Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric

by Peter A. Facione and Noreen C. Facione

Use the following rubric to think about HOW you've made your historical argument. Critical thinking by historians or anyone else requires constructing arguments based on solid evidence. In contrast, opinion, close-mindedness, or irrationality reflect a lack of critical thinking. In such cases, one merely expresses preconceptions and biases not based on valid, supoprting evidence. On the scale below, 4 represents the highest level of critical thinking (A or A), followed by 3 (C), 2 (D), and 1 (F). Aspire to apply your best criitical thinkings skills in all your assignments.

4: Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

  1. Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  2. Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  3. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view.
  4. Draws warranted, judicious, non-fallacious conclusions.
  5. Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.
  6. Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

3: Does most or many of the following:

  1. Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  2. Identifies relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con.
  3. Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view.
  4. Draws warranted, non-fallacious conclusions.
  5. Justifies some results or procedures, explains reasons.
  6. Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.

2: Does most or many of the following

  1. Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
  2. Fails to identify strong, relevant counter-arguments.
  3. Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
  4. Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.
  5. Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons. Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.

1: Consistently does all or almost all of the following:

  1. Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others.
  2. Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.
  3. Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
  4. Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons, and unwarranted claims.
  5. Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.
  6. Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions.
  7. Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.
[Source: 1994, Peter A. Facione, Noreen C. Facione, and The California Academic Press. Copyright 2002, Insight Assessment and the California Academic Press. Critical Thinking as Reasoned Judgment, The Album, Page 24.]