Rubric Examples

SCORE 0

(c) 1994, Peter A. Facione, Noreen C. Facione, and The California Academic Press. 217 La Cruz Ave., Millbrae, CA 94030.

Permission is hereby granted to students, faculty, staff, or administrators at public or nonprofit educational institutions for unlimited duplication of the critical thinking scoring rubric, rating form, or instructions herein for local teaching, assessment, research, or other educational and noncommercial uses, provided that no part of the scoring rubric is altered and that "Facione and Facione" are cited as authors.
Retrieved September 2, 2005 from http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/rubric.pdf

Portland State University Studies Program Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric*
Inquiry and Critical Thinking Rubric

Students will learn various modes of inquiry through interdisciplinary curricula—problem posing, investigating, conceptualizing—in order to become active, self-motivated, and empowered learners.

• 
  Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  
• 
  Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  
• 
  Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.
  
• 
  Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.
  
• 
  Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.
  
• 
  Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
  
• 
  Makes ethical judgments.
  

• 
  Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  
• 
  Thinks through issues by identifying relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  
• 
  Offers analysis and evaluation of obvious alternative points of view.
  
• 
  Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event.
  
• 
  Justifies (by using) some results or procedures, explains reasons.
  
• 
  Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
  

• 
  Describes events, people, and places with some supporting details from the source.
  
• 
  Make connections to sources, either personal or analytic.
  
• 
  Demonstrates a basic ability to analyze, interpret, and formulate inferences.
  
• 
  States or briefly includes more than one perspective in discussing literature, experiences, and points of view of others.
  
• 
  Takes some risks by occasionally questioning sources or by stating interpretations and predictions.
  
• 
  Demonstrates little evidence of rethinking or refinement of one’s own perspective.
  

• 
  Respond by retelling or graphically showing events or facts.
  
• 
  Makes personal connections or identifies connections within or between sources in a limited way. Is beginning to use appropriate evidence to back ideas.
  
• 
  Discusses literature, experiences, and points of view of others in terms of own experience.
  
• 
  Responds to sources at factual or literal level.
  
• 
  Includes little or no evidence of refinement of initial response or shift in dualistic thinking.
  
• 
  Demonstrates difficulty with organization and thinking is uneven.
  

• 
  Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  
• 
  Fails to identify strong, relevant counter arguments.
  
• 
  Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.
  
• 
  Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.
  
• 
  Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.
  

• 
  Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others.
  
• 
  Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counterarguments.
  
• 
  Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons and unwarranted claims.
  
• 
  Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.
  
• 
  Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.
  

*taken verbatim from Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to Rubrics. Sterling, VA: Stylus, pp. 122-123