p-sig. (exact)
TOT_PRE, PENCRISAL pre-test; RD_PRE, Deductive reasoning pre-test; RI_PRE, Inductive reasoning pre-test; RP_PRE, Practical reasoning pre-test; TD_PRE, Decision making pre-test; SP_PRE, Problem solving pre-test; TOT_POST, PENCRISAL post-test; RD_ POST, Deductive reasoning post-test; RI_ POST, Inductive reasoning post-test; RP_ POST, Practical reasoning post-test; TD_ POST, Decision making post-test; SP_ POST, Problem solving post-test; Min, minimum, Max, maximum, Asym, asymmetry; and Kurt, kurtosis.
Description of metacognition measurement (MAI).
Variables | Min. | Max. | Media | Asym. | Kurt. | K-S p-sig (exact) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TOT_MAI_PRE | 89 | 145 | 233 | 192.13 | 16.636 | −0.071 | 0.275 | 0.557 |
Decla_PRE | 89 | 22 | 37 | 30.58 | 3.391 | −0.594 | −0.152 | 0.055 |
Proce_PRE | 89 | 9 | 19 | 14.52 | 2.018 | −0.560 | 0.372 | 0.004 |
Condi_PRE | 89 | 8 | 23 | 18.04 | 3.003 | −0.775 | 0.853 | 0.013 |
CONO_PRE | 89 | 44 | 77 | 63.15 | 6.343 | −0.384 | 0.044 | 0.445 |
Plani_PRE | 89 | 10 | 31 | 24.35 | 4.073 | −0.827 | 0.988 | 0.008 |
Orga_PRE | 89 | 26 | 48 | 38.20 | 4.085 | −0.307 | 0.331 | 0.022 |
Moni_PRE | 89 | 15 | 35 | 25.24 | 3.760 | −0.436 | 0.190 | 0.005 |
Depu_PRE | 89 | 14 | 25 | 20.71 | 2.144 | −0.509 | 0.310 | 0.004 |
Eva_PRE | 89 | 12 | 28 | 20.49 | 3.310 | −0.178 | −0.044 | 0.176 |
REGU_PRE | 89 | 97 | 160 | 128.99 | 12.489 | −0.070 | 0.043 | 0.780 |
OT_MAI_POST | 89 | 138 | 250 | 197.65 | 17.276 | −0.179 | 0.969 | 0.495 |
Decla_POST | 89 | 23 | 39 | 31.21 | 3.492 | −0.407 | 0.305 | 0.020 |
Proce_POST | 89 | 8 | 20 | 15.24 | 2.116 | −0.723 | 0.882 | 0.001 |
Condi_POST | 89 | 0 | 24 | 18.85 | 2.874 | −0.743 | 0.490 | 0.029 |
CONO_ POST | 89 | 44 | 82 | 65.30 | 6.639 | −0.610 | 1.014 | 0.153 |
Plani_ POST | 89 | 12 | 33 | 25.51 | 3.659 | −0.539 | 0.994 | 0.107 |
Orga_ POST | 89 | 27 | 48 | 39.40 | 4.150 | −0.411 | 0.053 | 0.325 |
Moni_ POST | 89 | 17 | 35 | 26.44 | 3.296 | −0.277 | 0.421 | 0.143 |
Depu_ POST | 89 | 15 | 24 | 20.40 | 2.245 | −0.214 | −0.531 | 0.023 |
Eva_ POST | 89 | 12 | 29 | 20.60 | 3.680 | −0.083 | −0.098 | 0.121 |
REGU_PRE | 89 | 94 | 168 | 132.35 | 12.973 | −0.227 | 0.165 | 0.397 |
TOT_MAI_PRE, MAI pre-test; Decla_PRE, Declarative pre-test; Proce_PRE, Procedural pre-test; Condi_PRE, Conditional pre-test; CONO_PRE, Knowledge pre-test; Plani_PRE, Planning pre-test; Orga_PRE, Organization pre-test; Moni_PRE, Monitoring pre-test; Depu_PRE, Troubleshooting pre-test; Eva_PRE, Evaluation pre-test; REGU_PRE, Regulation pre-test; TOT_MAI_POST, MAI post-test; Decla_ POST, Declarative post-test; Proce_ POST, Procedural post-test; Condi_ POST, Conditional post-test; CONO_ POST, Knowledge post-test; Plani_ POST, Planning post-test; Orga_POST, Organization post-test; Moni_ POST, Monitoring post-test; Depu_ POST, Troubleshooting post-test; Eva_ POST, Evaluation post-test; and REGU_ POST, Regulation post-test;
As we see in the description of all study variables, the evidence is that the majority of them adequately fit the normal model, although some present significant deviations which can be explained by sample size.
Next, to verify whether there were significant differences in the metacognition variable based on measurements before and after the intervention, we contrasted medians for samples related with Student’s t -test (see Table 3 ).
Comparison of the METAKNOWLEDGE variable as a function of PRE-POST measurements.
Variables | Mean Difference (CI 95%) | value | gl. | p-sig. (bilateral) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TOT_MAI | Pre. | 89 | 192.13 | 16.636 | −8.152_−2.882 | −4.161 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 197.65 | 17.276 | |||||
Decla | Pre. | 89 | 30.58 | 3.391 | −1.235_−0.023 | −2.063 | 88 | 0.042 |
Post. | 89 | 31.21 | 3.492 | |||||
Proce | Pre. | 89 | 14.52 | 2.018 | −1.210_−0.228 | −2.911 | 88 | 0.005 |
Post. | 89 | 15.24 | 2.116 | |||||
Condi. | Pre. | 89 | 18.04 | 3.003 | −1.416_−0.202 | −2.65 | 88 | 0.010 |
Post. | 89 | 18.85 | 2.874 | |||||
CONO | Pre. | 89 | 63.15 | 6.343 | −3.289_−1.025 | −3.787 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 65.3 | 6.639 | |||||
Plan | Pre. | 89 | 24.35 | 4.073 | −1.742_−0.573 | −3.934 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 25.51 | 3.659 | |||||
Orga | Pre. | 89 | 38.2 | 4.085 | −2.054_−0.350 | −2.803 | 88 | 0.006 |
Post. | 89 | 39.4 | 4.15 | |||||
Moni | Pre. | 89 | 25.24 | 3.76 | −1.924_−0.480 | −3.308 | 88 | 0.001 |
Post. | 89 | 26.44 | 3.296 | |||||
TS | Pre. | 89 | 20.71 | 2.144 | −0.159_−0.766 | 1.303 | 88 | 0.196 |
Post. | 89 | 20.4 | 2.245 | |||||
Eval | Pre. | 89 | 20.49 | 3.31 | −0.815_−0.613 | −0.282 | 88 | 0.779 |
Post. | 89 | 20.6 | 3.68 | |||||
REGU | Pre. | 89 | 128.99 | 12.489 | −5.364_−1.356 | −3.331 | 88 | 0.001 |
Post. | 89 | 132.35 | 12.973 |
The results show that there are significant differences in the metaknowledge scale total and in most of its dimensions, where all the post medians for both the scale overall and for the three dimensions of the knowledge factor (declarative, procedural, and conditional) are higher than the pre-medians. However, in the cognition regulation dimension, there are only significant differences in the total and in the planning, organization, and monitoring dimensions. The medians are also greater in the post-test than the pre-test. However, the troubleshooting and evaluation dimensions do not differ significantly after intervention.
Finally, for critical thinking skills, the results show significant differences in the scale total and in the five factors regarding the measurement time, where performance medians rise after intervention (see Table 4 ).
Comparison of the CRITICAL THINKING variable as a function of PRE-POST measurements.
Variables | N | M | SD | Student’s -test | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean difference (CI 95%) | value | gl. | p-sig. (bilateral) | |||||
TOT | Pre. | 89 | 25.146 | 5.436 | −8.720_−6.246 | −12.023 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 32.629 | 5.763 | |||||
RD | Pre. | 89 | 2.978 | 3.391 | −2.298_−1.364 | −7.794 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 4.809 | 3.492 | |||||
RI | Pre. | 89 | 4.213 | 1.627 | −1.608_−0.706 | −5.097 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 5.371 | 1.547 | |||||
RP | Pre. | 89 | 18.04 | 2.248 | −1.416_−0.202 | −10.027 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 18.85 | 2.295 | |||||
TD | Pre. | 89 | 63.15 | 1.796 | −3.083_−2.063 | −6.54 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 65.3 | 1.748 | |||||
SP | Pre. | 89 | 24.35 | 2.058 | −1.135_−0.213 | −2.906 | 88 | 0.005 |
Post. | 89 | 25.51 | 1.812 |
These results show how metacognition improves due to CT intervention, as well as how critical thinking also improves with metacognitive intervention and CT skills intervention. Thus, it improves how people think about thinking as well as about the results achieved, since metacognition supports decision-making and final evaluation about proper strategies to solve problems.
The general aim of our study was to know whether a critical thinking intervention program can also influence metacognitive processes. We know that our teaching methodology improves cross-sectional skills in argumentation, explanation, decision-making, and problem-solving, but we do not know if this intervention also directly or indirectly influences metacognition. In our study, we sought to shed light on this little-known point. If we bear in mind the centrality of how we think about thinking for our cognitive machinery to function properly and reach the best results possible in the problems we face, it is hard to understand the lack of attention given to this theme in other research. Our study aimed to remedy this deficiency somewhat.
As said in the introduction, metacognition has to do with consciousness, planning, and regulation of our activities. These mechanisms, as understood by many authors, have a blended cognitive and non-cognitive nature, which is a conceptual imprecision; what is known, though, is the enormous influence they exert on fundamental thinking processes. However, there is a large knowledge gap about the factors which make metacognition itself improve. This second research lacuna is what we have partly aimed to shrink here as well with this study. Our guide has been the idea of knowing how to improve metacognition from a teaching initiative and from the improvement of fundamental critical thinking skills.
Our study has shed light in both directions, albeit in a modest way, since its design does not allow us to unequivocally discern some of the results obtained. However, we believe that the data provide relevant information to know more about existing relations between skills and metacognition, something which has seen little contrast. These results allow us to better describe these relations, guiding the design of future studies which can better discern their roles. Our data have shown that this relation is bidirectional, so that metacognition improves thinking skills and vice versa. It remains to establish a sequence of independent factors to avoid this confusion, something which the present study has aided with to be able to design future research in this area.
As the results show, total differences in almost all metaknowledge dimensions are higher after intervention; specifically, we see how in the knowledge factor the declarative, procedural, and conditional dimensions improve in post-measurements. This improvement moves in the direction we predicted. However, the cognitive regulation dimension only shows differences in the total, and in the planning, organization, and regulation dimensions. We can see how the declarative knowledge dimensions are more sensitive than the procedural ones to change, and within the latter, the dimensions over which we have more control are also more sensitive. With troubleshooting and evaluation, no changes are seen after intervention. We may interpret this lack of effects as being due to how everything referring to evaluating results is highly determined by calibration capacity, which is influenced by personality factors not considered in our study. Regarding critical thinking, we found differences in all its dimensions, with higher scores following intervention. We can tentatively state that this improved performance can be influenced not only by interventions, but also by the metacognitive improvement observed, although our study was incapable of separating these two factors, and merely established their relation.
As we know, when people think about thinking they can always increase their critical thinking performance. Being conscious of the mechanisms used in problem-solving and decision-making always contributes to improving their execution. However, we need to go into other topics to identify the specific determinants of these effects. Does performance improve because skills are metacognitively benefited? If so, how? Is it only the levels of consciousness which aid in regulating and planning execution, or do other factors also have to participate? What level of thinking skills can be beneficial for metacognition? At what skill level does this metacognitive change happen? And finally, we know that teaching is always metacognitive to the extent that it helps us know how to proceed with sufficient clarity, but does performance level modify consciousness or regulation level of our action? Do bad results paralyze metacognitive activity while good ones stimulate it? Ultimately, all of these open questions are the future implications which our current study has suggested. We believe them to be exciting and necessary challenges, which must be faced sooner rather than later. Finally, we cannot forget the implications derived from specific metacognitive instruction, as presented at the start of this study. An intervention of this type should also help us partially answer the aforementioned questions, as we cannot obviate what can be modified or changed by direct metacognition instruction.
Ethics statement.
Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
SR and CS contributed to the conception and design of the study. SR organized the database, performed the statistical analysis, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SR, CS, and CO wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
This study was partly financed by the Project FONDECYT no. 11220056 ANID-Chile.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
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.
Email citation, add to collections.
Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.
Affiliations.
Critical thinking is a complex, dynamic process formed by attitudes and strategic skills, with the aim of achieving a specific goal or objective. The attitudes, including the critical thinking attitudes, constitute an important part of the idea of good care, of the good professional. It could be said that they become a virtue of the nursing profession. In this context, the ethics of virtue is a theoretical framework that becomes essential for analyse the critical thinking concept in nursing care and nursing science. Because the ethics of virtue consider how cultivating virtues are necessary to understand and justify the decisions and guide the actions. Based on selective analysis of the descriptive and empirical literature that addresses conceptual review of critical thinking, we conducted an analysis of this topic in the settings of clinical practice, training and research from the virtue ethical framework. Following JBI critical appraisal checklist for text and opinion papers, we argue the need for critical thinking as an essential element for true excellence in care and that it should be encouraged among professionals. The importance of developing critical thinking skills in education is well substantiated; however, greater efforts are required to implement educational strategies directed at developing critical thinking in students and professionals undergoing training, along with measures that demonstrate their success. Lastly, we show that critical thinking constitutes a fundamental component in the research process, and can improve research competencies in nursing. We conclude that future research and actions must go further in the search for new evidence and open new horizons, to ensure a positive effect on clinical practice, patient health, student education and the growth of nursing science.
Keywords: critical thinking; critical thinking attitudes; nurse education; nursing care; nursing research.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PubMed Disclaimer
Full text sources.
NCBI Literature Resources
MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning
ISSN : 2397-7604
Article publication date: 23 November 2020
Issue publication date: 1 April 2022
The lack of critical thinking in new graduates has been a concern to the nursing profession. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of an innovative, evidence-based skills fair intervention on nursing students' achievements and perceptions of critical thinking skills development.
The explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed for this study.
The findings indicated participants perceived the intervention as a strategy for developing critical thinking.
The study provides educators helpful information in planning their own teaching practice in educating students.
Evidence-based practice, skills fair intervention.
Gonzalez, H.C. , Hsiao, E.-L. , Dees, D.C. , Noviello, S.R. and Gerber, B.L. (2022), "Promoting critical thinking through an evidence-based skills fair intervention", Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning , Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-08-2020-0041
Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2020, Heidi C. Gonzalez, E-Ling Hsiao, Dianne C. Dees, Sherri R. Noviello and Brian L. Gerber
Published in Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Critical thinking (CT) was defined as “cognitive skills of analyzing, applying standards, discriminating, information seeking, logical reasoning, predicting, and transforming knowledge” ( Scheffer and Rubenfeld, 2000 , p. 357). Critical thinking is the basis for all professional decision-making ( Moore, 2007 ). The lack of critical thinking in student nurses and new graduates has been a concern to the nursing profession. It would negatively affect the quality of service and directly relate to the high error rates in novice nurses that influence patient safety ( Arli et al. , 2017 ; Saintsing et al. , 2011 ). It was reported that as many as 88% of novice nurses commit medication errors with 30% of these errors due to a lack of critical thinking ( Ebright et al. , 2004 ). Failure to rescue is another type of error common for novice nurses, reported as high as 37% ( Saintsing et al. , 2011 ). The failure to recognize trends or complications promptly or take action to stabilize the patient occurs when health-care providers do not recognize signs and symptoms of the early warnings of distress ( Garvey and CNE series, 2015 ). Internationally, this lack of preparedness and critical thinking attributes to the reported 35–60% attrition rate of new graduate nurses in their first two years of practice ( Goodare, 2015 ). The high attrition rate of new nurses has expensive professional and economic costs of $82,000 or more per nurse and negatively affects patient care ( Twibell et al. , 2012 ). Facione and Facione (2013) reported the failure to utilize critical thinking skills not only interferes with learning but also results in poor decision-making and unclear communication between health-care professionals, which ultimately leads to patient deaths.
Due to the importance of critical thinking, many nursing programs strive to infuse critical thinking into their curriculum to better prepare graduates for the realities of clinical practice that involves ever-changing, complex clinical situations and bridge the gap between education and practice in nursing ( Benner et al. , 2010 ; Kim et al. , 2019 ; Park et al. , 2016 ; Newton and Moore, 2013 ; Nibert, 2011 ). To help develop students' critical thinking skills, nurse educators must change the way they teach nursing, so they can prepare future nurses to be effective communicators, critical thinkers and creative problem solvers ( Rieger et al. , 2015 ). Nursing leaders also need to redefine teaching practice and educational guidelines that drive innovation in undergraduate nursing programs.
Evidence-based practice has been advocated to promote critical thinking and help reduce the research-practice gap ( Profetto-McGrath, 2005 ; Stanley and Dougherty, 2010 ). Evidence-based practice was defined as “the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient” ( Sackett et al. , 1996 , p. 71). Skills fair intervention, one type of evidence-based practice, can be used to engage students, promote active learning and develop critical thinking ( McCausland and Meyers, 2013 ; Roberts et al. , 2009 ). Skills fair intervention helps promote a consistent teaching practice of the psychomotor skills to the novice nurse that decreased anxiety, gave clarity of expectations to the students in the clinical setting and increased students' critical thinking skills ( Roberts et al. , 2009 ). The researchers of this study had an opportunity to create an active, innovative skills fair intervention for a baccalaureate nursing program in one southeastern state. This intervention incorporated evidence-based practice rationale with critical thinking prompts using Socratic questioning, evidence-based practice videos to the psychomotor skill rubrics, group work, guided discussions, expert demonstration followed by guided practice and blended learning in an attempt to promote and develop critical thinking in nursing students ( Hsu and Hsieh, 2013 ; Oermann et al. , 2011 ; Roberts et al. , 2009 ). The effects of an innovative skills fair intervention on senior baccalaureate nursing students' achievements and their perceptions of critical thinking development were examined in the study.
The ability to use reasoned opinion focusing equally on processes and outcomes over emotions is called critical thinking ( Paul and Elder, 2008 ). Critical thinking skills are desired in almost every discipline and play a major role in decision-making and daily judgments. The roots of critical thinking date back to Socrates 2,500 years ago and can be traced to the ancient philosopher Aristotle ( Paul and Elder, 2012 ). Socrates challenged others by asking inquisitive questions in an attempt to challenge their knowledge. In the 1980s, critical thinking gained nationwide recognition as a behavioral science concept in the educational system ( Robert and Petersen, 2013 ). Many researchers in both education and nursing have attempted to define, measure and teach critical thinking for decades. However, a theoretical definition has yet to be accepted and established by the nursing profession ( Romeo, 2010 ). The terms critical literacy, CT, reflective thinking, systems thinking, clinical judgment and clinical reasoning are used synonymously in the reviewed literature ( Clarke and Whitney, 2009 ; Dykstra, 2008 ; Jones, 2010 ; Swing, 2014 ; Turner, 2005 ).
Watson and Glaser (1980) viewed critical thinking not only as cognitive skills but also as a combination of skills, knowledge and attitudes. Paul (1993) , the founder of the Foundation for Critical Thinking, offered several definitions of critical thinking and identified three essential components of critical thinking: elements of thought, intellectual standards and affective traits. Brunt (2005) stated critical thinking is a process of being practical and considered it to be “the process of purposeful thinking and reflective reasoning where practitioners examine ideas, assumptions, principles, conclusions, beliefs, and actions in the contexts of nursing practice” (p. 61). In an updated definition, Ennis (2011) described critical thinking as, “reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do” (para. 1).
The most comprehensive attempt to define critical thinking was under the direction of Facione and sponsored by the American Philosophical Association ( Scheffer and Rubenfeld, 2000 ). Facione (1990) surveyed 53 experts from the arts and sciences using the Delphi method to define critical thinking as a “purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as an explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which judgment, is based” (p. 2).
To come to a consensus definition for critical thinking, Scheffer and Rubenfeld (2000) also conducted a Delphi study. Their study consisted of an international panel of nurses who completed five rounds of sequenced questions to arrive at a consensus definition. Critical thinking was defined as “habits of mind” and “cognitive skills.” The elements of habits of mind included “confidence, contextual perspective, creativity, flexibility, inquisitiveness, intellectual integrity, intuition, open-mindedness, perseverance, and reflection” ( Scheffer and Rubenfeld, 2000 , p. 352). The elements of cognitive skills were recognized as “analyzing, applying standards, discriminating, information seeking, logical reasoning, predicting, and transforming knowledge” ( Scheffer and Rubenfeld, 2000 , p. 352). In addition, Ignatavicius (2001) defined the development of critical thinking as a long-term process that must be practiced, nurtured and reinforced over time. Ignatavicius believed that a critical thinker required six cognitive skills: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation and self-regulation ( Chun-Chih et al. , 2015 ). According to Ignatavicius (2001) , the development of critical thinking is difficult to measure or describe because it is a formative rather than summative process.
Fero et al. (2009) noted that patient safety might be compromised if a nurse cannot provide clinically competent care due to a lack of critical thinking. The Institute of Medicine (2001) recommended five health care competencies: patient-centered care, interdisciplinary team care, evidence-based practice, informatics and quality improvement. Understanding the development and attainment of critical thinking is the key for gaining these future competencies ( Scheffer and Rubenfeld, 2000 ). The development of a strong scientific foundation for nursing practice depends on habits such as contextual perspective, inquisitiveness, creativity, analysis and reasoning skills. Therefore, the need to better understand how these critical thinking habits are developed in nursing students needs to be explored through additional research ( Fero et al. , 2009 ). Despite critical thinking being listed since the 1980s as an accreditation outcome criteria for baccalaureate programs by the National League for Nursing, very little improvement has been observed in practice ( McMullen and McMullen, 2009 ). James (2013) reported the number of patient harm incidents associated with hospital care is much higher than previously thought. James' study indicated that between 210,000 and 440,000 patients each year go to the hospital for care and end up suffering some preventable harm that contributes to their death. James' study of preventable errors is attributed to other sources besides nursing care, but having a nurse in place who can advocate and critically think for patients will make a positive impact on improving patient safety ( James, 2013 ; Robert and Peterson, 2013 ).
Adopting teaching practice to promote CT is a crucial component of nursing education. Research by Nadelson and Nadelson (2014) suggested evidence-based practice is best learned when integrated into multiple areas of the curriculum. Evidence-based practice developed its roots through evidence-based medicine, and the philosophical origins extend back to the mid-19th century ( Longton, 2014 ). Florence Nightingale, the pioneer of modern nursing, used evidence-based practice during the Crimean War when she recognized a connection between poor sanitary conditions and rising mortality rates of wounded soldiers ( Rahman and Applebaum, 2011 ). In professional nursing practice today, a commonly used definition of evidence-based practice is derived from Dr. David Sackett: the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient ( Sackett et al. , 1996 , p. 71). As professional nurses, it is imperative for patient safety to remain inquisitive and ask if the care provided is based on available evidence. One of the core beliefs of the American Nephrology Nurses' Association's (2019) 2019–2020 Strategic Plan is “Anna must support research to develop evidence-based practice, as well as to advance nursing science, and that as individual members, we must support, participate in, and apply evidence-based research that advances our own skills, as well as nursing science” (p. 1). Longton (2014) reported the lack of evidence-based practice in nursing resulted in negative outcomes for patients. In fact, when evidence-based practice was implemented, changes in policies and procedures occurred that resulted in decreased reports of patient harm and associated health-care costs. The Institute of Medicine (2011) recommendations included nurses being leaders in the transformation of the health-care system and achieving higher levels of education that will provide the ability to critically analyze data to improve the quality of care for patients. Student nurses must be taught to connect and integrate CT and evidence-based practice throughout their program of study and continue that practice throughout their careers.
One type of evidence-based practice that can be used to engage students, promote active learning and develop critical thinking is skills fair intervention ( McCausland and Meyers, 2013 ; Roberts et al. , 2009 ). Skills fair intervention promoted a consistent teaching approach of the psychomotor skills to the novice nurse that decreased anxiety, gave clarity of expectations to the students in the clinical setting and increased students' critical thinking skills ( Roberts et al. , 2009 ). The skills fair intervention used in this study is a teaching strategy that incorporated CT prompts, Socratic questioning, group work, guided discussions, return demonstrations and blended learning in an attempt to develop CT in nursing students ( Hsu and Hsieh, 2013 ; Roberts et al. , 2009 ). It melded evidence-based practice with simulated CT opportunities while students practiced essential psychomotor skills.
Context – skills fair intervention.
According to Roberts et al. (2009) , psychomotor skills decline over time even among licensed experienced professionals within as little as two weeks and may need to be relearned within two months without performing a skill. When applying this concept to student nurses for whom each skill is new, it is no wonder their competency result is diminished after having a summer break from nursing school. This skills fair intervention is a one-day event to assist baccalaureate students who had taken the summer off from their studies in nursing and all faculty participated in operating the stations. It incorporated evidence-based practice rationale with critical thinking prompts using Socratic questioning, evidence-based practice videos to the psychomotor skill rubrics, group work, guided discussions, expert demonstration followed by guided practice and blended learning in an attempt to promote and develop critical thinking in baccalaureate students.
Students were scheduled and placed randomly into eight teams based on attributes of critical thinking as described by Wittmann-Price (2013) : Team A – Perseverance, Team B – Flexibility, Team C – Confidence, Team D – Creativity, Team E – Inquisitiveness, Team F – Reflection, Team G – Analyzing and Team H – Intuition. The students rotated every 20 minutes through eight stations: Medication Administration: Intramuscular and Subcutaneous Injections, Initiating Intravenous Therapy, ten-minute Focused Physical Assessment, Foley Catheter Insertion, Nasogastric Intubation, Skin Assessment/Braden Score and Restraints, Vital Signs and a Safety Station. When the students completed all eight stations, they went to the “Check-Out” booth to complete a simple evaluation to determine their perceptions of the effectiveness of the innovative intervention. When the evaluations were complete, each of the eight critical thinking attribute teams placed their index cards into a hat, and a student won a small prize. All Junior 2, Senior 1 and Senior 2 students were required to attend the Skills Fair. The Skills Fair Team strove to make the event as festive as possible, engaging nursing students with balloons, candy, tri-boards, signs and fun pre and postactivities. The Skills Fair rubrics, scheduling and instructions were shared electronically with students and faculty before the skills fair intervention to ensure adequate preparation and continuous resource availability as students move forward into their future clinical settings.
Institutional review board (IRB) approval was obtained from XXX University to conduct this study and protect human subject rights. The explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed for this study. The design was chosen to identify what effects a skills fair intervention that had on senior baccalaureate nursing students' achievements on the Kaplan Critical Thinking Integrated Test (KCTIT) and then follow up with individual interviews to explore those test results in more depth. In total, 52 senior nursing students completed the KCTIT; 30 of them participated in the skills fair intervention and 22 of them did not participate. The KCTIT is a computerized 85-item exam in which 85 equates to 100%, making each question worth one point. It has high reliability and validity ( Kaplan Nursing, 2012 ; Swing, 2014 ). The reliability value of the KCTIT ranged from 0.72 to 0.89. A t -test was used to analyze the test results.
A total of 11 participants were purposefully selected based on a range of six high achievers and five low achievers on the KCTIT for open-ended one-on-one interviews. Each interview was conducted individually and lasted for about 60 minutes. An open-ended interview protocol was used to guide the flow of data collection. The interviewees' ages ranged from 21 to 30 years, with an average of 24 years. One of 11 interviewees was male. Among them, seven were White, three were Black and one was Indian American. The data collected were used to answer the following research questions: (1) What was the difference in achievements on the KCTIT among senior baccalaureate nursing students who participated in the skills fair intervention and students who did not participate? (2) What were the senior baccalaureate nursing students' perceptions of internal and external factors impacting the development of critical thinking skills during the skills fair intervention? and (3) What were the senior baccalaureate nursing students' perceptions of the skills fair intervention as a critical thinking developmental strategy?
Inductive content analysis was used to analyze interview data by starting with the close reading of the transcripts and writing memos for initial coding, followed by an analysis of patterns and relationships among the data for focused coding. The intercoder reliability was established for qualitative data analysis with a nursing expert. The lead researcher and the expert read the transcript several times and assigned a code to significant units of text that corresponded with answering the research questions. The codes were compared based on differences and similarities and sorted into subcategories and categories. Then, headings and subheadings were used based on similar comments to develop central themes and patterns. The process of establishing intercoder reliability helped to increase dependability, conformability and credibility of the findings ( Graneheim and Lundman, 2004 ). In addition, methods of credibility, confirmability, dependability and transferability were applied to increase the trustworthiness of this study ( Graneheim and Lundman, 2004 ). First, reflexivity was observed by keeping journals and memos. This practice allowed the lead researcher to reflect on personal views to minimize bias. Data saturation was reached through following the recommended number of participants as well as repeated immersion in the data during analysis until no new data surfaced. Member checking was accomplished through returning the transcript and the interpretation to the participants to check the accuracy and truthfulness of the findings. Finally, proper documentation was conducted to allow accurate crossreferencing throughout the study.
Results for the quantitative portion showed there was no difference in scores on the KCTIT between senior nursing students who participated in the skills fair intervention and senior nursing students who did not participate, t (50) = −0.174, p = 0.86 > 0.05. The test scores between the nonparticipant group ( M = 67.59, SD = 5.81) and the participant group ( M = 67.88, SD = 5.99) were almost equal.
Initial coding.
The results from the initial coding and generated themes are listed in Table 1 . First, the participants perceived the skills fair intervention as “promoting experience” and “confidence” by practicing previously learned knowledge and reinforcing it with active learning strategies. Second, the participants perceived the skills fair intervention as a relaxed, nonthreatening learning environment due to the festive atmosphere, especially in comparison to other learning experiences in the nursing program. The nonthreatening environment of the skills fair intervention allowed students to learn without fear. Third, the majority of participants believed their critical thinking was strengthened after participating. Several participants believed their perception of critical thinking was “enhanced” or “reinforced” rather than significantly changed.
The final themes were derived from the analysis of patterns and relationships among the content of the data using inductive content analysis ( Saldana, 2009 ). The following was examined across the focused coding process: (1) factors impacting critical thinking skills development during skills fair intervention and (2) skills fair intervention a critical thinking skills developmental strategy.
Factors impacting critical thinking skills development . The factors impacting the development of critical thinking during the skills fair intervention were divided into two themes: internal factors and external factors. The internal factors were characteristics innate to the students. The identified internal factors were (1) confidence and anxiety levels, (2) attitude and (3) age. The external factors were the outside influences that affected the students. The external factors were (1) experience and practice, (2) faculty involvement, (3) positive learning environment and (4) faculty prompts.
I think that confidence and anxiety definitely both have a huge impact on your ability to be able to really critically think. If you start getting anxious and panicking you cannot think through the process like you need too. I do not really think gender or age necessarily would have anything to do with critical thinking.
Definitely the confidence level, I think, the more advanced you get in the program, your confidence just keeps on growing. Level of anxiety, definitely… I think the people who were in the Skills Fair for the first time, had more anxiety because they did not really know to think, they did not know how strict it was going to be, or if they really had to know everything by the book. I think the Skills Fair helped everyone's confidence levels, but especially the Jr. 2's.
Attitude was an important factor in the development of critical thinking skills during the skills fair intervention as participants believed possessing a pleasant and positive attitude meant a student was eager to learn, participate, accept responsibility for completing duties and think seriously. Participant 6 believed attitude contributed to performance in the Skills Fair.
I feel like, certain things bring critical thinking out in you. And since I'm a little bit older than some of the other students, I have had more life experiences and am able to figure stuff out better. Older students have had more time to learn by trial and error, and this and that.
Like when I had clinical with you, you'd always tell us to know our patients' medications. To always know and be prepared to answer questions – because at first as a Junior 1 we did not do that in the clinical setting… and as a Junior 2, I did not really have to know my medications, but with you as a Senior 1, I started to realize that the patients do ask about their meds, so I was making sure that I knew everything before they asked it. And just having more practice with IVs – at first, I was really nervous, but when I got to my preceptorship – I had done so many IVs and with all of the practice, it just built up my confidence with that skill so when I performed that skill during the Fair, I was confident due to my clinical experiences and able to think and perform better.
I think teachers will always affect the ability to critically think just because you want [to] get the right answer because they are there and you want to seem smart to them [Laugh]. Also, if you are leading in the wrong direction of your thinking – they help steer you back to [in] the right direction so I think that was very helpful.
You could tell the faculty really tried to make it more laid back and fun, so everybody would have a good experience. The faculty had a good attitude. I think making it fun and active helped keep people positive. You know if people are negative and not motivated, nothing gets accomplished. The faculty did an amazing job at making the Skills Fair a positive atmosphere.
However, for some of the participants, a positive learning environment depended on their fellow students. The students were randomly assigned alphabetically to groups, and the groups were assigned to starting stations at the Skills Fair. The participants claimed some students did not want to participate and displayed cynicism toward the intervention. The participants believed their cynicism affected the positive learning environment making critical thinking more difficult during the Skills Fair.
Okay, when [instructor name] was demonstrating the Chevron technique right after we inserted the IV catheter and we were trying to secure the catheter, put on the extension set, and flush the line at what seemed to be all at the same time. I forgot about how you do not want to put the tape right over the hub of the catheter because when you go back in and try to assess the IV site – you're trying to assess whether or not it is patent or infiltrated – you have to visualize the insertion site. That was one of the things that I had been doing wrong because I was just so excited that I got the IV in the vein in the first place – that I did not think much about the tape or the tegaderm for sterility. So I think an important part of critical thinking is to be able to recognize when you've made a mistake and stop, stop yourself from doing it in the future (see Table 2 ).
Skills fair intervention as a developmental strategy for critical thinking . The participants identified the skills fair intervention was effective as a developmental strategy for critical thinking, as revealed in two themes: (1) develops alternative thinking and (2) thinking before doing (See Table 3 ).
Develops alternative thinking . The participants perceived the skills fair intervention helped enhance critical thinking and confidence by developing alternative thinking. Alternative thinking was described as quickly thinking of alternative solutions to problems based on the latest evidence and using that information to determine what actions were warranted to prevent complications and prevent injury. It helped make better connections through the learning of rationale between knowledge and skills and then applying that knowledge to prevent complications and errors to ensure the safety of patients. The participants stated the learning of rationale for certain procedures provided during the skills fair intervention such as the evidence and critical thinking prompts included in the rubrics helped reinforce this connection. The participants also shared they developed alternative thinking after participating in the skills fair intervention by noticing trends in data to prevent potential complications from the faculty prompts. Participant 1 stated her instructor prompted her alternative thinking through questioning about noticing trends to prevent potential complications. She said the following:
Another way critical thinking occurred during the skills fair was when [instructor name] was teaching and prompted us about what it would be like to care for a patient with a fractured hip – I think this was at the 10-minute focused assessment station, but I could be wrong. I remember her asking, “What do you need to be on the look-out for? What can go wrong?” I automatically did not think critically very well and was only thinking circulation in the leg, dah, dah, dah. But she was prompting us to think about mobility alterations and its effect on perfusion and oxygenation. She was trying to help us build those connections. And I think that's a lot of the aspects of critical thinking that gets overlooked with the nursing student – trouble making connections between our knowledge and applying it in practice.
Thinking before doing . The participants perceived thinking before doing, included thinking of how and why certain procedures, was necessary through self-examination prior to taking action. The hands-on situational learning allowed the participants in the skills fair intervention to better notice assessment data and think at a higher level as their previous learning of the skills was perceived as memorization of steps. This higher level of learning allowed participants to consider different future outcomes and analyze pertinent data before taking action.
I think what helped me the most is considering outcomes of my actions before I do anything. For instance, if you're thinking, “Okay. Well, I need to check their blood pressure before I administer this blood pressure medication – or the blood pressure could potentially bottom out.” I really do not want my patient to bottom out and get hypotensive because I administered a medication that was ordered, but not safe to give. I could prevent problems from happening if I know what to be on alert for and act accordingly. So ultimately knowing that in the clinical setting, I can prevent complications from happening and I save myself, my license, and promote patient safety. I think knowing that I've seen the importance of critical thinking already in practice has helped me value and understand why I should be critically thinking. Yes, we use the 5-rights of medication safety – but we also have to think. For instance, if I am going to administer insulin – what do I need to know or do to give this safely? What is the current blood sugar? Has the patient been eating? When is the next meal scheduled? Is the patient NPO for a procedure? Those are examples of questions to consider and the level of thinking that needs to take place prior to taking actions in the clinical setting.
Although the results of quantitative data showed no significant difference in scores on the KCTIT between the participant and nonparticipant groups, during the interviews some participants attributed this result to the test not being part of a course grade and believed students “did not try very hard to score well.” However, the participants who attended interviews did identify the skills fair intervention as a developmental strategy for critical thinking by helping them develop alternative thinking and thinking before doing. The findings are supported in the literature as (1) nurses must recognize signs of clinical deterioration and take action promptly to prevent potential complications ( Garvey and CNE series 2015 ) and (2) nurses must analyze pertinent data and consider all possible solutions before deciding on the most appropriate action for each patient ( Papathanasiou et al. , 2014 ).
The skills fair intervention also enhanced the development of self-confidence by participants practicing previously learned skills in a controlled, safe environment. The nonthreatening environment of the skills fair intervention allowed students to learn without fear and the majority of participants believed their critical thinking was strengthened after participating. The interview data also revealed a combination of internal and external factors that influenced the development of critical thinking during the skills fair intervention including confidence and anxiety levels, attitude, age, experience and practice, faculty involvement, positive learning environment and faculty prompts. These factors should be considered when addressing the promotion and development of critical thinking.
A major concern in the nursing profession is the lack of critical thinking in student nurses and new graduates, which influences the decision-making of novice nurses and directly affects patient care and safety ( Saintsing et al. , 2011 ). Nurse educators must use evidence-based practice to prepare students to critically think with the complicated and constantly evolving environment of health care today ( Goodare, 2015 ; Newton and Moore, 2013 ). Evidence-based practice has been advocated to promote critical thinking ( Profetto-McGrath, 2005 ; Stanley and Dougherty, 2010 ). The skills fair intervention can be one type of evidence-based practice used to promote critical thinking ( McCausland and Meyers, 2013 ; Roberts et al. , 2009 ). The Intervention used in this study incorporated evidence-based practice rationale with critical thinking prompts using Socratic questioning, evidence-based practice videos to the psychomotor skill rubrics, group work, guided discussions, expert demonstration followed by guided practice and blended learning in an attempt to promote and develop critical thinking in nursing students.
The explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed to investigate the effects of the innovative skills fair intervention on senior baccalaureate nursing students' achievements and their perceptions of critical thinking skills development. Although the quantitative results showed no significant difference in scores on the KCTIT between students who participated in the skills fair intervention and those who did not, those who attended the interviews perceived their critical thinking was reinforced after the skills fair intervention and believed it was an effective developmental strategy for critical thinking, as it developed alternative thinking and thinking before doing. This information is useful for nurse educators who plan their own teaching practice to promote critical thinking and improve patient outcomes. The findings also provide schools and educators information that helps review their current approach in educating nursing students. As evidenced in the findings, the importance of developing critical thinking skills is crucial for becoming a safe, professional nurse. Internal and external factors impacting the development of critical thinking during the skills fair intervention were identified including confidence and anxiety levels, attitude, age, experience and practice, faculty involvement, positive learning environment and faculty prompts. These factors should be considered when addressing the promotion and development of critical thinking.
There were several limitations to this study. One of the major limitations of the study was the limited exposure of students' time of access to the skills fair intervention, as it was a one-day learning intervention. Another limitation was the sample selection and size. The skills fair intervention was limited to only one baccalaureate nursing program in one southeastern state. As such, the findings of the study cannot be generalized as it may not be representative of baccalaureate nursing programs in general. In addition, this study did not consider students' critical thinking achievements prior to the skills fair intervention. Therefore, no baseline measurement of critical thinking was available for a before and after comparison. Other factors in the nursing program could have affected the students' scores on the KCTIT, such as anxiety or motivation that was not taken into account in this study.
The recommendations for future research are to expand the topic by including other regions, larger samples and other baccalaureate nursing programs. In addition, future research should consider other participant perceptions, such as nurse educators, to better understand the development and growth of critical thinking skills among nursing students. Finally, based on participant perceptions, future research should include a more rigorous skills fair intervention to develop critical thinking and explore the link between confidence and critical thinking in nursing students.
Initial coding results
Themes | Frequency |
---|---|
Experience and confidence contributed to critical thinking skills | 76 |
Skills fair intervention had a relaxed atmosphere | 23 |
Skills fair intervention reinforced critical thinking skills | 21 |
Factors impacting critical thinking skill development during skills fair intervention
Themes | Subthemes | Frequency of mentions |
---|---|---|
Internal factors | 33 | |
Confidence and anxiety levels | 17 | |
Attitude | 10 | |
Age | 6 | |
External factors | 62 | |
Experience and practice | 21 | |
Faculty involvement | 24 | |
Positive learning environment | 11 | |
Faculty prompts | 6 |
Skills fair intervention as a developmental strategy for critical thinking
Themes | Subthemes | Frequency |
---|---|---|
Develops alternative thinking | 13 | |
Application of knowledge and skills | 9 | |
Noticing trends to prevent complications | 4 | |
Thinking before doing | 10 | |
Considering future outcomes | 5 | |
Analyzing relevant data | 5 |
American Nephrology Nurses Association (ANNA) ( 2019 ), “ Learning, leading, connecting, and playing at the intersection of nephrology and nursing-2019–2020 strategic plan ”, viewed 3 Aug 2019, available at: https://www.annanurse.org/download/reference/association/strategicPlan.pdf .
Arli , S.D. , Bakan , A.B. , Ozturk , S. , Erisik , E. and Yildirim , Z. ( 2017 ), “ Critical thinking and caring in nursing students ”, International Journal of Caring Sciences , Vol. 10 No. 1 , pp. 471 - 478 .
Benner , P. , Sutphen , M. , Leonard , V. and Day , L. ( 2010 ), Educating Nurses: A Call for Radical Transformation , Jossey-Bass , San Francisco .
Brunt , B. ( 2005 ), “ Critical thinking in nursing: an integrated review ”, The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 60 - 67 .
Chun-Chih , L. , Chin-Yen , H. , I-Ju , P. and Li-Chin , C. ( 2015 ), “ The teaching-learning approach and critical thinking development: a qualitative exploration of Taiwanese nursing students ”, Journal of Professional Nursing , Vol. 31 No. 2 , pp. 149 - 157 , doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2014.07.001 .
Clarke , L.W. and Whitney , E. ( 2009 ), “ Walking in their shoes: using multiple-perspectives texts as a bridge to critical literacy ”, The Reading Teacher , Vol. 62 No. 6 , pp. 530 - 534 , doi: 10.1598/RT.62.6.7 .
Dykstra , D. ( 2008 ), “ Integrating critical thinking and memorandum writing into course curriculum using the internet as a research tool ”, College Student Journal , Vol. 42 No. 3 , pp. 920 - 929 , doi: 10.1007/s10551-010-0477-2 .
Ebright , P. , Urden , L. , Patterson , E. and Chalko , B. ( 2004 ), “ Themes surrounding novice nurse near-miss and adverse-event situations ”, The Journal of Nursing Administration: The Journal of Nursing Administration , Vol. 34 , pp. 531 - 538 , doi: 10.1097/00005110-200411000-00010 .
Ennis , R. ( 2011 ), “ The nature of critical thinking: an outline of critical thinking dispositions and abilities ”, viewed 3 May 2017, available at: https://education.illinois.edu/docs/default-source/faculty-documents/robert-ennis/thenatureofcriticalthinking_51711_000.pdf .
Facione , P.A. ( 1990 ), Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction , The California Academic Press , Millbrae .
Facione , N.C. and Facione , P.A. ( 2013 ), The Health Sciences Reasoning Test: Test Manual , The California Academic Press , Millbrae .
Fero , L.J. , Witsberger , C.M. , Wesmiller , S.W. , Zullo , T.G. and Hoffman , L.A. ( 2009 ), “ Critical thinking ability of new graduate and experienced nurses ”, Journal of Advanced Nursing , Vol. 65 No. 1 , pp. 139 - 148 , doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04834.x .
Garvey , P.K. and CNE series ( 2015 ), “ Failure to rescue: the nurse's impact ”, Medsurg Nursing , Vol. 24 No. 3 , pp. 145 - 149 .
Goodare , P. ( 2015 ), “ Literature review: ‘are you ok there?’ The socialization of student and graduate nurses: do we have it right? ”, Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing , Vol. 33 No. 1 , pp. 38 - 43 .
Graneheim , U.H. and Lundman , B. ( 2014 ), “ Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures, and measures to achieve trustworthiness ”, Nurse Education Today , Vol. 24 No. 2 , pp. 105 - 12 , doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001 .
Hsu , L. and Hsieh , S. ( 2013 ), “ Factors affecting metacognition of undergraduate nursing students in a blended learning environment ”, International Journal of Nursing Practice , Vol. 20 No. 3 , pp. 233 - 241 , doi: 10.1111/ijn.12131 .
Ignatavicius , D. ( 2001 ), “ Six critical thinking skills for at-the-bedside success ”, Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing , Vol. 20 No. 2 , pp. 30 - 33 .
Institute of Medicine ( 2001 ), Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century , National Academy Press , Washington .
James , J. ( 2013 ), “ A new, evidence-based estimate of patient harms associated with hospital care ”, Journal of Patient Safety , Vol. 9 No. 3 , pp. 122 - 128 , doi: 10.1097/PTS.0b013e3182948a69 .
Jones , J.H. ( 2010 ), “ Developing critical thinking in the perioperative environment ”, AORN Journal , Vol. 91 No. 2 , pp. 248 - 256 , doi: 10.1016/j.aorn.2009.09.025 .
Kaplan Nursing ( 2012 ), Kaplan Nursing Integrated Testing Program Faculty Manual , Kaplan Nursing , New York, NY .
Kim , J.S. , Gu , M.O. and Chang , H.K. ( 2019 ), “ Effects of an evidence-based practice education program using multifaceted interventions: a quasi-experimental study with undergraduate nursing students ”, BMC Medical Education , Vol. 19 , doi: 10.1186/s12909-019-1501-6 .
Longton , S. ( 2014 ), “ Utilizing evidence-based practice for patient safety ”, Nephrology Nursing Journal , Vol. 41 No. 4 , pp. 343 - 344 .
McCausland , L.L. and Meyers , C.C. ( 2013 ), “ An interactive skills fair to prepare undergraduate nursing students for clinical experience ”, Nursing Education Perspectives , Vol. 34 No. 6 , pp. 419 - 420 , doi: 10.5480/1536-5026-34.6.419 .
McMullen , M.A. and McMullen , W.F. ( 2009 ), “ Examining patterns of change in the critical thinking skills of graduate nursing students ”, Journal of Nursing Education , Vol. 48 No. 6 , pp. 310 - 318 , doi: 10.3928/01484834-20090515-03 .
Moore , Z.E. ( 2007 ), “ Critical thinking and the evidence-based practice of sport psychology ”, Journal of Clinical Sport Psychology , Vol. 1 , pp. 9 - 22 , doi: 10.1123/jcsp.1.1.9 .
Nadelson , S. and Nadelson , L.S. ( 2014 ), “ Evidence-based practice article reviews using CASP tools: a method for teaching EBP ”, Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing , Vol. 11 No. 5 , pp. 344 - 346 , doi: 10.1111/wvn.12059 .
Newton , S.E. and Moore , G. ( 2013 ), “ Critical thinking skills of basic baccalaureate and accelerated second-degree nursing students ”, Nursing Education Perspectives , Vol. 34 No. 3 , pp. 154 - 158 , doi: 10.5480/1536-5026-34.3.154 .
Nibert , A. ( 2011 ), “ Nursing education and practice: bridging the gap ”, Advance Healthcare Network , viewed 3 May 2017, available at: https://www.elitecme.com/resource-center/nursing/nursing-education-practice-bridging-the-gap/ .
Oermann , M.H. , Kardong-Edgren , S. , Odom-Maryon , T. , Hallmark , B.F. , Hurd , D. , Rogers , N. and Smart , D.A. ( 2011 ), “ Deliberate practice of motor skills in nursing education: CPR as exemplar ”, Nursing Education Perspectives , Vol. 32 No. 5 , pp. 311 - 315 , doi: 10.5480/1536-5026-32.5.311 .
Papathanasiou , I.V. , Kleisiaris , C.F. , Fradelos , E.C. , Kakou , K. and Kourkouta , L. ( 2014 ), “ Critical thinking: the development of an essential skill for nursing students ”, Acta Informatica Medica , Vol. 22 No. 4 , pp. 283 - 286 , doi: 10.5455/aim.2014.22.283-286 .
Park , M.Y. , Conway , J. and McMillan , M. ( 2016 ), “ Enhancing critical thinking through simulation ”, Journal of Problem-Based Learning , Vol. 3 No. 1 , pp. 31 - 40 , doi: 10.24313/jpbl.2016.3.1.31 .
Paul , R. ( 1993 ), Critical Thinking: How to Prepare Students for a Rapidly Changing World , The Foundation for Critical Thinking , Santa Rosa .
Paul , R. and Elder , L. ( 2008 ), “ Critical thinking: the art of socratic questioning, part III ”, Journal of Developmental Education , Vol. 31 No. 3 , pp. 34 - 35 .
Paul , R. and Elder , L. ( 2012 ), Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life , 3rd ed. , Pearson/Prentice Hall , Boston .
Profetto-McGrath , J. ( 2005 ), “ Critical thinking and evidence-based practice ”, Journal of Professional Nursing , Vol. 21 No. 6 , pp. 364 - 371 , doi: 10.1016/j.profnurs.2005.10.002 .
Rahman , A. and Applebaum , R. ( 2011 ), “ What's all this about evidence-based practice? The roots, the controversies, and why it matters ”, American Society on Aging , viewed 3 May 2017, available at: https://www.asaging.org/blog/whats-all-about-evidence-based-practice-roots-controversies-and-why-it-matters .
Rieger , K. , Chernomas , W. , McMillan , D. , Morin , F. and Demczuk , L. ( 2015 ), “ The effectiveness and experience of arts‐based pedagogy among undergraduate nursing students: a comprehensive systematic review protocol ”, JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports , Vol. 13 No. 2 , pp. 101 - 124 , doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1891 .
Robert , R.R. and Petersen , S. ( 2013 ), “ Critical thinking at the bedside: providing safe passage to patients ”, Medsurg Nursing , Vol. 22 No. 2 , pp. 85 - 118 .
Roberts , S.T. , Vignato , J.A. , Moore , J.L. and Madden , C.A. ( 2009 ), “ Promoting skill building and confidence in freshman nursing students with a skills-a-thon ”, Educational Innovations , Vol. 48 No. 8 , pp. 460 - 464 , doi: 10.3928/01484834-20090518-05 .
Romeo , E. ( 2010 ), “ Quantitative research on critical thinking and predicting nursing students' NCLEX-RN performance ”, Journal of Nursing Education , Vol. 49 No. 7 , pp. 378 - 386 , doi: 10.3928/01484834-20100331-05 .
Sackett , D. , Rosenberg , W. , Gray , J. , Haynes , R. and Richardson , W. ( 1996 ), “ Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn't ”, British Medical Journal , Vol. 312 No. 7023 , pp. 71 - 72 , doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71 .
Saintsing , D. , Gibson , L.M. and Pennington , A.W. ( 2011 ), “ The novice nurse and clinical decision-making: how to avoid errors ”, Journal of Nursing Management , Vol. 19 No. 3 , pp. 354 - 359 .
Saldana , J. ( 2009 ), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers , Sage , Los Angeles .
Scheffer , B. and Rubenfeld , M. ( 2000 ), “ A consensus statement on critical thinking in nursing ”, Journal of Nursing Education , Vol. 39 No. 8 , pp. 352 - 359 .
Stanley , M.C. and Dougherty , J.P. ( 2010 ), “ Nursing education model. A paradigm shift in nursing education: a new model ”, Nursing Education Perspectives , Vol. 31 No. 6 , pp. 378 - 380 , doi: 10.1043/1536-5026-31.6.378 .
Swing , V.K. ( 2014 ), “ Early identification of transformation in the proficiency level of critical thinking skills (CTS) for the first-semester associate degree nursing (ADN) student ”, doctoral thesis , Capella University , Minneapolis , viewed 3 May 2017, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses database .
Turner , P. ( 2005 ), “ Critical thinking in nursing education and practice as defined in the literature ”, Nursing Education Perspectives , Vol. 26 No. 5 , pp. 272 - 277 .
Twibell , R. , St Pierre , J. , Johnson , D. , Barton , D. , Davis , C. and Kidd , M. ( 2012 ), “ Tripping over the welcome mat: why new nurses don't stay and what the evidence says we can do about it ”, American Nurse Today , Vol. 7 No. 6 , pp. 1 - 10 .
Watson , G. and Glaser , E.M. ( 1980 ), Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal , Psychological Corporation , San Antonio .
Wittmann-Price , R.A. ( 2013 ), “ Facilitating learning in the classroom setting ”, in Wittmann-Price , R.A. , Godshall , M. and Wilson , L. (Eds), Certified Nurse Educator (CNE) Review Manual , Springer Publishing , New York, NY , pp. 19 - 70 .
Related articles, all feedback is valuable.
Please share your general feedback
Contact Customer Support
New citation alert added.
This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:
You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.
To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.
Please log in to your account
Bibliometrics & citations, index terms.
Applied computing
Interactive learning environments
Personal space in virtual reality.
Improving the sense of “presence” is a common goal of three-dimensional (3D) display technology for film, television, and virtual reality. However, there are instances in which 3D presentations may elicit unanticipated negative responses. For example, ...
This document provides an analysis of bioeconomy research in South Africa and it discusses sources of growth in the country’s bioeconomy literature in general. We performed bibliometric analysis as indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) for number of ...
Two major form factors for virtual reality are head-mounted displays and large display environments such as CAVE®and the LCD-based successor CAVE2®. Each of these has distinct advantages and limitations based on how they’re used. This work explores ...
Published in.
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Permissions, check for updates, author tags.
Other metrics, bibliometrics, article metrics.
Login options.
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
View options.
View or Download as a PDF file.
View online with eReader .
View this article in HTML Format.
Copying failed.
Affiliations, export citations.
We are preparing your search results for download ...
We will inform you here when the file is ready.
Your file of search results citations is now ready.
Your search export query has expired. Please try again.
Introduction, language teaching: more than teaching language, introducing the books, critical thinking, taboos and controversial issues in foreign language education, gender diversity and sexuality in english language education, antisocial language teaching: english and the pervasive pathology of whiteness, social justice and the language classroom, final thoughts, the reviewer, beyond elt: more than just teaching language.
Steve Brown, Beyond ELT: more than just teaching language, ELT Journal , 2024;, ccae038, https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccae038
Most people would agree that the world is currently facing significant problems: we have not yet recovered from a global pandemic, wars are killing thousands every day, climate change is starting to damage people’s livelihoods and well-being, wealth inequality is increasing, minority groups are being oppressed for a variety of reasons, the spread of disinformation and fake news makes it increasingly difficult to know what is true and what is not—the list goes on. While these issues are causing real concern for people’s current welfare and for the future of the planet, and are the focus of everyday discussion all around the world, whether they have a place in the ELT classroom seems to be a different matter. There have long been calls—including from academics within the native English-speaking ‘inner circle’—for issues such as these to be incorporated into ELT curriculum content (see, for example, Pennycook 1989 ), but these calls have tended to be stifled by an ostensible desire for the ELT profession to remain ‘politically neutral’. In recent years, however, the extent of the problems facing the world, and the sense of urgency that something needs to be done to reverse the current trajectory, have allowed discourses advocating more transformative pedagogies to move closer to the mainstream. To this end, a number of books have been published recently that explore some of the bigger issues of concern in the world today, and how they can (and, more to the point, should ) be addressed in ELT. This survey review examines five such books, offering individual reviews of each one and considering the contribution they make towards a significant shift in ELT—one that moves away from the preservation of the status quo, and becomes focused on the promotion of a critically aware, transformative, social-justice-oriented agenda.
As Pennycook (2021) suggests, since its emergence as an academic discipline, the dominant view in applied linguistics in the United Kingdom and the United States—which has tended to play a significant role in informing English language teaching practice—was that it was, or should be, a ‘value-free’ discipline. As such, it drew on theories in SLA to develop language teaching approaches and methodologies from a position of what was claimed to be ‘political neutrality’. This desire for an ‘unbiased’ approach manifests itself in the content of many widely recognized ELT teacher training courses, which historically have focused on methodology and classroom processes, but which devote less attention to discussion of, or reflection on, the impact that English language teaching can have on wider society. This ostensibly neutral position is also adopted by some of the bigger global publishing companies that produce ELT materials, which tend to focus on rather bland topics that are likely to be acceptable for discussion in any context or culture, such as sport, travel, and shopping. Rather than selecting topics that learners can critically engage with, the main focus has tended to be on developing understanding of systems of language, providing and practising lexical items that are deemed most likely to be of some use to people’s everyday, academic or professional lives, and developing skills that allow learners to use this language and lexis within some kind of meaningful context.
However, an alternative school of thought within applied linguistics and ELT is that a position of political neutrality is in fact impossible, let alone preferable. For Pennycook, wherever in the world it is being taught, ‘English is bound up in a wealth of local social, cultural, economic and political complexities’ (Pennycook 2017: 7), making the inclusion of such complexities within the curriculum unavoidable. The question, then, is not whether social and political issues should be incorporated into ELT, but which ones. Besides, the practice of communicating across cultures, which is, after all, the main purpose of learning an additional language, brings with it ‘the opportunity for emancipation from the confines of learners’ native habitat and culture, with the development of new perceptions and insights into foreign and native cultures alike’ ( Byram 1988 : 15). This implies that any kind of language learning should entail some critical engagement with cultural norms and values, with a view to developing the learner’s understanding of their position within society.
The above argument suggests, then, that there is more to language teaching than teaching language. Language cannot be taught in a vacuum; there needs to be content, and decisions need to be made about what that content should be. These decisions determine what learners are (and are not) able to talk about most proficiently in the language they are learning. What is more, if the same content is being used across the world through the use of globally published textbooks, or if ELT is required to comply with global outcomes and standards, the likelihood is that the world’s English-learning population will become highly proficient in using English in some contexts, and hugely deficient in using it in others. Littlejohn claimed that ‘one of the most worrying aspects of standardisation and centralisation is that by setting out what needs to be done, what should not be done is simultaneously dictated’ ( Littlejohn 2012 : 294). Given the narrow range of topics and issues that tend to be covered in most ELT curricula, it is fair to assume that the ELT profession is very effectively preparing people to talk about their favourite room or their last shopping trip, to write a short description of information presented in a chart, or successfully chair a business meeting. However, when it comes to critically engaging with issues that are having a damaging impact on people or the world, or exploring ways to transform society in ways that will address the problems we currently face, it seems that our profession is less effective. This is not to say that ELT textbooks fail completely to include some mention of social justice issues, or to allow scope for teachers to incorporate such discussions into their teaching if they wish to. However, such affordances are a far cry from making these big issues central to the learning process, and pushing them to the periphery of the curriculum—or erasing them altogether (how many trans people are represented in published ELT materials, for example?)—is, in itself, a political act. As Freire famously put it in his seminal book Pedagogy of the Oppressed : ‘washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral’ ( Freire 1996 : 122).
Over the years, concepts such as linguistic imperialism, native-speakerism, and, more recently, translanguaging have exposed some of the more problematic underpinnings of applied linguistics and led to the emergence of critical applied linguistics ( Pennycook 2021 ) as a kind of parallel discipline. Yet much of the teaching practice that goes on in ELT still seems inclined to take a very cautious approach towards anything that might challenge learners’ existing beliefs and attitudes. This makes ELT something of an outlier in the field of education. While the ELT profession has, by and large, sought to avoid ‘controversial’ issues in the classroom, ostensibly so as not to upset learners’ sensibilities, the world of teacher education beyond TESOL has a more sophisticated understanding of the non-neutral nature of education, and it is widely accepted that the adoption of some kind of ideological position is unavoidable. Schiro (2013) identifies four different ideological positions that can be taken in teacher education: a scholar academic position, which promotes the transmission of cultural knowledge via the institution’s academic disciplines; a learner-centred position, which supports learners developing according to their needs and interests; a social reconstruction position, which is concerned with developing an understanding of social issues, with a view to transforming society; and a social efficiency position, which focuses on creating competent individuals who can meet the social and economic needs of the society in which they live. It is accepted, though, that subjective partiality is a requirement in any educational approach. Any attempts to ‘remove’ ideology or ‘political interference’ from education and focus instead on evidence-based ‘facts’ (see, for example, Morris 2014 ) are merely attempts to impose one ideological position over others.
It is curious, then, that the myth of neutrality should be so prevalent in ELT. After all, it is well documented that education has been complicit in the Eurocentric colonization of thought, and the resulting epistemicide, or eradication of alternative thought systems, that has taken place in the Global South as a result of this colonization ( de Sousa Santos 2014 ). One might expect an area of education with such a global reach as ELT to take more interest in its own—potentially very damaging—ideological position in global society. In a context in which the impact of corporate globalization on societies and the climate is facing widespread criticism, such critical examination might lead to a more social-transformation-oriented approach in ELT, rather than an approach that has tended to facilitate, rather than challenge, the spread of neoliberal ideology ( Block et al . 2012 ).
With this in mind, it does seem that things are changing. As the precarious nature of humanity highlighted above in the introduction requires the legitimacy of the status quo to come under increasing scrutiny, many ELT professionals and academics have started to reject the fallacy of a politically neutral pedagogy. As dominant ideologies are exposed as having a damaging impact on the ELT profession and wider global society, there are increasing calls for the adoption of a position that seeks to effect positive social change, in line with Schiro’s (2013) social reconstruction position. It is in this climate, then, that this survey review is presented, covering five recently published books, all of which challenge the premise that language teaching is ‘simply’ a question of ‘teaching language’. Instead, these books all hold the view that ignoring key issues in global society is, to a large extent, a dereliction of duty. Like all educators, language teachers, materials developers, and curriculum planners have a responsibility to include within their content the development of capacities to gain a critical understanding of the world, with a view to transforming it for the better.
The first book in this review is Critical Thinking , by Gregory Hadley and Andrew Boon. Unlike the other books, this one focuses on a specific learning skill which, the authors argue, should be incorporated into ELT in all its forms. I then move on to provide reviews of two edited books: Taboos and Controversial Issues in Foreign Language Education , edited by Christian Ludwig and Theresa Summer, and Gender Diversity and Sexuality in English Language Education: New Transnational Voices , edited by Darío Luis Banegas and Navan Govender. Each of these books explores various ways in which ELT can incorporate issues that have hitherto been marginalized in most ELT contexts. This is followed by a review of Antisocial Language Teachi ng: English and the Pervasive Pathology of Whiteness by J. P. B. Gerald, a single-author monograph which uses the construct of whiteness as a lens through which to analyse the ELT profession. Finally, I review Deniz Ortaçtepe Hart’s Social Justice and the Language Classroom: Reflection, Action and Transformation , which explores language teaching from a social justice perspective. I conclude by drawing together some of the common themes in the five books and reflecting on the contribution that they make to the ELT profession.
Before I begin this review, it is perhaps important to make a clear distinction between critical thinking and critical theory. Critical theory is an ontological position that views reality as socially constructed by hegemonic forces designed to locate power in ways that privilege some groups over others. Critical thinking (CT), on the other hand, is a discipline that is concerned with analysing data, claims, arguments, etc., with a view to identifying their underlying premises and assumptions, and, therefore, the extent to which they can be believed. Although CT is often applied by critical theorists, CT does not necessarily support critical theory, and can even be applied to critique it. Although critical theory heavily informs the epistemological assumptions underpinning the other books in this review, Hadley and Boon’s Critical Thinking is less concerned with adopting a specific epistemological or ideological position in ELT. Rather, the focus is on giving students the skills to understand the logic—or lack of logic—underpinning the texts and other sources of language content that they are exposed to. This book is part of a series entitled ‘Research and Resources in Language Teaching’, which seeks to bridge the often-criticized gap between research and language teaching practice. Although the series and book titles do not specify this, it is very much a book for teachers of English, with references made to English language, ELT, and EAP at various points throughout. Compared to the other books in this review, it has a very practical focus. Its main aim is to provide ideas for encouraging critical thinking among learners within a language teaching context, following what it calls on the back cover a ‘dynamic framework’.
As with all the books in this series, this volume is organized in four parts. Part I, ‘From Research to Implications’, starts with an introduction that offers a definition of critical thinking followed by a section that answers some common questions about CT, allowing the authors to address common sceptical views that readers may have about the importance of including CT within the language curriculum. Three key issues in CT are then addressed: argumentation, logical fallacies, and the role of problem-solving in externalizing or actualizing CT. These sections provide an overview of the research underpinning the principles of CT, with diagrams and tables supporting examples of different types of argumentation and analysis. Part II, entitled ‘From Implications to Application’, then takes some of the concepts and frameworks for CT introduced in Part I, and provides no fewer than 93 practical activities that aim to introduce these various concepts to learners.
Part III, ‘From Application to Implementation’, is concerned with methodology, and how the activities introduced in the previous part can be integrated into the curriculum. Two possible approaches are presented: first, how to create a self-standing CT course for English language learners; and second, how to supplement an existing course with CT activities. It also offers suggestions for adapting the activities to suit specific contexts and incorporate critical thinking more broadly into the teaching and learning process. A final section in this part offers some ideas for teachers to develop their own CT materials. Part IV, entitled ‘From Implementation to Research’, presents research and practice as part of a cycle and encourages teachers to use their own teaching to contribute to literature on the role and use of CT in ELT. This part offers a robust, mixed-methods research approach that teachers can apply to their own contexts, and offers some ideas for how to share their research findings. This part highlights the non-measurable nature of CT, and how an oversimplified, quantitative approach to research can only provide a partial, incomplete understanding of the phenomenon. It is a useful reminder that research into critical thinking is far from straightforward.
Although this book differs from the others in terms of its content and practical application, it still fits within the remit of this review as it is grounded in the principle that English language teachers have a responsibility to teach beyond language—to develop skills in critical literacy and analysis so that students can deal more effectively with the vast body of information that is thrust at them on a daily basis. ‘Our world’, the authors tell us in the introduction, ‘is experiencing a crisis of the mind’ (p. 4). They go on to say that ‘whether online, on the street, at home, or in the marketplace, we encounter arguments and propositions intended to prey upon those with an undeveloped sense of critical thinking’ (p. 5). As you might expect, this claim is then backed up with a solid, evidence-based argument which illustrates not only the prevalence of false or misleading information that is out there; it also reveals how CT features a lot less in education than it used to. In short, CT is needed more than ever, but it is being taught less.
The book introduces and uses a large amount of terminology about argumentation and different ways of analysing the truthfulness of certain statements. This is simultaneously very useful and somewhat bewildering to those readers who are not familiar with it (I include myself as one of those readers). Terms such as logical fallacy, false dilemma, and circular reasoning are used throughout the book, and may take some getting used to. However, these terms are clearly explained, and examples demonstrate that they relate to common features of everyday discourse—features that most readers will already be familiar with. The use of this terminology to describe strategies for argumentation and analysis highlights that CT is very much an established discipline in and of itself. It is clearly very useful, and in some ways reassuring, to know that teachers can draw on and apply these concepts in their teaching. The theory and research-focused parts of the book are supported with useful diagrams and figures that clearly illustrate the concepts being introduced and explored.
However, this book goes well beyond providing a theoretical overview of CT. The sheer number and range of ready-made practical activities make it very useful for any teacher who wishes to incorporate critical thinking into their practice. A possible problem with this is that it makes the book very lopsided in its structure, which is likely to affect how it is used by readers. Parts I, III, and IV make up a combined total of just 68 pages; in fact, Part III, which is concerned with how to implement CT into the ELT curriculum, is only eight pages long. By contrast Part II, which contains all the practical activities, is 226 pages long. This means that there may be a tendency for teachers to treat the book as if it was just a collection of activities: they might skim through Part I, select practical activities from Part II as stand-alone materials to supplement their own teaching, and never get to Parts III and IV. But the fact is that the book is much more than a collection of supplementary activities, and Parts I, III and IV are arguably the most valuable as they allow teachers to get a deep understanding of the importance of CT and its application to ELT. These parts also encourage teachers to develop their own skills in contributing to a more CT-oriented approach to ELT, by offering a research framework and practical tips on sharing ideas and findings. It would be a shame if these features of the book were to be overlooked. Perhaps the more theoretical and research-oriented ideas could have been woven throughout the practical section. This might have helped readers to develop an understanding of the theoretical underpinnings within each activity, and could also have illustrated how teachers themselves can contribute to the cycle from research to practice and back to research again.
Having said that, it would be unfair to criticize the book for being too practical—its practical application is a key strength in many respects, and it also distinguishes this book from the others in this review. Whether they read it all or dip into certain parts, this book offers scope for teachers to develop their capacities to understand and apply CT themselves, to introduce ready-made activities into the classroom to develop the CT of their students, to incorporate CT more coherently into their curriculum, and to conduct research related to CT in their own practice. The argument that the authors provide in Part I for incorporating critical thinking into ELT is a compelling one, and it justifies the book’s contribution to the field.
As previously mentioned, a long-standing criticism of ELT has been its tendency to avoid topics and issues that could be regarded as controversial or offensive. This tendency is compounded by a global approach to methodology and materials design; many large publishing corporations produce textbooks and other materials that aim to appeal to as wide a market as possible, in as many areas of the world as possible. The result of this is a tendency for ELT materials not only to follow a similar format and teaching approach, but also to stick to a very narrow range of topics. Materials published for a global market tend to avoid any mention of what are commonly referred to as the PARSNIP topics: politics, alcohol, religion, sex, narcotics, isms, and pork ( Gray 2002 ). An obvious problem with this universal, one-size-fits-all approach is that topics and issues which are not taboo in many parts of the world (and in some cases central to everyday life) are often omitted because they could cause offence in other countries or regions. For example, while the mention of pork may offend the sensibilities of many learners in the Middle East, it is a key element of people’s diets in a large number of other countries. In China the pig is even regarded as a symbol of prosperity and good fortune. Another example, from my own experience teaching ESOL learners in the United Kingdom, is the topic of narcotics. There is widespread, often public use of drugs in many areas of the United Kingdom, including areas where my learners were living, and a lot of these learners were unaware of the legalities and implications of drug use, addiction, and dependency. The social impact of drugs therefore became an important topic in our syllabus, as it gave the learners necessary knowledge to understand what was happening in their own neighbourhoods, to make informed decisions themselves, and to advise and give appropriate guidance to their children.
Another key problem with this controversy-averse approach to materials design is that the avoidance of issues such as politics, religion, racism, or gender discrimination guarantees that any discussion of these social issues, which could motivate engaged discussion, lead to effective language development, and provide opportunities to develop critical thinking skills, is effectively removed from the curriculum. This erasure is even more problematic when examined through the lens of critical pedagogy, which seeks to create ‘an informed, critical citizenry capable of participating and governing in a democratic society’ ( Giroux 2011 : 7). In order to become informed in this way, it is necessary for classroom discussions to incorporate these issues, challenge existing beliefs, and explore alternatives. This requires a focus on developing critical literacies: connecting with the learners’ own experiences, applying critical consciousness within the context of those experiences, and responding with follow-up action.
The relevance of critical literacies to language teaching is, or should be, self-evident, as it creates scope to teach useful language at the same time as focusing on content that is necessarily relevant to learners’ lives, and the area of critical language pedagogy has emerged as a field in its own right ( Crookes 2021 ). This book applies the principles of critical language pedagogy to explore how taboos and controversial issues can—and should—be incorporated into language education.
The book starts with an introductory chapter from the editors, followed by twenty chapters from contributing authors, which are divided into three parts. The introduction provides an overview of critical language pedagogy, a key tenet being ‘that beliefs and practices in society, which are related to power and the domination of certain groups over others, should be questioned and challenged’ (p. 5). It then discusses the PARSNIP policy in ELT materials design, before proposing the concept of ‘taboo literacy’ (p. 11), offering a pedagogic framework that can guide teachers towards effective incorporation of taboo topics into their teaching.
Part I (Chapters 2–6) is entitled ‘Theoretical Considerations and Insights’. It starts with a chapter by John Gray on the political economy of taboos, which explores how the ‘erasure’ or proscription of some topics, particularly sexual orientation, race, and class, allows the unfettered promotion of a more easily marketable, neoliberal world-view. This is followed by a chapter by Daniel Becker which presents a case for making taboos visible in the English language classroom. David Gerlach and Mareen Lüke present ideas for bringing critical approaches into language teacher education, and Grit Alter and Stefanie Fuchs provide a chapter discussing what constitutes a taboo topic in the first place, and analysing some ethical and practical issues that emerge in regard to their use in the foreign language classroom. The final chapter, by Aline Williams, focuses on the importance of resilience as a prerequisite for the application of critical language pedagogy.
Part II, ‘Empirical Enquiries’, consists of three chapters that present research related to taboo topics in language education. A chapter by Theresa Summer and Jeanine Steinbock presents findings from a study of adolescent learners’ perceptions of taboo topics in the English language classroom in Germany. In this study, participants broadly agreed that it is necessary for educators not only to include such topics in the curriculum, but also to pay attention to what the learners themselves have to say about them. Then Theresa Summer and Christian Ludwig, the book’s editors, provide a chapter on a survey of pre-service teachers’ attitudes to taboos in language teacher education which reveals that, while student teachers support the inclusion of taboo topics in the ELT curriculum, they also identify numerous challenges in doing this. These findings imply a need for a more systematic approach in teacher education that addresses the challenge of incorporating taboo and social justice issues in ELT. With this in mind, the following chapter by Christine Gardemann presents a study related to developing a pedagogic alliance in the ELT classroom between teachers and learners—‘a reciprocal relationship of mutual trust’ (p. 93).
Part III, entitled ‘Specific Taboos and Practical Examples’, is the longest section of the book, with twelve chapters exploring different taboo topics and their application in the language classroom. The range of topics discussed in these chapters is broad, and includes some that may not immediately spring to mind as taboo. Chapters on the issues of disability (by Katrin Thomson), mental health (Christian Ludwig and Veronika Martinez), swearing and taboo language (Valentin Werner), racism (Silke Braselmann), and human trafficking (Christian Ludwig) provide useful insight into how these issues can be incorporated into the language classroom. Other chapters are concerned with topics that are, in a sense, so taboo that they are unlikely to even be named as taboo topics, such as Maria Eisenmann’s interesting discussion of critical animal pedagogy and the incorporation of animal rights as a taboo topic in foreign language education, and Roman Bartosch’s chapter on death and extinction. Other chapters focus on taboo topics more generally and their application in different contexts or using certain media, such as Anchala Amarasinghe and Susanne Borgwaldt’s chapter using feature films to develop taboo literacy in the Sri Lankan context, a chapter from Sandra Stadler-Heer on taboo topics for South African students of European literature, and Janina Reinhardt’s chapter on using television series to legitimize discussion of taboo topics. Part III ends with a chapter from Eva Seidl that is concerned with translator and interpreter training and the role of taboo topics in developing agency.
A final chapter by Tyson Seburn, entitled ‘International Perspectives on Taboos in Foreign Language Education’, provides a conclusion to the book, drawing key themes together and discussing the relevance of critical pedagogy in foreign language teaching. This chapter ends with a call for both global and local teacher education programmes to incorporate these practices in order for ‘those in our profession, including our learners, to tackle injustice and build connections through communicative critical pedagogy’ (p. 259).
A key strength of this book is its logical layout and the way the chapters are grouped and sequenced. The theoretical overview of critical language pedagogy that the editors provide in the introduction, followed by the presentation of a framework for developing taboo literacy, is a helpful starting point that makes the book accessible to teachers who may be interested in incorporating a wider range of topics and issues in their teaching, but are unfamiliar with the background to the teaching of critical literacies. An awareness of the theoretical underpinnings is developed further throughout Part I, meaning that readers arrive at the research chapters with a clear understanding of the background informing the studies. The chapters that make up Part III could be dipped into individually by readers who are interested in specific taboos or learning contexts, but reading them all highlights the broad range of topics that currently tend to be omitted from the language curriculum, as well as providing useful insights into how it is not only possible, but highly beneficial, to bring discussion of these issues into our teaching. The diverse issues and contexts covered in Part III are supported by practical examples that are clearly and explicitly grounded in the principles of critical language pedagogy, demonstrating its universal relevance and applicability.
The closing chapter enhances the cohesion of the book further, stressing the need for critical pedagogy to be incorporated into teacher education. This message is prevalent throughout the book and is an important one. For the contributors to this book, the effective use of taboos and controversial issues is not simply a question of replacing the usual bland topics with racier ones. It involves adopting different pedagogies, and applying a new mindset from that which tends to be prescribed in most language teaching contexts. Keep things light, don’t cause offence, keep the students happy—mantras like these are drummed into language teachers from their initial training onwards, leading to the belief that any methodology designed to explore social problems, challenge existing beliefs, or encourage community action seems like a dangerous act of subversion. As this book convincingly argues, however, critical language pedagogy not only develops learners’ critical understanding of social issues, but also enriches and develops capacities for language development in areas that are highly relevant to their needs and, sadly, neglected in many language learning contexts.
Issues related to gender and sexuality in ELT have been a source of debate for quite some time. ELT textbooks in particular have been criticized for presenting only stereotypical gender roles and failing to represent people whose lifestyles and relationships do not conform to hetero- and cis-normative values. The narrow representation of gender and relationships in ELT materials has been highlighted as extremely unhelpful—to say the least—in most contexts, for a number of reasons. For John Gray, LGBTQ+ invisibility ‘means that lesbian and gay [and other] students are either silenced or forced into challenging the ways in which they are positioned’ ( Gray 2015 : 187). The failure to confront and criticize sexist attitudes and patriarchal structures has a similar impact with regard to gender identity, reinforcing beliefs and behaviours that perpetuate gender inequality while at the same time delegitimizing any challenge to the heteronormative, patriarchal status quo. Also, for migrant learners of English who have moved from socially repressive countries to new environments where LGBTQ+ and women’s rights are enshrined in law, the need to incorporate discussion of these issues and their social acceptability in the classroom is self-evident, and their failure to do this makes many popular ELT textbooks inappropriate for this context ( Brown and Nanguy 2021 ).
The lack of inclusion of a wider range of sexualities and gender roles in most popular ELT materials also affects teaching methodology, legitimizing the unhelpful narrative that discussing lifestyles which challenge some students’ beliefs, or have the potential to cause offence, is a bad idea and must be avoided at all costs. These materials encourage teachers to play safe through the use of innocuous topics, pandering to normative values that may be dominant but are also damaging. A new book that explores the issues of gender diversity and sexuality in ELT, which aims to develop queer critical literacies in teachers, and which offers ideas for their incorporation into the English language classroom, is therefore very welcome.
Although the contents page presents an introduction followed by twelve separate chapters, the editors tell us in their introduction that the book chapters are organized into three parts: ‘Teaching for Gender and Sexuality Diversity’, ‘Navigating Gender and Sexuality Diversity’, and ‘Interrogating Resources for Gender and Sexuality Diversity’. The first part includes chapters that cover initial teacher education in South Africa and Scotland (by Grant Andrews and Navan Govender), post-secondary education (Antonella Romiti and Jessie Smith), ELT in primary education (David Valente), and the teaching of younger learners in the private sector (Germán Canale). The chapters on navigating gender and sexual diversity present studies as wide-ranging as Gulsah Kutuk’s exploration of the effects of stereotyping on male Turkish learners, Lian Cao’s study of online dating as a source of informal language learning in Canada, and Shin-ying Huang’s analysis of Taiwanese university students’ reflections on, and reactions to, representations of gender and sexuality that seek to shape their identities. The final part, which is concerned with materials and resources, contains two chapters on gender and sexuality in ELT textbooks. The first, by Suha Alansari, focuses on gender representation in global textbooks and their localized versions, and finds that both versions are primarily concerned with promoting ‘the neoliberal conception of the global citizen’ (p. 156). Chris Richards then presents findings from a study that included a quantitative multimodal analysis of gender and sexuality representations in course materials, followed by the qualitative analysis of data collected from interviews with teachers. This study corroborates findings from previous research in identifying stereotypical gender representations and exclusively heteronormative presentations of relationships and families, although it does identify a progression towards more positive representation of women and a desire among teachers to adapt or subvert the negative representations they encounter. This chapter is followed by a critical analysis of language teacher education in Germany by David Gerlach, and a study of gender diversity in an online ELT programme in Bangladesh by Sayeedur Rahman and Mohammad Hamidul Haque. Joanna Pawelczyk’s final chapter is entitled ‘New Transnational Voices on Gender Diversity in English Language Education: Moving Forward’. This chapter refers back to some of the studies presented in the previous chapters, stressing the promotion of dominant ideologies surrounding gender roles and sexuality in ELT materials, and the concurrent erasure of non-heteronormative values and lifestyles. This creates a ‘transnational struggle to recognize a diversity of gender and sexual identities in English language education systems’ (p. 212), reflecting the global nature of some studies, the role of intercultural communication, and the fact that English language education needs to be ‘a truly diverse and inclusive space for all students’ (p. 216).
A small but important criticism of the book relates to the contents page, which does not separate the chapters into the three parts identified by the editors in the introduction. Doing this would allow readers to easily identify the book’s structure, making it more accessible. Nevertheless, there is a lot to commend this book for, not least its diversity of content. The editors state very clearly in the introduction their intention to ensure the book offers perspectives that go beyond those that are normally found in WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) countries. This is certainly achieved, with writers from a wide range of backgrounds and the inclusion of studies conducted in countries as diverse as Taiwan, Bangladesh, and Argentina. The diverse contexts add to the richness of the content, allowing the book to convey the complexity and variety of the issues and concepts it seeks to address. The inclusion of diverse contexts also demonstrates how different issues have different degrees of relevance in specific locations; this all helps to make the book a very interesting read. However, it also presents a challenge for the book as a whole to maintain a consistent message. Highlighting the range of issues to consider in different teaching contexts is, of course, a useful message in itself, especially when a key underpinning point of queer critical literacy is that gender diversity and sexualities are far more complicated than the traditional binary identities (male/female, gay/straight, married/single, etc.) that the heteronormative patriarchy has socially conditioned us all to accept. But it does mean that the ideas being conveyed in some chapters could be seen as not particularly relevant to the book’s overall message. For example, Gulsah Kutuk’s study into the impact of gender stereotyping on the listening performance of male Turkish university students relates to the perception that women are better at learning languages than men, and is concerned with exploring whether this leads to negative self-perceptions and diminished performance among male learners of English. Although there may be evidence for this, concerns that male learners are victims of gender stereotyping seems—to this reader at least—to be rather low priority compared to the extent to which stereotyping affects women and people with queer and/or trans identities in society. Similarly, although Suha Alansari’s study of global, regional, and localized (Saudi) ELT textbooks throws up some interesting findings—in particular the prevalence of neoliberal values in all three—readers in societies that broadly accept the principles of gender equality may wonder if it might be more useful to explore the lack of representation of sexualities in these materials.
Of course, by forcing readers to ask themselves questions such as these, the book is achieving its aim of encouraging the development of critical literacies. From my own (WEIRD) perspective, some of the issues explored in the book may seem somewhat out of step with the liberal and inclusive values that are widely accepted in my context. In the United Kingdom, for example, debates about gender equality tend to centre around how to remove barriers to achieving it, rather than whether or not it is a good idea. By developing my understanding of important gender and sexuality issues in other parts of the world, the book has helped me to identify different locations of struggle. This in turn encourages me to be less intolerant of other perspectives. Readers with similar backgrounds to mine are likely to benefit from the book in similar ways, while others will appreciate having the issues that are relevant to their contexts incorporated into this important discussion. This can lead to Pawelczyk’s call for action in the final chapter to go beyond creating discourses about normalizing diversity, and instead to start ‘talking about doing normalizing diversity in English language education … [which] … needs teachers and educators who are equipped with critical skills … to include and respect the (intersectional) identities of all students’ (p. 216). These critical skills and inclusive approaches have not traditionally been the focus of TESOL education courses, and this call for action is a refreshing change.
While the first three books in this review offer some analysis of why certain issues or skills are absent or poorly dealt with in ELT, they are mostly concerned with filling a gap in the discourse by offering ideas and examples for incorporating new content that benefits learners in ways that go beyond the development of linguistic and communicative competence. I now turn to a book that is primarily focused on exploring how a socially constructed phenomenon has had (and continues to have) a damaging impact on ELT. By the far the most polemic of the five books being reviewed, J. P. B. Gerald’s Antisocial Language Teaching: English and the Pervasive Pathology of Whiteness explores the concept of whiteness and its role in shaping ELT as a field that supports discourses of white supremacy, while at the same time delegitimizing blackness. To do this, the author draws on critical race theory, critical whiteness studies, and disability critical race studies to offer a (re)presentation of ELT that many people within the profession’s establishment will be uncomfortable with, and some may be reluctant to accept.
As a concept, whiteness goes beyond the notion of belonging to a specific racial group. In the United States, in particular, it also includes various characteristics and behaviours that tend to be associated with being part of that racial group. Unlike the concept of ‘race’, which limits itself to categorizing people according to perceived physical and (ostensibly) inherited behavioural differences, whiteness focuses on specific characteristics and behaviours, commonly associated with dominant social groups, which are widely presented as neutral—the default or norm from which others deviate—meaning it can be a difficult concept for white people to grasp. Through the lens of whiteness, deviation from this ‘norm’ implies deficiency as well as difference. According to Olcoń, ‘Whiteness therefore implies a power structure, an ideology and a racial identity which confers dominance and privilege’ ( Olcoń 2023 : 4). The area of scholarship known as critical whiteness studies is primarily concerned with exploring the concept of whiteness and exposing its damaging social impact, both in history and in contemporary life. In defining the key concepts of Antisocial Language Teaching , the author equates whiteness and white supremacy, saying there is no functional difference between the two and that ‘whiteness was created to be supreme, as a protection from the oppression that others deserve because of the groups into which they have been placed’ (p. 6).
The main focus of the book is on pathologizing whiteness in ELT. Gerald does not just explore examples of whiteness and problematize their impact on the profession. He presents whiteness as an illness, a disorder that has had a chronically debilitating effect that ‘renders the industry callous, corrupt and cruel’ (back cover). To do this, Gerald uses the American Psychology Association (APA)’s seven criteria for diagnosing antisocial personality disorder to analyse the ideologies and institutions that shape the global ELT profession. According to the book these criteria are used as a rhetorical device, but in effect they form an analytical framework for identifying ‘symptoms’ of whiteness. The use of this framework allows Gerald to present ELT as imperialistic, elitist, racist, dishonest, irresponsible, immoral, and a number of other things besides.
There are three main parts to the book. Part 1 is entitled ‘Disorder’, with seven chapters that mostly provide a historical overview of the social construction of whiteness, its associations with capitalism, its contrast with the (also socially constructed) concept of blackness, and its role in the hegemony of white varieties of English as ‘standard’ and other varieties as ‘inferior’. Part 2 uses the APA’s seven criteria to ‘diagnose’ ELT as an antisocial practice. These criteria are:
Failure to conform to social norms concerning lawful behaviors, such as performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
Deceitfulness, repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for pleasure or personal profit.
Impulsivity or failure to plan.
Irritability and aggressiveness, often with physical fights or assaults.
Reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Consistent irresponsibility, failure to sustain consistent work behavior, or honor monetary obligations.
Lack of remorse, being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated or stolen from another person. (pp. 63–109, passim ).
In his analysis, Gerald draws on a mix of existing literature and anecdotal evidence to critically examine common practices in ELT such as the hiring of unqualified teachers based on their ‘nativeness’, the exploitation of teachers through discrimination and deprofessionalization, the ELT profession’s platitudinous response to the Black Lives Matter movement, its role in the spread of colonialism and linguistic imperialism, and the use of ‘standard’ English to pathologize all other varieties and their speakers. Part 3 is entitled ‘Treatment’, and contains just two chapters followed by a conclusion. The first of these chapters offers, as a specific example of how to ‘treat’ ELT, an account of a course that Gerald developed and delivered during the Covid-19 pandemic, entitled ‘Decoding and Decentering Whiteness’. This is followed by a chapter called ‘Prosocial Language Teaching’, which presents seven ideas for decentring whiteness in ELT.
Using the APA’s criteria for antisocial personality disorder to ‘diagnose’ ELT as suffering from a medical condition is, in my view, a very effective framework for presenting Gerald’s thesis. It allows Gerald to turn the tables on ELT, by presenting something that is usually regarded as healthy and innocuous as being, in fact, seriously unwell and very destructive. In ELT, native-speaker varieties of English are idealized, heterosexist lifestyles and cis-gendered identities are normalized, neoliberal ideology and myths of meritocracy are presented uncritically, and racist perceptions of teachers who ‘don’t look like native-speakers’ are pandered to by employers. In this antisocial reality, any alternative positions are seen as subversive and potentially damaging: the acceptance of ‘non-native’ models of English will lead to a loss of standards; the inclusion of LGBTQ+ issues in materials will upset cis-gendered heterosexual learners; questioning the belief that hard work leads to success devalues individualism and entrepreneurialism; and recruiting teachers who do not conform to the idealized (i.e. white ‘native-speaker’) English teacher may lead to financial loss. The use of antisocial personality disorder traits to deconstruct the ELT exposes it as a particularly damaging profession–one that not only fails to address what is wrong with the world, but is actively complicit in causing harm. The idea behind this rhetorical device is good and it is, to a large extent, successful. However, the use of whiteness as the main focus of the book’s critique means that the author is less able to explore areas of ELT that do not easily fit into the APA’s seven criteria, or are less directly related to whiteness. Some of the chapters in Part 2 do not focus on aspects of ELT that you might expect. For example, it is not particularly clear why ‘standard’ varieties of English are the main focus of the chapter relating to reckless disregard for the safety of others. Certainly, negative perceptions of ‘non-standard’ or racialized varieties of English create discriminatory environments that could cause harm to users of those varieties, and I do not intend to belittle this issue. I do feel, though, that other practices, such as publishing companies’ delegitimization of gay people in order to increase market share, is surely a more obvious example of powerful forces in ELT having a reckless disregard for the safety of others. In addition to the symptoms that Gerald attributes to the damaging influence of whiteness in ELT, there are other symptoms that could perhaps be more effectively examined if other factors were more central to the discussion.
One thing that—for me, at least—is missing from this book is an explicit and critical examination of the role of capitalism in ELT. Gerald does make some historical references to capitalism, identifying its links with colonialism and the slave trade. But the role of capitalism in twenty-first-century ELT is connected to many of the problems that Gerald is referring to. A universal and UK/US-centric approach to methodology and materials content has spread globally through accredited, commercial TESOL qualification providers and publishing companies who seek to maximize efficiencies and profits by globalizing their products. The application of (white) ‘native-speaker’ models of English as ‘standard’ is promoted by commercial examining bodies that also aim to have a global reach, and is being exploited by ‘accent reduction training’ entrepreneurs who peddle the myth that it is possible to have a ‘neutral accent’. The motivation to employ white, ‘native-speaker’ teachers is driven by school owners feeling the need to pander to the beliefs and demands of their learners, however misguided and racist they may be. Much of what is wrong with ELT today can quite easily be linked to capitalism and the profit motive. The dismantling of the status quo that the author is calling for, therefore, is unlikely to happen if ELT continues to function within a capitalist paradigm.
Perhaps Gerald would argue that capitalism is itself a symptom of whiteness: a concept devised by white people and designed to control, dominate, and exploit the more vulnerable groups in society. However, the obvious links between whiteness and capitalism are not made as clear as they could be in the book. In fact, Part 3 (entitled ‘Treatment’) seems, if anything, to be largely pro-capitalist. The first chapter in this part presents a course that the author designed and delivered—commercially—online. In this chapter and, seemingly, without any irony, Gerald refers to his students as ‘clients’ (e.g. p. 117). In the following chapter, he proposes that we buy materials from ‘more anti-oppressive companies’ (p. 148), implying an acceptance that we must continue to rely on publishing companies for teaching resources:
The only reason that the publishers continue to create materials that reify these harmful ideas is because they think it’s the most profitable way to operate. Even though we are currently stuck existing within racial capitalism, we do still have the power to band together to affect the almighty market. (p. 148)
Of course, using one’s limited power as a customer to buy less-damaging materials in the hope that this will influence the market is not a bad idea, but only if one believes that consumers can control the market, which entails a belief in neoliberal ideology. It is rather surprising that such a recommendation should be made in a book that, according to one of the testimonials on the back cover, ‘makes a passionate case for demolishing the status quo in English language teaching’. The idea of decentring whiteness while embracing the principles of capitalism at the same time could be seen as rather naive. And in any case, even if market forces did lead to an eradication of ideology associated with white supremacy in ELT materials, other damaging factors associated with the commodification of language teaching would continue to prevail, and the status quo would remain far from demolished.
Having said all of this, there is still relatively little published literature that is concerned with the concept of whiteness in ELT, which makes this an important book in terms of its contribution to the wider discourse problematizing deeply embedded structures and ideologies. Part 2 provides a compelling argument that the ELT profession is seriously unwell, and in need of treatment. What is more, although he does not provide an explicit guide for designing a course that addresses whiteness in the way that Hadley and Boon do for a course in critical thinking, the author’s account of his own course, ‘Decentering and Decoding Whiteness’, provides a useful template that teacher educators can follow to bring anti-whiteness education into their own practice. The syllabus and overall approach are very informative, and could perhaps be adapted and used in a wider range of contexts. This chapter also includes sections depicting how some of the students (or ‘clients’) on this course coped with and reacted to the experience. These sections offer some interesting insights into the application of Freirean principles of critical pedagogy, including some uncomfortable and revelatory critical incidents as students gained a deeper critical understanding of their own positions in society. These accounts suggest that developing their own understanding of whiteness also developed the students' capacities for using antiracist language pedagogies in their own teaching.
Indeed, it may be that my criticism of the book—that it focuses too narrowly on whiteness in ELT and fails to address other, wider issues—exposes my own limited understanding of whiteness as a concept. Coming as I do from a relatively privileged, white British background, it is perhaps difficult for me to appreciate the all-pervasive nature of whiteness, particularly from a North American perspective. I understand white supremacy to be a discriminatory ideology that creates structures which oppress, marginalize, and disadvantage certain people. But the same could be said for heteronormativity, or patriarchy, or ableism, or linguicism. These ideologies can intersect, compounding the extent to which some people are oppressed, but I find it difficult to see how one single ideology, whiteness, is the cause of all the others.
For the final book in this review, I turn to a publication that is concerned with the broad and somewhat nebulous concept of social justice. The issue of social justice and whether it should be a goal in education has proved to be a surprisingly divisive issue. Some educators and policymakers regard the social justice movement as an attempt to indoctrinate learners through the promotion of dangerous ideologies, while others regard it as a means of giving learners the skills to challenge existing, dominant ideologies, which are themselves dangerous in their promotion of structural inequality and oppression. As mentioned elsewhere in this review, ELT has tended to shy away from the inclusion of social justice issues on the basis that they could be interpreted as controversial or create divisiveness in the classroom. Deniz Ortaçtepe Hart’s Social Justice and the Language Classroom: Reflection, Action and Transformation challenges this prevailing attitude by presenting an overview of language teaching for social justice—not simply as a list of topics to focus on now and again, but as an approach that informs all aspects of language education.
The book is divided into three parts. Part I is entitled ‘Language Teaching for Social Justice’, and the four chapters included here introduce key concepts that inform the entire book, particularly hegemony and intersectionality, which are covered in some detail in Chapter 1. Hegemony, the idea that oppressive structures are normalized to ensure that power is retained by those who hold it, is central to the understanding of social injustice as a structural phenomenon, rather than as something that can be attributed to individual behaviours. The main lens through which Ortaçtepe Hart uses to analyse and discuss social justice is intersectionality, a concept used to explore how different features of people’s identities—such as race, gender or disability—combine and influence the types of social injustice they may be affected by. Chapter 2 provides a discussion of social justice education, and introduces an approach to teaching called ‘transformative liberatory education’ (p. 27), which is based heavily on the work of Freire and education for ‘critical consciousness’ ( Freire 2013 ). This approach is all about developing an understanding of the societal structures that locate learners in certain positions in society, and to identify ways of challenging any injustices that they identify. Chapter 3 focuses in on social justice language education, identifying solid justifications for taking a social justice approach to language teaching. These justifications may resonate particularly strongly with readers who are involved in ELT, which has clear associations with colonialism, imperialism, and linguicism. Chapter 4 is concerned with curriculum, exploring the politically charged nature of decisions that affect all aspects of curriculum design and delivery, and justifying the need for social justice to inform all aspects of curriculum rather than being included as a single topic within a syllabus, or tagged on at the end of each lesson.
The three chapters in Part II each focus on critical themes and frameworks: neoliberalism, social class, and anticlassism; race, ethnicity, and antiracist language pedagogy; and social justice pedagogies for all gender and sexual identities. Each chapter starts with a critical analysis of each theme, and then moves on to present some alternative approaches and models. This is perhaps the ‘meatiest’ part of the book; it deconstructs the themes and exposes them as profoundly unjust, as well as deeply embedded. In Chapter 5 the author argues that the pervasive ideology of neoliberalism and the classless society has erased class from any discussion of social justice. Chapter 6 explores how race and ethnicity are socially constructed, and how racialized ideologies are embedded within the curriculum, while racism itself is often presented as a problem with some individuals, rather than in a structural sense. In Chapter 7, standard representations of sex and sexuality are revealed to be overwhelmingly patriarchal and heteronormative, and therefore repressive and unjust. Once exposed in this way, the author explores ways in which a social-justice-oriented approach to language education can orient learners towards different perspectives of these themes. Ortaçtepe Hart proposes an anti-neoliberal framework, and presents this with a view to dismantling classism. According to the author, antiracist pedagogies can be incorporated through practices that focus on the denormalization of whiteness and that seek to dismantle discriminatory systems and policies. By queering language education, a more inclusive curriculum can give legitimacy to families, relationships, and lifestyles that do not conform to the narrow, heteronormative images that languages learners tend to be exposed to.
Part III consists of a single, concluding chapter, which addresses the challenges we face as language educators when it comes to social justice education, before offering some useful ideas for reflection and practical application. It starts with an acknowledgement of the challenges that language educators are likely to face if they wish to take a social justice approach. These include challenges related to changing the attitudes of other stakeholders, accepting that social justice education requires difficult and sometimes painful discussions to take place in the classroom, and issues related to this such as tolerance, and the creation of ‘safe’ spaces. The author then offers some practical considerations on areas such as assessment for learning and the potential role of technology in social justice language education.
Before I go any further in my evaluation of this book, I should disclose that I am a colleague of the author, and also that I have already written an overwhelmingly positive review of this book for another journal. Sceptical readers may feel that my professional relationship with the author makes a positive review inevitable. However, as someone who cares deeply about ELT and its impact on the wider world, I can honestly say this book really speaks to me. The issue of social justice has, for too long, been neglected in most ELT contexts, and it is pleasing to see Ortaçtepe Hart calling for it to be placed at the centre of the language curriculum. It is the ‘all or nothing’ message that appeals to me the most: social justice is not something you can ‘touch on’ now and again. That would be performative social justice education, turning the whole concept into a commodity that can be incorporated into a neoliberal curriculum. No, social justice language education should drive everything: curriculum, materials, methods, assessment—everything.
Of course, this makes social justice language education seem like an impossible task. Most of us (and I include myself) work in contexts that are affected by profit-orientation, the need for efficiency, assessment criteria, policy, market forces, competition, employer expectations, and many other factors which run counter to the principles of a social justice approach. With this in mind, some people might criticize Ortaçtepe Hart’s book for not offering enough practical guidance on how to turn a ‘regular’ language curriculum into a social justice language curriculum. However, as I mentioned in my previous review, this is precisely the point. One of the key problems with the current model of ELT is that it assumes that a single, commodified approach can be applied by all teachers, to all learners, and in all contexts. For Ortaçtepe Hart, the social justice curriculum needs to be participatory, which means it has to be driven by the issues that are most relevant to the learners in each specific context. While Hadley and Boon provide a series of activities and clear guidelines that teachers can apply directly to incorporate critical thinking into ELT, and Gerald presents his own course as an example that can inspire teachers to find their own ways to counter the damaging impact of whiteness, Ortaçtepe Hart deliberately avoids providing readers with any kind of practical model for teachers to apply, or misapply, in whatever context they happen to be in. While this may seem to some like a frustrating omission, it ensures that the book adheres to the theories and pedagogies that it advocates, and forces readers to critically reflect on their own contexts and learners in adopting a social justice approach to language education.
Another key strength of the book is the use of intersectionality to explore the complexities of social (in)justice. It is the way in which different features of people’s individual identities combine to locate them in certain social positions and to affect their capacities for social mobility that creates social injustice in the first place. Although Gerald views the problems of ELT through the lens of whiteness, an intersectional lens allows Ortaçtepe Hart to incorporate not only race and ethnicity but also class, gender and sexual identity, sexuality, and a range of other issues into the discussion.
If I was to offer one criticism of the book, it would be that it could go into more depth to explore not only why social justice has been so neglected in ELT, but also why there continues to be such resistance to social justice language education in a world that is full of injustice, corruption, and exploitation. The concept of hegemony is used throughout the book to present ideas such as colour-blind pedagogies (which effectively deny the existence of racism), heteronormativity, and language ideologies. Nevertheless, it is the deeply embedded nature of these hegemonies, and the way they are controlled by those (usually profit-oriented) forces that benefit from them, that is, to my mind, the root of the problem. Having said that, the book already covers such a wide range of issues, and it could lose its balance and cohesion if it tried to squeeze in even more critical analysis.
All the books in this review follow the premise that ELT is about more than simply teaching and practising language items, systems, and skills, and therefore challenge the long-held belief that neutrality is both possible and preferable. Whereas Hadley and Boon’s Critical Thinking is primarily concerned with developing skills to assess the veracity of content, both inside and outside the classroom, the other books are more focused on the nature of the ELT curriculum itself. Proposing alternatives to existing models, however imperialistic, colonizing, or racist they may be, could simply give way to a different kind of colonization, particularly if they propose alternative ideologies that are popular in the Global North and seek to impose them on the rest of the world ( Selvi 2024 ). However, these publications all take steps to incorporate a global perspective, either by including chapters from diverse authors working in a wide range of contexts, or by including sections that stress the relevance of the issues to all contexts where critical thinking and critical consciousness can address inequities, injustices, and misinformation.
Of course, reading these books individually could give the impression that the problem with ELT is narrower than it actually is. Hadley and Boon tell us that there is a lack of focus on critical thinking. Reading Ludwig and Summer allows you to identify deficiencies in the range of topics being explored. Banegas and Govender’s book leads us to conclude that we need to do more to address issues of sexuality and gender identity. For Gerald, the problems in ELT are grounded in racism and the hegemony of whiteness. The reality, however, is that all of these problems exist, and they are all interconnected. Only Ortaçtepe Hart attempts to bring these issues together under the umbrella of social justice; this allows her to write about race, gender and sexuality, class, and how hegemonic forces have led to the construction of a pedagogical approach that is devoid of criticality and perpetuates inequity. Perhaps what our profession needs is more literature that aims to develop a clearer understanding of the bigger picture: the wide-ranging nature of hegemony and the fact that rather than exposing and challenging social injustice, ELT has been complicit in its global spread.
In addition to the main themes of each book, a recurring issue is the role of globalization and neoliberal capitalism in our profession. The dominant forces in ELT are motivated more by commercial success than by effective teaching practice. A reluctance to challenge the status quo, therefore, is understandable when the current system yields so much profit for the corporations who are responsible for designing the teacher education courses, creating the materials, and providing the assessments that measure our students’ success.
Nevertheless, the long-prevalent myth of neutrality in ELT, and the concomitant avoidance of critical engagement with real social and environmental problems, is losing credibility as the need for a more critically conscious approach becomes increasingly urgent. These books highlight something that is not discussed often enough in the global ELT profession: the fact that English language teachers are more than facilitators of procedure—we are educators. Of course, the primary purpose is to teach the language. We need to help our students to communicate ideas more effectively in English. But what ideas? And to what end? Are we happy to simply give people the language skills that allow them to play the system to their advantage, when the system itself is failing? These books all encourage us to reflect on our individual and collective responsibility as language educators, to develop our students’ capacities to problematize local and global issues, and to effect positive change in the world. Surely that is the purpose of education, and it is becoming abundantly clear that this is what the world needs more than it ever has before.
Steve Brown has worked in English language teaching since 1993. He started his career as a volunteer before spending several years in private language schools in Central Europe and South Africa. He returned to Scotland in 2001 and had a long career in the further education sector, before moving to higher education in 2018. Steve has held various management, leadership and teacher development positions, and is currently a lecturer in TESOL at the University of Glasgow. His research interests include materials analysis, curriculum design, ESOL policy, and ELT as emancipatory practice.
Email : [email protected]
Block , D. , J. Gray , and M. Holborow . 2012 . Neoliberalism and Applied Linguistics . London : Routledge .
Google Scholar
Google Preview
Brown , S. , and C. Nanguy . 2021 . ‘Global Coursebooks and Equalities Legislation: A Critical Study.’ New York State TESOL Journal 8 ( 2 ): 51 – 62 .
Byram , M. 1988 . ‘Foreign Language Education and Cultural Studies.’ Language, Culture and Curriculum 1 ( 1 ): 15 – 31 .
Crookes , G. 2021 . ‘Critical Language Pedagogy: An Introduction to Principles and Values.’ ELT Journal 75 ( 3 ): 247 – 55 .
De Sousa Santos , B. 2014 . Epistemologies of the South: Justice Against Epistemicide . London : Routledge .
Freire , P. 2013 . Education for Critical Consciousness. London : Bloomsbury .
Freire , P. 1996 . Pedagogy of the Oppressed . revised edn. London : Penguin .
Giroux , H. 2011 . On Critical Pedagogy. New York : Bloomsbury .
Gray , J. 2002 . ‘The Global Coursebook in English Language Teaching.’ In Globalization and Language Teaching , edited by D. Block and D. Cameron , 151 – 67 . London : Routledge .
Gray , J. 2015 . The Construction of English . Basingstoke : Palgrave MacMillan .
Littlejohn , A. 2012 . ‘Language Teaching Materials and the (very) Big Picture.’ Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 9 ( 1 ): 283 – 97 .
Morris , E. 2014 . ‘Teaching Needs Less Ideology and More Evidence.’ The Guardian Online , accessed 25 November 2015 . https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/nov/25/teaching-needs-less-ideology-more-evidence
Olcoń , K. 2023 . ‘Key Concepts in Critical Whiteness Studies.’ In Handbook of Critical Whiteness , edited by J. Ravulo , K. Olcoń , T. Dune , A. Workman , and P. Liamputtong . Singapore : Springer . https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1612-0_2-1
Pennycook , A. 1989 . ‘The Concept of Method, Interested Knowledge and the Politics of Language Teaching.’ TESOL Quarterly 23 ( 4 ): 589 – 618 .
Pennycook , A. 2021 . Critical Applied Linguistics: A (Critical Re)introduction. Abingdon : Routledge .
Schiro , M. S. 2013 . Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Issues and Enduring Concerns . 2nd edn. London : Sage .
Selvi , A. F. 2024 . ‘The Myopic Focus on Decoloniality in Applied Linguistics and English Language Education: Citations and Stolen Subjectivities.’ Applied Linguistics Review , pp. 1 – 25 . Online ahead of print . https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2024-0011
Month: | Total Views: |
---|---|
September 2024 | 628 |
Citing articles via.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide
Sign In or Create an Account
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence. One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson (2020, p. 205): "the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life."
Our critical thinking skills framework. The focus on critical thinking skills has its roots in two approaches: the cognitive psychological approach and the educational approach (see for reviews, e.g. Sternberg Citation 1986; Ten Dam and Volman Citation 2004).From a cognitive psychological approach, critical thinking is defined by the types of behaviours and skills that a critical thinker can show.
The disposition to use one's critical thinking skills is as important as the skills themselves. If a person understands the skills involved in thinking critically but fails to deploy those skills when the situation warrants, they would not be classified as a critical thinker. ... A Review of Critical Thinking Assessments" Journal of ...
1. Introduction. Critical thinking is a high-order thinking activity for "deciding what to believe or do" [1].It comprises skills of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, self-regulation, inquisitiveness, self-confidence, open-mindedness, prudence, and the like [2].Critical thinking was interpreted as seven definitional strands: judgment, skepticism, originality ...
The OECD rubrics were designed for use in real-life teaching practices in different ways: (1) designing and revising lesson plans to support students gain opportunity to develop critical thinking skills (and creativity); (2) assessing student work and progression in the acquisition of these skills; (3) generating newly aligned rubrics adapted ...
The purpose of this study is to identify and analyze articles that examine students' critical thinking abilities that have been published in several reputable international journals published in ...
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.
There is a need for effective methods to teach critical thinking (CT). One instructional method that seems promising is comparing correct and erroneous worked examples (i.e., contrasting examples). The aim of the present study, therefore, was to investigate the effect of contrasting examples on learning and transfer of CT-skills, focusing on avoiding biased reasoning. Students (N = 170 ...
Critical thinking requires epistemic cognition: the ability to construct, evaluate, and use knowledge. Epistemic dispositions and beliefs predict many academic outcomes, as well as whether people use their epistemic cognition skills, for example, scrutinizing methods in science and evaluating sources in history.
1. Introduction. Developing students' critical thinking skills is regarded as a highly important educational goal in many societies around the world, as it is seen as promoting such disparate qualities as democracy and personal development (Behar-Horenstein and Niu, 2011, Beyer, 1995, Facione, 2006, Martin, 2005, Tsui, 1998).Despite the importance of critical thinking as an educational goal ...
The results about the critical thinking of the students showed that the mean of deductive reasoning and evaluation skills were higher than that of other skills and analytical skills had the lowest mean and there was a positive significant relationship between the students' performance with inferential skill and the total score of critical ...
ABSTRACT. Critical thinking is a core component of higher education teaching and learning across multiple disciplines. However, supporting students to develop critical thinking skills can be challenging due to their prior experiences of education which may have emphasised rote learning and due to the high volume of approaches available to choose from as a teacher.
Abstract. Developing students' critical thinking is a major educational goal in societies around the world. In spite of this, the research community has had serious problems handling this highly prized goal. In reference to these problems, several issues have been discussed, one being the theory issue, where the theoretical development has ...
Field studies indicate the existence of relations between teaching metacognitive strategies and progress in students' higher-order thinking processes (Schraw, 1998; Kramarski et al., 2002; Van der Stel and Veenman, 2010). Metacognition is thus considered one of the most relevant predictors of achieving a complex higher-order thought process.
Abstract. Critical thinking is a complex, dynamic process formed by attitudes and strategic skills, with the aim of achieving a specific goal or objective. The attitudes, including the critical thinking attitudes, constitute an important part of the idea of good care, of the good professional. It could be said that they become a virtue of the ...
Abstract. This study looks at whether creativity and critical thinking help students solve problems and improve their grades by mediating the link between 21 st century skills (learning motivation, cooperativity, and interaction with peers, engagement with peers, and a smart classroom environment). The mediating relationship between creativity and critical thinking was discovered using ...
The ability to use reasoned opinion focusing equally on processes and outcomes over emotions is called critical thinking (Paul and Elder, 2008). Critical thinking skills are desired in almost every discipline and play a major role in decision-making and daily judgments. The roots of critical thinking date back to Socrates 2,500 years ago and ...
Proliferating information and viewpoints in the 21st century require an educated citizenry with the ability to think critically about complex, controversial issues. Critical thinking requires epistemic cognition: the ability to construct, evaluate, and use knowledge. Epistemic dispositions and beliefs predict many academic outcomes, as well as ...
engage deeply with content, develop critical thinking skills, and cultivate a passion for lifelong learning. However, the journey towards effective IBL is not without its challenges and limitations.
Aims & Scope. This leading international journal, launched in 2006, uniquely identifies and details critical issues in the future of learning and teaching of creativity, as well as innovations in teaching for thinking. As a peer-reviewed forum for interdisciplinary researchers and communities of researcher-practitioner-educators, the journal ...
Introduction. The importance of fostering and developing critical thinking (CT) in children from a young age (Lai Citation 2011) has been widely discussed and endorsed in scholarship (Facione Citation 2011; Lipman Citation 1991).Education policy often highlights CT skills as an essential component of twenty-first-century skills - the set of skills needed to solve the challenges of a rapidly ...
Project-based learning (PBL) is a transformative approach to college education with the potential to develop comprehensive skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and teamwork. This study explores factors influencing the effectiveness of PBL and proposes strategies for its enhancement among Chinese college students.
The most productive researcher is Rusyati L., and the Journal of Physics Conference Series is the most relevant source. Visualization mapping shows a strong relationship between VR and critical thinking skills, particularly for students in learning. Thematic evolution analysis indicates that VR is widely applied in education, training, and ...
Although critical theory heavily informs the epistemological assumptions underpinning the other books in this review, Hadley and Boon's Critical Thinking is less concerned with adopting a specific epistemological or ideological position in ELT. Rather, the focus is on giving students the skills to understand the logic—or lack of logic ...
Submit an article Journal homepage. 0 Views 0 CrossRef citations to date 0. ... critical thinking skills should be integrated and practiced throughout a student's degree program. Including project-based learning (PjBL) in general education classes can serve a dual purpose for the general education instructor: first, well-designed project ...
However, understanding how flaws in rational thinking can arise is useful for the critical thinking skills of identifying or challenging hidden assumptions (Jones, 2015) and evaluating other people's arguments (Cottrell, 2011). These examples from the literature suggest that exploring the psychological and sociological factors that affect ...