Developing critical thinking through the lens of interdisciplinarity: a case study of a criminological theory module

Why Rethinking Crime Matters to Everyone

Most of us encounter crime through news headlines, true‑crime podcasts, or TV dramas that promise clear answers about what went wrong and who is to blame. But real crime is rarely so simple. This paper follows a group of first‑year university students taking a criminology module that treats crime not as a riddle with one solution, but as a puzzle made of many different pieces—psychology, sociology, biology, law, politics, and more. By redesigning the course around this mix of perspectives, the authors show how students can learn to question easy explanations, think more deeply about why people break the law, and ultimately come away more confident, curious, and critical in how they understand the world.

Seeing Crime as a Multi‑Piece Puzzle

The article begins by explaining why criminological theory is so hard to teach. Crime has hundreds of competing explanations, and each discipline tends to guard its own favorite ideas. One researcher has even described the field as a “battlefield” of clashing theories. Rather than pretending there is one best answer, the authors argue that students need to see this diversity honestly and learn how to navigate it. Interdisciplinary education—bringing together ideas and methods from several fields—is presented as the best way to do this. If new criminologists learn early on to combine social, psychological, biological, and legal insights, they are better placed to build stronger explanations of crime and less likely to fall back on political bias or personal assumptions.

Inside an Unusual Criminology Classroom

The case study centers on a first‑year module at the University of Birmingham. The course combines eleven lectures, eleven discussion‑based seminars, a self‑guided online activity, and a final essay. It opens with big questions: What counts as knowledge? What makes a good theory? Why can no single factor—no gene, no mental health diagnosis, no neighborhood—explain all crime on its own? Students are introduced to different ways of linking theories together, and to “analytic criminology,” which asks them to think step‑by‑step about how individual decisions and social conditions interact. Throughout the term, every new theory is treated as one tool among many rather than a full explanation on its own, encouraging students to look for how the pieces connect.

Learning by Debate, Stories, and Fiction

Teaching methods go well beyond traditional lectures. In seminars, students work in small groups, debate opposing viewpoints, and give each other feedback. Simple structures—such as everyone taking a turn to speak before open discussion—help quieter students join in. Visual tools like comparison tables, concept maps, and a diagram linking personal choices to social structures make abstract ideas easier to grasp. A standout feature is a self‑guided online “jigsaw” activity developed with a Science and Fiction Lab. Here, students explore links between brain imaging, crime, and supernatural fiction, using stories to think about free will, responsibility, and the grey areas of human behavior. Many found this eye‑opening, though some wanted clearer guidance and more concrete examples to anchor the abstract ideas.

What Changed for the Students

To see what impact the module had, the authors ran focus groups with a small sample of students. The discussions revealed several shifts. Students reported moving from simply asking “what happened?” to asking “why did it happen, and why to this person in this context?” They found themselves applying course ideas to news stories and true‑crime media they already consumed. Seminars, in particular, helped them recognize that many supposed “either‑or” debates—such as nature versus nurture—are better understood as “both‑and” questions. The final essay, which asked students to explain a real crime using theory, pushed them to compare different explanations, spot each theory’s blind spots, and reflect on how their own educational background made them more comfortable with some perspectives (often sociological) than others (such as biological or psychological).

Why This Approach Matters Beyond the Classroom

In plain terms, the paper concludes that teaching students to look at crime from many angles at once makes them better thinkers. When courses deliberately weave together disciplines, encourage debate, and build in reflection and feedback, students become more analytical, better at joining up ideas, and more aware of their own biases. The authors argue that this style of teaching could improve not just criminology, but how future professionals—from police officers to policymakers and social workers—approach real‑world problems. Instead of reaching for quick, one‑sided answers, they are more likely to ask careful questions, weigh different kinds of evidence, and design responses that match the true complexity of crime.

Citation: Svingen, E., Tsirova, E. & Khalilova, U. Developing critical thinking through the lens of interdisciplinarity: a case study of a criminological theory module. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 13, 211 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-026-06517-4

Keywords: interdisciplinary criminology, critical thinking, criminology education, teaching methods, crime theory