active learning strategies to promote critical thinking

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

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

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

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

The new question-of-the-week is:

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

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

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

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

Current Events

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

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

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

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

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

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

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

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

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

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

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

An Issue of Equity

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

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

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

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

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

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

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

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

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

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

Designing experiences for critical thinking

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

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

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

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

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

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

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

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

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QUESTIONING

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

TALK TIME / CONTROL

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

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

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

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

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

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

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

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

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

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

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Instructional Strategies for Active Learning [Working Title]

Unveiling Critical Thinking: Instructional Strategies to Enhance Argumentation

Submitted: 28 January 2024 Reviewed: 20 March 2024 Published: 24 April 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.114878

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Instructional Strategies for Active Learning [Working Title]

Dr. Kira Carbonneau

Chapter metrics overview

8 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Argumentative writing serves as a stage where students showcase their critical thinking, a skill they already possess and have cultivated throughout their lives. However, it is argued that learners need instances within the classroom to activate this thinking, enriching it under the guidance of their teachers. It is the teacher who shapes and adapts the pedagogical environment, enabling students to respond naturally and spontaneously to meet class objectives. In the upcoming chapter, the implementation of a didactic sequence designed to enhance the argumentation skills of Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) students. This approach provided opportunities for students to, through reading and writing, interpret situations, analyze messages, evaluate options, infer conclusions, take positions, and explain them, actively monitoring their argumentation and writing process. This strategy embodies active learning in an environment facilitated by the teacher, where students forge their critical thinking.

• critical thinking
• didactic sequence
• argumentative writing
• active learning

Author Information

Diana lozano *.

• Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

A foreign language learner, considered a social agent, develops comprehension and expression skills that enable effective communication and assertive action in social interactions. The communicative tasks they fulfill are not solely related to language usage but are connected to goal-oriented actions that require critical thinking to respond, as they are associated with reflection and, above all, action in the face of social issues. This implies the need to adopt an alternative and humanistic attitude toward language education, as the critical dimension aligns with humanistic rather than technical approaches. These social acts lead the learner to make decisions that necessitate critical thinking and action.

Critical thinking comes into play in all language learner interactions due to the immediate information processing they are exposed to. Therefore, the descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) [ 1 ] envision a recognition of proficiency in the use of linguistic repertoire and knowledge appropriate to social situations. Learners enhance their language proficiency in an integrated manner, based on the development of their reactive and mediating capacity, as determined by foreign language curricula and teachers. The teacher guides students to apply their learning in real-life situations, ensuring that learning is activity-based. In the context of learning a foreign language in a classroom, the teacher facilitates the empowerment of students’ thinking and skills, preparing them to independently address situations beyond the classroom.

This implies that critical thinking should not be understood as something individuals can acquire through the practice of specific materials, nor is it something teachers provide to their students for use. The idea of capitalizing on the critical thinking learners already possess also implies that as it is put into practice to address social issues, this thinking will find alternatives for development and qualification. This chapter describes the scope of research conducted to obtain the Master’s degree in Applied Linguistics of Spanish as a Foreign Language at the Pontifical Javeriana University in Bogotá, Colombia. The objective was to observe and interpret how, through the implementation of a didactic sequence centered around the analysis of editorial cartoons, students of Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) create their own argumentative texts [ 2 ].

This didactic proposal, called ArguméntELE, illustrates how students actively engaged in their learning process to write an argumentative text in a foreign language, considering the teacher’s role in promoting activities that developed critical thinking skills in students through a didactic sequence. Students actively participated in constructing arguments, collaborating with peers, and applying language skills in practical, real-world contexts. Regarding the activities and exercises in the didactic sequence, it is interpreted that they constantly encourage the use of the different critical thinking skills described by Facione [ 3 ]. These skills are activated by designing and implementing activities that include the characteristics of each cognitive skill and emphasize a situation that allows its use. Therefore, it is expected that the activities in the didactic sequence will serve as supporting material for language teachers to include and adapt them in their classes to strengthen the student’s critical dimension as a social, intercultural, and autonomous actor.

2. Theoretical contextualization: critical thinking in communicative tasks

Understanding the context within which communication takes place requires the activation and use of critical thinking. In a social interaction, explicit aspects, such as language and its structure, and implicit aspects, such as the speakers’ intentions or hidden cultural traits, are reflected. Foreign language learners are expected to participate appropriately and effectively based on their performance within the framework of their proficiency level. According to Facione [ 3 ], critical thinking is vital for society. It is essential for individuals facing situations where they must act to contribute assertively to improvement or transformation within immediate social and intercultural contexts. As social actors, individuals are involved in economic, political, and cultural processes, and each action impacts society. Therefore, the ability to interpret, analyze, evaluate, infer, explain, and self-reflect results in reasoned actions as ways for a critical thinker to effectively intervene in each situation.

In a consensus on critical thinking [ 3 ], experts agreed that several cognitive skills share characteristics with the core skills of critical thinking, such as interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. Consequently, a learner proficient in these skills is considered an expert in critical thinking. It is crucial to foster critical thinking in teaching and learning processes through activities that include real situations (social, cultural, political, and educational) from the immersion context and its specific realities. This consideration arises first from the understanding that a student, when not a critical thinker, may be easily persuaded in their immediate context. Second, it ensures that SFL students need to be critical thinkers to function as social agents within a community, seeking improvement in any social or intercultural situation. As suggested by Pascale et al. [ 4 ] as a social agent, the learner must be able, according to their needs in the public, personal, professional, and/or educational sphere, to engage in transactions requiring immediate participation. This response implies that the learner must consider and interpret the entire situation, necessitating critical thinking skills such as interpretation, analysis, and inference to explain their ideas, evaluate, and reflect on results and their implications.

While these skills are innate, they need to be strengthened in a foreign language learning context. Thus, if a learner can successfully complete specific communicative tasks according to their proficiency level, they should also be able to demonstrate their cognitive abilities. This involves awareness of natural processing in their first language and reflection on how to express and understand information. Strengthening critical thinking is not only important in general education, as stated in Refs. [ 5 , 6 ], but also in teaching a foreign language. Through the voices of these authors, it is emphasized that students need to use critical thinking skills to evaluate not only simple and everyday situations critically but also to wisely address situations that arise in other cultures. Learning a foreign language distinguishes language as a resource that allows the development of critical thinking by serving as both a means of communication and an instrument for constructing thought. As a result, active learning serves as a foundational framework by integrating engaging communicative tasks, enhancing cognitive skills, and emphasizing critical thinking, thus enriching the learning experience in foreign language education.

The student is considered a critical thinker in the context in which they operate and in their own learning processes. Consequently, it is advisable for the SFL teacher to recognize the importance of conducting activities that promote critical thinking skills as a complement to their classes. Teachers could also use the activities proposed in this research as a model to activate, strengthen, and improve critical thinking for students to achieve a high level of argumentation.

In a guided learning context where teachers propose activities with a learner-centered approach, it is recognized that active learning enhances critical thinking through activities developed by learners. Bonwell and Eison [ 7 ] state that students’ involvement can be increased by using strategies such as leading discussions and questioning techniques skillfully to engage students in a personal exploration of the subject matter. Students can engage in short writing activities in class, share what they have written in small groups, and participate in presentations, debates, and role-playing activities.

Materials for Spanish as a second language courses and even other languages must challenge claims, myths, and prejudices embedded in everyday discourse to counter-argue, disarm, review, and analyze one’s own perspectives and conceptions [ 8 ]. For learners of SFL, the target language of the conducted research, this skill is crucial during communication. Language communication involves a discourse where information is constantly given and received, influenced by language recognition, speaker gestures, tone of voice, intention, implicit messages, among other communicative aspects. Thus, it is essential to employ critical thinking skills to recognize the strengths or weaknesses of certain ideas. It is not just about expressing ideas but also about persuading others and drawing their conclusions based on the information received. According to Centro Virtual Cervantes [ 9 ], argumentation refers to the reasoned expression of a point of view through a word, a statement, or a text. Fostering argumentation becomes relevant within the teaching and learning processes of SFL, as it seeks to influence the opinions and persuasion of recipients.

By using interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation skills within activities in the class, a significant improvement in the level of argumentation when writing an argumentative text can be achieved, thereby enhancing critical thinking. Similarly, when arguing about a situation or problem, the use of these skills is necessary to ensure that the presented premises are strong, relevant, and well-founded. If an instructor’s goals include not only imparting information but also developing cognitive skills and changing attitudes, alternative teaching strategies should be interwoven with the lecture method during classroom presentations [ 7 ]. This recognizes the need to activate deeper cognitive skills for understanding and analyzing information to interact or act in response to it. From a linguistic perspective, pragmatics reveals the enrichment of language comprehension beyond literal expressions, facilitating the understanding of implicit meanings and activating deep cognitive skills by considering context, inferring implicit meanings, and understanding cultural and social nuances of language. Teachers can incorporate these aspects into their class activities. With active learning, for a successful discussion to take place, instructors must set specific objectives for the class period, structure questions appropriate for the material under consideration, and demonstrate techniques to extend students while maintaining a supportive environment [ 7 ].

Active learning is guided by specific objectives established according to cognitive skills, as Kosslyn [ 10 ] estimates that it is not just about learning by doing, but activities need to be designed with a specific objective and keep students engaged. Kosslyn [ 10 ] also asserts that the key is to design activities appropriate to a set of knowledge and skills that students are aware of to achieve learning outcomes. This notion reinforces the activities proposed in the didactic sequence of this research, where each task aims to activate a critical thinking skill to develop communicative tasks.

2.1 Pragmatics and communicative competence

Pragmatics is defined as the discipline that studies language use, considering the relationship between the statement, the interlocutors, and the context in which the communication process unfolds. Therefore, its level of analysis focuses on how speakers interpret and produce messages in specific contexts [ 11 ]. For this reason, the research considered that the interpretation of editorial cartoons, as material in the classroom, should be based on the critical reading of extralinguistic elements, such as the author’s communicative intention or the social and cultural context it represents.

From the dimensions of written comprehension and expression, it is relevant to consider aspects of foreign language learning and teaching, such as the competencies that learners must develop. In a general framework, communicative competence is related, defined by Instituto Cervantes [ 11 ] as the ability of a person to behave effectively and appropriately in a specific speech community. This competence involves complying with a series of rules from a linguistic level, considering grammar, vocabulary, and semantics, etc., and from the level of language use, considering the sociocultural contexts where the communicative process unfolds. In other words, communicative competence is the ability to express linguistically correct messages without creating misunderstandings in specific intercultural contexts.

From communicative competence, several components emerge, such as linguistic, sociolinguistic, and pragmatic competences. According to Instituto Cervantes [ 1 ], linguistic competence refers to the formal knowledge of the language as a system and involves syntactic, lexical, and phonological skills independent of sociocultural contexts. Sociolinguistic competence involves sociocultural values or social conventions related to language use (courtesy norms, etc.). Finally, pragmatic competence refers to the speaker’s ability to make communicative use of language, considering not only the relationships between linguistic signs but also those between the communication context and the interlocutors.

From all the above, it can be suggested that effective understanding and analysis of hidden realities implied in editorial cartoons, for example, require the learner to develop the ability to identify these described extralinguistic elements. In many cases, these elements do not reflect the learner’s sociocultural context of origin. Therefore, with the design of the didactic sequence, activities were planned for the learner to have opportunities in the classroom to develop pragmatic competence together with linguistic and sociolinguistic competencies. In this way, their level of argumentation could improve, as they were able to generate linguistically correct messages, which are relevant and well-justified arguments avoiding possible misunderstandings.

In the chosen population of the conducted research and based on the authors’ teaching experience primarily, it was found that in SFL courses in a school in Bogotá, Colombia, students demonstrated a low level of argumentation for their proficiency level, according to the descriptors of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [ 1 ]. This issue was evident with The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test [ 12 ], which assesses critical thinking skills in a written argumentative text, although critical thinking in this test is reduced to an instrumental dimension, as it demands predetermined argumentative writing skills proposed by the CEFR descriptors [ 1 ].

This type of research provides fundamental theoretical foundations to enrich the practices of the researching teachers in the school under study and, in turn, benefit the learning processes of SFL students. Critical thinking skills must be put into practice in an SFL class because they are present in all students. However, the aim is for both the teacher and the student to be aware of their mental processes to increase their level of argumentation. This way, aspects that need improvement during class activities can be discovered to address the identified phenomenon. It is not about recognizing that the pedagogical practices applied are wrong but rather analyzing different ways and strategies to encourage the use of critical thinking skills in students.

3. Proposal and research methodology

This proposal and the research results were analyzed from a qualitative approach with an observation of students’ participation in the creation of their own texts within the environment created in the didactic sequence around cartoons, which was carried out during the application of the didactic material. For the implementation of the didactic sequence, there was an evaluation by a materials expert to confirm the methodology, and finally, an evaluation of the argumentative text they wrote to assess the use of arguments. This analysis allowed recognizing that students’ argumentation about controversial topics, such as the work environment exposed through cartoons, is mediated by their practice, and writing process, as revealed during the development of the didactic sequence. This sequence creates an active learning environment and is recognized as an engaging environment, which according to Narváez Pérez [ 13 ], is one where critical thinking is promoted through learning experiences that include exercises to ask and answer questions, synthesize, evaluate, compare, reflect, contextualize, make inferences, summarize, and solve problems. As advocated by the outlined didactic sequence.

3.1 Teaching strategy to promote argumentation

To enhance the argumentative skills of Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) students from a methodological and didactic perspective, a series of activities must be planned within a didactic sequence. The initial step involves the planning of activities, which stems from an analysis of the needs of the participating population. According to Woodward [ 14 ], class and course planning requires educators to think about their learners, content, materials, and activities, reflecting constantly on how to provide opportunities for students to enhance their learning. In other words, effective planning requires teachers to be aware of how to create a good class that aims to achieve the proposed cognitive goals. The teacher creates an active learning environment, which, according to Kosslyn [ 10 ], “improves how well students understand material, remember it, and know how to apply it across a wide range of situations.” Furthermore, it enhances the learning environment where the learner is the center, as Narváez Pérez [ 13 ] states, “creative activities are developed, points of view are explored, conclusions are drawn, deductive reasoning is practiced, hypotheses are questioned and formulated, analysis is carried out, comparisons are performed, new ideas are proposed, analysis is performed, and reflection is carried out.” Student-centered learning in the foreign language learning context enhances critical thinking, where the teacher plays the role of a mediator and facilitator of learning through applied strategies and resource utilization.

Regardless, it can be affirmed that for class planning to be effective, activities must be related to both learning objectives and student interests. These activities can be logically designed within a sequence. The Dictionary of Key Terms in SFL defines didactic sequence as a series of interconnected activities that aim to teach specific linguistic content within specific learning objectives. A set of activities may constitute a task, a complete lesson, or part of it. Depending on the type of activities, their characteristics, and their functions, the phases within the didactic sequence can be diversified. Also, the didactic sequence can incorporate principles of activity-based learning to ensure that these activities are not only interconnected but also designed to actively engage students, fostering a more dynamic and participatory learning experience through active learning.

Regarding these phases, Harmer [ 15 ] asserts that students need exposure, motivation, and opportunities to use language appropriately. Similarly, he acknowledges that students may react differently to stimuli, suggesting that most teaching sequences should integrate a series of characteristics or elements (hereinafter referred to as phases) that can last for minutes, hours, lessons, etc. In this regard, Harmer [ 15 ] proposes a series of phases that can ensure successful language learning. These phases include Motivation, Practice (controlled or free), and Interactive Explanation.

The didactic sequence of the research followed a communicative approach with a task-based methodology that presents a final task to set students in an active learning lesson where they are involved in higher-order thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation) [ 7 ], which involves writing an argumentative text about the work environment, as this is the central theme of the designed material. It is considered that certain characteristics of this type of text and the exercises proposed as facilitating tasks work in favor of metacognition when writing. For this reason, the didactic sequence is named ArguméntELE, as it is essential to promote good argumentation. Each of the activities proposed in this material responds to the theoretical contributions considered in the research, the needs of the students and their context, and the linguistic and functional contents of the PCIC (Plan Curricular del Instituto Cervantes) [ 11 ].

Furthermore, exercises that activate critical thinking skills relevant to argumentation processes must be proposed, and students are constantly asked for their opinions. With the completion of this research, the intention is to encourage teachers to activate the described critical thinking skills to increase their students’ level of argumentation. During the sequence, students are asked to express their opinions and justify them; but in the end, a comprehensive opinion is expected, considering aspects such as interpreting a problem in a situation, analyzing the factors involved in the situation, evaluating different options or points of view, hypothesizing about the inferred possibilities, explaining whether they agree or disagree, and also asking them to review their writing before submitting the final version.

Likewise, it is expected that students emphasize functional aspects for argumentation, as they are considered to have a great linguistic knowledge of their proficiency level, allowing them to understand instructions, statements, and express themselves to complete activities. According to the PCIC [ 11 ], students as social actors at this level have sufficient linguistic ability to present the details of a problem, make claims, and resolve conflicting situations by resorting to their ability to argue and persuasive language.

Thus, a total of 18 facilitating tasks are presented, allowing students to recognize various factors to enhance their level of argumentation, and they are tailored to each of the phases. Additionally, they are provided based on the four language skills for language learning (reading and listening comprehension, oral and written production). The didactic sequence comprises the following contents reflecting active learning:

Communicative Resources: Engage in problem interpretation, analyze factors, evaluate various options, propose hypotheses with inferred consequences, express agreement, or disagreement, and monitor the argumentation process. Active learning is exemplified as students participate actively in higher-order thinking processes like analysis, evaluation, and synthesis during problem-solving and argumentation.

Linguistic Resources: In accordance with PCIC [ 11 ], encompass expressions for opinions, assessments, agreement, disagreement, discourse organization, possibilities, and argumentation at the students’ language level. Active learning is apparent as students actively express opinions, assess information, and organize discourse, promoting language acquisition through practical application and interaction.

Lexical Resources: Utilize vocabulary for discussing work activities, unemployment, job search, and worker characteristics. Active learning is showcased through students’ exploration of pertinent vocabulary in real-world contexts, enhancing comprehension and retention through active engagement in discussions and exercises.

This sequence is characterized by starting with motivational activities related to the topic to be addressed within the proposed learning objectives. As explained earlier, these activities should be aligned with the learner’s interests and preferences to encourage their participation in the rest of the phases and activities. For the material designed to enhance the argumentation level of students, the exercises in the motivation phase provided an initial approach to reading and interpreting Quino’s cartoons. Then, with the free practice phase, the teacher could identify the students’ weaknesses to address them in the next phase. The free practice activities include exercises where students must give their initial perception of what they can interpret and analyze from the cartoons used. Regarding this phase, the designed material will integrate exercises of both oral and written productions without any restrictions regarding the interpretation of opinion cartoons. From their production, the aspects that need to be addressed in the Interactive Explanation phase can be defined.

Now, the material guiding the learning environment of the research is divided into the different moments of the boomerang didactic sequence proposed by Harmer [ 15 ], which was designed listing the following phases:

¡Involúcrate! (Get involved): In this phase, a motivation activity is presented that allows an analysis of the context of the situation proposed in the exercises. It involves sensitizing the student to approach the central themes of the material, which consist of different situations in the work environment.

The first activity involves reading a cartoon by Quino. As seen in Figure 1 , the sign behind the characters says “El valor del trabajo” in Spanish, which means the value of work, and the questions: what do you see in this picture, what do you get when you do a job? Students must justify their answers. To do this, first, the student must read, recognizing each aspect of the image, such as the location of the characters, the possible relationship between them; second, a reading of the text accompanying the cartoon, which is a statement by one of the characters. It is expected that the student begins to relate to the topic of the work environment and the aspects found in a cartoon, such as the relationship between characters, the characteristics that describe that relationship, the theme, the author’s implicit message, the hidden reality reflected, and that the student identifies with the situation or can identify if that reality is present in their country or context.

Cartoon to contextualize in the motivation activity.

¡Actívate! (Activate Yourself): In this phase, the student is allowed to engage in free practice to demonstrate their knowledge and seek, from their linguistic repertoire, to respond to the proposed language situation. Students are asked to take on the role of the person in charge of selecting a candidate for a job. This is illustrated in Figure 2 , where the material replicates the webpage of a job portal to immerse the student in this real-life situation.

Image to provide a role for the students in the practice activity.

The free practice phase aims for the student to identify how to argue by exploring and exploiting their prior knowledge. In the first step, students must identify aspects related to a job offer within an announcement based on candidate requirements. Then, with this information and two cover letters, they will decide which candidate is more suitable for the position and express it through an email justifying their opinion. In each activity of this phase, the student is free to respond from their linguistic repertoire, and aspects to be worked on in the next phase will be identified from their writing.

¡Aprende más! (Learn More): This is the central section of grammar presented with an interactive explanation. Discourse organizers (additive, consecutive, justificatory, information structuring, and counter-argumentative connectors) are exposed along with expressions useful when giving opinions, assessing, arguing, or counter-arguing an opinion. Figure 3 demonstrates how, in the material, the characters’ images are displayed, and linguistic resources that students can use to express themselves are highlighted in bold.

Activity with linguistic resources as a reference in the interactive explanation.

With all the contextualization from the previous exercises, students are presented with the phase that allows them to focus on useful strategies to increase their level of argumentation, linguistic resources, and the specific activation of each of the critical thinking skills presented in the objectives. For this reason, the phase consists of a topic divided into six situations and exercises, one to emphasize the use of each skill. Also, each includes a red box explicitly describing each linguistic resource with examples.

The first point activates the interpretation skill. In this, the student must comprehend a text about the relationship between money and happiness in a specific context. Then, the student must identify the main idea of this article and each of its paragraphs to choose the appropriate discourse connector according to its function until completing it.

The second point encourages the use of analysis skills. This is developed by asking the student to identify the relationships between two important factors within a specific work environment: depression and the type of work. This information is presented in a graph showing that most workers with unpaid jobs show more symptoms of depression. Then, students must describe if this situation also occurs in their home countries.

The third point stimulates the use of the evaluation skill, as when making assessments about the opinions of the interlocutors, in this case, the characters of the Mafalda series, students must express opinions considering different options or points of view. The exercise aims for students to recognize and use the linguistic elements that allow them to give opinions and make evaluations, which are presented in a table with their respective examples.

Now, with the fourth point, the use of the inference skill is activated by establishing possible consequences of an action in any situation and its implications. Through linguistic resources, such as ways to express possibilities, students can infer and express consequences or implications of hiring employees with depressive tendencies or symptoms.

With the fifth point, the use of the explanation skill is encouraged, where the student must have recognized the other skills to indicate whether they agree or disagree with some opinions presented through audios about one of the Mafalda cartoons. Similarly, some expressions are presented in a box, which students can use to respond to this activity.

Finally, in the last point of this phase, the self-regulation skill is activated by inviting the student to perform a conscious self-evaluation, to remember the linguistic resources they have learned throughout the development of the material and classify them according to their communicative function. These resources will be very useful to achieve the communicative objective proposed for the didactic sequence. During the development of the didactic sequence, students should be informed that these points present strategies that should be considered to strengthen an argument.

¡Practica! (Practice): With controlled practice exercises, students can follow rules and structures that allow them to approach the correct use of language to fulfill the proposed learning objectives. In Figure 4 , the character descriptions provide insight into their worldview, and students are required to complete the texts with expressions to articulate a point of view. However, critical thinking is engaged by intentionally using these messages with implicit cultural information, as the cartoon’s author critiques the social classes of Latin America, with each character embodying a particular perspective.

Practice activity to analyze the characters.

This phase is the controlled practice phase, which seeks for students to consider aspects of different cartoons, such as the personalities of the characters that also represent many of the thoughts of Latin Americans, and the message that the author conveys through them by using linguistic resources to give opinions that they recognized in the previous phase.

¡Escribe! (Write): In this phase, students are presented with exercises for free practice. Through this practice, students engage in written production exercises to integrate the knowledge acquired through the previous phases. In the final phase of free practice, the ultimate task is introduced, in which students are required to express their opinions on one of the themes covering the work environment in their country. For instance, salary, unemployment, job search, characteristics of a worker, the relationship between money and happiness, and paid and unpaid work. In this task, they must incorporate the aspects they learned in the “Learn More!” phase and consider the argumentation factors addressed in each point of the sequence.

4. Reflections

4.1 reflections on the natural and spontaneous use of critical thinking within a pedagogical environment mediated using cartoons.

Based on the observation of the implementation of the designed material, it was considered that the cartoons by Joaquín Salvador Lavado (Quino) encouraged students to use critical thinking skills such as analysis, interpretation, and inference when reading them. This was analyzed because many of the cartoons used contain implicit criticisms of the Latin American reality related to the work environment. Students recognized that these situations were not only specific to Latin America but also present in their home countries. Each participating student, from the first exercise, indicated that some of the situations presented in the exercises and depicted in the cartoons also occur in their countries, depending on their profession and working conditions.

This allows us to confirm that, as mentioned earlier, cartoons include implicit conventions that allow the creator to express a denial using symbols, juxtaposing incongruent images or images and incongruent words, or blatantly violating or reversing visual conventions [ 16 ]. The understanding of this implicit information is achieved through the stimulation of critical thinking skills. This is the case with the first exercise of the ArguméntELE didactic sequence, in which the teacher presented the initial exercise as a discussion activity between two students who had to discuss the meaning of that cartoon ( Figure 1 ). To understand this cartoon, students had to analyze and infer the meaning of both the graphic and linguistic elements, so the observer interprets that this cartoon served to encourage the use of analytical, interpretive, and inferential skills, leading students to describe and express an opinion and evaluation about it. This information confirms what Vásquez [ 17 ] states that learning can be developed involving thinking skills, seeking for the student to access the reality shown in the cartoon through the identification of the context, the characters that compose it, etc., culminating in an interpretation of the facts or ideas expressed by its author (p. 2). In this way, the student recognized the reality represented by the cartoon because, even though it may be different in their context, they interpreted and presented it from their experience throughout the sequence.

During the observation, it was noted that the cartoons invited them to consider their own context and make comparisons about the reality they presented. This leads to the affirmation that the use of cartoons was favorable for students to understand the main ideas of the author and to understand the complex, concrete, and abstract themes implicit in his works. When discussing and expressing an opinion about a cartoon, the activation of the skills of evaluation and explanation was observed again. This could be observed again since Quino’s cartoons allow students to recognize some of the realities in their own context by identifying what each of his works and characters represents. To understand the cartoons used in the didactic sequence, students used interpretation skills because, with this, meaning could be found in the characters’ comments. After this, they were able to activate the evaluation and explanation skills because, after assessing and considering what each character in the cartoon expressed, they could give an opinion with reasoned examples. As the teacher placed more emphasis on the arguments and presented aspects to consider for doing so, students included them in their oral and written discourse.

Throughout the development of the didactic sequence, it was evident that students considered and used the linguistic and non-linguistic inputs indicated by both the material and the teacher to improve their arguments in each response. This demonstrated the activation of self-regulation skills because students were aware of their own learning process and monitored how they interpreted each cartoon to express opinions about the situations the author wants to reflect. They also showed that these aspects were considered when rereading the points in the “Learn More!” phase when they were writing their final text.

However, it is important to clarify that the teacher should guide the reading of some of the cartoons used because it is not certain that the student can recognize all their graphic and linguistic elements with a first attempt. The teacher’s role is crucial in facilitating active learning, ensuring students navigate the complexities of visual and linguistic nuances within the cartoons for a more comprehensive understanding.

4.2 Reflections on the design of ArguméntELE from a methodological perspective

This research aimed to analyze and reflect on how, through the implementation of a didactic sequence based on the use of opinion cartoons, the argumentative writing of Spanish as a Foreign Language (SFL) students was strengthened. It is relevant to recognize how the activities developed allow students to argue and promote their learning by activating critical thinking skills. Simultaneously, an evaluation was conducted on how the design and presentation of each topic played a significant role in student motivation and the ease of performing activities. The reflections presented in this section are based on the observation of the material implementation.

In the design of the didactic sequence, the characteristics, and phases of the Boomerang didactic sequence [ 15 ], the students’ level, activities to encourage critical thinking skills, and linguistic elements related to expressing opinions, evaluating, expressing agreement and disagreement, suggesting possibilities, organizing a discourse, and arguing, according to the PCIC [ 11 ], were considered. Methodologically, the design of communicative and facilitating tasks was considered to reach the final task following the characteristics of the task-based approach. These tasks aimed to stimulate the use of critical thinking skills (interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation) using Quino’s cartoons as a motive for reading.

The Boomerang didactic sequence proposed by Harmer [ 15 ] integrates activities that activate the mentioned critical thinking skills and constantly invite students to express opinions and argue. This sequence is suitable for advanced levels and addresses the students’ needs. In each phase of the sequence, activities related to the students’ topic of interest and the use of Quino’s cartoons were integrated to reinforce the students’ level of argumentation through the writing of argumentative texts and the activation of the mentioned skills.

Through the observation of the material implementation, it was concluded that the exercises were relevant to each stage of the Boomerang didactic sequence. Although students indicated that it was extensive, they could recognize that there are many aspects to consider when arguing. Initially, the exercises in the motivation phase (¡Involúcrate!) succeeded in involving and motivating students with the sequence’s theme and the reading of cartoons. This activity opened a discussion within the class about the work reality of the participating students’ places of origin, as each one shared their experiences regarding their jobs. It also helped generate a discussion about how to read a cartoon and interpret the gestures of characters and other graphic elements present.

When students presented an example of the work situation in their places of origin, they indicated what their jobs were like and the forms of remuneration or subsidies they received. This demonstrates their ability to analyze situations that demand an immediate response as social actors. They also expressed that it was interesting to recognize connections between cultures because they recognized who Quino was but were not aware of his impact on the Hispanic world. Regarding the description of the work situation in their home countries, this provided an opportunity to break stereotypes.

Regarding the first free practice (¡Actívate!), it served to identify the linguistic aspects to be addressed in the Interactive Explanation phase. The ¡Actívate! section contains reading exercises that encourage students to deduce, evaluate, and compare information to reach a justified conclusion to be reported in writing. In the production of the final written texts, it is noticeable that students attempted to meet the criteria of the instruction in their established order; they expressed this while completing the final task. Therefore, it is considered that to carry out a more effective argumentation exercise, students should have more time to do it. With these actions, students unconsciously put into practice critical thinking skills useful for further developing their level of argumentation.

Although the use of critical thinking skills has been encouraged in previous phases, in the ¡Learn more! phase, six exercises are presented that emphasize the six specific critical thinking skills aimed at activating the didactic sequence while linguistic aspects for each skill are considered. Facione [ 3 ] indicates that there are activities that demonstrate each thinking skill. For example, the interpretation skill is evident from categorization; analysis from the examination of ideas; evaluation when assessing the quality of arguments; inference by making conjectures about alternatives; explanation through justification; and self-regulation through self-examination. These activities were presented in the didactic sequence, and it was observed that participating students were ready to develop them using these skills and the linguistic contents integrated into the other phases of the sequence.

On the other hand, in the ¡Practice! phase, controlled practice exercises are presented in which students must follow established patterns and then express themselves freely in the second free practice (¡Escribe!), which is the final task. During the controlled practice phase, students indicated that they knew people with traits like Mafalda’s characters. However, in the final task, students could not apply everything they had learned through the didactic sequence. This can be attributed to time, which probably was not sufficient to write the text. Therefore, the development of the didactic sequence should have been done in several class sessions, about three or four, to provide students with the opportunities and time needed to carry out the activities effectively. In their final writings, they used some discourse markers to organize their ideas (To begin with, however, also, etc.), expressions to give opinions and assess (For me, I think, it seems to me, etc.), but expressions to indicate possibilities or express agreement or disagreement were not recognized.

5. Conclusion

When designing material for a class, the logical sequence of learning is considered to organize activities. This sequence should consider, in the case of foreign languages, the students’ performance level, their motivations, and their experience or mastery of the topic to be addressed. Connecting students with the learning objectives of the class would lead them to active learning. According to Bonwell and Eison [ 7 ], if active learning is to be promoted, students must be engaged; they should be able to develop their skills, think critically, and explore their own attitudes. Therefore, it is crucial for the teacher to carefully select resources or activities to fulfill their objectives with active learning.

The ArguméntELE didactic sequence highlights active learning as a fundamental framework that propels language education beyond traditional boundaries. Throughout the sequence, active learning is not simply a pedagogical concept but a lived experience for students. Immersion in Quino’s cartoons, along with critical thinking exercises, actively engages students in interpreting, analyzing, and expressing opinions on real-world scenarios, fostering a deeper understanding of language in context. Active learning, as manifested in the sequence, goes beyond mere participation; it becomes a catalyst for cognitive processes such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The motivation phase, involving discussions sparked by cartoons, actively involves students in relating personal experiences, establishing connections, and setting the stage for the journey ahead. The subsequent phases—free practice, interactive explanation, and controlled practice—mirror active learning principles by encouraging students to actively apply linguistic elements and critical thinking skills in progressively challenging and personally relevant tasks.

Furthermore, the ArguméntELE sequence embodies activity-based learning by structuring a series of purposeful activities within a didactic sequence, forming a cohesive and dynamic educational framework. The interconnected activities strategically guide students through a learning trajectory, ensuring that each task contributes to a holistic language learning experience. In this approach, students actively shape their learning path, enhancing their engagement and sense of ownership in the educational process.

Additionally, the ArguméntELE sequence reflects the principles of active learning by prioritizing student involvement in higher-order thinking and exploration of their attitudes and values. The practice and writing phases actively encourage students to express opinions, evaluate, and engage in argumentation, aligning with active learning’s emphasis on fostering skills beyond mechanical memorization. In this way, active learning in the ArguméntELE sequence is not just a methodology—it is a transformative force that empowers students to be active participants, critical thinkers, and effective communicators. The sequence serves as a testament to the potential of active learning as a robust framework, shaping a language learning experience that transcends traditional paradigms and prepares students for the dynamic challenges of a globalized world.

• 1. Consejo de Europa. Marco común europeo de referencia para las lenguas: aprendizaje, enseñanza, evaluación [Internet]. France: Consejo de Europa; 2001. Available from: https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ELE/marco/cvc_mer.pdf
• 2. Lozano D, Medina J. El fortalecimiento de habilidades de pensamiento crítico en la escritura de textos argumentativos de estudiantes de ELE nivel B2. Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; 2019
• 3. Facione PA. Pensamiento crítico, ¿qué es y por qué es importante? Insight Assessment. 2007; 1 :1-22
• 4. Pascale E, Ramos A, Vallejo S. El estudiante como agente social, hablante intercultural y aprendiente autónomo: Elaboración de materiales para B1/B2 del Plan Curricular del Instituto Cervantes. V Encuentro Brasileño de Profesores de Español. Belo Horizonte: Marco ELE; 2009; 9 (13)
• 5. Collazos S. ¿Las prácticas de evaluación utilizadas por los docentes en los procesos formativos contribuyen al desarrollo del pensamiento crítico de los estudiantes del grado sexto del colegio Nuestra Señora de Fátima de Popayán? Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; 2012
• 6. Mantilla L. Propuesta pedagógica para hacer la clase de lengua castellana un espacio generador de pensamiento crítico. Bucaramanga: Universidad Industrial de Santander; 2009
• 7. Bonwell CC, Eison JA. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports; 1991. Disponible en: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf
• 8. Balestras A, Jiménez L. Pensamiento crítico, conciencia cultural y tecnología: actividades para cursos de español como L2. Comunicación. 2017; 26 :49-62. Available from: https://docplayer.es/95397194-Pensamiento-critico-conciencia-cultural-y-tecnologia-actividades-para-cursos-de-espanol-como-l2.htm
• 9. Centro Virtual Cervantes. CVC. Diccionario de términos clave de ELE. Índice [Internet]. 1997-2018. Available from: https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ELE/diccio_ELE/indice.htm [Accessed: August 19, 2018]
• 10. Kosslyn SM. Active Learning Online: Five Principles That Make Online Courses Come Alive. Alinea Learning; 2021. Disponible en: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=nlebk&AN=3242373&lang=es&site=eds-live&scope=site
• 11. Instituto Cervantes. Plan Curricular del Instituto Cervantes. Objetivos generales. [Internet]. 1997-2018. Available from: https://cvc.cervantes.es/ensenanza/biblioteca_ELE/plan_curricular/niveles/01_objetivos_introduccion.htm [Accessed: May 26, 2018]
• 12. Ennis RH, Weir E. The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test. California: Midwest Publications; 1985
• 13. Narváez PE. Critical thinking skills in elementary school learners and the task-based language teaching approach: A systematic literature review. Revista Educación. 2023; 47 (1):571-587
• 14. Woodward T. Planificación de clases y cursos. Madrid, Spain: Cambridge University Press; 2001
• 15. Harmer J. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman; 2007
• 16. Groarke L. Logic, Art and Argument. Informal Logic [Internet]. 1996. Available from: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=philosophypub
• 17. Vásquez J. Las caricaturas como recurso para el desarrollo de aprendizajes (habilidades del pensamiento) en el curso de historia en alumnos de 4to de secundaria en una institución educativa de Lima. Lima: Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia; 2017

© 2024 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Enhancing critical thinking through active learning

Yoko Kusumoto is an assistant professor in the College of Global Communication at J. F. Oberlin University in Tokyo, Japan. Her research interests include EMI and CLIL, language program development and evaluation, and teacher education. She is currently working on a project involving the understanding of notetaking in EAP for students in Sweden and Japan.

Today the Framework for 21st Century Learning developed by the Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) is widely recognized and has been used in the U.S., Canada and New Zealand. P21 defines and illustrates the skills and knowledge students need and states that critical thinking is fundamental for twenty-first century success and essential for success in an academic context. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also values the importance of cultivating critical thinking. However, critical thinking is not a part of the EFL curriculum in Japan, and lessons are not focused on the development of meta-cognitive strategies. How do we help students learn foreign languages and twenty-first Century Skills at the same time? Active learning and content and language integrated learning (CLIL) offer such a learning environment where learners enhance their cognitive skills and gain knowledge while they are learning content and language. This paper reports on a study that explores how active learning with CLIL instruction helps Japanese EFL learners to develop critical thinking skills. In the author’s student-centered instruction based class, critical thinking was stimulated with questions based on the revised Bloom’s taxonomy to develop lower and higher order thinking skills while various scaffolding activities were provided. Pretest-posttest results from the Critical Thinking Disposition Scale (CTDS) and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (CCTT) Level Z were compared to determine to what extent, if any, EFL learners developed critical thinking disposition and skills through active learning in CLIL classes. The results of the CTDS and CCTT suggest that active learning has value for increasing critical thinking.

About the author

American Philosophical Association. 1990. Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction, recommendations prepared for the committee on pre-college philosophy . Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press. ERIC Doc. No. ED 315-423. Search in Google Scholar

Anderson, Lorin W. & David Krathwohl. 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives . New York, NY: Longman. Search in Google Scholar

Bonwell, Charles C. & James A. Eison. 1991. Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. Retrieved from: files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED336049.pdf Search in Google Scholar

Browne, Laurie, Melissa Hough & Keri Schwab. 2009. Scaffolding: A promising approach to fostering critical thinking. Schole 24. 114–119. 10.1080/1937156X.2009.11949630 Search in Google Scholar

Coyle, Do, Philip Hood & David Marsh. 2010. CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning . Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009024549 Search in Google Scholar

Dalton-Puffer, Christiane. 2007. Discourse in Content And Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) classrooms . Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.20 Search in Google Scholar

Dalton-Puffer, Christiane. 2008. Outcomes and processes in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In Werner Delanoy & Laurenz Wolkmann (eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching . Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Search in Google Scholar

Dalton-Puffer, Christiane. 2011. Content-and-Language Integrated Learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31. 182–204. 10.1017/S0267190511000092 Search in Google Scholar

Dede, Chris. 2010. Comparing Frameworks for 21st Century Skills. In James Bellanca James & Ron Brandt (eds.), 21st century skills , 51–76. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. Search in Google Scholar

English Testing Service. n.d.. Mapping the TOEIC ® and TOEIC Bridge™ Tests on the Common European Framework Reference (CEFR) . https://www.ets.org/toeic/research/mapping_toeic (accessed 26 December 2016). Search in Google Scholar

Ennis, Robert H. 1993. Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice 32(3). 179–186. 10.1080/00405849309543594 Search in Google Scholar

Ennis, Robert H., Jason Millman & Thomas N. Tomko. 2005. Cornell critical thinking tests level X and Z Manual , 5th edn. Seaside, CA: The Critical Thinking Company. Search in Google Scholar

Facione, Peter. 1990. The California critical thinking skills test: College level . Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press. Search in Google Scholar

Facione, Peter. 1998. Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts . http://www.insightassessment.com . (accessed 8 January 2016). Search in Google Scholar

Facione, Peter. 2000. The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking skills. Informal Logic 20(1). 61–84. 10.22329/il.v20i1.2254 Search in Google Scholar

Facione, Peter & Noreen Facione. 1992. The California critical thinking dispositions inventory (CCTDI): and the CCTDI test manual . Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press. Search in Google Scholar

Fujiki, Daisuke & Yohei Okibayashi. 2008. The change of critical thinking dispositions through 4 months university education. Japan Society for Educational Technology 32. 37–40. Search in Google Scholar

Gauci, Sally, Arianne Dantas, David Williams & Robert Kemm. 2009. Promoting student-centered active learning in lectures with a personal response system. Advances in Physiology Education 33(1). 60–71. 10.1152/advan.00109.2007 Search in Google Scholar

Halpern, Diane. 2014. Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking , 5th edn. New York, NY: Psychology Press. Search in Google Scholar

Hayashi, Hajimu & Tsuyoshi Yamada. 2012. Improving critical thinking disposition by teaching research literacy: Focusing on academic writing and data analysis abilities. Kyoto University Higher Education Journal 18. 41–51. Search in Google Scholar

Hino, Nobuyuki. 1988. Yakudoku: Japan’s Dominant Tradition in Foreign Language Learning. JALT Journal 10. 45–55. Search in Google Scholar

Hirayama, Rumi & Takashi Kusumi. 2004. Effect of critical thinking disposition on interpretation of controversial issues: Evaluating evidence and drawing conclusions. The Japanese Association of Educational Psychology Journal 52. 186–198. 10.5926/jjep1953.52.2_186 Search in Google Scholar

Hirayama, Rumi, Yuko Tanaka, Miho Kawasaki & Takashi Kusumi. 2010. Development and evaluation of a critical thinking ability scale from Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z. The Japan Society for Educational Technology 33(4). 441–448. Search in Google Scholar

Ikeda, Makoto. 2011. The basic principles of CLIL. In Yoshinori Watanabe, Makoto Ikeda & Shinichi Izumi (eds.), CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning): New challenges in foreign language education at Sophia University, Volume 1: Principles and Methodol ogies, 1–12. Tokyo: Sophia University Press. Search in Google Scholar

Long, Christopher. 2003. Critical thinking and English education. Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 7. 215–224. Search in Google Scholar

Mehisto, Peter, David Marsh & Maria J. Frigols. 2008. Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education . London: Macmillan Education. Search in Google Scholar

Meyers, Chet & Thomas B. Jones. 1993. Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Search in Google Scholar

Mikuni, Yuko & Tomoko Ichinohe. 2012. A study on the critical thinking disposition of nursing students: Characteristics in nursing students and nursing education institutions. Journal of Japan Society of Nursing Research 35. 79–88. Search in Google Scholar

Mineshima, Michio & Junichiro Chino. 2013. Comparative analysis of questions and tasks in English textbooks in Japan, Korea, and Finland: How textbooks teach critical thinking. Journal of the Chubu English Language Education Society 42. 91–98. Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT). 2008. The Course of Study: Foreign languages . http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/new-cs/youryou/eiyaku/1298353.htm (accessed 8 January 2015). Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT). 2013a. The Second Basic Plan for the Promotion of Education . http://www.mext.go.jp/english/lawandplan/1355330.htm (accessed 8 January 2015). Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT). 2013b. Daigaku niokeru kyouikunaiyo no kaikakujokyo ni tsuite [A report on educational reform on university level]. http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chukyo/chukyo3/047/siryo/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2012/02/14/1316067_01.pdf . (accessed 8 January 2015). Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT). n.d. Gakushikatei kyoiku no kouchiku ni mukete [Restructuring curriculum of bachelors degree education] http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/gijyutu/gijyutu4/siryo/attach/1247211.htm (accessed 8 January 2015). Search in Google Scholar

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2015. Intervention and research protocol for OECD project on assessing progression in creative and creative and critical thinking skills in education . http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/EDU-CERI-CD-2015-12-REV1.pdf (accessed 13 March 2017). Search in Google Scholar

P21 Partnership for 21st century learning. n.d. Framework for 21st century learning . http://www.p21.org/index.php (accessed 26 December 2016). Search in Google Scholar

Stanovich, Keith E. & Richard F. West. 1997. Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking: the argument evaluation task. Journal of Educational Psychology 89. 342–357. 10.1037/0022-0663.89.2.342 Search in Google Scholar

Watson, Goodwin & Edward M. Glaser. 1980. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal . San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment Inc. Search in Google Scholar

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Journal and Issue

Articles in the same issue.

Active Learning

What is active learning.

Active learning generally refers to any instructional method that engages students in the learning process beyond listening and passive note taking. Active learning approaches promote skill development and higher order thinking through activities that might include reading, writing, and/or discussion. Metacognition -- thinking about one’s thinking -- can also be an important element, helping students connect course activities to their learning (Brame, 2016).

Active learning is rooted in constructivist learning theory , or the idea that students (humans!) learn by connecting new information and experiences to their prior knowledge and experiences, allowing them to build, or construct, new knowledge and understandings (Bransford et al., 1999). Often, although not exclusively, active learning approaches also include collaborative and cooperative learning in small groups. These approaches stem from social constructivism , which emphasizes the importance of peer-to-peer interactions in learning (Vygotsky 1978).

Beyond the theoretical underpinnings, many studies across disciplines have explored the benefits of active learning approaches in college classrooms (e.g., Freeman et al., 2014; Prince et al., 2004). Active learning strategies provide valuable opportunities for students to develop disciplinary skills and expertise, including serving as sources of knowledge, formulating questions and articulating ideas, as well as fostering interactions with peers (Turpen & Finkelstein, 2009). Perhaps most notably, compared to traditional lecture alone, use of active learning approaches has been shown to increase student performance and decrease failure rates, particularly for students from underrepresented and excluded communities (Eddy & Hogan, 2014; Haak et al., 2011; Theobald et al., 2020).

What are some strategies that I might try? 

There are many different active learning strategies that instructors might incorporate into their teaching. These can range from brief interactions during lecture, activities that may take 10-20 minutes, to strategies that could span multiple class periods. The table below outlines a variety of sample strategies with tips for both in-person and remote implementation in courses. The strategies are roughly organized based on potential time-intensity for implementation. Instructors might also explore these active learning designs as they consider opportunities for using each strategy.

Purposeful Pause

Quick write or “minute” paper, think-pair-share (tps), polling/peer instruction, concept map, case study/group problem solving, think-aloud problem solving, gallery walk, what can active learning look like in practice.

In this section, we’ve included several resources with videos that describe different types of active learning strategies and how to implement them. Many also demonstrate active learning strategies in action.

REALISE videos, SEER Center, University of Georgia

Scientific Teaching Series , iBiology

Community-building active learning strategies (remote context), OneHE 

How might I get started?

• Check out this active learning “cheat sheet” with 10 tips to help you get started, from choosing the “right” exercise to planning the logistics.
• If you are new to active learning, you might start with identifying strategies to incorporate into your lecture (see these resources on lecturing and interactive lecturing ).
• Have more questions, or interested in brainstorming for some ideas? Reach out to the Center for Teaching and Learning ( [email protected] ) for a consultation !

Request an Active Learning Classroom

Schedule a CTL Consultation Today!

What additional resources are available, active learning guides:.

• Active Learning Teaching Guide , Vanderbilt CFT
• Introduction to Active Learning , Michigan CRLT
• Active Learning , Yale Poorvu Center

Advice and strategies related to remote active learning:

• Hybrid active learning strategies , Eberly Center, CMU
• Flipping the remote classroom , Berkeley CTL

For a deeper dive:

Check out these research summaries describing common active learning techniques.

Polling with a student response system:

This Clicker Resource Guide (see PDF ) has some helpful advice for using polling questions in class with a student response system (e.g., iClicker Cloud or Poll Everywhere), including tips for logistics and "choreography" for implementation. It also touches on writing effective conceptual questions that are multiple choice.

Additional group-based learning approaches:

• Process-oriented guided inquiry learning (POGIL)
• Problem-based learning (PBL) (see also: the Problem Library ) and working in teams .

References:

Angelo, T.A. and Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Aronson, E.; Blaney, N.; Stephin, C.; Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publishing Company Aronson, Elliot. (2000) The jigsaw classroom. Retrieved from https://www.jigsaw.org/ . Barkley, Elizabeth F., K. Patricia Cross, and Clair H. Major. (2014) Collaborative learning techniques: A handbook for college faculty. Jossey-Bass. (available online and downloadable through the UC Berkeley Library; includes adaptations for synchronous and asynchronous instruction). Brame, C. (2016). Active learning. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved March 10, 2021 from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/active-learning/ . Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Christensen, C.R. (1987). Teaching and the case method. Boston: Harvard Business School. Crouch, C.H. and Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: ten years of experience and results. Am. Journal of Physics 69, 970-977. Eddy, S. L., & Hogan, K. A. (2014). Getting under the hood: How and for whom does increasing course structure work?. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 453-468. Fagen, A.P., Crouch, C.H., and Mazur, E. (2002). Peer instruction: results from a range of classrooms. Physics Teacher 40, 206-209. Francek, M. (2006). Promoting Discussion in the Science Classroom Using Gallery Walks. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(1). Francek, Mark. "What is Gallery Walk?". Starting Point-Teaching Entry Level Geoscience. Retrieved March 24, 2021. Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., and Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 111, 8410-8415. Haak, D.C., HilleRisLambers, J., Pitre, E., and Freeman, S. (2011). Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in introductory biology. Science 332, 1213–1216. Handelsman, J., Miller, S., and Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching. New York: W.H. Freeman. Herreid, C.F. (1994). Case studies in science: A novel method of science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 23(4), 221-229 Lyman, F. (1981). The responsive classroom discussions: the inclusion of all students. A. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming Digest, College Park: University of Maryland Press, pp. 109-113. Millis, B. J., & Cottell Jr, P. G. (1997). Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty. Series on Higher Education. Oryx Press, PO Box 33889, Phoenix, AZ 85067-3889. Nesbit, J.C. & Adesope, O.O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413-448. Novak, J.D. and Canas, A.J. (2008). The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 2008-01 (retrieved from http://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/theory-of-concept-maps ). Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education 93, 223-231. Rivard, L. O. P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 969-983. Rowe, M.B. (1980). Pausing principles and their effects on reasoning in science. In Teaching the Sciences, edited by F. B. Brawer. New Directions for Community Colleges No. 31. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ruhl, K., Hughes, C.A., and Schloss, P.J. (1987). Using the Pause Procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Education and Special Education 10, 14-18. Smith, M. K., W. B. Wood, W. K. Adams, C. Wieman, J. K. Knight, N. Guild, and T. T. Su. (2009). “Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions.” Science, 323, 122-24. Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113-120. Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., ... & Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476-6483. Turpen, C., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2009). Not all interactive engagement is the same: Variations in physics professors’ implementation of peer instruction. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 5(2), 020101. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Developing critical thinking with active learning strategies

Affiliation.

• 1 School of Nursing, La Salle University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 16372455
• DOI: 10.1097/00006223-200101000-00016

The development of students' critical thinking abilities is one of the greatest challenges facing contemporary nurse educators, especially those teaching graduate nursing students. Active learning techniques are suggested to promote critical thinking development. The authors describe how active learning strategies nurtured critical thinking processes in a group of adult nurse practitioner students.

Publication types

• Education, Nursing, Graduate*
• Nurse Practitioners / education*
• Teaching / methods*
• United States

Advertisement

Effects of Active Learning on Enhancing Student Critical Thinking in an Undergraduate General Science Course

• Published: 12 September 2012
• Volume 38 , pages 223–235, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

• Kyoungna Kim 1 ,
• Priya Sharma 2 ,
• Susan M. Land 2 &
• Kevin P. Furlong 3  

4843 Accesses

89 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

To enhance students’ critical thinking in an undergraduate general science course, we designed and implemented active learning modules by incorporating group-based learning with authentic tasks, scaffolding, and individual reports. This study examined the levels of critical thinking students exhibited in individual reports and the students’ critical thinking level change over time. Findings indicated that students’ average critical thinking level fell in the category of “developing”, but students’ scores on individual reports revealed a statistically significant increase. The study suggested that the active learning strategies employed in the study were useful to promote student critical thinking.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Cultivating and Leveraging Continuous Accountability Through Mundane Infrastructures for Critical Thinking

Active Learning Methods and Strategies to Improve Student Conceptual Understanding: Some Considerations from Physics Education Research

Strategies for Active Learning and Assessment of the Learning Processes

Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to Learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 443–459). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar  

Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bunce, D., & VandenPlas, J. R. (2006). Student recognition and construction of quality chemistry essay responses. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7 (3), 160–169.

Article   Google Scholar  

Chapman, B. S. (2001, Nov). Emphasizing concepts and reasoning skills in introductory college molecular cell biology. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (11), 1157–1176.

Edelson, D. C., & Reiser, B. J. (2006). Making authentic practices accessible to learners: Designing challenges and strategies. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 335–354). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Ennis, R. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14 (1), 5–25.

Ge, X., & Land, S. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (1), 21–38.

Gellin, A. (2003). The effect of undergraduate student involvement on critical thinking: A meta-analysis of the literature 1991–2000. Journal of College Student Development, 44 (6), 746–762.

Gupta, G. (2005). Improving students' critical-thinking, logic, and problem-solving skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 34 (4), 48.

Hager, P., Sleet, R., Logan, P., & Hooper, M. (2003). Teaching critical thinking in undergraduate science courses. Science Education, 12 , 303–313.

Halpern, D. F. (1999, Winter). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 80 , 69–74.

Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45 (1), 65–94.

Kim, K. (2009). Exploring undergraduate students' active learning for enhancing their critical thinking and learning in a large class. Dissertation Abstracts International, 70 (11), 3380934.

King, A. (1995). Inquiring minds really do want to know: Using questioning to teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 13–17.

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kronberg, J. R., & Griffin, M. S. (2000). Analysis problems-A means to developing students' critical-thinking skills: Pushing the boundaries of higher-order thinking. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29 (5), 348–352.

Lajoie, S. P., Lavigne, N. C., Guerrera, C., & Munsie, S. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29 , 155–186.

Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48 (3), 61–78.

Lynch, C. L., & Wolcott, S. K. (2001). Helping your students develop critical thinking skills. IDEA Paper #37 . Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.

MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions: Faculty can play a key role in fostering critical thinking among students using web communication tools. Educational Quarterly, 4 , 38–41.

Mayer, R. H. (1999). Designing instruction for constructivist learning. In C. M. Reigeluth, (Eds.), In C. M. Reigeluth, (Ed), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Volume II. pp,141–160. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McConnell, D. A. (2005). How students think: Implications for learning in introductory Geoscience Courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53 , 462–470.

Moon, J. (2008). Critical thinking: An exploration of theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

National Education Goals Panel (1991). The national education goals report: Building a nation of learners . Washington, DC: U.S. Printing Office.

National Research Council (1996). From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Paul, R. (1995). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world . Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Perkins, D. (1998). What is understanding? In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), Teaching for understanding: Linking research with practice (pp. 39–57). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., & Shepard, L. A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331 (6022), 1269–70.

Russell, A. A. (2004). Calibrated peer review: A writing and critical-thinking instructional tool. In Y. S. George (Ed.), Invention and impact: Building excellence in undergraduate science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education . American Association for the Advancement of Science: Washington, DC.

Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 149–163). Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. Retrieved December 8, 2009 from the Foundation for Critical Thinking. http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/defining.html

Takeo, A., Prothero, W. A., & Kelly, G. J. (2002). Applying analysis to assess the quality of university oceanography students’ scientific writing. Journal of Geoscience Education, 50 (1), 40–48.

Tsui, L. (1999). Courses and instruction affecting critical thinking. Research in HigherEducation, 40 (2), 185–200.

Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case studies. Journal of Higher Education, 73 (6), 749–763.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Yuretich, R. F. (2004). Encouraging critical thinking. Journal of College Science Teaching, 33 (3), 40–45.

Download references

Acknowledgement

This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 0607995 . Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Diplomatic Language Services, Arlington, VA, USA

Kyoungna Kim

Department of Education, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Priya Sharma & Susan M. Land

Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Kevin P. Furlong

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyoungna Kim .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kim, K., Sharma, P., Land, S.M. et al. Effects of Active Learning on Enhancing Student Critical Thinking in an Undergraduate General Science Course. Innov High Educ 38 , 223–235 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9236-x

Download citation

Published : 12 September 2012

Issue Date : June 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9236-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Active learning
• Undergraduate education
• Scaffolding
• Critical thinking
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Active Learning Strategies to Promote Critical Thinking

2003, Journal of Athletic Training

Related Papers

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CREATIVE RESEARCH THOUGHTS - IJCRT

priyamvada saarsar

Critical thinking skills as the mental processes required in processing information, solving problems, making a decision, and thinking critically. The teachers need to incorporate classroom activities that will promote the critical thinking skills of students" explained by Drew (2022). This objective can be achieved by using innovative teaching strategies in the classroom. These strategies advocate the use of step by step approach to developing critical thinking skills by introducing real word problems and clear instructions. The article is based on the reviews on the development of critical thinking. This article provides an insight into the previous researchers regarding the development of critical thinking skills. An attempt has also been made to explain the innovative and effective teaching strategies to foster critical thinking.

Dr. Julius Otundo

Critical thinking in the classroom is a common term used by educators. Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and evaluating information gathered from or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning or communication as a guide to belief and action (``Scriven, 1996”). The challenge, of course is to create learning environments that promote critical thinking both in the classroom and beyond. Teaching practicing critical thinking provides adults with the opportunity to embrace and take charge of their learning. Typically, students who implement critical thinking skills approach the courseware in a more thoughtful and effective manner, ask more challenging questions and participate in the learning process more intensely. To promote the critical thinking among the students various types of teaching strategies can be used by the teacher in the classroom.

Stacy E Walker

Roland Case

practice” (1991, p. 354). Research in the U.S. supports these observations. For example, Su’s (1990) study, based on interviews with 112 educators, found that although teachers stated that they valued critical thinking they did not implement it in their classrooms. Similarly, in her study of a three-year project to foster critical thinking in social studies, McKee (1988) found that teachers spent only four percent of class time on reasoning activities.

marzieh kalbali

Critical thinking can be the main objectives of education in a world that is an integral part of any educational system. In schools today, the emphasis is only on the skills of reading, writing and counting, while these skills are not inherently valuable and no scholarism in education. Thoughtful people exercise training schools. People tend to interpret the impact on recall information. It is necessary, adopt methods that enhance student motivation and challenge thought processes, change the passive and cautious in the exchange of ideas and thinking. The aim of this review study is to investigate the importance of developing critical thinking in students. Showed results of a study books and review previous research, can be reached in the light of faith and reason and thought and higher level of humanity. Critical thinking is one of the fundamental objectives of education at global level. Critical thinking can be judged on authenticity and value of the information and arguments presented. So for the future, we empower people with the freedom of thought and creativity, to nurture them from an early age. So schools have to replace the transfer of knowledge and disciplinary dry environments that require only reproduce knowledge, to provide conditions to build their students' knowledge.

Review of Educational Research

Critical thinking (CT) is purposeful, self-regulatory judgment that results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanations of the considerations on which that judgment is based. This article summarizes the available empirical evidence on the impact of instruction on the development and enhancement of critical thinking skills and dispositions and student achievement. The review includes 341 effects sizes drawn from quasi- or true-experimental studies that used standardized measures of CT as outcome variables. The weighted random effects mean effect size ( g+) was 0.30 ( p < .001). The collection was heterogeneous ( p < .001). Results demonstrate that there are effective strategies for teaching CT skills, both generic and content specific, and CT dispositions, at all educational levels and across all disciplinary areas. Notably, the opportunity for dialogue, the exposure of students to authentic or situated problems and examples, and mentoring ha...

Joanne Reid

A quasi-experimental study of a pedagogical treatment in critical thinking was undertaken in a college of business. The quantitative results demonstrated significant improvements in 6 of 7 measures of critical thinking using a validated assessment instrument. This treatment was taught in the college of business for four years. A qualitative/quantitative survey was taken of the graduates of the college who had taken this treatment. Quantitative results were validated by the qualitative responses of the graduates. Graduates were confirmed to use the critical thinking knowledge, skills and strategies they had learned in their personal, academic, and professional lives. Graduates were also shown to be highly satisfied with the effects of the treatment in their personal, academic, and professional lives.

Linda Murawski

English Language Teaching

samaneh eslamdoost

Developing critical thinking since the educational revolution gave rise to flourishing movements toward embedding critical thinking (CT henceforth) stimulating classroom activities in educational settings. Nevertheless the process faced with complications such as teachability potentiality, lack of practical frameworks concerning actualization of CT tasks, and transferability obstacles, as well as lack of a homogeneous model of conceptualization of CT among educators. The present study made an effort to represent a comprehensive model of CT for educators drawn on the contemporary literaturein order to indicate a uniform delineation of the construct and to offer a comprehensive model of CT for the intention of making boosting learners' capability of CT possible.

John P. Portelli

RELATED PAPERS

nabiha haouas

ASHRAF SIDDIK KHAN ABDUL RAHIM SIDDIQE

Revista Ibero-Americana de Estudos Legislativos

Thiago Silame , João Francisco Meira

Claudia Pilar

Environmental and Experimental Botany

José Manuel Moutinho Pereira

Daniel BERGEZ

Hilario Casado Alonso

Ciencia e investigación agraria

Denise Rougier

Silvio Plehati

Marcelo Mendes

Bronek Pabich

Inger Padilla

Monjur Rahman

Anuario Iehs Instituto De Estudios Historico Sociales

Vanesa Giacomasso

Istanbul Medical Journal

Elif Altınay Kırlı

Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi

Nefise Unsal

Aida Smajlovic

South Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities

F. Spikmans

Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad

odile lim tung

Theriogenology

Kaywalee Chatdarong

European Journal of Mineralogy

Stefan Marincea

Metin TOPRAK

Revista Religare

ANDREA CORBALÁN GIMÉNEZ

Valtonen Mauri Karttunen Hannu

Sergio Manuel

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• eLearning Platform
• eLearning Content
• Access 800 Courses on our Platform
• Bespoke eLearning
• Virtual Training
• Our Pricing
• Request a Demo
• Content Partnerships
• Whitepapers
• Most Popular Blogs
• Personal Learning Journeys
• Training Feedback Form
• Training Needs Analysis Template
• Personal Development Plan Template
• Learning and Development Strategy
• Talent Management Strategy
• Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model
• Microlearning
• Informal Learning
• 70 20 10 Learning

Home » Blog » 15 Active Learning Strategies and Examples

15 Active Learning Strategies and Examples

This paradigm shift from traditional teaching to active learning underscores the learner’s role in constructing knowledge. Rather than being just a recipient of information, the learner becomes an active participant in a two-way process, whereby learning is imprinted through memorable, interactive activities and challenges.

With today’s dynamic global environment, active learning has become more critical in L&D than ever before. This teaching approach encourages employees to play an active role in their own education, fostering a culture of continuous learning and adaptability, vital in the ever-evolving world of work.

What is Active Learning and How Does it Work?

First defined in 1991 by educational theorists Charles C. Bonwell and James A. Eison , the method includes “anything that involves students in doing things and thinking about the things they are doing.” It’s a reciprocal process where cognition and demonstration combine to reinforce key learning points.

A recent study conducted at Carnegie Mellon University’s Human-Computer Interaction Institute concluded that “active learning can put students in the driver’s seat of their lessons. Active learning techniques encourage students to produce thoughts and get feedback through interactive settings rather than passively receiving information as is common in pervasive approaches to education like lectures and readings.”

Active learning allows students to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge rather than passively receive information. It fosters learner engagement , interaction, and deeper understanding, moving beyond the memorization of facts to cultivate higher-order thinking skills.

Learn How To Create Personal Learning Journeys For FREE!

Key components of active learning strategies.

At the heart of active learning are three fundamental components: Engagement , Reflection, and Application. Learners actively engage with the material, reflect on the content’s relevance and meaning, and apply what they’ve learned in practical, often collaborative, situations.

Here’s how those three components work in more detail:

Engagement : This aspect describes a mix of concentration and interest. Students focus on the topic in hand because it is taught in a manner that makes it intrinsically interesting.

Reflection : Students are asked to consciously reflect on the subjects they have been learning. This helps personalise and imprint the knowledge, and the repetition of key points helps fix them in memory.

Application : This aspect focuses on the practical use of key pieces of learning. By making the topic practical, students learn how useful the subject can be, motivating them to remember and focus.

Another key element of active learning is that it’s frequently collaborative. Not only do learners benefit from interaction with the educator, but they join forces in team exercises, or share their opinions and experiences in group discussion.

Benefits of Active Learning

Active learning has a plethora of benefits, some of which include:

Boosting Retention

Active learning strategies help learners retain information better. When learners actively engage with content—discussing, debating, teaching, or applying it—they’re more likely to remember it. Part of the reason for this is that activities help personalise the learning content, creating appreciation and some of the positive emotions that make an experience memorable. Information Processing Theory explains retention in three stages – sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory.

Critical Thinking

Active learning cultivates critical thinking skills. Learners don’t just absorb information; they analyse, evaluate, and synthesise it, fostering problem-solving and decision-making skills. Critical thinking is considered a soft skill and is essential to any modern educational programme, from social science to the humanities, hard science, and vocational subjects.

Collaboration

Active learning often involves teamwork and collaboration. Through group activities and discussions, learners develop interpersonal skills and learn to work effectively as a team. This is particularly helpful in workplace settings where learners can support one another in the shared goal of picking up new skills they can use at work.

Increasing Engagement

Active learning increases learner engagement. Interactive activities stimulate interest and motivate learners, contributing to a more enjoyable and effective learning experience. By creating engaging interactive content, you can avoid the glazed eyes or after-lunch slump of less involving courses!

15 Active Learning Examples

Now that we understand active learning and its benefits, let’s delve into some practical strategies to implement this learning approach.

1. Think-Pair-Share

Think-Pair-Share encourages collaboration and peer learning. Learners think about a question or problem individually, pair up to discuss their thoughts, then share their insights with the larger group. This method combines social learning activities like collaboration and reflection in a way that draws out the strengths of both modalities.

2. Three-Step Interviews

Three-Step interviews allow learners to apply different questioning strategies and reflect on understanding. They take turns acting as the interviewer, interviewee, and observer, promoting active engagement and deep reflection. This kind of active learning works particularly well for courses emphasising social and negotiation skills, including hospitality, politics, journalism, and sales.

3. Case Studies

Using case studies enables learners to apply concepts to real-world scenarios. This strategy fosters critical thinking and problem-solving skills, linking theoretical learning to practical application. Case studies should be designed to chime with course participants’ lives and experiences, allowing them to offer their own personal insights. This allows them to become emotionally and intellectually involved in the subject under discussion, and the learning is likely to stick.

4. Role-Play

Role-play enhances empathy and problem-solving skills. By acting out scenarios, learners gain insights into different perspectives and learn to navigate complex situations. It can be particularly instructive to ask learners to inhabit both sides of an interaction, for instance, a police officer and suspect, or sales professional and buyer. Not all students will be comfortable in such a performative exercise, however.

5. Flipped Classroom

In a flipped classroom, learners explore content independently before class, freeing up classroom time for active discussions and problem-solving activities. This method works best in a highly motivated educational setting, such as vocational training resulting in professional qualifications. An obvious drawback is that, if students don’t prepare, they’ll get very little out of the class-based content. It’s also important for participants to reflect on in-class discussions after each session.

6. The Muddiest Point

The Muddiest Point requires learners to reflect on challenging areas, providing invaluable feedback for the educator. The educator will typically ask “what didn’t you understand?” or “what point did you find most complex?” and then follow up with a focused session exploring that concept. This technique helps identify misconceptions and knowledge gaps, as well as improving future iterations of course content.

7. Problem-Based Learning

Problem-Based Learning cultivates critical thinking and decision-making skills. Learners tackle real-world problems, applying knowledge and skills in a practical context. Rather than the theoretical situations covered in a typical case study, problem-based learning might take a story from the news or social media and explore it under the lens of the topic in hand. This makes the subject feel more relevant to the students, and more useful.

8. Simulations and Gamification

Simulations and gamification create immersive learning experiences. These methods engage learners in an interactive, competitive environment, enhancing motivation and learning outcomes. Such games could involve anything from quizzes to physical games or puzzles to be solved by teams. Some subjects will lend themselves to this better than others, and competitive workplaces , such as sales teams, may prove more comfortable with such challenges.

9. Peer Teaching

Peer teaching reinforces understanding and builds confidence in knowledge. By teaching their peers, learners gain a deeper understanding and consolidate their learning. The classic American “show and tell” in junior school is an example of this, but adult learners can also benefit from sharing their experiences or explaining a point with reference to an example from their own working lives.

10. Debates and Discussions

Debates and discussions encourage active participation and analysis. They foster critical thinking and the ability to articulate and defend viewpoints. Although a little out of favour in modern schools, nevertheless this classic strategy serves to imprint key issues in social, cultural, and political thinking. It’s possible to reduce the antagonistic elements of debates by imposing strict discourse rules (such as addressing the chair or avoiding ad hominem attacks).

11. Interactive Quizzes and Polls

Interactive quizzes and polls engage learners and assess knowledge. They make learning fun, while also serving as valuable tools for instant feedback. These can work just as well in-person as they might online, or in blended learning settings. They are essential as part of any eLearning Platform that offers online courses – as both a measurement tool and a method of monitoring progress and content effectiveness.

12. Experiential Learning

Experiential learning involves hands-on activities for practical skill development. Learners gain practical experience, increasing the transfer of learning to real-world situations. For situations in which site visits are impossible, bringing pieces of the subject into the classroom can be highly instructive. First aid lessons require this aspect, and children love this aspect of learning. It’s worth not neglecting this for adult learners of any subject, however.

13. Brainstorming Sessions

Brainstorming sessions stimulate creativity and idea generation. They foster open-mindedness, encouraging learners to consider various possibilities and solutions. When brainstorming, it’s vital not to make any value judgments on suggestions, but simply to group and list student ideas. Once everyone has had their say, the educator and class can begin to identify common themes and recurring ideas.

14. Field Trips and Site Visits

Field trips and site visits connect learning to real-world situations. They enhance understanding and contextualization of knowledge. Site visits are fun and instructive and add much-needed variety to an in-person course. They often introduce students to hands-on skills they might pursue in greater depth, or to potential workplaces or causes they can become invested in.

15. Learning Circles and Communities

Learning circles and communities help foster collaboration and knowledge sharing. They create a supportive learning environment where learners can learn from one another, share insights, and collaboratively solve problems. With digital courses, it’s often important to create a forum for learners where mutual encouragement and support can occur. When classes are held in-person, students can be encouraged to help one another with coursework and collaborative projects.

Implementing Active Learning Strategies

Key considerations.

When incorporating active learning strategies, consider the learning objectives , the learners’ characteristics and needs, and the available resources. It’s also important to ask what students want to get out of the course (rather than any objective need for certification or qualification).

The right blend of active learning strategies can enhance the learning experience, making it more engaging, meaningful, and effective.

For instance, you’ll need a very different approach with a community of language learners from different countries, with varying levels of proficiency, than you would teaching an established workplace group where the main variable is seniority.

Let’s break these variables down a little:

Student Objectives: What would each student like to get out of the class, in terms of educational purpose and enhancement of their working or home life?

Student Characteristics: What proficiency and understanding level are your students at? If it’s a workplace course, what level of seniority do they have (how easily can the effect change)? If you have shy students, how can you involve them in activities without undue pressure?

Student Needs: What is the practical outcome supposed to be? It could be a qualification, a certificate, or simply a better understanding of a topic. It’s also worth asking, going into a class, if anyone has any additional needs, since you may have students with dyslexia, ADHD, or other learning challenges.

Available Resources: Do you provide paper and pens, devices, calculators? Do you invite guest speakers? Are their physical challenges and hands-on experiences? Do you provide meals? All these ingredients could affect the success of your course.

Challenges of Active Learning Strategies

Active learning strategies, while beneficial, pose certain challenges. They require time, resources, and planning. They also require students to buy into a style of learning that some may not be familiar with.

Let’s unpack three more common challenges of active learning in a little more detail:

Student Hesitancy: To make active learning inviting, it’s best to design courses so that students come to expect and are prepared for this style of education from day one. Begin with simple exercises like a current knowledge quiz or simple pair exercises, and then progress to more involved exercises.

It’s also important to be clear with instructions and allow time for students to get used to being active rather than passive participants. Explain why you’re using these methods, rather than more rote methods of learning. If students believe it’s in their best interests to participate, they will.

Lack of Collaboration: Before you can expect a group of disparate individuals to work together, they must feel comfortable together. Begin with simple introductory exercises, so students get to know one another before being asked to share more personal experiences. Where students are too shy to choose partners, it’s okay to assign partners for them, so long as you attend to any obvious signs of discomfort.

Running out of Time: This is very common. When students are engaged, they can lose track of time. It’s often a good sign!

However, to avoid your course running out of control, make sure you do time trials of collaborative exercises, and be very upfront with any timescales you impose. You can even use a bell or whistle to warn students when they have five or two minutes left to finish up an exercise.

All these challenges can be overcome through careful design, strategic planning, scene setting, and the use of technology to streamline and support the learning process.

Remember that active learning is often a process of trial and error. What works well with one group may not prove so successful with another. It’s worth having alternative exercises to hand in case it becomes obvious that you need to pivot to a different approach.

Measuring the Impact of Active Learning Strategies

Methods to measure the effectiveness of active learning include surveys, assessments, observation, and feedback. Make sure you incorporate a bit of time for learners to complete satisfaction surveys or training feedback forms and make it as easy as possible to do so anonymously. Don’t make these too lengthy but do allow space for comments.

It’s essential to evaluate not only engagement and knowledge acquisition but also the development of skills and attitudes and the transfer of learning to real-world scenarios. Ideally, whoever has commissioned the course will have some method for following up and measuring KPIs after some weeks or months have passed. Ask if you can receive a copy of this information too.

Final Insights

Active learning, with its focus on engagement, reflection, and application, offers numerous benefits. It boosts retention, enhances critical thinking, fosters collaboration, and increases engagement.

At Skillshub, we fully commit to active learning, and incorporate many of its strategies into our learning solutions, creating eLearning content which is engaging, active and involving.

Our offerings are designed to facilitate active learning, equipping learners with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to thrive in today’s dynamic world.

If you’re ready to incorporate active learning into your L&D strategy with the help of an eLearning company , get in touch with us today!

Sean McPheat

Sean is the CEO of Skillshub. He’s a published author and has been featured on CNN, BBC and ITV as a leading authority in the learning and development industry. Sean is responsible for the vision and strategy at Skillshub, helping to ensure innovation within the company.

Updated on: 4 October, 2023

Would your connections like this too? Please share.

You might also be interested in…

13 Strategies for Enhancing Training & Development in Your Organisation

Pedagogy vs Andragogy: What’s the Difference for Learning Strategies?

The Ultimate Guide To Neurodiversity in the Workplace

What is Ebbinghaus’s Forgetting Curve and How to Overcome it

What Is a Learner-Centred Approach and Why Is It Important

Importance and Benefits of Providing Employee Training

• elearning Content
• Get In Touch

8 Active Learning Strategies: Build Critical Thinking

The Reflective Pause: First, ask a thought provoking question and then intentionally allow 10–15 seconds of silence to elapse before calling on any student to respond. Cognitive science research has shown that a pause of this length is necessary for the human brain to sufficiently process a question and formulate a reasonable response.

Model strong critical thinking. Avoid misleading, and imprecise expressions such as: “How do you feel about that?” and “What is your view of this?” and even “What did you think of this?”. Your students watch you, so what you say and what you do might be more powerful in motivating them to build their critical thinking skills than anything they read or hear in a lecture. If you show that you practice the positive critical thinking habits of mind and that you engage in problems and decisions by applying critical thinking skills, that message comes through to them. If you do not, you give them a negative message.

Call out strong critical thinking: Acknowledge when students use critical thinking so that you promote their self-awareness and recognition of reasoning (don’t forget to use the critical thinking vocabulary). For example, use phrases such as: “The claim you are making…”, “The inquisitiveness of this group was evident when…”, “I agree with your interpretation of…”, and “In your analysis of…”.

Don’t let students get by with shut-down clichés such as, “That’s just how I feel.”, “I was brought up to think that…”, “My parents always said that…”, and “It’s common sense.”. Require students to provide reasons or explanations for all their claims, interpretations, analyses, evaluations, and decisions. Ask why and expect a good, well-reasoned answer.

Work from example back to theory: Discuss the examples in the text first, and then draw out the concepts they teach. This active learning technique exercises students’ inductive reasoning skills and promotes active engagement and inquisitiveness.

Include student reflective journals: Cue students to practice specific thinking skills or mindset attributes. For example, practice interpretation, analysis, and evaluation skills by journaling “What exactly happened and why was that important?”

Use dynamic active learning activities to promote independent thinking and to expose students to the thinking of others. Here are some examples: conversing with a partner, small groups, or the whole class; investigations, inquires, and informed conversations; debates; simulations; role playing; fishbowl activities; panel discussions; brainstorming exercises; case studies; course blogs or wikis; individual or group argument mapping; social networking features such as asynchronous bulletin boards that are often found in course management systems; maintaining a paper or electronic Portfolio, and so on. Every moment is an opportunity. Provide frequent opportunities to practice critical thinking skills and receive formative feedback from the instructor and peers. Interactions that result in constructive feedback can be incorporated by the student and reinforce self-regulation.

This material about using active learning strategies to promote critical thinking is shared by Dr. Carol Gittens, PhD., Dean of the School of Education at St. Mary’s University. Dr. Gittens is a strategic planning consultant and a well-known expert in the training and assessment of critical thinking. If you are interested in additional strategies for teaching and training reasoning skills, check out the Deep Dives and Skill Builders at InsightBasecamp .