When reviewing research, consider such issues such as the validity of the design, the number of students in the study (n=?), the amount of time and degree of implementation that was involved, and other factors that may be influencing the stated results. For example, with Thinking Maps, there is an expectation that all teachers are trained in a school and receive follow-up professional development support. Additionally, students’ rarely reach fluency, or automaticity, with the language of Thinking Maps until well into their second year of exposure. This is true of most approaches to the development of thinking in students: it takes time, modeling across disciplines, and the intention of teachers to ensure that all students gain a degree of fluency with the processes. There is much to be gained by reviewing the quantitative and qualitative research in the sections linked below, along with insights from authors writing about the conceptual and theoretical foundations of different approaches and how to nurture the diverse range of thinkers as learners.