Critical Thinking Skills in Elementary School Curricula in some Arab Countries—A Comparative Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to analyze and compare school subjects to determine the extent to which critical thinking skills are being engaged in school subjects’ questions and activities in public education. Five Arab countries are included in this paper; Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Arab Republic of Egypt, and The Tunisian Republic, in elementary school levels (first, second, and third grades.)The study found that all Arab countries focus on operating inductive reasoning skills in their subjects, followed by reasoning and observation, sequentially, while dismissing credibility and assumptions skills. Saudi Arabia focused on developing critical thinking skills in science textbooks for the past three academic years, while Kuwait had the same focus on their Arabic language classes. Both the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and Egypt have paid a measurable attention to engaging critical thinking skills in Mathematics and the Arabic language, as well as Tunisia in their science textbooks. The least effective subjects in operating critical thinking skills were the Arabic language in Saudi Arabia, science in Kuwait, Domestic Economics in Egypt, and Islamic education in Jordan and Tunisia.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
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.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".