Использование проблемно-ориентированного обучения для развития критического мышления взрослых тема диссертации и автореферата по ВАК РФ 00.00.00, кандидат наук Пащенко Тарас Валерьевич

• Пащенко Тарас Валерьевич
• кандидат наук
• 2024

Оглавление диссертации кандидат наук Пащенко Тарас Валерьевич

Ключевые понятия исследования

Введение

Актуальность диссертационного исследования

Постановка проблемы, краткий анализ литературы с указанием пробелов в научном

знании и позиционированием исследования в обозначенном научном поле

Научный аппарат исследования

Задачи исследования

Исследовательские вопросы

Гипотеза исследования

Теоретическая рамка исследования

Методология и дизайн исследования

Результаты исследования

1. Анализ историко-философских предпосылок появления компонентов критического мышления как образовательного результата

2. Особенности применения проблемно-ориентированного обучения в онлайн-среде для развития критического мышления взрослых

3. Требования к курсу для развития критического мышления взрослых на основе проблемно-ориентированного обучения, реализуемого в онлайн-формате

4. Оценка образовательных результатов, связанных с критическим мышлением взрослых в онлайн-формате

5. Оценка результатов курса для развития критического мышления

Выводы

Положения, выносимые на защиту

Теоретическая значимость и научная новизна исследования

Список литературы

Приложения

Приложение 1: Статья Гиринский А. А., Лепетюхина А. О., Пащенко Т. В. Концепция критического мышления: генезис понятия и актуальные проблемы

применения в образовании // Мир психологии. 2023. № 3 (114) С

Приложение 2: Статья Гиринский А. А., Лепетюхина А. О., Пащенко Т. В. Критическое мышление: от гумбольдтовской модели до ФГОС // Образовательная политика. 2022. Т. 89. № 1. С

Приложение 3: Статья Santos Meneses L. F., Pashchenko T., Mikhailova A. Critical thinking in the context of adult learning through PBL and e-learning: A course framework // Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2023. Vol. 49. Article

Приложение 4: Статья Садова А. Р., Хиль Ю. С., Пащенко Т. В., Тарасова К. В. Измерение критического мышления взрослых: методология и опыт разработки //

Современная зарубежная психология. 2022. Т. 11. № 4. С

Приложение 5: Статья Пащенко Т. В., Формирование критического мышления взрослых с использованием проблемно-ориентированного обучения в онлайн-среде //Вопросы образования. 2024. №2 (принята в печать)

Ключевые понятия исследования

Проблемно-ориентированное обучение (ПОО) — это комплексный подход к обучению, объединяющий различные инструменты и методы, которые предполагают совместное обучение в малых группах через решение комплексных задач, требующих самостоятельного поиска информации, выдвижения и тестирования гипотез, выбора наилучшего решения из предложенных [Garrison, 1991; §endag & Odaba§i, 2009; Seibert, 2021].

Критическое мышление (КМ) — универсальная компетентность, включающая знания, навыки и диспозиции, позволяющие рационально анализировать и оценивать информацию для аргументированного принятия решений [Ennis, 1989; Dwyer et al., 2014; Корешникова и др., 2020; Добрякова и др., 2020].

Обучение взрослых — деятельность, направленная на формирование знаний, навыков, диспозиций и ценностей у учащихся старше 18 лет и, как правило, за пределами формального образования [Rubenson, 2010; Johnson, Majewska, 2022; Коршунов и др., 2019].

Онлайн обучение (веб-обучение, иногда — компьютерное обучение) — обучение, осуществляемое с использованием компьютерных мультимедийных технологий, таких как интернет [Haghparast et al., 2014; Dwyer и Walsh, 2020].

Слабоструктурированная задача — задача, условия которой содержат как избыточную, так и недостаточную информацию. Может иметь несколько правильных ответов и не иметь ясного алгоритма решения [Garrison, 1991; Johanssen, 2000].

Универсальная компетентность — совокупность знаний, навыков и диспозиций, определяющих успешное выполнение задач без привязки к конкретному контексту [Добрякова и др., 2020].

Введение диссертации (часть автореферата) на тему «Использование проблемно-ориентированного обучения для развития критического мышления взрослых»

Введение

Актуальность диссертационного исследования

Критическое мышление (далее — КМ) считается одной из наиболее востребованных компетентностей у современных работодателей. Недавние отчеты, посвященные анализу тенденций на рынке труда, показывают, что количество рабочих мест, требующих «мягких» навыков (или «универсальных компетентностей»), к которым относится и КМ, растет [Hall & Schmautzer, 2023; Indrasienè et al., 2021a; OECD, 2022; World Economic Forum, 2020]. По мнению работодателей, КМ способствует повышению профессиональной самооценки сотрудников, помогает справляться с трудными ситуациями и находить инновационные решения [Jiang et al. 2018]. Кроме того, КМ создает предпосылки для постоянного саморазвития сотрудника в интересах организационных изменений [Yuan et al. 2021], помогает сотрудникам конструктивно реагировать на вызовы меняющейся среды и искать лучшие решения для себя, клиентов и организации [Indrasienè et al. 2019]. О признании важности КМ может свидетельствовать его включение в качестве планируемого образовательного результата в документы, определяющие политику в области высшего образования в разных странах. Например, Кодекс качества высшего образования Великобритании (UK Quality Code for Higher Education) признает развитие КМ одним из основных принципов обучения и преподавания, «которые повышают общую возможность трудоустройства студентов и способствуют предпринимательскому поведению» [Quality Assurance Agency, 2018, p. 6]. В США Национальная академия наук, инженерии и медицины придает аналогичное значение КМ в показателях мониторинга высшего образования в области STEM [National Academies of Sciences, 2017]. Кроме того, в действующей версии российских Федеральных государственных образовательных стандартов высшего образования в ожидаемые результаты обучения включены универсальные компетенции, среди которых также фигурирует КМ [ФГОС ВО]. Среди универсальных компетенций в указанных документах КМ занимает особое место, так как определяет, насколько хорошо человек справляется с комплексными рабочими и повседневными задачами на основе анализа информации, рассуждений, оценки аргументов, принятия решений и т. д. [Корешникова и др. 2020, Zahner, 2022]. Поэтому развитые навыки КМ считаются необходимыми для того, чтобы учащиеся

высших учебных заведений могли добиться успеха не только в учебе, но и в личной и профессиональной сферах [Butler, 2012].

Несмотря на эти факты, на данный момент нельзя утверждать, что университеты уделяют адекватное внимание развитию универсальных компетентностей (в частности КМ) студентов [Huber & Kuncel, 2016; Indrasienè et al., 2021b; OECD, 2022; Zahner, 2022, Корешникова и др., 2020; 2021]. Например, недавнее исследование показывает, что уровень развития универсальных компетентностей у китайских, индийских и российских студентов невысок и не растет в ходе обучения [Loyalka et al., 2021]. Эти результаты подтверждаются мнением работодателей, которые отмечают недостаточный уровень развития универсальных компетентностей выпускников, выходящих на рынок труда [Gruzdev et al., 2018; Indrasienè et al., 2021a; OECD, 2022; Zahner, 2022]. Таким образом, можно утверждать, что существует разрыв между заявленной важностью развития КМ как универсальной компетентности и достигнутыми результатами обучения.

Данный разрыв приводит к росту образовательных услуг, направленных на развитие универсальных компетентностей сотрудников (с высшим образованием), в том числе КМ. Значительное число таких курсов реализуются, в том числе в онлайн-форматах на различных платформах. Например, «Открытое образование», Stepik, edX, Coursera, LinkedIn Learning предлагают открытые курсы по развитию КМ. Кроме того, ряд программ по КМ реализуется университетами (НИУ ВШЭ, УрФУ, ТюмГУ, ТГУ, НИЯУ МИФИ) и организациями дополнительного образования («Школа критического мышления», «Синхронизация»). Помимо студентов университетов, данные курсы предназначены для работающих взрослых, попадая в контекст непрерывного образования, что является причиной их реализации в различных онлайн-форматах (МООК, вебинары, текстовые курсы с использованием LMS), поскольку это позволяет работающим взрослым студентам совмещать работу и учебу [Bowen, 2015].

По мнению ряда авторов [Berg, Simonson, 2023], фундаментальной особенностью обучения в онлайн-форматах, или онлайн-обучения, является использование интернета в качестве среды для общения, взаимодействия и вовлечения. Онлайн-обучение предлагает гибкий и адаптивный подход к образованию, который выходит за рамки традиционного очного обучения, позволяя учащимся учиться в любом месте и в любое

время [Blaschke & Bedenlier, 2020]. Онлайн-обучение и дистанционное образование становятся все более распространенными в высших учебных заведениях в XXI в. [там же].

Несмотря на потенциальные преимущества использования онлайн-форматов, существующие курсы КМ часто выглядят как построенные на основе лекций классические университетские курсы, перегруженные пассивным обучением. Многие авторы обсуждают ограничения онлайн-формата, особенно для развития компетенций, связанных с коммуникацией, рассуждением, аргументацией [Cortázar et al., 2021; Lorencová et al., 2019; Saadé et al., 2012; §endag & Odaba§i, 2009; Viberg et al., 2020 и др.]. При этом множество исследований показали, что для развития КМ следует использовать стратегии активного обучения, включая, среди прочего, проблемно-ориентированное обучение (ПОО), групповые обсуждения и аутентичное обучение [Abrami et al., 2015; Bezanilla et al., 2019; Lorencova et al., 2019; Payan-Carreira et al., 2019; Theall, 2003]. Получается, что наиболее распространенные форматы обучения взрослых не вполне адекватны задаче развития такой комплексной компетентности, как КМ.

Таким образом, актуальность данного исследования возникает из: 1. Существования потребности в развитии КМ взрослых, связанной с запросом рынка труда и общества; 2. Несоответствия реальных образовательных результатов программ в рамках формального образования данному запросу; 3. Необходимости научно обоснованного создания образовательных продуктов, направленных на развитие КМ в рамках неформального (непрерывного) образования, в т. ч. с использованием инструментов онлайн-обучения.

Постановка проблемы, краткий анализ литературы с указанием пробелов в научном знании и позиционированием исследования в обозначенном научном поле

Актуальные научные дискуссии о развитии КМ как образовательного результата можно сгруппировать вокруг трех групп вопросов.

Первая группа вопросов связана с концептуализацией КМ как образовательного результата: Как понимается КМ?» или «Какие образовательные результаты являются компонентами КМ?» в рамках отдельного исследования или образовательного

продукта. Данный вопрос связан с теоретическими основаниями разработки педагогических интервенций и инструментов оценки. В существующих исследованиях [Тарасова, Орел, 2022] можно выделить по крайней мере три подхода к пониманию КМ: психологический [Рубинштейн, 2002; Теплов, 1946; Зейгарник, 1986], философский [Paul, Elder, 2011; Ennis, 2015; Hitchcock, 2020; Lai, 2011], образовательный (педагогический) [McPeck, 2016; Дьюи, 1910, 1933; Glaser, 1942; Weinstein (1990); Уиллингэм, 2020]. Отдельный интерес в рамках концептуального анализа КМ представляет вопрос о его историко-философских предпосылках. Изучение генезиса КМ как концепции и его компонентов может помочь прояснению современных представлений о КМ как образовательном результате, а также распространению перспективных образовательных практик.

Второй вопрос: «Какие практики (педагогические инструменты) способствуют развитию КМ обучающихся (являются эффективными)?» Ему посвящено немало эмпирических исследований, в т. ч. метаанализов [Abrami et al., 2008; 2015; Sobocan et al, 2022; de Oliveira et al., 2016; Huber & Kuncel, 2016; Kek & Huijser, 2011; Kong et al., 2014]. Среди множества инструментов наиболее эффективными признаются ПОО, дискуссионные формы обучения и тьюторская поддержка. Развитие КМ в рамках формального образования является достаточно хорошо изученной областью с точки зрения теоретических предположений, методов и их эффективности (например, [Scott et al., 2004]). Однако когда речь заходит о развитии КМ вне рамок традиционного образования (в контексте онлайн-обучения, при обучении взрослых), эта тема остается недостаточно изученной [Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Indrasienè et al., 2021a]. Кроме того, согласно [Awan et al. 2018] и [J.C. Trullàs et al. 2022], недостаточно изученным является и использование онлайн-инструментов в рамках проблемно-ориентированного обучения.

Третий вопрос: «Как встраивать эффективные практики в образовательный процесс для достижения запланированных образовательных результатов?» (стратегии развития КМ). Данный вопрос начали обсуждать в конце 1980-х гг., и до сих пор он остается актуальным. Эннис (1989) выделил 4 стратегии обучения КМ в рамках формального образования: общая стратегия предполагает обучение «общим» принципам критического мышления без использования специального контента, инфузионная — включение элементов критического мышления в предметные курсы, иммерсионная — обучение предмету с ожиданием формирования элементов

критического мышления естественным путем, а смешанная подразумевает одновременное использование нескольких упомянутых подходов [Ennis, 1989]. Метаанализ [Abrami et al., 2008] показал, что среди четырех стратегий формирования критического мышления смешанная в наибольшей степени способствует достижению образовательных результатов, связанных с критическим мышлением. При этом иммерсионная стратегия является наименее эффективной (в данном понимании эффективности), а общая и инфузионная демонстрируют среднюю эффективность.

Несмотря на значительное число исследований, посвященных данным вопросам в рамках формального образования и позволяющих судить об эффективности отдельных стратегий и педагогических инструментов в основном или высшем образовании, вопрос о том, будут ли эти стратегии сохранять эффект при переносе в неформальное образование взрослых, и тем более в онлайн-формат, требует дополнительного исследования.

Вопросы формирования и развития мышления имеют богатую историю и в российской (советской) психолого-педагогической традиции. В работах Л. С. Выготского, А. Н. Леонтьева, П. Я. Гальперина, Д. Б. Эльконина и В. В. Давыдова. В классических советских работах термин "критическое мышление" не использовался или использовался редко. Советские психологи использовали близкие к современному пониманию критического мышления понятия: творческое мышление [Гальперин, 1966], научное мышление [Давыдов, 2000], диалектическое мышление [Ильенков, 1995]. Важной особенностью данной традиции является изучение формирования мышления прежде всего в детском возрасте, а подходов к развитию мышления — в общем образовании.

Такая характеристика мышления как критичность обсуждалась в работах Б. В. Зейгарник, С. Л. Рубинштейна и Б. М. Теплова. Критичность рассматривается как навык, который можно развить (С. И. Векслер, Л. И. Божович), и как способность анализировать и оценивать мыслительные процессы и их результаты (Н. А. Менчинская, А. Б. Брушлинский). По мнению А. М. Матюшкина, критическое мышление является одним из заключительных этапов мышления, цель которого — проверка и оценка результатов предыдущих мыслительных действий. [Матюшкин, 1972; Харлампьева, 2003].

С начала двухтысячных годов можно отметить возрастающий интерес к проблемам развития критического мышления среди российских исследователей. Г. В. Сорина, опираясь на идеи Д. Дьюи, утверждает, что критическое мышление тесно связано с способностью анализировать свои мыслительные процессы. Она описывает критическое мышление как практически ориентированное, аналогичное прикладной логике [Сорина, 2003]. Т. А. Ольхова и В. Н. Елисеева рассматривают критическое мышление как сложное явление, которое включает не только интеллектуальные способности и навыки, но и осознание собственного мышления, наличие определенных установок и готовность использовать эти умения [Ольхова, Елисеева, 2013, стр. 48]. Среди известных в педагогическом сообществе методических разработок отдельного упоминания заслуживает технология, направленная на использование в общем образовании "Развитие критического мышления через чтение и письмо". В данном подходе КМ понимается как "процесс соотнесения внешней информации с имеющимися у человека знаниями, выработка решений о том, что можно принять, что необходимо дополнить, а что — отвергнуть. При этом иногда приходится корректировать собственные убеждения или даже отказываться от них, если они противоречат новому знанию" [Заир-Бек, Муштавинская, 2011].

Таким образом, несмотря на значительное число работ на русском языке и концептуальную близость авторских позиций можно увидеть, что в советской и российской традиции исследовалось преимущественно развитие мышления ребенка и формирование мышления в рамках общего образования. В свою очередь развитие критического мышления взрослых требует отдельного исследования.

Научный аппарат исследования

Объектом данного исследования является обучение взрослых как деятельность, направленная на развитие знаний, навыков и диспозиций, связанных с критическим мышлением у учащихся старше 18 лет и, как правило, за пределами формального образования.

Предмет исследования — использование проблемно-ориентированного обучения для развития критического мышления взрослых в онлайн-формате.

Целью исследования является изучение особенностей и способов развития критического мышления взрослых в рамках неформального образования с помощью проблемно-ориентированного обучения в онлайн-формате.

Задачи исследования

Для достижения поставленной цели необходимо выполнить следующие задачи:

1. Изучить и обосновать историко-философские основания концепции критического мышления и его отдельных компонентов как образовательных результатов.

2. Определить особенности развития КМ взрослых в контексте неформального образования.

3. Рассмотреть характеристики проблемно-ориентированного обучения, которые способствуют и препятствуют развитию КМ взрослых в рамках неформального образования.

4. Изучить особенности организации онлайн-обучения, способствующие и ограничивающие развитие КМ взрослых.

5. Разработать перечень требований к курсу для развития КМ взрослых на основе ПОО для реализации в онлайн-формате.

6. Разработать и провести валидизацию инструмента для оценки КМ взрослых.

7. На основе перечня требований разработать курс развития КМ взрослых с использованием ПОО в онлайн-формате.

8. Оценить эффективность предложенного методического решения.

Исследовательские вопросы

В исследовании были поставлены следующие исследовательские вопросы:

1. Каковы историко-философские основания выделения ключевых для обучения взрослых компонентов КМ: навыков работы с источниками информации, самостоятельных рассуждений, применения методов рационального познания в решении практических задач?

2. Каковы ключевые особенности применения проблемно-ориентированного обучения в онлайн-среде для развития КМ взрослых?

3. В чем специфика требований к курсу для развития КМ взрослых на основе ПОО, реализуемого в онлайн-формате?

4. Способствует ли курс, разработанный на основе проблемно-ориентированного обучения и реализуемый с использованием онлайн-обучения в контексте неформального образования взрослых, развитию КМ?

Гипотеза исследования

Исследование направлено на проверку следующей гипотезы:

Курс, построенный на основе проблемно-ориентированного обучения и реализуемый с использованием онлайн-форматов может способствовать развитию критического мышления взрослых, если в процессе разработки и реализации курса выполнялся ряд требований к дизайну курса, взаимодействию между преподавателем и студентами, а также к квалификации преподавателя.

Теоретическая рамка исследования

В данной работе КМ рассматривается как универсальная компетентность [Добрякова и др., 2020]. Этот подход выбран, поскольку большинство эмпирических исследований и прикладных разработок опираются именно на него. Данный подход прежде всего предполагает рассмотрение КМ как сложного конструкта, включающего некоторый набор знаний, навыков и диспозиций (деятельностных установок). Универсальность КМ состоит в том, что данная компетентность может быть использована в различных контекстах и позволяет успешно решать задачи в различных областях. Таким образом, КМ понимается как совокупность знаний, навыков и

диспозиций, позволяющих рационально анализировать и оценивать информацию для аргументированного принятия решений [Корешникова, Фрумин, Пащенко, 2020]. Примерами знаний как компонентов КМ можно назвать критерии достоверности источников, виды когнитивных искажений, основные способы правильных рассуждений, критерии убедительных аргументов, виды аргументативных уловок. К навыкам КМ относят навыки анализа информации, логических рассуждений, аргументации. Перечень диспозиций КМ может включать объективность, любознательность, открытость новому, рефлексивность и др. [Facione, 1990; Ennis, 2015; Орел, Тарасова, 2022].

Проблемно-ориентированное обучение (ПОО) — это интегрированный педагогический подход, который предполагает систематическое использование проблем (например, плохо структурированных задач) и различных видов деятельности, направленных на развитие навыков или целей обучения, таких как решение проблем или другие КМ и технические навыки и знания [Barrows & Tamblyn, 1980; Kek & Huijser, 2011; Kong et al., 2014; Trullàs et al., 2022]. Несмотря на многообразие определений, согласно [§endag, Odabaçi, 2009], разные авторы сходятся во мнении, что ПОО можно понимать в терминах трех принципов: 1. Для начала обучения необходимо наличие проблемы; 2. ПОО — это не изолированная техника обучения, а целостный подход, предполагающий взаимодействие нескольких подходов и методов обучения; 3. ПОО почти всегда ориентировано на студента.

Хотя иногда возникают разногласия в отношении количества названий фаз ПОО (например, Silva et al., 2018), похоже, существует согласие в том, что ПОО включает как минимум три фазы: фазу анализа проблемы, состоящую из группового обсуждения/работы по выявлению проблемы и формулированию учебных проблем/вопросов; фазу самообучения, состоящую из самостоятельного поиска и обработки информации; и фазу отчетности, состоящую из синтеза [Loyens et al., 2020; Yew & Goh, 2016]. Это перекликается с концептуальной моделью развития критического мышления у взрослых обучающихся, разработанной Гаррисоном (1991), в которой решение проблем занимает центральное место в «цикле критического мышления/обучения» (с. 293). В этой модели Гаррисон выделяет пять этапов: идентификация проблемы, определение проблемы, исследование, применимость и интеграция. Стоит отметить, что значительная часть моделей ПОО в большей или меньшей степени соответствует шагам рефлексивного действия Дьюи, а именно:

ощущение затруднения, обнаружение и определение затруднения, выдвижение замысла разрешения затруднения, формулировка следствий предполагаемого решения, заключение о верности или неверности решения [Дьюи, 2021]. Важно отметить, что проблемно-ориентированное (или проблемное) обучение разрабатывалось и в советской педагогической традиции. После сталинской традиционализации образования, в результате которой перспективные педагогические идеи (Д. Дьюи, Б.Е. Райков) оказались под запретом, интерес к ПОО и другим инновационным формам обучения возвращается в педагогические теоретические и практические дискуссии лишь в начале 1960-х гг. [Кларин, 2016]. В работах М. И. Махмутова, В. Оконя, И. Я. Лернера разрабатывались теоретические и методические аспекты применения проблемного обучения на уроках. Авторы глубоко анализировали этапы процесса познания как открытия учащимся новых знаний через постановку и решение проблем: от возникновения проблемной ситуации до проверки правильности решения [Махмутов, 2016], структуру проблемных уроков [Оконь, 1968], проблемное изложение как метод обучения [Лернер, 1974]. При этом, как и в случае с исследованиями развития мышления, объектом приложения новых педагогических форм остаются школьники. Как отмечает М.В. Кларин "В целом процессуально-ориентированное проблемное обучение соответствует общемировому тренду дидактических поисков. Однако в советской/российской педагогике есть инновационные проблемно-ориентированные дидактические разработки, которые не имеют прецедентов в мировой практике" [Кларин, 2016, стр. 392]. К их числу автор относит организационно-деятельностную педагогику, обучение на основе поэтапного формирования умственных действий, развивающее обучение, мыследеятельностную педагогику, Школу диалога культур, ТРИЗ-педагогику и др. Потенциал упомянутых разработок для развития критического мышления взрослых еще предстоит исследовать и оценить.

В актуальных дискуссиях об организационных формах обучения выделяют три формы обучения: формальное, информальное (informal) и неформальное (non-formal) [Johnson, Majewska, 2022]. Под формальным обучением понимается "институционализированная, хронологически распределенная и иерархически структурированная... система, простирающаяся от начального до высшего образования» [Coombs, Ahmed, 1974, стр. 8]. Информальное обучение "не привязано к конкретному месту или институту, не ограничено какой-либо иерархией" [Moldovan,

Boco§-Bin{in{an, 2015, стр. 341]. Неформальное обучение понимается как лежащее между формальным и информальным, сочетающее в себе признаки первого и второго: "любая организованная, систематическая образовательная деятельность, осуществляемая вне рамок формальной системы с целью предоставления выбранных типов обучения определенным подгруппам населения" [Coombs & Ahmed, 1974, p. 8]. В данном исследовании мы будем рассматривать обучение взрослых прежде всего как неформальное обучение. Термины «обучение взрослых», «непрерывное образование» и «обучение на протяжении всей жизни» иногда будут использоваться взаимозаменяемо, хотя некоторые исследователи разделяют данные понятия [Rubenson, 2010; Коршунов и др., 2019].

Исследователи выделяют три основные теории обучения взрослых: андрагогику, самонаправленное обучение (self-directed learning), трансформирующее обучение (Transformative learning) [Merriam, 2018]. В отечественной традиции андрагогика является разделом педагогики, изучающая особенности обучения взрослых. В этом значении в научных дискуссиях также встречается понятие "андрагогический подход в педагогике" [Кукуев, 2010]. Принимая во внимание многообразие дискуссионных вопросов и возможных интерпретаций особенностей обучения взрослых, необходимо отметить позицию С.И. Змеёва, согласно которой "Начала формирования андрагогики как самостоятельной науки были заложены в работах выдающегося американского теоретика и практика образования взрослых М.Ш.Ноулза" [Змеёв, 2000: с. 11].

Андрагогика в версии М. Ноулса ставит целью определить особенности обучения взрослых, которые помогут сделать процесс, технологии и средства обучения подходящими для взрослых обучающихся.

Ноулс [Knowles, 1984] формулирует следующие ключевые принципы андрагогики:

1. По мере взросления Я-концепция человека меняется от концепции зависимой личности к самоуправляемой личности.

2. Взрослый накапливает опыт, который является богатым ресурсом для обучения.

3. Готовность взрослого к учебе тесно связана с задачами развития его социальной роли.

4. По мере взросления изменяется временная перспектива — от будущего применения знаний к немедленному их применению. Таким образом, взрослый в обучении больше ориентирован на проблемы (задачи), чем на предметные знания.

5. Взрослыми в основном движет внутренняя мотивация, а не внешние мотиваторы.

6. Взрослым необходимо знать причину изучения чего-либо (цит. по Merriam, 2018).

Эти принципы являются отличительными качествами взрослого обучающегося. Ориентация на них должна делать обучение взрослых более эффективным.

Другой влиятельной теорией обучения взрослых называют теорию самоуправляемого обучения (self-directed learning). Эту теорию можно считать развитием первого принципа андрагогики Ноулса, согласно которому человек с возрастом становится более самостоятельным. Согласно модели Гаррисона [Garrison, 1997], SDL предполагает три взаимосвязанных компонента: самоуправление (self-management), самоконтроль (self-monitoring) и мотивацию. Самоуправление предполагает постановку целей обучения, управление учебными ресурсами и поддержкой. Самоконтроль в данном подходе понимается как процесс, в котором обучающийся принимает ответственность за достижение образовательных результатов. Осуществляя самоконтроль над процессом обучения, учащийся удостоверяется в том, что новые знания интегрируются в уже существующие и эта интеграция способствует осмысленному пониманию нового знания [Garrison 1997, стр. 24]. Мотивация, в свою очередь, связана как с участием в обучении, так и с настойчивостью при выполнении заданий. SDL предполагает, что учащийся может самостоятельно выбирать подходящие учебные средства, самостоятельно контролирует достижение образовательных результатов, самостоятельно отвечает за собственную мотивацию. Задачей преподавателя остается предоставление необходимых учебных материалов, фасилитация групповой или индивидуальной работы, проведение оценивания и предоставление обратной связи.

Теория трансформирующего обучения (TL) основана на предположении, что обучение во взрослом возрасте не сводится к добавлению новых знаний в «копилку» учащегося, а связано с изменением перспективы (картины мира, парадигмы). Данный процесс начинается с дезориентирующей дилеммы — затруднения, которое невозможно адекватно решить, опираясь на имеющуюся у учащегося перспективу. Этот опыт подводит к необходимости критически оценить собственные знания и убеждения, осознать необходимость их изменения и перейти к созданию более широкой перспективы, которая, в свою очередь, поможет разрешить существующее противоречие (Mezirow, 2000).

Список литературы диссертационного исследования кандидат наук Пащенко Тарас Валерьевич, 2024 год

Список источников

1. Добрякова М С, Фру мни И. Д., Баранников К. Д., Реморенко И. М, Зиял Н., Мои Дж., Хаутамяки Я. (2020). Гииверсаяьиые компекнтиости

50 i ОБРАЗОВАТЕЛЬНАЯ ПОЛИТИКА / N"1(39) 2022

и новая грамотность: от"лозунгов креальлосги. М : Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики. 172 с.

2. Гумбольдт В. фон. (2002). О внешней и внутренней организации высших учебны* заведений б Берлине. Неприкосновенны« запас, 2, 5-10.

3. Козлов С. Л. (2020). Имплантация. М : НЛО. 576 с.

4. Корешникова Ю. Н, Фрумин И. Д., Пащенко Т. В. (2021). Организационные и педагогические условия формирования навыка критического мышления у студентов российски* вузов. Университетское управление: практика и анализ, 25(1), 5-17.

5. Куренной 3. А. (2020). Философия либерального образования: принципы. Вопросы образования, 1,8-34.

6. Куренной В. А. (2020). Философия либерального образования: контексты. Вопросы образован™, 2,8-36.

7. Милль Дд Ст. (2000(1359» 0 свободе, https://old.inliberty.rn/ llbrary/491-c-syobode.

0. Милль Дж. Ст. (2010). Речьобуниверсигетском воспитании. Юманс Э,Новейшее образование.- его истинные цели и требования. СПб.: Русская книжная торговля, с. 5-71.

9. Милль Дд Ст. (2010). Автобиография. История моейлгизни «убеждений. М_: РИП0Л классик, 304с.

10. Сокулер 3. А. (2001). Знание и власть: наука л обществе модерна. СПб.: РХГИ 240 с.

11. ШеллингФ. В. Й. (2009 (1803)). Лекции о методе университетского образования. СПб: Mipb. 352 с.

12. Шлейермахер Ф. (201 В). Нечаянные мысли о духе немецки/университета. М.: Канон-Плюс. 207 с.

13. Critical Thinking (2018). Retrieved from: h ttps J/plarto.Stanford.edL/entiies/ oritical-th inking/.

14. Dewey J. (1910). How We Шгг*. Boston: D. C. Heath £ Co.

15. Ennis Ft. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educstfonaf Researcher, 18(3), 4-10.

16. Ennis Ft. H. (2016). Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis

with Beaing on Key Concepts. OSSA Conference Archive. Retrieved from: httpsJscholaruwindscr.ca/ossaarchive/OSSAI l/pafiersandcommentaries/l05.

17. Facione R A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings ami recommenifatrani. Newart, DE: American Philosophical Association.

18. FictTteJ.G.(1971 {W7)).DeduzierterP<aneinermBefazueirichteH№h6heren iehranstaH (¡едеШдегУегЬмЮпдтКешАкат^ейегШзетсЬаЯеп&е!^. Retrieved from: https://www.digitale-sammlijrKien.de/de/view/tJ5b10732168.

Приложение 3: Статья Santos Meneses L. F., Pashchenko T., Mikhailova A. Critical thinking in the context of adult learning through PBL and e-learning: A course framework // Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2023. Vol. 49. Article 101358.

Thinking Skills and Creativity 49 (2023) 101353

ELSEVIER

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thinking Skills and Creativity

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tsc

Critical thinking in the context of adult learning through PBL and e-learning: A course framework1*

Luis Fernando Santos-Meneses3'*, Taras Pashchenko b3 Aleksandra Mikhailova b

1 Center for Sociology of Higher Education, Institute of Education, HSE, 20 Myazmtskaya Ulitsa, Moscow ¡01000, Russia b Laboratory for Curriculum Design, Institute of Education, HSE, 20 Myasnitskaya Ulitsa, Moscow 10 J000, Russia

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Critical thinking Adult learning Ill-structured problems pbl

Online learning

Critical thinking (CT) is increasingly recognized in higher education and industry as an important set of skills and dispositions that citizens should possess in 21st-century society. Particularly, CT is nowadays overwhelmingly required in industry since it determines how well workers will perform their tasks or solve work-related problems. Nevertheless, there is a significant mismatch between the demand for CT and its supply, with higher education failing to meet the latter. Open courses outside formal education may contribute to bridging this gap. When it comes to adult learners in the non-formal education context, CT teaching and iearning differ from other traditional settings and audiences, and the field is underexplored. This literature review aimed at synthesizing criteria to promote CT in the context of adult education focusing on problem-based learning (PBL) and e-learning. Two leading principles play a central role in a CT development model in adult education: intrinsic motivation (inner condition) and iearning flexibility (outer condition). The former concerns the learner, while the latter concerns die learning arrangement. Although self-learning is an important alternative, which has been widely practiced in adult learning, collaborative learning cannot be dismissed for effective CT development in adults. Interestingly, ill-structured problems in the frame of an integrative PBL approach seem promising for successful systematic endeavors to unlock adults" CT potentialities, inside or outside the formal education system. And online iearning can assist with this goal in particular ways. Implications for CT teaching, learning, and course design in adult education are discussed.

1♦ Introduction

Critical thinking (CT) is widely regarded as a vital skill of the 21st century. Recent reports analyzing the trends in the labor market show that the number of jobs where soft skills are required is growing (Hall & Schmautzer, 2023; Indrasiene et al., 2021 a; OECD, 2022; World Economic Forum, 2020).

The recognition of the importance of CT is nominally included in different education documents across countries. For example, the UK Quality Code for Higher Education recognizes CT as part of the guiding principles for learning and teaching at the university level, "which enhance students' general employability and promote entrepreneurial behavior" (Quality Assurance Agency, 2018, p. 6). In the

This work is an output of a research project implemented as part of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University).

* Corresponding author. E-nurii address: [e-mail] (L.F. Santos-Meneses).

https://doL org/10.1016/j .tsc.2023.101358

Received 16 August 2022; Received in revised form 28 March 2023; Accepted 21 June 2023

Available online 22 June 2023

1871-1871/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

U.S., the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine attach a similar consideration to CT in the indicators for monitoring undergraduate STEM education (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017). In addition, the current Russian version of Federal State Educational Standards of Higher Education's1 expected learning outcomes includes soft skills, or universal competencies, that are most in-demand by employers, where CT appears among them. In these references, CT occupies a special place, as it determines how well a person copes with complex tasks of everyday life and work based on information analysis, reasoning, argument evaluation, decision making, and so on (Zahner, 2022).

Despite these facts, it is not yet possible to assert that the good practice of developing soft skills is being implemented at universities (Huber & Kuncel, 2016; Indrasiene et al., 2021b; OECD, 2022; Zahner, 2022). For instance, a recent study shows that the level of development of some soft skills among Chinese, Indian, and Russian students remains critically low (Loyalka et al., 2021). Moreover, some reports from different contexts indicate the opinions of employers who believe that university graduates entering the labor market have insufficiently developed soft skills (Gruzdev et al., 2018; Indrasiene et al., 2021a; OECD, 2022; Zahner, 2022). Thus, there is a gap between the claimed importance of developing soft skills and attained learning outcomes.

The existence of this gap leads to an increase in the number of educational services aimed at fostering the soft skills of employees, including critical thinking. Several educational programs and courses on the development of CT are now being implemented online. For instance, there are CT skills courses offered by edX,~ Coursera,3 Open Education,4 or Linkedln Learning,5 which are open to everyone. In addition, a number of programs on CT are implemented by universities" and professional development organizations. Apart from university students, these courses are aimed at working adults in the context of continuing education (lifelong learning). Many of these programs are implemented in various online formats (MOOCs, webinar-based, text-based courses with the use of LMS), which are in high demand because it is more convenient for adults or adult working students to combine work and study (Bowen, 2015; Class Central, n.d.).

Online learning is a form of education commonly known as e-learning, distance learning, or distance education (Berg & Simonson, 2023). According to the authors, the fundamental feature of online learning is the use of the Internet as a medium for communication, interaction, and engagement. Online learning offers a flexible and adaptable approach to education that goes beyond traditional face-to-face instruction, enabling students to learn anywhere and at any time (Blaschke & Bedenlier, 2020). Online learning and distance education have become increasingly prevalent in higher education institutions during the 21st century (Blaschke & Bedenlier, 2020).

Despite the vast audience reached, CT courses found on open platforms may often be lecture-based MOOCs/Webinars or look like classic university courses, heavily laden with passive instruction, which might not be the best form to foster CT. Instead, a wealth of research has shown that active learning strategies should be used for that purpose, including, among others, problem-based learning (PBL), group discussions, and authentic learning (Abrami et al., 2015; Bezanilla et al., 2019; Lorencova et al., 2019; Payan-Carreira et al., 2019; Theall, 2003).

Online learning combined with more student-centered approaches could, therefore, be an alternative to taking adults' CT competencies to a higher level. Among them, PBL appeals as a relevant method to suit adults' learning needs and characteristics, providing powerful opportunities for active engagement. According to Loyens et al. (2020), PBL is a student-centered instructional method rooted in the constructivist learning theory. This approach is founded on concepts from cognitive and educational psychology that have proven effective in promoting learning (Loyens et al., 2020). PBL is carried out with small groups of students "engaged in self-directed learning" (Anderson, 2010, p. 22). Different authors concur that PBL is not a standalone instructional method but rather a comprehensive approach that integrates various learning approaches and techniques (§endag & Odaba^i, 2009).

CT instruction, offline and in formal education settings, is a more or less well-researched area in terms of theoretical assumptions, methods, and their effectiveness (e.g., Scott et al., 2004). However, when it conies to CT in the context of online learning, especially in adult learning—outside the framework of formal or regular education—the topic remains underexplored (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Indrasiene et al., 2021 a). Added to that, according to A wan et al. (2018) and Trullas et al. (2022), the implementation of online tools into PBL sessions is an issue that has been poorly studied. Then, it is necessary to address the specificity of CT instruction using PBL and online learning in the context of adult learning. Taking into account these considerations, this work aims at synthesizing criteria to promote CT in the context of adult learning using PBL and online learning. To that end, the present work poses the following questions:

1) What are the major implications of CT development in the context of adult learning?

2) What are the factors of success and failure when employing PBL in adults' critical thinking instruction?

3) What are the advantages and disadvantages of online learning in adults' critical thinking instruction?

1 https://fgosvo.iu/fgosvo/index/24

2 https://www.edx.org/learn/critical-thinking-skills7soui'ce=aw&awc-6798_ 1660190177_76a6758605fe221723e46941 bafO 1308&utm_ source— aw&utnimedium—affiliate_partner&u true ontent—tex t-Iink&u tm_term—257l37_Business+lnsider

3 https://www.coursera.org/leam/crincal-tMnking-sldlls-for-professioiialshtrps://www.coursera. org/speciahzations/logic-critical-thinking-dukehttps://www. coursera. org/learn/ problemsolving

4 https: //opened u ,ru/course/uifu/Critliink/?sessioa s pring_2023

5 https: //www.linkedin.conv'learning/critical-diinking-and-problem-solving

6 https://ecornell.conieL.edu/cer

7 http://critical-thinking.ru/

Three sections follow this introduction aligned with the research questions. Accordingly, the major implications of CT development in adult learning are unraveled first in the next section. Then, PBL as a pedagogical approach to cultivating CT is examined, emphasizing factors of success and failure. After that, online learning in CT instruction is tackled, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of this learning approach to boost learners' CT. Finally, this article closes with the discussion section, which includes reflections revolving around the purpose and research questions as well as the contribution and implications of the study. The criteria highlighted in the present article, as part of the purpose of this study, could serve as the basis for developing more effective CT courses for adults, as discussed in the last section.

2♦ Critical thinking development in adult learning

As for the setting where adult learning takes place, it could be referred to as the education process that occurs outside of the formal system (Rubenson, 2010). In this sense, adult education, adult learning, and lifelong learning sometimes entail the same connotation and can be used interchangeably, although they can also be conceived differently (Rubenson, 2010). These terms will be used with no distinction here.

Given the usually complex schedule and responsibilities in adulthood, an important characteristic of adult learning is that it is carried out in flexible environments, in terms of time and space, so that adult learners can engage in learning activities amid their employment and other roles of adulthood (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020). As an inner process, or a process that occurs in the learner, adult learning could be understood as a transformation or change process resulting from learning activities whose core characteristics are selectiveness and self-directedness of the adult learner (Merriam, 2010; Rubenson, 2010).

When it comes to adult learners in the non-formal education context, CT teaching and learning differ from other traditional settings and audiences. These differences could be observed in at least aspects of the learning or cognitive development processes in the adult (e.g., Brookfield, 2019; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Illeris, 2010; Kallio, 2020; Kuhn, 1991, 1999; D, 2008; Piaget, 1952) and the outer learning conditions relative to the learning arrangement (diversity and availability of learning activities/options, schedules, degree of isolation when studying, modalities like online/offline study, etc.). According to Garrison (1991, p. 301), socioeconomic factors in adulthood condition "the methodology of organizing adult education," especially regarding the amount of self-learning to the detriment of collaborative learning. These socioeconomic factors include the roles, responsibilities, and economic factors of adulthood (Illeris, 2010; Garrison, 1991; Rubenson, 2010).

Adult learning is fundamental not only for rising productivity in the industry but for individual development and effective participation in society and, thus, for social or collective development (Rubenson, 2010). In this vein, critical thinking (CT) plays a significant role. According to Kuhn (1991), "the ability not just to think, but to think well is, or at the very least should be, essential to fulfilled adult life" (p. 1). Moreover, literacy in the 21st century is no longer a matter of reading to extract knowledge or information but of validating and constructing knowledge (OECD, 2021), mostly in digital environments, where CT is manifested as an ability inevitably present in literacy and digital competencies (Council of the European Union, 2018). Therefore, to be well-equipped to cope with the demands of adulthood and participate effectively in 21st-century society, traditional literacy does not suffice. It is indispensable to possess CT skills and dispositions.

In the adult's inner learning process, motivation is a crucial component since adult learning implies a more purposeful/intentional process that is meant to be meaningful to the adult learner (Illeris, 2010; Merriam, 2010). This applies to CT development, contrasting with forced training and memory-based learning targeting lower-order thinking skills aiming to pass a course. It is believed that forced learning undertakings driven by extrinsic motivation, although sometimes appear (e.g., Merriam, 2010, p. 13), they are supposed to take less place in these processes.

Prior research and theory explain that adults' motivation to learn is usually stronger than young learners' (e.g., Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Illeris, 2010), especially compared with older children and adolescents (Kuhn, 2008, pp. 28—29). Yet, sometimes, adults' motivation may appear extrinsic rather than intrinsic (e.g., Diep et al., 2016, p. 6; Illeris, 2010, p. 39; Merriam, 2010, p. 13), as noted earlier. Therefore, Green (2015) argues that a CT teaching program in the context of lifelong learning should promote learners* intrinsic motivation.

Green (2015) suggests that intrinsic motivation in the adult can be promoted by emphasizing the importance of critical thinking for a meaningful life—a life that transcends financial or utilitarian purposes—and by discouraging external rewards such as grades. In turn, this may inspire learners, Green argues, to continue their lifelong CT cultivation independently throughout their lives, which is what solid CT cultivation actually requires (Green, 2015). To some extent, this is consistent with Diep et al.' (2016) study, which showed that online participation of adults in an educational program is robustly stimulated or predicted by perceived learning benefits. The authors suggest that learning benefits should be explicitly communicated to adult learners.

The notion or connotation of the word ''problem" is also central in CT development in adult learning in two directions: as a motivation to learn and as a learning means. As explained in the following lines by reference to prior research and theory, the former is observed when solving a problem is the motive for learning, while the latter is when a problem (e.g., an ill-structured problem) is intentionally used to drive CT learning (e.g., Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Ku et al., 2014; Ku, 2009). Regarding the former, generic skills such as critical thinking and problem-solving are highly valued in the global market (Indrasiene et al., 2021a; OECD, 2022). According to Indrasiene et al. (2021 a), in the context of the labor market, the need to develop critical thinking has a strong pragmatic and consumerist orientation, among others, "to solve problems, make key decisions and direct one's activities towards improvement" (p. 442). This is consistent with Garrison's (1991) interpretation of Dewey's (1933) explanation regarding the role of problem solving in the conceptualization of CT.

On the other hand, it is believed that adults are mostly moved to learn in order to solve an immediate problem related to their social

role (Knowles, 1980; Merriam, 2010)—namely, work situations or others. Dwyer and Walsh (2020) and Ku (2009) concur that CT is vital for continuous professional development and social and interpersonal relations/contexts where decision-making and problem-solving are highly relevant on a daily basis. Thus, in the labor market, employers and employees have their interests or need to solve problems in common. However, a significant mismatch exists between the skills demand claimed by the economic and social reality in labor markets and societies and the supply of skills by higher education institutions, including CT and problem-solving (OECD, 2022).

Problem-solving and decision-making are integral to the conception of CT, either as skills, learning goals, or application outcomes

(Dwyer et al., 2014; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Facione, 1990; Halpern, 2014; Garrison, 1991; Heard et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2014; McPeck, 1981). However, these and other CT competencies and dispositions, as shown in Fig. 1 s do not develop solidly as a function of time or age (Brabeck, 1981; Dawson, 2008; Dwyer et al., 2014, 2015; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Fischer & Bid ell, 2006; Perry, 1970), or even as a result of many years of formal/regular education (Halpern, 2014, p. 17; Paul & Elder, 2012, pp. xxi, 20, 30, 2014, p. 176) or experience (Kahnenian, 2011), but as a consequence of robust, explicit and systematic training in the field of CT (Ab Kadir, 2017; Dwyer et al., 2014, 2015; Elder & Paul, 2015, p. 25; Ennis, 2016; Halpern, 2014, p. 15; Ku et al., 2013; Paul & Elder, 2012). In this regard, Dwyer and Walsh (2020), by reference to prior research, state:

"the development of the metacognitive and reflective judgment components of CT is not a simple function of age or time, but more so a function of the amount of interaction, or active engagement an individual has in working on problems that require CT [i.e., ill-structured problems]" (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020).

Here is where the notion of the wTord "problem" appeal s as a means to drive CT learning, becoming a "problem-centered orientation to learning," as Knowles emphasizes (cited in Garrison, 1991, p. 296). This is consistent with Kallio's (2020) explanation, highlighting that the highest stage or mode of adult thinking development—postformal and dialectical thinking, or "contextual integrative thinking" (p. 21)—is associated with the employment of ill-defined problems, where "the problem is framed in a way that the conditions are not clear enough, [so] the outcome cannot be straightforward either" (p. 20). Meanwhile, McPeck (1981) asserts that the core function of CT is "solving problems in the context of discovery" (pp. 16-17).

It seems apparent then that problems in die contexts of ill-structured problems and problem-solving are particularly important in the cultivation of adults' critical thinking. For one thing, adults are aware of the need for problem-solving skills in their daily life (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; KnowTles, 1980; Ku, 2009; Merriam, 2010). For the other, problems—ill-structured ones—are needed for cultivating this and other CT skills and dispositions, as prior research has shown (Brabeck, 1981; Dawson, 2008; Dwyer et al., 2014,

Adults' cognitive, metacognitive, arid behavioral potentialities

from the learning and thinking development theory

_*_

Abstract thinking (Piaget, 1952)

Logical-deductive thinking (Brookfield, 2019; Piaget, 1952), practical logic (Brookfield, 2019)

Critical reflection ("Brookfield, 2019), metacognition ("Brookfield, 2019; Kuhn, 1999,2008)

Rational planning and prioritization (Gogtay et al., 2004)

Learning autonomy, responsibility, and perseverance in educational! endeavors (Illeris, 2010; Keegan, 1996; Rotter, 1990; Wedemcyer, 1981)

* Flexible logic (Marchand, n.d.; Sternberg, 2013), non-absolutist thinking (Kallio, 2020; Kuhn, 1991)

* Contextual logic (Marchand, n,d,), engaging

thoughtfully in an authentic, real-world problem (Kuhn, 2018)

* Dialectical thinking (multi-logical/multiperspective thinking, etc.) (Brookfield, 2019; Kallio, 2020)

** Intellectual humility (Grossmann, 2017)

4

Evidence-based thinking and argumentation (Kuhn, 1991, 2008), making well-founded choices (Gogtay ct al., 2004)

LSkills and dispositions from the critical thinking theorv/tradition

Interpretation

Analysis Expert Consensus Statement on

Evaluation

Skills Inference

Explanation Critical

Self-Regulation Thinking -TheAPA Delphi Report (P. A.

Truth-seeking

Open-mindedness

Analyticity Facione,

Dispositions Systematicity 1990;P.

Confidence] in reasoning Facione & Gittcns, 2016)

Inquisitivcness

Judiciousness

Fig, 1. Adults' cognitive, metacognitive, and dispositional potentialities relevant to critical thinking: non-exhaustive list. These are not capacities inherent in every adult as a result of age but potentialities to be developed through systematic/intentional training mediated by ill-structured problems.

Note: Some thinking capacities and qualities are placed together in Fig. 1, indicating certain familiarity among each other, although they may enclose some conceptual differences if treated separately. For instance, contextual logic may denote a thinking skill, while engaging thoughtfully in an authentic real-world problem may denote a disposition with some particularities between them. Some thinking capacities or qualities with a mark (*) belong to Kallio Js (2020) "contextual integrative thinking" notion in the domain of adult cognitive development (pp. 21, 23), which represents a mature and holistic thinking mode. Meanwhile, ,lwise thinking," which represents an ideal goal of human/thinking development, encompasses intellectual humility (**) plus the qualities relative to contextual integrative thinking (*) (Grossmann, 2017; Kallio, 2020, p. 24). Similarly, other CT conceptual frameworks consider intellectual humility as integral to the concept of CT (see Paul & Elder, 2014 for reference).

2015; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; King & Kitchener, 1994, 2004; Ku et al., 2014). Since problem-based learning (PBL) is often composed of ill-structured problems (e.g., Kong et al., 2014; $endag & Odaba§i, 2009), this may appear as a suitable approach to teaching and learning CT to adults, matching their learning needs and interests in a special way. The following section addresses PBL as a pedagogical approach to teaching CT, Meanwhile, Fig. I displays a summary of adults' cognitive, metacognitive, and dispositional potentialities relevant to critical thinking.

3. PBL as a pedagogical approach to cultivating CT

PBL was first developed in the 60 s in the context of healdi education (Barrows v Tamblyn, 1980; Kek & Huijser, 201 I; Kong et al., 2014; Trullas et al., 2022). Later, it had applications in odier fields (e.g., Silva et al., 201S, in the field of management; Styawan & Arty, 2021, in the field of thermochemistry). Basically, PBL is an integrated pedagogical approach that involves the systematic use of problems (e.g., ill-structured problems) and different activities aiming at developing skills or learning goals such as pr oblem solving or other CT and technical skills and knowledge (Bar rows & Tamblyn, 1900; Kek & Huijser, 201 I; Kong et al., 2014; Trullas et al., 2022).

Although, sometimes, differences appear in temrs of the number and dre way in which authors name the PBL phases (e.g., Silva et al., 2018), there seems to be an agreement that PBL involves at least three phases: (i) a problem analysis phase, consisting of group discussion/work for problem identification and formulation of learning issues/questions; (ii) a self-study phase, consisting of independent information search and processing; and (iii) a reporting phase, consisting of synthesis (Loyens et al., 2020; Yew & Goh, 2016). This somewhat overlaps with Garrison's (1991) conceptual model for developing critical thinking in adult learners, which integrates problem solving at the heart of the ''critical thinking/learning cycle'' (p. 293). In this model, the five phases Garrison (1991) poses are problem identification, problem definition, exploration, applicability, and integration.

Meanwhile, Seibeit (2021) notes, by referencing Miner-Romanoff et al. (20 ] 9), drat PBL typically includes a work-related issue or situation framed with missing information, unclear answers, or involving ill-structured cases. According to §endag and Odaba$i (2009), different author's concur that PBL can be understood in terms of three principles: (i) it is necessary to have a problem to trigger-learning; (ii) PBL is not an instructional technique in isolation, but a holistic approach involving the interaction of several learning approaches and methods; and (iii) PBL is almost always student-centered.

PBL has been increasingly employed in intervention studies, testing its effectiveness in improving students" CT. For instance, Trullas et al." (2022) scoping review on PBL studies found that this learning approach "was more effective than other more traditional (or lecture-baaed methods) at improving problem-solving, self-learning skills, and social and communication skills.'" It is presumed that this approach serves this pur pose well because, contrary to traditional or lecture-based instruction, PBL is an active learning approach in which students engage in deep thinking, reflection, and inquiry through discussion, research, and self-learning, which are meant to be intelligibly facilitated/encouraged by the instructor (§endag & Odaba^i, 2009; Yuan et al., 200S). It is worth noting that active learning is fundamental for boosting learners' CT or higher-order thinking skills (e.g., Ab ICadir, 2017; Kek & Huijser, 201 I; Payan-Carreira et al., 2019; The all, 2003, p. 2494).

Accordingly, a large body of empirical research has found PBL effective for developing students' CT (e.g., Chan, 201G; de Oliveira et at., 2016; Kong et al., 2014; Liu & Paztor, 2022; Makhene, 201 7; Trullas et at., 2022), with some exceptions showing more skeptical findings (e.g., Bezanilla et al., 2019; Olivares & Her edia, 2012; Schwartz et al., 1992; Styawan & Arty, 2021). In particular, there are two prevalent factors that have contributed to PBL's effectiveness for developing students7 CT across different studies, namely the teacher's facilitation or dynamic rote followed by small group work (Kong etal., 2014; Seibert, 2021; §endag & Odaba^i, 2009; Trullaset al., 2022; Yuan et al., 2008). Liu and Paztor's (2022) meta-analysis shows other factors more related to the methodological research arrangement when implementing PBL aimed at fostering CT: maturity, nationality, instruction type, sample type, and group size. The specific aspects

Table J

Factors irr PBL that contributed to developing students' CT irr pilot research.

Yuan et al. (200S) ^endag and Odaba^i (2009) *Kong et al. (2014) Seibert (2021) *Trullas et al. (2022)

- Clarification, of the - Teacher's facilitation - Small group - Teacher's feedback - Small group size

scenario - The teacher challenged work (students - Teacher's support for group - The use of scenarios of

- Brainstorming students to think deeper by worked closely communication, team behavior, realistic cases

- Students' active role/ asking questions and cues with peers) students' information gathering, data - Good management of group

self-directed learning without direct answers/ - G iving and analysis, reaching consensus. dynamics

(more time to think by solutions. receiving motivation, and the use of appropriate - Institutional support for

themselves) - The teacher encouraged/ feedback resources. tutors' training and

- Croup discussion guided students to conduct - Teacher's administrative and

- Care planning further reflection and facilitation infrastructure assistance and

- Evaluation and research. coordination

reflection - Ill-structured problems - PBL sessions are more

- Constant small-group designed to have students attractive and dynamic for

work thinking deeper. students than naditional

- Teacher's facilitation questioning, discussing, and classes leading to greater

- Limited lecture-based conducting research. motivation to learn.

instruction

' jV:,"i:. This represents systematic literature reviews presenting a summary of the most sulking findings from prior empirical research.

Table 2

Reasons why PBL may become ineffective in promoting students' CT according to prior research.

Azer (2001) Hung (2006), Kek and Huijser Caplow et al. (1997), Yuan et al. (2008) *Kong et al. Styawan and Arty * Trailàs et al (2022)

(2011) Klunklin et al. (2011) (2014) (2021)

- Group member issues related to poor - Lack of systematic! ty in the - Students found PBL - Students' weak autonomous/self- - Short time for - Lack of students' - Methodological difficulty.

communications skills, lack of support for one design of the problem and stressful and time- directed learning dispositions. PBL skills in scientific - Unclear communication of the

another, distraction or stress in the group, implementation of the PBL consuming, causing - Students found PBL stressful and intervention literacy. learning methodology.

unresolved personal problems, and task model work overload. time-consuming, causing work - Lack of students' objectives, and assessment

completion unpunctuality overload. prior subject method.

- Teacher's insufficient assistance (for knowledge. - Bad management and

clarifying complex, confusing, or - Students' weak organization of the sessions.

conflicting concepts, stressing the need independent - Tutors' lltde experience in the

to evaluate arguments, etc.) learning habits. method.

- Teacher's - Lack of standardization in the

insufficient implementation of the method

assistance. by tutors.

- Some tutors found PBL

modules causing intense

anxiety, unhappiness, and

strained relations.

- Lack of administrative support.

- Work overload for tutors.

- Lack of material resources.

- Tutors' lack of experience and

training in guided self-learning.

*Notc This represents a systematic literature review reporting a summary of findings from prior empirical research.

of teachers' role/facilitation in PBL, that prior research in the context of CT points out are shown in Table I. This table also shows other specific features and factors in die application of PBL that contributed to developing students' CT in intervention studies.

Nevertheless, PBL can become ineffective due to different reasons. The methodological difficulty of PBL for teachers and students is the most serious matter that can compromise its effectiveness in promoting learners' CT, as prior research highlights (Klunklin et al., 201 I; Navarro Hernandez & Zamora, 2014; Trullas et al., 2022; Yuan et al., 2008). In drese experiences, students and teachers have found PBL stressful, time-consuming, and burdensome. Similarly, the method requires high demands of students' irrdependent/au-tonomous learning dispositions (Styawan & Arty, 2021; Yuan et al., 2008).

In the face of students' difficulties in conducting the PBL methodology, the teacher's assistance is fundamental. But, when it is weak, the results are detrimental to the learning goals, somewhat as in Styawan and Arty's (2021} and Yuan etal.'s (200C) studies. This condition could be associated with teachers' poor skills or limitations in facilitating PBL due to medrodological complexity, lack of experience or training, work overload, and lack of administrative support and materials, among others (Trullas et al., 2022). More details about PBL limitations and the causes of its ineffectiveness are shown in Table 2.

Recommendations for securing the effects of PBL on students' CT can be framed in function of the above-mentioned limitations and issues. For instance, institutional support for teachers' training, administrative assistance, infrastructure, materials, and coordination (Navarro Hernandez & Zamora S., 2014; Trullas et al., 2022). Fomenting students' independent learning habits, prior skills in scientific literacy, and making sure students possess sufficient prior/basic specialized or conceptual knowledge are also central (Hung, 2006; Styawan & Arty, 2021). Longer interventions are also required to observe robust gains in learners' CT through PBL (Kong et al., 20] 4; §endag & Odaba^i, 2009). Moreover, careful planification or lesson planning, teachers' role in providing feedback, clarifying, scaffolding, or assisting students play air important role as well, especially in the face of students' difficulties across the full PBL teaching pr ogram (Barrows, 199B; Kek& Huijser, 2011; Konget al., 2014; Lin et al., 2010; Seibert, 2021; §endag &. Odaba^i, 2009; Yuanetal., 2008). Finally, Barrows (1998) and Hung (2006) highlight that PBL entails a systematic learning process where problems must be carefully designed—PBL is not a matter of posing just any problem. In this vein, Hung (2006) proposes a systematic approach to problem design consisting of considerations teachers are called to follow. Among various specific considerations. Hung (2006.) notes that problems used in PBL should be authentic to secure meaningful learning and transferability and should be gauged according to students' prior conceptual knowledge and curriculum standards.

PBL can be conducted in traditional classroom settings or online learning environments (e.g., §endag & Odaba§i, 2009)—or both—matching adults' learning needs/conditions, yearning for flexibility in temrs of suppressing time and space barriers. According to Awan et al. (201S) and Trullas et al. (2022), the implementation of technologies and even social media into PBL sessions is an issue that has been poorly explored.

In what follows, a review of studies on online learning environments for CT teaching and learning is presented.

4. Online learning in CT instruction

E-leaming—or sometimes online learning, web-based learning, or computer-based learning (Haghparast et al., 2014)—could be conceived as "instruction delivered through the use of computer-based multimedia technologies, such as die internet, designed to foster the transfer of information for purposes of achieving specific learning goals," as Dwyer and Walsh (2020) state by reference to prior studies (e.g., Dwyer et al., 20 12; etc.).

A strong presence of online learning has now been taking place and seems to be increasing in the future of education. This is part of the changes the world is experiencing toward the digitalization of modern society—die digital/technological revolution or the digital transformation—accelerated by the COV1D-19 pandemic (Meirbekov et al., 2022). It is especially true in the higher education context (Heller, 2022, p. 53; KPMG, 2020) and self-directed learning endeavors outside the formal system (Brookfield, 2020).

Perhaps the most important features of online learning relevant to the promotion of adults' CT is that it facilitates self-learning and eliminates rigid time and space/distance conditions in the learning process (Brookfield, 2020; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; §endag & Odnbaji, 2009; Todd et al., 2019). This is particularly relevant to adults as, contrary to younger people, they have to follow a working agenda or roles of adulthood and share these widr their learning undertakings (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Illeris, 20 10, p. 41). This way, e-leaming has invigorated lifelong/adult learning with the concept of '"any time, any place, anywhere" (Senge, 2013, p. 79); and this includes CT development.

As noted earlier, active learning is an important condition for developing CT, and online learning lends itself well to this purpose. This is because online learning practices usually follow a constructivist (Sendag & Odaba^i, 2009) and active learning approach (Clark, 2005; Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Rossi et al., 2021). For example, through PBL applications (McLinden et al., 2006; §endag & Odabaji, 2009), multimedia exercises (Clark, 2005), or collaborative/group work, case studies, inquiry research project, and problem-based inquiry (Rossi et al., 2021). In particular, Saade et al. (2012) note that open-ended tasks in online settings favor CT development more than electronically administered multiple-choice questions, yes/no, and true/false answers.

Rossi et al. (2021) suggest that students in online learning environments should be willing to engage in die construction of their own knowledge, drus, in independent work, which is cognitively demanding. However, this condition matches adults' stronger disposition for self-directed/independent learning (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Illeris, 2010, p. 41; Merriam, 2010; Rubenson, 2010), as well as their preference for this learning modality due to their working agendas and other roles (Dwyer & Walsh, 202 3; Illeris, 2010, p. 4 I). More importantly, autonomy is considered a requisite for CT development (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004}, and e-learning environments, along witii adults' self-learning disposition, serve extraordinarily well for this purpose.

Research has shown that online learning is not only compatible but, in some cases, has outperformed the impact of traditional face-to-face settings (Heller, 2022; Heller et al., 2019; Todd et al., 20] 9). Prior studies in the context of CT have found gains in dris regard (e.

Table 3

Features and factors in online learning that contribute to developing students' CT according to prior research.

Study Brookfield (2020), Chou et al. (2019), Tan (2017), Todd et al. McGrew et al, (2019), Meirbekov et al. (2022) Brookfield (2020), Chou et al. (2019), McLinden et aL

(2019), Kuhn (2018) Rossi et al. (2021) Meirbekov et al. (2022), McLinden et al. (2006), Rossi et al.

(2006), OECD (2021), Rossi et al. (2021), (2021)

Saadé et al. (2012), Todd et al. (2019)

Feature/ - Synchronously and asynchronously online discussion/dialog (or - Easily applicable digital Easily accessible and applicable digital tools Different forms of Web-based interactivity (e. Synchronously or

factor online discussion forums) tools (e.g., Mindmeister) g., chat, forum, electronic file sharing, audio/ asynchronously

- Complex questions and multiple perspectives freely posed. - Authentic or real digital video forms, etc.) collaborative

discussed, and generated (Brookfield, 2020)., especially in sources and materials ( learning/work

asynchronous (Todd et al., 2019) and anonymous discussion formats ( McGrew et al., 2019)

Brookfield, 2020; Todd et al., 2019).

Specific - Students' reflection enhanced more than face-to-face dialog (Kuhn, - Students perceived it as Students' collaboration and discussion Engagement/interactive engagement (Saadé Engagement and

effect 2018) attractive and motivating facilitated by visualizing information. et al., 2012) motwation

- Learners' breadth and depth of thought enhanced (Todd et al., 2019) - Engagement comments, and ideas in graphic

- Participation/expression of introverted or non-outspoken students representations or mental maps

enhanced/unlocked (Tan, 2017)

g., Chou et al., 2019; Eftekhari et aL, 2016; Saade etal., 20 I 2}. For instance. Barker and Wendel's (2001) study showed that "students who participate in e-learning outperform traditional students (e.g., who attend class on a regular basis) on problem-solving and decision-making," as Dwyer and Walsh (2020) cite.

Prior research shows the existence of various features of online learning presumably responsible for its effectiveness in developing CT, as noted in Table 3.

Notwithstanding the evidence of the positive impact, online environments have limitations and contraindications when applying this approach for education purposes. In what follows, a list of reasons and contraindications is presented from prior research that can eclipse the effects of online Learning on students1 CT.

» Potential social isolation and health-related problems (e.g., mental health, fatigue, a sedentary lifestyle) when overusing or misusing the Internet {Heller, 2022, pp. 53-54)

* Restricted practical (face-to-face) learning activities and the interplay between theory and practice (Cortazar et al., 202 1)

• Limited teachers' competence to work effectively with new technologies (digital tools, media, etc.)—lack of training (Lorencova et al., 2019; Saade et al., 2012; §endag & Odabaji, 2009; Viberg, GronLund, & Andersson, 2020

• Limited teachers' and students' willingness to work with new technologies (digital tools, media, etc.) (Lorencova et al., 2019)

* Complexity perceived by students and teachers. Demanding independent workload for students and difficulties for teachers widi adjusting/adding new materials/tools, and lesson planning (Rossi et al., 2021)

• Learners' inability to analyze or summarize the massive flow of online information (Jou et al., 2016)

* Learners' difficulties in discerning valid (accurate/reliable) online information from otherwise {Molerov et al., 2020; Santos, 202 I)

* Short time for online learning intervention in research settings (Chou et al., 2019; Rossi et al., 2021)

• Epistemic arrogance could be potentially encouraged, and people's intellectual humility and open-mindedness potentially harmed when publicly committed to one's opinion on the Web (Yeatman, 2020)—ego involvement (Todd et al., 2019).

Despite the limitations and potential contraindications, online learning can be highly effective in improving learners' CT once the obstacles are addressed, as prior research has shown (e.g., Chou et al., 20L9). To this end, teachers' training (§endag & Odaba^i, 2009; Viberg, Groniund, & Andersson, 2020), mindful instructional design (Saade et al., 2012), well-planned pedagogical activities (CIiol: et al., 2019; Todd et al., 2019), appropriate tutor facilitation or enhanced scaffolding are fundamental (Chou et al., 2019), including feedback (Cortazar et al. (2021).

Particularly, Cortazar et al. (2021) propose a strategy called '"socially shared regulation scaffolding." According to their study, it promotes high-level group regulation strategies that allow the development of CT in an online-based course. The authors remark that this strategy was fundamental to success when working in groups in their research. Socially shared regulation scaffolding involves students' reflections to evaluate their cognitive behavior and motivation and the analysis of causes of success/failure when working/studying as a team. This is especially relevant in contexts where, as in Azer*s (2001) study, group member issues exist when teamwork is intensively required ill the learning process. Fig. 2 shows online learning strategies employed in prior research to teach CT, where PBL and other active learning approaches can be visualized in the digital ecosystem.

Online learning strategics for CT instruction in tie (liE'tal ecosystem

Se lf-1 ea rni ng/i n depe n de nt work

Different forms of evaluation

Synchronous and asynclu Dnous

Reading/ Listening Sea rch i ng& eval uating Cresting&.sharir>|

to/watching digital online content on social

material information/sources media

- Self/peer-assessments

- Online questionnaires

- Online quiz Ireal-tlnne assessment), etc.

Fig. 2. Framework for CT ins true don in online learning environments,

Note: Adapted from Trends in critical thinking insuxiction in 21st-century research and practice: Upgrading instruction in digital environments" [Manuscript submitted for publication].

5* Discussion

This study aimed to synthesize criteria to promote CT in the context of adult learning using PBL and online learning. To that end, three questions were posed: (i) What are the major implications of CT development in the context of adult learning? (ii) What are the factors of success and failure when employing PBL in adults' critical thinking instruction? And (iii) What are the advantages and disadvantages of online learning in adults' critical thinking instruction?

In regard to the first question, although there may not be a single strategy, the analyzed literature shows that ill-structured problems are particularly important for advancing adults* CT. The cognitive and learning theories explain that CT development in the adult necessitates complex real-life problems that can take the form of ill-structured problems (Garrison, 1991; Kallio, 2020; King & Kitchener, 1994,2004; Ku et al., 2014; Kuhn, 1991). This differs from well-structured problems in that the former evokes different possible answers (non-obvious ones), triggering the type of thinking that resembles CT, while the latter leads to monologic thinking (Kallio, 2020; King & Kitchener, 2004). Since the core characteristic of ill-structured problems is the diversity of unclear possible answers, this condition evokes multi-logic/multi-perspective thinking, stimulating learners' open-mindedness, skepticism or non-absolutist thinking, and truth-seeking, among other thinking skills and dispositions. Sufficient and systematic exposition and engagement of adult learners to ill-structured problems can, therefore, unlock these and other thinking competencies effectively, as Dwyer and Walsh (2020) explain.

Problems related to matters relevant to adults' lives or work situations can make this process more meaningful and engaging (e.g., how to maximize the revenues of X company amid aggressive competitors? How to significantly alleviate poverty in X country/location within X years? etc.). As Brookfield (2020 ) explains, CT teaching in adult education typically involves, among others: analysis, reflection, and discussion of learners' own dilemmas, problems, and experiences. In open societies, it also includes concerns for matters such as politics, social action, and democracy, as to discover new and better ways to see and live life. This is consistent with adults' potential for dialectical thinking (Brookfield, 2019) and inclination to engage thoughtfully in authentic, real-world problems (Kuhn, 2018).

Ill-structured problems are typically found in PBL (Seibert, 2021; Miner-Romanoff et al., 2019). This leads to the discussion of the second question in the present study. Among the factors of success analyzed here, prior research mainly points to the dynamic and (in) formative facilitation of the teacher and the arrangement of small group work (Kong et al, 2014; Seibert, 2021; §endag & Odaba§i, 2009; Trullas et al., 2022; Yuan et al., 2008). Table 1 displays an extended list of factors. Although a recent report showed that lectures could promote university students' CT (OECD, 2022) under certain conditions, it is generally accepted that active learning promotes CT development more than passive learning. Research has also shown more than one effective instructional approach for this purpose, mainly within the category of active learning (e.g., Abrami et al., 2015). Thus, the employment of a battery of active learning strategies in the same CT teaching program seems to be more effective than using a single or narrow approach, as Abrami et al. (2015) and Ennis (2016) note.

Interestingly, PBL is a learner-centered method not conducted in isolation but including various powerful learning approaches (Rossi et al., 2021; §endag & Odaba§i, 2009; Yuan et al., 2008). For example, discussion, research,, and self-learning (Yuan et al., 2008), among others. Therefore, PBL provides powerful opportunities for the active engagement that adults need for their CT development. However, the effectiveness of PBL poses some challenges and could be interrupted due to certain factors, especially given its complexity when applying it (e.g., Styawan & Arty, 2021; Trullas et al., 2022). A summary of these factors is presented in Table 2, and recommendations for the effective implementation of PBL in a CT program addressing adult learners are shown in Appendix B.

When it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of online learning as a means for adults* CT instruction, which evokes the third question in the present study, important considerations are unfolded next. One of the most striking is that modern digital technologies afford participation in learning processes anytime from anywhere. This includes the possibility to conduct remote real-time learning processes, which enables synchronic teaching-learning modalities—apart from the classic asynchronous one. This makes hunian-to-human interaction closer and more expedited when, for example, carrying out debates, discussions, feedback, and instructions, among others. Online learning affords a flexible environment to conduct a variety of teaching-and-learning modes, ranging from passive to active learning activities or from self-learning to collaborative learning modes. Moreover, multimedia and other digital tools can become appealing and engaging to users/learners by presenting content in ways different from the traditional lecturing or reading of physical sources since digital content is supplied through audio, video, and/or interactive text and images (e.g., Meirbekov et al., 2022; Saade et al., 2012), which may be particularly important for adults' self-learning. Table 3 displays a summary of e-learning features.

Furthermore, online learning facilitates source search or documentary research tremendously. The importance of this is remarkable in the 21st century since problem solving relies on information availability and processing, somewhat as Garrison (1991) and McPeck (1981) stated decades ago. However, information is, nowadays, abundantly available on the Web. Its accessibility is also almost immediate, differing from the way it was accessed in the 20th century (i.e., by getting physical books or materials), potentially making adult education in online distance modalities more productive.

Employing the Internet for this purpose, however, poses a significant challenge. That is, information encountered on the Web is usually unreliable (Santos, 2021). When one is misled by unreliable information on the Web on practical applications, the results can be dramatically detrimental (e.g., consuming hazardous substances taken as medicine, breaking a device when trying to fix it, etc.). What is more, unreliable information found on the Web can mislead learners, resulting in catastrophic learning outcomes, somewhat as Molerov et al. (2020) explain. For instance, developing or strengthening wrong beliefs about knowledge, science, or other issues, which goes hand-in-hand with adopting irrational thinking tendencies and behavior, including cognitive bias (e.g., motivated reasoning/confirmation bias, fanaticism, absolutism, nationalistic sentiments, monologic thinking, hate speech, etc.) An extended list of the disadvantages of online learning in adults' CT instruction is shown in Section 4.

The challenge that mis- and disinformation pose suggests the need for developing a subset of thinking and research skills and dispositions in CT education, such as evaluation skills for digital information, online search skills, and dispositions like truth-seeking and healthy skepticism, among others, when engaged in online environments (Santos, 2021). Search information on the Web should

then be handled carefully and assisted by the instructor in a CT education program. The Internet as a learning tool, therefore, represents both a challenge and an opportunity since, while risky, it provides a stimulus for developing the above-mentioned CT skills and dispositions in adults and other groups.

Based on the above-mentioned reflections and findings presented in this work, we propose a model for 21st-century CT development in the context of adult learning. As shown in Fig. A1, this model poses two guiding principles for a CT adult education program: intrinsic motivation and learning flexibility. In this model, die former refers to the learner's disposition required to undertake a consistent CT learning endeavor—inner condition—that CT development requires as a complex set of lifelong skills and dispositions (Facione, 1990; Green, 201 5). Meanwhile, the latter relates to time, space, and learning modalities (options or diversity)—outer conditions.

Intrinsic motivation for learning could be taken not only as a precondition for success in a CT program but as a disposition that might need to be stimulated as par t of that program, as Green (2015 ) recommends, although this is something that seems to be inherent in adults given die states of cognitive maturity reached as a result of age (e.g., Illeris, 2010; Keegan, 1996). Intrinsic motivation in adults could be stimulated by explaining with emphasis the learning goals and their benefits in ontological and pragmatical terms at the beginning and throughout die course (e.g., the contributions of CTfor a better life, resilience building, etc.), somewhat as Green (2015) and Diep et aL (2016) suggest.

As per learning flexibility, based on prior research (e.g., Dwyer & Walsh, 2020), this model advocates that adults' CT learning in the noil-formal education context is better conducted devoid of time and space limitations and through a diversity of learning modalities to better suit adults' learning and life styles or to provide different stimuli types. The research surveyed in the present study (e.g., Chou etak, 201 9; Rossi et aL, 2021) informs that online learning environments offer these possibilities perfectly. However, as part of the flexible nature of this model, it also includes some possibilities afforded by offline learning since we think, when possible, they could be helpful when combined witii distance online learning (i.e., offline experiential learning such as field trips, visits to museums, etc.), as visualized in Fig. A]. This is consistent with Baker's (2013) recommendations for fostering CT in a lifelong learning program focusing on information literacy and cultural heritage. Therefore, learning flexibility and intrinsic motivation are fundamental in an adult CT learning program.

Moreover, self-learning and collaborative learning are also part of the flexible nature of this model for adults' CT development. Self-learning, or learning autonomy, is a fundamental component of adult learning (llleris, 2010; Rubenson, 2010), among others, because it suits adults' complex agendas ami learning paces—it is not always possible to concur with other adult learners on the time to learn together. However, when developing CT in the context of adult learning, adults can resort not only to individual study but also to collaborative learning facilitated by online tools. In fact, Garrison (1991) advocates for collaborative or interpersonal learning with great emphasis over self-learning in a CT program in adult education. Hence, apart from self-engagement with content, it is important to provide opportunities for adults to engage or interact with other learners ami instructors, where online tools play a significant role (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020). Therefore, die model presented here includes collaborative learning in addition to self-Learning (see Fig. A I) since solving ill-structured problems in the frame of PBL to stimulate CT development requires collaborative work.

As Fig. AI shows, PBL is central to this model given the principles discussed earlier. Among others, problem-solving matches adults' interests and learning needs. Also, ill-structured problems in the frame of PBL can stimulate learning engagement, driving the development of higher-order thinking skills and dispositions, somewhat as prior research has shown (e.g., Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Ku et ah, 2014). Here, when referring to adults, they can include employers and employees if in the workplace context. Based oil prior research (e.g., Kong etal., 2014; Rossi et ah, 2021; Send ag & Odaba$i, 2009; Yuanet al.. 200S), this model takes PBL as an integrative approach ijntevrntivc PBL approach), which can include different learning strategies (e.g., case studies, inquiry-based learning/IBL, structured dialog, information search, and content engagement, among odiers), as shown in Fig. Al. It should be noted that this consideration regarding PBL and the other approaches can differ when treating each separately, standing as independent learning methodologies. However, it is believed that when the aim is to solve an ill-structured problem, it is necessary to invoke any available means. For example, inquiry-based learning can be adopted within PBL sessions to encourage and guide learners' search for information needed to solve a specific issue. Similarly, some principles and practices of project-based learning and otirer approaches can also be adopted to that end (integrated within PBL or separately). Fig. A I shows this possibility.

On die odier hand, dialogue, or discussion, also plays an important role in a program for promoting adults' CT (Brookfield, 2020; Garrison, 1991). Dialogue, by nature, requires social interaction and is at die heart of collaborative learning (Garrison, 1991) and PBL. Finding solutions to ill-structured problems can be better assisted through intersubjective discussions rather dian in isolation since the former triggers the generation of multi-perspectives, which are fundamental for solving complex or ill-structured problems. In this sense, dialogue can take the form of a dialectical practice where different/opposing sides or ideas compete with each other and asynthesis results from it. This is consistent witii BrookHeld's (2020) recommendations for adults' CT instruction. He suggests a kind of structured dialogue aimed at discovering and evaluating assumptions and new alternatives or perspectives. Therefore, we believe it important to include a structured dialovical and dialectical approach facilitated by online tools in the model for adults' CT development introduced here, as shown in Fig. AL

We expect these reflections can contribute to the comprehension and debate of how CT can be best developed in the context of lifelong learning, adult education, or adult learning, in research settings and beyond, as this field is under explored (Dwyer & Walsh, 2020; Indrasiene et al., 202 la). In addition, we believe that the research-based criteria and best practices synthesized here could be valuable to design courses ami promote effective interventions in this research line (see Appendix B for more details). This can be particularly novel in regard to interventions seeking the implementation of online tools into PBL sessions, which is something that has been poorly studied (Awanet al, 2018; Trulllas etal., 2022). Moreover, the present work highlights the powers of ill-structured problems to promote adults' CT which to our knowledge has been insufficiently analyzed in prior research. In this sense, the theoretical findings and reflections presented here around this topic can inspire further explorations on how ill-structured problems can unlock particular thinking capacities in adults, such as multi-sided or multi-perspective thinking, non-absolutist reflection, healthy skepticism, truth-seeking, and so on. This can imply intriguing theoretical implications to expand the explanations in the fields of adult cognitive development and CT.

The reflections and criteria for promoting adults' CT development discussed here have been mainly concerned with a domain-general CT conception, or CT as generic skills and dispositions. Therefore, implications about the applicability of an integrative PBL approach to advance adults' critical thought within a domain-specific view of CT remain for future research. In this line, it would be intriguing to unpack the types of ill-structured problems or ways to frame them and PBL teaching practices in specific fields (i.e., how an integrative PBL approach in online environments aimed at developing domain-specific CT in adults would work in Medicine, Business, Engineering, etc.). Future research could also attempt to shed light on how to reconcile the pragmatic nature of CT related to solving problems with a more ontological or philosophical one, less concerned with an instrumental or consumerist character of CT but leaning more toward matters of "being" as opposed to just "doing." This could give rise to new intriguing theoretical and instructional reflections in related directions.

Finally, the present study encloses some limitations. As a non-empirical work, some of the claims presented here may require being tested empirically. This is especially true in regard to the claimed effectiveness of ill-structured problems in the frame of an integrative PBL approach in online environments to promote adults' CT, as explained here. Furthermore, this work does not cover implementation specificities in terms of procedures—specific steps are not unpacked. Among others, this includes criteria or explanations for framing effective ill-structured problems, as in this attempt, problem niisframing can lead to poor CT development (Barrows, 1998; Hung, 2006). These aspects were beyond the scope of this literature review and can be considered in further studies. Overall, our expectation is that this study could serve as an impetus to increase the visibility of CT development in the context of adult learning within formal research and to expand effective practices aimed at promoting CT among adults, whether inside or outside the formal education system, so as to build a more productive and healthy society.

Declaration of Competing Interest

None. Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Appendix A

Fig, Al. Model for 21st-century CT development in the context of adult learning.

Note: The blue arrows indicate connections between self-learning with other learning approaches (all approaches or activities diat are conducted through self-learning). The yellow arrows indicate connections between collaborative learning with other learning approaches (all approaches or activities that aie conducted collaboratively). Meanwhile, the black arrows make no distinction between whether connections are established between self-learning or collaborative learning. They indicate straightforward and exclusive connections between components visually connected through the arrows. The integrative PBL approach implies die possibility of conducting other learning approaches, within the frame of PBL, guided by ill-structured problems.

L.F. Santos-Meneses et aL Appendix B

Framework for course design for CT development based on PBLand online learning in the context of adult education

1 The course must take at least 2 rronshs with © hours weefely for graup wort; A síiort«* cnurac! msiy nal h:iv<: A stri5''g isffecl bis CT «HeveJopmeiit, bul more intensa work niay Secóme a cause o1 alúdante' stress ard ■cognrtiye overloac! i A srna nijinbm ciT stisdwiík |cüriirig Iha cu., -se ns prefeífed ora number'hal manes oerso^alizM feedbacK manageab le i The course musí canta ¡n limite í le dure« baaed ins!ntólior>—il should bu aludaiil-ce rite red

t Prqblím^oíiíing adivines ara cvnlrad te llw «áurea

► Pfotalems must be iH-strucbured lo síinulate

■queslioning, d¡wus«K?n. and f^swfch, i P'oblems must be based on reelissic cases ar-d forai&ed on oontexte iamiliar to stutients 1o g«t overa lack of subject knowtedge and íñíntilic lilcraty i The cwse should facilítate both ^depende1"!

worst {self-leamiog) ano flenbte graup work ' When needed and posa Ele. Ene course

shoutó include face-tc-face sesaions I Formati v» assBKSTiHnl Shüuld be privilegiad ■alead úl gradábase!! assessmenl la íoster ""jinsic not vaton. i Inlrinsc motiva"»" Should ;jIsí> bii s'.iriulnldd by communicaíing lea"- ng '¿cala and t"e cene Sis of CT tJevelopsnenl. Opefu dlscusslon forums neetí to be constan! througtvout Uva tiOUffi«.

1 Desired learning objectives, learning methodology, and assessment iiust be Gear aixl should be communicated at tire beginning o-' tt»s course Iwtf al&o through«?! ^

> Group work should be formed wish no mora Wan 4 students

' Gr<Hlp sessions miMl blS Wflll-

stri.i:lurt:di'c!rgiini/t:d and •niinttgcd

■ Core PBL phases sfrould be clear tor both the Instructor and sludnMs (eg. problem iinn ysis, answers search. IntegratloiVsyntiieas).

> Evidence-based comments sNx*d be encouraged in the discussion, and discussions should be both slfaolurad and open

> Qnfcwi information xnarnh should be guided Indications should be provident Lo distinguish between reliable and unreliable infamalkM and to minimize extensive and «effective search processes

> Assessme-ni could be fac la led via learning ana ytics tools {e.g., quantlf cation of interac'Kww, commsote. etc.), performance-based assessment {e.g., reports of the resolution of cases/protolerns), qualitative BvidchCB Of Q|M№4№lMl tests (e.g., essay or arguineitlalion-based assessment;

1 Muliplo uhoico questionarios could "ako place in a «¡duDCd proportion Useful date to inform t:aurx<! improvement and rraxiini/e! Iiiflrtiing goals should be gathered.

1 The instructor reeds to have well-developed CT ski*s and dispositions

► The Instructor musí be experencefi.'lralned In

pel

► Thn instructor $hquld tie ;ihl<n In prepare and defivar wiell^lructuredi'organized sessiom

► The inslmctor must cha»snge students to think drwMMir uy jisfeing quastkyis and cues wilhout direct answwrs/soMkms and anoouraga students ".o conduct iurther reflectkwi and research

> Tho insliuctor musí facilitate the clarifrootion of the scenario of a probAcm. o'arnole b'a-islcirmlng, arw guided and structured ffiscus-sions

> The instruct&r must be a factual or to manage group dynamics, g*va feedback, support group communication, team behavior, students' information gathwng, data analysts, reaching consensus, motvabon, ano ihe irae of aoprapriate ™ sources

> The instructor must take »eed^ack and encourage students to reflect and prowkse

fcedbuiik Id ea^h a (tier

1 Digital tools used must be eas^y applicable For users kvilhciLit spec 1i: ICT s"tills

► The d«gilal platfomi used must provide synchronous and asynchronous pommunicaüon between sludianis and with Ihe teacher {including the opportunity lo communicate incognito)

• Sludonb must '"Jivo accttüS lo Juthii'Min digital soufces and materials

> Tho platform must support Flo sharing rinri collabaralivi! work including! doc:unient editing

• The platform must provide mtomiabon regarding learners' orogress.

» A platform wilh functions to visuafizn informatics, comments, and ideas in graphic represenlat-ans or mental rrsp& can be useful.

• A system for recording learners' navigation behavlor/atfions or ileaning practices online can pe useful.

i The Htternet coiwection musl be stabe, espec ally in synchronous sess ona.

Fig, Bl. Framework for course' design for CT development based on PBL andl online leaiing in die context of adult education. Wore. Fig. BI summarizes reseaich-based criteria and best practices analyzed in Sections 3 and 4 in article.

References

Ab Kadir, M. A (2017). What teacher knowledge matters in effectively developing critical thinkers in the 21st century curriculum? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 23, 79-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j .tsc.2016.10.011

Abrami, P.3 Bernard, EL, Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D., Wade, A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically; A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 35(2), 275-314.

Anderson, M. B, (2010). Education for medicine. International encyclopedia of education (pp. 19-24). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/B970-0-08-044G94-7.01044-7

Awan, Z.A., Awan, A.A., Alshawwa, L., Tekian, A., & Park, Y.S. (2018). Assisting the Integration of social media in problem-based learning sessions in the Faculty of Medicine at King Abdulaziz University. 40(supl), S37-S42. J0.1080/0142159X.20I8.I465179.

Azer, S. A. (2001). Problem based learning: Challenges, barriers and outcome issues, Saudi Medical Journal, 22(5), 389-397.

Baker, K. (2013). Critical thinking and lifelong learning. Information Literacy and Cultural Heritage, 95-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-l-84334-720-0.50004-0

Barker, K., & Wendel, T. (2001). E-learning: Studying Canada's virtual secondary schools. Society for the Advancement of Excellence in Education.

Barrows, H. S. (1998). Essentials of problem-based learning. Journal of Dental Education, 62(9), 630-633.

Barrows, H. S., St Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. Springer.

Berg, C. A., & Simonson, M. (2023). Distance learning. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britaimica.com/topic/distance-leaniing.

Bezanilla, M. J., Femandes-Nogueira, D., Poblete, M., & Caiindo-Dominguez, H. (2019). Methodologies for teaching-learning critical thinking in higher education: The teacher's view. TTrinJo^g Sfczits and Creativity, 33, Article 100584. https://doi.OEg/i0. JO 16/j.tsc.2019.100584. February.

Blaschke, L. M., Bedenher, S. (2020). Online learning. Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/J 0.1093/ACREFORE/ 9780190264093.013.674

Bowen, W. G. (2015). Frontmatter. Higher education in the digital age, Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.I515/9701400866137-FM

Brabeck, M. M. (1981). The relationship between critical thinking skills and development of reflective judgment among adolescent and adult women. In 89th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association (pp., 24-26).

Brookfield, S. (2019). Adult cognition as a dimension of lifelong learning. Lifelong Learning, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203183328-8

Brookfield, S. (2020). Teaching for critical thinking. International Journal of Adult Education and Technology, 11(3), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijaet.2020070101

Caplow, J., Donaldson, J., Kardash, C., 8t HosoKawa, M. (1997). Learning in a problem-based medical curriculum: Students" conceptions. Medical Education, 31, 440-447.

Chan, Z. C. Y. (2018). A systematic review on critical thinking in medical education. //BternQiio/iQl Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 30(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1515/ijamh-2015-0117

Chou, T., Wu, J., & Tsai, C. (2019). Research trends and features of critical thinking studies in e-learning environments: A review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(4), 1038-1077. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118774350

Clark, R. C. (2005). Multimedia learning in e-courses. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 589-615). Cambridge University Press.

Class Central (n.d.). AfOOCWateh, (2023)). The Report by Class Central. Retrieved March 24, 2023 from https://www.classcentral.com/report/category/moocwat<^

Cortázar, С., Mussbaum, M., Harcha, J., Alvares, D., Felipe, L., Goñi, J., etal. (2021). Computers inhuman behavior promoting critical thinking in an online, project-

based course. Computers in Human Behavior, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021., 106705 Council of the European Union. Council Recommendation on Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?

uri=CONSlL:ST_9009_2018_INIT&£rom-EN. Dawson, T. L. (2008). Metacognition and learning in adulthood. Developmental Testing Service, LLC.

de Oliveira, L. В., Díaz, L. J. R., Carbogim, F., da, C., Rodrigues, A. R. В., Piischel, V. A., et al. (2016). Effectiveness of teaching strategies on the development of critical

thinking in undergraduate nursing students: A meta-analysis. Revisía da Escola de Enfermagem, 50(2). https://doi.org/JO.1590/S0080-623420160000200023 Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relations of reflective thinking to the educative process. Heath.

Diep, N. A., Cocquyt, C., Zhu, C., & Van wing, T. (2016). Predicting adult learners' online participation: Effects of altruism, performance expectancy, and social capital.

Computers and Education, 101, 84-101. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.COMPEDU.20J6.06.002 Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., &. Stewart, I. (2012). An evaluation of argument mapping as a method of enhancing critical thinking performance in e-learning

environments, Metacognition and Learning, 7, 219-244. Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., Sl Stewart, 1. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 2Jst century. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 12, 43-52. httpsi//doi. org/10.1,016/j. tsc.2013.12,004

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2015), The effects of argument mapping-infused critical thinking instruction on reflective judgement performance. Thinking

Skilb and Creativity, 16, 11-26. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.12002 Dwyer, C. P., & Walsh, A. (2020). An exploratory quantitative case study of critical thinking development through adult distance learning. Educational Technology

Research and Development, ó£(l), 17-35, https://doi.org/10.1007/sll423-019-09659-2 Eftekhari, M.? Sotoudehnama, E., & Marandi, S. S. (2016). Computer-aided argument mapping in an EFL setting: Does technology precede traditional paper and pencil

approach in developing critical thinking? Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/sll423-016-9431-z Elder, L., &. Paul, R. (2015). The thinker's guide to the human mind. Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Ennis, R. H. (2016). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi, 37(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/sll245-016-9401-4

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. The California Academic Press, 423(c),

1-19., https: //doi.org/10.1016/j. tsc.2009.07.,002 Fischer, K. W., 8l Bidell, T. R (2006). Dynamic development of action, thought, and emotion. In W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology:

Theoretical modeb of human development (6th ed., pp. 313-399). Wiley. Garrison, D. R. (1991). Critical thinking and adult education: A conceptual model for developing critical! thinking in adult learners, international Journal of Lifelong

Education, 10(4), 287-303. https://dol.org/10.1080/0260137910100403 Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004), Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105. Green, P, (2015), Teaching critical thinking for lifelong learning. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1057/ 9781137378057.7

Grossmann, I. (2017). Wisdom in context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(2), 233-257. https://doi.org/10..1177/174569 i616672066

Gruzdev, M. V., Kuznetsova, 1. V., Tarkhanova, I. Y., Sl Kazakova, E. 1. (2018). University graduates' soft skills: The employers' opinion. European Journal of

Contemporary Education, 7(4), 690-698. https://d0i.0rg/l 0.13187/ejced.2018.4.690 Haghparast, M., Nasaruddin, F. H., & Abdullah, N. (2014). Cultivating critical thinking through e-learning environment and tools: A review. Procedía - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, 129, 527-535, https://doi.org/10,1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.710 Hall, S., Schmautzer, D. (2023). The skills revolution and the future of learning and earning., February. McKinsey & Company https://wwwmekirisey.com/industrie5/

educaüon/our-iiJlsights/the-skШs-revolution-and-the-fumгe-of-leamшg-and-earning. Hal pern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.), Taylor & Francis.

Heard, J., Scoular, C., Duckworth, D., Ramalingam, D., St Teo, I. (2020). Critical thinking: Skill development framework. The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER), 1-26. June.

Heller, R. F. (2022). The distributed university for sustainable higher education. The distributed university for sustainable higher education. Singapore: Springer, hctps;// doi.org/10.1007/978-981 -16-6506-6

Heller, R. F., Chilolo, E., Elliott, J., Johnson, В., Lipman, D., Ononeze, V., et al (2019). Do tutors make a difference in online learning? A comparative study in two

Open Online Courses. Open Praxis, (3), 11. https://doi.Org/10.5944/openpraxis.ll.3.960 Huber, C. R., Sl Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking 7 A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 431-468. https://doi.org/10.3102/ 0034654315605917

Hung, W. (2006). The 3C3R model: A conceptual framework for designing problems in PBL Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based learning, JI(J), 5-22. https://doi. org/10.7771 /1541 -5015.1006

Illeris, K. (2010). Characteristics of adult learning. International Encyclopedia of Education, 36-41. 10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00004-X.

Indrasiené, V., Jegeleviciené, V., Merfeldaité, O., Penkauskiené, D., Pivoriené, J., Raiiiene, A., et al. (2021a). Critical thinking in higher education and labour market.

Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/B18636 Indrasiené, V., JegeleviCiené, V., Merfeldaité, O., Penkauskiené, D., Pivoriené, J., Railiené, A., et al. (202 lb). The value of critical thinking in higher education and the

labour market: The voice of stakeholders. Sociaf Sciences, ¡0(G), 286. https://doi.org/10.3390/socscil0080286 Jou, M., Lin, Y.T., & Wu, D.W. (2016). Effect of a blended learning environment on student critical thinking and knowledge transformation. 24(6), 1131-1147.

10.1080/10494820.2014.961485. Kahneman, D, (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Kallio. E. K. (2020). Development of adult thinking: Interdisciplinary perspectives on cognitive development and adult learning. In E. K. Kailio (Ed.), Development of

adult thinking: interdisciplinary perspectives on cognitive development and adult learning. Taylor and Francis, https://doi,org/10.4324/970i 315187464. Keegan, D, (1996). Foundations of distance education. Routledge. htфs://www.routíedge,com/Foundations-of-Dístance-Education/Keegan/p/book/9700415139090. Kek, M., St Huijser, H. (2011). The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: Preparing students for tomorrow's digital futures in today's

classrooms. Higher Education Research and Development, 30(3), 329-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074 King, P. M., fit Kitchener, K. S. (1,994). Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. In,

350. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and Jossey-Bass Social and Behavioral Science Series. Street, San Francisco, CA 94104-1310: Sansome. King, P. M., Sl Kitchener, К S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educatíoíiaí

Psychologist, (1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1207/sl5326985ep3901_2 Klunklin, A., Subpaiboongid, P., Keitlertnapha, P., Vlseskul, N., Sc Turale, S. (2011). Thai nursing students' adaption to problem-based learning: A qualitative study.

Nurse Education in Practice, 12(6), 370-374. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.nepr.2011.03.011 Knowles, M, S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd ed.). Cambridge Books.

Kong, L. N., Qin, В., Zhou, Y.qing, Мои, S.yu, & Gao, H. M (2014). The effectiveness of problem-based learning on development of nursing students' critical thinking:

A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51(3), 458—469. httpEi//doLorg/10.1Q16/j.ijnurstu.2013,06.009 KPMG. (2020). The future of higher education in a disruptive world, https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/10/future-of-higher-education.pdf. Ku, K. (2009). Assessing students' critical thinking performance: Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity; 2, 70-76. Ku, K., Lai, E., Sl Hau, K. (2014) , Epistemoiogical beliefs and the effect of authority on argument-counterargument integration: An experiment. Thinking Skills and

Creativity, 13, 67-79. https://doiorg/l 0.1016/j.tsc.2014.03,004 Ku, К., Ho, L, Hau, K., Sl Lai, E. (2013). Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of critical thinking: An intervention study, frisfructíonaí Science, 42(2), 251-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/sll251-013-9279-0

Kuhn, D, (1991). Theskilb of argument. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB097S0511571350

Kuhn, D. (1999). A. Developmental Model of Critical Thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16-46. https://doi.org/10.3102/00l3189x02S002016 Kuhn, D. (2008). Education for thinking. Harvard University Press.

Kuhn, D. (2018). A role for reasoning in a dialogic approach to critical thinking. Topoi. 37(1), 121-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/sll245-016-9373-4 Lin, C. F., Lu, M. S., Chung, C. C., & Yang, C. M. (2010). A comparison of problem-based learning and conventional teaching in nursing ethics education. Nursing Ethics, 17(3), 373-382.

Liu, O., Frankel, L., & Roohr, K. (2014). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: Current state and directions for next-generation assessment. ETS Research

Report Series, 20} 4( 1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12009 Liu, Y.? Páztor, A. (2022). Effects of problem-based learning instructional intervention on critical thinking in higher education: A meta-analysis. Thinking Skills and

Creativity, 45. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101069. May. Lorencová, H.„ Jarosová, E., Avgitidou, S., 8t Dimitriadou, C. (2019). Critical thinking practices in teacher education programmes: A systematic review. Studies in

Higher Education, 44(5), 844-859. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1586331 Loyalka, P., Liu, O. L., Li, C., Kardanova, E., Chirikov, 1., Hu, S., et al. (2021). Skill levels and gains in university STEM education in China, India, Russia and the United

States. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(7), 892-904. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01062-3 Loyens, S. M. M., Wijnia, L., & Duker, I. V. (2020). Problem-based learning. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. https://doi.org/10.1093/ACREFORE/ 9780190264093.013.861

Makhene, A. (2017). Argumentation: A methodology to facilitate critical thinking. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, /4(1). https://doi.org/ 10.1515/ijmes-2016-0030

McCrew, S., Smith, M., Breakstone, J., Ortega, T., St Wineburg, S. (2019). Improving university students ' web sawy: An intervention study. British Journal of

Educational Psychology, 39, 485-500. https://doi.org/10.! 11 J/bjep. 12279 McLinden, M., McCall, S., Hinton, D., Weston, A., & Douglas, G. (2006). Developing online problem-based resources for the Professional development of teachers of

children with visual impairment. Open Learning, 21(3), 237-251. McPeck, J. (1981). Critical thinking and education, St, Martin's Press.

Meirbekov, A., Maslova, I., S¿ Gallyamova, Z. (2022). Digital education tools for critical thinking development. Thinking Skilh and Creativity, 44, Article 101023.

https://doi,org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101023. February. Merriam, S, B. (2010). Adult education-adult learning, instruction and program planning, international encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 12-17). ELSEVIER. Miner-Romanoff, K., Rae, A., fit Zakrzewski, C. E. (2019). A holistic and rmultifaceted model for ill-structured experiential problem-based learning: Enhancing student

critical thinking and communication skills. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), 70-96. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.jpblhe.v7il.3341 Molerov, D., Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, O., Nagel, M. T., Briickner, S., Schmidt, S., & Shavelson, R. J. (2020). Assessing university students' critical online reasoning ability: A conceptual and assessment framework with preliminary evidence. Frontiers in Education, 5(December), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.3389/ feduc.2020.577843

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Indicators for monitoring undergraduate STEM education. In indicators for monitoring

undergraduate stem education. The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/24943 Navarro Hernandez, N., & Zamora, S. (2014). The opinion of teachers about tutorial problem based learning. Revista Médica de Chile, 142(8), 989-997. https://doi.

org/10.4067/S0034-98872014000800006 OECD. (2021). 21st-century readers: Developing literacy skills in a digital world. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.17S7/a83d84cb-en OECD. (2022). In D. Van Damme, & D. Zahner (Eds.), Does higher education teach students to think critically?. OECD Publishing, https://doi.org/10.1787/cc9fa6aa-en. Olivares, S. L, fit Heredia, Y. (2012). Desarrollo del pensamiento crítico en ambientes de aprendizaje basado en problemas en estudiantes de educación superior.

Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, /7(54), 759-778. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2012). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (3rd ed.). Pearson Education. Paul, R., Elder, L. (2014). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.

Payan-carreira, R., Cruz, G., fit Papathanasiou, I. V. (2019). The effectiveness of critical thinking instructional strategies in health professions education : A systematic

review. Studies in Higher Education, 0(5), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1586330 Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Holt: Rinehart and Winston. Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (first publ. in 1936). International Universities Press.

Quality Assurance Agency. (2018). UK quality code - Advice and guidance, https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qc-a-g-leaming-and-teaching.pdf? sfvrsn=lf2aclSl_6.

Rossi, I., de Lima, J., Sabatke, B., Ferreira, M., Ramirez, G., fit Ramirez, M. (2021). Active learning tools improve the learning outcomes, scientific attitude, and critical thinking in higher education: Experiences in an online course during the COV1D-19 pandemic. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 49, 888-903. https:// doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21574

Rubenson, K. (2010). Adult education overview, international Encyclopedia of Education, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01723-l Saadé, R. G., Morin, D., & Thomas, J. D. E. (2012). Critical thinking in E-leaming environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1608-1617. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.025

Santos, L. F. (2021). Thinking critically through, controversial issues on digital media: Dispositions and key criteria for content evaluation. Thinking Skills and

Creativity, https://doi.org/! 0.1016/j.tsc.2021.100927 Schwartz, R, W., Donnelly, M. B., Nash, P. P., &. Young, B. (1992). Developing students' cognitive skills in a problem-based cur... Academic medicine. Academic

Medicine, 67( 10). https://journals, lww. com/academicmedicine/Abstract/i 992/10000/Developing_students_cognitive_skills_in_a. 16.aspx. Scott, C., Leritz, L. E, fit. Mumford, M. D. (2004). Types of creativity training: Approaches and their effectiveness. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(3), 149-179.

https://doLorg/10.1002/J.2162-6057.2004.TB01238.X Seibert, S. A. (2021). Problem-based learning: A strategy to foster generation Z's critical thinking and perseverance. Teaching and Learning in Nursing 16(1), 85-88.

https://doL org/10.1016/j .teln.2020.09.002 §endag, S., St Odaba§i, H. (2009). Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Computers and

Education, 53(1), 132-141. https://doi.Org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008 Senge, P. (2013). Learning organizations. Knowledge management in education: Enhancing learning & education. Taylor & Francis.

Silva, A. B. D., Bispo, A. C. K.d. A., Rodriguez, D. C., fit Vasquez, F. I. F. (2018). Problem-based learning: A proposal for structuring PBL and its implications for learning among students in an undergraduate management degree program. Revista de Gestao, 25(2), 160-177. https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-03-2018-030/

FULL/PDF

Styawan, A., fit Arty, I. S. (2021). Inquiry-based learning and problem-based learning: Which one has better effect on students critical thinking skills profile of

thermochemistry? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806(1). https://doi.Org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/l/012177 Tan, C. (2017). Teaching critical thinking: Cultural challenges and strategies in Singapore. British Educational Research Journal, 43(5), 988-1002. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/beij .3295

Theall, M. (2003). Higher Education. Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed., pp. 2493-2498). Macmillan.

Todd, C. L., Ravi, K., St McCray, K. (2019). Cultivating critical thinking skills in online course environments: Instructional techniques and strategies, /nfernationai

Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 9(1), 19-37. https://doi.org/10.4018/lJOPCD.2019010102 Trullas, J. C., Blay, C., Sarri, E., fit Pujol, R (2022). Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: A scoping review. BMC

Medical Education, 22(1). https://d0i.0rg/l 0.1186/s 12909-022-03154-8 Viberg, O., Grónlund, A., St Andersson, A. (2020). Integrating digital technology in mathematics education: a Swedish case study. Interactive Learning Environments, 31

(1), 232-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1770801 World Economic Forum. (2020). The Fuiure of Jobs Report 2020 (Issue October), https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-futiire-of-jobs-report-2020.

Yeatman, N. (2020). Is social media killing intellectual humility ? Big Think. https://bigthink.com/neuropsych/intellectual-hunuhty/? fbclid=IwAR3cuFv6c4MdLuBtPfdrzW0K4_490335Vnk3W0aYFRUBIv4SXTnRd9CaP0^

Yew, E. H. J., Bt Goh, K. (2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Education, 2(2), 75-79. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/J. HPE.2016.01.004

Yuan, H., Kunaviktikul, W., St Klunklin, A. (2000). Improvement of nursing students1 critical thinking skills through problem-based learning in the People's Republic of China : A quasi-experimental study. Nursing and Health Sciences, JO, 70-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1442-2010.2007.00373.x

Zahner. (2022). Assessing academic and career skills for CTE student success, https://www.acteonline.org/tech-essential-skills/.

Further reading

Facione, P., fit Gittens, C. A. (2016). Think critically (3rd ed.,). Pearson Education.

Gogtay, N.., Giedd, J. N., Lusk, L., Hayashi, K. M., Greenstein, D., Vaituzis, A. C., et al. (2004). Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, (21), 101. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0402680101

Marchand, H. (n.d.). Some reflections on post-formal thought. The Genetic Epistemologist. Retrieved March 14, 2023, from https://www,dareassociation.org/ documents/Some%20Reflections%20on%20Postformal%20Thought.htmL

Rotter, J. B. (1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45(4), 409-493. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0003-066X.45.4.489

Sternberg, R. J (2013). Personal wisdom in the balance. In M. Ferrari, St N. M. Weststrate (Eds.), The scientific study of personal wisdom: From contemplative traditions to neuroscience (pp. 53-74). Netherlands; Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7987-7_3.

Wedemeyer, C. A. (1981). Learning at the back door? Reflections on non-traditional learning in the lifespan. University of Wisconsin Press.

Приложение 4: Статья Садова А. Р., Хиль Ю. С., Пащенко Т. В., Тарасова К. В. Измерение критического мышления взрослых: методология и опыт разработки // Современная зарубежная психология. 2022. Т. 11. № 4. С. 105-116.

Электронный журнал

«Современная зарубежная психология»

2022. Том 11. № 4. С. 105-116.