Critical thinking has become an AI-era buzzword. But what does it actually mean, and how do we teach it?

Skip to content

MalikNalik/Shutterstock

https://theconversation.com/critical-thinking-has-become-an-ai-era-buzzword-but-what-does-it-actually-mean-and-how-do-we-teach-it-286363

https://theconversation.com/critical-thinking-has-become-an-ai-era-buzzword-but-what-does-it-actually-mean-and-how-do-we-teach-it-286363

Link copied

Share article

Share article

Copy link

Email

Bluesky

Facebook

WhatsApp

Messenger

LinkedIn

X (Twitter)

Print article

Spend enough time in discussions about education and artificial intelligence (AI), and critical thinking will inevitably pop up sooner rather than later. AI is changing how students learn and how educators assess learning, and in the face of this shift, critical thinking is often presented as the right pedagogical response.

But as technology reshapes the way we learn and teach, it’s easy to overlook one crucial question: what does critical thinking actually mean in today’s world?

There is a real danger of it becoming a hollow buzzword, an oversimplified, supposedly universal antidote to this new reality in which information, explanations, and increasingly sophisticated outputs are just a click away.

Expanding definitions

Critical thinking is broadly understood as a complex and valuable set of skills and habits. It includes the ability to evaluate evidence, assess arguments, identify assumptions, distinguish stronger claims from weaker ones, and draw reasoned conclusions.

These skills are still vital, but they do not fully capture what students need to confront the cognitive challenges of an AI-powered world.

Recent research has begun exploring this distinction through concepts such as digital critical thinking, which incorporates the idea that online environments, shaped by opaque algorithms, personalisation and platformed information, require people to interpret not only the content they encounter, but also how they ended up seeing it in the first place.

As the environments in which we learn and live evolve, so too should our understanding of critical thinking. As a researcher of civics education, I believe the answers lie not in abandoning traditional definitions of critical thinking, but in expanding them.

Read more:<br>What ancient Athens teaches us about debate – and dissent – in the social media age

Reflection and judgement

Critical thinking happens in two steps. The first is reflection, that vital micro-moment of pause and consideration that comes before the second step of forming a judgement.

Reflection requires people to question evidence, examine assumptions, compare competing interpretations, recognise the limits of their own perspective, and be willing to revise their conclusions in light of stronger arguments or new information.

But modern digital spaces aggressively shape our attention. Digital platforms decide what is visible, trustworthy, and worthy of engagement, then offer content to users in bite-sized videos, short blurbs, and eternally scrollable feeds.

Critical thinking is difficult within these digital spaces because the time and space needed for reflection disappears. Instead, users are likely to skip directly from consumption to judgement.

However, we can still nurture the crucial first stage of reflection outside of these digital environments. And just like any meaningful educational aim, this habit is not acquired through instruction alone. It is cultivated gradually through repeated practice, feedback, reflection, and revision across the curriculum.

While critical thinking begins with disciplined reflection, it does not end there. Reflection prepares us to exercise judgement.

Judgement is where thinking begins to orient action. It is where we decide what deserves our attention, how much confidence to place in our knowledge, and what responsibilities follow from it. It determines how we ultimately participate alongside others in situations where we cannot be 100% certain of what we know.

Read more:<br>Social media can support or undermine democracy – it comes down to how it’s designed

The key ingredient: intellectual humility

One of education’s less trumpeted achievements is that it helps students discover the limits of their own understanding. Wrestling with difficult ideas, constructing arguments, making mistakes, and revising one’s thinking all do more than just produce knowledge. These processes gradually calibrate judgement by teaching students the difference between reaching an answer and meaningfully understanding a topic.

With AI-powered tools, it is easier than ever to produce work that appears superficially thoughtful, persuasive and sophisticated. A person can sound informed and articulate without ever doing the difficult cognitive work of developing real understanding.

Students must therefore be taught to distinguish between an answer and real understanding. The ability to write fluent, proficiently...