantu seseorang untuk bisa mengumpulkan sekaligus menafsirkan suatu data untuk pemahaman yang lebih lanjut. Mereka juga akan bisa mencoba untuk mengembangkan sekaligus yakin terhadap persepsi sebuah ide.

3. Proses Berpikir

Dari segi proses berpikir keduanya juga memiliki perbedaan yang cukup menonjol. Di mana critical thinking memiliki proses berpikir melingkar. Sedangkan untuk analytical thinking akan menggunakan proses berpikir linier serta lebih fokus.

Mereka yang menggunakan critical thinking kebanyakan akan berputar secara terus-menerus terhadap suatu ide hingga mendapatkan kesimpulan. Sedangkan seseorang yang menerapkan analytical thinking lebih cenderung untuk bisa berfikir dari satu pemikiran ke pemikiran berikutnya. Rutenya adalah formasi lurus dari satu pemikiran ke pemikiran berikutnya.

Cara Membentuk Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis

Seperti yang dijelaskan sebelumnya jika kemampuan berpikir kritis atau critical thinking dari satu orang dengan orang lain itu berbeda. Namun untuk menumbuhkan kemampuan berpikir ini sebenarnya bisa dilakukan dengan beberapa tahap.

Jika Grameds belum begitu tahu bagaimana cara membentuk kemampuan critical thinking, ada beberapa poin di bawah ini yang akan membantu kamu agar lebih mudah meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis.

1. Kenali Masalah yang Ada

Hal pertama yang bisa Grameds lakukan dalam meningkatkan kemampuan critical thinking adalah mengenali atau mengidentifikasi masalah yang ada. Masalah bisa terjadi biasanya dipengaruhi oleh beberapa faktor. Mulai dari faktor psikologis, faktor orang terdekat seperti teman maupun keluarga, lalu ada juga faktor lingkungan yang bisa jadi mempengaruhi terjadinya suatu masalah.

Dalam proses identifikasi masalah yang ada, kamu dituntut untuk bisa lebih memahami diri sendiri. Dimulai dari faktor apa yang menyebabkan permasalahan tersebut terjadi, dampak apa saja yang bisa ditimbulkan dari masalah yang ada terhadap kamu dan orang sekitar. Lalu posisi kamu dalam permasalahan tersebut adalah sebagai apa.

2. Menentukan Skala Prioritas

Setiap orang pasti memiliki masalah dalam hidupnya. Namun bagi Grameds yang ingin berlatih meningkatkan kemampuan critical thinking sebaiknya mulailah menentukan skala prioritas terhadap masalah yang ada.

Dimulai dari mengenali masalah yang begitu mendesak, masalah yang bisa ditunda, hingga masalah yang bisa diselesaikan pada sesi paling akhir. Tentunya ketika skala prioritas suatu masalah sudah bisa kamu ketahui dengan baik. Maka kamu bisa dengan mudah mencapai target yang ingin dicapai.

3. Mengumpulkan Informasi

Ketika Grameds sudah mengetahui bagaimana prioritas masalah-masalah yang sedang ada, kamu bisa mencoba untuk memulai mengumpulkan informasi sembari melakukan analisa. Dapatkan informasi sebanyak-banyaknya terhadap masalah yang sedang ingin diselesaikan.

Grameds bisa mendapatkan berbagai macam informasi dari berbagai sumber, mulai dari buku, jurnal, internet, studi lapangan maupun pengalaman dan berbagai macam sumber lainnya. Semakin banyak informasi atau pengetahuan yang kamu miliki, maka kamu akan meminimalisasi kemungkinan-kemungkinan tertipu. Bahkan kemampuan analisis yang kamu miliki juga akan turut berkembang dengan bertambahnya pengetahuan.

4. Mengenali Persepsi Orang Lain

Dalam suatu masalah yang sedang dipecahkan, terkadang ada banyak persepsi atau argumen orang lain yang muncul. Pada saat hal tersebut terjadi, sebaiknya kamu tidak begitu saja langsung memakannya mentah-mentah.

Lakukan proses analisis terhadap setiap argumen yang ada. Karena hal inilah penting bagi kamu untuk bisa memperbanyak ilmu pengetahuan agar tidak mudah tertipu terhadap argumen orang lain. Berikan sedikit rasa curiga atau tidak percaya agar kamu bisa melakukan proses analisis terhadap argumen yang ada dengan lebih dalam lagi.

5. Lakukan Analisis Terhadap Setiap Data

Ketika kamu menerima sebuah data, sebaiknya jangan langsung percaya begitu saja. Pastikan untuk selalu melakukan analisis terhadap data tersebut. Selain itu menemukan informasi lain yang bisa dipercaya dan dipertanggungjawabkan sekaligus mampu menunjang setiap data yang telah kamu peroleh sebelumnya.

6. Pengambilan Keputusan

Ketika lima tahap sebelumnya telah dilakukan, maka kamu bisa melanjutkan dengan melakukan pengambilan keputusan. Dengan beberapa tahapan atau cara di atas, kamu akan semakin mudah dalam meningkatkan kemampuan critical thinking dalam diri sendiri.

Selain itu ketika kemampuan critical thinking yang kamu miliki sudah meningkat, maka kamu bisa membantu orang lain untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan mereka sekaligus mencari jalan keluar yang terbaik terhadap masalah tersebut.

Pentingnya Kemampuan Critical Thinking bagi Karyawan

Kemampuan critical thinking tak hanya bisa membantu kamu dalam menyelesaikan permasalahan pribadi saja. Namun kemampuan critical thinking juga sangat penting ketika kamu sedang dalam posisi sebagai seorang karyawan.

Banyak sekali lho manfaat yang diberikan oleh kemampuan critical thinking jika dimiliki oleh seorang karyawan. Mungkin Grameds juga belum begitu menyadari pentingnya critical thinking, namun agar kamu tahu lebih lanjut, maka penjelasan di bawah ini akan bisa membantu.

1. Mampu Meningkatkan Kinerja Tim

Dalam dunia kerja penting sekali memiliki kemampuan critical thinking. Mulai dari atasan hingga karyawan harusnya sama-sama memiliki kemampuan critical thinking. Sebab ketika semua orang dalam dunia kerja memiliki kemampuan critical thinking, maka kemudahan proses penjualan, produksi hingga aktivitas lapangan akan bisa didapatkan.

Oleh karena itu sejak awal rekrutmen calon karyawan, pihak perusahaan akan memberikan beberapa pertanyaan yang mengacu ke arah kemampuan critical thinking dari calon karyawan tersebut. Bahkan ketika karyawan baru sudah diterima sekalipun. Pihak perusahaan tetap akan memberikan pengembangan skill critical thinking dari setiap karyawan yang ada.

Sebab perusahaan-perusahaan yang berkualitas akan tahu jika semua proses yang ada di dalam perusahaan bisa berjalan dengan lancar karena dipengaruhi banyak faktor seperti kemampuan critical thinking.

2. Produk Berkualitas Bisa Dihasilkan dengan Baik

Setiap karyawan yang memiliki kemampuan critical thinking juga bisa membuat sebuah produk yang berkualitas. Produk yang berkualitas tinggi menuntut ketelitian dalam proses pengerjaanya. Bahkan seluruh detail barang maupun jasa sebelum didistribusikan kepada pihak konsumen akan dianalisis terlebih dahulu, apakah barang maupun jasa sudah benar-benar dibutuhkan oleh target pasar.

3. Bisa Mempermudah Menyelesaikan Konflik Antarkaryawan

Bukan hanya performa dalam kinerja seorang karyawan saja, adanya kemampuan critical thinking juga akan mempermudah seseorang dalam lingkup perusahaan untuk bisa menyelesaikan sebuah konflik yang terjadi antar karyawan. Tentunya penyelesain yang dilakukan dengan bantuan kemampuan critical thinking akan lebih damai dan tidak condong ke salah satu pihak.

4. Tak Mudah Tertipu

Mereka yang memiliki kemampuan critical thinking bisa dibilang tidak akan mudah tertipu oleh informasi yang didapatkannya. Dimana kemampuan critical thinking bisa membuat seorang individu bisa berpikir lebih logis, rasional, dan beralasan.

Selain itu mereka yang memiliki kemampuan critical thinking juga bisa membuat seseorang mengambil sebuah fakta berdasarkan analisis yang begitu dalam. Mereka juga tidak akan mudah percaya begitu saja terhadap informasi yang ada tanpa analisa yang begitu logis, bernalar dan rasional.

5. Menjadikan Individu yang Lebih Baik

Mereka yang sudah memiliki kemampuan critical thinking biasanya akan bisa menerima pendapat orang lain, berpikir terbuka dan tidak kaku. Ketika seseorang bisa melakukan hal tersebut, maka ia akan lebih mudah dihormati di lingkungan kerjanya.

Ketika ada seseorang yang bisa menerima pendapat orang lain, kamu akan lebih mudah dianggap sebagai rekan kerja yang baik.Dan jika hal tersebut bisa berjalan dengan begitu lancar dalam jangkauan waktu yang lama, maka kondisi lingkungan kerja kamu akan lebih kondusif dan hasil yang diberikan juga akan lebih produktif. Hal ini juga menunjukkan jika kemampuan critical thinking memang begitu penting bagi lingkungan kerja.

6. Memicu Sisi Kreativitas Individu

Agar bisa mendapatkan solusi terbaik dan kreatif terhadap masalah yang ada di tempat kerja bukan hanya diperlukan ide-ide baru saja. Pasalnya Grameds juga harus lebih tahu secara detail terkait dengan ide baru tersebut.

Apakah memang ide baru tersebut begitu cocok atau relevan sebagai solusi untuk menghadapi masalah yang ada atau malah sebaliknya. Agar bisa mencari ide yang relevan dan pas terhadap masalah yang ada bisa dibantu dengan kemampuan critical thinking.

Dengan kemampuan critical thinking seseorang bisa memilah mana ide terbaru yang paling relevan untuk menyelesaikan setiap masalah yang ada. Bahkan pengubahan ide baru agar bisa lebih relevan juga bisa terwujud dengan baik ketika dilakukan dengan bantuan kemampuan critical thinking.

7. Critical Thinking Sebuah Kemampuan Tanpa Batas

Memiliki kemampuan critical thinking memang begitu penting sekali bagi individu. Jika kamu bekerja dalam lingkup penelitian, hukum, manajemen, maupun keuangan, kemampuan critical thinking memang sangat dibutuhkan. Akan tetapi kemampuan critical thinking bukan hanya bisa digunakan pada dunia kerja saja, namun kemampuan critical thinking bisa digunakan untuk kehidupan sehari-hari.

8. Membantu Penyesuaian Diri Seseorang Terhadap Lingkungan Baru

Adanya kemampuan critical thinking bisa membuat seseorang bisa lebih mudah menyesuaikan diri terhadap kondisi atau lingkungan baru. Dengan adanya critical thinking, seorang karyawan bisa lebih mudah melakukan analisa informasi, mengintegrasikan pengetahuan, hingga memecahkan masalah.

Dari penjelasan di atas bisa disimpulkan jika kemampuan critical thinking memang begitu dibutuhkan oleh semua orang. Baik dalam lingkup kerja maupun kehidupan pribadi, penerapan kemampuan critical thinking memang bisa menunjang kehidupan yang lebih baik.

Jika Grameds ingin membaca buku-buku terkait critical thinking, maka kamu bisa mendapatkannya di gramedia.com . Sebagai #SahabatTanpaBatas, Gramedia selalu memberikan produk terbaik agar kamu memiliki informasi #LebihDenganMembaca.

Penulis: Hendrik Nuryanto

Kategori Ilmu Berkaitan Psikologi

Buku Pedoman HRD & SDM
Buku Psikologi Best Seller
Buku Psikologi Pendidikan
Buku Soal CPNS
Buku Soal Psikotes
Soal Psikotes Polri
Soal Psikotes TNI

Artikel Psikologi

Affirmasi Pagi
Affirmasi Islami
Affirmasi Dalam Hubungan
Anger Issue
Berdamai Dengan Diri Sendiri
Berpikir Positif
Berpikir Kreatif dan Inovatif
Broken Home
Cara Agar Tidak Insecure
Cara Agar Tidak Mudah Menangis
Cara Menjadi Dewasa
Cara Menjadi Orang Ikhlas
Cara Mengenal Diri Sendiri
Cara Mencintai Diri Sendiri
Cara Menjadi Orang Cuek
Cara Menhilangkan Banyak Pikiran
Cara Menghadapi Orang dengan Trust Issue
Cara Meditasi Yang Benar
Cara Melatih Mental
Ciri Orang Yang Sombong
Critical Thinking
Contoh Hard Skill
Contoh Self Control
Duck Syndrome
Eksibisionis, Pedofilia, Fetisme
Emosi Tidak Stabil
Fixed Mindset
Guilt Tripping
Hantu Seram
Highly Sensitive Person
Kepribadian Ganda
Manajemen Stres
Menangis Tanpa Sebab
Mengapa Kutu Buku Pakai Kacamata
Mindfulness
Mood Booster
Maladaptive Daydreaming
Konsep Diri
Konsep Berpikir Komputasional
Perbedaan Introvert dan Ekstrovert
Percaya Diri
Perfeksionis
Sikap Pesimis
Pengertian Hard Skill
Perkembangan Emosi
Penyebab Kenapa Afirmasi Gagal
Philophobia
Pikiran Negatif
Playing Victim
Regulasi Emosi
Sifat Manipulatif
Self Awarness
Self Afirmasi
Self Control
Self Development
Self Diagnosis
Self Efficacy
Self Esteem
Self Healing
Self Healing Terbaik
Self Improvement
Self Management
Strict Parents
Self Reward
Self Reminder
Sikap Optimis
Tanggung Jawab
Trauma Healing
Trust Issue
Overthinking

ePerpus adalah layanan perpustakaan digital masa kini yang mengusung konsep B2B. Kami hadir untuk memudahkan dalam mengelola perpustakaan digital Anda. Klien B2B Perpustakaan digital kami meliputi sekolah, universitas, korporat, sampai tempat ibadah."

Akses ke ribuan buku dari penerbit berkualitas
Kemudahan dalam mengakses dan mengontrol perpustakaan Anda
Tersedia dalam platform Android dan IOS
Tersedia fitur admin dashboard untuk melihat laporan analisis
Laporan statistik lengkap
Aplikasi aman, praktis, dan efisien

Written by Sevilla

Saya hampir selalu menulis, setiap hari. Saya mulai merasa bahwa “saya” adalah menulis. Ketertarikan saya dalam dunia kata beriringan dengan tentang kesehatan, khususnya kesehatan mental. Membaca dan menulis berbagai hal tentang kesehatan mental telah membantu saya menjadi pribadi yang lebih perhatian dan saya akan terus melakukannya.

Kontak media sosial Linkedin saya Sevilla

Kemampaun berpikir kritis dan pemecahan masalah (Critical-Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills) - mampu berfikir secara kritis, lateral, dan sistemik, terutama dalam konteks pemecahan masalah
Kemampuan berkomunikasi dan bekerjasama (Communication and Collaboration Skills) - mampu berkomunikasi dan berkolaborasi secara efektif dengan berbagai pihak
Kemampuan mencipta dan membaharui (Creativity and Innovation Skills) - mampu mengembangkan kreativitas yang dimilikinya untuk menghasilkan berbagai terobosan yang inovatif
Literasi teknologi informasi dan komunikasi (Information and ommunications Technology Literacy) - mampu memanfaatkan teknologi informasi dan komunikasi untuk meningkatkan kinerja dan aktivitassehari-hari
Kemampuan belajar kontekstual (Contextual Learning Skills) - Kemampuan menjalani aktivitas pembelajaran mandiri yang kontekstual sebagai bagian dari pengembangan pribadi
Kemampuan informasi dan literasi media (Information and Media Literacy Skills) - mampu memahami dan menggunakan berbagai media komunikasi untuk menyampaikan beragam gagasan dan melaksanakan aktivitas kolaborasi serta interaksi dengan beragam pihak.

Mengenal Konsep 4C dalam Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013

Thanks for reading Mengenal Konsep 4C dalam Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013 . Please share...!

Selanjutnya

0 komentar untuk "mengenal konsep 4c dalam pembelajaran kurikulum 2013".

Your comment for me, please!

IMAGES

Apa itu Critical Thinking?
Apa Itu Problem Solving? Ini Pengertian, Tujuan, & 5 Metodenya
Dianggap Jadi Salah Satu Skill yang Paling Dibutuhkan dalam Dunia Kerja, Seperti Apa Berpikir
5 of the Best Books on Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving
Apa Itu Problem Solving dan Cara Meningkatkannya
Critical Thinking What It Is and Why It

VIDEO

Content #7 :Part:2 -Join me as I share the Rights To Freedom in the Constitution of India in 10 mins
The Surprising Truth About FII Flows and the Stock Market: Logical Thinking Lessons and more
Questioning Yoga: Bridging Ancient Traditions and Modern Innovations
Apa itu inverse thinking ? #timothyronald #edukasi
Apa Itu Critical Value ? #genshinimpact
Cara Menyikapi Berita Hoax? Pinteran Mana Patrick Atau Spongebob?

COMMENTS

Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, dan Contoh Penerapannya
Berikut ini adalah beberapa manfaat berpikir kritis. 1. Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Kreatif Meningkat. Dari berpikir kritis, Anda dapat melatih diri sendiri dengan menyelidiki dan mengajukan pertanyaan terhadap lingkungan di sekitar. Berpikir kritis dapat meningkatkan sisi kreatif dalam diri sendiri. 2.
Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, Cara Membentuk, dan ...
Secara tidak langsung, critical thinking memungkinkan kamu melakukan identifikasi, berargumen, dan menyelesaikan masalah sekaligus. Baca juga: Mengenal Design Thinking: 4 Elemen dan Cara Mengaplikasikan. Bedanya critical thinking dengan analytical thinking. Critical thinking dan analytical thinking adalah dua hal yang berbeda (sumber: pexels)
Apa Itu Critical Thinking dan Mengapa Penting bagi Orang Indonesia?
Menurut Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD), kemampuan critical thinking merupakan satu dari lima soft skills utama yang harus dimiliki individu pada 2030. Dengan alasan itu, maka berpikir kritis sangat penting bagi pelajar saat ini yang kelak menjadi pemimpin di Indonesia. Di Indonesia sendiri sebenarnya gerakan ...
What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?
According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [1]: Universal. Crucial for the economy. Essential for improving language and presentation skills. Very helpful in promoting creativity. Important for self-reflection.
Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking. Critical thinking is a widely accepted educational goal. Its definition is contested, but the competing definitions can be understood as differing conceptions of the same basic concept: careful thinking directed to a goal. Conceptions differ with respect to the scope of such thinking, the type of goal, the criteria and norms ...
PDF CRITICAL THINKING SKILL: KONSEP DAN INIDIKATOR PENILAIAN
critical thinking skill pada abad 21 ini, maka dibutuhkan kajian tentang apa itu critical thinking skill. Fokus kajian ini berupa: (1) Definisi critical thinking skill; (2) Aspek critical thinking skill (3) Peranan critical thinking skill; (4) Peluang dan tantangan dalam mengembangan critical thinking skill
Critical Thinking vs. Problem-Solving: What's the Difference?
Critical thinking. This is a mode of thinking, compared to problem-solving, which is a set of solution-oriented strategies. Since critical thinking strengthens your reasoning, it makes it easier to learn new skills, including problem-solving. Working on your critical thinking can also help you understand yourself better, including your value ...
Critical Thinking
Critical Theory refers to a way of doing philosophy that involves a moral critique of culture. A "critical" theory, in this sense, is a theory that attempts to disprove or discredit a widely held or influential idea or way of thinking in society. Thus, critical race theorists and critical gender theorists offer critiques of traditional ...
Critical thinking: Definition and Structure
There are diverse viewpoints or conflicting conceptualizations of critical thinking from the viewpoint of philosophy, psychology, sociology, and education (Danvers, 2015;Lai, 2011;Willingham, 2019).
(PDF) Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts
Critical thinking focuses on deciding what to believe or do (Enis, 2011). An organization that can attract, retain, and develop the best critical thinkers has a significant and measurable ...
Apa itu Critical Thinking?
Selain critical thinking, ada communication, collaboration, creativity. Dan ditambah dengan problem solving. Ke-4 keterampilan di atas adalah kemampuan yang ingin dituju dalam kurikulum 2013. Namun apa sih sesungguhnya critical thinking itu? Sebelum menyimpulkan apa itu critical thinking, coba amati hal-hal kecil di sekitar kita.
Critical Thinking dan Problem Solving untuk Milenial
Problem solving. Problem solving, atau kemampuan menyelesaikan masalah, merupakan kemampuan yang wajib dimiliki generasi milenial. Kemampuan ini berguna saat dihadapkan pada kondisi yang sulit sehingga mampu fokus pada solusi, bukan pada masalah yang dihadapi. Setiap masalah yang datang, memang sudah seharusnya masalah cepat diselesaikan.
Critical Thinking and Decision-Making
Definition. Simply put, critical thinking is the act of deliberately analyzing information so that you can make better judgements and decisions. It involves using things like logic, reasoning, and creativity, to draw conclusions and generally understand things better. This may sound like a pretty broad definition, and that's because critical ...
Problem definition and formulation.
Problem definition and formulation (PDF) represents the first of the four rational problem-solving skills. The overarching goal of training in PDF is to help a person to better understand the nature of the problem and to set realistic goals. Although the tasks involved in this aspect of the problem-solving process may be the most complex and challenging, they are also perhaps the most important.
Defining Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.
Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving
Critical thinking involves asking questions, defining a problem, examining evidence, analyzing assumptions and biases, avoiding emotional reasoning, avoiding oversimplification, considering other interpretations, and tolerating ambiguity. Dealing with ambiguity is also seen by Strohm & Baukus (1995) as an essential part of critical thinking ...
Critical Thinking Adalah: Cara Mengasah dan Contoh
Critical thinking disebut juga berpikir kritis. Proses berpikir sendiri dibentuk dengan melibatkan gagasan dan proses mental. Sementara itu, dalam critical thinking ini keduanya berkaitan untuk mencapai pemikiran yang jernih, rasional, dan mandiri. Padahal, proses berpikir seseorang pasti berbeda-beda, mulai dari yang dangkal, sedang, kritis bahkan terlalu kritis dan peka terhadap perubahan ...
Pengertian Critical Thinking dan Bedanya Dengan Analytical Thinking
Critical Thinking - Salah satu kemampuan penting yang harus dimiliki oleh setiap individu adalah critical thinking atau yang kerap disebut dengan sebuah proses berpikir kritis dalam setiap keadaan yang ada. Mungkin Grameds bertanya-tanya, apa pentingnya seseorang memiliki kemampuan berpikir kritis. Atau mungkin pertanyaan lain seperti apakah perlu menerapkan kemampuan berpikir ini dalam ...
Mengenal Konsep 4C dalam Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013
Dalam Konteks Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013, keterampilan abad ke-21 hanya diistilahkan dengan 4C (Communication, Collaboration, Critical Thinking and Problem Solving, dan Creativity and Innovation) dan merupakan kemampuan sesungguhnya yang ingin dituju dengan Kurikulum 2013. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut, berikut penjelasan mengenai 4C;

Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, dan Contoh Penerapannya

Apa itu Critical Thinking ?

Manfaat Critical Thinking

1. Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis dan Kreatif Meningkat

2. Kemampuan Problem Solving Meningkat

3. Membuat Keputusan dengan Tepat

4. Komunikasi yang Efektif Meningkat

Komponen Critical Thinking

Indikator Critical Thinking

1. Menyimpulkan ( Inference )

2. Klarifikasi Lebih Lanjut ( Advanced Clarification )

3. Dugaan dan Keterpaduan ( Supposition and Integration )

Cara Membentuk Kemampuan Critical Thinking

Contoh Critical Thinking

Artikel Terkait

Apa itu IT Support? Pengertian, Tugas, Skill, dan Gaji

Rekrutmen adalah: Pengertian, Tujuan, Proses, dan Contohnya

Account Officer: Definisi, Gaji, Tugas, Skill, & Kualifikasi

React Developer: Karir, Gaji, dan Perbedaan Full Stack vs Front-end

Data Engineer: Pengertian, Tugas, Skill, dan Tanggung Jawab

Seputar Business Analyst, 5 Tanggung Jawab, Skill, dan Jenjang Karir

Critical Thinking: Pengertian, Manfaat, Cara Membentuk, dan Contohnya

Apa itu critical thinking ?

Bedanya critical thinking dengan analytical thinking

Manfaat critical thinking

Cara membentuk critical thinking

1. Analisis 5W + 1H

2. Buka kesempatan untuk menerima pemikiran lain

3. Coba identifikasi argumen yang berbeda denganmu

4. Kenali kelebihan dan kekurangan tiap keputusan

5. Berikan pendapat dan fakta yang mendukung

Apakah Kamu Sedang Mencari Pekerjaan?

5 Contoh Biografi Diri Sendiri untuk Peluang dan Perkembangan Karier

10 Cara Menulis Artikel yang Baik dan Benar untuk Pemula

Tips Menyampaikan Kata-kata Perpisahan Kerja yang Berkesan beserta Contohnya

Apa Itu Critical Thinking dan Mengapa Penting bagi Orang Indonesia?

Definisi Critical Thinking

Mengapa Berpikir Kritis itu Penting bagi Pelajar Indonesia?

Artikel Terkait

Bibliography

Critical Thinking

2.1 Dewey’s Three Main Examples

2. Examples and Non-Examples

8. Critical Thinking Dispositions

12. Controversies

Support SEP

Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts

Belajar Tiada Henti

Apa itu Critical Thinking?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Critical Thinking dan Problem Solving untuk Milenial

Artikel Untuk Kamu

Tentang Kami

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making - What is Critical Thinking?

Critical Thinking and Decision-Making: What is Critical Thinking?

The process

Improving your critical thinking

Real-world applications

Defining Critical Thinking

UTC RAVE Alert

References and Resources

Teaching Strategies to Help Promote Critical Thinking

Other Reading

On the Internet

Walker Center for Teaching and Learning

Critical Thinking Adalah: Cara Mengasah dan Contoh

Apa itu Critical Thinking ?

Perbedaan Problem Solving dan Critical Thinking

Manfaat Critical Thinking

1. Menunjang penyesuaian diri

2. Meningkatkan kinerja tim

3. Merupakan aset yang tidak akan habis

4. Tidak mudah tertipu

5. Menjadi rekan kerja yang baik

6. Meningkatkan kreativitas

7. Meningkatkan kepercayaan diri

8. Memudahkan dalam menyelesaikan masalah

Tujuan Critical Thinking

1. Mempertahankan argumen

2. Mempermudah dalam memberikan motivasi dan tujuan hidup