Critical Thinking and Speaking Proficiency: A Mixed-method Study
Open accessAbstract
The present study was intended to investigate the impact of teaching critical thinking skills on the speaking proficiency of Iranian EFL learners in Tehran, how this impact is explained and the participants' attitudes towards explicit critical-thinking content.To achieve this goal, two groups of female Iranian intermediate EFL learners were compared on their speaking performance, with one group having been trained in critical thinking explicitly and the other as the control group.Both groups were tested prior to and after the training of the experimental group was performed.A mixed-method approach was employed in the analysis of the data.In the quantitative analysis, a quasi-experimental method was adopted to investigate the impact of teaching critical thinking skills on the speaking proficiency of the experimental group in comparison with the control group.The results indicated that teaching critical thinking explicitly has a significantly positive impact on the speaking proficiency of female Iranian adult intermediate EFL learners.Through the qualitative approach, the participants' attitudes towards their training in critical thinking were studied during in-depth interviews.The results are described in detail.Accordingly, explicit instruction of critical thinking in the English class can make a deeper impression of the language taught.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Sanavi and Tarihat (2014) showed explicitly introducing critical thinking skills improved learners' speaking skills.
“Sanavi and Tarihat (2014) showed that explicitly introducing critical thinking skills improved learners' speaking skills compared to learners who did not receive critical thinking reinforcement.”
From Investigating Critical Thinking in ELT Textbooks: A Systematic Literature Review of Textbook Evaluation Studies (2024) · cites this paper as Sanavi and Tarihat, 2014
Cites
Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737011003255 · Cited by 5,687 · see citing works
Critical Thinking and Science Education
Bailin, S. (2002) · Science & Education · doi:10.1023/a:1016042608621 · Cited by 404 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Soe, T. (2024) · Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.31261/tapsla.13882 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Sanavi, R. V., & Tarighat, S.
- Affiliations
- Islamic Azad University, Tehran (IR)
- Venue
- Theory and Practice in Language Studies
- Publisher
- Academy Publication
- Published
- 2014-01-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1799-2591 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1977719084
- Cited by
- 50
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 9.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Theory and Practice in Language Studies (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Keywords
- critical thinking, speaking proficiency, explicit instruction, EFL learners, adult learners, student attitudes, English as a foreign language, Iranian learners
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