Introduction

There are various definitions around Critical thinking, authors have defined this concept based on studies associated to different contexts: “Critical thinking is a term that continues to manifest itself in many classrooms around the globe. While many institutional leaders are concerned about enhancing student learning outcomes, they also recognize the fundamental issues impacting this development.” (Magno, 2010, p.18). Critical thinking was also recently defined by the Association of American Colleges and Universities as ‘‘a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating.” (Liu, Frankel and Roohr, 2014). Liu, Mao, Frankel Xu (2018) explain that 2016), Critical thinking has been pictured as a ubiquitous skill for citizens to thrive in acknowledge society. It is also a skill that has received particular attention from higher education since 95% of the chief academic officers surveyed by the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U, 2011) believe that critical thinking is one of the most important learning outcomes expected of their college graduates.

Critical thinking of students has become an interesting field of study. It is worth starting with the approaches of Bloom (1956) who made a taxonomy of the skills and characteristics of critical thinking, among them: Analyze, apply, understand, know, synthesize and evaluate. Raths et al. (1978), a pioneer in developing the value clarification approach, believes this process helps people develop values “that represent the free and thoughtful choice of intelligent humans interacting with complex and changing environments.” In addition, this author says that the following are fundamental characteristics of this type of thinking: comparing, summarizing, observing, classifying, interpreting, organizing, supposing, imagining, gathering data, applying, formulating hypotheses, deciding, designing, investigating and coding. In other words, this is a posture of necessary actions that lead others to scientific thinking. Opinion or conclusion. ’Benedict (2013). Niu et al, cited in Halpern (2001), affirm “critical thinking skills refer to the abilities to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information as well as the disposition to apply these abilities.”

This paper is the result of a research project about strengthening Critical Thinking in the UCM undergraduate students, supported by the Catholic University of Manizales (agreement 084 of June 26, 2018). The project is aligned with the National Ministry of Education of Colombia (MEN) that seeks for students to think critically, which occurs when they use their cognitive skills that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. (Black 2005; Halpern 1998; Kuhn and Dean 2014; Nickerson 1994; Schroyens and Schaeken, 2005). It also considers the objectives of sustainable development, Goal 4: Quality Education: “the learners are able to use all opportunities for their own education throughout their life and to apply the acquired knowledge in everyday situations to promote sustainable development” (UNESCO, 2017, p.18). And as a subject matter inside the classroom “Critical thinking is a term that continues to manifest itself in many classrooms around the globe. While many institutional leaders are concerned about enhancing student learning outcomes, they also recognize the fundamental issues impacting this development.” (Magno, 2010, p.18).

Considering higher education concern about critical thinking development, the students who start at UCM are enrolled in real social, economic, and political meaningful situations, and they also start having difficulties when they have to use their critical thinking skills. Students exposure to different texts increase anxiety levels, therefore, it is mandatory to show a way to deal with them. How to support the development of critical thinking based on quality standards of higher education and social challenges? Domínguez (2018, p. 9) highlights the relevance of this type of study when he states that “Critical Thinking (CT) is pointed out as one of the main skills of the 21st Century to be promoted in Higher Education.”

The institution is also aware of the lack of competence in the reading process; the results of the national test Pruebas Saber Pro has also showed a low reading level among academic programs. This is not an exclusive concern of the Catholic University of Manizales, but one of all national and international universities. Cited by Rao, Cameron and Gaskin (2009).

Besides, Institutions of higher education are increasingly aware of the need to assess core competencies so that graduating students are able to think and read critically, research and use information, analyze quantitative data, and write effectively and fluently. Accreditation requirements and the job market are placing greater importance on mastery of the core competencies of critical thinking, information literacy, critical reading, quantitative reasoning, and writing (Breivik, 2005; Van Dusen, 1997).

The strategic platform supported by the Catholic University of Manizales states core 1: To be renowned as a diverse, inclusive and multicultural community, which contributes to a more just, supportive and fraternal society, objective 1.3 “to build capacities for a global performance.” All programs built critical thinking abilities which contribute to develop a better impact into a community and society. Evidences of this impact are exhibited at the university web page. UCM declares in its mission that “knowledge must have a high humanizing character in order to transform society and culture by educating and shaping new citizens and generating integral development in our people and their surroundings.” (Caicedo, 2020).

This paper aims at helping to show how current educational interventions and practices seek to promote skills in higher education students. There are also several findings around the barriers and about what is now important to improve college higher education. “Student requires constant interaction with the teacher/instructor to obtain everything necessary for their resolutions.” (Rivas and Saiz, 2016). Being aware of the level of reading that each one possesses allows the strengthening of critical thinking.

The main objective is to demonstrate that strategies of reading and writing strengthen Critical Thinking and argumentative capacity of the students. It is fundamental that teachers help students enhance linguistic competence to guide them to use adequate rules and to use tools to argue and think critically. This paper will help teachers to change or improve curricula for literacy and to put into practice techniques oh how to develop CT skills. Mohd Zin, Bee and Rafik-Galea (2014) claim that it is important to foster critical thinking and reading skills among students. At the same time, it is also crucial to foster positive thinking and reading dispositions among the students as the results showed that they also lack the willingness or inclination to think and read critically.

Methodology

Since research around Critical Thinking is predominantly qualitative (Domínguez, 2018), this research includes a pragmatically mixed methodology. Literature articles were reviewed according to authority, topicality and relevance. Critical reading workshops were done and diagnostic tests were administered to 158 first-semester students from 6 undergraduate programs of the Catholic University of Manizales: Advertising, Architecture, Environmental Engineering, Nursing, Bacteriology, and Business Administration in Tourism.

Population

Although 158 students began the university programs only 125 took the test. The students attended two sessions: the first part consisted of a reading and the second part was a diagnostic test. Table 2 shows the number of students who attended the workshop and the number of students who took the test.

Text revision and design in Critical thinking

Selection of text for diagnostic evaluation (2 texts-20 questions)

Two continuous texts were selected: the types corresponded to literary and journalistic level. Both texts were approved by communicative language teachers and analyzed in prior session with the students.

Based on the analysis of the test and the eventual redefinition of learning results, this research wants to emphasize the skills associated with the Critical Reading competence, reducing prevalence and prominence to the passive memorization of knowledge. (DiCarlo, 2009). This is important because learning is not committing a set of facts to memory but the ability to use resources to find, evaluate, and use information. In fact, memorizing anything discourages deep thinking. Deep thinking is essential because understanding is the residue of thinking. To encourage thinking we must create a joy, an excitement, and a love for learning. We must make learning fun because if we are successful, our students will be impatient to run home, study, and consider to really learn.

Formulation of CT questions under the ICFES model

Model in CT reading ICFES parameter. SABER PRO tests

Administering the CT test

Text 1

Questions from 1 to 10 were designed from the philosophical text known as Plato’s Myth of the Giges Ring. The test challenges, motivates and makes new students enjoy the university and the academic life. The answers require a mental exercise than implies considering hypotheses, contrasting solutions, pondering possible alternatives and making decisions. Beyond presenting a set of questions around a continuous text, the test seeks to have students interact as well as to challenge and involve them in a discussion based on hypothetical situations. Besides, using practical examples, argumentation as the foundation of all research work is encouraged (Niu, Behar-Horenstein and Garvan, 2013).

Text 2

Could it be that Google is turning this into us? The category of the text according to the ICFES classification corresponds to a continuous text of an informative-argumentative type. Questions 17-20 move students to the critical level, seeking their reflection on the text as an evaluation criterion of its content. It also evaluates the identification of assumptions, the derivation of implications, and the recognition of argumentative and rhetorical strategies. McKoon and Ratcliff (2018). A decision-making model combined with tests of particular comprehension processes can lead to further understanding of reading skills. In addition, Critical thinking involves an interaction among cognitive skills, associated character traits, dispositions, and motivations. I call these and other aspects of critical thinkers “virtues of critical thinking” that lead them to the intellectual excellences of character, cultivated by people who tend to aim at making reasoned judgments about what to do or believe." (Hamby, 2014, p. 4).

Selection of type of questions

Each text included 10 multiple-choice questions classified in 3 levels: literal, inferential and critical. Those were aligned to the guidelines of the ICFES (2018). The performance level (according to the scale proposed by the ICFES, Levels 1, 2,3,4).

Measurement and analysis of CT based on PRUEBAS SABER PRO (2018)

Students placed in level 1, from 0 to 125, were able to identify elements of the text such as the theme, the structure, among others, as long as they appear explicitly. Therefore, students recognized the communicative intention of the author and answered specific questions about information provided in the text. Likewise, some linguistic and discursive resources that allowed to understand the local meaning of the statements could be identified.

Similarly, students in level 2, from 126 to 160, apart from having the skills described for students in level 1, recognized the macrostructure of the text; that is, they understood the global meaning from the cohesion elements that allow the coherence of the text, and identified textual typology, discursive strategies, and the functions of language to understand the meaning of the text.

Likewise, students in level 3, from 116 to 200, apart from having the skills described for students in levels 1 and 2, were able to go beyond the explicit information in the text and mastered the text comprehension strategies. In addition, they projected writing based on the information in the text.

Finally, students in level 4, from 201 to 300, apart from having the skills described for students in levels 1, 2 and 3, were able to value the global content of the text based on local elements, the relationships between them, and their position in a given context from a hypothetical perspective.

Selection of critical reading percentages based on ICFES-SABER-PRO TEST

Methodology summary

Table 9

Methodology

Finding and results

CT characterization

The results are showed based on program profile

General results from level performance

Performance levels were established according to ICFES criteria in order to complete the numerical score given to students. The fact that 22% of the students are different from this type of test is alarming. Likewise, 30% of the students evaluated had the lowest performance level. Table 10 shows the other data related to performance levels:

Table 10
General Results

School of Social Sciences, Humanities and Theology

Advertising

15 students from 18 took the diagnostic evaluation.

Table 11
Advertising

39% of Advertising students are in level 4: Critical readers; 39% are in level 3: inferential readers, 5% are literal readers, and 17 % did not take the test.

School of Administration

Tourism Management

21 from 21 Students took the diagnostic evaluation.

Table 12
Tourism Management

23% of Tourism Management students are in level 4: Critical readers; 27% are in level 3: inferential readers, 35% are literal readers, and 15 % are low readers.

School of Health Sciences

Bacteriology

Students who took the diagnostic evaluation 12 from 20.

Table 13
Bacteriology

19% of Bacteriology students are in level 4: Critical readers; 19% are in level 3: inferential readers, 29% are literal readers, and 33 % did not take the test.

Nursing

Students who took the diagnostic evaluation 31 from 47 students.

Table 14
Nursing

19% of Nursing students are in level 4: Critical readers; 6% are in level 3: inferential readers, 41% are literal readers, and 34 % did not take the test.

School of Engineering and Architecture

Environmental Engineering

15 from 17 students took the diagnostic evaluation.

Table 15
Level of Performance Environmental Engineering

18% of Environmental Engineering students are in level 4: Critical readers; 6% are in level 3: inferential readers, 41% are literal readers, and 12 % did not take the test.

Architecture

31 from 35 Students who took the diagnostic evaluation.

Table 16
Level of Performance Architecture

6% of Architecture students are in level 4: Critical readers; 20% are in level 3: inferential readers, 34% are literal readers and 11% did not take the test.

General views

From 100% of the population 25% are literal readers, 19% are inferential readers and 4% are critical readers. 30% of the students are at the lowest level of performance and 22% of the students did not take the test.

Table 17
Level of Performance UCM overview

CT first place, 39% of Advertising students are in level 4: Critical readers: student’s profile has its essence on the personal growth of those who dare to defy creativity with critical thinking, communicative abilities, capacity to persuade, and spirit of research; people able to identify audiences and plan strategies to spread goods, services or an ideology through different media or connection points, all of these with the purpose of focusing on a planned action. There is a high sense of social responsibility and able to understand the dynamics of a globalized world and of an increasingly demanding consumer.

CT second place, 23% of Tourism Management students are in level 4: Critical readers; student’s profile scientific and humanistic rationale, also with strategic vision of management, with leadership skills, critical thinking and entrepreneurial spirit.

CT third place, Faculty of Health 19% of Bacteriology and Nursing students are in level 4: Critical readers; student’s profile human and professional quality, as well as for its contribution to the context in the scientific, academic and social fields. Professionals also recognize and respect interculturalism, beliefs, and the experiences of society, by promoting educational and developmental practices and processes intended to improve the life and health conditions of the community, the family and the individual.

CT fourth place, 18% of Environmental Engineering students are in level 4: Critical readers; student’s profile finds solutions to the environmental problems, which affect the population’s quality of life, through development, technological intervention, control, and prevention when natural resources are being used by society. These professionals are characterized for being socially responsible and able to respond to the environmental problems of the country.

CT fifth place, 6% of Architecture students are in level 4: Critical readers; Student’s profile transforms the territory to achieve a better quality of life. The architect mind makes it possible to have a constant evolution and innovation of the constructions, allowing the growth of the cities through creativity and design.

It is clear that students learn how to interpret and analyze a text considering their field of knowledge and the way they interact in their social group. People in particular communities learn how to read as they interact with and interpret texts within their culture and their social group (Brandt, 2011). By first forming theories about reading, they later reinforce or reject them in acts of communication with texts and with others around text. In this way, learning is usually implicit and determined by both students’ literate heritage and by the values and norms of their target discourses. (Kuzborska, 2015). The ethnographic study carried out by Jensen and Worth in 2014 states that interactions permit a deeper and more meaningful understanding of texts, there is success in providing the kind of critical interaction that captures students’ curiosity.

General overview advertising students

Thirty-nine percent of Advertising students are in level 4: Critical readers; 39% are in level 3: inferential readers, 5% are literal readers, and 17 % did not take the test.

Table 18
Advertising right answers

Conclusions

ICFES items guide high educational to identify reading levels of difficulty such as low-medium-high, and also reading comprehension levels such as literal-inferential-critical and shows skills dimensions. It becomes an excellent tool of observing CT among students. This paper will help Faculties evaluate their academic programs in relation to reading quality and CT as well as the curriculum they offer on this matter. We expect to contributes to UCM continuous improvement plan 2018-2025. Ahumada and Sanchez (2019) claim that programs related to the quality of education and the curriculum they offer make decisions based on solid foundations to generate improvement actions and strengthen the skills that students need in order to meet the objectives of any institution and achieve educational quality.

Critical thinking abilities will be better developed in a student-centered class, where the learning process is prioritized. Text levels refers to a conscious and reflexive usage of thinking abilities in addition to the deployment and development of research, cooperative work and communication. As Franco, Sousa and Vieira (2019) mentioned a critical thinker will be willing and capable of asking questions, searching for more information, identifying credible sources and legitimate information, being open to question personal beliefs and cognitive bias, among many other dispositions and abilities, while thinking according to criteria based on precision and validity, and on the grounds of knowledge.

Critical thinking and creativity reinforce each other, when students read different texts, they need to understand and interpret first and then reflect upon it. If the text is not part of student’s interest, teachers need to be creative in order to involve a real critical thinking. Both promote conceptual richness, coherent organization and exploratory persistence. Students need to know what they learn is meaningful for daily life. In other words CT has a positive impact on academic performance, seeing that critical thinkers think more effectively, and are more motivated to use suitable learning strategies (Halpern, 2014).

The career profile is a determining factor in the result and motivation and interests are outstanding in the reading and writing process. Similarly, teaching students how to evaluate their own processes and helping teachers how to include critical readings in their curricula will help to develop effective skills associated with critical thinking. The study of Huber and Kuncel (2016) demonstrated that college is already effective at fostering critical thought, sparing more resources to pursue other educational goals.

Reading into the future (2012), a competent reader for the 21st century will require a combination of knowledge, beliefs, abilities, and processes. It is crucial to expose students to different kind of texts and include techniques in order to motivate and passionate students towards reading. It is reinforced by Roohr, Olivera-Aguilar, Ling and Rikoon (2019). Twenty-first century and higher-learning skills such as critical thinking are highly desired for new college graduates entering the workplace, especially with rapidly changing technology and a more globalized economy.

Different field of knowledge together reading a common text give opportunities to see the same situation from different perspectives, allowing tolerance and respect to each points of view. But, as Weston (2005) affirms, “it is necessary to guide students toward this objective”. In other words, students built their arguments in favor of different conclusions and they assess them to consider how strong they really are. After the diagnostic evaluation, the students’ perceptions about the results through open questions were that some teachers need to propose better reading activities toward critical thinking questions instead of asking for memorization. It shows the necessity of teachers training of how to develop CT activities. Black (2005) mentioned that, with few exceptions, teachers had muddled notions about critical thinking and little training developing their students thinking skills. This paper shows the necessity to improve a complete system of preparation regarding students as well as teachers. Bartlett (2017) can also be a threat leading educators to a narrow vision of reading education driven solely by performance data.

The analysis of results of the diagnostic evaluation contributes to implement actions among faculties in CT. Students loved when teachers give feedback to critical reading, exchange arguments and confirm data and theories. Gokcora and DePaulo (2018) find out in their pilot study on frequent quizzes and student improvement of reading, that frequent effective feedback is provided through formative assessment. Frequent quizzing is used both before lecture and after class sessions to improve students retention and motivation (McKenzie, 1973).

References

Alexander, P. A., and The disciplined reading and learning research laboratory. (2012). Reading into the future: Competence for the 21st century. Educational psychologist, 47(4), 259-280. Doi: 10.1080/00461520.2012.722511

Ahumada, L. K., and Sanchez, I. D. (2019). Application of the Wilcoxon Test to correlate the results of the saber 11 and saber T&T test. In IOP conference series: materials science and engineering. 519(1), 012034. IOP Publishing.Doi: https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/519/1/012034

Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2009). Inquiry and analysis VALUE rubric. Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/inquiry-analysis

Benedict, J. (2013). Using popular-press nutrition books to develop critical reading skills of first-year college students. Journal of nutrition education and behavior, 45(2), 188-190. Doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2012.07.006

Breivik, P. S. (2005). 21st century learning and information literacy. Change: the magazine of higher learning, 37(2), 21-27. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3200/CHNG.37.2.21-27

Behar-Horenstein, L. S., and Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of College Teaching and Learning (TLC), 8(2). Doi: https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v8i2.3554

Black, S. (2005). Teaching students to think critically. The education digest, 70(6), 42-47.

Bartlett, B. and Clarence, Ng (Eds.). (2017). Improving reading and reading engagement in the 21st century. International Research and Innovation. Singapore: Springer.

Brandt, D. (2011). Literacy as involvement: the acts of writers, readers, and texts. Southern Illinois University Press.

Domínguez, C. (coord.). (2018). A European review on critical thinking educational practices in higher education Institutions (Crithinkedu project).Vila Real: UTAD.

DiCarlo, S.E. (2009). Too much content, not enough thinking, and too little FUN! Advances in physiology education, 33(4), 257-264. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00075.2009

Franco, A., Sousa, A.S. and Vieira, R.M. (2019). How to become an informed citizen in the (dis)information society? recommendations and strategies to mobilize one’s critical thinking. Sinergias diálogos educativos para a transformação social, 9, 45-58.

Gokcora, D. and DePaulo, D. (2018). Frequent quizzes and student improvement of reading: a pilot study in a community college setting. SAGE Open. 8(2), 1-9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018782580

Hamby, B.S. (2014). The virtues of critical thinkers. (Doctoral thesis). University of New Hampshire. Retrieved from: https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/bitstream/11375/15847/1/The%20Virtues%20of%20Critical%20Thinkers%20FINAL%20COPY.pdf

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking across domains: dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. The american psychologist, 53(4), 449–455. Doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449

Halpern, D. F. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. The journal of general education, 50(4), 270–286. Doi: 10.1353/jge.2001.0024

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: an introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). Psychology Press.

Huber, C. R., and Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 431-468. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Jensen, J.M. and Worth, B. (2014). Valuable knowledge: students as consumers of critical thinking in the community college classroom. Journal of general education, 63(4), 287-308. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1353/jge.2014.0025

Kuhn, D., and Dean, Jr., D. (2004). Metacognition: a bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into practice, 43(4), 268–274. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4304_4

Kuzborska, I. (2015). Perspective taking in second language academic reading: A longitudinal study of international students’ reading practices. Journal of english for academic purposes,20, 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.09.004

Liu, O. L., Frankel, L., and Roohr, K. C. (2014). 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(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12009

Liu, O. L., Mao, L., Frankel, L., and Xu, J. (2016). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: The HEIghtenTM approach and preliminary validity evidence. Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 41(5), 677-694. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1168358

Magno, C. (2010). The role of metacognitive skills in developing critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5(2), 137-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-010-9054-4

McKoon, G., and Ratcliff, R. (2018). Adults with poor reading skills, older adults, and college students: The meanings they understand during reading using a diffusion model analysis. Journal of memory and language, 102, 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.005

Ministerio de Educación Nacional (MEN). (2018). Módulo de Competencia genérica. Guía de orientación Saber Pro. Retrieved from: https://www.icfes.gov.co/documents/20143/496194/Guia%20de%20orientacion%20modulos%20de%20competencias%20genericas-saber-pro-2018.pdf

Mohd Zin, Z., Bee, E. W., and Rafik-Galea, S. (2014). Critical reading ability and its relation to l2 proficiency of malaysian esl. 3L: The southeast asian journal of english language studies, 20(02), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2014-2002-04

Nickerson, R. S. (1994). The teaching of thinking and problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Thinking and problem solving (pp. 409-449). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., and Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational research review. 9, 114-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Ollerton, N. (2020, april 30). Universidad católica de manizales: Meet the president. QS Top Universities. Retrieved from: https://www.topuniversities.com/where-to-study/latin-america/universidad-catolica-de-manizales-meet-president

Rao, S., Cameron, A. and Gaskin-Noel, S. (2009). Embedding general education competencies into an online information literacy course. Journal of library administration, 49(1-2), 59-73, Doi: 10.1080/01930820802310858

Raths, L. E., Harmin, M., and Simon, S. B. (1978). Values and teaching: working with values in the classroom (2nd ed). C. E. Merrill Pub. Co.

Rivas, S. F., and Saiz, C. (2016). Instrucción en pensamiento crítico: influencia de los materiales en la motivación y el rendimiento. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos,12(1), 91-106. Retrieved from: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=1341/134149742006

Roohr, K., Olivera-Aguilar, M., Ling, G. and Rikoon, S. (2019). A multi-level modeling approach to investigating students’ critical thinking at higher education institutions. Assessment and evaluation in higher education, 44(6), 946-960, Doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1556776

Schroyens, W.J. and Schacken, W. (2005). Issues in reasoning about iffy propositions: the development of deductive rationality in conditional reasoning. University of Leuven, Belgium. Retrieved from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=8ED216F5C38A9230EFAEB66433B986BA?doi=10.1.1.598.7593&rep=rep1&type=pdf

UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. Paris, France: the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Universidad Católica de Manizales. (s. f.). About UCM. Strategic Plataform. Recuperado 7 de julio de 2020, de http://www.ucm.edu.co/en/strategic-plataform/

Van Dusen, G. C. (1997). The virtual campus: technology and reform in higher education. graduate school of education and human development. George Washington University.

Weston, A. (2005). Las claves de la argumentación. (11 ed.). Barcelona, España: Ariel.

Notas de autor

Información adicional

Cómo citar: Loaiza, Y., Gil, G., David, F. (2020). A study of critical thinking in higher education students. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos, 16(2), 256-279.

Enlace alternativo

http://190.15.17.25/latinoamericana/downloads/Latinoamericana16(2)_13.pdf (pdf)