Critical Thinking Rubric -- AACU
Definition
Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion.
Capstone
4
|
Milestones
3 2
|
Benchmark
1
| ||
Explanation of issues
|
Issue/ problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively; delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.
|
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.
|
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown.
|
Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.
|
Evidence
Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion
|
Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly.
|
Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning.
|
Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning.
|
Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/ evaluation.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question.
|
influence of context and assumptions
|
Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position.
|
Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position.
|
Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa).
|
Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions).
Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position.
|
Student's position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)
|
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue.
Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others' points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
|
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue.
Others' points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis).
|
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue.
|
Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious.
|
Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences)
|
Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order.
|
Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
|
Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
|
Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified
|