critical thinking and problem solving digital resource

Distance Learning

Using technology to develop students’ critical thinking skills.

by Jessica Mansbach

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is a higher-order cognitive skill that is indispensable to students, readying them to respond to a variety of complex problems that are sure to arise in their personal and professional lives. The  cognitive skills at the foundation of critical thinking are  analysis, interpretation, evaluation, explanation, inference, and self-regulation.  

When students think critically, they actively engage in these processes:

• Communication
• Problem-solving

To create environments that engage students in these processes, instructors need to ask questions, encourage the expression of diverse opinions, and involve students in a variety of hands-on activities that force them to be involved in their learning.

Types of Critical Thinking Skills

Instructors should select activities based on the level of thinking they want students to do and the learning objectives for the course or assignment. The chart below describes questions to ask in order to show that students can demonstrate different levels of critical thinking.

*Adapted from Brown University’s Harriet W Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning

Using Online Tools to Teach Critical Thinking Skills

Online instructors can use technology tools to create activities that help students develop both lower-level and higher-level critical thinking skills.

• Example: Use Google Doc, a collaboration feature in Canvas, and tell students to keep a journal in which they reflect on what they are learning, describe the progress they are making in the class, and cite course materials that have been most relevant to their progress. Students can share the Google Doc with you, and instructors can comment on their work.
• Example: Use the peer review assignment feature in Canvas and manually or automatically form peer review groups. These groups can be anonymous or display students’ names. Tell students to give feedback to two of their peers on the first draft of a research paper. Use the rubric feature in Canvas to create a rubric for students to use. Show students the rubric along with the assignment instructions so that students know what they will be evaluated on and how to evaluate their peers.
• Example: Use the discussions feature in Canvas and tell students to have a debate about a video they watched. Pose the debate questions in the discussion forum, and give students instructions to take a side of the debate and cite course readings to support their arguments.  
• Example: Us e goreact , a tool for creating and commenting on online presentations, and tell students to design a presentation that summarizes and raises questions about a reading. Tell students to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s argument. Students can post the links to their goreact presentations in a discussion forum or an assignment using the insert link feature in Canvas.
• Example:  Use goreact, a narrated Powerpoint, or a Google Doc and instruct students to tell a story that informs readers and listeners about how the course content they are learning is useful in their professional lives. In the story, tell students to offer specific examples of readings and class activities that they are finding most relevant to their professional work. Links to the goreact presentation and Google doc can be submitted via a discussion forum or an assignment in Canvas. The Powerpoint file can be submitted via a discussion or submitted in an assignment.

Pulling it All Together

Critical thinking is an invaluable skill that students need to be successful in their professional and personal lives. Instructors can be thoughtful and purposeful about creating learning objectives that promote lower and higher-level critical thinking skills, and about using technology to implement activities that support these learning objectives. Below are some additional resources about critical thinking.

Additional Resources

Carmichael, E., & Farrell, H. (2012). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Online Resources in Developing Student Critical Thinking: Review of Literature and Case Study of a Critical Thinking Online Site.  Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice ,  9 (1), 4.

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review.  Pearson’s Research Reports ,  6 , 40-41.

Landers, H (n.d.). Using Peer Teaching In The Classroom. Retrieved electronically from https://tilt.colostate.edu/TipsAndGuides/Tip/180

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

Mandernach, B. J. (2006). Thinking critically about critical thinking: Integrating online tools to Promote Critical Thinking. Insight: A collection of faculty scholarship , 1 , 41-50.

Yang, Y. T. C., & Wu, W. C. I. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & Education , 59 (2), 339-352.

Insight Assessment: Measuring Thinking Worldwide

http://www.insightassessment.com/

Michigan State University’s Office of Faculty  & Organizational Development, Critical Thinking: http://fod.msu.edu/oir/critical-thinking

The Critical Thinking Community

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

Related Posts

Up Up and Away: How Superheroes Can Save Online Discussions

Is Technology Driving Online Education Off A Cliff?

Zaption: October 2015 Online Learning Webinar

All You Need is an Oven and a Knife

9 responses to “ Using Technology To Develop Students’ Critical Thinking Skills ”

This is a great site for my students to learn how to develop critical thinking skills, especially in the STEM fields.

Great tools to help all learners at all levels… not everyone learns at the same rate.

Thanks for sharing the article. Is there any way to find tools which help in developing critical thinking skills to students?

Technology needs to be advance to develop the below factors:

Understand the links between ideas. Determine the importance and relevance of arguments and ideas. Recognize, build and appraise arguments.

Excellent share! Can I know few tools which help in developing critical thinking skills to students? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks!

• Pingback: EDTC 6431 – Module 4 – Designing Lessons That Use Critical Thinking | Mr.Reed Teaches Math
• Pingback: Homepage
• Pingback: Magacus | Pearltrees

Brilliant post. Will be sharing this on our Twitter (@refthinking). I would love to chat to you about our tool, the Thinking Kit. It has been specifically designed to help students develop critical thinking skills whilst they also learn about the topics they ‘need’ to.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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

• Search Search Search …
• Search Search …

How to Teach Critical Thinking in the Digital Age: Effective Strategies and Techniques

In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the ability to think critically has become increasingly important for individuals of all ages. As technology advances and information becomes more readily available, it is essential for teachers to adapt their methods to effectively teach critical thinking skills in the digital age.

However, the task of teaching critical thinking can prove challenging. Research from Daniel Willingham , a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, suggests that students may struggle to apply these skills across different subjects and contexts. Nonetheless, with the right strategies and resources, educators can successfully incorporate critical thinking into their digital learning experiences , empowering their students to navigate the complex world of information.

The Importance of Critical Thinking in the Digital Age

In the digital age, we are constantly surrounded by information from various sources, making it essential for individuals to develop critical thinking skills in order to effectively evaluate the credibility and relevance of the content they consume. Furthermore, critical thinking helps people think through problems and apply the right information when developing solutions.

One of the challenges that the digital age presents is the need to differentiate factual and fake information. With the rise of social media and digital platforms, it becomes increasingly easy for false or misleading information to spread quickly. As a result, being able to discern between reliable and unreliable sources becomes an essential skill (The Tech Edvocate) .

In addition, critical thinking skills are vital in the workforce, as employees are expected to be effective problem solvers, innovative thinkers, and strong communicators. Possessing strong critical thinking skills prepares individuals to thrive in a constantly changing environment, as they can adapt to new situations, understand different perspectives, and make educated decisions.

Teaching critical thinking from a young age is crucial. Educators can use various strategies and techniques to integrate critical thinking in their lessons, such as using open-ended questions, encouraging students to evaluate sources, and promoting group work where students can learn from each other (Forbes) .

Challenges Faced in Teaching Critical Thinking Online

Teaching critical thinking skills online can be a challenging task for educators due to numerous obstacles. This section discusses the challenges of teaching critical thinking, focusing on difficulties such as information overload and technology distractions.

Information Overload

In the digital age, online students have access to an overwhelming amount of information. This can lead to difficulty in focusing on critical thinking exercises and applying those skills to new subject areas, as students struggle to navigate the vast online landscape of resources and materials.

Information overload can impede the development of effective critical thinking skills, as students find it more difficult to discern credible resources and make informed judgments. Educators must guide students in selecting appropriate resources and actively engage them in critical reflection on the information they encounter.

Technology Distractions

Another challenge in teaching critical thinking online is the presence of technology distractions. Online learners have to manage their time and attention across multiple devices and platforms, which can detract from their engagement with the learning material.

These distractions impact students’ ability to concentrate on critical thinking tasks and apply learned strategies. Additionally, constant multitasking can reduce the effectiveness of online learning, as students must split their focus between different tasks without giving their full attention to any one subject.

To mitigate technology distractions, educators can incorporate strategies such as limiting the use of technology during specific times, promoting time management skills, and offering engaging multimedia content. They can also foster a structured and supportive online learning environment, which encourages students to practice critical thinking throughout their coursework.

Techniques for Teaching Critical Thinking

Asking open-ended questions.

One effective technique for teaching critical thinking is to ask open-ended questions. These questions require more thought and exploration than simple yes or no answers, prompting students to critically analyze the issue at hand. Incorporating open-ended questions into lessons can encourage a deeper level of engagement and understanding in various subjects.

Debate and Discussion

Another valuable method for teaching critical thinking skills is to promote debate and discussion in the classroom. Through debates and discussions, students learn to listen to diverse perspectives, analyze arguments, and develop their own informed opinions. Encouraging students to express their ideas and engage with their peers in a respectful and thoughtful manner can foster a culture of critical thinking in the classroom.

Case Studies and Real-World Applications

Using case studies and real-world applications can help students develop critical thinking skills by connecting the material with real-life scenarios. When students analyze case studies, they can practice solving complex problems and applying the theoretical concepts they have learned to make informed decisions. Additionally, incorporating real-world examples and applications in lessons can make the learning experience more engaging and relevant for students.

Teaching Argument Evaluation

Teaching students how to evaluate arguments is an essential aspect of fostering critical thinking skills. By teaching them to identify the strengths and weaknesses of different arguments, students can better understand the nuances of logic and reasoning. This skill is especially crucial in the digital age, where students are often exposed to various sources of information, both reliable and unreliable. By developing their argument evaluation skills, students will be better equipped to navigate and assess the credibility of information they encounter online and in everyday life.

Digital Tools for Enhancing Critical Thinking

Teaching critical thinking in the digital age can be facilitated by leveraging digital tools that promote active learning and deeper engagement. This section explores various digital tools that can enhance critical thinking skills in students, including interactive learning platforms and collaboration and communication tools.

Interactive Learning Platforms

Interactive learning platforms help students develop critical thinking skills by engaging them in challenging activities that require problem-solving, analysis, and evaluation. These platforms often incorporate game-based elements and multimedia content to stimulate interest and maintain motivation.

For example, digital storytelling can be used to promote reflection, analysis, and synthesis skills in students. By creating and sharing their stories, students can critically assess their beliefs, values, and experiences, while comparing and contrasting them with their peers’ perspectives.

Collaboration and Communication Tools

Collaborative tools, such as online discussion forums, video conferencing, and shared documents, facilitate opportunities for students to exchange ideas, brainstorm solutions, and develop arguments on various topics. These tools foster critical thinking by encouraging students to analyze and evaluate different perspectives.

For instance, implementing project-based learning activities encourages students to work together, research, analyze data, and propose solutions to real-world problems. Through this collaborative process, students refine their critical thinking skills while learning how to communicate effectively and resolve conflicts.

Another example is the use of video conferencing tools, such as Zoom or Google Meet, for online debates or panel discussions. These sessions enable students to take a deep dive into topics and engage in structured discussions that challenge their assumptions and hone their critical thinking abilities.

Overall, integrating digital tools in the teaching process can effectively promote critical thinking in students, preparing them to thrive in the digital age.

Assessing Students’ Critical Thinking Skills

Assessing students’ critical thinking skills in the digital age requires a combination of formative and summative assessment methods. This section will outline these methods and explain how they can effectively be applied in the classroom.

Formative Assessment Methods

Formative assessment methods focus on continuous feedback and monitoring of students’ progress during the learning process. These methods aim to identify areas where students may require additional support or instruction. Some formative assessment methods for critical thinking skills include:

• Think-Pair-Share: An activity in which students think about the topic or question, discuss their thoughts with a partner, and then share their ideas with the whole class. This encourages students to evaluate different perspectives and revise their thinking accordingly.
• Questioning Techniques: Employing open-ended and higher-order questioning strategies can stimulate students’ critical thinking skills, prompting them to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information. Examples of these questions can be found here .
• Peer Review: Students provide feedback on each other’s work by identifying strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement. This encourages self-reflection and fosters a collaborative learning environment.

Summative Assessment Methods

Summative assessments measure students’ critical thinking skills at the end of a unit, course, or academic year. These assessments aim to determine students’ level of competence and measure their growth over time. Some summative assessment methods for critical thinking include:

• Performance-Based Assessments: These assessments require students to apply their critical thinking skills to complete a task or solve a problem. Examples include case studies, debates, and presentations.
• Essay Examinations: Essay exams provide an opportunity for students to demonstrate their critical thinking skills through written analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of information.
• Digital Assessments: Digital assessments can be used to assess critical thinking skills by incorporating multimedia elements, interactive features, and real-time feedback. Examples can be found at ExamSoft .

By integrating both formative and summative assessment methods, educators can provide a comprehensive and accurate understanding of students’ critical thinking abilities in the digital age.

Continuous Improvement and Adaptation

In the digital age, it is crucial for educators to promote continuous improvement and adaptation in the development of critical thinking skills. As technology and information evolve rapidly, teachers must actively engage students in reflecting on their learning process and adjusting their strategies accordingly.

A useful approach to foster continuous improvement is to encourage students to set goals, reflect on their progress and actively seek feedback. This process can be facilitated through digital tools such as online discussions, project-based learning, and gamification .

Furthermore, educators can:

• Implement mini research assignments that challenge students to investigate topics further and engage in self-guided exploration.
• Introduce debates or collaborative projects that require students to apply critical reasoning and consider multiple perspectives.
• Use active learning methods such as brainstorming sessions, trainings, and case studies to encourage students to analyze and evaluate information before drawing conclusions.

Taking advantage of digital resources, teachers can create an environment where students continuously refine their critical thinking abilities and adapt to the ever-changing digital landscape. By implementing these strategies, educators will better prepare students to effectively navigate and contribute to the digital age.

In the digital age, teaching critical thinking skills requires the incorporation of effective instructional strategies and innovative technologies. Engaging learners in activities such as data collection, analysis , and group discussions promotes a dynamic learning environment where students can develop and sharpen their thinking abilities.

Teachers should consider multiple methods to facilitate the development of critical thinking. By integrating different teaching approaches , educators can create a rich and diverse educational experience for their students. This may include the use of various digital tools, such as collaborative platforms, serious games, and immersive technologies, which enhance the learning process and keep the students motivated and engaged.

Adaptability and continuous professional improvement are essential aspects for educators striving to foster critical thinking skills in a digital age. By staying up-to-date with current trends and research , as well as incorporating new instructional approaches and technologies, teachers will be better equipped for navigating and succeeding in the rapidly evolving educational landscape.

Ultimately, empowering learners with robust critical thinking skills will not only prepare them for academic success but also help them become responsible digital citizens who can make informed decisions in a highly interconnected world. By embracing the opportunities that digital technologies provide and adapting teaching practices accordingly, educators can truly make a lasting impact on their students’ lives.

You may also like

Best Approach to Problem Solving: Efficient Strategies for Success

Problem-solving is a crucial skill in all aspects of life, from personal interactions to navigating complex work situations. It is essential for […]

Critical Thinking and Logic – A Brief Walkthrough

Shelter, food, clothing, and water – these are usually considered as the most important necessities to live decently and sufficiently. In order […]

Unleash Your True Mental Power with These 10 Critical Thinking Habits

Critical thinking is an extremely useful skill no matter where you are in life. Whether you are with the top decision-making bodies […]

Critical Thinking job interview questions

In all areas of work the applicants have their own reasons for applying for a position, and the main aim of the […]

Undividing Digital Divide pp 37–48 Cite as

Today’s Two Important Skills: Digital Literacy and Critical Thinking

• Semahat Aysu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6431-9983 4  
• First Online: 15 March 2023

424 Accesses

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Education ((BRIEFSEDUCAT))

Digital literacy of students and their skills to use the new technologies effectively and efficiently both for their learning and their future career is the concern of our age since the fast and vast information makes people adapt themselves to continuously changing life.

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

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Akayoğlu, S., Satar, H. M., Dikilitaş, K., Cirit, N. C., & Korkmazgil, S. (2020). Digital literacy practices of Turkish pre-service EFL teachers. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (1), 85–97.

Google Scholar  

Ata, R., & Yıldırım, K. (2019). Exploring Turkish pre-service teachers’ perceptions and views of digital literacy. Education Sciences, 9 (40). https://doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010040 .

Ayyildiz, P., Yilmaz, A., & Baltaci, H. S. (2021). Exploring digital literacy levels and technology integration competence of Turkish academics. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 7 (1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.7.1.15 .

Bevort, E., & Breda, I. (2008). Adolescents and the internet: Media appropriation and perspectives on education. In P. C. Rivoltella (Ed.), Digital literacy: Tools and methodology for information society (pp. 140–165). IGI Publishing.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Boyd, D. (2016). What would Paulo Freire think of blackboard: Critical pedagogy in an age of online learning. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 7 (1), 165–186.

Brooks-Young, S. (2007). Digital-age literacy for teachers: Applying technology standards to everyday practice. ISTE Publications.

Cottrell, S. (2005). Critical thinking skills: Developing effective analysis and argument. Palgrave Macmillan.

Erol, S., & Aydin, E. (2021). Digital literacy status of Turkish teachers. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 13 (2), 620–633.

Facione, P. A. (1990). The California critical thinking skills test-college level. Technical report: Experimental validation and content validity. California Academic Press (ERIC Document No: TM 015818).

Goldberg, I., Kingsbury, J., Bowell, T., & Howard, D. (2015). Measuring critical thinking about deeply held beliefs: Can the California critical thinking dispositions inventory help? Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 30 (1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryct20153016 .

Gökdaş, F., & Çam, A. (2022). Examination of digital literacy levels of science teachers in the distance education process. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 17 (2), 208–224. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2022.442.9 .

Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking. Lawrence.

Hall, R., Atkins, L., & Fraser, J. (2014). Defining a self-evaluation digital literacy framework for secondary educators: The DigiLit Leicester project. Research in Learning Technology, 22 (21440) . https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v22.21440

Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and media literacy: A plan of action. The Aspen Institute. https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp content/uploads/2010/11/Digital_and_Media_Literacy.pdf

Hinrichsen, J., & Coombs, A. (2013). The five resources of critical digital literacy: A framework for curriculum integration. Research in Learning Technology, 21 (21334). https:// doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21.21334 .

Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers and Education, 78 , 160–173.

Article   Google Scholar  

Linuma, M. (2016). Learning and teaching with technology in the knowledge society: New literacy, collaboration and digital content . Springer.

List, A. (2019). Defining digital literacy development: An examination of preservice teachers’ beliefs. Computers and Education, 138, 146–158.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life. Pearson.

Porat, E., Blau, I., & Bark, A. (2018). Measuring digital literacies: Junior high-school students’ perceived competencies versus actual performance. Computers and Education, 126 , 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.030

Purnama, S., Maulidya, U., Machali, I., Wibowo, A., & Narmaditya, B. S. (2021). Does digital literacy influence students’ online risk? Evidence from Covid-19 (Vol. 7). Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07406 .

Saxena, P., Gupta, S. K., Mehrotra, D., Kamthan, S., Sabir, H., Katiyar, P., & Prasad, S. V. S. (2018). Assessment of digital literacy and use of smart phones among Central Indian dental students. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research, 8 , 40–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2017.10.001 .

Setiawardani, W., Robandi, B., & Djohar, A. (2021). Critical pedagogy in the era of the industrial revolution 4.0 to improve digital literacy students welcoming society 5.0 in Indonesia. Journal of Elementary Education, 5 (1), 107–118.

Sharkey, J., & Brandt, D. S. (2008). Integrating technology literacy and information literacy. In P. C. Rivoltella (Ed.), Digital literacy: Tools and methodology for information society (pp. 85–97). IGI Publishing.

Shopova, T. (2014). Digital literacy of students and its improvement at the university. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science (ERIES Journal), 7 (2), 26–32.

Talib, S. (2018). Social media pedagogy: Applying an interdisciplinary approach to teach multimodal critical digital literacy. E-Learning and Digital Media, 15 (2), 55–66. https:// doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753018756904 .

Techataweewan, W., & Prasertsin, U. (2018). Development of digital literacy indicators for Thai undergraduate students using mixed method research. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 29 , 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.07.001 .

The European Parliament and the Council of the EU. (2006). Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 39 , 10–18.

UNESCO. (2008). Towards information literacy indicators. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.

Waddell, M., & Clariza, E. (2018). Critical digital pedagogy and cultural sensitivity in the library classroom: Infographics and digital storytelling. C&RL News , 228–232.

Welsh, T. S., & Wright, M. S. (2010). Information literacy in the digital age: An evidence-based approach. Chandos Publishing.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Foreign Languages, Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University, Tekirdağ, Turkey

Semahat Aysu

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Semahat Aysu .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Anafatalar Kampusu Eğitim, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale, Türkiye

Dinçay Köksal

Eğitim Fakültesi, Mersin University, Mersin, Türkiye

Ömer Gökhan Ulum

Eğitim Fakültesi, Inonu University, Battalgazi/Malatya, Türkiye

Gülten Genç

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Aysu, S. (2023). Today’s Two Important Skills: Digital Literacy and Critical Thinking. In: Köksal, D., Ulum, Ö.G., Genç, G. (eds) Undividing Digital Divide. SpringerBriefs in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25006-4_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25006-4_4

Published : 15 March 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-25005-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-25006-4

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Chapter 4: Critical Approaches to Digital Literacy

Maha Bali and Cheryl Brown

Using the Internet is probably a daily activity for many of you, but sometimes it’s such second nature we don’t stop to think about what underlies the information we use. In this chapter, we help you think about issues of equity in the online context and explore who predominantly contributes to the information we read. We look at who is and who isn’t represented in the digital space and how everyday platforms we use are themselves skewed towards particular viewpoints and preconceptions. We provide you with some strategies and tools to be critical in understanding the platforms you use and the information you read. We also foreground some of the negative and positive aspects of social media in constraining and enabling different people’s voices.

Chapter Topics:

Introduction, thinking about context, learning to be critical.

• Voices: Who Is Represented in Digital Space and Who Isn’t?

Critical Digital Literacies: Digital Platforms

Questioning digital platforms, positioning yourself online.

Learning Objectives

After completing this chapter, you should be able to:

• Develop a critical awareness of online contexts.
• Appraise online content.
• Develop critical questioning skills.
• Understand how some individuals or groups may be marginalized online.
• Recognize issues of access to information sources.
• Understand bias of digital platforms.
• Reflect on positionality and information privilege.
• Develop increased self-awareness of biases.

One of the most important elements of being online is the ability to be critically aware of where content comes from and who has authored it. You should be able to ask questions that will enable you to better understand context. In chapter 2, you explored the history of literacy and who traditionally has had access to the ability to read and write. Although digital technology and, specifically, the Internet have to some extent increased access to information, it is still inequitable.

There is an old saying: “Knowledge is power” (it’s so old that no one really knows who said it first). In many cultures knowledge used to be very closely guarded by elders or experts. It may have been locked away for safekeeping in libraries (such as the Library of Alexandria), where only privileged people like rulers and scribes could access it.

Technology has contributed to changes in who owns and can access information. So much so that some people believe the Internet can be credited with facilitating the coming together of our global community (in that it allows people to access information and engage with the world unhindered by distance). However, it has also contributed to the fragmentation of society as it is a place for conflict and disagreement as well as new forms of exclusion.

In the following sections, you will learn some strategies and habits to help you take a critical look at whatever you find online. However, we don’t usually verify every single piece of information we find online, so keep in mind that contextual knowledge can be the driver that motivates you to dig deeper.

Activity 4.1: Demonstrate Context

Imagine someone asks you to watch a video of US president Donald Trump standing by a wall in the White House, near the image above, telling ABC’s David Muir the following: “But when you look at this tremendous sea of love—I call it a sea of love—it’s really something special that all these people travelled here from all parts of the country, maybe the world, but all parts of the country. Hard for them to get here.”

• If your teacher showed you this video, would you believe it?
• If you received this video on social media (e.g., Facebook, WhatsApp) would you think it was real?
• What would make you doubt the authenticity of the scene?
• How would you verify its authenticity, or its lack of authenticity?
• Before reading the text below, try to verify the authenticity of the video above and keep track of the steps you took to do so.

The trick about that video is that you need to have a lot of contextual awareness to be suspicious of its authenticity: You need to recognize that the picture Trump is pointing at is of the Muslim Kaaba in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, and that it is a picture of Muslims in pilgrimage. You need to connect that with a knowledge that Trump has repeatedly used negative rhetoric against Islam and Muslims, and that calling this a “Sea of Love” sounds out of sync with his usual rhetoric. Someone who does not have this contextual knowledge may not seek to verify the authenticity of the video; and someone who has this contextual knowledge, but is not habitually skeptical, or does not know how to verify audiovisual material, may simply believe it and move on.

Once you’ve finished trying to verify the authenticity of the video above, see this blog post for the full video .

One of the pitfalls in critical thinking is that sometimes we find ourselves compelled to confirm our own biases. Confirmation bias is the tendency to selectively search for and interpret information in a way that confirms your own pre-existing beliefs and ideas. In other words, you interpret new information such that it becomes compatible with your existing beliefs, and if it can’t be interpreted thus, you either choose to ignore it or call it an exception ( Aryasomayajula , 2017).

Information and knowledge have significant roles in supporting and maintaining the power structures of the modern world. We should be aware that just because information may be available and accessible, doesn’t mean it is equitable and without bias. In principle it is possible that as long as people have the resources to access the Internet, they are in a position to make their voices heard. However, in reality, a vast majority of Internet users are not really able to make themselves heard and their concerns receive little attention. Perhaps it’s more accurate to suggest that the Internet offers ordinary people the potential for power. Regardless, it is more likely used for specific purposes by those who already have power, whether symbolic, political, or social.

Activity 4.2: Equity and Bias

Watch this video by Binna Kandola on Diffusion Bias , and try a couple of these Implicit Association Tests to explore some of your own hidden biases. There may be several reasons why some online content contains misinformation:

• Ignorance; sometimes people just get things wrong or make mistakes with no malice or ulterior motive (unintentional).
• The desire to present a one-sided view based on personal beliefs (religious, political, cultural).
• The desire to promote a message that supports commercial gain (advertising, commercial bias).
• Deliberately spreading propaganda by a ruling body or organization (usually political).
• Who is represented in digital space and who isn’t?
• Who is able to participate?
• Who has access to what already exists?
• Even when multiple perspectives are side by side, which voices are considered authoritative? Who sets the standard for what is considered credible?

Trying to figure out whether a source has expertise, authority, and trustworthiness is not always easy. Mike Caulfield, in his book Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers (2017), offers a useful outline for the fact-checking process. If you’re in doubt about something you’ve found online:

• Look around to see if someone else has already fact-checked the claim or provided a synthesis of research.
• Go “upstream” to the original source: Most Web content is not original. Get to the original source to understand the trustworthiness of the information.
• Read laterally: Once you get to the source of a claim, read what other people have said about the source (publication, author, etc.). The truth is in the network.
• Circle back: If you get lost, or hit dead ends, or find yourself going down an increasingly confusing rabbit hole, back up and start over knowing what you know now. You’re likely to take a more informed path with different search terms and better decisions about what paths to follow.

Activity 4.3: How to Be Critical

What is the purpose of a website? Is it to provide information? To sell you something? To share ideas? Explore the following three websites about different aspects of digital literacy to find out who owns or produces the content:

• “ Developing Digital Literacy Skills “
• “ Critical Digital Literacy: Ten Key Readings for Our Distrustful Media Age ”
• “ Digital Literacy “

Keep in mind:

• There is often a page called About or About Us which should give you some clues about the intent of the authors and the content.
• There is often a link to a Terms and Conditions page that highlights legal aspects of content ownership and how you can use that content.
• There may be a Testimonials or Reviews page that tells you what other people think of the services or content.
• There may be a Help or Support page to enable you to get the best out of the site.
• If there is a Cart at the top of the page or a page called Prices, the site may be trying to sell you something.
• Contact pages often tell you where the producer is based by providing an address or map.

Check the authority of the author or producer:

• See if you can find out who the author is. Is it an individual or an organization?
• Is the author a recognized expert in the field? Are they affiliated or connected to any organization? If so, is the organization credible?
• Is the organization or body producing the information reputable?
• Does the author provide sources for their information? Can you go and check out these original sources?
• Can you contact the author or organization for clarification of any content?

Look at the content:

• How old is the information or content? Is the information current? Is the source (website) updated regularly? Does it need to be?
• Can you tell why the content has been published? Are the goals of the publisher clearly stated?
• Is the content factual or does it contain opinions? Is the content biased in any way?
• Does the content provide links or information to other sites? Are these authoritative? Do they present alternative views or information?
• Can you check the accuracy of the content against other sources?
• Does the site try to get you to register or sign up to receiving other content by email?
• Does the website contain advertising? (This could affect the content.)

Questions adapted from McGill (2017) and Caulfield (2017), CC-BY-SA.

Activity 4.4: Spot the Fake

Use the points in the bulleted lists in Activity 4.3: How to be Critical to see if you can complete the following activities.

• Website A: Fangtooth
• Website B: Warty Frogfish
• Website C: Tree Octopus
• How long did it take you to spot the fake? How did you know the website was fake? Did you do any checks on other sites to verify the information contained in the sites? Does the fake website have links to true information? [See the end of this activity for the answer]:
• Is the article “ Australian Birds Have Weaponized Fire ” coming from a reputable source? Can the  National Post be trusted?
• Return to the  National Post  article and locate the link to the original scientific study. Is this a reputable journal? What can you determine about it? How about the authors of the study – do they have relevant expertise?
• Note what the paper says and covers and compare it to what the reporting source covers. Are the facts of the news story correct? Are there elements of the work the news story leaves out? Do your findings surprise you?

Answer: C) The Tree Octopus is fake

Activity adapted from Caulfield (2018), CC-BY

Asking Critical Questions

Asking questions is always a good idea. It will make you a better learner and thinker. Critical questioning means going deeper into your questioning and not just asking Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How, but instead asking more descriptive questions like “ Who benefits from this?” “ What is getting in the way of action?” “ Why has it been this way for so long?” or “How can we change this for our good?”

For more descriptive questions, see the Global Digital Citizen Foundation’s “ Ultimate Cheatsheet for Critical Thinking .”

Critical thinking isn’t only about being skeptical. In the words of the Global Digital Citizen Foundation, critical thinking is “ clear, rational, logical, and independent thinking.” It’s about “practising mindful communication and problem-solving with freedom from bias or egocentric tendency.”  There are also feminist approaches to thinking critically that involve empathy and contextuality, and trying to adopt the viewpoint and frame of reference of the “other” while refraining from judging them ( Thayer-Bacon;  Belenkey et al.) .

Activity 4.5: Ask Critical Questions

Here are two news articles about Digital Literacy

• “ Digital Literacy Is ‘Hot’ but Not Important “
• “ Digital Literacy ‘as Important as Reading and Writing “

Use some of the critical-questioning prompts from the Global Citizen Cheatsheet to practice critical inquiry. Ask questions of these articles and try to take your inquiry and thinking to a critical level.

Voices: Who Is Represented in Digital Space and Who Isn’t?

The Internet has provided a vehicle for people to transcend geography and political borders by interacting with information and communities from across the world. The notion of global citizenship has taken on a new meaning in educational contexts as a world view, or a set of values, that prepares students for a global or world society. It is an acknowledgement that your nation or place of residence is only part of the world and that you are part of a global society.

As a student and a global citizen it is important that you are aware of yourself and your place in the world, and of others’ places in the world, in order to begin to become aware of other people’s perspectives. A tool like Gapminder —a non-profit resource for global data and statistics—can be useful in helping you do this. Gapminder allows students and teachers to look at the world from social, economic, and environmental perspectives. Gapminder works on the premise that by having a data-based view of the world you can “fight the most devastating myths by building a fact-based world view that everyone understands.” It’s described by the Geographical Association of the UK as an “invaluable resource for making sense of contested concepts like uneven development, inequality and change.” This is particularly valuable given how commercial social media services and search engines have contributed to the spread of misinformation.

As useful as Gapminder can be as an online resource, with so much data and so many visualizations, we must also always question the sources of data, how the data sets were chosen, and the biases in the methodological approaches used in this statistical modelling style, etc. That is, no data or information is neutral and “merely a fact”; rather, data and information are “chosen facts” that can suggest a certain picture of a situation. Gapminder is one useful tool. But it should not be the only tool you use.

Activity 4.6: Evaluate Graphical Representations of the World

The intention of this activity is to give you a sense and opinion of how the world has been visually depicted and how this representation is actually an altered form of reality. Think about where you are geographically located. To what extent are, or have, common visualizations of the world (e.g., maps) shaped your beliefs about where you are from in relation to other countries?

Below are two versions of the world map, the Mercator Projection and the Gall-Peter Projection.

• What differences in perspective are shown by these two projections?
• We Have Been Misled By a Flawed World Map for 500 Years
• The Most Popular Map of the World is Highly Misleading
• Dymaxion Map
• Peirce Quincuncial
• Can you find any earlier maps of the world (e.g., from the ancient, pre-modern, or medieval periods)? How did “we” represent “ourselves” in the past? Who is responsible for this representation of “us”?

The aim of this activity is to help you evaluate the different ways in which representations of particular places and positions in the global system occur. What implications do these different ways of representing ourselves and others have for our own biases?

The Mercator map is the most popular map; it is used by Google, Wikipedia, the UN, and in many other popular depictions of the world. However, the Mercator map distorts perception of the size of continents, departing from their actual land-mass size, and rendering North America and Greenland as larger than Africa, for example. What does this do to our ability to frame and understand importance, dominance, and geopolitical relationships, specifically in light of the historical power configurations among developing countries (mostly minimized, marginalized, in the Mercator projection)?

So far in this chapter we have mainly focused on developing a critical approach to the actual information we find online. The following section introduces a new focus: on maintaining a critical perspective on the digital platforms  we use every day, such as Google, Facebook, and others. It is important to recognize how digital platforms can be used in digital citizenship and activism. At the same time, it is also important to recognize that not all people around the world have equal access to these platforms, and that some people risk more than others by using these platforms.

On Bias in Google and Wikipedia

Two spaces many of us use as a first step when searching for information are Google and Wikipedia

• Go to Google Images , and look up the term “professor.” What do you notice about the search results? Do many of the results have anything in common?
• Now search for images of “Egypt” and compare what you find with what happens when you look up images of “Cairo.” What do you notice about the difference between the search results?

You may find that most results for “Egypt” show historical monuments from the time of the Pharaohs such as the pyramids and the Sphinx while many results for “Cairo” show the modern-day city with modern buildings and bridges. The former reinforces stereotypes about Egypt as a place where people live in the desert and ride camels, missing the modern-day Egypt in favour of showing famous historical images.

Bias in Search Algorithms

As you’ll read more about in Chapter 5 , search algorithms are not “neutral.” Google’s algorithm specifically depends on proxies of popularity, which means that the top search results Google returns to us are biased. They are biased in the sense that content produced by marginal people or representing marginal views may be less visible, but also that “ where content shows up in search engine results is also tied to the amount of money and optimization that is in play around that content .” Even more alarming, Zeynep Tufecki has reported that the money-making recommender algorithm of YouTube (which is owned by Google) increasingly shows users more inflammatory content because it keeps them on the site longer and therefore exposes them to more ads.

Bias in Wikipedia Content and Editing

Wikipedia is often celebrated as a democratic digital space, an encyclopedia of crowd-sourced information that can be edited by anyone in the world. The credibility of information on Wikipedia is now considered less of a problem than when the site first began, as editors frequently check up on pages and highlight areas that require additional citation, occasionally removing information not supported by credible sources. Research has shown that these frequently edited articles on Wikipedia are likely to be on par with articles on Encyclopedia Britannica in terms of accuracy and neutrality.

• Bias in Wikipedia content standards : While anyone can contribute articles and make changes to Wikipedia, they must meet the standards that have been set by the organization. While some of these standards serve to remove bias, for example by ensuring that people don’t create biographical entries for themselves or their friends, others, such as the requirement that all content be sourced from previously published material, means that pages about marginalized people for whom there isn’t much existing information on the web, make the cut less often. The requirement that all facts be cited by a “credible” and “verifiable” source also impacts the content that is available in different languages. If you are writing an article for Wikipedia in your native language and can’t find a credible reference to link to, you may have to resort to a reference for it in a different language. However, this assumes such references exist or are accessible to you.
• Differences in Wikipedia content based on language and region: One notable example is the comparison between the English and Arabic Wikipedia pages for the Arab–Israeli War in October 1973. While both articles relay mostly the same facts, the Arabic version states that Egypt won that war, while the English version lists the result as a victory for the Israeli military. The Wikipedia articles don’t balance these perspectives in both languages: each version of Wikipedia tells a different version of history. Both articles cite their sources, which shows that history is told from the writer’s perspective. There is more than one version of history, but what matters here is to clarify how the wisdom of the crowd does not ensure the different versions coexist in any one Wikipedia article.

Research studies such as Reagle and Rhue’s look at gender bias on Wikipedia versus on Britannica (2011), highlight how Wikipedia reproduces gender, racial, and other biases. There has been a lot of coverage of gender bias in Wikipedia specifically (see “Wikipedia’s Hostility To Women ,” in The Atlantic, October 21, 2015). Wikipedia has its own article on gender bias on Wikipedia , which starts by showing that as of 2011, 90% of Wikipedia’s volunteer editors were male.

Gender imbalance on Wikipedia is usually discussed in terms of the number of Wikipedia articles on female figures versus the number on male figures, as well as the length of articles on female figures or topics of female interest versus the length of those on male figures and topics. It is also important to note that within controversial topics (e.g., GamerGate ) that involve gender sensitivity, the number and strength of male editors often results in a male view being the one disseminated on Wikipedia, rather than one balanced by the inclusion of females’ views. Beyond the numbers, there has been evidence of harassment of some female editors, gender imbalance , and hostility towards women , and even though Wikipedia has had several projects to try to counter the gender imbalance and increase women’s contributions in Wikipedia, several have not fared well .

Activity 4.8: Comparing Wikipedia Pages

If you are bilingual or multilingual, open two Wikipedia pages, in two different languages, on the same historical, political, or potentially controversial topic :

• Check out the Wikipedia page for the topic in each language.
• Are the pages direct translations or do they tell different stories?

If you are not bilingual or multilingual, try using Google Translate to see if different Wikipedia translations on the same topic are identical or different (sometimes just looking at the length is an indication). Google Translate is not 100% accurate, but it is relatively good for translations between English, French, German, and Spanish (Of course, those are the dominant Western languages, but they are also the ones that are easier to translate from English versus, say, Chinese or Arabic).

While many of us enjoy free-to-use platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and many other services, we should also be aware that these are commercial providers, with profit-making intentions, which may not (and often do not) have their users’ best interests in mind and may make ethically questionable choices.

Activity 4.9: Critiquing Digital Platforms

Watch this video by Chris Gilliard on platform capitalism .

In late 2017, Chris Gilliard posted a tweet asking:

What’s the most absurd/invasive thing that tech platforms do or have done that sounds made-up but is actually true? — Should old surveillance be forgot (@hypervisible) December 29, 2017

Try answering that question yourself before reading the responses.

If you go return to Chris’s tweet, you will find several links to reports of outrageous and ethically problematic things tech platforms have done. Examples include:

• When Facebook used their algorithm to selectively manage people’s timelines and manipulate their emotions and moods .
• When an unsubscribe service sold user emails to Uber .

Can you remember an instance of a digital platform doing something invasive or unethical? Why did it matter to you? In what ways did the platform infringe upon the rights of groups or individuals? What is the worst thing that has happened directly to you or to someone you know? What, in your view, is the most dangerous thing tech platforms can do?

Activity 4.10: Investigate Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policies

Have you ever read the Terms and Conditions or Privacy Policies of platforms you use? Some of them have extremely long and virtually unreadable policies, but others are much more straightforward.

Choose two of the platforms you use often and compare their Terms of Service or Privacy Policies.

• What did you learn?
• By using the platform are you taking risks that you had not previously been aware of?
• Can you determine, for example, if you retain the copyright for material you post to one of these platforms? (Squires, D.)

Activity 4.11: Surveillance and Online Safety

Read this article on how Facebook’s mistranslation of a Palestinian’s update resulted in him being arrested .

• Why do you think this happened?
• What kind of questions does it raise about who holds power in digital platforms?
• What does this incident tell us about how digital platforms work, and about what they prioritize?
• What kinds of issues does it raise about surveillance and privacy online?
• What kind of biases does it reveal?
• How does it connect to issues of race and racial profiling online and offline? Would a similar Facebook update by a person of greater privilege have created the same kind of reaction?

Activity 4.12: Reflecting on Digital Activism

Read the following article: “ How Young Activists Deploy Digital Tools for Social Change .”

Note how Nabela Noor, a young American Muslim, started out as a YouTube personality doing non-activist videos related to makeup. However, Islamophobic discourses surrounding the election of Trump spurred her into using YouTube to respond. In this way, social media empowered Noor to have a voice in a space where young Muslim voices were largely unheard in the dominant discourse. But it is also important to note that she would not have been able to do this without her previous digital literacy and following on YouTube, and definitely not without access to YouTube (which is banned altogether in some countries) and a good Internet connection (a privilege some people in rural US and Canadian towns don’t have; the same applies to many in the global South).

Note how the other activist in the article, the young Esra’a Al-Shafei from Bahrain, talks about her pathway to online activism advocating for the rights of marginalized people in the Arab region. Note how she does not show her face on camera, for her own safety.

Many other forms of digital activism have been seen in recent years, such as the roles of Twitter and Facebook in the Arab Spring (however, the real revolution took place in the streets). But using social media for activism can be dangerous, and risky. Some political bloggers get arrested or worse.

Twitter has had a central role in campaigns such as #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo. This brief video, “ How #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo Went From Hashtags to Movements ” featuring  Tarana Burke (the founder of #MeToo) and Patrisse Cullors (the founder of #BlackLivesMatter) shows how the movements started and grew, and also what both founders consider to be a new model of activism.

While these campaigns allow people to gather and work together and find supporters, they also make them more vulnerable to personal and systemic harassment, which can occasionally move outside the screen and spill into their everyday lives. Moreover, social media has been used to amplify extremist ideologies such as white supremacy, sometimes affording anonymity to people who spread hatred and violence that can lead to physical harm. This PBS podcast suggests approaches to fight back against these online aggressions.

Think of some examples of social media use for activism, and ask yourself:

• Who has the privilege and luxury to be a digital activist?
• In what ways does digital activism reproduce patterns of offline activism, especially in terms of whose voices get heard?
• How does digital activism counter patterns of offline privilege and activism, allowing new forms of activism and previously marginalized voices to be heard?

Positionality is the notion that your culture, ethnicity, gender, and many other aspects of your life (for example, education, religion, heritage, age, ability, language, etc.) influence your beliefs and values.

We felt that since this chapter reminds us to recognize the influence of the author and context on texts we encounter online, we should make our own positionality explicit: We are both scholars from the global South.

Maha is Egyptian and is an associate professor of practice at the Center for Learning and Teaching at the American University in Cairo (AUC) in Egypt. Since 2003, her work has involved supporting faculty in their teaching, including integration of technology. She also teaches undergraduate students, and recently designed and taught a course on digital literacies. Maha has a strong interest in equity and social justice issues, and her PhD from the University of Sheffield focused on the development of critical thinking for students at AUC. She identifies very much with her postcolonial hybridity, because even though she was born in Kuwait as an Egyptian to Egyptian parents, and grew up in Kuwait, she went through British and American education, lived briefly in the US and UK as an adult, and works at an American institution. All of this makes her more aware of postcolonial issues and global inequalities and inequity. Being a woman, a mom (to a girl), and a feminist also makes her very aware of gender issues. This is why you will find many examples across the text that mention postcolonial, language (especially Arabic), and gender issues with the digital world.

Cheryl is South African and an associate professor of e-learning in the School of Education Studies and Leadership at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand. Cheryl has lived and worked in South Africa, Australia, and, recently, New Zealand. A common interest of hers has centred around access to ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies) and how they facilitate or inhibit students’ participation in learning. In the past few years she has explored more closely the role technological devices (for example, cell phones and laptops) play in students’ learning in a developing context and in the development of students’ digital literacy practices. In her PhD, she explored how inequity influences students’ digital experience and therefore their digital identities. As a mother to two boys who have grown up with access to technology she feels it’s important to develop a healthy and critical awareness of both digital opportunities and challenges.

Activity 4.13: Reflect on Your Positionality

Think about who you are and about your past experiences in the world, the things you’re passionate about, and the things that trigger pain or anger.

• How might these things shape your view of the world, the ways in which you approach new information, and the ways you choose to use digital platforms?
• What might your biases be?
• What might your fears be?
• How might they influence your digital literacy?

Activity 4.14: Self-Test

What have you learned through undertaking the activities in this chapter? Has the process of working through critical approaches to digital literacy changed:

• the way you access information online?
• your social media presence?
• the way you search online?
• how you evaluate information online?
• the websites you regularly use?
• your understanding of who contributes to information on the Internet?
• how you personally interact and engage with people online?
• what information you will contribute online?

Make a list of the changes you plan to make in how you will use the Internet in the future.

Is there any personal action you can take to increase representation and equality on the Internet?

Media Attributions

• Chapter Header Image © Pixelkult
• Figure 4.1 Kaaba © Turki Al-Fassam is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
• Figure 4.2 Mercator_projection © Strebe is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license
• Figure 4.3 Gall–Peters Projection © Strebe is licensed under a CC BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) license

The objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

The tendency to selectively search for and interpret information in a way that confirms one’s own pre-existing beliefs and ideas.

Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or a particular point of view.

The notion that personal values, views, identity, and location in time and space influence how one understands the world.

Chapter 4: Critical Approaches to Digital Literacy Copyright © by Maha Bali and Cheryl Brown is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Top Courses
• Online Degrees
• Find your New Career
• Join for Free

Solving Problems with Creative and Critical Thinking

This course is part of People and Soft Skills for Professional and Personal Success Specialization

Taught in English

Some content may not be translated

Instructor: IBM Skills Network Team

Financial aid available

19,751 already enrolled

(221 reviews)

Recommended experience

Beginner level

No Previous Experience Required! This course can be taken by anyone regardless of professional experience.

What you'll learn

Utilize critical and creative thinking to solve issues.

Describe the 5-step process of effectively solving problems.

Analyze a problem and identify the root cause.

Explore possible solutions and employ the problem solving process.

Skills you'll gain

• Critical Thinking
• Creative Thinking
• Professional Development
• Problem Solving
• Soft skills

Details to know

Add to your LinkedIn profile

See how employees at top companies are mastering in-demand skills

Build your subject-matter expertise

• Learn new concepts from industry experts
• Gain a foundational understanding of a subject or tool
• Develop job-relevant skills with hands-on projects
• Earn a shareable career certificate

Earn a career certificate

Add this credential to your LinkedIn profile, resume, or CV

Share it on social media and in your performance review

There is 1 module in this course

In order to find a solution, one needs to be able to analyze a problem. This short course is designed to teach you how to solve and analyze problems effectively with critical and creative thinking.

Through the use of creative and critical thinking you will learn how to look at a problem and find the best solution by analyzing the different ways you can solve a problem. By taking this quick course you will gain the skills you need to find the root cause of a problem through the use of a five-step method. You will learn the process you must go through in order to find the problem, which leads to finding a solution. You will gain the necessary skills needed for critical and creative thinking which will be the foundation for successfully solving problems. This course provides fundamental skills that you will need to use in your day to day work. The course is suitable for anyone – students, career starters, experienced professionals and managers - wanting to develop problem solving skills regardless of your background. By taking this course you will be gaining some of the essential skills you need in order to be successful in your professional life. This course is part of the People and Soft Skills for Professional and Personal Success Specialization from IBM.

This module will help you to develop skills and behaviors required to solve problems and implement solutions more efficiently in an agile manner by using a systematic five-step process that involves both creative and critical thinking.

What's included

31 videos 11 readings 12 quizzes

31 videos • Total 30 minutes

• Why do you need to focus on solving problems? • 1 minute • Preview module
• The problem-solving process • 1 minute
• How can you solve problems in an agile way? • 0 minutes
• Let’s begin with the first topic • 0 minutes
• The problem-solving process-Identify • 0 minutes
• Write a problem statement • 0 minutes
• How do you find out if a problem is worth solving? • 0 minutes
• Recap • 0 minutes
• Let’s move to the second topic • 1 minute
• The problem-solving process: Analyze • 1 minute
• How do you use “The 5 Whys”? • 1 minute
• The root cause! • 0 minutes
• Many tools can help with root cause analysis • 0 minutes
• Let’s move to the third topic • 0 minutes
• The problem-solving process: Explore • 0 minutes
• Brainstorming rules • 1 minute
• Brainstorm to solve Georgia’s problem • 0 minutes
• Let’s move to the fourth topic • 0 minutes
• The problem-solving process: Select • 2 minutes
• Let’s find five solutions for one problem • 1 minute
• Use these factors to identify who should choose a solution • 0 minutes
• Use the Ease and effectiveness matrix to select the best solution • 0 minutes
• Recap • 1 minute
• Let’s move to the fifth topic • 0 minutes
• What will success look like? • 0 minutes
• How will you measure a solution’s effectiveness? • 0 minutes
• If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it • 0 minutes
• Build an implementation plan • 0 minutes
• Review the five-step problem-solving process • 2 minutes

11 readings • Total 36 minutes

• Critical and creative thinking are required to solve problems • 5 minutes
• What will you learn from the course? • 2 minutes
• Let’s help Georgia! • 5 minutes
• Is Georgia’s problem worth solving? • 4 minutes
• Recap • 2 minutes
• Brainstorm to get plenty of ideas • 5 minutes
• Let’s find five solutions for one problem • 2 minutes
• Who should chose a solution in Georgia's problem? • 2 minutes
• How will you work out the best possible solution? • 4 minutes
• Plan to implement the solution for Georgia • 3 minutes
• Congratulations and Next Steps. • 2 minutes

12 quizzes • Total 116 minutes

• Graded Quiz: Solving Problems with Critical and Creative Thinking • 20 minutes
• Practice Quiz: What do you think? • 5 minutes
• Practice Quiz: What do you think? • 3 minutes
• Practice Quiz: The “5 Whys” for Georgia • 20 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Which type of solution will work for Georgia? • 3 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Who should choose the solution in each case? • 10 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Who should choose a solution to Georgia’s problem? • 10 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Using the Ease and Effectiveness Matrix • 10 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Let’s use the Ease and effectiveness matrix for Georgia’s problem • 10 minutes
• Practice Quiz: What do you think success will look like? • 5 minutes
• Practice Quiz: What do you think? • 10 minutes
• Practice Quiz: Solving Problems with Critical and Creative Thinking • 10 minutes

Instructor ratings

We asked all learners to give feedback on our instructors based on the quality of their teaching style.

IBM is the global leader in business transformation through an open hybrid cloud platform and AI, serving clients in more than 170 countries around the world. Today 47 of the Fortune 50 Companies rely on the IBM Cloud to run their business, and IBM Watson enterprise AI is hard at work in more than 30,000 engagements. IBM is also one of the world’s most vital corporate research organizations, with 28 consecutive years of patent leadership. Above all, guided by principles for trust and transparency and support for a more inclusive society, IBM is committed to being a responsible technology innovator and a force for good in the world. For more information about IBM visit: www.ibm.com

Recommended if you're interested in Personal Development

People and Soft Skills Assessment

Developing Interpersonal Skills

People and Soft Skills for Professional and Personal Success

Specialization

Coursera Project Network

Generando un Data Lake House con Azure Synapse Analytics

Guided Project

Why people choose Coursera for their career

Learner reviews

Showing 3 of 221

221 reviews

Reviewed on Sep 29, 2022

It is not only a highly insightful course but the way it is put together makes it extremely easy to understand.

Reviewed on Oct 5, 2023

As Critical and creative thinking forms the foundation for successful problem-solving, this course equips you with the basic essential skills that are invaluable in your day-to-day work.

Reviewed on Feb 23, 2023

Great course with good instructors, thanks to Coursera for this excellent initiative.

New to Personal Development? Start here.

Open new doors with Coursera Plus

Unlimited access to 7,000+ world-class courses, hands-on projects, and job-ready certificate programs - all included in your subscription

Advance your career with an online degree

Earn a degree from world-class universities - 100% online

Join over 3,400 global companies that choose Coursera for Business

Upskill your employees to excel in the digital economy

Frequently asked questions

When will i have access to the lectures and assignments.

Access to lectures and assignments depends on your type of enrollment. If you take a course in audit mode, you will be able to see most course materials for free. To access graded assignments and to earn a Certificate, you will need to purchase the Certificate experience, during or after your audit. If you don't see the audit option:

The course may not offer an audit option. You can try a Free Trial instead, or apply for Financial Aid.

The course may offer 'Full Course, No Certificate' instead. This option lets you see all course materials, submit required assessments, and get a final grade. This also means that you will not be able to purchase a Certificate experience.

What will I get if I subscribe to this Specialization?

When you enroll in the course, you get access to all of the courses in the Specialization, and you earn a certificate when you complete the work. Your electronic Certificate will be added to your Accomplishments page - from there, you can print your Certificate or add it to your LinkedIn profile. If you only want to read and view the course content, you can audit the course for free.

What is the refund policy?

If you subscribed, you get a 7-day free trial during which you can cancel at no penalty. After that, we don’t give refunds, but you can cancel your subscription at any time. See our full refund policy Opens in a new tab .

Is financial aid available?

Yes. In select learning programs, you can apply for financial aid or a scholarship if you can’t afford the enrollment fee. If fin aid or scholarship is available for your learning program selection, you’ll find a link to apply on the description page.

More questions

Ed Tip: Problem-Solving and Critical Thinking

Students can use these graphic organizers to analyze concepts, solve problems, and think critically about the content they are exploring.

Problem-solving and critical thinking are essential life skills and, as teachers, we need to push our students beyond recall and comprehension to these types of higher-order thinking experiences. The templates in this collection are versatile tools to help prompt complex analysis and critical thinking in nearly any content area. The graphic organizers provide thought structures that can help students organize and make sense out of concepts as they process their thinking. With repeated opportunities to practice these skills in our classrooms, students can internalize these thought processes and become confident and effective critical thinkers.

At AVID Open Access, we’ve created multiple templates to help you and your students structure critical thinking thought processes. These activities may be completed digitally or printed to complete offline. A benefit of choosing to use these digitally is that multimedia (images, videos, links) can be added quite easily. The digital versions of the templates also have placeholders for text and images where appropriate. If you find a Google version that you like, click the “Use Template” button to generate your own version that can be edited and shared as needed. You may also download a PowerPoint version if you are a Microsoft user.

The templates may be completed digitally or printed to complete offline. If you choose to use these in a digital format, you will find placeholders for text and images integrated into the templates. If you find a Google version you like, click the “Use Template” button to generate your own version that can be edited and shared as needed. You may also download a PowerPoint version if you are a Microsoft user.

Templates from AVID Open Access

A/B Partner Talk

• Google Slides
• Microsoft PowerPoint

Cause and Effect #1 (Single Cause and Effect)

Cause and Effect #2 (Multiple Causes)

Cause and Effect #3 (Multiple Effects)

Cause and Effect #4 (Pictures)

Debate Preparation

• Google Docs
• Microsoft Word

Making Predictions

Notice and Wonder

Perspectives and Points of View

Problem Solution #1

Problem Solution #2 (Multiple Pictures)

Problem Solution #3 (Multiple Solutions)

Problem Solution #4 (Multiple Problems and Solutions)

Pro-Con Analysis

Spider Gram 1-4

Spider Gram 1-8

Online digital tools to use for problem-solving and critical thinking.

• AllSides for Schools : articles supporting multiple perspectives on an issue
• Circly : collaborative graphic organization tool
• Genially : create infographics
• Google Sheets : spreadsheet creation
• Kialo : organized online debates
• Lucidchart : create diagrams, flowcharts, and process maps; templates available
• Microsoft Excel : spreadsheet creation
• MindMeister : concept mapping tool
• MindMup : concept mapping tool
• Mindomo : concept mapping tool
• Online Chart Tool : chart generator
• Piktochart : create infographics
• Plotly : online chart creation studio
• ProCon : Britannica product exploring various sides of controversial issues
• Venngage : create simple graphs and data charts

Integration Ideas

These templates are quite versatile and can be applied to nearly any content area. You might use them to analyze a piece of literature or a historical event, or you might ask your students to deconstruct a math problem or think critically about a science experiment. Because the templates focus on thought processes rather than specific subject-area content, you can adapt them to your classroom material as you see fit. Similarly, the way that you use these with your students is quite adaptable. You might integrate them into a station during station rotation or add them to a playlist . Students could be asked to complete these either individually or collaboratively. If you distribute and collect the templates through a learning management system, you can quickly skim the submissions to determine if the class is on track or to identify students who might need more assistance. The goal is to get students to think critically and solve problems. The path to get there is flexible depending on your individual classroom needs.

How Can I Learn More?

Explore AVID Open Access for more free templates, articles, tool tips, podcasts, and other great resources, including the related collections: Engage Students Through Inquiry Learning , Become Information and Media Literate , and Inspire Students With Project-Based Learning .

Topic Collections

This course is part of the following collections:.

Did you find this resource useful?

Your rating helps us continue providing useful content in relevant subject areas.

• System Status
• Rest Assured Policy

Select from the list below to add to one of your Journeys, or create a new one.

You haven't created a Journey yet.

Stay in the Know!

Sign up for our weekly newsletter and be the first to receive access to best practice teaching strategies, grab-and-go lessons, and downloadable templates for grades K-12.

Does Technology Help Boost Students’ Critical Thinking Skills?

• Share article

Does using technology in school actually help improve students’ thinking skills? Or hurt them?

That’s the question the Reboot Foundation, a nonprofit, asked in a new report examining the impact of technology usage. The foundation analyzed international tests, like the Programme for International Student Assessment or PISA, which compares student outcomes in different nations, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress or NAEP, which is given only in the U.S. and considered the “Nation’s Report Card.”

The Reboot Foundation was started—and funded—by Helen Bouygues , whose background is in business, to explore the role of technology in developing critical thinking skills. It was inspired by Bouygues’ own concerns about her daughter’s education.

The report’s findings: When it comes to the PISA, there’s little evidence that technology use has a positive impact on student scores, and some evidence that it could actually drag it down. As for the NAEP? The results varied widely, depending on the grade level, test, and type of technology used. For instance, students who used computers to do research for reading projects tended to score higher on the reading portion of the NAEP. But there wasn’t a lot of positive impact from using a computer for spelling or grammar practice.

And 4th-graders who used tablets in all or almost all of their classes scored 14 points lower on the reading exam than those who reported never using tablets. That’s the equivalent of a year’s worth of learning, according to the report.

However, 4th-graders students who reported using laptops or desktop computers “in some classes” outscored students who said they “never” used these devices in class by 13 points. That’s also the equivalent of a year’s worth of learning. And 4th-grade students who said they used laptops or desktop computers in “more than half” or “all” classes scored 10 points higher than students who said they never used those devices in class.

Spending too much time on computers wasn’t helpful.

“There were ceiling effects of technology, and moderate use of technology appeared to have the best association with testing outcomes,” the report said. “This occurred across a number of grades, subjects, and reported computer activities.”

In fact, there’s a negative correlation between time spent on the computer during the school day and NAEP score on the 4th-grade reading NAEP.

That trend was somewhat present, although less clearly, on the 8th-grade reading NAEP.

“Overall usage of technology is probably not just not great, but actually can lower scores and testing for basic education [subjects like math, reading, science],” said Bouygues. “Even in the middle school, heavy use of technology does lower scores, but if you do have things that are specifically catered to a specific subject, that actually serves a purpose.”

For instance, she said her daughter, a chess enthusiast, has gotten help from digital sources in mastering the game. But asking kids to spend a chunk of every day typing on Microsoft Word, as some classrooms do in France, isn’t going to help teach higher-order thinking skills.

She cautioned though, that the report stops short of making a casual claim and saying that sitting in front of a laptop harms students’ ability to be critical thinkers. The researchers didn’t have the kind of evidence needed to be able to make that leap.

For more research on the impact of technology on student outcomes, take a look at these stories:

• Technology in Education: An Overview
• Computers + Collaboration = Student Learning, According to New Meta-Analysis
• Technology Has No Impact on Teaching and Learning (opinion)

Image: Getty

A version of this news article first appeared in the Digital Education blog.

Sign Up for The Savvy Principal

Critical Thinking & Digital Problem Solving

by Gloria  E. Jacobs, Ph.D., Research Specialist, College of Education, University of Arizona:  Brian Kane is the Digital Literacy Coordinator at Literacy Volunteers of Rochester. The Digital Literacy program at LVR provides a free drop-in service where individuals can learn basic computer skills or get assistance completing  computer-essential tasks. This service is provided by volunteers who work one-to-one with learners. Brian read our blog and asked, “What’s the difference between critical thinking and problem solving? Or, are they essentially the same thing?”    Read more …

Sharing is caring!

Username or Email Address

Remember Me

• Literacy Adventure
• Our History
• Staff & Board
• Annual Reports
• Program Overview
• Distance Learning Resources
• Customer Resources
• Sites & Schedules
• Make an Appointment
• Basic Computer Skills Workshop
• Become a Tutor
• Become a Digital Literacy Volunteer
• Support Literacy!
• Events Calendar
• Literacy News
• Eclipse Day 2024

Privacy Overview

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
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

• Enwei Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
• Wei Wang 1 &
• Qingxia Wang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

9 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Similar content being viewed by others

Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education

Sayed Fayaz Ahmad, Heesup Han, … Antonio Ariza-Montes

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research

Lisa Messeri & M. J. Crockett

Participatory action research

Flora Cornish, Nancy Breton, … Darrin Hodgetts

Introduction

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2  ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P  < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.95, P  < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2  = 86%, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P  < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P  < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P  < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P  < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P  < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P  < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P  < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P  < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P  < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P  < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P  < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P  < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P  < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P  < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P  < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P  < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P  < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar  

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

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

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

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

This article is cited by

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis.

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence

• Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
• Hung Phu Bui
• Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2023)

Quick links

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

The Tech Edvocate

• Advertisement
• Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
• Home Page Four
• Home Page Three
• Home Page Two
• Icons [No Sidebar]
• Left Sidbear Page
• Lynch Educational Consulting
• My Speaking Page
• Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
• Newsletter Unsubscription
• Page Example
• Privacy Policy
• Protected Content
• Request a Product Review
• Shortcodes Examples
• Terms and Conditions
• The Edvocate
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• Write For Us
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Assistive Technology
• Child Development Tech
• Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
• EdTech Futures
• EdTech News
• EdTech Policy & Reform
• EdTech Startups & Businesses
• Higher Education EdTech
• Online Learning & eLearning
• Parent & Family Tech
• Personalized Learning
• Product Reviews
• Tech Edvocate Awards
• School Ratings

5 Ways to Develop a Skincare Routine for Dry Skin

How to make a game on scratch, how to change your license plate, 3 ways to teach evangelism, how to play the elephant game: 7 steps, 4 ways to back up google docs, 3 simple ways to shrink jackets, how to blow smoke hearts: 13 steps, 3 ways to determine whether to diaper a senior dog, how to video call on tango, 7 must have apps, tools, and resources that develop critical thinking skills.

Gone are the days where children were expected to memorize facts and recite them at any given time. Instead, it is hoped that children will develop critical thinking skills so that they can analyze situations, think about different outcomes, and present well-reasoned conclusions. To help children develop critical thinking skills, there are some apps, tools, and resources. Here is a list of the top seven.

• Guess the Code

While this app is presented as a game, it is actually a great way for children to look at patterns and sequences, and try to figure them out. The app generates different color combinations, and it is up to the user to decipher the pattern and enter the next color.

• SimplePhysics

Physics can be a daunting subject, but the new way of approaching it makes physics more of a hands-on subject that gets students to engage in problem-solving actively. SimplePhysics provides games and puzzles that test the limits of students’ critical thinking skills.

• A Clockwork Brain

This app has a range of games in such categories as memory, attention, language, reasoning, and dexterity. Critical thinking is strengthened as children must work quickly to solve the problems before moving on to more challenging puzzles.

• Civilization VI

Now in its sixth iteration, this modern computer game is not just fun; it’s actually a place for children (and adults) to use the full extent of their imagination and critical thinking skills. The game starts with the dawn of humans, and it is up to the player to help them achieve civilization through each time period. Users must decide what it takes for a culture to evolve and this is no easy task.

• Whooo’s Reading

One of the most important steps in the journey towards critical thinking is the ability to read and interact with books. Reading is more than just memorizing letter combinations. It is about understanding the motive behind characters and the importance of setting. It is about connecting plot developments with real life and making connections between the two. To help students engage more when reading, Whooo’s Reading is a program that works to connect books at a deeper level. As a result of this program, students often increase their love of reading and as a bonus, do better on reading exams.

Social media has become pervasive in today’s culture, and while platforms like Twitter and Instagram can lead to more harm than good for most youth, social media can be used to an educator’s advantage. Edmodo provides a platform for students and teachers to engage in collaborative projects that help to foster creative thinking skills. It is a tool that can be used to bring students’ ideas together.

• Highlights Every Day

This app is a nostalgic treat for anyone that eagerly awaited their monthly Highlights magazine subscription. Updated for today’s technological world, Highlights Every Day is an app that features engaging puzzles, stories, and videos.

Critical thinking should be fostered because it creates students who actively engage in the world around them. It prepares children for a world where they will become adults and will need to navigate life. Critical thinking skills can be developed in fun, creative settings through the use of these apps, tools, and resources.

8 Essential Digital Literacy Skills That Students ...

13 must-have biology apps and tools.

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

5 Assistive Technology Apps for Students With Special Needs

Innovation in learning and teaching is too important to cut

How Edtech Companies Can Turn Threats into Opportunities

Using Technology to Empower Students with Special Needs

Brain-training apps just make you better at playing games

Search form

Critical thinking and problem solving with technology.

Brief Summary: Critical thinking and problem solving is a crucial skill in a technical world that can immediately be applied to academics and careers. A highly skilled individual in this competency can choose the appropriate tool to accomplish a task, easily switch between tools, has a basic understanding of different file types, and can troubleshoot technology when it’s not working properly. They can also differentiate between true information and falsified information online and has basic proficiency in data gathering, processing and interpretation. 

Learners with proficient skills in critical thinking and problem solving should be able to: 

• Troubleshoot computers and mobile devices when issues arise, like restarting the device and checking if it requires a software or operating system update 
• Move across tools to complete a task (for example, adding PowerPoint slides into a note taking app for annotation) 
• Differentiate between legitimate and falsified information online 
• Understand basic file types and know when to use them (for example, the difference between .doc and .pdf files) 

Market/Employer Trends: Employers indicate value in employee ability to problem solve using technology, particularly related to drawing information from data to identify and solve challenges. Further, knowing how to leverage technology tools to see a problem, break it down into manageable pieces, and work toward solving is of important value. Employers expect new employees to be able to navigate across common toolsets, making decisions to use the right tool for the right task.  

Self-Evaluation: 

Key questions for reflection: 

• How comfortable are you when technology doesn’t work the way you expect?  
• Do you know basic troubleshooting skills to solve tech issues?  
• Do you know the key indicators of whether information you read online is reliable? 

Strong digital skills in this area could appear as: 

• Updating your computer after encountering a problem and resolving the issue 
• Discerning legitimate news sources from illegitimate ones to successfully meet goals 
• Converting a PowerPoint presentation into a PDF for easy access for peers who can’t use PowerPoint 
• Taking notes on a phone and seamlessly completing them on a computer

Ways to Upskill: 

Ready to grow your strength in this competency? Try: 

• Reviewing University Libraries’ resources on research and information literacy  
• Read about troubleshooting in college in the Learner Technology Handbook 
• Registering for ESEPSY 1359: Critical Thinking and Collaboration in Online Learning  

Educator Tips to Support Digital Skills: 

• Create an assignment in Carmen prompting students to find legitimate peer-reviewed research  
• Provide links to information literacy resources on research-related assignments or projects for student review 
• Develop assignments that require using more than one tech tool to accomplish a single task 

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
• PMC10279556

Developing critical thinking skills through gamification

Claudia viviana angelelli.

a Heriot-Watt University, Centre for Translation and interpreting Studies in Scotland; School of Social Sciences, EH144AS, Edinburgh, Scotland

Geisa Muller de Campos Ribeiro

b Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG) – Faculdade de Informação e Comunicação (FIC) and Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia (FCT), Avenida Esperança s/n, Câmpus Samambaia, 74690-900, Goiânia, Brazil

Maico Roris Severino

Eilidh johnstone, gana borzenkova, dayane costa oliveira da silva.

Misinformation as well as the proliferation of fake news has been a problem during COVID-19 pandemic. This has affected many vulnerable communities in Brazil. The ability to understand and sort out pieces of reliable information and fake news has become a fundamental cognitive skill. In this study we report on the development of a serious game (a card-based role-playing game) using Brazilian folk heroes aimed to develop critical thinking skills to empower vulnerable communities affected by misinformation and fake news. Four groups located in the city of Goiânia (Brazil) participated in this research: one group of people experiencing homelessness; two groups of favela residents (one urban and one in the suburbs) and one group of recyclable material collectors from a cooperative. We gained entry and built trust with each of these groups and worked together for 10 months during the pandemic. We conducted participatory observations, individual interviews with each participant and discussed their daily interaction with information, specifically in the context of the covid-19 pandemic. The analyses of the observations and interview data gave us a glimpse of the communicative needs of the groups. Inserting players into a narrative where they can make decisions based on critical thinking and their own reflections on the pandemic was important for building knowledge and developing critical thinking in these communities. The nature of the game (interactive and cooperative) allowed participants to focus on problem-solving skills and group work. It encouraged them to use real-life knowledge and skills to solve the fictional problems presented by the narrative.

1. Introduction

“Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information” ( Freire, 2009 [1970], p. 170)

The global coronavirus pandemic has led to major changes in human behaviour, habits, and thought processes. Once simple decisions such as sending children to school, visiting the supermarket or meeting friends and family must now be preceded by complex assessments of the potential risks. People must make safe choices to the best of their ability based on the information available to them, which may be drawn from sources such as broadcast news, public health campaigns, social media posts and word of mouth. Unfortunately, not all of these sources are reliable. Misinformation has been a major issue worldwide throughout the pandemic ( Zarocostas, 2020 ), and understanding which information to trust has become a key cognitive skill.

Literature suggests that critical thinking can effectively combat misinformation ( Machete & Turpin, 2020 ; Roozenbeek & van der Linden, 2019 ), but much of the existing research on teaching it has been carried out in schools or universities, and in the Global North ( Cicchino, 2015 ; Halpern, 2001 ). It is time to develop methods for teaching critical thinking beyond formal education settings, beyond traditional teaching materials and classroom management and particularly to diverse learners from disadvantaged communities. Paulo Freire, on whose philosophy this project is grounded, saw education as central to the fight against oppression. He argued for a process he called ‘conscientisation’, where people are led to analyse and think critically about how inequality features in their lives. As Lucio-Villegas (2018, p. 163) writes, “It can be said that this process of becoming conscious is also the long and winding road to emancipation”. Widening the scope of critical thinking education could contribute to building the emancipatory pedagogy Freire hoped for.

Disadvantaged communities in Brazil have been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Limited access to specialised hospital care plays a role, as does the relative lack of official public awareness campaigns compared to higher-income districts. This is compounded by the prevalence of widespread misinformation and fake news, which have hindered efforts to mitigate the impact of the pandemic ( Ricard & Medeiros, 2020 ).

Distinguishing accurately between real and fake news is a vital skill, particularly during the pandemic. However, it is a skill that must be learned, and as with any other type of education, the chance to learn and practice critical thinking skills is not evenly spread across the socio-economic scale ( Freire, 1992 , p. 71). This project, rooted in Dewey (1933) and Freire (1992) focussed on developing participant's abilities to make informed decisions by understanding and applying concepts such as making a point, identifying the supporting evidence on which the point is based and evaluating this evidence. We saw the need to develop critical thinking individually but also to negotiate it with others, to raise awareness on the consequences of one's own decisions on others. Two activities supported participants to develop these abilities: 1) Conversation circles sessions: during five sessions participants worked individually and in pairs with materials tailored to their realities (including degrees of literacy, disabilities, as well as contextual information); 2) Serious game: one session provided participants opportunities to collaboratively analyse information and draw reasoned conclusions about its accuracy. In the conversation circles, we engage in critical thinking activities moving along steps adapted from Bloom's taxonomy (1956) , using materials which reflect participants’ daily lives and stories from their communities. During these sessions, participants learn to deal with the onslaught of fake news that has become a dangerous part of everyday life. This learning empowers them to make informed choices about their own and others’ health – something that has, perhaps, never been more important than now. This article focuses on a serious game to complement the conversation circles, aiming to develop critical thinking skills to empower vulnerable communities which are particularly affected by misinformation and fake news. In this article we report on the development and implementation of a serious game (a role playing game) in the context of developing critical thinking skills.

2. Serious games: brief review of the relevant literature

Serious games can be defined as “games whose primary intent is training or learning with definable learning goals, instead of being primarily intended for entertainment” ( Harz & Stern, 2008 , p. 13). Serious games can be used to enhance learning in a wide range of fields and for learners of all ages. They often incorporate simulations and role-play of real-life experiences, which can be used to support both formal and informal learning ( Qian & Clark, 2016 ; Romero et al., 2014 ) and the engaging learning experience promotes effective recall ( Boyle et al., 2016 ; Connolly et al., 2012 ; McDonald, 2017 ). Serious games can be digital or analogue, but some research suggests that analogue games may support learning more effectively than digital ones ( Talan et al., 2020 ). This could be because of the increased opportunity for cooperation and communication between players, or because of the flexibility offered by analogue formats (ibid., p.494).

Mitgutsch (2011) differentiates between learning in games, where players acquire new knowledge or information, learning through games, where players develop skills based on their in-game interactions, and learning beyond games, where players are able to apply these newfound or newly-improved skills to the real world). This final type of learning can set in motion a “transformative learning process […] in which the players explore new perspectives and develop new concepts of themselves, others and the world that they connect to real life circumstances” (ibid., p.56). Mitgutsch asserts that there is not yet conclusive evidence that such transformative learning can occur through serious games. However, there are growing indications that it might. Researchers and educators have found that participants’ cognitive skills can be enhanced by the need to cope with a variety of challenging scenarios within the interactive game environment ( Hwang et al., 2013 ; Prensky, 2001 ). Others in the education sector have noted the effect of game-based learning on players’ problem-solving abilities and their ability to think critically ( Michael & Chen, 2006 ; Qian & Clark, 2016 ; Romero et al., 2014 ). Serious games can be considered an effective tool for the development of 21st-century skills including communication, collaboration, and critical thinking ( Romero et al., 2014 ). An ever-widening range of audiences are now recognising the potential of serious games to change the way players learn ( McGonigal, 2011 ).

In this research project, a serious game provided the ideal complement for the critical thinking sessions. Although the project's goal was an educational one, in the widest sense of the word, it was vital that whatever activity was created for the participants did not feel academic. This would likely have discouraged participation, particularly by those who had negative experiences in school or who have had little formal education. Using a serious game creates a relaxed, engaging environment where participants are positioned not as ‘learners’ but as co-creators of knowledge.

2.1. Serious games, fake news, and COVID-19

In February 2020, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that, “We're not just fighting an epidemic; we're fighting an infodemic” ( Zarocostas, 2020 ). The spread of misinformation has been a well-recognised issue since at least 2016, when the Oxford Dictionaries declared ‘post-truth’ their Word of the Year ( Higgins, 2016 ). In post-truth situations, people are more easily influenced by emotions than by facts. The effects of misinformation and fake news have been particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic. Susceptibility to misinformation may make people less likely to get vaccinated against the virus and less likely to comply with public health measures ( Roozenbeek et al., 2020 , p. 12), endangering themselves and those around them. Conspiracy theories disseminated on social media have led to violence, with telecommunications masts in Europe, North America and Australasia destroyed due to a belief that COVID-19 is caused by 5 G technology ( Jolley & Paterson, 2020 ).

Although recent studies have specifically targeted the COVID-19 ‘infodemic’, serious games research has a long history of exploring issues of misinformation and fake news. These studies have demonstrated that serious games can contribute to participants’ ability to identify and think critically about misinformation.

Roozenbeek and van der Linden (2018 , 2019 ) base their research on inoculation theory, which suggests that exposing participants to incorrect information and providing them with means to argue against it can create ‘mental antibodies’ allowing them to recognise misinformation when they encounter it again, in much the same way that viral antibodies allow the immune system to recognise and react to a virus. Controlled exposure to misinformation could therefore provide a ‘vaccine’ against fake news ( McGuire, 1964 apud Roozenbeek & van der Linden, 2018 , p. 571). In their 2018 study, Roozenbeek and van der Linden created a multi-player board game in which players created their own misleading news articles. The game was designed to encourage players to think actively about the techniques used in misinformation, and they found that this process of ‘active inoculation’ did reduce the perceived reliability and persuasiveness of fake news articles (2018, p. 576). The researchers stress that their board game study was necessarily small-scale and exploratory; however, their 2019 experiment, which involved 15,000 participants playing an online browser game designed along the same principles, had similar results. Playing the game “significantly reduced the perceived reliability of tweets that embedded several common online misinformation strategies” (2019, p. 7). They also found the greatest change in those participants who had been most susceptible to fake news before playing the game, suggesting that inoculation could be of significant help to those most at risk of misinformation (2019, p.8).

Focussing on misleading multimodal texts, Clever et al. (2020) developed an app-based game in which participants have to match a headline to an image, and are rewarded both for successfully misleading others and for finding the true headline. Their study does not measure participant sensitivity to fake news before and after playing the game, so they are not able to identify whether the game succeeds in sensitising participants to fake news. Likewise, Katsaounidou et al. (2019) do not measure the effectiveness of their browser-based information-verification game, although their players did report feeling that it had helped them to better identify fake news. This is self-reported rather than empirically verified, but since these studies follow a similar process of inoculation to Roozenbeek's and van der Linden's, it is certainly possible that the games involved have similar effects.

Although the inoculation metaphor predates the outbreak of COVID-19, it seems particularly apt for the current moment. Basol et al. (2021) have designed a game along these lines which specifically targets misinformation around the pandemic. In Go Viral!, participants post on simulated social media sites and create their own conspiracy theories. Researchers found that participants were much more likely to identify manipulative misinformation about COVID-19 after playing the game (2021, p.6). Players were also more likely to suspect real news of being manipulative immediately after playing the game, but a follow-up assessment carried out a week later showed that this effect dissipated entirely with time, while participants’ increased sensitivity to fake news remained (2021, p.13). Basol et al. also found that players were less inclined to share fake news with others after playing the game (2021, p.14), suggesting that such interventions could be key in the worldwide fight against COVID-19 misinformation. Go Viral! has also been listed by the WHO as an anti-misinformation resource, and has been played over 300,000 times ( Basol et al., 2021 , p. 3).

Other researchers have focused on designing serious games to encourage responsible pandemic behaviour. Hernández (2020) created a game focused on COVID-19 prevention measures among the general public, and her results demonstrate the importance of game mechanics as well as informativity: her participants reported that the game provided useful facts, but was overly simple (2020, p.39). Suppan et al. (2020) targeted healthcare workers in long-term care facilities, identifying this as a sector where patients are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, but where resources are lacking and overwork may impact workers’ ability to adhere to guidelines. Suppan et al. (2021) found that participants were significantly more willing to change their behaviour after playing the game than when they were shown infection prevention and control guidelines in a non-game format. The game is translated into German and Italian and will be deployed at the national level across Switzerland ( Suppan et al., 2021 ).

The current project shares a range of attributes with the games mentioned above. As Roozenbeek's and van der Linden's (2018 , 2019 ) inoculation approach, our project provides participants with small amounts of misinformation in a controlled environment, and scaffolds analysis and discussion. However, working with disadvantaged communities in Brazil required the development of a game that would be accessible with minimum technology to participants with a range of literacy levels, as well as one that was appropriate to the target culture. These requirements led to the use of a critical-thinking-focused tabletop role-playing game rather than the more common board game or digital (whether app- or browser-based) formats.

3. Serious role-playing games

The term ‘role-playing game’ (RPG) can refer to a range of phenomena including tabletop role-playing games, single-player video games, and multiplayer online games. In all these types of game, the player takes on a character role that is different from their everyday persona. Tabletop RPGs, arguably the common ancestor of all the RPG genres ( Zagal & Deterding, 2018 ) and the type of game used in this research, are usually played in a group led by a facilitator. The facilitator describes the fictional world for the players, who react by narrating their characters’ actions. The game exists primarily in the facilitator's and the players’ shared imagination. This open-endedness is the key difference between tabletop RPGs and other types of game and has led to some difficulty in defining RPGs at all: Zagal and Deterding describe them as “the exception, the outlier, the not-quite-a- game” (2018, p.19). However, it is this very open-endedness and flexibility that makes RPGs useful serious games, as they can be adapted to reflect a wide range of real-world scenarios ( Ferrand et al., 2009 ).

Researchers have used serious RPGs to tackle subjects from wetlands management ( Morardet & Milhau, 2012 ) to migratory bird identification ( Chu & Chang, 2014 ). Several studies have used RPGs to encourage climate-adaptive farming practices ( Salvini et al., 2016 ; Sautier et al., 2017 ; Villamor & Badmos, 2016 ), to explore climate-aware infrastructure planning ( Schenk, 2014 ) or to raise awareness about the climate crisis ( de Suarez et al., 2012 ; Rumore et al., 2016 ). These are highly complex issues involving a range of factors, tensions and stakeholders, and RPGs are able to capture this complexity without requiring extensive technical knowledge from the players ( Flood et al., 2018 , p. 5). They provide ‘inhabitable learning systems’ ( de Suarez et al., 2012 , p. 13) which are able to challenge inadequate mental models. De Suarez et al. compare games to flight simulators: in the same way that pilots can learn to fly using sophisticated simulations, decision-makers can learn to balance delicate issues using serious games (2012, p.12–13).

Various serious games can act as ‘flight simulators’, but collaborative RPGs are particularly effective for social learning. Assuming a role allows participants to depart from their usual viewpoints and consider other perspectives ( Ahamer, 2013 ), and it empowers them to voice their opinions. As Morardet and Milhau note, role-playing “levels the playing field between stakeholders, allowing them to sit at the same table informally. Freedom of speech is higher in the game than in reality” (2010, p.47). The game provides a safe space for the exploration of contested issues, and for collaborative problem-solving.

Although the facilitator may provide guidance, problem solving is led by the players. Knowledge is not imparted by a lofty authority figure, but rather co-created by the group. Rumore et al. (2016) found that the social learning fostered in the RPG setting seemed to translate into increased awareness, political engagement and community action. Participants are empowered to take their newfound knowledge and skills beyond the game setting, and RPGs can become the catalyst for continued independent learning ( Flood et al., 2018 , p. 12). Social learning also provides space for the integration of local and traditional knowledge systems into decision-making processes ( Villamor & Badmos, 2016 ).

Flood et al. identify three types of learning that can occur in games including RPGs: cognitive learning, where participants acquire new knowledge; relational learning, where participants develop communication and cooperation skills; and normative learning, where participants are led to question accepted norms and values (2018, p.17–8). RPGs may highlight certain aspects over others – for example, Schenk (2014) focuses on building understanding and cooperation between stakeholders, while Hertzog et al. (2014) emphasise disseminating information about water management practices – but all RPGs, to some extent, involve all three of these learning types. This makes them immensely powerful tools for capacity building, skills development and information sharing.

RPGs feature prominently in serious games research carried out in the Global South ( Edwards et al., 2019 ; Hertzog et al., 2014 ; Morardet & Milhau, 2012 ; Salvini et al., 2016 ; Villamor & Badmos, 2016 ). In communities where there may be limited access to digital resources, or where literacy levels may vary, RPGs provide a low-resource, replicable medium for collective learning and engagement. The minimal written material involved also likely simplifies translation of the game into local languages where necessary (cf. Evans, 2013 ), or localisation to different cultures. The game itself provides a common language for the players, scaffolding discussion of the issues involved among participants with different knowledge bases ( Eisenack, 2013 ), and far from being a hindrance, having participants with different backgrounds and stakeholder positions involved in the game enriches the experience for all players ( Edwards et al., 2019 ).

An RPG therefore presented the ideal serious game format for this project. It provided an opportunity for participants to collaboratively develop critical thinking skills and deal with allegorical scenarios which reflected real-world issues; it required few resources and could easily be played in a range of settings; it was accessible to participants who did not have smartphones, and to those with lower literacy levels; it was easily replicated, both by the facilitators within this project and, potentially, by future projects. For some of the participants with lower literacy levels, the team noted the need to have more than one facilitator while playing. Even when participants did help each other out, it was important to make sure all of them could access all the information available at the same time.

Deciding to create a collaborative, analogue game enabled this project's success, but also changed its course. The team initially included game developers and programmers whose research focused on individual, digital games. As a result of the decision to pursue a RPG, these team members could not implement their initial research agendas and left to other projects. When working with vulnerable communities and designing empirically driven games these changes are to be expected, and researchers working with vulnerable communities are familiar with this risk.

4. Methods and initial results informing the game development

To design the RPG, which is the focus of this article, the team relied on various methods to assess and understand the participants’ needs, as well as to design and implement the RPG. Our approach was ethnographic. The project lasted 18 months (from October 2019 to March 2021). A team of 7 researchers in Brazil (including 2 co-Is and 3 research associates/assistants) and 4 in Scotland (including PI, co-I and 2 research assistants) divided tasks during the lockdown. Some activities needed to be done in situ (e.g., observations, implementation of activities) while others could be done remotely (e.g., design of data collection instruments and of materials for the conversation circles and the game, training of community leaders, and data analyses). By the time travelling between Brazil and Scotland was opened, PI and CIs worked together in Brazil to discuss findings with the participants on site and finish the project.

Once we received ethical approval, we started ethnographic observations (Brazilian team) to build trust and gain entry in four distinct communities (See Section 5 below). Simultaneously, the Scottish team worked remotely on a series of training sessions for local community leaders to act as local researchers. After gaining entry to four sites (3 months), we observed and interacted with participants for 6 months. Based on observations and informal conversations we designed a survey to capture how participants’ get information on COVID-19 and news in general. Each participant could fill the questionnaire with a researcher. Based on the data gathered we designed a semi-structured protocol and conducted a series of semi-structured interviews to explore partcicipants’ perceptions on media, how/to whom they assign trust, how they access news, among other questions. The data collected during the survey and interviews informed the design of two key activities in the project: the conversational circles and the serious game. Interviews and focus groups were conducted at the end of the Conversation Circles sessions and at the end of the game session to explore participants'positions vis à vis fake news.

The characteristics of the participants influenced the project's focus on critical thinking about (fake) news. Findings from initial interviews ( n  = 60), conducted by researchers in situ to explore participant's selection of sources of news, showed that broadcast television is the main source of news and information for these communities. There are two main news channels, Globo and Record, with conflicting political leanings, which seemed to split the population into two camps. Interviews suggested a high level of trust towards information gained from either news channel, with some participants triangulating the information by viewing both channels. Word of mouth and WhatsApp are also seen as fairly reliable sources of information. Other sources such as Facebook are viewed as less trustworthy and are treated with some caution. This is a positive sign, indicating some awareness of the spread of misinformation on social media. However, mixed public messaging and the prevalence of scientific denialism within the Brazilian political sphere ( Dall'Alba et al., 2021 ) mean that even information provided through authoritative channels may not be reliable. People also get information through the internet, friends and family. In this environment, critical thinking must extend to all information sources.

Community preferences also informed the design of the game. Interviews with community leaders and representatives suggested that phone-based games are unpopular and that phones are used exclusively for social media, further justifying the use of an analogue RPG rather than a browser- or app-based game. The interviews also highlighted that a game-based learning approach could provoke resistance, as participants might associate the game with gambling and addiction. Most forms of gambling have been banned in Brazil since 2008, but gambling addiction continues to be a problem, and treatment options are few and far between ( Tavares, 2014 ). To avoid any adverse effects on participants, it was important for the project to ensure that the game did not use any mechanics that could resemble gambling or prove addictive, as community members might have refused to take part in the game activity for fear of addiction or for religious reasons.

Therefore, in order to protect participants and to foster open debate, an allegorical story was used for the game. The story, in which players discover and combat a blight in the rainforest, mirrors the COVID-19 pandemic but frees participants from the complex real-world dynamics surrounding it. This is an innovative measure, as serious RPGs (e.g. Morardet & Milhau, 2012 ; Rumore et al., 2016 ; Salvini et al., 2016 ; Schenk, 2014 ; Speelman et al., 2013 ; Villamor & Badmos, 2016 ) tend to replicate real-world scenarios rather than using allegory. This often seems to work well, as participants are able to gain factual knowledge about the issues involved as well as develop critical thinking skills ( Salvini et al., 2016 ; Sautier et al., 2017 ). However, in some cases it has led to non-participation of stakeholders or conflict between players. For example, Hertzog et al. (2014) found that international companies involved in water management refused to participate in a role-playing activity, stating that they were unable to discuss their corporate strategies in public (2014, p.6). Villamor and Badamos, who note the processes of peer pressure at work during their game, quote one participant as saying to another, “We really need to talk after this game; I don't like the way you manage your cows” (2016, p. 7). Future research could consider whether an allegorical approach, as used in the present study, might help to mitigate these frictions.

The research methods used in this research is presented in Fig. 1 .

Methods used.

5. Participants and communities

The project targeted three participant groups in the city of Goiânia: residents from two favelas, members of a recycling cooperative, and people experiencing homelessness (PEH).

For over 100 years, Brazil's metropolitan centres have been characterised by the presence of favelas. No longer properly translated as ‘shanty towns’ or ‘slums’, some favelas have developed into “consolidated urban villages built of masonry and reinforced concrete” ( Cummings, 2015 , p. 1). However, favelas still tend to be densely populated, with high levels of poverty, food insecurity and crime, and are still marginalised within Brazilian society. Fix and Arantes (2021) write that favelas “sum up contradictions and conflicts and simultaneously embody forms of resistance and urban imagination” (2021, p. 13). The most recent census reports that in 2010, over 11 million people or around 6% of the total population of Brazil lived in favelas ( Pereira, 2020 , p. 42).

Informal waste collectors or catadores perform a valuable social function in Brazil, collecting recyclable materials to be sold for processing. However, the work is underpaid, heavily stigmatised and brings significant health risks ( Gutberlet et al., 2013 ). Catadores can find some protection from these issues by organising into cooperatives, which in Brazil are sometimes supported by governmental or nongovernmental organisations (ibid. p.4608). These cooperatives vary in size, level of organisation, and available resources, but they may provide training and safety equipment, and some campaign for better public recognition of the catadores’ work (N. F. Ramos et al., 2013 , p. 235). The cooperative involved in this research supports vulnerable people both by providing them with a stable income and by helping them to gain access to basic services such as vaccination programmes and child support. Catadores must also follow the rules of the cooperative, which mandate PPE and prohibit alcohol or drug use. During the pandemic, additional rules have been put in place to prevent virus transmission. The cooperative experiences high personnel turnover, as catadores move between areas or into other employment.

People experiencing homelessness live in precarious circumstances and often have difficulty accessing healthcare. In Brazil, the situation for PEH has deteriorated in recent years, particularly since 2017, as the result of economic and political instability ( Honorato & Oliveira, 2020 , p. 1065). Brazil's National Policy for the Homeless Population, or Decree 7053/2009, defines PEH as “a heterogeneous population group having in common extreme poverty, interrupted, or weakened family ties, and lack of regular conventional housing, thus using public places and degraded areas as temporary or permanent living spaces, as well as shelters for temporary overnight stays or as temporary housing” (quoted in Nunes et al., 2021 , p. 2). This heterogeneity sets the PEH group apart from the other two target audiences for this study. Favela residents and catadores are likely to have low levels of education, but PEH come from a wide range of socio-economic backgrounds and are likely to have had other living and employment situations prior to their experience of homelessness. Nunes et al. (2021) highlight PEH as a complex population with distinct needs which existing public health services rarely meet, and this has remained the case during the pandemic. The charitable organisation that assists PEH involved in this research has delivered thousands of masks and hygiene kits to PEH and provides over 1500 meals per day. They have also worked hard to raise awareness about COVID-19, finding that since PEH are isolated from usual channels of communication, they have limited access to information about the pandemic. In the table below ( Table 1 ) we present the number of participants per site attending the conversation circles and the RPG.

Participants per site.

CC – Number of participants who attended at least 3 of the total of 5 Conversation Circle (CC) sessions.

GS – Number of participants who attended the single Game Session (GS).

Each of these three groups have distinct characteristics, but there is one main commonality: all are particularly at risk from COVID-19. Crowded living conditions in the favelas make social distancing or self-isolation impossible, and facilities for handwashing are often limited or non-existent ( Pereira, 2020 ). For catadores , infections and illness resulting from exposure to contaminated materials have been an issue since before the pandemic (N. F. Ramos et al., 2013 ). For PEH, the exhortation to “stay home” is impossible to follow ( Honorato & Oliveira, 2020 ). All these factors increase the risk of COVID-19 transmission, and measures to raise awareness of safe pandemic behaviour among these populations are vital. This project aimed to contribute to this effort.

The following section briefly discusses the ‘conversation circles’, a series of workshops designed to build the critical thinking skills which participants then need to apply during the serious game.

6. Conversation circles

Before playing the game, participants take part in workshops or ‘conversation circles’ (CCs) designed to develop critical thinking skills and apply them during the game experience. Each of the five CCs begin with a social activity intended to build trust between participants, then progress to activities focused on critical thinking, and end with guided reflection on what has been learned during the session.

The sessions gradually increase in complexity, scaffolding in-depth critical thinking in an accessible and enjoyable way. Learners are given explicit information about critical thinking techniques ( Abrami et al., 2008 ). They are encouraged to apply these techniques to familiar, everyday situations such as deciding which pair of shoes to buy as well as to more abstract topics such as trusting or not trusting a person. After completing the five sessions, participants are well-equipped with conscious critical thinking skills, which they can then apply effectively during the serious game.

Conversation circles and the serious game complement one another in raising awareness on critical thinking. While the CCs included discussion and training for participants, the serious game provided reflection about the content presented in the conversation circles. It also provided the opportunity for participants to work with others as well as to negotiate and plan strategies and courses of action. Games allow for interactive teaching-learning strategies and knowledge construction. Their fun, interactive and cooperative nature encourages group problem solving, one of the project's aims.

7. Facilitating critical thinking in the game

Critical thinking is “a metacognitive process, consisting of a number of sub-skills (e.g., analysis, evaluation and inference) that, when used appropriately, increases the chances of producing a logical conclusion to an argument or solution to a problem” ( Dwyer et al., 2014 , p. 43). One of the earliest attempts to classify the processes involved in critical thinking, Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (1956), identifies six thinking processes, divided into lower-order and higher-order processes. Dwyer et al. note that although more recent work has built on this framework, the six categories of thought defined here remain fundamentally consistent with modern conceptions of thinking (2014, p.43). For Dwyer et al., the six key learning outcomes are memory, comprehension, analysis, evaluation, inference and reflective judgement (ibid, p.43), as can be seen in Fig. 2 . Memory and comprehension facilitate the higher-level thinking skills; analysis, evaluation and inference combine to enable reflective judgement (ibid. p.49). It is this reflective judgement that empowers critical thinkers to reject fake news and make informed decisions on topics such as COVID-19 vaccination or safe pandemic behaviour.

Bloom's taxonomy (adapted from Dwyer et al., 2014 , p.43).

The importance of teaching critical thinking has long been recognised ( Halpern, 2001 ). However, it is notoriously difficult to teach ( Willingham, 2008 ). Approaches to teaching critical thinking, and the success of those approaches, vary widely. Meta-analysis of studies on teaching critical thinking has shown that both the type and the pedagogical basis of the teaching methods used have significant effects on whether and how much participants’ critical thinking improves ( Abrami et al., 2008 , p. 1120). It seems to be particularly important that participants are explicitly told that they are learning critical thinking skills: the least effective interventions were the ones that embedded critical thinking techniques implicitly into course material (ibid., p.1120). Participants in this project were informed during the recruitment process that the conversation circles and game would focus on critical thinking, and so they were aware of the project's goals from the outset.

As demonstrated in the literature review, serious games and game-based learning have been used to teach a wide range of knowledge and skills. Although most games do not explicitly teach critical thinking, many have the requisite complexity to foster it ( Romero et al., 2014 , p. 158) and recent projects are turning towards a specific focus on critical thinking ( Cicchino, 2015 ; Halpern et al., 2012 ; Lee et al., 2016 ; McDonald, 2017 ). In an analysis of 20 studies focused on teaching critical thinking, Mao et al. (2021, p. 19) found that game-based learning (GBL) had a significantly positive impact on players’ critical thinking skills, particularly when the game involved role-playing.

Cicchino (2015) outlines six principles of GBL which a game must fulfil in order to foster critical thinking. Although Cicchino's work mostly comes from elementary school groups, we found these basic principles can be applied to adults, as can be seen in Table 2 .

Adapted from Cicchino, 2015 , pp.3–4.

Within the game setting, these principles led to engagement, collaboration, higher-level (in the Bloom's taxonomy sense) discourse, and a meaningful experience for players. The overall outcomes of a game created based on this framework include deeper and longer-lasting understanding of the content, flexible understanding which can be adapted to new situations, and increased critical thinking skills ( Cicchino, 2015 , p. 4). Since these were the planned outcomes of this project, a game-based learning environment was developed according to these six principles.

In the freeform tabletop roleplaying game, participants take on the roles of traditional Brazilian folk heroes. The story evolves through the actions of the characters, as interpreted by the facilitator, following a basic pattern of play. First, the facilitator sets the scene, providing situations to which players can react. The players then collectively decide how they want to act or respond, and the facilitator describes the effects of these actions on the story. The facilitator has the final say on what happens, ensuring that gameplay never deviates too far from the intended plot. Some of the narrative is emergent, but certain points in the game involve pre-set choices which players must resolve appropriately for the story.

To help structure play for participants unfamiliar with role-play, players are provided with a set of cards describing their character's abilities. Cards were used because they are an effective and compact way of presenting knowledge. The cards include visual elements, which are helpful for players with lower literacy levels, and can be referred to throughout the game. They can also be hidden, which contributes to the communicative aspect of the game: players must share their abilities and knowledge verbally, rather than by showing their character cards to the group. The strengths and weaknesses listed on the cards help players decide on the best course of action for their character.

Players are also provided with a handout which describes the game environment. Like the cards, these use visual representations to ensure that all participants are able to understand the information provided.

The game complies with Cicchino's six principles in the following ways, as can be seen in Table 3 .

Adapted from Cicchino, 2015 .

Participants are thus able to develop transferable critical thinking skills in a safely allegorical environment. The information provided to players is inconsistent between sources, and the players must discuss and interpret it in order to assess its accuracy. This critical approach to new information is an essential skill in a ‘post-truth’ world ( Higgins, 2016 ), and particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

8. Game characters and story

Players take the role of one of five characters based on Brazilian folk heroes. Each character can also be played by two or more participants working together, introducing a further layer of negotiation into play by requiring participants to agree on how their shared character should proceed. This also allows larger groups to take part in the game. Table 4 shows an example of the cards prepared for the game.

Example character.

The character roles were modelled on Brazilian mythological heroes for several reasons. Many of these characters are seen as guardians of nature, which provides logical motivation for them to work together in the story setting. They have diverse skills, knowledge and abilities, meaning that each character can make a unique contribution to the team. Importantly, participants are usually familiar with the characters’ abilities and motives prior to playing the game. Players can use their background knowledge of the characters to decide what they might do within the game, which alleviates some of the difficulty of role-playing for participants new to the format.

The characters’ diverse knowledge bases are central to the game's goal of fostering critical thinking, as players synthesise their characters’ knowledge to solve the problems presented in the story. The characters’ skills and personality are less important to the game mechanics. For example, Saci Pererê's medical knowledge is the most important. If the game were to be translated or localised for other cultures, it would be vital to find characters with the same knowledge bases.

8.1. The story

The characters meet by a river in the rainforest and notice that something is wrong. They work together to cross the river and discover a blight on the trees. The characters investigate the blight by looking at it, smelling, touching or tasting it, or asking forest animals for information. A supernatural white deer, Anhangá, appears, and tells the characters about a kind of medicine that can be used to treat the blight. The characters can acquire this medicine by finding an amulet for Cuca, a mysterious alligator-like creature, or by making it themselves with ingredients they find in the forest. Applying the medicine to the trees cures the blight, but any characters who previously touched the infected trees now discover that they too are infected. They must now discuss whether to take the medicine themselves or not and justify their decision.

9. Results and discussion

The game was developed as a communicative strategy to establish a bridge between researchers and participants, but in a more relaxed and informal environment. Inserting the players in a narrative where they can make decisions based on critical thinking and their own reflections about the pandemic was important to the construction of knowledge in these communities. The nature of the game (playful, interactive and cooperative) helped to focus participants on problem-solving skills and groupwork outside of traditional methodologies, which was part of the project's aim. The game also helped to reinforce many concepts and habits that were discussed during the conversation circles, and it allowed participants to use real-life situations to solve the fictional problems presented by the game's narrative. They were also capable of comparing fictional characters and objects to real life events. Some evidence on these findings will be presented below.

In each community, the participants were separated into groups according to the number of people present during each session. Local researchers narrated the game and facilitated discussions, presenting new cards and scenarios. More dynamic participation from local researchers was necessary to guide the participants during the game as the story evolved. Each of the communities included people with learning difficulties, and facilitators worked to ensure that all participants understood the dynamics of the game.

In many instances, some participants gave suggestions on how to advance the story and their suggestions sometimes came ahead of the facilitator's narrations, as for example, in Buena Vista, even before Anhangá appeared in the story, one participant asked if they had a glove to touch the slime and another commented that there could be a medicine to save the forest from the plague.

In Cooperrama, some participants associated the game with their own personal experiences to solve problems. For example, some participants had knowledge of plants, fungi and they decided to apply the remedy in the game to the soil, since fertilizers are also applied in this way. It was evident that some decisions were made based on participants' environmental awareness, as they work with recyclable materials. Many participants refused to cut down the trees, burn the forest to eliminate the pest or injure animals, even when it was necessary for the game to continue.

In all of the locations, there was suspicion about Cuca's morals. In Brazilian popular culture, Cuca is often presented as a villain and in the game, Cuca is portrayed as a character of dubious morals. In both the cards and the storybook she is described as a character with questionable traits, but she still helps the other characters during their journey.

In the Buena Vista favela , even though they did not fully trust Cuca, the participants believed that trusting Cuca was the best option. One participant compared Cuca to pop culture anti-heroes such as Batman and even joked that if Cuca tried anything against the group, she would be at a disadvantage, five to one, so they could beat her in a fight or tie her up. Another participant also compared Cuca to a bandit who only cares about gold, since at the end of the story, she asks the characters to find the Muiraquitã , an amulet buried in a nearby region. The story does not explain Cuca's intentions, desires or motivations, just that she wants to possess the amulet.

In Cooperama, one participant compared Cuca with Brazilian politicians due to the lack of clarity in their actions. In Vila Lobo, the group unanimously decided to take the medicine because they did not think Cuca was reliable. After some discussion, the second group of PEH chose to go to Cuca for the medicine, because they came to the conclusion that she had knowledge, and also because she is a being that lives in the forest. One participant commented that “she wants good things for the forest too”. In addition, they did not feel confident preparing the remedy, even with the step-by-step procedure.

This evidence shows that participants demonstrated a high degree of creativity, critical thinking and the ability to associate game-based learning with reality. All noted the need to make collective decisions and find shared solutions. Among the observed critical thinking skills, there is an emphasis on the evaluation and analysis phases. In their testimonials gathered at the end of the session, participants talked about the importance of listening to others with respect, of being mindful of different points of view and of making decisions based on dialogue. One participant from the favela Buena Vista stated: “Listen and help friends when they need it… do not think only of yourself… to make decisions, we need to evaluate and always put ourselves in the other's shoes and that for every action there is a reaction”. In the Vila Lobo favela , one participant even made an association between the forest and plague with the current pandemic, stating that we must join forces to fight COVID-19: “If we don't work together, the pandemic will last a long time”. Therefore, the games showed to be efficient in building critical thinking among participants and offering opportunities for socialisation. One participant from Cooperama said: “I learned that you have to discuss to reach an agreement and I learned that people have different opinions. I learned this by having more dialogue with friends”.

It is of course difficult to know whether the observed results will last over time. In a longitudinal game-based study on fake news inoculation, Maertens et al. (2021) found that for a group of participants who were regularly tested on their ability to identify fake news, the increased sensitivity to misinformation generated by the initial intervention lasted for up to three months. However, for participants who were not regularly tested, the effect dissipated within two months. They suggest that the assessments carried out with the first group may have served as ‘booster shots’, reinforcing the initial inoculation (ibid., p.12–13). Inoculation theorists have emphasised the role of boosters in forging long-term resistance to misinformation ( Ivanov et al., 2018 ; Pfau et al., 2006 ).

A game-based intervention, if sufficiently engaging, could provide an organic way of delivering inoculation boosters. For example, in Eisenack's work with the commercially-available board game Keep Cool, some participants found the game so entertaining that they wanted to purchase it (2013, p. 345). Continuing to play the game could refresh the skills these participants gained in the initial intervention and playing the game with other people could spread these skills beyond the project's initial reach. There are some indications that a similar process could occur with this project: game facilitators reported community interest in holding more game sessions. At the time of writing this article, some sites have already completed their second and third rounds of workshops. However, it is unlikely that all participants will be involved in these sessions, and it is possible that those who are not may see their critical thinking skills developed during their involvement in the project degrade over time. Exploring whether this occurs and to what extent would be insightful for a future follow-up study.

10. Limitations of our study, final considerations and call for further research

Snowball/convenience sampling was carried out due to relationships of trust within the communities which worked well for this study. However, this sampling method is not without its limitations. As participants were self-selected, it is possible that those who decided to take part in the study were already interested in critical thinking, an inclination which could make them particularly receptive to learning about it. An entirely random sample might produce different results but, randomization of subjects and experimental design was not the goal of this study.

As previously outlined, this study covered a range of target populations, each with their own characteristics. This meant that for the purpose of this study, one small group of participants could be drawn from each participating site. Using this range of participants demonstrated that the game-based methodology can be effective across different disadvantaged communities. Observational evidence indicates changes in how participants payed attention and listened to others, questioned the sources of information and justified their own claims. Differences in results between the groups, however, may be the result of individual tendencies and cannot be generalised to the wider community. A study focusing exclusively on, for example, PEH or catadores could draw wider conclusions about that community's particular tendencies around critical thinking. This could provide further insights into targeted methods of developing critical thinking with that specific population. There was also some turnover within the groups, as 27% of participants dropped out of the study during the circle conversation sessions. This happened mainly in the Vila Lobó favela , perhaps due to the fact that the facilitator was not a residing member of the community, impacting engagement. This suggests that the involvement of a residing community member as a facilitator is an important aspect of participant engagement.

An important consideration for the wellbeing of participants and the success of the project was to avoid conflict within the game setting. The COVID-19 pandemic and the government's handling thereof are highly-charged emotional issues. Additionally, in Brazil as in many other countries, public opinion is polarised. There were concerns that an open discussion of the pandemic could antagonise participants who support the government at the time or stifle debate if participants felt unable to voice their opinions for fear of others’ reactions. Research has demonstrated that conflicting opinions about the pandemic can even lead to violence ( Jolley & Paterson, 2020 ), and this risk should clearly be avoided at all costs when designing a research project. Consequently, the team decided not to include any statement/situation that might have the slightest potential of creating conflict among participants.

Looking ahead, our team plans to replicate this study in other vulnerable communities of Brazil. Our community partners have articulations with organizations that work with favela residents (such as Central Única das Favelas - CUFA), collectors of recyclable materials (such as the National Movement of Recyclable Materials Collectors - MNCR) and homeless people. Project materials have been developed in English and Portuguese. We also anticipate the possibility to work in other Spanish speaking countries in Latin America.

In sum, this study has contributed to the existing bodies of work on both serious games and critical thinking pedagogy. Previous work on game-based inoculation against fake news has tended to use digital games ( Basol et al., 2021 ; Clever et al., 2020 ; Roozenbeek & van der Linden, 2019 ), and this study has demonstrated that an analogue RPG can provide an accessible, low-resource alternative. It has also shown that using an allegorical game setting rather than a realistic one (such as Hertzog et al., 2014 ) can remain relevant to real-world events while mitigating some of the tension involved in discussion of highly charged issues, as was the case with discussions about self-care during the pandemic in an environment of political polarization. Finally, it has illustrated that a game-based approach to critical thinking can be effective and engaging not just for schoolchildren ( Cicchino, 2015 , p. e.g.; McDonald, 2017 ) but also, as evident from the information on Table 1 , for adult learners with varying levels of literacy and previous critical thinking experience.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Claudia Viviana Angelelli: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Geisa Muller de Campos Ribeiro: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Maico Roris Severino: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Eilidh Johnstone: Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Gana Borzenkova: Data curation, Investigation, Resources, Writing – original draft. Dayane Costa Oliveira da Silva: Data curation, Investigation, Resources, Visualization.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding this publication.

Acknowledgments

Research reported in this article was supported by United Kingdom Research and Innovation/Global Challenge Research Fund grant AH/V007025/1. Our deepest gratitude goes to the participants from all sites and the local community leaders who worked with us for over twenty-one months.

• Abrami P.C., Bernard R.M., Borokhovski E., Wade A., Surkes M.A., Tamim R., Zhang D. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2008; 78 (4):1102–1134. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahamer G. Game, not fight: Change climate change! Simulation & Gaming. 2013; 44 (2–3):272–301. doi: 10.1177/1046878112470541. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Basol M., Roozenbeek J., Berriche M., Uenal F., McClanahan W.P., van der Linden S. Towards psychological herd immunity: Cross-cultural evidence for two prebunking interventions against COVID-19 misinformation. Big Data & Society. 2021; 8 (1):1–18. doi: 10.1177/20539517211013868. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bloom B.S. David McKay; 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook: The cognitive domain. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Taxonomy%20of%20educational%20objectives%3A%20the%20classification%20of%20educational%20goals%3B%20Handbook%20I%3A%20Cognitive%20domain&author=BS.%20Bloom&publication_year=1956 [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyle E.A., Hainey T., Connolly T.M., Gray G., Earp J., Ott M., Lim T., Ninaus M., Ribeiro C., Pereira J. An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games. Computers & Education. 2016; 94 :178–192. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu H.C., Chang S.C. Developing an educational computer game for migratory bird identification based on a two-tier test approach. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2014; 62 (2):147–161. doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9323-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cicchino M. Using game-based learning to foster critical thinking in student discourse. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. 2015; 9 (2) doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1481. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Clever L., Assenmacher D., Müller K., Seiler M.V., Riehle D.M., Preuss M., Grimme C. In: Disinformation in open online media. van Duijn M., Preuss M., Spaiser V., Takes F., Verberne S., editors. Springer International Publishing; 2020. FakeYou! - A gamified approach for building and evaluating resilience against fake news; pp. 218–232. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Connolly T.M., Boyle E.A., MacArthur E., Hainey T., Boyle J.M. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education. 2012; 59 (2):661–686. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cummings . In: Global gentrifications: Uneven development and displacement. Lees L., Shin H.B., López-Morales E., editors. Policy Press; 2015. Confronting Favela Chic: The gentrification of informal settlements in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; pp. 82–100. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dall'Alba R., Rocha C.F., de Silveira R.P., da Dresch L.S.C., Vieira L.A., Germanò M.A. COVID-19 in Brazil: Far beyond biopolitics. The Lancet. 2021; 397 (10274):579–580. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00202-6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Suarez J.M., Suarez P., Bachofen C., editors. Games for a new climate: Experiencing the complexity of future risks. Boston University, the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future; 2012. https://scienceimpact.mit.edu/games-new-climate-experiencing-complexity-future-risks [ Google Scholar ]
• Dewey J. How we think. Prometheus Books; Buffalo, NY: 1933. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwyer C.P., Hogan M.J., Stewart I. An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2014; 12 :43–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2013.12.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Edwards P., Sharma-Wallace L., Wreford A., Holt L., Cradock-Henry N.A., Flood S., Velarde S.J. Tools for adaptive governance for complex social-ecological systems: A review of role-playing-games as serious games at the community-policy interface. Environmental Research Letters. 2019; 14 (11) doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab4036. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eisenack K. A climate change board game for interdisciplinary communication and education. Simulation & Gaming. 2013; 44 (2–3):328–348. doi: 10.1177/1046878112452639. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans J. Translating board games: Multimodality and play. The Journal of Specialised Translation. 2013; 20 :15–32. https://www.jostrans.org/issue20/art_evans.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferrand, N., Farolfi, S., & Abrami, G. (2009). WAT-A-GAME: Sharing water and policies in your own basin. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.462.8458&rep=rep1&type=pdf .
• Fix M., Arantes P.F. On urban studies in Brazil: The favela, uneven urbanisation and beyond. Urban Studies. 2021; 59 (5):893–916. doi: 10.1177/0042098021993360. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flood S., Cradock-Henry N.A., Blackett P., Edwards P. Adaptive and interactive climate futures: Systematic review of `serious games’ for engagement and decision-making. Environmental Research Letters. 2018; 13 (6) doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aac1c6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Freire P. New rev. Penguin Books; 1992. Pedagogy of the oppressed. https://envs.ucsc.edu/internships/internship-readings/freire-pedagogy-of-the-oppressed.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Freire P. Chapter 2 from ‘Pedagogy of the oppressed’ (M. B. Ramos, Trans.) Race/Ethnicity: Multidisciplinary Global Contexts. 2009; 2 (2):163–174. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25595010 [ Google Scholar ]
• Gutberlet J., Baeder A.M., Pontuschka N.N., Felipone S.M.N., Dos Santos T.L.F. Participatory research revealing the work and occupational health hazards of cooperative recyclers in Brazil. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2013; 10 :4607–4627. doi: 10.3390/ijerph10104607. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern D.F. Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. The Journal of General Education. 2001; 50 (4):270–286. doi: 10.1353/jge.2001.0024. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern D.F., Millis K., Graesser A.C., Butler H., Forsyth C., Cai Z. Operation ARA: A computerized learning game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2012; 7 (2):93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.03.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harz C.R., Stern P.A. Pepperdine University; 2008. Serious games for first responders: Improving design and usage with social learning theory (Volume A) http://www.proquest.com/docview/89148482/abstract/DD5680EC23334677PQ/1 [Ed.D.] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hernández M.L. Malmö University; 2020. Healthcare gamification serious game about COVID-19; stay at home. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1481046/FULLTEXT01.pdf [M.A.] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hertzog T., Poussin J.C., Tangara B., Kouriba I., Jamin J.Y. A role playing game to address future water management issues in a large irrigated system: Experience from Mali. Agricultural Water Management. 2014; 137 :1–14. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.003. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins K. Post-truth: A guide for the perplexed. Nature. 2016; 540 (7631) doi: 10.1038/540009. 9–9. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Honorato B.E.F., Oliveira A.C.S. Homeless population and COVID-19. Revista de Administração Pública. 2020; 54 (4):1064–1078. doi: 10.1590/0034-761220200268x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hwang G.J., Yang L.H., Wang S.Y. A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students’ learning performance in natural science courses. Computers & Education. 2013; 69 :121–130. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ivanov B., Parker K.A., Dillingham L.L. Testing the limits of inoculation-generated resistance. Western Journal of Communication. 2018; 82 (5):648–665. doi: 10.1080/10570314.2018.1454600. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jolley D., Paterson J.L. Pylons ablaze: Examining the role of 5 G COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and support for violence. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020; 59 (3):628–640. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12394. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katsaounidou A., Vrysis L., Kotsakis R., Dimoulas C., Veglis A. MAthE the game: A serious game for education and training in news verification. Education Sciences. 2019; 9 (2):155. doi: 10.3390/educsci9020155. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee H., Parsons D., Kwon G., Kim J., Petrova K., Jeong E., Ryu H. Cooperation begins: Encouraging critical thinking skills through cooperative reciprocity using a mobile learning game. Computers & Education. 2016; 97 :97–115. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucio-Villegas E. In: The Palgrave international handbook on adult and lifelong education and learning. Milana M., Webb S., Holford J., Waller R., Jarvis P., editors. Palgrave Macmillan; UK: 2018. Revisiting Paulo Freire: Adult education for emancipation; pp. 151–168. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Machete P., Turpin M. In: Responsible design, implementation and use of information and communication technology. Hattingh M., Matthee M., Smuts H., Pappas I., Dwivedi Y.K., Mäntymäki M., editors. Springer International Publishing; 2020. The use of critical thinking to identify fake news: A systematic literature review; pp. 235–246. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maertens R., Roozenbeek J., Basol M., van der Linden S. Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2021; 27 (1):1–16. doi: 10.1037/xap0000315. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mao W., Cui Y., Chiu M.M., Lei H. Effects of game-based learning on students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2021 doi: 10.1177/07356331211007098. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald S.D. Enhanced critical thinking skills through problem-solving games in secondary schools. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Skills and Lifelong Learning. 2017; 13 :79–96. https://www.ijello.org/Volume13/IJELLv13p079-096McDonald3482.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• McGonigal J. Vintage; 2011. Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. https://hci.stanford.edu/courses/cs047n/readings/Reality_is_Broken.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Michael D., Chen S. Thomson Course Technology; 2006. Serious games: Games that educate, train and inform. https://books.google.com.br/books/about/Serious_Games.html?id=49kTAQAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y [ Google Scholar ]
• Mitgutsch K. In: Serious games and edutainment applications. Ma M., Oikonomou A., Jain L.C., editors. Springer; 2011. Serious learning in serious games; pp. 45–58. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morardet, S., & Milhau, F. (2012). Wet-WAG, a role-playing game to support stakeholder dialogue on wetlands management. WETwin Project Report. https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-02597954/document .
• Nunes N.R., de A., Rodriguez A., Cinacchi G.B. Health and social care inequalities: The impact of COVID-19 on people experiencing homelessness in Brazil. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18 (11):5545. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115545. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pereira R.J. The risk of COVID-19 transmission in favelas and slums in Brazil. Public Health. 2020; 183 :42–43. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2020.04.042. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pfau M., Compton J., Parker K.A., An C., Wittenberg E.M., Ferguson M., Horton H., Malyshev Y. The conundrum of the timing of counterarguing effects in resistance: Strategies to boost the persistence of counterarguing output. Communication Quarterly. 2006; 54 (2):143–156. doi: 10.1080/01463370600650845. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Prensky M. McGraw-Hill; 2001. Digital game-based learning. https://www.amazon.com.br/Digital-Game-Based-Learning-Sivasailam-Thiagarajan/dp/1557788634 [ Google Scholar ]
• Qian M., Clark K.R. Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 63 :50–58. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ramos N.F., Castilhos A.B., Jr., Forcellini F.A., Graciolli O.D. Profile survey of waste pickers in Brazil: Requirements of the development of a collection vehicle and optimized routing. Journal of Urban and Environmental Engineering. 2013; 7 (2):231–246. doi: 10.4090/juee.2013.v7n2.231246. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ricard J., Medeiros J. Using misinformation as a political weapon: COVID-19 and Bolsonaro in Brazil. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. 2020; 1 (2) doi: 10.37016/mr-2020-013. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Romero M., Usart M., Ott M. Can serious games contribute to developing and sustaining 21st-century skills? Games and Culture: A Journal of Interactive Media. 2014; 10 (2):48–177. doi: 10.1177/1555412014548919. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roozenbeek J., Schneider C.R., Dryhurst S., Kerr J., Freeman A.L.J., Recchia G., van der Bles A.M., van der Linden S. Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society Open Science. 2020; 7 (10) doi: 10.1098/rsos.201199. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roozenbeek J., van der Linden S. The fake news game: Actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation. Journal of Risk Research. 2018; 22 (5):570–580. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roozenbeek J., van der Linden S. Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications. 2019; 5 (1):1–10. doi: 10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rumore D., Schenk T., Susskind L. Role-play simulations for climate change adaptation education and engagement. Nature Climate Change. 2016; 6 (8):745–750. doi: 10.1038/nclimate3084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salvini G., van Paassen A., Ligtenberg A., Carrero G.C., Bregt A.K. A role-playing game as a tool to facilitate social learning and collective action towards climate smart agriculture: Lessons learned from Apuí, Brazil. Environmental Science & Policy. 2016; 63 :113–121. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.05.016. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sautier M., Piquet M., Duru M., Martin-Clouaire R. Exploring adaptations to climate change with stakeholders: A participatory method to design grassland-based farming systems. Journal of Environmental Management. 2017; 193 :541–550. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.02.050. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schenk T. In: Infranomics: Sustainability, engineering design and governance. Gheorghe A.V., Masera M., Katina P.F., editors. Springer International Publishing; 2014. Boats and bridges in the sandbox: Using role play simulation exercises to help infrastructure planners prepare for the risks and uncertainties associated with climate change; pp. 239–255. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Speelman E., García-Barrios L., Groot J., Tittonell P.A. Gaming for smallholder participation in the design of more sustainable agricultural landscapes. Agricultural Systems. 2013; 126 doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2013.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suppan M., Abbas M., Catho G., Stuby L., Regard S., Achab S., Harbarth S., Suppan L. Impact of a serious game (Escape COVID-19) on the intention to change COVID-19 control practices among employees of long-term care facilities: Web-based randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2021; 23 (3) doi: 10.2196/27443. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suppan M., Catho G., Nunes T.R., Sauvan V., Perez M., Graf C., Pittet D., Harbarth S., Abbas M., Suppan L. A serious game designed to promote safe behaviors among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: Development of “Escape COVID-19” JMIR Serious Games. 2020; 8 (4):e24986. doi: 10.2196/24986. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Talan T., Doğan Y., Batdı V. Efficiency of digital and non-digital educational games: A comparative meta-analysis and a meta-thematic analysis. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2020; 52 (4):474–514. doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1743798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tavares H. Gambling in Brazil: A call for an open debate. Addiction (Abingdon, England) 2014; 109 (12):1972–1976. doi: 10.1111/add.12560. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Villamor G., Badmos B. Grazing game: A learning tool for adaptive management in response to climate variability in semiarid areas of Ghana. Ecology and Society. 2016; 21 (1) doi: 10.5751/ES-08139-210139. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willingham D.T. Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review. 2008; 109 (4):21–32. doi: 10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zagal J.P., Deterding S. In: Role-Playing game studies: Transmedia foundations. 1st ed. Zagal J.P., Deterding S., editors. Routledge; 2018. Definitions of role-playing games; pp. 19–52. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zarocostas J. How to fight an infodemic. The Lancet. 2020; 395 (10225):676. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30461-X. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Gettysburg College Gettysburg College

How enduring skills prepare Gettysburg students for what employers want, what our world needs

Gettysburg College delivers our signature undergraduate experience to every student through the Gettysburg Approach . It’s how we put A Consequential Education into action. We build within every student a breadth and depth of knowledge and set of enduring skills to prepare them to thrive in a competitive, complex world.

Within the Gettysburg Approach, students deepen their knowledge and practice and reinforce the enduring skills of adaptability, communication, creativity, intercultural fluency, leadership, problem solving, and teamwork through the Guided Pathways and Personal Advising Teams. Students hone these enduring skills through the experiences they select in an intentional way as they connect the activities they pursue with the skills they hope to strengthen.

Explore why these enduring skills are what employers want and what our world needs from Gettysburg graduates.

“Oral communication, for example, is viewed by most employers (64%) as a very important skill for new hires to possess, yet roughly half as many employers (34%) agree that recent college graduates are very well prepared in this area.” –  American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), “The Career-Ready Graduate: What Employers Say about the Difference College Makes,” 2023

Enduring skills: What employers want from college graduates

In May 2023, the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) conducted a national survey of employer views on higher education and the effectiveness of colleges and universities in preparing students for careers. More than 1,000 executives and hiring managers participated in this research, the eighth survey of its type that the AAC&U has commissioned since 2006.

Results from the 2023 survey indicated a strong correlation between the outcomes from a liberal arts education and the knowledge and skills employers identify as essential for success in entry-level jobs and advancement within their companies.

While eight in 10 employers surveyed agree that recent college graduates are well prepared for entry-level and advanced positions, they are divided about graduates’ proficiency in skill areas essential for career success. According to the report, “Oral communication, for example, is viewed by most employers (64%) as a very important skill for new hires to possess, yet roughly half as many employers (34%) agree that recent college graduates are very well prepared in this area.” 

When asked to identify the top three skills they would like colleges and universities to focus on to improve graduates’ career preparedness, employers ranked critical thinking as the top skill, followed by oral communication, adaptability and flexibility, and problem solving.

Through the Gettysburg Approach, Gettysburg College is responding to this preparedness gap—the divide between the importance employers place on specific skills in the workplace and their assessment of a college graduate’s readiness to effectively execute these skills.

Enduring skills: What our students gain through the Gettysburg Approach

Within the Gettysburg Approach, Gettysburg College emphasizes developing and deepening the enduring skills most valued by employers and graduate schools. These transcendent skills can be the hardest to teach. Yet, at Gettysburg, they are practiced, absorbed, reflected upon, and articulated purposefully by our students—giving them an advantage in their next step after graduation and every step after.

Our emphasis on developing these enduring skills has proven successful for generations of Gettysburgians . A survey of 200 employers reported that Gettysburg graduates possess and outperform their peers in what employers define as must-have career skills:

Enduring skills: What our world needs from college graduates

Possessing the skills to communicate well, think critically, and work with others collaboratively are not only essential for career success, but also skills our world needs from college graduates. For international and global studies major Michael DeRenzo ’26, addressing global poverty requires communication and teamwork skills to confront this challenge. Preparing for transformational change and impacting the future of labor calls for committed leadership from individuals like political science and East Asian studies double major Avery O’Neill ’24. Like environmental studies major Molly Hoffman ’24, advocating for earth-conscious environmental practices involves critical thinking and communication skills.

Enduring skills at work: Reflections from Gettysburg students

Through a guaranteed Career-Ready Experience , Gettysburg students participating in the Guided Pathways can further develop these skills in real-world professional settings.

“A Career-Ready Experience will help students connect what they learn in the classroom to graduate schools and the professional workplace by providing diverse, dynamic experiences to prepare them for a lifetime of career advancement and personal success,” said Associate Dean of Co-Curricular Education Jim Duffy. Internships are just one of several examples of a Career-Ready Experience students can discover at Gettysburg.

Caroline Gill ’24: Strengthening creativity and teamwork in lifestyle

Caroline Gill ’24, a business, organizations, and management major with a minor in political science , honed her experiential learning through internships at The GIANT Company and Burlington. At The GIANT Company, where she served as a marketing intern, Gill developed her communication skills through participating in meetings and events in collaboration with the Philadelphia 76ers and Philadelphia Phillies. “We worked not only as an internal team, but also as a team with the 76ers and Phillies to understand how to better each company and its objectives,” she said.

As a women’s knit tops buying intern for Burlington, Gill strengthened her creativity skills as she worked in product development and competitor analysis. “Understanding trends and projections for the current and next seasons were imperative to bring customers to [Burlington] stores,” she explained. “Going into New York City market days twice a week also allowed me to strengthen my teamwork skills and communication, as I had to work with various vendors. Being able to adapt to different situations such as shipments being late or the price of the garment being too high showed me how important it is to problem solve for the company’s needs.”

Andrew Nguyen ’24: Developing critical thinking and problem solving for business and finance

“During the summer of 2023, I interned at Global Industrial Company as a pricing analyst intern,” said mathematical economics major Andrew Nguyen ’24. “I had the opportunity to connect with wonderful colleagues and learned a lot about business narrative, researching skills, and applications of economic analysis on solving real business challenges.”

“I believe that my involvement in enriching academic courses and co-curricular leadership positions at Gettysburg prepared me for success in my internship where I can share the skills I have gained with the larger community and for a meaningful purpose.” –  Natalie Vancura ’25

Natalie Vancura ’25: Honing critical thinking and leadership for human resources support

Natalie Vancura ’25, a health sciences and public policy double major, experienced the value of building communication and critical thinking skills through her internship with Six Seconds. This international nonprofit provides businesses and organizations with emotional intelligence assessments and human resources tools.

“I have the opportunity to communicate with their global team to achieve the company’s mission of improving the emotional intelligence of people and organizations. I apply critical thinking skills to assess grant writing and marketing strategies to increase support for this goal,” she said. “I believe that my involvement in enriching academic courses and co-curricular leadership positions at Gettysburg prepared me for success in my internship where I can share the skills I have gained with the larger community and for a meaningful purpose.”

Dylan Weber ’24: Practicing problem solving and teamwork for coding and software development

Dylan Weber ’24, a computer science and health sciences double major, completed a summer 2023 internship as a software engineer at Graduate Management Admissions Council (GMAC) in Reston, Virginia. Weber said he relied on many enduring skills, including problem solving, teamwork, and collaboration, in his work coding and executing software development strategies for the firm. “I used problem solving and quick learning skills to investigate and solve bugs in the platform’s code. I wrote and saw the deployment of my code changes to the product,” he said.

“The Center for Career Engagement helped facilitate the interview for this position and prepared me to make a strong impression,” he continued. “Through connections I made at this internship, I secured a job at Billhighway after graduation.”

Gettysburg responds to the ‘unpredictability and inevitability of change’

In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) continues to develop and touch virtually every aspect of our lives, college graduates need enduring skills to thrive amid a rapidly changing world where tools like ChatGPT and Dall-E are ever-present. Supported by Gettysburg’s liberal arts and sciences education with the Gettysburg Approach as its foundation, our graduates are prepared to embrace continually evolving forms of technology through their ability to think critically, embrace diverse perspectives and viewpoints, and synthesize ideas.

In the Winter 2024 issue of GETTYSBURG College Magazine , we shared how Gettysburg students and alums are leaning into the challenges that confront our society with the rapid development of AI by pivoting, evolving, and keeping an open mind—supported by the knowledge and enduring skills they gained at Gettysburg. 

“As we think about AI, its implications, and the skills that our students will need to have in 20 or 50 years, it really does come down to something that we’ve focused on with our liberal arts and sciences education here at Gettysburg,” said Psychology Prof. Richard Russell , “having a level of flexibility, being able to integrate different ideas, and having a holistic approach.”

Learn how the Gettysburg Approach enables students to develop the knowledge and enduring skills necessary to thrive in an ever-changing world.

By Michael Vyskocil Posted: 04/03/24

More stories

Stronger than setbacks: rush ehrhart ’24 channels resiliency through reflection at gettysburg.

Fri, 22 Mar 2024

Molly Hoffman ’24 champions public service, environmental sustainability at Gettysburg

Mon, 4 Mar 2024

Gettysburg Approach guarantees Career-Ready Experience for every student

Fri, 23 Feb 2024

‘Act with intention in your impact’: Philanthropy empowers a Gettysburg education for Emily Kreider ’25

Mon, 19 Feb 2024