Following Critical Thinking from Matriculation to Graduation
Featuring Sandra M. Farah-Franco, College of Dental Medicine, Western University of Health Sciences
Published in the Journal of Dental Education, Sandra M. Farah-Franco and her colleagues set out to answer an important question for dental education:
How do critical-thinking skills develop throughout a four-year professional program, and what can educators learn by measuring them over time?
To explore this question, the research team conducted a longitudinal study using the Health Sciences Reasoning Test (HSRT), following multiple cohorts of dental students from matriculation through graduation. By examining critical-thinking development alongside academic and program outcomes, the study contributes valuable insight to ongoing conversations about student learning, curriculum evaluation, and clinical preparedeness.
Why This Research Stands Out
Many studies examine critical thinking at a single point in time. This research took a broader view.
The study followed nine dental student cohorts, administering the HSRT at multiple points throughout the curriculum and examining relationships between critical-thinking skills and several educational measures, including:
- Admissions data
- Grade point average (GPA)
- Critical reflection scores
- Program learning outcome (PLO) assessments
By tracking students across multiple years rather than relying on a single assessment, the researchers were able to explore how reasoning skills changed throughout the educational journey and how those skills related to academic performance.
What the Researchers Found
Critical Thinking Developed During the Early Years
Students demonstrated significant growth in several reasoning skill areas during the early stages of the dental program. Later in the curriculum, several measures declined, prompting discussion about possible contributing factors such as cognitive load, student motivation, and the demands of clinical education.
Several HSRT Measures Were Associated with Academic Outcomes
The researchers found significant relationships between multiple HSRT measures and academic indicators at different stages of the curriculum, including GPA, critical reflection scores, and program learning outcomes. These findings suggest that critical-thinking assessment can provide meaningful information alongside traditional educational measures.
The Findings Inform Curriculum Conversations
Rather than viewing assessment solely as a measurement tool, the authors discuss how the results may help educators identify opportunities for targeted curriculum development, strengthen specific reasoning skills, and better prepare students for clinical practice.
Why We Think This Research Matters
At Insight Assessment, we believe research plays an essential role in advancing educational practice.
Sandra M. Farah-Franco and her colleagues have contributed meaningful evidence to the growing body of literature exploring how critical-thinking skills develop throughout professional education. Their work demonstrates how longitudinal assessment can provide valuable insight into student learning while supporting thoughtful conversations about curriculum design, assessment, and continuous improvement.
We’re proud to highlight research like this because it advances the broader conversation around critical thinking and showcases the important work being conducted by educators across higher education.
Read the Original Publication
This Research Spotlight is intended to introduce and celebrate the work of Sandra M. Farah-Franco and her colleagues. We encourage readers interested in the complete methodology, statistical analyses, discussion, and study limitations to read the full publication:
An Important Note About the Findings
The authors are careful to discuss the study’s limitations and avoid drawing causal conclusions.
The publication notes several considerations, including differences in assessment timing across cohorts, pandemic-related disruptions, student motivation during testing, and the limitations of GPA as an outcome measure. As the authors explain, the findings describe observed relationships and should not be interpreted as evidence that HSRT scores caused improvements in academic or clinical performance.