january 29, 2010art beach retreat 2010 1art beach retreat 2010 assessment rubric for critical...

January 29, 2010 ART Beach Retreat 20101ART Beach Retreat 2010

Assessment Rubric for Critical Thinking

First Scoring Session Summary

ART Beach Retreat 2010

http://www.spcollege.edu/

January 29, 2010 ART Beach Retreat 2010 2


SPC Definition

Critical thinking is the active and systematic process of communication, problem-solving, evaluation, analysis, synthesis, and reflection, both individually and in community, to foster understanding, support sound decision-making, and guide action.




The ARC was designed by the QEP staff and the Faculty Champions to…

Enhance the QEP Align with the College’s definition of critical

thinking Be flexible for use in multi-disciplines Provides a snapshot view of how student

learning is being affected by the critical thinking initiative




Created to be flexible enough to address a number of student project modalities including written and oral communications.

Intended to evaluate the student’s use of critical thinking skills in the development of the paper as opposed to specifically evaluating the quality of student’s writing skills.




Performance Element

Exemplary(4)

Proficient(3)

Developing(2)

Emerging(1)

Not Present (0)

I. CommunicationDefine problem in your own words.

Identifies the main idea or problem with numerous supporting details and examples which are organized logically and coherently.

Identifies the main idea or problem with some supporting details and examples in an organized manner.

Identifies the main idea or problem with few details or examples in a somewhat organized manner.

Identifies the main idea or problem poorly with few or no details or states the main idea or problem verbatim from the text.

Does not identify the main idea or problem.

II. AnalysisCompare & contrast the available solutions.

Uses specific inductive or deductive reasoning to make inferences regarding premises; addresses implications and consequences; identifies facts and relevant information correctly.

Uses logical reasoning to make inferences regarding solutions; addresses implications and consequences; Identifies facts and relevant information correctly.

Uses superficial reasoning to make inferences regarding solutions; Shows some confusion regarding facts, opinions, and relevant, evidence, data, or information.

Makes unexplained, unsupported, or unreasonable inferences regarding solutions; makes multiple errors in distinguishing fact from fiction or in selecting relevant evidence.

Does not analyze multiple solutions.

III. Problem SolvingSelect & defend your final solution.

Thoroughly identifies and addresses key aspects of the problem and insightfully uses facts and relevant evidence from analysis to support and defend potentially valid solutions.

Identifies and addresses key aspects of the problem and uses facts and relevant evidence from analysis to develop potentially valid conclusions or solutions.

Identifies and addresses some aspects of the problem; develops possible conclusions or solutions using some inappropriate opinions and irrelevant information from analysis.

Identifies and addresses only one aspect of the problem but develops untestable hypothesis; or develops invalid conclusions or solutions based on opinion or irrelevant information.

Does not select and defend a solution.




Performance Element

Exemplary(4)

Proficient(3)

Developing(2)

Emerging(1)

Not Present (0)

IV. EvaluationIdentify weaknesses in your final solution.

Insightfully interprets data or information;identifies obvious as well as hidden assumptions, establishes credibility of sources on points other than authority alone, avoids fallacies in reasoning; distinguishes appropriate arguments from extraneous elements; provides sufficient logical support.

Accurately interprets data or information;identifies obvious assumptions, establishes credibility of sources on points other than authority alone, avoids fallacies in reasoning; distinguishes appropriate arguments from extraneous elements; provides sufficient logical support.

Makes some errors in data or information interpretation; makes arguments using weak evidence; provides superficial support for conclusions or solutions.

Interprets data or information incorrectly; Supports conclusions or solutions without evidence or logic; uses data, information, or evidence skewed by invalid assumptions; uses poor sources of information; uses fallacious arguments.

Does not evaluate data, information, or evidence related to final solution.

V. SynthesisSuggest ways to improve/strengthen your final solution.

Insightfully relates concepts and ideas from multiple sources; uses new information to enhance final solution; recognizes missing information; correctly identifies potential effects of new information.

Accurately relates concepts and ideas from multiple sources; uses new information to enhance final solution; correctly identifies potential effects of new information.

Inaccurately or incompletely relates concepts and ideas from multiple sources; shallow determination of effect of new information on final solution.

Poorly integrates information from more than one source to support final solution; Incorrectly predicts the effect of new information on final solution.

Does not identify new information for final solution.




Performance Element

Exemplary(4)

Proficient(3)

Developing(2)

Emerging(1)

Not Present (0)

VI. ReflectionReflect on your own thought process.“What did you learn from this process?”“What would you do differently next time to improve?”

Identifies strengths and weaknesses in own thinking: recognizes personal assumptions, values and perspectives, compares to others’, and evaluates them in the context of alternate points of view.

Identifies strengths and weaknesses in own thinking: recognizes personal assumptions, values and perspectives, compares to others’, with some comparisons of alternate points of view.

Identifies some personal assumptions, values, and perspectives;recognizes some assumptions, values and perspectives of others; shallow comparisons of alternate points of view.

Identifies some personal assumptions, values, and perspectives;does not consider alternate points of view.

Does not reflect on own thinking.



ARC Assignment Profile

ARC Assignment Profile is designed to provide consistency and accuracy in the evaluation of the ARC at the institutional level as well as provide guidelines for the use of the assessment at the course level.

The ARC is essentially a ‘tool’ to evaluate critical thinking. For a tool to be effective it must be used in the correct situation or ‘job.’

The purpose of the ARC Assignment Profile is to outline the most appropriate course assignment.



ARC Administration

The ARC was administered in thirteen sectionsof courses randomly selected across fourdisciplines of focus in 2009.

Paralegal Studies Library Business Technology Communication.



ARC Scoring Session Results

Thirteen faculty scored fifty-eight of the total186

ARC assessments during the scoring session.




Frequency of Assessments Requiring a Third Rater Two Raters Independently Scored Each Item A Third Rater Scored Items with Scores Differing by more than 1

point




Mean Scores for each Competency Overall Mean Score was 13.5 out of a possible 24 Highest Overall Student Score was 21




Highest Overall Mean Scores by Discipline Paralegal Studies at 15.75 Business Technologies at 15.64

January 29, 2010 ART Beach Retreat 201014ART Beach Retreat 2010


First Scoring Session Summary

ART Beach Retreat 2010

http://www.spcollege.edu/

january 29, 2010art beach retreat 2010 1art beach retreat 2010 assessment rubric for critical...

Documents

critical thinkingcreated

main idea

problem solvingselect

communicationdefine

critical thinking skills

relevant evidence

valid solutions

relevant information