Cited by 768Educational Methods and AnalysisEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentInnovations in Education and Learning Technologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 166 of the 168 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; none of the 116 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education

Open access

Abstract

This article addresses educational challenges posed by the future of work, examining “21st century skills”, their conception, assessment, and valorization. It focuses in particular on key soft skill competencies known as the “4Cs”: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In a section on each C, we provide an overview of assessment at the level of individual performance, before focusing on the less common assessment of systemic support for the development of the 4Cs that can be measured at the institutional level (i.e., in schools, universities, professional training programs, etc.). We then present the process of official assessment and certification known as “labelization”, suggesting it as a solution both for establishing a publicly trusted assessment of the 4Cs and for promoting their cultural valorization. Next, two variations of the “International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Skills Framework” are presented. The first of these comprehensive systems allows for the assessment and labelization of the extent to which development of the 4Cs is supported by a formal educational program or institution. The second assesses informal educational or training experiences, such as playing a game. We discuss the overlap between the 4Cs and the challenges of teaching and institutionalizing them, both of which may be assisted by adopting a dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs—playfully entitled “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”—for pedagogical and policy-promotion purposes. We conclude by briefly discussing opportunities presented by future research and new technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

Checked 2026-10-10 · 1 reference not checked yet

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This conceptual article argues that the “4Cs”—creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration—should be taught, assessed, and promoted together as core 21st century skills. It proposes “labelization” and two International Institute for Competency Development frameworks for assessing institutional support for the 4Cs and for evaluating informal learning activities such as games.

Key findings

  • The article positions the 4Cs as higher-order transversal “meta-competencies” and proposes a “Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs,” playfully called “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication,” to capture their overlap and support pedagogy, assessment, and policy promotion.
  • It presents the International Institute for Competency Development’s 4Cs Assessment Framework for institutions and programs, which divides each C into three components and assesses them across seven dimensions.
  • For informal contexts, it presents a games evaluation framework in which each C has five components; subcomponents are rated yes/no for whether they are “possible” and “required for success,” and if 60% (three of five) or more subcomponents are positively rated as required, the general component is considered required; if 60% or more components are positively rated as required, the game is labelized as potentially effective for training and improving that C.
  • It cites the World Economic Forum’s 2020 “Future of Jobs Report,” studying 15 industries in 26 advanced and emerging countries, as indicating that up to 50% of employees will need some degree of reskilling by 2025.

Methods

  • Design: conceptual and review article, not an empirical study; it synthesizes literature on each of the 4Cs and proposes assessment, certification, and promotion frameworks.
  • Data or sample: no primary sample or empirical dataset is reported; the IICD frameworks are described as based on expert opinion and a review of available literature, developed with international experts, teachers, and researchers from the University of Paris Cité, Oxford University, and AFNOR UK.
  • Main analysis: narrative synthesis and framework development; no statistical analysis is reported, though the games framework specifies a 60% threshold rule for rating components and labelizing a game’s potential effectiveness.

Limitations

  • The paper states that the complexity of the 4Cs’ definitions makes them difficult to assess in terms of both reliability and validity.
  • The paper states that a definitive taxonomy and measurement model are still lacking and might only be established through large-scale administration of a comprehensive battery of skill-measuring psychometric tests on appropriate cross sections of society.
  • Evident from the text: the proposed IICD frameworks and labelization process are presented as expert- and literature-based tools, but the article reports no empirical validation, reliability data, or outcome data for them.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/jintelligence11030054

Cites

166 of 168 references verified0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 The P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning. (© 2019, Battelle for Kids. All Rights Reserved. https://www.battelleforkids.org/; accessed on 17 January 2023).
Figure 1 The P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning. (© 2019, Battelle for Kids. All Rights Reserved. https://www.battelleforkids.org/; accessed on 17 January 2023).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 “‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: a Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs”. (Illustration of the interplay and interpenetration of creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication shown in dimensional space according to their differing cognitive/individual vs. social/interpersonal emphases; (© 2023, Branden Thornhill-Miller. All Rights Reserved. thornhill-miller.com; accessed on 20 January 2023)).
Figure 2 “‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: a Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs”. (Illustration of the interplay and interpenetration of creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication shown in dimensional space according to their differing cognitive/individual vs. social/interpersonal emphases; (© 2023, Branden Thornhill-Miller. All Rights Reserved. thornhill-miller.com; accessed on 20 January 2023)).CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

81 Not checked yet · 14 Own interpretation · 13 No basis given

Verify all 116 references — free account
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 42
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 30
64 of 64
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    If a game presents affordances conducive to exercising a given skill, engaged playing of that game should help improve that skill.

    “The evaluation of a game’s effectiveness for training/improving a given C rests on the following principle: if a game presents affordances conducive to exercising a given skill, engaged playing of that game should help improve that skill.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Future-oriented change in institutional practices, programming, and structure will likely meet with significant resistance from entrenched segments of traditional educational and training establishments.

    “The sort of future-oriented change and development required by this shift in institutional practices, programming, and structure will likely meet with significant resistance from comfortably entrenched (and often outdated) segments of traditional educational and training establishments.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Additional external evaluation and monitoring is rarely welcome by workers in any context.

    “Additional external evaluation and monitoring is rarely welcome by workers in any context.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Top-down processes from innovative and competition-conscious administrative levels will be met by bottom-up demands from students and education consumers to support institutional changes.

    “We believe, however, that top-down processes from the innovative and competition-conscious administrative levels will be met by bottom-up demands from students and education consumers to support these institutional changes.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The 4Cs have benefitted from subsequent promotion by organizations such as the OECD and the World Economic Forum, as well as some more direct support from recent empirical research.

    “In addition, the 4Cs have benefitted from their subsequent promotion by organizations such as the OECD and the World Economic Forum, as well as some more direct support from recent empirical research.”
5 of 5

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 148 references

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Barnett, Ronald (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education, Palgrave Macmillan US.
  2. Bourgeois-Bougrine, Samira (2022). The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible, Springer International Publishing.
  3. Burkhardt, Jean-Marie, Détienne, Françoise, Hébert, Anne-Marie, and Perron, Laurence (2009). Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT 2009, Springer.
  4. Doyle, Denise (2021). Creativity in the Twenty First Century. Edited by Anna Hui and Christian Wagner, Springer International Publishing.
  5. Dumitru, Daniela, Bigu, Dragos, Elen, Jan, Ahern, Aoife, McNally, Ciaran, and O’Sullivan, John (2018). A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions, UTAD. Available online: http://repositorio.utad.pt/handle/10348/8320.
  6. Evans, Carla (2020). Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Collaboration, National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
  7. Edward, Nouri Zalta (2020). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition), Stanford University.
  8. Huizinga, Johan (1949). Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Elements in Culture, Routledge.
  9. Keefer, Kateryna V., Parker, James D. A., and Saklofske, Donald H. (2018). The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality, Springer International Publishing.
  10. Matthews, Danielle (2014). Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. · DOI
  11. Moore, Brooke Noel, and Parker, Richard (2016). Critical Thinking, McGraw-Hill Education. [20th ed.].
  12. Proctor, Robert W., and Dutta, Addie (1995). Skill Acquisition and Human Performance, Sage Publications, Inc.
  13. Reiman, Joey (1992). Success: The Original Handbook, Longstreet Press.
  14. Rhodes, 1961, An Analysis of Creativity, The Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305
  15. Salas, Eduardo, Stagl, Kevin C., and Burke, C. Shawn (2004). International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  16. Scialabba, 1984, Mindplay, Harvard Magazine, 16, 19
  17. Matson, Johnny L. (2008). Clinical Assessment and Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorders, Elsevier.
  18. Sternberg, Robert J. (1999). Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge University Press.
  19. Spada, Hans, Meier, Anne, Rummel, Nikol, and Hauser, Sabine (2005). Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning Learning 2005: The next 10 Years!—CSCL’05, Taipei, Taiwan, May 30–June 4, Association for Computational Linguistics.
  20. Thompson, Jeri (2020). Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Complex Communication, National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment.
  21. van Rosmalen, Peter, Boyle, Elizabeth A., Nadolski, Rob, van der Baaren, John, Fernández-Manjón, Baltasar, MacArthur, Ewan, Pennanen, Tiina, Manea, Madalina, and Star, Kam (2014). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer International Publishing.
  22. Watson, Goodwin, and Glaser, Edwin M. (2010). Technical Manual and User’s Guide, Pearson.
  23. Whitmore, Paul G. (, January December). What are soft skills. Paper presented at the CONARC Soft Skills Conference, Fort Bliss, TX, USA.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 768

Metadata

Authors
Thornhill-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J.-M., Morisseau, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Vinchon, F., El Hayek, S., Augereau-Landais, M., Mourey, F., Feybesse, C., Sundquist, D., & Lubart, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Université Paris Cité (FR)
  • LaPEA, Université Paris Cité and Univ Gustave Eiffel, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France
  • AFNOR International, 93210 Saint-Denis, France
  • Association Française de Normalisation (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Guillaume Régnier (FR)
Corresponding author
Thornhill-Miller, Branden
Venue
Journal of Intelligence
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-03-15
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
54
ISSN
2079-3200 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4327597860
Cited by
768
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 242 · 2025: 308 · 2024: 187 · 2023: 31
FWCI
46.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Education and Learning Technologies
Keywords
21st century skills, 4Cs, creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, communication, soft skills, skill assessment, certification, competency framework, institutional evaluation, informal learning, play-based learning, future of work, education policy, interactionist model

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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