Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is the ability to use information, ideas and arguments from relevant perspectives to make sense of complex issues and solve problems. Degree graduates will locate, evaluate, interpret, and combine information to reach well-reasoned conclusions or solutions.

Student Learning Outcomes

Identify the problem or complex issue and its various components.

Sample

All students in the following courses: ART 101 & 102, HIM 111 & 112, AST 107 & 243, BUS 205, CST 100, ETR 113 & 114, MUS 121, ACC 231 & 261, ELE 217, SOC 266 & 268.

Measure

A rubric, based on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric, was used to evaluate work products of students in the selected courses.

View Rubric

Target

75% of students will receive a score of 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher on identifying the problem or complex issue and its various components.

Findings

95.79% of students scored a 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher.

Where do we go from here?

Findings are reviewed by the College’s General Education Committee every two-years. Action plans to address missed target outcomes were discussed in fall 2022. Because the target outcome was met, the committee did not see a need to implement any strategies for improvement.

Identify central issues and assumptions of a problem or issue.

Sample

All students in the following courses: ART 101 & 102, HIM 111 & 112, AST 107 & 243, BUS 205, CST 100, ETR 113 & 114, MUS 121, ACC 231 & 261, ELE 217, SOC 266 & 268.

Measure

A rubric, based on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric, was used to evaluate work products of students in the selected courses.

View Rubric

Target

75% of students will receive a score of 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher on identifying central issues and assumptions of a problem or issue.

Findings

95.99% of students scored a 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher.

Where do we go from here?

Findings are reviewed by the College’s General Education Committee every two-years. Action plans to address missed target outcomes were discussed in fall 2022. Because the target outcome was met, the committee did not see a need to implement any strategies for improvement.

Seek and evaluate the information needed to fully understand the problem or complex issue.

Sample

All students in the following courses: ART 101 & 102, HIM 111 & 112, AST 107 & 243, BUS 205, CST 100, ETR 113 & 114, MUS 121, ACC 231 & 261, ELE 217, SOC 266 & 268.

Measure

A rubric, based on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric, was used to evaluate work products of students in the selected courses.

View Rubric

Target

75% of students will receive a score of 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher on seeking and evaluating the information needed to fully understand the problem or complex issue.

Findings

94.75% of students scored at least a 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher.

Where do we go from here?

Findings are reviewed by the College’s General Education Committee every two-years. Action plans to address missed target outcomes were discussed in fall 2022. Because the target outcome was met, the committee did not see a need to implement any strategies for improvement.

Identify complexities of an issue, relevant perspectives and/or important relationships when taking a position on a complex issue or problem.

Sample

All students in the following courses: ART 101 & 102, HIM 111 & 112, AST 107 & 243, BUS 205, CST 100, ETR 113 & 114, MUS 121, ACC 231 & 261, ELE 217, SOC 266 & 268.

Measure

A rubric, based on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric, was used to evaluate work products of students in the selected courses.

View Rubric

Target

75% of students will receive a score of 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher on identifying complexities of an issue, relevant perspectives and/or important relationships when taking a position on a complex issue or problem.

Findings

94.75% of students scored a 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher.

Where do we go from here?

Findings are reviewed by the College’s General Education Committee every two-years. Action plans to address missed target outcomes were discussed in fall 2022. Because the target outcome was met, the committee did not see a need to implement any strategies for improvement.

Analyze various perspectives of a problem or complex issue in order to reach a well-reasoned conclusion or solution.

Sample

All students in the following courses: ART 101 & 102, HIM 111 & 112, AST 107 & 243, BUS 205, CST 100, ETR 113 & 114, MUS 121, ACC 231 & 261, ELE 217, SOC 266 & 268.

Measure

A rubric, based on the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) Critical Thinking VALUE Rubric, was used to evaluate work products of students in the selected courses.

View Rubric

Target

75% of students will receive a score of 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher on analyzing various perspectives of a problem or complex issue in order to reach a well-reasoned conclusion or solution.

Findings

95.8% of students scored a 2 (minimally meets expectations) or higher.

Where do we go from here?

Findings are reviewed by the College’s General Education Committee every two-years. Action plans to address missed target outcomes were discussed in fall 2022. Because the target outcome was met, the committee did not see a need to implement any strategies for improvement.

Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking Rubric	Capstone (Exceeds Expectations) 4	Milestone (Meets Expectations) 3	Milestone (Minimally Meets Expectations) 2	Benchmark (Does Not Meet Expectations) 1
Identify the issue/problem	Issue/problem is clearly understood and explained in detail.	Issue/problem is identified without serious omissions.	Issue/problem is stated with some omissions.	Issue/problem is not understood.
Recognize assumptions	Thoroughly analyzes personal and others’ assumptions	Identifies own and others’ assumptions when presenting a position/scenario	Explores and questions some assumptions beyond own assumptions	Aware of own assumptions
Seek and evaluate evidence	Seeks, evaluates and interprets information/theory to develop a comprehensive (integrated ideas across viewpoints) analysis of the issue/problem. Viewpoints of experts or alternative methods or approaches are examined thoroughly.	Seeks, evaluates and interprets information/theory to come up with a coherent (lists ideas in a meaningful sequence but not integrated) analysis of the issue/problem. Viewpoints of experts or alternative methods or approaches are subject to questioning.	Seeks, evaluates and interprets information/theory but not enough to understand fully or solve the issue/problem. Viewpoints of experts taken mostly as fact.	Information gathered is not understood or questioned.
Student’s position/scenario (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)	Specific position/scenario is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue or problem. Limits of position/scenario are acknowledged. Others’ points of view are synthesized/incorporated within position/scenario.	Specific position/scenario takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others’ points of view or alternative methods or approaches are acknowledged within position/scenario.	Specific position/scenario acknowledges different sides of an issue or alternative methods or approaches for solving a problem.	Specific position/scenario is stated, but is simplistic and obvious.
Reach a solution or conclusion to the issue/problem	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 or alternative methods or approaches; 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 inconsistent with the information gathered. Outcomes are oversimplified.