SLOs:
- clearly articulate an issue or problem;
- identify, analyze, and evaluate ideas, data, and arguments as they occur in their own or others’ work;
- acknowledge limitations such as perspective and bias;
- develop well-reasoned (logical) arguments to form judgments and/or draw conclusions.
Definitions:
Critical thinking: a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion (AAC&U Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric).
Inference: the drawing of a conclusion from known or assumed facts or statements
Assumption: that which is taken for granted as the basis of an argument, inference, or action
Fact: that which is the case
Bias: any preference or attitude that affects one’s outlook or behavior, esp. by inhibiting impartial consideration or judgement
| Learning Outcomes | Exceeds (10-9) | Meets (8.9-8) | Approaches (7.9-7) | Does Not Meet (6.9-0) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thesis - Clearly articulate an issue or problem | There is an accurate and precise description of the main issue or problem of the essay. The thesis is contentious, well constructed, and very clearly stated. | There is an accurate description of the main issue or problem of the essay, but it lacks precision. The thesis is salient but it is not clearly stated. | There is a description of the main issue or problem of the essay, but it lacks accuracy and precision. The thesis is present but unobvious and must be reconstructed from the text of the paper. | Either there is no description of the main issue or problem of the essay, or it is inaccurate and imprecise. Either there is no thesis present, the thesis is incoherent, or there are multiple competing theses. |
| Use of evidence - Identify, analyze, and evaluate ideas, data, and arguments as they occur in their own or others’ work | Premises (reasons for accepting the thesis) directly support the paper’s main thesis and are clearly stated and well-organized. Carefully considers and responds well to possible objections to the paper’s main thesis. | Premises are salient, but not clearly stated or well-organized. Considers and responds reasonably well to possible objections to the paper’s main thesis. | Premises are present, but unobvious and must be reconstructed from the text of the paper. Considers some objections to the paper’s main thesis but does not respond adequately to them. | Either there are no premises, or they are incoherent, fail to support the thesis, and/or fail to cohere with one another. Either there is no consideration of, and response to, objections to the paper’s main thesis, or any such consideration of, and response to, objections to the paper’s main thesis is inadequate or incomplete. |
|
Limitations/opposing views - Acknowledge limitations such as perspective and bias |
Limits of position are acknowledged effectively within the argument and others’ points of view are synthesized within position. | Limits of position and others’ points of view are acknowledged but they are not fully addressed within the argument. | Limits of position are not fully explored; minimal acknowledgement of different sides of the issue. | Either there is no attempt to identify the limits of position or to incorporate different sides of the issue, or the attempt is unsuccessful. |
| Reasoning - Develop well-reasoned (logical) arguments to form judgments and/or draw conclusions | The main argument of the essay is very strong and avoids logical fallacies. | The main argument of the essay is strong, containing only minimal logical fallacies. | The main argument of the essay has significant weaknesses, containing some significant logical fallacies. | Either there is no discernable argument in the essay, or the main argument of the essay is weak, containing major logical fallacies. |
Benchmark: 100% of students will meet or exceed standards
Give students a score for each row of the rubric, convert it based on a 100-point scale, and sort students into the appropriate performance category.
Example:
| Learning Outcome | Score |
|---|---|
| Problem: | 8/10 = 80 (Student meets) |
| Use of evidence: | 7.5/10 = 75 (Student approaches) |