language and communication in critical thinking

Critical Thinking and Effective Communication: Enhancing Interpersonal Skills for Success

In today’s fast-paced world, effective communication and critical thinking have become increasingly important skills for both personal and professional success. Critical thinking refers to the ability to analyze situations, gather information, and make sound judgments, while effective communication involves not only conveying ideas clearly but also actively listening and responding to others. These two crucial abilities are intertwined, as critical thinking often mediates information processing, leading to a more comprehensive understanding and ultimately enhancing communication.

Key Takeaways

Critical thinking fundamentals, skill and knowledge, analysis and evidence.

A key component of critical thinking is the ability to analyze information, which involves breaking down complex problems or arguments into manageable parts to understand their underlying structure [2] . Analyzing evidence is essential in order to ascertain the validity and credibility of the information, which leads to better decision-making. Critical thinkers must consider factors like the source’s credibility, the existence of potential biases, and any relevant areas of expertise before forming judgments.

Clarity of Thought

In summary, mastering critical thinking fundamentals, including skill and knowledge, analysis of evidence, and clarity of thought, is essential for effective communication. Cultivating these abilities will enable individuals to better navigate their personal and professional lives, fostering stronger, more efficient connections with others.

Importance of Critical Thinking

Workplace and leadership, decisions and problem-solving, confidence and emotions.

Critical thinking plays a significant role in managing one’s emotions and cultivating self-confidence. By engaging in rational and objective thinking, individuals can develop a clearer understanding of their own beliefs and values. This awareness can lead to increased self-assurance and the ability to effectively articulate one’s thoughts and opinions. Additionally, critical thinking can help individuals navigate emotionally-charged situations by promoting logical analysis and appropriate emotional responses. Ultimately, honing critical thinking skills can establish a strong foundation for effective communication and emotional intelligence.

Effective Communication

Verbal communication, nonverbal communication, visual communication.

Visual communication involves the use of visual aids such as images, graphs, charts, and diagrams to support or enhance verbal messages. It can help to make complex information more understandable and engaging. To maximize the effectiveness of visual communication, consider the following tips:

Critical Thinking Skills in Communication

Listening and analyzing.

Developing strong listening and analyzing skills is crucial for critical thinking in communication. This involves actively paying attention to what others are saying and sifting through the information to identify key points. Taking a step back to analyze and evaluate messages helps ensure a clear understanding of the topic.

Biases and Perspective

Considering other people’s perspectives allows you to view an issue from multiple angles, eventually leading to a more thorough understanding. Approaching communications with an open and receptive mind gives you a greater ability to relate and empathize with others, which in turn enhances the overall effectiveness of communication.

Problem-Solving and Questions

Ultimately, enhancing your critical thinking skills in communication leads to better understanding, stronger connections, and more effective communication. By combining active listening, awareness of biases and perspectives, and problem-solving through questioning, you can significantly improve your ability to navigate even the most complex communications with confidence and clarity.

Improving Critical Thinking and Communication

Methods and techniques.

By honing these skills, individuals can better navigate the complexities of modern life and develop more effective communication capabilities.

Problem-Solving Skills

By mastering this framework, individuals can tackle problems more effectively and communicate their solutions with clarity and confidence.

Staying on Point and Focused

By maintaining focus throughout your communication, you can improve your ability to think critically and communicate more effectively.

Teaching and Training Critical Thinking

Content and curriculum, instructors and teachers.

The role of instructors and teachers in promoting critical thinking cannot be underestimated. They should be trained and equipped with strategies to stimulate thinking, provoke curiosity, and encourage students to question assumptions. Additionally, they must create a learning environment that supports the development of critical thinking by being patient, open-minded, and accepting of diverse perspectives.

Engaging Conversations

Frequently asked questions, what are the essential aspects of critical thinking, how do communication skills impact problem-solving.

Effective communication skills are crucial in problem-solving, as they facilitate the exchange of information, ideas, and perspectives. Clear and concise communication helps ensure that all team members understand the problem, the proposed solutions, and their roles in the process. Additionally, strong listening skills enable better comprehension of others’ viewpoints and foster collaboration.

How does language influence critical thinking?

What strategies can enhance communication in critical thinking, what are the benefits of critical thinking in communication.

Critical thinking enhances communication by promoting clarity, objectivity, and logical reasoning. When we engage in critical thinking, we question assumptions, consider multiple viewpoints, and evaluate the strength of arguments. As a result, our communication becomes more thoughtful, persuasive, and effective at conveying the intended message .

How do critical thinking skills contribute to effective communication?

You may also like, critical thinking vs positive thinking (the pros and cons), how to teach critical thinking in the digital age: effective strategies and techniques, best apps for problem solving: top picks for effective solutions, decision making framework: a guide to smarter choices, download this free ebook.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Perspective
• Published: 19 June 2024

Language is primarily a tool for communication rather than thought

• Evelina Fedorenko   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-3823-514X 1 , 2 ,
• Steven T. Piantadosi 3 &
• Edward A. F. Gibson 1  

Nature volume  630 ,  pages 575–586 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

34k Accesses

2 Citations

1071 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

Language is a defining characteristic of our species, but the function, or functions, that it serves has been debated for centuries. Here we bring recent evidence from neuroscience and allied disciplines to argue that in modern humans, language is a tool for communication, contrary to a prominent view that we use language for thinking. We begin by introducing the brain network that supports linguistic ability in humans. We then review evidence for a double dissociation between language and thought, and discuss several properties of language that suggest that it is optimized for communication. We conclude that although the emergence of language has unquestionably transformed human culture, language does not appear to be a prerequisite for complex thought, including symbolic thought. Instead, language is a powerful tool for the transmission of cultural knowledge; it plausibly co-evolved with our thinking and reasoning capacities, and only reflects, rather than gives rise to, the signature sophistication of human cognition.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

The language network as a natural kind within the broader landscape of the human brain

An investigation across 45 languages and 12 language families reveals a universal language network

Two views on the cognitive brain

Barham, L. & Everett, D. Semiotics and the origin of language in the Lower Palaeolithic. J. Archaeol. Method Theory 28 , 535–579 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hockett, C. F. The origin of speech. Sci. Am. 203 , 88–97 (1960). A classic overview of the relationship between key features of human language and communication systems found in other species, with a focus on distinctive and shared properties .

Jackendoff, R. & Pinker, S. The faculty of language: what’s special about it? Cognition 95 , 201–236 (2005).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hurford, J. R. Language in the Light of Evolution: Volume 1, The Origins of Meaning (Oxford Univ. Press, 2007).

Kirby, S., Cornish, H. & Smith, K. Cumulative cultural evolution in the laboratory: an experimental approach to the origins of structure in human language. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105 , 10681–10686 (2008). This behavioural investigation introduces an experimental paradigm based on iterated learning of artificial languages for studying the cultural evolution of language; the findings suggest that languages evolve to maximize their transmissibility by becoming easier to learn and more structured .

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Seyfarth, R. M. & Cheney, D. L. The Social Origins of Language (Princeton Univ. Press, 2018).

Gibson, E. et al. How efficiency shapes human language. Trends Cogn. Sci. 23 , 389–407 (2019).

Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program (MIT Press, 1995).

Carruthers, P. The cognitive functions of language. Behav. Brain Sci. 25 , 657–674 (2002). This comprehensive review discusses diverse language-for-thought views and puts forward a specific proposal whereby language has a critical role in cross-domain integration .

Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S. Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (MIT Press, 2003).

Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. B. & Levinson, S. C. Can language restructure cognition? The case for space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8 , 108–114 (2004).

Vygotsky, L. S. Thought and Language (MIT Press, 2012).

Lupyan, G. The centrality of language in human cognition. Lang. Learn. 66 , 516–553 (2016).

Davidson, D. in Mind and Language (ed. Guttenplan, S.) 1975–1977 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1975).

Dummett, M. Origins of Analytical Philosophy (Harvard Univ. Press, 1994).

Gleitman, L. & Papafragou, A. in The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning (eds Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G.) 633–661 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005).

de Villiers, J. in Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience (eds Baron-Cohen, S. et al.) 83–123 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2000).

Gentner, D. in Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (eds Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S.) 3–14 (MIT Press, 2003). This position piece articulates one version of a language-for-thought hypothesis, whereby human intelligence is due to a combination of our analogical reasoning ability, possession of symbolic representations, and the ability of relational language to improve analogical reasoning abilities .

Buller, D. J. Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature (MIT Press, 2005).

Gould, S. J. & Vrba, E. S. Exaptation—a missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology 8 , 4–15 (1982).

Shannon, C. E. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27 , 379–423 (1948). This article introduces a formal framework for systems of information transfer, with core concepts such as channel capacity, and lays a foundation for the field of information theory .

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Goldberg, A. E. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure (Univ. Chicago Press, 1995).

Jackendoff, R. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution (Oxford Univ. Press, 2002).

Geschwind, N. The organization of language and the brain: language disorders after brain damage help in elucidating the neural basis of verbal behavior. Science 170 , 940–944 (1970).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Friederici, A. D. Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends Cogn. Sci. 6 , 78–84 (2002).

Bates, E. et al. Voxel-based lesion–symptom mapping. Nat. Neurosci. 6 , 448–450 (2003).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hagoort, P. The neurobiology of language beyond single-word processing. Science 366 , 55–58 (2019).

Fedorenko, E., Ivanova, A. I. & Regev, T. I. The language network as a natural kind within the broader landscape of the human brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 25 , 289–312 (2024).

Neville, H. J. et al. Cerebral organization for language in deaf and hearing subjects: biological constraints and effects of experience. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95 , 922–929 (1998).

Fedorenko, E., Hsieh, P.-J., Nieto-Castañon, A., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S. & Kanwisher, N. A new method for fMRI investigations of language: defining ROIs functionally in individual subjects. J. Neurophysiol. 104 , 1177–1194 (2010).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Vagharchakian, L., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Pallier, C. & Dehaene, S. A temporal bottleneck in the language comprehension network. J. Neurosci. 32 , 9089–9102 (2012).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Regev, M., Honey, C. J., Simony, E. & Hasson, U. Selective and invariant neural responses to spoken and written narratives. J. Neurosci. 33 , 15978–15988 (2013).

Hu, J. et al. Precision fMRI reveals that the language-selective network supports both phrase-structure building and lexical access during language production. Cereb. Cortex 33 , 4384–4404 (2022).

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Menenti, L., Gierhan, S. M. E., Segaert, K. & Hagoort, P. Shared language: overlap and segregation of the neuronal infrastructure for speaking and listening revealed by functional MRI. Psychol. Sci. 22 , 1173–1182 (2011). This fMRI investigation establishes that language comprehension and language production draw on the same brain areas in the left frontal and temporal cortex .

Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N. & Fitch, W. T. The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science 298 , 1569–1579 (2002).

Pallier, C., Devauchelle, A. D. & Dehaene, S. Cortical representation of the constituent structure of sentences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 2522–2527 (2011).

Bozic, M., Fonteneau, E., Su, L. & Marslen‐Wilson, W. D. Grammatical analysis as a distributed neurobiological function. Hum. Brain Mapp. 36 , 1190–1201 (2015).

Rodd, J. M., Vitello, S., Woollams, A. M. & Adank, P. Localising semantic and syntactic processing in spoken and written language comprehension: an activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis. Brain Lang. 141 , 89–102 (2015).

Blank, I., Balewski, Z., Mahowald, K. & Fedorenko, E. Syntactic processing is distributed across the language system. NeuroImage 127 , 307–323 (2016).

Fedorenko, E. et al. Neural correlate of the construction of sentence meaning. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113 , E6256–E6262 (2016).

Nelson, M. J. et al. Neurophysiological dynamics of phrase-structure building during sentence processing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , E3669–E3678 (2017).

Fedorenko, E., Blank, I. A., Siegelman, M. & Mineroff, Z. Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network. Cognition 203 , 104348 (2020). This fMRI investigation establishes that every part of the language network that is sensitive to syntactic structure building is also sensitive to word meanings and comprehensively reviews literature relevant to the syntax selectivity debate .

Giglio, L., Ostarek, M. O., Weber, K. & Hagoort, P. Commonalities and asymmetries in the neurobiological infrastructure for language production and comprehension. Cereb. Cortex 32 , 1405–1418 (2022).

Heilbron, M., Armeni, K., Schoffelen, J. M., Hagoort, P. & De Lange, F. P. A hierarchy of linguistic predictions during natural language comprehension. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2201968119 (2022).

Shain, C., Blank, I. A., Fedorenko, E., Gibson, E. & Schuler, W. Robust effects of working memory demand during naturalistic language comprehension in language-selective cortex. J. Neurosci. 42 , 7412–7430 (2022).

Desbordes, T. et al. Dimensionality and ramping: signatures of sentence integration in the dynamics of brains and deep language models. J. Neurosci. 43 , 5350–5364 (2023).

Shain, C. et al. Distributed sensitivity to syntax and semantics throughout the language network. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22 , 1–43 (2024). This fMRI investigation establishes distributed sensitivity to cognitive demands associated with lexical access, syntactic structure building and semantic composition across the language network.

Tuckute, G. et al. Driving and suppressing the human language network using large language models. Nat. Hum. Behav. 8 , 544–561 (2024).

Gentner, D. Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cogn. Sci. 7 , 155–170 (1983).

Google Scholar  

Duncan, J. How Intelligence Happens (Yale Univ. Press, 2012).

Varley, R. A., Klessinger, N. J., Romanowski, C. A. & Siegal, M. Agrammatic but numerate. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102 , 3519–3524 (2005). Patients with acquired damage to the language network display aphasia and linguistic deficits (including severe grammatical difficulties) but perform at the level of neurotypical control participants on diverse numerical reasoning tasks .

Klessinger, N., Szczerbinski, M. & Varley, R. Algebra in a man with severe aphasia. Neuropsychologia 45 , 1642–1648 (2007).

Lecours, A. & Joanette, Y. Linguistic and other psychological aspects of paroxysmal aphasia. Brain and Language 10 , 1–23 (1980).

Kertesz, A. in Thought Without Language (ed. Weiskrantz, L.) 451–463 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1988).

Varley, R. & Siegal, M. Evidence for cognition without grammar from causal reasoning and ‘theory of mind’ in an agrammatic aphasic patient. Curr. Biol. 10 , 723–726 (2000).

Siegal, M., Varley, R. & Want, S. C. Mind over grammar: reasoning in aphasia and development. Trends Cogn. Sci. 5 , 296–301 (2001).

Varley, R. In Cognitive Bases of Science (eds Carruthers, P. et al.) 99–116 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002).

Woolgar, A., Duncan, J., Manes, F. & Fedorenko, E. Fluid intelligence is supported by the multiple-demand system not the language system. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2 , 200–204 (2018).

Dronkers, N. F., Ludy, C. A. & Redfern, B. B. Pragmatics in the absence of verbal language: descriptions of a severe aphasic and a language-deprived adult. J. Neurolinguistics 11 , 179–190 (1998).

Varley, R., Siegal, M. & Want, S. C. Severe impairment in grammar does not preclude theory of mind. Neurocase 7 , 489–493 (2001).

Apperly, I. A., Samson, D., Carroll, N., Hussain, S. & Humphreys, G. Intact first-and second-order false belief reasoning in a patient with severely impaired grammar. Soc. Neurosci. 1 , 334–348 (2006). A person with acquired damage to the language network and consequent aphasia exhibits linguistic deficits but performs at the level of neurotypical control participants on theory of mind tasks .

Willems, R. M., Benn, Y., Hagoort, P., Toni, I. & Varley, R. Communicating without a functioning language system: Implications for the role of language in mentalizing. Neuropsychologia 49 , 3130–3135 (2011).

Bek, J., Blades, M., Siegal, M. & Varley, R. Language and spatial reorientation: evidence from severe aphasia. J. Exp. Psychol. 36 , 646 (2010).

Caramazza, A., Berndt, R. S. & Brownell, H. H. The semantic deficit hypothesis: Perceptual parsing and object classification by aphasic patients. B. Lang. 15 , 161–189 (1982).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Chertkow, H., Bub, D., Deaudon, C. & Whitehead, V. On the status of object concepts in aphasia. Brain Lang. 58 , 203–232 (1997).

Saygın, A. P., Wilson, S. M., Dronkers, N. F. & Bates, E. Action comprehension in aphasia: linguistic and non-linguistic deficits and their lesion correlates. Neuropsychologia 42 , 1788–1804 (2004).

Jefferies, E. & Lambon Ralph, M. A. Semantic impairment in stroke aphasia versus semantic dementia: a case-series comparison. Brain 129 , 2132–2147 (2006).

Dickey, M. W. & Warren, T. The influence of event-related knowledge on verb-argument processing in aphasia. Neuropsychologia 67 , 63–81 (2015).

Ivanova, A. A. et al. The language network is recruited but not required for nonverbal event semantics. Neurobiol. Lang. 2 , 176–201 (2021). In this fMRI study, semantic processing of event pictures in neurotypical individuals engages the language network, but less than verbal descriptions of the same events; however, individuals with acquired damage to the language network and consequent aphasia perform at the level of neurotypical control participants on a non-verbal semantic task .

Benn, Y. et al. The language network is not engaged in object categorization. Cereb. Cortex 33 , 10380–10400 (2023).

Varley, R. Reason without much language. Lang. Sci. 46 , 232–244 (2014).

Dehaene, S., Spelke, E., Pinel, P., Stanescu, R. & Tsivkin, S. Sources of mathematical thinking: behavioral and brain-imaging evidence. Science 284 , 970–974 (1999).

Hermer, L. & Spelke, E. Modularity and development: the case of spatial reorientation. Cognition 61 , 195–232 (1996).

Lupyan, G. Extracommunicative functions of language: verbal interference causes selective categorization impairments. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16 , 711–718 (2009).

Braga, R. M., DiNicola, L. M., Becker, H. C. & Buckner, R. L. Situating the left-lateralized language network in the broader organization of multiple specialized large-scale distributed networks. J. Neurophysiol. 124 , 1415–1448 (2020). This fMRI investigation of the language network establishes this network as one of the intrinsic large-scale networks in the human brain, distinct from nearby cognitive networks .

Fedorenko, E. & Blank, I. A. Broca’s area is not a natural kind. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24 , 270–284 (2020).

Fedorenko, E., Behr, M. K. & Kanwisher, N. Functional specificity for high-level linguistic processing in the human brain. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 16428–16433 (2011). This fMRI investigation finds that arithmetic addition, demanding executive function tasks and music processing do not engage the language areas, thus establishing their selectivity for linguistic input over non-linguistic inputs and tasks .

Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M. & Osherson, D. N. Thought beyond language: neural dissociation of algebra and natural language. Psychol. Sci. 23 , 914–922 (2012).

Amalric, M. & Dehaene, S. A distinct cortical network for mathematical knowledge in the human brain. NeuroImage 189 , 19–31 (2019).

Monti, M. M., Osherson, D. N., Martinez, M. J. & Parsons, L. M. Functional neuroanatomy of deductive inference: a language-independent distributed network. NeuroImage 37 , 1005–1016 (2007).

Monti, M. M., Parsons, L. M. & Osherson, D. N. The boundaries of language and thought in deductive inference. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106 , 12554–12559 (2009). This fMRI investigation finds largely non-overlapping activations of brain regions to language processing and logical processing, thus establishing the selectivity of language areas for linguistic input over logic statements .

Ivanova, A. A. et al. Comprehension of computer code relies primarily on domain-general executive brain regions. eLife 9 , e58906 (2020).

Liu, Y. F., Kim, J., Wilson, C. & Bedny, M. Computer code comprehension shares neural resources with formal logical inference in the fronto-parietal network. eLife 9 , e59340 (2020).

Paunov, A. M., Blank, I. A. & Fedorenko, E. Functionally distinct language and theory of mind networks are synchronized at rest and during language comprehension. J. Neurophysiol. 121 , 1244–1265 (2019).

Paunov, A. M. et al. Differential tracking of linguistic vs. mental state content in naturalistic stimuli by language and theory of mind (ToM) brain networks. Neurobiol. Lang. 3 , 413–440 (2022).

Shain, C., Paunov, A., Chen, X., Lipkin, B. & Fedorenko, E. No evidence of theory of mind reasoning in the human language network. Cereb. Cortex 33 , 6299–6319 (2023).

Sueoka, Y., Paunov, A., Ivanova, A., Blank, I. A. & Fedorenko, E. The language network reliably “tracks” naturalistic meaningful non-verbal stimuli. Neurobiol. Lang. https://doi.org/10.1162/nol_a_00135 (2024).

Piaget, J. The Language and Thought of the Child (Harcourt Brace, 1926).

Gentner, D. & Loewenstein, J. in Language, Literacy, and Cognitive Development: The Development and Consequences of Symbolic Communication (eds Amsel, E. & Byrnes, J. P.) 89–126 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2002).

Appleton, M. & Reddy, V. Teaching three year‐olds to pass false belief tests: a conversational approach. Soc. Dev. 5 , 275–291 (1996).

Slaughter, V. & Gopnik, A. Conceptual coherence in the child’s theory of mind: training children to understand belief. Child Dev. 67 , 2967–2988 (1996).

Hiersche, K. J., Schettini, E., Li, J. & Saygin, Z. M. (2022). Functional dissociation of the language network and other cognition in early childhood. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.08.11.503597 (2023).

Hiersche, K. J. Functional Organization and Modularity of the Superior Temporal Lobe in Children . Masters thesis, The Ohio State University (2023).

Hall, W. C. What you don’t know can hurt you: the risk of language deprivation by impairing sign language development in deaf children. Matern. Child Health J. 21 , 961–965 (2017).

Hall, M. L., Hall, W. C. & Caselli, N. K. Deaf children need language, not (just) speech. First Lang. 39 , 367–395 (2019).

Bedny, M. & Saxe, R. Insights into the origins of knowledge from the cognitive neuroscience of blindness. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 29 , 56–84 (2012).

Grand, G., Blank, I. A., Pereira, F. & Fedorenko, E. Semantic projection recovers rich human knowledge of multiple object features from word embeddings. Nat. Hum. Behav. 6 , 975–987 (2022).

Jackendoff, R. How language helps us think. Pragmat. Cogn. 4 , 1–34 (1996).

Jackendoff. R. The User’s Guide to Meaning (MIT Press, 2012).

Curtiss, S. Genie: A Psycholinguistic Study of a Modern-day Wild Child (Academic Press, 1977).

Peterson, C. C. & Siegal, M. Representing inner worlds: theory of mind in autistic, deaf, and normal hearing children. Psychol. Sci. 10 , 126–129 (1999).

Richardson, H. et al. Reduced neural selectivity for mental states in deaf children with delayed exposure to sign language. Nat. Commun. 11 , 3246 (2020).

Spelke, E. S. What Babies Know: Core Knowledge and Composition , Vol. 1 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2022).

Cheney, D. L. & Seyfarth, R. M. How Monkeys See the World: Inside the Mind of Another Species (Univ. Chicago Press, 1990).

Herrmann, E., Call, J., Hernández-Lloreda, M. V., Hare, B. & Tomasello, M. Humans have evolved specialized skills of social cognition: the cultural intelligence hypothesis. Science 317 , 1360–1366 (2007).

Tomasello, M. & Herrmann, E. Ape and human cognition: what’s the difference? Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19 , 3–8 (2010).

Fischer, J. Monkeytalk: Inside the Worlds and Minds of Primates (Univ. Chicago Press, 2017).

Krupenye, C. & Call, J. Theory of mind in animals: current and future directions. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 10 , e1503 (2019).

Shimizu, T. Why can birds be so smart? Background, significance, and implications of the revised view of the avian brain. Comparat. Cogn. Behav. Rev. 4 , 103–115 (2009).

Güntürkün, O. & Bugnyar, T. Cognition without cortex. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20 , 291–303 (2016).

Hart, B. L., Hart, L. A. & Pinter-Wollman, N. Large brains and cognition: where do elephants fit in? Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 32 , 86–98 (2008).

Godfrey-Smith, P. Other Minds: The Octopus and the Evolution of Intelligent Life (William Collins, 2016).

Schnell, A. K., Amodio, P., Boeckle, M. & Clayton, N. S. How intelligent is a cephalopod? Lessons from comparative cognition. Biol. Rev. 96 , 162–178 (2021).

Gallistel, C. R. Prelinguistic thought. Lang. Learn. Dev. 7 , 253–262 (2011).

Fitch, W. T. Animal cognition and the evolution of human language: why we cannot focus solely on communication. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 375 , 20190046 (2020).

Yamada, J. E. & Marshall, J. C. Laura: A Case Study for the Modularity of Language (MIT Press, 1990).

Rondal, J. A. Exceptional Language Development in Down Syndrome (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995).

Bellugi, U., Lichtenberger, L., Jones, W., Lai, Z. & St George, M. The neurocognitive profile of Williams syndrome: a complex pattern of strengths and weaknesses. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 12 , 7–29 (2000).

Little, B. et al. Language in schizophrenia and aphasia: the relationship with non-verbal cognition and thought disorder. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry 24 , 389–405 (2019).

Mahowald, K. et al. Dissociating language and thought in large language models. Trends Cogn. Sci. 28 , 517–540(2024).

Chomsky, N., Belleti, A. & Rizzi, L. in On Nature and Language (eds Belleti, A. & Rizzi, L.) 92–161 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002).

Schwartz, J. L., Boë, L. J., Vallée, N. & Abry, C. The dispersion–focalization theory of vowel systems. J. Phonetics 25 , 255–286 (1997).

Diehl, R. L. Acoustic and auditory phonetics: the adaptive design of speech sound systems. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 363 , 965–978 (2008).

Everett, C., Blasi, D. E. & Roberts, S. G. Climate, vocal folds, and tonal languages: Connecting the physiological and geographic dots. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112 , 1322–1327 (2015).

Blasi, D. E. et al. Human sound systems are shaped by post-Neolithic changes in bite configuration. Science 363 , eaav3218 (2019).

Dautriche, I., Mahowald, K., Gibson, E., Christophe, A. & Piantadosi, S. T. Words cluster phonetically beyond phonotactic regularities. Cognition 163 , 128–145 (2017).

Piantadosi, S. T., Tily, H. & Gibson, E. Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 3526–3529 (2011).

Levelt, W. J. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation (MIT Press, 1993).

Kemp, C. & Regier, T. Kinship categories across languages reflect general communicative principles. Science 336 , 1049–1054 (2012). This study provides a computational demonstration that the kinship systems across world’s languages trade off between simplicity and informativeness in a near-optimal way, and argue that these principles also characterize other category systems .

Gibson, E. et al. Color naming across languages reflects color use. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , 10785–10790 (2017).

Zaslavsky, N., Kemp, C., Regier, T. & Tishby, N. Efficient compression in color naming and its evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , 7937–7942 (2018).

Kemp, C., Gaby, A. & Regier, T. Season naming and the local environment. Proc. 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 539–545 (2019).

Xu, Y., Liu, E. & Regier, T. Numeral systems across languages support efficient communication: From approximate numerosity to recursion. Open Mind 4 , 57–70 (2020).

Denić, M., Steinert-Threlkeld, S. & Szymanik, J. Complexity/informativeness trade-off in the domain of indefinite pronouns. Semant. Linguist. Theor. 30 , 166–184 (2021).

Mollica, F. et al. The forms and meanings of grammatical markers support efficient communication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2025993118 (2021).

van de Pol, I., Lodder, P., van Maanen, L., Steinert-Threlkeld, S. & Szymanik, J. Quantifiers satisfying semantic universals have shorter minimal description length. Cognition 232 , 105150 (2023).

Clark, H. H. in Context in Language Learning and Language Understanding (eds Malmkj’r, K. & Williams, J.) 63–87) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998).

Winter, B., Perlman, M. & Majid, A. Vision dominates in perceptual language: English sensory vocabulary is optimized for usage. Cognition 179 , 213–220 (2018).

von Humboldt, W. Uber die Verschiedenheit des Menschlichen Sprachbaues (1836).

Hurford, J. R. Linguistic Evolution Through Language Acquisition: Formal and Computational Models (ed. Briscoe, E.) 301–344 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002).

Smith, K., Brighton, H. & Kirby, S. Complex systems in language evolution: the cultural emergence of compositional structure. Adv. Complex Syst. 6 , 537–558 (2003).

Piantadosi, S. T. & Fedorenko, E. Infinitely productive language can arise from chance under communicative pressure. J. Lang. Evol. 2 , 141–147 (2017).

Gibson, E. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68 , 1–76 (1998).

Lewis, R. L., Vasishth, S. & Van Dyke, J. A. Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends Cogn. Sci. 10 , 447–454 (2006).

Liu, H. Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty. J. Cogn. Sci. 9 , 151–191 (2008).

ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Futrell, R., Mahowald, K. & Gibson, E. Large-scale evidence of dependency length minimization in 37 languages. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112 , 10336–10341 (2015). This investigation of syntactic dependency lengths across 37 diverse languages suggests that dependencies are predominantly local cross-linguistically, presumably because non-local dependencies are cognitively costly in both production and comprehension .

Dryer, M. S. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68 , 81–138 (1992).

Hahn, M., Jurafsky, D. & Futrell, R. Universals of word order reflect optimization of grammars for efficient communication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 2347–2353 (2020).

Goldin-Meadow, S., Wing, C. S., Özyürek, A. & Mylander, C. The natural order of events: how speakers of different languages represent events nonverbally. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105 , 9163–9168 (2008).

Senghas, A., Kita, S. & Ozyürek, A. Children creating core properties of language: evidence from an emerging sign language in Nicaragua. Science 305 , 1779–1782 (2004).

Sandler, W., Meir, I., Padden, C. & Aronoff, M. The emergence of grammar: systematic structure in a new language. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102 , 2661–2665 (2005).

Gibson, E. et al. A noisy-channel account of crosslinguistic word-order variation. Psychol. Sci. 24 , 1079–1088 (2013).

Levy, R. A noisy-channel model of human sentence comprehension under uncertain input. In Proc. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 234–243 (2008).

Gibson, E., Bergen, L. & Piantadosi, S. T. Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110 , 8051–8056 (2013). This behavioural investigation demonstrates that language comprehension is robust to noise: in the presence of corrupt linguistic input, listeners and readers rely on a combination of prior expectations about messages that are likely to be communicated and knowledge of how linguistic signals can get corrupted by noise .

Futrell, R., Levy, R. P. & Gibson, E. Dependency locality as an explanatory principle for word order. Language 96 , 371–412 (2020).

Hahn, M. & Xu, Y. Crosslinguistic word order variation reflects evolutionary pressures of dependency and information locality. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2122604119 (2022).

Hahn, M., Futrell, R., Levy, R. & Gibson, E. A resource-rational model of human processing of recursive linguistic structure. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2122602119 (2022).

Piantadosi, S. T., Tily, H. & Gibson, E. The communicative function of ambiguity in language. Cognition 122 , 280–291 (2012).

Quijada, J. A grammar of the Ithkuil language—introduction. ithkuil.net https://ithkuil.net/00_intro.html (accessed 27 February 2022).

Srinivasan, M. & Rabagliati, H. The implications of polysemy for theories of word learning. Child Dev. Perspect. 15 , 148–153 (2021).

Bizzi, E. Motor control revisited: a novel view. Curr. Trends Neurol. 10 , 75–80 (2016).

Darwin, C. On the Origin of Species–A Facsimile of the First Edition (Harvard Univ. Press, 1964).

Herculano-Houzel, S. The remarkable, yet not extraordinary, human brain as a scaled-up primate brain and its associated cost. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109 , 10661–10668 (2012).

White, L. T. The historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science 155 , 1203–1207 (1967).

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

King, M. C. & Wilson, A. C. Evolution at two levels in humans and chimpanzees. Science 188 , 107–116 (1975).

Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium. Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome. Nature 437 , 69–87 (2005).

Buckner, R. L. & Krienen, F. M. The evolution of distributed association networks in the human brain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 17 , 648–665 (2013). This review presents the evidence for the disproportionate expansion of the association cortex relative to other brain areas in humans .

Duncan, J., Assem, M. & Shashidhara, S. Integrated intelligence from distributed brain activity. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24 , 838–852 (2020).

Saxe, R. & Kanwisher, N. People thinking about thinking people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of mind”. NeuroImage 19 , 1835–1842 (2003).

Buckner, R. L. & DiNicola, L. M. The brain’s default network: updated anatomy, physiology and evolving insights. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 20 , 593–608 (2019).

Deen, B. & Freiwald, W. A. Parallel systems for social and spatial reasoning within the cortical apex. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.09.23.461550 (2021).

Mitchell, D. J. et al. A putative multiple-demand system in the macaque brain. J. Neurosci. 36 , 8574–8585 (2016).

Cantlon, J. & Piantadosi, S. Uniquely human intelligence arose from expanded information capacity. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 3 , 275–293 (2024).

Tomasello, M. The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition (Harvard Univ. Press, 2009).

Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J. & Henrich, J. The cultural niche: Why social learning is essential for human adaptation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 10918–10925 (2011).

Henrich, J. The Secret of Our Success: How Culture is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter (Princeton Univ. Press, 2016).

Heyes, C. Cognitive Gadgets (Harvard Univ. Press, 2018).

Gumperz, J. J. & Levinson, S. C. (eds). Rethinking Linguistic Relativity (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1996).

Piaget, J. Language and Thought of the Child: Selected Works , Vol. 5 (Routledge, 2005).

Gleitman, L. R. & Papafragou, A. in Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning (eds Holyoak, K. & Morrison, R.) 2nd edn (Oxford Univ. Press, 2016).

Fedorenko, E. & Varley, R. Language and thought are not the same thing: evidence from neuroimaging and neurological patients. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 1369 , 132–153 (2016).

Gentner, D. Language as cognitive tool kit: How language supports relational thought. Am. Psychol. 71 , 650 (2016).

Frank, M. C., Everett, D. L., Fedorenko, E. & Gibson, E. Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition. Cognition 108 , 819–824 (2008).

Wernicke, C. The aphasic symptom-complex: a psychological study on an anatomical basis. Arch. Neurol. 22 , 280–282 (1869).

Lichteim, L. On aphasia. Brain 7 , 433–484 (1885).

Poeppel, D., Emmorey, K., Hickok, G. & Pylkkänen, L. Towards a new neurobiology of language. J. Neurosci. 32 , 14125–14131 (2012).

Tremblay, P. & Dick, A. S. Broca and Wernicke are dead, or moving past the classic model of language neurobiology. Brain Lang. 162 , 60–71 (2016).

Hillis, A. E. et al. Re‐examining the brain regions crucial for orchestrating speech articulation. Brain 127 , 1479–1487 (2004).

Flinker, A. et al. Redefining the role of Broca’s area in speech. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112 , 2871–2875 (2015).

Long, M. A. et al. Functional segregation of cortical regions underlying speech timing and articulation. Neuron 89 , 1187–1193 (2016).

Guenther, F. H. Neural Control of Speech (MIT Press, 2016).

Basilakos, A., Smith, K. G., Fillmore, P., Fridriksson, J. & Fedorenko, E. Functional characterization of the human speech articulation network. Cereb. Cortex 28 , 1816–1830 (2018).

Obleser, J., Zimmermann, J., Van Meter, J. & Rauschecker, J. P. Multiple stages of auditory speech perception reflected in event-related fMRI. Cereb. Cortex 17 , 2251–2257 (2007).

Mesgarani, N., Cheung, C., Johnson, K. & Chang, E. F. Phonetic feature encoding in human superior temporal gyrus. Science 343 , 1006–1010 (2014).

Norman-Haignere, S., Kanwisher, N. G. & McDermott, J. H. Distinct cortical pathways for music and speech revealed by hypothesis-free voxel decomposition. Neuron 88 , 1281–1296 (2015).

Overath, T., McDermott, J., Zarate, J. & Poeppel, D. The cortical analysis of speech-specific temporal structure revealed by responses to sound quilts. Nat. Neurosci. 18 , 903–911 (2015).

Norman-Haignere, S. V. et al. A neural population selective for song in human auditory cortex. Curr. Biol. 32 , 1470–1484.e12 (2022).

Hickok, G. & Poeppel, D. The cortical organization of speech processing. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 8 , 393–402 (2007).

Friederici, A. D. The cortical language circuit: from auditory perception to sentence comprehension. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16 , 262–268 (2012).

Wilson, S. M. et al. Recovery from aphasia in the first year after stroke. Brain 146 , 1021–1039 (2023).

Radford, A. et al. Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog 1 , 9 (2019).

Jain, S. & Huth, A. Incorporating context into language encoding models for fMRI. in Proc. 32nd International Conf. Neural Information Processing Systems (eds Bengio, S. et al.) (Curran Associates, 2018).

Schrimpf, M. et al. The neural architecture of language: Integrative modeling converges on predictive processing. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2105646118 (2021).

Caucheteux, C. & King, J. R. Brains and algorithms partially converge in natural language processing. Commun. Biol. 5 , 134 (2022).

Goldstein, A. et al. Shared computational principles for language processing in humans and deep language models. Nat. Neurosci. 25 , 369–380 (2022).

Tuckute, T., Kanwisher, N. & Fedorenko, E. Language in brains, minds, and machines. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-120623-101142 (2024).

Paulk, A. C. et al. Large-scale neural recordings with single neuron resolution using Neuropixels probes in human cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 25 , 252–263 (2022).

Leonard, M. K. et al. Large-scale single-neuron speech sound encoding across the depth of human cortex. Nature 626 , 593–602 (2024).

Fodor, J. A. The Language of Thought (Crowell, 1975).

Fodor, J. A. & Pylyshyn, Z. W. Connectionism and cognitive architecture: a critical analysis. Cognition 28 , 3–71 (1988).

Rule, J. S., Tenenbaum, J. B. & Piantadosi, S. T. The child as hacker. Trends Cogn. Sci. 24 , 900–915 (2020).

Quilty-Dunn, J., Porot, N. & Mandelbaum, E. The best game in town: the reemergence of the language-of-thought hypothesis across the cognitive sciences. Behav. Brain Sci. 46 , e261 (2023).

Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L. & PDP Research Group. Parallel Distributed Processing, Vol. 1: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition: Foundations (MIT Press, 1986).

Smolensky, P. & Legendre, G. The Harmonic Mind: From Neural Computation to Optimality–Theoretic Grammar Vol. 1: Cognitive Architecture (MIT Press, 2006).

Frankland, S. M. & Greene, J. D. Concepts and compositionality: in search of the brain’s language of thought. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 71 , 273–303 (2020).

Lake, B. M. & Baroni, M. Human-like systematic generalization through a meta-learning neural network. Nature 623 , 115–121 (2023).

Dehaene-Lambertz, G., Dehaene, S. & Hertz-Pannier, L. Functional neuroimaging of speech perception in infants. Science 298 , 2013–2015 (2002).

Pena, M. et al. Sounds and silence: an optical topography study of language recognition at birth. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100 , 11702–11705 (2003).

Cristia, A., Minagawa, Y. & Dupoux, E. Responses to vocalizations and auditory controls in the human newborn brain. PLoS ONE 9 , e115162 (2014).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank A. Ivanova, R. Jackendoff, N. Kanwisher, K. Mahowald, R. Seyfarth, C. Shain and N. Zaslavsky for helpful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript; N. Caselli, M. Coppola, A. Hillis, L. Menn, R. Varley and S. Wilson for comments on specific sections; C. Casto, T. Regev, F. Mollica and R. Futrell for help with the figures; and S. Swords, N. Jhingan, H. S. Kim and A. Sathe for help with references. E.F. was supported by NIH awards DC016607 and DC016950 from NIDCD, NS121471 from NINDS, and from funds from MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Simons Center for the Social Brain, and Quest for Intelligence.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Evelina Fedorenko & Edward A. F. Gibson

Speech and Hearing in Bioscience and Technology Program at Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA

Evelina Fedorenko

University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

Steven T. Piantadosi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed equally to conceiving, writing and revising this piece.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evelina Fedorenko .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature thanks Angelika Kratzer and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information, rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fedorenko, E., Piantadosi, S.T. & Gibson, E.A.F. Language is primarily a tool for communication rather than thought. Nature 630 , 575–586 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07522-w

Download citation

Received : 15 February 2023

Accepted : 03 May 2024

Published : 19 June 2024

Issue Date : 20 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07522-w

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

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

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 > Psycholinguistics - New Advances and Real-World Applications

Critical Communicative Competence: The Interplay of Cognitive Flexibility, Language Awareness, and Cultural Awareness

Submitted: 16 October 2023 Reviewed: 06 November 2023 Published: 18 December 2023

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1003880

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Psycholinguistics - New Advances and Real-World Applications

Xiaoming Jiang

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

62 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Changing living and communicative contexts have resulted in individuals assuming multiple and variable identities and facing diverse discursive and linguistic practices. Therefore, in the last decades, critical communicative competence has been established as an essential framework for addressing contemporary challenges. In the chapter, critical communicative competence is analytically explored through fundamental characteristics of critical thinking and a key competence as a complex interplay of cognitive, emotional-evaluative, and actional dimensions, implied on each of three interrelated components of communicative competence: cognitive, linguistic, and contextual. In the cognitive domain, multicultural and multimedia contexts demand cognitive flexibility in schemas and strategies. Critical linguistic awareness is essential in the linguistic domain as it enables a speaker to recognise the constructive and interpretative nature of language. In the contextual domain, critical cultural awareness is a tool for understanding how speakers’ choices are influenced by their culture and context. Despite the analytical approach, dimensions and components are considered interrelated and interdependent, and only in interaction, leading to more responsible and sensitive communication.

• critical thinking
• critical communicative competence
• cognitive flexibility
• language awareness
• cultural awareness

Author Information

Jerca vogel *.

• Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenija

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Various and changing living and communicative contexts, which today’s societies and individuals encounter due to population fluctuations, social changes, and technological development, have led to the instability of living, professional, and interest environments. As a result, individuals assume numerous and more variable identities than before and, when entering communicative situations in different environments, confront a broader range of discursive and linguistic practices. This process is reflected in re-questioning traditional concepts of languages and cultures, language varieties and discursive patterns, and the relationships between speakers. Consequently, the communicative demands imposed by new circumstances on individuals and society have also affected the understanding of communicative competence. Therefore, besides the relationship between language and reference, questioning how language reflects the real or imagined world, and the relationship between language and the individual, examining how individuals shape their perceptions of reality based on language, the focus has been placed primarily on the relationship between language and culture/society. Therefore, the essential question has become how text functions in context, with text understood as any linguistic realisation and context as the broadest sociocultural framework in which an individual operates linguistically, demanding a continuous search for knowledge, the development of new skills, and the formation of stances [ 1 ].

Due to these new circumstances, as in Ref. [ 2 ] asserts, the functional concept of communicative competence, which could be broadly defined as the ability to understand and use information from texts and to create appropriate and effective texts [ 3 ,  4 ], has faced numerous criticisms in Australia since the early 1990s. Sociologists have warned that such a model encourages competitive individualism; post-structuralists and feminist theorists have argued that the emphasis on the individual or personal perspective diminishes the understanding of how discourse shapes social relations; systemic functional linguists have cautioned that due to the emphasis on “experience,” personal growth, and literary narrative, students from the most vulnerable groups do not acquire sufficient explicit knowledge of how typical genres, which are expressions of intellectual and political power, work, and they do not acquire strategies for producing them; cultural and media studies have pointed out the systematic omission of visual texts, texts in new media, and texts in new work environments [ 2 ]. Therefore, critical communicative competence has been established as the theoretical framework that allows addressing the challenges of contemporary times.

2. From functional towards critical communicative competence

Critical communicative competence is not a homogenous concept. It is defined more narrowly or broadly, emphasising different dimensions and components in various disciplines and geographical areas with different historical and cultural backgrounds [ 5 ]. Therefore, in defining it, we will start from the fundamental concepts of critical thinking and competence.

2.1 Critical thinking in communication

As reference [ 6 ] noted, critical thinking is a broad and relatively abstract concept. The author [ 7 ] categorises its definitions into two groups, aligning with two perspectives on critical communication. The first group, primarily derived from philosophy and rhetoric, views critical thinking narrowly as the skill of analysing, evaluating, and constructing arguments. Therefore, critical thinking emphasises the ability to apply criteria, self-correction or critical reflection of one’s thought process, and sensitivity to context [ 6 ]. Similarly, the author [ 8 ] suggests that one of the most common narrowing concepts of critical communicative competence is its equation with the critical evaluation of information. For instance, in Singapore [ 2 ], where critical thinking was at the centre of educational reform as early as 1997, it is commonly associated with innovative and creative thinking and entrepreneurship but less with social and ethical issues.

The second group of definitions, stemming from a broader theory of knowledge and learning, views critical thinking as not just the skill of analysing, evaluating, and constructing arguments but also as a set of mental processes, problem-solving strategies, and creativity [ 6 ]. This group defines critical thinking as a permanent characteristic of an individual that incentivises him to approach activities with thoughtful scepticism aimed at deciding what to believe and how to act [ 9 ]. The authors of this group additionally emphasise intentionality and goal orientation, exploring assumptions, recognising hidden values, evaluating evidence, assessing the validity of conclusions, identifying and being aware of one’s own errors in thinking and listening [ 6 , 10 ], as well as overcoming egocentrism, omniscience, omnipotence, and invulnerability [ 11 ].

Definitions of communicative competence based on this understanding of criticality are thus no longer considered simply as the ability to participate in existing linguistic practice [ 6 , 8 ] but expand the concept of communicative competence, emphasising that an individual’s experience is historically shaped within specific power relations [ 8 ].

Therefore, the central consideration is focused on questions about the author‘s intent, the ideologies presented through the text, the societal role conveyed to the reader, and the values and viewpoints advocated or opposed [ 8 ]. Nevertheless, these approaches, while not denying the relations of social, cultural, and economic power that are expressed in texts, are focused on individual usage [ 2 ]. In Ref., the author [ 2 ] attributes the individual perspective to the fact that it arises from a psychological and psycholinguistic definition of communicative competence as an individual process rather than an activity embedded in a broader social context. Consequently, this perspective does not encompass those aspects of criticality that stress that communication is linked to social power and that critical communicative competence involves a critical attitude towards society and its beliefs.

Comparatively, the characteristics of uncritical and critical communication highlighted in the discussions can be illustrated in Table 1 .

Characteristics of non-critical and critical communication.

Motivation for critical communication stems from an awareness that it leads to deeper understanding, prevents and resolves misunderstandings and conflicts, and enables creative transfer and problem-solving.

Sensitivity to the sociocultural context of all participants in a communicative event and the acceptance of others’ perspectives, even if they differ significantly from our own.

Understanding the complexity of language and communication, acknowledging that in addition to its cognitive dimension, communication possesses an emotional or affective (relational) dimension. The speaker and the listener do not enter emotionally, interest-wise, or value-neutral.

Evaluation based on well-defined criteria requires general, sociocultural, and linguistic knowledge.

Metacognition is the ability to reflect critically or self-reflect on one’s thought process.

In Ref. [ 4 ], Sternberg adds ethics and social responsibility, signifying an awareness that speech acts have consequences that speakers have to take responsibility for and that they strive to use language for the benefit of all.

2.2 Dimensions of critical communicative competence

In addition to equating critical communication with critical evaluation of information and discourse, another narrowing in understanding critical communication, according to reference [ 8 ], is that it is mainly placed at the cognitive level. Namely, limiting critical communication solely to the cognitive domain fails to explain some essential characteristics, such as the motivation for critical communication, positive attitudes towards it, awareness of its emotional dimension, and readiness for the ethical realisation of discourses and sociocultural language uses that are deemed justified. Such an approach also excludes the inclination to reject expressions that convey social relations that are not accepted. Therefore, another significant aspect in the definition of critical communicative competence is which dimensions constitute it, how they are interrelated and how they interact in communication.

The most widely accepted definition of key competencies has been formulated by reference [ 12 ], who defines them as complex systems of knowledge, beliefs, and action tendencies that are built on well-organised knowledge, fundamental skills (strategies), generalised attitudes, and cognitive styles [ 12 ]. Thus, competence is defined as a complex composition of three dimensions: cognitive (knowledge, skills, cognitive styles, and experience), emotional-evaluative (attitudes and beliefs), and actional (i.e. readiness to act by one’s own beliefs).

A somewhat different perspective on competence can be discerned from the definitions that served as the basis for understanding communicative competence in language teaching. In Ref. [ 13 ], it is defined as the ability of speakers to communicate or use language knowledge in accordance with various psychological, social, and linguistic circumstances. In his definition, the cognitive dimension is primarily associated with skills and less with knowledge, while, on the other hand, he claimed that it is essential not to separate cognitive from non-cognitive (affective and volitional) factors [ 13 , 14 ]. Compared to reference [ 13 ], in Ref. [ 15 ], competence is understood as a synthesis of knowledge and skills required for communication. Thus, they expanded the understanding of the cognitive dimension while neglecting the emotional dimension.

On the opposite, the documents of the European Commission follow Weinert’s holistic understanding of competence [ 16 ], as The European Reference Framework: Key Competences for Lifelong Learning defines key competencies as combinations of knowledge, skills, and attitudes related to a specific context that individuals need for personal fulfilment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion, and employment [ 17 ]. Critical thinking, creativity, initiative, problem-solving, risk assessment, decision-making, and constructive emotional management are essential in developing and implementing all key competencies [ 17 ].

Similarly, the difference between a one-dimensional and a multi-dimensional view of communicative competence is reflected in the analytical definition of its components. All the mentioned models emphasise two central components: linguistic (grammatical and textual) and contextual (pragmatic or sociolinguistic) competence, attributing them to the cognitive dimension since they emphasise the skills required for their performance and, to some extent, knowledge. Linguistic and contextual components are complemented with components related to cognitive processes. Canale and Swain, and Bachman talk about strategic competence, which Canale and Swain [ 15 ] understand as an organiser, and Bachman, following reference [ 18 ], understands it as a processor or a web of cognitive abilities that enable the use of linguistic and non-linguistic data to understand text formation. Some other models consider cognitive competence either as the ability to organise data [ 17 , 19 ] or as factual knowledge of the world [ 20 , 21 , 22 ], and both relate them to skills required to perform established procedures in predictable contexts.

Because the three core components: cognitive, linguistic, and contextual, are primarily understood and analysed from a cognitive perspective, some authors try to incorporate non-cognitive dimensions into analytical models as additional components. References [ 19 , 22 ], for instance, discuss the motivation for communication. At the same time, reference [ 17 ] includes a “positive attitude towards understanding in one’s mother tongue” and a “willingness to engage in critical and constructive dialogue, respect for aesthetic qualities, and a desire to achieve them, commitment or interest in communicating with others” as distinctive competencies.

Nevertheless, based on the essential characteristics of critical thinking, we must view these dimensions as interrelated and interacting throughout the communication process and include them in essential competencies rather than separating them. In doing so, we will rely on Weinert’s definition of competence and the areas of criticality defined by Barnett (as cited in [ 23 ]) as (1) propositions, ideas, and theories, especially in connection with systematic knowledge; (2) the individual’s inner world, where criticality is expressed through critical self-reflection; and (3) the external world, where critical thinking is expressed through critical action.

The cognitive dimension refers to all elements that answer the question of what we can do, what we know, and how we reflect and improve our actions based on knowledge, experience, and beliefs. It encompasses cognitive, pragmatic, and language skills and strategies that enable the application of these skills while considering broader cognitive, language, and communication patterns and specific situations. It also includes metaknowledge or knowledge about the world in general and specific topics, language, its rules, genres and systems, sociocultural relations, linguistic diversity, and communication principles. On the other hand, it involves metacognition on one’s own or others’ language activities, the influence of emotions, biases, preferences, and values, and the appropriateness of evaluation criteria, enabling self-correction or improvement, knowledge transfer to new contexts, independent acquisition of new knowledge, and problem-solving.

The emotional or evaluative dimension concerns the general emotional orientation and emotional and value-based attitudes towards the subject (“world”), the way it is presented, the circumstances, as well as language in general and its diversity, by which it becomes an expression of individual or collective identity and a carrier of social power. A positive attitude does not mean uncritical acceptance of familiar practices and stances but rather a critical attitude towards established patterns, stereotypes, and prejudices and a willingness to embrace diversity. This attitude is closely linked to an individual’s knowledge of language and communication, experience, and the ability for knowledge- and experience-based reflection. Its goal is not only to recognise or raise awareness of one’s or others’ attitudes, as can be inferred from selected linguistic means, but also to reflect on the legitimacy of such attitudes from an ethical perspective [ 24 ].

From the perspective of the actional dimension, within the concept of critical communication, actions are initiated not only by motivational elements that predominantly prevail in a functional communication model but also stem from individuals’ needs, desires, and wishes. Equally important is the moral aspect, which implies a willingness to act responsibly and justly by ethical, social, cultural, and personal norms. A critical speaker strives to promote linguistic practices that they consider ethical and constructive and to change those that express unacceptable relationships [ 24 , 25 ].

Critical communicative competence can thus be defined as a level of communicative competence that enhances functional and cultural communicative competence with critical thinking. Participants in communication are sensitive to the individual and the sociocultural context; they consider the emotional and evaluative dimensions and are aware of the need for evaluation based on credible criteria, transcending emotional biases, prejudices, and established perspectives. They also self-reflect on their communication (metacognition) and consider their ethical and social responsibility for their communicative actions.

3. Complexity of critical communicative competence

Critical communication is a multi-dimensional activity embedded in the relationship between the real world, language, and society/culture. The cognitive, emotional-evaluative, and actional dimensions are interrelated and realised through three core competencies: cognitive, linguistic, and contextual, as illustrated in Figure 1 , where the circular diagram depicts the interconnections of core competencies, and arrows represent the realisation of dimensions in each of them.

Interconnections of dimensions and core competencies of critical communicative competence.

3.1 Cognitive component

Within the cognitive domain, according to reference [ 19 ], the processes of conceptual and logical organisation, as well as the storage of knowledge and experiences, are vital in connecting these knowledge and experiences into new networks, especially when dealing with problem-solving or new communicative circumstances. In this context, cognitive linguistics [ 26 ] and the theory of the psychology of communication [ 27 ] emphasise that language is not an autonomous phenomenon involving unique, specialised cognitive processes; instead, it is determined by the same cognitive processes found in other non-linguistic domains: memory, conceptualisation, logical reasoning, and perception [ 26 ]. This implies that cognitive abilities can be discussed on two levels: general cognitive processes and communicative competencies, through which these processes are enacted in specific ways for understanding and producing texts.

3.1.1 Cognitive processes in communication

General cognitive abilities related to communication, as defined by Ule Nastran [ 27 ], fall under the broader concept of perception. Perception encompasses information’s reception and selection, categorisation and organisation, and primary interpretation. When selecting information to focus on, we are primarily guided by distinguishing essential pieces of information from unimportant ones, ignoring specific messages, and adapting them to our existing cognitive apparatus, typification, and stereotyping. Therefore, the most crucial cognitive process is categorisation based on the principle of similarity or proximity into categories (concepts, representations). These categories are placed within cognitive schemas, determining our prior expectations [ 27 ].

While categories could be defined as individual concepts or representations, cognitive schemas are the organisation of knowledge about a particular person, object, situation, event, or the relationship between categories [ 27 ]. Schemas determine the characteristics attributed to individual concepts and what we consider accurate, as well as allow us to draw conclusions, explore assumptions and hidden values, assess the validity of conclusions, and extend our understanding and interpretation beyond directly given information. General categories and schemas may contain numerous subcategories based on sample cases, enabling flexible interpretation and, consequently, modifying initial categories (compare [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]).

From a communicative perspective, Brown [ 30 ] identified not only expectations related to schematic knowledge about specific topics but also those stemming from schematic knowledge about textual genres and their typical context (expected speaker, audience, time, place). Individuals form this knowledge based on their language usage experience and, during communication, invoke the entire discursive event, such as a lecture, and its typical microelements, like an introduction with the announcement of the topic and the presentation of the lecture’s structure (see also [ 28 ]).

Similarly, Hart [ 26 ] defines fundamental cognitive processes and links them with discursive strategies for their realisation. The comprehensive understanding that stems from a schema or scenario with which a speaker has associated a particular scene or event is associated with the structural configuration of the text. Comparing experiences enables framing, enabling the speaker/listener to assume which actors and processes will be given greater importance, how metaphorical meanings and symbols should be understood, and how connotations are assigned to words or texts. The ability to direct attention is the basis for identification ; that is, the speaker chooses which aspects (features) of a given situation/scene to include in the presentation and how to place them in relation to each other. Finally, the positioning depends on our chosen perspective or our placement in space, time, and a particular role [ 26 ]. Thus, it defines the sociocultural context from which we will operate.

3.1.2 Cognitive flexibility as a distinctive characteristic of critical cognitive competence

Rost [ 29 ] points out that schemas are not only used for interpreting texts but also for generating or retrieving them. In this process, we summarise and refresh the content by preserving the schematic framework while often modifying specific details, omitting them, or adding new ones to align our understanding with our culturally determined knowledge. From a critical perspective, it is essential to be aware that different cognitive strategies can, in specific contexts, be linked to the emotional-evaluative dimension. For instance, new information may be suppressed if it is unpleasant, threatening, or conflict with our environment, and thus undermines our belief in our inner strength and integration. At the same time, overly generalised, stereotypical categories can develop, into which all units of a particular general category are classified, regardless of their individuality or other sample cases. Such overly generalised categories are stereotypes [ 27 ], which include positive or negative attitudes towards the category [ 27 ].

Therefore, from the perspective of critical communication, in today’s multicultural society, cognitive flexibility is crucial in all cognitive processes. This is particularly important in categorisation, where static and unchanging schemas can lead to generalisations and evaluations based solely on one’s own cultural background and values. Instead, schemas should be open to variations and transitions, allowing for flexibility and consideration of different perspectives and sociocultural contexts. Compared to functional communication, critical communication has changed the fundamental orientation of participants towards the text and each other. In functional reading, the reader’s orientation is harmonised with the text, primarily seeking understanding. In critical reading, the readers are oriented towards the text; their primary purpose is to interpret and evaluate it [ 31 ]. Recognising excessive generalisation, stereotypes, and prejudices and avoiding their use requires him to change perspectives, reflect on implications and place the data in a meaningful context to analyse attitudes and positions from two aspects: textual and communicative [ 31 ].

Regarding communicative strategies, flexibility becomes a fundamental requirement, mainly due to digital communication, which is significantly influenced by multimedia and interactivity. This interaction affects the structure of communicative events, participants’ roles, and the interweaving of intentions, discourses, genres, and perspectives [ 32 ].

3.2 Linguistic competence

Traditionally, definitions of communicative competence have focused on linguistic processes. These include the formation of the literal meaning of sentences, which links processes of perception and attention direction, decoding words (i.e. recognising words in sound or writing), associating words with reference, constructing the propositional meaning of sentences based on the rules of a given language, and shaping the literal meaning of a text. The latter involves placing sentences within a textual framework and complementing them with data from the co-text using cohesion and coherence, logical reasoning based on given data, and new information [ 22 , 23 , 29 , 33 ].

3.2.1 Constructional nature of linguistic activity

Despite discussing linguistic skills, they cannot be observed separated from the cognitive or contextual component. For example, besides cognitive effects in word recognition, Rost [ 29 ] and Kranjc [ 33 ] emphasise that understanding words does not stop at recognising a word and connecting it to a concept but must also be linked to a specific reference. Due to the polysemous nature of most words, we must decide which of a word’s multiple meanings is realised in a particular sentence based on the context or world knowledge. This can communicate the creator’s experience, evaluation, and identity, which the reader may recognise, accept, or not [ 34 ].

Similarly, constructing propositional meaning is not limited to understanding words and their grammatical connections. It extends beyond that. As Lurija [ 35 ] pointed out, polysemy can be present in most sentences, even though we usually understand them without difficulty based on our linguistic knowledge. Complications arise in complex grammatical constructions requiring substantial transformations, such as nominalisation, prepositional phrases used to express relations between abstract concepts. On the other hand, a sentence’s propositional meaning is only part of what the author had in mind. Therefore, readers logically infer the unspoken. In addition, pragmatics has shifted attention from literal towards communicated meaning, as texts are always received within a specific speech situation, which is inferred based on textual and sociolinguistic schemas [ 34 ].

According to Hart [ 26 ] notes, it is essential to recognise that linguistic encoding is always a construction because the same situation, event, entity, or relationship can be represented in different ways by choosing linguistic elements. Namely, linguistic activity involves continuously choosing linguistic elements [ 36 ], which do not always occur at a conscious level, especially in a first language. Therefore, it is reflected and thoughtful choices that can improve an individual’s communicative ability. Thus, conscious choices can enhance an individual’s communicative competence. Effective language selection depends on the awareness of linguistic choice possibilities, knowledge of the language system, the ability to use various strategies, and considerations of contextual factors, especially the audience [ 37 ].

Critical linguistic awareness contributes significantly to developing critical communicative competence as it incentivises multi-dimensional activity at the linguistic level and considers the interplay of linguistic processes with cognitive and contextual aspects [ 37 ].

3.2.2 Critical linguistic awareness as a tool for realising critical linguistic competence

The concept of linguistic awareness has been formed in the past few decades, initially referring to the relationship between language use and linguistic knowledge. Donmall, as cited in Ref. [ 38 ], defined it as an individual’s sensitivity to language and awareness of its nature and role in human life, while in Ref. [ 39 ], it is defined as individuals’ ability to reflect on, and match, intuitively spoken and written utterances with their knowledge of the language. This tacit knowledge, as stated in Ref. [ 39 ], can be made explicit through outward expression ranging from spontaneous self-correction to explicit reflection on the production of utterances. A broader perspective on linguistic awareness was presented by Lier [ 40 ], defining it as the understanding of human linguistic activity and the role of language in thinking, learning, and social life, as well as an awareness of the power and control language affords and the complex relationship between language and culture. While his definition emphasised the cognitive dimension of language, it also incorporated the social and cultural dimensions by highlighting the role of language in social life.

However, even such an understanding of linguistic awareness does not facilitate a critical perspective on language in its sociocultural function. As Ochs [ 41 ] suggests, for an individual’s competent participation in a social group, it is essential to understand how people construct social situations with language and other symbolic tools. In every community, members convey social information using typical communicative and language forms. Therefore, grammar and vocabulary enable participants to recognise the social situation in which communication occurs.

Svalberg [ 42 ] thus concludes that the contemporary notion of linguistic awareness, as it has evolved in the last two decades, is not merely intellectual and passive. The development of linguistic awareness fosters engagement with the language, which can be intellectual, focusing on patterns, emotional, emphasising attitudes, or socio-political, where the emphasis is on effective communication and interaction as social action [ 42 ]. Similarly, other researchers have identified components of linguistic awareness. In Ref. [ 43 ], authors, for example, describe five domains of linguistic awareness: affective or emotional, social, the domain of power, cognitive, and performance. According to their definitions, the affective or emotional domain pertains to the relationship between the communicator’s feelings and cognitive processes. They associate the social domain mainly with the influences of a contemporary, globalising society where issues often stem from ethnic diversity. The domain of power considers language as a tool for manipulation, thus including an awareness of hidden meanings, unspoken assumptions, and rhetorical “traps” characteristic of holders of social power. The cognitive domain encompasses the relationship between language and thinking or cognitive processes, assuming metalinguistic awareness, reflection, analysis, and the students’ metacognition about their communication and thinking. The performance domain is mainly related to language use and communicative strategies.

The cognitive (intellectual) component of linguistic awareness primarily refers to how we use language, our linguistic skills, metalinguistic knowledge, and our ability to reflect on our own or others’ language use.

The emotional or evaluative aspect relates firstly to one’s general emotional and evaluative attitude towards language as a means of communication in a specific speech situation, towards language as a vehicle of societal power, and towards individual linguistic elements, which can be either negative or positive [ 44 ]. This attitude is closely linked to knowledge about language and communication and the ability to reflect on them. However, critical communication goes beyond merely recognising the attitude based on the text; it also raises questions about whether such an attitude is justified and ethical.

The actional dimension means that the individual strives to embody those aspects and characteristics of the linguistic activity or elements to which they hold a positive attitude and attempts to prevent those to which they hold a negative attitude.

As claimed by Clark and Ivanić [ 45 ] and as it is evident from the analytical representation of linguistic competence, it is impossible to think critically about linguistic elements without relating them to how they are used in a particular context or independently of social relationships.

3.3 Contextual component

Changes in the concept of communicative competence are closely related to the understanding of context and contextual determinants. Despite, as stated by Kramsch [ 46 ], that context was always at the core of communicative language learning, it was reduced in the 1970s and 1980s to one-to-one verbal interactions and perceived as static and objective. Conversely, the 1990s brought back the importance of context on a much larger cultural scale. At the same time, psycholinguistics and cognitive linguistics define context as a mental structure because we continuously categorise the world around us and ourselves in ways that are socially and culturally determined [ 47 ]. As a result, the discussion of communicative competence now leans more towards a socially oriented perspective, upgrading the previously dominant cognitive and individual views of language use and learning [ 48 ].

3.3.1 Relationship between language and culture

Discussing the embeddedness of linguistic activity into a broader sociocultural context, Lemke [ 49 ] emphasised that individuals in their social environment acquire organisational patterns of language use, reflecting established social power and solidarity relationships. In each speech act, a speaker indicates the role they have assumed and their place within the social system through the choice of linguistic varieties. Sociolinguistic competence is realised through the speaker’s choices of genres, discursive practices, and communicative patterns. It also involves an understanding of how the social context is expressed, an evaluation of the appropriateness of these choices, and a willingness to either maintain or alter conventions. However, critical competence requires more than mere knowledge and unreflective positive or negative attitudes. It necessitates reflecting on the value systems and social relationships inherent in communicative patterns, and assessing whether the social power dynamics expressed through language are ethically justifiable.

From a linguistic perspective, the chosen linguistic elements can reflect values, attitudes, beliefs, stereotypes, and even prejudices we express as bearers of a particular identity. Additionally, an acknowledgement of interactivity and inseparability of cognitive, linguistic, and cultural competence in critical communication has changed the understanding of the relationship between neutral and metaphorical expression.

While understanding the established relations between language and society certainly shapes expectations and influences prevailing choices, it cannot explain why an individual chooses, modifies, or even discards them despite being aware of the conventions. This question can only be answered by considering the specific circumstances in which the speaker and listener enter with their ideas about the world, their roles, their perceptions of each other, and their relationships [ 52 ]. As emphasised by Ule Nastran [ 27 ], the selection and understanding of patterns can only be interpreted through an individual’s pragmatic competence, that is, the interpretation of sociolinguistic and stylistic frameworks based on their knowledge of social conventions and systemic possibilities, as well as considering personal experiences, especially one’s viewpoints, motivation, values, beliefs.

The critical speaker will not adopt established patterns uncritically but will be aware that they express their identity through all their language activities. Therefore, they will analyse the relationship between the language they have chosen or will choose and the specific circumstances and try to empathise with the perspective of others.

3.3.2 Critical cultural awareness as a tool for realising critical contextual competence

The cognitive dimension of cultural awareness refers to how we use language for identification and the knowledge, thoughts, ideas, judgements, and evaluations of a specific (micro)culture, its linguistic expressions, the identity aspect of language, and sociolinguistic principles.

The emotional-evaluative dimension is related primarily to language as a bearer of social power. It involves a positive disposition towards one’s own and others’ social group and language, including intra-cultural language variants (registers) as an expression of social micro-groups.

From the perspective of the activity dimension, they seek to promote intercultural tolerant, argumentative, and emphatic communication while challenging egocentric, non-tolerant, exclusive, and hateful speech.

Critical communicative competence requires rhetorical sensitivity, the ability to adapt communication style to intentions or to others’ communicative patterns [ 27 , 53 ]. “Rhetorically sensitive individuals are more flexible in communication and attempt to balance their interests with those of others. They assume whether a particular form of communication is appropriate, when they can say something and when they cannot, while not concealing their fundamental ideas and genuine emotions” [ 27 ].

4. Conclusion

Recognising (social) criticality as an essential trait of communicative competence is, first and foremost, a response to the processes of globalisation and a reflection of the demand for developing “intercultural and inter-ethnical understanding and respect for communication diversity…” [ 54 ]. Simultaneously, the understanding of interculturality, on both inter- and intra-linguistic levels, has contributed to acknowledging the diversity of an individual’s language identities and the identity dimension of every language activity. This approach has brought attention to the relationship between language and culture, a perspective that Porter and Samovar summarised as “What we are talking about, how we are saying it, how we are seeing it, our inclination or disinclination, how we are thinking and what we are thinking about, are influenced by our culture” [ 55 ]. Consequently, Larre [ 56 ] suggests that language serves as a bridge between the sociocultural context and an individual’s mental activity. It is a cognitive tool individuals employ to make sense of the world, which is why language, culture, and thinking cannot be viewed from a singular perspective.

A critical speaker no longer perceives language merely as a means of communication but recognises it as a system of synonymic or antonymic, same- or different-functional elements that enable the speaker to refer to and comment on the content or context, as well as a mean for express, maintain or change social relations. Therefore, they regarded communication not only as a cognitive but also as an emotional process, where every speech act has consequences and demands responsibility.

• 1. O’Byrne WI. What is critical literacy in education?. 2018. Available from: https://wiobyrne.com/critical-literacy/ . [Accessed: Feb 07, 2020]
• 2. Luke A. Critical literacy in Australia: A matter of context and standpoint. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. 2005; 43 :448-461. DOI: 10.1598/JAAL.43.5.1. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43487602 [Accessed: Jan 19, 2020]
• 3. Vendramin V. Konceptualizacije pismenosti in razgradnja nekaterih s tem povezanih mitologij. Šolsko Polje. 2005; 16 (1-2):71-82
• 4. Vogel J. Kritična sporazumevalna zmožnost – osrednji koncept sodobnega pouka prvega jezika. Jezik in Slovstvo. 2021; 1 :3-16
• 5. Luke A, Baker CD. Towards a critical sociology of reading pedagogy: An introduction. In: Baker CD, Luke A, editors. Towards a Critical Sociology of Reading Pedagogy. Amsterdam, The Netherlands and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins; 1991. pp. xi–xxi
• 6. Rupnik Vec T, Kompare A. Kritično Mišljenje v Šoli. Ljubljana: Zavod RS Za Šolstvo; 2006
• 7. O’Rourke M. UI critical thinking handbook. 2005. Available from: https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/crit_think/ [Accessed: Oct 07, 2023]
• 8. O’Byrne WI. What is critical literacy in education? 2018. Available from: https://wiobyrne.com/critical-literacy/ [Accessed: Feb 10, 2023]
• 9. Halonen JS. Demystifying critical thinking. The Teaching of Psyhology. 1995; 1 :75-81. DOI: 10.1207/s15328023top2202_4
• 10. Myers DG. Psychology. 7th ed. New York: Worth Publishers; 2003
• 11. Sternberg RJ. Why schools should teach for wisdom: The balance theory of wisdom in educational settings. Educational Psyhologist. 2001; 4 :227-245. DOI: 10.1207/S15326985EP3604_2
• 12. Weinert FE. Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In: Rychen DS, Salganik LH, editors. Defining and Selecting Key Competencies. Göttingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers; 2001. pp. 45-65
• 13. Hymes D. On communicative comptence. In: Pride JB, Holmes J, editors. Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books; 1972. pp. 269-293
• 14. Štefanc D. Kompetence Kot Temelj Kurikularnega Načrtovanja v Obveznem Splošnem Izobraževanju. Ljubljana: Filozofska Fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani; 2009
• 15. Canale M, Swain M. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics. 1980; 1 :1-47
• 16. Ivšek L. Konceptualizacija Sporazumevalne Zmožnosti v Slovenščini Kot Ključne Kompetence. Ljubljana: Filozofska Fakulteta Univerze v Ljubljani; 2014
• 17. European Reference Framework. Key Competencies for Lifelong Learning. Luxemburg: Publications Office of the European Union; 2007
• 18. Ferbežar I. Merjenje in merljivost v jeziku. Na stičišču jezikoslovja in psihologije: Nekaj razmislekov. Slavistična Revija. 1999; 4 :418-436
• 19. Ulrich W. Didaktik Der Deutschen Sprache. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag; 2001
• 20. Skupni evropski jezikovni okvir. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo RS Za Šolstvo in Šport, Urad Za Razvoj Šolstva; 2011
• 21. Bešter Turk M. Sporazumevalna zmožnost – eden izmed temeljnih ciljev pouka slovenščine. Jezik in Slovstvo. 2011; 3-4 :111-130
• 22. Bešter Turk M, Križaj M. Jezikovni Pouk: Čemu, Kaj in Kako? Ljubljana: Rokus Klett; 2018
• 23. Byram M. Language awareness and (critical) cultural awareness – Relationships, comparisons and contrasts. Language Awareness. 2012; 1-2 :5-13. DOI: 10.1080/09658416.2011.639186
• 24. Vogel J. Understanding language awareness in the first language teaching in Slovenia as a “traditional monocultural” society. Journal of Language and Cultural Education. 2015; 2 :35-50. DOI: 10.1515/jolace-2015-0011
• 25. Gomezel Mikolič V. Povezanost narodne in jezikovne zavesti. Jezik in Slovstvo. 1999/2000; 1 :173-185
• 26. Hart C. Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. Bloomsbury Academic; 2016
• 27. Ule Nastran M. Psihologija Komuniciranja. Ljubljana: Fakulteta Za Družbene Vede; 2005
• 28. Vogel J. Neposredno razvijanje poslušanja z razumevanjem in vrednotenjem pri pouku; 2002
• 29. Rost M. Introducing Listening. London: Penguin Books; 1994
• 30. Brown G. Speakers, Listeners, and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1995
• 31. Wheeler LK. Critical reading of an essay’s argument. 2018. Available from: https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/reading_basic.html [Accessed: Apr. 11, 2022]
• 32. Vogel J. Mladi in sporazumevanje v digitalnem svetu. In: Vogel J, editor. Slovenski Jezik, Literatura, Kultura In Digitalni Svet(ovi). 59. Seminar Slovenskega Jezika, Literature In Kulture. 2023. pp. 29-38
• 33. Kranjc S. Skladnja Otroškega Govora od Prvega do Tretjega Leta. Ljubljana: Filozofska Fakulteta; 1998
• 34. Kunst Gnamuš O. Govorno Dejanje – Družbeno Dejanje. Ljubljana: Pedagoški Inštitut; 1984
• 35. Lurija AR. Osnovi Neurolingvistike. Beograd: Nolit; 1982
• 36. Verscheuren J. Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold; 1999
• 37. Grosman M. Kakšne pismenosti potrebujemo za 21. stoletje. Sodobna Pedagogika. 2010; 1 :16-26
• 38. Menacker T. Active critical language awareness: an innovative approach to language pedagogy. 1998. Available from: http://www2.hawaii.edu/~crookes/menacker.html [Accessed: Jan 20, 2020]
• 39. Masny D. Language learning and linguistic awareness: The relationship between proficiency and acceptability judgements in L2 1. In: James C, Garrett P, Candlin CN, editors. Language Awareness in the Classroom. 1st ed. Routledge; 1991. DOI: 10.4324/9781315845524
• 40. van Lier L. Introducing Language Awareness. London: Penguin English; 1995
• 41. Ochs E. Becoming a speaker of culture. In: Kramsch C, editor. Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. London, New York: Continuum; 2003. pp. 99-120
• 42. Svalberg AML. Engagement with language: Interrogating a construct. Language Awareness. 2009; 3-4 :242-258. DOI: 10.1080/[number_3]
• 43. James C, Garrett P, editors. Language Awareness in the Classroom. New York: Longman; 1992
• 44. Ule Nastran M. Sodobne Identitete v Vrtincu Diskurzov. Ljubljana: Znanstveno in Publicistično Središče; 2000
• 45. Clark R, Ivanić R. Consciousness-raising about the writing process. In: Garrett P, James C, editors. Language Awareness in the Classroom. London: Longman; 1991
• 46. Kramsch C, editor. Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. Ecological Perspectives. London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group; 2003
• 47. Bergoč S. Slovenščina Med Balkanom in Evropo. Koper: Univerzitetna Založba Annales; 2010
• 48. Larsen Freeman D. Language acquisition and language use from chaos/complexity theory perspective. In: Kramsch C, editor. Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. Ecological Perspectives. Continuum International Publishing Group; 2003. pp. 33-46
• 49. Lemke JL. Language development and identity: Multiple timescales in the social ecology of learning. In: Krmsch C, editor. Language Acquisition and Language Socialization. Ecological Perspectives. Continuum International Publishing Group; 2003. pp. 68-96
• 50. Gibbs RW. The Poetics of Mind: Figurative Thought, Language, and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1994
• 51. van Leeuwen T. Introducing Social Semiotics. London in New York: Routledge; 2005
• 52. Vogel J. Jezikovna kulturna zavesti pri pouku maternega/prvega jezika. Jezik in Slovstvo. 2014; 4 :3-14
• 53. Littlejohn SW. Theories of Human Communication. Belmont/CA: Wadsworth Publ. Co.; 1992
• 54. Hornberger NH, McKay SL. Sociolinguistics and Language Education. Multilingual Matters; 2010
• 55. Samovar LA, Porter RE, McDaniel ER. Communication between cultures. 1991
• 56. Larre S. English as a Second Dialect: A Handbook for Teachers. Victoria: University of Victoria; 1991. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/1828/2842 [Accessed: Mar. 18, 2018]

© 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.

Continue reading from the same book

Psycholinguistics.

Edited by Xiaoming Jiang

Published: 13 March 2024

By Jean Mathieu Tsoumou

59 downloads

By Jaelani Jaelani and Ziadah Ziadah

47 downloads

By Oksana Chaika

114 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

• Email* Password* Forgot password? Reset it here Keep me logged in Fields with * are mandatory Don't have an account? Create one here

Change Password

Your password must have 8 characters or more and contain 3 of the following:.

• a lower case character, 
• an upper case character, 
• a special character 

Password Changed Successfully

Your password has been changed

Create a new account

Can't sign in? Forgot your password?

Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password.

Request Username

Can't sign in? Forgot your username?

Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

• NEWLY PUBLISHED
• RECOMMEND TO A LIBRARIAN

Semantic Reasoning: Building Vocabulary With Critical Thinking Skills

• Karen A. Fallon ,
• Beth Lawrence , and
• Deena Seifert

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6994-7428

Speech-Language Pathology Department, Gwynedd Mercy University, PA

Google Scholar

More articles by this author

Communication Apptitude Inc, Columbia, MD

• Add to favorites
• Download Citation
• Track Citations

Increasing the depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge is critical for academic success, particularly for middle and high school students who face ever-increasing linguistic demands with each grade advancement. Implementing effective vocabulary instruction methods that integrate with classroom curricula remains of critical clinical importance for struggling students. This clinical focus article addresses the challenge of contextual vocabulary instruction by presenting semantic reasoning, an evidence-based instructional approach that utilizes both cognitive and linguistic processes. Semantic reasoning pairs critical-thinking, multiple visual examples, and language-based instruction to teach vocabulary words.

Conclusions:

This article provides a description of semantic reasoning as an evidence-based vocabulary teaching approach that can be used in contextualized language intervention, particularly with adolescent students. Step-by-step guides for preparing and implementing contextualized vocabulary lessons that use semantic reasoning are provided in an effort to promote clinical application of this approach.

• American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language . (2012). American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (5th ed.) . Houghton Mifflin . Google Scholar
• National Reading Panel . (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction . NICHD Clearinghouse . Google Scholar

Additional Resources

• Cited by Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups 8:6 (1186-1204) 7 Dec 2023 Vocabulary Instruction to Support Reading: A Clinician's Guide to Evidence-Based Practice Dawna Duff

December 2021

• Get Permissions

• Received: Mar 29, 2021
• Revised: Jun 30, 2021
• Accepted: Aug 26, 2021
• Published online: Nov 29, 2021
• Published in issue: Dec 17, 2021
• asha-topics
• asha-article-types

Copyright © 2021 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association

Loading ...

Advertisement

Communication, Critical Thinking, Problem Solving: A Suggested Course for All High School Students in the 21st Century

• Published: 05 December 2013
• Volume 44 , pages 63–81, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

• Terresa Carlgren 1  

4107 Accesses

24 Citations

Explore all metrics

The skills of communication, critical thinking, and problem solving are essential to thriving as a citizen in the 21st century. These skills are required in order to contribute as a member of society, operate effectively in post-secondary institutions, and be competitive in the global market. Unfortunately they are not always intuitive or simple in nature. Instead these skills require both effort and time be devoted to identifying, learning, exploring, synthesizing, and applying them to different contexts and problems. This article argues that current high school students are hindered in their learning of communication, critical thinking, and problem solving by three factors: the structure of the current western education system, the complexity of the skills themselves, and the competence of the teachers to teach these skills in conjunction with their course material. The article will further advocate that all current high school students need the opportunity to develop these skills. Finally, it will posit that a course be offered to explicitly teach students these skills within a slightly modified western model of education.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

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

Speaking Truth to Power: Teaching Critical Thinking in the Critical Theory Tradition

Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision

Critical pedagogy: critical thinking as a social practice, explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

A model of education as organized from western countries such as Canada, Great Britain, the United States, and some European nations by way of organizational structure (identified curricular outcomes, assessment strategies, hierarchical administrative levels).

Immersion in terms of critical thinking instruction refers to “deep, thoughtful, well understood subject-matter instruction in which the students are encouraged to think critically in the subject … but in which general critical thinking principles are not made explicit” (Ennis 1989 , p. 5).

Infusion as it refers to critical thinking involves the explicit instruction of critical thinking principles and strategies in conjunction with the subject material (Ennis 1989 , p. 5).

5 credit course as per government of Alberta standards (Alberta, Canada), http://education.alberta.ca/media/6719891/guidetoed2012.pdf , p. 42.

See basic structure of Alberta Education curriculum. Example from Science 10; http://education.alberta.ca/media/654833/science10.pdf .

Note: the curricular framework for this course is modelled after that of some curriculum in Alberta (Alberta Education 2005 ).

Alberta Education. (2005). Science 10 . Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/media/654833/science10.pdf .

Alberta Education. (2008). Mathematics grades 10–12 . Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/media/655889/math10to12.pdf .

Alberta Education. (2012). Guide to education: ECS to grade 12 . Retrieved from http://educaiton.alberta.ca/media/6719891/guidetoed2012.pdf .

Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011). A time for deeper learning: Preparing students for a changing world. Education Digest, 77 (4), 43–49. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&hid=12&sid=9695cbbb-ab96-496a-941e-35fa2bee2852%40sessionmgr4 .

Berger, E. B., & Starbird, M. (2012). The 5 elements of effective thinking . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Google Scholar  

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Conley, D. T., & McGaughy, C. (2012). College and career readiness: Same or different? Educational Leadership, 69 (7), 28–34. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&hid=12&sid=9695cbbb-ab96-496a-941e-35fa2bee2852%40sessionmgr4 .

Covey, S. (2004). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Restoring the character ethic . New York: Simon & Schuster.

Crenshaw, P., Hale, E., & Harper, S. L. (2011). Producing intellectual labour in the classroom: The utilization of a critical thinking model to help students take command of their thinking. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8 (7), 13–26. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=333f52c4-101e-4d9f-89e7-1088c51b14e7%40sessionmgr15&hid=19 .

Dobozy, E. (2012). Failed innovation implementation in teacher education: A case analysis. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 40 , 35–44. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=333f52c4-101e-4d9f-89e7-1088c51b14e7%40sessionmgr15&hid=19 .

Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18 (3), 4–10. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/stable/pdfplus/1174885.pdf?acceptTC=true .

Ennis, R. H., & Millman, J. (1985). Cornell critical thinking test level x . Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.

Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st century skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and authentic learning . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Holloway-Libell, J., Amrein-Beardsley, A., & Collins, C. (2012). All hat & no cattle. Educational Leadership, 70 (3), 65–68. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=ec665c98-aef1-44e8-8737-016b87157907%40sessionmgr13&vid=5&hid=1 .

Johanson, J. (2010). Cultivating critical thinking: An interview with Stephen Brookfield. Journal of Developmental Education, 33 (3), 26–30. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=14&sid=333f52c4-101e-4d9f-89e7-1088c51b14e7%40sessionmgr15&hid=19 .

Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments . New York: Routledge.

Jonassen, D. H. (2012). Designing for decision making. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60 (2), 341–359. doi: 10.1007/s11423-011-9230-5 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Kassim, H., & Fatimah, A. (2010). English communicative events and skills needed at the workplace: Feedback from the industry. English for Specific Purposes, 29 (3), 168–182. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/science/article/pii/S0889490609000635 .

Kirikkaya, E. B., & Bozurt, E. (2011). The effects of using newspapers in science and technology course activities on students’ critical thinking skills. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 44 , 149–166. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=2e1f2c2a-6199-4516-a3d0-5114f7c35314%40sessionmgr15&hid=19 .

Paige, M. (2012). Using VAM in high stakes employment decisions. Phi Delta Kappan, 94 (3), 29–32.

Passini, S. (2013). A binge-consuming culture: The effect of consumerism on social interaction in western societies. Culture & Psychology, 19 (3), 369–393. doi: 10.1177/1354067x13489317 .

Patterson, K., Grenny, J., & McMillan, R. (2011). Crucial conversations: Tools for talking when stakes are high (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools (5th ed.). Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Raybould, J., & Sheedy, V. (2005). Are graduates equipped with the right skills in the employability stakes? Industrial and Commercial Training, 37(4/5), 259–263. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/docview/214105484/fulltextPDF/13C3AF7848A26CBC442/26?accountid=9838 .

Richardson, J. (2011). Tune into what the new generation of teachers can do. Phi Delta Kappan, 92 (4), 14–19.

Robinson, K. (2011). Out of our minds . Chichester, West Sussex: Capstone Publishing Ltd.

Rosefsky, S., & Opfer, D. (2012). Learning 21st-century skills requires 21st-century teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 94 (2), 8–13.

Sahlberg, P. (2006). Education reform for raising economic competitiveness. Journal of Educational Change, 7 , 259–287. doi: 10.1007/s10833-005-4884-6 .

Schleicher, A. (Ed.) (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century: Lessons from around the world . Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/lib/ucalgary/docDetail.action?docID=10589565 .

Sherblom, P. (2010). Creating critically thinking educational leaders with courage, knowledge and skills to lead tomorrow’s schools today. Journal of Practical Leadership, 5 , 81–90. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=11&hid=12&sid=9695cbbb-ab96-496a-941e-35fa2bee2852%40sessionmgr4 .

Spencer, J. T. (2013). I’m a better teacher when students aren’t tested. Phi Delta Kappan, 94 (5), 72–73.

Tsang, K. L. (2012). Development of communication skills using an embedded approach for the evolving professional. The International Journal of Learning, 18 (3), 203–221. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=3&sid=924c3e4d-4fa2-4f95-a769-cbd05ada6724%40sessionmgr4&hid=28 .

Williamson, P. K. (2011). The creative problem solving skills of arts and science students—The two cultures debate revisited. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6 , 31–43. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.001 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Terresa Carlgren

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terresa Carlgren .

Course Syllabus and Outline

Title: Communication, Critical Thinking, and Problem Solving (an introduction)

Course Components

No exclusionary, discriminatory, or derogatory material will be taught in this course, nor will the content in this course be deemed controversial in any way.

Philosophy and Rationale

Much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uniformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated (Paul and Elder 2008 , p. 2).

The skills required of today’s youth are more pronounced than that of the past. Students are required to have basic knowledge of content in areas of Science, Math, and English; as well as technological skills, problem solving skills, critical thinking skills, and the ability to communicate (Sahlberg 2006 ). However, with the time constraints placed on teachers, knowledge outcomes taking priority on learning due to the high stakes standardized achievement tests, and an understanding that the particular skills of communication, critical thinking, and problem solving require explicit instruction (Rosefsky and Opfer 2012 ); students are not mastering these skills to an acceptable standard.

In order for students to acquire and master the skills necessary to compete and be successful in the work force, post secondary education, and life; students must have the opportunity to engage by learning these skills through practice, application, and devoted explicit attention. Furthermore, students must explore these skills without fear of failure but rather with hope that they can improve and move forward from the learning experience. In this way, learning these skills as a secondary item within the context of another content based course will not do the students justice.

Historically, the skills of sewing, cooking, woodworking, and mechanics where offered in high school as application based courses that required hands on and explorative learning with teacher guidance. More recently computer courses, and digital citizenship are taking hold in schools to teach students these skills. There is no reason why the skills of communication, critical thinking, and problem solving should be treated any differently.

Without the structure and organization of education making drastic changes to mandate these skills be made more of a priority in the classroom, it is feared that the teaching and learning of these skills will remain an oversight. It is unfortunate that the students; citizens, economic and market contributors of our future, will be underserved. It is with these reasons that this course offering takes place; such that an opportunity within the current educational structure can provide students the opportunity to guard themselves with new foundational skills for the future.

General Learner Expectations

By the end of this course, it is expected learners will have developed and ascertained explicit knowledge of communication, critical thinking and problem solving. More importantly, students will have acquired the skills of communication, critical thinking, and problem solving through application, exploration, and trial and error, such that they can utilize these skills in different contexts of their lives in preparation for the work force or post-secondary education.

Specific Learner Expectations

The following is a list of specific learner expectations for the course. Please note that the units identified for this course are titled ‘Skill-sets’ for a reason as they are not discrete topics to be taught in isolation, but rather guides toward the encompassing theme of acquiring these skills. This course is in no way designed as a check the outcome box course, nor is it organized in order by skill or outcome number. Rather, the outcomes and skill-sets must be taught in conjunction with each other through the duration of the course with trust being given to the fact that through student exploration and leadership; along side teacher guidance and facilitation, students will improve on their existing skill-set for these skills.

Skill Set A: Critical Thinking Skills Footnote 6

Knowledge Outcomes: (Students will be able to)

A.K.1 Define the difference between fact and inference.

A.K.2 Derive criteria for which to judge a problem or predicament.

A.K.3 List the elements of thought associated with critical thinking as per one critical thinking model (Paul and Elder, Rusten and Schuman).

A.K.4 Identify inherent and hidden bias in an argument.

A.K.5 Identify faults in thinking due to oversimplifying or over generalizing issues or problems.

A.K.6 Identify and state the purpose of thinking.

Skill Outcomes: (Students will be able to)

A.S.1 Utilize background knowledge to solve a problem or predicament.

A.S.2 Apply evidence to solve a problem or predicament.

A.S.3 Express an argument that is logical, clear, and concise.

A.S.4 Derive and model a process by which to critically analyze, think, and solve a problem or predicament that involves a reasonable, logical, and relevant thinking strategy.

A.S.5 Explore alternative options and methods before drawing a conclusion.

A.S.6 Illustrate and explore the consequences and implications following the solution of a problem or issue.

A.S.7 Model, display, or perform the ability to think critically through verbal, written, and physical means.

Attitudes Outcomes: (Students will)

A.A.1 Believe that it is possible for themselves to solve problems with a reasonable level of confidence.

A.A.2 Have confidence that they are able to ascertain information needed to help themselves think critically about a problem or issue.

A.A.3 Respect the diverse nature of thinking and problem solving that allows for others’ opinions and arguments to be taken into account without discrimination.

Skill Set B: Problem Solving Skills

B.K.1 Define convergent and divergent thinking.

B.K.2 State that for any given problem there is more than one problem solving strategy.

B.K.3 List possible problem solving strategies that exist.

B.K.4 State that problem solving strategies are used in context and explore the types of contexts that might exist.

B.K.5 Identify that for any problem solving strategy there must be an evaluative component and an ability to modify the strategy to fit a new context or problem.

B.S.1 Derive and model, illustrate, or describe a problem solving strategy that is context specific.

B.S.2 Derive and model a personal problem solving strategy to solve a personal problem.

B.S.3 Solve problems using mathematical reasoning.

B.S.4 Solve problems using technological means or supports.

B.S.5 Solve problems by modeling existing economic structures.

B.S.6 Solve problems by modeling existing political structures.

B.A.1 Have improved self-confidence in attempting to solve problems in a number of different contexts.

B.A.2 Be proud of the problem solving ability they have acquired.

B.A.3 Feel empowered to attempt new problem solving methods that are logical and relevant without fear of failure.

Skill Set C: Decision Making Skills

C.K.1 Identify that decision making is a process toward problem solving.

C.K.2 Identify personal bias in an argument.

C.K.3 State the difference between dialectic and rhetorical arguments.

C.K.4 Illustrate the types of decisions expected in personal, professional, and civic lives.

C.K.5 Describe the difference between rational and emotional expressions.

C.K.6 State and explain the difference between normative and naturalistic decision making.

C.K.7 Define the term dilemma.

C.K.8 State that the primary purpose of decision making is to decide on the best option, or provide maximum utility.

C.K.9 State that decision making can be made based on what is most consistent with personal beliefs or past experiences.

C.K.10 Identify that there is uncertainty and risk associated with every decision.

C.S.1 Construct a decision making process that includes identification, evidence, evaluation and modification of a problem.

C.S.2 Construct and apply a method of decision making to solve personal problems.

C.S.3 Construct and apply a method of decision making to solve professional problems.

C.S.4 Construct and apply a method of decision making to solve civic problems.

C.S.5 Examine positive and negative methods of modifying and changing decisions after they have been made.

C.S.6 Examine circumstances by which to modify, change, or renegotiate a decision.

Attitude Outcomes: (Students will)

C.A.1 Acknowledge that a commitment needs to be made upon making a decision.

C.A.2 Take ownership of decisions made using the decision making skills.

C.A.3 Understand that decisions require a course of action that is intended to yield results that are satisfying for special individuals.

C.A.4 Reflect on decisions made in their life and decide if they were appropriate or not.

Skill Set D: Communication Skills

Knowledge outcomes: (students will be able to).

D.K.1 Identify factors affecting communication.

D.K.2 State that communication involves more than one person.

D.K.3 Identify and explore the roles of speaker and listener in any conversation.

D.K.4 List and explore different environments involving communication (i.e.; formal language vs. slang, workplace vs. home life).

D.K.5 Describe the difference between teamwork and collaboration.

D.K.6 Describe what effective and ineffective communication looks, sounds, and feels like.

D.K.7 Explain the role of respect, honesty, fairness, and reason in any communication interaction.

D.S.1 Model and illustrate different conflict resolution strategies.

D.S.2 Identify and illustrate factors affecting teamwork.

D.S.3 Communicate effectively with peers while working collaboratively as a team.

D.S.4 Communicate effectively with teachers and parents regarding conflicts and successes.

D.S.5 Communicate clearly, logically, and precisely in verbal and written modes.

D.S.6 Ask and accept help in communicating when needed.

D.A.1 Feel empowered to communicate with peers.

D.A.2 Have confidence in the skill of communicating to discuss difficult issues with parents, teachers, and employers.

D.A.3 Feel empowered to ask and accept help by communicating in an appropriate fashion without fear of rejection or judgment.

Course Assessment

The assessment for this course is by way of individual student improvement in conjunction with final skill aptitude of the above stated skill sets by course end. This improvement and aptitude can be measured through a number of different means and will depend on the structure of the course as arranged and organized by the teacher. Outlined below are some classroom activities and possible assessments that might be of benefit to teachers planning this course.

Activities:

A pre and post written statement of the intention for being in the course and the problems and skills a student would like to solve and understand.

Assessed formatively (both pre and post) for critical thinking skills such as clarity of work, logic, reasoning, and evidence provided.

Pre and post formative assessments then evaluated for level of improvement.

Debate as a form of argument, decision making, communication and problem solving.

Following and respecting debate rules and roles of speaker/listener.

Utilizing rubrics for argument, decision making, communication and problem solving.

Market modeling—modeling the course as a competitive market with students given roles based on an application from them on their expertise and motivation toward the given problem. The roles would dictate a level of income for the student as well as a level of responsibility and leadership for them.

Assessed by way of improvement and movement ‘up the market ladder’—i.e.—what by way of promotion, what conflict resolution strategies or problems needed to be overcome, how long did it take to resolve or solve the problem?

Take into account rationale for why students have chosen their particular role (provided this rationale is given in a clear, appropriate, relevant, and significant manner)—i.e. standard of living, other priorities at the time etc.

Socratic Seminar on issue at hand to interpret and illustrate improvement in speaking and communicating an argument.

Assessed by way of quality and strength of participation and argument.

Resume of students skills ascertained and improved on through the course.

Cross curricular problems and projects modeling real life i.e. effects of globalization, and marketization on students by multinational companies. Projects to be displayed and presented to the class.

Assessed by way of rubrics (teacher and peer).

Likert scale survey for teacher and student on level of improvement of outcomes throughout the course.

Utilization of pre-existing rubrics i.e. Decision Making (Jonassen 2012 ).

Cornell CT Test level X for critical thinking as a pre and post test? (a quantitative assessment ordered from http://www.criticalthinking.com/getProductDetails.do?code=c&id=05501 ) (Ennis and Millman 1985 ).

Assessment strategies as well as possible outcomes for skill-sets can be found in Greenstein’s ( 2012 ), Assessing 21st Century Skills: A guide to evaluating mastery and authentic learning .

It is expected that all students will learn skill-set outcomes through the duration of the course. The question is how much will be learned? The answer depends on the individual student as well as their incoming skill level in each given area. In this case equal does not mean equitable and the goal of assessment for this course is to ascertain what improvement as well as final level of understanding an individual student has.

It should be stated that the nature of the course is student-centered and driven by the student. The teacher, however, is responsible for setting up the course and providing students an opportunity to explore this learning. Therefore, the teacher must come up with valid, rich, open activities for students to work within while at the same time ideally allowing the students to come up with the problems, scenarios, and arguments with which to discuss and solve. Explicit instruction may be necessary but should be severely limited allowing students ample opportunity for application and practice.

It is highly recommended that students work the duration of this course in groups (and differing groups) as it is here that communication, collaboration, and teamwork skills will be developed. It is further recommended that students be a part of the assessment process in deciding on the nature of the assessments, the criteria for the assessment, and in self and peer assessment. Allowing students to direct and lead requires trust and openness on the part of the teacher but is in fact part of the learning process.

Learning Resources

Since the premise of this course is for the teacher to be a ‘guide on the side’ and not a ‘sage on the stage’, there are no required learning resources for this course. However, it is recommended that teachers undertake professional development in the skill-set areas to ensure they have developed the necessary skills to pass on. Books such as: Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher by Brookfield, Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem - Solving Learning Environments by Jonassen, 7 Habits of Highly Effective People , Crucial Conversations, and The 5 Elements of Effective Thinking would be an introduction. Journal articles and professional publications regarding 21st century skills and the development of these would be helpful. Finally, professional development seminars or sessions by leading experts such as Richard Paul from The Foundation for Critical Thinking would be almost necessary.

From this learning, the teacher will need to develop a tool kit of resources at their disposal in which to best help their students. The nature of the course being student-centered will require a teacher to be flexible in the work that is undertaken. The teacher will also have to be reactive to issues, problems, and learning scenarios that take place in the classroom. However, as this is a course in allowing the students to ascertain skills in problem solving, critical thinking, and communication, it must be mentioned that it is the students who are doing the brunt of the work and actually doing the problem solving and critical thinking themselves. For instance, it would not be sufficient for a question to be: What book should we read to learn critical thinking? And have the answer to the problem be: go ask the teacher and he/she will tell us. Rather the answer should be: let us go to the library or use the internet and find out which book is the best book. What options are available? What type of critical thinking are we looking at? What is critical thinking? Who are the leading experts in the field? What bias do they have? Where can I actually find or order these books? What cost and what is my budget? In the end, a seemingly simple question—is wrought with learning experiences by the student provided the teacher take a backburner to the work and allow the student to take the reins.

Course Evaluation

The open nature of this course allows for a teacher at any time to make changes to the structure, organization, and assessment of the course due to evaluation and reflection. The evaluation and reflection of this course should therefore be ongoing by the student and teacher immersed in the learning environment. The teacher is responsible for periodically seeking feedback from students regarding the nature of the course, as well as professionally reflecting themselves on the presentation of the course to their students.

The teacher is also responsible for keeping records of the course, as well as feedback collected that identifies the (a) strengths and weaknesses of the course as it is being facilitated, (b) activities and assessments being implemented in the course, and (c) improvements to the course for a later date. The teacher should ideally create a long range plan (or running calendar) that becomes more descriptive as the course proceeds, about the level of difficulty, quality of problems, activities, resources, feedback, and assessments being utilized in the course to reference at a later date. Finally, the teacher should be able to provide evidence to the local school authority at any time in order for the authority to monitor, evaluate, and report progress should it be required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Carlgren, T. Communication, Critical Thinking, Problem Solving: A Suggested Course for All High School Students in the 21st Century. Interchange 44 , 63–81 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-013-9197-8

Download citation

Received : 19 April 2013

Accepted : 21 November 2013

Published : 05 December 2013

Issue Date : December 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-013-9197-8

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

• Communication
• Critical thinking
• Global market
• High school course
• Problem solving
• Western model of education
• 21st Century
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Career Advice
• Job Search & Interview
• Productivity
• Public Speaking and Presentation
• Social & Interpersonal Skills
• Professional Development
• Remote Work

Eggcellent Work

What is the role of communication in critical thinking  .

Communication is the framework, foundation, and skeletal structure of critical thinking. People who continually strive to  improve their critical thinking skills  are better communicators.

Critical thinkers have communication skills that:

• help them to articulate and visualize problems and solutions from different angles
• enable them to present their perspectives with confidence
• assimilate and organize their thoughts through logical analysis

In today’s job market, communication ability based on critical thinking are valued traits in new employees—and according to one 2016 survey by the Harvard Business Review—those skills are  sadly lacking  in many of today’s job applicants.

• The Ultimate Guide To Critical Thinking
• Is Critical Thinking A Soft Skill Or Hard Skill?
• How To Improve Critical Thinking Skills At Work And Make Better Decisions
• 5 Creative and Critical Thinking Examples In Workplace
• 10 Best Books On Critical Thinking And Problem Solving
• 12 Common Barriers To Critical Thinking (And How To Overcome Them)

How To Promote Critical Thinking In The Workplace

Critical thinking vs problem solving: what’s the difference, examples of communication in critical thinking.

There are a variety of ways to communicate effectively using critical thinking. Indeed.com highlights  four types of communication  in critical thinking with suggestions on deploying those communication tools:

1.  Verbal —Critical thinkers use a strong and confident speaking voice as well as active listening—a conscious effort to not only hear the words, but the complete message the other person is communicating. They avoid “filler” words and fluff, as well as excessive industry jargon when plain speaking will do.

2.  Visual —Good visual communications are governed by the following rules of thumb:

• get permission in advance
• only use visual presentations when they add value to the process
• consider the audience
• present clear and easy-to-understand visual presentations  focusing on the core message

3.  Written —Good writers strive for simplicity and prefer active voice. They never rely on tone and always thoroughly review what they have written. They keep a file of their own and the writing of others that they find effective and appealing to their writing style.

4.  Nonverbal —At the core of critical thinking is controlling emotions and self-monitoring. A critical thinker communicates intentionally and uses appropriate facial expressions and body knowledge to reinforce objectivity.

Nonverbal communication is especially effective when it is backed up with solid research and evidence, with appropriate nonverbal messaging that projects a relaxed, confident persona.

How language or communication influences your critical thinking

So, all the above communication methods contribute a unique perspective to what is the role of communication in critical thinking. Also, effective communication influences your critical thinking in several positive ways:

Critical thinking communication skills help you to stay on point

Staying on topic and avoiding deviating is a byproduct of critical thinking. In group settings, it can be difficult to fix a problem when others have their own views and possible hidden agendas. A skilled communicator can stay on track and focus on core issues, while establishing trust and a reputation for staying on point.

Critical thinkers have a curious mind and are in control of their emotions.

An essential feature of critical thinking is self-knowledge and an ability to shed biases and to control emotions. Employers seek this quality and value an employee who can regulate emotions as well as ask questions for useful solutions to difficult problems.

A caveat about emotions

David R. Novak  sees communication as a difficult process and argues that “critical thinking isn’t a purely rational process.” He is wary of anyone “trumpeting their ‘rationality,’ arguing that “their humanity has likely been corrupted.” In fact, dealing with emotions is “part of the process of communicating and part of critical thinking.”

Says Novak, “Emotions are real and powerful.” They can sometimes be central when hashing out difficult problems with people. His advice when dealing with emotion-driven problems is to “embrace and express authentic emotions appropriately.”

Finally, the thing about emotive expressions is that they “are evidence of systemic problems that lie beneath.” Novak’s advice: “Strive to be flexible to and open to the authentic expressions of others. You can’t tell people in pain to suppress emotions.”

What is the role of communication in critical thinking when evaluating applicants for management positions?

It is a given that when managers make a decision, they must share it both up and down the chain of their hierarchies. Managers who are critical thinkers demonstrate sophisticated communication skills. They provide supporting arguments and the necessary evidence to substantiate their decision. When their team is on the same page, they play by the same rules.

Critical thinking improves communication

When a manager thinks clearly and is not unduly swayed by bias, what follows is a more productive communication process. That process consists of better engagement where everyone can contribute to the mission.

Better communication through critical thinking is a stepping stone to emotional intelligence

Analytical rationality and  emotional intelligence  can coexist. In fact, a manager with well-developed critical thinking and communication skills can avoid emotion-driven decisions. However, their respect for the emotional and ethical implications of any problem or challenge enables them to come up with more  creative solutions.

Critical thinkers communicate with challenging open-ended questions

Managers who are critical thinkers actively encourage creativity. They are open to new ideas and their goal is, by effective communication, to amass a larger trove of information when facing decisions.

This communication habit, in turn, promotes even more creative solutions through asking challenging and open-ended questions from those who have a stake in the solution. When those open-ended questions are loaded with elements of critical thinking—e.g., “How do you know that? What evidence do you have?”—the manager is teaching everyone the value of critical thinking and communication.

Critical thinking plus good communication equal savings in time and money.

Managers who encourage critical thinking in the workplace minimize the requirement for supervision. They can catch problems early, and encourage initiative and independence. Managers can then focus on the core responsibilities of their duties and save their organization time and resources.

Let’s Recap

Communication is the foundation of critical thinking. Critical thinkers have communication skills that get to the heart of problems. Examples of communication resources in critical thinking include verbal, visual, written, and nonverbal skills. Each has its own value and applications in critical thinking.

Language or communication influences critical thinking effectiveness by helping you to stay on point and in control of your emotions. Emotions, however, can come into play in effectively communicating with those whose emotions have taken over.

Managers who are critical thinkers can develop communication styles that encourage their team to communicate better and play by the same rules. A manager who thinks and communicates clearly can promote better communications and a team that contributes to the mission.

When the goal is a creative solution to a difficult challenge, a manager who asks the right open-ended questions can tap into everyone’s innate desire to solve problems.

Finally, managers who encourage effective communication and critical thinking minimize the need for supervising their employees, while encouraging initiative and independence. That translates into savings in time, effort, and money.

• Is Critical Thinking Overrated?  Disadvantages Of Critical Thinking
• 15 Signs Of Poor Communication Skills And How To Fix Them   
• 25 In-Demand Jobs That Require Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills
• Brainstorming: Techniques Used To Boost Critical Thinking and Creativity
• 11 Principles Of Critical Thinking  
• Difference Between Public Speaking And Interpersonal Communication

Jenny Palmer

Founder of Eggcellentwork.com. With over 20 years of experience in HR and various roles in corporate world, Jenny shares tips and advice to help professionals advance in their careers. Her blog is a go-to resource for anyone looking to improve their skills, land their dream job, or make a career change.

Further Reading...

60+ Insightful 1:1 Questions For Managers and Employees

9 Most Sought-After Soft Skills In The Workplace

No comments, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Critical Thinking vs Problem Solving: What's the Difference?

Critical Thinking & Communication

Critical thinking and communication are closely related. If you aren’t able to think critically about problems, information, and obstacles as they relate to your relationships, the media you consume, and the conversations you have, you are set up to fail. If you can’t think critically, communication won’t be as good as it possibly can be. Good critical thinking directly influences the quality and nature of the messages you send, the conversations you have, the decisions you make, and the overall quality of your communication interactions.

Critical thinking helps communication improve. Good communication influences critical thinking.

“Critical Thinking” means getting beyond just the surface-level questions about a topic or subject during a conversation or discussion. Think of critical thinking as interrogating and investigating an idea, a current state, or a potential solution on the merits of its rigor and its usefulness. If you can’t “think critically” well, you’re quite simply at a disadvantage when you communicate. There is a steamroller of disinformation out there, tricky people everywhere, and there are important decisions all over the place! Better critical thinking helps you to analyze problems more adeptly, helps to create better connections with people, and achieves more positive, productive outcomes.

Critical thinking is an active process. You have to make a willful, conscious decision to engage in it. It’s a skill that needs to be exercised and practiced. It doesn’t just happen automatically. You have to put your critical thinking hat on and leave it on, almost quite literally. It can protect and shield you from all the bad ideas that are out there.

So what does better critical thinking get us? So what?  

What Does Critical Thinking Get Us?

Critical thinking, done in good faith, results in better outputs (ideas, conversations, relationships). Critical thinking leads to better communication outcomes. This goes both for you individually, for pairs of people, and for collective groups. It’s our human gift to be able to more rigorously interrogate ideas, thoroughly vet outcomes, and collaborate with people to create better outcomes. More critical thinking simply cannot be bad.

Critical thinking isn’t required only about big, obvious problems either. Of course, we should think critically collectively about the large problems that face us (Police Reform, for example). That’s obvious. Similarly, of course, it’s in your interest to think critically about problems and challenges, say, at your job. But we’re constantly faced with an array of problems, large and small. These problems happen at large scales with problems that are beyond any one person and they are the more simple sorts of relational problems that can be solved between two people with just slightly more close, dedicated effort.

So, how can we think critically, better?

Critical Thinking Explained

Critical thinking is essentially a purposeful process of asking questions. We can start by thinking of questions in standard categories: Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How. Some questions to ask yourself to stimulate critical thinking:

Who         … benefits from this?

                … is harmed?

                … makes the decision?

                … is directly affected? In what ways?

                … if anyone, would be a good person to consult?

What         … are the strengths/weaknesses?

                … is another perspective or a good alternative?

                … would be a counterargument?

                … is most important/least important?

                … is blocking us?

                … can we do to make a positive change?

Where      … could we learn from others?

                … can we get more information?

                … to improve?

                … could we get help?

                … will this idea take us?

When       … will we know we’ve succeeded?

                … can we expect to see change?

                … should we ask for help?

                … could this cause a problem?

                … should we revisit this issue to assess?

Why         … do we think this is a problem?

                … is this relevant to me (or us)?

                … is this the best solution for now?

                … has it been this way for so long?

                … have we allowed this to happen?

How          … does this benefit me, us, or others?

                … does this harm me, us, or others?

                … does this change things?

                … do we know the truth about this?

You can ask those you’re communicating with — or yourself — any of these questions or any combination of them. You can also come up with similar questions! These are just a guide to help get you started. There’s no limit to the amount or quality of good questions you can ask. Sprinkle these into your conversations and discussions as appropriate.

These questions, while decent inspiration, are quite stiff. “When should we revisit this issue to assess?” sounds halting and jerky. You’re not a robot, are you? Don’t ask it like that! Try to sound human. Say something like “Hey, uh, everybody? When can we follow up on this in a week or so to uhh, you know, check we’re doing alright?” You know, how people talk.  

The Shape of Critical Thinking

Good critical thinking interrogates an idea or problem purposefully, whether that is individually or together. Hopefully, this is done in the spirit of making progress. In practice, what critical thinking looks like can vary. There’s no one way to perform critical thinking to be proper, thorough, or fair.

What’s more, is that critical thinking isn’t just for relationships and the problems we face in them. Critical thinking is, at an even broader level, often about our human relationships with information: as we consume it, as we interact with it (and people spewing it off), and as we sift through the bombardments of information, advertisements, and messages that constantly pelt us like radioactive symbolic fallout. Critical thinking is your built-in BS detector.

Critical thinking is a tool for life. Use that brain evolution gave you! We should all strive to be better critical thinkers. Question things: authority, motive, tactics, perspective. Question it all, especially those in power and people trying to sell you things.  

A Few Words About Emotions

Critical thinking isn’t a purely rational process. There is no such thing as a purely rational process. Beware those trumpeting their “rationality,” and their humanity has likely been corrupted. Emotions are real and powerful. They are relevant and even central when you’re hashing out difficult problems with people. Interrogating others (and yourself) can be emotionally challenging. That’s ok. That’s exactly part of the process of communicating and part of critical thinking. Try to embrace and express authentic emotions appropriately, knowing full well that what’s “appropriate” is always shifting and political . Emotive expressions, when listened to, are evidence of systemic problems that lie beneath. Strive to be flexible and open to the authentic expressions of others. You can’t tell people in pain to suppress emotions.  

Critical thinking is hard. We don’t do it enough. It’s easy to *not* do it because you have to actively engage  in its practice. The residuals of evolution are pulling you in the other direction. Your monkey brain wants shortcuts, but you have to fight against this. Critical thinking improves communication. Good communication influences critical thinking. The relationship is reciprocal.

Hashing out an idea with someone, and critical thinking with them, is bond-forming. When you can rigorously vet and work out an idea or problem with another person, regardless of the size type, or shape of that problem, you are forming a bond with them. You are connecting. You are making something better. Engage in it. Surrender to the process. Get in there and mix it up.

Why Communication and Critical Thinking are the Most Essential 21st Century Skills

By: Aveek Pal Choudhuri | Thursday, 30 Apr 2020, 13:59 IST

During the past days of the COVID-19 pandemic, many people have lost their jobs as a result of a static or declining economy. Communication and critical thinking skills will come as a rescue for the unemployed allowing them to get hired and employed to keep their positions intact. These skills are given importance as it involves people skills and quick decisions.

Communication is considered as the skeletal structure of critical thinking, where a person thinks from the inner core and puts them into structured sentences. Analyzing any condition or situation is achieved due to a person’s critical thinking ability. Thereafter, communication skills help that person to negotiate its thoughts successfully. Solutions of assumed unsolvable problems come into reels.

Communication not only involves throwing out words - listening is also considered an indestructible part of communication. It is the code to unlock the thoughts of others who would want to convey essential information. Appreciative, empathetic, comprehensive, and critical are the four types of listening which when mastered make a person an ideal communicator.

People with better critical thinking skills are good communicators. They can visualize conditions from different angles and present their perspectives. Most of the times, critical thinkers are not intimated by others or adverse conditions. Having the ability to assimilate thoughts according to data analyzation and logic helps a critical thinker to establish a rational connection between ideas and reality. Some of the other reasons Why Communication and Critical Thinking are the most essential 21st century skills include:

• Clinching to the Point –  One of the most important skills of communication and critical thinking is clinching to the point and not deviating away. Identifying a problematic situation and then thinking of the factors to solve it without any outside influence can be hard. But a skillful critical thinker and good communicator can do it. While talking about the solutions with the trusted ones strengthen the bond and of course, a good communicator isn’t swayed away from the actual points.
• Non-Verbal Communication and Research –  Finding arguments and facts for supporting critical thoughts are required vehemently and maintaining attitude through facial expressions, physical gestures, eye contact, and voice is also vital. It is the mode of non-verbal communication and research in terms of data and argument finding.
• Controlling Emotion and Curiosity –  Making decisions depending on emotions is not good. It is harmful to the profession and hence controlling emotion is the tool to suppress the negative thoughts. It is looked for quality to have and employers often spot it out from the candidates. A curious mind knows to control emotion and ask questions that have productive answers. An open-minded person knows to control emotion and seek answers to tough questions. 

Post-pandemic days will be tough and employers will be seeking workforce with great skills. Both of these skills can be developed with time and it’s the perfect moment to do so. Start honing these skills and hope for the best.

Top Higher Education Scholarships in India

Transformative Leadership: Shaping the Future of Manufacturing

Current Issue

TheHigherEducationReview Tv

The Higher Education Review

• Linguistics
• Join Newsletter

Our Promise to you

Founded in 2002, our company has been a trusted resource for readers seeking informative and engaging content. Our dedication to quality remains unwavering—and will never change. We follow a strict editorial policy , ensuring that our content is authored by highly qualified professionals and edited by subject matter experts. This guarantees that everything we publish is objective, accurate, and trustworthy.

Over the years, we've refined our approach to cover a wide range of topics, providing readers with reliable and practical advice to enhance their knowledge and skills. That's why millions of readers turn to us each year. Join us in celebrating the joy of learning, guided by standards you can trust.

What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the ability to apply reasoning and logic to new or unfamiliar ideas, opinions, and situations. Thinking critically involves seeing things in an open-minded way and examining an idea or concept from as many angles as possible. This important skill allows people to look past their own views of the world and to better understand the opinions of others. It is often used in debates, to form more cogent and well-rounded arguments, and in science.

Open-Minded Approach

The ability to think critically is essential, as it creates new possibilities in problem solving. Being "open-minded" is a large part of critical thinking, allowing a person to not only seek out all possible answers to a problem, but to also accept an answer that is different from what was originally expected. Open-minded thinking requires that a person does not assume that his or her way of approaching a situation is always best, or even right. A scientist, for example, must be open to the idea that the results of an experiment will not be what is expected; such results, though challenging, often lead to tremendous and meaningful discoveries.

Rational Considerations

Another aspect of critical thinking is the ability to approach a problem or situation rationally. Rationality requires analyzing all known information, and making judgments or analyses based on fact or evidence, rather than opinion or emotion. An honest approach to reasoning requires a thinker to acknowledge personal goals, motives, and emotions that might color his or her opinions or thought processes. Rational thought involves identifying and eliminating prejudices, so that someone can have a fresh and objective approach to a problem.

Critical thinking often relies on the ability to view the world in a way that does not focus on the self. Empathizing with a person usually involves a thinker trying to put himself or herself in the place of someone else. This is often done by students of history, for example, in an attempt to see the world as someone would have while living in an ancient civilization or during a violent conflict. Communication skills, teamwork, and cooperation are typically improved through empathy, which makes it valuable in many professional fields.

How to Apply It

Effective critical thinking often begins with a thinker analyzing what he or she knows about a subject, with extra effort made to recognize what he or she does not know about it. This forms an initial knowledge base for consideration. The thinker can then look at what research has been done on the subject, and identify what he or she can learn simply by looking over such work. This approach is often used in science, as it allows a scientist to determine what people do not yet know or understand, and then look for ways to discover this information through experimentation.

When someone applies this approach to his or her own life, he or she often places more emphasis on finding prejudices and preconceived notions he or she holds. This lets the thinker strive to eliminate or avoid these opinions, to come to a more honest or objective view of an issue. Someone struggling with a fear of heights, for example, might strive to determine the cause of this fear in a rational way. By doing so, he or she might be better able to deal with the root cause directly and avoid emotional responses that could prevent self-improvement.

Common Uses

Critical thinking is used in many situations. Students often use it to evaluate the plot of a book or a character’s motives in a literature class. Members of a debate team frequently think critically about a subject to form a strong argument and anticipate points their competitors might make. Diets using common sense, in which the focus is on how weight is gained and lost through calories and exercise, can require that the dieter thinks critically about his or her lifestyle. Many people use open-mindedness and empathy in their professional lives, allowing them to work better with others and complete tasks more effectively.

Teaching This Skill

School systems in the US usually teach critical thinking from elementary school up through college-level courses. Teachers encourage students to learn through writing assignments and problem solving. For example, younger students might be asked how their lives would be different if they were born in another country or in a different time period. Such assignments push students to let go of what they know about the world around them, to better consider other perspectives and apply new ideas to their own lives.

• https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Editors' Picks

Related Articles

• What Is the Difference between Logic and Reason?
• What is Convergent Thinking?
• How can I Learn to Think Critically?
• What is Objectivism?

Our latest articles, guides, and more, delivered daily.

How might language affect critical thinking performance?

• School of Creative Science and Engineering

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

• Cognitive cost
• Critical evaluation
• Critical thinking skills instruction
• Language proficiency
• Language structure

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to document.

• 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005

Other files and links

• Link to publication in Scopus
• Link to the citations in Scopus

Fingerprint

• Critical Thinking Arts and Humanities 100%
• Student Year Arts and Humanities 100%
• Evaluative Statements Keyphrases 75%
• Second-year Students Keyphrases 50%
• Written Work Keyphrases 50%
• First-Year Student Social Sciences 50%
• Evaluation Use Keyphrases 25%
• Student Struggle Keyphrases 25%

T1 - How might language affect critical thinking performance?

AU - Manalo, Emmanuel

AU - Sheppard, Chris

N1 - Funding Information: This research was supported by a grant-in-aid (23243071) received from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. Publisher Copyright: © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. Copyright: Copyright 2016 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

PY - 2016/9/1

Y1 - 2016/9/1

N2 - This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

AB - This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

KW - Cognitive cost

KW - Critical evaluation

KW - Critical thinking skills instruction

KW - Language proficiency

KW - Language structure

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84974603780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84974603780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005

DO - 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84974603780

SN - 1871-1871

JO - Thinking Skills and Creativity

JF - Thinking Skills and Creativity

• Access through  your organization
• Purchase PDF

Article preview

Introduction, section snippets, references (52), cited by (36).

Thinking Skills and Creativity

How might language affect critical thinking performance.

• • We examined whether language structure or proficiency affect critical thinking.
• • Japanese students show critical evaluation better in Japanese than in English.
• • Proficiencies in native- and second-languages correlate with critical evaluation in writing.
• • But without critical evaluation instruction, no such correlations were found.
• • Results indicate importance of language proficiency and provision of instruction.

General discussion

List of funder and grant number, conflict of interest, acknowledgements, individual differences in information processing: an investigation of intellectual abilities and task performance during practice, intelligence, chinese and english counterfactuals: the sapir-whorf hypothesis revisited, does language shape thought: mandarin and english speakers’ conceptions of time, cognitive psychology, do chinese and english speakers think about time differently failure of replicating boroditsky (2001), the relationship between english language proficiency and success as a medical resident, english for specific purposes, objective measurement of low-proficiency efl narrative writing, journal of second language writing, evaluation in academic discourse: managing criticism in japanese and english book reviews, journal of pragmatics, re-evaluating evidence for the linguistic relativity hypothesis: response to boroditsky (2001), assessing students’ critical thinking performance: urging for measurements using multi-response format, exploring cultural differences in critical thinking: is it about my thinking style or the language i speak, learning and individual differences, to what extent do culture-related factors influence university students’ critical thinking use, methodological problems in cross-cultural studies of linguistic relativity, critical thinking as a citizenship competence: teaching strategies, learning and instruction, concept building and discussion: foundations, a critical approach to critical thinking in tesol, tesol quarterly, working memory, human memory, the linguistic shaping of thought, an ‘infusion’ approach to critical thinking: moore on the critical thinking debate, higher education research & development, validation of the c-test amongst hungarian efl learners, language testing, the differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in l2 oral production, applied linguistics, is critical thinking culturally biased, teaching philosophy, critical thinking: its definition and assessment, critical thinking in a second language, higher education research and development, listening to the world, pupils’ evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation, british journal of educational psychology, how do chinese students’ critical thinking compare with other students: a structured review of the existing evidence.

Additionally, the use of different CT instruments also introduces some biases. For example, research has suggested that second language proficiency could prevent students from demonstrating CT skills (Floyd, 2011; Manalo & Sheppard, 2016). It is justifiable to translate the CT tests into the Chinese language.

The Effect of Critical Thinking Embedded English Course Design to The Improvement of Critical Thinking Skills of Secondary School Learners^✰

Mapping the taxonomy of critical thinking ability in efl.

Therefore, EFL learners have different metalinguistic awareness and cognitive processes from mother language learners (Bialystok & Feng, 2009; Bialystok, Craik, Grady, Chau, Ishii & Gunji 2005; Cook, 1992; Cummins, 2007; Hall & Cook, 2012). In addition, learners’ language ability is a vital factor influencing critical thinking in language use (Li, 2016b; Manalo & Sheppard, 2016). The students in this study may have had different levels of English from those in the research done by Hughes (2014) (Levels A1+ to B1+) and by Paul et al. (1989) (Year 6 to Year 9 native speakers), but since their indicators involve all the skills in English learning, and very little other research on CTA in EFL was found, it was decided that they would be suitable examples for use in this study.

Fostering critical thinking in English-as-a-second-language classrooms: Challenges and opportunities

Hence, because language processing entails cognitive resources, the lower the degree of language proficiency, the greater the amount of cognitive resources required. Consequently, if too many resources are consumed by a lack of language proficiency, an insufficient amount may be left over for the execution of critical thinking (Manalo & Sheppard, 2016). Insufficient language proficiency therefore may account for poor critical-thinking performance.

The Assessment of Higher-order Thinking Skills in Online EFL Courses: A Quantitative Content Analysis

Reflexivity in multilingual and intercultural education: chinese international secondary school students’ critical thinking.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Table of contents

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

• Is free from research bias
• Provides evidence to support its research findings
• Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
• What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
• When did they say this? Is the source current?
• Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

• Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
• Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
• Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 30, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Products and services

Our innovative products and services for learners, authors and customers are based on world-class research and are relevant, exciting and inspiring.

• Academic Research
• English Language Learning
• English Language Assessment
• Educational resources for schools
• Educational Research & Network
• Assessment Research
• Cambridge Assessment International Education
• Cambridge CEM
• Cambridge Partnership for Education
• Cambridge Dictionary
• The Cambridge Mathematics Project

We unlock the potential of millions of people worldwide. Our assessments, publications and research spread knowledge, spark enquiry and aid understanding around the world.

• People and planet
• News and insights
• Accessibility
• Rights and permissions
• Annual Report

No matter who you are, what you do, or where you come from, you’ll feel proud to work here.

• Language learning materials
• Language Assessment

Teaching critical thinking in the language classroom

Life Competencies   Professional Development   Insights, Research and Linguistics  

In this article, Ana Tatsumi, our ELT consultant from Brazil, discusses the importance of critical thinking, considerations for teachers and students, and shares some classroom activity ideas.

Consider the game “This or that”: you will be given questions, and for each of them you must state your preference. They are:

a) a rich breakfast dish with eggs, bacon, pancakes and maple syrup or a healthy green smoothie; b) watching a movie at home or going out with friends on Saturday night; c) buying a new car (yours is fine, by the way) or going on a luxurious 2-week vacation anywhere; d) a very demanding, high-paying job or a 9-to-5 more stable position.

Making decisions is something we go through since childhood – from choosing which games to play or books to read to deciding on the best time to buy a house, we all must face issues, analyze and make decisions. The problem, however, is how to do that – and for us, teachers, how to teach it.

Critical thinking is not a fad. In fact, there is nothing new about it. Why then is it one of the so-called 21 st century skills? “To prepare students for this ever-changing and unpredictable world we live in” would be the standard answer, but let’s think further: why is critical thinking important?

Before we answer that question, let’s start with what critical thinking is. Take for instance the definition below by Tara DeLecce:

“Critical thinking means making reasoned judgments that are logical and well-thought out. It is a way of thinking in which you don’t simply accept all arguments and conclusions you are exposed to but rather have an attitude involving questioning such arguments and conclusions. It requires wanting to see what evidence is involved to support a particular argument or conclusion.”

Why critical thinking is important for our English students

If we take this definition and we try to break down the idea of preparing students for the world we live in, it is fair to say that critical thinking is important in several ways. For one, it helps students observe an object (fact, person, data) from different points of view, like an artist making sketches of a model from different angles, observing every detail, discovering new things at each new angle. That makes them get out of their comfort zone and challenge their preconceptions about the object (or even misconceptions, depending on what they have previously learned about it), and create new, better-informed ones.

Critical thinking also has an impact on students’ interpersonal skills. By thinking critically and seeing things from different angles, students become more open-minded and empathetic, better communicators, more inclined to collaborate with their peers and receive and discuss their ideas. Thinking more about students as individuals, it is possible to say that critical thinking helps them develop their creative side by allowing their thinking process to run more freely, and explore more possibilities. It will make them better decision-makers, and with practice, also help them save time to make those decisions.

How students can apply critical thinking

Quick research may show you different ways to do it, but there are elements in common:

• Identify the question, that is, what you would like to know;
• Do research on it. It is important that students use reliable sources of information;
• Apply the information found in your research to the initial question;
• Analyze it, and do more research if necessary;
• Draw conclusions, make decisions, prioritize them;
• Take action and create steps to make your decisions applicable to the initial question.

It might not always be possible to follow all steps in the language classroom, depending on the activity. That should not mean we should not teach critical thinking, even (and especially) to young students. Rather, we should encourage it. It can be as simple as asking “Why?” when someone makes a statement in class, or “How do you know?”, or “Where did you see that?”. The goal is not to discredit the student, but rather to have them start thinking about it, from different angles, in new ways.

Example activities

In case you feel your students do not have the language necessary to express themselves in English, you may want to have them use their thinking skills by exploring the space they are in. Total Physical Response (TPR) activities are also helpful, for they associate language and movement, and students start “producing language” by responding with their bodies.

For activities that are about the language, you can have students categorize words (good for vocabulary learning), make comparisons, memorize or sequence (facts in a story, names), think of cause and effect, and so on. Not only do these activities activate their thinking skills, but they are also very practical – you can fit them in any moment of the lesson.

If you have more time, you can go through all the steps above as the process for something bigger – a project, for instance. Projects also promote creativity and collaboration in class, for students will have to put their minds together and negotiate meaning, solve problems, and create something that will be the end product of the project. Another possibility is to flip the class – have students do research before class, and bring their findings to be applied to a topic proposed and have an informed discussion about it.

Considerations for teachers

These suggestions may be used with students at different ages, but we also must remember our role as teachers, and the things we should do to reach the end goal, which is to make them think. In that regard, there are some things we should consider:

• Start early: it’s important to tailor the activity for the children’s age, but it is possible to have them use their brains as early as possible;
• Do not answer their questions right away: teachers want to help students by giving them the answers so they can move on with the task, but if the main goal is to make them think, you may want to give them time to find the answers on their own. Alternatively, have them work in pairs or groups and try to find the answers together. That is not just an opportunity to foster collaboration, but you may be surprised at how creative your students get;
• Ask and encourage open-ended questions: you will foster critical thinking by asking questions and having students think of the answers, but you will also be the model they will copy. Whenever the occasion calls, allow them to ask questions to you and their classmates. That will help you motivate inquisitive students, who may in turn become open-minded adults;
• Help students develop their own ideas: we should not expect them to develop critical thinking skills overnight, without any support. Help them with their tasks by providing scaffolding – techniques/strategies to help them move progressively towards their goals (you can help them in their research, organize their thoughts, or put ideas in perspective), so they can not only complete the task, but also have a sense of achievement, which is a great motivator to keep working;
• Encourage students to think in new ways: creativity is the capacity to think in new ways, and to see associations and relationships that others may not have seen before. By encouraging students to do that, they will naturally become better thinkers and more creative people;
• Encourage understanding and respect: one of the consequences of exercising critical thinking is the development of intellectual empathy, which is the capacity to put oneself in someone else’s place and understand their thoughts and feelings. By doing so, students are more likely to become fair-minded, ethical thinkers. In that context, the notion of respect may be developed more naturally, but it should always be fostered, as in any teaching environment;
• It is not just about science and facts: critical thinking will not only make students intellectual empaths, but it will also help them become aware of their own knowledge and the need to address different ideas constantly – and through research and reasoning, they shall accomplish their tasks with integrity. So why not apply their skills to discuss issues from other subjects, such as Math, Literature, History, Sociology, or even moral issues, for example?

For more on critical thinking, read How you can encourage critical thinking in the era of ‘fake news’ .

Get teaching tips, insights, and resources straight to your inbox when you  create your free World of Better Learning account today.  

Tara DeLecce. 2018. What is Critical Thinking? – Definition, Skills & Meaning. [ONLINE] Available at: https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-critical-thinking-definition-skills-meaning.html. [Accessed 6 April 2018].

You have to be logged in to save articles

Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Matters

Defining critical thinking dispositions and why they’re crucial..

Posted September 23, 2024 | Reviewed by Devon Frye

• Another way to think about and measure critical thinking is to include aspects of motivational dispositions.
• Dispositions include open-mindedness and a willingness to be reflective when evaluating information.
• People scoring low in critical thinking dispositions tend to “keep it simple” when something is complex.
• Critical thinking dispositions help individuals avoid oversimplification and can facilitate awareness of bias.

Critical thinking springs from the notion of reflective thought proposed by Dewey (1933), who borrowed from the work of philosophers such as William James and Charles Peirce. Reflective thought was defined as the process of suspending judgment, remaining open-minded, maintaining a healthy skepticism, and taking responsibility for one’s own development (Gerber et al., 2005; Stoyanov & Kirshner, 2007).

Kurland (1995) suggested, “Critical thinking is concerned with reason, intellectual honesty, and open-mindedness, as opposed to emotionalism, intellectual laziness, and closed-mindedness. Thus, critical thinking involves… considering all possibilities… being precise; considering a variety of possible viewpoints and explanations; weighing the effects of motives and biases; being concerned more with finding the truth than with being right…being aware of one’s own prejudices and biases” (p. 3). Thus, being able to perspective-take and becoming conscious of one’s own biases are potential benefits of critical thinking capacities.

Reviews of the critical thinking literature (e.g., Bensley, 2023) suggest that the assessment of this construct ought to include aspects of motivational dispositions. Numerous frameworks of critical thinking dispositions have been proposed (e.g., Bensley, 2018; Butler & Halpern, 2019; Dwyer, 2017); some commonly identified dispositions are open-mindedness, intellectual engagement, and a proclivity to take a reflective stance or approach to evaluating information and the views and beliefs of both oneself and others. Demir (2022) posited that critical thinking dispositions reflect persons’ attitudes toward and routine ways of responding to new information and diverging ideas, willingness to engage in nuanced and complex rather than either/or reductionistic thinking, and perseverance in attempts to understand and resolve complex problems.

Other examples of dispositions are inquisitiveness, open-mindedness, tolerance for ambiguity, thinking about thinking, honesty in assessing or evaluating biases, and willingness to reconsider one’s own views and ways of doing things (Facione et al., 2001). Individual personality attributes associated with these proclivities include a need for cognition (a desire for intellectual stimulation), which is positively associated with critical thinking, and the need for closure (a motivated cognitive style in which individuals prefer predictability, firm answers, and rapid decision making ) and anti-intellectualism (a resentment of “the life of the mind” and those who represent it), both negatively associated with critical thinking.

Further, an ideological component that can impede critical thinking is dogmatism . In addition, rigid, dichotomous thinking impedes critical thinking in that it oversimplifies the complexity of social life in a pluralistic society (Bensley, 2023; Cheung et al., 2002; Halpern & Dunn, 2021) and tries to reduce complicated phenomena and resolve complex problems via “either/or” formulations and simplistic solutions.

In other words, folks with low critical thinking dispositions would tend to “keep it simple” when something is really quite complicated, and think it absolute terms and categories rather than seeing “the gray” in between the black and white extremes.

In sum, critical thinking dispositions are vitally important because they may help individuals avoid oversimplifying reality; they also permit perspective-taking and can facilitate their awareness of diversity and systematic biases, such as racial or gender bias . Some research has indicated that critical thinking dispositions uniquely contribute to academic performance beyond general cognition (Ren et al., 2020), and may help to reduce unsubstantiated claims and conspiracy beliefs (Bensley, 2023; Lantian et al., 2021).

But before we can study the potential impact of critical thinking dispositions, it is necessary to have a reliable, valid, and hopefully brief measure for this construct. I will discuss the development and validation of a measure of critical thinking dispositions in another post.

Bensley, D.A. ( 2023.) Critical thinking, intelligence, and unsubstantiated beliefs: An integrative review. Journal of Intelligence, 1 , 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11110207

Bensley, D.A. (2018). Critical thinking in psychology and everyday life: A guide to effective thinking . New York: Worth Publishers.

Butler, H.A., & Halpern, D.F. (2019). Is critical thinking a better model of intelligence? In Robert J. Sternberg (Ed.) The Nature of Intelligence (pp. 183–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cheung, C.-K, Rudowicz. E., Kwan, A., & Yue, X.. (2002). Assessing university students’ general and specific criticalthinking. College Student Journal, 36 , 504 – 25.

Demir, E. (2022). An examination of high school students’ critical thinking dispositions and analytical thinking skills. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6 , 190–200. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202217357

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process . Lexington: Heath and Company.

Dwyer, C. P. (2017). Critical thinking: Conceptual perspectives and practical guidelines . Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Facione, P., Facione, N,C,, & Giancarlo, C.A.F. (2001(. California Critical Disposition Inventory . Millbrae: California Academic Press.

Gerber, S., Scott, L., Clements, D.H., & Sarama, J. (2005). Instructor influence on reasoned argument in discussion boards. Educational Technology, Research & Development, 53 , 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504864

Halpern, D. F., & Dunn, D.S. (2021). Critical thinking: A model of intelligence for solving real-world problems. Journal of Intelligence, 9 , 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9020022

Kurland, D. (1995). I know what it says… What does it mean? Critical skills for critical reading . Belmont: Wadsworth.

Lantian, A., Bagneux, V., Delouvee, S., & Gauvrit, N. (2021). Maybe a free thinker but not a critical one: High conspiracybelief is associated with low critical thinking ability. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 35 , 674 – 84. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3790

Ren, X., Tong, Y., Peng, P. & Wang, T. (2020). Critical thinking predicts academic performance beyond general cognitiveability: Evidence from adults and children. Intelligence, 82 , 101487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101487

Stoyanov, S., & Kirschner, P. ( 2007). Effect of problem solving support and cognitive styles on idea generation:Implications for technology-enhanced learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40 , 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782496

Kyle D. Killian, Ph.D., LMFT is the author of Interracial Couples, Intimacy and Therapy: Crossing Racial Borders.

• Find Counselling
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• Richmond - Tweed
• Newcastle - Maitland
• Canberra - ACT
• Sunshine Coast
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

The Mediating Role of Critical Thinking Abilities in the Relationship Between English as a Foreign Language Learners’ Writing Performance and Their Language Learning Strategies

Maryam esmaeil nejad.

1 Department of English Language Education, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan Branch, Zanjan, Iran

Siros Izadpanah

2 Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan Branch, Zanjan, Iran

Ehsan Namaziandost

3 Department of English, Islamic Azad University, Shahrekord Branch, Shahrekord, Iran

Behzad Rahbar

4 Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Associated Data

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Recent developments in the field of education have led to a renewed interest in the mediating role of critical thinking abilities (CTA) in the relationship between language learning strategies and the intermediate English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ writing performance. Oxford Placement Test (OPT) was run to homogenize the participants, and 100 intermediate learners out of 235 were selected. Then, two valid questionnaires of Ricketts’ Critical Thinking Disposition and Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning were administered. Having administered the questionnaires, the researchers asked the participants to sit for a writing test. The data collected from the questionnaires and as well as the scores of their writing performances were analyzed through SPSS (25.00). The results showed a significant relationship between (a) learning strategies and learners’ writing performances, (b) the sub-sets of learning strategies and learners’ writing performances, and (c) CTA and learners’ learning strategies. However, CTA did not play a mediating role in the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and writing performance. Based on the results of the study, one might also conclude that strategies seemed to play a more important role in the performance of learners especially their writing performances. Therefore, this study had useful contributions for students, teachers, and curriculum designers. Findings of this research could assist teachers to be aware of learners’ strategies in learning writing and help their students to be responsive to using learning strategies in their learning process and create a satisfactory learning context for using learning strategies. Therefore, learners were able to become independent and feel responsibility for their own learning. Secondly, curriculum developers could take advantage of the findings to include learning strategies training into the curriculum. As a result, students were able to use strategies in their learning process more easily and finally, the results might pave the way for improving the research findings.

Introduction

This study examined the relationships between writing performance and language learning strategies (cognitive, metacognitive, social, affective, memory-related, and compensation). It also intended to determine the relationship between intermediate English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ critical thinking abilities and their writing performances. There are some factors which could affect language learning strategies by learners. According to some researchers’ different variables such as age, gender, language proficiency, motivation, anxiety, aptitude, and cultural background affect using language learning strategies by students (e.g., Berridge, 2018 ; Esteves et al., 2021 ). However, a quick review of the global literature shows that little attention is given to the role of critical thinking in learners’ choice of learning strategies as well as their writing performances.

Recent developments in the field of critical thinking abilities have also led to a renewed interest in EFL learners’ writing performance ( Renatovna and Renatovna, 2021 ). It is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore the role of critical thinking abilities ( Warsah et al., 2021 ). Recently, the focus of the teacher-oriented viewpoint has changed to a learner-centered perspective ( Reshadi and Aidinlou, 2012 ; Al Sharadgah, 2014 ; Yaralı and Aytar, 2021 ). Learners are now in charge of their learning more than ever. In other words, more learners take more responsibility to make the best use of language learning strategies (LLSs) and be conscious of their own individual needs ( Teng, 2020 ; Parra et al., 2021 ). New learning strategies are introduced to the learners to develop their personable attainments in the language learning process ( Sutiani et al., 2021 ).

Learning strategies are made up of mental processes – thoughts or behaviors – that help learners understand, learn, or sustain new information ( Panahandeh and Esfandiar, 2014 ; Jiang et al., 2021 ). The concept of learning strategies plays a crucial role in the study of second or foreign language learning. Even though many studies have been done to implement learning strategies, the idea of learning strategies is still obscure. Dörnyei and Skehan (2003) , Rajaee Pitenoee et al. (2017) , and Chang et al. (2021) assert that the opinion behind learning strategies has not been critically examined because the concepts and definitions have been inconsistent so far. Critical thinking abilities play a significant role in language learning and teaching. Choosing critical thinking abilities, among other skills and strategies, is to help students do writing performance difficulties and teachers who try to help do their students’ writing performances.

In addition, few studies have been carried on to compare the learning strategies of cognitive, metacognitive, and social/affective, memory-related strategies with writing performances. Besides, no studies, to the best knowledge of the researchers, had ever embarked on investigating the mediating role of critical thinking abilities in the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance and their learning strategies. A quick review of the global literature shows that little attention is given to the role of critical thinking abilities in learners’ choice of learning strategies and their writing performances.

In a nutshell, this study aimed to evaluate the mediating role of critical thinking abilities in the relationship between EFL learners’ writing performance and their language learning strategies.

Review of Literature

Learning strategies and writing performance.

Learning strategies are defined as “proceedings or stages used by a learner to comfort the attainment, storage, detection or use of information” ( Rigney, 1978 cited in Aslan, 2009 , p. 45). O’Malley and Chamot (1990) defined learning strategies as the particular thoughts or compartments that everybody uses to understand, learn, or maintain new information. On the other hand, Chamot (2004) , Bagheri (2015) , and Zarrinabadi et al. (2021) claim that learning strategies are the purposive thoughts and behavior that students take to earn a learning goal. More importantly, successful learners have their unique techniques to learn. Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) have been the first scholars who analyze the idea of successful language learning. This idea makes us more curious to discover more about the nature of the learning and learning process. Consequently, the majority of the research performed until now has been focusing on the detection, explanation, and categorization of learning strategies ( Pradhan and Das, 2021 ; Tran and Tran, 2021 ).

The relationship between language learning strategies (LLS) and writing performance (WP) has been the subject of much research over the last 20 years ( Goudarzi et al., 2015 ; Wale and Bogale, 2021 ). According to Green and Oxford (1995) , the picture is not crystal clear because a lot of research has focused on overall strategy use only and not considered individual strategy use or variations. In a study done by Saricoban and Saricaoglu (2008) in Turkey, it was found that compensation strategies had a positive correlation with academic achievement (p. 172) while affective strategies were negatively correlated. Students who used affective strategies were less successful than others. Griffiths (2004) , in a study at a private language school in Auckland, found that “there was a significant relationship between strategy use and language proficiency” (p. 82). The study showed that the “Advanced students reported a higher average frequency of use of each strategy than did elementary students” (p. 78). These studies imply that we can raise levels of proficiency by teaching these strategies. These studies may not have shown a clear causality in any direction between language proficiency and strategy use; however, it can be logically concluded that there are significant relationships between the two.

According to Oxford (1990) , learning strategies are categorized into direct and indirect strategies. Also, each category is divided into subcategories which are placed under the labels. Learners directly use direct strategies in the learning process to produce the target language. These strategies include memory strategies which are responsible for retrieving and storing information, cognitive strategies which learners use to process new information; and learners use compensation strategies to compensate for lack of enough knowledge in the target language ( Goudarzi et al., 2015 ; García-Sánchez and García-Martín, 2021 ; Zarrinabadi et al., 2021 ). As Oxford (1990) states, these strategies assist students to be more independent, identify their learning strengths and weaknesses, and be self-reliant in their language learning process. Therefore, learning strategies help learners to become competent in using a language. Based on Oxford and Burry-Stock (1995) , strategies are techniques or behaviors used unconsciously by learners to improve their understanding and use the target language. O’Malley and Chamot (1990) proposed a very comprehensive classification of learning strategies. Their tri-faceted classification is as follows:

• 1. Metacognitive strategies: It includes supervisory processes in planning for learning, supervising one’s understanding and production, and assessing to what extent individuals have achieved a learning goal.
• 2. Cognitive strategies: Mentally speaking, manipulating the materials to be learned through interaction by visualizing mental pictures or connecting the material with the previously known items. Physically speaking, categorizing the things to be learned meaningfully or summarizing the essential items to be known.
• 3. Social-affective strategies: Learner’s interact with others to look for help in learning, such as posing questions for cooperation or using some affective to control learning.

Critical Thinking Abilities and Writing Performance

In modern society, even in everyday life, people frequently need to deal with complicated public and political issues, make decisions, and solve problems ( Bagheri, 2015 ; Zarrinabadi et al., 2021 ). To do this efficiently and effectively, citizens must evaluate critically what they see, hear, and read. Although a massive amount of printed material is available in all areas in the age of “information explosion,” it is still easy to feel overwhelmed. But the information piled up on people’s desks and in their minds is of no use due to the enormous amount of it. Thus, they need to read selectively and sort out the bits and pieces that are interesting and useful for them. To do so, strong critical reading and critical thinking skills are indispensable ( Morgan and Shermis, 1994 ).

Writing is a complex process that needs much effort to be completed. Numerous researchers believe that writing is a skill that requires learning and practicing ( Fathi et al., 2019 ; Neimaoui, 2019 ; Wale and Bogale, 2021 ). Also, Langan (1987) , Reid (1993) , and El-Freihat and Al-Shbeil (2021) , note that writing is a craft skill that can be taught and learned. For effective writing in EFL classrooms, ELT practitioners ( Badger and White, 2000 ; Paltridge, 2004 ; Rahayu, 2021 ) suggest three following approaches: product, process, and genre. According to Zamel (1983) , Liu and Hansen (2002) , and Indah (2017) , the process approach focuses on the composing process, whereby writers express their notions as they attempt to transfer the meaning. According to Gabrielatos (2002) and Hall (2017) , a product approach is a traditional approach, in which students are motivated to copy a model text while the genre approach is the newcomer and an outcome of the communicative language teaching approach. The readers are at the center of this approach since its readership must successfully accept it.

The word “writing” means the text in written form in the process of thinking, constructing, and coding language into such text ( Tabibian and Heidari-Shahreza, 2016 ; Irzawati et al., 2021 ; Namaziandost et al., 2021 ). Since writing is one of the skills in first and second language learning, all skills have a relationship. As an instance, Harmer (1991) , Rahimi and Karbalaei (2016) , Taghinezhad et al. (2018) , and Yan (2018) believe that one skill cannot be carried out without the other, and it is impossible to communicate without listening, and people seldom write without reading.

The relation between writing and thinking is that writing is thinking if one cannot think clearly, one cannot write clearly. Writing develops thinking skills. It improves the thinking process and contributes to the development of thinking skills because an individual has to clearly state ideas and lay out arguments in such a way as to cultivate higher order of thinking. Regarding the relationship between both, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (1956 in Errihani, 2012 ; Jiang et al., 2021 ; Wale and Bogale, 2021 ) is suggestive in the context of English as a Foreign Language as it contends that cognitive activity is determined by language. The cognitive activity can be reflected in written text and later be understood well by the audience determined by the strength of the language ( Díaz Larenas et al., 2017 ; Rahayu, 2021 ). Consequently, the primary concern of second language (L2) writers is primarily on linguistics, as noted by Errihani (2012) . Therefore, critical thinking ability reflects their linguistic skill represented by their writing, which reflects the background knowledge.

The Relationship Between Critical Thinking Abilities and Learning Strategies

Literature on the relationship between critical thinking and language learning strategies is not much. However, a number of studies have been conducted so far. In a survey conducted by Nikoopour et al. (2011) , they surveyed the relationship between CTA and the use of LLS by Iranian language learners. Their findings reveal a significant correlation between direct and indirect LLS such as cognitive, meta-cognitive, and social with critical thinking. At the same time, no relationship was discovered between CTA and memory, compensation, and affective strategies. In another study by Ku (2009) , they aimed to examine the role of meta-cognitive strategies in critical thinking. Based on the findings, “good critical thinkers” are more active in meta-cognitive activities.

Although critical thinking ability is not directly measurable and is not easy to teach, there is always a chance to enhance these strategies through deliberate teaching ( Willingham, 2007 ; Nikoopour et al., 2011 ; Mosley et al., 2016 ). Learning strategies can develop and improve it ( Loving and Wilson, 2000 ; Seymour et al., 2003 ). The teacher is responsible for its development ( Choy and Cheah, 2009 ). Willingham (2007) stated that one of the fundamental purposes of education is to enable students to think critically, but this goal is incompetently met. As the 21st century is the age of information technology, critical thinking abilities are a crucial requirement to select and evaluate the reliability of the information ( Grabau, 2007 ). Asian students lack the required skill as it is not commonly emphasized in schools ( Egege and Kutieleh, 2004 ; Djiwandono, 2013 ). Learning activities have been used to develop the critical thinking skills of the learners for years. Literature suggests cooperative learning is very fruitful for developing students’ social skills, language acquisition, and academic achievement and fostering critical thinking skills ( Ghaith, 2003 ; Sadeghi, 2012 ). Students who learn through strategies have a chance to develop their thinking. Students’ face-to-face interaction promotes critical thinking abilities ( Fahim and Eslamdoost, 2014 ). Group discussions effectively stimulate and develop ideas, which is the first requirement of critical thinking abilities ( Devi et al., 2015 ). The student’s critical thinking abilities can be enhanced through cooperative learning. In collaborative learning, students have a chance to group discussion, evaluate and synthesize the information, and consider the solution as students are responsible for their learning. Cooperative learning promotes interaction among students, which helps develop critical thinking abilities ( Devi et al., 2015 ; Mahmoodi and Dehghannezhad, 2015 ).

This study examined the relationships between writing performance and language learning strategies (cognitive, metacognitive, social, affective, memory-related, and compensation). This study also intended to determine the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking abilities and their writing performances. Based on the analysis, one might also conclude that strategies seemed to play a more important role in learners’ performance, especially their writing performances. Therefore, this study had valuable contributions for students, teachers, and curriculum designers.

All in all, reviewing the literature so far indicates that the impact of CTA on language skills and sub-skills has not received as much attention as warranted. Moreover, rare studies, if any, have been done in this regard Iranian context. Thus, to cover these gaps, the researchers aim to explore if CTA has any role in the relationship between language learning strategies and the intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance. To this purpose, the following research questions were proposed:

• 1. Is there any significant relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performances?
• 2. Is there any significant relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ cognitive strategy (CS), metacognitive strategy (MS), social strategy (SS), affective strategy (AS), compensation strategy (CS), memory-related strategy (MS), and their writing performances?
• 3. Is there any significant relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking abilities and writing performances?
• 4. Is there any significant relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their critical thinking?
• 5. Does critical thinking ability play a mediating role in the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and writing performances?

Materials and Methods

Participants.

The participants of this study were 235 male and female Iranian EFL learners at different language institutes in Zanjan, Iran who were selected based on the convenience sampling method. Oxford Placement Test (OPT) was run to make the participants homogeneous, and 100 learners were selected as the final participants. According to the OPT, 37 people had advanced level scores and 98 people had elementary level scores who were excluded from the study. That is, low- and high-level average scores based on the OPT were summarized and included in the study [Mean (SD) = 37.5 ± 9.15]. The selected participants were all EFL intermediate learners at language institutes ranging from 18 to 35 years of age. More details about the participants can be seen in Table 1 .

Demographic characteristics of the participants.

Instruments

In line with the purposes of this research, three instruments were used:

• (1) OPT: To meet the purposes mentioned above, at first, a language skill test version 2, including 60 items matching cloze passages and multiple-choice questions were managed to sure the concord of the learners. The test items most focused on grammar and vocabulary. The participants were given 30 min to answer. Those learners whose scores fell between 30 and 39 were considered intermediate ones.
• (2) Critical Thinking Dispositions Questionnaire ( Ricketts, 2003 ) : Used to measure the intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking disposition. The questionnaire contained 33 statements on the Likert 5-point scale. The minimum mean and maximum scores that could be achieved were 33, 99, and 145. Three sub-components of the questionnaire are creativity with 11 sentences, sophistication with nine statements, and dedication with 13 statements. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the invention, sophistication, and commitment subcomponents are 0.64, 0.53, and 0.82, respectively. The reliability coefficient of the instrument was stated to be approximately 0.76 by PakMehr et al. (2010) .
• (3) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning Questionnaire ( Oxford, 1990 ) : The following inventory included in this analysis was the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) questionnaire used to classify LLS students. The SILL questionnaire was developed by Oxford (1990) and was used without alteration in this research. It comprised 50 items that included six types of LLSs: recall strategies, cognitive strategies, compensation strategies, metacognitive strategies, affective strategies, and social strategies. The questionnaire was a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 ( Never or almost never true of me ), 2 ( Usually not true of me ), 3 ( somewhat true of me ), 2 ( usually true of me ), and 5 ( always or almost always true of me ).

Writing Performance

In order to measure the writing performance of the participants, they were asked to sit for a writing exam in the class. An argumentative topic titled “Using a computer every day can have more negative than positive effects on your children. Do you agree or disagree?” was introduced to the intermediate learners to compose a well-formed essay.

There were many different types of rubrics in the literature for assessing writings. One of the appropriate scales for rating the writing of learners was Cooper’s (1997) scale. This rubric includes different criteria for assessing learning writing performance. Cooper’s (1997) checklist is shown below:

Rating scales covered “Task Achievement,” “Coherence and Cohesion,” “Lexical Resource,” and “Grammatical Range and Accuracy.”

In the holistic grading method, as illustrated in Figure 1 , the reader assigns a single score from 0 to 6 (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6) to an essay based on overall writing quality.

Cooper’s classification of writing rating scale. 6, outstanding; 5, very good; 4, good; 3, adequate; 2, less than adequate; 1, poor; 0, no substantive response.

Each essay was scored based on the four scales of “Task Achievement,” “Coherence and Cohesion,” “Lexical Resource,” and “Grammatical Range,” and “Accuracy.” In the end, the average of the five scales showed the last score given to any essay by each rater. Subsequently, the average score given by the two raters represented the writer’s final score.

In order to obtain fair answers to the study questions alluded to above, the following steps have been taken. First, the OPT was spread among EFL students from different institutes in Zanjan to assess the participants’ homogeneity and choose advanced language learners. One hundred participants receiving scores from 30 to 39 were selected as the final sample. Second, the Critical Thinking Dispositions Questionnaire (CTDQ) ( Ricketts, 2003 ) was distributed among the intermediate EFL learners. The CTDQ questionnaire included 33 Likert items. Moreover, the Approach Inventory questionnaire ( Oxford, 1990 ) for language learning was administered to the selected intermediate learners. It was a 50-item questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never or almost never applies to me) to 5 (always or almost always applies to me).

Afterward, the participants were asked to sit for an essay writing test. An argumentative topic entitled “Using a computer every day can have more negative than positive effects on your children. Do you agree or disagree?” was introduced to the intermediate earners to compose a well-formed essay on. Two raters scored all the essays based on Cooper’s (1997) rubric scale. The average score given by the two raters accounted for the learners’ final writing score. In the end, the scores of their writing performances and the data gathered from the SILL and Critical Thinking Disposition questionnaires were put into SPSS version 25 to be calculated.

The study was an ex-post-facto design since there were no treatments at all. Having collected the results, the researchers recorded the scores in computer files for statistical analysis using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0. After homogenizing the students as intermediate, to measure the relationship between the variables (SILL and SILL components and writing performance), since the normality was met, seven Pearson correlation tests were conducted. In addition, another Pearson correlation test was run to find if there was a significant relationship between critical thinking abilities and writing performance. Furthermore, the Pearson correlation test was conducted to measure the relationship between learning strategies and intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking abilities as a whole. Finally, to figure out whether critical thinking abilities would play a mediating role in the relationship between learning strategies and writing performance, the Sobel test was used.

This study aimed at investigating the mediating role of critical thinking abilities in the relationship between learning strategies, including cognitive, meta-cognitive, memory-related, compensation, social, and affective strategies, and intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance. First of all, it was necessary to check the normality distribution. Thus, a One-Sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov Test was run.

Based on the statistics in Table 2 , all the p -values are higher than 0.05 ( p > 0.05), it, thus, can be concluded that all the variables benefit from a normal distribution. Accordingly, the researchers are allowed to utilize parametric analysis of the data. The research questions of this study are answered in this part. The related descriptive analysis of all variables will be discussed before defining the inferential analysis:

Normality tests: One-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test.

As Table 3 shows, regarding the number of participants ( N = 100), the mean and the SD of writing performance are 4.22 and 3.27, respectively. The means for critical thinking abilities and learning strategies are 112.56 and 195.20, respectively.

Descriptive statistics of the research variables.

First of all, regarding the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performances, the results of Pearson correlation displayed in Table 4 [ r (98) = 0.865, p < 0.05 representing a large effect size] it can be concluded that there was a significant relationship between learning strategies and writing performance.

Pearson correlation: Learning strategies with writing performances.

Moreover, considering the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ CS, MS, SS, AS, CS, MS, and their writing performances, a Pearson correlation was run, which shows that there was a significant relationship between EFL learners’ CS, MS, SS, AS, CS, MS, and their writing performance ( p < 0.05) ( Table 5 ).

Pearson correlation: CS, MS, SS, AS, CS, and MS with writing performances.

In addition, to check the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking abilities and their writing performances, the Pearson correlation analysis in Table 6 [ r (98) = 0.843, p < 0.05] indicates that the relationship between critical thinking abilities and writing performance was significant.

Pearson correlation: CTA with writing performances.

Furthermore, regarding the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their critical thinking abilities, Pearson correlation results show a significant relationship ( p < 0.05) ( Table 7 ).

Pearson correlation: CTA with learning strategies.

Lastly, considering the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performances, the following conceptual model was used to illustrate the direct impact of learning strategies on writing performance.

As it is shown, the direct impact of learning strategies on writing performance is 0.847, with the SD of 0.05. Regarding the fact that p < 0.05, it is believed that direct impact is significant. The conceptual model below shows the mediating role of critical thinking abilities in the relationship between learning strategies and writing performance:

As depicted above, the impact of the mediating role of CTA on writing performance was 0.035, with the SD of 0.024. Since p > 0.05, it is concluded that the impact of CTA on writing performance is not significant. As also illustrated above, the impact of learning strategies on CTA is 6.057, with the SD of 0.209. Because p < 0.05, it is concluded that the impact of learning strategies on CT is significant. Besides, the impact of learning strategies on writing performance, with the mediating role of CTA, is 0.638, SD = 0.152. Regarding the p -value, which is less than 0.05 ( p < 0.05), it is concluded that the impact of learning strategies on writing performance, with the mediating role of CTA, is not significant because the Z value of the Sobel test is 1.46 and p > 0.14. Thus, CTA does not play a mediating role in the relationship between learning strategies and writing performance.

As stated earlier, this study made an effort to find answers to all research questions concerning the relationship between the three variables CTA, learning strategies, and writing efficiency. Reasonable methods have been used to obtain the answers needed for each question. The study found that high CTA students outperformed low CTA students. Cognitive and metacognitive techniques are not independent; they operate together as learners undertake the process of writing.

Both learning strategies and CTA played an essential role in students’ writing performance. CTA is highly related to writing performance, and it was proved those with high CTA did better in their writing performance, especially when the subject was a bit controversial. Furthermore, it was shown that utilizing learning strategies would improve learners’ writing performance. In other words, the more use of strategies, the better scores in writing performance.

As seen before, the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performance was significant. In addition, the relationships between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies subsets, including cognitive, metacognitive, affective, social, memory-related, and compensation strategies, and their writing strategies were all significant, meaning all the six subsets were significantly correlated with writing performances. The result of this study is in line with the studies done by Chamot (2004) , Berridge (2018) , Al-Jarrah et al. (2019) , Teng (2020) , Chang et al. (2021) , and Parra et al. (2021) in that metacognitive strategies together with its subsets of planning, organizing, and evaluating strategies are related to EFL learners’ writing performances. Besides, this study also confirmed the findings of Pradhan and Das (2021) and Tran and Tran (2021) that there was a positive correlation between English academic achievement and metacognition. In harmony with Teng (2020) and Jiang et al. (2021) , metacognitive strategies could yield the highest mean scores of EFL learners’ writing performances.

In congruence with the finding of Yan (2018) , García-Sánchez and García-Martín (2021) , and Parra et al. (2021) , this study showed a positive correlation between cognitive and metacognitive strategies of learners with their writing performances. Compatible with the findings of Díaz Larenas et al. (2017) and Rahayu (2021) , this study also showed that metacognitive and cognitive strategies would benefit EFL learners’ writing performance.

As Díaz Rodríguez (2014) asserts, this study also illustrated that cognitive and metacognitive strategies are not independent from one another; they work together while the learner is performing the task of writing. Following Rajaee Pitenoee et al.’s (2017) outcome, cognitive and metacognitive strategies would affect Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ writing performance. Meanwhile, in line with Azizi et al. (2017) , this study also confirmed that metacognitive strategies would contribute to higher proficiency in writing. In addition, as Tabrizi and Rajaee (2016) and Tran and Tran (2021) put forward, this study also concluded that cognitive and metacognitive writing strategies would help learners improve their writing. Besides, in agreement with Panahandeh and Esfandiar (2014) , this study showed that metacognitive strategies were positively correlated with writing performance.

However, as opposed to Rahimi and Karbalaei (2016) , who did not find any relationship between the use of metacognitive strategies and writing performance of EFL Iranian learners, this study concluded that metacognitive strategies were highly correlated with writing performance. Compatible with the findings of Goudarzi et al. (2015) and Wale and Bogale (2021) , the results of this study depicted that metacognitive awareness strategies highly affect achievement scores, and there was a significant correlation between metacognitive awareness strategies and their task performance.

Concerning the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ CTA and their writing performance’, it was revealed that intermediate EFL learners’ critical thinking abilities were significantly correlated with writing version. As Neimaoui (2019) , Renatovna and Renatovna (2021) , and Saenab et al. (2021) claim, this study justified that critical thinking ability plays a significant role in EFL learners’ writing performances. Furthermore, consistent with the finding of Hall (2017) and Warsah et al. (2021) , this study concluded that critical thinking abilities could lead to an improvement in EFL learners’ writing performances. Moreover, in agreement with Indah (2017) and Yaralı and Aytar (2021) , this study also stated that EFL learners’ writing performance was influenced by critical thinking. Furthermore, in line with Al Sharadgah (2014) , this study also depicted that those benefiting from a high level of critical thinking abilities would show a more remarkable improvement in their writing. In line with Taghinezhad et al. (2018) , this study proved that critical thinking abilities would improve students’ writing performance. This study also corroborated Golpour’s (2014) finding that critical thinking abilities would play a crucial part in learners’ writing performance. In other words, high critical thinkers were better in writing compared to low critical thinkers.

Considering the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their critical thinking, it was shown that these two variables were significantly correlated. This study is in line with Bagheri (2015) and Zarrinabadi et al. (2021) , who reported a significant relationship between CTA and language learning strategies. Besides, this study also confirmed Nikoopour et al. (2011) . They surveyed the relationship between CTA and the use of language learning strategies by Iranian language learners. Their findings revealed a significant correlation between cognitive, meta-cognitive, and social strategies with critical thinking. However, as opposed to the results of this study, no relationship was discovered between CTA and memory, compensation, and affective strategies. Besides, congruent with the findings of Ku and Ho (2010) , this study found “good critical thinkers” are more active in meta-cognitive activities. Furthermore, this study proved Mahmoodi and Dehghannezhad’s (2015) findings that there was a significant and positive correlation between CTA and language learning strategies.

Regarding the mediating role of critical thinking abilities in the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performances’, based on the statistical analysis, it was affirmed that CTA did not play a mediating role in the relationship between intermediate EFL learners’ learning strategies and their writing performances. As opposed to the researcher’s expectations, and as opposed to the fact that CTA was correlated with both learning strategies and writing performance, this study did not prove that CTA plays a significant role in the relationship between the other two variables. In other words, and surprisingly speaking, CTA does not guarantee the learners’ improvement in their writing performance.

In the present research, an effort was made to examine the importance of CTA to learners in general and their writing output in particular. As stated earlier, this analysis concluded that there was a significant association between CTA and the writing achievement of EFL intermediate learners. In addition, there was a significant association between learning methods and writing achievements. Furthermore, there was a significant association between the six subgroups of learning strategies and writing results. It was concluded that all the sub-sets of cognitive, metacognitive, memory-related, social, affective, and compensation strategies were highly correlated with writing performance, meaning the use of these strategies would lead to a better performance in the task of writing. In addition, as opposed to what the researcher had envisaged, it was proved that although CTA had correlations with both writing performance and learning strategies, it did not play a mediating role in the relationship between learning strategies and writing performance of intermediate EFL learners.

The present study’s findings have shown that more concentration should be placed on critical thinking abilities to enhance students’ academic writing performance. Based on the outcomes of the study, it could be concluded that students benefiting from a very high level of CTA did better in their performances than those lacking such a high degree. The findings of this study demonstrate that the students could be more prosperous in their performances if they learn to think critically and if they are aware of the strategies. This attitude can be helpful for all Iranian English students who wish to be competent in perfect performances, especially in their writing performances.

The construction of CTA and learning methods has given rise to looking at teaching, training, and evaluation differently. Taking into account students’ needs, desires, and abilities, CTA pedagogy provides resources for authentic learning. The findings of this study depict that the students could be more successful writers if they boost their CTA and their learning strategy use. This can help all Iranian English students who long to be proficient in perfect performances in their writing tasks. In addition, educators can forecast effective language behaviors by defining CTA learner profiles at various stages of growth. Teachers must also understand that different CTA-level learners vary in their learning. Teachers might benefit from the study’s findings to realize their students’ levels of CTA, and their use of learning strategies would help them develop a sense of competence while being prepared for a performance. CTA is a vital tool that would alleviate writing performance and operate as a practical way to improve the quality of language learning.

In the first place, the results of this study can help teachers know learners’ plans in learning writing and assist their students in being responsive to use learning plans in their learning steps and creating a good learning context for using learning plans. Thus, students can become self-sufficient and accept responsibility for their learning. Secondly, curriculum developers may take advantage of the findings to include learning strategies training into the curriculum. As a result, students can use strategies in their learning process more efficiently. The current study can also assist in solving the problems of EFL teachers and learners in enhancing the level of cognitive and meta-cognitive abilities. The results may apprise educators that assisting learners in increasing their level of analysis and monitoring in learning is vital in learning.

Data Availability Statement

Author contributions.

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Al Sharadgah T. A. (2014). Developing critical thinking skills through writing in an internet-based environment. Int. J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 4 169–178. [ Google Scholar ]
• Al-Jarrah T. M., Mansor N., Talafhah R. H., Al-Jarrah J. M., Al-Shorman F. M. (2019). Teaching EFL beginners metacognitive writing strategies through Tamer-Aien writing module. Int. J. English Res. 5 4–11. 10.5539/elt.v11n10p162 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Aslan O. (2009). The Role Of Gender And Language Learning Strategies In Learning English (Master Dissertation). Available online at: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12611098/index.pdf (accessed May, 2021). [ Google Scholar ]
• Azizi M., Nemati A., Estahbanati N. (2017). Meta-cognitive awareness of writing strategy uses among Iranian EFL learners and its impact on their writing performance. Int. J. English Lang. Transl. Stud. 5 42–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Badger R., White G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT J. 54 153–160. 10.1093/elt/54.2.153 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bagheri M. (2015). “ Keep it accurate and diverse: enhancing action recognition performance by ensemble learning ,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops , Boston, MA, 22–29. 10.1109/CVPRW.2015.7301332 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berridge K. C. (2018). Evolving concepts of emotion and motivation. Front. Psychol. 9 : 1647 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01647 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chamot A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electron. J. Foreign Lang. Teach. 1 14–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chang C., Colón-Berlingeri M., Mavis B., Laird-Fick H. S., Parker C., Solomon D. (2021). Medical student progress examination performance and its relationship with metacognition, critical thinking, and self-regulated learning strategies. Acad. Med. 96 278–284. 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003766 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Choy S. C., Cheah P. K. (2009). Teacher perceptions of critical thinking among students & its influence on higher education. Int. J. Teach. Learn. High. Educ. 20 198–206. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper C. (1997). “ Holistic evaluation of writing ,” in Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging , eds Cooper C., Odell L. (Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English; ), 3–32. [ Google Scholar ]
• Devi A. P., Musthafa B., Gustine G. G. G. (2015). Using cooperative learning in teaching critical thinking in reading. English Rev. 4 1–14. 10.25134/erjee.v4i1.310 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Díaz Larenas C., Ramos Leiva L., Ortiz Navarrete M. (2017). Rhetorical, metacognitive, and cognitive strategies in teacher candidates’ essay writing. Profile Issues Teach. Prof. Dev. 19 87–100. 10.15446/profile.v19n2.60231 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Díaz Rodríguez A. (2014). Retórica De La Escritura Académica: Pensamiento Crítico Y Discursivo [Academic Writing Rhetoric: Critical And Discursive Thought]. Medellín, CO: Universidad de Antioquia. [ Google Scholar ]
• Djiwandono P. I. (2013). Critical thinking skills for language students. TEFLIN J. 24 32–47. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dörnyei Z., Skehan P. (2003). “ Individual difference in L2 learning ,” in The Handbook Of Second Language Acquisition , eds Doughty C. J., Long M. H. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing; ), 589–630. [ Google Scholar ]
• Egege Y. S., Kutieleh S. (2004). “ Critical thinking & international students: a marriage of necessity ,” in Proceedings of the 8th Pacific Rim Conference First Year in Higher Education 2004 Conference: Dealing with Diversity , Melbourne, VIC. [ Google Scholar ]
• El-Freihat S., Al-Shbeil A. (2021). Effect of child literature based integrative instructional program on promoting 7th graders writing skills: an empirical study. Int. J. Instr. 14 197–216. 10.29333/iji.2021.14212a [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Errihani M. (2012). Critical thinking and the language factor: the case for the English language learner. Arab World English J. 3 4–17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Esteves C. S., Oliveira C. R. D., Argimon I. I. D. L. (2021). Social distancing: prevalence of depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms among Brazilian students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Public Health 8 : 589966 . 10.3389/fpubh.2020.589966 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fahim M., Eslamdoost S. (2014). Critical thinking: frameworks & models for teaching. English Lang. Teach. 7 141–151. 10.5539/elt.v7n7p141 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fathi J., Ahmadnejad M., Yousofi N. (2019). Effects of blog-mediated writing instruction on L2 writing motivation, self-efficacy, and self-regulation: a mixed methods study. J. Res. Appl. Linguist. 10 159–181. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gabrielatos C. (2002). “ Inference procedures and implications for ELT ,” in Research Methodology: Discourse in Teaching a Foreign Language , ed. Millrood R. P. (Tambov: Tambov State University Press; ), 30–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• García-Sánchez J. N., García-Martín J. (2021). Cognitive strategies and textual genres in the teaching and evaluation of advanced reading comprehension (ARC). Front. Psychol. 12 : 723281 . 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.723281 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghaith G. (2003). Effects of the learning together model of cooperative learning on English as a foreign language reading achievement, academic self-esteem, & feelings of school alienation. Biling. Res. J. 27 451–475. 10.1080/15235882.2003.10162603 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Golpour F. (2014). Critical thinking and EFL learners’ performance on different writing modes. J. Pan Pacific Assoc. Appl. Linguist. 18 103–119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goudarzi E., Ghonsooly B., Taghipour Z. (2015). Politeness strategies in English business letters: a comparative study of native and non-native speakers of English. Psychol. Lang. Commun. 19 44–57. 10.1515/plc-2015-0004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grabau L. J. (2007). Effective teaching & learning strategies for critical thinking to foster cognitive development & transformational learning. Effect. Teach. Learn. 5 123–156. [ Google Scholar ]
• Green J., Oxford R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Q. 29 261–297. 10.2307/3587625 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths C. (2004). Language Learning Strategies: Theory and Research. Occasional Paper No. 1. St Helens Auckland: School of Foundation Studies, Auckland Institute of Studies. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hall S. K. (2017). “ Practice makes perfect: developing critical thinking and effective writing skills in undergraduate science students ,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Higher Education Advances, HEAd’17 , Valencia. 10.4995/HEAD17.2017.5512 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harmer J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. [ Google Scholar ]
• Indah R. (2017). Critical thinking, writing performance and topic familiarity of Indonesian EFL learners. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 8 229–236. 10.17507/jltr.0802.04 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Irzawati I., Hasibuan A. R., Giovanni V. (2021). Portrait of Efl Learners’writings: errors, challenges and solutions. Esteem J. English Educ. Study Programme 4 10–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang L., Zhang S., Li X., Luo F. (2021). How grit influences high school students’ academic performance and the mediation effect of academic self-efficacy and cognitive learning strategies. Curr. Psychol. 1 112–136. 10.1007/s12144-020-01306-x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ku K. Y. L. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: urging for measurements using multi-response format. Think. Skills Creat. Elsevier 4 70–76. 10.1016/j.tsc.2009.02.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ku K. Y., Ho I. T. (2010). Dispositional factors predicting Chinese students’ critical thinking performance. Pers. Individ. Dif. 48 54–58. 10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.015 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Langan J. (1987). College Writing Skills. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu J., Hansen J. (2002). Peer Response In Second Language Writing Classrooms. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press:. 10.3998/mpub.8952 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Loving G. L., Wilson J. S. (2000). Infusing critical thinking into the nursing curriculum through faculty development. Nurse Educ. 25 70–75. 10.1097/00006223-200003000-00008 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahmoodi M. H., Dehghannezhad M. (2015). The effect of teaching critical thinking skills on the language learning strategy use of efl learners across different EQ levels. J. English Lang. Teach. Learn. 16 55–84. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan M., Shermis M. (1994). Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearing House on Reading and Communication Skills. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mosley P., Ardito G., Scollins L. (2016). Robotic cooperative learning promotes student STEM interest. Am. J. Eng. Educ. 7 117–128. [ Google Scholar ]
• Namaziandost E., Razmi M. H., Tilwani S. A., Pourhosein Gilakjani A. (2021). The impact of authentic materials on reading comprehension, motivation, and anxiety among Iranian male EFL learners. Read. Writ. Q. 38 1–18. 10.1080/10573569.2021.1892001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Neimaoui N. (2019). Improving EFL learners’ critical thinking skills in argumentative writing. English Lang. Teach. 12 98–109. 10.5539/elt.v12n1p98 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nikoopour J., Amini Farsani M., Nasiri M. (2011). On the relationship between critical thinking and language learning strategies among Iranian EFL learners. J. Technol. Educ. 5 195–200. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Malley J. M., Chamot A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies In Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524490 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Oxford R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oxford R. L., Burry-Stock J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL). System 23 1–23. 10.1016/0346-251X(94)00047-A [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• PakMehr H., Jafari Sani H., Saeedi Rezvani M., Kareshki H. (2010). “ The quality of teaching in higher education: education or research? ,” in The First National Conference of Education in Iran , Vol. 2 . [ Google Scholar ]
• Paltridge B. (2004). Approaches To Teaching Second Language Writing. 17th Educational Conference Adelaide 2004. Available online at: http://www.Englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference04/proceedings/pdf/Paltridge.pdf [Accessed September 20, 2010]. [ Google Scholar ]
• Panahandeh E., Esfandiar lS. (2014). The effect of planning and monitoring as metacognitive strategies on Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing accuracy. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 98 1409–1416. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.559 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Parra Y. J. F., Barriga A. M., Díaz R. A. L., Cuesta J. A. G. (2021). Teacher education and critical thinking: systematizing theoretical perspectives and formative experiences in Latin America. Rev. Invest. Educ. 39 149–167. 10.6018/rie.416271 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pradhan S., Das P. (2021). Influence of metacognition on academic achievement and learning style of undergraduate students in Tezpur University. Eur. J. Educ. Res. 10 381–391. 10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.381 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rahayu R. A. P. (2021). Effect of collaborative writing combined with blog online learning on Indonesian efl learners’ writing skill across motivation. SALEE 2 87–98. 10.35961/salee.v2i01.219 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rahimi F., Karbalaei A. (2016). The role of metacognitive strategies training on developing writing skill among Iranian EFL learners. J. Curr. Res. Sci. 1 327–341. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rajaee Pitenoee M., Modaberi A., Movafegh Ardestani E. (2017). The effect of cognitive and metacognitive writing strategies on content of the Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ writing. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 8 594–600. 10.17507/jltr.0803.19 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reid J. M. (1993). Teaching ESL writing. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents. [ Google Scholar ]
• Renatovna A. G., Renatovna A. S. (2021). Pedagogical and psychological conditions of preparing students for social relations on the basis of the development of critical thinking. Psychol. Educ. J. 58 4889–4902. 10.17762/pae.v58i2.2886 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reshadi E., Aidinlou N. (2012). Investigating the relationship between writing meta-cognitive awareness and use of cohesive ties in Iranian EFL context. J. Basic Appl. Sci. Res. 2 4699–4705. 10.5539/ijel.v2n5p18 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ricketts J. C. (2003). The Efficiency Of Leadership Development Critical Thinking Dispositions, And Student Academic Performance On The Critical Thinking Skills Of Selected Youth Leaders. Ph.D. thesis. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rigney J. W. (1978). “ Learning strategies: a theoretical perspective ,” in Learning Strategies , ed. O’Neil H. F., Jr. (New York, NY: Academic Press; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Rubin J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Q. 9 41–51. 10.1186/s12909-020-02297-w [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sadeghi M. R. (2012). The effects of cooperative learning on critical thinking in an academic context. J. Psychol. Educ. Res. 20 15–30. [ Google Scholar ]
• Saenab S., Zubaidah S., Mahanal S., Lestari S. R. (2021). ReCODE to Re-Code: an instructional model to accelerate students’ critical thinking skills. Educ. Sci. 11 2–29. 10.3390/educsci11010002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saricoban A., Saricaoglu A. (2008). The effect of the relationship between learning and teaching strategies on academic achievement. Nov. R. 2 162–175. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seymour B., Kinn S., Sutherland N. (2003). Valuing both critical & creative thinking in clinical practice: narrowing the research-practice gap? J. Adv. Nurs. 42 288–296. 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02618.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stern H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Can. Modern Lang. Rev. 31 304–318. 10.3138/cmlr.31.4.304 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sutiani A., Situmorang M., Silalahi A. (2021). Implementation of an inquiry learning model with science literacy to improve student critical thinking skills. Int. J. Instr. 14 117–138. 10.1186/s12913-017-2741-y [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tabibian M., Heidari-Shahreza M. A. (2016). The effect of cognitive and metacognitive strategy uses on Iranian EFL learners’ receptive skills. J. Appl. Linguist. Lang. Res. 3 67–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tabrizi A. R., Rajaee M. (2016). The effect of metacognitive and cognitive writing strategies on Iranian elementary learners’ writing achievement. Int. J. Learn. Dev. 6 216–229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Taghinezhad A., Riasati M. J., Rassaei E., Behjat F. (2018). The impact of teaching critical thinking on students’ writing performance and their critical thinking dispositions. BRAIN Broad Res. Artif. Intell. Neurosci. 9 64–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Teng F. (2020). Tertiary-level students’ English writing performance and metacognitive awareness: a group metacognitive support perspective. Scand. J. Educ. Res. 64 551–568. 10.1080/00313831.2019.1595712 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tran T. Q., Tran T. N. P. (2021). Vietnamese EFL high school students’ use of self-regulated language learning strategies for project-based learning. Int. J. Instr. 14 17–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wale B. D., Bogale Y. N. (2021). Using inquiry-based writing instruction to develop students’ academic writing skills. Asian Pacific J. Second Foreign Lang. Educ. 6 1–16. 10.1002/bmb.21563 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Warsah I., Morganna R., Uyun M. (2021). The impact of collaborative learning on learners’ critical thinking skills. Int. J. Instr. 14 443–460. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willingham D. T. (2007). Critical thinking: why is it so hard to teach? Am. Educ. 2 8–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yan L. (2018). A review on writing anxiety and metacognitive strategy in the process of EFL writing. Adv. Econ. Bus. Manag. Res. 75 11–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yaralı K. T., Aytar F. A. G. (2021). The effectiveness of storyline-based education program on critical thinking skills of preschool children. Egitim Bilim 46 77–98. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zamel V. (1983). The composing process of advanced ESL students: six case studies. TESOL Q. 17 165–187. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zarrinabadi N., Rezazadeh M., Chehrazi A. (2021). The links between grammar learning strategies and language mindsets among L2 and L3 learners: examining the role of and gender. Int. J. Multiling. 1 49–71. [ Google Scholar ]