The Effect of Adolescents’ Critical Thinking Dispositions and Perceptions of External Locus of Control on Their Attitudes Towards School

Abstract

This study examined how adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their perceptions of external locus of control affected their attitudes towards school. The study was conducted based on the correlational survey model. The population of the study consisted of high school students continuing their education in the city of Iğdır, Turkiye during the 2023 to 2024 academic year. The sample consisted of 829 high school students selected using the convenience sampling method. Results of the study showed a low-level negative correlation between adolescents’ perceptions of external locus of control and their critical thinking dispositions and attitudes towards school. On the other hand, their critical thinking dispositions had a positive and moderately significant correlation with their attitudes towards school. The study revealed that adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their perceptions of external locus of control significantly predicted their attitudes towards school. Suggestions were made according to the results of the study.

Keywords

adolescence critical thinking external locus of control attitude towards school

Introduction

Education is a process that improves not only individuals’ school achievement but also their thinking and problem-solving skills. However, students’ attitudes toward educational institutions can significantly affect the efficiency of this process. (Kallai et al., 2024). There are several factors that shape individuals’ attitudes towards school, especially during adolescence. Critical thinking disposition and the perception of external locus of control among these factors draw attention as variables that directly affect the individual’s interest in the learning process and academic achievement (Facione, 1990; Findley & Cooper, 1983; Halpern, 1998; Rotter, 1966).

Emotional, intellectual, and behavioural reactions exhibited by students towards the educational process constitute a multifaceted concept called “attitude towards school” (Psathiti & Sailer, 2023). Students who build positive attitudes towards school actively involve themselves and succeed in their courses, whereas those with negative attitudes demonstrate a drop in their academic performance (Dagnew, 2017; Moè et al., 2009; Verešová & Malá, 2016). Mental competencies and personality traits play an important role among the factors affecting attitude towards school (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002, Fredricks et al., 2004). On the other hand, it could be asserted that critical thinking skills are one of the main factors that shape an individual’s attitude towards school through academic achievement (Halpern, 2013; Hastaoğlu et al., 2018; Seferoğlu & Akbıyık, 2006).

Critical thinking refers to a mental process that allows an individual to analyse events, knowledge, and experiences from a sceptical perspective (Halpern, 1998, p. 450; Paul & Elder, 2019, p. 6). A student’s critical thinking habit can improve his/her problem-solving ability and school achievement and reinforce his/her interest in the educational process (Boisvert, 2002; Şenşekerci & Bilgin, 2008). The related studies have indicated that students who think critically are more active in the educational setting and participate more consciously in academic processes (Álvarez-Huerta et al., 2023; DeWaelsche, 2015). Additionally, studies have shown that critical thinking skills, which have a determinative role on attitudes, are also correlated with individuals’ perceptions of locus of control. While a positive correlation exists between critical thinking and internal locus of control, there is a negative correlation between critical thinking and external locus of control (Flor et al., 2013; Oğuz & Sarıçam, 2016; Saraçaloğlu & Yılmaz, 2011).

The way individuals interpret the events and their consequences determines their locus of control, another part of their personality construct. Those who believe that they can shape the events in their lives with their power have an internal locus of control; whereas, those who perceive events as the consequences of external factors have an external locus of control (Rotter, 1966). Since those with a high external locus of control tend to attribute their failures to external causes, they participate less actively in learning processes (Findley & Cooper, 1983). The related studies have indicated that those with a high perception of external control are less enthusiastic about their academic studies and tend to hold a negative attitude towards school (Gatawa & Yusuf, 2015; Rustamov et al., 2024; Twenge et al., 2004).

While the existing literature provides valuable insights into the relationships between critical thinking, locus of control, and attitudes toward school, studies that examine these three variables together within a single, consistent model are quite limited. Most previous research has focused on these constructs separately or in pairs. Furthermore, there is little research examining these dynamics specifically in the context of the Turkish education system and adolescent population. The main contribution of this research lies in its integrative approach, which simultaneously examines the interaction between critical thinking tendencies, external locus of control, and attitudes toward school. By doing so in a different cultural and developmental context, this research aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding and establish a basic model for future longitudinal or experimental studies that could establish causality.

Subproblems of the Research

Is there any significant correlation between adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their perceptions of external locus of control and their attitudes towards school?

Do adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their perceptions of external locus of control significantly predict their attitudes towards school?

Conceptual Structure

Critical Thinking

The concept of critical thinking dates to Ancient Greece and especially to Socratic dialectical inquiry method (Taylor, 1998). This approach evolved into a more systematic structure with the “reflective thinking” model introduced by John Dewey (1910) in the 20th century. Critical thinking, in today’s sense, was established in a theoretical framework with the Delphi Report prepared under the leadership of Facione (1990) and defined as a set of quantifiable skills. According to Facione (1990), critical thinking skills consist of cognitive skills such as interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and self-regulation.

Critical thinking is a goal-oriented and self-regulated way of thinking that directs problem-solving and decision-making processes (Facione, 1990; Halpern, 2013). Critical thinking is based on cognitive skills such as interpretation, evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation (Ernst & Monroe, 2004). Critical thinking features as an important skill for individuals when they examine complex problems, make logical inferences, and access reliable information (Ennis, 2011). Individuals who think critically are inquisitive, curious, knowledgeable, logical, open-minded, flexible, objective in their evaluation, aware of personal bias, responsible in decision-making, willing to re-evaluate their views on the subject, persistent in investigating the consequences, and tend to explore all the details of the subject (Facione, 1990).

Individuals who have developed critical thinking skills can approach the problems and circumstances they come across from different perspectives, they can recognise the thoughts and perspectives of others, and they can ask questions about events and comprehend the correlations between them and possible contradictions (Vincent-Lancrin, 2024). These individuals are able to analyse and recognise inconsistencies between ideas and discourses (Singh, 2017). They can also make on-the-spot observations and draw sound and logical inferences from these observations (Elder & Paul, 2002).

From the perspective of educational settings, students’ ability to analyse and evaluate information through critical thinking improves their engagement in the learning process and allows them to adopt a more positive outlook towards educational institutions (Fajari, 2020). Furthermore, this skill helps individuals maximise their academic potential by promoting self-orientation and metacognitive strategies (Chen, 2022).

Locus of Control

Locus of control was conceptualised by Rotter (1966). The concept describes the psychological structure that defines individuals’ perceptions that internal and external factors determine the control of events in their lives.

The concept of locus of control is related to individuals’ dispositions to attribute the control of events in their lives to their behaviour (internal) or external factors such as luck and fate (external) (Lefcourt, 2014). This concept introduces the fundamental distinction between whether people perceive that their experiences lie under their control or whether they believe that they are the consequence of external factors that are beyond their control (Smith, 2003). According to Rotter (1966), individuals focus on internal control if they believe that the consequences of their behaviours are controlled by their personality traits. On the contrary, they focus on external control if they believe that they control external factors such as luck and fate.

Individuals who have an internal locus of control demonstrate a strong sense of personal responsibility and believe that their actions underlie the events they go through (Judge et al., 1998). When they come across a new circumstance, they believe that they are capable of changing or channelling it. These individuals are confident in their abilities and tend to perceive uncertain or unpredictable circumstances as less threatening (Sorrentino & Hewitt, 1984). External locus of control, on the other hand, reflects a common belief that the consequences of the events that an individual goes through are determined by external factors rather than his/her control (Darshani, 2014). The individual may regard the large and complex forces acting around him/her as the main cause of the events he/she go through. People with an external locus of control are defined as individuals who believe that the consequences of their behaviours or the developments in their lives are shaped by external factors rather than their actions (Rotter, 1990).

Students with an internal locus of control explain their academic achievements with their efforts rather than external factors. These individuals are more actively involved in the learning process by building strong motivation and a sense of responsibility, which contributes to better school achievement and overall school welfare (Findley & Cooper, 1983; Nunn & Nunn, 1993). This supports them in building more positive attitudes towards school. Indeed, several studies have emphasised that there is a significant correlation between the internal locus of control and school satisfaction (Handrina & Ariati, 2017). On the other hand, students with an external locus of control tend to be less motivated and apathetic and hold negative attitudes as they attribute their academic performance to luck or environmental conditions (Parameswari, & Shamala, 2012; Sarıçam, 2014).

Attitude Towards School

Attitudes towards school are complex structures that include cognitive, affective, and behavioural dimensions that shape students’ academic performance and their attendance to courses to a great extent (Reid, 2006). The cognitive component of attitude refers to one’s knowledge about a fact; its affective component refers to one’s emotional reaction to it; and its behavioural component refers to the way of putting it into action (İnceoğlu, 2004). Students’ experiences related to this psychological structure may cause them to build positive or negative attitudes towards school. The emergence of positive attitudes towards school can also be associated with school engagement. Since school engagement is a process nourished by belonging, positive relationships, academic-social participation, and self-motivation (Mengi, 2011). When students hold positive attitudes towards school, it means that they like their school, feel a sense of belonging, and have positive experiences in the school environment (Açıkgöz, 2017).

It can be asserted that attitudes towards school are shaped by individual and environmental factors. Family support (Epstein, 2001), teacher attitude (Wentzel, 1997), academic achievement (Marks, 1998; Şahan, 2021), friend relationships (Ryan, 2001) and the physical and psychosocial setting of the school (Fraser, 1998) can be listed as environmental factors that affect attitudes towards school. On the other hand, individual factors mostly include psychological characteristics such as students’ personality traits (Opoku et al., 2023), self-perception (Harter, 1999; Marsh & Martin, 2011), motivation, self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997; Deci & Ryan, 1985), learning styles (Asuquo, 2024), and emotional regulation skills (Gross, 2002; Pekrun, 2006). Finally, since critical thinking disposition (Facione, 1990) and the perception of locus of control (Rotter, 1966) can also be listed among these psychological characteristics, they were also included in this study.

Method

Research Model

In this study, which examines the effect of adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their perceptions of external locus of control on their attitudes towards school, the correlational survey model was used. The correlational survey model is used to analyse the correlation between at least two variables and to make predictions based on the predictive correlations, if any (Fraenkel et al., 2012). The dependent variable of the study was attitude towards school, and the independent variables were critical thinking disposition and external locus of control.

Population and Sample

The population consists of students who were attending their high school education in Iğdır city in the academic year 2023 to 2024. The convenience sampling method was used in the study. The convenience sampling method is the inclusion of participants who are readily available or can be easily included in the sample (Aypay, 2015). In this sense, the sample consisted of 829 adolescent students who were reached face-to-face on a voluntary basis. Table 1 shows demographic characteristics of the students.

Table 1.

Frequency and Percentage Distributions of the Demographic Characteristics of the Participants.

Category	Sub-category	n	%
Gender	Female	536	64.7
Gender	Male	293	35.3
Type of school	Anatolian high school	361	43.5
	Science high school	95	11.5
	Anatolian Imam Hatip high school	92	11.1
	Vocational and technical Anatolian high school	281	33.9
Grade level	9th grade	220	26.5
	10th grade	193	23.3
	11th grade	230	27.7
	12th grade	186	22.4
Place of residence	City centre	531	64.1
	District	111	13.4
	Village	187	22.6
Monthly income of family	Income less than expenses	225	27.1
	Income equal to expenses	495	59.7
	Income more than expenses	109	13.1
Total		829	100.0

Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the students. According to the table, 64.7% (536) of the students were female and 35.3% (293) were male. 43.5% (361) of the students were from Anatolian high school, 11.5% (95) were from science high school, 33.9% (281) were from vocational and technical Anatolian high school, and 11.1% (92) were from Imam Hatip Anatolian high school. 26.5% (220) of the students were in the 9th grade, 23.3% (193) in the 10th grade, 27.7% (230) in the 11th grade and 22.4% (186) in the 12th grade. 54.1% (531) of the students reported that they lived in the city centre, 13.4% (111) in the district centre and 22.6% (187) in the village. Finally, 27.1% (225) of the students had a family income less than their expenses, 59.7% had a family income equal to their expenses, and 13.1% (109) had a family income more than their expenses.

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the relevant institutional ethics committee. In addition, permission to conduct the research in public high schools was granted by the provincial education authority. Prior to data collection, students and their parents were informed about the purpose of the study, and informed consent was obtained from all participants. Participation in the study was entirely voluntary, and participants were informed that they could withdraw from the research at any stage. All responses were collected anonymously, and confidentiality of the participants was strictly maintained.

Data Collection Tools

In the study, a “Personal Information Form,” the “Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale,” the “Critical Thinking Disposition Scale,” and the “School Attitude Assessment Survey” were used as data collection tools. The descriptions of the scales are provided below.

Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale

Rotter (1966) developed the scale, and Dağ (1991) conducted its Turkish validity and reliability study. The scale consists of 29 items, and each item has an A and a B option. The higher the total scores on the scale, the stronger the individual’s belief in an external locus of control. In the adaptation study of the scale, reliability coefficient was calculated to be .71. In this study, it was determined to be .80.

Critical Thinking Disposition Scale

Ertaş Kılıç and Şen (2014) adapted the scale into Turkish. The 5-point Likert-type scale consists of 25 items. The higher the score on the scale, the greater the critical thinking disposition. In the adaptation study of the scale, reliability coefficient was calculated to be .91 for the overall scale. In this study, reliability coefficient was found to be .92.

School Attitude Assessment Survey

McCoach (2002) developed the scale, and Parmaksızoğlu (2008) conducted its Turkish validity and reliability study. This 7-point Likert-type scale consists of six items. The higher the total scores on the scale, the better the positive attitude towards school. In the adaptation study of the scale, reliability coefficient was calculated to be .84. In this study, it was determined to be .83.

Data Analysis

The data of the study were analysed using SPSS 23 software. Whether or not the data were normally distributed was determined in order to identify necessary statistical method in the data analysis. Skewness and Kurtosis values were analysed to determine whether the data were normally distributed. These values range between −1.5 and +1.5, indicating that the data can be considered normally distributed (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). The skewness and kurtosis values of the three scales ranged between −1.5 and +1.5 and were considered to be normally distributed. According to this result, Pearson correlation analysis was used to establish the correlation between the variables and multiple linear regression analysis was used for predictive analysis. The assumption of multiple linear regression analysis requires no multiple linear correlations between the variables. In this regard, tolerance and variance inflation factors (VIF) were analysed. Tolerance values were found to be higher than zero, while VIF values were found to be less than 10. As the tolerance values move away from zero and VIF values are less than 10, this indicates that there is no multicollinearity problem (Field, 2009). Assumptions were met in the study, and multiple linear regression analysis was done.

Findings

This section presents the findings of the data analysis used in the study. Firstly, Pearson correlation analysis was done to establish the correlation between the variables, and Table 2 presents the findings.

Table 2.

The Correlation Between Critical Thinking Disposition, External Locus of Control, and Attitude Towards School.

Scale	1	2	3
(1) Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale	1
(2) Critical Thinking Disposition Scale	−.108*	1
(3) School Attitude Assessment Survey	−.199**	.357**	1

p < .05. **p < .001.

Table 2 shows the results of Pearson correlation analysis to determine the correlation between the “Rotter’s Locus of Control Scale,” the “Critical Thinking Disposition Scale,” and the “School Attitude Assessment Survey.” When the results of the analysis were examined, a weakly significant negative correlation was found between the “Rotter’s Locus of Control” scale and the “Critical Thinking Disposition” scale [r₍₈₂₉₎ = −0.108; p < .05]. This result indicated that the greater the critical thinking dispositions of the students, the weaker the external locus of control they had. A weakly significant negative correlation was found between the “Rotter’s Locus of Control” scale and the “School Attitude Assessment Survey” [r₍₈₂₉₎ = −0.199; p < .001]. This result indicated that the better the students’ attitudes towards school, the weaker the external locus of control they had. Finally, a positive and moderately significant correlation was found between the “Critical Thinking Disposition” scale and the “School Attitude Assessment Survey” [r₍₈₂₉₎ = 0.357; p < .001]. According to this result, the greater the students’ critical thinking dispositions, the better their attitudes towards school.

Table 3 presents the results of the multiple regression analysis conducted to examine the associations between students’ critical thinking dispositions, their perceptions of external locus of control, and their attitudes towards school. The results indicate statistically significant relationships, yet these relationships cannot be interpreted as causal due to the correlationel nature of the research design.

Table 3.

Results of Regression Analysis on the Prediction of Attitudes Towards School.

Variable	B	Standard error.	β	t	p
Constant	14.493	2.078		6.976	.000
External locus of control	−.416	.083	−.162	−5.034	.000
Critical thinking disposition	.192	.018	.339	10.525	.000
R = 0.391	R²_(Adjusted) = 0.151
F _(2–828) = 74.656	p = .000

Table 3 presents the results of the multiple linear regression analysis done to determine whether students’ external locus of control and their critical thinking dispositions predicted their attitudes towards school. According to results of the regression analysis, the model constructed for the prediction of locus of control and critical thinking disposition on attitude towards school was significant (F_(2–828) = 74.656; p < .001). These variables collectively accounted for 15.1% of the change in attitude towards school (R²_(Adjusted) = 0.151). When the significance tests of the regression coefficients were analysed, external locus of control [β = −.162; p < .001] and critical thinking disposition [β = .339; p < .001] were significant predictors of attitude towards school. When the external locus of control score increases by one point, the attitude towards school score decreases by 0.416 points, holding other variables constant. Conversely, for each one point increase in the critical thinking disposition score, the attitude towards school score increases by 0.192 points. According to the results of the regression analysis, the regression equation that predicted the level of attitude towards school was as follows: Level of Attitude Towards School = (−0.416 × External Locus of Control) + (0.192 × Critical Thinking Disposition) + (14.493)

Discussion

This section discusses the results of the statistical analyses along with the literature and recommendations are developed and presented based on these results.

The Relationship Between External Locus of Control, Critical Thinking, and Attitude Towards School

According to the results of the study, there was a negative, low-level, and significant correlation between adolescents’ perceptions of external locus of control and their critical thinking dispositions. Accordingly, as adolescents’ perceptions of external locus of control grew, their critical thinking dispositions diminished. The opposite also applies. There are numerous studies in the literature that are compatible with result of the present study (Bahadır et al., 2014; Moradi & Kouroshnia, 2016; Oğuz & Sarıçam, 2016). A study by Flor and colleagues (2013) investigating the effect of locus of control and psychological well-being on critical and creative thinking skills in adolescents also presents results similar to ours (Flor et al., 2013). However, unlike the results of this study, there are studies that report no correlation between external locus of control and critical thinking disposition (Bak, 2022; Kuchler, 2020). It is an expected outcome that individuals with a stronger external locus of control are disposed to think less critically. This is due to the fact that individuals with the stronger external locus of control perceive that factors other than themselves are the determinants of success or failure in their lives. Therefore, it would be understandable that individuals who tend to view events from a critical perspective do not believe that the consequences of their decisions are controlled by external factors.

According to the results of the analysis, there was a negative, low-level, and significant correlation between adolescents’ perceptions of an external locus of control and their attitudes towards school. Accordingly, as adolescents’ perceptions of an external locus of control grew, their attitudes towards school diminished. The opposite also applies. Previous studies have emphasised that a positive academic attitude is correlated with an internal locus of control and a negative academic attitude is correlated with an external locus of control (Atibuni et al., 2017; Carden et al., 2004). On the other hand, unlike the present study, the study by İhtiyaroğlu and Demir (2016) reported that there was a positive and low-level correlation between external locus of control and school engagement. Moreover, the same study revealed that students with a stronger internal locus of control also had high levels of school engagement based on the literature. It can be asserted that individuals who are highly engaged in school hold positive attitudes towards school (Fredricks et al., 2004). In the analyses conducted, it was found that in approximately 70% of the 275 hypotheses tested, internal factors such as intrinsic motivation, self-regulation, and self-concept predicted academic achievement at a stronger and more meaningful level than external locus of control (Abdalla et al., 2019). According to this result, students should focus less on external control in order to improve their positive attitudes towards school and academic achievement. In other words, it can be stated that schools should conduct studies to ensure that students focus on internal control for success.

According to another result of the study, there was a positive and moderately significant correlation between adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions and their attitudes towards school. Accordingly, as adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions increased, their attitudes towards school also improved. No studies have been found in the literature directly examining the correlations between critical thinking and attitudes towards school. Indirectly, inferences can be drawn from the correlations between students’ critical thinking skills and their attitudes towards school courses to substantiate this conclusion. This is because attitude towards school includes perceptions towards teachers, learning, campus, and school climate (relationships) (Erktin et al., 2010). Numerous studies have emphasised that there is a positive correlation between students’ critical thinking dispositions and attitudes towards the course (Aksu, 2012; Aydın Gürler & Kaplan, 2023) and school climate (Görür & Aybek, 2024). Today, many countries’ education systems are placing increasing importance on higher-level cognitive skills such as critical thinking, problem solving, and decision making in order to support 21st-century skills (Wechsler et al., 2018). These studies are compatible with the result of the present study. From this point of view, it can be asserted that it can contribute to improve the academic achievement of adolescents by reinforcing their positive attitudes towards school through practices that foster critical thinking.

The Predictive Power of External Locus of Control and Critical Thinking on School Attitude

The results of the study show that adolescents’ external locus of control perceptions significantly predict their attitudes towards school. As an important psychological characteristic of students, their perceptions of external locus of control can alter their attitudes towards the events and cases they come across. As the findings of the study showed, a lower perception of external locus of control indicated a better positive attitude towards school. Students with a stronger external locus of control are disposed to hold more negative attitudes towards academic matters (Atibuni et al., 2017). These students who attribute their academic results to external factors may avoid assuming responsibility and stay away from activities. This can often lead to low academic motivation and poor school achievement (Twenge et al., 2004). Moreover, some studies have emphasised that students with a stronger external locus of control are disposed to bullying in school settings (Kobayashi & Farrington, 2020). It can be asserted that this may negatively affect school settings. Practices that enable students to be more internally controlled can help avoid problems that may arise. This could contribute to students’ attitudes towards school and improve their school achievement.

Statistical analyses show that adolescents’ critical thinking dispositions significantly predict their attitudes toward school. It can be asserted that students build positive attitudes towards school by assessing school-related conditions more objectively through their critical thinking skills. Concerning attitudes towards school, studies by Akınoğlu (2001) and Şahinel (2001) reported that critical thinking skills positively affected attitudes towards courses. Likewise, Myszka-Strychalska (2022) stated that critical thinking disposition positively affected individuals’ attitudes towards school by supporting their experiences, motivation, and relationships towards school. Students with greater critical thinking dispositions are equipped to actively participate in learning processes by interacting with school materials (Görür & Aybek, 2024).

Limitations and Future Studies

The findings of this study should be interpreted considering several methodological limitations. The cross-sectional design precludes the establishment of causal relationships between the variables. Furthermore, the reliance on self-report measures introduces the potential for common method bias. The model’s modest explanatory power (R² = 15.1%) indicates that other significant predictors of attitude towards school, such as school climate or personality traits, were not included. The generalizability of the results is also constrained by the use of a convenience sample drawn solely from the city of Iğdır. To establish causality and enhance external validity, future research should employ longitudinal or experimental designs, incorporate additional predictive variables, and utilise diverse samples from different cultural contexts.

Conclusion

This study examined the complex interaction between adolescents’ critical thinking tendencies, their perception of an external locus of control and their attitudes towards school. The findings revealed a significant predictive relationship, indicating that these two psychological constructs collectively accounted for a substantial proportion of the variation in school attitudes. Specifically, higher critical thinking tendencies were associated with more positive attitudes towards school, while stronger external locus of control was associated with more negative attitudes.

The results have important theoretical and practical implications. From a theoretical perspective, they strengthen and extend existing social-cognitive theories by experimentally linking internal cognitive processes (critical thinking) to a belief system about personality (locus of control) in order to predict a fundamental educational outcome. This integrated framework provides a more holistic understanding of the factors that shape student engagement. From a practical perspective, these findings offer actionable insights for educational practitioners. Interventions to foster more positive school attitudes should have two aims: (1) developing critical thinking skills through pedagogical strategies that encourage questioning, analysis, and evaluation; and (2) implementing programmes designed to shift students’ locus of control from external to internal by promoting a growth mindset, personal responsibility, and attribution retraining. By addressing both cognitive and motivational domains, educators can create more empowering learning environments that improve attitudes and potentially increase academic achievement and overall student well-being. In summary, this research emphasises that adolescents’ attitudes towards school are not merely responses to external conditions, but are also significantly influenced by their internal psychological resources. Investing in the development of these resources is crucial for fostering more resilient and engaged students.

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

Kenan Çiftçi

Yunus Tunç

Eda Gülbetekin

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Committee of Iğdır University, Turkey (Meeting No: 2023/7; Date: 06 April 2023; Document No: E-37077861-900-98877). In addition, official permission to conduct the research in public high schools was granted by the Iğdır Provincial Directorate of National Education (No: E-19255454-605.01-76872024; Date: 25 May 2023).

Consent to Participate

Prior to data collection, students and their parents were informed about the purpose and procedures of the study. Informed consent was obtained from the participants, and participation was entirely voluntary. Participants were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any stage without any negative consequences.

Consent for Publication

Consent for publication was obtained from all participants involved in the study.

Author Contributions

The authors have made equal contributions to all phases of the work.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data and materials used in this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author.*

Use of AI

The authors declare that they did not use any generative AI other than language control in this study.

Confidentiality

All responses were collected anonymously and used solely for scientific purposes. Participants were assured that their identities would remain confidential.

References

Abdalla

M. M. I.

Abdelal

M. S.

Soon

S. C.

(2019). Attitude towards problem-based learning and its relationship with locus of control and academic self-concept among medical students. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 31(1), Article 11.

Açıkgöz

(2017). Ortaokul öğrencilerinde akran zorbalığı ile okula karşı tutum (Kartepe ilçesi örneği) [Bullying and attitude towards secondary school students: Sample of Kartepe district; Unpublished master's thesis]. Sakarya University.

Akınoğlu

(2001). Eleştirel düşünme becerilerini temel alan fen bilgisi öğretiminin öğrenme ürünlerine etkisi [The effect of critical thinking skills based science education to learning outcomes; Unpublished doctoral dissertation] Hacettepe University.

Aksu

(2012). Analysis of the relationship between mathematics Achievement of the vocational school students and their Attitudes towards the course, their critical thinking dispositions and their logical thinking skills [Unpublished master thesis, Adnan Menderes University].

Álvarez-Huerta

Muela

Larrea

(2023). Disposition towards critical thinking and student engagement in higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 48(2), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-022-09614-9

Asuquo

(2024). Student attitude and learning styles among in-school adolesents ın calabar education zone in cross river state. Journal Of Contemporary Research (JOCRES), 3(3), 38–52. Available at https://www.unicrossjournals.com/jocres/

Atibuni

D. Z.

Ssenyonga

Olema

Kemeza

(2017). Locus of control as a predictor of academic attitudes among university students. International Journal of Educational Policy Research and Review, 4(6),125–137. https://doi.org/10.15739/IJEPRR.17.014

Aydın Gürler

Kaplan

(2023). Attitudes towards STEAM, critical thinking disposition and decision-making skills: Mediation and gender moderation. International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, 10(1), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.1272051

Aypay

(2015). Araştırma yöntemleri desen ve analiz [Research methods: Design and analysis]. Anı Yayıncılık.

10.

Bahadır

Certel

Turan

(2014). The correlation between critical thinking disposition and internal-external locus of control of candidate students who participated in special talent examination in school of physical education and sports Ege University. Science, Movement and Health, 14(2), 332–337.

11.

Bak

(2022). College students’ fake news discernment: Critical thinking, locus of control, need for cognition, and the ability to discern fact from opinions [Unpublished doctoral thesis, The Florida State University]. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/college-students-fake-news-discernment-critical/docview/2749272833/se-2

12.

Bandura

(1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman; Times Books; Henry Holt & Co.

13.

Boisvert

(2002). Penseé critique et sciences humaine. Etudesur l’évolution de la penseé critiques des élèves du programme de sciences humaines au collégial [Critical thinking and social sciences: Study on the evolution of critical thinking among students in the social sciences program at the collegiate level] (Research Report). Cégep Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu.

14.

Carden

Bryant

Moss

(2004). Locus of control, test anxiety, academic procrastination, and achievement among college students. Psychological Reports, 95(2), 581–582. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.95.2.581-582

15.

Chen

(2022). Enhancing motivation to think critically. Journal of Higher Education Research, 3(4), 389–391. https://doi.org/10.32629/jher.v3i4.1019

16.

Dagnew

(2017). The relationship between students’ attitudes towards school, values of education, achievement motivation and academic achievement in Gondar secondary schools, Ethiopia. Research in Pedagogy, 7(1), 30–42. http://doi.org/10.17810/2015.46

17.

Dağ

İ.

(1991). Rotter’in İç-Dış Kontrol OdağıÖlçeği (RİDKOÖ)’nin üniversite öğrencileri için güvenirliği ve geçerliği [Reliability and validity of Rotter's Locus of Control Scale for university students]. Psikoloji Dergisi, 7(26), 10–16.

18.

Darshani

R. K. N. D.

(2014). A review of personality types and locus of control as moderators of stress and conflict management. International Journal of scientific and research publications, 4(2), 1–8.

19.

Deci

E. L.

Ryan

R. M.

(1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press.

20.

DeWaelsche

S. A.

(2015). Critical thinking, questioning and student engagement in Korean university English courses. Linguistics and Education, 32, 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.10.003

21.

Dewey

(1910). How we think. D.C. Heath & Co.

22.

Eccles

J. S.

Wigfield

(2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135153

23.

Elder

Paul

(2002). Critical thinking: Distinguishing between inferences and assumptions. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 34–35. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ645744

24.

Ennis

R. H.

(2011). The nature of critical thinking: An outline of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. University of Illinois Papershttps://education.illinois.edu/docs/default-source/faculty-documents/robertennis/thenatureofcriticalthinking_51711_000.pdf.

25.

Epstein

(2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Westview Press.

26.

Erktin

Okcabol

Ural

(2010). Examining school related factors leading to dropout through children’s conceptions and experiences: Development of a scale for attitudes towards elementary school. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 20(1), 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1375/ajgc.20.1.109

27.

Ernst

Monroe

(2004). The effects of environment-based education on students’ critical thinking skills and disposition toward critical thinking. Environmental Education Research, 10(4), 507–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462042000291038

28.

Ertaş Kılıç

Şen

A. İ.

(2014). UF/EMI Eleştirel Düşünme Eğilimi Ölçeğini Türkçeye uyarlama çalışması [The adaptation of UF/EMI Critical Thinking Disposition Scale into Turkish]. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(176), 1–12.

29.

Facione

P. A.

(1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi report). California Academic Press.

30.

Fajari

L. E. W.

(2020). Student critical thinking skills and learning motivation in elementary students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1440(1), Article 012104. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1440/1/012104

31.

Field

(2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage Publications Limited.

32.

Findley

M. J.

Cooper

H. M.

(1983). Locus of control and academic achievement: A literature review. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(2), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.2.419

33.

Flor

R. K.

Bita

Monir

K. C.

Zohreh

Z. Z.

(2013). The effect of teaching critical and creative thinking skills on the locus of control and psychological well-being in adolescents. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 82, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.223

34.

Fraenkel

R. J.

Wallen

E. N.

Hyun

H. H.

(2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.

35.

Fraser

B. J.

(1998). Classroom environment instruments: Development, validity and applications. Learning Environments Research, 1, 7–34. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009932514731

36.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

37.

Gatawa

M. I.

Yusuf

(2015). Internal versus external locus of control among students in tertiary educational institutions: A review of related literature and implications for educational psychology. Sokoto Educational Review, 16(2), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.35386/ser.v16i2.125

38.

Görür

D. Z.

Aybek

(2024). Examining the relationship between high school students’ perception of school climate and their critical thinking disposition. Scientific Educational Studies, 8(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.31798/ses.1464152

39.

Gross

J. J.

(2002). Emotion regulation: Affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0048577201393198

40.

Halpern

D. F.

(1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains. Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. The American Psychologist, 53(4), 449–455. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.53.4.449

41.

Halpern

D. F.

(2013). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315885278

42.

Handrina

I. A. G.

Ariati

(2017). Hubungan antara internal locus of control dengan school well-being pada siswa sma kolese loyola semarang [The relationship between internal locus of control and school well-being among students of Loyola College Senior High School Semarang]. Jurnal EMPATI, 6(1), 252–256. https://doi.org/10.14710/empati.2017.15087

43.

Harter

(1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. Guilford Press.

44.

Hastaoğlu

Mollaoğlu

Başer

(2018). Üniversite öğrencilerinde eleştirel düşünme ve akademik başarı arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between critical thinking and academic achievement in university students]. Uluslararası Bilimsel Araştırmalar Dergisi (IBAD), 3(2), 769–777. https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.461291

45.

İhtiyaroğlu

Demir

(2016). Farklı denetim odağına sahip öğrencilerin okul bağlılık düzeylerinin incelenmesi [Analysis of the level of students' attachment to school having different locus of control]. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(3), 282–296. https://izlik.org/JA78RY45JN

46.

İnceoğlu

(2004). Tutum algı iletişim [Attitude perception communication]. Elips Kitap.

47.

Judge

T. A.

Erez

Bono

J. E.

(1998). The power of being positive: The relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Human Performance, 11(2–3), 167–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.1998.9668030

48.

Kallai

Purohit

Tanwar

(2024). A theoretical perspective of Relationship between Student Behavior and Academic Achievement. Journal of Advances and Scholarly Research in Allied Education, 21(6), 11–17. https://doi.org/10.29070/yjddd697

49.

Kobayashi

Farrington

D. P.

(2020). Why do Japanese bully more than Americans? Influence of external locus of control and student attitudes toward bullying. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri/Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 20(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.12738/jestp.2020.1.002

50.

Kuchler

(2020). Me, myself, and I: The impact of metacognitive strategies on student locus of control and critical thinking skills [Unpublished master thesis, Central Washington University]. https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/1384/

51.

Lefcourt

H. M.

(2014). Locus of control: Current trends in theory and research (2nd ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315798813

52.

Marks

(1998). Attitudes to school life: Their influences and their effects on achievement and leaving school. https://research.acer.edu.au/lsay_research/62

53.

Marsh

H. W.

Martin

A. J.

(2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement: Relations and causal ordering. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X503501

54.

McCoach

D. B.

(2002). A validation study of the school attitude assessment survey. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 35(2), 66–77.

55.

Mengi

(2011). Ortaöğretim 10. ve 11. sınıf öğrencilerinin sosyal destek ve özyeterlik düzeylerinin okula bağlılıkları ile ilişkisi [Relations for the Social Support and Self Efficacy with School Bonding of the Secondary Education 10th and 11th Classes Students; Unpublished master's thesis]. Sakarya Üniversitesi.

56.

Moè

Pazzaglia

Tressoldi

Toso

(2009). Attitude towards school, motivation, emotions and academic achievement. In Larson

J. E.

(Ed.), Educational psychology: Cognition and learning, individual differences and motivation (pp. 259–274). Nova Science Publishers.

57.

Moradi

Kouroshnia

(2016). The moderating role of locus of control in the relationship between dimension of family communication patterns and critical thinking disposition of high school students. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 7(4), 405–409. https://research.ebsco.com/c/kelifi/search/details/g5pqb643wf?db=obo

58.

Myszka-Strychalska

(2022). Critical thinking of young people the results of diagnosis carried out as part of pedagogical innovation. Studiaz Teorii Wychowania, 4(41), 349–370. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.1651

59.

Nunn

G. D.

Nunn

S. J.

(1993). Locus of control and school performance: Some implications for teachers. Education, 113, 636–641.

60.

Oğuz

Sarıçam

(2016). The relationship between critical thinking disposition and locus of control in pre-service teachers. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.11114/JETS.V4I2.1196

61.

Opoku

O. G.

Adamu

Daniel

(2023). Relation between students’ personality traits and their preferred teaching methods: Students at the university of Ghana and the Huzhou Normal University. Heliyon, 9(1), e13011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13011

62.

Parameswari

Shamala

(2012). Academic motivation and locus of control among engineering students. Journal of Psychosocial Research, 7(1), 159–167.

63.

Parmaksızoğlu

A. C.

(2008). Türkiye’de lise öğrencilerinin okul başarılarında ebeveynlik davranışlarının ve öğrencilerin okul tutumlarının rolü [The roles of parenting practices and school attitudes in academic competence of Turkish high school students; Unpublished master's thesis]. Boğaziçi Üniversitesi.

64.

Paul

Elder

(2019). A guide for educators to critical thinking competency standards: Standards, principles, performance indicators, and outcomes with a critical thinking master rubric. Rowman & Littlefield.

65.

Pekrun

(2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9

66.

Psathiti

Sailer

(2023). Adolescents’ positive attitudes towards school: A reflection on the spatial configuration of school buildings. The Journal of Architecture, 28(8), 1442–1466. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2024.2302090

67.

Reid

(2006). Thoughts on attitude measurement. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140500485332

68.

Rotter

J. B.

(1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0092976

69.

Rotter

J. B.

(1990). Internal versus external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45(4), 489–493. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.4.489

70.

Rustamov

Nuriyeva

U. Z.

Allahverdiyeva

Abbasov

Rustamova

(2024). A structural equation modeling of academic locus of control, procrastination, and their impact on school satisfaction: Insights from the Azerbaijani educational system. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 10(1), 893–901. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.10.1.893

71.

Ryan

A. M.

(2001). The peer group as a context for the development of young adolescent motivation and achievement. Child Development, 72(4), 1135–1150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00338

72.

Saraçaloğlu

A. S.

Yılmaz

(2011). An investigation of prospective teachers’ critical thinking attitudes and locus of control. Elementary Education Online, 10(2), 468–478. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ilkonline/issue/8592/106815

73.

Sarıçam

(2014). Psychometric properties of the academic locus of control scale-adolescent form. Elementary Education Online, 13(4), 1135–1144. https://doi.org/10.17051/io.2014.32429

74.

Seferoğlu

S. S.

Akbıyık

(2006). Eleştirel düşünme ve öğretimi [Teaching critical thinking]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(30), 193–200. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/hunefd/issue/7806/102380

75.

Singh

N. K.

(2017). Skills of Critical Thinking. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Science and Technology, 4(5), 5180–5182. https://doi.org/10.18535/IJETST/V4I5.09

76.

Smith

V. L.

(2003). Analysis of locus of control and educational level utilizing the internal control index [Unpublished master thesis, Marshall University Graduate College].

77.

Sorrentino

R. M.

Hewitt

E. C.

(1984). The uncertainty-reducing properties of achievement tasks revisited. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 47(4), Article 884.

78.

Şahan

B. E.

(2021). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin okula bağlılıkları ile akademik başarıları ve okul etkililiği arasındaki ilişkiler örüntüsü [Pattern of the relationships between secondary school students' attachment to school and academic achievements and school effectiveness; Unpublished master's thesis]. İstanbul Sabahattin Zaim Üniversitesi.

79.

Şahinel

(2001). Eleştirel düşünme becerileri ile tümleşik dil becerilerinin geliştirilmesi [Developing integrated language skills via critical thinking skills; Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi.

80.

Şenşekerci

Bilgin

(2008). Eleştirel Düşünme ve Öğretimi [Critical thinking and its teaching]. UludağÜniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(14), 15–43. https://izlik.org/JA73XX64UE

81.

Tabachnick

B. G.

Fidell

L. S.

(2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

82.

Taylor

C. C. W.

(1998). Socrates. Oxford University Press.

83.

Twenge

J. M.

Zhang

(2004). It’s beyond my control: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of increasing externality in locus of control, 1960–2002. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8(3), 308–319. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_5

84.

Verešová

Malá

(2016). Attitude toward school and learning and academic achievement of adolescents. In Bekirogullari

Minas

M. Y.

Thambusamy

R. X.

(Eds.), 7th international conference on education and educational psychology, published by future academy (pp. 870–876). http://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.11.90

85.

Vincent-Lancrin

(2024). Critical thinking (pp. 124–128). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch27

86.

Wentzel

K. R.

(1997). Student motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.411

87.

Wechsler

S. M.

Saiz

Rivas

S. F.

Vendramini

C. M. M.

Almeida

L. S.

Mundim

M. C.

Franco

(2018). Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003