Motivation & Approach

1. Measuring critical thinking as a process is a challenge 

   1. Multiple rubrics and standardized tests available that measure product

   2. Computational approaches missing

2. Computational process accounts exist for other complex problem solving, such as engineering design, programming & computational thinking
   (e.g. Blikstein, 2011; Biswas et al, 2019; Vieira et al, 2016; Xing et al, 2019)

   1. Reliability, validity and explainability of computational methods remains a concern

   2. Not always explicitly backed by theory (learning/cognition)

3. Providing an embodied narrative of CT process (ENaCT)

   1. All thinking and cognition are embodied (action-based) - ergo, CT is embodied

   2. Capture and relate learner actions to CT components

What technology are we using?

We have built the ENaCT platform based on the LEAF framework.

People involved

Dr. Rwitajit MAJUMDAR, Kyoto University, Japan

Dr. Aditi KOTHIYAL, EPFL, Switzerland 

Dr. Huiyong LI, Kyoto University, Japan

Dr. Shitanshu MISHRA, MGIEP UNESCO, India

Dr. Prajakt PANDE, Roskilde University, Denmark

Dr. Jayakrishnan Madathil WARRIEM, IIT Madras, India

Ms. Yuan Yuan YANG, Kyoto University, Japan

Ms. Kinnari GATARE, India

Related publications

1. Majumdar R., Kothiyal A., Mishra S., Pande P.,  Li H, Yang Y.Y., Ogata H. and Warriem J.M. (2021) Design of a Critical Thinking Task Environment based on ENaCT framework. accepted in ICALT 2021.

2. Mishra S., Majumdar R., Kothiyal A., Pande P., Warriem J.M. (2021) Thinking Critically: Tracing Embodied Narratives of Critical Thinking Process. accepted in AIED 2021.

3. Mishra S., Majumdar R., Kothiyal A., Pande P., Warriem J.M. (2020) ENaCT: An Action-based Framework for the Learning and Analytics of Critical Thinking. in the LA@ICCE workshop of ICCE 2020.