As AI booms, how can we keep promoting critical thinking?

Daljit Singh explores practices to promote critical thinking in the face of threats from the increasing use of AI.

In short:

• Critical thinking has long been a core capability for lawyers grappling with problem framing, analysis, synthesis, evaluation and sound decision-making.
• There are fears that the growing use of AI poses a significant risk to critical thinking, particularly for junior and early-career lawyers, by encouraging ‘cognitive offloading’ and over-reliance on AI outputs.
• Legal entities must proactively and systematically promote critical thinking in the age of AI through targeted practices such as AI literacy, modelling reasoning, coaching and reflective practice.

Critical thinking is widely accepted within the legal profession as a core capability in practising law, the basis of sound legal judgement, and one of the hallmarks of a good lawyer.

This emphasis on critical thinking is evident across the professions, with Heard et. al (2025) highlighting that “the development of critical thinking as an essential skill in 21^St-century learning is uncontested within educational and professional settings”.

Some examples of how critical thinking is positioned and defined in the legal profession are discussed below.

These include definitions from a professional legal body, a legal research institute and a law firm:

• The Law Society of New South Wales, in its newly released Solicitor Capability Framework (2025), lists 14 priority capabilities and highlights critical thinking and decision-making together as a ‘primary’ priority capability. It defines critical thinking and decision-making as a function in which one “critically examines and assesses existing information, thinking, assumptions and issues to present well-reasoned insights that inform decision-making”.
• The Centre for the Future of the Legal Profession, as reported by Bell et. al (2025), includes critical thinking as one of 12 competencies and defines it as “to engage in a systematic and rigorous analysis of ideas”. It associates critical thinking closely with judgement, which is defined as including “problem formulation or recognition, the generation of ideas for hypothesised solutions from which a form of action, a decision, is chosen”.
• Baker McKenzie’s Global Development Framework lists 14 competencies, of which two are directly related to critical thinking. These are ‘crystallizing the problem’, and ‘deep thinking’ (Groysberg and Sherman 2007), defined respectively as including “insightful analysis that identifies the real issues, priorities and risks that need to be addressed”, and “having an agility of mind for penetrating analysis, synthesis and evaluation, and the creation of solutions”.

Drawing on the above definitions, critical thinking includes the following reasoning and deliberative processes to enable legal decision-making:

• exploring the framing of problems
• conducting a robust analysis of information, thinking, assumptions and issues
• synthesising ideas to develop new insights and options
• rigorously evaluating options
• deciding on the most appropriate solution.

These key elements of critical thinking constitute an iterative process, and are also regarded as ‘higher-order-thinking skills’.

AI poses threat to critical thinking

There is a growing body of research outlining the threat to critical thinking posed by the increasing use of AI across a broad range of people, including professionals.

A widely cited research study by Gerlich (2025) highlighted that the frequent use of AI leads to an erosion of critical thinking. He found that ‘cognitive offloading’, or the delegation of cognitive tasks, to AI led to this decline by reducing engagement in deep, reflective thinking. This effect was more pronounced for younger people. Gerlich emphasised the need for strategies to promote critical engagement with AI.

Research from Microsoft on the use of AI by knowledge workers, reported by Towers-Clark (2025), uncovered a confidence relationship with AI. The more professionals trusted AI abilities, the less likely they were to think critically. Professionals with higher self-confidence in their own skills engaged more critically with AI output. It also reported that the nature of work using AI is changing from information gathering to information verification, from problem-solving to response integration (adapting outputs to context), and task execution to task stewardship, all of which reinforce an even greater need for critical thinking.

Samantha Moppett, a law professor, has reported on research that indicated a significant deficit in critical-thinking skills among incoming law students in the United States. She stated that this deficit poses particular challenges as the legal profession increasingly integrates AI tools that can handle routine legal tasks but which require human oversight and evaluation.

Spirlet (2025) noted a recent report from the Work AI Institute, produced with researchers from universities including Notre Dame, Harvard and UC Santa Barbara, which highlighted that AI is making people feel smarter and more productive while their underlying skills slowly erode. The report also concluded that those most at risk were early-career professionals.

These studies raise concerns on the likely impact of AI usage on the critical-thinking abilities of lawyers, especially junior lawyers, who are in the early stages of developing their critical thinking and judgement skills.

This highlights a key issue for the legal profession on how to promote critical thinking in legal workplaces to mitigate the above risks, besides helping to enhance the general level of critical thinking across the profession.

Practices to promote critical thinking

Legal organisations can implement the following 12 practices as part of a robust talent development strategy to promote critical thinking in the age of AI.

1. Develop AI literacy

Conduct programs on how AI works, its strengths and limitations, any ethical considerations, plus advice on using effective prompts and evaluating AI outputs. Inculcate a heathy scepticism and curiosity in using AI and frame AI as a tool, rather than a replacement, for critical thinking.

2. Adopt criteria to critically evaluate AI outputs

Adams (2025) outlines how lawyers can critically assess AI output. This includes cross-referencing with authoritative sources; reviewing AI for consistency, completeness, relevance and currency, bias and balance and ethical compliance; and using prompts to interrogate AI.

3. Model critical thinking

Have senior lawyers share their reasoning and deliberation processes with junior lawyers, including their use of AI, as they work together on matters. This will enable juniors to learn more about critical thinking, and how it leads to optimal legal solutions.

4. Use simulation-based training

Abrahams (2025) outlines how some law firms are using simulation-based training to develop the foundational knowledge and skills of juniors. These develop skills, including critical thinking, using AI generated simulations, and structured coaching and feedback.

5. Compare and contrast AI and AI-human outputs

Include challenging cases in training which illustrate the use of only AI versus AI and human analysis. Explore differences and reinforce the importance of critical engagement with AI, identifying areas where AI struggles (e.g. in identifying nuances and context).

6. Map the thinking processes in using AI

Require junior lawyers to document their thinking in using AI, including their use of prompts, what they did to evaluate the AI output, revisions made, and their reasoning for changes. This should be reviewed by their supervisors for coaching and feedback.

7. Adopt critical-thinking tools

There are many publicly available tools from which to choose, including the ‘5-Whys’, ‘The Ladder of Inference’, ‘Concept Mapping’, ‘The Devil’s Advocate’, and the ‘RED model’ (the latter outlines how to Recognise assumptions, Evaluate arguments and Draw conclusions).

8. Expand the use of Socratic questioning

Use more Socratic questioning (also a critical-thinking tool) in training and coaching to stimulate critical thinking. Probe lawyers about their framing of issues, analysis, connecting ideas, developing options, evaluating options and selection of solutions.

9. Incorporate critical thinking into workflows

Insert critical-thinking prompts into workflows to remind lawyers of the key elements of critical thinking (problem framing, analysis, synthesis, evaluation etc.). Ask them to review if they are applying these and, if not, to adjust their approach.

10. Provide coaching and feedback on critical thinking

Supervisors should provide timely and comprehensive coaching and feedback on the extent to which lawyers are demonstrating critical thinking in their work, and engage them on how they can improve.

11. Ensure team meetings promote critical thinking

Foster more critical thinking in team meetings. For example, use critical-thinking tools and ask probing questions such as “What are our implicit assumptions?”, “Have we considered all perspectives?”, “What are we missing?”, and “Where could we be wrong?”.

12. Adopt reflective practice

Have lawyers reflect on their work product to stimulate critical thinking, considering what they did well, what they did not do as well, and how to improve. Teams should also do these for major matters. The Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner’s website has excellent tools on reflective practice for lawyers.

The above practices should be viewed as illustrative, rather than exhaustive, and reinforce each other in developing critical thinking. The practices include learning from one’s own work experience, learning from others (supervisors, coaches, peers, role models and mentors), and learning from formal training.

These practices will develop the ‘metacognition’ of lawyers. This is the process of lawyers becoming more aware of their thinking processes so they can better self-regulate and improve their critical thinking.

It may be tempting for some legal organisations to only use training workshops as that may be seen as easier to delegate to their learning function, or external providers. That would be an incomplete and short-sighted response as work experience and supervisory experiences are also required to foster critical thinking.

Institutionalising the practices

Legal organisations can institutionalise the practices promoting critical thinking by taking the following six key actions.

1. Clarify the meaning of critical thinking, and set expectations through the organisation’s competency framework.

For example, the Law Society of NSW’s Solicitor Capability Framework defines critical thinking and decision-making, and lists the skills at three levels – developing, proficient and expert. For more guidance, legal organisations can also include in their competency framework examples of positive and negative critical-thinking behaviours observed at work.

2. Have organisational leaders lead the way

Organisational leaders must lead, in promoting the practices and in institutionalising critical thinking. These leaders must role-model critical thinking, encourage others to think critically, and be open to changing their own thinking.

3. Develop and implement a comprehensive AI policy

This policy should guide AI use, including the development of AI literacy, protocols, ethical considerations and the evaluation of AI outputs. Adams’ (2025) open-access book, focused on AI for the legal profession, is an excellent resource on this.

4. Foster an environment of continuous learning

Critical thinking thrives when continuous learning is fostered. This requires an emphasis on psychological safety, the willingness to constructively challenge thinking (of self and others), the openness to changing one’s thinking, and allocating time for learning and feedback.

5. Recognise and reward critical-thinking behaviours

The organisational performance management and reward processes should recognise and reward the demonstration of critical-thinking behaviours, drawn from the organisation’s competency framework.

6. Monitor implementation to identify improvements

Obtain periodic feedback on the implementation of the AI policy, the critical-thinking practices and these key actions. Identify what is working well, and not as well. Communicate findings, highlighting successes and plans for improvement.

All of the above key actions are mutually reinforcing and will enable legal organisations to firmly embed and institutionalise the practices promoting critical thinking.

Conclusion

A growing body of research highlights the risk that critical thinking is being eroded by the frequent use of AI. This is of particular concern for the development of junior lawyers, who are in the early stages of developing their critical thinking and judgement skills.

Ensuring that critical thinking is fostered, rather than eroded, is therefore going to be a significant challenge for legal organisations, and the legal profession, in the age of AI.

In response to this threat, legal organisations should proactively adopt practices that will help lawyers develop and hone their critical-thinking skills. In addition, legal organisations should take key actions to institutionalise these practices.

Daljit Singh is the Principal of Transforming Talent. He is a talent management and leadership development expert and has held senior roles with KPMG and Baker McKenzie. Daljit is also a Teaching Fellow with the Australian College of Law where he teaches two post-graduate subjects – Workforce of the Future, and Leadership. You can contact him at daljit.singh@transformingtalent.com.au.

Additional references

• Facione, P. A. (2023), Critical thinking: What it is and why it Counts. Insight Assessment.
• Fruehwald, E. S. (2020), How to teach lawyers, judges and law students critical thinking. Independently Published.
• Gomez Schieber, E.A. et.al. (2025), Attorneys and AI: How lawyers use artificial intelligence and analyse its impact. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 9, Issue 7.
• Nigam, S. et a.al. (2024), Is AI finally going to take our jobs? Meeting client AI/technological demands while supporting junior lawyers' development. International Bar Association. 29 November.
• Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2014), Learning the art of critical thinking. Rotman Management, Winter.