Introduction 

While we are routinely tasked with processing and analyzing information, research consistently demonstrates that humans are remarkably poor at doing so. Our judgment is distorted by logical fallacies and cognitive biases, and we often fail to think rationally, blindly deferring to emotion or capitulating to social pressure. Professors often insist that they teach their students how, not what, to think; many universities claim that one of their foundational goals is to develop their students’ critical thinking skills. Despite their rhetorical commitment, many professors struggle to define that concept. Among both educators and the general populace, critical thinking often functions as an academic buzzword analogous to “thinking well” and serves as a catch-all term for identifying the myriad habits and skills necessary to do so. Since professors and students do not have a concrete understanding of what critical thinking entails, professors rarely teach it explicitly, and students are left unsure of how they can develop this skill. However, there are established programs that work. The University of Texas (UT) at Austin’s 90-year-old Plan II Honors program demonstrates that when universities return to the fundamentals of a traditional liberal arts education, students graduate with the analytical skills necessary to excel in any field and blossom into the leaders of tomorrow. 

Critical Thinking 

Despite the general ambiguity over the meaning of the term, for scholars of critical thinking, there is an established, frequently cited definition in academic literature. In 1990, the American Philosophical Association convened 46 scholars to “work toward a consensus” and formulate a much-needed definition. Their final report describes critical thinking as “purposeful, self-regulatory judgement which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference as well as an explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgement is based.” In other words, thinking critically means actively scrutinizing your reasoning and conclusions to ensure that they are logically coherent, defensible, and grounded in accurate and relevant information. When evaluating your own or others’ conclusions, it is necessary to cross-examine them through probing questions, clearly identify the supporting arguments and each piece of reasoning that supports the conclusion, and ensure that any implications that logically follow from your conclusion are also correct. 

Leading scholars Richard Paul and Linda Elder established a set of standards to assess the quality of thinking. These standards are: 

Clarity: Have the assumptions, premises, and conclusions been clearly articulated and defined? Accuracy: Have the premises and evidence been verified? Precision: Are the premises and conclusions specific enough? Relevance: Is each part of the argument relevant? Depth: Is the conclusion substantive, or is it too simplistic? Breadth: Have all counter arguments and perspectives been considered? Logicality: Does the conclusion follow from the premises? Fairness: Is the reasoning unbiased?

Thinking critically can be used in a situation as simple as identifying the best method of getting to work after your car breaks down. Making such a decision requires you to articulate clearly the alternatives (e.g., bus, Uber); determine the relevant information (ignore the route of the 10 bus if you are taking the 5); determine methods for accurately predicting the time that each option will take (are Google Maps’ estimates reliable?); consider logically whether your plan works (your friend cannot drive you if he is supposed to be in a conference meeting); and analyze whether you have considered all perspectives and potential complexities (breadth and depth).

However, critical thinking is undermined by the numerous logical fallacies that muddy our analysis: not taking the bus because of the statistically unlikely flat tire that occurred the last time; avoiding asking your friend for help because you are too proud or too fearful; lazily defaulting to taking an Uber without evaluating your options; not knowing what you do not know; not being willing, after having reviewed your decision and determined that it was wrong, to adjust accordingly. These biases, emotions, and assumptions creep in even more when critically thinking about political speeches, career and life decisions, and innumerable other important situations. 

Nevertheless, while this kind of everyday decision-making may not feel like an intellectual exercise, it is a simplified version of the critical thinking that we should utilize in all areas of life. Furthermore, one’s aptitude for it is not inherently based on intelligence; smart people are equally, if not more, capable of rationalizing bad decisions. Critical thinking is a skill that is developed and a process that an individual must willingly engage in, even though it is more intensive and slower than other methods of drawing conclusions. 

The Importance of Critical Thinking 

Critical thinking is necessary because we are constantly making decisions. While it is not necessary to thoroughly evaluate every choice, critical thinking is vital for making big life decisions such as determining your beliefs, choosing a spouse, or making career and education plans. 

Equally as important, critical thinking is essential to the functioning of our republic. Citizens elect our leaders. To effectively accomplish this duty, they must be able to sift truth from falsehood, formulate their beliefs, evaluate the candidates, and then decide. This requires critical thinking and a failure or inability to do so has dire consequences. A robust 2021 study conducted by Anthony Lantian et al. found a negative association between critical thinking ability and belief in conspiracy theories. This study confirms similar conclusions reached in related studies. Society is worse off when people believe that the earth is flat, the moon landing was faked, the Sandy Hook massacre was staged, and vaccines cause autism. Authoritarian movements and demagogues flourish by exploiting emotions and promulgating simplistic narratives. As AI becomes more prevalent and more people receive their news from social media, citizens need to be able to think critically before believing the information presented to them. This includes cross-checking claims by reading multiple independent sources. With the ever-increasing flow of information, critical thinking will become even more crucial. 

Meanwhile, advances in artificial intelligence mean that rote tasks are increasingly being performed by AI. People with skills like problem-solving, critical thinking, and creativity are most valued by employers. The World Economic Forum’s 2025 Future of Jobs Report found that, for the third year in a row, critical thinking is the #1 core skill for employers, with seven out of ten identifying it as vital. In any professional field you will be required to process information, adapt to new situations, and act on your own instead of simply following instructions; critical thinking is necessary to supplement the technical knowledge taught in school or acquired in training. 

The Failure of Universities 

Despite the necessity of this skill, universities are providing inadequate instruction. A PayScale and Future Workplace survey of over 76,000 managers and executives found that 60 percent believed that recent graduates lacked critical thinking skills. Worse, research studies empirically confirm this sentiment. A 2022 report by Dirk Van Damme and Doris Zahner found that 47% of graduating university students scored below “Proficient” (in Levels 1-2 out of 5) on the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+), an international exam designed by the Council for Aid to Education to assess the critical thinking and written communication skills of college students. These results led Damme and Zahner to conclude that “it is difficult to claim that a university qualification reliably signals a level of critical thinking skills expected by the global marketplace.” This continues a trend revealed by Douglas Belkin of the Wall Street Journal in 2017: “At more than half of schools [that had a statistically significant number of students taking CLA+], at least a third of seniors were unable to make a cohesive argument, assess the quality of evidence in a document or interpret data in a table.” 

In 1994, Lion Gardiner at George Washington University noted that faculty, despite wanting to develop critical thinking, in practice only focused on facts and concepts and opted for lecturing instead of increasing student participation. Further, tests “emphasize[d] recall of memorized factual information rather than intellectual challenge.” Another study conducted that year of 38 public and 28 private universities discovered that a key reason for this failure was the professors’ lack of knowledge in teaching critical thinking and their lack of criteria to evaluate students’ progress. Less than 20% of college professors “could give a clear explanation of what critical thinking is.” Consequently, while the vast majority of professors wanted to teach this skill, only 9% were clearly teaching it “on a typical day in class.” Furthermore, only 8% could name the intellectual criteria they provided to students to help them evaluate their own thinking. These trends continue today. If professors themselves cannot define or communicate the standards that ensure critical thinking, then students cannot develop it. 

A Model for Improvement: Plan II 

If colleges value fostering critical thinking, they must ensure that professors prioritize these skills and are given the latitude to effectively teach them in the classroom. Additionally, they should develop programs similar to UT’s Plan II Honors. Plan II has, over its ninety-year history, developed a curriculum focused on improving critical thinking, communication, reading, and writing skills. 

Seminar-style writing courses are a cornerstone of Plan II. First year students enroll in a year-long world literature class and then, as upperclassmen, pursue a variety of other writing-intensive elective courses known as “Signature Classes” and “Junior Seminars.” When students write to convey an opinion, not simply to regurgitate facts, they are forced to organize their thoughts, articulate their arguments, and provide evidence to support their claims. Throughout the writing process, students revise their paper by refining their arguments and considering new counterpoints: critical thinking. Capping classes at 10 to 20 students allows professors to give individualized, substantive feedback that is unavailable to freshmen in larger classes at other major universities. Through detailed constructive criticism, professors can challenge students’ thinking and expose gaps in logic, unjustified claims, and inconsistent reasoning. Unlike multiple-choice tests, writing reveals the student’s thought process. Although the right answer is important, how the student arrived at their conclusions is equally essential. Research has shown that writing significantly increases critical thinking skills. In their final year, all Plan II students write a thesis, which involves conducting extensive research and then formulating and defending an original argument. It is the capstone of their undergraduate educational career and provides the opportunity for every graduating senior to demonstrate the depth of their critical thinking skills. 

Meanwhile, the breadth of the curriculum, which requires classes in math, chemistry, physics, fine arts, philosophy, world history, and other subjects, aids critical thinking by forcing students to make connections across disciplines. By engaging with various topics, students develop different approaches to problem-solving. Plan II also requires students to take both a logic and a philosophy course. Logic teaches students to identify the different components of an argument (premises and a conclusion) and to differentiate between good and bad reasoning, such as by learning to recognize logical fallacies. This class gives students standards for thinking critically. The philosophy class then forces these students to utilize these skills to evaluate arguments on abstract and complex topics. They are compelled to challenge the opinions of renowned philosophers and even their classmates, thereby practicing core components of critical thinking. The smaller classes help students become familiar with their classmates and ensure they are comfortable disagreeing with and debating one another. 

The Plan II major was designed to offer students an alternative to the traditional “Plan I” college track, where a student majors in one specific discipline. Its founders, influenced by the Great Depression, recognized the importance of these skills, which could enable students to adapt to any job or field. Today, students will often adopt a “Plan I” major in addition to majoring in Plan II. 

While not every university offers a Plan II-like program, students can and should actively seek out classes that emphasize writing, provide a breadth of knowledge, and teach philosophy or logic. They should attempt to find people with whom they can debate and organizations such as school newspapers where they can write. For university administrators and professors, they must no longer assume that critical thinking will emerge on its own. They ought to cultivate their students’ minds by curating plentiful opportunities for reading, writing, and debating and by creating courses that explicitly teach the skills necessary to think critically.