Build success beyond the classroom: Critical thinking and assessment

Christina Cavage
A group of children stood at a table with their teacher watching her write something down on paper
Reading time: 4 minutes

There are some common myths related to critical thinking and assessment. Many people believe that it’s impossible to assess critical thinking, especially in classes where language is limited. However, it can be done! Here, the key to success is crafting tasks and rubrics that allow you to separate language skills and cognitive skills. After all, a low language level doesn’t necessarily reflect your student’s ability to think critically.

So, how can we measure how a student knows rather than just what they know?

How to measure critical thinking

Well, we first have to consider two types of assessment—formal and informal. Formal assessments tend to happen at the end of a task, lesson or skill-building activity and usually focus on the work the student has produced. Then, we have informal assessments. Those are the assessments that involve on-the-spot interactions. These types of assessments play a crucial role in measuring critical thinking.

Tips for teaching and assessing critical thinking
Play
Privacy and cookies

By watching, you agree Pearson can share your viewership data for marketing and analytics for one year, revocable by deleting your cookies.

Formal assessment

There is a common misconception that assessment should only focus on the final work that your students produce. The final ‘product’ is undeniably important and often an ideal measure of linguistic abilities. But the process of producing the final work is where you can see your students’ critical thinking skills in action.

When designing rubrics to measure both language and critical thinking, make sure that you only focus on one at a time—either language or critical thinking. Keeping these different skills in mind will help you to differentiate language skills and critical thinking skills, and evaluate them separately, when it comes to formal assessment.

When measuring language skills, use Bloom’s early or foundational cognitive domains as a model:

If we measure these items, we are really measuring language skills. For example, with a reading activity, we might ask the following questions:

  • Who is the story about?
  • Where does the story take place?
  • What is the main idea of the story?

Can they understand the overall organization and the key vocabulary? These types of questions assess a student’s linguistic ability.

Then, when it comes to critical thinking, the more advanced levels of Bloom’s cognitive domains provide a useful guide:

These types of questions assess a student’s metacognition or critical thinking:

  • Which character is most important to the story?
  • Why?
  • Do you agree or disagree with the character’s actions?
  • Why or why not?

The clear separation of language and critical thinking in assessment will help you to get a measure of each student’s progress in both skills.

Informal assessment

What about those informal assessments? It can be harder to delineate critical thinking and language skills clearly in an on-the-spot assessment.

For example, if you’ve assigned group work, consider keeping a checklist of how students interact with one another. Some checklist items can be:

  • Who made an inference?
  • Who supplied reasoning for another student’s idea?
  • Who made a comparison?
  • Who drew a conclusion?

You can also ask your students to keep a checklist and post these questions on an electronic bulletin board. Like self-assessment, these peer-to-peer assessments can get students reflecting and noticing.

Rubrics can also be useful in informal assessment. Let’s say you’ve asked students to prepare or write an essay. To measure critical thinking, you can look at each student’s ideation process when they’ve been working on their essays:

  • Is a student looking at all possible topics?
  • What are the factors that make a student select the option they did?
  • Are they demonstrating an awareness of other ideas?

The answers to these questions will tell you whether or not your students are thinking critically.

Just like with any other skills, the assessment of critical thinking needs to happen both formally and informally. We need to consider both the process and the final product. And in doing so, we need to carefully design rubrics that differentiate language skills and metacognition.

Learn about our English courses

More blogs from Pearson

  • A woman on a laptop with headphones on and writing down on paper
    Are online checks reliable for English tests?
    By Alice Bazzi
    Reading time: 3 minutes

    Identity verification is one of the most critical steps in any English language test. For institutions and governments, the question is clear: can online ID checks really be trusted? With modern technology, the answer is simply yes. And, in many cases, they are even more robust than manual checks. 

    PTE Express uses advanced biometric verification, combining facial recognition with real-time ID validation. Candidates are required to present official identification, which is cross-checked using automated systems that detect inconsistencies, fraudulent markers and different forms of tampering. 

    What makes this approach particularly powerful is the consistency. Unlike human-led checks, which can vary depending on conditions, staff training or volume, AI-driven verification applies the same rigorous standard to every candidate. 

    Additionally, liveness detection technology ensures that the person taking the tests are physically present and not using any static image or recording. This eliminates common fraud risks that are associated with impersonation.

  • Students sat together at a table working together
    Mind the gap in your English lesson planning
    By Ehsan Gorji
    Reading time: 4 minutes

    Professional English teachers love lesson planning. They can always teach a class using their full wardrobe of methods, techniques and games, but a detailed plan means they can deliver a richer and more modern lesson – after all, a teacher usually plans using their full potential.

    Whenever I observe a teacher in their classroom, I try to outline a sketch of their English lesson plan according to what is going on. I am careful to observe any "magic moments" and deviations from the written plan and note them down separately. Some teachers seize these magic moments; others do not. Some teachers prepare a thorough lesson plan; others are happy with a basic to-do list. There are also teachers who have yet to believe the miracles a lesson plan could produce for them, and therefore their sketch does not live up to expectations.

    The "language chunks" mission

    After each classroom observation, I'll have a briefing meeting with the English teacher. If the observation takes place in another city and we cannot arrange another face-to-face meeting, we'll instead go online and discuss. At this point, I'll elicit more about the teacher's lesson plan and see to what extent I have been an accurate observer.

    I have found that Language Inspection is the most frequent gap in lesson planning by Iranian teachers. Most of them fully know what type of class they will teach, they'll set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timely) objectives, consider the probable challenges, prepare high-quality material, break the language systems into chunks and artistically engineer the lesson. Yet, they often do not consider how those language chunks will perform within a set class time – and their mission fails.

    The Language Inspection stage asks a teacher to go a bit further with their lesson planning and look at the level of difficulty of various pieces of content in the lesson. Is there enough balance so that students can successfully meet the lesson objectives? If the grammar, vocabulary and skills are all above a student's ability, then the lesson will be too complex. Language Inspection allows a thoughtful teacher to closely align the objective with the difficulty of the grammar, vocabulary and skill. Like a train running along a fixed track, Language Inspection can help make sure that our lessons run smoothly.

    Lesson planning made easy with the GSE Teacher Toolkit

    If a lesson consists of some or many language chunks, those are the vocabulary, grammar and learning objectives we expect to become learning outcomes by the end of the class or course. While Language Analysis in a lesson plan reveals the vocabulary, grammar and learning objectives, in Language Inspection each chunk is examined to determine what they really do, how they can be presented, and – more importantly – to assess the learning outcomes required.

    The Global Scale of English (GSE) Teacher Toolkit can be a teacher's faithful lesson-planning companion, especially when it comes to Language Inspection. It's simple to use, yet modern and exciting. It is detailed and delivers everything you need.

    To use it, all you need is an internet connection on your mobile phone, tablet, laptop or PC. Launch the GSE Teacher Toolkit and you'll have the ability to delve into the heart of your lesson. You'll be able to identify any gaps in a lesson – much like seeing the gap between a train and a platform's edge.

    Ask yourself questions such as:

    • Does this grammar form belong in this lesson?
    • Do I need to include some vocabulary to fill this gap?
    • Is it time to move forward because my students are mastering this skill earlier than expected?

    The GSE Teacher Toolkit gives you the ability to assess your lesson for these gaps – whether small or large – in your teaching. By doing this, you can plan thoughtfully and clearly to better support your students. It really is an opportunity to "mind the gap" in your English lesson planning. 

  • A person on a laptop with a checklist graphic in front of them
    Are remote tests easy to cheat?
    By Alice Bazzi
    Reading time: 2 minutes

    As demand for flexible English language testing grows, so do the concerns around security. A common question from institutions, governments and agents is: Are remote tests easier to cheat on? 

    The short answer is: not when they have been designed properly. 

    PTE Express has been built with a multi-layered security framework that often exceeds traditional test center controls. It ensures test security with AI proctoring, identity verification and advanced monitoring. Candidates are continuously monitored throughout their test session with facial recognition, behavior analysis and environment scanning to detect suspicious activity.

    In addition, secure browser technology prevents candidates from opening other tabs, accessing external content or communicating with others during the test period. This creates a controlled testing environment, even outside a physical test center. 

    What makes this particularly important for institutions is the ability to scale without compromise. With international student flows becoming more diverse, universities and governments need a testing solution that maintains rigor while reaching students globally. 

    Another advantage is traceability. Every test session generates a detailed audit trail, allowing suspicious cases to be flagged, reviewed and investigated. This level of data-driven oversight is often more comprehensive than what is possible in crowded test centers. 

    For agents, this translates into confidence when advising students. For admissions teams, it means maintaining trust in test scores without adding an administrative burden or worry.