Exploring Critical Thinking Development Among University Students in Pakistan: A Phenomenological Study

Exploring Critical Thinking Development Among University Students in Pakistan: A Phenomenological Study | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Exploring Critical Thinking Development Among University Students in Pakistan: A Phenomenological Study Muhammad Irfan This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This phenomenological study explored how undergraduate students experience barriers and facilitators to critical thinking development in Pakistani higher education. Using purposive sampling, 15 final-year Education students participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's framework, with member checking ensuring trustworthiness. Eight interconnected themes emerged revealing complex barriers including social conformity pressures, institutional rigidities, financial constraints, and technological distractions. Students also identified enabling factors such as peer support, access to diverse perspectives, and institutional flexibility. The findings reveal how students navigate between conformity demands and critical engagement opportunities. The phenomenological approach provides rich understanding but limits generalizability. These insights inform institutional policies, pedagogical practices, and support systems needed to foster critical thinking in Pakistani higher education contexts. This research addresses a significant gap by providing insights into critical thinking development in an underrepresented Pakistani context. critical thinking phenomenology Pakistani higher education qualitative research undergraduate students barriers to learning Introduction Critical thinking stands as a cornerstone of contemporary higher education, widely recognized as essential for graduate success across academic and professional domains (Rusmin et al., 2024 ; Davies, 2013 ). Defined as the systematic ability to analyze information, evaluate its credibility, and construct well-reasoned responses (Davies, 2015 ), critical thinking encompasses cognitive processes including analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation (Facione, 1990 ). These competencies are increasingly valued in rapidly evolving global environments where graduates must navigate complex social, technological, and economic challenges (Salama, 2018). Despite its acknowledged importance, critical thinking development faces unique challenges within Pakistani higher education contexts. Pakistan's educational system, characterized by traditional pedagogical approaches and assessment methods emphasizing memorization over analysis, creates tensions between established practices and the cognitive demands of critical thinking (Kausar et al., 2025). Research indicates that many Pakistani students struggle with understanding and applying critical thinking, often lacking guidance on developing these skills effectively (Kausar et al., 2025). Additionally, educators frequently feel unprepared to teach critical thinking due to inadequate training and resources, perpetuating cycles of rote learning and surface-level engagement. Critical Thinking in Pakistani Higher Education Context Pakistan's higher education system operates within distinctive cultural, social, and institutional frameworks that shape how critical thinking is understood and practiced. With over 241.49 million inhabitants and a literacy rate of 60% (60% urban vs. 51% rural) (Tabassum, 2021), Pakistan's educational landscape reflects broader societal values emphasizing respect for authority, conformity to established norms, and collective harmony. These cultural orientations, while valuable in many contexts, can create tensions with questioning, challenging, and independent thinking essential for critical thinking development. The institutional environment at Pakistani universities, particularly public sector institutions, often reflects bureaucratic structures emphasizing rule-following, standardized procedures, and hierarchical relationships. Universities like Sukkur IBA University exemplify these characteristics while also attempting to innovate within traditional frameworks. The universities offer four-year Bachelor of Education (Honors) programs, serving students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, many of whom depend on scholarships for educational access. Furthermore, assessment systems in Pakistani higher education predominantly focus on content reproduction rather than analytical thinking. Grade Point Average (GPA) maintenance becomes crucial for scholarship retention and future opportunities, creating pressures that prioritize surface learning over deep engagement with ideas (Rusmin et al., 2024 ). This educational context requires nuanced understanding of how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact to influence critical thinking development. Research Gap and Significance While international research has extensively examined critical thinking development, limited attention has been paid to the specific experiences of students in South Asian contexts, particularly Pakistan. Existing studies often focus on measuring critical thinking skills rather than understanding the lived experiences of students navigating these challenges within their particular cultural and institutional environments. This study addresses this gap by centering student voices and experiences, revealing how they make sense of barriers and possibilities within their specific context. Literature Review Critical thinking remains a concept with multiple, sometimes conflicting definitions in educational literature. The American Philosophical Association's Delphi Report (Facione, 1990 ) identified core components including analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. However, other scholars emphasize different aspects, with King and Kitchener ( 1994 ) focusing on reflective judgment and Bailin et al. ( 1999 ) highlighting the normative dimension of "excellent thinking." This definitional diversity reflects the complexity of critical thinking as both a cognitive process and a disposition toward reasoned inquiry. For this study, we adopt a comprehensive definition that encompasses both skill-based and dispositional elements: critical thinking as the systematic application of analysis, evaluation, and reasoning to assess information and construct well-reasoned conclusions within specific contexts (Davies, 2015 ; Paul & Elder, 2019 ). International research consistently demonstrates the value of critical thinking for academic and professional success. Studies by Rusmin et al. (2022) and Davies (2023) highlight critical thinking as essential for navigating complex contemporary challenges. However, research also reveals persistent barriers to critical thinking development across diverse educational contexts. Cultural factors significantly influence how critical thinking is understood and practiced. Danvers ( 2023 ) notes that critical thinking frameworks often reflect Western philosophical traditions that may not translate directly to non-Western contexts. Students from collectivist cultures may experience tensions between individual critical analysis and group harmony, while those from authority-respecting cultures may struggle with questioning established knowledge and perspectives. Institutional factors also play crucial roles. Research by Moeti et al. (2017) demonstrates that students often prioritize grade achievement over deep learning when assessment systems reward surface approaches. Similarly, Fahim et al. (2014) emphasize that educators must themselves possess strong critical thinking skills to effectively foster these abilities in students. The assessment of critical thinking skills has evolved significantly over the past three decades, with various instruments developed to measure different dimensions of this complex construct. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) remain among the most widely used standardized assessments (Facione, 1990 ). These instruments measure both cognitive skills and dispositions toward critical thinking, providing quantitative data on students' abilities in analysis, evaluation, inference, and reasoning. More recent assessment tools emphasize real-world problem-solving scenarios rather than abstract reasoning tasks, reflecting growing recognition that critical thinking should be assessed within meaningful contexts rather than isolated cognitive exercises. However, critics argue that standardized assessments may not capture the full complexity of critical thinking, particularly its cultural dimensions and dispositional aspects. The challenge of assessing critical thinking becomes particularly complex in multicultural contexts where the definition of "excellent thinking" may vary across cultures. Cultural values around respect for authority and consensus-building may influence how students demonstrate critical thinking abilities. The relationship between critical thinking instruction and student outcomes has been extensively researched, with mixed results that reflect the complexity of fostering higher-order thinking skills. Research suggests that explicit instruction in critical thinking skills produces moderate positive effects on student achievement, particularly when combined with discipline-specific applications and active learning strategies. However, the implementation of critical thinking instruction varies significantly across educational contexts. Research emphasizes that critical thinking cannot be taught as a set of generic skills separate from content knowledge but must be integrated within disciplinary frameworks that provide meaningful contexts for analytical practice. This perspective challenges approaches that treat critical thinking as a standalone subject or skill set. Cultural considerations further complicate pedagogical approaches to critical thinking instruction. In developing country contexts, additional challenges include limited training for educators, resource constraints, and assessment systems that prioritize content reproduction over analytical engagement. Limited research specifically addresses critical thinking within Pakistani higher education contexts. Available studies (Kausar et al., 2025) primarily document challenges rather than exploring student experiences in depth. Most research focuses on measuring critical thinking abilities rather than understanding the lived experiences of students within their specific cultural and institutional contexts. Kausar et al. (2025) conducted a qualitative study of Pakistani university students' perspectives on critical thinking skills development in higher education. Their research found that students struggle with understanding and applying critical thinking, often lacking guidance on developing these skills effectively. However, this study focused primarily on documenting challenges rather than exploring the deeper contextual factors that shape students' approaches to critical thinking. The broader Pakistani educational context research emphasizes the role of cultural values in shaping educational practices. Studies highlight how traditional respect for authority, family-centered decision making, and collectivist values influence students' approaches to academic inquiry. Research on assessment systems in Pakistani higher education reveals the prevalence of content-based examinations that emphasize memorization over analysis, creating barriers to critical thinking development. This study addresses these gaps by providing in-depth exploration of how Pakistani undergraduate students experience critical thinking development, revealing both barriers and possibilities within their particular context. By focusing on lived experiences rather than skill measurement, we gain insights into how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact to influence critical thinking development. Research Questions Secondary Research Questions: What contextual factors constrain critical thinking expression in Pakistani universities? What factors enable or support critical thinking development despite constraints? How do students navigate between conformity pressures and critical engagement opportunities? Methodology Research Design and Philosophical Foundation This study employed a phenomenological design informed by constructivist philosophical assumptions. Phenomenology, as described by van Manen (2023), focuses on understanding the essence of lived experiences as they are experienced by individuals. This approach was selected because critical thinking development involves complex, subjective experiences that cannot be fully understood through quantitative measures alone. The constructivist paradigm posits that knowledge is constructed through individual experiences and social interactions (Merriam, 2009). This framework acknowledges that students' experiences with critical thinking are shaped by their cultural backgrounds, institutional contexts, and personal circumstances. Rather than seeking objective measurements of critical thinking skills, this study explores how students make sense of their experiences within their particular context. Setting and Participants The study was conducted at a public university in Pakistan, Sukkur IBA University, serving students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. The Education Departments offer four-year Bachelor of Education (Honors) programs, attracting students from across Pakistan, many of whom receive scholarships. Purposive sampling was employed to select 15 final-year Education students who demonstrated characteristics relevant to the research question. Selection criteria included: Inclusion criteria: The selection of participants for this study adhered to a purposive sampling approach, guided by specific inclusion criteria designed to ensure both relevance and richness of data. Participants were drawn exclusively from final-year students enrolled in the Education Department, as their advanced standing within the programme positioned them to offer mature and substantive reflections on their academic experiences. This particular cohort was deemed suitable given their accumulated exposure to pedagogical theories and institutional practices over the course of their studies. Academic performance served as an additional criterion. Specifically, participants were required to maintain a minimum Cumulative Grade Point Average of 3.5, which served as a reasonable indicator of sustained academic engagement and intellectual commitment. Beyond quantitative metrics, however, the study also valued communicative competence. Prospective participants needed to demonstrate a clear ability to articulate their thoughts coherently, a quality assessed through informal preliminary interactions prior to formal recruitment. Furthermore, willingness to engage in semi-structured interviews was essential. Participation was entirely voluntary, and only those who expressed genuine readiness to share their perspectives were included. Lastly, participants were required to possess sufficient proficiency in the English and Urdu language to engage meaningfully in interview conversations, ensuring that linguistic barriers would not compromise the depth or clarity of the data collected. Exclusion criteria: Alongside the inclusion parameters, certain exclusion criteria were established to maintain the integrity and focus of the research. Students who had previously received formal training in critical thinking were deliberately excluded from participation. This decision was grounded in the rationale that such prior exposure could potentially influence or confound their natural perspectives, thereby introducing bias into the findings and compromising the authenticity of responses that the study sought to capture. Additionally, students with less than one full semester remaining in their academic programme were not considered eligible for inclusion. The reasoning here was twofold. On one hand, such students might possess limited ongoing engagement with the institutional environment. On the other, their transitional status could affect the depth and consistency of their reflections, as their attention might already be directed toward post-graduation pursuits rather than current academic experiences. Language proficiency also constituted a determining factor in the exclusion process. Students who lacked fluency in either English or Urdu were not included in the study. Given that the interviews were conducted in these two languages, participants needed to possess adequate linguistic competence in at least one of them. This criterion was necessary to ensure that participants could express their thoughts with sufficient nuance and clarity, thereby safeguarding the quality and interpretive validity of the data gathered throughout the interview process. Participant Demographics: The final sample comprised fifteen participants, consisting of eight females and seven males, with ages ranging between twenty-one and twenty-three years. Their academic standing reflected consistent performance, with Cumulative Grade Point Averages falling within the range of 3.5 to 3.9. Importantly, the sample achieved geographical diversity, as participants represented all four provinces of Pakistan, thereby enhancing the potential for varied perspectives and experiences. In terms of financial background, nine participants were scholarship recipients while the remaining six were self-funded students. This distribution ensured representation across diverse socioeconomic strata, which enriched the data by capturing viewpoints shaped by differing material circumstances and life experiences. Data Collection Procedures Semi-structured Interviews: Each participant was interviewed twice over a four-week period. Initial interviews lasted 45-60 minutes, while follow-up interviews were 30-45 minutes. All interviews were conducted in English, with Urdu clarification when needed, in private spaces within the university to ensure confidentiality. Interview Guide: Interviews explored participants' experiences with critical thinking in their academic environment. Sample questions included: "Can you describe a situation where you wanted to question something in class but didn't? What prevented you?" "How do your family and friends influence your academic thinking and decision-making?" "What role does assessment play in how you approach learning?" "Can you share an experience where you felt comfortable expressing critical perspectives?" "What barriers do you face when trying to think deeply about academic content?" Data Management: All interviews were audio-recorded with informed consent and transcribed verbatim within 48 hours. Transcripts were shared with participants for member checking within one week of each interview. Participant identities were protected through pseudonym assignment, and all data were stored securely with restricted access. Critical Thinking Operationalization For this study, critical thinking was operationalized based on Facione's (1990) framework, specifically focusing on: Analysis: Ability to identify relationships and patterns in information Evaluation: Assessment of credibility and logical strength of arguments Inference: Drawing logical conclusions from evidence Explanation: Articulating reasoning clearly and systematically Self-regulation: Monitoring and evaluating one's own thinking processes Researcher Positionality The researcher approached this study with both insider knowledge and potential biases. Familiarity with the Pakistani educational system informed understanding of institutional contexts but may have influenced data interpretation. Reflexivity Procedures: To ensure methodological rigor and transparency, several reflexive strategies were employed throughout the research process. A reflexive journal was maintained consistently, serving as a space to document personal assumptions, evolving interpretations, and potential biases that might have influenced the analytical process. This practice encouraged ongoing self-awareness and critical examination of the researcher's positionality. Also, peer debriefing sessions were conducted with colleagues who were not directly involved in the study. These discussions provided valuable opportunities to challenge emerging interpretations and consider alternative explanations. Additionally, member checking was carried out with all participants to validate the accuracy and resonance of the themes identified during analysis. The researcher also remained attentive to cultural assumptions that could have shaped understanding, given the diverse backgrounds of participants. Furthermore, disconfirming evidence was actively sought during the analytical phase. This deliberate effort aimed to counteract confirmation bias and ensure that findings reflected the complexity and nuance inherent in participants' experiences rather than preconceived notions held by the researcher. Data Analysis Thematic Analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006): Phase 1: Familiarization Repeated reading of all transcripts to develop overall familiarity Initial note-taking and reflection on potential meanings Phase 2: Initial Coding Systematic coding of features across the entire dataset Generated 47 preliminary codes through line-by-line analysis Phase 3: Generating Themes Collated codes into potential themes Developed 12 preliminary categories through iterative analysis Phase 4: Reviewing Themes Refined and developed themes by checking against coded extracts and entire dataset Created thematic maps showing relationships between themes Phase 5: Defining and Naming Themes Clear definition and naming of final eight themes Developed analytical narratives for each theme Phase 6: Report Writing Selected vivid examples from participant quotes Constructed analytical narrative integrating themes with literature Trustworthiness Strategies: Triangulation: Multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and document analysis Member checking: All participants reviewed themes and interpretations Peer debriefing: Regular consultation with academic colleagues not involved in research Reflexive journaling: Ongoing documentation of researcher assumptions and decisions Audit trail: Detailed documentation of analytical decisions and theme development Findings Eight interconnected themes emerged from the analysis, revealing how students navigate complex constraints and possibilities while attempting to develop critical thinking. These themes are presented with rich description and interpretive analysis, highlighting both barriers and enabling factors within the Pakistani higher education context. Theme 1: Navigating Authority Relations Students experienced significant tensions between respect for authority—valued in Pakistani culture—and the questioning essential for critical thinking. One participant shared: "I become more attentive while presenting any critical opinion in class because I fear of clash with teacher on any belief about religion or affiliation of political party on the basis of which blasphemy case can be invoked." This fear reflects broader cultural concerns about religious and political sensitivities while highlighting institutional power dynamics. The participant's hypervigilance demonstrates how authority relations create self-censorship that prevents critical engagement. Another participant explained: "Parental pressure plays a significant role in our thinking process because society has developed several trends and patterns that need to be followed." However, students also identified enabling factors within authority relations. Some participants described supportive mentors who encouraged questioning: "One professor always asks us 'Why do you think this?' instead of just accepting textbook answers." This suggests that while cultural respect for authority can create barriers, supportive educator relationships can facilitate critical thinking development. Theme 2: Peer Dynamics and Intellectual Risk-Taking The social consequences of critical expression emerged as a significant theme. Participants described experiencing ridicule for analytical contributions: "I do not talk in class or provide any opinion based on analysis and consideration of multiple perspectives because my friends taunted me then as 'Bary aay philosopher' means oh you the great philosopher." This peer pressure creates environments where intellectual risk-taking is punished rather than rewarded. Students learn to conform to group expectations rather than express divergent thinking. One participant noted: "I believe that if I am supported emotionally and provided other students' support, I can enhance my critical thinking skills." Yet participants also described supportive peer relationships that encouraged critical thinking: "My study group always challenges each other's assumptions and we learn from these discussions." This demonstrates that peer influence can be either constraining or enabling depending on group dynamics. Theme 3: Institutional Constraints and Flexibility University policies and practices significantly shaped students' approaches to learning. Rigid attendance policies and grade-focused assessment systems created pressures toward conformity: "There are different rules and regulations of our university according to that we align our ways of thinking and behaving." These institutional constraints often prioritized compliance over critical engagement. One participant explained: "To maintain my scholarship, I avoid thinking critically and just follow what the teacher asks because I don't want any biasness from the side of teacher towards me." However, some institutional practices supported critical thinking development. Another participant noted: "The library provides access to international journals and our teachers encourage us to read beyond textbooks." This suggests that while many institutional practices create barriers, targeted interventions can facilitate critical thinking. Theme 4: Resource Access and Information Literacy Participants struggled with accessing diverse, credible sources of information: "I do not get different local or international resources easily through which I can search for credible and reliable information." This limitation constrained their ability to engage with multiple perspectives essential for critical thinking. The digital divide and institutional resource limitations created information deserts where students lacked access to diverse viewpoints. However, participants who successfully navigated these challenges described the benefits: "When I found reliable online databases, my thinking became much more analytical." Theme 5: Empathetic Sensitivity and Expression Cultural emphasis on harmony and respect for others created tensions for critical expression. One participant shared: "Teachers and students have certain beliefs about an idea, but it is difficult for me to openly express my critical views about others' beliefs and perspectives, as I think it will hurt the feelings of my friends and teachers." This empathetic sensitivity, while culturally valued, can inhibit the challenging questions essential for critical thinking. Students must navigate between respecting others' perspectives and engaging in analytical critique. Theme 6: Time and Energy Constraints The cognitive demands of critical thinking require significant time and mental energy. Participants described competing pressures: "It takes time and energy to think and reflect upon various aspects of any topic." Course loads, part-time employment, and family responsibilities created time pressures that prioritized surface learning. One participant noted: "It is a time-consuming process; therefore, I think to not follow any critical thinking skills and follow a specific pattern or opinion to make a decision without considering much widespread viewpoints." This reveals how time constraints can lead to intellectual shortcuts that undermine critical thinking. Theme 7: Financial Pressures and Survival Strategies For scholarship-dependent students, academic success meant financial security, creating pressures toward grade-focused rather than learning-focused approaches: "My scholarship is more important for me than other things because I cannot afford the financial burden of my higher education." These financial pressures created risk-averse academic strategies prioritizing safe, conventional responses over innovative thinking. However, some participants described how financial constraints motivated deeper engagement: "Because I can't afford to fail, I have to really understand concepts, not just memorize them." Theme 8: Technological Double-Edged Effects Digital technologies presented both opportunities and challenges for critical thinking. While providing access to vast information resources, they also created distractions and promoted surface-level engagement: "We want to reach conclusions that are available at one click; thus, we don't want to involve in long processes such as analysis, multiple sources of information, and connecting dots to reach an authentic decision." However, participants also described how technology facilitated critical thinking when used purposefully: "Online discussion forums let me engage with ideas from students worldwide." This demonstrates that technology's impact depends on how it's used rather than its inherent properties. Discussion Theoretical Implications The findings extend existing critical thinking literature by revealing how cultural, institutional, and individual factors interact to constrain or enable critical thinking development within specific contexts. The eight identified themes demonstrate that critical thinking development cannot be understood simply as individual cognitive skill acquisition, but rather as a complex process influenced by social, cultural, and institutional factors. These finding challenges deficit-based approaches that view critical thinking challenges as inherent student limitations rather than systemic barriers requiring institutional response. The theme of authority navigation particularly resonates with cross-cultural critical thinking research and extends theoretical understanding of how cultural values shape cognitive practices. Danvers ( 2023 ) notes that Western critical thinking frameworks often assume comfort with challenging established authority, which may not translate to collectivist cultures. Our findings support this observation while revealing how supportive relationships with educators can facilitate critical thinking even within authority-respecting cultures. This suggests that the relationship between cultural respect for authority and critical thinking development is more nuanced than previously understood, with the nature of authority relationships being more influential than authority respect itself. The financial pressure theme extends Moeti et al.'s (2016) research by revealing how socioeconomic constraints create fundamentally different approaches to academic engagement. Our findings suggest that for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, critical thinking may be a luxury they cannot afford when basic survival needs take precedence, revealing how educational equity issues intersect with critical thinking development. The peer dynamics theme contributes to understanding how social environments shape intellectual risk-taking behaviors, revealing how peer relationships specifically impact willingness to engage in critical analysis. The concept of "intellectual risk-taking" represents a significant theoretical contribution to understanding critical thinking development in social contexts. The empathetic sensitivity theme extends research on emotional intelligence by revealing how cultural values around harmony and respect can both facilitate and inhibit critical thinking development. This finding suggests that context and implementation determine whether cultural values enable or constrain analytical engagement. Furthermore, our findings contribute to broader theoretical debates about the universality of critical thinking frameworks. The participants' experiences suggest that critical thinking development occurs within specific cultural logics rather than abstract cognitive spaces, challenging universalist approaches that assume critical thinking skills transfer across contexts without cultural adaptation. Comparison with International Research While our findings align with international research on critical thinking barriers, they also reveal uniquely Pakistani contextual factors that extend understanding of how cultural, political, and institutional contexts shape critical thinking development. This comparative analysis reveals both universal patterns and context-specific variations that contribute to broader theoretical understanding. Like Indah and Kusuma's (2016) Indonesian study, our participants described social pressure as a significant barrier to critical thinking expression. However, the specific nature of these pressures in the Pakistani context—religious sensitivities, political affiliations, family expectations, and concerns about blasphemy accusations—reflect Pakistani cultural and political particularities that differ significantly from Indonesian or other Southeast Asian contexts. The peer dynamics theme shows both similarities and differences with international research. While bullying of intellectual peers occurs globally (Leach, 2011 ), the specific labeling as "philosopher" and the collective nature of peer pressure reflect local cultural expressions of intellectual intimidation. In contrast to individual bullying documented in Western contexts, our findings suggest more collective forms of social pressure where entire peer groups discourage critical expression. Our findings about authority navigation align with research in other collectivist cultures but reveal unique Pakistani dimensions. The participants' concerns about blasphemy accusations and political affiliations reflect a unique intersection of religious sensitivities and political instability that creates distinct barriers to critical expression. The financial pressure theme extends research on socioeconomic factors in critical thinking development. Our findings reveal how scholarship dependence creates specific forms of academic risk-aversion that prioritize safe, conventional responses over innovative thinking. Resource access challenges align with broader digital divide research but reveal context-specific constraints related to internet restrictions and limited database access. The technological theme reveals an interesting paradox consistent with broader digital natives research but with distinct Pakistani characteristics. While technology provides unprecedented access to information, it also promotes surface-level engagement (Rodzalan & Saat, 2015 ). However, our findings suggest that purposeful technology use can facilitate rather than hinder critical thinking, but this depends on access to appropriate tools and guidance. Practical Implications for Pakistani Higher Education The findings point to systemic issues requiring comprehensive institutional reform that addresses cultural, pedagogical, and structural dimensions of critical thinking development. The recommendations below target multiple stakeholder groups and systemic levels to create supportive environments for critical thinking development. Institutional Policy Reform Universities must audit policies that discourage critical thinking expression. Rigid attendance requirements should be replaced with flexible policies recognizing students' diverse circumstances. Assessment systems need restructuring to include analytical components rather than content reproduction alone. Universities should establish Critical Thinking Centers providing workshops and resources for culturally-responsive critical thinking pedagogies. Pedagogical Transformation for Educators Educator preparation programs must address the specific challenges of fostering critical thinking within Pakistani cultural contexts through comprehensive curriculum reform. Professional development programs should emphasize culturally-responsive pedagogy that honors local values while promoting analytical capabilities. Faculty development initiatives should focus on creating safe spaces for intellectual risk-taking, developing assessment strategies that reward analytical thinking, and building supportive mentor relationships that encourage questioning within respectful frameworks. Student Support Systems Enhancement Support systems for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds require particular attention. Scholarship programs should be redesigned to include support for deep learning approaches rather than merely grade achievement. Study skills programs should teach time management strategies that prioritize critical thinking within limited time constraints. Technology Integration Strategies Universities should implement strategic technology integration that maximizes benefits while minimizing distractions. This includes providing access to international databases, training in digital literacy, and creating moderated discussion forums exposing students to diverse perspectives. Policy Recommendations Higher education regulatory bodies should mandate critical thinking components in curriculum standards, creating system-wide incentives for institutional priority. Universities should establish research and evaluation programs to monitor the effectiveness of critical thinking initiatives using culturally-responsive assessment instruments. A Culturally-Responsive Framework for Critical Thinking Development Based on the findings, we propose a framework that acknowledges Pakistani cultural values while fostering critical thinking: Limitations and Future Research This study's phenomenological approach provides rich understanding of student experiences but involves several methodological limitations that should inform future research directions. The sample size of 15 participants, while appropriate for phenomenological research, limits the generalizability of findings across broader Pakistani higher education contexts. Additionally, the focus on Education students at public universities may not represent the experiences of students in private institutions, different academic disciplines, or other South Asian countries. The phenomenological approach, while valuable for understanding lived experiences, cannot establish causal relationships or assess the relative importance of different factors in critical thinking development. The cross-sectional design captures participants' experiences at a specific point in time but cannot track how these experiences evolve throughout students' academic careers. Future research employing quantitative methods could assess the prevalence of identified barriers across larger populations using culturally-adapted instruments. Longitudinal research could track critical thinking development from entry to graduation, identifying critical intervention periods. Comparative cross-cultural studies across South Asian contexts would help distinguish universal patterns from context-specific factors. Intervention research examining the effectiveness of culturally-responsive pedagogical strategies and policy changes would be particularly valuable for informing practice. Such studies could focus on specific strategies designed for Pakistani cultural contexts, institutional policy modifications, and faculty development initiatives. The findings provide a foundation for these future research directions by identifying key factors that shape critical thinking development in Pakistani higher education contexts. The phenomenological insights reveal the complexity of these experiences and highlight the need for multifaceted approaches addressing cultural, institutional, and individual dimensions. Conclusion This phenomenological investigation reveals that undergraduate students in Pakistani higher education navigate complex constraints and possibilities in developing critical thinking. The eight identified themes demonstrate that critical thinking development is not merely an individual cognitive process, but a socially embedded practice influenced by cultural values, institutional practices, and economic circumstances. The findings challenge deficit-based approaches that view students from particular cultural backgrounds as inherently lacking critical thinking capabilities. Instead, they reveal how contextual factors create barriers that can be addressed through thoughtful institutional and pedagogical interventions. Students possess the capacity for critical thinking but require supportive environments that honor their cultural values while encouraging analytical engagement. For Pakistani higher education institutions, the implications are clear: fostering critical thinking requires systematic attention to institutional policies, educator preparation, and student support systems. Rather than viewing cultural factors as obstacles to overcome, institutions should leverage students' strengths while addressing specific barriers through targeted interventions. The study contributes to international critical thinking literature by demonstrating the importance of contextual understanding in educational research. Critical thinking development cannot be understood through universal frameworks alone but requires attention to how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact within specific educational contexts. Ultimately, this research suggests that with appropriate institutional support and cultural sensitivity, students in Pakistani higher education can develop the critical thinking skills essential for academic success and professional readiness in an increasingly complex global environment. The challenge lies not in student capabilities but in creating educational environments that support and nurture these abilities within their particular cultural and institutional contexts. Declarations Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Ethics Statement: This research was approved by the institutional ethics committee. All participants provided informed consent, and their identities have been protected through pseudonym assignment. Data Availability: Data can be shared upon reasonable request, subject to ethical considerations and participant consent. Funding: This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors. Acknowledgments: The author acknowledges the participants who shared their experiences and the universities that facilitated this research. References Bailin S, Case R, Coombs JR, Daniels LB (1999) Conceptualizing critical thinking. J Curriculum Stud 31(3):285–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183133 Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Danvers E (2023) Prevent/Ing critical thinking? The pedagogical impacts of Prevent in UK higher education. Teach High Educ 28(6):1264–1279. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1872533 Davies M (2015) A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. In: Paulsen M (ed) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2 Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. American Philosophical Association Kausar H, Ajmal F, ANALYZING VALUES AND PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS IN PRE-SERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION OF PAKISTAN WITH REFERENCE TO THE TEACHER EDUCATION MODEL FOR THE 21 st CENTURY Rusmin L, Misrahayu Y, Pongpalilu F, Radiansyah, Radiansyah, Dwiyanto D (2024) Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills in the 21st Century. Join: Journal of Social Science. 1. 144–162. 10.59613/svhy3576 Indah RN, Kusuma AW (2016) Factors affecting the development of critical thinking of Indonesian learners of English language. J Humanit Social Sci 21(6):86–94 King PM, Kitchener KS (1994) Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and Jossey-Bass Social and Behavioral Science Series. Jossey-Bass. 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104 – 1310 Leach BT (2011) Critical thinking skills as related to university students' gender and academic discipline (Doctoral dissertation, East Tennessee State University) Merriam SB, Tisdell EJ (2009) A guide to design and implementation. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, 24, 39–54 Moeti B (2016) Critical thinking among post-graduate diploma in education students in higher education: reality or fuss? Journal of Education and Learning Saleh S (2018) Critical Thinking as a 21-Century Skill. Conceptions, Implementation and Challenges in the EFL Classroom Paul R, Elder L (2019) The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Rowman & Littlefield Fahim M, Ahmadian M (2012) Critical Thinking and Iranian EFL Context. J Lang Teach Res 3. 10.4304/jltr.3.4.793-800 Rodzalan SA, Saat MM (2015) The perception of critical thinking and problem solving skill among Malaysian undergraduate students. Procedia-Social Behav Sci 172:725–732 Davies M (2013) Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. High Educ Res Dev 32:529–544. 10.1080/07294360.2012.697878 Syed N (2021) Women in Pakistan: Status in Socio-Cultural and Politico-Legal Domains Van Manen M (2023) Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8827490","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":588073294,"identity":"a3c25017-7ba6-4a17-b1dc-84210c515368","order_by":0,"name":"Muhammad Irfan","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0009-0007-2462-2129","institution":"Marmara University, Istanbul","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Muhammad","middleName":"","lastName":"Irfan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-02-09 08:07:45","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":true,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":true,"humanSubjectConsent":true,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":102311747,"identity":"e4a7f637-52de-457e-ad2a-ed1eeb8c388e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-10 11:58:57","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":893679,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8827490/v1/07fcb89b-98d2-4506-adf2-9392f26db5f6.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eExploring Critical Thinking Development Among University Students in Pakistan: A Phenomenological Study\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eCritical thinking stands as a cornerstone of contemporary higher education, widely recognized as essential for graduate success across academic and professional domains (Rusmin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Defined as the systematic ability to analyze information, evaluate its credibility, and construct well-reasoned responses (Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), critical thinking encompasses cognitive processes including analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation (Facione, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). These competencies are increasingly valued in rapidly evolving global environments where graduates must navigate complex social, technological, and economic challenges (Salama, 2018).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite its acknowledged importance, critical thinking development faces unique challenges within Pakistani higher education contexts. Pakistan's educational system, characterized by traditional pedagogical approaches and assessment methods emphasizing memorization over analysis, creates tensions between established practices and the cognitive demands of critical thinking (Kausar et al., 2025). Research indicates that many Pakistani students struggle with understanding and applying critical thinking, often lacking guidance on developing these skills effectively (Kausar et al., 2025). Additionally, educators frequently feel unprepared to teach critical thinking due to inadequate training and resources, perpetuating cycles of rote learning and surface-level engagement.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eCritical Thinking in Pakistani Higher Education Context\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePakistan's higher education system operates within distinctive cultural, social, and institutional frameworks that shape how critical thinking is understood and practiced. With over 241.49\u0026nbsp;million inhabitants and a literacy rate of 60% (60% urban vs. 51% rural) (Tabassum, 2021), Pakistan's educational landscape reflects broader societal values emphasizing respect for authority, conformity to established norms, and collective harmony. These cultural orientations, while valuable in many contexts, can create tensions with questioning, challenging, and independent thinking essential for critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe institutional environment at Pakistani universities, particularly public sector institutions, often reflects bureaucratic structures emphasizing rule-following, standardized procedures, and hierarchical relationships. Universities like Sukkur IBA University exemplify these characteristics while also attempting to innovate within traditional frameworks. The universities offer four-year Bachelor of Education (Honors) programs, serving students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, many of whom depend on scholarships for educational access.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, assessment systems in Pakistani higher education predominantly focus on content reproduction rather than analytical thinking. Grade Point Average (GPA) maintenance becomes crucial for scholarship retention and future opportunities, creating pressures that prioritize surface learning over deep engagement with ideas (Rusmin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This educational context requires nuanced understanding of how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact to influence critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eResearch Gap and Significance\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhile international research has extensively examined critical thinking development, limited attention has been paid to the specific experiences of students in South Asian contexts, particularly Pakistan. Existing studies often focus on measuring critical thinking skills rather than understanding the lived experiences of students navigating these challenges within their particular cultural and institutional environments. This study addresses this gap by centering student voices and experiences, revealing how they make sense of barriers and possibilities within their specific context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLiterature Review\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCritical thinking remains a concept with multiple, sometimes conflicting definitions in educational literature. The American Philosophical Association's Delphi Report (Facione, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e) identified core components including analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation. However, other scholars emphasize different aspects, with King and Kitchener (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e) focusing on reflective judgment and Bailin et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) highlighting the normative dimension of \"excellent thinking.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis definitional diversity reflects the complexity of critical thinking as both a cognitive process and a disposition toward reasoned inquiry. For this study, we adopt a comprehensive definition that encompasses both skill-based and dispositional elements: critical thinking as the systematic application of analysis, evaluation, and reasoning to assess information and construct well-reasoned conclusions within specific contexts (Davies, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Paul \u0026amp; Elder, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInternational research consistently demonstrates the value of critical thinking for academic and professional success. Studies by Rusmin et al. (2022) and Davies (2023) highlight critical thinking as essential for navigating complex contemporary challenges. However, research also reveals persistent barriers to critical thinking development across diverse educational contexts. Cultural factors significantly influence how critical thinking is understood and practiced. Danvers (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) notes that critical thinking frameworks often reflect Western philosophical traditions that may not translate directly to non-Western contexts. Students from collectivist cultures may experience tensions between individual critical analysis and group harmony, while those from authority-respecting cultures may struggle with questioning established knowledge and perspectives. Institutional factors also play crucial roles. Research by Moeti et al. (2017) demonstrates that students often prioritize grade achievement over deep learning when assessment systems reward surface approaches. Similarly, Fahim et al. (2014) emphasize that educators must themselves possess strong critical thinking skills to effectively foster these abilities in students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe assessment of critical thinking skills has evolved significantly over the past three decades, with various instruments developed to measure different dimensions of this complex construct. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) remain among the most widely used standardized assessments (Facione, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e). These instruments measure both cognitive skills and dispositions toward critical thinking, providing quantitative data on students' abilities in analysis, evaluation, inference, and reasoning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore recent assessment tools emphasize real-world problem-solving scenarios rather than abstract reasoning tasks, reflecting growing recognition that critical thinking should be assessed within meaningful contexts rather than isolated cognitive exercises. However, critics argue that standardized assessments may not capture the full complexity of critical thinking, particularly its cultural dimensions and dispositional aspects. The challenge of assessing critical thinking becomes particularly complex in multicultural contexts where the definition of \"excellent thinking\" may vary across cultures. Cultural values around respect for authority and consensus-building may influence how students demonstrate critical thinking abilities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe relationship between critical thinking instruction and student outcomes has been extensively researched, with mixed results that reflect the complexity of fostering higher-order thinking skills. Research suggests that explicit instruction in critical thinking skills produces moderate positive effects on student achievement, particularly when combined with discipline-specific applications and active learning strategies. However, the implementation of critical thinking instruction varies significantly across educational contexts. Research emphasizes that critical thinking cannot be taught as a set of generic skills separate from content knowledge but must be integrated within disciplinary frameworks that provide meaningful contexts for analytical practice. This perspective challenges approaches that treat critical thinking as a standalone subject or skill set.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCultural considerations further complicate pedagogical approaches to critical thinking instruction. In developing country contexts, additional challenges include limited training for educators, resource constraints, and assessment systems that prioritize content reproduction over analytical engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLimited research specifically addresses critical thinking within Pakistani higher education contexts. Available studies (Kausar et al., 2025) primarily document challenges rather than exploring student experiences in depth. Most research focuses on measuring critical thinking abilities rather than understanding the lived experiences of students within their specific cultural and institutional contexts. Kausar et al. (2025) conducted a qualitative study of Pakistani university students' perspectives on critical thinking skills development in higher education. Their research found that students struggle with understanding and applying critical thinking, often lacking guidance on developing these skills effectively. However, this study focused primarily on documenting challenges rather than exploring the deeper contextual factors that shape students' approaches to critical thinking. The broader Pakistani educational context research emphasizes the role of cultural values in shaping educational practices. Studies highlight how traditional respect for authority, family-centered decision making, and collectivist values influence students' approaches to academic inquiry. Research on assessment systems in Pakistani higher education reveals the prevalence of content-based examinations that emphasize memorization over analysis, creating barriers to critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study addresses these gaps by providing in-depth exploration of how Pakistani undergraduate students experience critical thinking development, revealing both barriers and possibilities within their particular context. By focusing on lived experiences rather than skill measurement, we gain insights into how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact to influence critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eResearch Questions\u003c/h3\u003e\n\n\u003ch3\u003eSecondary Research Questions:\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat contextual factors constrain critical thinking expression in Pakistani universities?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhat factors enable or support critical thinking development despite constraints?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHow do students navigate between conformity pressures and critical engagement opportunities?\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eResearch Design and Philosophical Foundation\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study employed a phenomenological design informed by constructivist philosophical assumptions. Phenomenology, as described by van Manen (2023), focuses on understanding the essence of lived experiences as they are experienced by individuals. This approach was selected because critical thinking development involves complex, subjective experiences that cannot be fully understood through quantitative measures alone.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe constructivist paradigm posits that knowledge is constructed through individual experiences and social interactions (Merriam, 2009). This framework acknowledges that students\u0026apos; experiences with critical thinking are shaped by their cultural backgrounds, institutional contexts, and personal circumstances. Rather than seeking objective measurements of critical thinking skills, this study explores how students make sense of their experiences within their particular context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSetting and Participants\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted at a public university in Pakistan, Sukkur IBA University, serving students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds. The Education Departments offer four-year Bachelor of Education (Honors) programs, attracting students from across Pakistan, many of whom receive scholarships. Purposive sampling was employed to select 15 final-year Education students who demonstrated characteristics relevant to the research question. Selection criteria included:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eInclusion criteria:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe selection of participants for this study adhered to a purposive sampling approach, guided by specific inclusion criteria designed to ensure both relevance and richness of data. Participants were drawn exclusively from final-year students enrolled in the Education Department, as their advanced standing within the programme positioned them to offer mature and substantive reflections on their academic experiences. This particular cohort was deemed suitable given their accumulated exposure to pedagogical theories and institutional practices over the course of their studies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAcademic performance served as an additional criterion. Specifically, participants were required to maintain a minimum Cumulative Grade Point Average of 3.5, which served as a reasonable indicator of sustained academic engagement and intellectual commitment. Beyond quantitative metrics, however, the study also valued communicative competence. Prospective participants needed to demonstrate a clear ability to articulate their thoughts coherently, a quality assessed through informal preliminary interactions prior to formal recruitment. Furthermore, willingness to engage in semi-structured interviews was essential. Participation was entirely voluntary, and only those who expressed genuine readiness to share their perspectives were included. Lastly, participants were required to possess sufficient proficiency in the English and Urdu language to engage meaningfully in interview conversations, ensuring that linguistic barriers would not compromise the depth or clarity of the data collected.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eExclusion criteria:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlongside the inclusion parameters, certain exclusion criteria were established to maintain the integrity and focus of the research. Students who had previously received formal training in critical thinking were deliberately excluded from participation. This decision was grounded in the rationale that such prior exposure could potentially influence or confound their natural perspectives, thereby introducing bias into the findings and compromising the authenticity of responses that the study sought to capture. Additionally, students with less than one full semester remaining in their academic programme were not considered eligible for inclusion. The reasoning here was twofold. On one hand, such students might possess limited ongoing engagement with the institutional environment. On the other, their transitional status could affect the depth and consistency of their reflections, as their attention might already be directed toward post-graduation pursuits rather than current academic experiences.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLanguage proficiency also constituted a determining factor in the exclusion process. Students who lacked fluency in either English or Urdu were not included in the study. Given that the interviews were conducted in these two languages, participants needed to possess adequate linguistic competence in at least one of them. This criterion was necessary to ensure that participants could express their thoughts with sufficient nuance and clarity, thereby safeguarding the quality and interpretive validity of the data gathered throughout the interview process.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eParticipant Demographics:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe final sample comprised fifteen participants, consisting of eight females and seven males, with ages ranging between twenty-one and twenty-three years. Their academic standing reflected consistent performance, with Cumulative Grade Point Averages falling within the range of 3.5 to 3.9. Importantly, the sample achieved geographical diversity, as participants represented all four provinces of Pakistan, thereby enhancing the potential for varied perspectives and experiences.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn terms of financial background, nine participants were scholarship recipients while the remaining six were self-funded students. This distribution ensured representation across diverse socioeconomic strata, which enriched the data by capturing viewpoints shaped by differing material circumstances and life experiences.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Collection Procedures\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSemi-structured Interviews:\u003c/em\u003e Each participant was interviewed twice over a four-week period. Initial interviews lasted 45-60 minutes, while follow-up interviews were 30-45 minutes. All interviews were conducted in English, with Urdu clarification when needed, in private spaces within the university to ensure confidentiality.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInterview Guide:\u003c/em\u003e Interviews explored participants\u0026apos; experiences with critical thinking in their academic environment. Sample questions included:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026quot;Can you describe a situation where you wanted to question something in class but didn\u0026apos;t? What prevented you?\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026quot;How do your family and friends influence your academic thinking and decision-making?\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026quot;What role does assessment play in how you approach learning?\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026quot;Can you share an experience where you felt comfortable expressing critical perspectives?\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026quot;What barriers do you face when trying to think deeply about academic content?\u0026quot;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Management:\u003c/em\u003e All interviews were audio-recorded with informed consent and transcribed verbatim within 48 hours. Transcripts were shared with participants for member checking within one week of each interview. Participant identities were protected through pseudonym assignment, and all data were stored securely with restricted access.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCritical Thinking Operationalization\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor this study, critical thinking was operationalized based on Facione\u0026apos;s (1990) framework, specifically focusing on:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAnalysis:\u003c/em\u003e Ability to identify relationships and patterns in information\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEvaluation:\u003c/em\u003e Assessment of credibility and logical strength of arguments\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eInference:\u003c/em\u003e Drawing logical conclusions from evidence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eExplanation:\u003c/em\u003e Articulating reasoning clearly and systematically\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSelf-regulation:\u003c/em\u003e Monitoring and evaluating one\u0026apos;s own thinking processes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eResearcher Positionality\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe researcher approached this study with both insider knowledge and potential biases. Familiarity with the Pakistani educational system informed understanding of institutional contexts but may have influenced data interpretation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eReflexivity Procedures:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo ensure methodological rigor and transparency, several reflexive strategies were employed throughout the research process. A reflexive journal was maintained consistently, serving as a space to document personal assumptions, evolving interpretations, and potential biases that might have influenced the analytical process. This practice encouraged ongoing self-awareness and critical examination of the researcher\u0026apos;s positionality. Also, peer debriefing sessions were conducted with colleagues who were not directly involved in the study. These discussions provided valuable opportunities to challenge emerging interpretations and consider alternative explanations. Additionally, member checking was carried out with all participants to validate the accuracy and resonance of the themes identified during analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe researcher also remained attentive to cultural assumptions that could have shaped understanding, given the diverse backgrounds of participants. Furthermore, disconfirming evidence was actively sought during the analytical phase. This deliberate effort aimed to counteract confirmation bias and ensure that findings reflected the complexity and nuance inherent in participants\u0026apos; experiences rather than preconceived notions held by the researcher.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Analysis\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThematic Analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006):\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 1: Familiarization\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRepeated reading of all transcripts to develop overall familiarity\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInitial note-taking and reflection on potential meanings\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 2: Initial Coding\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSystematic coding of features across the entire dataset\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGenerated 47 preliminary codes through line-by-line analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 3: Generating Themes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCollated codes into potential themes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDeveloped 12 preliminary categories through iterative analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 4: Reviewing Themes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRefined and developed themes by checking against coded extracts and entire dataset\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCreated thematic maps showing relationships between themes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 5: Defining and Naming Themes\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClear definition and naming of final eight themes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDeveloped analytical narratives for each theme\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePhase 6: Report Writing\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSelected vivid examples from participant quotes\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConstructed analytical narrative integrating themes with literature\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTrustworthiness Strategies:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTriangulation:\u003c/em\u003e Multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and document analysis\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eMember checking:\u003c/em\u003e All participants reviewed themes and interpretations\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ePeer debriefing:\u003c/em\u003e Regular consultation with academic colleagues not involved in research\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eReflexive journaling:\u003c/em\u003e Ongoing documentation of researcher assumptions and decisions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAudit trail:\u003c/em\u003e Detailed documentation of analytical decisions and theme development\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eEight interconnected themes emerged from the analysis, revealing how students navigate complex constraints and possibilities while attempting to develop critical thinking. These themes are presented with rich description and interpretive analysis, highlighting both barriers and enabling factors within the Pakistani higher education context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 1: Navigating Authority Relations\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStudents experienced significant tensions between respect for authority\u0026mdash;valued in Pakistani culture\u0026mdash;and the questioning essential for critical thinking. One participant shared: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;I become more attentive while presenting any critical opinion in class because I fear of clash with teacher on any belief about religion or affiliation of political party on the basis of which blasphemy case can be invoked.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis fear reflects broader cultural concerns about religious and political sensitivities while highlighting institutional power dynamics. The participant\u0026apos;s hypervigilance demonstrates how authority relations create self-censorship that prevents critical engagement. Another participant explained: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;Parental pressure plays a significant role in our thinking process because society has developed several trends and patterns that need to be followed.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e However, students also identified enabling factors within authority relations. Some participants described supportive mentors who encouraged questioning: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;One professor always asks us \u0026apos;Why do you think this?\u0026apos; instead of just accepting textbook answers.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This suggests that while cultural respect for authority can create barriers, supportive educator relationships can facilitate critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 2: Peer Dynamics and Intellectual Risk-Taking\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe social consequences of critical expression emerged as a significant theme. Participants described experiencing ridicule for analytical contributions: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;I do not talk in class or provide any opinion based on analysis and consideration of multiple perspectives because my friends taunted me then as \u0026apos;Bary aay philosopher\u0026apos; means oh you the great philosopher.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This peer pressure creates environments where intellectual risk-taking is punished rather than rewarded. Students learn to conform to group expectations rather than express divergent thinking. One participant noted: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;I believe that if I am supported emotionally and provided other students\u0026apos; support, I can enhance my critical thinking skills.\u0026quot;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eYet participants also described supportive peer relationships that encouraged critical thinking: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;My study group always challenges each other\u0026apos;s assumptions and we learn from these discussions.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This demonstrates that peer influence can be either constraining or enabling depending on group dynamics.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 3: Institutional Constraints and Flexibility\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUniversity policies and practices significantly shaped students\u0026apos; approaches to learning. Rigid attendance policies and grade-focused assessment systems created pressures toward conformity: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;There are different rules and regulations of our university according to that we align our ways of thinking and behaving.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e These institutional constraints often prioritized compliance over critical engagement. One participant explained: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;To maintain my scholarship, I avoid thinking critically and just follow what the teacher asks because I don\u0026apos;t want any biasness from the side of teacher towards me.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e However, some institutional practices supported critical thinking development. Another participant noted: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;The library provides access to international journals and our teachers encourage us to read beyond textbooks.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This suggests that while many institutional practices create barriers, targeted interventions can facilitate critical thinking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 4: Resource Access and Information Literacy\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants struggled with accessing diverse, credible sources of information: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;I do not get different local or international resources easily through which I can search for credible and reliable information.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This limitation constrained their ability to engage with multiple perspectives essential for critical thinking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe digital divide and institutional resource limitations created information deserts where students lacked access to diverse viewpoints. However, participants who successfully navigated these challenges described the benefits: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;When I found reliable online databases, my thinking became much more analytical.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 5: Empathetic Sensitivity and Expression\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCultural emphasis on harmony and respect for others created tensions for critical expression. One participant shared: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;Teachers and students have certain beliefs about an idea, but it is difficult for me to openly express my critical views about others\u0026apos; beliefs and perspectives, as I think it will hurt the feelings of my friends and teachers.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This empathetic sensitivity, while culturally valued, can inhibit the challenging questions essential for critical thinking. Students must navigate between respecting others\u0026apos; perspectives and engaging in analytical critique.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 6: Time and Energy Constraints\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe cognitive demands of critical thinking require significant time and mental energy. Participants described competing pressures: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;It takes time and energy to think and reflect upon various aspects of any topic.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e Course loads, part-time employment, and family responsibilities created time pressures that prioritized surface learning. One participant noted: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;It is a time-consuming process; therefore, I think to not follow any critical thinking skills and follow a specific pattern or opinion to make a decision without considering much widespread viewpoints.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This reveals how time constraints can lead to intellectual shortcuts that undermine critical thinking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 7: Financial Pressures and Survival Strategies\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor scholarship-dependent students, academic success meant financial security, creating pressures toward grade-focused rather than learning-focused approaches: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;My scholarship is more important for me than other things because I cannot afford the financial burden of my higher education.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThese financial pressures created risk-averse academic strategies prioritizing safe, conventional responses over innovative thinking. However, some participants described how financial constraints motivated deeper engagement: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;Because I can\u0026apos;t afford to fail, I have to really understand concepts, not just memorize them.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eTheme 8: Technological Double-Edged Effects\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDigital technologies presented both opportunities and challenges for critical thinking. While providing access to vast information resources, they also created distractions and promoted surface-level engagement: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;We want to reach conclusions that are available at one click; thus, we don\u0026apos;t want to involve in long processes such as analysis, multiple sources of information, and connecting dots to reach an authentic decision.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e However, participants also described how technology facilitated critical thinking when used purposefully: \u003cem\u003e\u0026quot;Online discussion forums let me engage with ideas from students worldwide.\u0026quot;\u003c/em\u003e This demonstrates that technology\u0026apos;s impact depends on how it\u0026apos;s used rather than its inherent properties.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec35\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTheoretical Implications\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings extend existing critical thinking literature by revealing how cultural, institutional, and individual factors interact to constrain or enable critical thinking development within specific contexts. The eight identified themes demonstrate that critical thinking development cannot be understood simply as individual cognitive skill acquisition, but rather as a complex process influenced by social, cultural, and institutional factors. These finding challenges deficit-based approaches that view critical thinking challenges as inherent student limitations rather than systemic barriers requiring institutional response.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe theme of authority navigation particularly resonates with cross-cultural critical thinking research and extends theoretical understanding of how cultural values shape cognitive practices. Danvers (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) notes that Western critical thinking frameworks often assume comfort with challenging established authority, which may not translate to collectivist cultures. Our findings support this observation while revealing how supportive relationships with educators can facilitate critical thinking even within authority-respecting cultures. This suggests that the relationship between cultural respect for authority and critical thinking development is more nuanced than previously understood, with the nature of authority relationships being more influential than authority respect itself.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe financial pressure theme extends Moeti et al.'s (2016) research by revealing how socioeconomic constraints create fundamentally different approaches to academic engagement. Our findings suggest that for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, critical thinking may be a luxury they cannot afford when basic survival needs take precedence, revealing how educational equity issues intersect with critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe peer dynamics theme contributes to understanding how social environments shape intellectual risk-taking behaviors, revealing how peer relationships specifically impact willingness to engage in critical analysis. The concept of \"intellectual risk-taking\" represents a significant theoretical contribution to understanding critical thinking development in social contexts. The empathetic sensitivity theme extends research on emotional intelligence by revealing how cultural values around harmony and respect can both facilitate and inhibit critical thinking development. This finding suggests that context and implementation determine whether cultural values enable or constrain analytical engagement. Furthermore, our findings contribute to broader theoretical debates about the universality of critical thinking frameworks. The participants' experiences suggest that critical thinking development occurs within specific cultural logics rather than abstract cognitive spaces, challenging universalist approaches that assume critical thinking skills transfer across contexts without cultural adaptation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eComparison with International Research\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhile our findings align with international research on critical thinking barriers, they also reveal uniquely Pakistani contextual factors that extend understanding of how cultural, political, and institutional contexts shape critical thinking development. This comparative analysis reveals both universal patterns and context-specific variations that contribute to broader theoretical understanding. Like Indah and Kusuma's (2016) Indonesian study, our participants described social pressure as a significant barrier to critical thinking expression. However, the specific nature of these pressures in the Pakistani context\u0026mdash;religious sensitivities, political affiliations, family expectations, and concerns about blasphemy accusations\u0026mdash;reflect Pakistani cultural and political particularities that differ significantly from Indonesian or other Southeast Asian contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe peer dynamics theme shows both similarities and differences with international research. While bullying of intellectual peers occurs globally (Leach, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e), the specific labeling as \"philosopher\" and the collective nature of peer pressure reflect local cultural expressions of intellectual intimidation. In contrast to individual bullying documented in Western contexts, our findings suggest more collective forms of social pressure where entire peer groups discourage critical expression.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur findings about authority navigation align with research in other collectivist cultures but reveal unique Pakistani dimensions. The participants' concerns about blasphemy accusations and political affiliations reflect a unique intersection of religious sensitivities and political instability that creates distinct barriers to critical expression. The financial pressure theme extends research on socioeconomic factors in critical thinking development. Our findings reveal how scholarship dependence creates specific forms of academic risk-aversion that prioritize safe, conventional responses over innovative thinking. Resource access challenges align with broader digital divide research but reveal context-specific constraints related to internet restrictions and limited database access. The technological theme reveals an interesting paradox consistent with broader digital natives research but with distinct Pakistani characteristics. While technology provides unprecedented access to information, it also promotes surface-level engagement (Rodzalan \u0026amp; Saat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). However, our findings suggest that purposeful technology use can facilitate rather than hinder critical thinking, but this depends on access to appropriate tools and guidance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec37\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePractical Implications for Pakistani Higher Education\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings point to systemic issues requiring comprehensive institutional reform that addresses cultural, pedagogical, and structural dimensions of critical thinking development. The recommendations below target multiple stakeholder groups and systemic levels to create supportive environments for critical thinking development.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec38\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eInstitutional Policy Reform\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversities must audit policies that discourage critical thinking expression. Rigid attendance requirements should be replaced with flexible policies recognizing students' diverse circumstances. Assessment systems need restructuring to include analytical components rather than content reproduction alone. Universities should establish Critical Thinking Centers providing workshops and resources for culturally-responsive critical thinking pedagogies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec39\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePedagogical Transformation for Educators\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eEducator preparation programs must address the specific challenges of fostering critical thinking within Pakistani cultural contexts through comprehensive curriculum reform. Professional development programs should emphasize culturally-responsive pedagogy that honors local values while promoting analytical capabilities. Faculty development initiatives should focus on creating safe spaces for intellectual risk-taking, developing assessment strategies that reward analytical thinking, and building supportive mentor relationships that encourage questioning within respectful frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec40\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStudent Support Systems Enhancement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupport systems for students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds require particular attention. Scholarship programs should be redesigned to include support for deep learning approaches rather than merely grade achievement. Study skills programs should teach time management strategies that prioritize critical thinking within limited time constraints.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eTechnology Integration Strategies\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUniversities should implement strategic technology integration that maximizes benefits while minimizing distractions. This includes providing access to international databases, training in digital literacy, and creating moderated discussion forums exposing students to diverse perspectives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003ePolicy Recommendations\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHigher education regulatory bodies should mandate critical thinking components in curriculum standards, creating system-wide incentives for institutional priority. Universities should establish research and evaluation programs to monitor the effectiveness of critical thinking initiatives using culturally-responsive assessment instruments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eA Culturally-Responsive Framework for Critical Thinking Development\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on the findings, we propose a framework that acknowledges Pakistani cultural values while fostering critical thinking:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eLimitations and Future Research\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study's phenomenological approach provides rich understanding of student experiences but involves several methodological limitations that should inform future research directions. The sample size of 15 participants, while appropriate for phenomenological research, limits the generalizability of findings across broader Pakistani higher education contexts. Additionally, the focus on Education students at public universities may not represent the experiences of students in private institutions, different academic disciplines, or other South Asian countries.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe phenomenological approach, while valuable for understanding lived experiences, cannot establish causal relationships or assess the relative importance of different factors in critical thinking development. The cross-sectional design captures participants' experiences at a specific point in time but cannot track how these experiences evolve throughout students' academic careers. Future research employing quantitative methods could assess the prevalence of identified barriers across larger populations using culturally-adapted instruments. Longitudinal research could track critical thinking development from entry to graduation, identifying critical intervention periods. Comparative cross-cultural studies across South Asian contexts would help distinguish universal patterns from context-specific factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntervention research examining the effectiveness of culturally-responsive pedagogical strategies and policy changes would be particularly valuable for informing practice. Such studies could focus on specific strategies designed for Pakistani cultural contexts, institutional policy modifications, and faculty development initiatives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe findings provide a foundation for these future research directions by identifying key factors that shape critical thinking development in Pakistani higher education contexts. The phenomenological insights reveal the complexity of these experiences and highlight the need for multifaceted approaches addressing cultural, institutional, and individual dimensions.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis phenomenological investigation reveals that undergraduate students in Pakistani higher education navigate complex constraints and possibilities in developing critical thinking. The eight identified themes demonstrate that critical thinking development is not merely an individual cognitive process, but a socially embedded practice influenced by cultural values, institutional practices, and economic circumstances. The findings challenge deficit-based approaches that view students from particular cultural backgrounds as inherently lacking critical thinking capabilities. Instead, they reveal how contextual factors create barriers that can be addressed through thoughtful institutional and pedagogical interventions. Students possess the capacity for critical thinking but require supportive environments that honor their cultural values while encouraging analytical engagement.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFor Pakistani higher education institutions, the implications are clear: fostering critical thinking requires systematic attention to institutional policies, educator preparation, and student support systems. Rather than viewing cultural factors as obstacles to overcome, institutions should leverage students' strengths while addressing specific barriers through targeted interventions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study contributes to international critical thinking literature by demonstrating the importance of contextual understanding in educational research. Critical thinking development cannot be understood through universal frameworks alone but requires attention to how cultural values, institutional practices, and individual circumstances interact within specific educational contexts. Ultimately, this research suggests that with appropriate institutional support and cultural sensitivity, students in Pakistani higher education can develop the critical thinking skills essential for academic success and professional readiness in an increasingly complex global environment. The challenge lies not in student capabilities but in creating educational environments that support and nurture these abilities within their particular cultural and institutional contexts.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting Interests:\u003c/strong\u003e The authors declare no conflicts of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Statement:\u003c/strong\u003e This research was approved by the institutional ethics committee. All participants provided informed consent, and their identities have been protected through pseudonym assignment.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability:\u003c/strong\u003e Data can be shared upon reasonable request, subject to ethical considerations and participant consent.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding:\u003c/strong\u003e This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or non-profit sectors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments:\u003c/strong\u003e The author acknowledges the participants who shared their experiences and the universities that facilitated this research.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBailin S, Case R, Coombs JR, Daniels LB (1999) Conceptualizing critical thinking. J Curriculum Stud 31(3):285\u0026ndash;302. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183133\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/002202799183133\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol 3(2):77\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1191/1478088706qp063oa\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDanvers E (2023) Prevent/Ing critical thinking? The pedagogical impacts of Prevent in UK higher education. Teach High Educ 28(6):1264\u0026ndash;1279. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1872533\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13562517.2021.1872533\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavies M (2015) A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. In: Paulsen M (ed) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol 30. Springer, Cham. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFacione PA (1990) Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. American Philosophical Association\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKausar H, Ajmal F, ANALYZING VALUES AND PEDAGOGICAL SKILLS IN PRE-SERVICE TEACHER EDUCATION OF PAKISTAN WITH REFERENCE TO THE TEACHER EDUCATION MODEL FOR THE 21 st CENTURY\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRusmin L, Misrahayu Y, Pongpalilu F, Radiansyah, Radiansyah, Dwiyanto D (2024) Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills in the 21st Century. Join: Journal of Social Science. 1. 144\u0026ndash;162. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.59613/svhy3576\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.59613/svhy3576\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIndah RN, Kusuma AW (2016) Factors affecting the development of critical thinking of Indonesian learners of English language. J Humanit Social Sci 21(6):86\u0026ndash;94\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKing PM, Kitchener KS (1994) Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series and Jossey-Bass Social and Behavioral Science Series. Jossey-Bass. 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104\u0026thinsp;\u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;1310\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeach BT (2011) Critical thinking skills as related to university students' gender and academic discipline (Doctoral dissertation, East Tennessee State University)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMerriam SB, Tisdell EJ (2009) A guide to design and implementation. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, 24, 39\u0026ndash;54\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMoeti B (2016) Critical thinking among post-graduate diploma in education students in higher education: reality or fuss? Journal of Education and Learning\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaleh S (2018) Critical Thinking as a 21-Century Skill. Conceptions, Implementation and Challenges in the EFL Classroom\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaul R, Elder L (2019) The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Rowman \u0026amp; Littlefield\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFahim M, Ahmadian M (2012) Critical Thinking and Iranian EFL Context. J Lang Teach Res 3. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4304/jltr.3.4.793-800\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4304/jltr.3.4.793-800\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRodzalan SA, Saat MM (2015) The perception of critical thinking and problem solving skill among Malaysian undergraduate students. Procedia-Social Behav Sci 172:725\u0026ndash;732\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDavies M (2013) Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. High Educ Res Dev 32:529\u0026ndash;544. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/07294360.2012.697878\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/07294360.2012.697878\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSyed N (2021) Women in Pakistan: Status in Socio-Cultural and Politico-Legal Domains\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVan Manen M (2023) Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"critical thinking, phenomenology, Pakistani higher education, qualitative research, undergraduate students, barriers to learning","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis phenomenological study explored how undergraduate students experience barriers and facilitators to critical thinking development in Pakistani higher education. Using purposive sampling, 15 final-year Education students participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke's framework, with member checking ensuring trustworthiness. Eight interconnected themes emerged revealing complex barriers including social conformity pressures, institutional rigidities, financial constraints, and technological distractions. Students also identified enabling factors such as peer support, access to diverse perspectives, and institutional flexibility. The findings reveal how students navigate between conformity demands and critical engagement opportunities. The phenomenological approach provides rich understanding but limits generalizability. These insights inform institutional policies, pedagogical practices, and support systems needed to foster critical thinking in Pakistani higher education contexts. This research addresses a significant gap by providing insights into critical thinking development in an underrepresented Pakistani context.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Exploring Critical Thinking Development Among University Students in Pakistan: A Phenomenological Study","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-10 11:41:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8827490/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"d02034ab-8f71-4172-8a09-bef6f3911de6","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 10th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-02-10T11:41:49+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-10 11:41:49","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8827490","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8827490","identity":"rs-8827490","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}