Qualifying educators for developing critical thinking. A systematic framework

15 Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN Préface de Daniel Peraya La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Regards croisés et perspectives internationales Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Sous la direction de Florent MICHELOT et Simon COLLIN Préface de Daniel Peraya La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif Regards croisés et perspectives internationales Catalogage avant publication de Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec et Bibliothèque et Archives Canada Titre : La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif : regards croisés et perspectives internationales / sous la direction de Florent Michelot et Simon Collin. Noms : Michelot, Florent, 1982éditeur intellectuel. | Collin, Simon, 1982éditeur intellectuel. Collections : Formation à distance (Presses de l’Université du Québec) ; 15. Description : Mention de collection : Formation à distance = Distance Learning ; 15 | Comprend des références bibliographiques. Identifiants : Canadiana 20240025369 | ISBN 9782760561465 (PDF) Vedettes-matière : RVM : Technologies de l’information et de la communication pour l’éducation. | RVM : Connaissances en informatique. | RVM : Technologie éducative. Classification : LCC LB1028.43.C635 2024 | CDD 371.33/4—dc23 Révision Michèle Beaudoin et Riham Alkhakaf Conception graphique Marie-Noëlle Morrier Mise en page Florent Michelot Image de couverture iStock Dépôt légal : 4etrimestre 2024 › Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec › Bibliothèque et Archives Canada © 2024 – Presses de l’Université du Québec Tous droits de reproduction, de traduction et d’adaptation réservés Imprimé au Canada N6146-1 [01] C ha p it r e 23 Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking A Systematic Framework Dirk JAHN, and Alina KAISER with the Support of Luisa BÜCHER, Till LINK, and Hannah LENK Dimension covered Developing critical thinking with regard to the use of digital technology Keywords Critical thinking; teacher training; empirical findings; systematic approach School levels covered Secondary; post-secondary (college, university) Abstract As critical thinking (CT) has become more important as an essential skill for the 21st century, there are many different courses for educators in numerous specific fields that intend to turn educators into effective CT facilitators. Which programs care for high-quality learning experiences that really enhance teaching skills and mindsets to foster CT professionally, and which do not? Current research has not much to offer to address that question (Janssen et al., 2019). Therefore, we attempt to narrow this conceptual and empirical hiatus with a qualitative study to give clear criteria and understanding for evaluating or developing effective training concepts for educators. Résumé La pensée critique étant devenue une compétence essentielle pour le 21ᵉ siècle, il existe de nombreux cours destinés aux pédagogues, dans de nombreux domaines spécifiques, visant à faire de ces derniers des facilitateurs en matière de pensée critique. Quels sont les programmes qui proposent des expériences d’apprentissage de haute qualité qui améliorent réellement les compétences et les mentalités des enseignants afin de favoriser la pensée critique de manière professionnelle, et quels sont ceux qui ne le font pas ? Les travaux de recherche actuels n’ont pas grandchose à offrir pour répondre à cette question (Janssen et al., 2019). Par conséquent, nous tentons de réduire ce hiatus conceptuel et empirique avec une étude qualitative La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 466 afin de proposer des critères, ainsi qu’une compréhension claire pour évaluer ou développer des concepts de formation efficaces à destination des pédagogques. n the face of rapid and drastic global changes and challenges such as digitalization, global warming, species extinction, or the spread of zoonosis, critical thinking (CT) currently appears to be of particular importance among the needed skills for the 21st century in Western countries (Fadel et al., 2017). Several countries have governmental educational programs, policies, and strategies that consider developing CT as one of the most crucial skills in the 21st century. Examples are Quebec’s elaborated Digital Competency Framework or the Four-C model, stemming from the U.S. initiative P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Learning), which is promoted by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and have been attracting attention in the United States and Europe for several years. But how should these critical CT skills and dispositions be developed? It is indisputable that the educational system and its educators have a crucial role in supporting students to become independent and critical thinkers. CT is an expected learning outcome. At the same time, this is a major challenge. Although there is a diverse and rich body of scientific literature available on theoretical concepts of CT and on the effectiveness of methods and developing strategies (see, for example, the meta-analysis of Abrami et al., 2015), research on how educators should be trained for fostering CT, however, seems underrepresented (Jahn, 2012; Janssen et al., 2019).1 Therefore, in this paper, we attempt to narrow down this conceptual and empirical hiatus. The aim is to construct and elaborate a framework for the qualification of educators who want to develop CT in their field with respect to the use of digital media. The framework will mainly address the qualification of educators who work with adolescent and adult students in “formal” education processes in secondary and higher education. We will construct the framework by drawing on Jahn’s research and experience (a design-based research study from 2012, publications from 2014 and 2022) and expand it with insights from new qualitative expert interviews and further research results. The framework will address crucial questions for the design of training programs for educators. 1 This thesis is supported by the cited resources. To ensure the accuracy of that statement, we researched literature on our own, using the databases ERIC (Education resources information center) and the German education research portal: to get the most suitable results we focused during our search on the terms “training,” “teachers,” and “critical thinking.” The search on “training for fostering critical thinking,” for example, found more than 100 publications in the education research portal and more than 20,000 in the ERIC database on March 30, 2023. However, the review of the first ten pages respectively did not show any relevant results for our research questions. In most cases, the primary focus is on the need for and importance of CT promotion and the implementation of CT in the classroom, but not on how pedagogical professionals can be promoted for fostering CT. Due to the large amount of data, it was not possible to look through every document. Therefore, it is possible that we have overlooked something despite an extensive search. I The digital competency in question 1. How should teachers be qualified to foster CT skills and teach them in their individual teaching practice? Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 467 1 Empirical Evidence on the Importance of Educator Training for Effective CT Instruction 1.1 Two Branches of Research on Critical Thinking There is a towering international amount of research on many different aspects of critical thinking available these days, ranging from small empirical studies to comprehensive meta-analyses and elaborated theories (for an overview, see Cursio and Jahn, 2021; Jahn, 2012). One branch of this discourse is more dedicated to constructing theories, and it focuses on the nature, concepts, and foundations of CT as an object. These works deal with conceptual, theoretical, and phenomenological considerations such as the cognitive (Halpern, 2007) and performative processes of CT (Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Brookfield, 1987), thinking styles and criteria of CT (e.g., Paul and Elder, 2003), attitudes and traits of a critical thinker (Facione, 1990), etc. In this line of work, the requirements, challenges, and contexts of the CT process are also discussed and analyzed. For instance, CT demands a certain kind of sensory and emotional experience, i.e. getting in touch with a segment of the world in a resonant or dissonant way, which then leads the individual into the ongoing transformative process of critical thought and action (Dewey, 1933; Brookfield, 1987; Garrison & Archer, 2003). Recently, cognitive biases due to mental effects like framing, priming, or anchoring have been the focus of that line of CT concepts, with the goal of identifying and breaking irrational thought patterns and traps inherent in thinking (see, e.g., Pettersson, 2020). But CT does not take place only in seclusion or in one person’s mind and body. It also takes place and unfolds in discussions, actions, and interactions with others and the world (Brookfield & Preskill, 2005). Here, ideas and claims of truth are exchanged, criticized, or tested. They have to live up to their promises in action. CT also occurs while the body is in movement, for example, while walking in the woods or on a bicycle tour, when the mind is at ease and free from all distractions (Cursio & Jahn, 2022). These and further insights about the process of CT and its conditions give clues about developing settings and strategies, in which CT can be nurtured. Various versions of CT with different goals have sprung from that strand of research/theory from different fields like psychology, philosophy, or neuroscience, dating back at least to the early 20th century and John Dewey (Jahn, 2019). On a broader conceptual level, CT can be understood as part of a transformative process in which an individual applies analytical (e.g., logical, inferential, methodological, epistemological, etc.) and ethical modes of thinking. They take on different perspectives, put themselves in other beings’ positions and evaluate, create, and test assumptions and ideas in order to eventually come up with informed judgements, actions and a richer understanding of a segment of the world. That implies, for example, becoming aware of fundamental 2. What are the main design principles and objectives for the construction of a CT intervention that qualifies educators? 3. What role can digital media play in CT qualification programs? La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 468 assumptions about a given issue or experience from different perspectives and soundly evaluating these assumptions that frame experience on a logical, empirical, epistemological, aesthetical, ethical, and constructive level in order to judge, decide, and act more independently and responsibly (Jahn, 2019). Regarding digital media content, this could mean analyzing not only the given explicit information containing oral or written speech on a logical or empirical level but also taking a deeper look at the way a message is conveyed or presented. Images, visualizations, paintings, photos, sound recordings, collages, memes, videos and the like often have a much greater impact in terms of gripping us emotionally, shaking us up, outraging us, disturbing and even influencing us. In the age of synthetically created media, which can be produced ever more easily, quickly and professionally with generative AI (keyword “deepfakes”), critical thinking is increasingly needed and challenged. However, the analysis here works with different criteria and strategies than is the case with the aforementioned logical, empirical and epistemological examination. Questions are on how something is staged and presented (use of editing, perspective, sound and music, light, colors, contrasts, arrangement, etc.), what is not shown (but would be relevant) or on how something is perceived or is intended to perceive. Further, the truth value of what is shown is reflected in different categories. In this mode, critical thinking becomes critical-aesthetic analysis. In the context of promoting media literacy (see Baacke, 1996; Chetty et al., 2017), learners should, for example, be enabled to critically engage with (digital) media – whether as recipients or as users. This is also one of the main goals of Quebec’s Digital Competency Framework and its 12 interdependent key dimensions.2 Here, CT is also about the explicit and implicit consequences and risks of digital media use. For example, if you always orient yourself with a navigation device, you might soon lose your bearings. CT, in this context, is also about understanding the mechanisms, potentials, and risks of digital media. For example, social media algorithms often flush up posts to the first places that are clicked or liked the most. However, the most appealing content does not necessarily constitute the most wellfounded, balanced, or objective contributions but often the most aesthetic, emotionalizing, or simplifying ones. That leads us to the second branch of research and to the question of how CT can be trained, fostered, or assessed effectively. On a methodological level, numerous studies that address the question rely on empirical testing of pedagogical interventions. Many of these studies focus on the effectiveness of different instructional approaches and strategies, didactical methods and conditions for successful CT promotion, CT instruction principles, the role of digital media in fostering CT, strategies of proper CT assessment, etc. Insights gained from this branch have shed light on some highly debated questions considering effective CT instruction strategies. On an instructional or methodological level, meta-studies suggest that in order to increase the probability of success, it is vital to work with discussion-based learning formats (Socratic questioning and pro-contra debate, among others) to make use of authentic instruction scenarios (case studies, simulations, role plays, etc.), or to combine these two formats and to add mentoring approaches (like modelling CT) (Abrami et al., 2015). These results hold true for learners of nearly all ages and relate not only to teaching and learning in in-person formats. In addition to these, plenty of studies have also indicated that specially designed, stimulating self-learning activities like reflective writing and critical reading, among others, can also help to promote CT (see Meyers, 1986; Van 2 The Digital Competency Framework is available under: http://www.education.gouv.qc.ca/en/currentinitiatives/digital-action-plan/digital-competency-framework/ Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 469 Gelder, 2001; Moon, 2008). This also applies to well-crafted and carried out teachingand learning scenarios that are enriched by digital media or are completely implemented with digital media (using methods and principles of authentic or anchored instruction, dialogue, mentoring, or individual study – for example, with eportfolios, WebQuests, serious games, and so on [for an overview, see Cursio and Jahn, 2021]). 1.2 The Impact of Teacher Training Hardly surprising, Abrami et al. (2008) have also shown that training teachers for CT instruction can have a strong effect on instruction quality and task designs and hence successful CT promotion. Based on a literature review of 117 quantitative, heterogeneous studies from 1960 to 2005 on the promotion of CT – most of which used standardized and accepted tests to assess CT —, Abrami and colleagues (2008) demonstrated that the preparation of educators for fostering CT plays a crucial role for effective promotion: the intervention “instructor received training” (k = 16 studies, SE = 0,04) showed a very high average score of effect size (g = 1.0) that outscored many other interventions such as certain CT instruction approaches (e.g., infusion approach, g = 0,54) or strategies like integrating clear and precise CT objectives into the curriculum (g = 0,13) (Abrami et al., 2008, p. 1119.) When instructors attend special trainings as preparation for teaching CT (pre-service and in-service), the probability that they will achieve qualitative and successful instruction of CT strongly increases: Martin (2005), for example, reviewed multiple studies that analyzed effects of CT instruction training for teachers on their teaching styles. He concluded that teachers who take part in these trainings use more discussion-based learning scenarios (asking open-ended questions and the like), model CT more often, and so on (2005). These results are cohesive with qualitative and quantitative studies on teachers’ preparedness for CT intervention in different countries that did not receive special training for fostering CT. These studies mostly focused on teachers’ understanding of CT (concept clarity) and CT instruction knowledge and skills. Some recent as well as older studies from various countries suggest that it is likely that teachers without special training (pre-service or in-service) have no clear and elaborated concept and understanding of CT (Paul et al., 1997; Astleitner et al., 2002; Grübel, 2010; Janke, 2021; Stedman & Adams, 2012). Hence, it can be difficult for teachers to derive clear learning objectives related to CT and effectively design and deliver learning experiences that enhance CT skills and dispositions of the students. In some studies, teachers even got tested in their CT skills and did not score much better than their students did, whom did not score very well (Astleitner et al., 2002). Fortunately, there has recently been an international proliferation of training courses, handouts, and online courses for educators in multiple subject areas that intend to turn educators into effective CT teachers. A glimpse at the courses and handout descriptions online shows that they are quite heterogeneous in terms of many aspects of CT teaching (e.g., the concept of CT, subject specificity, methods offered, etc.) and also vary widely in terms of training design aspects (duration, type of format, degree of online elements, assessment, etc.). It is hard to tell which of these courses and programs care for high-quality learning experiences that actually enhance teaching skills and mindsets in order to foster CT professionally. There are only a few studies on the effectiveness of teacher training available, as described earlier, that show to which degree teacher training can be useful for promoting CT. For example, Janssen La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 470 and colleagues consider their study on effective teacher training from 2019 to be one of the first ever to focus on teachers’ CT skills and attitudes in the context of training (Janssen et al., 2019): “To the best of our knowledge this was the first study that explored the potential effects of CT training on teacher’s CT skills and attitudes” (Janssen et al., 2019, p. 22). In that study, Janssen and colleagues show that teachers not only need to be trained in the methods and approaches for fostering CT but that it makes sense to strengthen the teachers themselves in CT and in its apparent relevance. In a quasi-experimental study, 32 teachers from the Dutch University of Applied Sciences were prepared in three modules (each of three hours) to promote CT. In the first module, the teachers dealt intensively with CT as a concept with a focus on cognitive biases, their detection and avoidance in concrete tasks. The aim was to deepen teachers’ understanding of what CT is and how it works. The other two modules aimed to emphasize the relevance of CT and to show how it can be promoted successfully. To do this, the teachers also went through exercises in which they developed and discussed their own tasks for promoting CT in their practice. After each individual module, teachers were tested on their acquired respective skills, for example, through performance assessment (e.g., CT tests, recognizing cognitive biases in student work). In addition, there was a pretest before the training started. The trained teachers performed significantly better in CT tests and in detecting and explaining cognitive biases in student material than those in the control group. Although these teachers were better at performing CT and detecting and explaining cognitive biases, they performed at a rather low level. They improved only in tasks for which they received training (not in novel tasks), and they had problems explaining the detected thinking flaws in student material, which is essential for giving feedback to the student and hence is an important factor for fostering CT. Moreover, the already high-rated attitude toward the relevance of CT could not be increased any further. In addition, the individual evaluation of how well teachers can promote CT decreased shortly after the first module and then increased again (e.g., because the teachers realized how little they knew and could do about CT). Besides the interesting results of the innovative study, quantitative research designs like this with a strong focus on measuring the generated effects of certain inputs often fall short of explaining precisely what works well and how certain training elements should be designed generally. The authors themselves stated: “[. . .] we cannot draw conclusions on what aspects of the training were most effective for which outcomes” (Janssen et al., 2019, p. 21). The study has shown, however, that teachers need an elaborate idea of CT and must be able to apply CT routinely in their practice. Further, it is important that teachers regard fostering CT as an important educational goal. 2 Deriving Design Principles from Research and Theory for Effective Training Designs 2.1 Introduction: Model of Transfer Process (Baldwin & Ford, 1988) As indicated before, there is not much research available on the question of how to design effective training for CT facilitators (Janssen, 2019), especially with a focus on using digital media as a tool for fostering CT in itself and CT in the context of digital Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 477 distinguished in this context, as well as general and specialized approaches. The role of digital media was addressed rather rarely and is mainly used as a methodical tool. 4 Constructing a Framework for Qualifying Educators for Fostering Critical Thinking Instead of presenting the results in a rather chronological and descriptive way, we decided to structure the gained insights in a practitioner-friendly manner in order to provide helpful impulses for developing CT qualifications for beginners. The guiding principle hereby is the logic of planning a workshop. 4.1 General Aspects The target group for the training are mainly teachers for (young) adults in secondary or tertiary educational institutions. When asked about the target group, several experts named a second target group, i.e., the one that ultimately benefits from the teacher qualification. This secondary target group also influences the design of the training program. Expert #7 referred to this connection as a meta-level: “. . .and it is important that we always have a double level here, and this is generally the case in higher education training. So, unlike the primary level of teaching, where teachers teach content to students, we are dealing with this trained-trainer level. We enable teachers to do something which they are then supposed to pass on to students” (Expert #7). This also results in a special challenge for the participants of the qualification. They, too, must take their future target group into account when developing their own understanding of CT, as another interviewee explains. They have to think about how they get their target group used to CT. According to the course design, the duration of the different training programs differs vastly, ranging from one-hour workshops to courses lasting several weeks. The training time frame is usually set by institutions and tends to be rather limited (“Everything is tightened up; you only have three hours” [Expert #2]). Thus, the training design must adapt accordingly. This is crucial since duration and workload significantly shape the learning content, curriculum, learning objectives, and methods, including assessment and feedback. These consequences must thus be considered during course design: “First of all, we have to be very aware of the limits of our situation. What can I possibly accomplish in this class that meets twice a week—for one to mention, right?” (Expert #4). The experts agree that very short trainings have a limited benefit that does not go beyond a brief stimulus. In this context, they criticize that a sustainable transfer into practice and the development of a personal understanding of CT can hardly be accomplished in brief training sessions. A practical solution, mentioned by Experts #5 and #7, could be blended learning concepts that combine classroom sessions and selflearning phases in which the imparted knowledge can be deepened or tested. Expert #4 emphasizes the importance of some form of didactic post-intervention: “To summarize, you need the orientation and a system for follow-up.” A possible system of dealing with limited time is to encourage the trainers to implement a weekly meeting to discuss and share their experiences in fostering CT. La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 478 4.2 CT Concepts of the Experts While participants of all workshops had to deal with the conceptual understanding of CT, course instructors emphasized quite different concepts. To give some examples: Expert #1’s understanding of CT is more categorized by thinking styles that refer to critical theory and they hereby emanate empowerment of students. His concept of CT is elaborate but plain and comprehensible, formulated in a simple, illustrative and memorable language (e.g., checking assumptions that inform actions and experiences): “I tend not to speak too much about the theoretical background. Most of the people I work with are not very interested in that. They are interested in very practical aspects” (Expert #1). In contrast, Experts #5 and #7 have elaborated a rather complex model of CT for their training, which is framed by concepts and terminology of logic, epistemology, ethics, aesthetics, or psychology. Expert #4 relies on certain intellectual criteria from the field of analytic philosophy, like logic or accuracy, which are supposed to function as a frame of reference for CT. His concept of intellectual standards seems rather like a scheme or checklist of guidelines that can be used for all kinds of occasions. Expert #3, on the other hand, stressed that there is no generally comprehensive conceptual approach to CT, as it is context-bound. Rather, the particular, specific disciplinary context and associated teaching goals dictate what constitutes CT and how it is expressed. The different versions of CT and the used terminology may be influenced by the trainers and their backgrounds, but they might also be aligned with their respective target groups. Teachers, for example, may not be used to the technical language of epistemology or cognitive sciences. The concepts, models, and terminology used must fit the respective audiences without trivializing or oversimplifying difficult concepts or questions. Essential Learning Objectives and Aligned Training Designs. The essential learning objectives within training designs can be summarized in three categories: Concept Clarity, Process Clarity and Fostering Readiness. At the beginning of each paragraph, possible learning objectives within the categories formulated by the experts are mentioned. Furthermore, design principles and examples for a practical implementation that are used by the experts to achieve these learning objectives are presented. Understanding CT: Concept Richness and Clarity. ● Teachers should be able to describe and elaborate a rich understanding of CT and align it with subject matter; ● Teachers should be able to demonstrate CT in authentic contexts. All interview partners emphasized the importance of conceptual clarity and richness for teachers. With a clear and rich understanding of CT in mind, teachers can much more precisely elaborate or demonstrate the skills and dispositions they want to foster in their lessons. By elaborating a clear and rich conceptualization of CT, its thinking styles, levels, and criteria, teachers will be able to formulate learning objectives related to CT skills and dispositions. This is a fundamental step towards planning lessons around these objectives and evaluating their effectiveness – so it is assumed. Six of the seven experts stressed that it is not sufficient to have a clear general understanding of CT but that educators need a precise concept for their subject and field of work (CT in. . .), which they must develop and work on. “I think one of the other things I’m trying to do is to work from very specific concrete experiences and actions that people are taking. I Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 479 don’t teach CT as a disconnected foremost mental analysis. [. . .] I’m always trying to teach it in the context of the specific decisions and actions that people are facing” (Expert #4). Expert #3 takes a similar view: “I think that, to me, it is the key to critical thinking in any area of the disciplinary framework.” At the same time, it is important to be aware that one is taking a limited perspective within this disciplinary framework. In this respect, Expert #7 calls for a regular critical examination of one’s own thought processes. “So it’s always about generating a reflexive level. So that people always think: ‘What did I just assume or what did I not consider?’” (Expert #7). Expert #1’s instructions for CT, which summarize the important basic thinking steps, can be applied here. I think that the core process that is entailed is becoming aware of assumptions that guide actions and that frame the decisions and judgments that we make. It is subjecting those assumptions to some kind of appraisal whereby we decide that the assumptions are accurate and, valid and wellgrounded or that they need further investigation or perhaps that they are not justified in the situation we find ourselves. So, the core process would be examining assumptions, researching, and appraising assumptions. (Expert #1) Designs Principles to Achieve Concept Richness and Clarity. Although all experts emphasized that concept clarity is crucial for fostering CT, the process of achieving this is handled differently in training with different audiences. A minority of the experts operate in a mediating push-modus in their training: they present more or less elaborated concepts of CT, which the participants should internalize, apply to their subject and field of education, and sometimes demonstrate themselves in authentic contexts. The offer is realized in an inductive and deductive way: the inductive approach leads from concrete, authentic situations to which the participants are exposed and on which they reflect – for example, ambiguous situations that participants experienced in professional or private settings – to the application of certain CT styles that are helpful to understand the authentic situation better. These are then made visible and explicit by the trainers. From there, a conceptual superstructure is sometimes introduced. In the deductive approach, the general principles, levels, or criteria of CT are presented without context and then applied to authentic situations. Those interview partners that had a very closed and criteria-driven concept of CT (#4) put much effort in making these criteria visible via lectures on these concepts and via exercises in which participants demonstrated their application and confrontation with these criteria. The goal was to develop the ability to analyze problems based on these thinking standards and thus make intelligent decisions. The thinking standards included criteria such as clarity, accuracy, or logic. In addition, participants are made aware of the importance of CT and are motivated to use and promote it. This can be encouraged by showing that CT is an essential learning competence for the respective subject and problem-solving competence for the learner’s everyday life, be it at work, as a civil citizen or as a private person. Other experts rather follow a pull modus. They do not want the participants to commit on a specific model but push them to come up with their own concepts and versions of CT fitting to their respective field and subject: they ask the participants to elaborate and define CT on a general basis and in their specific subject or field of work. Expert #3, for example, does not even present a concept of CT at all. Instead, lecturers La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 480 in higher education from different backgrounds develop an understanding of CT in their field in phases of self-study. In a second step, these understandings are further clarified and improved in an ongoing process of discussion and reflection with peers and the trainer. In comparison to the other trainings, the instructor takes a reserved role. He classifies the participants and their discussions, the criticism practiced in each case, and the joint struggle for a suitable practice of promoting CT as motivating and particularly insightful. Experts #5 and #7 developed a mixed approach of push and pull in an inductive style. First, they stimulate thinking about CT in general via prompts in self-study and written assignments (e.g., participants must define CT in general and in their field). Then, they analyze, systematize, cluster and visualize the results for all participants via Padlet or other pinboard tools to get an overview of the conceptual understanding of all participants. In the next step, they discuss and reflect on that overview with the group and introduce their comprehensive and extensive model of CT levels and thinking styles, to which the participants can adjust their concepts. In a joint effort, the group develops its own concept of CT, which is then compared to a comprehensible model. In their opinion, it is helpful to have a diverse group with different conceptions of CT from different fields which discuss the different perspectives of CT. Thus, demonstrating the diversity of conceptual approaches (e.g., logic, philosophy of science, ethics, cognitive biases, and so on) can positively influence every single understanding of CT and reduce one-sided conceptualizations. Expert #5 reported, for example, a slight tendency in some branches of natural science to omit the ethical side of CT. A conceptualization can then be helpful in recognizing the importance of certain aspects of CT and integrating them. Expert #6 also works with that inductive, context-sensitive approach: In the first step, participants reflect on and explicate their definition of CT. From this individual perspective, she moves on and focuses on the respective science and inherent teaching and learning cultures of the participants and how CT skills become visible in the performance of the respective students. From there, when participants have adjusted and discussed the different characteristics and expressions of CT and reflected on them, she introduces a general and unifying model of CT. All experts use different ways to illustrate, experience, and exercise CT at work. Expert #5 lets the participants experience certain critical and uncritical thinking styles, for example, by exposing them to exercises in which they can instinctively learn how certain cognitive biases, like the anchoring effect or priming, can frame or distort their own thought processes. For illustration, some experts work with authentic student artifacts (essays) that demonstrate critical and confused thinking on different levels. Being designed for higher education, the course aims to provide participants with a broad overview of the traditions and perspectives of CT and offers a conceptual understanding for the higher education context. To get an understanding of CT in relation to the epistemological development of the students, the papers to be analyzed cover the spectrum between uncritical and high-level CT as understood by the expert. Participants are encouraged to clarify certain terminology within their own discipline and to develop an understanding of CT in their own context. Other interview partners work with exercises in which CT must be applied, evaluated, and demonstrated. Expert #1, for example, used methods like Scenario Analysis or Personal Reflection Exercises, mostly consisting of stimulating cases (participants’ own or invented) and reflective questions that invite participants to think critically about these challenging experiences or cases. The expert models and illustrates CT activities that he identified Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 481 in the workshop by presenting and structuring the thoughts and assumptions of participants collected through the methods he used. The training design of Expert #1 strongly relies on self-experience in the application of CT. Most of his methods prompt reflection on one’s own (future) professional practice as an educator. In some of the trainings (#3, #5, #7), participants are also requested to formulate learning objectives for their future lessons that refer to certain CT skills or dispositions within their subject. This is another method to get the participants to think and talk about CT with respect to their subject. Discussions, cooperative feedback, and reflection on CT as a concept and its meaning for teaching in each case and subject play a crucial role in all experts’ course designs. Through these principles and the respective approaches and methods, the training should provide an in-depth elaboration of what CT means and what it could mean in the respective subject cultures and contexts, which can be seen as an important transfer effort. Furthermore, in all trainings, participants are invited to experience at least certain steps of a CT process by experiencing methods and activities that promote CT on their own. This leads them to demonstrate, apply, and model CT in authentic contexts. Some of the experts indicated that discussing and reflecting on CT concepts are also important to improving teachers’ CT. Understanding CT in Action: Process Richness and Clarity. ● Teachers should be able to explain the process of CT holistically (e.g., from a cognitive, emotional, social, or performative perspective) and be able to describe the different steps and actions the person takes in the process, the inherent required conditions, and possible challenges on a general basis and also in their concrete subject-contexts. Some of the interview partners (#1, #4, #5, #7) stressed that it is not enough to internalize and adopt the concept of CT as a merely cognitive phenomenon, a brain process like thinking in certain intellectual criteria. Instead, teachers must deeply understand the process of CT in action from an internal and external student perspective – a holistic transformative, cognitive, and bodily event in which the thinker goes through different affective, emotional, or rational phases and takes on different actions of discourse, interaction, investigation, exploration, evaluation, testing out ideas and decisions with others, reflecting in solitude, etc. (see chapter 2.1)4. “The participants who undergo such a process of critical thinking should be very active and casual, that they also really try to break it down for practice, to adapt it, to think about how it looks and how it could look for me, that’s how I see it” (Expert #5). Only when teachers know about the conditions, steps, actions, or challenges that CT as a transformative process of learning and change requests to thrive, they can understand and derive fitting teaching strategies and design learning situations that foster CT in the respective and individual phases. For example, considering the basic conditions for CT to grow means nurturing a climate of mutual respect, appreciation, and understanding, in which every social or cultural background is welcomed as enrichment, where experiences, opinions, assumptions, and ideas can be shared 4 The process of CT is often presented in the literature in phase models, which describe what students experience and do in the different steps of the process and the skills and dispositions that are needed to succeed in each of these phases. The models often have a four-step or five-step linear structure, which is as follows: feeling of a discrepancy, which is caused by certain experienced events or observations, exploring the phenomenon, evacuation, coming up with plans for actions and testing them in the real world. La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 482 without the fear of repression from peers or the teacher (in form of grades or a loss of acknowledgement for example) and where making mistakes or juxtaposing no longer valid worldviews is valued. Designs Principles to Achieve Process Clarity. Interview partner #5 indicated that to demonstrate and discuss the process of CT, it is helpful to work with models that can vividly depict and illustrate the complex and multilayered process of CT. This allows participants to really grasp and conceive what CT as a real-life phenomenon is about – with regard to the thinker, their actions, the role of reflection, the prerequisites, the influx of the environment, and so on. Although there are general models available, for example, the CT Model of Stephen Brookfield (1987) or the Practical Inquiry Model by Garrison and Archer (2000), that give many practical hints for pedagogical endeavours, Interview partner #4 emphasized that teachers should develop their own process models for their subjects and contexts in order to enable a better transfer. In his workshop, participants have to develop and visualize their own CT process models that are highly connected to the respective subject and understanding of CT – in line with the learning objectives pursued. Through feedback and discussions, participants continually construct and improve their models in several meetings in order to vividly illustrate the ideal-typical process of CT for a specific subject matter, e.g., CT in historical studies. Interview partner #5 discusses general process models with the participants and highlights certain didactical implications that can be derived from these models, for example, the need for setting up a good learning climate in which learners do not have to fear constraints of grading or the pressure to say the “right thing.” Then, the participants are invited to develop their own models. They visualize their approaches on flipcharts or PowerPoints and then present them to the audience members who also play the role of students. With this exercise, teachers can check if their models are comprehensible and complete. The finalized models could then be used in class to demonstrate CT processes. Some interview partners also rely on self-experience as a design principle for the workshop (#1, #5, #6, #7). By structuring the training at least partly in accordance with the phases of the CT process (e.g., triggering event, exploration, integration and resolution/action), participants experience parts of the CT process on their own. Through reflection and discussion, they come to an understanding of how the process feels like and can be fostered. Promoting CT Promotion: Skills and Attitudes. ● Teachers should be able to apply teaching styles and methods that support CT at the appropriate stage (method skills in the classroom); ● Teachers should be able to design teaching and learning environments that stimulate CT at the appropriate stage (design skills prior to classroom interactions); ● Teachers should cultivate a professional attitude and mindset for fostering CT (role of the teacher, teaching and learning). These learning objectives show how demanding the development of CT is in regard to the requested teacher skills and attitudes. Not only should teachers be able to use supportive methods and teaching styles in the classroom for facilitating and scaffolding CT, like modelling CT (through thinking aloud and visualizing CT, among Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 483 other things), moderating critical dialogue or triggering thinking. They should also be designers and creators of inspiring and stimulating learning situations that generate stirring and authentic experiences that prompt and carry the process of CT. These learning situations or scenarios are labelled in literature as problem-based learning, exploratory learning, service learning, etc. These situations, which heavily rely on authentic instruction, bring normal teaching formats and resources (90 minutes, the teacher carries the lesson as an expert. . .) to their limits because they demand more attention and resources. Furthermore, teachers need a certain attitude as reflective practitioners if they want to foster CT as an open and transformative learning process. For example, the promotion of CT includes the promoters themselves: teachers should be open to examining and expanding their thinking as well as to abandon any preconceived notions if new insights replace the old ones. To entice CT, teachers need to practice their thinking and critical spirit at eye level with students. They have to build up trust and a learning climate of openness in which everybody feels welcome. In order to do so, teachers have to think about their role as teachers, question their assumptions about students, teaching and learning, or reflect on the tangible and intangible effects of curricula and the way school is practiced and lived (the effects of competition, habitus, power structures, etc.) It becomes clear that knowledge about CT as a concept and process is important to design authentic situations and tasks that lead the students into the different phases of CT and to use appropriate methods that stimulate and guide the process. Moreover, the process reveals what the role of a teacher could be as a facilitator of CT and how school as a system must be designed in order to benefit CT and not interfere with it. Designs Principles for Promoting CT Promotion Skills and Attitudes. The interview partners reported different approaches in training to get the participants ready for developing CT. One useful design principle is, again, self-experience. Selfexperience, in this context, can be differentiated into an active and receptive experience. In the active form, participants try out and experience methods and task settings themselves in the role of teachers who aim at fostering CT with their students. In the receptive form, participants experience methods and tasks in the role of students. Both forms enable a direct resonance to the performance and the effect of the method or task. With this opportunity, participants can experience the effectiveness and the effect of the approach. Additionally, teachers get first clues on how they can use the methods and design principles and they can adapt the respective method or design principle to their context of teaching (transfer). Receptive self-experience: Experts #1 and #2 teach methods and principles for fostering CT through the receptive method itself and let participants discover and analyze authentic learning situations that other teachers use for fostering CT. For example, they work with authentic, ambiguous, stunning, and poignant videos or video-based methods such as the branching scenario5 that affect the viewer in different ways, or they let the participants try out WebQuests,6 which also create cognitive dissonance, multi-perspectivity, and work with ambiguity. Participants are invited to experience the respective task and then reflect on and discuss the experience. The participants become acquainted with the advantages and disadvantages of the respective method, can judge the effect and impression the respective method has on them and their students, and look out for ways to adapt the methods to their teaching 5 Cf. https://h5p.org/branching-scenario 6 Cf. https://webquest.org/ La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 484 context. Expert #5 pointed out that they should work with methods that are manageable and fit many teaching contexts, such as the think-pair-share method. Most of the methods used are in the area of promoting CT, modelling CT as a teacher, or using certain kinds of dialogue formats to foster CT. One example is the Circle of Voices, in which every participant can utter their assumptions and ideas in a relaxed atmosphere and without interruption or coercion. In addition, Experts #5 and #7 designed their training in such a way that the participants experienced learning situations that prompted their CT. Active self-experience: Expert #3 emphasizes the importance of active participation: “I think active learning is the key to critical thinking.” In this context, an error-friendly learning culture appears significant to him. The participants need permission to make mistakes and experiment with different approaches and methods. Expert #5, for example, demonstrates and discusses a lot of methods and design principles/task designs that support CT in different phases of the process. Then, the participants have to apply the methods and design principles to their subject field and plan a lesson in which they want to address specific aspects of CT. After planning such a lesson, some or all participants (dependent on the duration of the workshop) simulate a short sequence of that lesson in the training (active experience) in which they demonstrate the way in which they design lessons and tasks for CT and how they as teachers perform to foster CT (modelling, using ambiguity, using methods like triggering, Socratic questioning, etc.). The other participants act as students (a receptive form of self-experience). Expert #3 also works with the transfer and simulation approach. In his workshop, the university teachers each prepared a written assignment that aimed to practice the skills and processes of CT they had defined in their CT model in a professional context. Then, the participants in the student role tested the written assignments and gave feedback to the instructor. Through this approach, teachers found out how misleading and unclear these tasks were at times in relation to the learning objectives of CT. Through discussion and expert feedback, participants revised and improved their tasks several times. In both approaches, the experts use reflection, feedback, and discussion to generate and initiate transfer and improve the skills with regard to teaching methods and task designs. In the active self-experience approach, the transfer really connects to the respective subject and practice, as teachers apply the methods and task designs in their context (planning lessons or written tasks and then simulating them/testing them). All interviewees agree that a high degree of participation during the qualification is important for successful training, as it ensures a sustainable transfer, gives the participants the opportunity to practice, encourages them to actively deal with CT, and enables them to experience self-efficacy. Furthermore, all discussed workshops illustrate that the professional development of the participating (prospective) teachers within the qualification plays an important role in initiating longer-term, fruitful development for fostering CT. “Well, I find this aspect of personality development important in the academic context, [. . .] because it has a very strong connection to personality development—the ability to think critically” (Expert #6). Expert #5 emphasizes his own attitude towards the possibility of personal development as a critical thinker and trainer. “So, I would like to promote CT also in myself, never feel done with CT or so and also always remain open for what what is yet to come and for other arguments or points of view. Because promoting CT in the classroom also means that I can develop myself as a teacher and so on” (Expert #5). Chapitre 23 / Qualifying Educators for Developing Critical Thinking 485 In addition to conceptual and didactic aspects that are considered in the development of a training, the participants’ willingness and motivation are also decisive for a successful qualification. According to the literature, deficient motivation reduces the chance of transfer to their everyday teaching reality. Hence, in order to achieve a sustainable, practically relevant effect, the question is: How does one engage the participants? The (intrinsic) motivation of the participants plays an important role here – which can be influenced at least indirectly. The experts cite various aspects in this regard, such as creating an attractive learning setting as well as arousing positive emotions and interest among the participants. “I think attraction is the best way. I mean, making it attractive, making learning fun. It might sound very simple, but I really believe that if a learner is engaged and having fun, things will go well” (Expert #3). Furthermore, tasks must appear manageable and meaningful; they must be considered important. To promote this, Expert #1 regularly invites former participants at the beginning of his workshop to talk about their experiences. “I just ask them to speak to the group about how this process helps them and how it works for them. I think it is important to establish in the learner’s mind that this is a beneficial process that will help them in their own lives” (Expert #1). The pedagogical professionals are encouraged to engage in an intensive critical examination of the importance of good teaching practice, of their own assumptions about the teaching profession, teaching and learning, as well as the role of educational institutions. However, the experts accentuate this differently in their workshops. In the workshop of Expert #1, for example, the critical experimentation, discussion, and reflection aim at recognizing possible hegemonic power structures and the role of power in general in the context of education. Expert #3, to bring up another example, encourages collaborative, collegial exchange and the development of a community interested in teaching practice to promote CT in which existing teaching practice is collectively reflected upon and improved. 4.3 The Role of Digital Media The role of digital media varies in the experts’ training designs, especially regarding the active use of digital tools. Except for two experts, all of them view digital tools rather critically. The shared skepticism is summarized by Expert #3: “I have a bias; I think there are certain limitations to computerized or e-learning. I think something takes place when two human beings are next to each other that you can’t quite measure, but I think it’s very important in terms of the effective development of the learner in terms of their own, again, ego-strength [sic] and growth.” Therefore, Experts #3 and #2 propose a combination of e-learning and real interaction. Both stress the significant role of interaction and how the participants can work together and discuss face-toface. Experts #5, #6, and #7 are positive about digital media as a usable tool in their courses. Expert #5, for example, uses e-learning as a method in his own training and often works with films as a medium for his training sessions. Furthermore, he demonstrates how participants can use digital media and tools in their own teaching practice. Expert #6 applies chats, serious games, or WebQuests as possible tools in her teaching content. Digitalization itself and related problems, such as fake news or questions about the opportunities and risks of digitalization, are also only addressed La compétence numérique en contexte éducatif 486 by these experts. This can probably be explained by the increased importance of this social development in recent years. 4.4 Challenges The experts report various challenges they have to deal with during the training. These relate to institutional and individualor participant-related dimensions. As Expert #6 noted, the main challenges on the institutional level are time constraints, a lack of support from superiors, a lack of teamwork, and a different appreciation of CT in the institutions. According to Experts #5 and #7, a typical problem that arises from the participants’ side is very specific subject-related questions and the role of paradigms. In this context, a limited perspective on science and teaching impedes the dialogue within a heterogeneous group of participants. “[T]hat they consider their repertoire of methods to be the real thing and that is also a style that is very often cultivated at universities [sic]. And the funny thing is that people who are like that think they are the most critical thinkers of all and don’t realize that they are exactly the opposite, that they are limited to their learned tools and that it is a limitation and not the objective view of the world” (Expert #7). Expert #5 describes this phenomenon as “expert dilemma” and attributes this to the fact that certain participants (usually university teachers) already consider themselves experts for CT and teaching CT, especially since they equate their respective paradigm of science with CT. It is apparent that the group structure is seen as a challenge, too. Expert #6 emphasizes the high degree of flexibility in training design that is needed to deal with this. “Well, I also believe [. . .] that there can’t be a perfect program for a qualification in critical thinking because it always depends on the people who are involved in it. What you can do is to create packages that have to be part of such a program. But at which point they have to appear can depend on the interaction of the actors” (Expert #6). Conclusion As research proves, CT qualification programs for teachers have an enormous influence on the quality of CT promotion. At the same time, there is little scientific evidence on how such training programs should be designed to promote CT effectively. Hence, the leading question of this project was: how should an instructor training be designed to qualify educators for promoting basic CT skills in secondary and higher education? The central findings of our research are presented in the following framework.