04051002132 a study of high school students’ perceptions and practices of critical thinking in their english writing
INTRODUCTION
Rationale
Critical thinking is vital in modern education, enhancing students' self-directed learning and problem-solving abilities Facione (2011) emphasizes that critical thinking involves logical analysis and evaluation, which are crucial for academic success Research shows that students trained in critical thinking are more likely to approach complex problems creatively and draw conclusions based on well-evaluated data (Lai, 2011) Therefore, education must prioritize the development of critical thinking skills to prepare the younger generation for future challenges Additionally, fostering critical thinking contributes to innovation, economic growth, and social progress within nations, achievable through effective educational initiatives that require diverse stakeholder involvement Rodríguez et al (2014) highlight that the government plays a key role in ensuring educational success by committing to accessible education for all citizens, such as implementing free education policies in developing countries Moreover, teachers and students are essential in collaborating with the government to execute and enhance education policies, as the quality of education relies not only on development plans but also on their effective implementation, necessitating cooperation among various stakeholders, including government officials and education professionals (Purnomo).
Numerous studies highlight the crucial role of instructors in enhancing a nation's educational system (Rodríguez-Santero, Torres-Gordillo, 2017) Furthermore, student engagement serves as a key metric for assessing the quality and effectiveness of educational policies implemented in schools (Madani, 2019).
According to Scott (2017), enhancing education quality involves three key skill frameworks: study and innovation skills, life and career skills, and technology and communication skills Among these, learning and enhancement skills, including communication, critical thinking, creativity, and cooperation, are vital for student development Critical thinking is increasingly recognized as essential in both Western and Asian educational contexts, with schools emphasizing its importance in academic writing through argumentation and the application of evaluation and analysis skills (Jones, 2005) However, many students struggle to understand the significance of argumentation in writing and often lack comprehension of reasoning, evaluation, and analysis concepts (Wingate, 2011).
In contemporary high schools, the focus of education is to cultivate students who possess critical thinking skills and reflective citizenship Students are expected to develop the abilities necessary to critically analyze their surroundings, which will better prepare them for the demands of a globalized world Critical thinking is essential for students to enhance during their high school years, although its definition and instruction remain debated among professionals in various fields, including education and Applied Linguistics In Vietnam, the writing skill is a key component of English examinations that assesses students' critical thinking abilities Writing is often viewed as the most challenging of the four skills due to its complexity and significance in education, making it crucial for students to learn how to write essays that incorporate critical thinking effectively.
3 always challenging for any student in question, especially students who are unskilled in English
The author emphasizes the importance of analytical thinking in developing English language skills through the thesis titled “A Study of High School Students’ Perceptions and Practices of Critical Thinking in Their English Writing.”
Aim of the study
This study investigates high school students' perceptions and application of critical thinking in English argumentative essay writing It seeks to understand how students define and assess the importance of critical thinking in their learning process, as well as the extent to which they use these skills to construct arguments, counter opposing views, and demonstrate logical reasoning Additionally, the research aims to identify the challenges students encounter in applying critical thinking in their essays and provide recommendations for improving these skills in academic writing Ultimately, the study aspires to enhance the instruction and evaluation of critical thinking in higher education programs, laying a practical foundation for developing more effective teaching strategies in argumentative writing.
Research Questions
Based on the above aims, the study sheds light on two main questions as follows:
1 How do high school students perceive critical thinking?
2 To what extent do high-school students use critical thinking skills in their argumentative essays?
Scope of the study
This research focuses exclusively on high school students in specific schools in Hanoi, aiming to understand their comprehension and perception of critical thinking in English writing It examines the relationship between students' awareness and application of critical thinking skills in their written work, intentionally excluding factors like teaching methods and prior educational background.
This study focuses on critical thinking in argumentative essay composition among high school students, rather than on standardized assessments like the IELTS While IELTS writing samples can serve as analytical references, they are not intended as instructional models for preparation The primary aim is to analyze how students employ critical reasoning, construct arguments, and evaluate counterarguments in their essays By examining a single writing sample as a case study, the research highlights the manifestation of critical thinking in argument formulation, evidence use, and logical reasoning This approach emphasizes the practical application of critical thinking over mere writing proficiency within a testing framework Concentrating on argumentative essays ensures the analysis remains within the academic writing domain, where critical thinking is vital Ultimately, this study enhances understanding of how students develop and apply reasoning skills in writing, providing valuable insights for educators seeking to foster critical thinking skills beyond the constraints of standardized testing.
Significance of the study
The study explores how high school students in Hanoi develop critical thinking skills, highlighting the impact of gender and age on this cognitive growth By understanding these influences, teachers can tailor their instructional methods to better meet the diverse needs of their students, thereby minimizing gaps in critical thinking abilities across various subjects The findings provide valuable insights for educators to improve their teaching strategies with proven practices that promote critical thinking Additionally, identifying the challenges students face in applying critical thinking in their writing allows teachers to find effective ways to support their students.
Structure of the Thesis
Chapter I: Introduction – This introductory chapter sets the stage for the investigation by exploring the significant influence of critical thinking and its implementation in high school students’ writing This chapter further delineates the objectives, research questions, and scope of the investigation In addition, this chapter highlights the significance and organizational framework of the study
Chapter II: Literature Review – In this section, an in-depth examination of critical thinking is undertaken, drawing upon existing scholarly works This chapter discusses the origins and basic definitions of critical thinking, the importance of critical thinking in general and in education in particular, and the factors that influence the perception and practice of critical thinking In addition, the theoretical framework of higher-order thinking of Bloom’s Taxonomy is also clarified
Chapter III: Methodology – Here, the research approach is explained, detailing the data selection, data collection procedures, and strategies used to analyze the data Chapter IV: Results and Discussion – This section of the study reports on the findings from the analysis of high school students’ critical thinking perceptions and the assessment of high school students’ critical thinking practices through a writing test This chapter delves further into the interpretation and clarification of these results Chapter V: Conclusion – The concluding chapter summarizes the main findings of the study, acknowledges any limitations encountered, and suggests directions for future research
LITERATURE REVIEW
Critical thinking
Recent studies underscore the importance of critical thinking in English academic practices, particularly focusing on the difficulties high school students face in articulating their ideas, which is essential for effective essay writing.
This section delves into critical thinking, highlighting its significance in academic settings and education It also investigates the various factors that shape students' understanding and application of critical thinking skills.
Critical thinking is a widely debated concept, with significant uncertainty surrounding its definition and manifestation The various interpretations of "critical thinking" highlight the complexity and diversity of opinions on the subject.
Critical thinking is a cognitive skill essential for logical decision-making, as highlighted by Jones (2005) and McPeck (1981) Toulmin, Rieke, and Janik (1984) define critical thinking as the process of presenting reasons to support a claim While syllogisms can effectively teach logical argumentation (Davies, 2008), Wingate (2011) notes that they are better suited for individual claims rather than the broader structure of an essay Nonetheless, the teaching of syllogisms remains valuable.
Critical thinking enhances writing skills by enabling the effective reasoning of arguments in essays or theses, as noted by Andrews (1995) In high school education, the concept of argument plays a crucial role in developing students' analytical abilities.
Critical thinking is exemplified by the ability to utilize a network of interconnected concepts to either support a specific viewpoint or challenge an opposing one (Andrews 1995, Scott 2000).
The term "critical thinking" originally referred to a philosophical concept but has since expanded to encompass fields like psychology and education (Houston, 2011) Houston defines it as the organization of thought and evaluation of arguments In the 1960s, cognitive transfer was described through classification, comparison, and contrast tactics, while the 1980s saw the inclusion of problem-solving scenarios and transfer abilities in its definition (Ameziane, 2016) Some scholars, such as Moon (2008), interpret critical thinking as the production of more complex thoughts A contemporary view by Nunez, Medina, and Cubides (2018) describes critical thinking as an ongoing interactive process of observing, analyzing, reflecting, and evaluating reality, suggesting that its development occurs not only individually but also through collaboration within a community of practice.
Critical thinking is a multifaceted concept that serves as both a social activity and a cognitive function Its extensive applicability is highlighted through the process of argumentation, where a text transforms existing knowledge rather than merely replicating it.
2.1.2 The importance of critical thinking
Critical thinking is a learned skill that must be nurtured and consistently practiced within active learning environments (Lisa and Mark, 2008) Implementing active learning techniques not only enhances the enjoyment of the course for both instructors and students but also significantly promotes critical thinking among students (Duron, Limbach, and Waugh, 2006).
Effective learning enhances course efficiency, with teachers serving as educational leaders responsible for instilling critical thinking skills in students (Fuad et al., 2017) These skills are vital for navigating complex challenges in social, scientific, and practical contexts (Shakirova, 2007) Developing critical thinking is crucial for academic success, as it prepares students for community life and the workforce (Hashemi, 2011) When students cultivate these skills, they become adept at problem-solving (Snyder & Snyder, 2008) Research by Linda Murawski (2014) highlights that applying critical thinking within education can significantly impact students' futures.
Critical thinking is an essential element in education, involving the ability to examine, assess, and combine knowledge to make wise decisions and solve complex situations
It goes beyond simply gathering information and motivates students to develop advanced cognitive abilities that are essential for success in both academic and real- life situations
Critical thinking in education involves essential skills such as analysis, interpretation, evidence assessment, innovative problem-solving, and effective communication Ennis (1991) describes it as the process of breaking down complex information into its parts, identifying patterns, and interpreting data thoughtfully This method fosters a deeper understanding of intricate topics Brookfield (2011) emphasizes that critical thinking is the ability to assess the reliability and relevance of evidence, guiding students to scrutinize sources, recognize biases, and make informed judgments based on the quality of information Paul and Elder (2007) assert that critical thinking enhances these evaluative skills.
The development of creative and analytical problem-solving skills involves encouraging individuals to think outside the box This process includes exploring diverse options and applying innovative strategies to overcome challenges, as noted by Halpern.
Critical thinking involves the ability to clearly and systematically express thoughts and ideas It enables students to articulate their viewpoints, develop logical reasoning, and communicate analyses effectively, thereby enhancing vital communication skills that are applicable in various contexts.
Critical thinking equips individuals with the skills necessary to navigate uncertainty and challenges, fostering resilience across various fields Engaging students in critical thinking creates an interactive learning environment that prioritizes active inquiry over rote memorization This skill extends beyond formal education, promoting lifelong learning and encouraging curiosity, adaptability, and open-mindedness Furthermore, critical thinking enables individuals to make informed and logical decisions, enhancing decision-making in both academic and everyday contexts It serves as a vital defense against deception, helping individuals discern reliable information sources and reducing vulnerability to manipulation.
Critical thinking in education is essential for cognitive growth, preparing students for academic success and a future that demands flexibility, insight, and the ability to solve complex problems.
2.1.4 Factors influencing students' perceptions and practices of critical thinking
High order thinking skills
Higher-order thinking skills are crucial for student education and the development of critical thinking abilities (Heong, Yunos, & Hassan, 2011) Engaging in higher-order thinking enables students to gain a deeper understanding of subjects and enhances their critical thinking skills Individuals with strong foundational qualities and values typically exhibit higher-order thinking and effectiveness (Ritchhart, 2002) By learning higher-order thinking skills in the classroom, students can enhance their awareness, persistence, and contextual sensitivity (Roberts & Erdos, 1993).
Piaget's work from 1936 was the first of its kind to examine the structure of higher- order thinking by going through the phases of cognitive development (Piaget, 1936)
Adults possess a wealth of logic, reasoning, understanding, and critical thinking, highlighting a connection between age and learning styles Bruner introduces the concept of a "spiral curriculum," designed to integrate past challenges with new contexts and interfaces, enhancing the learning experience.
By 1956, Bloom developed a comprehensive Higher-Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) model encompassing cognitive, emotional, and psychomotor components This theory outlines six levels of higher-order thinking: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating information.
The HOTS model encompasses critical thinking, problem-solving, decision-making, and metacognition, making it a comprehensive educational framework that extends beyond Bloom's taxonomy Constructivism, an educational approach that prioritizes the learner's active role in the learning process, has evolved from its roots in psychology to become a significant method in education, effectively explaining how individuals learn and assimilate new information (Bada & Olusegun, 2015).
Research gap
No Name of Author Published year
2022 Teachers’ perceptions and practices of critical thinking instruction in Indonesian senior high schools: a case study
Educators recognize skills, disposition, and knowledge as vital elements of critical thinking, emphasizing active learning activities over passive ones to improve students' critical thinking abilities The study reveals that all educators employed various pedagogical strategies to some degree to foster critical thinking in their students.
2019 The role of critical thinking in academic writing: an investigation of EFL students’ perceptions and writing experiences
Cultural background plays a significant role in shaping writing styles; however, students can learn and excel in new discourses The difficulties they encounter often arise from unclear argumentation, insufficient knowledge of the topic, and challenges associated with the essay format, such as establishing an authorial voice and meeting assessment criteria.
2017 Exploring critical thinking for secondary level students in chemistry: from insight
The motivation of pupils about one-time summative assessments significantly undermines critical thinking among secondary science students The emphasis on examinations
No Name of Author Published year
Research indicates that implementing effective educational practices enhances students' performance orientation and motivation to excel in assessments Often, students are perceived as passive and hesitant, rarely asking questions or providing feedback, which can hinder their engagement and critical thinking skills.
Investigation into Critical Thinking Skills of Urban High School Students: Role of an IT/STEM Program
Participants who completed the program and answered all three time-series TER tests demonstrated significant improvements in critical thinking skills The post-program CTS test scores showed greater consistency among participants, with an average score of 20.07 Additionally, there was a notable increase in inductive reasoning abilities during the first nine months, with continued progress observed in the following nine months.
In recent years, critical thinking has become a key focus in educational research, especially in higher education While numerous studies have examined students' awareness and perceptions of critical thinking through qualitative methods like interviews and reflective journals, there is a notable lack of systematic assessment of students' critical thinking abilities in their written texts Additionally, no studies have utilized a mixed-methods approach to evaluate high school students' written performance by combining qualitative and quantitative data This gap underscores the necessity for a comprehensive investigation that not only captures learners' perceptions but also objectively assesses their critical thinking skills in academic writing Consequently, this study aims to fill this gap by employing a mixed-methods design to evaluate and interpret critical thinking in high school students' written work.
METHODOLOGY
Research design
This study utilized the case study technique to explore high school students' perceptions and applications of critical thinking in essay writing, as it allows for in-depth analysis within real-world contexts (Yin, 2018) Critical thinking is influenced by individual competencies, pedagogical approaches, curriculum design, and sociocultural factors, making case studies ideal for examining cognitive processes rather than just statistical outcomes By integrating qualitative and quantitative methodologies, the research began with semi-structured interviews to capture students' perceptions and identify cognitive obstacles (Merriam, 2009) An essay writing assessment evaluated students' use of critical thinking based on criteria such as logical reasoning and persuasive evidence (Facione, 1990) This dual approach clarified students' understanding of critical thinking and its practical application, revealing potential disconnects between theory and practice Additionally, the quantitative analysis following rubric scoring provided valuable insights into assessing critical thinking skills in educational research.
According to Moskal and Leydens (2019), Cronbach’s alpha is essential for assessing the internal consistency of rubric scores, ensuring that evaluations are reliable and accurately reflect student performance rather than subjective biases Additionally, Pallant (2020) emphasizes the importance of quantitative analysis techniques, such as t-tests and ANOVA, in comparing scores across various demographic groups, which is vital for understanding the differences in critical thinking development among students of different genders, ages, or class levels.
In conclusion, employing quantitative analysis following rubric scoring enhances objectivity and scientific rigor in research, while also uncovering significant relationships, enabling precise conclusions, and providing practical insights for improving educational effectiveness.
Mixed-method case studies provide a comprehensive insight into students' critical thinking approaches, offering empirical evidence to support the development of effective teaching strategies in high school writing education.
Research participants and research context
The study involved high school students aged 15 to 18, a critical period for their development and education During this time, they encounter a wide range of knowledge that helps build a solid foundation for their understanding and skills.
The English learning program in high schools is an essential and mandatory part of education, highlighting the need to investigate students' understanding and use of critical thinking in English writing tasks Its compulsory nature provides a consistent study population, allowing for the examination of how educational environmental factors influence the development of critical thinking skills.
Researching the influence of the learning environment and educational demands is crucial for understanding their impact on students' critical thinking skills in English writing.
Research instruments
In the qualitative phase, the primary instruments employed were a semi-structured interview
Semi-structured interviews are essential for understanding high school students' perspectives on critical thinking, as they strike a balance between structure and flexibility This method allows researchers to explore participants' cognitive processes in depth while maintaining a consistent framework for comparison According to Kvale (1996), these interviews provide the necessary flexibility to examine responses while ensuring comparability By using predetermined questions, researchers can gain insights into students' critical thinking in contexts such as writing and academic discussions This approach enables students to express their thoughts in their own words, yielding richer data than rigid methods like multiple-choice questions It captures the nuances of student reasoning, justification, and reflection, which are vital components of critical thinking Furthermore, students can showcase their critical thinking abilities, the challenges they encounter, and their views on potential improvements Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2014) highlight that this interview technique is particularly beneficial in educational research, as it helps researchers understand cognitive processes within specific environments Ultimately, this method provides valuable insights into students' critical thinking skills, allowing educators to tailor teaching strategies to meet individual learning needs.
The convenience sample employed in this study was deemed advantageous for researchers regarding time, cost, and effort in participant selection Sampling is the
This study employs purposive sampling, a method that involves deliberately selecting specific individuals, places, or events to gather essential information that cannot be acquired through other sampling techniques (Wilumila, 2002; Maxwell) This approach is crucial for accurately determining the parameters or characteristics of the entire population.
In-person interviews were conducted in the first semester of the 2023-2024 academic year with six students from grades 10, 11, and 12 to gather confidential insights on their perceptions of critical thinking (CT) The author acted as a facilitator, encouraging discussion while maintaining neutrality and avoiding personal biases The meticulous recording and note-taking ensured the accuracy of the data, which was essential for analyzing patterns and understanding key principles of CT Participants responded to questions about their fundamental understanding of CT, its application in writing, challenges faced, and its relation to the learning process, including its development based on Bloom's Taxonomy Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and was audio-recorded for subsequent transcription and analysis.
The interview questions were meticulously structured into seven principal sections:
This article explores the essential aspects of critical thinking, including its definition, application in writing, and key elements It addresses the challenges faced in developing critical thinking skills and highlights its significance in the learning process Furthermore, it discusses the development of critical thinking and its connection to personal opinions The content is structured into seven main sections, derived from insights obtained through semi-structured interviews.
Interviews were crucial in revealing specific challenges students faced with critical thinking, guiding the researcher in refining questionnaire topics The first section, “understanding of critical thinking,” highlighted that many 10th graders had a limited grasp of the concept, while 12th graders showed a more developed understanding, indicating a need for initial conceptual clarification The second section, “Applying critical thinking in writing,” emerged from students' struggles to incorporate critical thinking into their writing structure, necessitating more targeted assessment The third section, “Identifying the Elements of Critical Thinking,” was added due to students' difficulties in recognizing key components like logical reasoning, evidence, and analysis.
The sections "Challenges and Difficulties" and "Critical Thinking and Learning Process" were created to explore the specific issues faced by students, particularly highlighting that 10th graders frequently struggle with assignments demanding deep analytical thinking.
The article explores the "Development of Critical Thinking" and its connection to "Linking Critical Thinking to Personal Opinion," highlighting the progress of 12th graders in articulating their views Through semi-structured interviews, rich data was gathered to accurately reflect students' experiences with critical thinking, covering theoretical concepts, practical applications, and challenges faced A total of 20 questions were designed to provide detailed insights while ensuring participant comfort The analysis of interview transcripts employed analytic induction, a qualitative research method, allowing for a thorough examination of the data.
21 for prominent or repeating patterns During the subsequent phase, the author categorised the topics into several headings that were derived from the collected data
The headers in the article closely align with those in the topic guide, facilitating efficient data management for category analysis and comparison The author strategically selected excerpts from the transcripts for the 'Findings and Discussion' section, focusing on their capacity to illustrate key themes Rather than prioritizing frequency, the chosen participants' impressions were emphasized for their effectiveness in conveying important concepts and insights.
In this study's quantitative phase, rubrics are utilized as a comprehensive assessment tool to evaluate students' critical thinking in English writing They provide a standardized benchmark for assessing critical thinking skills and outline expected achievement levels for each criterion, aiding in grade assignment and specific outcome attainment According to Churches (2015), rubrics systematically gather information on an individual's knowledge and skills, while Garfolo et al (2016) highlight their effectiveness in assessing specific behaviors Aiken (1996) emphasizes that explicit criteria are vital for evaluating learning outcomes, and Facione (1990) notes that rubrics are essential for breaking down complex tasks into measurable components The detailed nature of rubrics allows researchers to assess not only the final results but also the processes and unique aspects of students' critical thinking abilities.
Hence, the utilisation of rubrics not only enables a clear and equitable evaluation procedure but also aids in constructing a comprehensive database of students' critical
22 thinking abilities by means of thorough examination and assessment of each significant facet
This study utilizes a rubric to assess students' critical thinking skills in writing An online writing skills evaluation was conducted by educators at the end of the first semester of the 2023-2024 academic year, involving 50 students from grades 10 to 12 The assessment centered on the theme of Global Warming, a topic included in the English curriculum.
The implementation process was executed through meticulous processes of the Rubric to guarantee objectivity and effectiveness, specifically as follows:
Utilizing the IELTS Writing scoring criteria to create a rubric is a wise choice, as it breaks down into key components: Coherence and Cohesion aligns with Organisation, while Grammatical Range and Accuracy pertains to Mechanics This approach maintains the integrity of IELTS standards while making them applicable in diverse educational settings The Coherence and Cohesion criterion assesses the ability to logically organize ideas and use cohesive devices effectively This focus on Organisation underscores the importance of structure and the logical flow of concepts in writing As Nunan (1991) noted, “effective writing relies heavily on the logical arrangement of ideas” (p 90), emphasizing the critical role of organization in writing skills Meanwhile, the Grammatical Range and Accuracy criterion highlights the need for varied and precise grammatical structures, evaluating essential writing mechanics such as spelling, punctuation, and grammar.
"mechanics are the foundation of written communication, ensuring that meaning is clear and unambiguous" (p 112) This is particularly crucial in scholarly writing, where precision is paramount
Employing the IELTS Writing score criteria by delineating particular elements such as Content, Organisation, Language Use, and Mechanics guarantees a comprehensive
The evaluation of writing involves assessing content, structure, linguistic proficiency, and technical precision, ensuring the impartiality of IELTS while being suitable for various assessment contexts Weigle (2002) emphasized that utilizing well-validated scoring criteria improves the reliability and validity of writing assessments, highlighting the effectiveness of this approach Consequently, the rubric is based on essential elements of critical thinking and essay composition.
The organization criterion assesses a student's capability to evaluate material, construct arguments, and provide supporting evidence It measures the coherence of the candidate's work, ensuring that an essay meets organizational standards by being clear, coherent, and effectively articulating both primary and secondary points.
Mechanics assesses the composition, syntax, and clarity of writing, focusing on the candidate's understanding and flexible application of diverse grammatical structures Proficiency in language use, from simple to complex constructs, is crucial Additionally, the accurate application of punctuation, such as full stops and commas, is vital for meeting this criterion.
The grading criteria are organized into levels from low to high, typically ranging from 1 to 4 points, with comprehensive descriptions for each level This structure enhances transparency and minimizes uncertainty in the evaluation process.
• Selection of writing topic: The writing topic is chosen from a shared subject suitable for students in grades 10, 11, and 12, guaranteeing diversity in age and proficiency level
• Evaluation procedure: Two separate evaluators utilise the rubric to assess the identical collection of articles This facilitates the evaluation of grading consistency among assessors
• Discussion and rectification: Should a substantial discrepancy in scoring arise between the two instructors, we shall confer to determine the most suitable final score
The average score for each criterion is computed individually and subsequently combined to yield the overall score for each article
• Comparative analysis of scores: The findings are examined to discern variations among grades, ages, and genders, while also identifying the criteria with which studentsencounter the most challenges
Research procedures
The research was conducted in two separate phases, both utilizing the same methodology In the first phase, the author will interview candidates to evaluate their comprehension and interpretation of critical thinking In the second phase, 50 high school students will be selected to participate in a 40-minute writing test on the same topic.
Subsequently, the author will employ the rubrics scale to assess the students' proficiency in critical thinking
Methods of Data Collection
Data were collected through semi-structured interviews lasting approximately 30 minutes each, which were audio-recorded to ensure accurate transcription and analysis The interview questions focused on students' views on critical thinking, the challenges they faced, and how they applied this thinking in their English writing.
In the quantitative phase, data was collected from students' written assignments, which were assessed using a predefined rubric designed to evaluate critical thinking skills such as analysis, evaluation, and logical reasoning.
Data analysis methods
Qualitative data obtained from interviews were subjected to inductive analysis Interview transcripts were meticulously analysed to discern emergent themes and patterns pertaining to critical thinking in English writing
Quantitative data were examined utilising SPSS software The study employed t-tests
Literature review Identifying gap and the aim of the study Interviewing students
Grading writing papers based on Rubric
Students take a writing online test
This study utilized statistical methods to evaluate critical thinking efficacy in writing among two student groups, employing ANOVA to analyze differences across multiple groups The analysis of rubric-assessed papers provided score data, which was examined to determine the correlation between factors such as grade level and critical thinking abilities.
Validity and reliability
To ensure the reliability and accuracy of the study, the rubric was assessed and refined based on the four scoring criteria of the IELTS Writing Task 2 before its official use, promoting consistency in writing evaluation In the qualitative phase, interview data was carefully recorded and transcribed, with the author cross-referencing the findings with multiple sources to ensure precision and thoroughness.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Research question 1: How do high school students perceive critical thinking
This section presents the findings from the data collected to answer the research questions through the following points: high school students’ perceptions on critical thinking
High School Students’ Perceptions on Critical Thinking
The semi- structured interview data reveal a number of themes showing high school students’ perceptions as shown in Table 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
This study utilized semi-structured interviews with high school students to explore their views and practices regarding critical thinking in English writing The analysis identified two key themes: students' perceptions of autonomous writing and critical thinking, and their habits of questioning to enhance idea development in writing Students expressed diverse opinions on the benefits of independent thought and writing compared to following a set structure, with some believing that personal arguments and free expression made their writing more unique and compelling.
"I write in accordance with my emotions and personal style, which proves more effective for readers." (Student D)
Conversely, certain studentsbelieved that writing is contingent upon the particular subject matter Upon encountering a new subject, students often require assistance from educators or recommended frameworks for first guidance
" I tend to write according to my feelings, with my own personality, which is more effective for readers." (Student B)
Certain students often integrate both approaches, initially contemplating
28 independently to apply their information, and subsequently consulting the blueprint when faced with challenges
"I depend on the topic: within my understanding, I think by myself, the first time I see the topic I need a suggested outline." (Student A)
The research reveals that students adopt diverse strategies for critical thinking in their writing, showcasing a spectrum from active involvement and creativity to dependence on teacher support This highlights differing levels of confidence among students in their critical thinking abilities when crafting essays.
Many students acknowledge that asking questions during the writing process is essential for expanding ideas and clarifying perspectives One student noted that engaging in critical thinking through questioning improves writing, resulting in a more creative and less formulaic approach.
"I like to think for myself, be unique, not be constrained, and create my own point of view." (Student C)
Moreover, certain students perceive inquiry as a means to investigate diverse viewpoints on the matter, thereby aiding them in constructing a more cohesive argument:
“I ask many questions, both answering and giving different opinions.” (Student D)
Several students feel that posing questions enhances clarity in writing, hence facilitating readers' access to information
"I do Asking questions are questions that readers want to know, clearly." (Student C)
Not all students feel inclined to ask questions during the writing process, as some believe this depends on the specific subject matter and their personal writing style.
The effectiveness of questioning in critical thinking varies among students, with many acknowledging its importance While some actively engage in inquiry to develop their ideas, others utilize this skill only when necessary.
The study reveals that students utilize various methods for critical thinking in essay writing, with some demonstrating spontaneous critical thinking and concept development, while others depend on guidance from teachers or structured frameworks Questioning is identified as a vital strategy for developing ideas and arguments, but the extent of its use varies based on students' writing styles and comprehension levels These findings highlight the importance of systematically teaching students how to cultivate critical thinking and apply it flexibly in academic writing.
4.1.1.2 Applying Critical Thinking in Writing
This section outlines the key findings from qualitative data on high school students' use of critical thinking in writing argumentative essays The analysis focused on four main themes: preparation for argumentative writing, organization and structure of arguments, consideration of multiple perspectives, and the importance of questioning to clarify arguments.
Students exhibited diverse strategies in preparing for argumentative writing, with many focusing on the importance of collecting factual information and consulting credible sources to substantiate their arguments.
"I search for facts, verify information, and listen to debates on YouTube." (Student A)
Others focused on formulating key ideas and generating questions, suggesting that questioning the topic helped them develop structured arguments:
"I find the main topic, identify key points, and generate related questions This helps me form ideas and later construct counterarguments." (Student C)
Additionally, a few students highlighted the importance of checking prior knowledge, ensuring they had sufficient background information before writing:
"I explore multiple topics, check if I have encountered a similar issue before, and review materials before starting the essay." (Student E)
These findings suggest that while students recognize the importance of preparation,
30 their methods vary between information gathering, structured brainstorming, and self-assessment
Regarding organizing and structuring arguments most students expressed awareness of the need for logical sequencing and coherence in their essays Some students adhered strictly to structured approaches:
"I follow a pre-established outline." (Student B)
Meanwhile, others emphasized diverse perspectives and external references, ensuring their arguments were well-rounded:
"I collect additional documents, refer to others’ opinions, and then develop my reasoning." (Student C)
This suggests that while some students prioritize a fixed structural framework, others prefer a more flexible, research-driven approach to organizing their arguments
Engaging with opposing viewpoints is a crucial aspect of effective argumentation, and students demonstrated various strategies in this area Some students actively challenged counterarguments and offered well-reasoned responses.
"I always acknowledge different perspectives, identify counterarguments, and respond logically." (Student B)
Others demonstrated a strong personal stance, rejecting a conventional approach:
"I do not just follow the given topic I present my own unique viewpoint instead of conforming to standard arguments." (Student D)
Additionally, some students viewed perspective-taking as a process of broadening their reasoning scope rather than simply rebutting arguments:
"Considering multiple perspectives helps me refine my ideas and clarify my reasoning." (Student F)
These findings indicate that while students generally recognize the value of counterarguments, their approaches differ—some aim for logical rebuttal, while others emphasize individual expression and critical independence
The ability to ask critical questions is vital for structuring ideas and refining reasoning, as most students recognize that questioning plays a key role in clarifying their arguments.
"I always ask myself different questions to ensure my argument is clear." (Student B)
"I frame questions as if I were the reader to check if my reasoning is logical." (Student D)
Moreover, some students linked questioning to self-regulation and refinement:
"I continuously evaluate my ideas through questioning Once I finalize my outline, I ensure my arguments are solid." (Student F)
These findings highlight that questioning is a fundamental strategy in students’ critical thinking process, allowing them to self-assess, refine, and strengthen their arguments
The study highlights that students utilize a variety of critical thinking strategies in their argumentative writing, with some favoring structured outlines and factual sources, while others emphasize perspective-taking and independent reasoning Questioning emerges as a key element in the writing process, serving as a means for self-regulation and enhancing arguments These results indicate that although students recognize critical thinking principles, their application differs based on individual preferences, past experiences, and chosen writing strategies.
4.1.1.3 Identifying Elements of Critical Thinking
Most students view the ability to identify the strengths and weaknesses of arguments in essays as crucial However, their methods of evaluation differ greatly Some students take an active approach by organizing information based on its importance to assess the validity of the arguments presented.
"Yes I arrange them according to their level of importance." (Student A)
Others emphasize that not all arguments have absolute strengths, and a broader perspective is necessary before drawing conclusions:
"We talk about strengths, but not every argument is inherently stronger than others, so we still need to consider its weaknesses." (Student B)
Some students take a more practical approach, suggesting that some topics do not
32 have a clear distinction between strengths and weaknesses, as it depends on the ability to argue convincingly:
"Sometimes, certain topics do not have an obvious strong or weak side Only by arguing effectively can we clarify the issue." (Student D)
These findings indicate that students acknowledge the existence of strengths and weaknesses in arguments, yet the depth of their analysis and evaluation skills vary significantly
When it comes to identifying the essential components of a persuasive argument, many students acknowledge that they lack a clear strategy for determining these key elements.
Meanwhile, others have a more structured approach, such as selecting the most relevant evidence to support their claims:
"I choose the most relevant evidence." (Student B)
Additionally, some students focus on carefully reading the prompt and breaking down key elements to ensure their essay follows a clear direction:
"I read the prompt carefully, underline keywords to determine the topic, and then establish a clear approach." (Student F)
Research indicates that students demonstrate differing levels of proficiency in recognizing key components of argumentation Some students employ effective strategies, while others face challenges in choosing relevant ideas and supporting evidence.
A key element of critical thinking for students is the ability to analyze and evaluate opposing viewpoints Many students recognize that engaging with contrasting perspectives can enhance the strength of their own arguments.
"Different opinions serve as supporting evidence for my viewpoint." (Student A)
Others emphasize the importance of questioning the validity of an opposing argument rather than simply accepting or rejecting it:
"When encountering opposing viewpoints, I take them as suggestions or question whether they are actually valid." (Student D)
Additionally, some students attempt to balance personal perspectives with opposing views, maintaining a fair ratio in their discussion:
"I try to balance my argument at a 5:5 or 7:3 ratio, slightly favoring the majority opinion." (Student F)
Research question 2 To what extent do high-school students use critical thinking
4.2.1 Descriptive statistics in research stage 2
In terms of gender, a total of 50 samples met the criteria for inclusion in phase 2 analysis, of which 28 participants were male (56%) and 22 participants were female (44%)
Regarding age, the participants in the study are high school students from a high school in Vietnam, with ages ranging from 16 to 18, comprising 32%, 38%, and 30% respectively
4.2.1.2 One-way analysis of variance between genders and 2 rubric criteria
Table 3: Descriptives of genders and 2 rubric criteria
Table 4: Test of Homogeneity of Variances of genders and
Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig organization 752 1 48 390 mechanics 004 1 48 950
Table 5: ANOVA of genders and 4 rubric criteria
Squares df Mean Square F Sig organization Between Groups 013 1 013 026 873
A one-way analysis comparing genders across two rubric criteria revealed that among
In a study involving 50 students, consisting of 28 males and 22 females, the mean scores for essay writing in mechanics were 2.82 for males and 2.77 for females This resulted in a slight difference of 0.05 between the genders, suggesting a minor disparity in language use.
The study revealed that the average scores for males and females in writing organization were 3.21 and 3.18, respectively, with a statistically significant difference of 0.03 (p < 0.05) This suggests that men generally exhibit greater logic and coherence in their writing compared to women Additionally, the Test of Homogeneity of Variances showed significance values of 39% for "organization" and 95% for "mechanics," indicating no variance discrepancies between genders across all rubric criteria The ANOVA results further confirmed that the significance coefficients for the two criteria were 87.3% and 81.7%, both exceeding 5%, which implies no significant differences in the evaluation of the four factors based on gender classification.
4.2.1.3 Independent samples test between age groups and 2 rubric criteria
4.2.1.3.1 Independent samples test between two age groups of 16, 17 and 4 rubric criteria
Table 16: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 16, 17 and 2 rubric criteria
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper organization Equal variances assumed
The data reveals that 16 students aged 16 and 19 students aged 17 participated in the test The average scores for organization, language use, and mechanics were 2.94 and 3.11, and 2.44 and 2.95 for the two age groups, respectively The differences in mean values between these groups are not statistically significant, suggesting that any discrepancies may arise from random variation With a confidence level of 95%, there is no significant difference across all three criteria according to the rubric However, the significance level of 4.5% for the mechanics variable indicates a notable difference in grammar usage and accuracy in academic writing between the two age groups.
4.2.1.3.1 Independent samples test between two age groups of 17, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Table 7: Group Statistics of two age groups of 17, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Deviation Std Error Mean organization 17 19 3.11 658 151
Table 8: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 17, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper organization Equal variances assumed
The analysis reveals a total of 34 students aged 17 and 18, with 19 students being 17 years old and 15 students aged 18 The mean coefficient difference between these age groups is not statistically significant, suggesting that any observed differences are due to random factors rather than influencing the overall statistics In the Independent Samples Test, the Sig (2-tailed) values for the three variables related to organization are 58.5%, which is above the 5% threshold, further supporting the lack of significant difference.
There is no significant difference between the two age groups in terms of coherence and cohesiveness, with a confidence level of 95% However, the significance index (2-tailed) for these criteria is 2.2%, which is less than the 5% threshold, indicating a statistically significant difference between the 17 and 18 age groups This disparity in coherence and cohesion is not random.
4.2.1.3.3 Independent samples test between two age groups of 16, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Table 9: Group Statistics of two age groups of 16, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Table 10: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 16, 18 and 2 rubric criteria
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper organization Equal variances assumed
According to the chart above, there are a total of 31 students aged 16 and 18, comprising 16 students who are 16 years old and 15 students who are 18 years old
The mean coefficient difference between the two age groups is not statistically significant, suggesting that this variation is due to random factors and does not impact the overall statistics.
The Samples Test reveals that the Sig (2-tailed) value for all criteria across the two age groups is below 0.05, suggesting that the differences in rubric criteria between these age groups are statistically significant and not due to random chance.
4.2.1.3.3 Independent samples test between three age groups and their total scores
Table 11: Group Statistics of two age groups of 16, 17 and their total scores age N Mean Std Deviation
Table 12: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 16, 17 and and their total scores
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper t o t a l
Equal variances assumed 4.168 049 -1.681 33 102 -1.428 849 -3.155 300 Equal variances not assumed -1.637 27.018 113 -1.428 872 -3.217 362
Table 13: Group Statistics of two age groups of 17, 18 and their total scores
Group Statistics age N Mean Std Deviation
Table 14: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 17, 18 and and their total scores
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
Confiden ce Interval of the Differenc e Lower Upper total Equal variances assumed
Table 15: Group Statistics of two age groups of 16, 18 and their total scores
Group Statistics age N Mean Std Deviation Std Error Mean total 16 16 10.63 2.895 724
Table 16: Independent Samples Test of two age groups of 16, 18 and and their total scores
Levene's Test for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper total Equal variances assumed
The analysis of age groups 16 and 17 reveals mean coefficients of 10.63 and 12.05, with significance levels of 10.2% and 11.3% For age groups 17 and 18, the mean coefficients are 12.05 and 12.93, with significance levels of 21.1% and 20.4% A p-value exceeding 0.05 suggests that the mean differences between these groups are not statistically significant, indicating that the observed disparities may be due to chance rather than true differences in the population Although the mean difference exceeds 2, it is not statistically significant However, this difference may still hold practical relevance in fields like education or social sciences, reflecting variations in experience or aptitude Notably, there is a significant disparity between the 16 and 18 age groups, with average coefficients of 10.63 and 12.93, and a significance coefficient of 1.3%.
A T-test result showing a difference greater than 2 with a significance coefficient (p-value) below 0.05 indicates a statistically significant difference in scores, reflecting a genuine disparity in critical thinking skills in writing among groups Age-adjusted findings reveal that 18-year-olds exhibit higher critical thinking scores than 16-year-olds This group with superior mean scores demonstrates enhanced critical thinking abilities, allowing for more effective analysis, evaluation, and application of critical thinking in both writing and the learning process.
The analysis reveals no significant score difference between 16 and 17-year-old students, but a notable gap exists between 17 and 18-year-olds, with the latter outperforming the former in all rubric criteria This disparity can be attributed to cognitive development and learning experiences associated with age At 16, students are just beginning to engage with critical thinking and academic writing frameworks, leading to distinct cognitive processes Many 16-year-olds struggle with critical thinking, as evidenced by incomplete assignments and illogical organization of ideas, which confuses readers Additionally, their language proficiency is often limited, with imprecise jargon and frequent spelling errors that significantly impact their scores Furthermore, students at this age typically rely on simple phrases instead of employing a diverse range of grammatical structures, such as compound sentences.
Eighteen-year-old students, with two more years of educational experience, demonstrate improved writing skills compared to younger students They engage in more analytical, argumentative, and critical tasks, leading to a deeper enhancement of skills such as critical thinking, analysis, and idea organization, as evaluated by the rubric.
At 17, students show significant educational growth compared to 16-year-olds, having engaged in more analytical and writing activities According to Piaget's theory of cognitive development, the key difference between 16 and 18 years is that 18-year-olds enter the final formal operational stage, which is marked by advanced critical, analytical, and synthetic skills This stage signifies the full maturation of critical thinking abilities, allowing students to evaluate diverse perspectives, question assumptions, and draw logical conclusions.
The study found no significant differences in writing and critical thinking skills between male and female students, likely due to equal access to educational resources and training Contemporary teaching practices promote the development of cognitive and writing abilities without gender bias, contributing to diminished disparities Additionally, research shows that high school students aged 16 to 18, regardless of gender, demonstrate significant advancements in logical and abstract thinking, with skill acquisition often not distinctly separated by gender These findings align with previous studies on the topic.
Research shows that gender disparities in critical thinking and writing skills can be minimized through equal educational methods Halpern (1997) found that when both boys and girls are placed in a learning environment that fosters cognitive development, the differences in their skills become negligible.
Research shows that age disparities enhance students' critical thinking, analytical, and writing skills, especially in late high school This aligns with Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development, suggesting that older students develop higher-order thinking skills through improved learning experiences Kuhn found that critical thinking skills notably improve with age during high school, as students face increased cognitive demands from standardized assessments and analytical essays.