Aziza Ellozy Originally published on: October 4, 2005
“…in all cases where critical thinking is desired, students need to explicitly and consciously use criteria to assess their own thinking and that of others.” (Broadbear, 1-8)
Last issue, we published a guide for your students on how to read critically. Because experts recommend providing them also with criteria for assessment of critical thinking, we have chosen to share with you the Critical Thinking Rubric developed by Washington State University’s “Critical Thinking Project,” a rubric that has been commonly adapted in several U.S. universities. You may find it helpful to adopt, simplify, or adapt parts of it to the needs of your class.
1) Identifies and summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or the source’s position)
Scant
- 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.
Substantially Developed
- 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 considers the influence of the context on the issue.
Scant
- Discusses the problem only in egocentric or socio-centric terms.
- Does not present the problem as having connections to other contexts-cultural, political, etc.
Substantially Developed
- Analyzes the issue with a clear sense of scope and context, including an assessment of the audience of the analysis.
- Considers other pertinent contexts.
- 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, and completeness.
- Observes cause and effect and addresses existing or potential consequences.
- Clearly distinguishes between fact, opinion, and acknowledges value judgments.
3) 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 and completeness. - Observes cause and effect and addresses existing or potential consequences.
- Clearly distinguishes between fact, opinion, and acknowledges value judgments.
4) 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.
5) 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.
6) Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences.
Scant
- 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.
Substantially Developed
- Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications, and consequences considering context, assumptions, data, and evidence.
- Objectively reflects upon their own assertion.
7) 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
- Appropriately identifies one’s own position on the issue, drawing support from experience and information not available from assigned sources.
Sources
Broadbear, James. “Essential Elements of Lessons Designed to Promote Critical Thinking.” The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) 3.3 (2003): 1-8.
“The Critical Thinking Rubric.” WSU Critical Thinking Project. Washington State University. 04 October. 2005 http://wsuctproject.wsu.edu/ctr.html
