REASONING IN THE NATURAL SCIENCES Student Learning Outcome Below Competent Competent Competent 1. Explain the foundational knowledge of a particular scientific discipline. Insufficiently demonstrates foundational knowledge in the discipline. Accurately demonstrates foundational knowledge in the discipline. Analyzes information and/or solves problems advanced foundational knowledge. 2. principles and techniques of scientific inquiry. Inaccurately applies principles and techniques of scientific inquiry. Accurately applies principles and techniques of scientific inquiry. Skillfully applies principles and techniques of scientific inquiry to synthesize reasonable and appropriate conclusions. 3. Evaluate the credibility and the use/misuse of scientific information. Insufficiently recognizes or distinguishes credible from non- credible information. Accurately recognizes and distinguishes credible from non- credible information. Applies credible information to evaluate and/or explain a hypothesis. 4. Analyze the reciprocal impact of science and society. Inadequately describes the interactions between science and society. Adequately describes and analyzes the interactions between science and society. Insightfully describes and analyzes the interactions between science and society and proposes solutions for complex issues.
CRITICAL THINKING IN THE HUMANITIES Student Learning Outcome Below Competent Competent Above Competent 1. Identify fundamental concepts in the humanities. Recognize humanistic concepts without connections to aesthetic works/objects. Restrict thinking to established, rigid categories. and connect humanistic concepts to aesthetic works/objects. Recognize established categories as socially constructed. humanistic concepts to other disciplines. Apply other disciplinary concepts to the humanities. Pose new fundamental concepts and modes of understanding. 2. Analyze texts and other created artifacts using theories and methods of the humanities. Accept established canons as Restrict one’s thinking to untheorized “common sense.” Take information from sources without interpretation or evaluation. Interpret aesthetic works/objects both as part of and beyond established canons. Recognize that are objects of study beyond the traditional/obvious. theory to analyses. Craft a critical argument based on evidence. Interrogate ideas/challenge the notions of the canons, and/or invents new canons. Choose objects of study beyond the traditional/obvious. Recognize limits of theories and imagine new theories. Offer evidence from unconventional sources or viewpoints. 3. Interpret texts and other created artifacts within multiple historical, intellectual, and cultural contexts. Interpret texts/artifacts as individual and outside of historical/social context. Accept narrow forms of rationality as the highest order of experience. Interpret texts/artifacts as embedded in products of historical/social contexts. Reflect on sensory experience with artifacts. Imagine how and artifacts could better challenge systems of power. Build discourses that are challenging, uncomfortable and embrace uncertainty. 4. Synthesize multiple complex sources and create a coherent narrative or argument. Summarize without synthesis of multiple sources in the field. Narrative or argument is incoherent and/or does not consider dissenting points of view. Does not articulate a critical stance. Synthesize multiple complex sources within the field and create a coherent narrative or argument by engaging dissenting points of view and taking a critical stance. Connect interdisciplinary sources to generate a novel narrative or argument that integrates dissenting points of view and produces a creative, compelling, and inclusive critical stance.