Two Rubrics for Critical Thinking Assessment: A Mini-Training Session
Two Rubrics for Critical
Thinking Assessment:
A Mini-Training Session
The 2005 Assessment Institute at IUPUI
October 24, 2005
Facilitators
Jerry K. Stonewater
Susan K. Wolcott
Univ. Director of Liberal Educ. & Assessment
Miami University
Oxford, OH
Email: stonewjk@muohio.edu
Phone: 513-529-7135
Independent Scholar & Consultant
WolcottLynch Associates
Bellevue, WA
Email: swolcott@
Phone: 425-830-3962
Web site:
Participant Outcomes:
?
?
?
?
Identify Student Learning Outcomes for Critical Thinking
Use a Rubric to Assess Student Papers
Evaluate/Critique Assessment Rubric Design
Recommend Improvements to Assessment Task Design
1
Identify Learning Outcomes for
Critical Thinking
ACTIVITY
List Words/Phrases That Describe the Critical Thinking Outcomes You
Would Like Students to Achieve:
2
Using a Rubric to Assess
Critical Thinking
RUBRIC: Set of scoring guidelines for assessing student
performance
Ideally, an Assessment Method Should:
? Link Assessment Results to Student Learning (Help
¡°Close the Loop¡±)
? Provide Students With Useful Feedback by Pointing
to Ways They Can Improve
3
Miami University Experience
Using WSU Rubric
Available from Washington State University at
The Critical Thinking Rubric
1) Identifies and summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or the
source's position).
Scant
Substantially Developed
Identifies the main problem and
Does not identify and summarize the subsidiary, embedded, or implicit
problem, is confused or identifies a aspects of the problem, and
different and inappropriate problem. identifies them clearly, addressing
their relationships to each other.
Does not identify or is confused by
Identifies not only the basics of the
the issue, or represents the issue
inaccurately.
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
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.
Substantially Developed
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
Deals only with a single perspective
and fails to discuss other possible
perspectives, especially those salient
to the issue.
Substantially Developed
Addresses perspectives noted
previously, and additional diverse
perspectives drawn from outside
information.
(continued)
4
4) Identifies and assesses the key assumptions.
Scant
Does not surface the assumptions and
ethical issues that underlie the issue, or
does so superficially.
Substantially Developed
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
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.
Substantially Developed
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
Analyzes the issue with a
Discusses the problem only in egocentric clear sense of scope and
context, including an
or sociocentric terms.
assessment of the audience of
Does not present the problem as having
the analysis.
connections to other contexts-cultural,
political, etc.
Considers other pertinent
contexts.
7) Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences.
Substantially Developed
Identifies and discusses
Fails to identify conclusions, implications, conclusions, implications, and
and consequences of the issue or the key consequences considering
relationships between the other elements context, assumptions, data,
of the problem, such as context,
and evidence.
implications, assumptions, or data and
evidence.
Objectively reflects upon the
their own assertions.
Scant
(continued)
5
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- critical thinking skills for auditors piti viti
- critical thinking competency standards
- evaluating critical thinking skills two conceptualizations ed
- two rubrics for critical thinking assessment a mini training session
- skills to critical thinking
- critical thinking 2 how to think critically library
- critical thinking the very basics narration
- diagrams helpful 9 for understanding critical thinking and its
- an introduction to critical thinking syracuse university
- chapter 1 introduction what is critical thinking understanding
Related searches
- fun critical thinking interview questions
- critical thinking interview questions
- critical thinking questions for interview
- good critical thinking questions examples
- sample critical thinking questions
- list of critical thinking questions
- critical thinking competency examples
- assessment rubrics for teachers
- critical thinking in education articles
- critical thinking argument examples
- critical thinking and philosophy
- critical thinking competency standards