Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society

Abstract

The amount of information and variety of situations tackled on a daily basis call for new cognitive functions, namely combining knowledge, experience and intellectual abilities. Critical thinking is valued as a higher-order type of reasoning and a skill transversal to the educational organisms. We introduce some definitions suggested in the literature, and describe the cognitive functions responsible for critical thinking used in learning and problem solving situations. We then present the most used assessment procedures, illustrating with instruments as well as programs and curricular planning implemented in the classroom to teach and develop critical thinking. Finally, we highlight the importance of further investigation, in order to reach a convergence of theoretical and practical elements needed to define critical thinking.

Full text

ISSN 0254-9247Vol. 29 (1), 2011 REVISTA DE PSICOLOGÍA
DEPARTAMENTO
DE PSICOLOGÍA
Vol. 29 (1), 2011, ISSN 0254-9247
Lima, Perú
Proceso de construcción colaborativa a través del chat según el
tipo de tarea
Néstor Roselli
Impacto de una intervención con grupos de mamás y bebes en el
desarrollo infantil
Beatriz Oré, Juan José Díaz y Mary Penny
Identificando áreas sensibles en los contactos interculturales: un
estudio exploratorio
Ignacio Ramos-Vidal
Sexismo ambivalente, estereotipos y valores en el ámbito militar
Elena Zubieta, Maite Beramendi, Fernanda Sosa y José Alejandro
Torres
Simplicity in complex times: Six principles for teaching the
gifted
Leonora Cohen
Perceptions of organizational communication processes in
quality management
Esther Arnold y Narbal Silva
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society
Leandro da Silva Almeida y Amanda Helena Rodrigues Franco
Leandro da Silva Almeida
Esther Arnold
Maite Beramendi
Leonora Cohen
Juan José Díaz
Amanda Helena Rodrigues Franco
Beatriz Oré
Mary Penny
Ignacio Ramos-Vidal
Néstor Roselli
Narbal Silva
Fernanda Sosa
José Alejandro Torres
Elena Zubieta

Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Departamento de Psicología
REVISTA DE PSICOLOGÍA
ISSN 0254-9247
Vol. 29 (1), 2011
Editora Emérita: Cecilia orne
Editora: Sheyla Blumen
Comité
Ejecutivo:
Roberto Criado, Santiago Cueto, Marcia de la Flor, Roberto Lerner,
Matilde Ráez, María Ragúz
Comité
Editorial:
Reynaldo Alarcón (Universidad Ricardo Palma, Perú), Victoria Arévalo
(Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú), Robert Bechtel (University
of Arizona, EE.UU.), Germán Berrios (University of Cambridge, Reino
Unido), Mary Louise Claux (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Jozef Corveleyn (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Bélgica), Susana
Frisancho (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú), Fernando Jiménez
Gómez (Universidad de Salamanca, España), Ramón León (Universidad
Ricardo Palma, Perú), María Regina Maluf (Universidade de São Paulo,
Brasil), Patricia Martínez (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Aníbal Meza (Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia), Franz Mönks
(Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Holanda), Luis A. Oblitas (Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México), Alfonso Orantes (Universidad Central
de Venezuela), Juana Pinzás (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Ernesto Pollitt (University of California, Davis, EE.UU.), María del Pilar
Sánchez-López (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España), Malva
Villalón (Ponticia Universidad Católica de Chile), Orlando Villegas
(Wayne State University, EE.UU.)
Asistente
de Edición:
Paula Moreyra
© Fondo Editorial de la Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2011
Av. Universitaria 1801, Lima 32 - Perú
Teléfono: (511) 626-2650, Fax: (511) 626-2913
feditor@pucp.edu.pe
www.pucp.edu.pe/publicaciones
Diseño de cubierta y diagramación de interiores: Fondo Editorial PUCP
ISSN 0254-9247
Hecho el Depósito Legal en la Biblioteca Nacional del Perú N° 95-0869
Primera edición: junio 2011
Tiraje: 150 ejemplares
S   
   
T A G E
P. M A 156, B
C .: @.
T: 332-3229 F: 424-1582
S  
A G P  11   
  
 2011 L – P

Revista de Psicología Vol. 29 (1), 2011 (ISSN 0254-9247)
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a
shiftingsociety
Leandro da Silva Almeida1 and Amanda Helena Rodrigues Franco2
University of Minho, Portugal
The amount of information and variety of situations tackled on a daily basis call for new
cognitive functions, namely combining knowledge, experience and intellectual abilities.
Critical thinking is valued as a higher-order type of reasoning and a skill transversal to
the educational organisms. We introduce some definitions suggested in the literature, and
describe the cognitive functions responsible for critical thinking used in learning and prob-
lem solving situations. We then present the most used assessment procedures, illustrating
with instruments as well as programs and curricular planning implemented in the classroom
to teach and develop critical thinking. Finally, we highlight the importance of further inves-
tigation, in order to reach a convergence of theoretical and practical elements needed to
define critical thinking.
Keywords: Critical thinking, intelligence, reasoning, transversal skills, adult cognition.
Pensamiento crítico: su relevancia para la educación en una sociedad cambiante
El volumen de información y la multiplicidad de situaciones a enfrentar diariamente exi-
gen nuevas funciones cognitivas, particularmente combinando conocimiento, experiencia y
habilidades intelectuales. El pensamiento crítico es valorado como una forma superior de
razonamiento y una competencia transversal a los sistemas educativos. Se presentan algunas
definiciones presentes en la literatura, describiendo las funciones cognitivas responsables
por el pensamiento crítico en las situaciones de aprendizaje y de resolución de problemas. Se
exponen los procedimientos más empleados en su evaluación, ilustrando con algunas prue-
bas y con algunos programas y planificación curricular implementados para la enseñanza y
el desenvolvimiento en la clase. Finalmente, se señala la importancia de continuar haciendo
estudios que busquen la convergencia de elementos teóricos y prácticos asociados a la defi-
nición de pensamiento crítico.
Palabras clave: pensamiento crítico, inteligencia, razonamiento, competencias transversales,
cognición en la edad adulta.

Understood by some as an innate aptitude, considered by others as a
learned set of problem solving skills, the topic intelligence does not enjoy
of the consensus of the researchers (Almeida, 1994; Almeida, Guisande &
Ferreira, 2009). In an attempt to define and operationalize this construct
in opposition to the psychometric tradition, Sternberg (2003) presents
the concept of developing expertise, suggesting that intelligence refers to a
developing potential, which results from the interaction between genetic
factors and life contexts. Such interaction provides individual differences
in cognitive abilities and in the performance of daily situations.
The psychometric approach has been pointed out as being exces-
sively focused in the immutable and analytical aspects of intelligence,
regardless of its changeable nature or the impact of people’s experience.
This classic perspective has devoted little attention to the mechanisms
inherent to the improvement of each individual’s cognitive and resolu-
tive efficiency in face of learning, practice or mere experience (Sternberg,
1999, 2003). This criticism suggests that there are cognitive abilities or
even forms of intelligence that are of useful to individuals, both in their
daily lives and in their line of work, that don’t seem to have been valued
by traditional instruments of intelligence assessment and that are also
undervalued by the education system (Almeida et al., 2009; Gardner,
1983; Sternberg, 1985). We believe that one of these cognitive abilities
claiming a deeper analysis is critical thinking.
1 PhD in Educational Psychology from the University of Porto. Full teacher at University of
Minho, teaches classes of cognition and learning, methodology of investigation, and method-
ology of construction and validation of assessment instruments. Supervises Master and PhD
programs. President of the Institute of Education. Author of several research projects in the
field of intelligence. Contact: Institute of Education, University of Minho, Campus Gualtar,
4709 Braga, Portugal; leandro@ie.uminho.pt
2 Master in Educational Psychology from the University of Minho. Research grant holder
working at the Investigation Center of the Institute of Education of the same university. Does
research in the field of intelligence. Contact: Universidade do Minho, Instituto de Educação,
Campus Gualtar, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal; amanda.hr.franco@gmail.com

178
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
Critical thinking in today’s information society
In a social era characterized by a large amount of information, eas-
ily accessible and with which people see themselves confronted by at
every moment, it is crucial to know how to apprehend the information
that is essential and submit it to an appropriate treatment, whether it
is to accept it as reliable and worthy of being processed, or whether
it is to classify it as fallacious and disposable (Halpern, 1999). In this
sense, and given the everlasting and swift social transformations, criti-
cal thinking stands out as a fundamental cognitive resource (Halpern,
1998; Ku, 2009; Phan, 2010). It might even constitute itself as the
decisive element to successfully accomplish, succeed or be successful
when performing the multiplicity of tasks and situations we tackle on a
daily basis (Bailin, Case, Coombs & Daniels, 1999a, 1999b; Halpern,
1998; Phan, 2010).
Critical thinking is perceived as a cognitive capacity that allows
one to convey meaning to disperse ideas, capacitating people to mean-
ingful dialogue with others (Brady, 2008) and to experience satisfying
feelings, both in their personal and social lives (Saiz & Rivas, 2010).
This mechanism permits a better adjustment to the surrounding envi-
ronment (Rivas & Saiz, 2010), becoming of great use in school and
work contexts, for in both cases there is required a capacity to give a
quick and efficient response to the more varied challenges (Carroll,
2005; Pithers & Soden, 2000). As a matter of fact, research in this
area associates a higher degree of critical thinking to superior levels of
control and proactivity in school education and daily life experience
(Carroll, 2005; Kuhn, 1999). Specifically in the school context, criti-
cal thinking skills allow students to organize their learning, and also
to supervise and evaluate their school tasks, which positively affects
their academic performance (Paul, 2005; Phan, 2010). All these aspects
illustrate the extreme relevance and the enduring topicality of critical
thinking, whether it is in the most diverse daily situations or as a line
of study that is important to deepen and better comprehend (Bailin et
al., 1999a).

179
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
Defining critical thinking
But what can really be understood as critical thinking? In real-
ity, there are different definitions, although resulting from proximal
assumptions and maintaining some similarity amongst them (Allen,
Rubenfeld & Scheffer, 2004; Halpern, 1999, 2006; Yanchar, Slife &
Warne, 2008). The conceptual diversity comes from the fact that criti-
cal thinking is studied in different scientific subjects and applied in
multiple contexts (Philley, 2005). In this sense, this area has benefited
from the interest of researchers in the fields of Education, Psychology
or Philosophy (Phan, 2010; Yanchar et al., 2008).
Seeking some level of convergence from the different definitions
available in the literature, critical thinking can be defined as a more
complex and significantly demanding logic form of higher-order rea-
soning (Brady, 2008; Philley, 2005). In terms of its operationalization,
critical thinking presumes a repertoire of faculties: articulation of
ideas; meaning elicitation; consideration of divergent arguments and
search of evidence to evaluate the legitimacy of each one; formulation
of hypothesis; justification of personal arguments and beliefs; decision
making; problem solving; monitoring and evaluation of personal cog-
nitions and actions (Facione, 2010; Halpern, 1998, 1999, 2006). To
sum it up, and accordingly to Halpern (1998), subjacent to critical
thinking seem to be elemental capacities of idea/argument decomposi-
tion and synthesis, but also the capacity to evaluate the performance
and products resulting from personal action, during and after the pro-
cess. We can synthesize the dimensions that constitute critical thinking
or the aspects that are implied in its definition by suggesting that this
is a multifaceted cognitive construct, with an inductive, deductive and
creative nature, comprising an heterogeneous set of skills and necessar-
ily implying the motivation to use them (Bailin et al., 1999a; Facione,
2010; Halpern, 2006; Philley, 2005).
Guided by a goal to be achieved (the cognitive finality or direc-
tion), critical thinking translates the employment of cognitive aptitudes
and the use of one’s knowledge base to critically analyze facts or beliefs,

180
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
in order to produce rational knowledge that can direct behavior (Car-
roll, 2005) and sustain daily decision making and problem solving
(Saiz & Rivas, 2010). This way, it implies a flexible and reflexive atti-
tude, including the analysis, evaluation and correction of one’s activity
and progress towards the established goal, as well as the motivation to
pursue that desired goal (Halpern, 1998). Therefore, its relevance to
school learning situations is clear: on the one hand, critical thinking
is a resource that allows the student to adopt an analytical and evalu-
ative attitude towards his/her performance, perfecting the quality of
the learning process; on the other hand, the learning process allows
the gradual improvement of the skills characteristic of critical thinking
(Paul, 2005; Phan, 2010).
The authors suggest that, more than the potential itself, the
decisive element here is truly a proactive and motivated attitude. If
the motivational component—which cultivates the application of
theoretical and practical components—is absent, a strong knowledge
about critical thinking skills and the mastery in their use will prove
to be insufficient (Facione, 2010; Halpern, 1999). Critical thinking
entails the translation of cognitive skills into behavior (Saiz & Rivas,
2010; Sternberg, 1997), which will not happen if deprived of motiva-
tion (Facione, 2010). The motivational factor—emphasized by some
authors as being the essential feature for the development of skill and
success in school (e. g. Halpern, 1999; Sternberg, 1999)—might help
to understand the reason why some students’ execution quality isn’t
compatible with their cognitive potential, assessed, for instance, with
intelligence assessment tests. This explains why some students, despite
having potential, do not perform particularly well, and also why others
less promising but more motivated perform better (Facione, 2010).
At last, critical thinking stands additionally on some level of cre-
ativity, which is accountable for the appetence to anticipate possible
results, and also to produce and implement particular alternatives of
action in each situation (Bailin et al., 1999b; Facione, 2010). The
deliberation of arguments that are divergent of one’s own or the analy-
sis of an argument accordingly to multiple perspectives are visible in

181
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
the person who reveals critical thinking (Carroll, 2005), as well as
the acceptance of new ideas, and an inquisitive and interested search
for accurate knowledge regarding the situation at hand (Bailin et al.,
1999a; Paul, 2005).
From the analysis of these three essential aspects of critical think-
ing emerges the possibility of it being the characterization of a fifth
stage of cognitive development. It is important to bear in mind that in
his theory of cognitive development, Piaget (2008) claimed the exis-
tence of four stages in which such development occurred, from birth to
late adolescence (sensorimotor, preoperatory, concrete operations and
formal operations). The literature gives evidence of a post-Piaget group
of theoreticians trying to update the author’s approach; they suggest
the establishment of a subsequent stage of intelligence development,
which is very much associated to the individual’s epistemic status and
to the knowledge role in the structuring of intelligence and its manifes-
tation beyond adolescence and throughout adulthood (Feldman, 2004;
King & Kitchener, 1994; Marchand, 2002).
In such a stage, it is assumed that knowledge isn’t factual, but
rather circumstantial and relative, strongly marked or dependent of
the individual’s idiosyncrasies and the specificities of the surrounding
environment. This way, thought as the potential of being continually
developed, which derives from the possibility of integrating discon-
nected types of knowledge that are susceptible of being reformulated in
personal schemes of reality representation. Such openness to experience
and capacity to tolerate ambiguity is a consequence of a more flexible
and divergent form of thinking, capable of operating with contradic-
tion and not edified on laws of pure logic (Bruine de Bruin, Fischhoff
& Parker, 2007; Marchand, 2002). In face of this, an equivalence of
this type of thinking with the one we have been referring to as critical
thinking is pondered, since both relate to a superior reasoning that pre-
sumes an inquisitive attitude fit for generating possible and adequate
solutions to the processing of rather complex information and problem
solving.

182
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
In conclusion, critical thinking appears to be a higher-order type
of reasoning employing cognitive skills and directed by a motivational
component in problem solving. Being a contextual type of think-
ing, it acts on a knowledge base (which also includes the individual’s
knowledge concerning his/her own skills), recurrently accessed and
restructured, which implies supervision of the self in benefit of pursu-
ing the goal previously defined (Bailin et al., 1999b; Halpern, 2006;
Pithers & Soden, 2000). Accordingly to Bruine de Bruin et al. (2007),
these critical thinking characteristics combine a group of critical skills,
namely inference and application of relations, pondering and evalua-
tion of alternatives, or self-regulation and metacognition. This allows
us to anticipate a great variability amongst subjects, for each person
adopts, in each situation and for the obtaining of a desired result, a line
of action that is somehow distinctive. Recalling the old saying Rather
be smart than intelligent, it is possible to unravel the popular wisdom it
encloses: we can realize that being smart is another way of perceiving
intelligence. In other words, it describes the person’s critical use of his/
her resources or cognitive skills in order to achieve a desired aim.
Assessing critical thinking
Alongside the definition of critical thinking it is necessary to con-
template the assessment as well (Ku, 2009; Rivas & Saiz, 2010). And
such as the definition of critical thinking is imbued with disagreement,
its assessment equally lacks convergence (Brookfield, 1997). On the
one hand, there is a myriad of instruments to assess this construct,
frequently indicted of lacking validity (Allen et al., 2004); on the other
hand, there seem to be few adequate instruments to assess critical
thinking in all its extent (Ennis, 1993), in particular in what refers to
its development (Ku, 2009). For instance, Colucciello (1999) identifies
the absence of assessment instruments that are capable of simultane-
ously comprising the cognitive and motivational components of critical
thinking.

183
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
Despite the difficulties inherent to its measurement, critical think-
ing assessment is feasible (Rivas & Saiz, 2010). Ku (2009) presents the
following critical thinking assessment instruments as the most well-
known: Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser,
1980); Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test (Ennis & Weir, 1985);
Cornell Critical Thinking Test (Ennis, Millman & Tomko, 1985);
California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione, 1990); and, Halp-
ern Critical Thinking Assessment Using Everyday Situations (Halpern,
2007). Referring to the latter, it seems to fill a gap in the available criti-
cal thinking assessment instruments scenario (Ku, 2009; Rivas & Saiz,
2010). In fact, it grasps both cognitive and motivational components,
thus offering a comprehensive multidimensional view of the construct.
To do so, it makes use of open-answer and multiple-choice questions,
concerning daily problematic situations with which the subjects can
easily relate to (Ku, 2009).
If we take a step back to the definition of critical thinking and recall
its dimensions, authors generally presume that there are three main
aspects composing this construct: knowledge base, motivation and cog-
nitive operations. Regarding the latter facet, usually referred to as critical
thinking skills, which are associated to the strategies applied in order to
attain a goal set a priori, some difficulties are produced when wanting
to try to identify which and how many are these skills. Nevertheless, we
find Halpern’s (1998) suggestion more adequate, as it includes verbal
reasoning, argument analysis, hypothesis testing, probability consid-
eration, and decision making and problem solving. In the same way,
Facione (2010) resorts to cognitive functions in order to put critical
thinking skills into practice, considering such skills to be interpretation,
analysis and evaluation, inference production, explanation and self-
regulation; this enables us to assume the need for particular assessment
exercises that are prone to capture the specificities of these functions.
One of the setbacks of assessing critical thinking appears to be the
outcome of the nature of the construct itself: being this a complex type
of reasoning characteristic of higher-order thinking, it becomes intricate
to carry out a precise measurement resorting to assessment instruments

184
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
composed of items or situations that are necessarily delimited (Brady,
2008). Likewise, it is noticeable that some authors neglect the effort of
contextualizing their research at a theoretical level, often resulting in
a quest for critical thinking assessment deprived of proper theoretical
framing, that doesn’t enable the comprehension and explanation of the
construct under analysis (Yanchar et al., 2008). It is important that the
attempts to assess critical thinking derive from previous conceptualiza-
tions and their clarification (Brookfield, 1997; Yanchar et al., 2008).
A criticism that is usually pointed at conventional intelligence
assessment tests insinuates that these instruments disregard the role of
the context to the quality of the subject’s performance (Almeida, 1994;
Sternberg, 1999). As a matter of fact, nowadays only a small number
of authors defend the possibility of assessing the essence of intelligence
without considering it, in part, as a product of the subject’s learning
experiences and their cultural contexts of life (Almeida, 1994). Daily
life contexts have a meaningful impact on cognitive functioning, mak-
ing it necessary to secure that the power of such circumstances is taken
into consideration when assessing intelligence. In fact, people don’t
live in an aseptic environment, invulnerable to its stimuli. From here
derives the need to weigh the contextual variable when defining and
assessing critical thinking (Sternberg, 2003; Yanchar et al., 2008).
In regard to the critical thinking assessment instrument’s format,
open-answer questions are described as being prone to a more efficient
evaluation, when compared to the multiple-choice ones (Ennis, 1993).
The latter are useful to assess the cognitive dimension of the construct,
but do not properly regard the motivational dimension; additionally,
they restrain the expression of critical thinking, making it impossible
to foresee how the subject will react in face of daily life challenges (Ku,
2009). By using open-answer questions, it is possible to identify which
critical thinking skills are the most used, conferring better visibility to
the student’s reasoning (Rivas & Saiz, 2010). Nonetheless, there can
be anticipated one difficulty here: assessing answers that were obtained
with a more open format can be expected to be more time consuming
and ambiguous.

185
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
In conclusion, it can be inferred that a clear definition of what
really is the structure of critical thinking is vital, and that the elaboration
of valid and comprehensive assessment instruments is indispensable.
However, besides its definition and assessment, it is necessary to addi-
tionally consider intervention on critical thinking and its skills or basic
components. In fact, assessment gains particular social relevance if serv-
ing as a foundation or support to the efforts of intervention (Rivas &
Saiz, 2010). This way, it matters to think over school settings, more spe-
cifically the guidelines that dictate the education system and teachers’
practice, in order to examine how they stand about this topic inherent
to cognition, learning processes and problem solving.
Developing critical thinking
The true mission of education is commonly described as being the
promotion of thinking skills, critical natured thinking skills to be more
precise (Almeida, 1996; Barnes, 2005; Noddings, 2008; van Gelder,
2005). This issue is particularly significant in higher education, con-
sidering that it is by means of a university education that students get
equipped to enter the labor market, acquiring and perfecting resources
with which they can face future challenges (Barnes, 2005). This process
occurs by using what they have learned along their university education
years and from the knowledge they have acquired and that is demanded
in their line of work (Halpern, 1998; Ku, 2009).
Despite the importance conveyed by the education system about
developing critical thinking skills, effective efforts to put such skills
into practice and to promote their training hasn’t been noticeable so far
(Noddings, 2008). More complex thinking skills aren’t covered by con-
ventional teaching and assessment formats, which are still too focused
on data transmission, memorization of factual information and subse-
quent evocation of knowledge in evaluation situations (Brady, 2008;
Paul, 2005; Pithers & Soden, 2000). To a certain extent, this may be
produced by some unawareness usually revealed by teachers about what

186
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
critical thinking is in fact and how it can be integrated in their teaching
and evaluating methods (Paul, 2005). Such a conventional approach,
in which teaching and learning processes are centered on analytical
skills and critical thinking is omitted, should be corrected (Barnes,
2005), for it doesn’t provide true opportunities for the students’ cogni-
tive development (van Gelder, 2005). According to a few authors, there
should be an intentional effort to go beyond the curriculum and to
implement changes in each teacher’s pedagogic method and in the edu-
cation system itself, in aim to fully grasp critical thinking skills (Kuhn,
1999; Paul, 2005).
In dependence of the criticism made to traditional education meth-
ods and their excessive emphasis in data transmission, another one rises,
upon which students are perceived as a passive receptacle of the knowl-
edge offered by teachers (Barnes, 2005; Brady, 2008). By tradition,
teachers are conceived as experts who must transmit their knowledge
to students, whereas students are rewarded for memorizing information
merely for testing situations, and not for elaborating their own ideas
and developing a reasoning that is both open-minded and critical. As a
consequence, students aren’t very active learners: they resort to a more
memory-based approach, rather than a comprehensive one, to acquire
curricular contents, they employ little effort to elaborate ideas on their
own, and they don’t develop the skills needed to autonomously solve
their daily problems (Barnes, 2005; Brady, 2008; Facione, 2010).
Ideally, the education system should permit each student’s expan-
sion in a number of curricular and cognitive areas, which is feasible by
means of teaching the various thinking skills. These are susceptible of
improvement, with the possibility of being learned, internalized and
independently applied by students in multiple circumstances, assisting
them to think more efficiently when dealing with distinct real-life situ-
ations (Halpern, 1998, 1999, 2006; Noddings, 2008). This is possible
because this type of reasoning supports the development of analytical,
critical and decision making skills, which are useful on a daily and
transversal basis, and increase learning and problem solving quality
(Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007).

187
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
In this context, the teacher’s role is to guide students, allowing them
an active and regulated part in their way to developing critical think-
ing (Barnes, 2005; Paul, 2005). Such a process encloses the theoretical,
practical and motivational components of critical thinking: the intro-
duction to the implied concepts and understanding, which provide for
the enrichment of one’s knowledge base; the familiarity, perfecting and
expansion of a set of skills needed to reflexive thinking; the strengthen-
ing of the disposition to put knowledge and skills into use (Bailin et
al., 1999a; Brady, 2008). This way, critical thinking must be valued by
education systems, in order to make propitious an environment in the
class-room that allows and stimulates the adoption of a reflexive atti-
tude towards the quality of one’s thinking (Colucciello, 1999).
In sum, we can accept that critically thinking isn’t an innate and
intuitive ability, spontaneously sprouted (Saiz & Rivas, 2010). On the
contrary, it emerges from the learning-teaching process, being gradu-
ally and deliberately acquired, and assuming a previous and symbiotic
mastery of a set of basic skills, such as reading comprehension, argu-
ment analysis and production, or still, search for evidence to stand for a
particular point of view (Facione, 2010; van Gelder, 2005). In concern
to the binomial nature versus nurture, critical thinking definitely seems
to belong to the scope of the second (Brookfield, 1997), considering
that it relies on explicit, continued and persistent teaching (Bailin et
al., 1999b; Ennis, 1993; van Gelder, 2005). The perfecting of critical
thinking requires time, for it is dependent of cognitive development
(Kuhn, 1999) and takes place with the appropriation of resources that
allow the subject to give a more reflexive and efficient answer to circum-
stances (Phan, 2010). Furthermore, the relational interaction that takes
place in school settings seems to boost the quality of critical thinking;
in the relationship with teacher and peers, the student grasps by mod-
eling and receives feedback about his/her activity (Brookfield, 1997).
In this sense, the teacher should be aware of the students’ beliefs
regarding their skills, analyze how their thinking takes form, and sup-
port them to unravel and correct their thinking inaccuracies (van
Gelder, 2005). As a matter of fact, in aim of a deeper understanding of

188
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
a particular dimension of psychological functioning, it is equally impor-
tant to analyze both functional and deviant areas. In other words, while
trying to ascertain which skills are needed to become more efficient
in task accomplishment, it is additionally necessary to discover if any
cognitive errors are being made and preventing the fulfillment of one’s
full potential. In reality, it seems plausible to conclude that the subject
might even be equipped with the cognitive aptitudes necessary for an
efficient performance but something is stopping him/her from appro-
priately directing his/her attitude and behavior in order to be successful
in the execution of personal and professional daily activity. Therefore,
by acquiring knowledge about this kind of obstacle, the subject is given
the chance to overcome it (Efklides & Sideridis, 2009).
In an initial phase, this type of thinking requires the subject to
learn the theory underlying critical thinking and its specific concepts,
which will endure the construction of a metacognitive knowledge base
to guide one’s activity (Brady, 2008; Carroll, 2005). Data about what
and which are critical thinking skills is acquired—namely, comprehen-
sion, argument analysis, hypothesis testing, probability consideration,
decision making and problem solving—, besides data about how and
where they should be used (Halpern, 1998; Kuhn, 1999). In fact, critical
thinking is, to some point, distinctive of the surrounding environment,
considering that knowledge and skill are employed with deliberation
and according to the specificities of contextual circumstances (Bailin et
al., 1999a; Brookfield, 1997).
Besides comprising a conceptual understanding in order to emerge,
critical thinking needs to be consolidated through training in the class-
room and reinforced with examples of possible everyday situations in
which such skills can be applied (Ennis, 1993; van Gelder, 2005). The
real world must be given as a reference, as well as the decision making
that occurs in face of challenges raised on a daily basis (Allen et al.,
2004; Rivas & Saiz, 2010). Doing so, it is being made explicit how this
type of thinking and resources can become useful and how they should
be applied (Saiz & Rivas, 2010).

189
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
The possibility of multiple uses of the acquired critical thinking
skills is presented as relevant in the literature (Ennis, 1993; Kuhn, 1999;
Rivas & Saiz, 2010). If education is exclusively focused on memoriza-
tion, the prospect of knowledge being transversal and the possibility
of transferring critical thinking skills from one area to others where
they can be found useful is reduced, particularly in everyday situations
where decision making and problem solving are in order (Noddings,
2008; Pithers & Soden, 2000; van Gelder, 2005). Underlying the
capacity of transference is the facility to distance oneself from a super-
ficial apprehension of the task at hand, searching instead for its basic
structure and applying the previously developed skills (Halpern, 1998,
1999). In short, what seems to be in cause here is the reuse of knowl-
edge. In a society where environmental issues are a hot topic and are
included in the speech of worldwide great leaders, cultivating a green
attitude—characterized by idea recycling and knowledge reuse—seems
to be the great goal to be achieved.
Regardless of the assumptions exposed earlier, there is no particu-
lar tested model that can be presented as being effective in teaching
critical thinking skills (Allen et al., 2004). There has been some debate
over whether critical thinking skills have a general nature, or instead,
are specific to a subject or field of knowledge (Brookfield, 1997; Kuhn,
1999). On the one hand is presented the hypothesis of curricular infu-
sion, where education is multidisciplinary and focused on teaching
both contents of the program and critical thinking skills; on the other
hand is the alternative of developing critical thinking in a specific sub-
ject, degree course or intervention program, specially designed to its
promotion (Allen et al., 2004; Bailin et al., 1999b; Halpern, 1999).
Some authors consider the first as the (most) effective format, since the
use of critical thinking is sensible to contextual variables; this way, link-
ing different information of the same content, or from distinct areas of
knowledge, is facilitated, making it easier to transfer such information
to multiple contexts (Bailin et al., 1999b; Kuhn, 1999; Pithers &
Soden, 2000).

190
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
In regard to teaching strategies, some seem to be more appropriate
than others to make critical thinking development viable: direct teach-
ing; modeling; collaborative and/or tutorial learning; presentation of
challenges to stimulate the expression of critical thinking; emphasis
on a curious and inquisitive attitude towards the surrounding environ-
ment; feedback regarding the student’s performance along the entire
process (Bailin et al., 1999a; Brookfield, 1997; Colucciello, 1999;
Noddings, 2008).
Final considerations
The production of knowledge occurs inexorably and at a vertigi-
nous pace, making the ability to discriminate from the available mass
of data the information that is relevant, reliable and reusable one of
the key-skills to possess (Halpern, 1998). Simultaneously, it is essen-
tial to instigate a conscious citizenship, with which each person reveals
values that benefit him/her at a personal level and, more important,
the community he/she belongs to (Barnes, 2005; Noddings, 2008).
The path that makes the development of such an attitude and ability
possible seems to be the one of critical thinking, understood as the
capacity to make good decisions, i.e., decisions that are grounded and
logical (Paul, 2005). In fact, to have and efficiently apply analytical
and decision making skills may have a positive impact in people’s qual-
ity of life (Bruine de Bruin et al., 2007). In this sense, the capacity to
think critically is an essential resource for a society one hopes to be a
democratic one, made of citizens capable of thinking for themselves
and unreceptive to hastily accepting any argument as valid (Brookfield,
1997; Facione, 2010).
The educational system of a number of countries, as well as the
scientific production in the area, theoretically characterize critical
thinking as a valuable resource and its teaching as one of the missions
of today’s schooling. Nevertheless, the approaches to this topic are still
surrounded by too much abstraction, resulting in the maintenance of a

191
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
vague concept that is put into practice only partially and through sig-
nificant limitations or difficulties. Likewise, there is a diversity of skills
that are suggested as characterizing critical thinking and the attached
cognitive behaviors, which often result from the divergence of points
of view (Bailin et al., 1999b). There is lacking an in-depth study of
this area: Transformations to the definition and operationalization of
this construct are in need (Phan, 2010; Yanchar et al., 2008), as well as
additional efforts to elaborate assessment instruments that are valid and
sufficiently comprehensive (Ennis, 1993). Moreover, it is vital to build
models that relate critical thinking and learning (styles) (Colucciello,
1999), not only the one occurring in school settings, but also the one
brought up in the labor market and other situations of everyday life
(Phan, 2010).
Other topics are also insufficiently explored. One of them con-
cerns the ideal moment to start the teaching-learning process of critical
thinking skills. Although it is considered that such skills can be pre-
cociously widened (Bailin et al., 1999b), still remains to know which
developmental stage or school level is the most appropriate to do so,
where a reasonable degree of education would correspond to maximum
learning. For instance, Ennis (1993) states that critical thinking skills
should be taught since childhood; Halpern (1999), on the other hand,
asserts that these skills can be taught precociously, but more intention-
ally during higher education.
Another aspect that would benefit of research concerns the promo-
tion of critical thinking skills in the family context, more specifically
the parents’ role. Accepting the premise that these skills can (and must)
be developed via direct education from the teacher and a proactive atti-
tude towards learning by the student, we can deduct that the parents
must also have a role in this equation. Remains to ascertain if merely as
mediators who help with homework and hence support the skills that
are expected to be developed through the completion of such activities,
or as an active part in the process of developing such skills, stimulating
them deliberately and according to the attainment of specific goals.

192
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
Even if until now we have observed the impossibility of a concep-
tualization that is broadly accepted by those who focus on the concept
of critical thinking, it is essential to give continuity to research and to
make efforts towards the development of knowledge in this area. There
is lacking an attempt to build an approach both wider and grounded
in valid assessment efforts, which is able to contain the diversity of
perspectives and characteristics that the myriad of authors associate to
critical thinking, as to make dialogue amongst researchers and between
these and the education system possible. Such an articulation would
be prolific: for the area’s advance, for a better quality of the teaching-
learning process, for a better adaptation and dynamism in the labor
market, but most of all for a life in society characterized by critical
reflection and dialogue.
References
Allen, G. D., Rubenfeld, M. G. & Scheffer, B. K. (2004). Reliability
of assessment of critical thinking. Journal of Professional Nursing,
20(1), 15-22.
Almeida, L. S. (1994). Inteligência: definição e medida. Aveiro: Centro
de Investigação, Difusão e Intervenção Educacional.
Almeida, L. S., Guisande, A. & Ferreira, A. I. (2009). Inteligência: per-
spectivas teóricas. Coimbra: Almedina.
Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R. & Daniels, L. B. (1999a). Common
misconceptions of critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Stud-
ies, 31, 269-283.
Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R. & Daniels, L. B. (1999b). Con-
ceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31,
285-302.
Barnes, C. A. (2005). Critical thinking revisited: Its past, present, and
future. New Directions for Community Colleges, Summer 2005,
5-13.

193
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
Brady, M. (2008). Cover the material: Or teach students to think? Edu-
cational Leadership, 65, 64-67.
Brookfield, S. D. (1997). Assessing critical thinking. En A. D. Rose &
M. A. Leahy (Eds.), Assessing adult learning in diverse settings: Cur-
rent issues and approaches (pp. 17-29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bruine de Bruin, W., Fischhoff, B. & Parker, A. M. (2007). Individual
differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 92, 938-956.
Carroll, R. (2005). Becoming a critical thinker: A guide for the new mil-
lennium (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.
Colucciello, M. L. (1999). Relationships between critical thinking dis-
positions and learning styles. Journal of Professional Nursing, 15,
294-301.
Efklides, A. & Sideridis, G. D. (2009). Assessing cognitive failures.
European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 25, 69-72.
Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice,
32, 179-186.
Facione, P. A. (2010). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts.
Insight Assessment. Retrieved on August 30, 2010, from: http://
www.insightassessment.com/home.html.
Feldman, D. H. (2004). Piaget’s stages: The unfinished symphony of
cognitive development. New Ideas in Psychology, 22, 175-231.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.
New York: Basic Books.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across
domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacogni-
tive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53, 449-455.
Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college
students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker.
New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 80, 69-74.
Halpern, D. F. (2006). The nature and nurture of critical thinking. En
R. J. Sternberg, R. Roediger & D. F. Halpern (Eds.), Critical
thinking in psychology (pp. 1-14). Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.

194
Revista de Psicología, Vol. 29 (1), 2011, pp. 175-195 (ISSN 0254-9247)
King, P. M. & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment:
Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical think-
ing in adolescents and adults. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ku, K. Y. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance:
Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Think-
ing Skills and Creativity, 4, 70-76.
Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educa-
tional Researcher, 28, 16-26.
Marchand, H. (2002). Em torno do pensamento pós-formal. Análise
Psicológica, 20, 191-202.
Noddings, N. (2008). What does it mean to educate the WHOLE
CHILD? Educational Leadership, 63, 8-13.
Paul, R. (2005). The state of critical thinking today. New Directions for
Community Colleges, Summer 2005, 27-38.
Phan, H. P. (2010). Critical thinking as a self-regulatory process com-
ponent in teaching and learning. Psicothema, 22, 284-292.
Philley, J. (2005). Critical thinking concepts. Professional Safety, 50,
26-32.
Piaget, J. (2008). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood.
Human Development, 51, 40-47.
Pithers, R. T. & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A
review. Educational Research, 42, 237-249.
Rivas, S. F. & Saiz, C. (2010). ¿Es posible evaluar la capacidad de pen-
sar críticamente en la vida cotidiana? In H. J. Ribeiro & J. N.
Vicente (Eds.), O lugar da lógica e da argumentação no ensino da
Filosofia (pp. 53-74). Coimbra: Unidade I & D, Linguagem,
Interpretação e Filosofia.
Saiz, C. & Rivas, S. F. (2010). ¿Mejorar el pensamiento crítico con-
tribuye al desarrollo personal de los jóvenes? In H. J. Ribeiro
& J. N. Vicente (Eds.), O lugar da lógica e da argumentação no
ensino da Filosofia (pp. 39-52). Coimbra: Unidade I & D, Lin-
guagem, Interpretação e Filosofia.

195
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society / Almeida y Franco
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in life-
long learning and success. American Psychologist, 52, 1030-1037.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Intelligence as developing expertise. Contempo-
rary Educational Psychology, 24, 359-375.
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). A broad view of intelligence: The theory of
successful intelligence. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 55, 139-154.
van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from
cognitive science. College Teaching, 53, 41-46.
Yanchar, S. C., Slife, B. D. & Warne, R. (2008). Critical thinking as
disciplinary practice. Review of General Psychology, 12, 265-281.
Recibido: 2 de febrero de 2011
Aceptado: 15 de marzo de 2011

Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Departamento de Psicología
REVISTA DE PSICOLOGÍA
ISSN 0254-9247
Vol. 29 (1), 2011
Editora Emérita: Cecilia orne
Editora: Sheyla Blumen
Comité
Ejecutivo:
Roberto Criado, Santiago Cueto, Marcia de la Flor, Roberto Lerner,
Matilde Ráez, María Ragúz
Comité
Editorial:
Reynaldo Alarcón (Universidad Ricardo Palma, Perú), Victoria Arévalo
(Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú), Robert Bechtel (University
of Arizona, EE.UU.), Germán Berrios (University of Cambridge, Reino
Unido), Mary Louise Claux (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Jozef Corveleyn (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Bélgica), Susana
Frisancho (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú), Fernando Jiménez
Gómez (Universidad de Salamanca, España), Ramón León (Universidad
Ricardo Palma, Perú), María Regina Maluf (Universidade de São Paulo,
Brasil), Patricia Martínez (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Aníbal Meza (Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia), Franz Mönks
(Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, Holanda), Luis A. Oblitas (Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México), Alfonso Orantes (Universidad Central
de Venezuela), Juana Pinzás (Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú),
Ernesto Pollitt (University of California, Davis, EE.UU.), María del Pilar
Sánchez-López (Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España), Malva
Villalón (Ponticia Universidad Católica de Chile), Orlando Villegas
(Wayne State University, EE.UU.)
Asistente
de Edición:
Paula Moreyra
© Fondo Editorial de la Ponticia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2011
Av. Universitaria 1801, Lima 32 - Perú
Teléfono: (511) 626-2650, Fax: (511) 626-2913
feditor@pucp.edu.pe
www.pucp.edu.pe/publicaciones
Diseño de cubierta y diagramación de interiores: Fondo Editorial PUCP
ISSN 0254-9247
Hecho el Depósito Legal en la Biblioteca Nacional del Perú N° 95-0869
Primera edición: junio 2011
Tiraje: 150 ejemplares
S   
   
T A G E
P. M A 156, B
C .: @.
T: 332-3229 F: 424-1582
S  
A G P  11   
  
 2011 L – P

ISSN 0254-9247Vol. 29 (1), 2011 REVISTA DE PSICOLOGÍA
DEPARTAMENTO
DE PSICOLOGÍA
Vol. 29 (1), 2011, ISSN 0254-9247
Lima, Perú
Proceso de construcción colaborativa a través del chat según el
tipo de tarea
Néstor Roselli
Impacto de una intervención con grupos de mamás y bebes en el
desarrollo infantil
Beatriz Oré, Juan José Díaz y Mary Penny
Identificando áreas sensibles en los contactos interculturales: un
estudio exploratorio
Ignacio Ramos-Vidal
Sexismo ambivalente, estereotipos y valores en el ámbito militar
Elena Zubieta, Maite Beramendi, Fernanda Sosa y José Alejandro
Torres
Simplicity in complex times: Six principles for teaching the
gifted
Leonora Cohen
Perceptions of organizational communication processes in
quality management
Esther Arnold y Narbal Silva
Critical thinking: Its relevance for education in a shifting society
Leandro da Silva Almeida y Amanda Helena Rodrigues Franco
Leandro da Silva Almeida
Esther Arnold
Maite Beramendi
Leonora Cohen
Juan José Díaz
Amanda Helena Rodrigues Franco
Beatriz Oré
Mary Penny
Ignacio Ramos-Vidal
Néstor Roselli
Narbal Silva
Fernanda Sosa
José Alejandro Torres
Elena Zubieta