EvaluationRubric

These rubrics were built inductively by the students in the class.


 * Applicable to all products**


 * **Criterion** || **4 (Excellent)** || **3 (Good)** || **2 (Weak)** || **1 (Lacking)** ||
 * **Accuracy** || All ... statements are factually correct, supported with evidence. || Most ... || Some ... || Statements consistently inaccurate, no supporting evidence provided. ||
 * **Breadth** || Consistently … considers alternatives and uses them to express learning. || Sometimes … || Minimally … || Fails to … ||
 * **Clarity** || Consistently … defines terms, illustrates points, provides examples. || Usually … || Rarely … || Consistently fails to … ||
 * **Depth** || Does not … over-simplify or fail to consider the full complexity of the issue || Rarely … || Often … || Consistently… ||
 * **Logic Flow** || Clear line of reasoning throughout document; statements and conclusions follow from one another. || Usually || Sometimes || Never ||
 * **Relevance** || All ... statements are connected to the central point of the work. || Most ... || Some ... || No ... ||
 * **Format** || Document conforms to a format appropriate to its purpose. || Mostly || Occasionally || Does not ||
 * **Visual Appeal** || Document is neat, legible, clean, uses white space appropriately. || Mostly ||  || Not ||
 * **Writing** || Very few or none … typographic, spelling, grammar errors. || Few … || Several … || Constant … ||

Modified source: Paul, R & Elder, L. 2001. The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking. The Foundation for Critical Thinking. Santa Rosa, CA. http://www.criticalthinking.org/