Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Peter Facione: Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Peter Facione: Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully

4,780
views

Published on

Peter Facione presents on critical thinking at the WASC Resource Fair, January 2012.

Peter Facione presents on critical thinking at the WASC Resource Fair, January 2012.

Published in: Technology, Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
4,780
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
73
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully 1/17/2012  Planning 1. How is assessment different than grading?  Design  Measurement 2. Is our main goal developmental or summative?  Interpretation  Value 3. Which curricular level should we assess? lesson course general education requirement Dr. Peter A. Facione major baccalaureate degree graduate degree total institutional experience pfacione@measuredreasons.com © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA Critical 4. If we hope to show positive growth, do Thinking we have clean baseline / pretest data? Anticipates 5. If we hope to show comparative strength, Consequences do we have relevant benchmark / norms? 6. If we hope to demonstrate accomplishing goals, do we a clear criteria of success? © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CADr. Peter A. Facione, Measured Reasons LLC,pfacione@measuredreasons.com 1
  • 2. Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully 1/17/2012 “Critical Thinking” - Expert Consensus 7. Do we have an focused, accurate, consensus definition Process of purposeful, reflective judgment 11. When and where should we gather data? of the construct we seek to measure? which manifests itself in 12. Howcan we motivate student to give their 8. Do we have one or more valid, reliable ways of gathering data about that construct? reasoned consideration best effort? 9. Do we have a clear idea of which students we shall need of evidence, context, methods, standards, 13. Who will collect and store the data to sample? and conceptualizations in 10. Must we gather data from them all, or can we use 14. Whowill score, rate, compile and analyze representative sampling? deciding what to believe or what to do. the data? The Delphi Report: Executive Summary: (1990), © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 The California Academic Press, or Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured ERIC Doc ED315 423 © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA Share scoring Three Basic Options rubrics with students to set for Measuring Learning Outcomes expectations and to make “critical Purpose and Focus 1. Rubrics and Rating Tools thinking” Depth of Though Qualitative Rating Forms, Typological Matches, Checklists operational. Thesis Require practiced judgment and inter-rater calibration Adaptable to performance and written data Reasoning Organization 2. Portfolios & Self-Reports Voice Journals, Work Product, Focus Groups, Questionnaires Insights about personal progress or deficiency Grammar and Vocabulary Require significant resources for data analysis Mechanics of Presentation © 2010 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CADr. Peter A. Facione, Measured Reasons LLC,pfacione@measuredreasons.com 2
  • 3. Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully 1/17/2012 Three Basic Options for Measuring Learning Outcomes 1. Rubrics and Rating Tools 127 Qualitative Rating Forms, Typological Matches, Checklists Require practiced judgment and inter-rater calibration Using 35 18 Adaptable to performance and written data Quantitative / Categorical Scores 3. Validated Tests & Inventories 2. Portfolios & Self-Reports Baseline / Cross-Sectional / Longitudinal Journals, Work Product, Focus Groups, Questionnaires Time and Labor Efficient / Norm referenced Insights about personal progress or deficiency Potential for comparisons & data integration Require significant resources for data analysis Are we getting a valid and reliable measure of the targeted phenomenon? 180 MBA Students © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA 40 17. Do cross-sectional comparisons mean anything, or 35 are the differences explainable by student attrition, maturation, selection bias, etc.? 30 25 18. What level of achievement should we have expected 20 Pretest of our students as a group? 15 Posttest 10 19. If we see gains, are they educationally significant and 5 for which subgroups of students. 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 ( © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CADr. Peter A. Facione, Measured Reasons LLC,pfacione@measuredreasons.com 3
  • 4. Questions for Assessing Critical Thinking Usefully 1/17/2012 Positive movement across categories 38.8% Negative movement across categories 10.9% 20. How do we fund the faculty time, staff positions, and operating budget, and how do we manage impact of Weak disposition Strong disposition outcomes assessment on other academic and Toward truth-seeking Toward truth-seeking institutional priorities? Weak disposition Strong disposition Toward truth-seeking Toward truth-seeking 21. Which unit has the expertise and objectivity to Mean = 35.7 analyze, interpret and report on the data we gather? s.d. = 5.6 Mean = 38.5 s.d. = 6.2 22. How can we maximize the benefits of outcomes assessment to inform and support other functions? Accreditation, Admissions, Student Success, Institutional Accountability, Curricular Development, Research, Grants, Fund-Raising 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 A Look across Four Years at the Disposition toward Critical Thinking Among Undergraduate Students, C. Giancarlo (Gittens) and P. Facione, The Journal of General Education, (2001). Volume 50, number 1. p. 29-55. A Look across Four Years at the Disposition toward Critical Thinking Among Undergraduate Students, C. Giancarlo (Gittens) and P. Facione, The Journal of General Education, (2001). Volume 50, number 1. p. 29-55. © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA pfacione@measuredreasons.com Contents 1. The Power of Critical Thinking California Critical Thinking Skills Test - CCTST 2. 3. Skilled and Eager to Think Solve Problems and Succeed in College 4. Clarify Ideas and Concepts Test of Everyday Reasoning - TER 5. Analyze Arguments and Diagram Decisions 6. Evaluate Credibility of Claims and Sources 7. Evaluate Arguments: Four Basic Tests Business Critical Thinking Skills Test - BCTST 8. Evaluate Deductive Reasoning & Spot Fallacies 9. Evaluate Inductive Reasoning & Spot Fallacies Health Sciences Reasoning Test - HSRT 10. Think Heuristically – Risks and Benefits of Snap Judgments 11. Think Reflectively – Strategies for Decision Making 12. Comparative Reasoning – Think “This is Like That” California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory - CCTDI 13. Ideological Reasoning – Think “Top Down” 14. Empirical Reasoning – Think “Bottom Up” California Measure of Mental Motivation – CM3 Pearson Education 15. Write Sound and Effective Arguments Supplemental Chapters A. Think Like a Social Scientist Insight Assessment B. Think Like a Natural Scientist www.insightassessment.com C. Ethical Decision Making D. The Logic of Declarative Statements Dr. Peter A. Facione 650-697-5628 © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CA © 2012 Peter A. & Noreen C. Facione , and Measured Reasons, Hermosa Beach, CADr. Peter A. Facione, Measured Reasons LLC,pfacione@measuredreasons.com 4