Strategy of the European Commission “Europe 2020“ (World Economic Forum, 2016) mentions that the ability to solve problems creatively, to think rationally, independently and critically, to communicate and cooperate, to adapt and react to constantly changing world are the main factors in the contemporary economic growth.  National documents in education (The Law of Education of the Republic of Lithuania, 2011,  The Strategy of State Advancement “Lithuania 2030”, 2012; National Strategy of Education for the years 2013–2022; National Programme of Advancement for the years 2021–2030; Concept of a Good School, 2015) state that creativity and critical thinking are extremely important resources of our country and have to be responsibly educated. However, when attempting to implement these pursuits in practice one frequently gets confused which school subject and in what way might contribute to educating those thinking abilities. It is agreed that critical and creative thinking are thinking abilities of a higher level, nevertheless, there is no common agreement upon their components and their expression in particular school subjects what hinders a collective pursuit of mutual goals.

The problem also lies in the fact that the concepts of critical and creative thinking are also shifting. A century ago (Dewey, 1902, 1916), as well as nowadays (Lipman, 2003; Arends and Kilcher, 2010; Facione 2011; (Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019)Halpern & Sternberg, 2020) it is agreed that critical thinking comprises the interpretation of particular facts, their analysis, evaluation, establishing connections between elements, inter-connecting the knowledge already possessed and the new knowledge, making evidence-based conclusions and solutions.  However, more ad more frequently the researchers write that the abilities of critical thinking should comprise the ability to solve versatile problems in the process of people’s communication and cooperation as well as analyzing learning process, your own and other people’s thoughts.  (Krulik & Rudnick, 1993; Lipman, 1995; Thomas & Thorne, 2009; Voogt & Roblin, 2012; Voss et al., 2012; Lucas & Spencer, 2017; Vidergor, 2018; Plubsiri & Chaiyasang, 2020; Halpern & Sternberg, 2020).

Researchers’ opinions on the contribution of school subjects into educating these abilities also differ (Lipman, 1985), however, it is agreed that Mathematics is particularly suitable for educating critical and creative thinking since it has got clear rules of defining the relationship between mathematical notions (Rajendran, 2010); Aizikovitsh & Amit (2010) (Piaseckienė, 2018); Sičiūnienė (2018); Willingham (2019).

In order to make decisions on how to further improve teaching of Mathematics, it is essential to make an agreement concerning the components of critical and creative thinking in Mathematics, as well as evaluate students’ expression in it. The problematic issue emphasizes the object of the research – the expression of critical and creative thinking in 4^th grade students when teaching / learning Mathematics.

The aim of the research is to indicate the expression of 4^th grade students’ in Lithuania critical and creative thinking in the area of Mathematics.

With the view to achieving the aim of the research the following objectives were set:

1. To prepare a tool for the research – a test to measure and validate critical and creative thinking abilities of 4^th grade students.
2. To assess and compare the students’ being investigated abilities of critical and creative thinking.

Methodology of the research: test modelling; statistics analysis of the data of the test and the students being investigated.  

The size of sampling was stated with the use of Paniotto one-step random selection formula. All schools in the country were sent requests to invite children to participate in the critical and creative thinking programme. Consequently, 404 fourth-graders (54 per cent boys, 46 per cent girls) were selected. There were students from all areas of Lithuania participating; however, when interpreting the results, we have to bear in mind that there is a probability that those are the children from families where parents are interested in their children’s achievements. A tool suitable for measuring critical and creative thinking abilities of 4th grade students had not been found, therefore one of the primary objectives of the research was to prepare such a tool. The test consisted of 25 tasks, and having solved them, the students could have scored max. 42 points: 21 points for the areas of critical and creative thinking tasks correspondingly. These tasks were composed basing on the following list of critical and creative thinking components, made up by the authors of the present article: analyze, synthesis and drawing conclusion, assessment, explore and generate ideas, formulate questions and search for the ways of solutions. When making the test, we aimed to have sufficient number of tasks for all the three levels of students’ achievements (satisfactory, basic and advanced). The themes of the content were analyzed not only in the documents regulating Lithuanian content of education (Curriculum of Primary Education of the Republic of Lithuania (2008); Standardized Curriculum of Mathematics for the 4th Grade (ŠMM, 2012)), but also in the International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS). Before creating the test, the tasks were piloted, their quality and the quality of their assessment was evaluated by experts with the help of teachers and scientists. Pursuing scoring agreement, two external assessors who realize what the assessment process and final evaluation should be like were assessing open-type tasks basing on the test assessment instruction. With the view to avoiding the threats of the instrumentation in the initial stage of the research possible threats of remote testing were analyzed. The testees were asked to get acquainted with the instruction of filling in the electronic test. In the research we followed the main ethical principles characteristic for social research (Žydžiūnaitė, 2011). All the 404 selected students in April, 2020 completed a test in MOODLE distant learning environment. Duration of the test was 90 min.

The results of the research show that the test is suitable for use to assess the abilities of critical and creative thinking of motivated, curious fourth-graders in the area of mathematics, and could be used in the future when researching students’ abilities in this area. It was stated that the average students’ score is 23,6 points, a standard dispersion of the sum of points – 7.7. The highest score obtained was 42 points. Discriminative index of all the 25 tasks of the test is good or very good (30 - 51,24 %). To check the internal consistency of the tasks of the prepared test the meaning of the coefficient Cronbacho alfa (α) (0,825) shows that the scale of the 25 tasks of the test is reliable as a measurement tool. Skewness of the grade distribution of the test is (–0,02), Kurtosis is (0,026), the value of this criterion as well as Kolmogorov-Smirnov test criterion (p = 0,083) proves the normality of test points distribution. The results of the conducted Wilcoxon's criterion Test Statistics analysis (Z = –5,281, p = 0,000, r = –0,263) show that the differences in students’ critical ad creative thinking are statistically meaningful. Critical thinking abilities are more obviously expressed (x = 12,22 ± 4,24), than those of creative thinking (x = 11,33 ± 4,20). The results of the Friedman and Wilcoxon criterion show that the abilities of analysis, synthesis and drawing conclusions, evaluation, exploration and generating ideas, formulating questions and searching for the ways of solutions differ statistically significantly (p = 0,000, kai α = 0,05). 4th grade students are more able to analyze, carry out a synthesis, draw conclusions and make evaluations (critical thinking) than formulate questions and search for the ways of solutions, explore and generate ideas. The results obtained will be analyzed in the future in more detail.

1.Aizikovitsh-Udi, E., & Cheng, D. (2015). Developing critical thinking skills from dispositions to abilities: Mathematics education from early childhood to high school. Creative Education, 6(04), 455. 2.Arends, D., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: Becoming an accomplished teacher Routledge. 3.Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan. 4.Facione, P. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (the delphi report). 5.Halpern, D. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2020). An introduction to critical thinking: Maybe it will change your life. Critical Thinking in Psychology. 6.Krulik, S., & Rudnick, J. A. (1993). Reasoning and problem solving: A handbook for elementary school teachers Allyn and Bacon. 7.Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press. 8.Lucas, B., & Spencer, E. (2017). Teaching creative thinking: Developing learners who generate ideas and can think critically (pedagogy for a changing world series) Crown House Publishing Ltd. 9.Piaseckienė, K. (2018). Analysis of the results of problem solution during mathematics olympiads for fifth grade students. Lietuvos Matematikos Rinkinys, 59, 76-81. 10.Plubsiri, P., & Chaiyasang, S. (2020). Critical thinking in mathematics: A must-thinking process to be developed in mathematics classroom. Academic meeting reports presenting national and international research, 1(11), 162. 11.Rajendran, N. S. (2010). Teaching & acquiring higher-order thinking skills. Penerbitan Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, Malaysia. 12.Sičiūnienė, V., & Dargytė, J. (2011). Silpnai besimokančiųjų bendrojo lavinimo mokyklos mokinių matematinių gebėjimų diagnostika. Mokytojų Ugdymas, (16), 64-76. 13.Thomas, A., & Thorne, G. (2009). How to increase higher order thinking. Metarie, LA: Center for Development and Learning. 14.Vidergor, H. E. (2018). Effectiveness of the multidimensional curriculum model in developing higher-order thinking skills in elementary and secondary students. The Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 95-115. 15.Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321. 16.Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., & Segal, J. W. (2012). Higher order thinking in the teaching of social studies: Connections between theory and practice. Informal reasoning and education (pp. 399-418) Routledge. 17.Žydžiūnaitė, V. (2011). Baigiamojo darbo rengimo metodologija. Mokomoji knyga. Klaipėda: Klaipėdos valstybinė kolegija. 18. World Economic Forum. (2020). The Future of Jobs Report 2020. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland.