Skip to main content
Log in

Critical thinking and digital adaptation in philosophy teaching: an innovative model to develop students’ soft skills in the context of digital transformation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
SN Social Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the context of digital transformation, higher education is facing increasing demands to innovate teaching methods in order to foster essential soft skills among students. Among these, critical thinking and digital adaptability are considered two core competencies that enable learners not only to actively acquire knowledge but also to flexibly adapt to digital learning and working environments. This article explores the role of philosophy - not merely as an academic discipline, but as a pedagogical tool with the potential to simultaneously enhance both critical thinking and digital adaptability. While philosophy encourages logical reasoning and deep reflection, digital adaptability requires flexibility and initiative in a technology-rich environment, revealing a complementary relationship that can be leveraged in higher education. However, a review of the literature indicates a lack of concrete pedagogical models that integrate critical thinking and digital adaptability in the teaching of philosophy. This gap raises the central research question: How can critical thinking and digital adaptability be integrated into philosophy instruction to contribute to the development of soft skills among students in the context of digital transformation in higher education? Grounded in theoretical analysis and philosophical reasoning, this paper proposes an integrative model consisting of three key components: critical thinking, digital adaptability, and innovative teaching methods. This is the study’s primary contribution, offering not only a novel pedagogical approach to philosophy instruction but also a foundation for future applied and empirical research aimed at enhancing soft skill development in digitalized higher education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from €39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Data availability

All data used in this study are fully provided in the article. If there is any request for additional data, the author is willing to provide it upon reasonable request.

References

  • Bevir M (Ed) (2013) The sage handbook of governance, 1st edn. SAGE Publications

  • Bond M, Buntins K, Bedenlier S, Zawacki-Richter O, Kerres M (2020) Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: a systematic evidence map. Int J Educ Technol Higher Educ 17(1):2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond M, Marín VI, Dolch C, Bedenlier S (2018) Digital transformation in German higher education: student and teacher perceptions and usage of digital media. Int J Educ Technol Higher Educ 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0130-1

  • Broda E, Strömbäck J (2024) Misinformation, disinformation, and fake news: lessons from an interdisciplinary, systematic literature review. Ann Int Commun Assoc 48(2):139–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2024.2323736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookfield SD (2011) Teaching for critical thinking: tools and techniques to help students question their assumptions, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass

  • Burbules N, Callister T Jr. (2019) Watch it: the risks and promises of information technologies for education, 1st edn. Routledge

  • Carr N (2011) The shallows: what the internet is doing to our brains. W. W. Norton & Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Creswell JD (2018) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 5th edn. SAGE Publications

  • Descartes R (1999) Discourse on method and meditations on first philosophy, (D. A. Cress (Trans. 4th edn)). Hackett Publishing Company

  • Dewey J (1933) How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. D.C. Heath and Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus HL (2008) On the internet, 2nd edn. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887936

  • Ennis RH (2011) Critical thinking. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 26(1). https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613

  • European Commission (2022) DigComp 2.2: the digital competence framework for citizens. Publications Office of the European Union

    Google Scholar 

  • Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. In: Research findings and recommendations. American Philosophical Association

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L (2013) The ethics of information, Reprint edn. Oxford University Press

  • Foucault M (1982) The archaeology of knowledge: and the discourse on language. Vintage

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman S, Eddy S, McDonough M, Smith M (2014) Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111(23):8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrison DR (2016) E-Learning in the 21st Century: a community of inquiry framework for research and practice, 3rd edn. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315667263

  • Garrison DR, Vaughan ND (2007) Blended learning in higher education: framework, principles, and guidelines, 1st edn. Jossey-Bass

  • Hodges C, Moore S, Lockee B, Trust T, Bond A (2020) The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review

  • Jonassen DH (2010) Learning to solve problems: a handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments, 1st edn. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203847527

  • Kahne J, Bowyer B (2019) Can media literacy education increase digital engagement in politics? Learn Media Technol 44(2):211–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1601108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner PA, van Merriënboer JJG (2013) Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educ Psychologist 48(3):169–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff K (2019) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology, 4th edn. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878781

  • Laurillard D (2002) Rethinking university teaching: a conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies, 2nd edn. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315012940

  • Lipman M (2003) Thinking in education, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press

  • Luckin R, Holmes W (2016) Intelligence unleashed: an argument for ai in education. UCL Knowledge Lab. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1475756

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin F, Stamper B, Flowers C (2020) Examining student perception of readiness for online learning: importance and confidence. Online Lear 24(2). 10.24059/olj.v24i2.2053

  • Meirbekov A, Maslova I, Gallyamova Z (2022) Digital education tools for critical thinking development. Think Skills Creat 44:101023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadi M (2023) Digital information literacy, self-directed learning, and personal knowledge management in critical readers: application of idc theory. Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn 19(4). 10.58459/rptel.2024.19004

  • Mokhtari F (2023) Fostering digital literacy in higher education: benefits, challenges and implications. International Journal Of Linguistics Literature Translation 6(10):160–167. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2023.6.10.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris TH, Rohs M (2021) Digitization bolstering self-directed learning for information literate adults–A systematic review. Comput Educ Open 2:100048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum MC (2016) Not for profit: why democracy needs the humanities, Updated edn. Princeton University Press

  • OECD (2019) Future of education and skills 2030. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul R, Elder L (2022) Critical thinking: tools for taking charge of your learning and your life, 4th edn. The Foundation for Critical Thinking

  • Popper KR (2014) The logic of scientific discovery (Reprint of the 1959 edition). Martino Fine Books

  • Punie Y, Brecko B, Ferrari A (2013) DIGCOMP: a framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe (EUR 26035). Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2788/52966

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Radianti J, Majchrzak TA, Fromm J, Wohlgenannt I (2020) A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Com & Edu 147:103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker C (2017) European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker C, European Commission (2017) European framework for the digital competence of educators: digcompedu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/159770

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker C, Punie Y (2017) European framework for the digital competence of educators. DigCompEdu). Joint Research Centre (European Commission). https://doi.org/10.2760/159770

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Savin-Baden M, Fraser H (2023) Rethinking problem-based learning for the digital age: a practical guide for online settings, 1st edn. Routledge. 10.4324/9781003258322

  • Schwab K (2017) The fourth industrial revolution, Kindle edn. Crown Currency

  • Selwyn N (2016) Education and technology: key issues and debates, 2nd edn. Bloomsbury Academic

  • Siemens G (2013) Learning analytics: the emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Sci 57(10):1380–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213498851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spante M, Hashemi SS, Lundin M, Algers A (2018) Digital competence and digital literacy in higher education research: systematic review of concept use. Cogent Educ 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1519143

  • Sweller J (1988) Cognitive load during problem solving: effects on learning. Cognitive Sci 12(2):257–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuorikari R, Kluzer S, Punie Y (2022) DigComp 2.2: the digital competence framework for citizens – with new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Joint Research Centre, European Commission. https://doi.org/10.2760/115376

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Watson RT, Webster J (2020) Analysing the past to prepare for the future: writing a literature review a roadmap for release 2.0. J Decis Syst 29(3):129–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2020.1798591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weller M (2011) The digital scholar: how technology is transforming academic practice. Bloomsbury Academic

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L (P. M. S. Hacker & J. Schulte (Eds) (2009) Philosophical investigations, 4th edn. Wiley-Blackwell

  • World Economic Forum (2020) The future of jobs report 2020. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2020/

  • Yuan L, Powell S (2013) MOOCs and open Education: implications for higher Education. JISC CETIS, Glasgow

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman BJ (2002) Becoming a self-regulated learner: an overview. Theory Pract 41(2):64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any funding from any other organization or individual.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

The sole author of this article is fully responsible for all stages of the research, including: idea generation, theoretical framework development, data collection and analysis, manuscript writing, content editing, and approval of the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thao Van Vi.

Ethics declarations

Ethics statement

This article does not involve human or animal research and therefore does not require approval from a research ethics committee. However, the author is committed to adhering to ethical standards in academic research, including honesty, transparency, and objectivity in the collection, analysis, and presentation of data.

Copyright statement

The author confirms that this article is an original research work, not copied or duplicated from any other work. All citations and references are fully acknowledged to ensure compliance with the principles of publication ethics.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest with respect to the research, funding, or publication of this article.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Van Vi, T. Critical thinking and digital adaptation in philosophy teaching: an innovative model to develop students’ soft skills in the context of digital transformation. SN Soc Sci 5, 205 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-025-01236-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-025-01236-0

Keywords