Foreign Languages Critical Thinking Grading Rubric
Qualities of Critical Thinking
Essay
Explanation of topic choice
(15%)
Inadequate
Developing
Acceptable
Advanced
Excellent
Fails to identify, summarize, or
explain the topic of choice.
Represents the issues
inaccurately or inappropriately
Identifies topic of choice, but
does not summarize or explain
the issues clearly or sufficiently
Clearly identifies and summarizes
the issues, but does not clearly
explain why/how the issues are
problems or create questions
Evidence
Selecting and using
information to investigate a
point of view or conclusion
(15%)
Doesn't present arguments or
supporting information that
counts as evidence
(No research completed, no
citations)
Presents limited arguments or
information but fails to evaluate
the quality of the evidence
(Fails to research each side
equally or poor quality or
incomplete sources)
Presents arguments or information
with limited evaluation of evidence
from different perspectives
(Research represents multiple
perspectives but some
questionable sources.)
Clearly and completely identifies
and summarizes the issues, and
explains why/how they are
problems, questions, conflicts or
issues of concern
Clearly understands the arguments
or information from different
perspectives and expresses
judgment about the evidence
(Research should be more
extensive, but uses quality
sources.)
Influence of context and
assumptions (i.e.
cultural/social, educational,
technological, political,
scientific, economic, ethical,
personal experience)
(15%)
Student's position :
(20%)
Presents issue as having no
connections to other
conditions or contexts
No analysis of assumptions
Limited identification of contexts
and/or assumptions related to
issue
Identifies multiple contexts and/or
multiple assumptions but limited
application to issue Limited
recognition of own and others
contexts and/or assumptions
Fully identifies multiple contexts and
assumptions, both author's own and
others and integrates them into the
discussion as it applies to the issue
Clearly and completely identifies
and summarizes the issues, and
explains fully why the issues can
create conflicts; recognizes issues
that are not explicitly stated
Fully recognizes and evaluates
arguments and evidence from
different perspectives and uses
skillful judgment
(Research is extensive and uses
high quality primary and secondary
resources to fully develop multiple
perspectives.)
Thoroughly and systematically
analyzes own and others
assumptions and relevant contexts
Fully applies the analysis of the
contexts and assumptions to the
topic
Fails to formulate and clearly
express or imply own point of
view regarding issue
Vaguely states or implies a
position regarding the issue, and
shows limited awareness of other
perspectives and no discussion of
strengths and weaknesses of
other's viewpoint.
Formulates a clear and precise
personal point of view concerning
issue
Considers a range of alternative
positions and discusses strengths
and weaknesses of other's position
States a specific, imaginative, and
reasonable personal point of view
concerning the issue Recognizes
limits of own position while
synthesizing other perspectives into
own position
Conclusions and related
outcomes
(implications and
consequences)
No consideration of
implications of personal choice
and related outcomes
Limited connections between the
conclusions drawn and the
information provided; little or no
discussion of implication of the
position taken
States a position regarding issue
with awareness of other
perspectives; considers only minor
objections and considers only the
weakest and/or mostly easily
refuted alternative positions
Minimal discussion of strengths
and weaknesses of other's
viewpoint
Conclusions follow from the
information, but conclusions are of
limited significance; position
assumptions and implications of
conclusions are not explored.
Conclusions and implications are
fully fleshed out in a systematic way
that follows from consideration of
multiple perspectives; conclusions
and implications are insightful and
creative.
Multiple significant sentence
structure errors that affect
understanding;
argument/evidence is
unclearly presented; five or
more spelling errors
Incomplete or no internal
documentation, failure to
correctly use MLA format
and/or plagiarism
Two to three significant sentence
structure errors or numerous
other distracting errors; some
clarity or coherence issues; three
to five spelling errors
Most conclusions clearly follow from
the information considered and
integrate multiple perspectives.
Position assumptions and
implications are explored although
full significance might not be
developed.
No major sentence structure errors,
but some grammar errors such as
agreement errors Expression is
clear though occasional
awkwardness or wordiness; one or
two minor spelling errors
Correctly uses MLA format, but
some punctuation or minor citation
errors
Clear distinction between sources
and authors words, though some
transitions are awkward
(15%)
Grammar, Expression, and
Spelling
(10%)
Documentation
(10%)
An attempt to use MLA to
correctly format, but at least 6
errors
Difficult to tell difference
between what is cited and what
is the author’s words
*The Critical Thinking elements are a version of the AAC&U Values rubric.
One or two sentence structure
errors or districting grammar
errors; mostly clear presentation,
though it might be wordy or
incoherent in spots; two to three
spelling errors
Uses MLA format, but has three to
five documentation errors
All sources are cited, but not
correctly or clearly.
Meets the standards of written
English, with no spelling errors.
Clear expression that effectively and
concisely states issues, a position,
and consequences
Meets MLA standards without
documentation errors Transitions
between cited material and author’s
words are clear, smooth, and
effective