4 - Exemplary 3 - Satisfactory 2- Below Satisfactory 1 - Unsatisfactory

If applicable, consistently does all or If applicable, consistently does If applicable, consistently does If applicable, consistently does all or
almost all of the following most or many of the following most or many of the following almost all of the following
Purpose --Demonstrates a clear understanding of --Demonstrates an understanding --Is not completely clear about the --Does not clearly understand the
the assignment’s purpose of the assignment’s purpose purpose of the assignment purpose of the assignment

Key Question, --Clearly defines the issue or problem; --Defines the issue; identifies the --Defines the issue, but poorly --Fails to clearly define the issue or
Problem, or accurately identifies the core issues core issues, but may not fully (superficially, narrowly); may problem; does not recognize the core
Issue --Appreciates depth and breadth of explore their depth and breadth overlook some core issues issues
problem --Demonstrates fair-mindedness --Has trouble maintaining a fair- --Fails to maintain a fair-minded
--Demonstrates fair-mindedness toward minded approach toward the approach toward the problem
problem problem
Point of View --Identifies and evaluates relevant --Identifies and evaluates relevant --May identify other points of view --Ignores or superficially evaluates
significant points of view points of view but struggles with maintaining alternate points of view
--Is empathetic, fair in examining all --Is fair in examining those views fairmindedness; may focus on --Cannot separate own vested interests
relevant points of view irrelevant or insignificant points of and feelings when evaluating other
view points of view
Information --Gathers sufficient, credible, relevant --Gathers sufficient, credible, and --Gathers some credible --Relies on insufficient, irrelevant, or
information: observations, statements, relevant information information, but not enough; some unreliable information
logic, data, facts, questions, graphs, --Includes some information from information may be irrelevant --Fails to identify or hastily dismisses
themes, assertions, descriptions, etc. opposing views --Omits significant information, strong, relevant counter-arguments
--Includes information that opposes as --Distinguishes between including some strong counter- --Confuses information and inferences
well as supports the argued position information and inferences drawn arguments drawn from that information
--Distinguishes between information and from it --Sometimes confuses information
inferences drawn from that information and the inferences drawn from it
Concepts --Identifies and accurately explains/uses --Identifies and accurately explains --Identifies some (not all) key --Misunderstands key concepts or
the relevant key concepts and uses the key concepts, but not concepts, but use of concepts is ignores relevant key concepts
with the depth and precision of a superficial and inaccurate at times altogether
“4”
Assumptions --Accurately identifies assumptions --Identifies assumptions --Fails to identify assumptions, or --Fails to identify assumptions
(things taken for granted) --Makes valid assumptions fails to explain them, or the --Makes invalid assumptions
--Makes assumptions that are consistent, assumptions identified are
reasonable, valid irrelevant, not clearly stated, and/or
invalid
Interpretations, --Follows where evidence and reason lead --Follows where evidence and --Does follow some evidence to --Uses superficial, simplistic, or
Inferences in order to obtain defensible, thoughtful, reason lead to obtain justifiable, conclusions, but inferences are irrelevant reasons and unjustifiable
logical conclusions or solutions logical conclusions more often than not unclear, claims
--Makes deep rather than superficial --Makes valid inferences, but not illogical, inconsistent, and/or --Makes illogical, inconsistent
inferences with the same depth and as a “4” superficial inferences
--Makes inferences that are consistent --Exhibits closed-mindedness or
with one another hostility to reason; regardless of the
evidence, maintains or defends views
 based on self-interest
Implications, --Identifies the most significant --Identifies significant implications --Has trouble identifying --Ignores significant implications and
Consequences implications and consequences of the and consequences and significant implications and consequences of reasoning
reasoning (whether positive and/or distinguishes probable from consequences; identifies
negative) improbable implications, but not improbable implications
--Distinguishes probable from improbable with the same insight and precision
implications as a “4”
Critical Thinking Grid

4 = Thinking is exemplary, skilled, marked by excellence in clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicality, and fairness
3 = Thinking is competent, effective, accurate and clear, but lacks the exemplary depth, precision, and insight of a 4
2 = Thinking is inconsistent, ineffective; shows a lack of consistent competence: is often unclear, imprecise, inaccurate, and superficial
1 = Thinking is unskilled and insufficient, marked by imprecision, lack of clarity, superficiality, illogicality, and inaccuracy, and unfairness

@Foundation for Critical Thinking, www.criticalthinking.org

 Critical Thinking Worksheet

Overall Score ________

If applicable,
score the Element of Reasoning Comments
element (1-4)
Purpose: Does the student demonstrate a clear understanding of the assignment’s
purpose?

Key Question, Problem, or Issue: Does the student clearly define the issue or
problem, accurately identify the core issues, appreciate their depth and breadth?

Point of View: Does the student identify and evaluate relevant significant points of
view? Does the student demonstrate fairmindedness toward the problem?

Information: Does the student gather sufficient, credible, relevant information

(statements, logic, data, facts, questions, graphs, assertions, observations, etc.)?
Does the student include information that opposes as well as supports the argued
position? Does the student distinguish between information and inferences drawn
from that information?

Concepts: Does the student identify and accurately explain/use the relevant key
concepts?

Assumptions: Does the student accurately identify assumptions (things taken for
granted)? Does the student make assumptions that are consistent, reasonable,
valid?

Interpretations, Inferences: Does the student follow where evidence and reason
lead in order to obtain defensible, thoughtful, logical conclusions or solutions?
Does the student make deep (rather than superficial) inferences? Are the inferences
consistent?

Implications, Consequences: Does the student identify the most significant

implications and consequences? Does the student distinguish probable from
improbable implications?
 4 = Thinking is exemplary, skilled, marked by excellence in clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicality, and fairness
3 = Thinking is competent, effective, accurate and clear, but lacks the exemplary depth, precision, and insight of a 4
2 = Thinking is inconsistent, ineffective; shows a lack of consistent competence: is often unclear, imprecise, inaccurate, and superficial
1 = Thinking is unskilled and insufficient, marked by imprecision, lack of clarity, superficiality, illogicality, and inaccuracy, and unfairness

@Foundation for Critical Thinking, www.criticalthinking.org