Critical Thinking Rubric

Learning Outcome	Exceeds Expectations	Meets Expectations	Approaches Expectations	Does Not Meet Expectations
For normalized learning gains (Hake gains ^{1, 2}) following pre/post- test assessment	High normalized learning gain. g > 0.5	Medium normalized learning gain. 0.3 < g < 0.5	No significant gain nor loss. 0 < g < 0.3	Any significant normalized loss. g < 0
1) Problem Setting: Identify or describe a problem or question and its component parts.	Comprehensively, clearly, and accurately identifies and describes a problem or question and its component parts.	Accurately identifies or describes a problem or question and its component parts.	Identifies and/or describes a problem or question; is missing some components or some components are inaccurate.	Does not identify or describe a problem or question; key components are missing or incorrect.
2) Recognize Assumptions: Recognize and assess personal and other relevant underlying assumptions.	Recognizes and thoroughly assesses personal and other relevant underlying assumptions; comprehensively investigates and/or explains the role biases have in shaping points of view, analysis, and conclusions.	Recognizes and assesses personal or other relevant underlying assumptions. Adequately investigates and/or explains the role biases have in shaping points of view, analysis, and conclusions.	Recognizes and assesses personal and other relevant underlying assumptions. Does not investigate and/or explain the role biases have in shaping points of view, analysis, and conclusions.	Does not recognize or assess the personal and other relevant underlying assumption.
3) Evidence: Identify, gather, and analyze the information/data necessary to address the problem or question.	Identifies and gathers information/data to address a problem or question. Analysis is thorough and reflects multiple sources when addressing the problem or question.	Identifies and gathers information/data to address a problem or question. Analysis is adequate to address the problem or question.	Identifies and gathers information/data to address a problem or question. Analysis is inadequate to address the problem or question.	Does not gather or analyze information necessary to address a problem or question.
4) Evaluate: Evaluate information/data for credibility (e.g., bias, reliability, validity) and relevance to a situation.	Comprehensively and accurately evaluate relevant information/data for credibility. Demonstrate skills as evaluators in addition to awareness of the evaluation process.	Accurately evaluate relevant information/data for credibility. Demonstrate adequate skills as evaluators in addition to awareness of the evaluation process.	Evaluate information/data for credibility but may not be fully accurate. Does not demonstrate adequate skills as evaluators in addition to awareness of the evaluation process.	Does not evaluate information/data for credibility. Does not demonstrate skills as evaluators in addition to awareness of the evaluation process.
5) Context: Identify relevant (disciplinary) context(s) including, as appropriate, principles, criteria, concepts, values, histories, and theories.	Comprehensively and accurately identifies the relevance of the context in which the problem, event, and/or issue exists, is interpreted, or is perceived. Context is comprehensive and accurate.	Accurately identifies the relevance of the context/environment in which the problem, event, and/or issue exists, is interpreted or is perceived. Context is present and accurate.	Identifies relevance of the contexts in which the problem, event, and/or issue exists, is interpreted, or is perceived. Context is present but may not be fully accurate.	Does not identify the relevance of the contexts in which the problem, event, and/or issue exists, is interpreted, or is perceived. Context is not present.
6) Reasoning/Conclusion: Develop logical conclusions, solutions, and outcomes that reflect an informed, well- reasoned evaluation.	Shows logical reasoning to reach a valid and thorough conclusion supported by relevant data; a clear and accurate explanation of the conclusion in the context of the problem is present.	Shows logical reasoning to reach a valid conclusion supported by data; an explanation of the conclusion in the context of the problem is present.	Shows reasoning to reach a conclusion but may not be supported by relevant or adequate data; an explanation of the conclusion in the context of the problem is not present.	Does not develop a logical conclusion, solution, or outcome that is supported by data.

Section Menu