Improving learners’ critical thinking and learning engagement through Socratic questioning in Nominal Group Technique

Alies Poetri Lintangsari, Ive Emaliana, Irene Nany Kusumawardani


Critical thinking is assumed as one of the essential skills in today’s era. One of the ways to foster students’ critical thinking is through discussion that provokes their curiosity. Unfortunately, in the online setting, some studies reported that students face challenges in online discussion.  Therefore, teachers should find a way to optimize students’ engagement in online discussions. The Nominal Group Technique (NGT), which this paper argues for proposing a potential way in improving students’ participation and their critical thinking in an online discussion, is less used as a teaching strategy in educational practices. With the integration of Socratic Questioning, this research implemented a pre-experimental method with a one-shot design aimed at investigating the effectiveness of the NGT implementation in Critical Reading Classes conducted online combining both synchronous and asynchronous settings. Pre- and post-tests were implemented in two classes involving 52 students in six meetings. The descriptive statistics and t-test analysis had been implemented to find out the differences in students’ critical thinking skills before and after the NGT implementation. The result showed that there was a significant improvement in students’ critical thinking skills at p<0.001, which confirmed that NGT with the integration of Socratic Questioning had a significant effect on the improvement of students’ critical thinking skills in an online context.


critical thinking; English language teaching; Nominal Group Technique; online discussion engagement; Socratic Questioning

Full Text:



Abdullah, M. M., & Islam, R. (2011). Nominal group technique and its applications in managing quality in higher education. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and Social Science, 5(1), 81-99.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th ed.). Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Astin, A. W. (2014). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Development, 40(5), 518-529.

Atherton, C. (2005). Defining literary criticism. Palgrave Macmillan.

Behrman, E. H. (2006). Teaching about language, power, and text: A review of classroom practices that support critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(6), 490-498.

Buelow, J. R., Barry, T., & Rich, L. E. (2018). Supporting learning engagement with online students. Online Learning Journal, 22(4), 313-340.

Chapple, M., & Murphy, R. (1996). The nominal group technique: Extending the evaluation of students’ teaching and learning experiences. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(2), 147-160.

Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of online discussion strategies: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 228-241.

EF. (2021). The world’s largest ranking of countries and regions by English skills.

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (1998). The role of Socratic questioning in thinking, teaching, and learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 71(5), 297-301.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Goss-Sampson, M. A. (2019). Statistical analysis in JASP: A guide for students. JASP.

Greenlaw, S. A., & DeLoach, S. B. (2003). Teaching critical thinking with electronic discussion. Journal of Economic Education, 34(1), 36-52.

Jones, C. A. (2005). Assessment for learning. Newnorth Ltd.

Kennedy, G. (2020, May). What is student engagement in online learning … and how do I know when it is there? Melbourne CSHE Discussion Paper.

Kirkpatrick, A. (2012). English in ASEAN: Implications for regional multilingualism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33(4), 331-344.

Kuh, G. (2007). What student engagement data tell us about college readiness. Peer Review: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Lauder, A. (2008). The status and function of English in Indonesia: A review of key factors. Makara Human Behavior Studies in Asia, 12(1), 9-20.

Lee, J., & Martin, L. (2017). Investigating students’ perceptions of motivating factors of online class discussions. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 18(5), 148-172.

Lee, M. Y., Kim, H., & Kim, M. (2014). The effects of Socratic questioning on critical thinking in web-based collaborative learning. Education as Change, 18(2), 285-302.

Macken-Horarik, M. (2014). Making productive use of four models of school English: A case study revisited. English in Australia, 49(3), 7-19.

Macphail, A. (2001). Nominal group technique: A useful method for working with young people. British Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 161-170.

Madar, D. (1982). Using nominal group technique to foster productive behavior in group discussions. Teaching Political Science, 9(4), 185-189.

Madison, J. P. (2016). NCTE/ERIC summaries and sources: Critical thinking in the English classroom. The English Journal, 60(8), 1133-1144.

Miller, L. E. (2009). Evidence-based instruction: A classroom experiment comparing nominal and brainstorming groups. Organisation Management Journal, 6(4), 229-238.

Moeljono, E. E., & Lintangsari, A. P. (2021). Investigating Indonesian EFL learners’ critical thinking: Current state and future directions. English Review: Journal of English Education, 10(1), 83-92.

Mulia, N. A. (2020). Indonesian EFL students’ engagement in online language learning platform. Retain, 8, 154-163.

Nwankwo, A. A. (2015). Students’ learning experiences and perceptions of online course content and interactions [Doctoral dissertation, Walden University]. Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies.

OECD. (2018). Indonesia: Contry note. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA): Result from PISA 2018.

Pace, C. R., & Kuh, G. D. (1998). College student experiences questionnaire (4th ed.). Indiana University.

Snyder, C. R., Shorey, H. S., Cheavens, J., Pulvers, K. M., Adams, V. H., & Wiklund, C. (2002). Hope and academic success in college. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 820-826.

Suhaimah, S., & Setyowati, L. (2021). The students’ opinion on online learning. Education of English as Foreign Language, 4(2), 88-93.

Sutherland, A., & Incera, S. (2021). Critical reading: What do faculty think students should do? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 51(4), 267-290.

Szabo, Z., & Schwartz, J. (2011). Learning methods for teacher education: The use of online discussions to improve critical thinking. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(1), 79-94.

Ubu, A. C. P., Putra, I. N. A. J., & Santosa, M. H. (2021). EFL university student engagement on the use of online discussion in North Bali. Language and Education Journal Undiksha, 4(1), 22-31.

Vaseghi, R., Gholame, R., & Barjesteh, H. (2012). Critical thinking: An influential Factor in developing English reading comprehension performance. Advances in Asian Social Science, 2(1), 401-410.

Williams, L., & Lahman, M. (2011). Online discussion, student engagement, and critical thinking. Journal of Political Science Education, 7(2), 143-162.

Xia, J. C., Fielder, J., & Siragusa, L. (2013). Achieving better peer interaction in online discussion forums: A reflective practitioner case study. Issues in Educational Research, 23(1), 97-113.

Yang, Y. T. C., Newby, T. J., & Bill, R. L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. International Journal of Phytoremediation, 21(1), 163-181.

Zastrow, C., & Navarre, R. (1977). The nominal group: A new tool for making social work education relevant. Journal of Education for Social Work, 13(1), 112-118.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View Journal Stats