The Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric was developed as a key deliverable of the ‘Building Capacity to Measure Essential Employability Skills’ project funded by the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario (HEQCO) . This handbook serves as a resource to teachers in using the Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric.

Critical thinking is one of the six skill categories within the ‘essential employability skills’ (EES) curriculum requirements for Ontario college programs – specifically, EES numbers 4 and 5. Each of these essential employability skills must be addressed (learned, practiced, evaluated) within a program. How and when these are implemented should be based on decisions regarding the program as a whole and by individual teachers.

The wording of the learning outcomes associated with the critical thinking essential employability skill: ‘Apply a systematic approach to solve problems’ and ‘Use a variety of thinking skills to anticipate and solve problems’ are too vague for direct measurement in an assignment; more concrete and measurable learning outcomes are needed.

In this project we used the skill of critical thinking as an example to demonstrate possible ways of incorporating a broadly described essential employability skill into the curriculum – what needs to be taught and practiced, how it can be demonstrated by the learner, and how it can be measured by the teacher.

We aimed to develop a common language with which teachers could talk about critical thinking in the classroom. Our objective was to create a practical critical thinking measurement or marking tool, grounded in the literature, and developed by George Brown College teachers, which would have sufficient flexibility to allow it to be adapted by teachers for use in any college classroom in which critical thinking is being taught and measured.

The project began with a review of the literature about critical thinking. While there are many valid definitions of critical thinking, we chose the following three definitions in the earliest discussions with faculty about the development of the first version of the critical thinking rubric.

‘Purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual and methodological considerations on which a judgment is based’ (American Philosophical Association)

‘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’

(American Association of Colleges and Universities, Critical Thinking Value Rubric)

‘[Critical thinking] entails (1) identifying assumptions that frame our thinking and determine our actions, (2) checking out the degree to which these assumptions are accurate and valid, (3) looking at our ideas and decisions (intellectual, organizational, and personal) from several different perspectives, and (4) on the basis of all this, taking informed actions’ (Brookfield, 2012)

The literature confirmed that there is no single standard definition of critical thinking, which results in a wide range of critical thinking constructs being taught and evaluated. Faculty in Phase 1 of the project agreed on six relevant, concrete and measurable critical thinking constructs which could be taught, and then evaluated within an assignment. These were the critical thinking constructs that were already most commonly taught and evaluated, according to project faculty.

1. Clarifies the issue to be discussed and/or the position to be argued in this paper
2. Identifies the sources of ideas or evidence used in developing the argument or conclusions
3. Analyses the ideas or evidence to develop the argument or conclusions
4. Critiques contradictory evidence, information, experts’ opinions and/or methodologies
5. Acknowledges personal biases or assumptions
6. Describes conclusions

During the project, we recognized that a student’s mastery of the English language, as used in their assignment, could strongly influence the teacher’s rating of critical thinking skills, and provide a focus other than specifically on the critical thinking skills. For this reason, English language-specific criteria were excluded from this rubric.

The Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric:

• Is brief and easy for a marker to use
• Has demonstrated high inter-rater reliability through a validation process with George Brown faculty
• Focuses on only a select and manageable number of the many possible critical thinking constructs identified in the literature—uses six distinct critical thinking criteria (i.e. constructs) judged by GBC faculty to be most relevant to the types of assignments used at George Brown
• Provides meaningful descriptors for a range of performance levels, clearly distinguishing from inadequate to exemplary performance in regard to expectations (which, in turn, would be identified in the assignment instructions).
• Uses 4 distinct levels of performance for each construct:
  • Inadequate
  • Below expectations
  • Meets expectations
  • Exemplary/exceeds expectations
• Includes a description or example of performance in each of the 24 cells to assist the marker in differentiating the 4 levels of performance for each criterion
• Uses sufficiently generic language in the descriptors allowing applicability to different types of assignments
• Provides sufficient flexibility to be used either as a stand-alone rubric (with the addition of a grading scheme and criteria weights) or to be integrated into and existing rubric whenever relevant
• Can be used for formative feedback
• May be adapted to use some but not all of the criteria, depending upon what is taught in the course.

The Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric can be used to develop or modify curriculum, both teaching and learning activities, and assignments. The six constructs can inform what is to be discussed, taught and practiced about critical thinking in a course or across courses in a program.

This rubric should be used to evaluate only those assignments that have specifically incorporated the relevant critical thinking criteria from the rubric. It is assumed that the constructs to be evaluated have been discussed/taught/practiced by students, that students already know the specific performance expectations for each critical thinking construct (criterion) to be evaluated, and that this information is clearly identified in the assignment instructions.

Options for using the Critical Thinking Assessment Rubric:

1. The rubric can be used as a stand-alone marking rubric either for formative/teaching purposes or for summative evaluation with the addition of a grading scheme and criteria weights.
2. No specific weight is currently attached to the six criteria in this rubric. Teachers may choose to attach relative weights or a grading scheme to the rubric.
3. Any or all of the six critical thinking constructs (criteria) as relevant to the assignment can be incorporated into an existing grading rubric.
4. Teachers may choose to use fewer than the six criteria provided in this rubric, as is relevant to the specifics of their assignment.
5. Teachers may add additional critical thinking criteria, reflecting other relevant critical thinking constructs, as needed.

The following are real examples of five course assignments which were developed or modified by the project faculty to incorporate the critical thinking constructs. To illustrate and assist you in identifying this, we have purposely colour-coded the relevant sections of these assignments to demonstrate where the critical thinking constructs are incorporated.