 |
Critical Thinking Assessment Project |
Statement of Purpose
Theoretical Standpoint
Fundamental Critical Thinking Competencies
Check your critical thinking skill with an Informal
Self-Assessment Quiz
(Under construction - only narrative example available now)
Submit a critical thinking assessment concept to our Assessment Concept
Suggestion Box
The Critical Thinking Assessment Project seeks to develop and make
available an adequate, modular instrument for the assessment of critical
thinking competence both generally and in the contexts of specific
disciplines. The organization and reporting methodology of this modular
instrument will reflect recognition of diverse critical thinking
challenges and strategies in
order to account most accurately for the multiple variables that
contribute to meaningful critical thinking competence.
In creating this list of competencies and the implementation strategies
below, we have taken the position that in practice, critical thinking
consists primarily of employing a set of techniques whose purpose is
almost exclusively evaluative. We include, however, skill in the
construction of definitions, arguments, and explanations as critical
thinking concerns to the extent that these entail formal abilities in
addition to the obvious need for relevant factual knowledge.
In drawing these category lines, we explicitly intend to isolate the
critical faculties for examination and development, much as someone
training seriously for a sport
systematically isolates muscle groups to make sure that each is up to the
strength and flexibility demands of the sport. Moreover, just as the
fitness of a particular muscle group can be a necessary but not
sufficient condition for success in the chosen sport, so critical
thinking skill is understood as one of those capabilities that can be
intentionally developed to optimize performance, though such development
by itself
cannot be taken as a guarantee of success in solving practical problems,
nor of achieving insight. Success in any particular task of thinking, we
believe, will be favored by integration of creative and critical thinking
skills with various discipline-specific competencies.
This project's theory of assessment of critical thinking skill
differentiates
itself from any theory that envisions an assessment that could be
reported as a
single value (e.g., a test score) or as a set of values purporting to
measure anything
other than a specific skill that is relevant to critical thinking
competence. Our assessment approach is most succinctly communicated
through explanation of the Assessment
Profile that is generated when an individual completes a sufficient
number of assessment instrument elements for
some picture of competence to emerge.
Essential critical thinking competence appropriate for university-level work includes ability to:
identify issues of belief, empirical
truth, and logic [Details]
evaluate credibility of sources of
information and opinion [Details]
identify necessary or probable
assumptions and presuppositions [Details]
recognize the difference between
normative and non-normative claims [Details]
identify relevant and irrelevant
claims in a given context [Details]
recognize misleading uses of
language [Details]
determine when additional
information is needed for a given purpose [Details]
construct deductive and inductive
arguments [Details]
identify valid and invalid
arguments, including fallacies of deduction and induction [Details]
recognize logical conflict,
compatibility, and equivalence [Details]
critique and construct analogical
arguments and explanations [Details]
understand and evaluate causal
arguments and explanations [Details]
assess common types of statistical
information, generalizations, and reasoning [Details]
Both in theory and in practice, these competencies partially overlap each other. Each item in the list can serve as a worthwhile focus of instruction and merits appropriately designed assessment. It is reasonable to expect that just as these items lend themselves to different modes of instruction that contribute in their particular ways to a student's general education, so also different modes of assessment will return various kinds of usable information. Rigid reliance on any single mode of instruction risks an adverse effect on ability to construe novel situations, and narrowly focused assessment strategies risk skewing the inductive inferences that constitute assessment proper.
For each of the critical thinking abilities targeted in the curriculum, there will be some general instructional techniques that promise to increase students' abilities and some general assessment techniques that will provide (1) insight into level of technical mastery and (2) information to help conceive elements of critical thinking instruction in all courses, whether a course explicitly and exclusively thematizes methods of critical thinking as a modern introductory logic or critical thinking course would, or incorporates some subset of critical thinking methods as an expected part of university-level instruction generally.
The annotated list below, which will be updated periodically, is intended to be a compendium. As critical evaluations of these ideas become available, modifications will be made and links to discussions and additional relevant materials will be updated. Last update: 12/98.
Ability to identify issues
of belief, empirical truth, and logic [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture or lecture/discussion - Instructor leads a close reading of a text containing an argument with attention to argument structure and types and functions of claims in the text.
2. Computer application - An opening screen explains the principles of separating issues of empirical truth from issues of logic and provides one or two examples of how to make this determination. Then, given a passage containing at least one argument with at least one premise that is the conclusion of a subargument, and which is displayed with a variable get-box preceding each proposition, the student is instructed to place the letter "E" in a box to designate a claim whose truth-value is most likely intended to be determined by empirical investigation and an "L" for those whose truth-value is most likely intended to be determined by logical argument. Arguments about diverse topics and employing a variety of inductive and deductive forms help correct for strategies of rote learning. Extensive diagnostics constitute an important part of the instruction.
3. Group problem - Given a passage containing claims whose truth-value is stated to be either a matter of empirical truth or of logic, discuss why the determination is as given.
Assessment techniques
1. Essay - Given a passage that contains an argument and that contains a stated conclusion, at least one dubious but relevant premise, and at least one obviously true statement that concerns the topic but is not relevant as a premise, explain how the argument succeeds or fails.
2. Checkboxes - Given a conclusion some number of claims of varying believability but relatively clear-cut relevance or irrelevance to the conclusion, identify which would support the conclusion if true.
3. Multiple-choice - Given a passage that contains some claims that are matters of fact, and which could reasonably be investigated, and others that are supported by those claims, determine whether a claim in the passage is one whose truth-value is likely to be determined by investigation or by argument.
Ability to evaluate
credibility of sources of information and opinion [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture - Instructor presents principles of qualification by training or experience.
2. Lecture - Instructor presents research relevant to evaluating powers of observation, including enhancement and impairment.
3. Lecture - Instructor discusses critical or theoretical readings or presents summary material concerning impartiality.
4. Lecture - Instructor or research librarian surveys availability and appropriate use of documentation.
5. Lecture/discussion and group discussion - Group considers factors affecting the credibility of several different parties with conflicting interests in a situation.
6. Lecture/discussion and group discussion - Group is given a description of a situation in which two or more parties are in conflict. Assessments are made of the credibility of the parties based on the information given. Then, following initial assessments, more information is given and credibility of the parties is reassessed. This process may iterate several times.
7. Lecture - Instructor discusses role of intentionality in constitution of attention.
Assessment techniques
1. Multiple-choice - A situation in which conflicting interpretations are likely is described in a prompt. The test item would consist of a single claim and options to judge whether the claim, if true, would increase, decrease, or not significantly affect the credibility of one party or another in the situation.
2. Multiple-choice - A situation in which one party (e.g., a psychologist) presents an explanation that will be either accepted or not.
Ability to identify
necessary or probable assumptions or presuppositions [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture - Instructor explains how assumption and presupposition function in arguments and explanations and provides examples.
2. Lecture - Instructor provides a relatively complex inductive argument with non-controversial premises and traces assumptions back through successive stages of generality.
Assessment techniques
1. Ordering - Given an objective and a preformulated set of steps to achieve it, place the steps in the logically necessary order according to information given.
2. Essay - Given an argumentative or explanatory passage, discuss what the writer may or must have assumed in the formulation of the position taken in the passage.
Ability to recognize the
difference between normative and non-normative claims [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture - Instructor provides explanation of categorical limitations on discussion, overt prescriptions with direct references, uses of emotive language to affect attitude, and language that strives for neutrality.
Assessment techniques
1. True/False - Given a set of several claims in a passage, identify which are best taken as intended to function as rules and which are best taken as intended to function as descriptions or reports.
Ability to identify relevant
and irrelevant claims in a given context [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1.
Ability to recognize
misleading uses of claims and questions [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1.
Ability to determine when
additional information is needed for a given purpose [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1. Given a conclusion and some facts, explain what additional information would be needed for the conclusion to be justified with certainty (or to your satisfaction).
Ability to construct
deductive and inductive arguments [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1.
Ability to identify valid
and invalid arguments, including fallacies of deduction and
induction [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture - Explain validity.
Assessment techniques
1. Given an argument, show or explain how to determine validity.
Ability to recognize
logical conflict, compatibility, and equivalence [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1. Objective - Given a claim, match it with its plain language logical equivalent.
Ability to critique and
construct analogical arguments and explanations [To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1.
Ability to understand and
evaluate causal arguments and explanations [To
Competency List]
Instruction practices
1.
Assessment techniques
1.
Ability to assess common
types of statistical information, generalizations, and reasoning
[To Competency List]
Instruction practices
1. Lecture - Explain basic statistical concepts (e.g., mean, median, mode, std. deviation) in the context of a specific extended problem (e.g., selecting a college or university, analyzing information about communities to which one might relocate).
2. Group work - Provide different groups with data sets that are consistent, but differently characterized. The characterizations might differ with respect to inclusion of facts, granularity of data, etc. The group task would be to tell the story presented in the data and formulate three questions whose answers would be relevant to their confidence in their interpretations of the data they were given. The stories would be written in class, handed in, read to the class, and then critiqued in light of each other and the knowledge of both the instructor and students.
Assessment techniques
1. Essay - Given a set of data and two competing characterizations of it (including representations of fact, extrapolations, and generalizations), explain what works and what does not in the alternative versions. If either is entirely satisfactory, explain why. If neither is entirely satisfactory, construct an account that is satisfactory with respect to the features already presented in the competing accounts and explain what gaps, if any, must remain.
2. Multiple choice - Given a paragraph that contains verbal representations of a situation and then several quantitative statements that purport to characterize some aspect(s) of that paragraph, select the quantitative data that most closely corresponds to some designated claim(s) in the paragraph.
3. Multiple choice - Given a paragraph that contains a number of quantitative statements, select from several choices the verbal description that most closely corresponds to the quantitative information.
Integration of Critical Thinking Techniques into Specialized Content Courses
Accounting
Current:
Consider:
African American Studies
Current:
Consider:
African Studies
Current:
Consider:
Agricultural Business
Current:
Consider:
Agricultural Engineering Technology
Current:
Consider:
Agriculture
Current:
Consider:
American Indian Studies
Current:
Consider:
American Studies
Current:
Consider:
Animal Science
Current:
Consider:
Anthropology
Current:
Consider:
Arabic
Current:
Consider:
Art
Current:
Consider:
Asian American Studies
Current:
Consider:
Asian Studies
Current:
Consider:
Biology
Current:
Consider:
Business Administration
Current:
Consider:
Business Law
Current:
Consider:
Chemistry
Current:
Consider:
Chicano Studies
Current:
Consider:
Child Development
Current:
Consider:
Chinese
Current:
Consider:
Civil Engineering
Current:
Consider:
Communication
Current:
Consider:
Communication Design
Current:
Consider:
Communication Studies
Current:
Consider:
Computer Science
Current:
Consider:
Construction Management
Current:
Consider:
Economics
Current:
Consider:
Education
Current:
Consider:
Education Administration
Current:
Consider:
Education-Bilingual/Multicultural
Current:
Consider:
Education-Curriculum and Instruction
Current:
Consider:
Education-Master's Study
Current:
Consider:
Education-Reading/Language Arts
Current:
Consider:
Education-Second Language
Current:
Consider:
Education-Special Education
Current:
Consider:
Education-Teacher Education
Current:
Consider:
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Current:
Consider:
Electrical/Electronic Engineering
Current:
Consider:
Engineering
Current:
Consider:
English
Current:
Consider:
English as a Foreign Language
Current:
Consider:
Finance
Current:
Consider:
Foreign Languages and Literatures
Current:
Consider:
French
Current:
Consider:
General Education
Current:
Consider:
General Studies Thematic
Current:
Consider:
Geography
Current:
Consider:
Geosciences
Current:
Consider:
German
Current:
Consider:
Health and Community Services
Current:
Consider:
Hebrew
Current:
Consider:
Hindi
Current:
Consider:
History
Current:
Consider:
Honors
Current:
Consider:
Humanities
Current:
Consider:
Industrial Technology
Current:
Consider:
Interdisciplinary Studies (Graduate)
Current:
Consider:
Interdisciplinary Studies (Undergraduate
Current:
Consider:
International Business
Current:
Consider:
International Studies
Current:
Consider:
Italian
Current:
Consider:
Japanese
Current:
Consider:
Journalism
Current:
Consider:
Latin American Studies
Current:
Consider:
Management
Current:
Consider:
Management Information Systems
Current:
Consider:
Marketing
Current:
Consider:
Mathematics
Current:
Consider:
Mechanical Engineering
Current:
Consider:
Middle Eastern Studies
Current:
Consider:
Multicultural & Gender Studies
Current:
Consider:
Music
Current:
Consider:
Nursing
Current:
Consider:
Nutrition & Food Science
Current:
Consider:
Philosophy
Current:
Consider:
Physical Education
Current:
Consider:
Physics
Current:
Consider:
Plant and Soil Science
Current:
Consider:
Political Science
Current:
Consider:
Portuguese
Current:
Consider:
Production & Operations Management
Current:
Consider:
Psychology
Current:
Consider:
Quantitative Business Analysis
Current:
Consider:
Real Estate
Current:
Consider:
Recreation Administration
Current:
Consider:
Religious Studies
Current:
Consider:
Rural and Town Planning
Current:
Consider:
Russian
Current:
Consider:
Social Science
Current:
Consider:
Social Work
Current:
Consider:
Sociology
Current:
Consider:
Spanish
Current:
Consider:
Speech Pathology
Current:
Consider:
Thai
Current:
Consider:
Theatre Arts
Current:
Consider:
University Academics
Current:
Consider:
Women's Studies
Current:
Consider: