K–12 schools are navigating a difficult reality: staffing shortages, increased workload, and growing expectations for student outcomes. A 2022 poll of National Education Association members found that about 55% of educators reported being more likely to leave the profession earlier than planned, and national reporting also indicated that more than half of U.S. public schools began the 2022–2023 year understaffed. In this context, professional development (PD) can’t just be “more training.” It has to be better training—training that strengthens educators’ judgment, adaptability, and decision-making.
One of the most powerful levers PD leaders can pull is the intentional development of educators’ critical thinking. Colt Turner’s narrative literature review, “Strategies That Promote Critical Thinking During K–12 Educators’ Professional Development Experiences,” synthesizes research at the intersection of adult learning, critical thinking, and teacher professional development. The takeaway is clear: critical thinking is not a “nice-to-have” add-on. It is central to transformative learning and to helping teachers respond effectively to complex classroom realities.
At TinyEYE, we partner with schools through online therapy services, and we see firsthand how educators thrive when they have strong systems of support and shared problem-solving routines. Critical thinking is a foundational skill that helps teams collaborate across roles—teachers, special education staff, administrators, and related service providers—especially when services and learning are delivered in hybrid or online formats.
Why critical thinking belongs at the center of teacher professional development
Adult learning research emphasizes that meaningful professional growth often requires a shift in mindset, not just new information. Transformative learning theory (notably Mezirow’s work) highlights that adults change their perspectives through critical reflection—examining assumptions, evaluating evidence, and revising beliefs when warranted. In other words, transformation depends on critical thinking.
In the day-to-day reality of schools, teachers constantly face “ill-structured problems”: situations with incomplete information, competing priorities, and no single correct answer. Examples include balancing academic expectations with student mental health needs, responding to parent concerns, adapting instruction for diverse learners, or evaluating the impact of an intervention. PD that builds critical thinking prepares educators to navigate these challenges with more confidence and clarity.
What critical thinking is (and what it isn’t)
The literature offers many definitions, but several common threads emerge:
Critical thinking is reflective. Dewey described it as an ongoing practice of reflective thinking—considering beliefs and assumptions from multiple viewpoints.
Critical thinking is evaluative. Paul and Elder framed it as analyzing and evaluating thinking with the goal of improving it. Halpern emphasized that evaluation is what makes thinking “critical.”
Critical thinking is evidence-oriented. Willingham included insisting that claims are backed by evidence as a defining feature.
Critical thinking is context-sensitive. Lipman highlighted that good judgment depends on criteria and sensitivity to context.
It’s also important to clarify what critical thinking is not. Brookfield cautioned against common misconceptions, such as the belief that critical thinking is only for highly educated people, or that it’s the same as being negative, combative, or simply “smart.” Critical thinking is a practice—one that can be taught, modeled, and strengthened over time.
Key models PD leaders can use to structure critical thinking
One reason critical thinking initiatives fail is that programs promote the idea of critical thinking without adopting a shared model or language. Jones and Haydon argued that selecting a model helps align professional learning across an organization, improves communication, and increases efficiency. Below are several models highlighted in the literature.
1) Brookfield’s approach: examine assumptions, consider perspectives, take informed action
Brookfield’s model is practical for PD because it connects thinking to action. It includes:
Hunting assumptions (surfacing what’s hidden)
Checking assumptions (testing reliability and validity)
Exploring different viewpoints (seeing from multiple angles)
Taking informed action (using evidence to guide decisions)
Brookfield also describes phases of critical thinking—often triggered by a “disorienting dilemma” that creates discomfort and forces a re-evaluation. This is highly relevant to educators adapting to new technologies, changing student needs, or evolving service delivery models.
2) Ennis’s taxonomy: abilities and dispositions
Ennis contributed a framework that includes both what critical thinkers can do (abilities) and how they tend to approach thinking (dispositions). Dispositions such as open-mindedness, using credible sources, and willingness to change positions based on evidence are particularly important in school cultures where initiatives can become politicized or emotionally charged.
3) Lipman’s criteria-based judgment
Lipman emphasized that critical thinking relies on clear criteria—standards, principles, policies, objectives—so educators can make informed judgments. In PD, this can translate into shared rubrics for evaluating instructional strategies, intervention fidelity, or the quality of evidence used in decision-making.
4) King and Kitchener’s reflective judgment model
This stage-based model uses ill-structured problems to assess how adults reason. It’s a strong fit for case-based PD, where educators analyze complex scenarios and justify decisions rather than search for a single “correct” answer.
Program-level decisions that make critical thinking more than a buzzword
The review emphasizes that critical thinking grows best when it is embedded into existing PD content—not isolated as a one-off workshop. Several program-level choices matter:
Integrate critical thinking into the curriculum. Swartz and others argue that it should show up at the program, course, and lesson levels.
Teach it explicitly, not implicitly. Research suggests overt instruction in critical thinking improves transfer to real scenarios.
Scaffold complexity over time. Using frameworks like Bloom’s taxonomy can help PD gradually move from comprehension to analysis and evaluation.
Protect time for reflection. Reflection is repeatedly identified as essential, but it is also the first thing cut when schedules tighten.
Create psychologically safe conditions. Facilitators can build trust by clarifying intent, modeling their own reflective thinking, and using discussion protocols to keep conversations productive.
High-impact strategies PD facilitators can use immediately
Model critical thinking out loud
Brookfield highlights intentional modeling as a core strategy. In practice, this means facilitators demonstrate how they evaluate claims, notice assumptions, and revise conclusions. Tactics include:
“Speaking in tongues”: explaining a concept through multiple lenses (e.g., teacher lens, student lens, family lens, administrator lens).
Assumption inventories: pausing to identify paradigmatic, prescriptive, and causal assumptions shaping decisions.
Point-counterpoint: respectful disagreement that shows how multiple interpretations can be reasonable.
Devil’s advocate: exploring opposing perspectives to stress-test reasoning.
Make evidence and source credibility non-negotiable
In an era of misinformation, educators need routines for evaluating sources. PD can incorporate mini-practices such as:
Checking the authority and purpose of a source
Triangulating evidence across multiple references
Identifying bias (including one’s own)
Distinguishing research findings from opinions or anecdotes
This is especially relevant when schools adopt new programs or interventions and staff must evaluate vendor claims, research summaries, and implementation guidance.
Use better questions, not more questions
Brookfield argues that questioning is at the heart of critical thinking. Research cited in the review also suggests open-ended questions support learners across achievement levels, and that higher-level question types (prediction, evaluation, inference) are associated with stronger critical thinking development.
Examples PD facilitators can use include:
“What assumption is driving this decision—and what evidence supports it?”
“What would count as strong evidence that this strategy is working?”
“What is a plausible alternative explanation for what we’re observing?”
“How might this look different in another grade level, school, or community context?”
Structure discourse so it builds thinking (not tension)
Discourse supports critical thinking when it is intentional. The literature points to discussion protocols as a way to keep conversations focused and equitable. Debates and argumentation activities can improve analytical thinking when participants must justify claims and respond to counterarguments.
For PD leaders, the goal isn’t to “win” a debate—it’s to normalize reasoned disagreement and evidence-based decision-making.
Assess critical thinking as an outcome
If critical thinking matters, it should be measured. The review notes that assessments exist (including those aligned with Paul and Nosich’s work and tools from the Foundation for Critical Thinking). Even without a formal test, PD programs can build assessment into practice through:
Rubrics that evaluate reasoning quality in case analyses
Reflection prompts that require evidence and alternative perspectives
Performance-based tasks (e.g., video analysis, lesson study artifacts, implementation reflections)
Six practical implications PD leaders can act on
Turner’s review concludes with six clear recommendations. In simplified terms, PD programs should:
Adopt and document a critical thinking model (even a blended one)
Preserve time for critical reflection
Make meaningful discourse routine
Use high-quality questioning aligned with complex thinking
Define critical thinking as an outcome and measure growth
Embed critical thinking into existing PD rather than isolating it
Where TinyEYE fits into a critical-thinking culture
When schools use online therapy services, teams often need strong collaboration habits: aligning goals, interpreting progress data, coordinating schedules, and ensuring students receive consistent support. Critical thinking strengthens these routines by helping educators and related service providers:
Clarify what success looks like (criteria-based judgment)
Evaluate evidence of progress and adjust plans accordingly
Surface assumptions about student needs, access, and engagement
Communicate across roles with shared language and reasoning
Ultimately, critical thinking is not an “extra initiative.” It is the skill that helps educators make every initiative more effective.
For more information, please follow this link.
