Critical Thinking Rubric Evidence Absent Inconsistent Evidence Reasonable Evidence Compelling Evidence There is little or no evidence There is limited evidence that There is substantial evidence There is consistent and that facilitators are using facilitators are using strategies that facilitators are using meaningful evidence that strategies that allow students that allow students to build strategies that allow students facilitators are using strategies to build skills in critical skills in critical thinking. to build skills in critical that allow students to build thinking. thinking. skills in critical thinking. 1 2 3 4 Facilitator doesn’t use any Facilitator uses 1 (maybe 2) Facilitator consistently and Facilitator consistently and strategies to build critical effectively uses 1 (maybe 2) effectively uses 2 or more strategies to build critical thinking. strategies to build critical strategies to build critical thinking, but not consistently thinking. thinking. or effectively. OR Almost all students are actively The facilitator may briefly Facilitator uses a strategy in a The facilitator uses prompts or reflecting on the content and prompt for a critical thinking, negative way. questions to encourage critical making meaningful connections but may move on after one or thinking. between the activities they two responses, so there is no For example, the facilitator participated in and concepts. sustained reflective activity. pulls a student aside to debrief Students’ reflections include a conflict, but the conversation connections among ideas and The facilitator may review is dominated by the facilitator attempts to explain concepts, what was learned, but the and is more of a lecture than a but are still incomplete or students passively paraphrase conversation that engages the inconsistent; or only a small what happened during the student in critical thinking. subset of students show activity or repeat what the evidence of critical thinking. facilitator reviewed.
Critical Thinking Rubric Evidence Absent Inconsistent Evidence Reasonable Evidence Compelling Evidence There is little or no evidence that facilitators are using strategies that allow students to build skills in critical thinking. There is limited evidence that facilitators are using strategies that allow students to build skills in critical thinking. There is substantial evidence that facilitators are using strategies that allow students to build skills in critical thinking. There is consistent and meaningful evidence that facilitators are using strategies that allow students to build skills in critical thinking. 1 2 3 4 Facilitator doesn’t use any strategies to build critical thinking. OR Facilitator uses a strategy in a negative way. For example, the facilitator pulls a student aside to debrief a conflict, but the conversation is dominated by the facilitator and is more of a lecture than a conversation that engages the student in critical thinking. Facilitator uses 1 (maybe 2) strategies to build critical thinking, but not consistently or effectively. The facilitator may briefly prompt for a critical thinking, but may move on after one or two responses, so there is no sustained reflective activity. The facilitator may review what was learned, but the students passively paraphrase what happened during the activity or repeat what the facilitator reviewed. Facilitator consistently and effectively uses 1 (maybe 2) strategies to build critical thinking. The facilitator uses prompts or questions to encourage critical thinking. Students’ reflections include connections among ideas and attempts to explain concepts, but are still incomplete or inconsistent; or only a small subset of students show evidence of critical thinking. Facilitator consistently and effectively uses 2 or more strategies to build critical thinking. Almost all students are actively reflecting on the content and making meaningful connections between the activities they participated in and concepts.
SLP-Power-Skills-Rubric.docx