how important is creative and critical thinking in the 21st century workplace brainly

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Enfoque Educación

The ABCs of Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Matters

January 10, 2024 por Valentina Gimenez Leave a Comment

Thinking is a natural act for human beings. Every day, we have thousands of thoughts. However, just because we are thinking does not mean we are doing it well or that all our thoughts require critical reasoning because doing so would be too exhausting. Critical thinking becomes a core skill in a world that is changing so dynamically. Thinking critically not only helps with generating a well-founded personal opinion but also helps solve complex problems in many ways.

Given the importance of this skill, the good news is that critical thinking can be exercised and trained. In other words, this 21st-century skill can be intentionally taught. Below, we will explain how.

What Is Critical Thinking?

According to the publication of the brief series Life Skills. Fostering Critical Thinking by the 21st Century Skills Initiative, “critical thinking mainly aims at assessing the strength and appropriateness of a statement, theory, or idea through a questioning  and  perspective-taking  process, which  may  or  may  not  in  turn  result in a possibly novel statement or  theory.”

Furthermore, in this publication by Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin , it is argued that “critical thinking need not lead to an original position to a problem. The most conventional one may be the most appropriate. However, it typically involves examining and evaluating different possible positions”.

In other words, it is not limited to solving problems after a reflection. It is also about being able and willing to challenge the core assumptions of accepted theories, paradigms, or knowledge.

Critical thinking implies recognizing that other perspectives may also have merit and, therefore, evaluating each argument or theory’s possible strengths, weaknesses, and biases is possible, no matter how unaligned they are with what we think.

Critical thinking involves using logic, reasoning, and creativity to reach conclusions.

Why Is Critical Thinking Important?

Critical thinking is a skill that has applications in practically all aspects of daily life. It can help you make better decisions, improve employability, and better understand the world. In other words, critical thinking is a fundamental skill for being a 21st-century citizen.

What Is Critical Thinking Used For?

Critical thinking has various functionalities in everyday life, whether in fulfilling professional obligations or carrying out personal activities. Thinking critically is used to:

• Make good decisions : it is important as an exercise to analyze and evaluate sources of information based on their truthfulness, relevance, and reasoning, which leads to better decision-making. Ask or question before blindly accepting things as they appear, and form your judgment based on the facts, information, and knowledge available.
• Solve problems: use logic and reasoning to analyze and deconstruct problems and choose the best solutions considering the weaknesses and strengths of each alternative solution.
• Promote creativity : this is one of the main characteristics of critical thinking and is associated with the previous point, by questioning facts, theories, or concepts, space is also opened up which is very useful for developing new solutions to problems.
• Improve employability: especially in the digital age, where many jobs are being automated, there is consensus that critical thinking and creativity are two fundamental skills for improving people’s employment prospects.
• Digital and global citizenship : Critical thinking plays a role in individual well-being, but above all, it is considered an essential pillar of the functioning of modern democracies. The ability to voice an independent and well-founded opinion to vote and weigh the quality of arguments presented in the media and other sources of information. In addition, when misinformation, fallacies, and fake news can be a problem for democratic systems, critical thinking helps prevent the spread of false information. It contributes verified, respectful, and ethical content to digital communities and social networks.

4 Steps to Exercise Critical Thinking

According to the publication on critical thinking, there are four key cognitive processes involved in exercising critical thinking:

Determining and understanding the problem is an important first dimension of a critical thinking inquisitive process. This sometimes includes asking why the problem is posed in a certain way, examining whether associated solutions or claims can be based on inaccurate facts or reasoning, and identifying knowledge gaps. This inquiry process partly concerns rational thinking (checking facts, observing, and analyzing reasoning). Still, it includes a more ‘critical’ dimension when identifying possible limitations of the solution and questioning some of the underlying assumptions and interpretations, even when the facts are accurate.

In critical thinking, imagination plays an important role in the mental elaboration of an idea, but all thinking involves some level of imagination. At a higher level, imagination also consists of identifying and reviewing alternative or competing worldviews and theories with an open mind to consider the problem from multiple perspectives.

This allows for a better identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed evidence, arguments, and assumptions, although this evaluation also belongs to the inquisitive process.

The product of critical thinking is one’s position or solution to a problem or judgment about others’ positions or solutions. This mainly involves good inference, a balance between different ways of looking at the problem, and, therefore, recognition of its possible complexities.

As with good thinking, critical thinking involves the ability to argue and justify one’s position rationally, with relevant information, under existing perspectives and socially recognized forms of reasoning, or possibly some new ones.

4. Reflect or evaluate

Finally, although one may consider their stance or way of thinking to be superior to some alternatives, perhaps because it encompasses a broader view or is better supported by existing evidence, critical thinking involves some process of self-reflection on the perspective one espouses, It is possible limitations, and uncertainties. Therefore, this type of thinking implies a certain level of humility, as thinking critically also involves openness to competing ideas.

While one should not adopt ancient skepticism and suspend judgment in all cases, sometimes this may be the most appropriate position.

You may also be interested: 4 Benefits of Developing Listening Skills and the Steps to Achieve It

How to Be a Critical Thinker?

Being a critical thinker brings enormous benefits that go beyond the workplace. It is also good for personal development and daily life in the community. So how do you achieve it?

To be a critical thinker you have to exercise other habits and skills, such as fostering curiosity, questioning the established, improving analysis and communication skills, maintaining self-discipline and being alert to cognitive biases.

Let’s review some of the key skills acquired by great critical thinkers:

• Identify relationships between variables and hypothesis testing.
• Master systemic thinking and scientific reasoning.
• Understand the underlying social, natural, and technological relationships in a system.
• Exercise informational literacy, which includes understanding, finding, and obtaining data, reading, interpreting, evaluating, and handling data.
• Avoid cognitive biases; consider all available information, not just what aligns with your point of view.
• Create a strategy, theory, method, or argument based on evidence synthesis.
• Create an argument that goes beyond the available information.
• Computational thinking: for example, abstractions and generalizations of patterns, structured problem decomposition, and iterative thinking.
• Be able to criticize a work product regarding its credibility, relevance, and bias using a set of standards or a specific framework.

These activities to promote critical thinking can be driven at home, at school, or individually.

Teaching Critical Thinking

Although education systems do not usually have a subject specifically dedicated to developing critical thinking, this skill can be developed as part of other learning. Therefore, the publication “Life Skills: Fostering Critical Thinking” develops some strategies for teaching this skill in schools.

Including Critical Thinking in Education

• Use conceptual rubrics that clarify the skills involved.
• Include critical thinking as a learning objective in lesson plans.
• Provide students with tasks and problems that encourage them to question their cognitive abilities and assumptions and explore multiple perspectives.
• Generate an environment in which students feel safe to take risks expressing their thoughts and expressions that arise from their reasoning.
• Assess critical thinking by including it in exams and national assessments.

By fostering these strategies at all educational levels, students can be better prepared for the future with critical thinking skills and improve the quality of their education.

And you, do you consider yourself a critical thinker? How has exercising critical thinking helped you in your life? Check out our blog and discover more content to boost your critical thinking!

Valentina Gimenez

Valentina Giménez es coordinadora de comunicación de la División de Educación en el Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Es uruguaya. Fue periodista y productora de contenidos, especializada en temas políticos. Ha trabajado para televisión y prensa escrita. Tiene un MBA por la UCU Business School y es Licenciada en Comunicación Social por la Universidad Católica del Uruguay. Fue consultora en asuntos públicos y comunicación estratégica en su país.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Your Message

Blog posts written by Bank employees:

Copyright © Inter-American Development Bank ("IDB"). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives. (CC-IGO 3.0 BY-NC-ND) license and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any non-commercial purpose. No derivative work is allowed. Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC- IGO license. Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license.

For blogs written by external parties:

For questions concerning copyright for authors that are not IADB employees please complete the contact form for this blog.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDB, its Board of Directors, or the countries they represent.

Attribution: in addition to giving attribution to the respective author and copyright owner, as appropriate, we would appreciate if you could include a link that remits back the IDB Blogs website.

Privacy Policy

Privacy Overview

• Parent/Guardian

• Student Life
• Support CH-CH
• Reopening Plan
• Reopening Videos
• Community Resources
• FAQ and Links
• Reopening Translations
• We Teach the Way Students Learn
• Challenge/Support
• Inquire Now
• Visit CH-CH
• Need-Based Financial Aid
• Charger Scholarship
• Waltham Scholarships
• CH-CH Admissions Virtual Experience
• Our Approach
• Anti-Racism & Equity Initiatives
• Our Students
• Our Teachers
• 2020 Strategic Plan
• Trustees and Advisors
• Teaching Fellows
• Skills and Academic Support
• Beyond the Classroom
• College Counseling
• Matriculation List
• Advisor & Grade Level Programs
• Residential Life
• Athletics Calendar
• Theatre Program
• Get Involved
• Community Service
• Dining Services
• Welcome from Advancement
• Ways to Support
• Annual Fund
• Building Creativity
• Parent/Guardian Association
• Resources for Our Community
• The Chronicle Magazine

Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall School Blog: Take Charge

The power of creativity in 21st century learning.

Rapid change, complexity, and social divisiveness mark the world today. How will we survive tomorrow? Will we be able to sustain the human values that we cherish - kindness, courage, empathy? What is the role of schools in this moment? Educational leaders are faced with a central dilemma; how and what do you teach in the context of continuing change, with facts and ideas that become obsolete in the moment, and careers and work areas that have not yet been imagined? And how does a school like CH-CH respond to these challenges?

A little recent background provides some perspective. Early in the 21st century, STEM domains were recognized as drivers of change; Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics. A group of leaders from higher education, business and industry, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills met to wrestle these questions. They aimed to identify the attributes needed for success in the world of the mid 21st century. Their work stimulated a broad redesign of educational goals and practices, with a new emphasis on 21st century skills. P21 explicitly linked successful learning outcomes with innovation , or the creation of new ideas and novel approaches. Creativity emerged as a core concept.

“ Learning and innovation skills increasingly are being recognized as those that separate students who are prepared for a more and more complex life and work environments in the 21st century, and those who are not. A focus on creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaboration is essential to prepare students for the future. ” (P21)

Grant Wiggins provided further direction with the concept of Understanding by Design and the phrase “begin with the end in mind”. P21 goals are the “end in mind” for effective education today. But how do we get there? What tools and practices do we need? When creativity and innovation emerged as part of the essential toolbox of learning, STEAM (with A= Arts) largely supplanted STEM as the acronym that captures progressive educational practices. But “creativity” and “the Arts” are not synonyms. Arts disciplines certainly form a natural home base for creativity, and STEAM and P21 rightly highlighted the essential role of arts education in promoting creative thinking and practices. So what exactly is creativity?

Creativity is a defining psychological factor of what it means to be human. Change is part of the natural flow of life and humans have a unique ability to thrive in conditions of change. Change requires new behaviors, new ways of perceiving and thinking, novel approaches, innovation, creativity. We perceive the world actively through our senses, creating meaning and adapting to its demands in novel and inventive ways. This inventiveness can be seen throughout human history in the creation of new technologies, in the forging of new social and communicative constructs, and in the building of aesthetic forms that bring us together in communities. In individual and collective experiences, creativity is the center that holds everything else together. And in learning, creativity is a thread that connects with, interacts with and supports all other elements of learning. We create meaning when we think. We create connection when we use language. In his ground-breaking classic work “Flow; The Psychology of Optimal Experience” (1988), psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi lays out the argument for a new understanding of the relationships between optimal states of experience, learning, high-level performance, productivity and happiness, individual and societal. Creativity is at the core of this web of related psychological states.

Today, a new vision of arts and creativity is emerging. Disciplined work habits, learnable skills, perseverance, practice, resilience and collaboration have become equal partners with more traditional ideas of arts education such as talent, uniqueness, vision and spontaneity. P21 was adamant that good educational programs should push all students towards high levels of mastery. Creativity and the Arts are no longer just for the talented few. All students can and must develop skills and understandings in these areas if they are to be successful in the 21st century. Creative thinking, creative habits of mind, creative expressions, creative problem solving, creative collaborations and relationships – all can be acquired, practiced, refined, learned. In successful schools of today and tomorrow, the goal of a vibrant education in the arts is to prepare students for all kinds of work, life experiences, and social challenges, not “simply” for a career in an arts-related area. The creative mind is one that is prepared for the future, in all its challenging dimensions.

The impact of creativity is magnified immensely when it emerges from its natural home in the Arts and takes off into new territories. Every domain of schooling – academics, athletics and activities, social and personal life – is empowered by the pathways and opportunities of creativity. Gone is the idea that “the Arts” is an add-on, with less inherent value than other disciplines. Instead, the Arts emerge as the leading edge, imbuing other domains with a spirited creative sensibility.

A serious commitment to creativity is needed. Other 21st century skills, such as critical thinking and communication, have long been at the heart of educational programming. But creativity? Not so much. Professional support must be available, so that teachers can model creative thinking and practices, and schools can purposefully develop curricular goals that support creativity. Once this happens, the development of skills and habits of creative thinking, perception and expression will have a powerful impact on the professional, personal and community lives of generations to come.

These are difficult challenges for many schools. But schools built around educational philosophies that recognize individual differences in learning, such as Multiple Intelligences  and Differentiated Instruction   are better prepared to respond to these challenges and provide contexts in which creativity and innovation can flourish. Schools in which Social and Emotional Learning are understood, such as in the Making Caring Common initiative, also provide fertile ground for creativity. The nurturing of creativity requires unique pathways to learning, an understanding that one size does not fit all, encouragement of experimentation, multiple “answers” and diverse approaches, support for learning from mistakes, comfort with ambiguity, a zest for discovery and innovation, and a strong and resilient work ethic. Even seemingly routine practices such as the way schools assess and record progress in student learning make a difference; systems of number or letter grades alone cannot capture the complexity of creativity in learning. Schools that have the courage to address these issues – as in the Mastery Transcript movement - are ahead of the curve in this respect.

CH-CH finds itself in this moment in a position of strength. The values and goals that it has promoted since its early days, joined with a contemporary understanding of teaching and learning, position the school well to be a leader in creativity education . Multiple Intelligences (MI) and Differentiated Instruction (DI) form the backbone of the school’s instructional practices and the social-emotional context of learning is given high priority. Alternative methods of assessment and grading which support individual learning pathways while continuing to emphasize mastery and high standards are being examined. These existing elements are being galvanized with new energy by the school’s Campaign for Creativity and by the excitement created by the Re-Imagined Barn project. For CH-CH students and for young people everywhere, our hope is that nurturing their creativity today will help them respond to the unimaginable challenges of tomorrow’s world; a world in which kindness, courage and empathy will survive because of them, and a world in which creative minds will build success, happiness, and peaceful and prosperous communities.

About the author:

Dr. Margaret Allen has had a long career in teaching, academic administration and instructional design at the college and secondary school levels. She has a PhD in Linguistics and Psychology, and an MEd in Instructional Design. In the 1980's and 90's, she was Academic Dean at CH-CH and established several key initiatives, including the Senior Presentation program, which continues at the school today. She is married to Richard Allen, former Head of the Art Department at CH-CH and a practicing studio artist. As Academic Dean at Tilton School in NH in the early 2000s, Dr. Allen led the way in developing programs such as the Senior Research program and used the framework of Understanding by Design and the findings of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills to revise the curriculum and the grading system. She has conducted research and written extensively on curricular matters. After her retirement from Tilton School in 2014, Dr. Allen returned to CH-CH to become a member of the Board of Trustees.

Topics: Multiple Intelligences , Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall , Student Skill Building , Building Creativity

Subscribe Here!

Recent Posts

Posts by tag.

• Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall (67)
• Boarding School (37)
• Student Skill Building (32)
• Caring Community (20)
• Student Wellness (20)
• Multiple Intelligences (14)
• Beyond the Classroom (10)
• Athletics (9)
• Leadership (9)
• Inclusion (8)
• Teacher Spotlight (8)
• Embracing Diversity (7)
• Matriculation (7)
• Building Creativity (5)
• College Counseling (5)
• Study Guide and Strategies (5)
• Alumni Entrepreneurs (4)
• Class of 2020 (4)
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (4)
• Experiential Learning (4)
• Graduation (4)
• Admissions (3)
• Making Caring Common (3)
• Middle School (3)
• Studying Tips (3)
• Visual and Performing Arts (3)
• Alumni Artists (2)
• Anti-Racism (2)
• Class of 2019 (2)
• Community Service (2)
• Healthy Eating at School (2)
• Inspiration Video (2)
• Rewrite Your Story (2)
• Running Brook Camps (2)
• Self-Care Strategies (2)
• Class of 2021 (1)
• Halloween (1)
• Harvard Graduate School of Education (1)
• Independent Study (1)
• International Program (1)
• MakerSpace (1)
• Winter Carnival (1)
• homecoming (1)

Chapel Hill - Chauncy Hall

785 Beaver Street Waltham, MA 02452 781-314-0800 [email protected]

Located 10 miles from Boston, Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall is a coeducational college preparatory school that teaches the way students learn. The School welcomes students with diverse learning styles and helps them to develop self-confidence and achieve academic success through personalized, integrated learning. Chapel Hill-Chauncy Hall offers 180 boarding and day students a richly diverse cultural and academic environment and opportunities to engage in the arts, athletics and community service.

Our  Privacy Policy .

©2018 Chapel Hill - Chauncy Hall. All Rights Reserved.

Critical Thinking, A 21st-Century Essential

• Family-Friendly Activities and Staycations
• Childcare is No Child’s Play: The Ultimate Preschool Guide

Critical Thinking For Preschoolers

How many times have you seen friends sharing information online, only to click into it and find out that it is a piece of fake news? Have you received forwarded messages in your Whatsapp or Telegram chats asking you to pass on the message when it is a poorly-researched opinion?

In today’s increasingly complex and technological world, this seems to happen all the time! And the only way to protect individuals from believing false information or emails and phone scams is to develop essential critical thinking skills.

Does your child often go along with answers their siblings or friends say? Or do they question the answers provided? Teaching little ones to question and uncover questionable statements presented as facts, is essential today!

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is a phrase thrown about in the workplace, parenting, education, and early education fraternity. It comprises a variety of sub-skills which include analysing, evaluating, synthesising, reflecting, and reasoning information to establish its integrity. What that means more simply is for children to:

• Arrive at a conclusion independently
• Look at other perspectives
• Understand the process of thinking (metacognition)
• Comprehend different parts and the whole of a problem
• Draw the links between cause and effect
• Think about solutions and potential challenges of each solution

In our ever-changing technological world, information is replete, and critical thinking skills are a must! More importantly, if we teach our children to be critical thinkers, they would be making a positive change in society and the world in the future.

Why Do Children in Preschool Need Critical Thinking?

While it is possible to achieve success during our schooling days decades ago just by memorising information and regurgitating them for our tests, society today requires children to have intelligent thinking habits to continually ask challenging questions and acquire critical thinking.

Especially when the world outside of the classroom holds questions with do not necessarily have one correct answer, it is imperative to start building a strong foundation for critical thinking at an early age; yes even when they are in preschool!

Educators say that if we want children to succeed in our increasingly complex world, we should teach them how to think critically!

How Do We Encourage Children To Be Critical Thinkers?

Teaching critical thinking is easier than one might think and here are some simple ways to get your little ones started!

1. Ask Questions Instead of Providing Answers

Children are curious by nature and love asking questions about everything and anything around them. Why is the sky blue? Why are the clouds look like they are moving? What does my crayon fall to the ground? Why, daddy? Why, mummy?

Instead of providing answers to their plethora of questions and in turn unintentionally prescribing your views and opinions onto your child, you may just want to turn the question back to them and get them thinking: “What do you think?” As young children see the world differently, they may have their own creative opinions; yes, even your toddlers! Sometimes, you may get funny or impossible answers, but you are helping them to make sense of the world on their own, and are also simultaneously opening the doors for deeper investigation and discussions!

2. Challenge Their Perspectives

Whenever children tell you a piece of new information, rather than take it as face-value, you may just want to challenge their perspectives or views. For instance, when your child tells you that “You shouldn’t go out when it rains”, you could challenge them by asking, “How do you know?” or point out that people are walking downstairs as you look out the window on a rainy day. Sometimes, these statements are picked up by their caretakers, and challenging them encourages them to think and research on their own.

Furthermore, you could also prompt them to think about how that perspective may be different from another person. For example, a person who doesn’t have an umbrella or raincoat may not want to go out when it rains, but if you have an umbrella or raincoat that keeps you dry, you can head out of the house! This teaches young children that there are conditions to which a statement may or may not be true.

3. Provide Opportunities For Play

Your little ones learn the most through play and by testing how things work through trial and error, it helps them to develop critical thinking. Play helps children explore cause and effect and encourages curiosity as they learn how to play and how things work.

For instance, children will need to problem-solve as they find out how to get the figurine to balance on top of the tower, or to observe why a spoon drops faster than a piece of fluff.

Read more – Let Children Learn Through Play: 8 Play-Based Learning Activities

4. Don’t Solve All of Their Problems

It also helps that daddy and mummy don’t come to their rescue ALL of the time! Some children cry and give up when things don’t go their way. Crying helps alert their caregivers and signals for help. While adults do need to assist with the big problems that children face, for little situations, children are capable of solving it on their own.

Baby steps, baby steps; and these are what it takes to encourage and stimulate critical thinking skills in our children!

Developing Critical Thinking At Mulberry Learning

At Mulberry Learning Preschools,  children are encouraged to ask questions , pose problems, and figure out the answers, with the help of their teachers! These skills are imparted through our proprietary  inquiry-based learning  approach which provides a rich opportunity for kids to widen and deepen their understanding and strengthen their appreciation of new knowledge. Students can act as little scientists, finding answers to their questions through engaging in research, conducting mini-experiments, analysing their findings, and presenting their observations to their peers and parents.

Find out more about our Signature Programmes

About Mulberry Learning

Established in 2006, Mulberry Learning is an award-winning Reggio-inspired preschool with 11 locations around Singapore. Mulberry Learning is the world’s first and only preschool network certified by the USA for the Habits of MindTM framework, and its curriculum has been voted as “Singapore’s Best Holistic Learning Programme” for 3 years running by leading parenting publications.

Exclusive Promotion

Book a virtual tour with Mulberry Learning to find out how its award-winning curriculum can help prepare your child for his or her Primary years and beyond! Explore our beautifully crafted Reggio-inspired learning spaces from the comfort of your own home with our Virtual School Tours!

Related Articles

It’s Playtime, Babies! 9 Simple Infant Developmental Activities

5 minutes with Ms Tracy Yang, Singapore’s first Qualified Behaviour Analyst

Revamped Professional Development Programme for Preschool Teachers

6 Fun Ways to Motivate Your Child To Learn Chinese

Mulberry school tour.

Selected Centre

—Please choose an option— Alexandra Bukit Merah Cairnhill Choa Chu Kang Creative (Near Jurong East) Tanjong Pagar Toa Payoh Woodlands Shenton Way (Q2 2017) Marymount (Q3 2017)

Parent's Particulars

Salutation * —Please choose an option— Dr Mr Mrs Ms Mdm

Given Name *

* indicates required fields

Child's Particulars

Date of Birth *

+ Add another Child

Second Child's Given Name

Second Child's Date of Birth

Third Child's Given Name

Third Child's Date of Birth

Fourth Child's Given Name

Fourth Child's Date of Birth

Programme Interested * —Please choose an option— Infant Care Playgroup N1 N2 K1 K2

Earliest Enrolment Date *

How did you hear about Mulberry?

  Facebook   Flyers   Internet   Email/E-Blast

  Forums   Magazines   Word of Mouth   Others

Our Locations

Click here to visit our Contact Us page and view the preschool/infant care centres conveniently located near you.

• Infant Care

CONNECT WITH US

Useful links, view our privacy policy.

Mulberry Learning prides itself on making the preschool experience both memorable and enjoyable while transforming a child into a competent explorer, an imaginative thinker, and a creative problem solver. Through our proprietary award-winning curriculum, unique Habits of Mind programme and dedicated staff who are passionate about imparting positive attitudes, Mulberry Learning holds strong in its promise to deliver a holistic education that nurtures the Future Ready Child.

A PREMIUM PRESCHOOL BRAND UNDER GLOBAL EDUHUB

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• The Future of Jobs and Jobs Training
• Theme 2: Learners must cultivate 21st‑century skills, capabilities and attributes

Table of Contents

• About this canvassing of experts
• Theme 1: The training ecosystem will evolve, with a mix of innovation in all education formats
• Theme 3: New credentialing systems will arise as self‑directed learning expands
• Theme 4: Training and learning systems will not meet 21st‑century needs by 2026
• Theme 5: Jobs? What jobs? Technological forces will fundamentally change work and the economic landscape
• Acknowledgments

Will training for the skills likely to be most important in the jobs of the future work be effective in large-scale settings by 2026? Respondents in this canvassing overwhelmingly said yes, anticipating improvements in such education will continue. However, when respondents answered the question, “Which of these skills can be taught effectively via online systems?” most generally listed a number of “hard skills” such as fact-based knowledge or step-by-step processes such as programming or calculation – the types of skills that analysts say machines are taking over at an alarming pace right now. And then, when asked, “What are the most important skills needed to succeed in the workplace of the future?” while some respondents mentioned lessons that might be taught in a large-scale setting (such as understanding how to partner with AI systems or how use fast-evolving digital tools) most concentrated on the need for “soft skills” best developed organically, mentioning attributes such as adaptability, empathy, persistence, problem-solving, conflict resolution, collaboration and people skills, and critical thinking.

Tough-to-teach intangibles such as emotional intelligence, curiosity, creativity, adaptability, resilience and critical thinking will be most highly valued

Learning will, in itself, become important. The skill to continue to learn will be important in all jobs Anonymous respondent

[how to use]

Overall, as these respondents foresee a big re-sorting of workplace roles for machines and humans, they expect that the jobs-related training systems of the future will often focus on adding or upgrading the particular capabilities humans can cultivate that machines might not be able to match.

An anonymous respondent ’s terse description of top future skills was echoed by many dozens of others in this study: “Learning will, in itself, become important. The skill to continue to learn will be important in all jobs.”

Susan M ernit , CEO and co-founder at Hack the Hood, explained, “At Hack the Hood, the tech-inclusion nonprofit I lead, the most valuable skill we teach low-income young people of color, ages 16-25, is that they have the ability and the discipline to learn harder and harder things – the most critical skill for the emerging workplace. Research shows that for our cohorts a blend of online and real-world learning is an effective mix.”

George McKee , a retiree, predicted, “As always, the most important skills will be the ability to learn and organize new things and to discriminate sense from nonsense. Public schools will continue to fall behind in their ability to foster these skills in large populations.”

Meryl Krieger , career specialist at Indiana University, Bloomington’s Jacobs School, replied, “The most important skills in the workforce of the future are 1) transferrable skills and 2) training in how to contextualize and actually transfer them. These are really hard to teach at scale, but then the workforce of the future is something we are barely coming to have the dimmest perceptions about.”

Jessica Vitak , an assistant professor at the University of Maryland, observed that the most-needed skills are capabilities that have always had value, writing, “As much as people like to imagine the future being heavily reliant on robots and high-tech gadgets, I don’t see too much of the workforce shifting dramatically in terms of the skills required to complete tasks.”

Many of the skills of the future are hybrid skills – requiring expertise or fluency across some of our traditional domains. Trevor Hughes

Many other participants in this study said highly valued strengths of human character will be necessary to partner with technology in jobs of the future. An anonymous respondent wrote, “The increasing reach of data, automation and eventually AI will force those jobs that remain to require even greater human touch.”

Susan Price , a digital architect at Continuum Analytics, expanded on that point, explaining, “People will continue to prefer and increasingly value human nurses, teachers, writers, artists, counselors, ethicists and philosophers. This shift has been apparent over the past 20 years or so. As we have come to prefer ATMs over tellers and travel apps over travel agents, our patronage of other ‘human contact’ specialists such as counselors and therapists, personal trainers, manicurists, and massage therapists has increased. Example: People skills in user interface and experience design will be increasingly in demand, but will greatly benefit from artificial intelligence and machine learning for usability evaluations and testing. Another example: The role of truck drivers will need to evolve as they are replaced with self-driving transports. There will remain the need for humans to manage transportation tracking and auditing, perform problem-solving, and occupy stakeholder contact roles such as sales and customer support communication.”

Trevor Hughes , CEO at the International Association of Privacy Professionals, replied, “Training will indeed be an important part of preparing the workforce for our digital future, but it won’t be easy. Many of the skills of the future are hybrid skills – requiring expertise or fluency across some of our traditional domains. Take privacy as an example. Any digital economy professional needs to understand privacy and how it creates risk for organizations. But that means grasping law and policy, business management, and technology. Modern professionals will need to bridge all of these fields.”

An anonymous respondent replied, “The two trends with the most hype right now are AI and VR. Let’s assume that these technologies will have a large impact on the nature of the future work. The workforce of the future (that is not completely displaced by this tech) then needs the skills to utilize these technologies. Some broad skills I anticipate are interacting with machine learning systems, reasoning with underlying algorithms and embedded judgments, being comfortable delegating tactical decisions to those algorithms, etc.”

Michael Rogers, author and futurist at Practical Futurist, said, “In a rapidly changing work environment populated by many intelligent machines, we will need to train people from an early age in communication skills, problem-solving, collaboration and basic scientific literacy. Without those basics in place, occupational training is insufficient.”

The anonymous director of evaluation and research at a university ranked in the top 10 in the U.S. wrote, “Sure, Lynda.com and Udacity and others that can provide skills, just like the corporate training programs we use now. … But those skills won’t be the same as an education – as the habits of mind and social interleavings that make for the types of problem definition, interdisciplinary perspectives, and incisive thought that will be most needed – deep engagement with the stuff of distinctly human capabilities.”

Justin Reich , executive director at the MIT Teaching Systems Lab, observed, “The most important skills for the future will be the kinds of things that computers cannot readily do, places where human workers have a comparative advantage over computers. Two important domains of human comparative advantage are ill-structured problem solving and complex, persuasive communication. (Frank Levy and Richard Murnane’s ‘ Dancing with Robots ’ offers a nice summary of the research informing this position.) Ironically, computers are most effective at teaching and assessing routine tasks, the kinds of things that we no longer need human beings to do. Large-scale learning, which generally depends on automated assessment, is most effective at teaching the kinds of skills and routine tasks that no longer command a living wage in the labor market.”

An anonymous CEO for a nonprofit technology network argued that some “soft” skills can be taught, observing, “Many research reports have demonstrated that one of the most important skills in our developing workforce is reasoning and complex problem solving. The internet enables us to teach and practice these skills in a unique and appropriate way by connecting and engaging people across geographies, backgrounds, ages, etc.” And an anonymous professor at the University of California, Berkeley said, “I do think there will be a lot more online training in the future – and it will actually be more successful at teaching things that are not directly translatable to jobs (humanities subjects, such as art history, media studies, etc.) – the things that television documentaries are already good at teaching. I’m not sure that great writing skills or public speaking/presentation skills will be taught in this format.”

Alf Rehn , professor and chair of management and organization at Åbo Akademi University in Turku, Finland, responded, “The key thing to realize about skills and the future is that there is no one set of skills that we can identify as core or important. The future of skills is going to be one of continuous change and renewal, and any one special skill we can identify now will almost certainly be outdated in not too long. Creativity and critical thinking will be as important in the future as it is today, but beyond this we should be very careful not to arrogantly assume too much. And this is precisely why new programs, online and off, will be so crucial. Innovative, faster and more agile training systems will not only be helpful, they’ll be critical.”

An anonymous self-described “chief problem solver” said the world needs problem solvers, writing, “Huge portions of the human condition can be effectively learned through one-to-many learning environments enabled through the internet. Many cannot. … If you take a look at the prevalence of strong problem-solving skills in our society now versus 20 years ago, you’ll notice that an overwhelming majority are now quite specialized in their particular areas of interest/work, but on average have less ability than their counterparts 20 years ago to adequately handle new/incongruous/conflicting information or tasks. Instead of figuring it out and thereby training up our ingenuity-focused skills, we now tend to simply Google someone else’s answer. While this is ‘efficient’ in terms of getting to an adequate solution rapidly, it means that … people are not able to handle new inputs, be flexible, or actually puzzle out new problems.”

Many participants mentioned the general categories of communication and people skills. An anonymous respondent summed it up, writing, “No matter what kind of hard skills one comes to the workplace with, at the end of the day things always seem to boil down to people and communication challenges.”

Micah Altman , director of research at MIT Libraries, wrote, “Given the increased rate of technical change and the regular disruptions this creates in established industries, the most important skills for workforces in developed countries are those that support adaptability and which enable workers to engage with new technologies (and especially information and communication technologies) and to effectively collaborate in different organizational structures.”

No matter what kind of hard skills one comes to the workplace with, at the end of the day things always seem to boil down to people and communication challenges. Anonymous respondent

An anonymous technology analyst for Cisco Systems commented, “The gig economy takes over, and micro-skill training will come to the fore. Debate is a most important skill that can be taught online, emphasizing the importance of preparation.”

[there will be]

An anonymous respondent observed, “The job of the future is the one that combines technical, operational, managerial and entrepreneurial skills.”

Axel Bruns , professor in the Digital Media Research Center at Queensland University of Technology, wrote, “Over the past decade there has been a substantial growth in generic digital literacies training, and this is now being replaced or enhanced by literacies training in specific areas and for particular purposes (social media literacy for communication professionals, data literacy for journalists, etc., to name just two particularly obvious fields). There has also been the emergence of a range of specialist positions that address the cutting edge of such literacies – under job titles such as data scientist or computational journalist, for instance. Across the creative industries, and beyond, the possession of such skills will increasingly serve as a differentiator between job applicants, and within organisational hierarchies in the workplace. Those who possess these skills are also more likely to branch out beyond their core disciplines and industries, as many such skills are inherently interdisciplinary and enable the worker to engage in a wider range of activities. Beyond generic digital literacies, some of the key areas I see as important are: 1) platform-specific literacies, e.g., social media literacies; 2) data science, i.e., the ability to gather, process, combine, and analyse ‘big data’ from a range of sources; 3) data visualisation. Until the accreditation schemes for workers with these skills are standardised, which eventually they will be, we will continue to see leading workers in these areas … be able to enter the workplace on the basis of their demonstrated expertise and track record rather than on the basis of formal accreditation. While there are many MOOCs and other online courses now purporting to teach these skills, it is important to point out that there is a substantial qualitative component to these skills – somewhat paradoxically, perhaps, especially where they deal with ‘big data’: the engagement with such large datasets is less about simply generating robust quantitative metrics and more about developing a qualitative understanding of what such metrics actually mean . Such an understanding is difficult to teach through semi-automated online courseware; direct teacher/learner interaction remains crucial here.”

An anonymous vice president of product at a new startup commented, “In a grand folly of correlation being mistaken for causation, we’re trying to pipeline all kids into college to try to juice their earnings, while steering kids away from practical technical skills like manufacturing tech that might be a better fit, opting instead to saddle them with student loans for a degree they won’t finish from a school that no employer will respect.”

The consultant said one more skill that could be most critical: “An important skill for the workforce of the future is an ability to cultivate a strong network, so if your job disappears you’re able to quickly find a new role.”

[to choose]

Practical experiential learning via apprenticeships and mentoring will advance

Several experts wrote about the likelihood that apprenticeship programs will be refashioned offline and online via evolving application of human knowledge and technology tools. An anonymous security engineer at Square commented, “Never before in history has it been so easy for anyone to learn to become anything they want to be, and that will only continue to improve.”

Connecting the virtual to the physical will change everything. Will Kent

Cory Salveson , learning systems and analytics lead at RSM US, predicted, “There will be a big market for this: more self-directed or coached/mentored, project-based, online learning options that coexist with traditional brick-and-mortar university degree credentialing to make the labor market more agile, whether it wants to be or not.”

Will Kent , e-resources librarian at Loyola University-Chicago, replied, “Connecting the virtual to the physical will change everything. Anyone can learn anything online now. With the right kind of career or social positioning/privilege/luck/connections, users can sidestep traditional degree processes. For those in industries that still demand degrees as currency, the requirements for degrees will change, continuing education will become more embedded in the workplace or new types of evaluation will become more popular. Deliverable-based time constraints rather than 9-5, asynchronous offices/projects will be commonplace, and employers will have to make time for employees to self-educate or else they will fall behind. New credentialing systems will complement, not compete with, older iterations. One will not be favored above the other in practice (i.e., if you can do your work, no one will question how you learned what you learned).”

D. Yvette Wohn , assistant professor of information systems at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, wrote, “Knowledge can be acquired through massive online means, but skills will still require a small-group, personalized approach with much individual feedback. In the future, the technology will be advanced such that the modality – online or offline – is not the issue; rather, it is the size and intimacy of the learning environment that will matter. Formalized apprenticeships that require both technical skills and interpersonal interaction will become more important. As more people get degrees, university degrees will matter less, but that does not mean that higher education does not have its place. Schools that are able to provide a more holistic learning experience that does not focus on a specific skill but is able to provide students with an interdisciplinary and social experience will become more valuable.”

John B. Keller , director of e-learning at the Metropolitan School District of Warren Township, Indiana, wrote, “Online training will continue to improve, and … any skills or knowledge updating that can reasonably be delivered online will be. That said, there will still be a need in many areas for verifiable performance of complex skills and behaviors that may not be possible to be accomplished algorithmically. Skills demanded in the future will include analysis of big data sets, interpretation of trends within historic contexts, clear and effective intercultural communication, design and systems thinking, as well as the ability to advance and advocate for distinctly human contributions to progress and the advance of culture. As more and more skills are broken down into repeatable processes, they will be handed off to technology and video as key transfer platforms. The demand for skills that cannot be easily transferred via online systems will ensure that experience, mentorship, coaching, apprenticeship and demonstrated proficiency all have prominent roles to play against a backdrop of online learning.”

An anonymous respondent wrote, “Online classes can teach prerequisite knowledge that can prepare workers for further hands-on training or apprenticeship.”

[I include]

Some respondents believe mentoring does not have to be in person – in the traditional face-to-face sense – to be one-to-one. In fact, they say the online world has already multiplied the number of available mentors in every subject.

Valerie Bock , VCB Consulting, former Technical Services Lead at Q2 Learning, responded, “To develop proficiency, we seem to need exposure to war stories of others who were there when the usual rules didn’t apply. MIT’s … EdX platform has a code checker built in, which means well-structured classes can be created with automatically graded exercises supplemented by discussion forums where students can ask their questions and move past places where they are stuck. These courses actually provide the coaching learners need to become skillful. So yeah, coding is probably a skill that can be taught and credentialed effectively via a self-directed online course. In the meantime, a lot of coders learn their craft informally, by examining code written by others and asking questions about it. To me, the most promising application of the internet is the way it increases the number of potential mentors. Global organizations are already leveraging the asynchronous properties of online venues to put their subject matter experts in touch with mentees half the world away, spanning time and distance obstacles. … People use the internet every day, informally, to learn bits and pieces that help them be more effective in the work (paid and unpaid) they do, sometimes by accessing content, but often by contacting other people. The value added to human welfare by parenting forums, elder care discussions, recipe exchanges, addiction recovery communities and even stain removal resources is deeply underestimated.”

Ed Dodds , digital strategist at Conmergence, added, “The global startup ecosystem and makerspace ecosystem will both be intersecting and growing in parallel. … More intentional formal mentorship networks (guilds) are likely to proliferate.”

“What would help,” added an anonymous respondent , “is improving people’s efficiency at providing supports to others. Sort of Slack on steroids.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Business & Workplace
• Digital Divide
• Education & Learning Online
• Future of the Internet (Project)
• Future of Work

Is College Worth It?

Half of latinas say hispanic women’s situation has improved in the past decade and expect more gains, a majority of latinas feel pressure to support their families or to succeed at work, a look at small businesses in the u.s., majorities of adults see decline of union membership as bad for the u.s. and working people, most popular.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC10054602

Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education

Branden thornhill-miller.

1 Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK

2 International Institute for Competency Development, 75001 Paris, France

Anaëlle Camarda

3 LaPEA, Université Paris Cité and Univ Gustave Eiffel, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France

4 Institut Supérieur Maria Montessori, 94130 Nogent-Sur-Marne, France

Maxence Mercier

Jean-marie burkhardt.

5 LaPEA, Univ Gustave Eiffel and Université Paris Cité, CEDEX, 78008 Versailles, France

Tiffany Morisseau

6 Strane Innovation, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

Samira Bourgeois-Bougrine

Florent vinchon, stephanie el hayek.

7 AFNOR International, 93210 Saint-Denis, France

Myriam Augereau-Landais

Florence mourey, cyrille feybesse.

8 Centre Hospitalier Guillaume Regnier, Université de Rennes 1, 35200 Rennes, France

Daniel Sundquist

Todd lubart, associated data.

Not Applicable.

This article addresses educational challenges posed by the future of work, examining “21st century skills”, their conception, assessment, and valorization. It focuses in particular on key soft skill competencies known as the “4Cs”: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In a section on each C, we provide an overview of assessment at the level of individual performance, before focusing on the less common assessment of systemic support for the development of the 4Cs that can be measured at the institutional level (i.e., in schools, universities, professional training programs, etc.). We then present the process of official assessment and certification known as “labelization”, suggesting it as a solution both for establishing a publicly trusted assessment of the 4Cs and for promoting their cultural valorization. Next, two variations of the “International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Skills Framework” are presented. The first of these comprehensive systems allows for the assessment and labelization of the extent to which development of the 4Cs is supported by a formal educational program or institution. The second assesses informal educational or training experiences, such as playing a game. We discuss the overlap between the 4Cs and the challenges of teaching and institutionalizing them, both of which may be assisted by adopting a dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs—playfully entitled “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”—for pedagogical and policy-promotion purposes. We conclude by briefly discussing opportunities presented by future research and new technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

1. Introduction

There are many ways of describing the massive educational challenges faced in the 21st century. With the appearance of computers and digital technologies, new means of interacting between people, and a growing competitiveness on the international level, organizations are now requiring new skills from their employees, leaving educational systems struggling to provide appropriate ongoing training. Indeed, according to the World Economic Forum’s 2020 “Future of Jobs Report”, studying 15 industries in 26 advanced and emerging countries, up to 50% of employees will need some degree of “reskilling” by 2025 ( World Economic Forum 2020 ). Although many national and international educational efforts and institutions now explicitly put the cultivation of new kinds of skills on their educational agendas, practical means of assessing such skills remains underdeveloped, thus hampering the valorization of these skills and the development of guidance for relevant pedagogy ( Care et al. 2018 ; Vincent-Lancrin et al. 2019 ; for overviews and discussion of higher education in global developmental context, see Blessinger and Anchan 2015 ; Salmi 2017 ).

This article addresses some of these challenges and related issues for the future of education and work, by focusing on so-called “21st Century Skills” and key “soft skills” known as the “4Cs” (creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration), more particularly. It begins with a brief discussion of these skills, outlining their conceptual locations and potential roles in the modern educational context. A section on each “C” then follows, defining the C, summarizing research and methods for its scientific assessment at the individual level, and then outlining some means and avenues at the systemic level for fostering its development (e.g., important aspects of curriculum, institutional structure, or of the general environment, as well as pedagogical methods) that might be leveraged by an institution or program in order to promote the development of that C among its students/trainees. In the next section, the certification-like process of “labelization” is outlined and proposed as one of the best available solutions both for valorizing the 4Cs and moving them towards the center of the modern educational enterprise, as well as for benchmarking and monitoring institutions’ progress in fostering their development. The International Institute for Competency Development’s 4Cs Framework is then outlined as an example of such a comprehensive system for assessing and labelizing the extent to which educational institutions and programs support the development of the 4Cs. We further demonstrate the possibility of labelizing and promoting support for the development of the 4Cs by activities or within less formal educational settings, presenting a second framework for assessment of the 4Cs in games and similar training activities. Our discussion section begins with the challenges to implementing educational change in the direction of 21st century skills, focusing on the complex and overlapping nature of the 4Cs. Here, we propose that promoting a “Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs” not only justifies grouping them together, but it might also assist more directly with some of the challenges of pedagogy, assessment, policy promotion, and ultimately, institutionalization, faced by the 4Cs and related efforts to modernize education. We conclude by suggesting some important future work for the 4Cs individually and also as an interrelated collective of vital skills for the future of education and work.

“21st Century Skills”, “Soft Skills”, and the “4Cs”

For 40 years, so-called “21st century skills” have been promoted as those necessary for success in a modern work environment that the US Army War College ( Barber 1992 ) has accurately described as increasingly “VUCA”—“volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous”. Various lists of skills and competencies have been formulated on their own or as part of comprehensive overarching educational frameworks. Although a detailed overview of this background material is outside the scope of this article (see Lamri et al. 2022 ; Lucas 2022 for summaries), one of the first prominent examples of this trend was the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21), whose comprehensive “Framework for 21st Century Learning” is presented in Figure 1 ( Battelle for Kids 2022 ). This framework for future-oriented education originated the idea of the “4Cs”, placing them at its center and apex as “Learning and Innovation Skills” that are in need of much broader institutional support at the foundational level in the form of new standards and assessments, curriculum and instructional development, ongoing professional development, and appropriately improved learning environments ( Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2008 ). These points are also consistent with the approach and assessment frameworks presented later in this article.

The P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning. (© 2019, Battelle for Kids. All Rights Reserved. https://www.battelleforkids.org/ ; accessed on 17 January 2023).

Other important organizations such as the World Economic Forum ( 2015 ) have produced similar overarching models of “21st century skills’’ with the 4Cs at their center, but the term “21st century skills’’ has been rightly criticized for a several reasons: the skills referred to are not actually all unique to, or uniquely important to, the 21st century, and it is a term that is often used more as an advertising or promotional label for systems that sometimes conflate and confuse different kinds of skills with other concepts that users lump together ( Lucas 2019 ). Indeed, though there is no absolute consensus on the definition of a “skill”, they are often described as being multidimensional and involve the ability to solve problems in context and to perform tasks using appropriate resources at the right time and in the right combination ( Lamri and Lubart 2021 ). At its simplest, a skill is a “learned capacity to do something useful” ( Lucas and Claxton 2009 ), or an ability to perform a given task at a specified performance level, which develops through practice, experience. and training ( Lamri et al. 2022 ).

The idea of what skills “are’’, however, has also evolved to some extent over time in parallel to the nature of the abilities required to make valued contributions to society. The digital and information age, in particular, has seen the replacement by machines of much traditional work sometimes referred to as “hard skills’’—skills such as numerical calculation or driving, budget-formulating, or copyediting abilities, which entail mastery of fixed sets of knowledge and know-how of standard procedures, and which are often learned on the job. Such skills are more routine, machine-related, or technically oriented and not as likely to be centered on human interaction. In contrast, the work that has been increasingly valued in the 21st century involves the more complex, human interactive, and/or non-routine skills that Whitmore ( 1972 ) first referred to as “soft skills”.

Unfortunately, researchers, educators, and consultants have defined, redefined, regrouped, and expanded soft skills—sometimes labeling them “transversal competencies”, “generic competencies”, or even “life skills” in addition to “21st century skills”—in so many different ways within and across different domains of research and education (as well as languages and national educational systems) that much progress towards these goals has literally been “lost in translation” ( Cinque 2016 ).

Indeed, there is also a long-standing ambiguity and confusion between the terms “competency” (also competence) and “skill” due to their use across different domains (e.g., learning research, education, vocational training, personnel selection) as well as different epistemological backgrounds and cultural specificities ( Drisko 2014 ; Winterton et al. 2006 ; van Klink and Boon 2003 ). The term “competency” is, however, often used as a broader concept that encompasses skills, abilities, and attitudes, whereas, in a narrower sense, the term “skill” has been defined as “goal-directed, well-organized behavior that is acquired through practice and performed with economy of effort” ( Proctor and Dutta 1995, p. 18 ). For example, whereas the command of a spoken language or the ability to write are skills (hard skills, to be precise), the ability to communicate effectively is a competence that may draw on an individual’s knowledge of language, writing skills, practical IT skills, and emotional intelligence, as well as attitudes towards those with whom one is communicating ( Rychen and Hersch 2003 ). Providing high-quality customer service is a competency that relies on listening skills, social perception skills, and contextual knowledge of products. Beyond these potential distinctions, the term “competency” is predominant in Europe, whereas “skill” is more commonly used in the US. Yet it also frequently occurs that both are used as rough synonyms. For example, Voogt and Roblin ( 2012, p. 299 ) examine the “21st century competences and the recommended strategies for the implementation of these skills”, and Graesser et al. ( 2022, p. 568 ) state that twenty-first-century skills “include self-regulated learning, collaborative problem solving, communication (…) and other competencies”. In conclusion, the term “competencies” is often used interchangeably with “skills” (and can have a particularly large overlap with “soft skills”), but it is also often considered in a broader sense as a set of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that, together, meet a complex demand ( Ananiadoui and Claro 2009 ). From this perspective, one could argue that the 4Cs, as complex, “higher-order” soft skills, might best be labeled competencies. For ease and convenience, however, in this text, we consider the two terms interchangeable but favor the term “skills”, only using “competency” in some instances to avoid cumbersome repetition.

Even having defined soft skills as a potentially more narrow and manageable focus, we are still aware of no large-scale study that has employed a comprehensive enough range of actual psychometric measures of soft skills in a manner that might help produce a definitive empirical taxonomy. Some more recent taxonomic efforts have, however, attempted to provide additional empirical grounding for the accurate identification of key soft skills (see e.g., Joie-La Marle et al. 2022 ). Further, recent research by JobTeaser (see Lamri et al. 2022 ) surveying a large, diverse sample of young workers about a comprehensive, systematic list of soft skills as actually used in their professional roles represents a good step towards some clarification and mapping of this domain on an empirical basis. Despite the fact that both these studies necessarily involved assumptions and interpretive grouping of variables, the presence and importance of the 4Cs as higher-order skills is evident in both sets of empirical results.

Various comprehensive “21st century skills” systems proposed in the past without much empirical verification also seem to have been found too complex and cumbersome for implementation. The 4Cs, on the other hand, seem to provide a relatively simple, persuasive, targetable core that has been found to constitute a pedagogically and policy-friendly model by major organizations, and that also now seems to be gaining some additional empirical validity. Gathering support from researchers and industry alike, we suggest that the 4Cs can be seen as highest-level transversal skills—or “meta-competencies”—that allow individuals to remain competent and to develop their potential in a rapidly changing professional world. Thus, in the end, they may also be one of the most useful ways of summarizing and addressing the critical challenges faced by the future of work and education ( National Education Association 2011 ).

Taking them as our focus, we note, however, that the teaching and development of the 4Cs will require a complex intervention and mobilization of educational and socio-economic resources—both a major shift in pedagogical techniques and even more fundamental changes in institutional structures ( Ananiadoui and Claro 2009 ). One very important issue for understanding the 4Cs and their educational implementation related to this, which can simultaneously facilitate their teaching but be a challenge for their assessment, is the multidimensionality, interrelatedness, and transdisciplinary relevance of the 4Cs. Thus, we address the relationships between the Cs in the different C sections and later in our Discussion, we present a “Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs’’ that we hope will assist in their understanding, in the further development of pedagogical processes related to them, and in their public promotion and related policy. Ultimately, it is partly due to their complexity and interrelationships, we argue, that it is important and expedient that the 4Cs are taught, assessed, and promoted together.

2. The 4Cs, Assessment, and Support for Development

2.1. creativity.

In psychology, creativity is usually defined as the capacity to produce novel, original work that fits with task constraints and has value in its context (for a recent overview, see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ). This basic definition, though useful for testing and measurement, is largely incomplete, as it does not contain any information about the individual or groups doing the creating or the nature of physical and social contexts ( Glăveanu 2014 ). Moreover, Corazza ( 2016 ) challenged this standard definition of creativity, arguing that as it focuses solely on the existence of an original and effective outcome, it misses the dynamics of the creative process, which is frequently associated with periods of creative inconclusiveness and limited occasions of creative achievements. To move away from the limitations of the standard definition of creativity, we can consider Bruner’s description of creativity as “figuring out how to use what you already know in order to go beyond what you currently think” (p. 183 in Weick 1993 ). This description echoes the notion of potential, which refers to a latent state that may be put to use if a person has the opportunity.

Creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon that can be approached from many different angles. There are three main frameworks for creativity studies: the 4Ps ( Rhodes 1961 ), the 5As ( Glăveanu 2013 ), and the 7Cs model ( Lubart 2017 ). These frameworks share at least four fundamental and measurable dimensions: the act of creating (process), the outcome of the creative process (product), the characteristics of creative actor(s) enacting the process (person), and the social and physical environment that enable or hinder the creative process (press). Contrary to many traditional beliefs, however, creativity can be trained and taught in a variety of different ways, both through direct, active teaching of creativity concepts and techniques and through more passive and indirect means such as the development of creativity-supporting contexts ( Chiu 2015 ; Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 ). Alongside intelligence, with which it shares some common mechanisms, creativity is now recognized as an indispensable element for the flexibility and adaptation of individuals in challenging situations ( Sternberg 1986 ).

2.1.1. Individual Assessment of Creativity

Drawing upon previous efforts to structure creativity research, Batey ( 2012 ) proposed a taxonomic framework for creativity measurement that takes the form of a three-dimensional matrix: (a) the level at which creativity may be measured (the individual, the team, the organization, and the culture), (b) the facets of creativity that may be assessed (person/trait, process, press, and product), and (c) the measurement approach (objective, self-rating, other ratings). It is beyond the scope of this article to offer a literature review of all these dimensions, but for the purposes of this paper, we address some important aspects of individual-level and institutional-level assessment here.

Assessing creativity at an individual level encompasses two major approaches: (1) creative accomplishment based on production and (2) creative potential. Regarding the first approach focusing on creative accomplishment , there are at least four main assessment techniques (or tools representing variations of assessment techniques): (a) the historiometric approach, which applies quantitative analysis to historically available data (such as the number of prizes won or times cited) in an effort to understand eminent, field-changing creativity ( Simonton 1999 ); (b) the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) ( Amabile 1982 ), which offers a method for combining and validating judges’ subjective evaluations of a set of (potentially) creative productions or ideas; (c) the Creative Achievement Questionnaire ( Carson et al. 2005 ), which asks individuals to supply a self-reported assessment of their publicly recognizable achievement in ten different creative domains; and (d) the Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA) ( Jauk et al. 2014 ; Diedrich et al. 2018 ), which includes self-report scales assessing the frequency of engagement in creative activity and also levels of achievement in eight different domains.

The second major approach to individual assessment is based on creative potential, which measures the cognitive abilities and/or personality traits that are important for creative work. The two most popular assessments of creative potential are the Remote Associations Test (RAT) and the Alternative Uses Task (AUT). The RAT, which involves identifying the fourth word that is somehow associated with each of three given words, underscores the role that the ability to convergently associate disparate ideas plays as a key capacity for creativity. In contrast, the AUT, which requires individuals to generate a maximum number of ideas based on a prompt (e.g., different uses for a paperclip), is used to assess divergent thinking capacity. According to multivariate models of creative potential ( Lubart et al. 2013 ), there are cognitive factors (e.g., divergent thinking, mental flexibility, convergent thinking, associative thinking, selective combination), conative factors (openness, tolerance of ambiguity, intuitive thinking, risk taking, motivation to create), and environmental factors that all support creativity. Higher creative potential is predicted by having more of the ingredients for creativity. However, multiple different profiles among a similar set of these important ingredients exist, and their weighting for optimal creative potential varies according to the profession, the domain, and the task under consideration. For example, Lubart and Thornhill-Miller ( 2021 ) and Lubin et al. ( forthcoming ) have taken this creativity profiling approach, exploring the identification and training of the components of creative potential among lawyers and clinical psychologists, respectively. For a current example of this sort of comprehensive, differentiated measurement of creative potential in adults in different domains and professions, see CreativityProfiling.org. For a recent battery of tests that are relevant for children, including domain-relevant divergent-exploratory and convergent-integrative tasks, see Lubart et al. ( 2019 ). Underscoring the growing recognition of the importance of creativity assessment, measures of creative potential for students were introduced internationally for the first time in the PISA 2022 assessment ( OECD 2019a ).

2.1.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Creativity

The structural support that institutions and programs can provide to promote the development of creativity can be described as coming through three main paths: (1) through design of the physical environment in a manner that supports creativity, (2) through teaching about creativity, the creative process, and creativity techniques, and (3) through training opportunities to help students/employees develop personal habits, characteristics, and other ingredients associated with creative achievement and potential.

Given the multi-dimensionality of the notion of creativity, the environment can positively influence and help develop creative capacities. Studies have shown that the physical environment in which individuals work can enhance their positive emotions and mood and thus their creativity. For example, stimulating working environments might have unusual furniture and spaces that have natural light, windows open to nature, plants and flowers, a relaxing atmosphere and colors in the room (e.g., green and blue), or positive sounds (e.g., calm music or silence), as well as inspiring and energizing colors (e.g., yellow, pink, orange). Furthermore, the arrangement of physical space to promote interpersonal exchange rather than isolation, as well as the presence of tools, such as whiteboards, that support and show the value of exchange, are also important (for reviews, see Dul and Ceylan 2011 ; Samani et al. 2014 ).

Although it has been claimed that “creativity is intelligence having fun” ( Scialabba 1984 ; Reiman 1992 ), for most people, opportunities for fun and creativity, especially in their work environment, appear rather limited. In fact, the social and physical environment often hinders creativity. Corazza et al. ( 2021 )’s theoretical framework concerning the “Space-Time Continuum”, related to support for creativity, suggests that traditional education systems are an example of an environment that is “tight” both in the conceptual “space” it affords for creativity and in the available time allowed for creativity to happen—essentially leaving little room for original ideas to emerge. Indeed, though world-wide data suggest that neither money nor mere time spent in class correlate well with educational outcomes, both policies and pedagogy that direct the ways in which time is spent make a significant difference ( Schleicher 2022 ). Research and common sense suggest that teachers, students, and employees need more space and time to invest energy in the creative process and the development of creative potential.

Underscoring the importance of teaching the creative process and creativity techniques is the demonstration, in a number of contexts, that groups of individuals who generate ideas without a specific method are often negatively influenced by their social environment. For example, unless guarded against, the presence of others tends to reduce the number of ideas generated and to induce a fixation on a limited number of ideas conforming to those produced by others ( Camarda et al. 2021 ; Goldenberg and Wiley 2011 ; Kohn and Smith 2011 ; Paulus and Dzindolet 1993 ; Putman and Paulus 2009 ; Rietzschel et al. 2006 ). To overcome these cognitive and social biases, different variants of brainstorming techniques have shown positive effects (for reviews of methods, see Al-Samarraie and Hurmuzan 2018 ; Paulus and Brown 2007 ). These include: using ( Osborn 1953 ) initial brainstorming rules (which aim to reduce spontaneous self-judgment of ideas and fear of this judgment by others); drawing attention to ideas generated by others by writing them down independently (e.g., the technique known as “brainwriting”); and requiring incubation periods between work sessions by forcing members of a problem-solving group to take breaks ( Paulus and Yang 2000 ; Paulus and Kenworthy 2019 ).

It is also possible to use design methods that are structured to guide the creative process and the exploration of ideas, as well as to avoid settling on uncreative solution paths ( Chulvi et al. 2012 ; Edelman et al. 2022 ; Kowaltowski et al. 2010 ; see Cotter et al. 2022 for a valuable survey of best practices for avoiding the suppression of creativity and fostering creative interaction and metacognition in the classroom). Indeed, many helpful design thinking-related programs now exist around the world and have been shown to have a substantial impact on creative outcomes ( Bourgeois-Bougrine 2022 ).

Research and experts suggest the utility of many additional creativity enhancement techniques (see, e.g., Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 ), and the largest and most rapid effects are often attributed to these more method- or technique-oriented approaches ( Scott et al. 2004 ). More long-term institutional and environmental support for the development of creativity, however, should also include targeted training and understanding of personality and emotional traits associated with the “creative person” (e.g., empathy and exploratory habits that can expand knowledge, as well as increase tolerance of ambiguity, openness, and mental flexibility; see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2021 ). Complementing these approaches and focusing on a more systemic level, recent work conducted by the OECD exemplifies efforts aimed to foster creativity (and critical thinking) by focusing simultaneously on curriculum, educational activities, and teacher support and development at the primary, secondary, and higher education levels (see Vincent-Lancrin et al. 2019 ; Saroyan 2022 ).

2.2. Critical Thinking

Researchers, teachers, employers, and public policymakers around the world have long ranked the development of critical thinking (CT) abilities as one of the highest educational priorities and public needs in modern democratic societies ( Ahern et al. 2019 ; Dumitru et al. 2018 ; Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ). CT is central to better outcomes in daily life and general problem solving ( Hitchcock 2020 ), to intelligence and adaptability ( Halpern and Dunn 2021 ), and to academic achievement ( Ren et al. 2020 ). One needs to be aware of distorted or erroneous information in the media, of the difference between personal opinions and proven facts, and how to handle increasingly large bodies of information required to understand and evaluate information in the modern age.

Although much research has addressed both potentially related constructs, such as intelligence and wisdom, and lists of potential component aspects of human thought, such as inductive or deductive reasoning (for reviews of all of these, see Sternberg and Funke 2019 ), reaching a consensus on a definition has been difficult, because CT relies on the coordination of many different skills ( Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Dumitru et al. 2018 ) and is involved in, and sometimes described from the perspective of, many different domains ( Lewis and Smith 1993 ). Furthermore, as a transversal competency, having the skills to perform aspects of critical thinking in a given domain does not necessarily entail also having the metacognitive ability to know when to engage in which of its aspects, or having the disposition, attitude, or “mindset” that motivates one to actually engage in them—all of which are actually required to be a good critical thinker ( Facione 2011 ).

As pointed out by the American Philosophical Association’s consensus definition, the ideal “critical thinker” is someone who is inquisitive, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded, and keeps well-informed, thus understanding different points of view and perspectives ( Facione 1990b ). These characteristics, one might note, are also characteristic of the “creative individual” ( Facione 1990b ; Lai 2011 ), as is the ability to imagine alternatives, which is often cited as a component of critical thinking ability ( Facione 1990b ; Halpern 1998 ). Conversely, creative production in any domain needs to be balanced by critical appraisal and thought at each step of the creative process ( Bailin 1988 ). Indeed, it can be argued that creativity and critical thinking are inextricably linked and are often two sides of the same coin. Representing different aspects of “good thought” that are linked and develop in parallel, it seems reasonable that they should, in practice, be taught and considered together in teaching and learning ( Paul and Elder 2006 ).

Given its complexity, many definitions of critical thinking have been offered. However, some more recent work has helpfully defined critical thinking as “the capacity of assessing the epistemic quality of available information and—as a consequence of this assessment—of calibrating one’s confidence in order to act upon such information” ( Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ). This definition, unlike others proposed in the field (for a review, see: Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Liu et al. 2014 ), is specific (i.e., it limits the use of poorly defined concepts), as well as consensual and operational (i.e., it has clear and direct implications for the education and assessment of critical thinking skills; Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ; Pasquinelli and Bronner 2021 ). Thus, this approach assumes that individuals possess better or worse cognitive processes and strategies that make it possible to judge the reliability of the information received, by determining, for example, what the arguments provided actually are. Are the arguments convincing? Is the source of information identifiable and reliable? Does the information conflict with other information held by the individual?

It should also be noted that being able to apply critical thinking is necessary to detect and overcome the cognitive biases that can constrain one’s reasoning. Indeed, when solving a problem, it is widely recognized that people tend to automate the application of strategies that are usually relevant in similar and analogous situations that have already been encountered. However, these heuristics (i.e., automatisms) can be a source of errors, in particular, in tricky reasoning situations, as demonstrated in the field of reasoning, arithmetic problems ( Kahneman 2003 ) or even divergent thinking tasks ( Cassotti et al. 2016 ; for a review of biases, see Friedman 2017 ). Though some cognitive biases can even be seen as normal ways of thinking and feeling, sometimes shaping human beliefs and ideologies in ways that make it completely normal—and even definitely human— not to be objective (see Thornhill-Miller and Millican 2015 ), the mobilization of cognitive resources such as those involved in critical reasoning on logical bases usually makes it possible to overcome cognitive biases and adjust one’s reasoning ( West et al. 2008 ).

According to Pasquinelli et al. ( 2021 ), young children already possess cognitive functions underlying critical thinking, such as the ability to determine that information is false. However, until late adolescence, studies have demonstrated an underdevelopment of executive functions involved in resistance to biased reasoning ( Casey et al. 2008 ) as well as some other higher-order skills that underlie the overall critical thinking process ( Bloom 1956 ). According to Facione and the landmark American Philosophical Association’s task force on critical thinking ( Facione 1990b ; Facione 2011 ), these components of critical thinking can be organized into six measurable skills: the ability to (1) interpret information (i.e., meaning and context); (2) analyze information (i.e., make sense of why this information has been provided, identify pro and con arguments, and decide whether we can accept the conclusion of the information); (3) make inferences (i.e., determine the implications of the evidence, its reliability, the undesirable consequences); (4) evaluate the strength of the information (i.e., its credibility, determine the trust in the person who provides it); (5) provide explanations (i.e., summarize the findings, determine how the information can be interpreted, and offer verification of the reasoning); (6) self-regulate (i.e., evaluate the strength of the methods applied, determine the conflict between different conclusions, clarify the conclusions, and verify missing elements).

2.2.1. Individual Assessment of Critical Thinking

The individual assessment of critical thinking skills presents a number of challenges, because it is a multi-task ability and involves specific knowledge in the different areas in which it is applied ( Liu et al. 2014 ; Willingham 2008 ). However, the literature provides several tools with which to measure different facets of cognitive functions and skills involved in the overarching critical thinking process ( Lai 2011 ; Liu et al. 2014 ). Most assessments involve multiple-choice questions requiring reasoning within a particular situation based upon a constrained set of information provided. For example, in one of the most widely used tests, the California Critical Thinking Skills Test ( Facione 1990a ), participants are provided with everyday scenarios and have to answer multiple questions targeting the six higher-order skills described previously. Similarly, the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal ( Watson 1980 ; Watson and Glaser 2010 ) presents test takers with passages and scenarios measuring their competencies at recognizing assumptions, evaluating arguments, and drawing conclusions. Although the Watson–Glaser is one of the oldest and most frequently used assessments internationally for hiring and promotion in professional contexts, its construct validity, like many other measures of this challenging topic, has some limitations ( Possin 2014 ).

Less frequently, case study or experiential methods of assessment are also used. This approach may involve asking participants to reflect on past experiences, analyze the situations they faced and the way they behaved or made judgments and decisions and then took action ( Bandyopadhyay and Szostek 2019 ; Brookfield 1997 ). These methods, often employed by teachers or employers on students and employees, usually involve the analysis of qualitative data that can cast doubt on the reliability of the results. Consequently, various researchers have suggested ways to improve analytic methods, and they emphasize the need to create more advanced evaluation methods ( Brookfield 1997 ; Liu et al. 2014 ).

For example, Liu et al. ( 2014 ) reviewed current assessment methods and suggest that future work improves the operational definition of critical thinking, aiming to assess it both in different specific contexts and in different formats. Specifically, assessments could be contextualized within the major areas addressed by education programs (e.g., social sciences, humanities, and/or natural sciences), and the tasks themselves should be as practically connected to the “real world” as possible (e.g., categorizing a set of features, opinions, or facts based on whether or not they support an initial statement). Moreover, as Brookfield ( 1997 ) argues, because critical thinking is a social process that takes place in specific contexts of knowledge and culture, it should be assessed as a social process, therefore, involving a multiplicity of experiences, perceptions, and contributions. Thus, Brookfield makes three recommendations for improving the assessment of critical thinking that are still relevant today: (1) to assess critical thinking in specific situations, so one can study the process and the discourse related to it; (2) to involve students/peers in the evaluation of critical thinking abilities, so that the evaluation is not provided only by the instructor; and (3) to allow learners or participants in an experiment to document, demonstrate, and justify their engagement in critical thinking, because this learning perspective can provide insight into basic dimensions of the critical thinking process.

Finally, another more recent and less widely used form of assessment targets the specific executive functions that underlie logical reasoning and resistance to cognitive biases, as well as the ability of individuals to resist these biases. This form of assessment is usually done through specific experimental laboratory tasks that vary depending on the particular executive function and according to the domain of interest ( Houdé and Borst 2014 ; Kahneman 2011 ; West et al. 2008 ).

2.2.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Critical Thinking Skills

The executive functions underlying general critical thinking, the ability to overcome bias ( Houdé 2000 ; Houdé and Borst 2014 ), and meta-cognitive processes (i.e., meta information about our cognitive strategies) can all be trained and enhanced by educational programs ( Abrami et al. 2015 ; Ahern et al. 2019 ; Alsaleh 2020 ; Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Uribe-Enciso et al. 2017 ; Popil 2011 ; Pasquinelli and Bronner 2021 ; Yue et al. 2017 ).

Educational programs and institutions can support the development of critical thinking in several different ways. The process of developing critical thinking focuses on the interaction between personal dispositions (attitudes and habits), skills (evaluation, reasoning, self-regulation), and finally, knowledge (general and specific knowledge, as well as experience) ( Thomas and Lok 2015 ). It is specifically in regard to skills and knowledge that institutions are well suited to develop critical thinking through pedagogical elements such as rhetoric training, relevance of information evaluation (e.g., media literacy, where and how to check information on the internet, dealing with “fake news”, etc.), deductive thinking skills, and inductive reasoning ( Moore and Parker 2016 ). A few tools, such as case studies or concept mapping, can also be used in conjunction with a problem-based learning method, both in individual and team contexts and in person or online ( Abrami et al. 2015 ; Carmichael and Farrell 2012 ; Popil 2011 ; Thorndahl and Stentoft 2020 ). According to Marin and Halpern ( 2011 ), training critical thinking should include explicit instruction involving at least the four following components and objectives: (1) working on attitudes and encouraging individuals to think; (2) teaching and practicing critical thinking skills; (3) training for transfer between contexts, identifying concrete situations in which to adopt the strategies learned; and (4) suggesting metacognition through reflection on one’s thought processes. Supporting these propositions, Pasquinelli and Bronner ( 2021 ), in a French national educational report, proposed practical advice for creating workshops to stimulate critical thinking in school classrooms, which appear relevant even in non-school intervention situations. For example, the authors suggest combining concrete examples and exercises with general and abstract explanations, rules and strategies, which can be transferred to other areas beyond the one studied. They also suggest inviting learners to create examples of situations (e.g., case studies) in order to increase the opportunities to practice and for the learner to actively participate. Finally, they suggest making the process of reflection explicit by asking the learner to pay attention to the strategies adopted by others in order to stimulate the development of metacognition.

2.3. Communication

In its most basic definition, communication consists of exchanging information to change the epistemic context of others. In cooperative contexts, it aims at the smooth and efficient exchange of information contributing to the achievement of a desired outcome or goal ( Schultz 2010 ). But human communication involves multiple dimensions. Both verbal and non-verbal communication can involve large quantities of information that have to be both formulated and deciphered with a range of purposes and intentions in mind ( Jones and LeBaron 2002 ). These dimensions of communication have as much to do with the ability to express oneself, both orally and in writing and the mastering of a language (linguistic competences), as with the ability to use this communication system appropriately (pragmatic skills; see Grassmann 2014 ; Matthews 2014 ), and with social skills, based on the knowledge of how to behave in society and on the ability to connect with others, to understand the intentions and perspectives of others ( Tomasello 2005 ).

Like the other 4Cs, according to most authorities, communication skills are ranked by both students and teachers as skills of the highest priority for acquisition in order to be ready for the workforce in 2030 ( OECD 2019b ; Hanover Research 2012 ). Teaching students how to communicate efficiently and effectively in all the new modalities of information exchange is an important challenge faced by all pedagogical organizations today ( Morreale et al. 2017 ). All dimensions of communication (linguistic, pragmatic, and social) are part of what is taught in school curricula at different levels. But pragmatic and social competencies are rarely explicitly taught as such. Work on social/emotional intelligence (and on its role in students’ personal and professional success) shows that these skills are both disparate and difficult to assess ( Humphrey et al. 2007 ). Research on this issue is, however, becoming increasingly rigorous, with the potential to provide usable data for the development of science-based practice ( Keefer et al. 2018 ). Teachers and pedagogical teams also have an important, changing role to play: they also need to master new information and communication technologies and the transmission of information through them ( Zlatić et al. 2014 ).

Communication has an obvious link with the three other Cs. Starting with critical thinking, sound communication implies fostering the conditions for a communicative exchange directed towards a common goal, which is, at least in educational and professional contexts, based on a fair evaluation of reality ( Pornpitakpan 2004 ). Collaboration too has a strong link with communication, because successful collaboration is highly dependent on the quality of knowledge sharing and trust that emerges between group members. Finally, creativity involves the communication of an idea to an audience and can involve high-quality communication when creative work occurs in a team context.

2.3.1. Individual Assessment of Communication

Given the vast field of communication, an exhaustive list of its evaluation methods is difficult to establish. A number of methods have been reported in the literature to assess an individual’s ability to communicate non-verbally and verbally. But although these two aspects are intrinsically linked, they are rarely measured together with a single tool. Moreover, as Spitzberg ( 2003 ) pointed out, communication skills are supported by different abilities, classically conceptualized as motivational functions (e.g., confidence and goal-orientation), knowledge (e.g., content and procedural knowledge), or cognitive and socio-cognitive functions (e.g., theory of mind, verbal cognition, emotional intelligence, and empathy; McDonald et al. 2014 ; Rothermich 2020 ), implying different specific types of evaluations. Finally, producing vs. receiving communication involve different skills and abilities, which can also vary according to the context ( Landa 2005 ).

To overcome these challenges, Spitzberg ( 2003 ) recommends the use of different assessment criteria. These criteria include the clarity of interaction, the understanding of what was involved in the interaction, the satisfaction of having interacted (expected to be higher when communication is effective), the efficiency of the interaction (the more competent someone is, the less effort, complexity, and resources will be needed to achieve their goal), its effectiveness or appropriateness (i.e., its relevance according to the context), as well as criteria relative to the quality of the dialogue (which involves coordination, cooperation, coherence, reciprocity, and mutuality in the exchange with others). Different forms of evaluation are also called for, such as self-reported questionnaires, hetero-reported questionnaires filled out by parents, teachers, or other observers, and tasks involving exposure to role-playing games, scenarios or videos (for a review of these assessment tools, see Cömert et al. 2016 ; Landa 2005 ; Sigafoos et al. 2008 ; Spitzberg 2003 ; van der Vleuten et al. 2019 ). Results from these tools must then be associated with others assessing underlying abilities, such as theory of mind and metacognition.

2.3.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Communication Skills

Although communication appears to be a key employability skill, the proficiency acquired during studies rarely meets the expectations of employers ( Jackson 2014 ). Communication must therefore become a priority in the training of students, beyond the sectors in which it is already known as essential (e.g., in medicine, nursing, engineering, etc.; Bourke et al. 2021 ; D’Alimonte et al. 2019 ; Peddle et al. 2018 ; Riemer 2007 ), and also through professional development ( Jackson 2014 ). Training programs involving, for example, communication theory classes ( Kruijver et al. 2000 ) and self-assessment tools that can be used in specific situations ( Curtis et al. 2013 ; Rider and Keefer 2006 ) have had convincingly positive results. The literature suggests that interactive approaches in small groups, in which competencies are practiced explicitly in an open and feedback-safe environment, are more effective ( Bourke et al. 2021 ; D’Alimonte et al. 2019 ; AbuSeileek 2012 ; Fryer-Edwards et al. 2006 ). These can take different forms: project-based work, video reviews, simulation or role-play games (see Hathaway et al. 2022 for a review; Schlegel et al. 2012 ). Finally, computer-assisted learning methods can be relevant for establishing a secure framework (especially, for example, when learning another language): anonymity indeed helps to overcome anxiety or social blockages linked to fear of public speaking or showing one’s difficulties ( AbuSeileek 2012 ). Each of these methods tackles one or more dimensions of communication that must then be assessed as such, by means of tools specifically developed and adapted to the contexts in which these skills are expressed (e.g., see the two 4Cs evaluation grids for institutions and for games outlined in Section 4 and Section 5 , below).

2.4. Collaboration

Collaborative problem solving—and more generally, collaboration—has gained increasing attention in national and international assessments (e.g., PISA) as an educational priority encompassing social, emotional, and cognitive skills critical to efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation in the modern global economy ( Graesser et al. 2018 ; OECD 2017 ). Understanding what makes effective collaboration is of crucial importance for professional practice and training ( Détienne et al. 2012 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ), as evidenced by the long line of research on group or team collaboration over the past 40 years (for a review, see e.g., Salas et al. 2004 ; Mathieu et al. 2017 ). Although there is no consensus on a definition of collaboration, scholars often see it as mutual engagement in a coordinated effort to achieve a common goal that involves the sharing of goals, resources, and representations relating to the joint activity of participants; and other important aspects relate to mutual respect, trust, responsibilities, and accountability within situational rules and norms ( Détienne et al. 2012 ).

In the teamwork research literature, skills are commonly described across three classes most often labeled Knowledge, Behavior, and Attitudes (e.g., Cannon-Bowers et al. 1995 ). Knowledge competencies refer to the skills related to elaborating the knowledge content required for the group to process and successfully achieve the task/goal to which they are assigned. Behavior includes skills related to the actualization of actions, coordination, communication, and interactions within the group as well as with any other relevant interlocutors for the task at hand. Note here that effective collaboration involves skills that have also been identified elsewhere as essential competencies, including communication, creativity, and critical thinking. Finally, several attitudes have been evidenced or hypothesized as desirable competencies in the team context, for example, attitude towards teamwork, collective orientation, cohesion/team morale, etc. Another common distinction lies between teamwork and taskwork. Teamwork refers to the collaborative, communicative, or social skills required to coordinate the work within the participants in order to achieve the task, whereas taskwork refers to specific aspects related to solving the task such as using the tools and knowing the procedure, policies, and any other task-related activities ( Salas et al. 2015 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ). Furthermore, collaborative competences can have specific (to a group of people or to a task) and general dimensions (i.e., easily transferable to any group or team situation and to other tasks). For example, skills related to communication, information exchange, conflict management, maintaining attention and motivation, leadership, etc. are present and transferable to a large number of group work situations and tasks (team-generic and task-contingent skills). Other skills can, on the other hand, be more specific to a team or group, such as internal organization, motivation, knowledge of the skills distributed in the team, etc.

2.4.1. Individual Assessment of Collaboration

Assessing collaboration requires capturing the dynamic and multi-level nature of the collaboration process, which is not as easily quantifiable as group/team inputs and outputs (task performance, satisfaction, and changes at group/team and individual level). There are indeed multiple interactions between the context, the collaboration processes, the task processes, and their (various) outcomes ( Détienne et al. 2012 ). The integrative concept of “quality of collaboration” ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ) encapsulates much of what is currently known about collaborative processes and what constitutes effective collaboration. According to this approach, collaborative processes can be grouped along several dimensions concerning communication processes such as grounding, task-related processes (e.g., exchanges of knowledge relevant for the task at hand), and organization/coordination processes ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ). Communication processes are most important for ensuring the construction of a common referential within a group of collaborators. Task-related processes relate to how the group resolves the task at hand by sharing and co-elaborating knowledge, by confronting their various perspectives, and by converging toward negotiated solutions. Collaboration also involves group management activities such as: (a) common goal management and coordination activities, e.g., allocation and planning of tasks; (b) meeting/interaction management activities, e.g., ordering and postponing of topics in the meeting. Finally, the ability to pursue reflexive activity, in the sense of reflecting not only on the content of a problem or solution but on one’s collaboration and problem-solving strategies, is critical for the development of the team and supports them in changing and improving their practices. Graesser et al. ( 2018 ) identify collaborative skills based on the combination of these dimensions with a step in the problem-solving process.

A large body of methodology developed to assess collaboration processes and collaborative tools has been focused on quantifying a restricted subset of fine-grained interactions (e.g., number of speakers’ turns; number of words spoken; number of interruptions; amount of grounding questions). This approach has at least two limitations. First, because these categories of analysis are often ad hoc with respect to the considered situation, they are difficult to apply in all situations and make it difficult to compare between studies. Second, quantitative variations of most of these indicators are non-univocal: any increase or decrease of them could signify either an interactive–intensive collaboration or else evidence of major difficulties in establishing and/or maintaining the collaboration ( Détienne et al. 2012 ). Alternatively, qualitative approaches based on multidimensional views of collaboration provide a more elaborated or nuanced view of collaboration and are useful for identifying potential relationships between distinctive dimensions of collaboration and aspects of team performance, in order to identify processes that could be improved. Based on the method of Spada et al. ( 2005 ) in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) research, Burkhardt et al. ( 2009 ) have proposed a multi-dimensional rating scheme for evaluating the quality of collaboration (QC) in technology-mediated design. QC distinguishes seven dimensions, grouped along five aspects, identified as central for collaboration in a problem-solving task such as design: communication (1, 2), task-oriented processes (3, 4), group-oriented processes (5), symmetry in interaction—an orthogonal dimension—(6), and individual task orientation (7). This method has recently been adapted for use in the context of assessing games as a support to collaborative skills learning.

2.4.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Collaboration and Collaborative Skills

Support for individuals’ development of collaborative skills provided by institutions and programs can take a variety of forms: (a) through the social impact of the physical structure of the organization, (b) the nature of the work required within the curriculum, (c) content within the curriculum focusing on collaboration and collaborative skills, and (d) the existence and promotion of extracurricular and inter-institutional opportunities for collaboration.

For instance, institutional support for collaboration has taken a variety of forms in various fields such as healthcare, engineering, public participation, and education. Training and education programs such as Interprofessional Education or Team Sciences in the health domain ( World Health Organization 2010 ; Hager et al. 2016 ; O’Carroll et al. 2021 ), Peer-Led Team Learning in chemistry and engineering domains ( Wilson and Varma-Nelson 2016 ), or Collaborative Problem Solving in education ( Peña-López 2017 ; Taddei 2009 ) are notable examples.

Contextual support recently arose from the deployment of online digital media and new mixed realities in the workplace, in the learning environments and in society at large—obviously stimulated and accentuated with the COVID-19 pandemic. This has led many organizations to invest in proposing support for synchronous and asynchronous collaboration (notably remote, between employees, between students and educators or within group members, etc.) in various ways, including the provision of communication hardware and software, computer-supported cooperative work and computer-supported collaborative learning platforms, training and practical guides, etc. Users can collaborate through heterogeneous hybrid collaborative interaction spaces that can be accessed through virtual or augmented reality, but also simple video conferencing or even a voice-only or text-only interface. These new spaces for collaboration are, however, often difficult to use and less satisfactory than face-to-face interactions, suggesting the need for more research on collaborative activities and on how to support them ( Faidley 2018 ; Karl et al. 2022 ; Kemp and Grieve 2014 ; Singh et al. 2022 ; Waizenegger et al. 2020 ).

A substantive body of literature on teams, collaborative learning, and computer-supported technologies provides evidence related to individual, contextual, and technological factors impacting the collaboration quality and efficiency. For example, teacher-based skills that are critical for enhancing collaboration are, among others, the abilities to plan, monitor, support, consolidate, and reflect upon student interaction in group work ( Kaendler et al. 2016 ). Research focuses also on investigating the most relevant tasks and evaluating the possibilities offered by technology to support, to assess (e.g., Nouri et al. 2017 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ), and/or to learn the skills involved in pursuing effective and satisfying collaboration (see e.g., Schneider et al. 2018 ; Doyle 2021 ; Ainsworth and Chounta 2021 ).

3. Labelization: Valorization of the 4Cs and Assessing Support for Their Development

Moving from the nature of the 4Cs and their individual assessment and towards the ways in which institutions can support their development in individuals, we can now address the fundamentally important question of how best to support and promote this 21st century educational mission within and among institutions themselves. This also raises the question of the systemic recognition of educational settings that are conducive to the development of the 4Cs. In response to these questions, the nature and value of labelization is now presented.

A label is “a special mark created by a trusted third party and displayed on a product intended for sale, to certify its origin, to guarantee its quality and to ensure its conformity with the standards of practices in force” ( Renard 2005 ). A label is therefore a way of informing the public about the objective properties and qualities of a product, service, or system. The label is usually easily identifiable and can be seen as a proof that a product or service, a company, or an organization complies with defined criteria. Its effectiveness is therefore closely linked to the choice of requirements set out in its specifications, as well as to the independence and rigor of the body that verifies compliance with the criteria.

3.1. Labeling as a Means of Trust and Differentiation

As a sign of recognition established by a third party, the label or certification can constitute a proof of trust aiming to reassure the final consumer. According to Sutter ( 2005 ), there are different means of signaling trust. First, the brand name of a product or service and its reputation can, in itself, constitute a label when this brand name is recognized on the market. Second, various forms of self-declaration, such as internal company charters, though not statements assessed by a third party, show an internal commitment that can provide reassurance. Finally, there is certification or labeling, which is awarded by an external body and requires a third-party assessment by a qualified expert, according to criteria set out in a specific reference framework. It is this external body, a trusted third party, which guarantees the reliability of the label and constitutes a guarantee of credibility. Its objectivity and impartiality are meant to guarantee that the company, organization, product, or service meets defined quality or reliability criteria ( Jahn et al. 2005 ).

Research on populations around the world (e.g., Amron 2018 ; Sasmita and Suki 2015 ) show that the buying decisions of consumers are heavily influenced by the trust they have in a brand. More specifically, third-party assurances and labelization have been shown to strongly influence customer buying intentions and purchasing behavior (e.g., Kimery and McCord 2002 ; Lee et al. 2004 ). Taking France as an example, research shows that quality certification is seen as “important” or “significant” by 76% of companies ( Chameroy and Veran 2014 ), and decision makers feel more confident and are more willing to invest with the support of third-party approval than if their decision is merely based on the brand’s reputation or its demonstrated level of social responsibility ( Etilé and Teyssier 2016 ). Indeed, French companies with corporate social responsibility labels have been shown to have higher than average growth rates, and the adoption of quality standards is linked with a 7% increase in the share of export turnover ( Restout 2020 ).

3.2. Influence on Choice and Adoption of Goods and Services

Studies diverge in this area, but based on the seminal work of Parkinson ( 1975 ); Chameroy and Veran ( 2014 ), in their research on the effect of labels on willingness to pay, found that in 75% of cases, products with labels are chosen and preferred to those without labels, demonstrating the impact of the label on customer confidence—provided that it is issued by a recognized third party. Thus, brands that have good reputations tend to be preferred over cheaper new brands, because they are more accepted and valued by the individual social network ( Zielke and Dobbelstein 2007 ).

3.3. Process of Labelizing Products and Services

The creation of a label may be the result of a customer or market need, a request from a private sector of activity or from the government. Creating a label involves setting up a working group including stakeholders who are experts in the field, product managers, and a certification body in order to elaborate a reference framework. This is then reviewed by a specialized committee and validated by the stakeholders. The standard includes evaluation criteria that must be clearly defined ( Mourad 2017 ). An audit system is set up by a trusted third party. It must include the drafting of an audit report, a system for making decisions on labeling, and a system for identifying qualified assessors. The validity of the assessment process is reinforced by this double evaluation: a first level of audit carried out by a team of experts according to a clearly defined set of criteria and a second level of decision making assuring that the methodology and the result of the audit are in conformity with the defined reference framework.

3.4. Labelization of 21st Century Skills

The world of education is particularly concerned by the need to develop and assess 21st century skills, because it represents the first link in the chain of skills acquisition, preparing the human resources of tomorrow. One important means of simultaneously offering a reliable, independent assessment of 21st century skills and valorizing them by making them a core target within an educational system (schools, universities, and teaching and training programs of all kinds) is labelization. Two examples of labelization processes related to 21st century skills were recently developed by the International Institute for Competency Development ( 2021 ; see iicd.net; accessed on 20 November 2022) working with international experts, teachers, and researchers from the University of Paris Cité (formerly Université Sorbonne Paris Cité), Oxford University, and AFNOR UK (an accredited certification body and part of AFNOR International, a subsidiary of the AFNOR group, the only standards body in France).

The last two or three decades has seen the simultaneous rise of international ranking systems and an interest in quality assurance and assessment in an increasingly competitive educational market ( Sursock 2021 ). The aim of these labelization frameworks is to assist in the development of “quality culture” in education by offering individual programs, institutions, and systems additional independent, reliable means of benchmarking, charting progress, and distinguishing themselves based on their capacity to support and promote the development of crucial skills. Importantly, the external perspectives provided by such assessment system should be capable of being individually adapted and applied in a manner that can resist becoming rigidly imposed external standards ( Sursock and Vettori 2017 ). Similarly, as we have seen in the literature review, the best approach to understanding and assessing a particular C is from a combination of different levels and perspectives in context. For example, important approaches to critical thinking have been made from educationally, philosophically, and psychologically focused vantage points ( Lai 2011 ). We can also argue that understandings of creativity are also results of different approaches: the major models in the literature (e.g., the “4Ps” and “7Cs” models; see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ) explicitly result from and include the objectives of different education-focused, process-focused, and “ingredient” or component-focused approaches.

The two assessment frameworks outlined in the sections that follow were formulated with these different perspectives and objective needs in mind. Given the complexity and very different natures of their respective targets (i.e., one assessing entire formal educational contexts such as institutions or programs, whereas the other targets the less multi-dimensional, informal educational activities represented by games), the assessment of the individual Cs also represents what experts consider a target-appropriate balance of education- and curriculum-focused, process-focused, and component-focused criteria for assessing each different C.

4. The International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Competencies 4Cs Assessment Framework for Institutions and Programs

One comprehensive attempt to operationalize programmatic-level and institutional-level support for the development of the 4Cs is the International Institute for Competency Development’s 4Cs Assessment Framework ( International Institute for Competency Development 2021 ). Based upon expert opinion and a review of the available literature, this evaluation grid is a practical tool that divides each of the 4Cs into three “user-friendly” but topic-covering components (see Table 1 and definitions and further discussion in the sections that follow). Each of these components is then assessed across seven dimensions (see Table 2 , below), designed to cover concisely the pedagogical process and the educational context. Examples for each point level are provided within the evaluation grid in order to offer additional clarity for educational stakeholders and expert assessors.

Three different components of each C in IICD’s 21st Century Skills 4Cs Assessment Framework.

Seven dimensions evaluated for the 3 different components of each C.

* Educational-level dependent and potentially less available for younger students or in some contexts.

The grid itself can be used in several important and different ways by different educational stakeholders: (1) by the institution itself in its self-evaluation and possible preparation for a certification or labelization process, (2) as an explicit list of criteria for external evaluation of the institution and its 4Cs-related programs, and (3) as a potential long-term development targeting tool for the institution or the institution in dialogue with the labelization process.

4.1. Evaluation Grid for Creativity

Dropping the component of “creative person” that is not relevant at the institutional level, this evaluation grid is based on Rhodes’ ( 1961 ) classic “4P” model of creativity, which remains the most concise model today ( Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ). The three “P” components retained are: creative process , creative environment , and creative product . Creative process refers to the acquisition of a set of tools and techniques that students can use to enhance the creativity of their thinking and work. Creative environment (also called “Press” in earlier literature) is about how the physical and social surroundings of students can help them be more creative. Finally, creative product refers to the evaluation of actual “productions” (e.g., a piece of art, text, speech, etc.) generated through the creative process.

4.2. Evaluation Grid for Critical Thinking

Our evaluation grid divides critical thinking into three main components: critical thinking about the world , critical thinking about oneself (self-reflection), as well as critical action and decision making . The first component refers to having an evidence-based view of the exterior world, notably by identifying and evaluating sources of information and using them to question current understandings and solve problems. Self-reflection refers to thinking critically about one’s own life situation, values, and actions; it presupposes the autonomy of thought and a certain distance as well as the most objective observation possible with regard to one’s own knowledge (“meta-cognition”). The third and final component, critical action and decision making, is about using critical thinking skills more practically in order to make appropriate life decisions as well as to be open to different points of view. This component also addresses soft skills and attitudes such as trusting information.

Our evaluation framework for critical thinking was in part inspired by Barnett’s “curriculum for critical being” (2015), whose model distinguishes two axes: one defined by the qualitative differences in the level of criticality attained and the second comprised of three different domains of application: formal knowledge, the self, and the world. The first two components of our framework (and the seven dimensions on which they are rated) reflect and encompass these three domains. Similar to Barrett’s proposal, our third rubric moves beyond the “skills-plus-dispositions” model of competency implicit in much theorizing about critical thinking and adds the importance of “action”—not just the ability to think critically and the disposition to do so, but the central importance of training and practicing “critical doing” ( Barnett 2015 ). Critical thinking should also be exercised collectively by involving students in collective thinking, facilitating the exchange of ideas and civic engagement ( Huber and Kuncel 2016 ).

4.3. Evaluation Grid for Collaboration

The first component of collaboration skills in the IICD grid is engagement and participation , referring to the active engagement in group work. Perspective taking and openness concerns the flexibility to work with and accommodate other group members and their points of view. The final dimension— social regulation —is about being able to reach for a common goal, notably through compromise and negotiation, as well as being aware of the different types of roles that group members can hold ( Hesse et al. 2015 ; Rusdin and Ali 2019 ; Care et al. 2016 ). (These last two components include elements of leadership, character, and emotional intelligence as sometimes described in other soft-skill and competency-related systems.) Participation, social regulation, and perspective taking have been identified as central social skills in collaborative problem solving ( Hesse et al. 2015 ). Regarding social regulation in this context, recognizing and profiting from group diversity is key ( Graesser et al. 2018 ). When describing an assessment in an educational setting of collaborative problem solving (with a task in which two or more students have to collaborate in order to solve it, each using a different set of resources), two main underpinning skills were described for the assessment: the social skill of audience awareness (“how to adapt one’s own behavior to suit the needs of the task and the partner’s requirements”, Care et al. 2016, p. 258 ) and the cognitive skill of planning and executing (developing a plan to reach for a goal) ( Care et al. 2016 ). The former is included in the perspective taking and openness rubric and the latter in the social regulation component in the IICD grid. Evans ( 2020 ) identified four main collaboration skills consistently mentioned in the scientific literature that are assessed in the IICD grid: the ability to plan and make group decisions (example item from the IICD grid: teachers provide assistance to students to overcome differences and reach a common goal during group work); the ability to communicate about thinking with the group (assessed notably in the meta-reflection strand of the IICD grid); the ability to contribute resources, ideas, and efforts and support group members (included notably in the engagement and participation as well as the social regulation components); and finally, the ability to monitor, reflect, and adapt individual and group processes to benefit the group (example item from the IICD grid: students use perspective-taking tools and techniques in group activities).

4.4. Evaluation Grid for Communication

The evaluation grid for communication is also composed of three dimensions: message formulation, message delivery, and message and communication feedback . Message formulation refers to the ability to design and structure a message to be sent, such as outlining the content of an argument. Message delivery is about effectively transmitting verbal and non-verbal aspects of a message. Finally, message and communication feedback refers to the ability of students and teachers to understand their audience, analyze their social surroundings, and interpret information in context. Other components of communication skills such as theory of mind, empathy, or emotional intelligence are also relevant and included in the process of applying the grid. Thompson ( 2020 ) proposes a four-component operationalized definition of communication for its assessment in students. First, they describe a comprehension strand covering the understanding and selection of adequate information from a range of sources. Message formulation in the IICD grid captures this dimension through its focus on content analysis and generation. Second, the presentation of information and ideas is mentioned in several different modes, adjusted to the intended audience, verbally as well as non-verbally. The message delivery component of the IICD grid focuses on these points. Third, the authors note the importance of communication technology and its advanced use. The IICD grid also covers the importance of technology use in its tools and techniques category, with, for example, an item that reads: students learn to effectively use a variety of formats of communication (social media, make a video, e-mail, letter writing, creating a document). Finally, Thompson ( 2020 ) describes the recognition of cultural and other differences as an important aspect of communication. The IICD grid aims at incorporating these aspects, notably in the meta-reflection category under each of the three dimensions.

5. Assessing the 4Cs in Informal Educational Contexts: The Example of Games

5.1. the 4cs in informal educational contexts.

So far, the focus has been on rather formal ways of nurturing the 4Cs. Although institutions and training programs are perhaps the most significant and necessary avenues of education, they are not the sole context in which 4Cs’ learning and improvement can manifest. One other important potential learning context is game play. Games are activities that are present and participated in throughout human society—by those of all ages, genders, and socio-economic statuses ( Bateson and Martin 2013 ; Huizinga 1949 ; Malaby 2007 ). This informal setting can also provide favorable conditions to help improve the 4Cs ( van Rosmalen et al. 2014 ) and should not be under-appreciated. Games provide a unique environment for learning, as they can foster a space to freely explore possibilities and one’s own potential ( de Freitas 2006 ). We argue that games are a significant potential pathway for the improvement of the 4Cs, and as such, they merit the same attention as more formal ways of learning and developing competencies.

5.2. 4Cs Evaluation Framework for Games

Compared to schools and educational institutions, the focus of IICD’s evaluation framework for games (see International Institute for Competency Development 2021 ) is more narrow. Thus, it is fundamentally different from the institutional grid: games, complex and deep as they can sometimes be, cannot directly be compared to the complexity of a school curriculum and all the programs it contains. The evaluation of a game’s effectiveness for training/improving a given C rests on the following principle: if a game presents affordances conducive to exercising a given skill, engaged playing of that game should help improve that skill.

The game’s evaluation grid is scored based on two criteria. For example, as a part of a game’s rating as a tool for the development of creativity, we determine the game must first meet two conditions. First, whether or not the game allows the opportunity for creativity to manifest itself: if creativity cannot occur in the game, it is obviously not eligible to receive ratings for that C. Second, whether or not creativity is needed in order to perform well in the game: if the players can win or achieve success in the game without needing creativity, this also means it cannot receive a rating for that C. If both conditions are met, however, the game will be considered potentially effective to improve creativity through the practice of certain components of creative behavior. This basic principle applies for all four of the Cs.

As outlined in Table 3 , below, the evaluation grid for each of the four Cs is composed of five components relevant to games that are different for each of the Cs. The grid works as follows: for each of the five components of each C, we evaluate the game on a list of sub-components using two yes/no scales: one for whether it is “possible” for that subcomponent to manifest and one for whether that sub-component is “required for success” in the game. This evaluation is done for all sub-components. After this, each general component is rated on the same two indicators. If 60% (i.e., three out of five) or more sub-components are positively rated as required, the general component is considered required. Then, the game is evaluated on its effectiveness for training and improving each of the 4Cs. If 60% or more components are positively rated as required, the game will be labelized as having the potential to be effective for training and improving the corresponding C.

Five different components evaluated for each C by the 4Cs assessment framework for games.

The evaluation grid for creativity is based on the multivariate model of creative potential (see Section 2.1.1 and Lubart et al. 2013 for more information) and is composed of four cognitive factors and one conative factor: originality , divergent thinking , convergent thinking , mental flexibility , and creative dispositions . Originality refers to the generation of ideas that are novel or unexpected, depending on the context. Divergent thinking corresponds to the generation of multiple ideas or solutions. Convergent thinking refers to the combination of multiple ideas and the selection of the most creative idea. Mental flexibility entails changing perspectives on a given problem and breaking away from initial ideas. Finally, creative dispositions concerns multiple personality-related factors conducive to creativity, such as openness to experience or risk taking.

The evaluation grid for critical thinking echoes Halpern’s ( 1998 ) as well as Marin and Halpern’s ( 2011 ) considerations for teaching this skill, that is, taking into consideration thinking skills, metacognition, and dispositions. The five components of the critical thinking grid are: goal-adequate discernment, objective thinking, metacognition, elaborate reasoning, and uncertainty management. Goal-adequate discernment entails the formulation of inferences and the discernment of contradictions when faced with a problem. Objective thinking corresponds to the suspension of one’s own judgment and the analysis of affirmations and sources in the most objective manner possible. Metacognition, here, is about questioning and reassessing information, as well as the awareness of one’s own cognitive biases. Elaborate reasoning entails reasoning in a way that is cautious, thorough, and serious. Finally, uncertainty management refers to the dispositional propensity to tolerate ambiguity and accept doubt.

The evaluation grid for collaboration is based on the quality of collaboration (QC) method ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ; see Section 2.4.2 for more details) and is composed of the following five components: collaboration fluidity, well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision, balance of contribution, organization and coordination, and cognitive syncing, input, and support. Collaboration fluidity entails the absence of speech overlap and the presence of a good flow in terms of turns to speak. Well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision is about contributing to the discussion and task at hand, as well as participating in discussions and arguments, in order to obtain a consensus. Balance of contribution refers to having equal or equivalent contributions to organization, coordination, and decision making. Organization and coordination refers to effective management of roles, time, and “deadlines”, as well as the attribution of roles depending on participants’ skills. Finally, cognitive syncing, input, and support is about bringing ideas and resources to the group, as well as supporting and reinforcing other members of the group.

The five components used to evaluate communication in games include both linguistic, pragmatic, and social aspects. Linguistic skills per se are captured by the mastery of written and spoken language component. This component assesses language comprehension and the appropriate use of vocabulary. Pragmatic skills are captured by the verbal and non-verbal communication components and refer to the efficient use of verbal and body signals in the context of the game to achieve one’s communicative goals ( Grassmann 2014 ; Matthews 2014 ). Finally, the grid also evaluates social skills with its two last components, social interactions and social cognition, which, respectively, refer to the ability to interact with others appropriately—including by complying with the rules of the game—and to the understanding of other people’ mental states ( Tomasello 2005 ).

6. Discussion and Conclusions

Each of the 4Cs is a broad, multi-faceted concept that is the subject of a tremendous amount of research and discussion by a wide range of stakeholders in different disciplines, professions, and parts of the educational establishment. The development of evaluation frameworks to allow support for the 4Cs to be assessed and publicly recognized, using a label, is an important step for promoting and fostering these skills in educational contexts. As illustrated by IICD’s 4Cs Framework for educational institutions and programs, as well as its games/activities evaluation grid, the specific criteria to detect support for each C can vary depending upon the educational context (e.g., formal and institutional level or informal and at the activity level). Yet considering the 4Cs together highlights some additional observations, current challenges, and opportunities for the future that are worthy of discussion.

6.1. Interrelationships between the 4Cs and a New Model for Use in Pedagogy and Policy Promotion

One very important issue for understanding the 4Cs and their educational implementation that can be simultaneously a help and a hindrance for teaching them—and also a challenge when assessing them—is their multidimensionality and interrelatedness. In other words, the 4Cs are not entirely separate entities but instead, as Figure 2 shows, should be seen as four interlinked basic “elements” for future-oriented education that can help individuals in their learning process and, together, synergistically “bootstrap” the development of their cognitive potentials. Lamri and Lubart ( 2021 ), for example, found a certain base level of creativity was a necessary but not sufficient condition for success in managerial tasks, but that high-level performance required a combination of all four Cs. Some thinkers have argued that one cannot be creative without critical thinking, which also requires creativity, for example, to come up with alternative arguments (see Paul and Elder 2006 ). Similarly, among many other interrelationships, there is no collaboration without communication—and even ostensibly individual creativity is a “collaboration” of sorts with the general culture and precursors in a given field. As a result, it ranges from impossible to suboptimal to teach (or teach towards) one of the 4Cs without involving one or more of the others, and this commingling also underscores the genuine need and appropriateness of assessing them together.

“‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: a Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs”. (Illustration of the interplay and interpenetration of creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication shown in dimensional space according to their differing cognitive/individual vs. social/interpersonal emphases; (© 2023, Branden Thornhill-Miller. All Rights Reserved. thornhill-miller.com; accessed on 20 January 2023)).

From this perspective, Thornhill-Miller ( 2021 ) proposed a “dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs” and their interrelated contributions to the future of education and work. Presented in Figure 2 , this model is meant to serve as a visual and conceptual aid for understanding the 4Cs and their interrelationships, thereby also promoting better use and understanding of them in pedagogical and policy settings. In addition to suggesting the portmanteau of “crea-critical thinking” as a new term to describe the overlap of much of the creative and critical thinking processes, the title of this model, “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”, is a verbal representation of the fluid four-way interrelationship between the 4Cs visually represented in Figure 2 (a title meant to playfully repackage the 4Cs for important pedagogical and policy uses). This model goes further to suggest some dimensional differences in emphases that, roughly speaking, also often exist among the 4Cs: that is to say, the frequently greater emphasis on cognitive or individual elements at play in creativity and critical thinking in comparison to the social and interpersonal aspects more central to communication and collaboration ( Thornhill-Miller 2021 ).

Similarly focused on the need to promote a phase change towards future-oriented education, Lucas ( 2019 ) and colleagues have suggested conflating creative thinking and critical thinking in order to propose “3Cs” (creative thinking, communication, and collaboration) as new “foundational literacies” to symmetrically add to the 3Rs (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic) of previous educational eras. Although we applaud these efforts, from our applied research perspective, we believe that the individual importance of, and distinct differences between, creative thinking and critical thinking support preserving them both as separate constructs in order to encourage the greatest development of each of them. Moreover, if only three categories were somehow required or preferable, one could argue that uniting communication and collaboration (as “collab-ication” suggests) might be preferable—particularly also given the fact that substantial aspects of communication are already covered within the 3Rs. In any case, we look forward to more such innovations and collaborations in this vibrant and important area of work at the crossroads between research, pedagogy, and policy development.

6.2. Limitations and Future Work

The rich literature in each of the 4Cs domains shows the positive effects of integrating these dimensions into educational and professional curricula. At the same time, the complexity of their definitions makes them difficult to assess, both in terms of reliability (assessment must not vary from one measurement to another) and of validity (tests must measure that which they are intended to measure). However, applied research in this area is becoming increasingly rigorous, with a growing capacity to provide the necessary tools for evidence-based practice. The development of these practices should involve interdisciplinary teams of teachers and other educational practitioners who are equipped and trained accordingly. Similarly, on the research side, further exploration and clarification of subcomponents of the 4Cs and other related skills will be important. Recent efforts to clarify the conceptual overlap and hierarchical relations of soft skills for the future of education and work, for example, have been helpful and promising (e.g., Joie-La Marle et al. 2022 ; Lamri et al. 2022 ). But the most definitive sort of taxonomy and measurement model that we are currently lacking might only be established based on the large-scale administration of a comprehensive battery of skill-measuring psychometric tests on appropriate cross sections of society.

The rapid development and integration of new technologies will also aid and change the contexts, resources, and implementation of the 4Cs. For example, the recent developments make it clear that the 4Cs will be enhanced and changed by interaction with artificially intelligence, even as 4Cs-related skills will probably, for the same reason, increasingly constitute the core of available human work in the future (see, e.g., Ross 2018 ). Similarly, research on virtual reality and creativity suggest that VR environments assist and expand individual and collaborative creativity ( Bourgeois-Bougrine et al. 2022 ). Because VR technologies offer the possibility of enhanced and materially enriched communication, collaboration, and information availability, they not only allow for the enhancement of creativity techniques but also for similar expansions and improvements on almost all forms of human activity (see Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 )—including the other three Cs.

6.3. Conclusion: Labelization of the 4Cs and the Future of Education and Work

Traditional educational approaches cannot meet the educational needs of our emergent societies if they do not teach, promote, and assess in line with the new learner characteristics and contexts of the 21st century ( Sahin 2009 ). The sort of future-oriented change and development required by this shift in institutional practices, programming, and structure will likely meet with significant resistance from comfortably entrenched (and often outdated) segments of traditional educational and training establishments. Additional external evaluation and monitoring is rarely welcome by workers in any context. We believe, however, that top-down processes from the innovative and competition-conscious administrative levels will be met by bottom-up demands from students and education consumers to support these institutional changes. And we contend that efforts such as labelizing 4C processes will serve to push educators and institutions towards more relevant offerings, oriented towards the future of work and helping build a more successful future for all.

In the end, the 4Cs framework seems to be a manageable, focused model for modernizing education, and one worthy of its growing prevalence in the educational and research marketplace for a number of reasons. These reasons include the complexity and cumbersome nature of larger alternative systems and the 4Cs’ persuasive presence at the core of a number of early and industry-driven frameworks. In addition, the 4Cs have benefitted from their subsequent promotion by organizations such as the OECD and the World Economic Forum, as well as some more direct support from recent empirical research. The promotion, teaching, and assessment of the 4Cs will require a complex social intervention and mobilization of educational resources—a major shift in pedagogy and institutional structures. Yet the same evolving digital technologies that have largely caused the need for these massive, rapid changes can also assist in the implementation of solutions ( van Laar et al. 2017 ). To the extent that future research also converges on such a model (that has already been found pedagogically useful and policy-friendly by so many individuals and organizations), the 4Cs framework has the potential to become a manageable core for 21st century skills and the future of education and work—one that stakeholders with various agendas can already begin building on for a better educational and economic future together.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.T.-M. and T.L.; writing—original draft preparation, B.T.-M., A.C., M.M., J.-M.B., T.M., S.B.-B., S.E.H., F.V., M.A.-L., C.F., D.S., F.M.; writing—review and editing, B.T.-M., A.C., T.L., J.-M.B., C.F.; visualization, B.T.-M.; supervision, B.T.-M., T.L.; project administration, B.T.-M., T.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

B.T.-M. and T.L. are unpaid academic co-founder and project collaborator for the International Institute for Competency Development, whose labelization frameworks (developed in cooperation with Afnor International and the LaPEA lab of Université Paris Cité and Université Gustave Eiffel) are used as examples in this review. S.E.H. and M.A.-L. are employees of AFNOR International. No funding was received to support this research or article, which reflects the views of the scientists and researchers and not their organizations or companies.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

• Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Eugene, Waddington David I., Wade C. Anne, Persson Tonje. Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2015; 85 :275–314. doi: 10.3102/0034654314551063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• AbuSeileek Ali Farhan. The Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods and Group Size on the EFL Learners’ Achievement in Communication Skills. Computers & Education. 2012; 58 :231–39. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahern Aoife, Dominguez Caroline, McNally Ciaran, O’Sullivan John J., Pedrosa Daniela. A Literature Review of Critical Thinking in Engineering Education. Studies in Higher Education. 2019; 44 :816–28. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586325. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ainsworth Shaaron E., Chounta Irene-Angelica. The roles of representation in computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Cress Ulrike, Rosé Carolyn, Wise Alyssa Friend, Oshima Jun., editors. International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Springer; Cham: 2021. pp. 353–69. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alsaleh Nada J. Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]; The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. 2020 19 :21–39. Available online: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1239945.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Al-Samarraie Hosam, Hurmuzan Shuhaila. A Review of Brainstorming Techniques in Higher Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2018; 27 :78–91. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amabile Teresa M. Social Psychology of Creativity: A Consensual Assessment Technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1982; 43 :997–1013. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amron Manajemen Pemasaran. The influence of brand image, brand trust, product quality, and price on the consumer’s buying decision of MPV cars. European Scientific Journal. 2018; 14 :228–39. doi: 10.19044/esj.2018.v14n13p228. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ananiadoui Katerina, Claro Magdalean. 21st Century Skills and Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2009. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bailin Sharon. Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity. Springer; Dordrecht: 1988. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandyopadhyay Subir, Szostek Jana. Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking: Assessing Critical Thinking of Business Students Using Multiple Measures. Journal of Education for Business. 2019; 94 :259–70. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2018.1524355. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barber Herbert F. Developing Strategic Leadership: The US Army War College Experience. Journal of Management Development. 1992; 11 :4–12. doi: 10.1108/02621719210018208. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnett Ronald. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan US; New York: 2015. A Curriculum for Critical Being; pp. 63–76. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bateson Patrick, Martin Paul. Play, Playfulness, Creativity and Innovation. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Batey Mark. The Measurement of Creativity: From Definitional Consensus to the Introduction of a New Heuristic Framework. Creativity Research Journal. 2012; 24 :55–65. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.649181. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Battelle for Kids Framework for 21st Century Learning Definitions. 2022. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_DefinitionsBFK.pdf
• Bellaera Lauren, Weinstein-Jones Yana, Ilie Sonia, Baker Sara T. Critical Thinking in Practice: The Priorities and Practices of Instructors Teaching in Higher Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2021; 41 :100856. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100856. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blessinger Patrick, Anchan John P. In: Democratizing Higher Education: International Comparative Perspectives. 1st ed. Blessinger Patrick, Anchan John P., editors. Routledge; London: 2015. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.routledge.com/Democratizing-Higher-Education-International-Comparative-Perspectives/Blessinger-Anchan/p/book/9781138020955 [ Google Scholar ]
• Bloom Benjamin Samuel., editor. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I, Cognitive Domain. Longmans; New York: 1956. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira. The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. Design Thinking. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira, Bonnardel Nathalie, Burkhardt Jean-Marie, Thornhill-Miller Branden, Pahlavan Farzaneh, Buisine Stéphanie, Guegan Jérôme, Pichot Nicolas, Lubart Todd. Immersive Virtual Environments’ Impact on Individual and Collective Creativity: A Review of Recent Research. European Psychologist. 2022; 27 :237–53. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000481. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourke Sharon L., Cooper Simon, Lam Louisa, McKenna Lisa. Undergraduate Health Professional Students’ Team Communication in Simulated Emergency Settings: A Scoping Review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2021; 60 :42–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.07.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brookfield Stephen D. Assessing Critical Thinking. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 1997; 75 :17–29. doi: 10.1002/ace.7502. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burkhardt Jean-Marie, Détienne Françoise, Hébert Anne-Marie, Perron Laurence. Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT 2009. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg: 2009. Assessing the ‘Quality of Collaboration’ in Technology-Mediated Design Situations with Several Dimensions; pp. 157–60. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Camarda Anaëlle, Bouhours Lison, Osmont Anaïs, Masson Pascal Le, Weil Benoît, Borst Grégoire, Cassotti Mathieu. Opposite Effect of Social Evaluation on Creative Idea Generation in Early and Middle Adolescents. Creativity Research Journal. 2021; 33 :399–410. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2021.1902174. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cannon-Bowers Janis, Tannenbaum Scott I., Salas Eduardo, Volpe Catherine E. Defining team competencies and establishing team training requirements. In: Guzzo Richard A., Salas Eduardo., editors. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations. Jossey-Bass; San Francisco: 1995. pp. 333–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Care Esther, Scoular Claire, Griffin Patrick. Assessment of Collaborative Problem Solving in Education Environments. Applied Measurement in Education. 2016; 29 :250–64. doi: 10.1080/08957347.2016.1209204. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Care Esther, Kim Helyn, Vista Alvin, Anderson Kate. Education System Alignment for 21st Century Skills: Focus on Assessment. Brookings Institution; Washington, DC: 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carmichael Erst, Farrell Helen. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Online Resources in Developing Student Critical Thinking: Review of Literature and Case Study of a Critical Thinking Online Site. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 2012; 9 :38–55. doi: 10.53761/1.9.1.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carson Shelley H., Peterson Jordan B., Higgins Daniel M. Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal. 2005; 17 :37–50. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Casey Betty J., Getz Sarah, Galvan Adriana. The Adolescent Brain. Developmental Review: DR. 2008; 28 :62–77. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2007.08.003. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cassotti Mathieu, Camarda Anaëlle, Poirel Nicolas, Houdé Olivier, Agogué Marine. Fixation Effect in Creative Ideas Generation: Opposite Impacts of Example in Children and Adults. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2016; 19 :146–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.10.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chameroy Fabienne, Veran Lucien. Immatérialité de La Qualité et Effet Des Labels Sur Le Consentement à Payer. Management International. 2014; 18 :32–44. doi: 10.7202/1025088ar. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiu Fa-Chung. Improving Your Creative Potential without Awareness: Overinclusive Thinking Training. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2015; 15 :1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2014.11.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chulvi Vicente, Mulet Elena, Chakrabarti Amaresh, López-Mesa Belinda, González-Cruz Carmen. Comparison of the Degree of Creativity in the Design Outcomes Using Different Design Methods. Journal of Engineering Design. 2012; 23 :241–69. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2011.624501. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cinque Maria. ‘Lost in Translation’. Soft Skills Development in European Countries. Tuning Journal for Higher Education. 2016; 3 :389–427. doi: 10.18543/tjhe-3(2)-2016pp389-427. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cömert Musa, Zill Jördis Maria, Christalle Eva, Dirmaier Jörg, Härter Martin, Scholl Isabelle. Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) - A Systematic Review of Rating Scales. PLoS ONE. 2016; 11 :e0152717. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152717. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corazza Giovanni Emanuele. Potential Originality and Effectiveness: The Dynamic Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal. 2016; 28 :258–67. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corazza Giovanni Emanuele, Darbellay Frédéric, Lubart Todd, Panciroli Chiara. Developing Intelligence and Creativity in Education: Insights from the Space–Time Continuum. In: Lemmetty Soila, Collin Kaija, Glăveanu Vlad, Forsman Panu., editors. Creativity and Learning. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. pp. 69–87. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cotter Katherine N., Beghetto Ronald A., Kaufman James C. Creativity in the Classroom: Advice for Best Practices. In: Lubart Todd, Botella Marion, Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira, Caroff Xavier, Guégan Jérôme, Mouchiroud Christohe, Nelson Julien, Zenasni Franck., editors. Homo Creativus. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. pp. 249–64. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Curtis J. Randall, Back Anthony L., Ford Dee W., Downey Lois, Shannon Sarah E., Doorenbos Ardith Z., Kross Erin K., Reinke Lynn F., Feemster Laura C., Edlund Barbara, et al. Effect of Communication Skills Training for Residents and Nurse Practitioners on Quality of Communication with Patients with Serious Illness: A Randomized Trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2013; 310 :2271. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.282081. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• D’Alimonte Laura, McLaney Elizabeth, Prospero Lisa Di. Best Practices on Team Communication: Interprofessional Practice in Oncology. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care. 2019; 13 :69–74. doi: 10.1097/SPC.0000000000000412. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Freitas Sara. Learning in Immersive Worlds: A Review of Game-Based Learning. JISC; Bristol: 2006. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearninginnovation/gamingreport_v3.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Détienne Françoise, Baker Michael, Burkhardt Jean-Marie. Perspectives on Quality of Collaboration in Design. CoDesign. 2012; 8 :197–99. doi: 10.1080/15710882.2012.742350. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diedrich Jennifer, Jauk Emanuel, Silvia Paul J., Gredlein Jeffrey M., Neubauer Aljoscha C., Benedek Mathias. Assessment of Real-Life Creativity: The Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA) Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2018; 12 :304–16. doi: 10.1037/aca0000137. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Doyle Denise. Creativity in the Twenty First Century. Edited by Anna Hui and Christian Wagner. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. Creative and Collaborative Practices in Virtual Immersive Environments; pp. 3–19. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drisko James W. Competencies and Their Assessment. Journal of Social Work Education. 2014; 50 :414–26. doi: 10.1080/10437797.2014.917927. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dul Jan, Ceylan Canan. Work Environments for Employee Creativity. Ergonomics. 2011; 54 :12–20. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2010.542833. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dumitru Daniela, Bigu Dragos, Elen Jan, Ahern Aoife, McNally Ciaran, O’Sullivan John. A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions. UTAD; Vila Real: 2018. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: http://repositorio.utad.pt/handle/10348/8320 [ Google Scholar ]
• Edelman Jonathan, Owoyele Babajide, Santuber Joaquin. Design Thinking in Education. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. Beyond Brainstorming: Introducing Medgi, an Effective, Research-Based Method for Structured Concept Development; pp. 209–32. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Etilé Fabrice, Teyssier Sabrina. Signaling Corporate Social Responsibility: Third-Party Certification versus Brands: Signaling CSR: Third-Party Certification versus Brands. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 2016; 118 :397–432. doi: 10.1111/sjoe.12150. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans Carla. Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Collaboration. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment; Dover: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione Peter Arthur. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test–College Level. Technical Report# 1. Experimental Validation and Content Validity. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]; 1990a Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED327549.pdf
• Facione Peter Arthur. Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. Research Findings and Recommendations. ERIC, Institute of Education Sciences; Washington, DC: 1990b. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. pp. 1–112. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED315423 [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione Peter Arthur. Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment. 2011; 2007 :1–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Faidley Joel. Ph.D. dissertation. East Tennessee State University; Johnson City, TN, USA: 2018. Comparison of Learning Outcomes from Online and Face-to-Face Accounting Courses. [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman Hershey H. Cognitive Biases That Interfere with Critical Thinking and Scientific Reasoning: A Course Module. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2017:1–60. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2958800. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fryer-Edwards Kelly, Arnold Robert M., Baile Walter, Tulsky James A., Petracca Frances, Back Anthony. Reflective Teaching Practices: An Approach to Teaching Communication Skills in a Small-Group Setting. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2006; 81 :638–44. doi: 10.1097/01.ACM.0000232414.43142.45. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glăveanu Vlad Petre. Rewriting the Language of Creativity: The Five A’s Framework. Review of General Psychology: Journal of Division 1, of the American Psychological Association. 2013; 17 :69–81. doi: 10.1037/a0029528. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glăveanu Vlad Petre. The Psychology of Creativity: A Critical Reading. Creativity Theories Research Applications. 2014; 1 :10–32. doi: 10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldenberg Olga, Wiley Jennifer. Quality, Conformity, and Conflict: Questioning the Assumptions of Osborn’s Brainstorming Technique. The Journal of Problem Solving. 2011; 3 :96–118. doi: 10.7771/1932-6246.1093. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graesser Arthur C., Sabatini John P., Li Haiying. Educational Psychology Is Evolving to Accommodate Technology, Multiple Disciplines, and Twenty-First-Century Skills. Annual Review of Psychology. 2022; 73 :547–74. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-113042. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graesser Arthur C., Fiore Stephen M., Greiff Samuel, Andrews-Todd Jessica, Foltz Peter W., Hesse Friedrich W. Advancing the Science of Collaborative Problem Solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2018; 19 :59–92. doi: 10.1177/1529100618808244. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grassmann Susanne. The pragmatics of word learning. In: Matthews Danielle., editor. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition. John Benjamins Publishing Company; Amsterdam: 2014. pp. 139–60. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hager Keri, St Hill Catherine, Prunuske Jacob, Swanoski Michael, Anderson Grant, Lutfiyya May Nawal. Development of an Interprofessional and Interdisciplinary Collaborative Research Practice for Clinical Faculty. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2016; 30 :265–67. doi: 10.3109/13561820.2015.1092951. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F. Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring. The American Psychologist. 1998; 53 :449–55. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F., Dunn Dana S. Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems. Journal of Intelligence. 2021; 9 :22. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020022. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hanover Research A Crosswalk of 21st Century Skills. 2012. [(accessed on 15 August 2022)]. Available online: http://www.hanoverresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/A-Crosswalk-of-21st-Century-Skills-Membership.pdf
• Hathaway Julia R., Tarini Beth A., Banerjee Sushmita, Smolkin Caroline O., Koos Jessica A., Pati Susmita. Healthcare Team Communication Training in the United States: A Scoping Review. Health Communication. 2022:1–26. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2022.2036439. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hesse Friedrich, Care Esther, Buder Juergen, Sassenberg Kai, Griffin Patrick. A Framework for Teachable Collaborative Problem Solving Skills. In: Griffin Patrick, Care Esther., editors. Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. Springer Netherlands; Dordrecht: 2015. pp. 37–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hitchcock David. Critical Thinking. In: Edward Nouri Zalta., editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition) Stanford University; Stanford: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Houdé Olivier. Inhibition and cognitive development: Object, number, categorization, and reasoning. Cognitive Development. 2000; 15 :63–73. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00015-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Houdé Olivier, Borst Grégoire. Measuring inhibitory control in children and adults: Brain imaging and mental chronometry. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5 :616. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00616. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huber Christopher R., Kuncel Nathan R. Does College Teach Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2016; 86 :431–68. doi: 10.3102/0034654315605917. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huizinga Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Elements in Culture. Routledge; London: 1949. [ Google Scholar ]
• Humphrey Neil, Curran Andrew, Morris Elisabeth, Farrell Peter, Woods Kevin. Emotional Intelligence and Education: A Critical Review. Educational Psychology. 2007; 27 :235–54. doi: 10.1080/01443410601066735. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• International Institute for Competency Development 21st Century Skills 4Cs Labelization. 2021. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://icd-hr21.org/offers/21st-century-competencies/
• Jackson Denise. Business Graduate Performance in Oral Communication Skills and Strategies for Improvement. The International Journal of Management Education. 2014; 12 :22–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2013.08.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahn Gabriele, Schramm Matthias, Spiller Achim. The Reliability of Certification: Quality Labels as a Consumer Policy Tool. Journal of Consumer Policy. 2005; 28 :53–73. doi: 10.1007/s10603-004-7298-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jauk Emanuel, Benedek Mathias, Neubauer Aljoscha C. The Road to Creative Achievement: A Latent Variable Model of Ability and Personality Predictors. European Journal of Personality. 2014; 28 :95–105. doi: 10.1002/per.1941. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Joie-La Marle Chantal, Parmentier François, Coltel Morgane, Lubart Todd, Borteyrou Xavier. A Systematic Review of Soft Skills Taxonomies: Descriptive and Conceptual Work. 2022. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: [ CrossRef ]
• Jones Stanley E., LeBaron Curtis D. Research on the Relationship between Verbal and Nonverbal Communication: Emerging Integrations. The Journal of Communication. 2002; 52 :499–521. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02559.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaendler Celia, Wiedmann Michael, Leuders Timo, Rummel Nikol, Spada Hans. Monitoring Student Interaction during Collaborative Learning: Design and Evaluation of a Training Program for Pre-Service Teachers. Psychology Learning & Teaching. 2016; 15 :44–64. doi: 10.1177/1475725716638010. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman Daniel. A Perspective on Judgment and Choice: Mapping Bounded Rationality. The American Psychologist. 2003; 58 :697–720. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan; New York: 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karl Katherine A., Peluchette Joy V., Aghakhani Navid. Virtual Work Meetings during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Good, Bad, and Ugly. Small Group Research. 2022; 53 :343–65. doi: 10.1177/10464964211015286. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keefer Kateryna V., Parker James D. A., Saklofske Donald H. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2018. Three Decades of Emotional Intelligence Research: Perennial Issues, Emerging Trends, and Lessons Learned in Education: Introduction to Emotional Intelligence in Education; pp. 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kemp Nenagh, Grieve Rachel. Face-to-Face or Face-to-Screen? Undergraduates’ Opinions and Test Performance in Classroom vs. Online Learning. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5 :1278. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kimery Kathryn, McCord Mary. Third-Party Assurances: Mapping the Road to Trust in E-retailing. The Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application. 2002; 4 :63–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohn Nicholas W., Smith Steven M. Collaborative Fixation: Effects of Others’ Ideas on Brainstorming. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2011; 25 :359–71. doi: 10.1002/acp.1699. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kowaltowski Doris C. C. K., Bianchi Giovana, de Paiva Valéria Teixeira. Methods That May Stimulate Creativity and Their Use in Architectural Design Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2010; 20 :453–76. doi: 10.1007/s10798-009-9102-z. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kruijver Irma P. M., Kerkstra Ada, Francke Anneke L., Bensing Jozien M., van de Wiel Harry B. M. Evaluation of Communication Training Programs in Nursing Care: A Review of the Literature. Patient Education and Counseling. 2000; 39 :129–45. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00096-8. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lai Emily R. Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson’s Research Reports. 2011; 6 :40–41. doi: 10.25148/lawrev.11.2.3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamri Jérémy, Lubart Todd. Creativity and Its’ Relationships with 21st Century Skills in Job Performance. Kindai Management Review. 2021; 9 :75–91. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamri Jérémy, Barabel Michel, Meier Olivier, Lubart Todd. Le Défi Des Soft Skills: Comment les Développer au XXIe Siècle? Dunod; Paris: 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Landa Rebecca J. Assessment of Social Communication Skills in Preschoolers: Assessing Social Communication Skills in Children. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews. 2005; 11 :247–52. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.20079. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee Sang M., Choi Jeongil, Lee Sang-Gun. The impact of a third-party assurance seal in customer purchasing intention. Journal of Internet Commerce. 2004; 3 :33–51. doi: 10.1300/J179v03n02_03. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis Arthur, Smith David. Defining Higher Order Thinking. Theory into Practice. 1993; 32 :131–37. doi: 10.1080/00405849309543588. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu Ou Lydia, Frankel Lois, Roohr Katrina Crotts. Assessing Critical Thinking in Higher Education: Current State and Directions for next-Generation Assessment: Assessing Critical Thinking in Higher Education. ETS Research Report Series. 2014; 2014 :1–23. doi: 10.1002/ets2.12009. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd. The 7 C’s of Creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior. 2017; 51 :293–96. doi: 10.1002/jocb.190. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Thornhill-Miller Branden. Creativity: An Overview of the 7C’s of Creative Thought. Heidelberg: Heidelberg University Publishing. 2019 doi: 10.17885/HEIUP.470.C6678. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Barbot Baptiste, Besançon Maud. Creative Potential: Assessment Issues and the EPoC Battery/Potencial Creativo: Temas de Evaluación y Batería EPoC. Estudios de Psicologia. 2019; 40 :540–62. doi: 10.1080/02109395.2019.1656462. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Zenasni Franck, Barbot Baptiste. Creative potential and its measurement. International Journal of Talent Development and Creativity. 2013; 1 :41–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Tubart, Thornhill-Miller Branden. Creativity in Law: Legal Professions and the Creative Profiler Approach. In: Masson Antoine, Robinson Gavin., editors. Mapping Legal Innovation: Trends and Perspectives. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. pp. 1–19. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubin Jeffrey, Hendrick Stephan, Thornhill-Miller Branden, Mercier Maxence, Lubart Todd. Creativity in Solution-Focused Brief Therapy Forthcoming.
• Lucas Bill. Why We Need to Stop Talking about Twenty-First Century Skills. Centre for Strategic Education; Melbourne: 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucas Bill. Creative Thinking in Schools across the World. The Global Institute of Creative Thinking; London: 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucas Bill, Claxton Guy. Wider Skills for Learning: What Are They, How Can They Be Cultivated, How Could They Be Measured and Why Are They Important for Innovation? NESTA; London: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Malaby Thomas M. Beyond Play: A New Approach to Games. Games and Culture. 2007; 2 :95–113. doi: 10.1177/1555412007299434. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marin Lisa M., Halpern Diane F. Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2011; 6 :1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mathieu John E., Hollenbeck John R., van Knippenberg Daan, Ilgen Daniel R. A Century of Work Teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. The Journal of Applied Psychology. 2017; 102 :452–67. doi: 10.1037/apl0000128. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matthews Danielle. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2014 doi: 10.1075/tilar.10. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald Skye, Gowland Alison, Randall Rebekah, Fisher Alana, Osborne-Crowley Katie, Honan Cynthia. Cognitive Factors Underpinning Poor Expressive Communication Skills after Traumatic Brain Injury: Theory of Mind or Executive Function? Neuropsychology. 2014; 28 :801–11. doi: 10.1037/neu0000089. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore Brooke Noel, Parker Richard. Critical Thinking. 20th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; New York: 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morreale Sherwyn P., Valenzano Joseph M., Bauer Janessa A. Why Communication Education Is Important: A Third Study on the Centrality of the Discipline’s Content and Pedagogy. Communication Education. 2017; 66 :402–22. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2016.1265136. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mourad Maha. Quality Assurance as a Driver of Information Management Strategy: Stakeholders’ Perspectives in Higher Education. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. 2017; 30 :779–94. doi: 10.1108/JEIM-06-2016-0104. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Education Association . Preparing 21st Century Students for a Global Society: An Educator’s Guide to the “Four Cs”. National Education Association; Alexandria: 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nouri Jalal, Åkerfeldt Anna, Fors Uno, Selander Staffan. Assessing Collaborative Problem Solving Skills in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments—The PISA Framework and Modes of Communication. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET) 2017; 12 :163. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v12i04.6737. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Carroll Veronica, Owens Melissa, Sy Michael, El-Awaisi Alla, Xyrichis Andreas, Leigh Jacqueline, Nagraj Shobhana, Huber Marion, Hutchings Maggie, McFadyen Angus. Top Tips for Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice Research: A Guide for Students and Early Career Researchers. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2021; 35 :328–33. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2020.1777092. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2017. PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . Framework for the Assessment of Creative Thinking in PISA 2021: Third Draft. OECD; Paris: 2019a. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . Future of Education and Skills 2030: A Series of Concept Notes. OECD Learning Compass; Paris: 2019b. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/learning-compass-2030/OECD_Learning_Compass_2030_Concept_Note_Series.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Osborn A. F. Applied Imagination. Charles Scribner’s Sons; New York: 1953. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parkinson Thomas L. The Role of Seals and Certifications of Approval in Consumer Decision-Making. The Journal of Consumer Affairs. 1975; 9 :1–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.1975.tb00545.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Partnership for 21st Century Skills . 21st Century Skills Education and Competitiveness: A Resource and Policy Guide. Partnership for 21st Century Skills; Tuscon: 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasquinelli Elena, Bronner Gérald. Éduquer à l’esprit critique. Bases théoriques et indications pratiques pour l’enseignement et la formation. Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale, de la JEUNESSE et des Sports; Paris: 2021. Rapport du Conseil Scientifique de l’Éducation Nationale. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasquinelli Elena, Farina Mathieu, Bedel Audrey, Casati Roberto. Naturalizing Critical Thinking: Consequences for Education, Blueprint for Future Research in Cognitive Science. Mind, Brain and Education: The Official Journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society. 2021; 15 :168–76. doi: 10.1111/mbe.12286. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul Richard, Elder Linda. Critical thinking: The nature of critical and creative thought. Journal of Developmental Education. 2006; 30 :34–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Yang Huei-Chuan. Idea Generation in Groups: A Basis for Creativity in Organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2000; 82 :76–87. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2888. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Kenworthy Jared B. Effective brainstorming. In: Paulus Paul B., Nijstad Bernard A., editors. The Oxford Handbook of Group Creativity and Innovation. Oxford University Press; New York: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Dzindolet Mary T. Social Influence Processes in Group Brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993; 64 :575–86. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.575. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Brown Vincent R. Toward More Creative and Innovative Group Idea Generation: A Cognitive-Social-Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming: Cognitive-Social-Motivational View of Brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2007; 1 :248–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00006.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peddle Monica, Bearman Margaret, Radomski Natalie, Mckenna Lisa, Nestel Debra. What Non-Technical Skills Competencies Are Addressed by Australian Standards Documents for Health Professionals Who Work in Secondary and Tertiary Clinical Settings? A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. BMJ Open. 2018; 8 :e020799. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020799. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peña-López Ismaël. PISA 2015 Results (Volume V): Collaborative Problem Solving. PISA, OECD Publishing; Paris: 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popil Inna. Promotion of Critical Thinking by Using Case Studies as Teaching Method. Nurse Education Today. 2011; 31 :204–7. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.002. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pornpitakpan Chanthika. The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades’ Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2004; 34 :243–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Possin Kevin. Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score. Informal Logic. 2014; 34 :393–416. doi: 10.22329/il.v34i4.4141. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor Robert W., Dutta Addie. Skill Acquisition and Human Performance. Sage Publications, Inc.; Thousand Oaks: 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Putman Vicky L., Paulus Paul B. Brainstorming, Brainstorming Rules and Decision Making. The Journal of Creative Behavior. 2009; 43 :29–40. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01304.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reiman Joey. Success: The Original Handbook. Longstreet Press; Atlanta: 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ren Xuezhu, Tong Yan, Peng Peng, Wang Tengfei. Critical Thinking Predicts Academic Performance beyond General Cognitive Ability: Evidence from Adults and Children. Intelligence. 2020; 82 :101487. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101487. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Renard Marie-Christine. Quality Certification, Regulation and Power in Fair Trade. Journal of Rural Studies. 2005; 21 :419–31. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Restout Emilie. Labels RSE: Un décryptage des entreprises labellisées en France. Goodwill Management. 2020. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://goodwill-management.com/labels-rse-decryptage-entreprises-labellisees/
• Rhodes Mel. An Analysis of Creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan. 1961; 42 :305–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rider Elizabeth A., Keefer Constance H. Communication Skills Competencies: Definitions and a Teaching Toolbox: Communication. Medical Education. 2006; 40 :624–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02500.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Riemer Marc J. Communication Skills for the 21st Century Engineer. Global Journal of Engineering Education. 2007; 11 :89. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rietzschel Eric F., Nijstad Bernard A., Stroebe Wolfgang. Productivity Is Not Enough: A Comparison of Interactive and Nominal Brainstorming Groups on Idea Generation and Selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2006; 42 :244–51. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross David. Why the Four Cs Will Become the Foundation of Human-AI Interface. 2018. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.gettingsmart.com/2018/03/04/why-the-4cs-will-become-the-foundation-of-human-ai-interface/
• Rothermich Kathrin. Social Communication Across the Lifespan: The Influence of Empathy [Preprint] SocArXiv. 2020 doi: 10.31235/osf.io/adgmy. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rusdin Norazlin Mohd, Ali Siti Rahaimah. Practice of Fostering 4Cs Skills in Teaching and Learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2019; 9 :1021–35. doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i6/6063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rychen Dominique Simone, Hersch Salganik Laura., editors. Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society. Hogrefe and Huber; Cambridge: 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahin Mehmet Can. Instructional Design Principles for 21st Century Learning Skills. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2009; 1 :1464–68. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.258. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salas Eduardo, Stagl Kevin C., Burke C. Shawn. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; Chichester: 2004. 25 Years of Team Effectiveness in Organizations: Research Themes and Emerging Needs; pp. 47–91. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salas Eduardo, Shuffler Marissa L., Thayer Amanda L., Bedwell Wendy L., Lazzara Elizabeth H. Understanding and Improving Teamwork in Organizations: A Scientifically Based Practical Guide. Human Resource Management. 2015; 54 :599–622. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21628. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salmi Jamil. The Tertiary Education Imperative: Knowledge, Skills and Values for Development. Springer; Cham: 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Samani Sanaz Ahmadpoor, Rasid Siti Zaleha Binti Abdul, bt Sofian Saudah. A Workplace to Support Creativity. Industrial Engineering & Management Systems. 2014; 13 :414–20. doi: 10.7232/iems.2014.13.4.414. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saroyan Alenoush. Fostering Creativity and Critical Thinking in University Teaching and Learning: Considerations for Academics and Their Professional Learning. OECD; Paris: 2022. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sasmita Jumiati, Suki Norazah Mohd. Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management. 2015; 43 :276–92. doi: 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schlegel Claudia, Woermann Ulrich, Shaha Maya, Rethans Jan-Joost, van der Vleuten Cees. Effects of Communication Training on Real Practice Performance: A Role-Play Module versus a Standardized Patient Module. The Journal of Nursing Education. 2012; 51 :16–22. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20111116-02. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schleicher Andreas. Why Creativity and Creative Teaching and Learning Matter Today and for Tomorrow’s World. GloCT in Collaboration with OECD CERI; Paris: 2022. Creativity in Education Summit 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schneider Bertrand, Sharma Kshitij, Cuendet Sebastien, Zufferey Guillaume, Dillenbourg Pierre, Pea Roy. Leveraging Mobile Eye-Trackers to Capture Joint Visual Attention in Co-Located Collaborative Learning Groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2018; 13 :241–61. doi: 10.1007/s11412-018-9281-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schultz David M. Eloquent Science: A course to improve scientific and communication skills; Paper presented at the 19th Symposium on Education; Altanta, GA, USA. January 18–21; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scialabba George. Mindplay. Harvard Magazine. 1984; 16 :19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott Ginamarie, Leritz Lyle E., Mumford Michael D. The Effectiveness of Creativity Training: A Quantitative Review. Creativity Research Journal. 2004; 16 :361–88. doi: 10.1080/10400410409534549. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sigafoos Jeff, Schlosser Ralf W., Green Vanessa A., O’Reilly Mark, Lancioni Giulio E. Communication and Social Skills Assessment. In: Matson Johnny L., editor. Clinical Assessment and Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Elsevier; Amsterdam: 2008. pp. 165–92. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simonton Dean Keith. Creativity from a Historiometric Perspective. In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 1999. pp. 116–34. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh Pallavi, Bala Hillol, Dey Bidit Lal, Filieri Raffaele. Enforced Remote Working: The Impact of Digital Platform-Induced Stress and Remote Working Experience on Technology Exhaustion and Subjective Wellbeing. Journal of Business Research. 2022; 151 :269–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.07.002. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spada Hans, Meier Anne, Rummel Nikol, Hauser Sabine. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning Learning 2005: The next 10 Years!—CSCL’05, Taipei, Taiwan, May 30–June 4. Association for Computational Linguistics; Morristown: 2005. A New Method to Assess the Quality of Collaborative Process in CSCL. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spitzberg Brian H. Methods of interpersonal skill assessment. In: Greene John O., Burleson Brant R., editors. The Handbook of Communication and Social Interaction Skills. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Mahwah: 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg Robert. Intelligence, Wisdom, and Creativity: Three Is Better than One. Educational Psychologist. 1986; 21 :175–90. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2103_2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg Robert J., Funke Joachim. The Psychology of Human Thought: An Introduction. Heidelberg University Publishing (heiUP); Heidelberg: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sursock Andrée. Quality assurance and rankings: Some European lessons. In: Hazelkorn Ellen, Mihut Georgiana., editors. Research Handbook on University Rankings. Edward Elgar Publishing; Cheltenham: 2021. pp. 185–96. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sursock Andrée, Vettori Oliver. Qualitätskultur. Ein Blick in Die Gelebte Praxis der Hochschulen. Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation; Vienna: 2017. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Quo vadis, quality culture? Theses from different perspectives; pp. 13–18. Available online: https://www.aq.ac.at/de/ueber-uns/publikationen/sonstige-publikationen.php [ Google Scholar ]
• Sutter Éric. Certification et Labellisation: Un Problème de Confiance. Bref Panorama de La Situation Actuelle. Documentaliste-Sciences de l Information. 2005; 42 :284–90. doi: 10.3917/docsi.424.0284. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taddei François. Training Creative and Collaborative Knowledge-Builders: A Major Challenge for 21st Century Education. OCDE; Paris: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas Keith, Lok Beatrice. Teaching Critical Thinking: An Operational Framework. In: Davies Martin, Barnett Ronald., editors. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan US; New York: 2015. pp. 93–105. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson Jeri. Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Complex Communication. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment; Dover: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thorndahl Kathrine L., Stentoft Diana. Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking and Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Scoping Review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 14. 2020 doi: 10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28773. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornhill-Miller Branden. ‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: A Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs (Creativity, Critical Thinking, Collaboration and Communication) 2021. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: http://thornhill-miller.com/newWordpress/index.php/current-research/
• Thornhill-Miller Branden, Dupont Jean-Marc. Virtual Reality and the Enhancement of Creativity and Innovation: Underrecognized Potential Among Converging Technologies? Journal for Cognitive Education and Psychology. 2016; 15 :102–21. doi: 10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.102. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornhill-Miller Branden, Millican Peter. The Common-Core/Diversity Dilemma: Revisions of Humean Thought, New Empirical Research, and the Limits of Rational Religious Belief. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 2015; 7 :1–49. doi: 10.24204/ejpr.v7i1.128. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tomasello Michael. Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press; Cambridge: 2005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Uribe-Enciso Olga Lucía, Uribe-Enciso Diana Sofía, Vargas-Daza María Del Pilar. Pensamiento Crítico y Su Importancia En La Educación: Algunas Reflexiones. Rastros Rostros. 2017; 19 doi: 10.16925/ra.v19i34.2144. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van der Vleuten Cees, van den Eertwegh Valerie, Giroldi Esther. Assessment of Communication Skills. Patient Education and Counseling. 2019; 102 :2110–13. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.07.007. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Klink Marcel R., Boon Jo. Competencies: The triumph of a fuzzy concept. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management. 2003; 3 :125–37. doi: 10.1504/IJHRDM.2003.002415. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Laar Ester, Van Deursen Alexander J. A. M., Van Dijk Jan A. G. M., de Haan Jos. The Relation between 21st-Century Skills and Digital Skills: A Systematic Literature Review. Computers in Human Behavior. 2017; 72 :577–88. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Rosmalen Peter, Boyle Elizabeth A., Nadolski Rob, van der Baaren John, Fernández-Manjón Baltasar, MacArthur Ewan, Pennanen Tiina, Manea Madalina, Star Kam. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2014. Acquiring 21st Century Skills: Gaining Insight into the Design and Applicability of a Serious Game with 4C-ID; pp. 327–34. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vincent-Lancrin Stéphan, González-Sancho Carlos, Bouckaert Mathias, de Luca Federico, Fernández-Barrerra Meritxell, Jacotin Gwénaël, Urgel Joaquin, Vidal Quentin. Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What It Means in School. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Voogt Joke, Roblin Natalie Pareja. A Comparative Analysis of International Frameworks for 21st Century Competences: Implications for National Curriculum Policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2012; 44 :299–321. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2012.668938. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waizenegger Lena, McKenna Brad, Cai Wenjie, Bendz Taino. An Affordance Perspective of Team Collaboration and Enforced Working from Home during COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems: An Official Journal of the Operational Research Society. 2020; 29 :429–42. doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1800417. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson Goodwin. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. Psychological Corporation; San Antonio: 1980. [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson Goodwin, Glaser Edwin M. Technical Manual and User’s Guide. Pearson; Kansas City: 2010. Watson-Glaser TM II critical thinking appraisal. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weick Karl E. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1993; 38 :628–52. doi: 10.2307/2393339. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• West Richard F., Toplak Maggie E., Stanovich Keith E. Heuristics and Biases as Measures of Critical Thinking: Associations with Cognitive Ability and Thinking Dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2008; 100 :930–41. doi: 10.1037/a0012842. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitmore Paul G. What are soft skills; Paper presented at the CONARC Soft Skills Conference; Fort Bliss, TX, USA. December 12–13; 1972. pp. 12–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willingham Daniel T. Critical Thinking: Why Is It so Hard to Teach? Arts Education Policy Review. 2008; 109 :21–32. doi: 10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson Sarah Beth, Varma-Nelson Pratibha. Small Groups, Significant Impact: A Review of Peer-Led Team Learning Research with Implications for STEM Education Researchers and Faculty. Journal of Chemical Education. 2016; 93 :1686–702. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00862. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winterton Jonathan, Deist Françoise Delamare-Le, Stringfellow Emma. Typology of Knowledge, Skills and Competences: Clarification of the Concept and Prototype. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; Luxembourg: 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Economic Forum . New Vision for Education: Unlocking the Potential of Technology. World Economic Forum; Geneva: 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Economic Forum The Future of Jobs Report 2020. 2020. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020
• World Health Organization . Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice. World Health Organization; Geneva: 2010. No. WHO/HRH/HPN/10.3. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yue Meng, Zhang Meng, Zhang Chunmei, Jin Changde. The Effectiveness of Concept Mapping on Development of Critical Thinking in Nursing Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nurse Education Today. 2017; 52 :87–94. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.02.018. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zielke Stephan, Dobbelstein Thomas. Customers’ Willingness to Purchase New Store Brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 2007; 16 :112–21. doi: 10.1108/10610420710739982. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zlatić Lidija, Bjekić Dragana, Marinković Snežana, Bojović Milevica. Development of Teacher Communication Competence. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 116 :606–10. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.265. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Why Is Critical Thinking Important in the Workplace?

Any workplace can contribute to the development of its employees, no matter its size or industry. The same is true of how every employee has a role in improving their workplace.

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing something and reasoning through an issue to achieve a logical and meaningful answer. It also allows us to look at all sides of an argument, exploring different options to reach the right result. 

This article examines just how vital critical thinking is in the workplace, its benefits, and how to develop it.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking refers to self-directed, reflective thinking that questions assumptions, examines beliefs, and seeks evidence, which has an objective basis for truth. Also, it is the thought process that you use to sort out good ideas from bad ones.

Critical thinkers question assumptions, weigh opposing viewpoints, and consider alternative explanations.

By learning how to think critically, you can solve problems more effectively, work more effectively with others, handle difficult situations, and communicate clearly and confidently in a team.

What Are the Types of Critical Thinking Skills?

This type of thinking skill aims to help you think about information. You use analysis to draw conclusions, recognize patterns, identify cause/effect relationships, or solve problems.

It also helps you monitor and correct your thinking when necessary using unbiased analysis. Furthermore, it disciplines you to think in a specific way before acting.

What Are the Benefits of Critical Thinking?

Self-disciplined thinking, accurate decision-making, reducing risk, and encouraging customer satisfaction are some of the benefits of critical thinking in the workplace.

Here are some benefits that make self-disciplined thinking vital in any work environment.

1. Critical Thinking Is Helpful When Receiving and Interpreting Information at the Workplace

The ability to make worthwhile and effective decisions is crucial. When you engage in critical thinking, you look for facts first before concluding. This type of thinking requires you to be objective about facts and data, and honest about your own biases and emotions. 

Critical thinkers constantly make self-corrective adjustments based on new information. It can also lead to a more challenging, rewarding, and satisfying career and personal life.

2. It Enables You to Communicate Your Ideas More Effectively 

Self-monitored thinking helps you communicate more effectively, make better decisions, plan better, and develop strategies that help you accomplish your goals. 

Furthermore, this can also help you to become more confident, successful, and self-aware in your everyday life.

3. It Helps in Decision-Making and Problem-Solving

Also, it enables you to gather information and learn more about things that are new or unfamiliar to you. 

4. It Encourages Extensive Analysis in the Workplace 

By challenging other thought processes, the individual increases the chances of creating something new and innovative. 

5. It Enables You to Become a More Effective Employee 

There is evidence that critical thinking skills in the workplace offer benefits including, improved job performance, greater productivity, and higher-quality products. 

Learning to use these skills in your daily work routines could improve your chances of being promoted, earning a higher salary, and getting ahead.

Furthermore, employees who can think critically and logically are less inclined to make poor decisions and can help the company avoid costly mistakes.

6. It Builds Trust, Loyalty, and Respect among Your Workmates 

Also, when we can trust each other to have open minds and respectful interactions, we’re better able to build a positive culture. 

7. It Helps You Strengthen Your Business Strategies and Improve Productivity

Flexibility is the key to success – regardless of your goals. And the first step to developing a strategy is analytical thinking. This is the ability to look at any given situation, analyze the facts and data at hand, and distill them into an unbiased opinion based on sound reasoning.

Strategic thinking is about solving problems creatively, considering many points of view, and making rational decisions.

8. Provides a Framework for Making Sound Business Decisions

When you think critically, you examine your assumptions, recognize your own biases, and make sound business decisions using objective evidence. 

9. It Makes Employees More Intuitive and Innovative

It also helps you tap into different parts of your mind, which leads to increased creativity. People who think critically tend to be more open-minded toward other ideas. They may not reach a consensus, but the discussion is less likely to stagnate. 

Using its skills can help you and your team manage projects, make decisions, assign tasks, and solve problems quickly.

Additionally, it can benefit the workplace by inspiring employees with fresh, creative approaches to old problems.

How do you develop critical thinking skills?

Activities like reading, writing, arithmetic homework, puzzles, and playing strategy games can also help develop these skills from a young age. You can also engage in other mental or physical activities to stimulate your mind.

Is critical thinking an inherited trait?

Is critical thinking possible for everyone.

Furthermore, egocentric or ethnocentric people cannot develop this trait since they do not understand things from another’s perspective and tend to have biased opinions.

Conclusion 

No company wants to keep employees who are unable or too afraid to think critically. In addition to making you valuable to the company, this trait helps the organization avoid mishaps that could harm its profitability or cause chaos in the workplace.

Learn more about critical thinking skills and how they impact everyday living.

I hope you found this article helpful. Thanks for reading.

You may also like:

Why do waiters get paid so little [+ how to make more money], navigating workplace norms: can you email a resignation letter, difference between roles and responsibilities, does suspension mean termination, moral claim: definition, significance, contemporary issues, & challenges, why can’t you flush the toilet after a drug test.

• Skip to content
• Skip to search
• Staff portal (Inside the department)
• Student portal
• Key links for students

Other users

• Forgot password

Notifications

{{item.title}}, my essentials, ask for help, contact edconnect, directory a to z, how to guides, education for a changing world, key skills for the 21st century, about the report.

Stephen Lamb, Esther Doecke and Quentin Maire from Victoria University's Centre for International Research on Education Systems (CIRES) investigate the evidence for 21st-century skills and how they might be best taught and assessed.

The report investigates the evidence base for nine commonly identified 21st-century skills:

• Critical thinking
• Creative thinking
• Metacognition
• Problem-solving
• Collaboration
• Self-efficacy
• Conscientiousness
• Perseverance

Published: August 2017.

Download the report

Future Frontiers Analytical Report: Key Skills for the 21st Century [PDF 2MB]

Executive Summary [PDF 288KB]

Listen to the podcast

[School bell ringing, sounds of children playing in a playground; introductory sound bites]

Jennifer Macey:

From the New South Wales Department of Education – this is Charlie’s Future.

Stephen Lamb:

The concept for example of an inquiring mind, a lifelong learner, an ethical citizen, the concept of somebody who's entrepreneurial. You want people, in no matter what sphere of life, to become actively engaged as a citizen. These sorts of skills are important, and increasingly important in a world where the world of work itself is changing.

Welcome to Charlie’s Future, a podcast series that explores the role of education in preparing young people to thrive in an age of Artificial Intelligence. This podcast is part of the ‘Education for a Changing World initiative’ by the New South Wales Department of Education.

Join us as we meet some of the leading thinkers on this issue. We’ll explore the future of work, the future of education, and the future skills needed to navigate this brave new world.

At Sydney Olympic Park, high school students are competing in the annual regional first robotics challenge.

Female student:

So the robots start inside the field and then the robots have to try and get gears, and the robots drive over and catch the gears, which they put onto the steam ship.

Each school team have physically built and coded their own robot on wheels. They use remote controls to manoeuvre these machines across a field, make their robots climb a rope, and manipulate their robot to collect and drop plastic gears or discs into baskets.

The human player which is the pilot inside the tower will pick up the gear. Once they have a certain amount of gears, they can turn the gears and activate a rotor. There are four rotors and you get points for each rotor you get.

This high-stakes competition doesn’t just involve the ICT skills of coding, or engineering – these students are using all their 21st century skills, including collaboration, communication, computational thinking...

Male student:

One of the main things we have to talk about is where do we want to start and also discuss our end-game strategy:

... creativity, problem solving and even resilience when faced with a disappointing call from an umpire.

Critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, resilience – these are some of the 21st century skills that schools are now being encouraged to teach alongside traditional skills of numeracy and literacy. But what exactly are 21st century skills? How do you teach them? How do you assess them?

Remember Charlie and their friends? They’re starting school, which means they’ll be finishing school in about 2030 or 2040. So what skills that will best equip Charlie to navigate an AI future?

The New South Wales Department of Education commissioned some of the country’s leading thinkers on the future of education to consider these questions. The researchers at the Centre for International Research on Education Systems at Victoria University examine school systems around the world to find out where these 21st century skills are being taught and who’s doing it best.

Professor Stephen Lamb, Dr Quentin Maire and Esther Doeke collected evidence from around the world and produced a report titled ‘Key Skills for the 21st Century: an evidence-based review’ which is available on the Department’s website.

[While we were recording this interview – the Victorian police were testing their emergency alarms throughout the city.]

So to begin, what exactly are 21st century skills?

Quentin Maire:

Generally, we think about them as what students will need in the future to succeed in life, in work but also in life more broadly. As part of this report we identified nine skills that most states or countries focus on. They can be grouped in different ways but one way of looking at them would be to focus on the more cognitive heavy skills, so those where thinking is really at the centre, and these ones are critical thinking, creativity, metacognition, and problem solving. But also some more dispositional or attitudinal skills that matter as well and these can be skills like collaboration, working with others, motivation, self-efficacy (so: can I can I do it? can I succeed?), conscientiousness and grit or perseverance. So, these other nine skills that we've looked at.

And they're sometimes called soft skills aren't they?

Yes because they're not necessarily considered in the same way as literacy and numeracy and the things that we take as hard skills associated with the sort of traditional subject areas. So they’re more competencies or capacities that somebody has that they can apply across all areas of their life so to speak, in thinking about work and thinking about the way they live, the ways of thinking and so on.

It's important to note, right up front that this isn’t an exhaustive list and it’s not unassailable because a lot of this interest came around through thinking through the impact of digital literacy and sort of management of information and how it's important today to become very competent and being able to use computers for example and iPads and Facebook and all the sorts of things that are associated with it and apply across so many different domains and areas.

There are also these other sorts of skills that are associated with critical thinking and problem solving. So it’s more about the ways of thinking and the tools that we think with rather than just the knowledge that sits at the base of a lot of subject areas.

What about digital literacy? There seems to be a recent push in many schools to teach coding - but Esther Doeke says 21st century skills are more than just coding, and being able to critically analyse big data is one skill that will become increasingly important.

Esther Doeke:

I’ll start with digital literacy. That’s a really important skill, not only from the mechanics from being able to code or being able to set up the ICT infrastructure required, but also the ability to critically assess the information they get online. That’s obviously a big buzzword at the moment with fake news; but it’s true, it’s a real skill and students should be given opportunities to develop those skills within schools.

Critical thinking involves a judgment or an evaluation of claims of evidence of arguments to decide what is right or what should be done. So it's really that evaluation dimension of what is there and how solid is it that matters.

Then we have other and other skills that are important. Metacognition is really about is thinking about one's thinking, in a sense, so meta-thinking, if you wish, and really that's about monitoring how your thinking works in the achievement of a given goal. So if I want to solve something, I want to complete something, how's is my thinking helping or on track to get this done? So students can think about what they did right or wrong and still be, in a way, engaging with their own thinking.

I think it may also be worth mentioning that these skills do not replace some other skills like literacy and numeracy - these are not being discarded, they're coming in as a broader set of skills that students are expected to develop.

So why are these key 21st century skills so important?

There are various reasons why I think why countries or states are focusing on these skills. One of the reasons is because they are associated with positive outcomes in schools or in education. So, students who do well at examinations or in Year 12 for example, generally tend to do well in these areas as well: so they tend to be pretty good at considering that it can succeed, they are conscientious, they can focus on the tasks etc. So that's a first reason.

But there is another reason which is related to the changes that are happening in the workforce and the types of work or labour that these students will do in the future.

Yes - there is an economist called James Heckman who did all this work on, looking from very early on, what predicts future success. And he identified that these sorts of skills including some things that almost sound like traits which are, you know, your perseverance, your conscientiousness, your application, your motivation, these sorts of things and the levels of them, were associated with future success well beyond the impact of qualifications.

So how do you teach 21st century skills, such as critical thinking or meta-cognition in a classroom. Can they be taught as a subject like maths and English?

That’s a really good question because of a lot of systems and other countries spend a lot of time in defining these concepts - and there is no one real definition, there’s multiple definitions. So when it comes down to collecting evidence about teaching it, we actually can’t find a lot out there. We can point to some really positive practice that we can see, for instance, it comes to mind, applied learning, project based learning is a really great way to incorporate a range of these skills within various disciplines, and giving kids the chance to develop these skills in a meaningful way.

So for instance in VET or Vocational Education and Training, it’s about applied learning, students are say in a hospitality kitchen and within that there’s a unit on communication. So, students are learning how to communicate, how to work with the chef, and that’s very valuable, because it’s not communication being learnt in an esoteric way, they’re applying it.

Well one of the difficulties or one of the issues is that we have a long history of taking up our subject areas like mathematics and English and we've worked out over a period of time the sorts of texts and the way that this knowledge should be taught. With these sorts of skills these newly discussed sorts of skills that we're talking about, there isn't the long history we have about knowing how best to teach them. So in many of the schools and systems that have attempted to emphasise this in recent times, they have come to, even within their subject areas, focus on the sorts of tasks that may involve project based learning that Esther has just talked about as a means of promoting things like collaboration, communication skills, problem solving within the context of a project. Because this brings students and learners together and it allows them to operate together and emphasise the sorts of skills and outlooks that they need and that we're talking about in relation to these sorts of skills.

And what about things like grit or perseverance – aren’t these innate characteristics that can be developed in children before they even start school?

How do we teach young people to be resilient for example - there isn't necessarily easy tasks that we can go to or activities within a classroom that they can teach that in that sort of way. So this is where this new knowledge being having to be formed about the best sorts of ways in which resilience and grit and perseverance can happen, because we can see within subject areas like mathematics, as tasks become harder, to teach teacher can't afford really, doesn't want the children to give up. They've got to be able to display a capacity to keep on task and keep doing what's required. And that's true of every subject area - just because things become harder, we can't necessarily allow students to give up on their learning. So, it's how we teach that grit and perseverance so that they keep going even under some difficult circumstances. It's a very valuable skill and applies to so many different areas.

So we've been engaged with half a dozen schools that have taken on some sets of tasks in which we can look at how well students have acquired certain skills around critical thinking in particular. There was a task that actually involved trying to answer the question, think about the evidence that's available in and around whether we have landed on the moon. So there’s a set of tasks built up around that can which teachers take on and there's quite a range of evidence that’s there which people can pursue to look at about whether we have or haven't. There's evidence both ways and so it's getting somebody or some students to think through what that evidence looks like, where they would go to get it, and how that looks, and then to be able to make judgements and rational judgments themselves based on that evidence. What do they think coming to that point of view. There isn't necessarily a right or wrong answer here, but it's the process they go through, their reasoning that's what's important.

So the natural follow-up question would be: how should a school assess something like resilience or critical thinking skills?

Some of the skills can be assessed more directly through direct assessment like we'd have a NAPLAN test, but many of these skills that we're describing can't be got at in that sort of way. For example, the concept of resilience: it's not clear how you would get that through a direct assessment.

That could come about through teacher judgment and teachers standing back and judging how resilient a student is or their critical thinking or problem solving or other sorts of skills, or we can use self-reported tests, which is a longstanding way of doing this, which is to actually ask students a set of items give them a set of items to which they respond. And from that being able to assess their level of based on what they report their level of skill.

The research report found that in the US, the core districts of California have embraced the teaching of these 21st century skills and have already set up tools to test for and measure their students proficiency in these skills.

Look, the core districts are a good example. They cover about 1.2 million students across a series of districts in California that have grouped together. They have implemented it at a whole-of-district level, across all of their districts, and they apply it both in the learning and what students are expected to acquire whilst they’re at school, but they’ve also gone on to think about assessment and judgement.

I think the core districts really stood out for us because they’re not only interested in these concepts and putting them into the curriculum and defining them, they’re also measuring them within their students and using them as a way for school improvement. And they’re measuring these concepts, through a student self-reported measure: so, asking the students a series of questions that can then determine a rating of how well the students are going on concepts such as growth mindset, and self-efficacy and self-management.

The truth is that they’re one of the first school districts or school systems to do this type of stuff, to measure it in such a comprehensive way. Our systems here in Australia do run, say for instance in NSW, there’s the ‘Tell Them From Me’ survey, which is asking students every year in NSW, respond to a series of questions, defining how much they feel belonging, or how much they feel safe at school. But this is actually stepping back and measuring these key skills for 21st century in a different way and providing schools with the means from which to learn from each other and improve.

And they've done some work which compares whether teacher judgments, self-reporting and direct assessment, and found that the student assessment self-reporting is quite robust. And they've taken it as far now as including it within their school performance framework, so they actually judge schools by the levels of skills that students display and have acquired in school.

So this is going much further than most of the systems where we're still trying to identify what it is going to focus on and how we're going to do it. Here's a system that's actually taken that to a point of thinking about how well their schools are doing in delivering on these things.

The teaching and testing of 21st century skills are at different stages of development in school systems around the world. The researchers point out that one of the aspects holding some systems back is a lack of support for teachers to implement the concepts and assessments.

It’s really important that teachers are supported. We have to firstly value their teacher judgement of these concepts, know that they are already assessing students on many of these dimensions that we have identified as key skills. We should value what they’re already doing in schools. And something that we felt that came out to us when we were reading through all the materials is that, we’re seeing lots of development on the policy front in terms of schools, but we’re not seeing then teacher training programs taking it onboard, saying we’re going to start working this through our programs. If teachers aren’t prepared to work in this 'new frontier', so to speak, we can’t expect them to start delivering on it, it’s not fair.

I think you're right, I think the point that Esther made about teachers and their preparation, their readiness for teaching these skills is very important. And in fact, we have evidence from New Zealand actually showing that teachers and schools find it, or have found it difficult, to teach these skills and to make sure students learn these skills. But at the same time, we also have evidence from New Zealand, as well, of grass-root developments in schools of teachers and schools coming together to develop tools and instruments, pedagogical tools to help students learn these [skills]. So, I think we’re in the early stages of evidence based that we need to understand how we can teach and develop these skills.

Teacher training is very important, and so is professional development: I mean they’re the two main mechanisms. So at the present moment I don't think that these skills have necessarily filtered their way through to teacher training and have been taken up with the sort of systematic rigour that's required; but this is needed in the future.

Well I think that, the way it’s framed in the Australian Curriculum at the moment, which is that these [skills] should be across all disciplines, and ideally would like all teachers to come together and plan in a team-based approach which skill is coming into which subject and when – I think ideally, that would be great. But knowing how schools work, obviously not all teachers can make the time to do that. So, for instance, we see in the social and ethical understanding subjects in Victoria, we find a lot of PE (Physical Education) teachers being put into that type of planning because people think that’s the ideal fit. But really it would be great for all subjects to get onboard and see where it can fit in some way.

There has been an evaluation in New Zealand about these 21st century skills or key skills, and they looked at secondary schools and between 2012 and 2015. They found that little progress had occurred in student’s exposure to the skills or opportunities for developing these skills. And then they actually asked teachers and principals why that was the case, and they mentioned exactly what you said: that the schedule is too tight, there is too much, we have to focus on senior secondary examinations, there is a lot, and therefore this doesn't come high enough in our priority list, in a sense.

And there seems to be some agreement in this report with the previous report on ‘The Best and Worst of Times’ by the academics at Sydney University - that schools should not just be a preparing students for industry and university, but also to be critical and engaged citizens who can thrive in an increasingly complex future.

I think if we were to ask a group of employers, for example, they would point to these things as being critical. So yes, they want people with content knowledge, but they want people with more than just content knowledge, who can be adaptable and flexible, and think about things in new sorts of ways, so that they are creative and innovative in the way that they operate.

If we undertake this correctly. yeah, it could be very revolutionary. If we think it through deeply, and enact change over various fronts, and not just put this emphasis in the prep into year ten area of schooling - we mention in our report we don’t want our schools to be just ATAR factories or university preparatory systems - we want them also to factor this in for when students are in the crucial final stages of schooling. So, don’t create this just for the early years. And if we can transfer these learnings into the upper secondary years, perhaps that could be quite revolutionary, I think.

The concept for example of an inquiring mind, a lifelong learner, an ethical citizen, the concept of somebody who's entrepreneurial - these are goals that we're thinking about, and these tie over to professions and jobs that people have. You want people no matter what sphere of life to have those sorts of qualities. But they do cover all spheres of life, engaging for example in local politics, your local community, becoming actively engaged as a citizen. These sorts of skills are increasingly important in a world where the world of work itself is changing and we can't guarantee now the sorts of jobs that have been there in the past will be there in the future. But what we can ensure is that people who have and are equipped and skilled in certain ways, with these sorts of skills, will be more flexible will be more adaptable. The concept of an inquiry mind for example to learn for themselves and to be able to be more self-sufficient as learners and agents.

What final words of wisdom would our researchers have for little Charlie, who is starting school this year?

I would say remaining open minded to various approaches to learning, and learning about different things, and including these skills that can then broaden the perspective and the views or outlooks on life.

Well you could just focus in on the sorts of skills that Charlie may need in the future. An important message here is that systems have to be able to help Charlie along the way, and that's what this is really all about: trying to identify what schools can do, and school administrations, to be able to ensure that everything's in place so that Charlie can make the best out of their schooling and walk away with the sort of platform of skills that Charlie needs to be able to operate successfully in a future world.

I guess I would say to Charlie that the skills that we’re talking about also might change in 5 or 10 years, so hopefully, they will be able to be dynamic in the way they conceptualise skills in that we’re not being definitive, giving them that freedom for the future.

That was Professor Stephen Lamb, Dr Quentin Maire and Esther Doeke from the Centre for International Research on Education Systems at Victoria University in Melbourne, ending this episode of Charlie’s Future – a podcast series by the New South Wales Education Department.

Go online to read the full report - 'Key Skills for the 21st Century: an evidence-based review'. Just do a search for ‘Future Frontiers’ on the Department’s website. There you’ll also find links to all the reports commissioned for the Education for a Changing World initiative.

And do join this conversation. If you have comments get in touch with us through our Facebook group: Future Frontiers: Education for a Changing World. Our Twitter handle is: @education2040, Hashtag #futurefrontiers, or email us at [email protected].

Thanks so much for joining us. This is Charlie’s Future.

Additional resources

Watch the Charlie's Future animation that explores what the world will look like for children starting school today, and what skills they will need to flourish.

• Teaching and learning

Business Unit:

• Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation

• Social Studies
• High School

Define and give examples of 21st century workplace skills. Why is it important that these skills are included in the curriculum?

Ceokash5810 is waiting for your help., expert-verified answer.

• 22.6K answers
• 3.6M people helped

These skills are essential for adapting to modern workplace demands and should be integrated into the curriculum to prepare students for future challenges.

These skills are often referred to as 21st-century skills and include:

• Critical thinking: The ability to analysis and evaluate information effectively. For example, solving complex problems or making informed decisions.
• Creative problem-solving: The capacity to think outside the box and develop innovative solutions. For instance, devising new marketing strategies or improving processes.
• Effective communication: The skill to convey information clearly and persuasively in both written and oral forms. This is vital for presentations and collaborative projects.
• Teamwork: The ability to work well with others, recognizing diverse perspectives and contributing to group efforts. Team projects and group discussions are examples where this skill is essential.

Importance in Curriculum: Integrating these skills into the curriculum is crucial because they prepare students for future societal needs, employment, and competitiveness in a complex society. Educators and educational systems must adapt to ensure students are ready to meet these evolving demands.

Still have questions?

Get more answers for free, you might be interested in, new questions in social studies.

More From Forbes

10 Most Important Leadership Skills For The 21st Century Workplace (And How To Develop Them)

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

With the rise of the gig economy and with many companies adopting flatter, more flexible organizational structures , now is the perfect time to refocus on what good leadership looks like. Because, in our rapidly changing workplaces, leadership will apply to more people than ever before. You may be overseeing a project that requires you to coordinate several team members. Or you may be a gig worker collaborating with other gig workers. Or you may be occupying a traditional management role. Whatever your job title, this precious ability to bring out the best in people will be a vital part of success.

Of course, being a good leader really requires us to polish up multiple skills at once. Here are ten skills that I think are essential for leaders – with a few pointers on how to develop them.

1. Motivating others

The ability to motivate others is all part of inspiring people to be the best they can be. So how can you better motivate others?

· Ensure people know how their role contributes to the company’s vision. That their work matters, basically.

· Be clear on what you need people to do, why, and when. But, importantly, give people the autonomy to accomplish those tasks their way.

· Show your appreciation and celebrate success.

2. Fostering potential

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

Great leaders look for potential, not performance. Here are three ways to foster potential:

· Don’t fall into the trap of getting people to think and act like you. Encourage them to think and act like them.

· Let people know that it’s okay to fail sometimes. This is all part of inspiring people to take risks, step outside their comfort zone and test new ideas.

· Don’t let people grow complacent. Encourage them to develop their skills and think about the next stage of their career, whatever that may be.

3. Inspiring trust

What makes a leader trustworthy? The following behaviors are a good start:

· Being ethical. This means being honest and transparent, keeping promises, and generally making sure you don't say one thing and then do another.

· Making your values clear and, of course, living those values.

· Standing up for what you believe in.

4. Taking on and giving up responsibility

Good leaders take on responsibility, but they also know when to let go of responsibility and delegate to others. When doing this, try to:

· Play to the strengths of those around you and allocate responsibility accordingly.

· Ensure people have the knowledge, resources, and tools they need to succeed.

· Decide how you'll monitor progress without micromanaging. For example, you can agree on how the person will report back to you and how often – as well as the best way for them to raise any questions.

5. Thinking strategically

Strategic thinking requires leaders to take a wider view, so they can solve business problems and make a long-term plan for the future. To enhance your strategic thinking skills:

· Remember the difference between urgent and important . Urgent fire-fighting tasks can suck up a lot of your time and energy, leaving very little bandwidth for those things that are important from a big-picture perspective but not urgent. Constantly remind yourself of your priorities, and manage your time accordingly.

· Use critical thinking to gather data and find solutions to your most pressing strategic questions. For example, “Where will our growth come from in three or five years’ time?”

· Don’t rely on assumptions or gut instincts when answering such questions.

6. Setting goals and expectations for everyone

Setting goals is a great way to drive performance. But have you considered a more dynamic way of setting goals?

· Instead of the traditional, top-down approach (where leadership sets strategic goals, then managers set goals for teams and individuals), you might like to consider the Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) approach.

· With OKRs, leadership sets some strategic OKRs for the business, then each team and individual designs their own OKRs that contribute to achieving the company's strategic OKRs.

· OKRs should be simple and agile. Forget annual goal-setting; OKRs are typically set on a monthly or quarterly basis.

If you’d like to know more about OKRs, check out my related articles .

7. Giving (and receiving) feedback

Good leaders are able to give and receive feedback, both positive and negative (or, as I prefer to call it, constructive). When it comes to giving people constructive feedback:

· Don’t put it off. You don’t want to overwhelm someone with a loooong list of everything they’re getting wrong. Instead, have a process in place for regular catchups, where you can chat through progress and give feedback.

· Don’t dilute constructive feedback with praise. While it’s important to regularly give people praise, I wouldn’t do it at the same time as constructive feedback. When you sandwich negative comments with a positive comment on either side, there's a risk the person may only hear the good stuff.

· Be specific, not emotional. Just treat it as a straightforward conversation, using specific, concrete examples instead of opinions or emotions.

8. Team building

A good leader is a bit like a football manager in that they have to pick strong players who perform different roles and then shape those players into a cohesive unit. As part of this:

· Remember, each person will bring their own unique skills and experiences, be motivated by different things, have different working styles, and so on. Embrace this rather than trying to get everyone to behave the same way.

· Model the behaviors you want to see: connecting as human beings, showing an interest, listening to each other, treating people with respect and dignity, and supporting one another.

· Give feedback and reward a job well done.

9. Positivity

If you show up with a negative “this won’t work, that thing sucks, why do we bother” kind of attitude, it’ll soon spread throughout your team. Here’s how to lead from a place of positivity:

· Think carefully about the language you use, verbally and in writing. Use words with positive connotations – turning a “problem” into an “opportunity” being a prime example.

· Celebrate successes, big and small. Highlighting the little wins frequently can be just as impactful as sporadically celebrating the big wins.

· Resist the urge to complain in front of your team. As Tom Hanks says to his band of soldiers in Saving Private Ryan , "Gripes go up, not down. Always up."

10. Authenticity

For me, being an authentic leader is a key part of building trust. So as well as being ethical (see earlier), you’ll want to:

· Practice self-awareness. A good leader is aware of their weaknesses as well as their strengths.

· Be open about those weaknesses rather than trying to hide them.

· Bring your whole self to work, as opposed to having one persona for work and one outside of work.

To stay on top of future trends and future skills, make sure to subscribe to my newsletter and have a look at my new book, Future Skills: The 20 Skills & Competencies Everyone Needs To Succeed In A Digital World .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

Creative Thinking

An essential skill for the 21st century.

Inkbot Design

Preparing for the world isn’t an easy task.

As the world changes, new technologies and practices are introduced.

What we learn in schools usually becomes obsolete by the time we’re ready to start working.

This is why preparation for children and young adults nowadays should focus on developing skills that are crucial for adapting to this ever-changing reality.

Embrace life-long learning as a foundation for professional development.

One of the essential skills we need to develop is creative thinking.

What is creative thinking?

A definition of creative thinking is defined as a way to look at and solve problems from a different perspective, avoiding orthodox solutions and thinking outside the box.

This creative process allows you to explore connections, meet new challenges and seek solutions that are unusual, original and fresh.

Many believe that creative thinking techniques are based on experience, including Steve Jobs:

Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesise new things. And the reason they were able to do that was that they’d had more experiences or they have thought more about their experiences than other people.

Having this in mind, we have to understand that creative thinking is a skill we need to develop early on.

We have to be able to break the patterns and traditional way of thinking to be able to start thinking in a creative way. A way that is going to help you create a new approach to a particular situation or a problem.

Starting with this method early on guarantees more experience as you learn from many different examples as you grow up.

Connecting this experience with current challenges and situations is going to help with reaching creative solutions.

Characteristics of creative thinkers include:

1 — they are communicators.

Creativity and confidence are expressed in many ways through both listening and communicating.

This is why creative thinkers are good communicators.

Collaboration is also important for this kind of thinking, and good communication is essential for work performance as a part of a team.

2 — They are open-minded

An open mind is a mind that appreciates criticism, is ready for new solutions and ideas, and isn’t afraid of evaluating ideas.

A person who is open-minded is willing to learn from both successes and mistakes, being able to grow and develop.

Related Article: Graphic Design Resources September 2015

3 — They are risk-takers

Exploring new ideas and strategies is impossible without risk-taking, as a willingness to face challenges and accept change.

Creative thinkers are resilient, and they aren’t afraid of taking a chance, knowing that one needs to be brave when exploring innovative and original ways of thinking about and solving problems.

They know that leaving a comfort zone is sometimes necessary to succeed, even if it means facing the unknown.

4 — They are knowledgeable

To develop an understanding of things and situations, you need a background story.

Knowledge allows creative thinkers to see the full picture, which is why they know a lot about the sector they work in.

They are experts in what they do, and the concept of life-long learning is what they base their expertise on.

5 — They are flexible

Abilities to adapt to changes and think outside the usual patterns are parts of creative thinking, which is why being flexible is a characteristic trait of creative thinkers.

They welcome changes; they aren’t afraid of changing their method of work, and they are good at working with others.

Why is it important?

The world and society are advancing at a remarkable pace. We need to equip ourselves with the ability to adapt to this trend, not to hold back.

We can achieve great success by facing challenges and responding to them with a new way of thinking and self-confidence.

Ability to apply innovative thinking in both a digital and non-digital environment has become a characteristic of successful people nowadays.

If you want to build a successful career, it’s important to develop creative thinking techniques as one of your skills, together with problem solving and critical thinking.

Regardless if you’re a graphic designer, a social media manager or a front-end developer, these skills are essential to help you develop your real potential and use it to overcome obstacles and deal with problems each day.

When it comes non-digital world, teachers are first to benefit from this skill, because they’re the ones that will affect the generations to come.

They have the role of transferring this skill to their students.

This skill also has a significant role within creativity in business.

It allows managers, analysts, and other industry professionals to apply creative process to the corporate sphere, start looking at things from a different perspective and come up with solutions that will separate them on the market.

Related Article: Interview Tips and Portfolio Advice from Creative Directors

The main benefits of developing creative thinking include:

· Increase your self-confidence

· Solve problems more efficiently

· Earn respect

· Be an innovator

· Make a difference

· Be more successful at work

Developing creative thinking

As an innovative way of approaching and analysing ideas, creative problem solving became an essential skill for the 21st century.

Although some people might seem more creative than others, this skill is something that is developed and improved using various techniques and practices.

Being an essential skill today and one of those assets you could leverage in your work pursuit, try developing creative problem solving using the following exercises:

• Brainstorming

This technique includes thinking about something and putting down all the ideas that come to your mind–regardless how silly or unrelated they might seem at first.

In this ocean of ideas, you’re bound to find one that will stand out, one that will be tangible and innovative.

Used as an individual or group practice, brainstorming is a great way to develop creative thinking and problem solving.

It encourages thinking in a different way and exploring many options that might be applied in that situation.

The more options come to your mind, the more potential you’ll have to find great ideas.

• Mind mapping

Mind mapping is the process of connecting the dots.

While brainstorming involves putting all the ideas down as they come to your mind, mind mapping is about arranging your thoughts, thinking in a logical way, using associations, recognising patterns and creating an order.

All that cluster of ideas from brainstorming should come together in mind mapping.

This exercise engages both left and right hemisphere of the brain; it encourages you to think about the relationship among aspects and ideas.

It also has a positive influence on organisational skill.

Since reframing focuses on analysing the same situation or a problem from a different perspective, it’s a great exercise for developing creative thinking.

Reframing means changing the frame of things, so you’ll need to take a look at a problem or a situation in a different way, to be able to come up with a new, innovative approach.

Explore other meanings of things, analyse the context and spread the perspective to spot new opportunities and expect potential obstacles.

Again, this exercise and way of thinking are applicable in many professions nowadays.

• Envisaging the future

The goal of this exercise is to train your mind to anticipate future based on the images of today.

Start with the current situation.

Regardless if you’re using images or data to understand it, try to think about future and where you want future to take you.

Through this process, you’ll need to create bridges from present to future, and this is where creativity comes in useful, as ideas to overcome gaps become solutions that will take you to desired future and help you achieve your goals.

The technique of using role play is a good way to change the way you’re thinking and explore the situation from a different perspective.

Creative thinking encourages you to be open-minded, so when using this method, you’ll try to think about the situation from the point of someone else.

You need to reframe your way of thinking to see a different perspective of things, to change the perspective and find new solutions that go over your limits and overcome your personal style of problem-solving.

Assuming a new role encourages you to come up with solutions that might not be typical for you, but they are what you need for creative problem solving.

Related Article: Where to find creative inspiration?

Learners of today have a unique role in our society.

The traditional forms of learning styles and students profile are becoming obsolete.

Learners of today need to adopt this reality of constant change and progress, to be able to stay competitive and successful.

We need to understand this concept of lifelong learning as a part of our reality, and most professions such as design, web development, freelancing, management, all need more creative thinkers.

Creative thinking and problem solving are essential skills for professional development, especially in the digital environment.

Originally Published — What is Creative Thinking?

Author Bio: Zorana is a blog writer, freelancer, teacher and mom. She’s passionate about digital marketing and life-long learning. Follow her at https://twitter.com/RadovicZorana

Written by Inkbot Design

Inkbot Design is a Branding Agency & Graphic Design Studio. We Help Businesses Grow with Professional Logo Design, Brand Identity, Web Development & Marketing.

Text to speech

IntegrateDots Inc.

Equipping for 21st Century Economy

Critical Thinking & Creativity in the 21st Century

The 21st century economy requires new mind-sets, different knowledge and skills. Unfortunately, traditional schools, where didactic teaching is still prevalent, fall terribly short of what’s required in this new dynamic, fast paced and increasingly interconnected global economy. This post from World Economic Forum sums up what are skill sets required in the 21st Century marketplace.

Among the 16 key skills listed above, the two most difficult (and most valuable?) skills to have are critical thinking and creativity. These two skills, especially creativity, cannot be easily taught in classroom. A better approach is to have these skills caught rather than taught. Perhaps, allow open-minded and unstructured learning environment to encourage critical thinking and creativity?

Many countries yearn to have their own Silicon Valleys. They want to have the Silicon Valley type of creativity and innovations to spur their economies. They have tried all means to replicate the Silicon Valleys’ ecosystem (both the hardware and software). Despite spending a humongous amount over many years to build the high capital infrastructures such air hubs, science parks and implement tax incentives to lure big name MNCs to set up R&D labs, notable successes in innovations and creativity have proved to be mostly elusive. Singapore is one example. Why?

There are several reasons. In this post, we’ll focus on one – Singapore’s exam-centric education system.

The Singapore education has ranked consistently high among developed countries in the TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study). It produces high averages; even the bottom 25% percentile score higher than the world’s median. In the 2015 OECD Global School Ranking, Singapore tops the list of Maths and Science (for 15 year-olds), ahead of many advanced first world countries such as Germany (13th), Australia (14th), New Zealand (17th), UK (20th), France (23rd), and US (28th).

Despite such good showing, detractors of the Singapore education system question why the country has not produced a single Nobel laureate. There are countries with smaller populations than Singapore which have produced Nobel laureates (e.g. New Zealand produced 3 laureates) . Among the “Four Asian Tigers”, Singapore is the only country that has not produced a Nobel laureate. Taiwan clinched the Nobel prize for Chemistry in 1986, Hong Kong for Physics in 2009, and South Korea for Chemistry in 1987 and Peace in 2000. Here’s a list of Nobel Laureates by Country of Birth .

Over the decades, the education system in Singapore has launched many initiatives to sharpen students’ thinking skills. The “Teach Less, Learn More” is one such initiative. The Ministry of Education (MOE) has recognized the importance of equipping students with 21st century skills for the globalized workplace. These initiatives aim to nurture students to become confident, creative and independent thinkers.

Despite these efforts, majority of students have not made the leap to become more entrepreneurial and critical thinkers. Comparing Singapore’s education system with those of other developed countries, one stark difference is that the Singapore system over-emphasizes on examinations. As a result, the initiatives to equip students with 21st century competencies have not produced the desired outcomes fast enough.

Since independence, Singapore’s development has been nothing short of spectacular. The country has not encountered any major disasters or civil unrests. The peace and prosperity enjoyed by Singapore over the past decades has lulled large segments of its population into contentment. Foreigners often comment that life in Singapore is too sheltered and structured.

Singaporean students are constantly exhorted to study hard and do well in exams so that they will be rewarded with abundant opportunities to succeed in life later. Hence, many Singaporean students pursue academic excellence single-mindedly. Students are trained to be exam-smart and would typically ace exams through the rote learning approach. Academic excellence is seen by many as the “end all and be all”.

It is therefore of little surprise why many students avoid speaking up, are adverse to risk taking and do not find motivation to think out of the box and experiment with new ideas.

• ← Hello World!
• 2014 Cambridge H2 Physics (9646/01) Solutions →