Critical thinking (CT) draws from foundational theories like Socrates' elenchus method of inquiry through dialogue (Oyler & Romanelli, 2014), Dewey's reflective thinking as deliberate evidence-based inquiry (Dewey, 1910), and the triadic model by Perkins (1993) emphasizing inclinations, sensitivities, and abilities. These frameworks highlight CT as encompassing not just cognitive skills (e.g., analysis, evaluation per Facione, 1990) but also dispositions like open-mindedness and contextual sensitivities (Ennis, 1996; Siegel, 1988). Despite this strong normative emphasis, empirical research continues to highlight a persistent gap between policy aspirations and teachers’ everyday classroom practices (OECD, 2019a; Biesta, 2010). This gap appears particularly pronounced in relation to the teaching and assessment of CT, which remains uneven, fragmented, and weakly supported across school levels (Abrami et al., 2015).

A growing body of research suggests that teachers face multiple challenges when attempting to operationalise CT in practice, including conceptual ambiguity regarding what CT entails (Li, 2023; Galindo-Domínguez et al., 2023), difficulties aligning CT with subject-specific curricula (Batdı, 2024), limited assessment tools (Abrami et al., 2015) and insufficient institutional or professional support (Stoll & Louis, 2007).

The urgency of addressing these challenges has intensified with the rapid diffusion of digital technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) in educational contexts (Brazão & Tinoca, 2025). Automated tools increasingly shape how students access information, produce texts, and solve problems, raising concerns about the outsourcing of key cognitive processes such as evaluation, interpretation, and judgment (Vincent-Lancrin et al., 2019). In this context, teachers are required to navigate new pedagogical tensions between efficiency and depth, automation and autonomy, and support and dependence (Biesta, 2010). Understanding teachers’ perceptions of CT and the challenges they encounter is therefore essential for designing educational responses that remain meaningful in AI-rich learning environments.

This project investigates the central challenges in teaching and assessing critical thinking school levels in Italy, focusing on teachers’ conceptions of CT and their perceived access to professional and community-based support (Shafer, 2025). Rather than examining CT implementation within a single institutional setting, the study adopts a system-level perspective, exploring how challenges and supports vary across pre-primary, primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary education.

The study employs a national survey design, targeting in-service teachers across all levels of schooling. Data are collected through an online questionnaire distributed nationally via professional networks, institutional channels, and social media dissemination (Galindo-Domínguez et al., 2023). An expected sample of approximately 300 teachers allows for cross-level and cross-context comparisons. The survey examines teachers’ definitions of CT, perceived pedagogical and assessment challenges, experiences of collegial and community support, and attitudes towards digital technologies and AI in relation to CT development.

By providing quantitative evidence at scale, this study contributes to the still underdeveloped empirical literature on critical thinking implementation across educational levels (Granström et al., 2023). The findings aim to inform policy, teacher education, and school leadership by identifying structural and professional conditions necessary to support coherent and sustainable approaches to CT in contemporary education systems.

This study is the second phase of a four-year project that included a curriculum analysis, a nationwide teacher survey, and in-depth interviews with 8 teachers from primary and lower secondary schools at a local lower secondary school in Italy. The interviewees represented a range of subject areas including languages, mathematics, literature, English, and student support. These teachers were recruited from those who had attended Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS) workshops and/or experimented with the method in their classrooms. This second phase includes a cross-sectional national survey designed to investigate teachers’ conceptions of critical thinking and the challenges associated with its teaching and assessment across all levels of schooling (Nolan, 2024). The target population includes in-service teachers working in pre-primary, primary, lower secondary, and upper secondary education, across a range of subject areas and institutional contexts. Data are collected through an online questionnaire designed to capture both conceptual and contextual dimensions of teachers’ engagement with CT (Connors & Piro, 2025). The survey is structured into thematic sections addressing: (1) professional background and school level; (2) teachers’ definitions and understandings of critical thinking; (3) perceived pedagogical and assessment-related challenges; (4) access to institutional or community-based support (e.g. professional learning communities, collaborative planning, informal peer networks); and (5) perceptions of digital technologies and artificial intelligence in relation to students’ critical thinking development. The questionnaire includes a combination of closed-ended items using Likert-scale responses and a limited number of open-ended questions to allow respondents to elaborate on their experiences. Participants are recruited through a national dissemination strategy (e.g., professional teacher networks, institutional mailing lists, and targeted social media posts) and the expected sample includes approximately 300 teachers. This nationwide survey data complements, with a broader and quantitative perspective, the local in-depth interviews that revealed that teachers conceptualize CT across epistemic (analysis), argumentative (perspective-taking), ethical-civic (empathy, autonomy), and metacognitive dimensions, often as a transversal skill rather than a separate subject, with VTS enhancing observation, dialogic exchange, and non-judgmental climates despite constraints like time pressures, assessment demands, and transmissive habit. Quantitative data will be analysed using descriptive and inferential statistical methods, through SPSS. Descriptive analyses map overall trends in teachers’ conceptions of CT and perceived challenges, while inferential analyses explore differences and associations across school levels, subject areas, and access to professional support. Responses to open-ended items will be analysed using qualitative content analysis to contextualise and deepen interpretation of the survey results.

This study aims to contribute to ongoing debates on the role of critical thinking in contemporary education by examining how teachers conceptualise critical thinking and the challenges they encounter in its teaching and assessment across different levels of schooling in Italy. By adopting a system-level perspective and combining insights from earlier qualitative work with a nationwide survey, the research addresses a gap in the empirical literature concerning how critical thinking is understood and supported beyond single institutional or subject-specific contexts (Galindo Domínguez, Bezanilla, & Poblete, 2023). Rather than treating critical thinking as a fixed or uniformly implemented construct, the study acknowledges the plurality of teachers’ conceptions and the contextual conditions that shape classroom practice (Li, 2023). The survey design allows for the exploration of variations across educational levels and subject areas, offering a nuanced account of how pedagogical challenges intersect with teachers’ access institutional and community-based support (Stoll & Louis, 2007). In doing so, the study responds to longstanding concerns regarding the fragmentation of critical thinking initiatives and the limited alignment between policy aspirations and everyday teaching practices (OECD, 2019b). The research also situates critical thinking within a broader educational landscape characterised by rapid technological and artificial intelligence. Drawing on existing literature, the study treats these developments as an important contextual dimension and explores how teachers perceive their relevance for students’ critical thinking development (Brazão & Tinoca, 2025). This exploratory focus reflects the need for empirically grounded insights into how emerging technologies are interpreted and negotiated by teachers in relation to core educational aims. By providing large-scale quantitative evidence complemented by qualitative insights from open-ended survey responses, this study seeks to inform teacher education, professional development, and school leadership by identifying structural and professional conditions that may enable more coherent and sustainable approaches to critical thinking (Batdı, 2024).

Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275–314 Batdı, V. (2024). Evaluation of the effectiveness of critical thinking training on teachers in primary and secondary schools. Review of Education. Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge. Brazão, P., & Tinoca, L. (2025). Artificial intelligence and critical thinking: A case study with educational chatbots. Frontiers in Education, 10. Connors, C., & Piro, J. S. (2025). Visual Thinking Strategies as humanistic education: A qualitative study of teachers using VTS. International Journal of Changes in Education, 2(2), 66–79. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D. C. Heath. Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical thinking. Prentice Hall. Galindo-Domínguez, H., Bezanilla, M. J., & Poblete, M. (2023). A teachers' based approach to assessing the perception of critical thinking in university students. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1127705. Granström, M., Kikas, E., & Eisenschmidt, E. (2023). Classroom observations: How do teachers teach learning strategies? Frontiers in Education, 8. Li, L. (2023). Critical thinking from the ground up: Teachers' conceptions and practice in EFL classrooms. Teachers and Teaching, 29(6), 571–593. Nolan, S. (2024). Visual Thinking Strategies for reading engagement: Adapting lessons from Denmark to English language learning. Children’s Literature in English Language Education, 12(2), 20–40. Oyler, D. R., & Romanelli, F. (2014). The fact of ignorance: Revisiting the Socratic method as a tool for teaching critical thinking. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(7), Article 144. OECD. (2019a). Education policy outlook 2019: Working together to help students succeed. OECD. OECD. (2019b). Fostering students' creativity and critical thinking: What it means in school. OECD. Perkins, D. N. (1993). Teaching for Understanding. American Educator, 17, 28-35. Siegel, H. (1988). Educating reason: Rationality, critical thinking, and education. Routledge. Shafer, D. (2025). A critical thinking thematic framework and observation tool for improved theory and developing secondary teachers' instructional practice: Proof of concept. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 56. Stoll, L., & Louis, K. S. (2007). Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(1), 3–10. Vincent-Lancrin, S., González-Sancho, C., Bouckaert, M., de Luca, F., Fernández-Barrerra, M., Jacotin, G., Urgel, J., & Vidal, Q. (2019). Fostering students' creativity and critical thinking: What it means in school. OECD Publishing.