critical thinking creativity and innovation

• Innovation & Critical Thinking

Because organizations must innovate to stay alive in today's highly competitive marketplace, organizations need employees who can channel their creativity and innovation toward organizational challenges and goals.   The Innovation and Critical Thinking Certificate is comprised of four courses. It first helps you become re-acquainted with your own stores of creativity and innovation. Next, you are given a set of tools that allow you to leverage your creativity to identify and solve organizational problems. One activity then asks you how you might look at a problem from a different angle to produce a more creative result; others walk you through the process of using analogies or replacement techniques to invent creative solutions to problems.

Each 3 to 5 hour, self-paced course in this program offers an assortment of interactive exercises, videos, selected readings, case studies, and self-assessments that will engage you and help you apply your newly discovered creativity in the workplace.

Upon successful completion, you can download a printable certificate of completion for this online program. This certificate has no textbooks or prerequisites.

Students who complete the Innovation and Critical Thinking Certificate are awarded a total of 22 CPEs (1 Technical; 21 Non-Technical) and 2.2 CEUs.

The Innovation and Critical Thinking certificate consists of 4 courses, each taking approximately 3 to 5 hours to complete. Students have four months to complete the certificate. 

The four courses are:

• Creativity in Teams and Organizations
• Innovation in Teams and Organizations
• Introduction to Critical Thinking
• Personal Creativity

In this certificate program, students will learn how to do the following:

• Explain the connection between creativity and innovation
• Outline the five factors for creative teams
• Use team creative tools such as brainstorming, Discussion 66, anonymous idea generation, and visioning
• Explain the importance of diversity in team creativity
• Describe techniques for prototyping new ideas
• Explain how to overcome creative barriers for teams and organizations
• Describe ways to make teams and organizations more open to creativity and innovation
• Outline the key factors for an innovative organization
• Discuss the barriers to innovation
• Explain the differences between incremental, semi-radical, and radical innovation
• Describe internal innovation tools such as idea champions, idea incubators, new venture teams and skunk works
• Explain the process of moving from idea to commercialization
• Discuss the issues surrounding innovation in the public sector
• Define critical thinking, reasoning, and logic
• Ask appropriate questions for critical thinking
• Understand the process of systemic problem-solving
• Identify and overcome barriers to critical thinking
• Articulate common reasoning fallacies
• Understand critical thinking as it pertains to the workplace
• Describe the basis of personal creativity
• Explain the uses of creative tools
• Distinguish between vertical and lateral thinking
• Employ creative tools like SCAMPER, random input, mind mapping, and DO IT
• Describe the key characteristics of personal creativity
• Assess the issues surrounding measuring creativity

This certificate offers an assortment of interactive exercises, selected readings, quizzes and self-assessments. Upon completion, learners are given a summary of what they've learned for quick reference while at work.

This program has an "Ask the Expert" feature, which submits your questions directly to an expert in the field you are studying. Questions are answered within 3 business days.

This certificate requires no textbooks or prerequisites. There are some downloadable materials which students can save during the program to access for further use.

Quizzes and Testing

• There are quizzes and tests throughout the course with exercises and scenarios for students to answer and self-assess their learning. Students are required to complete all content elements in the course and earn at least a 70% average test score to earn their certificate.
• As a non-credit program, students earn a complete/incomplete status.  Letter grades are not issued, nor recorded by Duke Continuing Studies.

Eligibility

All registrants must meet the following requirements:

• Be at least 18 years of age
• Possess word processing and internet skills
• Be fluent in the English language (including reading and writing)
• Be familiar with how online programs work and be comfortable using them
• Be computer literate, have reliable internet access and a valid email account (Please note personal email accounts are preferred as they are less likely to be blocked by fire walls and spam filters)
• Meet the computer technical requirements specifications

Admission is discretionary. The office of Duke Continuing Studies, Professional Certificate Programs, requires students be a least 18 years of age and meet minimum suitability standards. Students are not matriculated Duke University students and university student privileges do not apply to Continuing Studies students.

Duke Continuing Studies reserves the exclusive right, at its sole and absolute discretion, to withhold registration or require withdrawal from the program of any student or applicant.

Certificate Requirements In order to earn a certificate of completion from Duke Continuing Studies, students are required to achieve an average test score of 70% and to complete all content elements in the course within 4 months (120 days).

Technical Requirements

• Windows XP SP2 or newer
• Mac OS 10.4.11 or higher
• Linux/Unix (any recent version)
• 1 Ghz or faster CPU
• sound card and headphones or speakers (some assignments have audio components)
• Microsoft Office 97 (or newer) or comparable office suite such as Open Office (free download available at  openoffice.org )
• Adobe Flash Player 9 or greater (free download available at  adobe.com )
• Adobe Reader/Acrobat Reader 7.0 or greater (free download available at  adobe.com )

Web Browser

• Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 or greater
• Firefox 3.6 or greater ( free download available )
• Netscape, Safari, Opera, Chrome, and other web browsers may work, however may not render all features of the course(s)
• Cookies must be enabled
• JavaScript must be enabled
• Reliable internet connection
• E-mail account (to be able to register and to receive e-mail from the system regarding registration, course status, etc.)

Registration

Registration is ongoing; therefore students can begin the program when it is convenient for them! 

Registration is not available June 24 - June 30 annually due to the close of the fiscal year for the university.

Note: our enrollment system is a separate system from that used for your online training, and therefore, access to the online training is not an automated process upon your registration. Please be aware that there may be a time delay of up to 5 business days before you receive the email with your access to the online program. This delay will not affect your allotted completion time for the program.  Please check your spam/junk folder because sometimes the access emails end up there.

Enrollment steps 

• Register for the program using the links provided above.
• Receive an email within five business days from our program partner MindEdge containing details about how to access the program’s web portal.
• Log-in and begin coursework.  Students will have 4 months to complete their coursework from the date they receive their program access.

Registration Methods

• Register Online  using a credit card with our secure, real-time registration system. Add the course to your shopping cart and follow the instructions for checking out.
• Register by Phone  at 919-684-6259 during our business hours (Monday through Friday, 8:00am to 5:00pm EST).

Is this program offered online only?

Yes, this program is exclusively offered online and is self-paced. No classroom programs are currently available for Innovation and Critical Thinking.

Who should take this course?

This course is designed for adult learners interested in exploring and expanding their personal and professional creativity.

Do I have to log on a certain times on certain days?

No, these courses are completely self-paced, allowing students to schedule the courses work as they so desire within the allotted access time.

When is registration open?

Students may register between July 1 and June 23 each year. Registration is not available from June 24 - June 30 annually due to the close of the fiscal year for the university.

After registering, when will students receive additional program details?

Within 5 business days of enrollment (excluding Duke holidays), students will receive an email from our program partner MindEdge with web access information.

Is access to a computer required during this program?

This is an exclusively online program and access to a reliable computer is required for the duration of the program.

How long do students have access to each online course?

Students will have access to all courses within the certificate for four months (120 days) from the date in which they receive program access.

How long does the course take to complete?

Each of the four courses of the certificate is estimated to take about 3-5 hours to complete. However, completion time will vary by student.

Are extensions granted to students who request them?

No. Sufficient time to complete coursework has been given, and therefore no extensions will be granted. If a certificate program is not finished and a student wants to re-enroll to complete it, he or she will have to purchase the program again and restart the training from the beginning.

What are the technical requirements for this program?

See the Requirements section above.

How do students ask questions?

Each course has an "Ask the Expert" feature, which submits your questions directly to an expert in the field you are studying. Questions are answered within 3 business days.

What do students do if there are technical issues while completing the course?

Students should contact the Program Manager via email to troubleshoot technical issues. Students will receive a response within 3 business days (excluding Duke holidays).

How do students earn a certificate of completion from Duke Continuing Studies?

Students who complete the program with an average minimum score of 70% within the given time frame and pay tuition in full (upon registration) will receive a certificate of completion from Duke Continuing Studies. The certificate is downloadable after the course is completed. Students will be able to download the certificate for up to six months after completing the course.

Will these courses count for credits or degrees?

No. These courses are not applicable to a degree.

What is the refund policy for these courses?

There are no refunds given for online courses.

Tuition: $299

Duke employee discount.

• $30 off the fee of $299; Duke employee pays fee of $269
• Student must register and pay tuition in full prior to receiving program access
• Questions:  Contact Program Manager at 919-684-3379 

Discount must be requested and applied during the registration process and cannot be applied in addition to any other discount that may be offered. You may be asked to verify your status as a Duke employee.

​ Group Discount

Do you have a group (Duke or non-Duke entity) interested in training? Contact the Program Manager for details.

Funding Sources

No loans can be construed to imply any degree-seeking status for students of Duke Continuing studies. Duke Continuing Studies courses are non-credit.

Duke Continuing Studies (DCS) will not certify (approve) loan amounts greater than the amount of the tuition regardless of the amount approved by the lending agency. DCS reserves the right to reject any loan which exceeds the tuition amount. DCS will not be responsible for refunding monies in excess of the tuition. Students needing to secure loan funding for books or other items in relation to the program are responsible for making separate loan arrangements with the funding agency. No loan funds will be refunded to the student.

Should a student choose to borrow less than the tuition amount, the balance must be paid prior to the close of the registration period.

Our Professional Certificate programs are non-credit (not degree applicable); therefore, they are  NOT  eligible for federal education loans.  DO NOT SUBMIT FAFSA FORMS  for these programs. Some of our programs may offer payment plans. Please see individual program web pages for those details.

Other Funding Sources

The funding options listed below may not be applicable to all programs at this time. Please contact the organization offering the funding to see if you qualify and if the funds can be used for the program in which you are interested.

Sallie Mae Smart Option Loan

To apply for this private student loan, visit Sallie Mae’s website , and click the I’m ready to apply button . The following application should populate with the pertinent information for Duke Continuing Studies.

• Under Loan Needs, select Student and then Undergraduate degree.
• Select Career training school.
• Select North Carolina from the drop down menu.
• Under name of school begin typing DUKE PROFESSIONAL , then select DUKE PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATES, DURHAM, NC, 00292099 when it populates.
• Click Continue.
• Next, You've confirmed that you want a Smart Option Student Loan for DUKE PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATES will appear.
• Fill out Basic Information.
• Fill out Permanent Address section.
• DUKE PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATES, DURHAM, NC, 00292099 should already have populated for the school.
• Select Certificate for Degree/Certificate of Study.
• Select your Specialty or select Other if it is not shown in the options.
• Select Half Time for Enrollment Status.
• Select Certificate/Continuing Ed for Grade Level .
• Enter your Loan period begins and loan period end dates.
• Enter your Anticipated Graduation / Completion .
• Enter loan amount. NOTE: This may not exceed the cost of tuition.
• Estimated financial assistance should be $0.00 .
• Under Loan request , click Use calculated need.
• Do not check any box in typical school expenses.
• Follow the remaining loan application prompts.

Wells Fargo Graduate Loan

Please note that Wells Fargo is no longer accepting new applications for their private student loans. However, students with an outstanding balance on a Wells Fargo private student loan may be eligible to be borrowers on a new private loan. See  here  for details.

Duke Hospital Employees

Duke University Hospital employees may be eligible for support from the Employee Development Initiative (EDI), which helps employees pay for short-term career-related programs, workshops, and seminars. For more information, visit the Employee Development Initiative site or call Duke Hospital Human Resources at (919) 668-2170.

Workforce Investment Act

The WIA provides professional and basic skills training services to those who have been unable to find employment. Please keep in mind that this process can be lengthy, so plan to apply well in advance of the program start date.  For more information on eligibility, the application process, or to find your local Workforce Development Board, visit the  NC JobLink Career Center website .

AmeriCorps Education Awards are available only for AmeriCorps volunteers and can be used for educational expenses for non-degree courses, such as Continuing Education courses offered by qualified schools. For more information on qualified schools and programs, contact the National Service Trust at 1-800-942-2677, or visit the FAQ page of the  AmeriCorps website .

Wire Transfers

Contact our registration office at [email protected] for details on how to send wire transfers. Very specific instructions must be followed in order for our office to receive a successful transfer.

Online Refund and Transfer Policy

There are no refunds, cancellations, or transfers for online, self-paced courses.

Extension Policy

No extensions will be granted. Students who require additional time to complete the course(s) they registered for will be responsible for re-registering and paying for the course in full for a second time.

Tax Deductions

Course fees and expenses are sometimes tax deductible. Please consult an accountant concerning this matter. Non-credit programs at Duke Continuing Studies do not generate 1098-T forms, in accordance with the following IRS guideline:

• Instructions for Forms 1098-E and 1098-T  published by the Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, states “You do not have to file Form 1098-T or furnish a statement for: Courses for which no academic credit is offered, even if the student is otherwise enrolled in a degree program…”
• Business Communication
• Data Analytics
• Digital Media & Marketing
• Entrepreneurship
• Finance Essentials
• Management Skills
• Small Business Management
• CE Courses Online
• Essentials of Human Resources
• Human Resource Management
• Diversity & Inclusion in Human Resources Management
• Legal Nurse Consulting Program
• Legal Nurse Consulting as a Career
• Paralegal Online Program
• Agile Practitioner
• Management Accounting (CMA)
• Developing Leaders
• Emerging Leaders
• Inclusive Leaders
• Tackling Bias and Creating Inclusion
• Project Management CE Program
• Supply Chain Management
• Sustainable Management
• Lean Six Sigma Green Belt
• Lean Six Sigma Yellow Belt
• Data Science
• Online Learning Certificate
• Ace Your Job Search
• Special Programs
• Nonprofit Certificate Individual Classes
• Nonprofit Certificate Intensive Track
• Executive Certificate in Nonprofit Leadership
• Custom Training
• Teaching Opportunities
• In-Person Guide
• Finding Course Links and Recordings
• Special Interest Groups
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Program Overview
• Summer Residential Program
• Summer Commuter Program
• Summer Online Courses
• Duke University Marine Lab
• Summer For-Credit Courses
• 2024 Community Days
• How to Apply
• Important Dates
• Technology Requirements
• Employment Opportunities
• Undergraduate Coursework
• Graduate Coursework
• Auditing Courses
• Duke Employee Tuition Rates
• Student Login
• Instructor Login

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC10054602

Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education

Branden thornhill-miller.

1 Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK

2 International Institute for Competency Development, 75001 Paris, France

Anaëlle Camarda

3 LaPEA, Université Paris Cité and Univ Gustave Eiffel, 92100 Boulogne-Billancourt, France

4 Institut Supérieur Maria Montessori, 94130 Nogent-Sur-Marne, France

Maxence Mercier

Jean-marie burkhardt.

5 LaPEA, Univ Gustave Eiffel and Université Paris Cité, CEDEX, 78008 Versailles, France

Tiffany Morisseau

6 Strane Innovation, 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France

Samira Bourgeois-Bougrine

Florent vinchon, stephanie el hayek.

7 AFNOR International, 93210 Saint-Denis, France

Myriam Augereau-Landais

Florence mourey, cyrille feybesse.

8 Centre Hospitalier Guillaume Regnier, Université de Rennes 1, 35200 Rennes, France

Daniel Sundquist

Todd lubart, associated data.

Not Applicable.

This article addresses educational challenges posed by the future of work, examining “21st century skills”, their conception, assessment, and valorization. It focuses in particular on key soft skill competencies known as the “4Cs”: creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication. In a section on each C, we provide an overview of assessment at the level of individual performance, before focusing on the less common assessment of systemic support for the development of the 4Cs that can be measured at the institutional level (i.e., in schools, universities, professional training programs, etc.). We then present the process of official assessment and certification known as “labelization”, suggesting it as a solution both for establishing a publicly trusted assessment of the 4Cs and for promoting their cultural valorization. Next, two variations of the “International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Skills Framework” are presented. The first of these comprehensive systems allows for the assessment and labelization of the extent to which development of the 4Cs is supported by a formal educational program or institution. The second assesses informal educational or training experiences, such as playing a game. We discuss the overlap between the 4Cs and the challenges of teaching and institutionalizing them, both of which may be assisted by adopting a dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs—playfully entitled “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”—for pedagogical and policy-promotion purposes. We conclude by briefly discussing opportunities presented by future research and new technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality.

1. Introduction

There are many ways of describing the massive educational challenges faced in the 21st century. With the appearance of computers and digital technologies, new means of interacting between people, and a growing competitiveness on the international level, organizations are now requiring new skills from their employees, leaving educational systems struggling to provide appropriate ongoing training. Indeed, according to the World Economic Forum’s 2020 “Future of Jobs Report”, studying 15 industries in 26 advanced and emerging countries, up to 50% of employees will need some degree of “reskilling” by 2025 ( World Economic Forum 2020 ). Although many national and international educational efforts and institutions now explicitly put the cultivation of new kinds of skills on their educational agendas, practical means of assessing such skills remains underdeveloped, thus hampering the valorization of these skills and the development of guidance for relevant pedagogy ( Care et al. 2018 ; Vincent-Lancrin et al. 2019 ; for overviews and discussion of higher education in global developmental context, see Blessinger and Anchan 2015 ; Salmi 2017 ).

This article addresses some of these challenges and related issues for the future of education and work, by focusing on so-called “21st Century Skills” and key “soft skills” known as the “4Cs” (creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration), more particularly. It begins with a brief discussion of these skills, outlining their conceptual locations and potential roles in the modern educational context. A section on each “C” then follows, defining the C, summarizing research and methods for its scientific assessment at the individual level, and then outlining some means and avenues at the systemic level for fostering its development (e.g., important aspects of curriculum, institutional structure, or of the general environment, as well as pedagogical methods) that might be leveraged by an institution or program in order to promote the development of that C among its students/trainees. In the next section, the certification-like process of “labelization” is outlined and proposed as one of the best available solutions both for valorizing the 4Cs and moving them towards the center of the modern educational enterprise, as well as for benchmarking and monitoring institutions’ progress in fostering their development. The International Institute for Competency Development’s 4Cs Framework is then outlined as an example of such a comprehensive system for assessing and labelizing the extent to which educational institutions and programs support the development of the 4Cs. We further demonstrate the possibility of labelizing and promoting support for the development of the 4Cs by activities or within less formal educational settings, presenting a second framework for assessment of the 4Cs in games and similar training activities. Our discussion section begins with the challenges to implementing educational change in the direction of 21st century skills, focusing on the complex and overlapping nature of the 4Cs. Here, we propose that promoting a “Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs” not only justifies grouping them together, but it might also assist more directly with some of the challenges of pedagogy, assessment, policy promotion, and ultimately, institutionalization, faced by the 4Cs and related efforts to modernize education. We conclude by suggesting some important future work for the 4Cs individually and also as an interrelated collective of vital skills for the future of education and work.

“21st Century Skills”, “Soft Skills”, and the “4Cs”

For 40 years, so-called “21st century skills” have been promoted as those necessary for success in a modern work environment that the US Army War College ( Barber 1992 ) has accurately described as increasingly “VUCA”—“volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous”. Various lists of skills and competencies have been formulated on their own or as part of comprehensive overarching educational frameworks. Although a detailed overview of this background material is outside the scope of this article (see Lamri et al. 2022 ; Lucas 2022 for summaries), one of the first prominent examples of this trend was the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21), whose comprehensive “Framework for 21st Century Learning” is presented in Figure 1 ( Battelle for Kids 2022 ). This framework for future-oriented education originated the idea of the “4Cs”, placing them at its center and apex as “Learning and Innovation Skills” that are in need of much broader institutional support at the foundational level in the form of new standards and assessments, curriculum and instructional development, ongoing professional development, and appropriately improved learning environments ( Partnership for 21st Century Skills 2008 ). These points are also consistent with the approach and assessment frameworks presented later in this article.

The P21 Framework for 21st Century Learning. (© 2019, Battelle for Kids. All Rights Reserved. https://www.battelleforkids.org/ ; accessed on 17 January 2023).

Other important organizations such as the World Economic Forum ( 2015 ) have produced similar overarching models of “21st century skills’’ with the 4Cs at their center, but the term “21st century skills’’ has been rightly criticized for a several reasons: the skills referred to are not actually all unique to, or uniquely important to, the 21st century, and it is a term that is often used more as an advertising or promotional label for systems that sometimes conflate and confuse different kinds of skills with other concepts that users lump together ( Lucas 2019 ). Indeed, though there is no absolute consensus on the definition of a “skill”, they are often described as being multidimensional and involve the ability to solve problems in context and to perform tasks using appropriate resources at the right time and in the right combination ( Lamri and Lubart 2021 ). At its simplest, a skill is a “learned capacity to do something useful” ( Lucas and Claxton 2009 ), or an ability to perform a given task at a specified performance level, which develops through practice, experience. and training ( Lamri et al. 2022 ).

The idea of what skills “are’’, however, has also evolved to some extent over time in parallel to the nature of the abilities required to make valued contributions to society. The digital and information age, in particular, has seen the replacement by machines of much traditional work sometimes referred to as “hard skills’’—skills such as numerical calculation or driving, budget-formulating, or copyediting abilities, which entail mastery of fixed sets of knowledge and know-how of standard procedures, and which are often learned on the job. Such skills are more routine, machine-related, or technically oriented and not as likely to be centered on human interaction. In contrast, the work that has been increasingly valued in the 21st century involves the more complex, human interactive, and/or non-routine skills that Whitmore ( 1972 ) first referred to as “soft skills”.

Unfortunately, researchers, educators, and consultants have defined, redefined, regrouped, and expanded soft skills—sometimes labeling them “transversal competencies”, “generic competencies”, or even “life skills” in addition to “21st century skills”—in so many different ways within and across different domains of research and education (as well as languages and national educational systems) that much progress towards these goals has literally been “lost in translation” ( Cinque 2016 ).

Indeed, there is also a long-standing ambiguity and confusion between the terms “competency” (also competence) and “skill” due to their use across different domains (e.g., learning research, education, vocational training, personnel selection) as well as different epistemological backgrounds and cultural specificities ( Drisko 2014 ; Winterton et al. 2006 ; van Klink and Boon 2003 ). The term “competency” is, however, often used as a broader concept that encompasses skills, abilities, and attitudes, whereas, in a narrower sense, the term “skill” has been defined as “goal-directed, well-organized behavior that is acquired through practice and performed with economy of effort” ( Proctor and Dutta 1995, p. 18 ). For example, whereas the command of a spoken language or the ability to write are skills (hard skills, to be precise), the ability to communicate effectively is a competence that may draw on an individual’s knowledge of language, writing skills, practical IT skills, and emotional intelligence, as well as attitudes towards those with whom one is communicating ( Rychen and Hersch 2003 ). Providing high-quality customer service is a competency that relies on listening skills, social perception skills, and contextual knowledge of products. Beyond these potential distinctions, the term “competency” is predominant in Europe, whereas “skill” is more commonly used in the US. Yet it also frequently occurs that both are used as rough synonyms. For example, Voogt and Roblin ( 2012, p. 299 ) examine the “21st century competences and the recommended strategies for the implementation of these skills”, and Graesser et al. ( 2022, p. 568 ) state that twenty-first-century skills “include self-regulated learning, collaborative problem solving, communication (…) and other competencies”. In conclusion, the term “competencies” is often used interchangeably with “skills” (and can have a particularly large overlap with “soft skills”), but it is also often considered in a broader sense as a set of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that, together, meet a complex demand ( Ananiadoui and Claro 2009 ). From this perspective, one could argue that the 4Cs, as complex, “higher-order” soft skills, might best be labeled competencies. For ease and convenience, however, in this text, we consider the two terms interchangeable but favor the term “skills”, only using “competency” in some instances to avoid cumbersome repetition.

Even having defined soft skills as a potentially more narrow and manageable focus, we are still aware of no large-scale study that has employed a comprehensive enough range of actual psychometric measures of soft skills in a manner that might help produce a definitive empirical taxonomy. Some more recent taxonomic efforts have, however, attempted to provide additional empirical grounding for the accurate identification of key soft skills (see e.g., Joie-La Marle et al. 2022 ). Further, recent research by JobTeaser (see Lamri et al. 2022 ) surveying a large, diverse sample of young workers about a comprehensive, systematic list of soft skills as actually used in their professional roles represents a good step towards some clarification and mapping of this domain on an empirical basis. Despite the fact that both these studies necessarily involved assumptions and interpretive grouping of variables, the presence and importance of the 4Cs as higher-order skills is evident in both sets of empirical results.

Various comprehensive “21st century skills” systems proposed in the past without much empirical verification also seem to have been found too complex and cumbersome for implementation. The 4Cs, on the other hand, seem to provide a relatively simple, persuasive, targetable core that has been found to constitute a pedagogically and policy-friendly model by major organizations, and that also now seems to be gaining some additional empirical validity. Gathering support from researchers and industry alike, we suggest that the 4Cs can be seen as highest-level transversal skills—or “meta-competencies”—that allow individuals to remain competent and to develop their potential in a rapidly changing professional world. Thus, in the end, they may also be one of the most useful ways of summarizing and addressing the critical challenges faced by the future of work and education ( National Education Association 2011 ).

Taking them as our focus, we note, however, that the teaching and development of the 4Cs will require a complex intervention and mobilization of educational and socio-economic resources—both a major shift in pedagogical techniques and even more fundamental changes in institutional structures ( Ananiadoui and Claro 2009 ). One very important issue for understanding the 4Cs and their educational implementation related to this, which can simultaneously facilitate their teaching but be a challenge for their assessment, is the multidimensionality, interrelatedness, and transdisciplinary relevance of the 4Cs. Thus, we address the relationships between the Cs in the different C sections and later in our Discussion, we present a “Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs’’ that we hope will assist in their understanding, in the further development of pedagogical processes related to them, and in their public promotion and related policy. Ultimately, it is partly due to their complexity and interrelationships, we argue, that it is important and expedient that the 4Cs are taught, assessed, and promoted together.

2. The 4Cs, Assessment, and Support for Development

2.1. creativity.

In psychology, creativity is usually defined as the capacity to produce novel, original work that fits with task constraints and has value in its context (for a recent overview, see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ). This basic definition, though useful for testing and measurement, is largely incomplete, as it does not contain any information about the individual or groups doing the creating or the nature of physical and social contexts ( Glăveanu 2014 ). Moreover, Corazza ( 2016 ) challenged this standard definition of creativity, arguing that as it focuses solely on the existence of an original and effective outcome, it misses the dynamics of the creative process, which is frequently associated with periods of creative inconclusiveness and limited occasions of creative achievements. To move away from the limitations of the standard definition of creativity, we can consider Bruner’s description of creativity as “figuring out how to use what you already know in order to go beyond what you currently think” (p. 183 in Weick 1993 ). This description echoes the notion of potential, which refers to a latent state that may be put to use if a person has the opportunity.

Creativity is a multifaceted phenomenon that can be approached from many different angles. There are three main frameworks for creativity studies: the 4Ps ( Rhodes 1961 ), the 5As ( Glăveanu 2013 ), and the 7Cs model ( Lubart 2017 ). These frameworks share at least four fundamental and measurable dimensions: the act of creating (process), the outcome of the creative process (product), the characteristics of creative actor(s) enacting the process (person), and the social and physical environment that enable or hinder the creative process (press). Contrary to many traditional beliefs, however, creativity can be trained and taught in a variety of different ways, both through direct, active teaching of creativity concepts and techniques and through more passive and indirect means such as the development of creativity-supporting contexts ( Chiu 2015 ; Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 ). Alongside intelligence, with which it shares some common mechanisms, creativity is now recognized as an indispensable element for the flexibility and adaptation of individuals in challenging situations ( Sternberg 1986 ).

2.1.1. Individual Assessment of Creativity

Drawing upon previous efforts to structure creativity research, Batey ( 2012 ) proposed a taxonomic framework for creativity measurement that takes the form of a three-dimensional matrix: (a) the level at which creativity may be measured (the individual, the team, the organization, and the culture), (b) the facets of creativity that may be assessed (person/trait, process, press, and product), and (c) the measurement approach (objective, self-rating, other ratings). It is beyond the scope of this article to offer a literature review of all these dimensions, but for the purposes of this paper, we address some important aspects of individual-level and institutional-level assessment here.

Assessing creativity at an individual level encompasses two major approaches: (1) creative accomplishment based on production and (2) creative potential. Regarding the first approach focusing on creative accomplishment , there are at least four main assessment techniques (or tools representing variations of assessment techniques): (a) the historiometric approach, which applies quantitative analysis to historically available data (such as the number of prizes won or times cited) in an effort to understand eminent, field-changing creativity ( Simonton 1999 ); (b) the Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) ( Amabile 1982 ), which offers a method for combining and validating judges’ subjective evaluations of a set of (potentially) creative productions or ideas; (c) the Creative Achievement Questionnaire ( Carson et al. 2005 ), which asks individuals to supply a self-reported assessment of their publicly recognizable achievement in ten different creative domains; and (d) the Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA) ( Jauk et al. 2014 ; Diedrich et al. 2018 ), which includes self-report scales assessing the frequency of engagement in creative activity and also levels of achievement in eight different domains.

The second major approach to individual assessment is based on creative potential, which measures the cognitive abilities and/or personality traits that are important for creative work. The two most popular assessments of creative potential are the Remote Associations Test (RAT) and the Alternative Uses Task (AUT). The RAT, which involves identifying the fourth word that is somehow associated with each of three given words, underscores the role that the ability to convergently associate disparate ideas plays as a key capacity for creativity. In contrast, the AUT, which requires individuals to generate a maximum number of ideas based on a prompt (e.g., different uses for a paperclip), is used to assess divergent thinking capacity. According to multivariate models of creative potential ( Lubart et al. 2013 ), there are cognitive factors (e.g., divergent thinking, mental flexibility, convergent thinking, associative thinking, selective combination), conative factors (openness, tolerance of ambiguity, intuitive thinking, risk taking, motivation to create), and environmental factors that all support creativity. Higher creative potential is predicted by having more of the ingredients for creativity. However, multiple different profiles among a similar set of these important ingredients exist, and their weighting for optimal creative potential varies according to the profession, the domain, and the task under consideration. For example, Lubart and Thornhill-Miller ( 2021 ) and Lubin et al. ( forthcoming ) have taken this creativity profiling approach, exploring the identification and training of the components of creative potential among lawyers and clinical psychologists, respectively. For a current example of this sort of comprehensive, differentiated measurement of creative potential in adults in different domains and professions, see CreativityProfiling.org. For a recent battery of tests that are relevant for children, including domain-relevant divergent-exploratory and convergent-integrative tasks, see Lubart et al. ( 2019 ). Underscoring the growing recognition of the importance of creativity assessment, measures of creative potential for students were introduced internationally for the first time in the PISA 2022 assessment ( OECD 2019a ).

2.1.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Creativity

The structural support that institutions and programs can provide to promote the development of creativity can be described as coming through three main paths: (1) through design of the physical environment in a manner that supports creativity, (2) through teaching about creativity, the creative process, and creativity techniques, and (3) through training opportunities to help students/employees develop personal habits, characteristics, and other ingredients associated with creative achievement and potential.

Given the multi-dimensionality of the notion of creativity, the environment can positively influence and help develop creative capacities. Studies have shown that the physical environment in which individuals work can enhance their positive emotions and mood and thus their creativity. For example, stimulating working environments might have unusual furniture and spaces that have natural light, windows open to nature, plants and flowers, a relaxing atmosphere and colors in the room (e.g., green and blue), or positive sounds (e.g., calm music or silence), as well as inspiring and energizing colors (e.g., yellow, pink, orange). Furthermore, the arrangement of physical space to promote interpersonal exchange rather than isolation, as well as the presence of tools, such as whiteboards, that support and show the value of exchange, are also important (for reviews, see Dul and Ceylan 2011 ; Samani et al. 2014 ).

Although it has been claimed that “creativity is intelligence having fun” ( Scialabba 1984 ; Reiman 1992 ), for most people, opportunities for fun and creativity, especially in their work environment, appear rather limited. In fact, the social and physical environment often hinders creativity. Corazza et al. ( 2021 )’s theoretical framework concerning the “Space-Time Continuum”, related to support for creativity, suggests that traditional education systems are an example of an environment that is “tight” both in the conceptual “space” it affords for creativity and in the available time allowed for creativity to happen—essentially leaving little room for original ideas to emerge. Indeed, though world-wide data suggest that neither money nor mere time spent in class correlate well with educational outcomes, both policies and pedagogy that direct the ways in which time is spent make a significant difference ( Schleicher 2022 ). Research and common sense suggest that teachers, students, and employees need more space and time to invest energy in the creative process and the development of creative potential.

Underscoring the importance of teaching the creative process and creativity techniques is the demonstration, in a number of contexts, that groups of individuals who generate ideas without a specific method are often negatively influenced by their social environment. For example, unless guarded against, the presence of others tends to reduce the number of ideas generated and to induce a fixation on a limited number of ideas conforming to those produced by others ( Camarda et al. 2021 ; Goldenberg and Wiley 2011 ; Kohn and Smith 2011 ; Paulus and Dzindolet 1993 ; Putman and Paulus 2009 ; Rietzschel et al. 2006 ). To overcome these cognitive and social biases, different variants of brainstorming techniques have shown positive effects (for reviews of methods, see Al-Samarraie and Hurmuzan 2018 ; Paulus and Brown 2007 ). These include: using ( Osborn 1953 ) initial brainstorming rules (which aim to reduce spontaneous self-judgment of ideas and fear of this judgment by others); drawing attention to ideas generated by others by writing them down independently (e.g., the technique known as “brainwriting”); and requiring incubation periods between work sessions by forcing members of a problem-solving group to take breaks ( Paulus and Yang 2000 ; Paulus and Kenworthy 2019 ).

It is also possible to use design methods that are structured to guide the creative process and the exploration of ideas, as well as to avoid settling on uncreative solution paths ( Chulvi et al. 2012 ; Edelman et al. 2022 ; Kowaltowski et al. 2010 ; see Cotter et al. 2022 for a valuable survey of best practices for avoiding the suppression of creativity and fostering creative interaction and metacognition in the classroom). Indeed, many helpful design thinking-related programs now exist around the world and have been shown to have a substantial impact on creative outcomes ( Bourgeois-Bougrine 2022 ).

Research and experts suggest the utility of many additional creativity enhancement techniques (see, e.g., Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 ), and the largest and most rapid effects are often attributed to these more method- or technique-oriented approaches ( Scott et al. 2004 ). More long-term institutional and environmental support for the development of creativity, however, should also include targeted training and understanding of personality and emotional traits associated with the “creative person” (e.g., empathy and exploratory habits that can expand knowledge, as well as increase tolerance of ambiguity, openness, and mental flexibility; see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2021 ). Complementing these approaches and focusing on a more systemic level, recent work conducted by the OECD exemplifies efforts aimed to foster creativity (and critical thinking) by focusing simultaneously on curriculum, educational activities, and teacher support and development at the primary, secondary, and higher education levels (see Vincent-Lancrin et al. 2019 ; Saroyan 2022 ).

2.2. Critical Thinking

Researchers, teachers, employers, and public policymakers around the world have long ranked the development of critical thinking (CT) abilities as one of the highest educational priorities and public needs in modern democratic societies ( Ahern et al. 2019 ; Dumitru et al. 2018 ; Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ). CT is central to better outcomes in daily life and general problem solving ( Hitchcock 2020 ), to intelligence and adaptability ( Halpern and Dunn 2021 ), and to academic achievement ( Ren et al. 2020 ). One needs to be aware of distorted or erroneous information in the media, of the difference between personal opinions and proven facts, and how to handle increasingly large bodies of information required to understand and evaluate information in the modern age.

Although much research has addressed both potentially related constructs, such as intelligence and wisdom, and lists of potential component aspects of human thought, such as inductive or deductive reasoning (for reviews of all of these, see Sternberg and Funke 2019 ), reaching a consensus on a definition has been difficult, because CT relies on the coordination of many different skills ( Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Dumitru et al. 2018 ) and is involved in, and sometimes described from the perspective of, many different domains ( Lewis and Smith 1993 ). Furthermore, as a transversal competency, having the skills to perform aspects of critical thinking in a given domain does not necessarily entail also having the metacognitive ability to know when to engage in which of its aspects, or having the disposition, attitude, or “mindset” that motivates one to actually engage in them—all of which are actually required to be a good critical thinker ( Facione 2011 ).

As pointed out by the American Philosophical Association’s consensus definition, the ideal “critical thinker” is someone who is inquisitive, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded, and keeps well-informed, thus understanding different points of view and perspectives ( Facione 1990b ). These characteristics, one might note, are also characteristic of the “creative individual” ( Facione 1990b ; Lai 2011 ), as is the ability to imagine alternatives, which is often cited as a component of critical thinking ability ( Facione 1990b ; Halpern 1998 ). Conversely, creative production in any domain needs to be balanced by critical appraisal and thought at each step of the creative process ( Bailin 1988 ). Indeed, it can be argued that creativity and critical thinking are inextricably linked and are often two sides of the same coin. Representing different aspects of “good thought” that are linked and develop in parallel, it seems reasonable that they should, in practice, be taught and considered together in teaching and learning ( Paul and Elder 2006 ).

Given its complexity, many definitions of critical thinking have been offered. However, some more recent work has helpfully defined critical thinking as “the capacity of assessing the epistemic quality of available information and—as a consequence of this assessment—of calibrating one’s confidence in order to act upon such information” ( Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ). This definition, unlike others proposed in the field (for a review, see: Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Liu et al. 2014 ), is specific (i.e., it limits the use of poorly defined concepts), as well as consensual and operational (i.e., it has clear and direct implications for the education and assessment of critical thinking skills; Pasquinelli et al. 2021 ; Pasquinelli and Bronner 2021 ). Thus, this approach assumes that individuals possess better or worse cognitive processes and strategies that make it possible to judge the reliability of the information received, by determining, for example, what the arguments provided actually are. Are the arguments convincing? Is the source of information identifiable and reliable? Does the information conflict with other information held by the individual?

It should also be noted that being able to apply critical thinking is necessary to detect and overcome the cognitive biases that can constrain one’s reasoning. Indeed, when solving a problem, it is widely recognized that people tend to automate the application of strategies that are usually relevant in similar and analogous situations that have already been encountered. However, these heuristics (i.e., automatisms) can be a source of errors, in particular, in tricky reasoning situations, as demonstrated in the field of reasoning, arithmetic problems ( Kahneman 2003 ) or even divergent thinking tasks ( Cassotti et al. 2016 ; for a review of biases, see Friedman 2017 ). Though some cognitive biases can even be seen as normal ways of thinking and feeling, sometimes shaping human beliefs and ideologies in ways that make it completely normal—and even definitely human— not to be objective (see Thornhill-Miller and Millican 2015 ), the mobilization of cognitive resources such as those involved in critical reasoning on logical bases usually makes it possible to overcome cognitive biases and adjust one’s reasoning ( West et al. 2008 ).

According to Pasquinelli et al. ( 2021 ), young children already possess cognitive functions underlying critical thinking, such as the ability to determine that information is false. However, until late adolescence, studies have demonstrated an underdevelopment of executive functions involved in resistance to biased reasoning ( Casey et al. 2008 ) as well as some other higher-order skills that underlie the overall critical thinking process ( Bloom 1956 ). According to Facione and the landmark American Philosophical Association’s task force on critical thinking ( Facione 1990b ; Facione 2011 ), these components of critical thinking can be organized into six measurable skills: the ability to (1) interpret information (i.e., meaning and context); (2) analyze information (i.e., make sense of why this information has been provided, identify pro and con arguments, and decide whether we can accept the conclusion of the information); (3) make inferences (i.e., determine the implications of the evidence, its reliability, the undesirable consequences); (4) evaluate the strength of the information (i.e., its credibility, determine the trust in the person who provides it); (5) provide explanations (i.e., summarize the findings, determine how the information can be interpreted, and offer verification of the reasoning); (6) self-regulate (i.e., evaluate the strength of the methods applied, determine the conflict between different conclusions, clarify the conclusions, and verify missing elements).

2.2.1. Individual Assessment of Critical Thinking

The individual assessment of critical thinking skills presents a number of challenges, because it is a multi-task ability and involves specific knowledge in the different areas in which it is applied ( Liu et al. 2014 ; Willingham 2008 ). However, the literature provides several tools with which to measure different facets of cognitive functions and skills involved in the overarching critical thinking process ( Lai 2011 ; Liu et al. 2014 ). Most assessments involve multiple-choice questions requiring reasoning within a particular situation based upon a constrained set of information provided. For example, in one of the most widely used tests, the California Critical Thinking Skills Test ( Facione 1990a ), participants are provided with everyday scenarios and have to answer multiple questions targeting the six higher-order skills described previously. Similarly, the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal ( Watson 1980 ; Watson and Glaser 2010 ) presents test takers with passages and scenarios measuring their competencies at recognizing assumptions, evaluating arguments, and drawing conclusions. Although the Watson–Glaser is one of the oldest and most frequently used assessments internationally for hiring and promotion in professional contexts, its construct validity, like many other measures of this challenging topic, has some limitations ( Possin 2014 ).

Less frequently, case study or experiential methods of assessment are also used. This approach may involve asking participants to reflect on past experiences, analyze the situations they faced and the way they behaved or made judgments and decisions and then took action ( Bandyopadhyay and Szostek 2019 ; Brookfield 1997 ). These methods, often employed by teachers or employers on students and employees, usually involve the analysis of qualitative data that can cast doubt on the reliability of the results. Consequently, various researchers have suggested ways to improve analytic methods, and they emphasize the need to create more advanced evaluation methods ( Brookfield 1997 ; Liu et al. 2014 ).

For example, Liu et al. ( 2014 ) reviewed current assessment methods and suggest that future work improves the operational definition of critical thinking, aiming to assess it both in different specific contexts and in different formats. Specifically, assessments could be contextualized within the major areas addressed by education programs (e.g., social sciences, humanities, and/or natural sciences), and the tasks themselves should be as practically connected to the “real world” as possible (e.g., categorizing a set of features, opinions, or facts based on whether or not they support an initial statement). Moreover, as Brookfield ( 1997 ) argues, because critical thinking is a social process that takes place in specific contexts of knowledge and culture, it should be assessed as a social process, therefore, involving a multiplicity of experiences, perceptions, and contributions. Thus, Brookfield makes three recommendations for improving the assessment of critical thinking that are still relevant today: (1) to assess critical thinking in specific situations, so one can study the process and the discourse related to it; (2) to involve students/peers in the evaluation of critical thinking abilities, so that the evaluation is not provided only by the instructor; and (3) to allow learners or participants in an experiment to document, demonstrate, and justify their engagement in critical thinking, because this learning perspective can provide insight into basic dimensions of the critical thinking process.

Finally, another more recent and less widely used form of assessment targets the specific executive functions that underlie logical reasoning and resistance to cognitive biases, as well as the ability of individuals to resist these biases. This form of assessment is usually done through specific experimental laboratory tasks that vary depending on the particular executive function and according to the domain of interest ( Houdé and Borst 2014 ; Kahneman 2011 ; West et al. 2008 ).

2.2.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Critical Thinking Skills

The executive functions underlying general critical thinking, the ability to overcome bias ( Houdé 2000 ; Houdé and Borst 2014 ), and meta-cognitive processes (i.e., meta information about our cognitive strategies) can all be trained and enhanced by educational programs ( Abrami et al. 2015 ; Ahern et al. 2019 ; Alsaleh 2020 ; Bellaera et al. 2021 ; Uribe-Enciso et al. 2017 ; Popil 2011 ; Pasquinelli and Bronner 2021 ; Yue et al. 2017 ).

Educational programs and institutions can support the development of critical thinking in several different ways. The process of developing critical thinking focuses on the interaction between personal dispositions (attitudes and habits), skills (evaluation, reasoning, self-regulation), and finally, knowledge (general and specific knowledge, as well as experience) ( Thomas and Lok 2015 ). It is specifically in regard to skills and knowledge that institutions are well suited to develop critical thinking through pedagogical elements such as rhetoric training, relevance of information evaluation (e.g., media literacy, where and how to check information on the internet, dealing with “fake news”, etc.), deductive thinking skills, and inductive reasoning ( Moore and Parker 2016 ). A few tools, such as case studies or concept mapping, can also be used in conjunction with a problem-based learning method, both in individual and team contexts and in person or online ( Abrami et al. 2015 ; Carmichael and Farrell 2012 ; Popil 2011 ; Thorndahl and Stentoft 2020 ). According to Marin and Halpern ( 2011 ), training critical thinking should include explicit instruction involving at least the four following components and objectives: (1) working on attitudes and encouraging individuals to think; (2) teaching and practicing critical thinking skills; (3) training for transfer between contexts, identifying concrete situations in which to adopt the strategies learned; and (4) suggesting metacognition through reflection on one’s thought processes. Supporting these propositions, Pasquinelli and Bronner ( 2021 ), in a French national educational report, proposed practical advice for creating workshops to stimulate critical thinking in school classrooms, which appear relevant even in non-school intervention situations. For example, the authors suggest combining concrete examples and exercises with general and abstract explanations, rules and strategies, which can be transferred to other areas beyond the one studied. They also suggest inviting learners to create examples of situations (e.g., case studies) in order to increase the opportunities to practice and for the learner to actively participate. Finally, they suggest making the process of reflection explicit by asking the learner to pay attention to the strategies adopted by others in order to stimulate the development of metacognition.

2.3. Communication

In its most basic definition, communication consists of exchanging information to change the epistemic context of others. In cooperative contexts, it aims at the smooth and efficient exchange of information contributing to the achievement of a desired outcome or goal ( Schultz 2010 ). But human communication involves multiple dimensions. Both verbal and non-verbal communication can involve large quantities of information that have to be both formulated and deciphered with a range of purposes and intentions in mind ( Jones and LeBaron 2002 ). These dimensions of communication have as much to do with the ability to express oneself, both orally and in writing and the mastering of a language (linguistic competences), as with the ability to use this communication system appropriately (pragmatic skills; see Grassmann 2014 ; Matthews 2014 ), and with social skills, based on the knowledge of how to behave in society and on the ability to connect with others, to understand the intentions and perspectives of others ( Tomasello 2005 ).

Like the other 4Cs, according to most authorities, communication skills are ranked by both students and teachers as skills of the highest priority for acquisition in order to be ready for the workforce in 2030 ( OECD 2019b ; Hanover Research 2012 ). Teaching students how to communicate efficiently and effectively in all the new modalities of information exchange is an important challenge faced by all pedagogical organizations today ( Morreale et al. 2017 ). All dimensions of communication (linguistic, pragmatic, and social) are part of what is taught in school curricula at different levels. But pragmatic and social competencies are rarely explicitly taught as such. Work on social/emotional intelligence (and on its role in students’ personal and professional success) shows that these skills are both disparate and difficult to assess ( Humphrey et al. 2007 ). Research on this issue is, however, becoming increasingly rigorous, with the potential to provide usable data for the development of science-based practice ( Keefer et al. 2018 ). Teachers and pedagogical teams also have an important, changing role to play: they also need to master new information and communication technologies and the transmission of information through them ( Zlatić et al. 2014 ).

Communication has an obvious link with the three other Cs. Starting with critical thinking, sound communication implies fostering the conditions for a communicative exchange directed towards a common goal, which is, at least in educational and professional contexts, based on a fair evaluation of reality ( Pornpitakpan 2004 ). Collaboration too has a strong link with communication, because successful collaboration is highly dependent on the quality of knowledge sharing and trust that emerges between group members. Finally, creativity involves the communication of an idea to an audience and can involve high-quality communication when creative work occurs in a team context.

2.3.1. Individual Assessment of Communication

Given the vast field of communication, an exhaustive list of its evaluation methods is difficult to establish. A number of methods have been reported in the literature to assess an individual’s ability to communicate non-verbally and verbally. But although these two aspects are intrinsically linked, they are rarely measured together with a single tool. Moreover, as Spitzberg ( 2003 ) pointed out, communication skills are supported by different abilities, classically conceptualized as motivational functions (e.g., confidence and goal-orientation), knowledge (e.g., content and procedural knowledge), or cognitive and socio-cognitive functions (e.g., theory of mind, verbal cognition, emotional intelligence, and empathy; McDonald et al. 2014 ; Rothermich 2020 ), implying different specific types of evaluations. Finally, producing vs. receiving communication involve different skills and abilities, which can also vary according to the context ( Landa 2005 ).

To overcome these challenges, Spitzberg ( 2003 ) recommends the use of different assessment criteria. These criteria include the clarity of interaction, the understanding of what was involved in the interaction, the satisfaction of having interacted (expected to be higher when communication is effective), the efficiency of the interaction (the more competent someone is, the less effort, complexity, and resources will be needed to achieve their goal), its effectiveness or appropriateness (i.e., its relevance according to the context), as well as criteria relative to the quality of the dialogue (which involves coordination, cooperation, coherence, reciprocity, and mutuality in the exchange with others). Different forms of evaluation are also called for, such as self-reported questionnaires, hetero-reported questionnaires filled out by parents, teachers, or other observers, and tasks involving exposure to role-playing games, scenarios or videos (for a review of these assessment tools, see Cömert et al. 2016 ; Landa 2005 ; Sigafoos et al. 2008 ; Spitzberg 2003 ; van der Vleuten et al. 2019 ). Results from these tools must then be associated with others assessing underlying abilities, such as theory of mind and metacognition.

2.3.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Communication Skills

Although communication appears to be a key employability skill, the proficiency acquired during studies rarely meets the expectations of employers ( Jackson 2014 ). Communication must therefore become a priority in the training of students, beyond the sectors in which it is already known as essential (e.g., in medicine, nursing, engineering, etc.; Bourke et al. 2021 ; D’Alimonte et al. 2019 ; Peddle et al. 2018 ; Riemer 2007 ), and also through professional development ( Jackson 2014 ). Training programs involving, for example, communication theory classes ( Kruijver et al. 2000 ) and self-assessment tools that can be used in specific situations ( Curtis et al. 2013 ; Rider and Keefer 2006 ) have had convincingly positive results. The literature suggests that interactive approaches in small groups, in which competencies are practiced explicitly in an open and feedback-safe environment, are more effective ( Bourke et al. 2021 ; D’Alimonte et al. 2019 ; AbuSeileek 2012 ; Fryer-Edwards et al. 2006 ). These can take different forms: project-based work, video reviews, simulation or role-play games (see Hathaway et al. 2022 for a review; Schlegel et al. 2012 ). Finally, computer-assisted learning methods can be relevant for establishing a secure framework (especially, for example, when learning another language): anonymity indeed helps to overcome anxiety or social blockages linked to fear of public speaking or showing one’s difficulties ( AbuSeileek 2012 ). Each of these methods tackles one or more dimensions of communication that must then be assessed as such, by means of tools specifically developed and adapted to the contexts in which these skills are expressed (e.g., see the two 4Cs evaluation grids for institutions and for games outlined in Section 4 and Section 5 , below).

2.4. Collaboration

Collaborative problem solving—and more generally, collaboration—has gained increasing attention in national and international assessments (e.g., PISA) as an educational priority encompassing social, emotional, and cognitive skills critical to efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation in the modern global economy ( Graesser et al. 2018 ; OECD 2017 ). Understanding what makes effective collaboration is of crucial importance for professional practice and training ( Détienne et al. 2012 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ), as evidenced by the long line of research on group or team collaboration over the past 40 years (for a review, see e.g., Salas et al. 2004 ; Mathieu et al. 2017 ). Although there is no consensus on a definition of collaboration, scholars often see it as mutual engagement in a coordinated effort to achieve a common goal that involves the sharing of goals, resources, and representations relating to the joint activity of participants; and other important aspects relate to mutual respect, trust, responsibilities, and accountability within situational rules and norms ( Détienne et al. 2012 ).

In the teamwork research literature, skills are commonly described across three classes most often labeled Knowledge, Behavior, and Attitudes (e.g., Cannon-Bowers et al. 1995 ). Knowledge competencies refer to the skills related to elaborating the knowledge content required for the group to process and successfully achieve the task/goal to which they are assigned. Behavior includes skills related to the actualization of actions, coordination, communication, and interactions within the group as well as with any other relevant interlocutors for the task at hand. Note here that effective collaboration involves skills that have also been identified elsewhere as essential competencies, including communication, creativity, and critical thinking. Finally, several attitudes have been evidenced or hypothesized as desirable competencies in the team context, for example, attitude towards teamwork, collective orientation, cohesion/team morale, etc. Another common distinction lies between teamwork and taskwork. Teamwork refers to the collaborative, communicative, or social skills required to coordinate the work within the participants in order to achieve the task, whereas taskwork refers to specific aspects related to solving the task such as using the tools and knowing the procedure, policies, and any other task-related activities ( Salas et al. 2015 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ). Furthermore, collaborative competences can have specific (to a group of people or to a task) and general dimensions (i.e., easily transferable to any group or team situation and to other tasks). For example, skills related to communication, information exchange, conflict management, maintaining attention and motivation, leadership, etc. are present and transferable to a large number of group work situations and tasks (team-generic and task-contingent skills). Other skills can, on the other hand, be more specific to a team or group, such as internal organization, motivation, knowledge of the skills distributed in the team, etc.

2.4.1. Individual Assessment of Collaboration

Assessing collaboration requires capturing the dynamic and multi-level nature of the collaboration process, which is not as easily quantifiable as group/team inputs and outputs (task performance, satisfaction, and changes at group/team and individual level). There are indeed multiple interactions between the context, the collaboration processes, the task processes, and their (various) outcomes ( Détienne et al. 2012 ). The integrative concept of “quality of collaboration” ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ) encapsulates much of what is currently known about collaborative processes and what constitutes effective collaboration. According to this approach, collaborative processes can be grouped along several dimensions concerning communication processes such as grounding, task-related processes (e.g., exchanges of knowledge relevant for the task at hand), and organization/coordination processes ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ). Communication processes are most important for ensuring the construction of a common referential within a group of collaborators. Task-related processes relate to how the group resolves the task at hand by sharing and co-elaborating knowledge, by confronting their various perspectives, and by converging toward negotiated solutions. Collaboration also involves group management activities such as: (a) common goal management and coordination activities, e.g., allocation and planning of tasks; (b) meeting/interaction management activities, e.g., ordering and postponing of topics in the meeting. Finally, the ability to pursue reflexive activity, in the sense of reflecting not only on the content of a problem or solution but on one’s collaboration and problem-solving strategies, is critical for the development of the team and supports them in changing and improving their practices. Graesser et al. ( 2018 ) identify collaborative skills based on the combination of these dimensions with a step in the problem-solving process.

A large body of methodology developed to assess collaboration processes and collaborative tools has been focused on quantifying a restricted subset of fine-grained interactions (e.g., number of speakers’ turns; number of words spoken; number of interruptions; amount of grounding questions). This approach has at least two limitations. First, because these categories of analysis are often ad hoc with respect to the considered situation, they are difficult to apply in all situations and make it difficult to compare between studies. Second, quantitative variations of most of these indicators are non-univocal: any increase or decrease of them could signify either an interactive–intensive collaboration or else evidence of major difficulties in establishing and/or maintaining the collaboration ( Détienne et al. 2012 ). Alternatively, qualitative approaches based on multidimensional views of collaboration provide a more elaborated or nuanced view of collaboration and are useful for identifying potential relationships between distinctive dimensions of collaboration and aspects of team performance, in order to identify processes that could be improved. Based on the method of Spada et al. ( 2005 ) in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) research, Burkhardt et al. ( 2009 ) have proposed a multi-dimensional rating scheme for evaluating the quality of collaboration (QC) in technology-mediated design. QC distinguishes seven dimensions, grouped along five aspects, identified as central for collaboration in a problem-solving task such as design: communication (1, 2), task-oriented processes (3, 4), group-oriented processes (5), symmetry in interaction—an orthogonal dimension—(6), and individual task orientation (7). This method has recently been adapted for use in the context of assessing games as a support to collaborative skills learning.

2.4.2. Institutional and Environmental Support for Development of Collaboration and Collaborative Skills

Support for individuals’ development of collaborative skills provided by institutions and programs can take a variety of forms: (a) through the social impact of the physical structure of the organization, (b) the nature of the work required within the curriculum, (c) content within the curriculum focusing on collaboration and collaborative skills, and (d) the existence and promotion of extracurricular and inter-institutional opportunities for collaboration.

For instance, institutional support for collaboration has taken a variety of forms in various fields such as healthcare, engineering, public participation, and education. Training and education programs such as Interprofessional Education or Team Sciences in the health domain ( World Health Organization 2010 ; Hager et al. 2016 ; O’Carroll et al. 2021 ), Peer-Led Team Learning in chemistry and engineering domains ( Wilson and Varma-Nelson 2016 ), or Collaborative Problem Solving in education ( Peña-López 2017 ; Taddei 2009 ) are notable examples.

Contextual support recently arose from the deployment of online digital media and new mixed realities in the workplace, in the learning environments and in society at large—obviously stimulated and accentuated with the COVID-19 pandemic. This has led many organizations to invest in proposing support for synchronous and asynchronous collaboration (notably remote, between employees, between students and educators or within group members, etc.) in various ways, including the provision of communication hardware and software, computer-supported cooperative work and computer-supported collaborative learning platforms, training and practical guides, etc. Users can collaborate through heterogeneous hybrid collaborative interaction spaces that can be accessed through virtual or augmented reality, but also simple video conferencing or even a voice-only or text-only interface. These new spaces for collaboration are, however, often difficult to use and less satisfactory than face-to-face interactions, suggesting the need for more research on collaborative activities and on how to support them ( Faidley 2018 ; Karl et al. 2022 ; Kemp and Grieve 2014 ; Singh et al. 2022 ; Waizenegger et al. 2020 ).

A substantive body of literature on teams, collaborative learning, and computer-supported technologies provides evidence related to individual, contextual, and technological factors impacting the collaboration quality and efficiency. For example, teacher-based skills that are critical for enhancing collaboration are, among others, the abilities to plan, monitor, support, consolidate, and reflect upon student interaction in group work ( Kaendler et al. 2016 ). Research focuses also on investigating the most relevant tasks and evaluating the possibilities offered by technology to support, to assess (e.g., Nouri et al. 2017 ; Graesser et al. 2018 ), and/or to learn the skills involved in pursuing effective and satisfying collaboration (see e.g., Schneider et al. 2018 ; Doyle 2021 ; Ainsworth and Chounta 2021 ).

3. Labelization: Valorization of the 4Cs and Assessing Support for Their Development

Moving from the nature of the 4Cs and their individual assessment and towards the ways in which institutions can support their development in individuals, we can now address the fundamentally important question of how best to support and promote this 21st century educational mission within and among institutions themselves. This also raises the question of the systemic recognition of educational settings that are conducive to the development of the 4Cs. In response to these questions, the nature and value of labelization is now presented.

A label is “a special mark created by a trusted third party and displayed on a product intended for sale, to certify its origin, to guarantee its quality and to ensure its conformity with the standards of practices in force” ( Renard 2005 ). A label is therefore a way of informing the public about the objective properties and qualities of a product, service, or system. The label is usually easily identifiable and can be seen as a proof that a product or service, a company, or an organization complies with defined criteria. Its effectiveness is therefore closely linked to the choice of requirements set out in its specifications, as well as to the independence and rigor of the body that verifies compliance with the criteria.

3.1. Labeling as a Means of Trust and Differentiation

As a sign of recognition established by a third party, the label or certification can constitute a proof of trust aiming to reassure the final consumer. According to Sutter ( 2005 ), there are different means of signaling trust. First, the brand name of a product or service and its reputation can, in itself, constitute a label when this brand name is recognized on the market. Second, various forms of self-declaration, such as internal company charters, though not statements assessed by a third party, show an internal commitment that can provide reassurance. Finally, there is certification or labeling, which is awarded by an external body and requires a third-party assessment by a qualified expert, according to criteria set out in a specific reference framework. It is this external body, a trusted third party, which guarantees the reliability of the label and constitutes a guarantee of credibility. Its objectivity and impartiality are meant to guarantee that the company, organization, product, or service meets defined quality or reliability criteria ( Jahn et al. 2005 ).

Research on populations around the world (e.g., Amron 2018 ; Sasmita and Suki 2015 ) show that the buying decisions of consumers are heavily influenced by the trust they have in a brand. More specifically, third-party assurances and labelization have been shown to strongly influence customer buying intentions and purchasing behavior (e.g., Kimery and McCord 2002 ; Lee et al. 2004 ). Taking France as an example, research shows that quality certification is seen as “important” or “significant” by 76% of companies ( Chameroy and Veran 2014 ), and decision makers feel more confident and are more willing to invest with the support of third-party approval than if their decision is merely based on the brand’s reputation or its demonstrated level of social responsibility ( Etilé and Teyssier 2016 ). Indeed, French companies with corporate social responsibility labels have been shown to have higher than average growth rates, and the adoption of quality standards is linked with a 7% increase in the share of export turnover ( Restout 2020 ).

3.2. Influence on Choice and Adoption of Goods and Services

Studies diverge in this area, but based on the seminal work of Parkinson ( 1975 ); Chameroy and Veran ( 2014 ), in their research on the effect of labels on willingness to pay, found that in 75% of cases, products with labels are chosen and preferred to those without labels, demonstrating the impact of the label on customer confidence—provided that it is issued by a recognized third party. Thus, brands that have good reputations tend to be preferred over cheaper new brands, because they are more accepted and valued by the individual social network ( Zielke and Dobbelstein 2007 ).

3.3. Process of Labelizing Products and Services

The creation of a label may be the result of a customer or market need, a request from a private sector of activity or from the government. Creating a label involves setting up a working group including stakeholders who are experts in the field, product managers, and a certification body in order to elaborate a reference framework. This is then reviewed by a specialized committee and validated by the stakeholders. The standard includes evaluation criteria that must be clearly defined ( Mourad 2017 ). An audit system is set up by a trusted third party. It must include the drafting of an audit report, a system for making decisions on labeling, and a system for identifying qualified assessors. The validity of the assessment process is reinforced by this double evaluation: a first level of audit carried out by a team of experts according to a clearly defined set of criteria and a second level of decision making assuring that the methodology and the result of the audit are in conformity with the defined reference framework.

3.4. Labelization of 21st Century Skills

The world of education is particularly concerned by the need to develop and assess 21st century skills, because it represents the first link in the chain of skills acquisition, preparing the human resources of tomorrow. One important means of simultaneously offering a reliable, independent assessment of 21st century skills and valorizing them by making them a core target within an educational system (schools, universities, and teaching and training programs of all kinds) is labelization. Two examples of labelization processes related to 21st century skills were recently developed by the International Institute for Competency Development ( 2021 ; see iicd.net; accessed on 20 November 2022) working with international experts, teachers, and researchers from the University of Paris Cité (formerly Université Sorbonne Paris Cité), Oxford University, and AFNOR UK (an accredited certification body and part of AFNOR International, a subsidiary of the AFNOR group, the only standards body in France).

The last two or three decades has seen the simultaneous rise of international ranking systems and an interest in quality assurance and assessment in an increasingly competitive educational market ( Sursock 2021 ). The aim of these labelization frameworks is to assist in the development of “quality culture” in education by offering individual programs, institutions, and systems additional independent, reliable means of benchmarking, charting progress, and distinguishing themselves based on their capacity to support and promote the development of crucial skills. Importantly, the external perspectives provided by such assessment system should be capable of being individually adapted and applied in a manner that can resist becoming rigidly imposed external standards ( Sursock and Vettori 2017 ). Similarly, as we have seen in the literature review, the best approach to understanding and assessing a particular C is from a combination of different levels and perspectives in context. For example, important approaches to critical thinking have been made from educationally, philosophically, and psychologically focused vantage points ( Lai 2011 ). We can also argue that understandings of creativity are also results of different approaches: the major models in the literature (e.g., the “4Ps” and “7Cs” models; see Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ) explicitly result from and include the objectives of different education-focused, process-focused, and “ingredient” or component-focused approaches.

The two assessment frameworks outlined in the sections that follow were formulated with these different perspectives and objective needs in mind. Given the complexity and very different natures of their respective targets (i.e., one assessing entire formal educational contexts such as institutions or programs, whereas the other targets the less multi-dimensional, informal educational activities represented by games), the assessment of the individual Cs also represents what experts consider a target-appropriate balance of education- and curriculum-focused, process-focused, and component-focused criteria for assessing each different C.

4. The International Institute for Competency Development’s 21st Century Competencies 4Cs Assessment Framework for Institutions and Programs

One comprehensive attempt to operationalize programmatic-level and institutional-level support for the development of the 4Cs is the International Institute for Competency Development’s 4Cs Assessment Framework ( International Institute for Competency Development 2021 ). Based upon expert opinion and a review of the available literature, this evaluation grid is a practical tool that divides each of the 4Cs into three “user-friendly” but topic-covering components (see Table 1 and definitions and further discussion in the sections that follow). Each of these components is then assessed across seven dimensions (see Table 2 , below), designed to cover concisely the pedagogical process and the educational context. Examples for each point level are provided within the evaluation grid in order to offer additional clarity for educational stakeholders and expert assessors.

Three different components of each C in IICD’s 21st Century Skills 4Cs Assessment Framework.

Seven dimensions evaluated for the 3 different components of each C.

* Educational-level dependent and potentially less available for younger students or in some contexts.

The grid itself can be used in several important and different ways by different educational stakeholders: (1) by the institution itself in its self-evaluation and possible preparation for a certification or labelization process, (2) as an explicit list of criteria for external evaluation of the institution and its 4Cs-related programs, and (3) as a potential long-term development targeting tool for the institution or the institution in dialogue with the labelization process.

4.1. Evaluation Grid for Creativity

Dropping the component of “creative person” that is not relevant at the institutional level, this evaluation grid is based on Rhodes’ ( 1961 ) classic “4P” model of creativity, which remains the most concise model today ( Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ). The three “P” components retained are: creative process , creative environment , and creative product . Creative process refers to the acquisition of a set of tools and techniques that students can use to enhance the creativity of their thinking and work. Creative environment (also called “Press” in earlier literature) is about how the physical and social surroundings of students can help them be more creative. Finally, creative product refers to the evaluation of actual “productions” (e.g., a piece of art, text, speech, etc.) generated through the creative process.

4.2. Evaluation Grid for Critical Thinking

Our evaluation grid divides critical thinking into three main components: critical thinking about the world , critical thinking about oneself (self-reflection), as well as critical action and decision making . The first component refers to having an evidence-based view of the exterior world, notably by identifying and evaluating sources of information and using them to question current understandings and solve problems. Self-reflection refers to thinking critically about one’s own life situation, values, and actions; it presupposes the autonomy of thought and a certain distance as well as the most objective observation possible with regard to one’s own knowledge (“meta-cognition”). The third and final component, critical action and decision making, is about using critical thinking skills more practically in order to make appropriate life decisions as well as to be open to different points of view. This component also addresses soft skills and attitudes such as trusting information.

Our evaluation framework for critical thinking was in part inspired by Barnett’s “curriculum for critical being” (2015), whose model distinguishes two axes: one defined by the qualitative differences in the level of criticality attained and the second comprised of three different domains of application: formal knowledge, the self, and the world. The first two components of our framework (and the seven dimensions on which they are rated) reflect and encompass these three domains. Similar to Barrett’s proposal, our third rubric moves beyond the “skills-plus-dispositions” model of competency implicit in much theorizing about critical thinking and adds the importance of “action”—not just the ability to think critically and the disposition to do so, but the central importance of training and practicing “critical doing” ( Barnett 2015 ). Critical thinking should also be exercised collectively by involving students in collective thinking, facilitating the exchange of ideas and civic engagement ( Huber and Kuncel 2016 ).

4.3. Evaluation Grid for Collaboration

The first component of collaboration skills in the IICD grid is engagement and participation , referring to the active engagement in group work. Perspective taking and openness concerns the flexibility to work with and accommodate other group members and their points of view. The final dimension— social regulation —is about being able to reach for a common goal, notably through compromise and negotiation, as well as being aware of the different types of roles that group members can hold ( Hesse et al. 2015 ; Rusdin and Ali 2019 ; Care et al. 2016 ). (These last two components include elements of leadership, character, and emotional intelligence as sometimes described in other soft-skill and competency-related systems.) Participation, social regulation, and perspective taking have been identified as central social skills in collaborative problem solving ( Hesse et al. 2015 ). Regarding social regulation in this context, recognizing and profiting from group diversity is key ( Graesser et al. 2018 ). When describing an assessment in an educational setting of collaborative problem solving (with a task in which two or more students have to collaborate in order to solve it, each using a different set of resources), two main underpinning skills were described for the assessment: the social skill of audience awareness (“how to adapt one’s own behavior to suit the needs of the task and the partner’s requirements”, Care et al. 2016, p. 258 ) and the cognitive skill of planning and executing (developing a plan to reach for a goal) ( Care et al. 2016 ). The former is included in the perspective taking and openness rubric and the latter in the social regulation component in the IICD grid. Evans ( 2020 ) identified four main collaboration skills consistently mentioned in the scientific literature that are assessed in the IICD grid: the ability to plan and make group decisions (example item from the IICD grid: teachers provide assistance to students to overcome differences and reach a common goal during group work); the ability to communicate about thinking with the group (assessed notably in the meta-reflection strand of the IICD grid); the ability to contribute resources, ideas, and efforts and support group members (included notably in the engagement and participation as well as the social regulation components); and finally, the ability to monitor, reflect, and adapt individual and group processes to benefit the group (example item from the IICD grid: students use perspective-taking tools and techniques in group activities).

4.4. Evaluation Grid for Communication

The evaluation grid for communication is also composed of three dimensions: message formulation, message delivery, and message and communication feedback . Message formulation refers to the ability to design and structure a message to be sent, such as outlining the content of an argument. Message delivery is about effectively transmitting verbal and non-verbal aspects of a message. Finally, message and communication feedback refers to the ability of students and teachers to understand their audience, analyze their social surroundings, and interpret information in context. Other components of communication skills such as theory of mind, empathy, or emotional intelligence are also relevant and included in the process of applying the grid. Thompson ( 2020 ) proposes a four-component operationalized definition of communication for its assessment in students. First, they describe a comprehension strand covering the understanding and selection of adequate information from a range of sources. Message formulation in the IICD grid captures this dimension through its focus on content analysis and generation. Second, the presentation of information and ideas is mentioned in several different modes, adjusted to the intended audience, verbally as well as non-verbally. The message delivery component of the IICD grid focuses on these points. Third, the authors note the importance of communication technology and its advanced use. The IICD grid also covers the importance of technology use in its tools and techniques category, with, for example, an item that reads: students learn to effectively use a variety of formats of communication (social media, make a video, e-mail, letter writing, creating a document). Finally, Thompson ( 2020 ) describes the recognition of cultural and other differences as an important aspect of communication. The IICD grid aims at incorporating these aspects, notably in the meta-reflection category under each of the three dimensions.

5. Assessing the 4Cs in Informal Educational Contexts: The Example of Games

5.1. the 4cs in informal educational contexts.

So far, the focus has been on rather formal ways of nurturing the 4Cs. Although institutions and training programs are perhaps the most significant and necessary avenues of education, they are not the sole context in which 4Cs’ learning and improvement can manifest. One other important potential learning context is game play. Games are activities that are present and participated in throughout human society—by those of all ages, genders, and socio-economic statuses ( Bateson and Martin 2013 ; Huizinga 1949 ; Malaby 2007 ). This informal setting can also provide favorable conditions to help improve the 4Cs ( van Rosmalen et al. 2014 ) and should not be under-appreciated. Games provide a unique environment for learning, as they can foster a space to freely explore possibilities and one’s own potential ( de Freitas 2006 ). We argue that games are a significant potential pathway for the improvement of the 4Cs, and as such, they merit the same attention as more formal ways of learning and developing competencies.

5.2. 4Cs Evaluation Framework for Games

Compared to schools and educational institutions, the focus of IICD’s evaluation framework for games (see International Institute for Competency Development 2021 ) is more narrow. Thus, it is fundamentally different from the institutional grid: games, complex and deep as they can sometimes be, cannot directly be compared to the complexity of a school curriculum and all the programs it contains. The evaluation of a game’s effectiveness for training/improving a given C rests on the following principle: if a game presents affordances conducive to exercising a given skill, engaged playing of that game should help improve that skill.

The game’s evaluation grid is scored based on two criteria. For example, as a part of a game’s rating as a tool for the development of creativity, we determine the game must first meet two conditions. First, whether or not the game allows the opportunity for creativity to manifest itself: if creativity cannot occur in the game, it is obviously not eligible to receive ratings for that C. Second, whether or not creativity is needed in order to perform well in the game: if the players can win or achieve success in the game without needing creativity, this also means it cannot receive a rating for that C. If both conditions are met, however, the game will be considered potentially effective to improve creativity through the practice of certain components of creative behavior. This basic principle applies for all four of the Cs.

As outlined in Table 3 , below, the evaluation grid for each of the four Cs is composed of five components relevant to games that are different for each of the Cs. The grid works as follows: for each of the five components of each C, we evaluate the game on a list of sub-components using two yes/no scales: one for whether it is “possible” for that subcomponent to manifest and one for whether that sub-component is “required for success” in the game. This evaluation is done for all sub-components. After this, each general component is rated on the same two indicators. If 60% (i.e., three out of five) or more sub-components are positively rated as required, the general component is considered required. Then, the game is evaluated on its effectiveness for training and improving each of the 4Cs. If 60% or more components are positively rated as required, the game will be labelized as having the potential to be effective for training and improving the corresponding C.

Five different components evaluated for each C by the 4Cs assessment framework for games.

The evaluation grid for creativity is based on the multivariate model of creative potential (see Section 2.1.1 and Lubart et al. 2013 for more information) and is composed of four cognitive factors and one conative factor: originality , divergent thinking , convergent thinking , mental flexibility , and creative dispositions . Originality refers to the generation of ideas that are novel or unexpected, depending on the context. Divergent thinking corresponds to the generation of multiple ideas or solutions. Convergent thinking refers to the combination of multiple ideas and the selection of the most creative idea. Mental flexibility entails changing perspectives on a given problem and breaking away from initial ideas. Finally, creative dispositions concerns multiple personality-related factors conducive to creativity, such as openness to experience or risk taking.

The evaluation grid for critical thinking echoes Halpern’s ( 1998 ) as well as Marin and Halpern’s ( 2011 ) considerations for teaching this skill, that is, taking into consideration thinking skills, metacognition, and dispositions. The five components of the critical thinking grid are: goal-adequate discernment, objective thinking, metacognition, elaborate reasoning, and uncertainty management. Goal-adequate discernment entails the formulation of inferences and the discernment of contradictions when faced with a problem. Objective thinking corresponds to the suspension of one’s own judgment and the analysis of affirmations and sources in the most objective manner possible. Metacognition, here, is about questioning and reassessing information, as well as the awareness of one’s own cognitive biases. Elaborate reasoning entails reasoning in a way that is cautious, thorough, and serious. Finally, uncertainty management refers to the dispositional propensity to tolerate ambiguity and accept doubt.

The evaluation grid for collaboration is based on the quality of collaboration (QC) method ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ; see Section 2.4.2 for more details) and is composed of the following five components: collaboration fluidity, well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision, balance of contribution, organization and coordination, and cognitive syncing, input, and support. Collaboration fluidity entails the absence of speech overlap and the presence of a good flow in terms of turns to speak. Well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision is about contributing to the discussion and task at hand, as well as participating in discussions and arguments, in order to obtain a consensus. Balance of contribution refers to having equal or equivalent contributions to organization, coordination, and decision making. Organization and coordination refers to effective management of roles, time, and “deadlines”, as well as the attribution of roles depending on participants’ skills. Finally, cognitive syncing, input, and support is about bringing ideas and resources to the group, as well as supporting and reinforcing other members of the group.

The five components used to evaluate communication in games include both linguistic, pragmatic, and social aspects. Linguistic skills per se are captured by the mastery of written and spoken language component. This component assesses language comprehension and the appropriate use of vocabulary. Pragmatic skills are captured by the verbal and non-verbal communication components and refer to the efficient use of verbal and body signals in the context of the game to achieve one’s communicative goals ( Grassmann 2014 ; Matthews 2014 ). Finally, the grid also evaluates social skills with its two last components, social interactions and social cognition, which, respectively, refer to the ability to interact with others appropriately—including by complying with the rules of the game—and to the understanding of other people’ mental states ( Tomasello 2005 ).

6. Discussion and Conclusions

Each of the 4Cs is a broad, multi-faceted concept that is the subject of a tremendous amount of research and discussion by a wide range of stakeholders in different disciplines, professions, and parts of the educational establishment. The development of evaluation frameworks to allow support for the 4Cs to be assessed and publicly recognized, using a label, is an important step for promoting and fostering these skills in educational contexts. As illustrated by IICD’s 4Cs Framework for educational institutions and programs, as well as its games/activities evaluation grid, the specific criteria to detect support for each C can vary depending upon the educational context (e.g., formal and institutional level or informal and at the activity level). Yet considering the 4Cs together highlights some additional observations, current challenges, and opportunities for the future that are worthy of discussion.

6.1. Interrelationships between the 4Cs and a New Model for Use in Pedagogy and Policy Promotion

One very important issue for understanding the 4Cs and their educational implementation that can be simultaneously a help and a hindrance for teaching them—and also a challenge when assessing them—is their multidimensionality and interrelatedness. In other words, the 4Cs are not entirely separate entities but instead, as Figure 2 shows, should be seen as four interlinked basic “elements” for future-oriented education that can help individuals in their learning process and, together, synergistically “bootstrap” the development of their cognitive potentials. Lamri and Lubart ( 2021 ), for example, found a certain base level of creativity was a necessary but not sufficient condition for success in managerial tasks, but that high-level performance required a combination of all four Cs. Some thinkers have argued that one cannot be creative without critical thinking, which also requires creativity, for example, to come up with alternative arguments (see Paul and Elder 2006 ). Similarly, among many other interrelationships, there is no collaboration without communication—and even ostensibly individual creativity is a “collaboration” of sorts with the general culture and precursors in a given field. As a result, it ranges from impossible to suboptimal to teach (or teach towards) one of the 4Cs without involving one or more of the others, and this commingling also underscores the genuine need and appropriateness of assessing them together.

“‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: a Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs”. (Illustration of the interplay and interpenetration of creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication shown in dimensional space according to their differing cognitive/individual vs. social/interpersonal emphases; (© 2023, Branden Thornhill-Miller. All Rights Reserved. thornhill-miller.com; accessed on 20 January 2023)).

From this perspective, Thornhill-Miller ( 2021 ) proposed a “dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs” and their interrelated contributions to the future of education and work. Presented in Figure 2 , this model is meant to serve as a visual and conceptual aid for understanding the 4Cs and their interrelationships, thereby also promoting better use and understanding of them in pedagogical and policy settings. In addition to suggesting the portmanteau of “crea-critical thinking” as a new term to describe the overlap of much of the creative and critical thinking processes, the title of this model, “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”, is a verbal representation of the fluid four-way interrelationship between the 4Cs visually represented in Figure 2 (a title meant to playfully repackage the 4Cs for important pedagogical and policy uses). This model goes further to suggest some dimensional differences in emphases that, roughly speaking, also often exist among the 4Cs: that is to say, the frequently greater emphasis on cognitive or individual elements at play in creativity and critical thinking in comparison to the social and interpersonal aspects more central to communication and collaboration ( Thornhill-Miller 2021 ).

Similarly focused on the need to promote a phase change towards future-oriented education, Lucas ( 2019 ) and colleagues have suggested conflating creative thinking and critical thinking in order to propose “3Cs” (creative thinking, communication, and collaboration) as new “foundational literacies” to symmetrically add to the 3Rs (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic) of previous educational eras. Although we applaud these efforts, from our applied research perspective, we believe that the individual importance of, and distinct differences between, creative thinking and critical thinking support preserving them both as separate constructs in order to encourage the greatest development of each of them. Moreover, if only three categories were somehow required or preferable, one could argue that uniting communication and collaboration (as “collab-ication” suggests) might be preferable—particularly also given the fact that substantial aspects of communication are already covered within the 3Rs. In any case, we look forward to more such innovations and collaborations in this vibrant and important area of work at the crossroads between research, pedagogy, and policy development.

6.2. Limitations and Future Work

The rich literature in each of the 4Cs domains shows the positive effects of integrating these dimensions into educational and professional curricula. At the same time, the complexity of their definitions makes them difficult to assess, both in terms of reliability (assessment must not vary from one measurement to another) and of validity (tests must measure that which they are intended to measure). However, applied research in this area is becoming increasingly rigorous, with a growing capacity to provide the necessary tools for evidence-based practice. The development of these practices should involve interdisciplinary teams of teachers and other educational practitioners who are equipped and trained accordingly. Similarly, on the research side, further exploration and clarification of subcomponents of the 4Cs and other related skills will be important. Recent efforts to clarify the conceptual overlap and hierarchical relations of soft skills for the future of education and work, for example, have been helpful and promising (e.g., Joie-La Marle et al. 2022 ; Lamri et al. 2022 ). But the most definitive sort of taxonomy and measurement model that we are currently lacking might only be established based on the large-scale administration of a comprehensive battery of skill-measuring psychometric tests on appropriate cross sections of society.

The rapid development and integration of new technologies will also aid and change the contexts, resources, and implementation of the 4Cs. For example, the recent developments make it clear that the 4Cs will be enhanced and changed by interaction with artificially intelligence, even as 4Cs-related skills will probably, for the same reason, increasingly constitute the core of available human work in the future (see, e.g., Ross 2018 ). Similarly, research on virtual reality and creativity suggest that VR environments assist and expand individual and collaborative creativity ( Bourgeois-Bougrine et al. 2022 ). Because VR technologies offer the possibility of enhanced and materially enriched communication, collaboration, and information availability, they not only allow for the enhancement of creativity techniques but also for similar expansions and improvements on almost all forms of human activity (see Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 )—including the other three Cs.

6.3. Conclusion: Labelization of the 4Cs and the Future of Education and Work

Traditional educational approaches cannot meet the educational needs of our emergent societies if they do not teach, promote, and assess in line with the new learner characteristics and contexts of the 21st century ( Sahin 2009 ). The sort of future-oriented change and development required by this shift in institutional practices, programming, and structure will likely meet with significant resistance from comfortably entrenched (and often outdated) segments of traditional educational and training establishments. Additional external evaluation and monitoring is rarely welcome by workers in any context. We believe, however, that top-down processes from the innovative and competition-conscious administrative levels will be met by bottom-up demands from students and education consumers to support these institutional changes. And we contend that efforts such as labelizing 4C processes will serve to push educators and institutions towards more relevant offerings, oriented towards the future of work and helping build a more successful future for all.

In the end, the 4Cs framework seems to be a manageable, focused model for modernizing education, and one worthy of its growing prevalence in the educational and research marketplace for a number of reasons. These reasons include the complexity and cumbersome nature of larger alternative systems and the 4Cs’ persuasive presence at the core of a number of early and industry-driven frameworks. In addition, the 4Cs have benefitted from their subsequent promotion by organizations such as the OECD and the World Economic Forum, as well as some more direct support from recent empirical research. The promotion, teaching, and assessment of the 4Cs will require a complex social intervention and mobilization of educational resources—a major shift in pedagogy and institutional structures. Yet the same evolving digital technologies that have largely caused the need for these massive, rapid changes can also assist in the implementation of solutions ( van Laar et al. 2017 ). To the extent that future research also converges on such a model (that has already been found pedagogically useful and policy-friendly by so many individuals and organizations), the 4Cs framework has the potential to become a manageable core for 21st century skills and the future of education and work—one that stakeholders with various agendas can already begin building on for a better educational and economic future together.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, B.T.-M. and T.L.; writing—original draft preparation, B.T.-M., A.C., M.M., J.-M.B., T.M., S.B.-B., S.E.H., F.V., M.A.-L., C.F., D.S., F.M.; writing—review and editing, B.T.-M., A.C., T.L., J.-M.B., C.F.; visualization, B.T.-M.; supervision, B.T.-M., T.L.; project administration, B.T.-M., T.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

B.T.-M. and T.L. are unpaid academic co-founder and project collaborator for the International Institute for Competency Development, whose labelization frameworks (developed in cooperation with Afnor International and the LaPEA lab of Université Paris Cité and Université Gustave Eiffel) are used as examples in this review. S.E.H. and M.A.-L. are employees of AFNOR International. No funding was received to support this research or article, which reflects the views of the scientists and researchers and not their organizations or companies.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

• Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Eugene, Waddington David I., Wade C. Anne, Persson Tonje. Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2015; 85 :275–314. doi: 10.3102/0034654314551063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• AbuSeileek Ali Farhan. The Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods and Group Size on the EFL Learners’ Achievement in Communication Skills. Computers & Education. 2012; 58 :231–39. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahern Aoife, Dominguez Caroline, McNally Ciaran, O’Sullivan John J., Pedrosa Daniela. A Literature Review of Critical Thinking in Engineering Education. Studies in Higher Education. 2019; 44 :816–28. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586325. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ainsworth Shaaron E., Chounta Irene-Angelica. The roles of representation in computer-supported collaborative learning. In: Cress Ulrike, Rosé Carolyn, Wise Alyssa Friend, Oshima Jun., editors. International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. Springer; Cham: 2021. pp. 353–69. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alsaleh Nada J. Teaching Critical Thinking Skills: Literature Review. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]; The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. 2020 19 :21–39. Available online: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1239945.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Al-Samarraie Hosam, Hurmuzan Shuhaila. A Review of Brainstorming Techniques in Higher Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2018; 27 :78–91. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amabile Teresa M. Social Psychology of Creativity: A Consensual Assessment Technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1982; 43 :997–1013. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amron Manajemen Pemasaran. The influence of brand image, brand trust, product quality, and price on the consumer’s buying decision of MPV cars. European Scientific Journal. 2018; 14 :228–39. doi: 10.19044/esj.2018.v14n13p228. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ananiadoui Katerina, Claro Magdalean. 21st Century Skills and Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2009. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 41. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bailin Sharon. Achieving Extraordinary Ends: An Essay on Creativity. Springer; Dordrecht: 1988. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandyopadhyay Subir, Szostek Jana. Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking: Assessing Critical Thinking of Business Students Using Multiple Measures. Journal of Education for Business. 2019; 94 :259–70. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2018.1524355. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barber Herbert F. Developing Strategic Leadership: The US Army War College Experience. Journal of Management Development. 1992; 11 :4–12. doi: 10.1108/02621719210018208. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnett Ronald. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan US; New York: 2015. A Curriculum for Critical Being; pp. 63–76. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bateson Patrick, Martin Paul. Play, Playfulness, Creativity and Innovation. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Batey Mark. The Measurement of Creativity: From Definitional Consensus to the Introduction of a New Heuristic Framework. Creativity Research Journal. 2012; 24 :55–65. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2012.649181. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Battelle for Kids Framework for 21st Century Learning Definitions. 2022. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_DefinitionsBFK.pdf
• Bellaera Lauren, Weinstein-Jones Yana, Ilie Sonia, Baker Sara T. Critical Thinking in Practice: The Priorities and Practices of Instructors Teaching in Higher Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2021; 41 :100856. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100856. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blessinger Patrick, Anchan John P. In: Democratizing Higher Education: International Comparative Perspectives. 1st ed. Blessinger Patrick, Anchan John P., editors. Routledge; London: 2015. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.routledge.com/Democratizing-Higher-Education-International-Comparative-Perspectives/Blessinger-Anchan/p/book/9781138020955 [ Google Scholar ]
• Bloom Benjamin Samuel., editor. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I, Cognitive Domain. Longmans; New York: 1956. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira. The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. Design Thinking. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira, Bonnardel Nathalie, Burkhardt Jean-Marie, Thornhill-Miller Branden, Pahlavan Farzaneh, Buisine Stéphanie, Guegan Jérôme, Pichot Nicolas, Lubart Todd. Immersive Virtual Environments’ Impact on Individual and Collective Creativity: A Review of Recent Research. European Psychologist. 2022; 27 :237–53. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000481. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourke Sharon L., Cooper Simon, Lam Louisa, McKenna Lisa. Undergraduate Health Professional Students’ Team Communication in Simulated Emergency Settings: A Scoping Review. Clinical Simulation in Nursing. 2021; 60 :42–63. doi: 10.1016/j.ecns.2021.07.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brookfield Stephen D. Assessing Critical Thinking. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education. 1997; 75 :17–29. doi: 10.1002/ace.7502. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burkhardt Jean-Marie, Détienne Françoise, Hébert Anne-Marie, Perron Laurence. Human-Computer Interaction—INTERACT 2009. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg: 2009. Assessing the ‘Quality of Collaboration’ in Technology-Mediated Design Situations with Several Dimensions; pp. 157–60. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Camarda Anaëlle, Bouhours Lison, Osmont Anaïs, Masson Pascal Le, Weil Benoît, Borst Grégoire, Cassotti Mathieu. Opposite Effect of Social Evaluation on Creative Idea Generation in Early and Middle Adolescents. Creativity Research Journal. 2021; 33 :399–410. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2021.1902174. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cannon-Bowers Janis, Tannenbaum Scott I., Salas Eduardo, Volpe Catherine E. Defining team competencies and establishing team training requirements. In: Guzzo Richard A., Salas Eduardo., editors. Team Effectiveness and Decision Making in Organizations. Jossey-Bass; San Francisco: 1995. pp. 333–80. [ Google Scholar ]
• Care Esther, Scoular Claire, Griffin Patrick. Assessment of Collaborative Problem Solving in Education Environments. Applied Measurement in Education. 2016; 29 :250–64. doi: 10.1080/08957347.2016.1209204. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Care Esther, Kim Helyn, Vista Alvin, Anderson Kate. Education System Alignment for 21st Century Skills: Focus on Assessment. Brookings Institution; Washington, DC: 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carmichael Erst, Farrell Helen. Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Online Resources in Developing Student Critical Thinking: Review of Literature and Case Study of a Critical Thinking Online Site. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice. 2012; 9 :38–55. doi: 10.53761/1.9.1.4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carson Shelley H., Peterson Jordan B., Higgins Daniel M. Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure of the Creative Achievement Questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal. 2005; 17 :37–50. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Casey Betty J., Getz Sarah, Galvan Adriana. The Adolescent Brain. Developmental Review: DR. 2008; 28 :62–77. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2007.08.003. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cassotti Mathieu, Camarda Anaëlle, Poirel Nicolas, Houdé Olivier, Agogué Marine. Fixation Effect in Creative Ideas Generation: Opposite Impacts of Example in Children and Adults. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2016; 19 :146–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.10.008. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chameroy Fabienne, Veran Lucien. Immatérialité de La Qualité et Effet Des Labels Sur Le Consentement à Payer. Management International. 2014; 18 :32–44. doi: 10.7202/1025088ar. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chiu Fa-Chung. Improving Your Creative Potential without Awareness: Overinclusive Thinking Training. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2015; 15 :1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2014.11.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chulvi Vicente, Mulet Elena, Chakrabarti Amaresh, López-Mesa Belinda, González-Cruz Carmen. Comparison of the Degree of Creativity in the Design Outcomes Using Different Design Methods. Journal of Engineering Design. 2012; 23 :241–69. doi: 10.1080/09544828.2011.624501. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cinque Maria. ‘Lost in Translation’. Soft Skills Development in European Countries. Tuning Journal for Higher Education. 2016; 3 :389–427. doi: 10.18543/tjhe-3(2)-2016pp389-427. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cömert Musa, Zill Jördis Maria, Christalle Eva, Dirmaier Jörg, Härter Martin, Scholl Isabelle. Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) - A Systematic Review of Rating Scales. PLoS ONE. 2016; 11 :e0152717. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152717. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corazza Giovanni Emanuele. Potential Originality and Effectiveness: The Dynamic Definition of Creativity. Creativity Research Journal. 2016; 28 :258–67. doi: 10.1080/10400419.2016.1195627. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corazza Giovanni Emanuele, Darbellay Frédéric, Lubart Todd, Panciroli Chiara. Developing Intelligence and Creativity in Education: Insights from the Space–Time Continuum. In: Lemmetty Soila, Collin Kaija, Glăveanu Vlad, Forsman Panu., editors. Creativity and Learning. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. pp. 69–87. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cotter Katherine N., Beghetto Ronald A., Kaufman James C. Creativity in the Classroom: Advice for Best Practices. In: Lubart Todd, Botella Marion, Bourgeois-Bougrine Samira, Caroff Xavier, Guégan Jérôme, Mouchiroud Christohe, Nelson Julien, Zenasni Franck., editors. Homo Creativus. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. pp. 249–64. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Curtis J. Randall, Back Anthony L., Ford Dee W., Downey Lois, Shannon Sarah E., Doorenbos Ardith Z., Kross Erin K., Reinke Lynn F., Feemster Laura C., Edlund Barbara, et al. Effect of Communication Skills Training for Residents and Nurse Practitioners on Quality of Communication with Patients with Serious Illness: A Randomized Trial. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2013; 310 :2271. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.282081. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• D’Alimonte Laura, McLaney Elizabeth, Prospero Lisa Di. Best Practices on Team Communication: Interprofessional Practice in Oncology. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care. 2019; 13 :69–74. doi: 10.1097/SPC.0000000000000412. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Freitas Sara. Learning in Immersive Worlds: A Review of Game-Based Learning. JISC; Bristol: 2006. [(accessed on 1 November 2022)]. Available online: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearninginnovation/gamingreport_v3.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Détienne Françoise, Baker Michael, Burkhardt Jean-Marie. Perspectives on Quality of Collaboration in Design. CoDesign. 2012; 8 :197–99. doi: 10.1080/15710882.2012.742350. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diedrich Jennifer, Jauk Emanuel, Silvia Paul J., Gredlein Jeffrey M., Neubauer Aljoscha C., Benedek Mathias. Assessment of Real-Life Creativity: The Inventory of Creative Activities and Achievements (ICAA) Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2018; 12 :304–16. doi: 10.1037/aca0000137. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Doyle Denise. Creativity in the Twenty First Century. Edited by Anna Hui and Christian Wagner. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. Creative and Collaborative Practices in Virtual Immersive Environments; pp. 3–19. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drisko James W. Competencies and Their Assessment. Journal of Social Work Education. 2014; 50 :414–26. doi: 10.1080/10437797.2014.917927. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dul Jan, Ceylan Canan. Work Environments for Employee Creativity. Ergonomics. 2011; 54 :12–20. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2010.542833. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dumitru Daniela, Bigu Dragos, Elen Jan, Ahern Aoife, McNally Ciaran, O’Sullivan John. A European Review on Critical Thinking Educational Practices in Higher Education Institutions. UTAD; Vila Real: 2018. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: http://repositorio.utad.pt/handle/10348/8320 [ Google Scholar ]
• Edelman Jonathan, Owoyele Babajide, Santuber Joaquin. Design Thinking in Education. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2022. Beyond Brainstorming: Introducing Medgi, an Effective, Research-Based Method for Structured Concept Development; pp. 209–32. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Etilé Fabrice, Teyssier Sabrina. Signaling Corporate Social Responsibility: Third-Party Certification versus Brands: Signaling CSR: Third-Party Certification versus Brands. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics. 2016; 118 :397–432. doi: 10.1111/sjoe.12150. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans Carla. Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Collaboration. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment; Dover: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione Peter Arthur. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test–College Level. Technical Report# 1. Experimental Validation and Content Validity. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]; 1990a Available online: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED327549.pdf
• Facione Peter Arthur. Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. Research Findings and Recommendations. ERIC, Institute of Education Sciences; Washington, DC: 1990b. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. pp. 1–112. Available online: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED315423 [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione Peter Arthur. Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Insight Assessment. 2011; 2007 :1–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Faidley Joel. Ph.D. dissertation. East Tennessee State University; Johnson City, TN, USA: 2018. Comparison of Learning Outcomes from Online and Face-to-Face Accounting Courses. [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman Hershey H. Cognitive Biases That Interfere with Critical Thinking and Scientific Reasoning: A Course Module. SSRN Electronic Journal. 2017:1–60. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2958800. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fryer-Edwards Kelly, Arnold Robert M., Baile Walter, Tulsky James A., Petracca Frances, Back Anthony. Reflective Teaching Practices: An Approach to Teaching Communication Skills in a Small-Group Setting. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges. 2006; 81 :638–44. doi: 10.1097/01.ACM.0000232414.43142.45. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glăveanu Vlad Petre. Rewriting the Language of Creativity: The Five A’s Framework. Review of General Psychology: Journal of Division 1, of the American Psychological Association. 2013; 17 :69–81. doi: 10.1037/a0029528. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glăveanu Vlad Petre. The Psychology of Creativity: A Critical Reading. Creativity Theories Research Applications. 2014; 1 :10–32. doi: 10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.02. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldenberg Olga, Wiley Jennifer. Quality, Conformity, and Conflict: Questioning the Assumptions of Osborn’s Brainstorming Technique. The Journal of Problem Solving. 2011; 3 :96–118. doi: 10.7771/1932-6246.1093. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graesser Arthur C., Sabatini John P., Li Haiying. Educational Psychology Is Evolving to Accommodate Technology, Multiple Disciplines, and Twenty-First-Century Skills. Annual Review of Psychology. 2022; 73 :547–74. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-113042. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Graesser Arthur C., Fiore Stephen M., Greiff Samuel, Andrews-Todd Jessica, Foltz Peter W., Hesse Friedrich W. Advancing the Science of Collaborative Problem Solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2018; 19 :59–92. doi: 10.1177/1529100618808244. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grassmann Susanne. The pragmatics of word learning. In: Matthews Danielle., editor. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition. John Benjamins Publishing Company; Amsterdam: 2014. pp. 139–60. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hager Keri, St Hill Catherine, Prunuske Jacob, Swanoski Michael, Anderson Grant, Lutfiyya May Nawal. Development of an Interprofessional and Interdisciplinary Collaborative Research Practice for Clinical Faculty. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2016; 30 :265–67. doi: 10.3109/13561820.2015.1092951. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F. Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring. The American Psychologist. 1998; 53 :449–55. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern Diane F., Dunn Dana S. Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems. Journal of Intelligence. 2021; 9 :22. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020022. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hanover Research A Crosswalk of 21st Century Skills. 2012. [(accessed on 15 August 2022)]. Available online: http://www.hanoverresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/A-Crosswalk-of-21st-Century-Skills-Membership.pdf
• Hathaway Julia R., Tarini Beth A., Banerjee Sushmita, Smolkin Caroline O., Koos Jessica A., Pati Susmita. Healthcare Team Communication Training in the United States: A Scoping Review. Health Communication. 2022:1–26. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2022.2036439. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hesse Friedrich, Care Esther, Buder Juergen, Sassenberg Kai, Griffin Patrick. A Framework for Teachable Collaborative Problem Solving Skills. In: Griffin Patrick, Care Esther., editors. Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. Springer Netherlands; Dordrecht: 2015. pp. 37–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hitchcock David. Critical Thinking. In: Edward Nouri Zalta., editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2020 Edition) Stanford University; Stanford: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Houdé Olivier. Inhibition and cognitive development: Object, number, categorization, and reasoning. Cognitive Development. 2000; 15 :63–73. doi: 10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00015-0. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Houdé Olivier, Borst Grégoire. Measuring inhibitory control in children and adults: Brain imaging and mental chronometry. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5 :616. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00616. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huber Christopher R., Kuncel Nathan R. Does College Teach Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2016; 86 :431–68. doi: 10.3102/0034654315605917. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huizinga Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Elements in Culture. Routledge; London: 1949. [ Google Scholar ]
• Humphrey Neil, Curran Andrew, Morris Elisabeth, Farrell Peter, Woods Kevin. Emotional Intelligence and Education: A Critical Review. Educational Psychology. 2007; 27 :235–54. doi: 10.1080/01443410601066735. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• International Institute for Competency Development 21st Century Skills 4Cs Labelization. 2021. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://icd-hr21.org/offers/21st-century-competencies/
• Jackson Denise. Business Graduate Performance in Oral Communication Skills and Strategies for Improvement. The International Journal of Management Education. 2014; 12 :22–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ijme.2013.08.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahn Gabriele, Schramm Matthias, Spiller Achim. The Reliability of Certification: Quality Labels as a Consumer Policy Tool. Journal of Consumer Policy. 2005; 28 :53–73. doi: 10.1007/s10603-004-7298-6. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jauk Emanuel, Benedek Mathias, Neubauer Aljoscha C. The Road to Creative Achievement: A Latent Variable Model of Ability and Personality Predictors. European Journal of Personality. 2014; 28 :95–105. doi: 10.1002/per.1941. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Joie-La Marle Chantal, Parmentier François, Coltel Morgane, Lubart Todd, Borteyrou Xavier. A Systematic Review of Soft Skills Taxonomies: Descriptive and Conceptual Work. 2022. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: [ CrossRef ]
• Jones Stanley E., LeBaron Curtis D. Research on the Relationship between Verbal and Nonverbal Communication: Emerging Integrations. The Journal of Communication. 2002; 52 :499–521. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02559.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaendler Celia, Wiedmann Michael, Leuders Timo, Rummel Nikol, Spada Hans. Monitoring Student Interaction during Collaborative Learning: Design and Evaluation of a Training Program for Pre-Service Teachers. Psychology Learning & Teaching. 2016; 15 :44–64. doi: 10.1177/1475725716638010. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman Daniel. A Perspective on Judgment and Choice: Mapping Bounded Rationality. The American Psychologist. 2003; 58 :697–720. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahneman Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan; New York: 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Karl Katherine A., Peluchette Joy V., Aghakhani Navid. Virtual Work Meetings during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Good, Bad, and Ugly. Small Group Research. 2022; 53 :343–65. doi: 10.1177/10464964211015286. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Keefer Kateryna V., Parker James D. A., Saklofske Donald H. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2018. Three Decades of Emotional Intelligence Research: Perennial Issues, Emerging Trends, and Lessons Learned in Education: Introduction to Emotional Intelligence in Education; pp. 1–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kemp Nenagh, Grieve Rachel. Face-to-Face or Face-to-Screen? Undergraduates’ Opinions and Test Performance in Classroom vs. Online Learning. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5 :1278. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01278. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kimery Kathryn, McCord Mary. Third-Party Assurances: Mapping the Road to Trust in E-retailing. The Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application. 2002; 4 :63–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohn Nicholas W., Smith Steven M. Collaborative Fixation: Effects of Others’ Ideas on Brainstorming. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2011; 25 :359–71. doi: 10.1002/acp.1699. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kowaltowski Doris C. C. K., Bianchi Giovana, de Paiva Valéria Teixeira. Methods That May Stimulate Creativity and Their Use in Architectural Design Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 2010; 20 :453–76. doi: 10.1007/s10798-009-9102-z. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kruijver Irma P. M., Kerkstra Ada, Francke Anneke L., Bensing Jozien M., van de Wiel Harry B. M. Evaluation of Communication Training Programs in Nursing Care: A Review of the Literature. Patient Education and Counseling. 2000; 39 :129–45. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(99)00096-8. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lai Emily R. Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson’s Research Reports. 2011; 6 :40–41. doi: 10.25148/lawrev.11.2.3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamri Jérémy, Lubart Todd. Creativity and Its’ Relationships with 21st Century Skills in Job Performance. Kindai Management Review. 2021; 9 :75–91. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamri Jérémy, Barabel Michel, Meier Olivier, Lubart Todd. Le Défi Des Soft Skills: Comment les Développer au XXIe Siècle? Dunod; Paris: 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Landa Rebecca J. Assessment of Social Communication Skills in Preschoolers: Assessing Social Communication Skills in Children. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews. 2005; 11 :247–52. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.20079. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee Sang M., Choi Jeongil, Lee Sang-Gun. The impact of a third-party assurance seal in customer purchasing intention. Journal of Internet Commerce. 2004; 3 :33–51. doi: 10.1300/J179v03n02_03. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis Arthur, Smith David. Defining Higher Order Thinking. Theory into Practice. 1993; 32 :131–37. doi: 10.1080/00405849309543588. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu Ou Lydia, Frankel Lois, Roohr Katrina Crotts. 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; 2014 :1–23. doi: 10.1002/ets2.12009. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd. The 7 C’s of Creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior. 2017; 51 :293–96. doi: 10.1002/jocb.190. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Thornhill-Miller Branden. Creativity: An Overview of the 7C’s of Creative Thought. Heidelberg: Heidelberg University Publishing. 2019 doi: 10.17885/HEIUP.470.C6678. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Barbot Baptiste, Besançon Maud. Creative Potential: Assessment Issues and the EPoC Battery/Potencial Creativo: Temas de Evaluación y Batería EPoC. Estudios de Psicologia. 2019; 40 :540–62. doi: 10.1080/02109395.2019.1656462. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Todd, Zenasni Franck, Barbot Baptiste. Creative potential and its measurement. International Journal of Talent Development and Creativity. 2013; 1 :41–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart Tubart, Thornhill-Miller Branden. Creativity in Law: Legal Professions and the Creative Profiler Approach. In: Masson Antoine, Robinson Gavin., editors. Mapping Legal Innovation: Trends and Perspectives. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2021. pp. 1–19. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubin Jeffrey, Hendrick Stephan, Thornhill-Miller Branden, Mercier Maxence, Lubart Todd. Creativity in Solution-Focused Brief Therapy Forthcoming.
• Lucas Bill. Why We Need to Stop Talking about Twenty-First Century Skills. Centre for Strategic Education; Melbourne: 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucas Bill. Creative Thinking in Schools across the World. The Global Institute of Creative Thinking; London: 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lucas Bill, Claxton Guy. Wider Skills for Learning: What Are They, How Can They Be Cultivated, How Could They Be Measured and Why Are They Important for Innovation? NESTA; London: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Malaby Thomas M. Beyond Play: A New Approach to Games. Games and Culture. 2007; 2 :95–113. doi: 10.1177/1555412007299434. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marin Lisa M., Halpern Diane F. Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2011; 6 :1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mathieu John E., Hollenbeck John R., van Knippenberg Daan, Ilgen Daniel R. A Century of Work Teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. The Journal of Applied Psychology. 2017; 102 :452–67. doi: 10.1037/apl0000128. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matthews Danielle. Pragmatic Development in First Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 2014 doi: 10.1075/tilar.10. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald Skye, Gowland Alison, Randall Rebekah, Fisher Alana, Osborne-Crowley Katie, Honan Cynthia. Cognitive Factors Underpinning Poor Expressive Communication Skills after Traumatic Brain Injury: Theory of Mind or Executive Function? Neuropsychology. 2014; 28 :801–11. doi: 10.1037/neu0000089. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore Brooke Noel, Parker Richard. Critical Thinking. 20th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; New York: 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morreale Sherwyn P., Valenzano Joseph M., Bauer Janessa A. Why Communication Education Is Important: A Third Study on the Centrality of the Discipline’s Content and Pedagogy. Communication Education. 2017; 66 :402–22. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2016.1265136. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mourad Maha. Quality Assurance as a Driver of Information Management Strategy: Stakeholders’ Perspectives in Higher Education. Journal of Enterprise Information Management. 2017; 30 :779–94. doi: 10.1108/JEIM-06-2016-0104. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Education Association . Preparing 21st Century Students for a Global Society: An Educator’s Guide to the “Four Cs”. National Education Association; Alexandria: 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nouri Jalal, Åkerfeldt Anna, Fors Uno, Selander Staffan. Assessing Collaborative Problem Solving Skills in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments—The PISA Framework and Modes of Communication. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET) 2017; 12 :163. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v12i04.6737. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Carroll Veronica, Owens Melissa, Sy Michael, El-Awaisi Alla, Xyrichis Andreas, Leigh Jacqueline, Nagraj Shobhana, Huber Marion, Hutchings Maggie, McFadyen Angus. Top Tips for Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice Research: A Guide for Students and Early Career Researchers. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2021; 35 :328–33. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2020.1777092. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Science, Reading, Mathematic, Financial Literacy and Collaborative Problem Solving. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2017. PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . Framework for the Assessment of Creative Thinking in PISA 2021: Third Draft. OECD; Paris: 2019a. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/PISA-2021-creative-thinking-framework.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• OECD . Future of Education and Skills 2030: A Series of Concept Notes. OECD Learning Compass; Paris: 2019b. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/teaching-and-learning/learning/learning-compass-2030/OECD_Learning_Compass_2030_Concept_Note_Series.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Osborn A. F. Applied Imagination. Charles Scribner’s Sons; New York: 1953. [ Google Scholar ]
• Parkinson Thomas L. The Role of Seals and Certifications of Approval in Consumer Decision-Making. The Journal of Consumer Affairs. 1975; 9 :1–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.1975.tb00545.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Partnership for 21st Century Skills . 21st Century Skills Education and Competitiveness: A Resource and Policy Guide. Partnership for 21st Century Skills; Tuscon: 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasquinelli Elena, Bronner Gérald. Éduquer à l’esprit critique. Bases théoriques et indications pratiques pour l’enseignement et la formation. Ministère de l’Éducation Nationale, de la JEUNESSE et des Sports; Paris: 2021. Rapport du Conseil Scientifique de l’Éducation Nationale. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pasquinelli Elena, Farina Mathieu, Bedel Audrey, Casati Roberto. Naturalizing Critical Thinking: Consequences for Education, Blueprint for Future Research in Cognitive Science. Mind, Brain and Education: The Official Journal of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society. 2021; 15 :168–76. doi: 10.1111/mbe.12286. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul Richard, Elder Linda. Critical thinking: The nature of critical and creative thought. Journal of Developmental Education. 2006; 30 :34–35. [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Yang Huei-Chuan. Idea Generation in Groups: A Basis for Creativity in Organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2000; 82 :76–87. doi: 10.1006/obhd.2000.2888. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Kenworthy Jared B. Effective brainstorming. In: Paulus Paul B., Nijstad Bernard A., editors. The Oxford Handbook of Group Creativity and Innovation. Oxford University Press; New York: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Dzindolet Mary T. Social Influence Processes in Group Brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993; 64 :575–86. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.64.4.575. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paulus Paul B., Brown Vincent R. Toward More Creative and Innovative Group Idea Generation: A Cognitive-Social-Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming: Cognitive-Social-Motivational View of Brainstorming. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2007; 1 :248–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00006.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peddle Monica, Bearman Margaret, Radomski Natalie, Mckenna Lisa, Nestel Debra. What Non-Technical Skills Competencies Are Addressed by Australian Standards Documents for Health Professionals Who Work in Secondary and Tertiary Clinical Settings? A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. BMJ Open. 2018; 8 :e020799. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020799. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peña-López Ismaël. PISA 2015 Results (Volume V): Collaborative Problem Solving. PISA, OECD Publishing; Paris: 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Popil Inna. Promotion of Critical Thinking by Using Case Studies as Teaching Method. Nurse Education Today. 2011; 31 :204–7. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.002. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pornpitakpan Chanthika. The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades’ Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2004; 34 :243–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Possin Kevin. Critique of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Test: The More You Know, the Lower Your Score. Informal Logic. 2014; 34 :393–416. doi: 10.22329/il.v34i4.4141. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor Robert W., Dutta Addie. Skill Acquisition and Human Performance. Sage Publications, Inc.; Thousand Oaks: 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Putman Vicky L., Paulus Paul B. Brainstorming, Brainstorming Rules and Decision Making. The Journal of Creative Behavior. 2009; 43 :29–40. doi: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.2009.tb01304.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reiman Joey. Success: The Original Handbook. Longstreet Press; Atlanta: 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ren Xuezhu, Tong Yan, Peng Peng, Wang Tengfei. Critical Thinking Predicts Academic Performance beyond General Cognitive Ability: Evidence from Adults and Children. Intelligence. 2020; 82 :101487. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2020.101487. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Renard Marie-Christine. Quality Certification, Regulation and Power in Fair Trade. Journal of Rural Studies. 2005; 21 :419–31. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2005.09.002. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Restout Emilie. Labels RSE: Un décryptage des entreprises labellisées en France. Goodwill Management. 2020. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://goodwill-management.com/labels-rse-decryptage-entreprises-labellisees/
• Rhodes Mel. An Analysis of Creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan. 1961; 42 :305–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rider Elizabeth A., Keefer Constance H. Communication Skills Competencies: Definitions and a Teaching Toolbox: Communication. Medical Education. 2006; 40 :624–29. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02500.x. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Riemer Marc J. Communication Skills for the 21st Century Engineer. Global Journal of Engineering Education. 2007; 11 :89. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rietzschel Eric F., Nijstad Bernard A., Stroebe Wolfgang. Productivity Is Not Enough: A Comparison of Interactive and Nominal Brainstorming Groups on Idea Generation and Selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 2006; 42 :244–51. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2005.04.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross David. Why the Four Cs Will Become the Foundation of Human-AI Interface. 2018. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.gettingsmart.com/2018/03/04/why-the-4cs-will-become-the-foundation-of-human-ai-interface/
• Rothermich Kathrin. Social Communication Across the Lifespan: The Influence of Empathy [Preprint] SocArXiv. 2020 doi: 10.31235/osf.io/adgmy. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rusdin Norazlin Mohd, Ali Siti Rahaimah. Practice of Fostering 4Cs Skills in Teaching and Learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2019; 9 :1021–35. doi: 10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i6/6063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rychen Dominique Simone, Hersch Salganik Laura., editors. Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society. Hogrefe and Huber; Cambridge: 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sahin Mehmet Can. Instructional Design Principles for 21st Century Learning Skills. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2009; 1 :1464–68. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.258. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salas Eduardo, Stagl Kevin C., Burke C. Shawn. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; Chichester: 2004. 25 Years of Team Effectiveness in Organizations: Research Themes and Emerging Needs; pp. 47–91. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salas Eduardo, Shuffler Marissa L., Thayer Amanda L., Bedwell Wendy L., Lazzara Elizabeth H. Understanding and Improving Teamwork in Organizations: A Scientifically Based Practical Guide. Human Resource Management. 2015; 54 :599–622. doi: 10.1002/hrm.21628. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salmi Jamil. The Tertiary Education Imperative: Knowledge, Skills and Values for Development. Springer; Cham: 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Samani Sanaz Ahmadpoor, Rasid Siti Zaleha Binti Abdul, bt Sofian Saudah. A Workplace to Support Creativity. Industrial Engineering & Management Systems. 2014; 13 :414–20. doi: 10.7232/iems.2014.13.4.414. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saroyan Alenoush. Fostering Creativity and Critical Thinking in University Teaching and Learning: Considerations for Academics and Their Professional Learning. OECD; Paris: 2022. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sasmita Jumiati, Suki Norazah Mohd. Young consumers’ insights on brand equity: Effects of brand association, brand loyalty, brand awareness, and brand image. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management. 2015; 43 :276–92. doi: 10.1108/IJRDM-02-2014-0024. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schlegel Claudia, Woermann Ulrich, Shaha Maya, Rethans Jan-Joost, van der Vleuten Cees. Effects of Communication Training on Real Practice Performance: A Role-Play Module versus a Standardized Patient Module. The Journal of Nursing Education. 2012; 51 :16–22. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20111116-02. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schleicher Andreas. Why Creativity and Creative Teaching and Learning Matter Today and for Tomorrow’s World. GloCT in Collaboration with OECD CERI; Paris: 2022. Creativity in Education Summit 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schneider Bertrand, Sharma Kshitij, Cuendet Sebastien, Zufferey Guillaume, Dillenbourg Pierre, Pea Roy. Leveraging Mobile Eye-Trackers to Capture Joint Visual Attention in Co-Located Collaborative Learning Groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2018; 13 :241–61. doi: 10.1007/s11412-018-9281-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schultz David M. Eloquent Science: A course to improve scientific and communication skills; Paper presented at the 19th Symposium on Education; Altanta, GA, USA. January 18–21; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scialabba George. Mindplay. Harvard Magazine. 1984; 16 :19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott Ginamarie, Leritz Lyle E., Mumford Michael D. The Effectiveness of Creativity Training: A Quantitative Review. Creativity Research Journal. 2004; 16 :361–88. doi: 10.1080/10400410409534549. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sigafoos Jeff, Schlosser Ralf W., Green Vanessa A., O’Reilly Mark, Lancioni Giulio E. Communication and Social Skills Assessment. In: Matson Johnny L., editor. Clinical Assessment and Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorders. Elsevier; Amsterdam: 2008. pp. 165–92. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simonton Dean Keith. Creativity from a Historiometric Perspective. In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. Handbook of Creativity. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 1999. pp. 116–34. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh Pallavi, Bala Hillol, Dey Bidit Lal, Filieri Raffaele. Enforced Remote Working: The Impact of Digital Platform-Induced Stress and Remote Working Experience on Technology Exhaustion and Subjective Wellbeing. Journal of Business Research. 2022; 151 :269–86. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.07.002. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spada Hans, Meier Anne, Rummel Nikol, Hauser Sabine. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning Learning 2005: The next 10 Years!—CSCL’05, Taipei, Taiwan, May 30–June 4. Association for Computational Linguistics; Morristown: 2005. A New Method to Assess the Quality of Collaborative Process in CSCL. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spitzberg Brian H. Methods of interpersonal skill assessment. In: Greene John O., Burleson Brant R., editors. The Handbook of Communication and Social Interaction Skills. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Mahwah: 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg Robert. Intelligence, Wisdom, and Creativity: Three Is Better than One. Educational Psychologist. 1986; 21 :175–90. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep2103_2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg Robert J., Funke Joachim. The Psychology of Human Thought: An Introduction. Heidelberg University Publishing (heiUP); Heidelberg: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sursock Andrée. Quality assurance and rankings: Some European lessons. In: Hazelkorn Ellen, Mihut Georgiana., editors. Research Handbook on University Rankings. Edward Elgar Publishing; Cheltenham: 2021. pp. 185–96. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sursock Andrée, Vettori Oliver. Qualitätskultur. Ein Blick in Die Gelebte Praxis der Hochschulen. Agency for Quality Assurance and Accreditation; Vienna: 2017. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Quo vadis, quality culture? Theses from different perspectives; pp. 13–18. Available online: https://www.aq.ac.at/de/ueber-uns/publikationen/sonstige-publikationen.php [ Google Scholar ]
• Sutter Éric. Certification et Labellisation: Un Problème de Confiance. Bref Panorama de La Situation Actuelle. Documentaliste-Sciences de l Information. 2005; 42 :284–90. doi: 10.3917/docsi.424.0284. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taddei François. Training Creative and Collaborative Knowledge-Builders: A Major Challenge for 21st Century Education. OCDE; Paris: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas Keith, Lok Beatrice. Teaching Critical Thinking: An Operational Framework. In: Davies Martin, Barnett Ronald., editors. The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan US; New York: 2015. pp. 93–105. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson Jeri. Measuring Student Success Skills: A Review of the Literature on Complex Communication. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment; Dover: 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thorndahl Kathrine L., Stentoft Diana. Thinking Critically about Critical Thinking and Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: A Scoping Review. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 14. 2020 doi: 10.14434/ijpbl.v14i1.28773. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornhill-Miller Branden. ‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: A Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs (Creativity, Critical Thinking, Collaboration and Communication) 2021. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: http://thornhill-miller.com/newWordpress/index.php/current-research/
• Thornhill-Miller Branden, Dupont Jean-Marc. Virtual Reality and the Enhancement of Creativity and Innovation: Underrecognized Potential Among Converging Technologies? Journal for Cognitive Education and Psychology. 2016; 15 :102–21. doi: 10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.102. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thornhill-Miller Branden, Millican Peter. The Common-Core/Diversity Dilemma: Revisions of Humean Thought, New Empirical Research, and the Limits of Rational Religious Belief. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 2015; 7 :1–49. doi: 10.24204/ejpr.v7i1.128. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tomasello Michael. Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard University Press; Cambridge: 2005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Uribe-Enciso Olga Lucía, Uribe-Enciso Diana Sofía, Vargas-Daza María Del Pilar. Pensamiento Crítico y Su Importancia En La Educación: Algunas Reflexiones. Rastros Rostros. 2017; 19 doi: 10.16925/ra.v19i34.2144. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van der Vleuten Cees, van den Eertwegh Valerie, Giroldi Esther. Assessment of Communication Skills. Patient Education and Counseling. 2019; 102 :2110–13. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.07.007. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Klink Marcel R., Boon Jo. Competencies: The triumph of a fuzzy concept. International Journal of Human Resources Development and Management. 2003; 3 :125–37. doi: 10.1504/IJHRDM.2003.002415. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Laar Ester, Van Deursen Alexander J. A. M., Van Dijk Jan A. G. M., de Haan Jos. The Relation between 21st-Century Skills and Digital Skills: A Systematic Literature Review. Computers in Human Behavior. 2017; 72 :577–88. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.010. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Rosmalen Peter, Boyle Elizabeth A., Nadolski Rob, van der Baaren John, Fernández-Manjón Baltasar, MacArthur Ewan, Pennanen Tiina, Manea Madalina, Star Kam. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing; Cham: 2014. Acquiring 21st Century Skills: Gaining Insight into the Design and Applicability of a Serious Game with 4C-ID; pp. 327–34. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vincent-Lancrin Stéphan, González-Sancho Carlos, Bouckaert Mathias, de Luca Federico, Fernández-Barrerra Meritxell, Jacotin Gwénaël, Urgel Joaquin, Vidal Quentin. Fostering Students’ Creativity and Critical Thinking: What It Means in School. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2019. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Voogt Joke, Roblin Natalie Pareja. A Comparative Analysis of International Frameworks for 21st Century Competences: Implications for National Curriculum Policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2012; 44 :299–321. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2012.668938. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Waizenegger Lena, McKenna Brad, Cai Wenjie, Bendz Taino. An Affordance Perspective of Team Collaboration and Enforced Working from Home during COVID-19. European Journal of Information Systems: An Official Journal of the Operational Research Society. 2020; 29 :429–42. doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1800417. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson Goodwin. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. Psychological Corporation; San Antonio: 1980. [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson Goodwin, Glaser Edwin M. Technical Manual and User’s Guide. Pearson; Kansas City: 2010. Watson-Glaser TM II critical thinking appraisal. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weick Karl E. The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1993; 38 :628–52. doi: 10.2307/2393339. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• West Richard F., Toplak Maggie E., Stanovich Keith E. Heuristics and Biases as Measures of Critical Thinking: Associations with Cognitive Ability and Thinking Dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2008; 100 :930–41. doi: 10.1037/a0012842. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitmore Paul G. What are soft skills; Paper presented at the CONARC Soft Skills Conference; Fort Bliss, TX, USA. December 12–13; 1972. pp. 12–13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willingham Daniel T. Critical Thinking: Why Is It so Hard to Teach? Arts Education Policy Review. 2008; 109 :21–32. doi: 10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson Sarah Beth, Varma-Nelson Pratibha. Small Groups, Significant Impact: A Review of Peer-Led Team Learning Research with Implications for STEM Education Researchers and Faculty. Journal of Chemical Education. 2016; 93 :1686–702. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00862. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winterton Jonathan, Deist Françoise Delamare-Le, Stringfellow Emma. Typology of Knowledge, Skills and Competences: Clarification of the Concept and Prototype. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities; Luxembourg: 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Economic Forum . New Vision for Education: Unlocking the Potential of Technology. World Economic Forum; Geneva: 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• World Economic Forum The Future of Jobs Report 2020. 2020. [(accessed on 2 November 2022)]. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020
• World Health Organization . Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice. World Health Organization; Geneva: 2010. No. WHO/HRH/HPN/10.3. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yue Meng, Zhang Meng, Zhang Chunmei, Jin Changde. The Effectiveness of Concept Mapping on Development of Critical Thinking in Nursing Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nurse Education Today. 2017; 52 :87–94. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2017.02.018. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zielke Stephan, Dobbelstein Thomas. Customers’ Willingness to Purchase New Store Brands. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 2007; 16 :112–21. doi: 10.1108/10610420710739982. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zlatić Lidija, Bjekić Dragana, Marinković Snežana, Bojović Milevica. Development of Teacher Communication Competence. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 116 :606–10. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.265. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Creativity and Critical Thinking

• First Online: 31 January 2022

Cite this chapter

• Peter Ellerton 6 &
• Robert Kelly 7  

1065 Accesses

1 Citations

The twenty-first century has seen a rapid growth of curriculum initiatives that consider the development of cross-curriculum competencies as a core issue, and significant for every discipline area. Both because of such cross-curriculum developments and because of the nature of STEM itself, the integration of the particular core competencies of ‘creativity’ and ‘critical thinking’ across the STEM disciplines has also grown rapidly in educational importance. Creativity and critical thinking in education are best viewed from the perspectives of both learner development and teacher expertise, with the attributes specific to each concept appropriately seen as increasing in sophistication or complexity over time. A broad examination of each of the two concepts and their interrelatedness, and the consequent implications for educational practice concerned with developing them, creates a lens through which to view the application of creativity and critical thinking across the complexity and diversity of the STEM disciplines and their integrated forms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Altan, S., Lane, J. F., & Dottin, E. (2017). Using habits of mind, intelligent behaviors, and educational theories to create a conceptual framework for developing effective teaching dispositions. Journal of Teacher Education, 70 (2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117736024 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Amabile, T. (2012). The componential theory of creativity . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Google Scholar  

Amabile, T., & Pratt, M. (2017). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37 , 157–183.

Annas, J. (1995). Virtue as a skill. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 3 (2), 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559508570812 .

Bailin, S., & Battersby, M. (2016). Fostering the virtues of inquiry. An International Review of Philosophy, 35 (2), 367–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6 .

Bowers, S. (2019). Irish teenager wins Google science award for microplastics project . Retrieved from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/irish-teenager-wins-google-science-award-for-microplastics-project-1.3971256

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry . New York.

Dottin, E. (2009). Professional judgment and dispositions in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 , 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.06.005

Ellerton, P. (2015). Metacognition and critical thinking: Some pedagogical imperatives. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 409–426). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_25 .

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations . Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED315423

Gloor, P. (2017). Swarm leadership and the collective mind . Bingley, UK: Emerald.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gotz, I. (1981). On defining creativity. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 39 , 297–301.

Guilford, J. (1959). Traits of creativity. In H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 142–161). New York: Harper.

IDEO . (2012). Design thinking toolkit for educators (2nd ed.). Retrieved from https://designthinkingforeducators.com

Kallick, B., & Costa, A. L. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development . http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uql/detail.action?docID=410671

Kelly, R. (2012). Educating for creativity: A global conversation . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Kelly, R. (2016). Creative development: Transforming education through design thinking, innovation and invention . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Kelly, R. (2020). Collaborative creativity: Educating for creative development, innovation and entrepreneurship . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.

Lubart, T. I. (2000). Models of creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13 (3–4), 295–308.

Mead, G. H. (1910). The psychology of social consciousness implied in instruction. Science, 31 (801), 688–693.

Mulnix, J. W. (2010). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44 (5), 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x .

OECD. (2018a). Teaching, assessing and learning creative and critical thinking skills in education . Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/assessingprogressionincreativeandcriticalthinkingskillsineducation.htm

OECD. (2018b). Fostering and assessing students’ critical and creative thinking skills in higher education . Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Fostering-and-assessing-students-creative-and-critical-thinking-skills-in-higher-education.pdf

Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imagination . New York: Charles Schribner.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21). (2018). Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/members-states/partner-states

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools / by Richard Paul and Linda Elder (5th ed.). Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Piirto, J. (2004). Understanding creativity . Scottsdale: Great Potential.

Plucker, J., Beghetto, R., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39 , 83–96.

Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of innovation . New York: Oxford University.

Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (2011, November 23). Defining critical thinking . Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

United Nations. (2019). United Nations sustainable development goals . Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/

Siegel, H. (1989). Epistemology, critical thinking, and critical thinking pedagogy. Argumentation, 3 (2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00128144 .

Siegel, H. (2017). Education’s epistemology: Rationality, diversity, and critical thinking . https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190682675.003.0007 .

Sperber, D., & Mercier, H. (2012). Reason as a social competence. In H. Landemore & J. Elster (Eds.), Collective wisdom—Principles and mechanisms (pp. 368–392). New York: Cambridge University.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

The Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2013). It takes more than a major: Employer priorities for college learning and student success . Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2013_EmployerSurvey.pdf

Topping, K. J., & Trickey, S. (2007). Impact of philosophical enquiry on school students’ interactive behaviour. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2 (2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2007.03.001 .

Van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 58 (2), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0085794 .

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

Waks, L. J. (2014). Education 2.0: The learning web revolution and the transformation of the school . Boulder: Paradigm.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought . New York: Harcourt Brace.

Willingham, D. T. (2008). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review, 109 , 21–32. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32 .

Willingham, D.T. (2019). How to teach critical thinking . Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/media/exar/How-to-teach-critical-thinking-Willingham.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Peter Ellerton

Faculty of Arts, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Robert Kelly

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Kelly .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

Amanda Berry

University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Cathy Buntting

Deborah Corrigan

Richard Gunstone

Alister Jones

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Ellerton, P., Kelly, R. (2021). Creativity and Critical Thinking. In: Berry, A., Buntting, C., Corrigan, D., Gunstone, R., Jones, A. (eds) Education in the 21st Century. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85300-6_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85300-6_2

Published : 31 January 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-85299-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-85300-6

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Introducing Lenovo’s new content filtering and online safety solution, Lenovo NetFilter

•  United States
• Contact Sales: 833-247-2527

Education insights

Exploring the 4 C’s of 21st Century Learning

May 27, 2021

Learning and Innovation Skills, or the 4 C’s of 21 st Century Learning include Critical Thinking and Problem Solving, Creativity and Innovation, Communication, and Collaboration. If the 4 C’s sound familiar, it’s because they probably are. Most people learned many of these skills in school. So why are they called 21 st -Century Skills ? The answer is simple: they are the set of skills 21 st century employers consider the most important skills in prospective employees.

Economists, human resource directors, and business leaders have examined the 4 C’s for at least three decades. What skills, they ask, do major industries and professions need in an employee or professional? In other words, what skills can we teach students that are “future-proof” no matter how quickly the world changes?

Every five years, the World Economic Forum interviews human resource and business leaders to identify the most important skills needed in an employee. According to their 2020 Future of Jobs Report , the ten most vital core skills needed in the coming decade are:

• Cognitive flexibility
• Complex problem solving
• Critical thinking
• Judgment and decision making
• Negotiation
• People management
• Coordinating with others
• Service orientation
• Emotional intelligence.

While the list of vital skills will vary depending on who you talk to, there is a clear common thread across the board: any list of “future-proof” skills is always represented by the four categories of the 4 C’s. In the 20 th century, career-specific skills reigned supreme in schools, universities, and professions. Today, however, students must learn skills to meet the changes of the new century and be the workforce of the future. As a result, educators must shift teaching methodologies to teach these learning and innovation skills.

The framework for 21st Century Learning

For many, however, modern teaching methodologies like the 4 C’s, collaborative learning, or project-based learning can sound like neglect of traditional curriculum . The reality is that no subject in the traditional curriculum is being replaced.

In fact, the 4 C’s are part of a larger educational framework whose foundation is the traditional curriculum: math, reading, writing, language arts, science, civics, history, languages, geography, and the arts. The 4 C’s were originally part of the Framework for 21 st Century Learning from the Partnership for 21 st -Century Skills. In this framework, the traditional curriculum is still the focus, and Learning and Innovation Skills, or the 4 C’s, are intended to be used to support it.

What are the 4 C’s?

While the 4 C’s may sound a bit vague, they are actually composites of real skills that are definable, measurable, and teachable.

Creativity and innovation

Creativity is a set of skills that enables learners to discover alternatives, brainstorm ideas, generate solutions, rethink existing paradigms, and create new knowledge. However, creativity involves more than just “thinking outside the box.” In the 21 st century, creativity is overwhelmingly a group process that requires openness to new and divergent ideas, the ability to formulate useful feedback, the recognition of the limits of new ideas and the value of old ideas, and the capacity to use failure as an opportunity. Group creativity skills are just as important, if not more so, as thinking outside the box.

Critical thinking and problem solving

In the real world, problems do not have “right answers” conveniently printed at the back of the textbook. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving involves mastering skills that enable learners to define problems, pose questions, sort through information, evaluate evidence, weigh alternatives, consider different points of view, analyze arguments, understand complexity, and approach unfamiliar problems. Many of these skills have long been taught in the classroom in traditional courses like science, civics, history, and math, but the goal is to use them deliberately throughout the curriculum.

Communication

Communication is the set of skills that allows students to read, listen, interpret, speak, write, persuade, negotiate, argue, and master a large variety of media. Learning communication skills dates back centuries in subjects like reading, writing, oratory, and language arts. The difference, however, is that the 4 C’s put communication at the center of learning in all subjects, from language arts to algebra. A few ways to teach communication skills to students include encouraging activities that reinforce active listening, asking open-ended questions, fostering critical thinking and reflective learning opportunities, and modeling effective conversation skills when communicating with students.

Collaboration

In our complex and changing world, success requires that people work together . Most problems and projects in the 21 st century workplace are multifaceted and multidisciplinary, requiring a diverse set of skills, knowledge, and backgrounds to bring to completion. Collaboration is the set of skills that enable people to collectively set goals, allocate resources, fulfill group roles, plan, manage time, make group decisions, negotiate, resolve conflicts, and build teams. Unlike other aspects of the 4 C’s, collaboration is a relatively recent structural innovation in K-12 education. Widely adopted in the 1990’s, collaborative learning was originally intended to enhance learning outcomes in the traditional curriculum . The 4 C’s also focus on developing a defined set of interactional skills that not only increase learning, but are also necessary skills in today’s workplace. A few ways to encourage collaborative learning include incorporating games into lessons, creating a safe space for class discussion, encouraging storytelling and brainstorming, and amplifying all student voices.

The 4 C’s of 21st Century Learning are here to stay

For proof of concept of the crucial value of the 4 C’s, we need look no further than the last 12 months. As the COVID-19 pandemic raged across the country, teachers and learners worked to master distance learning in classrooms entirely managed through technology. When we reflect back, 2020 will likely be remembered as “the Year of Distance Learning.” Simply meeting the challenges posed by a year of remote and hybrid learning became a crash course in the 4 C’s for everyone, from students and teachers to administrators and IT personnel.

The 4 C’s are fundamental skills educators must teach as they transition from a “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side” style of teaching. They are the tools students use every day to meet the challenges of a changing classroom, even without the duress of a pandemic. They are an enduring skillset and are part of every student’s future.

Find out how LanSchool can help develop creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication skills in your classroom.   

Even more from LanSchool

Join our mailing list and receive the latest edtech news and LanSchool updates delivered directly to your inbox.

3 ways to use the American Rescue Plan to purchase…

Features and updates

5 LanSchool features you can’t miss

How to write an effective digital lesson plan for k-12…, 8 key netiquette lessons to develop good digital citizens, get in touch.

Contact us today to learn more about LanSchool licenses, features, and benefits.

Try LanSchool for Free

Ready to see how LanSchool can transform your school or district?

• WhatsApp: +971 50 985 0174
• Dubai office: +971 4 589 6164

• Testimonials

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest information delivered directly to you

Type here to search

An intensive 5-day training course, leading with critical thinking, creativity and innovation, creating the future by igniting workplace creativity, course introduction.

This Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation training course is designed for managers who want to encourage more creativity and innovation in their own teams, colleagues and organisations.

The training course gives delegates a practical understanding of innovation management theories, and the principles of design thinking, so they can contribute to the analysis, planning and building of new products and services. And, they will learn the methods to help their teams to explore; greater levels of personal curiosity, networking, teamwork, collaborative working, risk - and the use of agile methods to improve project working. Together, promoting the attitudes and work habits needed in any organization that seeks more creative working, change and innovation.

This Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation training course will highlight:

• The challenge of change – understanding why organizations need to innovate
• The principles of design thinking, and the use of critical thinking, to discover problems
• Innovation strategy, planning tools and developing the business canvas
• Encouraging creative practice, debates, conflicts, risks and failing fast
• Open innovation – maximizing valuable relationships to deliver new initiatives
• Managing self and others – avoiding procrastination and promoting productivity.
• Practical steps and take-aways – leading conversations to start innovating

At the end of this Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation training course, successful delegates will learn how to:

• Add to the organisational debates of changes and innovation
• Prepare business models and outline plans for new business initiatives
• Encourage objectivity, creative thinking and collaborative working practices
• Use management methods that promote open debates and generate ideas
• Promote lean and agile work habits, that delivers innovation results faster

Training Methodology

This Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation training course is designed for active and motivated managers who are willing to contribute to business conversation. In a confidential and professional setting, where debate is encouraged and respected, they are expected to bring their own thoughts to the discussions on challenges and opportunities we face. Those that contribute and engage fully in material and team exercises will gain the most.

The training course will blend  learning formats that will stimulate and stretch participants, including simple tests, formal seminar style presentations from trainer structured and informal discussions, along with solo work, group exercises and case studies, to allow the time to encourage critical thinking and reflection. Workshops and content will use a mix of printed material, slides, case studies, and videos.

Organisational Impact

Participants will gain the ability to think strategically about innovation and creativity, and improve their management skills. The organization will benefit as successful participants will be able to:

• Contribute to critical thinking, debates and plans for innovation and change initiatives
• Build practical everyday work habits and processes that deliver innovation
• Support team members and colleagues to use creative ideas in their work
• Encourage more networking, relationships and conversations to promote new ideas
• Create credible canvas discussions that can help explore new business models

Personal Impact

This Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation training course offers substantial professional development opportunities for the individual to improve their careers. Participants will personally benefit from:

• Gaining more confidence in discussing innovation and change with senior colleagues
• Becoming recognized as one of the organization’s champions of innovation
• Increasing their range of senior executive leadership abilities and skills
• Obtaining insights into their own creative capabilities and self-management
• Appreciating how innovation impacts across industries, cultures and organizations

Who Should Attend?

This Oxford Management Centre training course is designed broadly for a range of talented managers across the organization who are expected to be involved in new products, services and processes and who are being tasked to drive change and new ways of working.

This training course is suitable to a wide range of professionals but will greatly benefit:

• Managers tasked with driving new products, services and processes
• Commercial, technical (it) or operational areas involved in change projects
• Professionals advising on innovation projects (e.g., lawyers, accountants, HR)
• General managers involved in business development, sales and customer service
• Managers promoting change and wanting to build more creativity in their teams

Course Outline

The innovation challenge – leading in times of uncertainty.

• Why innovation? organizational change and leadership in context
• Understanding innovation horizons, oceans and funnels
• Sensing and responding to trends and changes in our environment
• Classic environmental scanning tools and methods of analysis
• Traditional R&D and product life cycles

The Business Challenge – Moving Away from Comfort

• Systems thinking +Thinking fast and slow + Design thinking
• The business case essentials – Corporate intrapreneurship
• Developing and challenging the business model
• Lean strategy and agile methods
• Building, testing, learning and failing fast

The Creative Challenge – Encouraging Risk and New Ideas

• The creative process: Where do good ideas come from
• Creative teams, creative culture – And creative conflicts
• Ways to encourage more creative work and better meetings
• Encouraging the deep work and avoiding procrastination and bureaucracy
• Open innovation – Using alliances, networks, suppliers and partners to innovate

The Leadership Challenge – Developing Talent and Delivering Results

• Understanding personality and our style of leadership
• The leader as servant – Being adaptive and authentic
• The art of persuasion – Selling your ideas
• Talent Management – Recruiting the team and raising competencies
• Improving performance and attitudes – The use of coaching and feedback

The Productive Challenge – Taking the Next Steps

• Incremental gains: Making small changes that make a big difference
• Project Management – Balancing risks and innovation measures
• Learning from successful organisations
• From good organisation to great organisation
• Your innovation leadership and direction

Certificate

Oxford Management Centre Certificate will be provided to delegates who successfully completed the training course.

Accreditation

In association with

GLOMACS Training & Consultancy

Visit website

PetroKnowledge

The Energy Training Centre

This training course is also part of below 10-day title:.

Leadership Mastery

• LinkedIn LinkedIn LinkedIn
• Facebook Facebook Facebook
• Twitter Twitter Twitter
• WhatsApp WhatsApp WhatsApp
• Print Print Print
• Favorites Add to favorites Add to favorites
• Pinterest Pinterest Pinterest
• Email App Email App Email App
• Gmail Gmail Gmail
• Reddit Reddit Reddit
• Adfty Adfty Adfty
• Amazon Amazon Amazon
• Atavi Atavi Atavi
• Bit.ly Bit.ly Bit.ly
• BizSugar BizSugar BizSugar
• Blogger Blogger Blogger
• Buffer Buffer Buffer
• Diigo Diigo Diigo
• Evernote Evernote Evernote
• Flipboard Flipboard Flipboard
• Google Classroom Google Classroom Google Classroom
• LINE LINE LINE
• MIX MIX MIX
• Myspace Myspace Myspace
• QRSrc.com QRSrc.com QRSrc.com
• Skype Skype Skype
• Telegram Telegram Telegram
• Trello Trello Trello
• Tumblr Tumblr Tumblr
• Yahoo Mail Yahoo Mail Yahoo Mail

Oxford Management Centre Typically replies within an hour

Course Registration Form

Enquiry for a course, request form, request for a different format, download brochure, accept cookies & privacy policy.

We use cookies to provide necessary website functionality, improve your experience and analyze our traffic. By using our website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our cookies usage. More information

Select cookies to accept

• Site Preferences

Accept Cookies Customise Cookies -->

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 2: Thinking Creatively

Chapter 2 learning outcomes.

After reading this chapter, you should be able to do the following:

• Identify eight creative thinking ideas to boost your personal creativity.
• Explain three ways to enhance team collaboration and creativity.
• Identify three threats to team creativity.
• Describe the “shape of ideation” as it is graphed from a team ideation session.
• Describe the SCAMPER technique for brainstorming.
• List three barriers to creativity.
• List three benefits of doing creativity exercises.
• List ten reasons businesses nurture creativity and innovation.

Inspiration or Perspiration

A century ago, Thomas Edison thought deeply about what drives invention or, as we call it today, innovation. One of his famous sayings, “Genius is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration,” stresses that innovation involves more than just great ideas. Edison knew from his own experience that the systematic hard work of trial-and-error experimentation paid off. His inventions, like the lightbulb and the phonograph, emerged through thousands of attempts as he refined the process step by step ( [1] ).

Thomas Edison knew breakthroughs do not come from “lightbulb” moments (pun intended). His quote captures this concept perfectly.

“Genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration” (Thomas Edison)

Personal creativity.

Not everyone considers themselves creative, but most of us do have the ability to be creative. We use our creative minds more often than we think.  Whenever you solve a problem, try something new, or give advice to a friend, you are probably using creative thought.

Just like doing physical exercise to work out your body, sometimes you need to do mental exercises in order to work out your mind. Play the video below to learn about the following eight creative thinking tips you can put into practice to help boost your creativity.

• Schedule Creative Free Time
• Set a Timer
• Think Quantity Over Quality
• Become an “Idea Machine”
• Switch Up Your Routine
• Look at Something Familiar Through a New Lens
• Read More Often
• Freewrite More Often

Play the “8 Creative Thinking Exercises to Boost Your Creativity” YouTube Video below to see if there is an exercise to boost your creative thinking. [2] Transcript for “8 Creative Thinking Exercises to Boost Your Creativity” Video [PDF–New Tab] . Closed captioning is available on YouTube.

There is a misconception that creativity is this thing that happens in the shower, a strike of lightning that you get out of nowhere, but the reality is creativity is not a moment in time, it’s a process and it takes time to develop.

If you were to generate a list of possible solutions to any given problem you may notice that the first few on the list will be similar to ideas other people may also come up with, but as you get to the bottom of the list you may find your ideas become more unique.  This is because we solve problems every day in our lives and we are good at it.  If I asked you how you will get to work today since your car is being repaired at the service center, you might say, “I’ll get a ride with a friend,” or “I’ll take the bus,” or “My mechanic loaned me a vehicle.”  If I then asked you to think of some other ways you might get to work, I’m sure your ideas will become more novel as you provide additional possibilities.  These novel ideas may not always be feasible, but while you are brainstorming new ideas, don’t judge them for feasibility, just get the ideas first (quantity), then later evaluate each idea on how well it resolves the problem or takes advantage of the opportunity.

Commands for Being Creative

• Get Stupid!  Throw out what you know and start from somewhere new.  Try drawing an image of a telephone.  What did you draw?  Something you have seen?  Did you think to draw a phone that does not exist yet? Lose the concept of what you think a phone is and start thinking about what a phone might be in the future.
• Want the Box. Constraints are necessary for creativity.  The more boundaries you have the more creative you will be.
• Can the critic. Don’t listen to the critic inside you that always tells you, “that’s a bad idea.”  Ignore this voice.

Explore the Concept – Personal Creativity Exercise – SIT Technique

Doing daily creative warm-up exercises may help you become a more flexible thinker in your job and help you approach work challenges with less fear and a more playful attitude.

• Take any household product you use daily, such as a coffee cup, a hairbrush, a toothbrush, a pen, a notebook, a laptop, etc.
• Addition Technique: Add something to the product to change it.  What can it now do or be used for?
• Subtraction Technique: Subtract or take away a part of the product.  What can it now do or be used for?
• Answer Example: For the addition technique, you might add another handle to a mug, making it easier to hold or making it into a sippy cup for toddlers (if you also added a lid).  For the subtraction technique, you might subtract or remove the handle on the mug altogether turning it into a travel mug that will fit in a car cup holder.

SCAMPER Technique for Brainstorming

Creative thinking and problem-solving are essential parts of the design process to turn ideas into innovation and break the barriers against creativity. One of the successful methods used in creative thinking is the SCAMPER technique. While there are different creative thinking and problem-solving techniques such as  reversed brainstorming ,  Hurson’s thinking model , the Six Hats of critical thinking , and  Lego Serious Play , SCAMPER is considered one of the easiest and most direct methods. The SCAMPER technique is based very simply on the idea that what is new is actually a modification of existing old things around us. [3]

What does the SCAMPER acronym stand for?

• S–Substitute (e.g., components, materials, people)
• C–Combine (e.g., mix, combine with other assemblies or services, integrate)
• A–Adapt (e.g., alter, change function, use part of another element)
• M–Modify/Magnify (e.g., increase or reduce in scale, change shape, modify attributes)
• P–Put to other uses (e.g., more than one way to use, more than one function)
• E–Eliminate (e.g., remove elements, simplify, reduce to core functionality)
• R–Rearrange/Reverse (e.g., turn inside out or upside down) [4]

Click on the information icon beside each of the letters below to learn more about SCAMPER.

Transcript for “SCAMPER” H5P [PDF–New Tab] .

Benefits of Doing Creativity Exercises

Creativity exercises offer many benefits for individuals, groups, or companies who use them, including the following: [5]

• Improved flexible thinking:  Creativity exercises improve your mental flexibility. You may see the possibility of small shifts or changes to a project that you didn’t notice before.
• Discovery of multi-dimensional ideas:  If you or your team have been working in the same field for a long time, you might use the same ideas repeatedly. Creativity exercises help you discover entirely new solutions to repetitive problems.
• Embracing work challenges:  With enough practice, work challenges become something to look forward to as an opportunity to show and improve your mental creativity rather than a test delaying your progress.
• Seeing new concepts: Some creativity exercises help develop your creative vision, allowing you to see objects, ideas, and problems in a new way. This is highly beneficial when looking for a novel solution to a business challenge.
• Improved teamwork: Creativity exercises help individuals and groups improve teamwork skills like communication, problem-solving, and unity.

Team Creativity

Team creativity is based on having open debates, and a free flow of ideas . For that to happen, trust must exist among team members. Where trust is lacking–so will creativity.  D uring brainstorming sessions, it is important to let everyone know that no idea is bad, no one will be judged, and all innovation comes with some risks. Listed be low are a few ideas on how to enhance creativity and collaboration in teams, as well as a list of some of the threats that may impair team creativity.

Enhancing Creativity and Collaboration in Teams

• Complementary Skill Sets. Collaboration works best when team members have complementary and diverse skill sets required to complete the project. Companies may also consider collaborating with customers, experts in the field, or experts in technical, design, marketing, and finance areas. [6]
• Appreciating Others .  Engaging in purposeful conversations and the ability to resolve conflicts are essential ingredients for collaboration. The team needs time to get to know each other not just as professionals, but as human beings, to build trust through informal social interaction. [7]
• Open Communication. Encourage people to voice their ideas and opinions. Team members need to know it is okay to share their ideas and opinions, and that this is actually valued. When team members feel comfortable sharing their thoughts, it’s more likely to foster the kinds of discussions required to generate creative solutions. [8]
• Facilitate Diverse Ways of Working. People have their own ways of doing things. Some people like to work in teams; others prefer to work alone. Some enjoy using a pencil and notepad to jot down their thoughts, while others always make notes on their tablets or make voice recordings on their phones. Managers and team leaders need to allow people to choose how they work – as long as they do their jobs and do them well – they’re happier, and that can prompt more creativity. [9]
• Prevent Internal Competition. Competition for a promotion, pay raise, bonus, or anything else among team members has a negative effect on team creativity. Team members will try to promote their own ideas, or even not share ideas within the team, and rather share them outside the team with the team leader, or upper management. No internal competition among team members should exist. [10]
• Establish Ground Rules. Include rules such as “nobody gets to monopolize the conversation,” and “nobody gets to be quiet all the time.” Establish what happens when someone is late to a meeting. Will you allow using computers and phones in the meeting (hint: do you want their full attention or not?) Make sure you keep a “parking lot” list of things so you do not forget any ideas. [11]

Threats to Team Creativity

Social Loafing:  This is the tendency for group members to slack off. These members may think their ideas are dispensable or may see other members working hard, and believe they do not need to contribute. [12]

Conforming: Members may conform due to the desire to be liked. If they believe their teammates will be critical of their suggestions, they will be more likely to agree rather than disagree. [13]

Production Blocking:  This can occur when members cannot express their ideas because others are expressing their own. When working alone, individuals can work without interruption of thought, whereas when working in a group, members may forget their ideas or may not get time to speak. [14]

Performance Matching:  When working in a team for an excessive amount of time, members will start to develop the same tendencies. Members that achieve higher ideals than the group may lower their standards, whereas members that work at a slower pace may increase their efforts. Overall, the team will plateau and may find it more difficult to generate unique ideas over time. [15]

Team Ideation Session: Graphing the Process

What happens in our thinking process when we are given a problem to solve in a specific amount of time?  As described by Stefan Mumaw in the LinkedIn Learning, Creativity Boot Camp course. If we graphed this ideation process for a group trying to solve a problem or take advantage of an opportunity, we would see a graph (refer to Figure 2.1 below) that at first has many ideas, but after a short period of time the group feels they have exhausted all the good ideas, and the ideas dwindle almost to a halt.  What happens next, is that someone offers a different, silly, or absurd idea, then more ideas come from that idea and the tide has turned. These ideas are more unique and are often the best ideas that get generated during the session and they appear on the graph after initial ideas have dwindled. The graph resembles the letter “M” with the first arc being higher than the second arc. This graph shape is known as the shape of ideation because it consistently reveals itself this way. [16]

Explore the Concept – Team Creativity Exercise – Telephone Pictionary

In every creative team, it is essential to have a little bit of abstract thinking. The team-building exercise of telephone Pictionary does just that and it can be played in larger groups or small ones. Sometimes, interpreting those you work with can be a real challenge. This game deals with this issue in a fun and enlightening way.

Use strips of paper with song titles or lyrics written on them, such as “Ice, Ice Baby,” “Singing in the Rain” or famous quotes, like “Crying over spilled milk,” “A Pinch to Grow an Inch” or movie titles or phrases, like “There’s No Place Like Home,” “May the Force Be With You.” Each team member starts with their phrase. They write it out on the first page of their notebook as best they can.

All notebooks are passed to the left after 30 seconds. That person then has 30 seconds to interpret the drawing and, on the next page in the notebook, write down what they think the drawing is depicting. The next person draws what the last person wrote (without looking back at the drawings in the notebook). The notebook gets passed again and again until it makes it back to the original owner. Once each notebook is back where it started, the owner of the notebook shows each page to the group to see how the original phrase got interpreted down the line.

This exercise really demonstrates how meaning can get misconstrued and the importance of explaining things with other people’s sensibilities taken into account. [17]

Barriers to Creativity

Below is a list of some of the things that can be barriers to personal, team, and organizational creativity. [18]

• Functional fixedness . You see objects, components, and things around you, and you can’t imagine them doing different functions than what they’re designed to do. [19]
• Structural fixedness . You find it really hard to imagine objects having a different structure than what you’re used to. [20]
• Relational fixedness . You find it very hard to imagine two objects having a relationship that wasn’t there before. [21]
• Self-censorship.  Get the critic out of your mind. Stop telling yourself your ideas are not good enough.
• Micro-Management. Micro-Management stifles a person’s ability to be creative as micromanagers provide too much detail related to how a particular task or problem should be tackled. This reduces the ability for the person to think for themselves and add their own creative flair.
• Overthinking. Overthinking about a problem or task uses the logical conscious side of our mind. Often creativity comes from the subconscious mind so rather than overthinking it might be wise to go for a walk or simply start daydreaming.
• Concerns about Image. Image risks are where people worry about the impression that people will have of them after suggesting an idea.
• Lack of Time. Lack of time and/or opportunity. People often feel that they are too busy with their day-to-day efforts to have time to focus on being creative. Resolve this by setting some planned time aside each and every day for creative efforts.
• Lack of Sleep. Lack of sleep not only forms barriers to creativity but to most other things too! Try and lead a healthy well-balanced life with lots of exercise and water and healthy nutrition.
• Criticism. Criticism from others can off-put you from proceeding any further with your ideas. Try and dismiss negative thinkers or win them over by demonstrating the validity of your idea with a prototype.
• Rules, Policies, and Procedures. If the organization that you work in has lots of rules, policies, and procedures then these can sometimes stifle creativity due to the bureaucracy that they create. If you can’t advance your project forward without five signatures then you will find it difficult to maintain momentum.
• Fear of Rejection. Just having that underlying fear that others will reject your ideas can be a barrier to creativity. Work with your passions, enjoy your creative moments, and don’t let others put you off.
• Stress. Stress is not only a distraction that drains the energy we might channel into being creative, it is also very bad for our health and concentration.
• Lack of Motivation , commitment, skills to perform creative tasks, or employee preparation to persist.
• Lack of organizational or managerial support or sufficient resources for creative work.

Importance of Creativity and Innovation to Business

Creativity fuels innovation. Creativity is a thought process, while innovation is an action.  For a business to survive it needs both. Some of the top reasons businesses nurture creativity and innovation include:

• Innovation helps organizations grow.
• Innovation keeps organizations relevant.
• Innovation helps organizations differentiate themselves.
• Innovation increases productivity in the workplace by sparking excitement and feelings of purpose in employees.
• Innovation improves a team’s problem-solving skills by challenging the team to dive deeper and develop novel solutions.
• Innovation helps organizations position themselves as innovators in the marketplace.
• Innovation helps organizations generate more profits.
• Innovation helps organizations reduce expenses.
• Innovation helps organizations attract employees, investors, partners, and contractors.
• Innovation helps organizations gain a competitive advantage.

Key Takeaways

• Eight creative thinking tips you can try any time. Schedule creative free time, Set a timer,  Think quantity over quality, Become an “Idea Machine,” Switch up your routine, Look at something familiar through a new lens, Read more often, and Freewrite more often.
• Commands for being creative.  Get stupid! Want the box. Can the critic.
• The SCAMPER technique for brainstorming is based very simply on the idea that what is new is actually a modification of existing old things around us
• Benefits of doing creativity exercises.  Improved flexible thinking,  Discovery of multi-dimensional ideas,  Embracing work challenges, See ing new concepts, and Improved teamwork.
• Team creativity is based on having open debates, and a free flow of ideas .
• Enhancing creativity and collaboration in teams. Collaboration works best when team members have complementary skill sets required to complete the project. Engaging in purposeful conversations and the ability to resolve conflicts are essential ingredients for collaboration. Open communication must be there. Facilitate diverse ways of working. Establish ground rules for working together.
• Threats to team creativity. Social loafing, Conformity, Production blocking, and Performance matching.
• Team ideation session: Graphing the process. When given a problem to solve in a specific amount of time what happens in our thinking process?  If we graphed this ideation process we would see a graph that at first has many ideas, but after a short period of time the group feels they have exhausted all the good ideas, and the ideas stall.  What happens next, is that someone offers a different, silly, or absurd idea, then more ideas come from that idea and the tide has turned.  The best ideas often come after this turn in the graph.  This is known as the shape of ideation because it consistently reveals itself this way. [22]
• Barriers to creativity. Functional, structural, and relational fixedness; self-censorship; micro-management; overthinking; concerns about image; lack of time; lack of sleep; criticism; rules, policies, and procedures; fear of rejection; stress; lack of motivation; and lack of organizational or managerial support.
• Importance of Creativity and Innovation to Business.
• Innovation helps organizations generate more growth and profits.

End-of-Chapter Exercises

• Take a Quiz to See How Creative You Are. Complete one or more of the following quizzes.   Huffpost How Creative Are You? , What Percent Creative Are You? , What’s Your Creative Type? ,  MindTools How Creative Are You? ,  Are You In The Top 10% of the Most Creative People in the World? , and Are You Actually Creative? . Did you learn anything new about yourself or were the results what you expected?
• Grab a partner to try this creative exercise. Together you are going to write down as many cereal box toys as you can think of if boxes of cereal were around during the days of the wild, wild, west.  You have three minutes to compile one list together; write down as many ideas as you can.
• Compare Groups. How many ideas did you and your partner come up with in three minutes?  Sometimes people say they don’t have time to come up with more ideas, but as you can see given only three minutes you and your partner were able to come up with some ideas. So time is not a problem, motivation may be an issue when it comes to thinking creatively.  For this exercise you may have been motivated because the exercise was silly and fun, you had a partner to work with, maybe your professor was observing you, and you only had three minutes to finish the task. This exercise is adapted from one called Wild Westios shared in the LinkedIn Learning, Creativity Boot Camp module.
• Grab a partner.  You have five minutes to create the ultimate desk. Discuss and sketch it out.
• Compare Groups. How many desks had a beverage dispenser? How many desks were mobile, roll or fly? How many desks have some sort of water feature? How many desks come with some sort of extra person, such as a chef or masseuse? How many desks have a large flat surface?  Why a large flat surface?  Because that is what you know.  We start with what we know a desk to be.  We attach ideas to what we know, so we become improvers.  We have to stop starting with other people’s solutions and we have to ask questions.  What is a desk and what does a desk need to do?  We insert restrictions that are not really there. This exercise is adapted from one called Ultimate Desk shared in the LinkedIn Learning, Creativity Boot Camp module.
• Squiggles.   This exercise should take you five minutes. Take a sheet of paper and draw 5 to 10 squiggles in different shapes and sizes. Now turn your squiggles into birds.  Think about the main characteristics of a bird (beak, tail, legs) and start adding them. First, draw a beak which is a simple triangle – make variations in size and position. Then, do the same with the tale, which is also a triangle. Finally, add legs that are made out of sticks. That is how simple it is!  Take a look at the drawings and spend a minute considering how easily the brain finds patterns. [23]
• Write a Six-Word Story.  Ernest Hemingway, one of the greatest authors of all time, was once challenged to write a complete story in just six words. Never one to shy from a challenge, he wrote: “For sale: baby shoes, never worn.” What would your complete six-word story be? [24]
• Packaging Yourself.  If you were a product, available for sale at your favourite retail store, what store would you be sold in? What would the packaging look like? What would your catchy product title be? What would it say on the box? This is not just an exercise in creative thinking, but of establishing your own personal brand in a fun and inventive way. [25]
• Find Creative Uses for Everyday Objects. A pen is just a pen…or is it? What do you have around you right now that could be used for something completely different? Alton Brown, the chef who knows his science, refuses to buy objects that have just one use. He finds ways to use kitchen tools in the most inventive ways. So what can you do with that stapler, the pair of scissors, or that old bookend? [26]

Self-Check Exercise – Quiz – Thinking Creativity

Additional resources.

• LinkedIn Learning Creativity Bootcamp Training
• 50 Fun Creativity Exercises  to Boost the Power of Your Creative Mind
• 21 Ways to Boost Your Personal Creativity
• 5 Team Building Exercises Guaranteed to Spark Creativity
• Business Innovation – Canada Periodical Fund – Canada.ca
• Innovation Canada (ic.gc.ca)
• MaRS Discovery District
• Discover Your Creative Type
• 18 Creativity Exercises to Try at Work
• 5 Innovative Games for Creative Ideas
• 9 Ways to Dramatically Improve You Creativity

(Note: This list of sources used is NOT in APA citation style instead the auto-footnote and media citation features of Pressbooks were utilized to cite references throughout the chapter and generate a list at the end of the chapter.)

Media Attributions

• The Shape of Ideation © Stefan Mumaw adapted by Kerri Shields is licensed under a All Rights Reserved license
• Otazo, K. (n.d.). Innovation takes perspiration. https://www.strategy-business.com/article/li00010 ↵
• Johnson, S. (2010, September 17). 8 creative thinking exercises to boost your creativity. [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/pfg9a9diN40 ↵
• Elmansy, R. (n.d.).  A guide to SCAMPER technique for creative thinking. https://www.designorate.com/a-guide-to-the-scamper-technique-for-creative-thinking/ ↵
• Serrat, O. (2009, February 31). The SCAMPER technique. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/27643/scamper-technique.pdf ↵
• Indeed. (2021, March 19). 18 creativity exercises to improve creative thinking and problem-solving at work. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/creativity-exercise ↵
• Creativity at Work. (n.d.). 12 ways to enhance creativity and collaboration in teams. https://www.creativityatwork.com/12-ways-to-enhance-creativity-and-collaboration-in-teams/ ↵
• Kelly. (2019, August 22). Four strategies to enhance your team's creativity. https://www.creativityatwork.com/12-ways-to-enhance-creativity-and-collaboration-in-teams/ ↵
• Solomon, Y. (n.d.). How to build a brilliantly creative team. https://www.inc.com/yoram-solomon/8-steps-to-build-superior-team-creativity.html ↵
• Kaur, S. (n.d.). Team making portfolio: Teach creativity.   https://sandeepartly.wordpress.com/team-creativity/ ↵
• Mumaw, S. (2014, November 19). Creativity boot camp. [Video]. LinkedIn Learning. https://www.linkedin.com/learning/creativity-boot-camp?u=2167290 ↵
• Merritt, J. (2022, June 7). The 30 most effective team building activities for creative teams. https://www.getrodeo.io/blog/team-building-activities ↵
• Innovation-Creativity. (n.d.). Creativity barriers. https://www.innovation-creativity.com/barriers-to-creativity/#:~:text=Barriers%20To%20Creativity%20Include%3A%201%20Functional%20fixedness.%20Functional,creativity%20but%20to%20most%20other%20things%20too%21%20 ↵
• Ozment, D. (2020, September 22). Fixedness: Your main barrier to creative thinking. https://drewboyd.com/fixedness-your-main-barrier-to-creative-thinking/ ↵
• Strimaityte, A. (2019, November 26). We might think creativity is a talent and not something everyone can have, but luckily that is not true. Creativity is a muscle that you can train. https://innovationlab.net/blog/9-best-exercises-to-spark-creativity-in-ideation/ ↵
• Sugget, P. (2020, February 6).  Creative exercises to get the wheels turning.   https://www.thebalancecareers.com/creative-brain-exercises-39352 ↵
• Sugget, P. (2020, February 6).  Creative exercises to get the wheels turning. https://www.thebalancecareers.com/creative-brain-exercises-39352 ↵

is based very simply on the idea that what is new is actually a modification of existing old things around us.

If we graphed this ideation process we would see a graph that at first has many ideas, but after a short period of time the group feels they have exhausted all the good ideas, and the ideas stall.  What happens next, someone offers a different, silly, or absurd idea, then more ideas come from that idea and the tide has turned.  The best ideas often come after this turn in the graph.

You see objects, components, and things around you, and you can’t imagine them doing different functions than what they’re designed to do.

You find it really hard to imagine objects having a different structure than what you’re used to.

You find it very hard to imagine two objects having a relationship that wasn’t there before.

Leading Innovation, 2nd Edition Copyright © 2023 by Kerri Shields is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Developing critical thinking, creativity and innovation skills

2014, 2014 IEEE Innovations in Technology Conference

Related Papers

The International Journal of Engineering Education

Barry Shoop

Paul Skaggs

We believe students need to possess an understanding of innovation and related skills (i.e., creativity, problem finding and forming, ability to generate and develop new ideas into practical and helpful products, etc.) to keep pace and stay ahead of the rapid development and implementation of new science and technology in the 21st century. This research focuses on the methods and efforts developed and being implemented to advance a culture of innovation within our college of technology and engineering. The primary method we have developed to help our students be innovative involves emerging them in an Innovation Boot Camp. The purpose of this paper is to describe the purpose, learning outcomes, curriculum, methods of instruction, and the relative impact the Boot Camp is having on student understanding of and skills associated to innovation, and how the experience is impacting our college initiative to create a culture of innovation.

2012 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)

Tobias Haertel

Larry Richards

Conference on Frontiers in Education

Stephanie Nelson

This paper presents a rationale, course objectives, and sample exercises for a newly developed general education class that is encouraged especially for engineering and technology students. The class was developed in response to a need to engage students with social and ethical issues related to their disciplines, as well as to empower them as critical thinkers who will be actively

Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'18)

Luciana Leveratto

2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings

Catherine Amelink

Creativity Research Journal

Richard West

Over the years many training methods for creativity and innovation have been developed. Despite these programs and research, further improvement is necessary, particularly in schools of technology and engineering education, where previous efforts have focused on developing solutions to defined problems, not in identifying and defining the problems themselves in ways that promote creative outcomes. This study presents initial efforts to develop an instructional program designed to teach innovation to undergraduate technology and engineering students. Results from a pre/posttest analysis using both the Torrance Tests for Creative Thinking and a survey with self-reported data indicate that the Innovation Boot Camp was successful because it (a) encapsulated innovation into a process that students could learn and apply, (b) engaged students in multidisciplinary groups, and (c) provided a hands-on, activities-oriented curriculum explicitly designed to enhance innovation. Notwithstanding, ideas for improvement and further research and development of the curriculum are described. 1

Faculty in the School of Technology at BYU believe that for students to excel in 21st century economies, cross-disciplinary interaction and innovation methods need to be experienced in each of the schools six disciplines: Industrial Design, Manufacturing Technology, Information Technology, Construction Management, Facility Management and Technology and Engineering Education. This research paper demonstrates how this goal was accomplished through the development and implementation of a two day Innovation Boot Camp. Each student in the School of Technology is requested to attend this Boot Camp which: • introduces and practices principles of Design Thinking • practices problem definition (strategic thinking), rather than problem solving (implementation) • provides inviting and engaging experiences and projects to reduce anxiety in this new, cross disciplined environment The innovation boot camp is an intensive two day, hands on, experiential learning experience where students exercise ...

RELATED PAPERS

Anita Woolley

Actas de Periodismo y Comunicación, Vol. 2, N.º 1, diciembre 2016

Fabiana Castagno

Lílian Praça

Dr. Narendra Kumar Sharma

The Journal of Organic Chemistry

Flora Zaman

IEEE Access

Peter Popoola

Plant Physiology

Grazyna Dobrowolska

Ethnicity & Disease

Felicia Anumah

Rosario Joaquin Reales V

Communication & Society

Rafael Sofokleous

Pham Thanh Nghiep

ANTONIO GABRIEL MORENO PIMENTEL

Antonina Pavilanis

Journal of Clinical Medicine

Tamar Wainstock

International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications (IJSRP)

Revista Interdisciplinar em Cultura e Sociedade

Tuanny Soeiro Sousa

kjgg fdfdgg

Journal of High Energy Physics

Robert Henderson

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

André Garcia Sá

Econometric Research in Finance

Rahman Raji

Dr. Ir. Chairul Paotonan, ST.,MT.

Food Science and Technology

Timothy Mason

Jameel M Al-Khayri

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Accelerator
• All courses

Critical Thinking, Creativity And Innovation

Course starting date –  Click here

Creativity isn’t the sole domain of gifted artists but in fact, a learnable skill that can be applied not just in creating innovative products and services, but to every aspect of work-life processes and communications. By applying creativity to the tasks and challenges you face in your work, you will begin to experience breakthroughs you never thought possible. You will feel confident that you really are on the creative edge and able to consider different sides of an issue while anticipating a broader range of possibilities. 

In this Critical Thinking, Creativity & Innovation course, you will discover how to build and expand your creative abilities and those of your team.

• Participants will develop the following competencies:
• Use effective communication to motivate creativity in your team
• Help your team find creative solutions to workplace challenges
• Come to accurate conclusions and decisions more often
• Recognize and encourage creative people
• Learn how to challenge assumptions and expand perceptions about situations

This course aims to enable participants to achieve a high level of confidence in their ability to solve problems, think creatively, and communicate their ideas confidently. Objectives for the week include:

• Building a company culture that promotes innovation & creativity
• Understanding and utilizing the immense capacities of our brains create new ways of thinking, doing, and being
• Mastering creative ways to present your ideas confidently
• Balancing logic and intuition to make more effective decisions
• Overcoming creative blocks and challenge existing approaches to workplace issues
• Develop flexible, creative, and well-motivated teams

Teaching  Method

This course will utilize a variety of proven online learning techniques to ensure maximum understanding, comprehension, retention of the information presented.  

Course Benefits

Attending this Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity and Innovation course will enable participants to use simple but highly-effective creative problem-solving and decision-making tools to better:

• Align their efforts to achieve organizational goals and objectives
• Build and develop their team’s working style and processes
• Enhance their team’s commitment and achievement
• Transfer the classroom learning directly to the workplace with immediate impact
• Create a climate of innovation amongst their teams
• Create ownership of complex problems and empower solutions

Personal Impact

As a participant, you will learn to:

• Consolidate the tools and techniques for thinking creatively
• Make better decisions for solving problems innovatively and successfully
• Learn a process for ensuring that your team contribute effectively
• Enhance creative thinking in the workplace
• Display the confidence to tackle complex issues courageously
• Employ a comprehensive toolkit of processes and techniques to ensure success in any situation

Who Should Attend?

This Leading with Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Innovation course is designed for all leaders – supervisors, professionals, and executives who are required to handle various issues and challenges. It is also recommended for professionals who desire to enhance their creative abilities for better workplace performance.

This course is suitable for a wide range of professionals but will greatly benefit: 

• Leaders and Managers
• Supervisors and Team Leaders
• HR Professionals
• Team Members who require high levels of creativity and innovation in their jobs
• Entrepreneurs and Freelancers

Course Features

• Lectures 39
• Duration 40 hours
• Skill level Intermediate
• Certificate Yes
• Assessments Yes

You have 10 weeks remaining for the course

• Lecture 1.1 Leadership – Igniting the Creative Spark in your Team
• Lecture 1.2 Big Picture Thinking – Why are we here? What are we trying to create?
• Lecture 1.3 The Big 5 P’s of Creativity – Philosophy, Place, People, Process, and Product
• Lecture 1.4 Vision Boards – Harnessing the Power of Intention
• Lecture 1.5 Tapping into and Motivating Talent
• Lecture 1.6 Empowering Individual and Team Creativity
• Lecture 1.7 Harnessing the Power of Conflict and Differences
• Quiz 1.1 End of class assessment 0 question
• Lecture 2.1 The Creative Brain – Exploring Ways of Thinking
• Lecture 2.2 What is Creativity? What is Innovation?
• Lecture 2.3 Creativity and Self-Perception
• Lecture 2.4 Measuring Creativity
• Lecture 2.5 Divergent vs. Convergent Thinking
• Lecture 2.6 Lateral Thinking
• Lecture 2.7 Left and Right Brain Roles in the Innovation and Creativity Process
• Lecture 2.8 Ways to Boost Your Creativity
• Quiz 2.1 End of class assessment 0 question
• Lecture 3.1 Creativity and Problem Solving Processes
• Lecture 3.2 An Overview of Different Problem Solving Processes
• Lecture 3.3 Methods of Analysis
• Lecture 3.4 How to Become a Creative Genius
• Lecture 3.5 Overcoming Creative Blocks
• Lecture 3.6 Mind Mapping – The Swiss Army Knife of the Brain
• Lecture 3.7 The Six Hat Approach
• Lecture 3.8 A Toolbox of Creative Thinking Methodologies
• Lecture 4.1 Critical Thinking – Evaluating and Presenting Ideas
• Lecture 4.2 Insight and Intuition – Trusting your Gut
• Lecture 4.3 Logical and Intuitive Decision Making
• Lecture 4.4 Is this Practical? – A Checklist for Feasibility
• Lecture 4.5 Presenting Ideas through Metaphor and Analogy
• Lecture 4.6 The Power of Storytelling
• Lecture 4.7 The Power of Visuals in Presenting your Ideas
• Lecture 4.8 Overcoming Resistance to Change
• Lecture 4.9 End of class assessment
• Lecture 5.1 Creativity and Innovation in a Brave New World
• Lecture 5.2 Using Technology to Enhance Creativity
• Lecture 5.3 Spotting Trends and Setting Trends
• Lecture 5.4 Developing a Creative Working Environment
• Lecture 5.5 Develop a Culture of Creativity and Innovation
• Lecture 5.6 Learning from Successful Companies
• Lecture 5.7 Advice from the Best Creative Minds
• Quiz 5.1 End of class assessment 0 question

Our courses are presented by experienced instructors with over 70 years of combined industry and consulting experience.

We have provided you with facilitators who are specialists in their various sectors and core discipline areas, including, technology, investment banking, management consulting, energy and oil & gas, manufacturing, telecoms and media, financial services, education, hospitality and leisure, and much more.

This programme gives participants the benefit of decades, of hands-on industry experience. The workshop style of this course ensures delegates have the opportunity to practicalise their learning, ask questions, receiving thorough answers to their individual questions from the presenters’ experiences.

Our instructors provide real-world examples, including the experience of dealing with surprises in the real world application of this course

Average Rating

Detailed Rating

You May Like

Getting Ready for a Career in Investment Banking and Management Consulting

Financial Due Diligence

Enterprise Risk Management: Imperative for Enhancing Business Performance

Discounted Cash Flow And Comparables Valuation

Financial Analysis, Modelling And Forecasting

Login with your site account.

Remember Me

Not a member yet? Register now

Register a new account

Want to become an instructor?

Are you a member? Login now

Modal title

Critical Thinking and Innovation – The New High Ranking Skills at the Workplace

“For CEOs today, it’s all about achieving growth and efficiency through innovation.  It’s not about product innovation so much anymore as about innovating business models, process, culture and management.”  ~ Ginni Rometty, IBM CEO

You might attribute critical thinking and innovation as a strong skill set for leaders within an organization, but that’s an expectation from employees of the 21st century. Many employers are making it known that for a talented candidate to join their org they are seeking people who are driven by critical thinking and innovation. You don’t need to be in a leadership position to be an outstanding contributor. Learn to become an innovative leader  within your team, find opportunities to think out of the box, and thrive and shine at your current work.

What does critical thinking  mean?

Critical thinking by some is being cited as the number 1 workplace skill you must work on now. In an interesting analysis by TalentLens titled   Critical Thinking Means Business : Learn to Apply and Develop the NEW #1 Workplace Skill  By Judy Chartrand, Ph.D., Heather Ishikawa, MA, & Scott Flander

“When more than 400 senior HR professionals were asked in a survey to name the most important skill their employees will need in the next five years, critical thinking ranked the highest – surpassing innovation or the application of information technology. Such a response reflects how the nature of work – and the skills required – have been changing dramatically.”

According to a Pearson’s Research Report by Emily R. Lai :

“Critical thinking includes the component skills of analyzing arguments, making inferences using inductive or deductive reasoning, judging or evaluating, and making decisions or solving problems. Background knowledge is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for enabling critical thought within a given subject. Critical thinking involves both cognitive skills and dispositions.”

Biran Tracy in a relevant article 7 Qualities of Creative Thinkers says:

“The most important part of  creative thinking is your ability to generate ideas. .. Every single time you originate a new idea, write it down, make a plan for its implementation through creative thinking and then take action, you are behaving like a genius.”

Now that you’ve heard from the experts what critical thinking really means; what does it mean to you or how will you define it?

How can you showcase such qualities?

Though it is not always possible to come up with some exemplary examples on how you have used critical thinking in your past job or career but if you are reading it now, it certainly is a good idea to try it now and it might prove useful in the future. How has critical thinking and action helped you solve a problem or come up with a better solution for a project you’ve worked on.

What does innovation  mean?

Looking around for the appropriate definitions of innovation here’s what I’ve found that really talks to me:

Quoting business.gov.au :

Everyone can innovate. Innovation generally refers to renewing, changing or creating more effective processes, products or ways of doing things. For businesses, this could mean implementing new ideas, creating dynamic products or improving your existing services. Innovation can be a catalyst for the growth and success of your business, and help you adapt and grow in the marketplace. Being innovative does not mean inventing; innovation can mean changing your business model and adapting to changes in your environment to deliver better products or services. Successful innovation should be an in-built part of your business strategy and the strategic vision, where you create an environment and lead in innovative thinking and creative problem solving.

No one can tell how to be innovative, there’s no better solution than what Leonardo Da Vinci told us hundreds of years ago:

“Stand still and watch the patterns, which by pure chance have been generated: Stains on the wall, or the ashes in a fireplace, or the clouds in the sky, or the gravel on the beach or other things. If you look at them carefully you might discover miraculous inventions.”

What does innovation mean to you or have you seen it implemented at your workplace?

Top 10 Skills for the successful 21st century worker – An Infographic via Univ of Phoenix

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

A Crash Course in Critical Thinking

What you need to know—and read—about one of the essential skills needed today..

Posted April 8, 2024 | Reviewed by Michelle Quirk

• In research for "A More Beautiful Question," I did a deep dive into the current crisis in critical thinking.
• Many people may think of themselves as critical thinkers, but they actually are not.
• Here is a series of questions you can ask yourself to try to ensure that you are thinking critically.

Conspiracy theories. Inability to distinguish facts from falsehoods. Widespread confusion about who and what to believe.

These are some of the hallmarks of the current crisis in critical thinking—which just might be the issue of our times. Because if people aren’t willing or able to think critically as they choose potential leaders, they’re apt to choose bad ones. And if they can’t judge whether the information they’re receiving is sound, they may follow faulty advice while ignoring recommendations that are science-based and solid (and perhaps life-saving).

Moreover, as a society, if we can’t think critically about the many serious challenges we face, it becomes more difficult to agree on what those challenges are—much less solve them.

On a personal level, critical thinking can enable you to make better everyday decisions. It can help you make sense of an increasingly complex and confusing world.

In the new expanded edition of my book A More Beautiful Question ( AMBQ ), I took a deep dive into critical thinking. Here are a few key things I learned.

First off, before you can get better at critical thinking, you should understand what it is. It’s not just about being a skeptic. When thinking critically, we are thoughtfully reasoning, evaluating, and making decisions based on evidence and logic. And—perhaps most important—while doing this, a critical thinker always strives to be open-minded and fair-minded . That’s not easy: It demands that you constantly question your assumptions and biases and that you always remain open to considering opposing views.

In today’s polarized environment, many people think of themselves as critical thinkers simply because they ask skeptical questions—often directed at, say, certain government policies or ideas espoused by those on the “other side” of the political divide. The problem is, they may not be asking these questions with an open mind or a willingness to fairly consider opposing views.

When people do this, they’re engaging in “weak-sense critical thinking”—a term popularized by the late Richard Paul, a co-founder of The Foundation for Critical Thinking . “Weak-sense critical thinking” means applying the tools and practices of critical thinking—questioning, investigating, evaluating—but with the sole purpose of confirming one’s own bias or serving an agenda.

In AMBQ , I lay out a series of questions you can ask yourself to try to ensure that you’re thinking critically. Here are some of the questions to consider:

• Why do I believe what I believe?
• Are my views based on evidence?
• Have I fairly and thoughtfully considered differing viewpoints?
• Am I truly open to changing my mind?

Of course, becoming a better critical thinker is not as simple as just asking yourself a few questions. Critical thinking is a habit of mind that must be developed and strengthened over time. In effect, you must train yourself to think in a manner that is more effortful, aware, grounded, and balanced.

For those interested in giving themselves a crash course in critical thinking—something I did myself, as I was working on my book—I thought it might be helpful to share a list of some of the books that have shaped my own thinking on this subject. As a self-interested author, I naturally would suggest that you start with the new 10th-anniversary edition of A More Beautiful Question , but beyond that, here are the top eight critical-thinking books I’d recommend.

The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark , by Carl Sagan

This book simply must top the list, because the late scientist and author Carl Sagan continues to be such a bright shining light in the critical thinking universe. Chapter 12 includes the details on Sagan’s famous “baloney detection kit,” a collection of lessons and tips on how to deal with bogus arguments and logical fallacies.

Clear Thinking: Turning Ordinary Moments Into Extraordinary Results , by Shane Parrish

The creator of the Farnham Street website and host of the “Knowledge Project” podcast explains how to contend with biases and unconscious reactions so you can make better everyday decisions. It contains insights from many of the brilliant thinkers Shane has studied.

Good Thinking: Why Flawed Logic Puts Us All at Risk and How Critical Thinking Can Save the World , by David Robert Grimes

A brilliant, comprehensive 2021 book on critical thinking that, to my mind, hasn’t received nearly enough attention . The scientist Grimes dissects bad thinking, shows why it persists, and offers the tools to defeat it.

Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know , by Adam Grant

Intellectual humility—being willing to admit that you might be wrong—is what this book is primarily about. But Adam, the renowned Wharton psychology professor and bestselling author, takes the reader on a mind-opening journey with colorful stories and characters.

Think Like a Detective: A Kid's Guide to Critical Thinking , by David Pakman

The popular YouTuber and podcast host Pakman—normally known for talking politics —has written a terrific primer on critical thinking for children. The illustrated book presents critical thinking as a “superpower” that enables kids to unlock mysteries and dig for truth. (I also recommend Pakman’s second kids’ book called Think Like a Scientist .)

Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters , by Steven Pinker

The Harvard psychology professor Pinker tackles conspiracy theories head-on but also explores concepts involving risk/reward, probability and randomness, and correlation/causation. And if that strikes you as daunting, be assured that Pinker makes it lively and accessible.

How Minds Change: The Surprising Science of Belief, Opinion and Persuasion , by David McRaney

David is a science writer who hosts the popular podcast “You Are Not So Smart” (and his ideas are featured in A More Beautiful Question ). His well-written book looks at ways you can actually get through to people who see the world very differently than you (hint: bludgeoning them with facts definitely won’t work).

A Healthy Democracy's Best Hope: Building the Critical Thinking Habit , by M Neil Browne and Chelsea Kulhanek

Neil Browne, author of the seminal Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking, has been a pioneer in presenting critical thinking as a question-based approach to making sense of the world around us. His newest book, co-authored with Chelsea Kulhanek, breaks down critical thinking into “11 explosive questions”—including the “priors question” (which challenges us to question assumptions), the “evidence question” (focusing on how to evaluate and weigh evidence), and the “humility question” (which reminds us that a critical thinker must be humble enough to consider the possibility of being wrong).

Warren Berger is a longtime journalist and author of A More Beautiful Question .

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

More From Forbes

7 steps to navigate innovation and creativity with emerging technology.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

The intersection of innovation and creativity with emerging technologies offers more than a glimpse ... [+] into the art of the possible, it propels us toward a future that is both exciting and uncertain.

The intersection of innovation and creativity with emerging technologies offers more than a glimpse into the art of the possible, it propels us toward a future that is both exciting and uncertain.

Human creativity has been the engine of progress. Innovation and creativity have been driving forces behind everything from the Mona Lisa to the moon landing. But as algorithms, automation, and digitization continue to advance, how can emerging technology further enhance creativity? And how can organizations be sure to benefit?

Emerging Technology

While emerging technologies like VR, AI, big data, and others often dominate headlines, their impact lies in their ability to solve problems, add value, and improve lives safely and securely. And rather than a creativity killer, emerging tech can be a powerful amplifier.

• AI-powered design tools: These tools can generate variations on existing ideas, helping designers explore a broader range of possibilities and identify optimal solutions. For example, an AI system might analyze social media conversations and news articles to identify a growing public interest in sustainable fashion, leading a clothing company to develop a line of eco-friendly apparel.
• Virtual reality (VR): VR allows designers, architects, filmmakers, and others to fully immerse themselves in their creations, fostering a deeper understanding and enabling more intuitive design possibilities. Imagine an architect using VR to walk through a building design before construction even begins, allowing for real-time adjustments and a more creative, collaborative design process.
• Augmented Reality (AR): AR overlays digital elements onto the real world, blurring the lines between imagination and reality. For example, an architect can use AR to virtually "place" a new building design onto a city landscape, allowing for real-time visualization and stakeholder feedback.
• Three-Dimensional Printing: 3D printing has revolutionized the prototyping process, allowing creators to materialize their ideas into physical objects in a matter of hours. This rapid prototyping facilitates faster iteration and experimentation, leading to quicker innovation cycles.
• The Internet of Things (IoT): The power and potential of IoT is a growing network of interconnected devices constantly generating data. This data can be harnessed to identify user needs and pain points, informing the development of increasingly creative and innovative user-centric offerings as well as expediting maintenance and repair.
• Big data analytics: The sheer volume of data available today holds untapped innovation potential. Big data analytics can uncover hidden patterns, consumer preferences, and emerging trends that can inform entirely new product or service ideas. For instance, a streaming service might analyze user viewing habits to identify unexpected correlations between seemingly disparate genres, leading to the creation of innovative, genre-bending content.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024, important considerations.

AI excels at pattern recognition but struggles with true originality. Overreliance on AI-generated suggestions for example can lead to homogenization of ideas, stifling the spark of divergent thinking.

Organizations often face barriers such as resource constraints, risk aversion, and cultural resistance to change. Technology is a tool, and its effectiveness depends on the human employing it.

AI algorithms are only as good as the data they're trained on. Biases in data sets can lead to uninspired or even harmful outputs. Organizations must be vigilant about mitigating bias and ensuring the ethical use of emerging technology in creative processes.

Emerging technologies can streamline innovation, allowing companies to bring new ideas to market faster. AI and big data tools can make creativity more accessible by automating mundane tasks and providing insightful data analysis, emerging technologies free humans to focus more on creativity. Support safe spaces for experimentation. When ideas fall flat, celebrate the lessons learned and iterate.

Company Examples

Forbes tracks the world’s most innovative companies. And a few firms offer notable examples.

One of the world’s leading tech firms, Google , encourages employees to spend 20% of their work hours, or one day a week, working on personal projects of their choice. These projects are unconnected to their regular job duties, furthering a practice of innovation, creativity, engagement, and experimentation.

Pixar encourages cross-functional brainstorming and idea-building. Team members build on each other's ideas, cultivating a collaborative spirit that allows for the creation of more robust and imaginative concepts and leading technology practices. They strive for a playful and fun environment that is advantageous to creativity.

Zappos is well known for its fun workplace and integrates play and creativity into its regular routines. They welcome wild, fun ideas, both tech-driven and low-tech, and work intentionally to provide a safe space for employees to share and explore their creativity which also enhances team spirit and employee engagement.

Action Steps And Best Practices

How can organizations navigate this intersection and leverage creativity with emerging technologies to grow? Consider these action steps and best practices :

• Encourage and reward creative problem-solving at all levels of the organization. Provide opportunities for unconstrained creative thinking, experimentation, and cross-functional collaboration.
• Invest productively in innovation capabilities, including research and development, resourcing, and operational agility.
• Link innovation to growth aspirations and reinforce its importance in strategic and financial discussions.
• Pursue multiple pathways to growth, both in core businesses and when entering adjacent customer segments, industries, or geographies. Innovative growers also only enter markets where there are clear opportunities to create and capture value.
• Embrace a culture of experimentation with emerging technologies. Allocate resources for employees to explore and learn the potential of AI, VR, and other emerging tech.
• Invest in training programs that equip your workforce with the skills to leverage these new technologies effectively. Be intentional about bridging any skill gaps.
• Establish an external innovation pipeline. Partner with external stakeholders like universities and startups to tap into fresh perspectives and cutting-edge ideas and build strong M&A capabilities.

A Need, Not A Want

Innovation translates into growth, and creativity is the most crucial skill of the future . 70% of employers list creative thinking as the skill most needed in 2024. Organizations that prioritize innovation and creativity coupled with emerging technologies are also better equipped to adapt to disruptions. By continuously pushing the boundaries of what's possible, these organizations will promote a culture of innovation and creativity needed for sustained success.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Using Creative Assignments to Reinforce Innovation, Problem Solving, Creativity, and Critical-Thinking Skills

• Carmen Saunders-Russell California State University, Northridge Author

The author explains how using creative assignments reinforces invention, problem-solving, and critical thinking skills in undergraduate health administration students. While several studies look at the use of creative assignments to help students develop these skills, few studies exist on their use in health administration. In addition, the use of assignment transparency is explored as a means to explain how integrative learning helps students connect concepts developed in creative assignments to real-world experiences. The author provides a framework for using this method of instruction with today’s learners and future healthcare leaders.

• Requires Subscription PDF

Access Agreement Journal on Excellence in College Teaching

Before proceeding you must agree to the terms and conditions of usage as outlined below by clicking on the Accept button and/or by both parties’ signatures below. You will have to do this only once. After agreement, you will be redirected back to the main Journal page. A pdf copy of the terms is available for download.

This Access Agreement (the "Agreement") is effective upon processing of payment ("Effective Date") and is entered into by and between the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching (“JECT”) and the Customer (“Customer").

This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and supersedes and voids all prior communications, understandings, and agreements relating to the Product(s), including any terms of use displayed to Authorized Users via the online site of the Product(s). Alterations to the Agreement and to any Addendum to the Agreement are only valid and binding if they are recorded in writing and signed by both parties

. I. Definitions

"Authorized Users" shall mean individuals who are authorized by the Customer (which shall include those individuals authorized by the Institutions hereunder) to access the Customer's information services whether on-site or off-site via secure authentication and who are affiliated with the Customer as a student (undergraduates and postgraduates), employee (whether on a permanent or temporary basis), or a contractor of the Customer. Individuals who are not a current student, employee, or a contractor of the Customer, but who are permitted to access the Customer's information services from computer terminals within the physical premises of the Customer ("Walk-In Users"), are also deemed to be Authorized Users, but only for the time they are within the physical premises of the Customer. Walk-In Users may not be given means to access the Product(s) when they are not within the physical premises of the Customer.

"Commercial Use" shall mean use for the purpose of monetary reward (whether by or for the Customer or an Authorized User) by means of the sale, resale, loan, transfer, hire, or other form of exploitation of the Product(s). For the avoidance of doubt, neither recovery of direct cost by the Customer from Authorized Users, nor use by the Customer or Authorized Users of the Product(s) in the course of research funded by a commercial organization, shall be deemed to constitute Commercial Use.

"Educational Purposes" shall mean for the purpose of education, teaching, distance learning, private study and/or research as described in Section II below.

"Institutions" shall mean the Customer's participating institutions, if applicable.

"License" shall mean the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and use the Product(s) pursuant to the specific terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

"Product(s)" shall mean the products, materials and/or information contained therein that are subject to this Agreement. Product(s) include the Journal on Excellence in College Teaching and the archive of the Learning Communities Journal.

"Reasonable Amount" shall be determined based on guidelines set forth by 17 U.S. Code § 107 (Limitations on exclusive rights, Fair use).

"Secure Authentication" shall mean access to the Product(s) by Internet Protocol ("IP") ranges or by another means of authentication agreed between the Publisher and Customer or Institutions (if applicable) from time to time.

II. Authorized Use of Product(s)

Customer, the Institutions (if applicable), and Authorized Users may use the Product(s) for Educational Purposes as follows:

Analysis . Authorized Users shall be permitted to extract or use information contained in the Product(s) for Educational Purposes, including, but not limited to, text and data mining, extraction and manipulation of information for the purposes of illustration, explanation, example, comment, criticism, teaching, research, or analysis.

Course Packs . Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s) in the preparation of course packs or other educational materials.

Digital Copy . Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may download and digitally copy a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).

Display . Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users shall have the right to electronically display the Product(s) to the extent necessary to further the intent and purpose of this Agreement.

Electronic Reserve . Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may use a Reasonable Amount of each of the Product(s) in connection with specific courses of instruction offered by Customer.

Interlibrary Loan . The Customer and the Institutions shall be permitted to use Reasonable Amounts of the Content to fulfill occasional requests from other, non-participating institutions, a practice commonly called Interlibrary Loan ("ILL"). Customer and the Institutions shall fulfill such requests in compliance with Section 108 of the United States Copyright Law (17 USC S108, "Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction by libraries and archives") and the Guidelines for the Proviso of Subsection 108(2g)(2) prepared by the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU).

The electronic form of the Product(s) may be used as a source for ILL. Customer and the Institutions shall include copyright notices on all ILL transmissions. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in no event shall any non-secure electronic transmission of files be permitted.

Print Copy . Customer, the Institutions, and Authorized Users may print a Reasonable Amount of the Product(s).

Recover Copying Costs . Customer and the Institutions may charge a reasonable fee to cover costs of copying or printing portions of Product(s) for Authorized Users.

Scholarly Sharing . Authorized Users may transmit to a third party colleague in hard copy or electronically, Reasonable Amounts of the Product(s) for personal use, professional use, or Educational Purposes but in no event for Commercial Use. In addition, Authorized Users have the right to use, with appropriate credit, figures, tables, and brief excerpts from the Product(s) in the Authorized User's own scientific, scholarly, and educational works.

Text Mining . Authorized Users may use the licensed material to perform and engage in text mining/data mining activities for legitimate academic research and other Educational Purposes. Those uses beyond educational use shall require permission from the Publisher.

III. Restrictions

Except as provided herein, the institution shall make reasonable efforts to inform its authorized users not to use, alter, decompile, modify, display, or distribute the Product(s) as follows:

Alter Identification . Remove, obscure, or modify copyright notices, text acknowledging, attributions, or other means of identification or disclaimers as they appear. Alter Product(s).

Alter, decompile, adapt, or modify the Product(s), except to the extent necessary to make it perceptible on a computer screen, or as otherwise permitted in this Agreement. Alteration of words or their order is strictly prohibited.

Commercial Use . No Commercial Use of the Product(s) shall be permitted unless the Customer or an Authorized User has been granted prior written consent by an authorized representative of the Product(s). Use of all or any part of the Product(s) for any Commercial Use or for any purpose other than Educational Purposes.

Distribution . Display or distribute any part of the Product(s) on any electronic network, including without limitation, the Internet, and any other distribution medium now in existence or hereinafter created, other than by a Secure Authentication; print and distribute any portion(s) of the Product(s)s to persons or entities other than the Customer or Authorized Users, except as provided in Section II.

JECT acknowledges that the Customer cannot police or control the actions of its students, faculty, and other Authorized Users with respect to their use of the Product(s). In the event of abuse, the institution shall make prompt and reasonable efforts to heal the breach and notify the publisher.

IV. Term and Termination

This agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall remain in effect unless and until terminated as permitted herein (the "Term"). There is no perpetual electronic access to content made available during the term of the agreement.

JECT may terminate this Agreement if Customer violates any of the terms and conditions set forth herein. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer of the basis for termination.

The Customer may terminate this Agreement if sufficient funds are not provided or allotted in future government-approved budgets of the Customer (or reasonably available or expected to become available from other sources at the time the Customer’s payment obligation attaches) to permit the Subscriber, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue this Agreement.

In the event of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) by an Authorized User, Customer shall cooperate with JECT in the investigation of any unauthorized use of the Product(s) of which it is made aware and shall use reasonable efforts to remedy such unauthorized use and prevent its recurrence. JECT may terminate such Authorized User's access to the Product(s) after first providing reasonable notice to the Customer (in no event less than two (2) weeks) and cooperating with the Customer to avoid recurrence of any unauthorized use. In the event of any termination of access, JECT will promptly notify the Customer

. V. Refunds

In the event that a subscription is canceled by the Customer prior to the subscription end date, the following will be used as guidelines for refunds.

Electronic subscriptions . The Customer shall be entitled to a full refund within 14 days of the start of the most recent subscription term. Refunds requested after 14 days but no later than 60 days from the start of the most recent subscription term will be allowed, minus a 30% processing fee. Refunds will not be granted if requested more than 60 days after the start of the most recent subscription term.

Journal on Excellence in College Teaching Center for Teaching Excellence Miami University 317 Laws Hall Oxford, Ohio 45056

All rights reserved | Miami University | The Journal on Excellence in College Teaching