1: Teach familiar topics through unfamiliar lenses

2: Complicate and collapse traditional notions of ‘power’

3: Make room for heroes, anti-heroes and those in between

4: Underline the value of cultural history

• Mohamud, A. and Whitburn, R. (2014). ‘Unpacking the suitcase and finding history: Doing justice to the teaching of diverse histories in the classroom.’ Teaching History, 154: 40-6. 
• Royal Historical Society (2018). Race, ethnicity and equality report. London: Royal Historical Society. Available at: https://files.royalhistsoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/17205337/RHS_race_report_EMBARGO_0001_18Oct.pdf.

Further reading

• Counsell, C. (2021). ‘History’, in Cuthbert, A.S. and Standish, A., eds., What should schools teach? (London: UCL Press), pp. 154-173. 
• Dennis, N. (2021). ‘The stories we tell ourselves: History teaching, powerful knowledge and the importance of context’, in Chapman, A., Knowing history in schools: Powerful knowledge and the powers of knowledge (London: UCL Press), pp. 216-233. 
• Lockyer, B. and Tazzymant, T. (2016). ‘“Victims of history”: Challenging students’ perceptions of women in history.’ Teaching History, 165: 8-15. 

More from the NACE blog

• How can we identify and challenge more able learners in history?
• Top 3 ways your school library can support the teaching of history
• 3 ways to challenge more able students in secondary history

What is critical thinking?

Many definitions of critical thinking exist – far too many to list here! – but one key definition that is often used is:

“[the] purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which judgment is based” (1, p. 3).

Despite the different definitions, there is a consensus regarding the dimensions of critical thinking and these dimensions have implications for how critical thinking is understood and taught. Critical thinking includes skills and dispositions (1). The former refers to reasoning and logical thinking, e.g., analysis, evaluation, and interpretation, whereas the latter refers to the tendency to do something, e.g., being open-minded (2). This blog post primarily is referring to the development of critical thinking skills as opposed to dispositions.

Critical thinking can be subject-specific or general, and thus can either be embedded within a specific subject or it can be developed independently of subject knowledge – something that we will revisit later.

How are critical thinking skills developed?

Developing critical thinking is often regarded as the cornerstone of higher education, but the reality is that many educational institutions are failing to develop critical thinking consistently and reliably in their students, with only around 6% of university graduates considered proficient (3), (4), (5).

Thus, there is a disconnect between the value of critical thinking and the degree to which it is supported by effective instruction (6). So, what does effective instruction look like? Helpfully, cognitive psychology provides us with some of the answers:

1. Context is king: the importance of background knowledge

The important question at hand here is: are some types of critical thinking more difficult to develop than others? The short answer is yes – subject-specific critical thinking appears to be easier to develop than general critical thinking. Studies have shown that critical thinking interventions improve subject-specific as opposed to general critical thinking (7), (8). This is also what we have found in our own research (9).

Possible reasons for why this is the case include the fact that the length of time needed to develop general critical thinking is much greater. This is coupled with the idea that general critical thinking is simply not as malleable as subject-specific critical thinking (10). For balance, though, some studies have reported improvements in general critical thinking, indicating that under the right circumstances, general improvement is possible (6), (11). The key message here is that background knowledge is an important part of teaching critical thinking and the extent to which you aim to develop critical thinking beyond the scope of the course content should be assessed dependent on what is achievable in the given context.

2. Be explicit: approaches to critical thinking instruction

The importance of background knowledge also has implications for critical thinking instruction (12).  There are four main approaches to critical thinking instruction; general, infusion, immersion and mixed (13):

The general approach explicitly teaches critical thinking as a separate course outside of a specific subject. Content can be used to structure examples and activities but it is not related to subject-specific knowledge and tends to be about everyday events.

The infusion approach explicitly teaches both subject content and general critical thinking skills, where the critical thinking instruction is taught in the context of a specific subject.

Similarly, the immersion approach also teaches critical thinking within a specific subject, but it is taught implicitly as opposed to explicitly. This approach infers that critical thinking will be a consequence of interacting with and learning about the subject matter.

Lastly, the mixed approach is an amalgamation of the above three approaches where critical thinking is taught as a general subject alongside either the infusion or immersion approach in the context of a specific subject. 

In terms of which are the best instructional approaches to adopt, evidence from a meta-analysis of over 100 studies showed that explicit approaches led to the greatest increase in critical thinking compared to implicit approaches. Specifically, the mixed approach where critical thinking was taught explicitly as a separate strand and within a specific subject was the most effective, whereas the implicit immersion approach was the least effective. This research suggests that developing critical thinking skills separately and then applying them to subject content explicitly works best (14).

3. Be strategic: effective teaching strategies

The knowledge that critical thinking needs to be deliberately and explicitly built into courses is integral to developing critical thinking. However, without the more granular details of exactly what teaching strategies sit beneath this, it will only get us so far. A number of teaching strategies have been shown to be effective, including the following:  

Both answering and generating higher-order thinking questions have been shown to increase critical thinking (8) (14). For example, psychology students who were given higher-order thinking questions compared to lower-order thinking questions significantly improved their subject-specific critical thinking (8). Alison King’s work on higher-order questions provides some useful examples of question stems (15).

Ensuring that critical thinking is anchored in authentic instruction that allows students to engage with problems that make sense to them, and that enables further inquiry, is important (6). Some ways to facilitate authentic instruction include simulations and applied problem solving.

Closely related to higher-order questions and authentic instruction is dialogue – essentially discussions are needed to develop critical thinking. Teachers asking questions is particularly beneficial to the development of critical thinking, in part because teachers will often be asking questions that require higher-order thinking. A meta-analysis study showed that authentic instruction and dialogue were particularly effective for developing general critical thinking (6).

Engaging pupils in explicit self-reflection techniques promotes critical thinking. For example, asking students to judge their performance on a paper can increase their ability to understand where they need to improve and develop in the future (16). Other formalisations of this include reflection journals (17). In my current role, we also employ self-reflection activities to increase critical thinking.

So, to conclude, remember when developing critical thinking skills that context is king, always be explicit and always be strategic!

Find out more… On 29 April 2021 Dr Bellaera presented a live webinar for NACE members exploring the research on critical thinking and how to apply it in your school. Watch the recording here (login required). Plus: Dr Bellaera's research paper on critical thinking is available to read and download here until 4 August 2021.

References:

(17) Mannion, J., & Mercer, N. (2016). Learning to learn: Improving attainment, closing the gap at Key Stage 3. The Curriculum Journal, 27, 246-271.

Dr Chris Yapp, NACE Patron

This past month has been marked for me by the death of two major influencers on my thinking and life over 30 years. Lord Harry Renwick died from COVID-related complications and Sir Ken Robinson from cancer.

Harry was a past Chairman of the British Dyslexia Association, a lifelong passion, and an early supporter of the societal and economic good that computing could bring. He was generous to me with his time and opened many doors in parliament, but also outside. Importantly, he led me to the work of Thomas G West. I still have a signed copy of “In the Mind’s Eye” (first edition) on my shelf. I have been delighted to discover that there is a new edition now available.

Tom’s work in the USA on visual giftedness ought to be as influential and well-known as Howard Gardner’s books. His evidence on visual thinking and creativity in science and mathematics made sense of various anecdotes I had collected over the years but could not make coherent.

That is where the link with Sir Ken Robinson comes in. I did not know him well; we met five times over around 15 years, the last time being a decade ago. I would like to add my tribute to him and address a criticism of his thinking that has been raised in many of the otherwise warm obituaries and tributes to a life well-lived.

I followed Ken Robinson speaking at a conference around 1995. My advice to anyone who would listen was, “Do not accept an invitation to speak after Ken Robinson.” At that time the usual reaction was, “Who is he?” I don’t think there is anyone connected with education now – since his famous TED lecture "Do schools kill creativity?" – who would ask that. He was a brilliant communicator, of that there is no doubt, but I want to pay tribute to him outside the podium.

He was as engaging and fun away from the speaker platform as he was on it. He was an avid networker who loved to connect people who he thought would find each other stimulating company. His network of contacts was truly global. An educator I much admire, Richard Gerver, who was mentored by Sir Ken, has written a very personal tribute here. It is well worth a read.

1999 was the 40^th anniversary of a famous speech by C P Snow, “The Two Cultures”. I gave a talk at a conference on the “Renaissance of Learning”. After leaving the platform Ken came up to me. He wanted to talk about one slide. I had argued that there was a false dichotomy in education policy in the UK but also internationally, that the arts were creative, and engineering was a discipline. Drawing on C P Snow’s ideas I suggested that you could not be a great engineer if you were not creative or a good artist without discipline. I had given examples of “seeing” the mathematics as an aesthetic experience. Ken wanted the reference, which was to Tom West’s work. His advice to me was simple: “Keep saying it, one day they’ll listen.”

Over the years I have been contacted by people around the world on email or social media, where the opening line has been: “I met Sir Ken at a conference and he suggested I look you up. He said you’d been thinking about this for years.”

None of the exchanges that followed have ever been with timewasters. I think the last was around five years ago, five years after we last spoke. He used his global celebrity status to bring like minds together. He was far humbler and more cautious than the public speaker image may project.

The criticism I want to address is this: that he did not appreciate creativity in science and maths. In my opinion, for what it’s worth, he avoided the celebrity status trap of pontificating on things that he had little mastery of. I think he was right to do so.

Of course, he was a passionate about the arts, but he had a genuine interest in creativity in all its forms. The people he pointed in my direction were engaging with his ideas in physics, chemistry, mathematics and many more disciplines.

He will be much missed as an inspiration, but he has left a legacy of a life lived well.

If you are passionate about creativity in education, I can pay no finer tribute to Sir Ken than his own words to me: “Keep saying it, one day they’ll listen.”

About the author

NACE patron Dr Chris Yapp is an independent consultant specialising in innovation and future thinking. He has 30 years’ experience in the ICT industry, with a specialisation in the strategic impact of ICT on the public sector, creative industries, digital inclusion and social enterprises. With a longstanding interest in the future of education, he has written and lectured extensively on the challenges of personalised learning, lifelong learning, educational transformation and the knowledge economy.

Join Chris at this year’s NACE Leadership Conference (16-20 November) for a session exploring the use of learning technologies to extend and enrich learning.
View the conference programme.

Alongside her webinar for NACE members, author and teacher trainer Sue Cowley shares five ways to ensure all learners are stretched and challenged – it’s differentiation, but not as you might expect!

It is tempting to think of differentiation as being about preparing different materials for different students – the classic ‘differentiation by task’. However, this type of differentiation is the most time-consuming for teachers in terms of planning. It can also be hard to create stretch through this approach, because it is difficult to pitch tasks at exactly the right level.

In reality, rather than being about preparing different activities, differentiation is a subtle skill that is not easily spotted ‘in action’. For instance, it might include adaptations to the teacher’s use of language, or ‘in the moment’ changes to a lesson, based on the teacher’s knowledge of individual learners.

1. Identify and account for prior knowledge

The highest-attaining students often have a great deal of knowledge about a diverse range of subjects – typically those areas of learning that fascinate them. They are likely to be autodidacts – reading widely around a favoured subject at home to find out more. Sometimes they will teach themselves new skills without any direct teacher input – for instance using YouTube to learn a language that is not on offer at school. At times, their level of knowledge or skill might outpace yours.

A key frustration for high attainers is the feeling that they are being taught things in school that they already know. Find ways to assess and ascertain the prior knowledge of your class before you start a new topic, and incorporate this information into your teaching. One simple strategy is to ask the class to write down the things they already know about a topic, before you begin to study it, and any questions that they want answered during your studies. Use these questions as a simple way to provide extension opportunities in lessons.

Where a learner has extensive prior knowledge of a topic, ask if they would like to present some of the knowledge they have to the class – this can help build confidence and presentational skills. It can also be useful for high-attaining learners to explain something they understand easily to a child who doesn’t ‘get it’ so quickly. The act of having to rephrase or reconceptualise something in order to teach it requires the learner to build empathy, understand alternative perspectives and think laterally.

2. Build on interests to extend

Where a high-attaining learner has an interest in a subject, they typically want to explore it far more widely than you have time to do at school. Encourage your high attainers to read widely around a subject outside of lesson time by providing them with information about suitable materials. A lovely way to do this is to give them suitable adult-/higher-level texts to read (especially some of your own books on a subject from home).

3. Inch wide, mile deep

When thinking about how to make an aspect of a subject more challenging, it is helpful to think about curriculum as being made up of both surface-level material and at the same time ideas that require much deeper levels of understanding. A useful metaphor is a chasm that must be crossed: those learners who struggle need you to build a bridge to help them to get over it. However, other students will be able to climb all the way down into the chasm to see what is at the bottom, before climbing up the other side.

For each area of a subject, consider what you can add to create depth. This might typically be about digging into an area more deeply, going laterally with a concept, or asking students to use more complex terminology to describe abstract ideas.

4. Use questioning techniques to boost thinking

The effective use of questions is vital for stretching your highest-attaining learners. Studies have shown that teachers tend to use far more closed questions than open ones, even though open-ended questions lead to more challenge because they require higher-order thinking.

Socratic questioning is a very useful way to increase the level of difficulty of your questions, because it asks learners to dig down into the thinking behind questions and to provide evidence for their answers. You can find out more about this technique at www.criticalthinking.org.

Another useful approach to questioning is a technique commonly used in early years settings, and known as ‘sustained shared thinking’ (for more on this, see this report on the Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years Project). In this approach, the child’s thinking is developed through the use of a ‘serve and return’ conversation in which open-ended questions are asked to build understanding.

5. Consider learner roles

Taking on a fresh role or perspective can really help to challenge our thinking. This is particularly so where we are asked to argue in favour of a viewpoint that we do not ourselves hold. This encourages the learner to build empathy with different viewpoints and to consider how a topic looks from alternative perspectives. A simple way to do this is by asking students to argue the opposite position to that which they actually hold, during a class debate.

Sue Cowley is an author, presenter and teacher educator. Her book The Ultimate Guide to Differentiation is published by Bloomsbury.

To find out more about these techniques for creating stretch and challenge, watch Sue Cowley's webinar on this topic (member login required). 

Not yet a NACE member? Find out more, and join our mailing list for free updates and free sample resources.

1. Communication

2. Critical thinking

3 and 4. Coherence and Creativity in argumentation