1.+Critical+Thinking+Value+Rubric

// f //// or more information  //// ,  //// please  //// contact value  //// @  //// aacu.org  //  ||                  ||   The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success.  **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.  **Framing Language **  This rubric is designed to be transdisciplinary, reflecting the recognition that success in all disciplines requires habits of inquiry and analysis that share common attributes. Further, research suggests that successful critical thinkers from all disciplines increasingly need to be able to apply those habits in various and changing situations encountered in all walks of life. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';"> This rubric is designed for use with many different types of assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list of possibilities. Critical thinking can be demonstrated in assignments that require students to complete analyses of text, data, or issues. Assignments that cut across presentation mode might be especially useful in some fields. If insight into the process components of critical thinking (e.g., how information sources were evaluated regardless of whether they were included in the product) is important, assignments focused on student reflection might be especially illuminating. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';"> **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Glossary ** //<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. //    •  <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than one way. • <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or unstated) that are "taken for granted or accepted as true without proof." (quoted from www.dictionary.reference.com/browse/assumptions) • <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural, environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that influence and complicate the consideration of any issues, ideas, artifacts, and events. • <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as stated. For example, "she was green with envy" would be interpreted to mean that her skin was green. • <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif';">Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a non-literal way. For example, "she was green with envy" is intended to convey an intensity of emotion, not a skin color.
 * ** <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 20pt; font-variant: small-caps;">Critical Thinking **** <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 20pt; font-variant: small-caps;"> VALUE Rubric  **

// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">f //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">or more information  //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">,  //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">please  //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">contact value  //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">@  //// <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">aacu.org  //   || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">   || <span style="font-family: Garamond,serif; font-size: 10.5pt;"> **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Definition ** <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;"> 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. <span style="font-family: Garamond,serif; font-size: 10.5pt;"> //<span style="font-family: Garamond,serif; font-size: 10.5pt;">Ev ////<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">aluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. //   <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;"> <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">4  ||||  **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Milestones ** <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">3 2  ||  **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Benchmark ** <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">1  || //<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion // || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Others' points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Others' points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 4pt;">
 * ** <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 20pt; font-variant: small-caps;">Critical Thinking **** <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 20pt; font-variant: small-caps;"> VALUE Rubric  **
 * <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">  ||  **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Capstone **
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Explanation of issues ** || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown.  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.  ||
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Evidence **
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Influence of context and assumptions ** || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position.  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa).  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position.  ||
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Student's position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) ** || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue.
 * **<span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences) ** || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order. || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.  || <span style="font-family: 'Garamond','serif'; font-size: 10.5pt;">Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.  ||