Critical Thinking Explained
Introducing some key challenges and solutions in teaching critical thinking
This is the first essay in the Critical Thinking Explained series. The series will explain what critical thinking is (and is not) and how it relates to intelligence, common sense, expertise, content knowledge, creativity, problem-solving, decision-making and other key educational concerns.
It will also provide a variety of basic ideas, general strategies and targeted resources to help teach critical thinking regardless of content area or year level.
Where to begin?
The title of the series is a bit of a giveaway, I guess. Before we talk about critical thinking it makes sense to go to the core of the problem and define it.
This is not as simple a task as it might seem. There are lots of ways to think about it and many commonly cited definitions. Here are some:
1. Dewey
“The disciplined process of active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed knowledge.”
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think, D.C. Heath & Co.
Dewey brought critical thinking into clear focus as a modern educational goal.
2. Ennis
“Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do.”
Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14(1), 5–24.
Ennis’ definition remains one of the most concise and widely used in educational contexts, emphasising reasonableness, reflection, and decision-making about belief or action.
3. Facione
“We understand critical thinking to be 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 that judgment is based.”
Facione, P. A. (Ed.). (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (The Delphi Report). American Philosophical Association.
This definition emerged from the landmark Delphi study of 46 experts, and remains on of the most authoritative multidisciplinary consensus statements on what critical thinking is and does. It has a strong focus on skills.
4. Paul and Elder
“Critical thinking is the art of analysing and evaluating thinking with a view to improving it.”
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2002). Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life. Financial Times Prentice Hall.
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: https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766
Paul and Elder highlight metacognitive self-improvement, treating thinking as a skill that can be systematically monitored, evaluated, and refined.
5. Halpern
“Critical thinking refers to the use of cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed — the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions.”
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449–455.
Halpern’s cognitive-psychological framing emphasises transferable skills and goal-oriented reasoning, integrating motivation and metacognition.
6. Lipman
“Critical thinking is skillful, responsible thinking that facilitates good judgment because it relies upon criteria, is self-correcting, and is sensitive to context.”
Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking—What can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1), 38–43.
Lipman’s definition, grounded in philosophy for children (P4C), emphasises judgment, criteria, and context sensitivity, highlighting ethical and dialogical dimensions of reasoning.
A topic in definitional distress
All well and good! Each seems to have something meaningful to offer. But there are problems with these and many other definitions when taken collectively. They include:
Conflicting accounts as to what critical thinking is, from it being a process, an outcome, an ability, a skill set or a mode of thinking.
A lack of explanation about how to use the definitions to achieve the goal of developing critical thinkers.
Not disambiguating key terms such as critical thinking, intelligence and expertise.
A lack of precision in defining thinking skills or the type of thinking involved in producing good outcomes.
A lack of clarity in understanding of how the norms of good thinking are developed in individual and social contexts.
In a sense, the summing of definitions produces something so general that it is almost unactionable. As Matthew Lipman notes, “the list is endless, because it consists of nothing less than an inventory of the intellectual powers of humankind.”
I’m trying to keep these short and sharp, so my next post will provide a way of thinking about critical thinking that immediately speaks to its teachability and relationship to content knowledge: two themes that I will also unpack in future essays.
To get you thinking, I’ve included below (for paid subscribers) a critical thinking matrix that connects skills and values to produce a way of talking about thinking skills in context. It is one tool amongst many for this purpose. Enjoy!
