Promoting students' critical thinking (CT) has been an essential goal of higher education. However, despite the various attempts to make CT a primary focus of higher education, there is little agreement regarding the conditions under which instruction could result in greater CT outcomes. In this review, we systematically examined current empirical evidence and attempted to explain why some instructional interventions result in greater CT gains than others. Thirty three empirical studies were included in the review and features of the interventions of those individual studies were analyzed. Emphasis was given to the study features related to CT instructional approach, teaching strategy, student and teacher related characteristics, and CT measurement. The findings revealed that effectiveness of CT instruction is influenced by conditions in the instructional environment comprising the instructional variables (teaching strategies and CT instructional approaches), and to some extent by student-related variables (year level and prior academic performance). Moreover, the type of CT measures adopted (standardized vs. non-standardized) appear to influence evaluation of the effectiveness of CT interventions. The findings overall indicated that there is a shift towards embedding CT instruction within academic disciplines, but failed to support effectiveness of particular instructional strategies in fostering acquisition and transfer of CT skills. The main limitation in the current empirical evidence is the lack of systematic design of instructional interventions that are in line with empirically valid instructional design principles.

IntroductionAlthough medical students are increasingly exposed to clinical experiences as part of their training, these often occur parallel with, rather than connected to, their classroom-based learning experiences. Additionally, students seem to struggle with spontaneously making the connection between these spheres of their training themselves. Therefore, this systematic review synthesized the existing evidence about educational interventions that aim to enhance the connection between learning in the classroom and its application in the workplace.MethodsElectronic databases (AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, Medline, RDRB, PsycINFO and WoS) were screened for quantitative and qualitative studies investigating educational interventions that referenced a connection between the classroom and workplace-based experiences within undergraduate, graduate or postgraduate medical education.ResultsThree types of interventions were identified: classroom to workplace interventions, workplace to classroom interventions, and interventions involving multiple connections between the two settings. Most interventions involved a tool (e. g. video, flow chart) or a specific process (e. g. linking patient cases with classroom-based learning content, reflecting on differences between what was learned and how it works in practice) which aimed to enhance the connection between the two settings.DiscussionSmall-scale interventions can bring classroom learning and workplace practice into closer alignment. Such interventions appear to be the necessary accompaniments to curricular structures, helping bridge the gap between classroom learning and workplace experience. This paper documents examples that may serve to assist medical educators in connecting the classroom and the workplace.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi: 10.1007/s40037-017-0338-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Despite the widespread belief in a positive influence of research on education, the empirical evidence is lacking (Hattie and Marsh 1996). Several authors have questioned the appropriateness of the operationalisation of both aspects of the relation between teaching and research. This article takes a closer look at the research questions in empirical studies on the nexus between teaching and research and examines the used variables and their measurement techniques. The study reveals that the used variables and their operationalisation are diverse as well as limited. There is for example a diversity in the investigated population, the level of analysis (individual faculty, department, institutions), the nature of the institutions investigated or the questionnaires used. The operationalisation of both teaching and research is limited. Student learning or the way research is integrated into teaching are virtually absent and the measurement of research is mostly confined to the quantity of the research output. This calls for a more systematic research agenda in which student learning is investigated along with more fine grained measures of teaching and in which the relation of these two indicators and the research proficiency of faculty are looked at.

Critical thinking helps students to confront a multitude of challenges they will face in their carreers and personal lives. It is therefore an important task of higher education to promote students' critical thinking. However, students do not enter higher education as a blank slate. Background characteristics of students are important in developing instruction. The present study investigates the influence of an important background characteristic, namely students' secondary education, and their current higher education programme on critical thinking in the first year of higher education. The critical thinking of college freshmen was measured by the Scipio, a test consisting of both constructed response items and forced choice items. The results indicate that (1) the growth in critical thinking during the first year of higher education is on average small, (2) students with a background in general secondary education have higher entrance performances and show more growth during the first year than students with other educational backgrounds, (3) critical thinking plays a role in the educational choice that students make when they enter higher education, and (4) students in a professional bachelor programme grow more in CT during the first year of higher education than students in an academic bachelor programme.

With the rise of undergraduate research and inquiry (ugrI) in higher education, it is important to provide students with opportunities to disseminate their research. This completes the research cycle and builds key communication skills. In this article we develop a framework for the dissemination of ugrI, linking exposure to the development of student autonomy. We illustrate the framework with case studies ranging from dissemination activities within the curriculum, such as poster presentations and journal clubs, through to ugrI journals, conferences and product launches. Finally we consider how institutions can promote and support the dissemination of ugrI. To avoid reliance on individuals, institutions should invest in appropriate infrastructure, such as an undergraduate research office, to ensure long-term support for ugrI and the promotion of dissemination activities.