Cited by 60Education and Critical Thinking DevelopmentInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Group work and the learning of critical thinking in the Hong Kong secondary liberal studies curriculum

Fung, Dennis, Howe, Christine·2014·Cambridge Journal of Education

Abstract

This article reports the findings of a one-year longitudinal study that investigated the impact of group work on the development of students’ critical thinking in Hong Kong secondary schools. It explores whether the participation of teachers in a group-based teaching intervention adapted from an earlier study conducted in the United Kingdom (UK) facilitated students’ use of critical arguments in Liberal Studies lessons. In addition to examining students’ critical thinking skills through test performance and the use of reasoned justifications in written class-work, the article also discusses the applicability to the Hong Kong context of the programme on which the intervention was based. In general, the results of the study indicate that group work is more effective than whole-class instruction in developing students’ critical-thinking skills and that students make better progress in ‘teacher-supported’ than ‘student self-directed’ group work.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0305764x.2014.897685

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Small-group research provides compelling evidence that expression and reasoned discussion of differences of opinion supports both academic attainment and general reasoning.

    “This research provides compelling evidence for the third of the above themes: the expression and reasoned discussion of differences of opinion has been shown repeatedly to support both academic attainment and general reasoning”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fung, D., & Howe, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Fung, Dennis
Venue
Cambridge Journal of Education
Published
2014-04-03
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
245-270
ISSN
  • 0305-764X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-3577
OpenAlex
W2080366674
Cited by
60
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4
FWCI
30.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Cambridge Journal of Education (publishedVersion)
  • Hong Kong Education Bibliographic Database (submittedVersion)
  • The HKU Scholars Hub (University of Hong Kong) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
group work, critical thinking, secondary education, Hong Kong, whole-class instruction, critical argumentation, educational intervention, curriculum reform

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review