The
Critical Thinking Rubric
printer friendly version
The following rubric analyzes the term or concept "critical thinking". All of the assignments in this course -- including the Study Questions, the film reviews, short story writing and so on -- incorporate most or all of these qualities.
For the Conference Paper, however, we'll apply this rubric more directly to the topics each of you have chosen to examine and write about.
| 1) Identifies and
summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or the source's
position). |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Does not identify and summarize the problem,
is confused or identifies a different and inappropriate problem. Does not identify or is confused by the issue, or represents the issue inaccurately. |
Identifies the main problem and subsidiary,
embedded, or implicit aspects of the problem, and identifies them clearly,
addressing their relationships to each other. Identifies not only the basics of the issue, but recognizes nuances of the issue. |
2) Identifies and presents the STUDENT'S OWN perspective and
position as it is important to the analysis of the issue. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Addresses a single source or view of the argument and fails to clarify the established or presented position relative to one's own. Fails to establish other critical distinctions. | Identifies, appropriately, one's own position on the issue, drawing support from experience, and information not available from assigned sources. |
3) Identifies and considers OTHER salient perspectives and
positions that are important to the analysis of the issue. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Deals only with a single perspective and fails to discuss other possible perspectives, especially those salient to the issue. | Addresses perspectives noted previously, and additional diverse perspectives drawn from outside information. |
4) Identifies and assesses the key assumptions. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Does not surface the assumptions and ethical issues that underlie the issue, or does so superficially. | Identifies and questions the validity of the assumptions and addresses the ethical dimensions that underlie the issue. |
5) Identifies and assesses the quality of supporting
data/evidence and provides additional data/evidence related to the
issue. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Merely repeats information provided, taking
it as truth, or denies evidence without adequate justification. Confuses
associations and correlations with cause and effect. Does not distinguish between fact, opinion, and value judgments. |
Examines the evidence and source of
evidence; questions its accuracy, precision, relevance, completeness. Observes cause and effect and addresses existing or potential consequences. Clearly distinguishes between fact, opinion, & acknowledges value judgments. |
6) Identifies and considers the influence of the context *
on the issue. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Discusses the problem only in egocentric or
sociocentric terms. Does not present the problem as having connections to other contexts-cultural, political, etc. |
Analyzes the issue with a clear sense of
scope and context, including an assessment of the audience of the analysis.
Considers other pertinent contexts. |
7) Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and
consequences. |
|
| Scant | Substantially Developed |
| Fails to identify conclusions, implications, and consequences of the issue or the key relationships between the other elements of the problem, such as context, implications, assumptions, or data and evidence. | Identifies and discusses conclusions,
implications, and consequences considering context, assumptions, data, and
evidence. Objectively reflects upon the their own assertions. |