Challenging the Status Quo: Critical Thinking Skills Integration in the EFL Curriculum of Young Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to explore the level of critical thinking skills integrated into the tasks of the Omani English language curriculum of young learners. The study implemented a content analysis checklist that was based on the six critical thinking skills which were agreed upon by a group of international critical thinking experts and declared in the Delphi Report that was published by the American Philosophical Association (APA). The two textbooks of grade four, second semester (4B) beside the Teacher’s Book, were utilized as the sample of this analysis. Results of the study showed a low level of critical thinking skills integrated into the tasks of these textbooks as these tasks made up only (35.55%) of all the tasks in the textbooks. In addition, the self-examination subskill was highly represented compared with the other critical thinking subskills (20. 81%). Moreover, results showed that four of the critical thinking subskills (detecting arguments, analyzing arguments, presenting arguments, and self-correction) were absent from the tasks of both textbooks. Based on these findings several implications were addressed.
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 | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".