# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The IP address used for your Internet connection is part of a subnet that has been blocked from access to PubMed Central. Addresses across the entire subnet were used to download content in bulk, in violation of the terms of the PMC Copyright Notice.

# data[].attributes.headline
abstract: In this presentation we will give information about what critical and creative thinking is and why they are important. After that we will talk about how we can encourage FDY students to improve critical and creative thinking skills outside of the classroom.: 

# data[].attributes.subject
abstract: In this presentation we will give information about what critical and creative thinking is and why they are important. After that we will talk about how we can encourage FDY students to improve critical and creative thinking skills outside of the classroom.: 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Peer Review reports

Background

Problem Based Learning (PBL) is a learner-centred method, which has been implemented in many medical programs worldwide for over four decades. PBL has positive impacts on student learning and stimulates students to become lifelong learners [ 1]. However concerns have been raised about 'signs of erosion' in the original PBL process [ 2], which have had negative impacts on both learning processes and outcomes [ 2- 4]. Students, teachers, and curriculum designers can all contribute to degradation in the quality of PBL. Students in particular, may perform hapzardly in the tutorial process and deviate from the intended procedures, which were developed by Faculty based on the underlying philosophy of PBL. For example, whilst brainstorming is essential for activating students' prior knowledge, it tends to be shortened or sometimes even skipped during PBLs [ 2].

Two broad types of dysfunctional student behaviour during the tutorial process have been identified [ 4]. Individual dysfunctional behaviour refers to students' performances that do not support the collaborative learning process. Students may be too quiet or dominant, lack commitment, experience personality clashes, or arrive late. Group dysfunctional behaviour is related to disorganise tutorial activities, especially groups taking shortcuts in the tutorial process.

As the PBL tutorial does not always work optimally as a learning method that fosters active, constructive, and goal-directed learning, comprehensive corrective actions that are in line with PBL philosophy are needed. Dolmans et al., [ 3] offer three solutions: using regular evaluation to improve group performance, stimulating elaboration, and using more formative rather than summative assessment. Moust et al. [ 2] also recommend improving the learning environment by giving more support to students to become self-directed learners, and by introducing self-assessment to induce student learning.

Self-assessment supports learners in exploring their own strengths and weaknesses in learning [ 5, 6]. Self-assessment is necessarily a comparative process, with the student comparing their own performance to specific standards or to previous performances or to the performance of others. Self-assessment is a key component of "assessment as learning," [ 7] where students apply self-regulatory processes in their learning such as setting goals, selecting learning strategies, assessing learning progress, evaluating information from feedback, and then making improvements in their learning processes for the next time.

Self-assessment seems ideally suited for implementation into the PBL tutorial [ 8]. Some literature exists on self-assessment in the PBL tutorial process; however, most employ a self-assessment tool that has not been evaluated for this construct [ 9- 12]. Moreover most research focuses on the 'accuracy' of self-assessment and shows that students are inaccurate in assessing their own performance in the PBL tutorial [ 11, 13, 14]. Whilst this may be true, there has been little research on the ways in which self-assessment might enhance student learning [ 15]. For this to happen, the implementation of a self-assessment tool requires scaffolding, for example by enhancing students' awareness of the value of self-assessment, providing continuous feedback to students, and improving the design of the self-assessment tool around a specific task with specific objectives [ 16, 17]. Self assessment tools should also be designed with the broader context of learning in mind, and not focus on a specific domain such as knowledge acquisition [ 18]. The PBL self-assessment tools reported in previous research [ 10, 11, 13] have not been constructed or implemented using such approaches.

We aimed to fill this gap by developing a valid self-assessment tool to be used in the PBL tutorial setting, which we named the Self-assessment scale for active learning and critical thinking (SSACT). The tool was specifically designed to enhance student learning by promoting the self-assessment of students' performance during the PBL process phases of problem analysis, self-directed learning, and reporting [ 19]. The purpose of this research was to investigate the validity of the SSACT in the context of the PBL tutorial by determining its internal structure [ 20- 22]. We investigated the internal structure through assessing the factorial validity, scale stability and internal consistency of the SSACT [ 23].

Methods

The development of the SSACT consisted of three stages namely; 1) scale construction 2) scale validation and 3) investigation of scale stability (see Fig. 1). The study was conducted in the academic year 2013-2014 at the Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Indonesia (FM IUI), which employs PBL in the pre-clinical phase (year 1-4) of a 6 year course. Study participants were students and tutors who had experienced PBL.

The flowchart of the development and validation stage of SSACT

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Sydney, where the first author was a doctoral student (approval numbers 2013/1057, 2014/191 and 2014/344). On receipt of this approval, the Dean of the FM IUI endorsed this study. Written informed consent was obtained from the students and tutors at the FM IUI, who participated in this study.

Scale construction was based on the results of qualitative research undertaken with 10 students and 10 tutors with at least one-year experience of PBL tutorials, at the FM IUI. Semi-structured in-depth interviews [ 24] were conducted in Bahasa Indonesia by the first author (UK) using questions which explored their experiences in conducting the PBL tutorial, and their perspectives of self-assessment. The data from the interviews was transcribed, coded and analysed using thematic analysis to identify the contributing domains pertinent to self-assessment [ 25]. From this analysis, three themes were identified. These were initially labelled as: self-directed learning, teamwork, and reasoning skills, and were used as the preliminary domains in the subsequent process of scale construction stage.

The first author subsequently created an initial pool of 80 items by combining interpretation of student and staff perspectives of the PBL process, understandings of the literature, and incorporation of items from existing tools [ 26]. Each of the initial pool items reflected specific characteristics one of the three preliminary domains underlying the tool. For instance, the item "I applied various learning strategies during independent study" reflected the students' capability to apply appropriate self directed learning strategies. All of these 80 items were created by the first author in two languages, Bahasa Indonesia and English, and were reviewed by CR and CJ for clarity and English language. The Indonesian version of the scale was applied in this research. However, the development process of the scale was conducted both in Bahasa Indonesia and English using a de-centering approach. In this approach both of these two languages were equally important and the modification process was conducted simultaneously [ 27].

To assure its content validity, we used a panel of experts (n = 15) from Indonesia and Australia to review the initial set of 80 items [ 28]. This panel consisted of a psychologist who had expertise in measurement, ten medical educators who had experience as PBL tutors, and four non-medical educators who were familiar with PBL and had been a tutor for at least one year. The reviewing process was conducted through an online questionnaire, which was completed in two stages [ 29]. In the first stage, the experts were asked to match each item with the three domains provided, in order to determine the agreement among the experts. In the second stage, they evaluated the clarity of each item to ensure the wording was unambiguous. Items in which the representativeness score was less than 70 % were removed from the scale or were rewritten based on the feedback of the experts in the second stage.

Thirty students were then invited to complete the revised self-assessment tool and to give feedback regarding ambiguity in the items, the clarity of the instructions to complete the scale, and the time to complete the self-assessment tool. Consequently, the questionnaire was further refined and reduced to 37 Likert scale items, across the three preliminary domains. A 7-point Likert scale ( 1 = 'not very true of me' to 7 = 'very true of me') was chosen since a response scale with up to 7 points offers better reliability, validity and discriminant power than a scale with less points [ 30]. This questionnaire was designed to be completed by the students at the end of the tutorial meeting by reflecting on their tutorial performance in the previous unit or scenario.

Scale validation involved inviting students from the third and fourth years (n = 270), labelled Group 1, to use the 37 item scale resulting from the scale construction stage. Completed data was available from 256 questionnaires (94.8 %). These were analysed with exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using the oblique rotation method. Item redundancy was determined based on the following assumptions: a) the loading factor for each item > 0.5, b) an average corrected item-to- total correlation > 0.35, c) the average of the inter-item correlation > 0.20, d) no overlap among the items or wording redundancy, and e) relevancy to the theory underlying the tool [ 31]. Consequently it appeared that two factors under laid the scale. These were named 'active learning' and 'critical thinking,' and the scale was further reduced to 29 items.

The self-assessment tool of 29 items was then distributed to students from the first and second year (n = 255), labelled Group 2, to further validate the scale by confirming the factor structure. Of 255 students, 250 students returned the self-assessment tool; however because of incomplete data 238 questionnaires (93,1 %), were used in the analysis. The scale validation was conducted through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) using AMOS™ software to assess the dimensionality as a feature of the internal structure of the measurement scale [ 26, 32, 33]. Scale dimensionality refers to the homogeneity of the items and the factors underlying a construct. The dimensionality of the tool was evaluated using selected criteria of fit indices to assess whether the model was a close fit to the data or not. The criteria employed were: a) The goodness of fit index (GFI) > 0.9; b) Adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) > 0.8 [ 34]; c) the root mean square error approximation (RMSEA) < 0.1 [ 35]; d) the p value should be significant and the chi square divided by degrees of freedom < 3 [ 36]; e) the Tucker Lewis coefficient (TLI); and f) comparative fit index (CFI) > 0.90 [ 37]. After model fit was established, the internal consistency of the scale was measured using Cronbach's alpha for the total scale and for each of the two sub-scales [ 38].

Scale stability was established by cross-validation of a base line model derived from the scale validation stage in order to determine stability of estimates across two independent samples of students. Multiple-sample analyses allow the researcher to constrain model parameters to be identical across two or more samples and to test how well these constraints fit the data [ 39]. The unconstrained base line model was compared with 3 other CFA models that were constrained at increasingly stringent levels (see Table 3). This comparison was intended to evaluate whether the factors, the correlation between the two factors, and the items in each factor were consistent across Group 1 and Group 2 [ 39]. Indicators to evaluate the equivalence of a model across groups which rely on differences of chi square in each model are influenced by the sample size [ 39] and thus problematic. Therefore, we used the criterion based on a difference in CFI (ΔCFI) of less than 0.01 [ 40].

Results

Scale validity

The CFA of the two-factor model with 29 items indicated that this model had a poor fit based on the fit indices recommended by AMOS TM. Some items had high correlations with other items in the differing factors. To obtain a model fit, all of these items were removed. As a result, a two-factor model consisting of 14 items was a close fit to the data in Group 2 (See Fig. 2), due to the fact that all of the fit indices criteria, which were used in data analysis, were fulfilled. The results were CMIN/df = 1.99, p = 0.000, CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.93, GFI = 0.92, AGFI = 0.88, R = 0.06. The loading factor for each item was > 0.50 with a smallest value of 0.55 (item no 1) and the highest of 0.75 (item no 3 and 10) (see Fig. 2). However, the other finding from this analysis showed that the correlation between the two factors was fairly high (r = 0.80), indicating that this tool was derived from a potential single underlying factor. To check this, the one factor solution model was compared with the two factors solution model [ 39]. The resulting parameters such as the value of CFI, TLI, GFI, AGFI, CMIN/df and RMSEA indicated that the two-factor solution model was better and more appropriate to the data than the one factor solution model. The values of CFI, TLI, GFI, and AGFI of the two factors model were higher than one factor model, and the values of CMIN/df and RMSEA of the two factors model were lower than the other one. The comparison of fit indices between these two models is given in Table 1.

The two-factor model of the self-assessment tool in the PBL tutorial

Cronbach's alpha showed that the reliability coefficient was more than 0.8 for each factor (see Table 2), meaning that each subscale scale had good internal consistency. Table 2 also provides the mean and standard deviation for each factor.

Scale stability

The result of the multi group analysis across Group 1 and Group 2 indicated that the base line model, a two-factor model with 14 items had acceptable fit indices. The CFI and RMSEA were 0.923 and 0.051 respectively. Subsequently, this baseline model was compared with the three other models which each had increasingly stringent invariance constraints (see Table 3). The multi group analysis showed that the difference in CFI (ΔCFI) between the base line model and each of the 3 other models was less than 0.01. The differences in CFI (ΔCFI) were 0.003, 0.003 and 0.008 for model A, model B, and model C respectively. This result indicated that Group 1 and Group 2 had the same structural model including similarity in the factorial structure, the theoretical construct, and structural regression paths. The base-line model consisting of 2 factors with 14 items was quite stable across two independent samples since there were no significant differences with the 3 other models.

Discussion

This paper has provided evidence of the validity of the SSACT by demonstrating its content validity, and its internal structure. All of the processes from defining the domain, constructing the definition, developing the items, and conducting expert reviews provided evidence of content validity [ 20- 22].

After condensing, the final scale consisted of 2 factors with 14 items (see Table 4). The CFA confirmed that this scale consisted of a two dimensional construct. Each item in this scale was derived from its latent construct or first order factor. The factors underlying the structure of SSACT were active learning and critical thinking. The factor structure appeared stable across independent student populations [ 39].

The active learning scale consisted of items related to collaborative learning (item no 5) and self directed-learning skills (item no 1-4, 6) (Table 4). These results are in line with Yew et al. [ 41], who also found that active learning in PBL was a cumulative process and was empowered by collaborative learning and self-directed learning processes. On the other hand, the inclusion of critical thinking as one of the domains in this scale also provided evidence that PBL tutorials stimulate students' critical thinking. In PBL, students actively construct their knowledge through elaboration process [ 19, 32, 42]. All of the items in the critical thinking domain (Table 4) including item no 8, 9 and 13, reflect on cognitive skills applied during PBL tutorial such as questioning, analysing, and generating hypothesis. Item no 8 "I communicated my ideas clearly" includes skills in organizing ideas [ 43]. Item 9 "I performed the role given to me by other group members" means that each student has same responsibility to participate actively in PBL tutorial by explaining and questioning, which are forms of critical thinking [ 44, 45]. Item 13, "I explained knowledge from the resources in my own words" is related to the skill of paraphrasing where students need to understand the information first before they explain it to others [ 43].

The strong significant correlation between the two subscales (r = 0.80) was evidence that the SSACT has two distinct but theoretically strongly related constructs [ 28]. Critical thinking is a self-directed process to assist connecting new knowledge to prior knowledge. Students need to justify their new understanding through sharing with others. On the other hand, self-directed learning referred to students' internal cognitive processes in managing their learning in order to achieve their learning goals. To be self-directed learners, students need to think critically regarding their own learning condition [ 46].

Our data also indicated that the SSACT had good reliability for each subscale as well as total scale (coefficient Alpha >0.8). This means that the interrelatedness among the designed items in each subscale supported its construct and all items in the scale also supported the self- assessment construct [ 28].

Strengths and weaknesses of the research

The strength of this study is that we applied a number of complementary strategies in developing the tool. Previous studies of PBL self-assessment tool development constructed the domains from literature review or previous existing tool [ 12, 14]. In this study, the domains were derived from student and tutor perspectives of a PBL tutorial captured via a qualitative study. The final items and domains of the SSACT reflected students' activities during problem analysis, self- directed learning and the reporting phase in the PBL tutorial. The SSACT also had good construct, internal consistency and stability when applied across samples. All of these results suggest that SSACT is appropriate for the PBL context.

On other hand, this study also had some limitations. So far, the impact of this tool on students learning, a part of the consequential validity, has not been explored. The relationship of the SSACT to other variables of interest such as academic achievement, quality of learning environment and students' motivation also has not been identified [ 20- 22]. Furthermore, the original scale was developed in Bahasa Indonesia and validated in Indonesia. Even though the English version was developed together with the original version, the Indonesian research context and student characteristics might influence the result of the validation for an English language PBL context.

Implications and future research

Students could use this tool to guide their learning in several ways. Firstly, use of this tool may enable students to better understand the aspects that should be considered in each phase of the PBL tutorial. These include the problem analysis phase, the self-directed learning phase, and the reporting phase. Secondly, the active learning subscale could inform the students on how to become better self-directed learners. This tool asks the students about their learning activities in order to identify their learning needs, apply appropriate learning strategies, monitor their progress, and evaluate their performance. Thirdly, the critical thinking subscale could alert the students to the need to conduct higher order cognitive activities and may reduce superficial thinking. Engagement in both active learning and critical thinking activities may help to prevent PBL erosion since these activities are the core processes of PBL tutorial [ 2]. When applied across multiple PBL cases, the SSACT may also stimulate students to become better self-regulated learners since self- assessment could facilitate students to monitor their learning and identify their own strengths and weaknesses and form a basis on which to improve their learning [ 47].

In order to optimise the benefits of this self-assessment scale, students need scaffolding from both the tutor and faculty in applying this scale. Students should be informed the advantages of self-assessment in assisting their learning. By understanding the objectives of self assessment, students would be more likely to assess themselves honestly and be more motivated to improve areas of weaknesses in their learning [ 48, 49]. Constructive feedback from the tutor will also promote student learning and achievement through self-assessment [ 48]. This scale is intended to be implemented formatively. If self-ratings were used summatively, students could not assess themselves in a reliable manner and would tend to report good behaviours in order to obtain good mark [ 49].

Future research could be conducted to investigate further evidence of validity by comparing this tool with other measurements of critical thinking and active learning and by evaluating the educational impact. Research in other settings, such as other medical schools and countries with different cultures and different PBL process will provide more information about the broader utility of the self-assessments tool.

Conclusion

The development and the validation process of the SSACT provides evidence regarding its internal structure, which was investigated through its factorial validity, scale stability and internal consistency. The two factors underlying this scale, active learning and critical thinking, were important skills that should be central to a PBL tutorial. Implementation of this self-assessment scale in a PBL tutorial may contribute to guiding students to achieve the essential outcomes of the PBL method and may stimulate them to become self-regulated learners.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the students and tutors at the Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Indonesia who participated in this study. The authors also would like to express our gratitude to all those experts in Indonesia and Australia who reviewed the content of the SSACT in the scale development process. The authors also wish to thank the Directorate General Higher Education of Indonesia (DIKTI), which sponsored the first author to conduct a PhD, from which this research has been drawn.

Author information

Affiliations

1. Medical Education Unit (MEU) Fakultas Kedokteran UII, Jl.Kaliurang Km 14.5 Ngaglik, Sleman, Yogyakarta, 55584, Indonesia

Umatul Khoiriyah

2. Sydney Medical School - Northern, the University of Sydney, Hornsby Kur-ring-gai Hospital, Palmerston Road, Hornsby, NSW, 2077, Australia

Chris Roberts

3. Sydney Medical School, Edward Ford Building A27, the University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia

Christine Jorm

4. Maastricht University, Educational Development and Research, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht, 6200, MD, The Netherlands

C. P. M. Van der Vleuten

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Umatul Khoiriyah.

Additional information

Competing of interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contribution

UK conceived the study and led in, the design, data collection, analysis and interpretation of the research supported by CR, CJ and CV. UK drafted the first version of the manuscript with CR, CJ, and CV providing critical review and revision and correctness for English. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Authors' information

* UK is a PhD candidate in Medical Education, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney and a staff member of the Medical Education Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Islamic University of Indonesia.

* CR is an Associate Professor in Primary Care and Medical Education at Sydney Medical School-Northern, University of Sydney.

* CJ is an Associate Professor and Associate Dean (Professionalism), Medical Education, Office of Medical Education, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney.

* CV is a Professor of Education and Scientific Director of the School of Health Professions Education of Maastricht University.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Khoiriyah, U., Roberts, C., Jorm, C. et al. Enhancing students' learning in problem based learning: validation of a self-assessment scale for active learning and critical thinking. BMC Med Educ 15, 140 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0422-2
Download citation
Keywords

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Critical Thinking

Problem Base Learn

Root Mean Square Error Approximation

Scale Stability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Enhancing students' learning in problem based learning: validation of a self-assessment scale for active learning and critical thinking - BMC Medical Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Problem based learning (PBL) is a powerful learning activity but fidelity to intended models may slip and student engagement wane, negatively impacting learning processes, and outcomes. One potential solution to solve this degradation is by encouraging self-assessment in the PBL tutorial. Self-assessment is a central component of the self-regulation of student learning behaviours.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Maureen Leming
Take a little bit of creativity, add a dash of innovation, and sprinkle in some critical thinking. This recipe makes for a well-rounded and engaged student who's ready to tackle life beyond the classroom. It's called Problem-Based Learning (PBL), and it teaches concepts and inspires lifelong learning at the same time.

This open-ended problem-based learning style presents students with a real-world issue and asks them to come up with a well-constructed answer. They can tap into online resources, use their previously-taught knowledge, and ask critical questions to brainstorm and present a solid solution. Unlike traditional learning, there might not be just one right answer, but the process encourages young minds to stay active and think for themselves.

We're all about the problem-based learning approach at The Hun School of Princeton. Through this article, you'll discover why - and what it looks like in real time.

An Overview of Problem-Based Learning

Problem-based learning (PBL) is a teaching style that pushes students to become the drivers of their learning education.

Problem-based learning uses complex, real-world issues as the classroom's subject matter, encouraging students to develop problem-solving skills and learn concepts instead of just absorbing facts.

This can take shape in a variety of different ways. For example, a problem-based learning project could involve students pitching ideas and creating their own business plans to solve a societal need. Students could work independently or in a group to conceptualize, design, and launch their innovative product in front of classmates and community leaders.

At the Hun School of Princeton, a problem-based learning mode is offered in conjunction with course content. This approach has been shown to help students develop critical thinking and communication skills as well as problem-solving abilities.

Aspects of Problem-Based Learning

Problem-based learning can be applied to any school subject, from social studies and literature to mathematics and science. No matter the field, a good problem-based learning approach should embody features like:

Challenging students to understand classroom concepts on a deeper level.

Pushing students to make decisions they're able to defend.

Clearly connecting current course objectives to previous courses and knowledge.

Encouraging students to work as a group to solve the complex issue at hand.

Engaging students to solve an open-ended problem in multiple complex stages.

Benefits of Student-Led, Problem-Based Learning

Student-led learning is one of the most empowering ways to seat students at the forefront of their own educational experience.

It pushes students to be innovative, creative, open-minded, and logical. It also offers opportunities to collaborate with others in a hands-on, active way.

As part of our immersive educational model, we've discovered many benefits of problem-based learning:

Promote self-learning: As a student-centered approach, problem-based learning pushes kids to take initiative and responsibility for their own learning. As they're pushed to use research and creativity, they develop skills that will benefit them into adulthood.

Highly engaging: Instead of sitting back, listening and taking notes, problem-based learning puts students in the driver's seat. They have to stay sharp, apply critical thinking, and think outside the box to solve problems.

Develop transferable skills: The abilities students develop don't just translate to one classroom or subject matter. They can be applied to a plethora of school subjects as well as life beyond, from taking leadership to solving real-world dilemmas.

Improve teamwork abilities: Many problem-based learning projects have students collaborate with classmates to come up with a solution. This teamwork approach challenges kids to build skills like collaboration, communication, compromise, and listening.

Encourage intrinsic rewards: With problem-based learning projects, the reward is much greater than simply an A on an assignment. Students earn the self-respect and satisfaction of knowing they've solved a riddle, created an innovative solution, or manufactured a tangible product.

Five Examples of Problem-Based Learning in Action

With a little context in mind, it's time to take a look at problem-based learning in the real world. One of the best parts of this learning style is that it's very flexible. You can adapt it to your classroom, content, and students. The following five examples are success stories of problem-based learning in action:

1. Maritime discovery: Students explore maritime culture and history through visits to a nearby maritime museum. They're tasked with choosing a specific voyage, researching it, and crafting their own museum display. Throughout their studies, they'll create a captain's log, including mapping out voyages and building their own working sextant.

2. Urban planning: Perfect for humanities classes, this example challenges students to observe and interview members of their community and determine the biggest local issue. They formulate practical solutions that they will then pitch to a panel of professional urban planners.

3. Zoo habitats: This scientific example starts with a visit to a local zoo. Students use their observations and classroom knowledge to form teams and create research-supported habitat plans, presented to professional zoologists.

4. Codebreakers: Instead of regular math lessons, let students lead with a code-breaking problem-based learning assignment. Students take on the role of a security agent tasked with decrypting a message, coding a new one in return, and presenting their findings to the classroom.

5. Financial advisors: Challenge students to step into the role of a financial advisor and decide how to spend an allotted amount of money in a way that most benefits their community. Have them present their solution and explain their reasoning to the class.

The Hun School: Problem-Based Learning in Action

The Hun School of Princeton brings problem-based learning to life in our classrooms. Our collaborative school culture places a unique emphasis on hands-on, skilled-based education. NextTerm is just one example of problem-based learning in action here at The Hun School.

NextTerm gives students the opportunity to apply classroom knowledge to solve real-world problems on a local, national, and global scale. Take our Migration and Identity class, for example. Students in this course travel to the U.S.-Mexican border to speak directly to border patrol agents, ranchers, and immigrants in order to learn about the complex issue of migration straight from the source. Of course, this location is one of many that our students can explore. Our mandatory three-week mini-course, NextTerm, brings students beyond the campus and into a new environment, from domestic locations in Arizona, Montana, and Memphis to international locales in France and Ghana.

At our campus in Princeton, Hun students explore a relevant issue in collaboration with each other and field experts. They could be learning about the complexity of Ghanian economics or experiencing the modern-day impact of French history. This real-world immersion gives new power to their knowledge and helps them see the link between the classroom and the world at large. As they solve problems, Hun students can develop as individuals and teammates.

Ready to learn more about The Hun School approach and see problem-based learning strategies at work?

Inquire about Hun or schedule a tour to see problem-based learning in action!
Request More Information

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Problem-Based Learning (PBL) | Hun School of Princeton

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Problem-Based Learning, or Student-Led Learning, focuses on the process of finding an answer- a process invaluable to prepare students for the real world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Viability of Virtual Worlds in Higher Education: Can Creativity Thrive Outside the Traditional Classroom Environment? - ProQuest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore millions of resources from scholarly journals, books, newspapers, videos and more, on the ProQuest Platform.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.jstor.org/stable/42927188?saml_data=eyJzYW1sVG9rZW4iOiJjM2FiMjQxMS1jYTg5LTQ0YTktOWRmYi03Mjk0YWYwYWE4NWMiLCJpbnN0aXR1dGlvbklkcyI6WyI4NDA3NzU2Zi1lNTU0LTQ4N2QtYThjMC0wNzk0MTc1MGFkNWEiXX0&seq=2

# data[].attributes.headline
How can students develop their creative thinking skills on their own?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can students develop their creative thinking skills on their own?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.topuniversities.com/blog/5-ways-improve-your-creative-thinkinghttps://www.topuniversities.com/blog/5-ways-improve-your-creative-thinking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Summer is the time for internships and summer jobs for many students, and it is also a great time to work on your creative thinking and innovation skills so you'll be in good shape to get that dream job after graduation.

Everyone says that modern companies - including those which are most popular to work for - highly value innovative thinking and creativity. The problem is, how can you be creative without failing, looking stupid or repeating what others have already suggested a hundred times?

For last few years I have been talking to various startups and have heard many interesting recipes for innovation. Here are six ways to improve your own creative thinking and innovation skills...

1. Create your own "Three Ifs"

Many good innovators take an existing object and ask clever questions to twist the very concept of it and make it new. Steve Jobs didn't start with the idea of a smartphone. He just took an existing cell phone and asked a very simple question: how can we improve it to make it better - or the best?

Let's be clear about this - there are no universal recipes for innovation, and each person should develop her or his own approach depending on specialty, interest, type of thinking, or even the type of team s/he is participating in.

That said, I usually suggest my students build creative thinking around three "ifs":

(1) What would happen if I change it (the object/ system/ social relationship, etc)?
(2) What would I change or improve about this object if I wanted to use it in 10 years?
(3) What would I do if I had a one-million-dollar investment to improve it?

These questions can become powerful tools that can help you to think differently. It is important to exercise these skills by repeatedly using the "three ifs" formula (or designing your own set of questions) about all sorts of things. And many new ideas will pop up.

For example, for several semesters I kept asking my students, let us take a bicycle, think about it and ask the "three if" questions, so we can come up with a new idea. Initially the students strongly resisted and were very skeptical. However, after several rounds of discussions and brainstorming they began to come up with many new creative ideas. We narrowed down those innovations into small course projects and my students' teams won several cash awards to implement their creative ideas.

2. Practice dreaming

The greatest paradox is that creative thinking is not necessarily the product of IQ or enlightenment via the proverbial apple falling on your head. It is a matter of regularly training your imagination, practicing your powers of observation and dreaming, big or small. It sounds so simple, and yet in this era of information overload and highly charged urban life, this important element is often missing from our everyday lives.

All too often we stay focused on the main task at hand, devoting our mental powers to routine actions (including Twitter and SMS - well, I am sometimes guilty of this too), so that at the end of the day the most creative idea we can come up with is just to finally take a break in front of the TV or computer screen. Sound familiar?

Whatever you're doing - whether it's work or leisure - practice spending time applying the "three ifs" formula to anything you see or imagine. This will help you get into the habit of making space in your mind for dreaming - essential for creative thinking and innovation.

3. Make time for cohesive creative thinking

Every textbook on creativity affirms to the importance of setting aside clearly defined time for creative thinking and innovation. For example, Google asks its teams to allocate at least 20% of their time to creative thinking or new projects. But often, even if we show up ready to innovate, still something doesn't work and fresh ideas fail to pop up like popcorn. There are two reasons for this stalemate. The first is that we don't practice dreaming, and the second is we don't practice focusing on cohesive ideas.

Therefore, the next rule of creative thinking is very simple: allocate time - it might be an hour per day or per week - in which to exercise creative thinking about something specific. A colleague told me that when he was a student many years ago he started musing about mobile phones - what they would be in 10 and 20 years' time. Already at college his essays on this topic won much praise, and after college he got a cool job designing apps for phones to make them much smarter and attractive for "millennials".

4. Learn to pitch your ideas (in an elevator)

There is simple truth in the fact that Steve Jobs of Apple was great at exploring and explaining innovations based on existing products - laptops, cell phones, music players. He didn't invent those products, but he made them better and he was great at explaining why his version was superior to other competing goods.

On many occasions I hear from my students, "But I had that idea first" or "I proposed something like that just recently and nobody listened to me." In this situation I always highlight the bottom line - probably you did have a wonderful idea, but you didn't express yourself clearly and excitingly enough to grab people's attention, or help others to grasp the nature of your innovation or project.

There is an old saying, "If you cannot express your idea in three sentences - you don't have an idea!" One of the most important innovation skills is the ability to present a very short and clear description of a new idea (two to three sentences - like shouting through the closing door of an elevator) and to make a short presentation (two to three minutes - what is called an "elevator pitch"). Like any other skill, the ability to articulate in this way can only come through much practice.

5. Bounce ideas off others

Even a great innovator needs people around her or him to discuss - or "bounce" - new creative ideas and innovations. What do the major innovative ideas of our time have in common, from Microsoft (well, when it was young) to Google? All of them were created by teams of people who stayed together to conceive the idea, plan their innovative projects, take them to investors and the public, and most importantly jointly brainstorm those innovations within the team - bouncing ideas, questions and improvements until the product was perfected to become the next multi-billion dollar "eureka."

Therefore, a final important asset to add to your innovation skillset, is the ability to be a valuable team player, capable of bouncing ideas to the next level. For some young people this is very natural, while for others it does not come so easily to be a team player. But it is never too late to train yourself in this mode of interacting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Ways to Improve Your Creative Thinking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Summer is the time for internships and summer jobs for many students, and it is also a great time to work on your creative thinking and innovation skills so you'll be in good shape to get that dream job after graduation.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Critical thinking...the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself.

Critical thinking is a rich concept that has been developing throughout the past 2,500 years. The term "critical thinking" has its roots in the mid-late 20th century. Below, we offer overlapping definitions which together form a substantive and trans-disciplinary conception of critical thinking.

Critical Thinking as Defined by the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking, 1987

A statement by Michael Scriven & Richard Paul, presented at the 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform, Summer 1987.

Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.

It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints; and frame of reference. Critical thinking - in being responsive to variable subject matter, issues, and purposes - is incorporated in a family of interwoven modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking.

Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated; 2) the mere possession of a set of skills, because it involves the continual use of them; and 3) the mere use of those skills ("as an exercise") without acceptance of their results.

Critical thinking varies according to the motivation underlying it. When grounded in selfish motives, it is often manifested in the skillful manipulation of ideas in service of one's own, or one's groups', vested interest. As such it is typically intellectually flawed, however pragmatically successful it might be. When grounded in fairmindedness and intellectual integrity, it is typically of a higher order intellectually, though subject to the charge of "idealism" by those habituated to its selfish use.

Critical thinking of any kind is never universal in any individual; everyone is subject to episodes of undisciplined or irrational thought. Its quality is therefore typically a matter of degree and dependent on, among other things, the quality and depth of experience in a given domain of thinking or with respect to a particular class of questions. No one is a critical thinker through-and-through, but only to such-and-such a degree, with such-and-such insights and blind spots, subject to such-and-such tendencies towards self-delusion. For this reason, the development of critical thinking skills and dispositions is a life-long endeavor.

Another Brief Conceptualization of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers - concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so. They avoid thinking simplistically about complicated issues and strive to appropriately consider the rights and needs of relevant others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to life-long practice toward self-improvement. They embody the Socratic principle: The unexamined life is not worth living , because they realize that many unexamined lives together result in an uncritical, unjust, dangerous world.

~ Linda Elder, September, 2007

Why Critical Thinking?

The Problem
Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so. But much of our thinking, left to itself, is biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of our life and that of what we produce, make, or build depends precisely on the quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is costly, both in money and in quality of life. Excellence in thought, however, must be systematically cultivated.

A Definition
Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or problem - in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and
imposing intellectual standards upon them.

The Result

A well cultivated critical thinker:

raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely;

gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;

thinks openmindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and

communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

(Taken from Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, Foundation for Critical Thinking Press, 2008)

In a seminal study on critical thinking and education in 1941, Edward Glaser defines critical thinking as follows "The ability to think critically, as conceived in this volume, involves three things: ( 1 ) an attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one's experiences, (2) knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, and (3) some skill in applying those methods. Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. It also generally requires ability to recognize problems, to find workable means for meeting those problems, to gather and marshal pertinent information, to recognize unstated assumptions and values, to comprehend and use language with accuracy, clarity, and discrimination, to interpret data, to appraise evidence and evaluate arguments, to recognize the existence (or non-existence) of logical relationships between propositions, to draw warranted conclusions and generalizations, to put to test the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives, to reconstruct one's patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience, and to render accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life.

( Edward M. Glaser, An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking, Teacher's College, Columbia University, 1941)

Back to top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Critical thinking...the awakening of the intellect to the study of itself. Critical thinking is a rich concept that has been developing throughout the past 2,500 years. The term "critical thinking" has its roots in the mid-late 20th century. Below, we offer overlapping definitions which together form a substantive and trans-disciplinary conception of critical thinking.

# data[].attributes.headline
QUESTION: how can we encourage FDY students to improve critical and creative thinking skills out of class  

# data[].attributes.subject
QUESTION: how can we encourage FDY students to improve critical and creative thinking skills out of class  

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.gre.ac.uk/articles/ils/critical-thinking

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is critical thinking? We often make the mistake of confusing being critical with being negative or "nit-picking" and this is unfortunate. Anybody can adopt a negative position to any point of view simply by saying "no" but this is not being critical, more often than not this is simply being awkward.

In this era of so called 'alternative facts' it has never been more important to question our sources of information. Critical thinking involves looking beyond the obvious surface issues, asking questions about motivation and purpose. Being critical requires you to not only gather appropriate data and information but to examine it carefully and question its reliability and authority.

Checklist Guide

One way of helping to focus your critical thinking is by considering the 6 W's:

Who by? Who has produced a piece of information is a crucial issue. Everyone has a perspective, a point of view, that can't be avoided. Being aware of a person's point of view, background and even prejudices helps us to interpret their work and better understand why they are saying what they are saying.

Why? Why something has been written or said is a very important critical issue. We are bombarded by information these days and each piece is presented to serve a particular purpose. Knowing why something something has been written will help in identifying the underlying motivation of the writer or producer and thus help us decide whether the information is valuable to us or not.

What? What evidence is the information based upon? In reading a book or watching the TV or listening to teachers it is important to ask questions about the basis for what is being said. It is important not to believe something just because somebody says so, we need to know why they are saying what they are saying, otherwise it is simply gossip. Newspaper articles can often be accused of this, making claims based on little or no evidence.

When? The period in history when a piece of information was presented is very important, especially in fields where there is rapid development such as IT. There is little use writing an essay about the current state of mobile phone technology based upon a book written in the 1980's.

Where? Geographical location is often an important critical factor. Where something was produced will often make a difference to the kind of information being presented and the way it is presented. Healthcare issues, for example, will differ widely between developed and developing countries. Attitudes to law, religion and society vary a great deal from country to country.

Who for? The target audience for a presentation of information will be an important issue when critically evaluating its value and significance. Writers can aim their work very specifically at the young or the old, male or female, different political groups, different social groups and so on. Some writings or media productions are aimed at the general public others are aimed at a small section. Some information is packaged for easy consumption by people with limited education some is tailored to the needs of students, teachers and experts. It is important when studying to ask whether your source material is pitched at the appropriate level - the "Ladybird Book of Policemen" would not, for example, be an appropriate textbook for an undergraduate essay on criminality and policing in the UK.

Final Comments

Thinking critically is a skill that is taught at school and university BUT its main purpose is to better equip you to understand the world, to make more sense of the vast amount of information that is available to us and to avoid, being manipulated. It is a life skill.

We all act critically in our everyday lives. We don't simply accept gossip and random information and we certainly shouldn't accept everything we see on TV or in the media as true and authoritative. It is vital in our everyday lives to be able to question why people are saying things to us be it the government, our friends or the advertising industry. If we accepted everything we heard and read and saw, without question, we would be open to constant abuse and manipulation. To buy what we really need, to vote for who we really support and to befriend those who truly care for us we have to think critically.

Who do you think is being most critical here and why?

For Further Information

The Skills You Need website has more information on critical thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
academic skills; writing an essay or report; doing research; writing a dissertation; working independently

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is critical thinking? We often make the mistake of confusing being critical with being negative or "nit-picking" and this is unfortunate. Anybody can adopt a negative position to any point of view simply by saying "no" but this is not being critical, more often than not this is simply being awkward.