MétaCan
Menu
← all works

Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically

2014· article· en· 865 citations· W2130102695 on OpenAlex· 10.3102/0034654314551063

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

Candidate categories
Metaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Theoretical or conceptualConsensus signal: none
Genre
Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score
0.805
Threshold uncertainty score
1.000
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.165
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread
0.420 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

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

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Review of Educational Research
Topic
Education and Critical Thinking Development
Field
Social Sciences
Canadian institutions
Concordia University
Funders
not available
Keywords
Critical thinkingPsychologyInterpretation (philosophy)DisciplineSituatedInferenceMathematics educationStudent achievementOutcome (game theory)Academic achievementPedagogyEpistemologyComputer scienceSociologyMathematicsSocial science
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes