The authors reviewed 42 empirical studies of teaching of critical thinking skills in postsecondary education published between 1994 and 2009. The instructional intervention, test measure, and research design of the studies were analyzed. Study results suggest that: (1) the same instructional interventions can lead to different results, depending on the interventions implementation; (2) qualitative data can inform researchers about intervention effects that are not easily captured by quantitative instruments; and (3) most studies reviewed are subject to limitations in research design, sample size, or sample representativeness. The following recommendations are made: (1) statistical significance should not be the only criterion for instructors to consider when choosing new teaching methods; (2) multiple test measures, including quantitative and qualitative, should be used to assess changes in students critical thinking skills; (3) future research should properly address internal validity threats, e.g. by adopting at least a quasi-experimental design, in order to establish causal relationship between intervention and changes in students critical thinking skills.
This leading international journal, launched in 2006, uniquely identifies and details critical issues in the future of learning and teaching of creativity, as well as innovations in teaching for thinking. As a peer-reviewed forum for interdisciplinary researchers and communities of researcher-practitioner-educators, the journal welcomes papers that represent a variety of theoretical perspectives. In particular, the journal is interested in papers that advance new and existing methodological approaches, and are innovative works on the theories, practices and possibilities of creativity and thinking skills research. Papers may relate to any age level and any settings: formal and informal, education and work-based as long as they connect to the learning and teaching, facilitation and/or practice teaching for thinking and/or creativity.
While there is no universal agreement about the dimensions of thinking skills and creativity or their themes, debates and terms, we welcome methodological advancements and critiques that progress current thinking and stimulate developments about the naming and framing of boundaries and related fields of knowledge.The journal particularly welcomes several types of research article:
- Empirical studies which address critical issues in the future of learning and teaching, facilitation and practice, directly relevant to advancing thinking skills relevant to the enquiry and advancement of creativity;
- Critical reports of research practices and innovation in identifying major debates in advancing thinking skills and creativity;
- Synthetic reviews;
- New departures in methodological, theoretical and conceptual case studies.