Explore the collection
Critical thinking for classroom discussion
Use practical explanations of claims, evidence, reasons and respectful disagreement, with original activities for secondary classrooms.
Clear thinking starts with a manageable question: what is being claimed, and what is offered in support? This collection moves from identifying an argument to checking its sources and discussing disagreement. It works alongside worldview learning, but its fictional examples also make sense in ordinary school situations.
Choose a thinking task
| Learning task | Explanation | Activity |
|---|---|---|
| Separate an assertion from its support | Claims, evidence and reasons | Claim, evidence and reasoning worksheet |
| Decide what a source can establish | Evaluating sources | Worldviews reading log |
| Explain a disagreement fairly | Respectful disagreement | Discussion ground rules |
| Compare more than one defensible answer | Ethics without religion | Ethical dilemmas |
A small example: what follows from the evidence?
Fictional example. A school garden group says: “Four of our six bean plants grew taller beside the window, so every classroom plant should be moved there.”
The first part reports an observation about those six plants. The second proposes a much broader decision. We would need to ask what else differed: plant variety, watering, starting height and the conditions away from the window. Even a real measurement would not automatically justify a conclusion about every plant.
Ask learners to write three separate sentences: the observation, the proposed conclusion, and one question that could change their confidence. There is no need to collect personal information or conduct a real experiment to discuss the fictional argument.
Match the support to the question
An empirical question asks about what happens or what is the case. An interpretation asks what a text or action might mean. An ethical question asks what should be done and why. An activity may contain all three. Data can inform an ethical decision, but a value judgement also needs reasons about what matters.
The claims guide works through these distinctions. The sources guide adds a second check: a source can accurately explain its own position without independently proving a claim about everybody else.
Make room for a fair disagreement
Ask a learner to restate the other view before challenging it. Check whether the disagreement concerns a fact, a meaning, an assumption or a value. Then ask what further reason, example or evidence might help. A discussion does not have to end in agreement to produce a more accurate explanation.
Use the ground-rules activity before discussing contested topics. Pupils can work with fictional speakers throughout; no one needs to represent a religion or non-religious community.