Assessing Critical Thinking: A Structured Approach

Last registered on July 13, 2026

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Assessing Critical Thinking: A Structured Approach
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0019134
Initial registration date
July 10, 2026

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
July 13, 2026, 8:29 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Chicago

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2026-03-10
End date
2027-09-01
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of an augmented critical thinking (CT) curriculum on the development of CT skills among 9th grade students in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia recently introduced a national critical thinking course as part of its Vision 2030 education reforms, aiming to shift students away from rote learning toward analytical, evidence-based reasoning. While the curriculum represents an important policy commitment, little is known about whether it effectively develops students' CT abilities in practice. We ground our work in List's (2022) CT Hierarchy, which defines critical thinking as the ability to reason empirically and abstractly, and recognizes that these skills develop progressively: from intuitive, bias-prone thinking toward more deliberate, reflective reasoning. Building on this framework, we developed a structured CT assessment and an augmented curriculum module for 9th grade that intensifies the existing national course with active learning methods, including logic exercises, claim-evidence-reasoning tasks, and metacognitive reflection. Using a randomized controlled trial across schools in Makkah and the Eastern Province, we measure whether students who receive the augmented curriculum show greater gains in CT scores relative to those receiving the standard curriculum. Our assessment captures performance across four cognitive domains: correlation vs. causation, logical reasoning, mathematical and statistical thinking, and cognitive bias. We also examine variation by gender, and baseline CT level. Results will inform curriculum policy and teacher training at scale, with implications for how CT can be effectively taught within national education systems.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Cuna, Michael et al. 2026. "Assessing Critical Thinking: A Structured Approach." AEA RCT Registry. July 13. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.19134-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2026-05-24
Intervention End Date
2026-06-25

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Critical thinking score
Critical thinking subscores: cognitive bias, math & stat reasoning, logical thinking, correlation vs. causation
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Heterogeneity of treatment effects by gender and baseline CT score
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
This study uses a school-level randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of an augmented critical thinking (CT) curriculum on 9th grade students in Saudi Arabia. Schools in Makkah and the Eastern Province were randomly assigned to either the augmented curriculum (treatment) or the standard national CT curriculum (control). The augmented curriculum is a 4-week module that intensifies the existing national course with active learning methods grounded in List's (2022) CT framework, including logic exercises, claim-evidence-reasoning tasks, and metacognitive reflection. Student CT is measured using a 25-item assessment covering four domains: correlation vs. causation, logical reasoning, math and statistical reasoning, and cognitive bias.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Stratified randomization with rerandomization. Schools were first stratified on three variables: region, school gender composition, and baseline CT score quartile. Within each stratum, complete random assignment was used, with singletons and remainder units assigned with equal probability. Rerandomization was then applied following Li, Ding, and Rubin (2020), accepting only assignments where the minimum p-value from an F-test of covariate balance across treatment and control exceeded 0.5. The final assignment was selected by computer using R.
Randomization Unit
School-level
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
72 schools; 36 per region
Sample size: planned number of observations
9,128 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
36 control schools, 36 treatment schools
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
University of Chicago Social and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board
IRB Approval Date
2025-03-15
IRB Approval Number
IRB25-0436