Reading Time: 8 minutes

Critical thinking has long been a foundational skill in post-secondary education, but in the 21st century—particularly in the age of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI)—it has been getting even more press than usual. Some have mused that our human ability to think critically is a key feature that distinguishes us from Large Language Models, and that GenAI use can undermine our reflexive capabilities and responsibilities (Lindebaum & Fleming, 2024). Others have argued that GenAI can serve as an effective assistant to actually help enable learners to think more critically (Mwangi Thiga, 2024). Irrespective of whatever side you may take in this debate, most educators would agree that while critical thinking has always been central to higher education, in today’s climate–where students face a deluge of information, misinformation, and AI-generated content, the ability to think critically has become even more vital.  

After all, when we teach, we are not only aiming to help students become successful Personal Support Workers, Paramedics, Chefs, HR managers, Veterinary Technicians, and more, we are also educating future democratic citizens. Hence, our and their ability to discern truth, evaluate evidence, and make ethical decisions is of paramount importance. While “critical thinking” is referenced often in assignment instructions, on course outlines, and in discussion amongst fellow colleagues, it can be challenging to describe what exactly we mean when we talk about critical thinking in higher education, and to communicate clearly to students what we expect of them when they are being asked to think critically.   

As Elder and Paul (2005), in their influential about critical thinking competency standards, say “…only when teachers understand the foundations of critical thinking can they effectively teach for it… Teachers are able to foster critical thinking only to the extent that they themselves think critically” (p. 6).   

This hub post starts by defining the individual and social dimensions of critical thinking, and then outlines various competencies associated with critical thinking to suggest ways they may align with your own teaching philosophies and course learning outcomes. This post also offers some discipline-specific examples and suggestions about how you can model critical thinking and incorporate related active learning opportunities into your weekly lessons. It’s also important to remind ourselves (and illustrate for students) that critical thinking is not the end—but rather a means to an end to help cultivate traits such as empathy, fairmindedness, and intellectual humility, courage, and perseverance (Elder & Paul, 2005).  These intellectual traits are essential for our graduates because they form the foundation of responsible and effective participation in both professional and civic life. 

  

Defining Critical Thinking: Individual and Social Dimensions  

 While there are various definitions of critical thinking, one useful starting point is to differentiate between “individual” and “social” critical thinking (Larson et al., 2024).   

Individual critical thinking has been defined as “the ability to thoughtfully analyze and evaluate situations and recommend courses of action that consider stakeholders, implications, and consequences” (Lovelace, et al., 2016, p.101). You’ll note that inherent to this definition is a willingness to engage, an ability to take on other perspectives, and to “analyze” and “evaluate” (both higher order thinking skills according to Bloom’s taxonomy). Both cognitive and affective skills and attitudes are required (Lindebaum & Fleming, 2024; Parks-Leduc et al., 2021,).    

In contrast, social critical thinking involves “reflecting critically upon, and challenging, the status quo of prevailing social and institutional arrangements” (Humber & Knights, 2022, p. 303). Social critical thinking encourages students to look at the world through the lens of power dynamics and imbalances, to engage with each other to ensure a diversity of perspectives are heard, and to work towards collective problem-solving (Berkovich, 2014; Colombo, 2023; Edwards & Kupers, 2024).  

In an outcomes-based education framework, the development of individual and social thinking is essential because it directly supports learners in achieving the intended learning outcomes, especially those related to problem-solving, collaboration, and ethical reasoning.  In your course, critical thinking is likely both an outcome and a means to mastering content. It also provides a way to develop what Paul and Elder (2005) describe as the perspective of a domain expert.  

It’s usually quite clear for faculty teaching a course “what” they will be teaching. The content you want students to encounter is evident. But “how” you will share this content with students and ensure it is memorable and meaningful to their lives is much less obvious.   
  

Modelling Critical Thinking in the Classroom  

Educators play a crucial role in modelling critical thinking. One way to ensure you are doing this, is to move away from traditional lecture style lessons (where students are expected to sit passively and take notes as you “get through” the content), and ensure you are instigating class discussions based on “why” and “how” questions.   

You might start off with something simple that can give students a sense of ownership over the content like:  
“Last week we talked about the concept of ‘cost per hire’ of employees. How would you define and describe this in your own words? Why is it important for any organization to take into account?”  

Then, when students are ready, you can move on to slightly more advanced questions.  

For example:  

• In a veterinary technician course, instead of asking, “What are the symptoms of feline diabetes?” an instructor might ask instead, “Why might two cats with the same symptoms require different treatment plans?” This encourages students to consider variables such as breed, age, and owner capacity—developing both diagnostic reasoning and empathy.  

• In a leisure studies class where you are guiding students to explore the difference between inclusive and exclusive recreational programming, you might share with students a real-life local recreation schedule and program and ask: “How might this community centre’s swimming program unintentionally exclude certain populations?” This pushes students to analyze systemic barriers and propose inclusive solutions.  

See the Spectrum of Effective Questioning for more ways to pose questions that will engage students’ critical thinking abilities.  

It’s important in these moments too, to give students sufficient time to think quietly and reflect, or jot down ideas and notes on paper before sharing ideas with a peer or the whole class. The 2 example questions above couldn’t be answered thoughtfully in just 2-3 minutes. 

By modelling curiosity, skepticism, and openness to multiple viewpoints, educators create a classroom culture where critical thinking is not just taught but practiced, valued, and personalized for every student.  

Active Learning Ideas for the Post-Secondary Classroom  

There are also many active learning strategies that go beyond class discussions that are particularly effective in fostering critical thinking. Below are three discipline-specific examples, each tied to a concrete learning outcome:  

Pro/Con Lists 

Let’s imagine you’re teaching in Culinary Arts  

Learning Outcome: Evaluate the sustainability and cultural implications of various cooking techniques.  

Activity: Students create a pro/con list comparing traditional open-flame grilling with sous-vide cooking. They must consider not only taste and efficiency but also energy use, cultural authenticity, and environmental impact. This encourages critical evaluation from multiple perspectives.  

Just Getting Started: If you are just getting started with critical thinking in your classroom, consider drawing the pro/con list yourself and asking for student input. Or, use a tool like Padlet to encourage collaborative submissions. 

Structured Debates 

Let’s imagine you’re teaching in Police Foundations  

Learning Outcome: Assess the ethical and practical implications of different policing models.  

Activity: Students engage in a formal, friendly debate on the topic: “Community policing is more effective than zero-tolerance policing.” Each side must research evidence, anticipate counterarguments, and present a persuasive case. This builds argumentation skills and ethical reasoning.  

Just Getting Started: Formal debates can be complex and highly structured, and they can lead to competitive feelings or privilege students who are outspoken, first-language English speakers, etc. If you are just getting started, consider organizing a low-pressure version of a debate. For example, put a “provocative statement” on the board, have students vote (strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree), then invite speakers or groups of speakers before re-voting. 

Case Study Analysis 

Let’s imagine you’re teaching in the Personal Support Worker Program  

Learning Outcome: 
Apply ethical decision-making frameworks to real-world caregiving scenarios involving vulnerable populations. 

Activity: 
Students analyze a case where an elderly client with early-stage dementia refuses to take prescribed medication. The PSW must balance the client’s right to autonomy with their duty of care, the family’s concerns, and institutional policies. 

Scenario Details: 

The client, Mrs. Thompson, is 82 and lives in an assisted living facility. She has been prescribed medication to manage her condition, but she consistently refuses it, claiming she feels fine. Her daughter insists the medication is essential and pressures the staff to ensure compliance. Facility policy emphasizes respecting client autonomy unless there is immediate risk. The PSW has built a trusting relationship with Mrs. Thompson and is concerned about damaging that trust. 

Discussion Prompts: 

• Which ethical principles are at play in this scenario? (e.g., autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence)? 

• How should the PSW approach the situation to respect the client’s rights while ensuring safety? 

• What communication strategies could help mediate between the client and her family? 

• How might cultural values or personal beliefs influence the decisions made? 

Just Getting Started: Keep the case simple at first, adding only essential details. Use a picture to help students imagine or talk about what they see. 

Live Actor Role-Play 

Let’s imagine you’re an instructor in a Construction Management Program. 

Learning Outcome: 
Demonstrate effective conflict resolution and ethical decision-making in a high-pressure construction site scenario. 

Activity: 
Students participate in a live role-play where they act as the site manager dealing with a subcontractor (played by a live actor) who is cutting corners on safety to stay on schedule. The student must navigate the conversation while balancing project deadlines, safety regulations, and professional relationships. 

Scenario Details: 

• The project is behind schedule due to weather delays. 

• A subcontractor is observed removing fall protection gear to speed up work on scaffolding. 

• The subcontractor argues that the crew is experienced and that delays will cost everyone money. 

• The student, acting as the site manager, must address the issue in real time with the actor playing the subcontractor. 

• An observer (instructor or peer) plays the role of a safety inspector who arrives mid-conversation. 

Critical Thinking Prompts: 

• How should the site manager respond to the subcontractor’s justification? 

• What are the legal and ethical implications of allowing the practices the subcontractor is proposing? 

• How can the manager maintain a professional relationship while enforcing safety? 

• What communication strategies can de-escalate the situation and ensure compliance? 

• Just Getting Started: Actor role play is a complex and high pressure learning activity. If you are just getting started, model the role play with a colleague, or perhaps provide a prompt that can be used with genAI. Tools like AI Tutor Pro and LinkedIn Learning may also assist with low stakes role play practice. 

The Role of AI in Helping Foster Critical Thinking  

GenAI can be more than a “tool” and can offer unique opportunities to act as a learning companion for students to practice critical thinking. One powerful method is to use AI for Socratic questioning. This article outlines how this process can work effectively if faculty members intentionally design and structure prompts they share with students. A key component in critical thinking is the “thinking” part,; like a muscle that students need our help to train and strengthen. The “thinking” part itself should not be outsourced to GenAI. This hub post about task stewardship with AI and this one that describes in detail 3 approaches to using GenAI to assist with the critical thinking process, may also inform your lesson planning.  

Where to go From Here 

By modelling critical inquiry, designing active learning experiences, and leveraging AI thoughtfully, educators can help students become not just better thinkers, but more responsible and engaged citizens who have the dispositions (curiosity, open-mindedness, intellectual humility etc.) and willingness to engage in critical thinking. Teaching critical thinking requires intentionality, creativity, and a willingness to embrace new tools and methods. That said, critical thinking is messy, effortful, and challenging, especially for students who are novices or who are trained in education systems that privilege rote memorization. It needs to be done in small chunks, with praise and support, and made explicit about the “why’ these skills are important for students to develop rather than outsource to AI. 

References 

Berkovich, I. 2014. Between person and person: Dialogical pedagogy in authentic leadership development. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13: 245–264 

Colombo, L. A. 2023. Civilize the business school: For a civic management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 22: 132–149 

Edwards, M. G., & Küpers, W. 2024. Feelings for the planet: An alternative vocabulary for incorporating biosphere-focused emotions into management learning and education, Academy of Management Learning & Education.

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2005). Critical thinking competency standards: Standards, principles, performance indicators, and outcomes with a critical thinking master rubric. Foundation for Critical Thinking. 

Larson, B. Z., Mollick, E., & Mollick, L. (2024). Critical thinking in the age of generative AI. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 23(3), 373–378. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2024.0338 

Lindebaum, D., & Fleming, P. (2024). ChatGPT undermines human reflexivity, scientific responsibility and responsible management research. British Journal of Management, 35(2), 566–575. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12781 

Lovelace, K. J., Eggers, F., & Dyck, L. R. (2016). I do and I understand: Assessing the utility of web-based management simulations to develop critical thinking skills. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 15: 100–121.  

Mwangi Thiga, M. (2024). Generative AI and the development of critical thinking skills. Iconic Research and Engineering Journals, 7(9), 83–90. https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1705580.pdf 

Parks-Leduc, L., Mulligan, L., & Rutherford, M. A. (2021). Can ethics be taught? Examining the impact of distributed ethical training and individual characteristics on ethical decision-making. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 20(1), 30–49