Skip to main content

iRubric: Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric


edit   print   share   Copy to my rubrics   Bookmark   test run   assess...   delete   Do more...
Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric 
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. 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. 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. Courtesy of AAC&U: http://aacu.org/value/index.cfm
Rubric Code: L4B67
Ready to use
Public Rubric
Subject: (General)  
Type: (Other)  
Grade Levels: Undergraduate, Graduate

Powered by iRubric Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric
  Capstone

4 pts

Milestone

3 pts

Milestone

2 pts

Benchmark

1 pts

Explanation of issues

Capstone

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding.
Milestone

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions.
Milestone

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown.
Benchmark

Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description.
Evidence

Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion
Capstone

Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly.
Milestone

Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning.
Milestone

Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning.
Benchmark

Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question.
Influence of context and assumption

Capstone

Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position.
Milestone

Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position.
Milestone

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).
Benchmark

Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position.
Conclusions and outcomes

Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences)
Capstone

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.
Milestone

Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Milestone

Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly.
Benchmark

Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.



Keywords:
  • Critical thinking, Ambiguity, Assumptions, Context, Literal meaning, Metaphor

Subjects:

Types:

Discuss this rubric




Do more with this rubric:
Preview

Preview

Preview this rubric.
Edit

Edit

Modify this rubric.
Copy

Copy

Make a copy of this rubric and begin editing the copy.

Print

Print

Show a printable version of this rubric.
Categorize

Categorize

Add this rubric to multiple categories.
Bookmark

Bookmark

Bookmark this rubric for future reference.
Assess
Test run

Test run

Test this rubric or perform an ad-hoc assessment.
Grade

Grade

Build a gradebook to assess students.
Collaborate

Collaborate

Apply this rubric to any object and invite others to assess.
Share
Publish

Publish

Link, embed, and showcase your rubrics on your website.
Email

Email

Email this rubric to a friend.
Discuss

Discuss

Discuss this rubric with other members.
 

Do more with rubrics than ever imagined possible.

Only with iRubrictm.

n67