Teaching Critical Thinking: The Real Skill Shortage No One Talks About

We talk a lot about skill shortages in Australia—cybersecurity, AI, engineering—but the biggest gap in our workforce might not be what you expect. It’s critical thinking. The ability to evaluate evidence, challenge assumptions, and make independent, well-reasoned decisions is in short supply. And it’s not just a workforce problem; it’s an education problem.

@Daniel T. Willingham’s How to Teach Critical Thinking, commissioned by the NSW Department of Education, cuts through the noise and lays out the real challenge: critical thinking isn’t a generic skill you can just "teach" in a one-size-fits-all class. It’s domain-specific, deeply tied to knowledge, and needs a rethink in how we approach education and workforce training.

The Myth of “Thinking Skills”

The common belief is that critical thinking is a general skill—like riding a bike—that once learned, can be applied anywhere. Willingham dismantles this idea. Critical thinking in history looks nothing like critical thinking in science, and neither resemble what a great software engineer or CEO does when making decisions.

Instead, thinking critically requires deep expertise in a subject. A historian sources documents, a scientist tests hypotheses, a developer debugs code—each is a form of problem-solving, but the rules of evidence, logic, and best practices differ vastly.

Why This Matters for Business & AI

Here’s the kicker: even experts struggle to apply their critical thinking outside their field. Willingham highlights how neurologists don’t diagnose heart conditions well, and software engineers trained in one coding language often struggle with another. It’s a major blind spot in the “AI will solve everything” narrative.

We’re seeing AI and automation take over routine decision-making, but the real value in human thinking isn’t in rote logic—it’s in the ability to contextualize, adapt, and judge. The best AI models still rely on human oversight, and that oversight needs critical thinkers.

Companies hiring for AI-related roles today aren’t just looking for technical skills—they need people who can challenge assumptions, question biases in data, and navigate ethical grey areas. If we don’t start teaching and embedding critical thinking into AI governance, we risk automation amplifying bad decisions instead of improving them.

Fixing Critical Thinking: A 4-Step Plan

Willingham offers a concrete way forward, and it’s not another corporate “thinking skills” seminar. It’s about embedding critical thinking into real-world domains. Here’s what that looks like:

1. Define the Domain-Specific Skillset:
2. Integrate Thinking with Knowledge:
3. Sequence Learning Thoughtfully:
4. Reinforce & Repeat Over Time:

The Workforce Wake-Up Call

If we’re serious about preparing for the AI age, we need to rethink how we train employees, students, and leaders to ask the right questions, not just follow rules.

The workforce doesn’t just need people who can code, analyse data, or manage projects—it needs people who challenge assumptions, spot patterns, and make decisions where AI falls short.

Critical thinking is the real competitive advantage. Time to invest in it.

If this resonates, let’s chat. DM me, follow me, or let’s build a better approach together. ??