Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching
Volume 16 (2025 Issue 1
The
Impact of
Bilingualism on Critical Thinking
–
Insights from a Comparative Study among Secondary School Students in
Germany
Emine Altıntaş (University of Education Karlsruhe, Germany) & Nalan Kızıltan (Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey)
Abstract
This article explores the relationship between bilingualism and
critical thinking. To investigate this, monolingual and bilingual
participants from various public secondary schools in Germany were
invited to take part in the experiment through purposive sampling.
Data for this quantitative study were gathered using the Critical
Thinking Disposition Scale (Semerci, 2016), a 49-statement,
five-point Likert-type scale. This multidimensional scale assessed
the extent to which participants could use metacognition,
flexibility, systematicity, tenacity and patience, and
open-mindedness to reflect their critical thinking dispositions. When
analysing the correlation between bilingualism and the critical
thinking dispositions of the participants, these five subscales were
used as a basis. The data were analysed using the SPSS software and
an Independent Two Samples t-test. The critical thinking dispositions
of bilingual children were also compared in terms of gender and age.
The study's findings showed that bilingual children seem to have
performed better in all five of these critical thinking disposition
subscales. According to these findings, it can be concluded that
there is a correlation between bilingualism and critical thinking
dispositions.
Keywords:
Bilingualism, critical
thinking,
critical-thinking
dispositions,
language
acquisition
1 Introduction
Bilingualism
is a growing phenomenon worldwide in our modern era. There are many
reasons for
the growing
population of bilingual people, such as emigration, international
mobility, professional or personal reasons. Bilingual people are
present in a variety of age ranges
and with different backgrounds
all around the world. As Brown (1994: 1)
stated, bilingualism is a
way
of
life for people.
Bilingual people not only speak two different
languages but also think in two different ways. What is more, they
are closely familiar with two different cultures and traditions. In
their endeavour to exceed the limits of their mother tongue,
bilinguals undergo significant cognitive, cultural, and communicative
influences.
This
study is theoretically based on the theories of Whorf (1956),
Vygotsky (1934,
1962)
and Cummins (1979). Whorf
(1956) hypothesises
that people who can speak different languages think in different
patterns. Studies show that various cognitive factors are in a
positive
relationship
with bilingualism. For
instance, Hakuta (1990) asserts that one of the skills bilinguals
seem to be better at is metalinguistic ability, which refers to the
ability to think flexibly and abstractly about language and
appreciate linguistic form rather than content. Bilingualism is
positively associated with higher levels of cognitive functioning.
Among these intellectual skills is critical thinking, which is
defined as ‘reasonable and reflective thinking focused on deciding
what to believe’ (Ennis, 2018: 166). Critical thinking is crucial
in that one can apply it to different areas of life and learning
(American Philosophical Association, 1990). In the Delhi Report,
Facione (1990: 3) concludes that there are two dimensions of critical thinking
which are skills
and dispositions.
Critical thinking skills are defined as competences that are applied
while making decisions and judgments, while thinking dispositions are
the inclination and willingness to use critical thinking skills.
This
study is based on the following research questions:
Is
there a statistically significant difference between the
critical-thinking
dispositions of monolingual
and
bilingual
children?
How
do children’s critical thinking dispositions differ across the
subscales of Semerci’s (2016) Critical Thinking Disposition Scale
(metacognition, flexibility, systematicity, tenacity-patience and
open-mindedness)?
Is
there
a statistically significant difference between critical thinking
dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children in terms of
gender?
Is
there
any statistically significant difference between critical thinking
dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children in terms of age?
2 Methodology
2.1
Participants
This study, utilising
purposive sampling, was conducted with a sample of 196 children aged
between 10 and 14, who were 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th graders
enrolled in three different public secondary schools in
Aschaffenburg, Germany during the 2017-2018 Academic Year. The
participants were divided into two groups as monolingual children of
German and bilingual children. There were 82 participants in the
monolingual group while there were 114 participants
in
the bilingual group. The monolingual group consisted of 34 female and
48 male students, while
the bilingual
group consisted of 50 female and 64 male students.
In
the bilingual group, the
children's mother
tongues were varied, such as Turkish, Italian, Russian and Arabic
while their second language was German. The
bilingual participants were chosen from among children born and
residing in Germany who were fluent in the German language. To create
a balanced distribution, students from rural public schools with
similar socioeconomic status and educational backgrounds were
selected. Therefore, the results may be biased, as students from
private or high schools are not represented in the study
The demographic information of
the participants is presented in the table below:
-
Category
|
Subcategory
|
Count
|
Percentage
|
Gender
|
Female
Male
|
84
112
|
42,9
57,1
|
Age
|
10-11
12-13
13+
|
33
79
137
|
16,9
40,3
69,8
|
Languages
|
German
Turkish
Other (Italian,
Russian and Arabic)
|
82
51
63
|
41,8
26,0
32,2
|
Groups
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
41,8
58,2
|
Table 1: Distribution of Participants’ Demographic Information
2.2
Instruments
This
descriptive study is based on quantitative data collected through a
questionnaire consisting of two main parts: A Personal Information
and Critical-Thinking
Disposition Scale
(Semerci 2016). The
Personal Information part,
developed by the researchers, was used in order to gather data about
the independent variables of the study.
In this part, the participants indicated their gender, age, grade,
and place of birth. In order to create a balanced sample group, only
participants who were born in Germany were chosen for the study.
The participants also indicated their mother tongue and second
language in the questionnaire. This enabled the creation of control
and experimental groups. This study did not employ objective language
proficiency tests due to the impracticality of administering
assessments for each participant's language.
The
second part of the questionnaire was
the Critical
Thinking
Disposition Scale,
which is a Likert-type item scale. This
Instrument comprised 49 items, each rated on a five-point scale.
Participants responded to each item based on the degree to which they
agreed, with options ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (totally
agree). It is evident that the numerical coding system is arbitrary
in nature. Its primary function is to facilitate the quantitative
analysis of participants' responses, thereby enhancing the
objectivity of data interpretation and facilitating efficient
management of large datasets.
The scale
employed in this study was multi-dimensional. There were five
subscales: metacognition (14 items), flexibility (11 items),
systematicity (13 items), tenacity-patience (8 items) and
open-mindedness (3 items). The critical-thinking dispositions of
monolingual and bilingual children were compared in terms of these
five subscales.
2.3
Data Collection
The questionnaire was
administered in three languages: The languages under consideration
are German, English and Turkish. The establishment of a supportive
and relaxed atmosphere was of paramount importance in ensuring that
participants felt comfortable while completing the questionnaire.
Furthermore, participants were encouraged to ask questions if they
encountered any difficulties. The study was conducted with no time
constraints imposed on the participants, thus allowing them to
respond at their own pace. Throughout the data collection process,
the classroom teachers collaborated closely with the researchers,
providing assistance as required. The researchers and classroom
teachers collaborated to clarify any ambiguous items or instructions,
thereby ensuring the comprehension of the participants and the
veracity of their responses.
2.4
Data Analysis
The data obtained from a total
of 196 participants were analysed quantitatively utilizing the
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 23. The
analysis was performed at 95% confidence level. Descriptive
statistics, including frequencies and percentages, were calculated
for all demographic variables and Likert-scale items. In addition,
the responses to the Likert-scale items were summarised using
descriptive measures, such as means and standard deviations. To
examine potential differences in scale scores based on gender and
age, Independent Two Samples t-test were conducted. These tests were
used to compare the means between independent groups and assess
whether statistically significant differences existed between them.
3 Results and Discussion
The results were interpreted
in consideration of the aforementioned research questions. The
objective of the present study was to ascertain the critical thinking
dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children. In addition, the
study sought to evaluate the impact of gender on critical thinking
dispositions and to examine the correlation between bilingualism and
critical thinking dispositions. The findings are presented in the
subsequent tables and are discussed in detail below.
In order to address Research
Question 1, which pertains to the potential existence of a
statistically significant discrepancy between the critical thinking
dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children, an Independent
Two Samples t-test was conducted. This test was utilised to undertake
a comparative analysis of the critical thinking dispositions between
the control and experimental groups.
-
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Control
|
82
|
163.11
|
23.61
|
-2.794
0.006
|
Experimental
|
114
|
172.09
|
21.11
|
Table
2:
The Difference
between Critical Thinking Dispositions of Control and Experimental
Group (p
< a=0,05)
As demonstrated in Table 2,
the experimental group exhibited a higher mean score on the scale (M=
172.09) in comparison to the control group (M=163.11). Consequently,
it can be concluded that, among the two groups examined, bilingual
children exhibited superior critical thinking dispositions in
comparison to monolingual children.
The data obtained for Research
Question 2, which examined potential differences in critical thinking
dispositions among children across the subscales (metacognition,
flexibility, systematicity, tenacity and patience, and
open-mindedness), are presented in Table 3:
-
Subscales
|
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Metacognition
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
49.66
51.19
|
7.01
6.93
|
-1.521
|
0.130
|
Flexibility
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
36.38
38.83
|
6.36
4.93
|
-2.919
|
0.004
|
Systematicity
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
41.83
44.59
|
7.89
6.94
|
-2.592
|
0.010
|
Tenacity
patience
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
24.43
26.68
|
5.34
5.16
|
-2.965
|
0.003
|
Open-minded- ness
|
Control
Experimental
|
82
114
|
10.82
10.80
|
2.28
2.11
|
-0.060
|
0.953
|
Table
3:
Differences
in Critical Thinking Disposition Subscales between Control and
Experimental Groups (* p < a=0,05)
The data indicate that the
experimental group outperformed the control group across all
subscales in terms of mean scores. However, while significant
differences were observed in the subscales of flexibility,
systematicity, and tenacity-patience, no significant differences were
found in the metacognition and open-mindedness subscales. With regard
to these results, it can be said that bilingual children have better
scores in critical thinking dispositions than monolingual children,
as the bilingual participants scored better than the monolingual
children in three out of five subscales.
The t-test results show that
there is a statistically significant difference in flexibility score
between monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingual children have a
higher flexibility level (M=38,83) than monolingual children. Many
researchers allege that bilingual people have more cognitive
flexibility than monolingual people (Peal & Lambert, 1962;
Ben-Zeev, 1977; Bialystok, 2001; Bialystok & Senman, 2004; Prior
& MacWhinney, 2010; Xia et al., 2022).
The term flexibility
has been employed
in a variety of studies to describe different cognitive abilities,
including the performance of bilinguals on general reasoning tests
(Peal & Lambert, 1962); their ability to pay attention to
structure and detail (Ben-Zeev, 1976, 1977a); their performance on
perceptual and 'set-changing' tasks (Balkan, 1970); and their
performance on creativity tests measuring divergent thinking skills
(Landry, 1974). The findings of these studies indicate that
bilinguals appear to demonstrate superior cognitive flexibility. In
this study, flexibility is defined as an individual's capacity to
adapt by shifting between various tasks and mental frameworks (Miyake
et al., 2000). A plethora of studies have indicated that individuals
who are bilingual and possess an equilibrium in their linguistic
abilities exhibit a higher degree of flexibility in their performance
on diverse cognitive tasks when compared to monolingual individuals
(Balkan, 1970). The term balanced
bilingual refers to
an individual who possesses a reasonable degree of proficiency in
both languages (Baker, 2006). At this point, the present study is not
an exception, insofar as the results indicate that bilingual children
have greater flexibility in problem solving and decision making than
monolingual children. The results of the study indicate that
bilingual children exhibit a superior ability to propose multiple
solutions to problem-solving tasks. This finding aligns with the
conclusions of the study conducted by Diaz & Klingler (1991),
which demonstrated that bilingual individuals exhibited superior
performance in non-verbal problem-solving tasks when compared to
monolingual individuals. The bilingual experience of managing two
language systems, which demands that children frequently switch
between languages and inhibit the non-target language, leads to these
advantages (Bialystok, 2012). It is hypothesised that this constant
practice in language control may strengthen broader executive
functions, particularly flexibility and attentional control (Adesope
et al., 2010). It can be concluded that bilingual individuals tend to
exhibit greater cognitive flexibility.
As demonstrated in Table 3, a
statistically significant discrepancy is evident between monolingual
and bilingual children with regard to the systematicity subscale.
Specifically, bilingual children exhibit higher mean scores (M=44.59)
in comparison to monolingual children (M=41.83).
This result is consistent with Wenner’s
(2009)
study,
which
claims that monolingual and bilingual people think in different ways
and that bilingual children are able to solve problems much
more
easily than monolingual ones. Furthermore, there is a statistically
significant difference between monolingual and bilingual children in
the tenacity-patience subscale,
with
bilingual
children having
a higher
tenacity-patience level (M=26.68)
than monolingual children
(M=24.43).
However,
a statistically significant difference has not been detected between
the monolingual and bilingual children in terms of metacognition and
open-mindedness.
For Research Question 3, the
Independent Two Samples t-test was carried out to compare the
critical thinking dispositions of the monolingual and bilingual
children in terms of gender:
Table
4: Difference of Critical Thinking Dispositions of the Female
Monolingual and Bilingual Children (*: p < a=0,05)
Table 4 presents a
cross-tabulation of the differences in subscales between female
monolingual and bilingual children. The t-test results are presented
to facilitate a comparison between the subscales of female
monolingual and bilingual children. The t-test results indicate a
statistically significant difference in terms of tenacity-patience
scores between female monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingual
girls have been shown to exhibit a higher level of tenacity and
patience (M=26.06) in comparison to monolingual girls (M=22.91).
Conversely, the analysis yielded no statistically significant
disparities in terms of metacognition, flexibility, systematicity,
and open-mindedness scores. Therefore, it can be interpreted that
there is no statistically significant difference in the critical
thinking dispositions of the female monolingual and bilingual
children. These results align with the findings of studies conducted
by Çekin (2015) and Topoğlu & Öney (2013), which revealed no
significant differences in students' critical thinking dispositions
based on gender.
Table 5 illustrates the
differences in critical thinking dispositions between male
monolingual and bilingual children:
-
Group
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p
|
Control
|
48
|
164,42
|
24,65
|
-2,086 0,039*
|
|
Experimental
|
64
|
173,92
|
23,27
|
|
|
Table 5: Differences of
Subscales of the Female Monolingual and Bilingual Children (*: p <
a=0,05)
Table 5 illustrates the
differences in critical thinking dispositions between male
monolingual and bilingual children. The findings reveal a
statistically significant difference in the critical thinking
dispositions of male monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingual
boys have higher critical thinking disposition levels (M = 173.92)
than monolingual boys (M = 164.42). To further explore this
difference, the critical thinking dispositions of male children in
the control and experimental groups were compared according to the
five subscales.
Table 6 shows a cross table
for the differences of subscales of the male monolingual and
bilingual children. It presents independent Two Samples t-test
results comparing male monolingual and bilingual children with
respect to the subscales.
-
Subscales
|
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Metacognition
|
Control
Experimental
|
48
64
|
50.15
51.56
|
7.23
7.29
|
-1.021
|
0.310
|
Flexibility
|
Control
Experimental
|
48
64
|
36.35
39.20
|
6.90
5.45
|
-2.361
|
0.020
|
Systematicity
|
Control
Experimental
|
48
64
|
41.46
45.22
|
8.37
7.61
|
-2.480
|
0.015*
|
Tenacity- patience
|
Control
Experimental
|
48
64
|
25.50
27.16
|
4.78
5.06
|
-1.755
|
0.082
|
Open-minded-ness
|
Control
Experimental
|
48
64
|
10.96
10.78
|
2.22
2.16
|
0.425
|
0.672
|
Table 6: Differences of Subscales of the Male Monolingual and Bilingual
Children (*: p < a=0,05)
According to the results of
the t-test, there is a statistically significant difference in
flexibility and systematicity scores between monolingual and
bilingual male children. Bilingual
male children show a higher flexibility level (M=39.20)
than monolingual children
(M=
36.35).
Moreover, a statistically significant difference has been found in
systematicity subscales, and bilingual male children have a higher
systematicity level (M=45.22)
than monolingual children
(M=41.46).
However,
no statistically significant differences were found in the other
subscales, such as metacognition, tenacity, patience and
open-mindedness. According to these results, a statistically
significant difference in critical thinking dispositions was found
between monolingual and bilingual boys, whereas no such difference
was observed between monolingual and bilingual girls. This may be due
to differences in cognitive development between girls and boys during
adolescence (Willingham, 2007).
With regard to Research
Question 4, which focused on potential differences in the critical
thinking dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children by age
group, an independent two-sample t-test was used to compare the
critical thinking dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children
in the following age groups: 10–11, 12–13, and over 13:
-
Subscales
|
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Metacognition
|
Control
Experimental
|
21
12
|
49.71
54.00
|
6.14
4.49
|
-2.110
|
0.043
|
Flexibility
|
Control
Experimental
|
21
12
|
35.71
39.33
|
6.43
4.08
|
-1.753
|
0.089
|
Systematicity
|
Control
Experimental
|
21
12
|
42.67
44.67
|
8.59
8.40
|
-0.648
|
0.522
|
Tenacity-patience
|
Control
Experimental
|
21
12
|
26.14
28.33
|
5.94
4.52
|
-1.106
|
0.277
|
Open-minded- ness
|
Control
Experimental
|
21
12
|
11.43
11.42
|
2.27
1.93
|
0.015
|
0.988
|
Table 7: Differences of Critical Thinking Dispositions of the Monolingual and
Bilingual Children aged 10-11 (*: p < a=0,05)
According to the t-test
results shown in Table 7, there is no statistically significant
difference between the flexibility, systematicity, tenacity-patience
and open-mindedness subscales. However, there is a statistically
significant difference in the metacognition scores of 10-11 year old
monolingual and bilingual children, with the latter having higher
metacognition levels (M=54.00) than the former (M=49.71).
Accordingly, Siegal et al. (2010) conclude that exposure to multiple
languages facilitates children’s metalinguistic awareness,
positively affecting their cognitive development. They argue that,
although children may sometimes have difficulties with vocabulary
comprehension, they overcome this with age.
In Table 8, Independent Two
Samples t-test results are presented to compare the subscales of
monolingual and bilingual children aged 12-13:
-
Subscales
|
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p
|
Metacognition
|
Control
Experimental
|
31
48
|
49,97
50,00
|
6,94
7,63
|
-0,019
|
0,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flexibility
|
Control
Experimental
|
31
48
|
36,94
38,33
|
6,70
4,71
|
-1,011
|
0,317
|
Systematicity
|
Control
Experimental
|
31
48
|
41,74
44,75
|
7,55
5,79
|
-1,999
|
0,049*
|
Tenacity-patience
|
Control
Experimental
|
31
48
|
24,48
27,15
|
4,56
4,69
|
-2,490
|
0,015*
|
Open-mindedness
|
Control
Experimental
|
31
48
|
10,39
10,44
|
2,19
2,26
|
-0,098
|
0,922
|
Table 8: A Cross Table for the
Differences of Subscales of Critical Thinking Dispositions of the
Monolingual and Bilingual Children aged 10-11 (*: p < a=0,05)
The results indicate a
statistically significant difference in the systematicity and
tenacity-patience subscales, with higher scores in the experimental
group. However, no such difference was found in the metacognition,
flexibility, or open-mindedness subscales. Therefore, it is concluded
that there is no statistically significant difference between the
critical thinking dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children.
Table 9 shows the statistical
analysis of the critical thinking dispositions of monolingual and
bilingual children aged over 13:
-
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Control Group
|
30
|
160,90
|
23,37
|
-2,127
|
0,036
|
Experimental Group
|
54
|
172,09
|
22,96
|
|
|
Table 9: Differences of
Critical Thinking Dispositions of the Monolingual and Bilingual
Children aged 12-13 (*: p < a=0,05 )
According to the above
results, the difference between the two groups is considered
statistically significant. The results show that the critical
thinking disposition level of bilingual children (M=172.09) is higher
than that of monolingual children (M=160.90). This difference may be
attributed to the onset of adolescence, which generally begins at
around the age of 12 or 13. During this period, cognitive abilities
advance significantly and logical thinking reaches a level similar to
that of adults. Whitmire (2000) describes adolescence as a period of
significant cognitive and social development. As children progress
from adolescence into adulthood, the bilingual individuals benefit
from their ability to communicate in two languages and their
experience of diverse cultural and social environments.
As shown in Table 10, the
results of the independent two-sample t-test are presented to compare
13-year-old monolingual and bilingual children in terms of the
subscales.
-
Subscales
|
Groups
|
N
|
M
|
SD
|
t
|
p*
|
Metacognition
|
Control
Experimental
|
30
54
|
49,30
51,63
|
7,83
6,59
|
-1,450
|
0,151
|
Flexibility
|
Control
Experimental
|
30
54
|
36,27
39,17
|
6,12
5,33
|
-2,265
|
0,026
|
Systematicity
|
Control
Experimental
|
30
54
|
41,33
44,43
|
7,95
7,63
|
-1,754
|
0,083
|
Tenacity-patience
|
Control
Experimental
|
30
54
|
23,17
25,89
|
5,50
5,63
|
-2,145
|
0,035
|
Open-mindedness
|
Control
Experimental
|
30
54
|
10,83
10,98
|
2,35
1,99
|
-0,307
|
0,760
|
Table 10: Differences of Subscales of Critical Thinking Dispositions of the
Monolingual and Bilingual Children aged 12-13 (*: p < a=0,05 )
According to the results of
the t-test, there is a statistically significant difference in
flexibility scores: the bilingual children have a higher level of
flexibility (M = 39.17) than the monolingual children (M = 36.27).
Furthermore, a statistically significant difference was found in
tenacity-patience scores, with the bilingual children achieving
higher scores (M = 25.89). However, no statistically significant
difference was found in the metacognition, systematicity and
open-mindedness subscales.
Regarding the participants’
age, the results of this study show a meaningful correlation between
age and critical thinking dispositions after adolescence. As
participants' age increases, their critical thinking levels also
increase, and the difference in critical thinking disposition scores
between monolingual and bilingual children widens. Examining the
existing literature on the relationship between age and critical
thinking ability reveals inconsistent findings. Kelly's (2003)
research on trainee teachers indicates that critical thinking levels
increase with age, which is consistent with the present study.
However, Gülener (2007) concludes that the relationship between age
and critical thinking ability is not statistically significant in his
study of students at the Faculty of Education. Emir (2012) reports
that critical thinking skills tend to decline with age.
4 Conclusions
This study investigates the
correlation between bilingualism and critical thinking dispositions.
It also discusses critical thinking dispositions in monolingual and
bilingual children, categorised by gender and age. The results
suggest that there is a correlation between bilingualism and the
critical thinking dispositions of bilingual speakers. These
dispositions have been analysed in accordance with five critical
thinking subcategories: metacognition, flexibility, systematicity,
tenacity and patience, and open-mindedness. Bilingual speakers were
found to outperform monolingual speakers in all five of these
subscales. Furthermore, statistically significant differences were
observed in three of these subscales: flexibility, systematicity, and
tenacity-patience. Based on these results, it can be concluded that
bilingual children have better critical thinking dispositions than
monolingual children. These findings are consistent with previous
research, such as Konaka's (1997) study, which suggests that
bilingualism positively impacts divergent thinking skills, and
Kharkhurin's (2012) study, which concludes that bilingualism enhances
creative thinking and reasoning abilities.
This study compared the
critical thinking dispositions of monolingual and bilingual children
in terms of gender and age. Firstly, when comparing the critical
thinking dispositions of female monolingual and bilingual children,
only a statistically significant difference in tenacity-patience
scores was documented, with bilingual girls demonstrating higher
levels of tenacity and patience. However, no statistically
significant differences were found between female monolingual and
bilingual children in terms of metacognition, flexibility,
systematicity and open-mindedness. When comparing the critical
thinking dispositions of male monolingual and bilingual children, a
statistically significant difference was found in two out of the five
critical thinking disposition subscales, namely flexibility and
systematicity. In both of these subscales, the bilingual boys
demonstrated higher levels. Thus, in these subscales, bilingual boys
displayed higher levels of critical thinking than monolingual boys.
For the other three subscales of critical thinking dispositions:
metacognition, tenacity-patience, and open-mindedness, no significant
difference was found.
The results of the study were
also evaluated in terms of three age groups. A statistical difference
was found in the critical thinking dispositions of monolingual and
bilingual children aged 10–11. According to the results, the only
statistically significant difference was in metacognition scores,
with bilingual children aged 10–11 having a higher metacognitive
level. In the second age group, however, no statistically significant
difference was found in the critical thinking dispositions of
monolingual and bilingual children aged 12–13. However, a
statistically significant difference was found in terms of
systematicity and tenacity-patience levels, with bilingual children
aged 12–13 achieving higher scores than their monolingual
counterparts. Unlike the previous two comparisons of age groups, a
statistically significant difference in critical thinking disposition
scores was detected in the final group of children aged over 13. The
results indicate a statistically significant difference in
flexibility and tenacity/patience scores, with bilingual children
over 13 having higher flexibility and tenacity/patience levels.
In conclusion, the findings of
the present study suggest that there is a relationship between
bilingualism and critical thinking dispositions. Previous studies,
including this one, have shown that bilingualism has a positive
effect on critical thinking (Bialystok, 2001; Adesope et al., 2010;
Yang et al., 2011; Kharkhurin, 2012). Since critical thinking is one
of the 21st-century skills included in school curricula, children
must be prepared to raise their awareness of critical thinking and
develop their ability to understand oral and written discourse.
Moreover, as the world becomes increasingly interconnected, children
are likely to become bilingual naturally. Therefore, the correlation
between critical thinking and bilingualism is of the utmost
importance in education and social life. As the number of bilingual
children worldwide is increasing day by day, incorporating
bilingualism into education systems is essential (UNESCO, 2023;
Eurostat, 2024). Last but not least, the mother tongues of bilingual
children should be given importance in their formal education.
Ethics
Committee Approval
The
authors confirm that ethical approval was obtained from The Council
of Higher Education (Approval Date and Number 2018-178).
References
Adesope, O. O., Lavin, T.,
Thompson, T., & Ungerleider, C. (2010). A systematic review and
meta-analysis of the cognitive correlates of bilingualism. Review of
Educational Research, 80(2), 207–245.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310368803
Altıntaş, E. (2019). A
comparative study of critical thinking dispositions of monolingual
and bilingual children
(Unpublished master's thesis). Ondokuz Mayıs University Graduate
School of Educational Sciences, Samsun, Turkey.
Balkan, L. (1970). Les effets
du bilinguisme francais-anglais sur les aptitudes Intellectuelles.
Bruxcllcs: Aimav.
Ben-Zeev, S. (1977).
Mechanisms by which childhood bilingualism affects understanding of
language and cognitive structures. In P.A. Hornby (Ed.),
Bilingualism:
Psychological, Social and Educational Implications.
NewYork, NY: Academic.
Bialystok, E. (2001).
Bilingualism in
development: Language, literacy, and cognition.
Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605963
Bialystok, E., and Senman, L.
(2004). Executive processes in appearance-reality tasks: the role of
inhibition of attention and symbolic representation. Child
Dev. 75, 562–579.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00693.x
Bialystok, E. (2012).
Bilingualism: Consequences for mind and brain. Trends
in Cognitive Sciences,
16(4), 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.03.001
Brown, H. D. (1994).
Principles of
language learning and teaching.
New York, Oxford University Press.
Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic
interdependence and the educational development of bilingual
children. Review of
Educational Research,
49 (2), 222-251.
Çekin, A. (2015). The
investigation of critical thinking dispositions of religious culture
and ethics teacher candidates. Journal
of Education and Learning (Edu Learn),
9 (2), 158.
Diaz, R. M. and Klinger, C.
(1991). Towards an explanatory model of the interaction between
bilingualism and cognitive development. In Bialystok, E. (ed.)
Language processing
in bilingual children.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 167–192.
Emir, S. (2012). Eğitim
fakültesi öğrencilerinin eleştirel düşünme eğilimleri, Hasan
Ali Yücel Journal
of Education Faculty,
17, 34-57.
Ennis, R.H. (2018). Critical
Thinking Across the Curriculum: A Vision. Topoi 37, 165–184.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4
Eurostat (2024). More pupils
in the EU are learning multiple languages. European Commission.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/de/web/products-eurostat-news/w/edn-20241002-1
Facione, P. A. (1990).
Critical thinking: A
statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment
and instruction- The Delphi Report.
Millbrae CA: The California Academic Pres.
Hakuta, K. (1990).
Bilingualism & bilingual education: A research perspective. NCBE
FOCUS: Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education,
1, 1-13. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual
Education.
Kharkhurin, A. V. (2012).
Multilingualism and creativity. SAGE Open, 2(4), 2158244012466810.
https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.27195524
Kelly, M. (2003). An
examination of the critical and creative thinking disposition of
teacher education students.
Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. University of Massachusetts. USA.
Konaka, K. (1997). The
relationship between degree of bilingualism and gender to divergent
thinking ability among native Japanese-speaking children in the New
York area. Doctoral
dissertation, New York University, New York, U.S.
Kroll, J. F., Dussias, P.E.,
Bogulski, C. A., & Kroff, J. R. V. (2012). Juggling two languages
in one mind: What bilinguals tell us about language processing and
its consequences for cognition. In Brian H. Ross (Ed.): The
Psychology of Learning and Motivation,
56, 229-262. San Diego: Academic Press.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394393-4.00007-8
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P.,
Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., and Wager, T. D. (2000).
The Unity and Diversity of executive functions and their
contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: a latent variable
analysis. Cognit.
Psychol. 41,
49–100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
Peal, E. and Lambert, W. E.
(1962). The relationship of bilingualism to intelligence.
Psychological
Monographs 76 (27),
1–23.
Prior, A., & MacWhinney,
B. (2010). A bilingual advantage in task switching. Bilingualism:
Language and Cognition,
13(2), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990526
Semerci, N. (2016). Eleştirel
Düşünme Eğilimi (EDE) Ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve
güvenirlik revize çalışması. Turkish
Studies, 11 (9),
725-740. (http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.9573)
Siegal, M., Surian, L.,
Matsuo, A., Geraci, A., Iozzi, L., Okumura, Y., and Itakura, S.
(2010). Bilingualism accentuates children’s understanding.
PlosONE.5(2). e9004. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009004
Topoğlu, O. &
Ünal-Öney, E. (2013). Eğitim fakültesi güzel sanatlar
eğitimi bölümü öğrencilerinin eleştirel düşünme
eğilimlerinin çeşitli değişkenlerle ilişkisinin
incelenmesi. Turkish
Studies, 8(8),
1301-1312. (http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.5368)
UNESCO. (2023). Multilingual
education: A key to quality and inclusive learning.
UNESCO.
https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/multilingual-education-key-quality-and-inclusive-learning
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962).
Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (First published in 1934)
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind
in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenner, M. (2009). The neural
advantage of speaking 2 languages. Scientific American.
(https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bilingual-brains/)
Willingham, D. T. (2007).
Critical Thinking: Why Is It So Hard to Teach? All about Adolescent
Literacy. (http://www.adlit.org/article/21409/)
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language,
thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (John B.
Carroll, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Xia T., An, Y. and Guo, J.
(2022) Bilingualism and creativity: Benefits from cognitive
inhibition and cognitive flexibility. Front. Psychol. 13,1016777.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1016777
Yang, S., Yang, H., &
Lust, B. (2011). Early childhood bilingualism leads to advances in
executive attention: Dissociating culture and language. Bilingualism:
Language and Cognition,
14(3), 412–422. doi:10.1017/S1366728910000611
Authors:
Emine Altıntaş
Doctoral Student / Foreign
Language Teacher
Institute of German Language
and Literature
University of Education
Karlsruhe
Karlsruhe
Germany
Email: drk-emine@hotmail.com
Dr Nalan Kızıltan
Full Professor
Department of Foreign Language
Education
Ondokuz Mayıs University
Samsun
Turkey
Email:
kiziltannalan@omu.edu.tr
