APPRENTICE
PRACTITIONER
EXPERT
Clarity
OPPOSITE
UNCLEAR:
Thinking is difficult to
understand; even by
asking questions the
reader cannot figure out
the meaning
Some parts of thinking are
understandable but many
parts are ambiguous and
may be easily
misinterpreted; the reader
has to ask many questions
to figure out the meaning
Most thinking is
understandable;
sometimes the reader has
to ask questions to figure
out the meaning; there is
still room for
misinterpretation in some
places
Thinking is
understandable; obvious
efforts are made to prevent
misinterpretation or
misunderstanding
CLEAR:
Thinking is understandable
in every way; nothing is
confusing or unexplained;
there is no room for
misinterpretation
INACCURATE:
Thinking is based on
untrue information or faulty
premises; the facts present
are erroneous or thinking
is not substantiated with
facts so there is no way to
tell if the thought is
accurate
Some thinking is based on
true information, but some
thinking is unsubstantiated
and questionable;
information is often
distorted; some parts of
thinking are based on
flawed premises
Most thinking is reliable
and based on true
information; sometimes
information has been
distorted or unfairly
interpreted, but an effort is
made to substantiate
thinking with evidence;
thinking is based mostly on
valid premises
Thinking is based on true
and complete information;
obvious efforts are made
to avoid distorting or
misinterpreting information;
all thinking is substantiated
by credible information and
most thinking is based on
valid premises
ACCURATE:
Thinking is based on true,
complete information that
is never distorted; all
thinking is substantiated
with indisputable facts and
based on valid premises
Thinking is mostly detailed
and specific; in most cases
words express an exact
meaning but sometimes
words are approximate
Thinking is detailed and
specific; obvious efforts
are made to use exact
words, numbers, and
examples to express a
particular meaning
Precision
NOVICE
Accuracy
Common Critical Thinking Rubric – Students use this rubric to assess their own thinking
IMPRECISE:
Thinking is vague or
general; the reader
becomes confused or
misinterprets meaning
because words or numbers
are not exact enough;
imprecision interferes with
accuracy of thought
Some parts of thinking are
detailed and specific, but
other parts are general or
vague; the reader has to
ask questions to determine
the exact meaning
PRECISE:
Thinking is detailed and
specific; exact words,
numbers, and examples
are always used to
express a particular
meaning; precision
improves accuracy and
clarity of thought
PRACTITIONER
EXPERT
Thinking is somewhat
related to the matter at
hand; some
ideas/examples used have
an implicit connection to
the question or problem;
includes extraneous
information along with
some information that is
applicable to the task
Thinking is mostly related
to the matter at hand;
sometimes the connection
between ideas/examples
and the question or
problem is implicit instead
of explicit; most
information selected is
applicable to the task
Thinking is always related
to the matter at hand;
thinker attempts to explain
how ideas and examples
are pertinent to the
question or problem being
addressed; all information
selected is applicable to
the task
RELEVANT:
Thinking is always strongly
connected to the matter at
hand; all ideas and
examples are explicitly
pertinent to answering the
question or solving the
problem; information
selected is the most
applicable information to
the task
Thinking deals with a few
complexities or problems
inherent in the task while
ignoring others; often
oversimplifies; sometimes
moves beyond a surface or
cursory view of the issue
Thinking deals with many
of the complexities and
problems inherent in the
task; occasionally
oversimplifies or ignores
nuance; moves beyond a
surface view
Thinking adequately
addresses most of the
complexities and problems
inherent in the task;
obvious efforts are made
to avoid oversimplification
and to include some
nuances
DEEP:
Thinking shows thorough
consideration of
complexities and problems
inherent in the task;
embraces and explores
nuance; successfully
avoids oversimplification
Thinking shows awareness
of many facts and more
than one perspective
related to an issue; may
distort opposing points of
view or fail to consider
them in good faith; thinking
may be inflexible due to
biases
Thinking shows
consideration of many
facts and multiple
perspectives related to an
issue; some points of view
may be superficially
explored; conclusions may
demonstrate biases; some
thinking is partial or based
on incomplete information
Thinking shows careful
consideration of many
facts and multiple
perspectives related to an
issue; all points of view are
explored fairly; obvious
efforts are made to
overcome biases;
accounts for partial or
incomplete information
BROAD:
Thinking shows careful
consideration of all the
facts and perspectives
related to an issue; seeks
less-obvious points of view
and explores all points of
view in a fair, open-minded
way; unbiased
Relevance
APPRENTICE
IRRELEVANT:
Thinking is unrelated to the
matter at hand; there is no
connection between
thinking and the question
or problem being
addressed; information
used is extraneous or
inapplicable to the task
Depth
NOVICE
SUPERFICIAL:
Thinking avoids
complexities and
problems; thinking
oversimplifies and gives a
“surface” view of the
problem or issue at hand;
lack of depth leads to
inaccuracy
Breadth
OPPOSITE
NARROW:
Thinking is plagued by
biases and prejudices that
are never balanced by
competing points of view; a
partial view of the issue or
problem leads to an
inaccurate portrayal; very
few facts or perspectives
related to the question are
considered; might be
“jumping to conclusions” or
going with “gut feeling”
APPRENTICE
PRACTITIONER
EXPERT
ILLOGICAL:
Thinking does not make
sense; many parts of
thinking contradict each
other; inferences drawn
from evidence are
unreasonable or irrational
Some thinking makes
sense but many elements
of thought are inconsistent
with or unrelated to each
other; inferences drawn
from evidence are not
usually the most
reasonable of all possible
inferences; many small
contradictions or a few
major contradictions
Thinking makes sense but
some elements of thought
do not mutually support
one another or add up to
one whole idea; inferences
and conclusion mostly
follow from the evidence
and examples explained;
occasional contradictions
Thinking makes sense and
elements of thought are
connected; obvious efforts
are made to weave
thoughts into a coherent
whole; most inferences
and conclusions follow
reasonably from evidence
and examples explained;
very few contradictions
LOGICAL:
Thinking consistently
makes sense; all elements
of thought are mutually
supportive and make a
coherent whole; all
inferences and conclusions
follow reasonably from the
evidence and examples
explained; no
contradictions
Significance
TRIVIAL:
Thinking focuses on
unimportant aspects of the
problem or issue; ignores
the central ideas of the
question; facts used are
insignificant; examples
given are outliers or
anomalies
Thinking includes
important aspects of the
problem but places equal
or more focus on
unimportant aspects as
well; the central ideas of
the question may be
treated superficially; some
important facts and
examples are used
Thinking mostly focuses on
the important aspects of
the problem, but may
divert some attention to
less important parts as
well; the central ideas of
the question are
considered but may not be
distinguished fully from
peripheral ideas; many
important facts and
examples are used
Thinking focuses on the
most important aspects of
the problem or issue;
thinking keeps the central
ideas of the question as
the focus; the most
important facts are used;
obvious efforts are made
to ensure the most
important examples are
selected
SIGNIFICANT:
Thinking consistently
focuses on the most
important aspects of the
problem or issue; the
central ideas of the
question are fully
considered; only the most
important facts are used;
all examples are illustrative
of general trends or rules
UNFAIR:
Thinking treats individuals,
groups, or ideas unjustly;
prejudices are obvious and
lead to unethical
conclusions or solutions;
personal interests cloud
judgment and cause
distortion of others’ views
Thinking treats some
individuals, groups, and
ideas with respect; thinking
is still partial to own vested
interests and most
conclusions and solutions
reflect personal biases;
thinker may not see this as
a problem
Thinking treats most
individuals, groups, and
ideas with respect; thinking
is partial to own vested
interests but thinker shows
awareness of this problem;
does not distort others’
views
Thinking treats all
individuals, groups, and
ideas with respect; obvious
efforts are made to remain
impartial when coming to
conclusions or solutions;
shows openness to the
validity of opposing ideas
FAIR:
Thinking treats all
individuals, groups, and
ideas with respect and
empathy; thinking is
impartial and leads to just
conclusions or solutions;
allows for compelling
opposing views to alter
own perspective
Logic
NOVICE
Fairness
OPPOSITE