Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
- View all journals
- My Account Login
- Explore content
- About the journal
- Publish with us
- Sign up for alerts
- Open access
- Published: 17 October 2024
Enhancing student critical thinking and learning outcomes through innovative pedagogical approaches in higher education: the mediating role of inclusive leadership
- Tariq Mehmood Bhuttah 1 ,
- Qian Xusheng 1 ,
- Muhammad Naseem Abid 2 &
- Sonia Sharma 3
Scientific Reports volume 14 , Article number: 24362 ( 2024 ) Cite this article
1856 Accesses
Metrics details
- Climate sciences
This quantitative study examines the influence of innovative pedagogical approaches (IPA) on enhancing student critical thinking (SCT) and student learning outcomes (SLO) in higher education, with an emphasis on the mediating role of inclusive leadership(IL). Using a sample of 321 students from public and private universities in Pakistan, the research reveals that methods such as problem-based learning, flipped classrooms, and interactive teaching significantly boost academic performance and cultivate critical thinking skills. The findings indicate that innovative pedagogical approaches positively and significantly impact student critical thinking (β = 0.536, t = 6.539, p < 0.001) and learning outcomes (β = 0.551, t = 12.725, p < 0.001). Additionally, inclusive leadership mediates the relationship between innovative teaching methods and both student critical thinking (β = 0.331, t = 3.833, p < 0.001) and learning outcomes (β = 0.405, t = 8.662, p < 0.001). Data were collected using survey questionnaires adapted from established studies on inclusive leadership, innovative pedagogical approaches, student critical thinking, and learning outcomes. These results highlight the essential role of inclusive leadership in enhancing the efficacy of innovative pedagogies by creating a supportive and diverse learning environment. The study suggests that implementing active learning strategies and integrating technology in the classroom, along with inclusive leadership practices, can significantly improve student engagement, critical thinking, and overall academic performance. This research offers valuable insights for educators and policymakers seeking to enhance teaching and learning experiences in higher education.
Similar content being viewed by others
A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms
Co-designing inclusive excellence in higher education: Students’ and teachers’ perspectives on the ideal online learning environment using the I-TPACK model
A dual mediation model of the association between principal inclusive leadership and teacher innovative behavior
Introduction.
Exploring pedagogical approaches is essential to meet the evolving needs of students and create a more engaging learning environment. Higher education is a critical stage, laying the foundation for future academic and professional pursuits. A contribution to the discussion of pedagogical approaches and their effectiveness in higher education can be found in 1 which emphasizes constructive alignment as a key component of teaching in higher education. Active learning strategies and their impact on student engagement and learning outcomes were reviewed by 2 . In 3 investigated innovative course design and teaching strategies for creating meaningful learning experiences in higher education. Student retention and success in higher education are stressed by 4 , who emphasizes the importance of engaging and supportive pedagogical approaches. However, many educational systems still rely on traditional teaching methods that often fail to effectively engage students, particularly in STEM subjects, where theory is frequently prioritized over practical, hands-on learning 5 , 6 .
Recent studies highlight the benefits of innovative teaching methods in various contexts.
For example, problem-based learning in STEM education in China has been shown to enhance students’ creativity and entrepreneurship 7 . In contrast, project-based learning in Indonesia has improved content knowledge and problem-solving skills in seismology 8 . These examples underscore the need to examine the impact of modern pedagogical approaches on student performance, as traditional methods may not fully address the diverse needs of today’s learners 9 . A recent study by 10 proved that various teaching methods, including technology integration impact students’ achievement and learning outcomes. Technology-supported interventions significantly improve reading outcomes, demonstrating enhancements and improvements in student achievement 11 .
Interactive teaching methods actively involve students in learning, encouraging participation, collaboration, and critical thinking 12 , Unlike traditional lectures, these methods use activities such as discussions, group work, simulations, and problem-solving to help students construct knowledge rather than passively receive it 13 . Research shows that these methods improve learning outcomes at the university level, promoting deep learning, critical thinking, and higher-order skills like analysis and evaluation. They also increase student engagement, motivation, and knowledge retention, while fostering essential skills for the modern workforce, such as collaboration and communication. For instance 14 , revealed that active learning approaches, such as interactive teaching methods, led to higher exam scores and lower failure rates compared to traditional lectures. Similarly 15 , found that students in interactive classrooms excelled in concept retention and problem-solving skills compared to those in traditional settings. Beyond academic performance, interactive teaching methods positively influence various aspects of student development.
Lecture-based teaching has long dominated higher education in these countries. However, with evolving pedagogical perspectives and technology integration, interactive teaching methods are increasingly recognized for enhancing student engagement and learning outcomes 16 . Research in South Asia shows that these methods positively impact university students, fostering higher-order cognitive skills, critical thinking, and deep learning, which are vital for academic and professional success. For instance, studies from Pakistan and India highlight that interactive methods like problem-based learning, collaborative learning, and flipped classrooms improve student performance, engagement, and critical thinking skills 17 . In 18 note that innovative learning models play a crucial role in advancing educational transformation and improving outcomes. According to UNESCO (2017), these models enhance the quality and relevance of education, making it more effective, accessible, and sustainable, while also helping bridge the digital divide and promoting equitable access. In higher education institutions (HEIs), leadership often defines key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure employee and institutional performance, ensuring inclusivity through discussions between leaders and staff. While leadership significantly influences standards and performance, the predominant approach in HEIs remains top-down, as observed in leadership studies 19 , 20 . Innovative pedagogical approaches have recently garnered considerable attention as key strategies for improving critical thinking and learning outcomes in higher education. These methods, such as problem-based learning, flipped classrooms, and technology integration, aim to foster more engaging and effective learning environments. In 21 described various PBL methods and their benefits, including improved critical thinking and problem-solving skills. In 22 examined the role of inquiry-based learning in developing critical thinking and cognitive skills. Similarly 23 , highlighted the role of inquiry-based learning to enhance students’ cognitive and metacognitive skills.
Hypotheses development and research model
Innovative pedagogical approaches and critical thinking.
Innovative pedagogical approaches can enhance students’ critical thinking and learning outcomes. To create a learning environment that fosters deeper understanding and better retention of knowledge, educators need to integrate methods that promote active engagement, problem-solving, and higher-order thinking. Teaching methods such as inquiry-based learning, project-based learning, and problem-oriented learning encourage students to question, analyze, and synthesize information rather than passively receive it. As 24 explain, these approaches require students to conduct sustained research and collaborate, which enhances their critical and creative thinking abilities.
Several studies have explored how gamification, which incorporates game-like elements into educational settings, can boost student engagement, motivation, and critical thinking. Cooperative learning enhances critical thinking and learning outcomes in higher education 25 . Learning through experience fosters critical thinking and deeper understanding. A combination of experiential learning and critical thinking enhances learning outcomes 26 . By combining community service with academic study, students improve their critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and overall learning outcomes 27 . Additionally, design-based research supports the development of effective pedagogical approaches that enhance critical thinking 28 .
The literature indicates that innovative pedagogical approaches can greatly enhance students’ critical thinking skills. Problem-based learning (PBL), for instance, involves students tackling real-world challenges, thereby fostering higher-order thinking 29 . Similarly, flipped classrooms, where students study lecture content at home and engage in interactive activities during class, have been shown to promote critical thinking by providing more time for discussion and practical application of knowledge 30 . These approaches go beyond rote memorization, encouraging students to analyze, evaluate, and generate new ideas 31 .
Learning outcomes in higher education
The positive impact of innovative pedagogical approaches on learning outcomes is well-documented. Research shows active learning strategies, including collaborative projects and interactive simulations, enhance student retention and comprehension 32 . For example, active learning boosts student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics courses. These methods often result in better academic outcomes, increased student engagement, and more positive attitudes toward learning 33 .
Active learning strategies like flipped classrooms and collaborative learning have improved students’ academic performance. According to 34 , students enrolled in active learning environments achieved higher exam scores and lower failure rates than those enrolled in traditional lecture-based instruction. As a result of active learning, there is more interaction and feedback.
In addition to providing students with real-world problems to solve and promotes deep learning and improves students’ ability to think critically and solve problems. Using team-based problem-solving scenarios 35 , stated that PBL fosters critical thinking and collaboration. As 36 explore, flipped classroom models promote critical thinking by shifting instruction outside of the classroom and allowing more time for interactive and analytical activities. Using flipped classroom approaches 37 , examine the impact of these approaches on students’ academic performance and critical thinking skills.
Inquiry-based learning, including problem-based learning, enhances critical thinking by fostering student self-direction and inquiry. found that learning approaches positively impacted students’ critical thinking. According to 38 , collaborative learning strategies such as group discussions and peer teaching foster deeper engagement and reflection among students, thus contributing to enhanced critical thinking. Technology-supported collaborative learning environments can improve critical thinking through shared knowledge construction 39 . Students can foster critical thinking and problem-solving skills by integrating technology into education 40 .
Mediating role of inclusive leadership
Inclusive leadership is vital for the effective implementation of innovative pedagogical approaches. Inclusive leaders cultivate environments that value diversity and encourage full participation from all students 41 . This type of leadership is key to creating an inclusive classroom culture where innovative teaching methods can flourish. Research by 42 emphasizes that inclusive leadership practices, such as acknowledging individual contributions and promoting open communication, enhance the effectiveness of innovative pedagogies by ensuring all students feel supported and valued.
The role of inclusive leadership is crucial in translating innovative pedagogical practices into improved critical thinking and learning outcomes. Inclusive leaders foster a supportive, diverse environment that encourages active participation, which is essential for the success of these teaching methods 43 . According to 44 , leadership practices that emphasize inclusivity can bridge the gap between innovative pedagogies and student outcomes, ensuring that all students have the opportunity to engage with and benefit from these approaches.
Leadership plays a critical role in any sector, according to research by 45 . In the educational sector, leadership plays an important role in improving the performance of the institution and employees, particularly faculty members. A high level of motivation is present among the leadership as they strive to fulfill their board-assigned goals and tasks. Leadership tasks, however, can be accomplished by teachers, since they are the key stakeholders. As a result 46 , report that the management’s less productive attitudes can hinder the teachers’ performance. Teachers’ teaching assistants need all kinds of resources, which the management arranges for them.
As universities embrace digitalization, universities are also responsible for adopting new technologies and assisting teachers in using them. Moreover 47 , showed that positive management behavior influences teachers’ performance through the development of understanding. Less productive coordination between management and instructors, however, can negatively affect learners’ performance. Positive relationships between teachers and management can lead to improved student learning 48 . According to 49 , the university administration needs to motivate the teachers to adopt the new methods so they can do the appropriate job for the learners. Teachers’ performance can be adversely affected if more attention is not paid to available resources, and students’ performance may also be adversely affected. As shown in the study by 50 , the availability of the necessary resources can improve the performance of teachers with an integrating attitude.
To improve student learning, teachers should adopt new methodologies and practices, and they should have a positive attitude towards it. A study by 51 concluded that teachers’ innovative input can provide students with a reliable working attitude toward their learning performance. Students’ performance is enhanced more innovatively when teachers use critical working methods. The leadership of the institute is responsible for providing teachers with all resources and instruments they might need to perform well. Despite this 52 , claim that innovative teaching methods are essential to standardizing students to meet modern learning requirements at every level of education.
Objectives and hypothesis of the study
To study Innovative pedagogies approach impact on student’s critical thinking.
Innovative pedagogies approach positively and significantly impact student critical thinking.
To study Innovative pedagogical approaches impact student learning outcomes.
Innovative pedagogical approaches positively and significantly impact student learning outcomes.
To study relationship of innovative pedagogies approaches on student critical thinking as mediated by inclusive leadership.
A positive and significant relationship between innovative pedagogies approaches and student critical thinking is mediated by inclusive leadership.
To study inclusive leadership mediation role between innovative pedagogical approaches and student learning outcomes.
Inclusive leadership mediates a positive and significant relationship between innovative pedagogical approaches and student learning outcomes.
Conceptual framework
A conceptual framework demonstrates how innovative pedagogical approaches (e.g., active learning, group discussions, problem-solving activities) relate to an independent variable while the dependent variable reflects student learning outcomes (e.g., academic performance, motivation, critical thinking skills) at a university level in Lahore, Pakistan, using inclusive leadership as a mediator.
Based on the framework shown in Fig. 1 , teachers can positively influence student learning outcomes by employing interactive teaching methods and pedagogical approaches in the classroom. Engaging students, facilitating active participation, and fostering collaborative learning can enhance academic performance, motivation, and critical thinking skills 53 .
In 54 discussed the characteristics of inclusive leadership and its potential to create supportive environments that enhance the implementation of innovative pedagogical approaches. The role of inclusive leadership supports the implementation of innovative pedagogies by fostering an environment that values diverse perspectives and collaborative learning. In 55 provided insights into how inclusive leadership can enhance the effectiveness of various initiatives by creating a supportive environment, which can be analogous to its role in educational settings. In 56 examined the role of inclusive leadership can mediate the relationship between leadership practices and innovative behaviors, suggesting a similar mediation process for pedagogical approaches in education.
Research model for this study, Source(s): Author’s creation.
Methodology
Data collection, participants, and procedure.
In this research, “quantitative data” is gathered to support findings and hypotheses. The study used Simple Random Sampling to select a sample of 321 students. First, all employed undergraduate and graduate students at selected public and private universities in Pakistan were listed, totaling 400 students. Each student was then assigned a unique number from 1 to 400. To ensure random selection, a random number generator was used to pick 321 unique numbers within this range. The students corresponding to these numbers were chosen for the sample. This approach ensures that every student has an equal chance of being selected, making the sample more representative and reliable. Survey questionnaires were then distributed to the 321 randomly chosen students to collect data for analysis.
A summary of respondents’ characteristics is shown in Table 1 .
The data for this research was collected using measurement scales that were adopted from previous studies. Before collecting the data, these studies were carefully reviewed to ensure that they fit the context of the current research. The items used in the questionnaire were evaluated for their validity and reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha being used to check these factors. For data analysis and to provide empirical evidence, the software Smart-PLS 4.0 was used.
Ethical statement
All methods employed in this study were carried out in strict adherence to relevant guidelines and regulations. The research complied with local laws, and institutional requirements, and has been approved by the University of Education, Dr. Muhammad Amin Ethical Research Review Committee (No: UE-May-2024-106).
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all participants before their involvement, ensuring their rights to voluntary participation, anonymity, and the option to withdraw at any time. The research design was meticulously developed to respect and protect the rights and well-being of every participant.
The data for this study were gathered using questionnaires adapted from well-regarded previous research on inclusive leadership, project success, and self-efficacy. The variables under investigation were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale, where respondents rated their level of agreement from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with the following scale: 5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, and 1 = strongly disagree. Additionally, demographic information, including gender, age, qualifications, faculty, university sector, and experience of the respondents, was collected to supplement the analysis.
Innovative pedagogies approaches
To assess Innovative Pedagogical Approaches (IPA), we utilized a tool developed by S. Prakash in 2012, titled “Attitude Towards Innovative Teaching Methods – Student’s Perspective,” which was presented at a conference. The scale comprised ten items: five related to teacher perceptions and five to student perceptions. As part of this study, we adopted only five items related to student perceptions of innovative pedagogies.
Student critical thinking scale
This study utilized the Critical Thinking Questionnaire (CThQ) developed by 57 . The original questionnaire consisted of six dimensions and 25 items; however, we adopted one item from each dimension, totaling six items. The SCT tool had a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.729, indicating that it was valid.
Student learning outcomes scale
To measure (SLO) for this study, we measured the student academic achievement scale using six items adapted by King et al. (2012) from the original Inventory of School Motivation (ISM) created by McInerney et al. (1997). The 43-item questionnaire is designed to assess four types of achievement goals: mastery (task and effort), performance (competition and social power), social (affiliation and social concern), and extrinsic (praise and rewards). The SLO tool demonstrated validity, as reflected by a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.920.
Inclusive leadership scale
To assess inclusive leadership in this article, we utilized a scale originally developed by 58 , which encompasses five key dimensions: supporting team members, ensuring justice and equity, shared decision-making, encouraging diverse contributions, and helping group members fully contribute. Initially, the scale comprised 36 items, incorporating various elements from different authors. However, after undergoing validity testing, the scale was refined to 32 items. For this study, we selected one representative item from each dimension, resulting in a total of five items. The Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.915 demonstrated the validity of the IL tool.
Instrument validity and reliability
To ensure the validity and reliability of the instrument, we first referred to previous studies with similar variables to select and adapt subscales for our study. The original questionnaire, developed in English, was translated into the local language (Urdu) by two high school English teachers and then back-translated into English by two others. Three experts—two from the field of education and one English language expert —evaluated the questions’ suitability. To further enhance content validity, five faculty members from public universities completed the questionnaire. A pilot test with 25 participants was then conducted to assess the clarity and comprehensibility of the questions, and these participants were excluded from the official survey. Cronbach’s alpha values for the four constructs in the pilot test exceeded the minimum acceptable value of 0.60, with item-total correlations above 0.3.
Measurement model assessment
In this study, we utilized Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) through Smart-PLS 4.0 to approximate the theoretical framework outlined by 59 . Smart-PLS was selected for its ability to analyze both direct and indirect effects comprehensively. The first stage of our PLS analysis involved evaluating the measurement model, which is essential for ensuring the quality of the measurements. To assess the validity and reliability of the measurement model, we employed two key criteria. Initially, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to assess individual item reliability, internal consistency, as well as discriminant and convergent validity.
Individual item reliability was assessed using factor loadings (standardized) on their respective constructs. Loadings should typically be at least 0.7, indicating that the construct explains over 50% of the item’s variance. Items with lower loadings may still be acceptable if other items within the construct have sufficient loadings. Items below 0.4 are recommended for removal, while those below 0.7 may remain if their removal does not significantly improve internal consisten. In this study, most items had loadings above 0.7, with five items slightly below 0.7 but above 0.5, which was deemed acceptable (see Table 3 ; Fig. 2 ).
Measurement model assessment.
Model fit statistics
A model’s fit statistics indicate how well it matches the observed data. By using fit indices, the Saturated Model and Estimated Model are compared. For the Saturated Model, the Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) value is 0.068, whereas for the Estimated Model, it is 0.069, indicating a good fit since values below 0.08 are generally acceptable (see Table 2 ). As measured by the d_ULS and d_G indices, the Saturated and Estimated models differ slightly, with d_ULS at 1.158 and 1.209 and d_G at 0.915 and 0.937, respectively. In the Estimated Model, Chi-square values are 1191.767 and 1214.369, showing a slight increase. As the Normed Fit Index (NFI) value is close to 0.766, there is a reasonably good fit between the two models.
Table 3 illustrates robust correlations between the items and their corresponding constructs, especially in areas such as innovative pedagogical approaches, student critical thinking, student learning outcomes, and inclusive leadership. High outer loadings, mostly exceeding 0.7, confirm that the constructs are well-defined by their items. The VIF values, which are generally low, indicate minimal multi-collinearity, supporting the model’s validity. The outer weights demonstrate the relative significance of each item within its construct, underscoring the model’s effectiveness in evaluating educational practices and their influence on student and leadership outcomes.
The results of the measurement model, as shown in Table 4 , indicate strong construct reliability and validity across four key areas: Inclusive Leadership (IL), Innovative Pedagogical Approaches (IPA), Student Critical Thinking (SCT), and Student Learning Outcomes (SLO). Cronbach’s alpha values range from 0.729 to 0.920, indicating good internal consistency within each construct. Composite reliability values (rho_c) are high, exceeding 0.81 for all constructs, which supports the reliability of the measurement model. Additionally, the average variance extracted (AVE) values, ranging from 0.526 to 0.746, confirm that a significant portion of variance is captured by the constructs, indicating strong convergent validity.
The discriminant validity assessment using the Fornell-Larcker Criterion, as presented in Table 5 , shows that the square root of the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct is higher than its correlations with other constructs, indicating good discriminant validity. The values for Inclusive Leadership (IL), Innovative Pedagogical Approaches (IPA), Student Critical Thinking (SCT), and Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) are all above 0.8, demonstrating that each construct is distinct from the others, with the highest discriminant validity seen between IL and SLO (0.901). This supports the theoretical differentiation between the constructs being measured.
Structural equational model
Structural equational model.
The direct effects of IPA on SCT and SLO are illustrated in Fig. 3 and detailed in Table 6 . For Hypothesis, H1, the direct impact of IPA on SCT is significant, with a path coefficient (ß) of 0.536, a t-value of 6.539, and a p-value of 0.000, confirming strong support. Similarly, Hypothesis H2 reveals a significant direct effect of IPA on SLO, with a path coefficient (ß) of 0.551, a t-value of 12.725, and a p-value of 0.000, demonstrating the robustness of this effect. These findings align with prior studies, such as those by 60 , 61 which reported significant direct effects of IPA on similar constructs, further reinforcing the validity of these relationships.
The mediation analysis in the provided data shows that IL significantly mediates the relationship between IPA and both SCT and SLO. For the relationship between IPA and SCT, mediated by IL, the standardized coefficient (β) is 0.331 with a t-value of 3.833 and a p-value of 0.000, indicating strong statistical support (see Table 7 ; Fig. 3 ). Similarly, the mediation effect of IL between IPA and SLO is also significant, with a standardized coefficient (β) of 0.405, a t-value of 8.662, and a p-value of 0.000. The narrow confidence intervals for both relationships further underscore the robustness of these findings, suggesting that IL plays a critical role in mediating the effects of IPA on SCT and SLO. These results align with existing literature on mediation effects in similar models, confirming the importance of IL as a mediator in these relationships.
Influence of IPA on SCT (H1)
The significant positive relationship between IPA and SCT (ß = 0.536, p = 0.000) suggests that innovative teaching methods directly foster student critical thinking. This result aligns with prior research 62 , 63 , emphasizing the need for educators to adopt innovative pedagogies to stimulate deeper cognitive engagement in students. This finding also reinforces constructivist learning theories, which advocate for active student participation and critical thinking in learning environments.
Effect of IPA on SLO (H2)
The strong positive impact of IPA on SLO (ß = 0.551, p = 0.000) highlights the importance of creative and interactive teaching methods for improving learning outcomes. These results are consistent with previous studies by 64 , 65 , which reported similar effects of innovative pedagogical practices on student performance. The implications are significant for educational policymakers and practitioners, suggesting that investment in pedagogical innovation can directly enhance student achievement.
Mediation role of IL in IPA-SCT relationship (H3)
Inclusive Leadership (IL) significantly mediated the relationship between IPA and SCT, with a standardized coefficient of 0.331 ( p = 0.000). This supports the hypothesis that IL strengthens the positive effects of innovative teaching approaches on critical thinking. The role of leadership in fostering an inclusive and supportive environment may explain why students engaged in innovative learning models experience higher levels of critical thinking. This finding aligns with leadership theories that emphasize the importance of inclusivity in creating equitable and effective learning environments 66 , 67 .
Mediation role of IL in IPA-SLO relationship (H4)
IL also played a crucial mediating role between IPA and SLO, with a standardized coefficient of 0.405 ( p = 0.000). This finding suggests that IL not only facilitates the adoption of innovative pedagogies but also amplifies their impact on learning outcomes. The significance of leadership in shaping educational success has been widely documented, and this study further confirms IL’s pivotal role in enhancing the effectiveness of innovative teaching practices 68 .
Implications for theory and practice
The study’s results underscore the importance of integrating innovative pedagogies and inclusive leadership in educational settings. The positive effects of IPA on both critical thinking and learning outcomes, combined with the mediating role of IL, highlight the need for a holistic approach to education that combines creative teaching with supportive leadership. These findings have practical implications for teacher training programs, educational leadership development, and curriculum design. Additionally, the study contributes to the growing body of literature that links pedagogical innovation and leadership with improved student outcomes, offering evidence-based guidance for educational reform.
By building on existing theoretical frameworks and empirical studies, this research offers new insights into how educational practices can be improved through the combined use of innovative pedagogies and inclusive leadership, creating a more dynamic and effective learning environment for all students.
For educators
Adopting Innovative Pedagogical Approaches (IPA) : The results show that IPA significantly enhances both student critical thinking and learning outcomes. Educators should integrate creative and interactive teaching methods such as problem-based learning, inquiry-based teaching, and the use of digital tools to foster deeper cognitive engagement in students.
Fostering Inclusive Leadership (IL) : The mediating role of IL indicates that educators in leadership positions must create supportive, inclusive environments to maximize the impact of innovative teaching. This implies a need for professional development in leadership skills that promote inclusivity, equity, and collaboration in classrooms.
Focus on Student-Centered Learning : With IPA directly impacting student critical thinking, educators should shift toward learner-centered teaching strategies, giving students more opportunities for active participation, exploration, and collaboration.
For policy makers
Support for Professional Development : Given the importance of both IPA and IL in improving educational outcomes, policymakers should provide targeted funding and resources for professional development programs aimed at fostering innovative pedagogical skills and inclusive leadership practices in teachers and school administrators.
Curriculum Reform : Policymakers should encourage the integration of innovative teaching practices into national curricula, emphasizing the development of critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities alongside traditional academic knowledge.
Promote Leadership Training : Educational policies should focus on leadership development programs that train educators to create inclusive learning environments. Policy initiatives can emphasize mentorship programs and workshops that enhance the ability of leaders to implement IPA effectively.
For future research
Exploring Long-Term Effects of IPA : Future research should investigate the long-term impact of IPA on student outcomes, beyond immediate learning gains, to understand how these approaches influence lifelong learning and career success.
Examine the Role of IL in Different Educational Contexts : Further studies could explore the role of Inclusive Leadership in varying educational contexts, such as in rural or under-resourced schools, to determine how leadership influences innovation and student outcomes in diverse settings.
Cross-Cultural Comparisons : Future research could also explore how the effectiveness of IPA and IL varies across different cultural and educational systems, providing more global insights into the role of pedagogy and leadership in educational success.
Impact of Emerging Technologies : Investigating how emerging technologies like AI, virtual reality, and gamification can further enhance IPA and contribute to student learning outcomes, especially in STEM and creative disciplines, could offer new directions for educational innovation.
Limitations and directions for future research
One limitation of this study is the reliance on self-reported data , which may introduce biases such as social desirability bias or inaccuracies in participants’ responses. Self-reported measures are subjective and may not fully capture the objective realities of participants’ experiences.
Another limitation pertains to the limited generalizability of the findings. The data may be context-specific, particularly if the study focuses on specific educational institutions or regions. Consequently, the applicability of these findings to other contexts, especially those outside the current sample’s geographical or educational scope, may be constrained.
The use of cross-sectional data also limits the ability to draw causal inferences . Future studies could benefit from longitudinal designs to explore how relationships between constructs evolve over time.
Future research should consider employing objective measures alongside self-reported data to strengthen the validity of findings. Incorporating performance-based assessments or observational data may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the constructs under study.
Broader sample sizes across different regions or countries would enhance the generalizability of the results. Cross-cultural comparisons could also yield insights into how leadership practices and pedagogical approaches influence student outcomes in diverse educational settings.
Exploring additional mediating or moderating variables , such as teacher motivation or institutional support, could provide a deeper understanding of the pathways through which innovative pedagogical approaches impact student learning and critical thinking.
Longitudinal research examining how inclusive leadership practices evolve and sustain their impact on student outcomes over time could also offer valuable insights.
Conclusions
The study’s findings provide significant evidence of the positive effects of innovative pedagogical approaches (IPA) on student critical thinking (SCT) and student learning outcomes (SLO). The strong correlations between items and their constructs, as demonstrated by high outer loadings and minimal multicollinearity, support the model’s robustness. Additionally, inclusive leadership (IL) plays a critical mediating role in enhancing the impact of IPA on SCT and SLO, underscoring the importance of leadership in fostering educational improvements.
The broader implications for education suggest that schools and institutions should prioritize the integration of innovative teaching methods alongside fostering inclusive leadership to maximize student engagement and learning outcomes. These findings are supported by high reliability and validity measures, as well as statistically significant path coefficients, further confirming the model’s effectiveness.
Educational leaders are encouraged to adopt these approaches to create more inclusive and effective learning environments, which could lead to improved critical thinking and better overall academic performance for students. This study’s contributions highlight the intertwined relationship between leadership, pedagogy, and student success, offering valuable insights for enhancing educational practices.
Data availability
For inquiries concerning the data and materials presented in this paper, please feel free to contact the corresponding authors via email at [email protected].
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. Train-the-trainers: implementing outcomes-based teaching and learning in Malaysian higher education. Malays. J. Learn. Instr. 8 , 1–19 (2011).
Google Scholar
Strachan, R., & Liyanage, L. (2015). Active student engagement: The heart of effective learning. Global innovation of teaching and learning in higher education: transgressing boundaries , 255–274.
Fink, L. D., Davis, J. R. & Arend, B. D. Facilitating seven ways of learning: a resource for more purposeful, effective, and enjoyable college teaching (Routledge, 2013).
Tinto, V. Enhancing student success: Taking the classroom success seriously. Int. J. First Year Higher Educ. 3 (1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v2i1.119 (2012).
Article Google Scholar
Nadelson, L. S. & Seifert, A. L. Integrated STEM defined: contexts, challenges, and the future. J. Educ. Res. 110 (3), 221–223 (2017).
Nicolaides, A. Innovative teaching and learning methodologies for higher education Institutions. Educ. Res. 3 (8), 620–626 (2012).
Weng, C., Chen, C. & Ai, X. A pedagogical study on promoting students’ deep learning through design-based learning. Int. J. Technol. Design Educ. 33 (4), 1653–1674 (2023).
Rohaetin, S. & Kartini, K. Motivation and learning achievement of economic education students, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, University of Palangka Raya During the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic. Jurnal Ilmiah Kanderang Tingang 12 (02), 222–233 (2021).
Gess-Newsome, J. et al. Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 41 (7), 944–963 (2019).
Hattie, J. The black box of tertiary assessment: an impending revolution. Tertiary Assess. Higher Educ. Student Outcomes: Policy Pract. Res. 259 , 275 (2009).
Cheung, A. C. & Slavin, R. E. The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: a meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 9 , 88–113 (2013).
Yakovleva, N. O. & Yakovlev, E. V. Interactive teaching methods in contemporary higher education. Pacific Sci. Rev. 16 (2), 75–80 (2014).
Debs, L., Miller, K. D., Ashby, I. & Exter, M. Students’ perspectives on different teaching methods: comparing innovative and traditional courses in a technology program. Res. Sci. Technol. Educ. 37 (3), 297–323 (2019).
Kamran, F., Kanwal, A., Afzal, A. & Rafiq, S. Impact of interactive teaching methods on students learning outcomes at university level. J. Positive School Psychol. 7 (7), 89–105 (2023).
Betti, A., Biderbost, P. & García Domonte, A. Can active learning techniques simultaneously develop students’ hard and soft skills? Evidence from an international relations class. Plos One 17 (4), e0265408 (2022).
Article CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar
Lund Dean, K. & Wright, S. Embedding engaged learning in high enrollment lecture-based classes. Higher Educ. 74 (4), 651–668 (2017).
Asad, M. M., Hussain, N., Wadho, M., Khand, Z. H. & Churi, P. P. Integration of e-learning technologies for interactive teaching and learning process: an empirical study on higher education institutes of Pakistan. J. Appl. Res. Higher Educ. 13 (3), 649–663 (2021).
Zhang, J. H. et al. An individualized intervention approach to improving university students’ learning performance and interactive behaviors in a blended learning environment. Interact. Learn. Environ. 28 (2), 231–245 (2020).
Teräs, H. Collaborative online professional development for teachers in higher education. Profession. Develop. Educ. 42 (2), 258–275 (2016).
Alam, F., Das, H. K. & Arafin, S. S. Incorporating student voice: bring changes in teaching techniques of college-level management education in Bangladesh. J. Appl. Res. Higher Educ. 15 (3), 866–883 (2023).
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn?. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 16 , 235–266 (2004).
Abdi, A. The effect of inquiry-based learning method on students’ academic achievement in science course. Univ. J. Educ. Res. 2 (1), 37–41 (2014).
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., et al. Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educ. Res. Rev. 14 , 47–61 (2015).
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. Teaching for meaningful learning: a review of research on inquiry-based and cooperative learning. Book excerpt. George Lucas Educ. Found. (2008).
Boudadi, N. A. & Gutiérrez-Colón, M. Effect of Gamification on students’ motivation and learning achievement in Second Language Acquisition within higher education: a literature review 2011–2019. EuroCALL Rev. 28 (1), 57–69 (2020).
Miettinen, R. The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of reflective thought and action. Int. J. Lifelong Educ. 19 (1), 54–72 (2000).
Eyler, J., & Giles Jr, D. E. Where’s the Learning in Service-Learning? Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series . Jossey-Bass, Inc., 350 Sansome St., San Francisco, CA 94104 (1999).
Li, C. C., Aldosari, M. A. & Park, S. E. Understanding pedagogical approaches on student learning styles. Ann. Dent. Oral Health 4 (1), 1039–1045 (2021).
Yu, D., Zhang, Y., Xu, Y., Wu, J. & Wang, C. Improvement in critical thinking dispositions of undergraduate nursing students through problem-based learning: a crossover-experimental study. J. Nurs. Educ. 52 (10), 574–581 (2013).
Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. A. The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. In 2013 ASEE annual conference & exposition (pp. 23–1200) (2013).
Freeman, S. et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111 (23), 8410–8415 (2014).
Article ADS CAS PubMed Central Google Scholar
Prince, M. Does active learning work? A review of the research. J. Eng. Educ. 93 (3), 223–231 (2004).
Michael, J. Where’s the evidence that active learning works?. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 30 (4), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00053.2006 (2006).
Chi, M. T. & Wylie, R. The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educ. Psychol. 49 (4), 219–243 (2014).
Killian, M. & Bastas, H. The effects of an active learning strategy on students’ attitudes and students’ performances in introductory sociology classes. J. Scholar. Teach. Learn. 15 (3), 53–67 (2015).
Ölmefors, O. & Scheffel, J. High school student perspectives on flipped classroom learning. Pedag. Culture Soc. 31 (4), 707–724 (2023).
Hao, Y. & Lee, K. S. Teaching in flipped classrooms: exploring pre-service teachers’ concerns. Comput. Hum. Behav. 57 , 250–260 (2016).
Gillies, R. M. Dialogic interactions in the cooperative classroom. Int. J. Educ. Res. 76 , 178–189 (2016).
Roschelle, J. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning/Springer-Verlag .
Ertmer, P. A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 42 (3), 255–284 (2010).
Rayner, S. Educational diversity and learning leadership: a proposition, some principles and a model of inclusive leadership? Educ. Rev. 61 (4), 433–447 (2009).
Ryan, J. C. & Tipu, S. A. Leadership effects on innovation propensity: a two-factor full range leadership model. J. Bus. Res. 66 (10), 2116–2129 (2013).
Shore, L. M. et al. Inclusion and diversity in work groups: a review and model for future research. J. Manage. 37 (4), 1262–1289 (2011).
Leithwood, K., Seashore, K., Anderson, S. & Wahlstrom, K. Review of research: How leadership influences student learning. The Wallace Foundation. https://doi.org/10.59656/EL-SB5787.001 (2004).
De Jong, L., Meirink, J. & Admiraal, W. School-based teacher collaboration: Different learning opportunities across various contexts. Teach. Teach. Educ. 86 , 102925 (2019).
Kidd, W. & Murray, J. Educators’ perspectives of online teaching during the pandemic: implications for initial teacher education. J. Educ. Teach. 48 (4), 393–406 (2022).
Wheldall, K., & Merrett, F. (2017). Positive teaching: the behavioural approach . Routledge.
Bao, Y. A dual mediation model of the association between principal inclusive leadership and teacher innovative behavior. Sci. Reports 14 (1), 12320 (2024).
ADS CAS Google Scholar
Androutsos, A. & Brinia, V. Developing and piloting a pedagogy for teaching innovation, collaboration, and co-creation in secondary education based on design thinking, digital transformation, and entrepreneurship. Educ. Sci. 9 (2), 113 (2019).
Pozo-Rico, T., Poveda, R., Gutiérrez-Fresneda, R., Castejón, J. L., & Gilar-Corbi, R. (2023). Revamping teacher training for challenging times: teachers’ well-being, resilience, emotional intelligence, and innovative methodologies as key teaching competencies. Psychology research and behavior management , 1–18.
Huberman, M. (1992). Understanding teacher development. Teacher development and instructional mastery , 122–142.
Özgenel, M., Mert, P. & Parlar, H. Improving teacher performance: leadership qualities of school principals as a tool. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 19 (39), 1127–1148 (2020).
Lee, J. S. The effects of the teacher–student relationship and academic press on student engagement and academic performance. Int. J. Educ. Res. 53 , 330–340 (2012).
Fagan, H. A. S., Wells, B., Guenther, S. & Matkin, G. S. The path to inclusion: a literature review of attributes and impacts of inclusive leaders. J. Leader. Educ. 21 (1), 88–113 (2022).
Gallegos, P. V. (2013). The work of inclusive leadership. Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion , 177–202.
Jiang, J., Ding, W., Wang, R. & Li, S. Inclusive leadership and employees’ voice behavior: a moderated mediation model. Curre. Psychol. 41 (9), 6395–6405 (2022).
Kobylarek, A., Błaszczyński, K., Ślósarz, L. & Madej, M. Critical Thinking Questionnaire (CThQ)–construction and application of critical thinking test tool. Andrag. Adult Educ. Soc. Market. 2 (2), 1–1 (2022).
Prakash, S. Attitude of student teachers towards innovative teaching learning methods. Paper presented in State level seminar on Innovative teaching learning methods in school education at Peniel rural college of education on 14th March 2012 (2012).
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M. & Sarstedt, M. Partial least squares structural equation modeling: rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Plann. 46 (1–2), 1–12 (2013).
Kivunja, C. Innovative pedagogies in higher education to become effective teachers of 21st century skills: unpacking the learning and innovations skills domain of the new learning paradigm. Int. J. Higher Educ. 3 (4), 37–48 (2014).
Meng, Q., Jia, J. & Zhang, Z. A framework of smart pedagogy based on the facilitating of high order thinking skills. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 17 (3), 251–266 (2020).
Okolie, U. C. et al. Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills through engagement with innovative pedagogical practices in Global South. Higher Educ. Res. Develop. 41 (4), 1184–1198 (2022).
Lee, N. Y., Wang, Z. & Lim, B. The development of critical thinking: What university students have to say. Teach. Higher Educ. 29 (1), 286–299 (2024).
Ammar, M., Al-Thani, N. J. & Ahmad, Z. Role of pedagogical approaches in fostering innovation among K-12 students in STEM education. Soc. Sci. Human. Open. 9 , 100839 (2024).
Byers, T., Imms, W. & Hartnell-Young, E. Comparative analysis of the impact of traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning outcomes. Stud. Educ. Evaluat. 58 , 167–177 (2018).
Randel, A. E. et al. Inclusive leadership: realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev. 28 (2), 190–203 (2018).
Korkmaz, A. V., Van Engen, M. L., Knappert, L. & Schalk, R. About and beyond leading uniqueness and belongingness: a systematic review of inclusive leadership research. Hum. Resour. Manage. Rev. 32 (4), 100894 (2022).
Kuknor, S. C. & Bhattacharya, S. Inclusive leadership: new age leadership to foster organizational inclusion. Eur. J. Traini. Develop. 46 (9), 771–797 (2022).
Download references
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
School of Education, Zhejiang Normal University, No 688, Yingbin Avenue, Wucheng District, Jinhua City, 321004, Zhejiang Province, China
Tariq Mehmood Bhuttah & Qian Xusheng
School of Education, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 1037 Luoyu Road, Hongshan District, Wuhan City, 430074, Hubei Province, China
Muhammad Naseem Abid
Department of Education, Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India
Sonia Sharma
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Contributions
Tariq Mehmood Bhuttah Concept and write the initial draft of the paper.Qian Xusheng removed the errors from the results and discussion section. Muhammad Naseem Abid analysis and mentoring. Sonia Sharma helped with proofreading and graphics.
Corresponding authors
Correspondence to Qian Xusheng or Muhammad Naseem Abid .
Ethics declarations
Competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Material 1
Supplementary material 2, supplementary material 3, rights and permissions.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Bhuttah, T.M., Xusheng, Q., Abid, M.N. et al. Enhancing student critical thinking and learning outcomes through innovative pedagogical approaches in higher education: the mediating role of inclusive leadership. Sci Rep 14 , 24362 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75379-0
Download citation
Received : 05 August 2024
Accepted : 04 October 2024
Published : 17 October 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-75379-0
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Innovative pedagogical approaches
- Critical thinking
- Learning outcomes
- Inclusive Leadership
- Higher education
Quick links
- Explore articles by subject
- Guide to authors
- Editorial policies
Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.
