See Below

1    

The Graduate School - UMUC CRITICAL THINKING Rubric

SUMMER 2015 Learners demonstrate the ability to apply logical thinking processes to formulate clear, defensible ideas

and to draw ethical conclusions.

Critical Thinking Evaluation Criteria:

1. Identify and clearly explain the main issue or problem under critical consideration. See: Defining Critical Thinking

1.1 Summarize the issue or problem with supporting details to provide full understanding. Explanation: What, exactly, is the problem or issue you’re meant to consider? If you can’t state it clearly in your own words, you don’t really understand it. Make sure you’ve covered the facts and the background in your summary, and make the key relationships clear.

1.2 Identify the underlying causes or conditions contributing to the issue or problem and consider the context. Explanation: What factors have contributed to the issue or problem? Be sure you can explain how the circumstances may be shaping the issue. Look for assumptions people may be operating under, including your own assumptions. If any assumptions seem unsound, challenge them.

1.3 Pose significant questions to be answered prior to analyzing and addressing the issue or problem. Explanation: As you think about an issue, you need to pose

2    

questions to guide your analysis. These questions can vary widely: what is the significance of the issue? How relevant and accurate is the information? How accurate and appropriate are the interpretations or assumptions? What are the implications of the analysis? How reasonable or ethical are the analysis or the responses? Obviously, you won’t ask ALL of these questions every time, and you’re not limited to them – but use them as a starting point.

2. Gather and analyze information to investigate the issue or problem. See: The Critical Thinking.org Logical Analysis Model; The Foundations of Ethical Reasoning

2.1 Scan the environment for information relevant to the issue or problem. Explanation: Don’t assume you know everything about the issue or problem from the get-go. Look around – ask questions, do some reading, find analogous situations. Gather information from a variety of sources in order to inform your analysis.

2.2 Assess the reliability of the information gathered. Explanation: Information needs to be reliable before you can use it. This reliability comes in five different realms: authority, credibility, objectivity, quality, and currency. Authority relates to the author’s expertise in the field; you want to rely on experts who are actually experts. The credibility of a source concerns its trustworthiness. Your source material should be objective (based in fact) rather than subjective (based in opinion). The content should be high quality, fact-based, well documented, complete and accurate. Your information also needs to be current; while some information doesn’t change, the ways people think about it does. Your sources should be as current and up-to-date as possible.

2.3 Analyze the information in a logical and organized

3    

manner to see how concepts are developed and connected. Explanation: Once you’ve got a pile of information, you need to be systematic in the way you examine it. Can the issue be broken down into individual parts? Once it’s broken down, examine each part to see how it connects to the others. If you can see how they relate to each other or to other problems, you might be able to see how the problem developed. Compare and contrast related ideas or pieces of information.

2.4 Identify contradictory information and seek to reconcile contradictions. Explanation: Does the information you’ve gathered support or undermine your analysis? Where do the individual bits of information NOT fit together? Where do they contradict each other? If information is contradictory, check the trustworthiness of the sources; perhaps one source is more reliable than the other. If necessary, do a little further research.

3. Consider and analyze other possible viewpoints, conclusions or solutions to the issue or problem. See:

3.1 Articulate clearly and fairly the viewpoints of others and their reasoning to provide adequate understanding. Explanation: You can’t just rush into an argument or analysis without considering more than one side of the issue. Your side MIGHT be the most-correct side, but you need to make sure your blinders are off before you declare that to be the case. Give “the other guy” his due, and explain other perspectives fairly. This will broaden your own understanding, and it will assure your audience that you’ve considered alternatives.

3.2 Identify significant, potential implications and

4    

consequences of alternative points of view. Explanation: Now that you’ve given “the other guy” his say, think about his point of view. Do these other viewpoints have implications for the issue at hand? Explain those implications relative to the previously identified ones.

3.3 Evaluate assumptions underlying other possible viewpoints, conclusions or solutions. Explanation: Now that you know what the other viewpoints are, think about what informs them. Is “the other guy” laboring under a different set of assumptions? Identify them; evaluate them; consider how they inform his viewpoint.

4. Develop well-reasoned ideas, conclusions or decisions, checking them against relevant criteria and benchmarks. See:

4.1 Articulate inferences that follow logically from the evidence presented. Explanation: You need to be able to explain your line of reasoning clearly, so that the reader/listener/client can follow. The inferences need to make sense both individually and together (sometimes each one makes sense, but when they’re all packaged together they don’t work).

4.2 Assert logical conclusions only when sufficient evidence supports them, and distinguish between attainable and unattainable solutions. Explanation: A conclusion is only logical when enough evidence supports it; you can’t jump to a conclusion and hope that missing pieces of evidence don’t matter. It is also important to know the difference between a solution that is within the realm of possibility and one that is not. If your conclusion leads you to a solution that will cost millions of dollars or a change in basic

5    

human nature, that may not be attainable – but perhaps one that involves a few thousand dollars or takes into consideration human limitations would be.

4.3 Incorporate ethical reasoning when formulating ideas, conclusions or decisions. Explanation: No decision is a good decision unless it’s ethical, and there are several different ethical models. (Some ethical models include the Utilitarian approach, the Rights approach, the fairness approach, the Common-Good approach, and the Virtue approach. You’ll want to find the right approach for the issue at hand. Consider the most appropriate ethical model, and then apply it to your decision. What are the ethical implications of your idea, conclusion, or decision? Can you live with these implications?

OVERALL EVALUATION LEVEL