Definition 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. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Explanation of issues Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown. 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 Information is from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation, to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. 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. Information is from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. Influence of context and assumptions Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. 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). Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position Student's position (perspective, Specific position (perspective, Specific position (perspective, Specific position (perspective, Specific position (perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others' points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others' points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences) 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 Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.