The ARC Assignment Profile
Assessment Rubric for Critical Thinking
The Assessment Rubric for Critical Thinking (ARC) is a global rubric template
developed for the College to provide a snapshot view of how student learning is being
affected by the critical thinking QEP initiative. It is designed to assess a variety of student
projects from a critical thinking perspective. For example, students in a composition class
may be asked to complete a paper on a specific topic. This ARC rubric template can evaluate
the student’s use of critical thinking skills in the development of the paper as opposed to
specifically evaluating the quality of student’s writing skills. The ARC rubric template is
designed to be flexible enough to address a number of student project modalities including
written and oral communications.
Validating the ARC
The development of any quality rubric is a long and arduous process. The initial
version of the ARC was developed by the College’s current team of faculty champions in
conjunction with QEP staff and resources from their various disciplines.
The initial
administrations were just the beginning of the rubric development and validation process.
Refinement of this initial instrument has included thorough reviews by faculty and
assessment experts from around the college as well as a preliminary tests of the instrument
on sample of discipline-specific, course projects. Faculty champions will determine the
quality and usability of the rubric through the rating of student artifacts and will
recommend modifications as needed.
The ARC has been piloted and results were analyzed from a quantitative as well as a
qualitative perspective to establish the quality, reliability, and validity of the assessment
instrument. Based on these validation results, some additional refinements and
modifications were made to the instrument to ensure the quality of the final standardized
instrument. Rubric results will be reevaluated after each administration, and additional
refinements and modifications may be made to the instrument as the assessment
development and validation is intended to be an on-going dynamic process.
Assignment Profile for ARC
Page 1 of 5
Last Revised: 05/20/2010
ARC Assignment Profile
The ARC Assignment Profile is designed to provide consistency and accuracy in the
evaluation of the ARC as well as provide guidelines for the use of the assessment at the
course level. The ARC is essential a ‘tool’ to evaluate critical thinking, but for a tool to be
effective it must be used in the correct situation or ‘job.’ It would be inefficient to use a
machete to conduct heart surgery. The purpose of the ARC Assignment Profile is to outline
the most appropriate course assignment.
1. Participating faculty should have one assignment during the course that can be
evaluated using the ARC scoring rubric. The course assignment could be a graded
homework assignment or a major assessment for the course.
2. The course assignment for the ARC should include all of the elements of the rubric
and should be aligned with the task outlined for each element. Assignments that
only evaluate some of the elements or are not aligned with the specific ARC tasks
will be considered incomplete.
3. Faculty may add additional discipline specific rubric elements (such as grammar
and punctuation in a composition class), but should maintain the ARC elements as
listed.
4. Students should be provided a copy of the assignment rubric (ARC and any
additional discipline specific elements). The specific elements and tasks include:
1. Communication: Define the problem in your own words.
2. Analysis: Compare & contrast the available solutions within the scenario.
3. Problem Solving: Select one of the available solutions and defend it as
your chosen solution.
4. Evaluation: Identify the weaknesses of your chosen solution.
5. Synthesis: Suggest ways to improve/strengthen your chosen solution
(may use information not contained within the scenario).
6. Reflection: Reflect on your own thought process after completing the
assignment.
a. “What did you learn from this process?”
b. “What would you do differently next time to improve?”
5. The evaluating scenario (selected or created) should be stated in such a manner to
allow the student to address each of the tasks. The QEP team is willing to assist you
with the creation of the scenario or identify possible sources of existing scenarios
that could be used. A very basic sample scenario is provided at the end of the
document.
Assignment Profile for ARC
Page 2 of 5
Last Revised: 05/20/2010
SPC’s Assessment of Critical Thinking (ARC) Scoring Template
Rater (scorer) name: _____________________________Paper ID: _____________________Date: ____________________
Performance
Element
I. Communication
Define problem in
your own words.
II. Analysis
Compare &
contrast the
available solutions.
III. Problem
Solving
Select & defend
your chosen
solution.
Exemplary
(4)
Identifies the main
idea or problem with
numerous supporting
details and examples
which are organized
logically and
coherently.
Proficient
(3)
Identifies the main idea
or problem with some
supporting details and
examples in an
organized manner.
Developing
(2)
Identifies the main
idea or problem
with few details or
examples in a
somewhat organized
manner.
Emerging
Not Present
(1)
(0)
Identifies the main
Does not identify
idea or problem
the main idea or
poorly with few or no problem.
details or states the
main idea or problem
verbatim from the
text.
Uses specific
inductive or
deductive reasoning
to make inferences
regarding premises;
addresses
implications and
consequences;
identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly.
Thoroughly identifies
and addresses key
aspects of the
problem and
insightfully uses facts
and relevant evidence
from analysis to
support and defend
potentially valid
solutions.
Uses logical reasoning
to make inferences
regarding solutions;
addresses implications
and consequences;
Identifies facts and
relevant information
correctly.
Uses superficial
reasoning to make
inferences regarding
solutions; Shows
some confusion
regarding facts,
opinions, and
relevant, evidence,
data, or information.
Makes unexplained,
unsupported, or
unreasonable
inferences regarding
solutions; makes
multiple errors in
distinguishing fact
from fiction or in
selecting relevant
evidence.
Identifies and
addresses key aspects
of the problem and
uses facts and relevant
evidence from analysis
to develop potentially
valid conclusions or
solutions.
Identifies and
addresses some
aspects of the
problem; develops
possible conclusions
or solutions using
some inappropriate
opinions and
irrelevant
information from
analysis.
Identifies and
Does not select and
addresses only one
defend a solution.
aspect of the problem
but develops
untestable
hypothesis; or
develops invalid
conclusions or
solutions based on
opinion or irrelevant
information.
Assignment Profile for ARC
Page 3 of 5
Does not analyze
multiple solutions.
Score
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
ARC Last Revised: 11/13/2008
Rater (scorer) name: _____________________________Paper ID: _____________________Date: ____________________
Performance
Element
IV. Evaluation
Identify weaknesses
in your chosen
solution.
V. Synthesis
Suggest ways to
improve/strengthen
your chosen solution.
VI. Reflection
Reflect on your own
thought process.
“What did you learn
from this process?”
“What would you do
differently next time
to improve?”
Exemplary
(4)
Insightfully interprets
data or information;
identifies obvious as
well as hidden
assumptions,
establishes credibility
of sources on points
other than authority
alone, avoids fallacies
in reasoning;
distinguishes
appropriate arguments
from extraneous
elements; provides
sufficient logical
support.
Insightfully relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple sources;
uses new information
to enhance chosen
solution; recognizes
missing information;
correctly identifies
potential effects of new
information.
Identifies strengths and
weaknesses in own
thinking: recognizes
personal assumptions,
values and
perspectives, compares
to others’, and
evaluates them in the
context of alternate
points of view.
Assignment Profile for ARC
Proficient
(3)
Accurately interprets
data or information;
identifies obvious
assumptions,
establishes credibility
of sources on points
other than authority
alone, avoids fallacies
in reasoning;
distinguishes
appropriate
arguments from
extraneous elements;
provides sufficient
logical support.
Developing
(2)
Makes some errors in
data or information
interpretation; makes
arguments using
weak evidence;
provides superficial
support for
conclusions or
solutions.
Accurately relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple
sources; uses new
information to
enhance chosen
solution; correctly
identifies potential
effects of new
information.
Identifies strengths
and weaknesses in
own thinking:
recognizes personal
assumptions, values
and perspectives,
compares to others’,
with some
comparisons of
alternate points of
view.
Inaccurately or
incompletely relates
concepts and ideas
from multiple
sources; shallow
determination of
effect of new
information on
chosen solution.
Identifies some
personal
assumptions, values,
and perspectives;
recognizes some
assumptions, values
and perspectives of
others; shallow
comparisons of
alternate points of
view.
Page 4 of 5
Emerging
(1)
Interprets data or
information
incorrectly;
Supports
conclusions or
solutions without
evidence or logic;
uses data,
information, or
evidence skewed
by invalid
assumptions; uses
poor sources of
information; uses
fallacious
arguments.
Poorly integrates
information from
more than one
source to support
chosen solution;
Incorrectly predicts
the effect of new
information on
chosen solution.
Not Present
(0)
Does not evaluate
data, information,
or evidence related
to chosen solution.
Identifies some
personal
assumptions,
values, and
perspectives;
does not consider
alternate points of
view.
Does not reflect on
own thinking
Score
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
Does not identify
new information
for chosen
solution.
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
4 3 2 1 0
    
N/A 
Comments:
ARC Last Revised: 11/13/2008
Sample Scenario: Deer Overpopulation:
Three teenagers were seriously injured in a car accident when swerving to avoid a deer on a two-lane road near a
small, rural town in Florida. The residents of the town have seen more and more deer enter the town’s populated
areas over recent years. Local law enforcement has been called numerous times this year to remove the animals
from backyards and neighborhood streets, and one deer even caused considerable damage as it entered a restaurant
in town. The mayor has been charged by the city leaders to keep the town residents safe. Local crops have even
been damaged by the animals. Some long time residents have requested that the hunting season and catch limits be
extended in order to reduce the deer population. One city leader even proposed that the city purchase electronic
devices to deter the deer from entering populated areas. Health concerns have recently been elevated as three deer
carcasses were found at the edge of town and local law enforcement suspect that the animals had been poisoned.
Assignment Profile for ARC
Page 5 of 5
Last Revised: 05/20/2010