The Role of Socratic Questioning in Critical Thinking Development in EFL Argumentative Writing

Prepared by the researche  : Farah Ben Mansour – Faculty of Letters and Humanities, University of Sfax, Tunisia – Laboratory of Approaches to Discourse (LAD)  – Email: farah.benmansour@flshs.usf.tn – ORCID iD: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4264-8369

DAC Democratic Arabic Center GmbH

International Journal of Educational and Psychological Studies : Twenty-fifth Issue – June 2024

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link

https://democraticac.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%B1%D8%A8%D9%88%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D9%81%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B3-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%B4%D8%B1%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%AD%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86-%E2%80%93-%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%86%D9%8A%D9%88-2024.pdf

Abstract

This study investigates how Socratic questioning can foster critical thinking in EFL argumentative writing among first-year university students in Tunisia. While teachers generally value critical thinking, classroom practices often remain teacher-centered and exam-driven, limiting opportunities for students to analyze, evaluate, and reason independently. Grounded in Facione’s core cognitive skills (2011) and Paul and Elder’s intellectual standards (2014), the study explores the alignment between instructional strategies and the development of critical thinking in writing. Data were collected through classroom observations and students’ argumentative essays. Observations documented student participation, engagement, and reasoning in response to Socratic questions, while pre- and post-intervention essays were analyzed for clarity of claims, evidence evaluation, consideration of counterarguments, and logical coherence. Findings reveal that Socratic questioning enhanced student engagement, promoted analytical reasoning, and encouraged reflective thinking. Post-intervention essays showed improved argument structure, better use of evidence, and greater awareness of alternative perspectives. The study highlights the pedagogical value of Socratic questioning in EFL writing instruction, offering practical strategies for teachers and curriculum designers to foster active, student-centered learning. It also contributes to theoretical discussions on integrating critical thinking into tertiary EFL education, demonstrating that guided questioning can effectively bridge the gap between teacher perceptions and classroom practice.

1. Introduction

Critical thinking has become a central learning objective in higher education worldwide, particularly in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) programs, where students must engage with complex texts, evaluate evidence, and construct coherent arguments (Facione, 2011; Paul & Elder, 2014). The ability to reason analytically and reflectively is increasingly valued not only for academic success but also for lifelong learning and professional competence. In Tunisian tertiary education, teachers generally recognize the importance of critical thinking; however, classroom practices often remain teacher-centered, exam-driven, and focused on rote memorization, limiting opportunities for students to practice higher-order thinking skills (Karimi & Zare, 2015; Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019).

Research indicates a persistent gap between teachers’ positive perceptions of critical thinking and their actual classroom implementation (Borg, 2003; Akbari, 2014). While teachers may support critical thinking in principle, factors such as large class sizes, rigid syllabi, and insufficient training in critical thinking pedagogy often prevent meaningful integration of critical reasoning into writing instruction. This misalignment is particularly evident in argumentative writing, which requires students to analyze claims, evaluate evidence, and engage with counterarguments. Despite its importance, limited empirical and conceptual research has explored how specific instructional strategies, such as Socratic questioning, can bridge this gap in EFL contexts. Socratic questioning, a structured dialogue-based instructional technique, has been shown to promote student reflection, reasoning, and active engagement across disciplines (King, 1995; Shor, 1996).

In the context of EFL argumentative writing, Socratic questioning can help students move beyond descriptive or formulaic responses, fostering deeper reasoning, evidence evaluation, and the articulation of well-supported arguments. Grounded in Facione’s core cognitive skills (2011) and Paul and Elder’s intellectual standards (2014), Socratic questioning provides a theoretically informed approach to embedding critical thinking into classroom practice. The significance of this study lies in its potential to inform both teaching practice and curriculum design. By examining how Socratic questioning influences student reasoning and argumentative writing, the study offers actionable insights for tertiary EFL instructors and contributes to broader discussions on critical thinking integration in higher education. This study addresses the gap between theoretical support for critical thinking and its practical implementation, demonstrating strategies for fostering student autonomy, reflective thinking, and reasoning skills in writing classrooms.

This study is guided by the following research questions:

1. How does the implementation of Socratic questioning influence student engagement and reasoning during EFL argumentative writing lessons?
2. In what ways do pre- and post-intervention argumentative essays reflect changes in critical thinking skills, such as evidence evaluation, counterargument consideration, and argument coherence?
3. What patterns emerge from classroom observations and essay analyses that indicate the development of critical thinking in EFL students?

The structure of the paper is organized as follows. The literature review examines theoretical perspectives on critical thinking, teacher cognition in EFL contexts, Socratic questioning as a pedagogical strategy, particularly Socratic questioning, in developing reasoning skills. The methodology part details the participants, data sources, data collection procedures, and analytic approach. The results and discussion section presents findings from classroom observations and essay analyses, integrating them with existing literature. Finally, the conclusion summarizes the study’s contributions, discusses pedagogical implications, and provides recommendations for future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Critical thinking in higher education

 Critical thinking has long been recognized as a core objective of higher education because it equips learners with the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information to make reasoned judgments (Facione, 2011, p. 7). It is considered a multi-dimensional skill set, encompassing cognitive, metacognitive, and reflective abilities that allow students to engage with ideas critically rather than passively accepting information. In the context of EFL learning, critical thinking is particularly important because students must navigate linguistic challenges, cultural assumptions, and multiple perspectives while constructing coherent arguments in a second language (Paul & Elder, 2014, p. 12).

Research has shown that critical thinking is not merely a set of isolated skills but a mode of engagement that requires learners to question assumptions, evaluate evidence, and reflect on their reasoning processes (Ennis, 2015). This distinction is crucial in EFL classrooms, where students often focus on accuracy and grammar at the expense of analysis and reasoning. Higher education, especially in language learning contexts, aims to develop intellectual autonomy, enabling students to think independently, solve problems creatively, and communicate ideas persuasively.

Despite the global emphasis on critical thinking, empirical evidence indicates that students frequently struggle to apply critical thinking in practical tasks, particularly in EFL writing contexts. This is often due to a traditional focus on teacher-centered instruction, rote learning, and exam-oriented assessments, which do not provide opportunities for reflection, analysis, or argumentation (Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019). Therefore, effective strategies are needed to bridge the gap between conceptual understanding of critical thinking and its classroom implementation, ensuring that students develop both cognitive and metacognitive skills necessary for complex reasoning tasks.

2.2. Critical thinking and argumentative writing

Argumentative writing is widely acknowledged as a key domain for practicing and demonstrating critical thinking. It requires students to formulate a clear claim, support it with evidence, consider opposing viewpoints, and organize ideas coherently (Raimes, 1983; Hyland, 2019). In EFL contexts, students face additional challenges due to limited language proficiency, unfamiliarity with academic discourse conventions, and reliance on memorized sentence structures. These challenges can impede the demonstration of critical thinking even when students conceptually understand it (Karimi & Zare, 2015).

Several studies have emphasized the importance of integrating critical thinking into writing instruction. For instance, scaffolded activities such as brainstorming, argument mapping, peer review, and guided questioning have been shown to improve the quality and depth of student essays (Bailin, Case, Coombs, & Daniels, 1999). These strategies allow learners to practice reasoning, evaluate evidence critically, and anticipate counterarguments, promoting both the cognitive and procedural aspects of critical thinking.

Moreover, argumentative writing encourages metacognitive awareness, as students must reflect on their reasoning processes, revise claims, and justify choices. Facione (2011) notes that critical thinking in writing involves both analysis and self-regulation, where learners evaluate not only the content of arguments but also their own reasoning strategies. Paul and Elder (2014) similarly highlight that reflective writing exercises strengthen students’ ability to internalize critical thinking skills, making them transferable across tasks and contexts.

2.3. Socratic questioning as a pedagogical strategy

Socratic questioning has been widely recognized as a highly effective strategy for promoting critical thinking. Originating from classical philosophy, Socratic questioning encourages learners to examine assumptions, evaluate evidence, consider alternative perspectives, and justify reasoning (King, 1995; Shor, 1996). Unlike traditional teacher-led approaches, Socratic questioning is dialogic: it prompts learners to reflect, discuss, and negotiate meaning rather than passively receive information.

In EFL classrooms, Socratic questioning has been shown to enhance cognitive engagement, foster deeper reasoning, and promote learner autonomy. Akbari (2014) found that structured questioning in language classrooms increased student participation, encouraged critical reflection, and improved argumentation in both oral and written tasks. Similarly, King (1995) emphasizes that asking open-ended, probing questions helps learners develop higher-order thinking by requiring them to justify claims, analyze underlying assumptions, and integrate multiple perspectives.

Socratic questioning also aligns with sociocultural theories of learning, which posit that knowledge is co-constructed through social interaction (Vygotsky, 1978). By engaging students in collaborative discussion and reflective dialogue, teachers provide opportunities for scaffolding critical thinking, enabling learners to reach levels of reasoning beyond what they could achieve individually. In writing contexts, this process supports the transfer of critical thinking skills from oral discussion to structured, reasoned essays, bridging the gap between classroom dialogue and academic product outcomes.

2.4. Teacher cognition and beliefs in EFL contexts

A significant body of research highlights the role of teacher cognition, teachers’ beliefs, knowledge, and attitudes, in shaping classroom practice. Borg (2003) notes that teachers may hold positive beliefs about critical thinking but struggle to implement it due to institutional, cultural, or structural constraints, such as large class sizes, exam-oriented syllabi, and lack of professional training. This misalignment between beliefs and practice is a key barrier to developing critical thinking skills in EFL contexts (Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019).

Studies also emphasize that teachers’ facilitation strategies are critical in promoting critical thinking. Shor (1996) argues that teacher-led dialogue and scaffolding create a supportive environment where learners feel empowered to question, reason, and reflect. Paul and Elder (2014) similarly stress that teachers must adopt a guiding role rather than a directive one, encouraging students to explore ideas, defend arguments, and critically evaluate reasoning. In this sense, teacher cognition is not just about beliefs but also about practical pedagogical knowledge that enables structured, critical thinking-oriented learning experiences.

2.5. Integrating Socratic questioning, critical thinking, and writing

The literature consistently demonstrates that Socratic questioning enhances critical thinking in both classroom discussions and written output. By promoting reflective dialogue, probing questions, and consideration of counterarguments, teachers can encourage learners to construct well-reasoned arguments and transfer these skills to writing tasks (Karimi & Zare, 2015; Akbari, 2014). Classroom-based studies have shown that students exposed to Socratic questioning produce more coherent, evidence-based, and analytically developed essays, compared to peers taught with traditional teacher-centered methods.

Despite the established benefits, few studies have investigated the use of Socratic questioning in Tunisian tertiary EFL contexts, particularly in relation to argumentative writing. Many studies remain theoretical or focus on teacher perceptions rather than empirical classroom outcomes. Consequently, there is a research gap in understanding how Socratic questioning can practically bridge the gap between teachers’ positive perceptions of critical thinking and students’ ability to demonstrate it in written argumentative tasks. Addressing this gap provides both theoretical insight and practical guidance for implementing critical thinking-oriented pedagogy in higher education EFL contexts.

2.6. Summary

In conclusion, the literature establishes that critical thinking is a central learning goal in higher education and is particularly relevant for EFL students engaged in argumentative writing. Socratic questioning emerges as a powerful pedagogical tool to foster reflective engagement, reasoning, and analytical skills. Effective implementation, however, depends on teacher cognition, classroom facilitation, and curriculum design, highlighting the persistent gap between theoretical support for critical thinking and actual practice in EFL classrooms. This study addresses this gap by examining how Socratic questioning can enhance classroom engagement and the quality of students’ argumentative essays, contributing to both theoretical understanding and practical application of critical thinking in tertiary EFL education.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research design

This study adopts a quasi-experimental qualitative design to investigate the role of Socratic questioning in developing critical thinking in EFL argumentative writing among first-year university students in Tunisia. Although quasi-experimental designs are often associated with quantitative research, the focus of this study is primarily qualitative, emphasizing classroom observations and essay analyses to explore the depth of students’ reasoning, reflection, and argumentation skills. The design allowed the researcher to implement an intervention within a real classroom setting, while using pre- and post-tests to examine changes in students’ critical thinking development over time. By combining observational and written data, the study offers a comprehensive understanding of how Socratic questioning facilitates the development of critical thinking in practice, rather than merely describing teacher beliefs or student perceptions.

3.2. Participants

The participants consisted of first-year English major students enrolled in the second semester of the 2023-2024 academic year at the Faculty of Lettres and Humanities of Sfax. A total of 52 students from two writing composition classes participated in the study. They were selected through convenience sampling, as they were already part of the researcher’s classes. All students had comparable levels of English proficiency, confirmed by prior academic performance. The classrooms included a diverse mix of students in terms of gender, motivation, and prior exposure to argumentative writing, providing a representative sample of typical first-year EFL learners. The investigator also acted as the instructor implementing the Socratic questioning strategy, ensuring consistency in the delivery of the intervention.

3.3. Research instruments

Data were collected from two primary sources. First, classroom observations were conducted during argumentative writing lessons to document students’ engagement, reasoning, participation, and responses to Socratic questioning. Observations were guided by a structured checklist focusing on critical thinking behaviors, including elaboration of ideas, evidence-based reasoning, questioning, and collaborative discussion. Second, students’ argumentative essays were collected both before (pre-test) and after (post-test) the intervention. These essays were analyzed for evidence of critical thinking, including clarity of claims, use of evidence, logical coherence, recognition of counterarguments, and depth of argumentation. These data sources provided complementary perspectives on critical thinking development, allowing the study to triangulate classroom behavior with tangible written outcomes.

3.4. Intervention procedure

The intervention was implemented over one semester during regular writing classes. Initially, students completed a pre-test essay on a selected topic to establish a baseline of their critical thinking skills and argumentative writing abilities. The Socratic questioning strategy was then introduced. Lessons were structured to include open-ended, probing questions designed to stimulate analysis, evaluation, and reflection. Students were encouraged to justify their positions, consider counterarguments, and respond to peers’ ideas. The teacher adopted a facilitative role, guiding discussion, prompting deeper thinking, and providing feedback without supplying direct answers. This iterative process permitted students to practice critical thinking in a supportive, collaborative environment. At the end of the intervention, students completed a post-test essay on a comparable topic, which served as the primary measure of change in argumentative and critical thinking skills. Both classroom interactions and essay outcomes were then systematically analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Socratic questioning approach.

3.5. Data analysis

All data were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Classroom observation notes were coded to identify patterns of student engagement, reasoning, questioning, and collaborative dialogue. Essays were analyzed according to critical thinking indicators, including claim clarity, evidence evaluation, logical organization, and consideration of counterarguments. The pre- and post-test essays were compared for evidence of skill development which allow the researcher to link observed classroom behaviors with written outcomes. Triangulation of observations and essay analysis enhanced the credibility and reliability of the findings, providing a comprehensive picture of critical thinking development.

3.6. Ethical considerations

Ethical guidelines were strictly followed throughout the study. Participation was voluntary, and students provided informed consent. Confidentiality was ensured by anonymizing all essays and observation notes. The intervention did not affect students’ official grades or academic standing. This investigation was conducted in accordance with the university’s ethical review policies, ensuring that the rights and well-being of participants were protected at all stages.

5. Results and Discussion

5.1. Classroom observations

Classroom observations revealed significant changes in student behavior and engagement throughout the Socratic questioning intervention. At the beginning of the study, many students were passive participants, often waiting for the teacher to provide answers rather than generating ideas independently. Their contributions were limited to short, factual responses, reflecting a teacher-centered classroom culture and a lack of experience with dialogic learning, consistent with previous studies in EFL contexts (Karimi & Zare, 2015; Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019). As the intervention progressed, students demonstrated a clear shift toward active engagement. Socratic questioning prompted learners to analyze claims, consider evidence, and reflect on counterarguments. For example, when discussing topics related to current social issues, students were encouraged to justify their positions, respond to peer questions, and challenge assumptions. Observations indicated that students gradually developed analytical reasoning skills, frequently pausing to deliberate on opposing perspectives before articulating their ideas. These findings support King’s (1995) assertion that structured questioning encourages reflective dialogue and deeper reasoning.

Furthermore, the observations highlighted increased collaborative learning. Students were more willing to participate in group discussions, ask clarifying questions, and build on each other’s ideas. The teacher’s role as a facilitator, rather than a transmitter of knowledge, was crucial in maintaining a supportive environment where learners felt comfortable expressing tentative ideas. Shor (1996) emphasizes that creating such a dialogic classroom culture is essential for fostering critical thinking, and the current study confirms its effectiveness in a Tunisian EFL context. Some challenges were noted. A few students initially struggled with the open-ended nature of Socratic questions and required repeated scaffolding to engage meaningfully. Over time, however, even these students displayed greater confidence and willingness to contribute, indicating that consistent exposure to structured questioning enhances both participation and reasoning skills.

5.2. Analysis of students’ argumentative essays

Pre-intervention essays revealed common weaknesses in reasoning and argumentation. Most essays were descriptive or narrative, with claims presented without sufficient justification, evidence, or engagement with counterarguments. Logical coherence was limited, and students tended to rely on memorized phrases or formulaic structures. These findings are consistent with research showing that EFL students often struggle to produce analytical and critical written work due to traditional, teacher-centered instruction (Borg, 2003; Fathi & Derakhshan, 2019). Post-intervention essays displayed significant improvements. Students demonstrated enhanced clarity in expressing claims, organized their arguments more coherently, and incorporated evidence from texts or external sources to support their points. Several students explicitly addressed counterarguments, reflecting higher-order critical thinking skills and a growing awareness of alternative perspectives. This aligns with the theoretical frameworks proposed by Facione (2011) and Paul and Elder (2014), highlighting that critical thinking is not just a set of skills but a reflective, reasoning-based approach to learning. Notably, students’ post-intervention writing showed transfer of reasoning strategies from classroom discussion to written expression. Observational notes indicated that ideas debated in class were frequently expanded upon in essays, suggesting that Socratic questioning not only improved reasoning but also supported internalization of critical thinking processes for writing tasks. This supports Ennis’s (2015) claim that reflective engagement and practice are essential for meaningful critical thinking development.

5.3. Integration of observations and writing outcomes

Triangulating classroom observations with essay analysis revealed consistent patterns of improvement. Students who actively participated in Socratic questioning demonstrated stronger reasoning skills in their written work. For example, students who posed and responded to peer questions during discussions were more likely to include well-supported claims, anticipate counterarguments, and structure essays logically. Conversely, students less engaged in classroom dialogue tended to show smaller gains in essay quality, emphasizing the link between oral reasoning practice and written critical thinking outcomes. The findings also highlight the role of teacher facilitation in fostering critical thinking. The teacher’s use of probing, open-ended questions guided students to explore underlying assumptions, evaluate evidence, and reflect on the reasoning process. This aligns with Akbari (2014), who notes that teacher cognition and pedagogical choices significantly influence students’ ability to develop critical thinking in EFL contexts.

Additionally, the classroom culture of dialogue and inquiry reinforced student autonomy, encouraging learners to take ownership of their reasoning and argumentation. Overall, the results indicate that Socratic questioning is a practical and effective approach for developing critical thinking in tertiary EFL writing classrooms. It promotes both process-oriented learning (classroom reasoning and dialogue) and product-oriented outcomes (improved argumentative essays), bridging the gap between teachers’ theoretical support for critical thinking and the realities of classroom practice. These results contribute to the growing body of research demonstrating that inquiry-based, dialogic methods enhance student reasoning, engagement, and analytical writing (King, 1995; Shor, 1996; Paul & Elder, 2014).

6. Conclusion

6.1. Summary of the major findings

This study examined the role of Socratic questioning in enhancing critical thinking in EFL argumentative writing among first-year university students in Tunisia. The results demonstrate that integrating structured questioning into classroom practice significantly fosters student engagement, reflective thinking, and analytical reasoning. Observations revealed that students became more active participants, moving from passive, teacher-directed behavior to dialogic interactions, where they evaluated evidence, considered counterarguments, and elaborated on their ideas. Similarly, post-intervention essays showed measurable improvements in argument structure, clarity of claims, use of evidence, and engagement with opposing viewpoints, highlighting the successful transfer of oral reasoning skills into written work.

The findings confirm that Socratic questioning effectively bridges the gap between teachers’ beliefs about the importance of critical thinking and the actual classroom implementation of critical thinking-oriented pedagogy. Students showed greater intellectual autonomy, reflective engagement, and the ability to structure reasoned arguments, skills central to higher-order thinking. These outcomes align with previous research which emphasized that inquiry-based methods and teacher facilitation can enhance both cognitive and metacognitive aspects of learning in EFL contexts (King, 1995; Shor, 1996; Paul & Elder, 2014). Therefore, this study establishes that Socratic questioning is a practical, effective strategy for developing critical thinking in tertiary EFL classrooms, supporting both process-oriented learning (classroom reasoning) and product-oriented outcomes (argumentative writing).

6.2. Pedagogical and theoretical implications

The results of this study have several important pedagogical and theoretical implications. First, Socratic questioning can be systematically incorporated into EFL writing courses to foster active, student-centered learning, promoting not only engagement but also higher-order thinking skills. By prompting students to evaluate evidence, question assumptions, and justify positions, teachers can cultivate learners who are more autonomous, reflective, and capable of independent reasoning.

Second, the findings underscore the importance of teacher professional development. Effective implementation of Socratic questioning requires instructors to understand critical thinking principles, craft meaningful open-ended questions, and adopt a facilitative classroom role. Teacher training programs should emphasize strategies for scaffolding discussions, promoting dialogue, and assessing reasoning processes, enabling instructors to create environments conducive to critical thinking.

Third, curriculum designers can integrate critical thinking-oriented objectives, activities, and assessment criteria across courses, ensuring that students encounter opportunities to practice reasoning consistently. Embedding these strategies into the syllabus supports coherence between instructional goals and observable learning outcomes, enhancing the overall quality of EFL education at the tertiary level.

Finally, the study contributes to the theoretical understanding of critical thinking development in EFL contexts, demonstrating that dialogic methods can effectively transform both classroom interaction and written outcomes, bridging the gap between teacher beliefs and classroom practice.

6.3. Recommendations

Based on the findings, several practical and research-based recommendations emerge. First, teachers should implement Socratic questioning consistently, gradually increasing the complexity of prompts as students gain confidence in reasoning. Combining these strategies with peer discussions, collaborative writing tasks, and reflective exercises can further reinforce critical thinking development and its transfer from oral to written modes.

Second, universities and teacher training programs should provide targeted professional development, focusing on inquiry-based instruction, questioning techniques, and classroom facilitation. Workshops, seminars, or mentoring programs could support teachers in applying these strategies effectively in real-world EFL classrooms.

Third, curriculum planners should design assessment systems that reflect critical thinking objectives, including rubrics that evaluate argumentation, evidence evaluation, and logical reasoning. Assessments should encourage students to apply critical thinking consistently rather than focusing solely on memorization or surface-level writing.

Finally, future research should explore the long-term sustainability of critical development in EFL contexts, possibly through longitudinal studies across multiple semesters. Investigating the combination of Socratic questioning with other active learning strategies, such as project-based learning or collaborative tasks, could provide further insights into how critical thinking and writing skills interact.

References

Akbari, R. (2014). Transforming lives: Introducing critical pedagogy into ELT classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 18(3), 251–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813510930

Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183133

Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903

Ennis, R. H. (2015). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 31–50). Palgrave Macmillan.

Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts (Rev. ed.). Insight Assessment.

Fathi, J., & Derakhshan, A. (2019). The contribution of teacher cognition to EFL learners’ critical thinking. Language Teaching Research, 23(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817702184

Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Karimi, M., & Zare, P. (2015). Critical thinking in EFL classrooms: Challenges and implications. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 241–270. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.184

King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum: Inquiring minds really do want to know. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2201_3

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2014). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional and personal life (2nd ed.). Pearson.

Raimes, A. (1983). Techniques in teaching writing. Oxford University Press.

Shor, I. (1996). When students have power: Negotiating authority in a critical pedagogy. University of Chicago Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.