Fails to identify strong, relevant counter-arguments. Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences. Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications, and consequences considering context, assumptions, data, and evidence.
Identifies relevant arguments reasons and claims pro and con. Objectively reflects upon the their own assertions. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view. Emerging Mastering 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.
Does not distinguish between fact, opinion, and value judgments. Regardless of the evidence or reasons maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions. Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.
Analytical Critical Thinking Scoring Rubrics Analytical rubrics provide more information than holistic rubrics.
Addresses perspectives noted previously, and additional diverse perspectives drawn from outside information. Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons, and unwarranted claims.
Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view. Draws warranted, judicious, non-fallacious conclusions.
Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others. Identifies not only the basics of the issue, but recognizes nuances of the issue. Does not present the problem as having connections to other contexts--cultural, political, etc.
Departments typically use the A version as a pre-test before students begin the program or course and the B version as a post-test.
Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason. The holistic rubric illustrated above combines five different kinds of thinking into a single category.duplication of the critical thinking scoring rubric, rating form, or instructions herein for local teaching, assessment, research, or other educational and noncommercial uses, provided that no part of the scoring rubric is altered and that "Facione and Facione" are cited.
ANALYTICAL ESSAY RUBRIC 3 - Exemplary - Satisfactory 2- Below Satisfactory 1 - Unsatisfactory Key Question, Problem, or Issue @Foundation for Critical Thinking, mi-centre.com Title: Microsoft Word - Analytical. critical thinking /persuasive writing rubric Learning Expectation One: Students are critical thinkers, readers, listeners, and viewers.
I mplementation: Students research, read, listen, and view information focused on a specific issue; analyze and evaluate content.
Rubric Rating Scale NA Emerging Developing Mastering d urately. tho s. issue. d problem, issue 1 2 3 4 5 6 cio-little n not an alysis. Peter Facione and Noreen Facione have developed the four-level Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric to assess the critical thinking skills and some of the dispositions identified by the Delphi project as these skills are demonstrated by by students in essays, projects, presentations, clinical practices, and such.
The Critical Thinking Rubric presented in this CTL Bulletin was created to facilitate embedded assessment of goal 2 of the Gen-Ed program. A random set of student papers across our Gen-Ed courses will be selected and.Download