Critical Thinking Rubricideas, suggestions, recommendations from Faculty Flex (first draft, 1/13; second draft 1/23; third draft 1/30; fourth draft 2/6/2012)

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. (From the AAC&U)

Unsatisfactory / Emerging / Proficient / Advanced
Comprehension: Identification of issues, problems, topics, etc. / Does not identify the intended meaning of the work, or its biases and perspectives. / Few issues/problems in the work are identified with a beginning understanding of their relevance to the work. Biases and perspectives are touched upon; information is delivered (expressed) in a way that shows a beginning understanding of the work and its purpose. / Some issues/problems in the work are identified with some understanding of their relevance to the work is evident. Biases and perspectives are adequately identified; information is delivered (expressed) in a way that shows good understanding of the work and its purpose. / Main issues/problems in the work are identified and why/how they are problems or questions is clearly and comprehensively explained. Biases and perspectives are fully understood; all the information is delivered (expressed) showing a full understanding of the work and its purpose.
Application: Investigation and integration of evidence, contexts, and assumptions. / Does not distinguish between fact, opinion, and value judgments; does not question evidence. / Evidence that leads to a claim in the work is only vaguely apparent; assumptions (personal, those in the work, and others’) are touched upon, and there is the beginning of some examination of additional perspectives. / Evidence that leads to a claim in the work is investigated, and some distinction is made between appropriate and inappropriate evidence; assumptions (personal, those in the work, and others’) are integrated as are additional perspectives. / Evidence that leads to a claim in the work is thoroughly investigated, and appropriate and inappropriate evidence is insightfully distinguished; assumptions (personal, those in the work, and others’) are carefully identified through a thorough examination of contexts and additional perspectives.
Synthesis and Analysis: Connection of arguments, contexts, perspectives, etc., and formulation of a position. / Does not identify and summarize, or accurately represent the problem(s); no argument or hypothesis is apparent. / The main problem(s) and complexities are beginning to emerge. An argument, position, or hypothesis is attempted but the relationship to the problem(s), etc. is not clear. / The main problem(s) and of the work and the relationship between perspectives and contexts are apparent. An argument, position, or hypothesis is made that shows an understanding of the arguments, etc. / The main problem(s) and complexities of the work are carefully and clearly identified, and the relationship between perspectives and contexts are acknowledged and conveyed. A reasonable, clear, position or hypothesis is expressed demonstrating some complexity of thought.
Evaluation and Analysis: Accepts or refutes positions, perspectives, arguments, etc., and draws conclusions. / Does not identify the positions, perspectives, arguments, or implications of the work, and does not draw a conclusion. / Begins to identify the positions, perspectives, arguments and implications of the work, and a conclusion from these is attempted. / Reasonably identifies and discusses the positions, perspectives, arguments and implications of the work, and draws some conclusion based on this consideration. / Effectively identifies and discusses with insight the positions, perspectives, arguments and implications of the work, and considers their relevance in order to draw conclusions.