Effectiveness of Critical Thinking Instruction in Higher Education: A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies
Open accessAbstract
Promoting students’ critical thinking (CT) has been an essential goal of higher education. However, despite the various attempts to make CT a primary focus of higher education, there is little agreement regarding the conditions under which instruction could result in greater CT outcomes. In this review, we systematically examined current empirical evidence and attempted to explain why some instructional interventions result in greater CT gains than others. Thirty three empirical studies were included in the review and features of the interventions of those individual studies were analyzed. Emphasis was given to the study features related to CT instructional approach, teaching strategy, student and teacher related characteristics, and CT measurement. The findings revealed that effectiveness of CT instruction is influenced by conditions in the instructional environment comprising the instructional variables (teaching strategies and CT instructional approaches), and to some extent by student-related variables (year level and prior academic performance). Moreover, the type of CT measures adopted (standardized vs. non-standardized) appear to influence evaluation of the effectiveness of CT interventions. The findings overall indicated that there is a shift towards embedding CT instruction within academic disciplines, but failed to support effectiveness of particular instructional strategies in fostering acquisition and transfer of CT skills. The main limitation in the current empirical evidence is the lack of systematic design of instructional interventions that are in line with empirically valid instructional design principles.
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?
Cultural and demographic factors play a role in shaping students' critical thinking dispositions.
“Additionally, cultural, and demographic factors play a role in shaping students' critical thinking dispositions.Studies have explored how gender, educational background, parental education, and academic discipline influence students' engagement with critical thinking tasks [14].”
From Systematic literature review on critical thinking in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as [14]
Cites
Education and thinking: The role of knowledge.
Glaser, R. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.2.93 · Cited by 1,272 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The goal of CT instruction is, therefore, to help students acquire and transfer those domain-independent thinking skills to solve problems faced in everyday life (e.g., Ennis, 1989; Glaser, 1984; Halpern, 1998).”
Halpern, D. F. (1998) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.53.4.449 · Cited by 1,118 · cited 8× · see citing works
“A suite of instructional strategies, which are suggested as useful to promote students’ CT is available (e.g., Beyer, 2008; Ennis, 1989; Halpern, 1998; Paul, 1993; Tsui, 2002).”
InfluentialFacione, N. C., Facione, P. A., & Sanchez, C. A. (1994) · Journal of Nursing Education · doi:10.3928/0148-4834-19941001-05 · Cited by 626 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
El Soufi, N., & See, B. H. (2019) · Studies in Educational Evaluation · doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.12.006 · Cited by 183 · see citing works
The Use of Critical Thinking to Identify Fake News: A Systematic Literature Review
Machete, P., & Turpin, M. (2020) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_20 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
A Literature Review of Critical Thinking in Engineering Education
Ahern, A., Dominguez, C., McNally, C., O’Sullivan, J. J., & Pedrosa, D. (2019) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2019.1586325 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Systematic literature review on critical thinking in higher education
Rothinam, N., Vengrasalam, R., Naidu, S., Nachiappan, S., & Jabamoney, S. (2025) · Edelweiss Applied Science and Technology · doi:10.55214/25768484.v9i5.7377 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Hyytinen, H., Jämsä, M., Tuononen, T., & Kleemola, K. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2025.2553341 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tiruneh, D. T., Verburgh, A., & Elen, J.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Venue
- Higher Education Studies
- Published
- 2014-01-22
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1925-4741 (ISSN-L)
- 1925-475X
- OpenAlex
- W1991076664
- Cited by
- 255
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 14
- FWCI
- 8.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Higher Education Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Lirias (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Keywords
- critical thinking instruction, critical thinking skills, higher education, educational intervention, teaching methods, critical thinking assessment, prior academic achievement, year level, teaching principles
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