Pti Critical Thinking Test Wayne

On By In 1


The purpose of the International Critical Thinking Test is to provide an assessment of the fundamentals of critical thinking that can be used in any subject. The goal of the test is two-fold. The first goal is to provide a reasonable way to pre- and post-test students to determine the extent to which they have learned to think critically within a discipline or subject. The second goal is to provide a test instrument that stimulates faculty to teach their discipline so as to foster critical thinking in the students.

Once faculty become committed to pre- and post-testing their students using the exam, it is natural and desirable for them to emphasize analysis and assessment of thinking in their routine instruction within the subjects they teach. The exam, therefore, is designed to have a significant effect on instruction.  In other words, the test is designed to have high consequential validity; that is, the consequence of using the test is significant: faculty tend to re-structure their courses to put more emphasis on critical thinking within the disciplines (to help students prepare for the test). It also has the consequence that faculty think through important critical thinking principles and standards (which they otherwise take for granted).  See our white paper: Consequential Validity: Using Assessment to Drive Instruction.

The International Critical Thinking test differs from traditional critical thinking tests in that traditional tests tend to have low consequential validity; that is, the nature of the test items is such that faculty, not seeing the relevance of the test to the content they teach, ignore it.

The International Critical Thinking Test is the perfect test to teach to. For one, the structure and standards for thought explicit in the test are relevant to thinking in all departments and divisions. The English Department can test their students using a literary prompt. The History Department can choose an excerpt from historical writing; Sociology from sociological writing; etc. In one case, a section from a textbook may be chosen; in another, an editorial, in a third, a professional essay. In short, the writing prompt can be chosen from any discipline or writing sample.

What is more, since to make the test reliable the faculty must be intimately involved in the choosing of the writing prompt and in the grading of tests, faculty are primed to follow up on the results. Results are seen to be relevant to assessing instruction within the departments involved.

The International Critical Thinking Essay Test is divided into two parts: 1) analysis of a writing prompt, and 2) assessment of the writing prompt. The analysis is worth 80 points; the assessment is worth 20. In the Analysis segment of the test, the student must accurately identify the elements of reasoning within a written piece (each response is worth 10 points). In the Assessment segment of the test, the student must construct a critical analysis and evaluation of the reasoning (in the original piece).  Part one can be used within using part two.

Each student exam must be graded individually by a person competent to assess the critical thinking of the test taker and trained in the grading called for in this examination. In evaluating student exams the grader is attempting to answer two questions:

The International Critical Thinking Test Is Available to Educational Institutions Under Three Different Options

The Nature of the Exam


Grading the International Critical Thinking Test

In Part I of the test, the grader makes 8 judgments concerning student work, each worth 10 points. In Part II of the test, the grader grades holistically (0-20 points). There are, therefore, 100 points possible for the two parts: 80 for the first part and 20 for the second part. The graders are asked to keep in mind the following general criteria as they award points.

What Does Part I Look Like?

Directions for Students: After you have carefully read the assigned reading, complete the following sentences with whatever elaboration you think necessary to make your meaning clear. Do not write on the test. Use separate sheets of paper so that you have room for elaboration.

1) The main purpose of this editorial, article, or essay is ________________________.

2) The key question (whether stated or unstated) is __________________.

3) The most important information in this editorial, article, or essay is ____________.

4) The main conclusion(s) in this editorial, article, or essay is (are) ____________________.

5) The main idea(s) we need to understand in order to understand this editorial, article, or essay is (are) ___________________________. Here is a short explanation of what the author means by this/these concept(s): _________________________________________________________________

6) The main assumption(s) underlying the author’s thinking is (are)________________.

7) The main implications of this line of reasoning is (are) __________.

8) The main point(s) of view presented in this editorial, article, or essay is (are): _____________________________. (What is the author focused on and from what angle?)


Intellectual Standards and Criteria Used in the International Critical Thinking Essay Test

The test taker should be guided by the questions below in developing his/her assessment of the writing sample (Part II). In addition, the test taker is called upon to comment on the reasoning as appropriate in terms of its clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, significance, and fairness -- or lack thereof.

1. Question: Is the question at issue clear and unbiased? Does the expression of the question do justice to the complexity of the matter at issue?

2. Purpose:Is the purpose well-stated or implied? Is it clear and justifiable? Are the question and purpose directly relevant to each other?

3.Information: Is relevant evidence, experiences and/or information essential to the issue cited? Is the information accurate? Are the complexities of the issue addressed?

4.Ideas (concepts):Are key ideas clarified when necessary? Are the concepts used justifiably?

5. Assumptions: Is there sensitivity to what is being taken for granted or assumed? (Insofar as those assumptions might reasonably be questioned?) Are questionable assumptions being used without addressing problems which might be inherent in those assumptions?

6.Conclusions: Is a line of reasoning well developed explaining the main conclusions? Are alternative conclusions considered? Are there any apparent inconsistencies in the reasoning?

7.Point of View: Is a sensitivity to alternative relevant points of view or lines of reasoning shown? Is consideration given to objections framed from other relevant points of view? If so, were they responded to?

8. Implications: Is sensitivity shown to the implications and consequences of the position taken?

The International Critical Thinking Essay Test Can Be Taken With A Variety of Prompts

Since every administration of the exam requires that a given writing prompt be chosen, it is possible to give students the exam on multiple occasions — in one case, testing their ability to analyze and evaluate scientific thinking; in another, sociological thinking; in a third, literary thinking; and so on. In one case, a section from a textbook may be chosen; in another, an editorial; in a third, a professional essay. In other words, the writing prompt can be chosen from any discipline or writing sample.

{"id":456,"title":"The Nature of the Exam","author":"","content":"<p><img style=\"float: right;\" src=\"http://www.criticalthinking.org/image/pimage/CriticalThinkingEssayTest.gif\" alt=\"\" /><span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong><br /> Grading the International Critical Thinking Test<br /> </strong></span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><br /> In Part I of the test, the grader makes 8 judgments concerning student work, each worth 10 points. In Part II of the test, the grader grades holistically (0-20 points). There are, therefore, 100 points possible for the two parts: 80 for the first part and 20 for the second part. The graders are asked to keep in mind the following general criteria as they award points.<br /> <br /> </span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"color: #000099;\"><span><strong>What Does Part I Look Like?</strong><br /> </span></span><br /> Directions for Students: After you have carefully read the assigned reading, complete the following sentences with whatever elaboration you think necessary to make your meaning clear. Do not write on the test. Use separate sheets of paper so that you have room for elaboration.<br /> <br /> <strong>1)</strong> The main purpose of this editorial, article, or essay is ________________________.<br /> <br /> <strong>2)</strong> The key question (whether stated or unstated) is __________________.<br /> <br /> <strong>3)</strong> The most important information in this editorial, article, or essay is ____________.<br /> <br /> <strong>4)</strong> The main conclusion(s) in this editorial, article, or essay is (are) ____________________.<br /> <br /> <strong>5)</strong> The main idea(s) we need to understand in order to understand this editorial, article, or essay is (are) ___________________________. Here is a short explanation of what the author means by this/these concept(s): _________________________________________________________________<br /> <br /> <strong>6)</strong> The main assumption(s) underlying the author’s thinking is (are)________________.<br /> <br /> <strong>7)</strong> The main implications of this line of reasoning is (are) __________.<br /> <br /> <strong>8) </strong>The main point(s) of view presented in this editorial, article, or essay is (are): _____________________________. (What is the author focused on and from what angle?)<br /> </span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><br /> <br /> <span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong>Intellectual Standards and Criteria Used in the International Critical Thinking Essay Test</strong></span><br /> <br /> The test taker should be guided by the questions below in developing his/her assessment of the writing sample (Part II). In addition, the test taker is called upon to comment on the reasoning as appropriate in terms of its clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, significance, and fairness -- or lack thereof.<br /> <br /> <strong>1. <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Question:</span></strong> Is the question at issue clear and unbiased? Does the expression of the question do justice to the complexity of the matter at issue?<br /> <br /> <strong>2. <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Purpose:</span> </strong>Is the purpose well-stated or implied? Is it clear and justifiable? Are the question and purpose directly relevant to each other?<br /> <br /> <strong>3.</strong><span style=\"color: #0044aa;\"><strong> <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Information:</span></strong></span> Is relevant evidence, experiences and/or information essential to the issue cited? Is the information accurate? Are the complexities of the issue addressed?<br /> <br /> <strong>4.</strong><span style=\"color: #0044aa;\"><strong> <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Ideas (concepts):</span> </strong></span>Are key ideas clarified when necessary? Are the concepts used justifiably?<br /> <br /> <strong>5. <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Assumptions:</span></strong> Is there sensitivity to what is being taken for granted or assumed? (Insofar as those assumptions might reasonably be questioned?) Are questionable assumptions being used without addressing problems which might be inherent in those assumptions?<br /> <br /> <strong>6.</strong> <span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong>Conclusions</strong>:</span> Is a line of reasoning well developed explaining the main conclusions? Are alternative conclusions considered? Are there any apparent inconsistencies in the reasoning?<br /> <br /> <strong>7.</strong> <span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong>Point of View</strong>:</span> Is a sensitivity to alternative relevant points of view or lines of reasoning shown? Is consideration given to objections framed from other relevant points of view? If so, were they responded to?<br /> <br /> <strong>8. <span style=\"color: #000099;\">Implications:</span></strong> Is sensitivity shown to the implications and consequences of the position taken?<br /> </span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><br /> <span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong><span>The I</span></strong></span></span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong>nternational Critical Thinking Essay Test</strong></span></span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong><span> Can Be Taken With A Variety of Prompts</span></strong><br /> <br /> </span>Since every administration of the exam requires that a given writing prompt be chosen, it is possible to give students the exam on multiple occasions — in one case, testing their ability to analyze and evaluate scientific thinking; in another, sociological thinking; in a third, literary thinking; and so on. In one case, a section from a textbook may be chosen; in another, an editorial; in a third, a professional essay. In other words, the writing prompt can be chosen from any discipline or writing sample.</span><br style=\"clear: both;\" /></p>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"1","sku":"","files":{},"images":{}}

General Directions to the Student


After you carefully read the writing sample (taking whatever notes you want), you will have two tasks — each of them important. First, you will complete a template (see Form A) demonstrating your ability to recognize key important components in the thinking of an author. For example, your ability to recognize the author's purpose or the nature of the question, problem, or issue that is at the heart of the original editorial, article, or essay. You should not write your answers on Form A. Use your own paper, or blank pages provided, in order to have room to elaborate.

Second, you will summarize your assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the reasoning of the original editorial, article, or essay (with special attention to the components you commented on). In doing this, you should present your analysis and assessment in the form of a persuasive explanation of your thinking about the original, imagining your audience as educated reasonable persons. You are therefore appealing to the reason of the audience, not their emotions. You should refer to intellectual standards whenever you can (Clarity, Accuracy, Precision, Relevance, Depth, Breadth, Logicalness, Significance).

For example, you might feel that the question or problem in the text was never sufficiently made clear or that the information in support of a key conclusion was irrelevant to the question. You would then state how the issue or question should have been expressed. If you judge that the information in the original editorial, article, or essay was in part irrelevant, you would state what sort of information was relevant and comment on how that information could best be obtained. You should refer to the Criteria for Evaluating Reasoning (see Form B) in assessing the author's thinking as displayed in the editorial, article, or essay.

You are provided with the main criteria that the grader will be using in assessing your answers.

The "grader" will be asking himself/herself two questions while reading your answer:

  1. Did the student clearly understand the key components in the thinking of the original editorial, article, or essay?
  2. Was the student able to effectively evaluate the reasoning in the original editorial, article, or essay? Did the student present a reasonable case for his/her interpretation of the writing sample?

In an excellent evaluation, the evaluator takes into account the nature and purpose of the original writing sample. For example, it would be inappropriate to apply the same criteria to an editorial (which is severely limited in space) that one would to a research monograph or to the report of a scientific experiment to a scientific journal. In some writing technical information is essential and in other writing it is enough to cite common experience in supporting one's conclusions.

In every case, we expect the student to sympathetically enter into the viewpoint of the author and to engage in a fair-minded assessment based on an insightful understanding of the author's reasoning. The extra weight (80 points) which is given to an accurate analysis as a necessary first step to evaluation (20 points) reflects our emphasis on the fact that fair-minded critical thinkers always make sure that they understand something BEFORE they criticize it. Good criticism always makes a contribution to the object of its criticism. It brings both strengths and weaknesses out into the open so that we may build on the first and correct the second.


The Validity and Reliability of The International Critical Thinking Essay Test 

The main purpose of this test is for internal, not external use. The goal is to facilitate the faculty at given institutions putting more emphasis on thinking critically within the disciplines taught. Because the faculty use various prompts on different testing occasions and choose those prompts from different disciplines, it is difficult to compare student performances (using different prompts) by point scores alone. The goal is for the grading faculty to report back to the teaching faculty with appropriate commentary that enables faculty to form reasonable conclusions about the degree to which students are developing critical thinking skills.

The exam has high "face validity," for it directly tests the students’’ ability 1) to accurately identify the most fundamental intellectual structures in thinking and 2) to do so in a piece of writing which the faculty themselves choose. It is clear and uncontroversial that critical thinking requires the thinker to analyze and evaluate reasoning. The test requires the student to do just that and, once again, to do so with respect to prompts which are representative of the content that is covered by instruction.

One gains insight into the validity of the exam to the extent that one recognizes the significance of the abilities directly tested in the exam: the students’’ ability to accurately identify the purpose of a piece of writing, the questions it raises, the information it embodies, the inferences and conclusions arrived at, the key concepts, the underlying assumptions, the implications of the reasoning, and the point of view of the reasoner.

One gains further insight into the validity of the exam to the extent that one recognizes the significance of the intellectual standards which the student must use to assess the reasoning in the prompt: the relative clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, significance, and fairness of the reasoning. Beyond that one gains insight into the usefulness of the test in grasping its potential in helping faculty to develop comparable descriptions of their programs and course grading standards that highlight the critical thinking embodied in the content.

Of course, success depends directly on the competence of the graders and the manner in which they have established consistency in their grading. Here are the instructions faculty are given for this purpose:

How to Understand the Examination

First review some of the basic principles and purposes behind critical thinking so that you go into the grading of the examination with the clearest sense of what you are going to assess. You should review the Elements of Thought and the Universal Intellectual Standards. Then you should carefully review the editorial, article, or essay the students are going to analyze and comment on. Each faculty evaluator should read and take the test himself/herself. The faculty evaluators should reach consensus on the range of interpretations of that piece that are plausible. Once a consensus is achieved, one or two student case analyses should be individually assessed by all faculty and scoring compared.

Faculty should use Form A and Form B as the criteria for scoring. All faculty should be within a 10 point range.

How To Score Exams 

1) First, carefully read and analyze the editorial yourself, making sure that you are clear as to its structure: the writer’s purpose, the central question posed, the information presented and reasons given in support of the author’s position, the main conclusions and concepts, the fundamental assumptions and implications, and, of course, the point of view within the framework of which all of the reasoning proceeds.

2) Do a critical evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses (or limitations) of the original writing prompt. Make sure there is agreement of the faculty graders on these strengths and weaknesses.

2) Read a few of the essays to be scored.

3) Follow the grading procedure detailed in test.

4) The margin of error for graders should be plus or minus ten points. Practice grading with two other graders until the scoring of the three of you fall consistently within this range.

{"id":"457","title":"General Directions to the Student","author":"","content":"<p><br /> After you carefully read the writing sample (taking whatever notes you want), you will have two tasks&nbsp;&mdash; each of them important. First, you will complete a template (see Form A) demonstrating your ability to recognize key important components in the thinking of an author. For example, your ability to recognize the author's purpose or the nature of the question, problem, or issue that is at the heart of the original editorial, article, or essay. You should not write your answers on Form A. Use your own paper, or blank pages provided, in order to have room to elaborate.<br /> <br /> Second, you will summarize your assessment of strengths and weaknesses of the reasoning of the original editorial, article, or essay (with special attention to the components you commented on). In doing this, you should present your analysis and assessment in the form of a persuasive explanation of your thinking about the original, imagining your audience as educated reasonable persons. You are therefore appealing to the reason of the audience, not their emotions. You should refer to intellectual standards whenever you can (Clarity, Accuracy, Precision, Relevance, Depth, Breadth, Logicalness, Significance).<br /> <br /> For example, you might feel that the question or problem in the text was never sufficiently made clear or that the information in support of a key conclusion was irrelevant to the question. You would then state how the issue or question should have been expressed. If you judge that the information in the original editorial, article, or essay was in part irrelevant, you would state what sort of information was relevant and comment on how that information could best be obtained. You should refer to the Criteria for Evaluating Reasoning (see Form B) in assessing the author's thinking as displayed in the editorial, article, or essay.<br /> <br /> You are provided with the main criteria that the grader will be using in assessing your answers.<br /> <br /> The \"grader\" will be asking himself/herself two questions while reading your answer:</p>\r\n<ol>\r\n<li> <span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\">Did the student clearly understand the key components in the thinking of the original editorial, article, or essay?</span> <strong><br /> </strong></li>\r\n<li> Was the student able to effectively evaluate the reasoning in the original editorial, article, or essay? Did the student present a reasonable case for his/her interpretation of the writing sample?</li>\r\n</ol>\r\n<p>In an excellent evaluation, the evaluator takes into account the nature and purpose of the original writing sample. For example, it would be inappropriate to apply the same criteria to an editorial (which is severely limited in space) that one would to a research monograph or to the report of a scientific experiment to a scientific journal. In some writing technical information is essential and in other writing it is enough to cite common experience in supporting one's conclusions.<br /> <br /> In every case, we expect the student to sympathetically enter into the viewpoint of the author and to engage in a fair-minded assessment based on an insightful understanding of the author's reasoning. The extra weight (80 points) which is given to an accurate analysis as a necessary first step to evaluation (20 points) reflects our emphasis on the fact that fair-minded critical thinkers always make sure that they understand something BEFORE they criticize it. Good criticism always makes a contribution to the object of its criticism. It brings both strengths and weaknesses out into the open so that we may build on the first and correct the second.<br /> <br /> <span style=\"color: #0044aa;\"><br /> </span><strong><span style=\"color: #000099;\">The Validity and Reliability of The </span></strong><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><span style=\"color: #000099;\"><strong>International Critical Thinking Essay Test&nbsp;</strong></span></span><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"> </span></p>\r\n<p>The main purpose of this test is for internal, not external use. The goal is to facilitate the faculty at given institutions putting more emphasis on thinking critically within the disciplines taught. Because the faculty use various prompts on different testing occasions and choose those prompts from different disciplines, it is difficult to compare student performances (using different prompts) by point scores alone. The goal is for the grading faculty to report back to the teaching faculty with appropriate commentary that enables faculty to form reasonable conclusions about the degree to which students are developing critical thinking skills.<br /> <br /> The exam has high \"face validity,\" for it directly tests the students&rsquo;&rsquo; ability 1) to accurately identify the most fundamental intellectual structures in thinking and 2) to do so in a piece of writing which the faculty themselves choose. It is clear and uncontroversial that critical thinking requires the thinker to analyze and evaluate reasoning. The test requires the student to do just that and, once again, to do so with respect to prompts which are representative of the content that is covered by instruction.<br /> <br /> One gains insight into the validity of the exam to the extent that one recognizes the significance of the abilities directly tested in the exam: the students&rsquo;&rsquo; ability to accurately identify the purpose of a piece of writing, the questions it raises, the information it embodies, the inferences and conclusions arrived at, the key concepts, the underlying assumptions, the implications of the reasoning, and the point of view of the reasoner.<br /> <br /> One gains further insight into the validity of the exam to the extent that one recognizes the significance of the intellectual standards which the student must use to assess the reasoning in the prompt: the relative clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logicalness, significance, and fairness of the reasoning. Beyond that one gains insight into the usefulness of the test in grasping its potential in helping faculty to develop comparable descriptions of their programs and course grading standards that highlight the critical thinking embodied in the content.<br /> <br /> Of course, success depends directly on the competence of the graders and the manner in which they have established consistency in their grading. Here are the instructions faculty are given for this purpose:</p>\r\n<p><strong><span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000099;\">How to Understand the Examination</span></strong></span></strong></p>\r\n<p>First review some of the basic principles and purposes behind critical thinking so that you go into the grading of the examination with the clearest sense of what you are going to assess. You should review the Elements of Thought and the Universal Intellectual Standards. Then you should carefully review the editorial, article, or essay the students are going to analyze and comment on. Each faculty evaluator should read and take the test himself/herself. The faculty evaluators should reach consensus on the range of interpretations of that piece that are plausible. Once a consensus is achieved, one or two student case analyses should be individually assessed by all faculty and scoring compared.<br /> <br /> Faculty should use Form A and Form B as the criteria for scoring. All faculty should be within a 10 point range.<br /> <br /> <strong><span style=\"color: #000099;\">How To Score Exams</span>&nbsp;</strong></p>\r\n<p>1) First, carefully read and analyze the editorial yourself, making sure that you are clear as to its structure: the writer&rsquo;s purpose, the central question posed, the information presented and reasons given in support of the author&rsquo;s position, the main conclusions and concepts, the fundamental assumptions and implications, and, of course, the point of view within the framework of which all of the reasoning proceeds.<br /> <br /> 2) Do a critical evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses (or limitations) of the original writing prompt. Make sure there is agreement of the faculty graders on these strengths and weaknesses.<br /> <br /> 2) Read a few of the essays to be scored.<br /> <br /> 3) Follow the grading procedure detailed in test.<br /> <br /> 4) The margin of error for graders should be plus or minus ten points. Practice grading with two other graders until the scoring of the three of you fall consistently within this range.</p>\r\n<p><br style=\"clear: both;\" /></p>","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"1","sku":"","files":{},"images":{}}

Practical Guide for Critical Thinking Instruction


Critical thinking is, among other things, "thinking that analyzes itself, evaluates itself, and improves itself as a result," In science classes, students should learn to think scientifically; in math classes, to think mathematically; in history classes, to think historically; etc… Critical thinking is essential to this internalization. We internalize the logic of scientific thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it. We internalize the logic of mathematical thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it. We internalize the logic of historical thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it.


To teach a subject in a critical manner requires that students take ownership of the basic intellectual structures of the discipline (the elements of thought focused upon in Part I of the exam). It also requires that students internalize intellectual standards which they can use in assessing thinking for its strengths and weaknesses (the standards of thought which are focused upon in Part II of the International Critical Thinking Test).

The Elements of Thought
(The Essence of Part I of the Exam)

To understand content as a mode of thinking, we need to recognize that all content has a logic which is defined by the same eight dimensions that define the thinking which produced, and continue to produce it.

All content/thinking has been generated by organizing goals and purposes (that enable professionals to share in the pursuit of common ends and projects);

All content/thinking is defined by the problems it defines and solves;

All content/thinking presupposes the gathering and use of information in professional performance & problem solving;

All content/thinking requires the making of inferences from relevant data or information to interpretative conclusions (rendering thereby the data of use to practitioners for guiding judgments);

All content/thinking is structured by concepts (theoretical constructs) that organize, shape, and "direct" it;

All content/ thinking proceeds from assumptions or presuppositions from which it logically proceeds (providing "boundaries" for the field);

All content/thinking generates implications and consequences, that enable professionals to make predictions and test theories, lines of reasoning, and hypotheses;

All content/thinking defines a frame of reference or point of view (which provide practitioners with a logical map of use in considering the professional "moves" they will make).

The Exam Highlights the Interrelationship Between Content and Thinking
Each of the above sentences, as you may have noted, read equally well with either "content" or "thinking" as the subject. This is no accident of language.

There is a perfect logical symmetry captured in each case. The symmetry is a reflection of the fact that all of what we call "content" is nothing more nor less than an organized product of a specific mode of disciplined thinking, developed by a community of thinkers.

When we master the logic of the thinking, we master the logic of the content. When we master the logic of the content, we master the logic of the thinking. For example, when we learn to think like a historian, we, at one and the same time, master the logic of the discipline called "History." When we master the logic of "History," we master, ipso facto, the logic of historical thought. Period. There is nothing else that remains.

Once we begin to grasp content as a mode of thinking, we can begin to isolate the connection between what it is that good thinkers must do to think well within that content and what it is that students must do to perform competently in the academic field defined by it.

For example, it is possible to construct a generic description of academic goals that can be contextualized for virtually any field of study. Consider the following generic description. As you read through it, mentally place your discipline in the blank spaces. It is followed by a couple of sample contextualizations to exemplify what we mean.

{"id":458,"title":"Practical Guide for Critical Thinking Instruction ","author":"","content":"&lt;p&gt;&lt;br id=\"__mce\" /&gt; Critical thinking is, among other things, \"thinking that analyzes itself, evaluates itself, and improves itself as a result,\" In science classes, students should learn to think scientifically; in math classes, to think mathematically; in history classes, to think historically; etc&amp;hellip; Critical thinking is essential to this internalization. We internalize the logic of scientific thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it. We internalize the logic of mathematical thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it. We internalize the logic of historical thinking when we can analyze, evaluate, and improve instances of it.&lt;/p&gt;\r\n&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt; To teach a subject in a critical manner requires that students take ownership of the basic intellectual structures of the discipline (the elements of thought focused upon in Part I of the exam). It also requires that students internalize &lt;a href=\"/resources/articles/universal-intellectual-standards.shtml\"&gt;intellectual standards&lt;/a&gt; which they can use in assessing thinking for its strengths and weaknesses (the standards of thought which are focused upon in Part II of the International Critical Thinking Test).&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"color: #000099;\"&gt;The Elements of Thought&lt;br /&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"&gt;(&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"color: #666666;\"&gt;The Essence of Part I of the Exam&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;)&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;\r\n&lt;p&gt;To understand content as a mode of thinking, we need to recognize that all content has a logic which is defined by the same eight dimensions that define the thinking which produced, and continue to produce it.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking has been generated by organizing goals and purposes (that enable professionals to share in the pursuit of common ends and projects);&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking is defined by the problems it defines and solves;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking presupposes the gathering and use of information in professional performance &amp;amp; problem solving;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking requires the making of inferences from relevant data or information to interpretative conclusions (rendering thereby the data of use to practitioners for guiding judgments);&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking is structured by concepts (theoretical constructs) that organize, shape, and \"direct\" it;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/ thinking proceeds from assumptions or presuppositions from which it logically proceeds (providing \"boundaries\" for the field);&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking generates implications and consequences, that enable professionals to make predictions and test theories, lines of reasoning, and hypotheses;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; All content/thinking defines a frame of reference or point of view (which provide practitioners with a logical map of use in considering the professional \"moves\" they will make).&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"color: #000099;\"&gt;The Exam Highlights the Interrelationship Between Content and Thinking&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;Each of the above sentences, as you may have noted, read equally well with either \"content\" or \"thinking\" as the subject. This is no accident of language.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; There is a perfect logical symmetry captured in each case. The symmetry is a reflection of the fact that all of what we call \"content\" is nothing more nor less than an organized product of a specific mode of disciplined thinking, developed by a community of thinkers.&lt;/p&gt;\r\n&lt;p&gt;When we master the logic of the thinking, we master the logic of the content. When we master the logic of the content, we master the logic of the thinking. For example, when we learn to think like a historian, we, at one and the same time, master the logic of the discipline called \"History.\" When we master the logic of \"History,\" we master, ipso facto, the logic of historical thought. Period. There is nothing else that remains.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; Once we begin to grasp content as a mode of thinking, we can begin to isolate the connection between what it is that good thinkers must do to think well within that content and what it is that students must do to perform competently in the academic field defined by it.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; For example, it is possible to construct a generic description of academic goals that can be contextualized for virtually any field of study. Consider the following generic description. As you read through it, mentally place your discipline in the blank spaces. It is followed by a couple of sample contextualizations to exemplify what we mean.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=\"font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;\"&gt; &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;\r\n&lt;p&gt;&lt;br style=\"clear: both;\" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;","public_access":"1","public_downloads":"1","sku":"","files":{},"images":{}}

The International Critical Thinking Essay Exam Suggests Model Descriptions of Goals For Academic Programs


Students successfully completing a major in ... will acquire a range of ... thinking skills and abilities which they use in the acquisition of knowledge. Their work at the end of the program will be clear, precise, and well-reasoned. They will demonstrate in their thinking, command of the key ... terms and distinctions, the ability to identify and solve fundamental ... problems. Their work will demonstrate a mind in charge of its own ... ideas, assumptions, inferences, and intellectual processes. They will demonstrate the ability to analyze ... questions and issues clearly and precisely, formulate ... information accurately, distinguish the relevant from irrelevant, recognize key questionable ... assumptions, use key ... concepts effectively, use ... language in keeping with established professional usage, identify relevant competing ... points of view, and reason carefully from clearly stated ... premises, as well as show sensitivity to important ... implications and consequences. They will demonstrate excellent ... reasoning and problem-solving.

Sample Contextualizations

History Department

Critical Thinking Competency Exam

Exam information

Purpose

Toward the goal of developing competent critical thinkers, undergraduates who earn a degree from Wayne State University (WSU) should be able to:

  • Recognize that all decision-making as to "what to believe" involves examining and weighing evidence.
  • Clearly state a belief or assumption or fact.
  • Gather and analyze relevant supporting and contradictory evidence.
  • Formulate and identify deductively and inductively warranted conclusions from available evidence.
  • Recognize the structure of arguments (premises, conclusions, and implied assumptions).
  • Assess the consistency, inconsistency, logical implications, and equivalence among statements, and recognize explanatory relations among statements.
  • Arrive at a well-reasoned conclusion supported by evidence.

Before completing their first seventy-five credits towards their bachelor's degree, students are required to demonstrate competence in critical thinking by one of the methods listed below.

  • Successfully complete a WSU course in critical thinking.  See the current Undergraduate Bulletin for approved courses.
  • Pass the WSU Critical Thinking Competency Examination.  No credit hours are earned for passing the examination.
  • Receive transfer credit for successful completion of a comparable course taken at another college or university.

Description of the examination

The Critical Thinking Competency Examination covers the following areas:

  • Analysis
  • Inference
  • Evaluation
  • Inductive Reasoning
  • Deductive Reasoning
  • Interpretation
  • Explanation

The examination is computer-based and consists of 34 multiple choice questions.  The test is timed for 45 minutes.  Questions relate to everyday life.  Test-takers will be asked to:

  • Analyze or interpret information presented in text, charts, or images.
  • Draw accurate and warranted inferences.
  • Evaluate references and explain why they represent strong or weak reasoning.
  • Explain why a given evaluation of an inference is strong or weak.

A total scaled score of 73 is needed to meet the requirement.  Sample questions are available at http://www.insightassessment.com/CT-Resources/node_1487.  Solution strategies and explanations for these sample questions can be requested by following this link: https://forms.wayne.edu/51c1c4fa5607b/

A general critical thinking practice test can be found here: https://www.assessmentday.co.uk/CriticalThinkingTest-Solutions.pdf

The book Think Critically by Peter Facione is also recommended as a resource to help prepare for the examination, available at http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/think-critically-peter-facione/1100055748?ean=9780205490981&itm=2&usri=facione

The examination fee is $35.00.

On the day of the examination

Bring your WSU OneCard, or government-issued, current, signed, photo-bearing identification (e.g., driver's license, state ID).  The identification presented must be an original document.  Valid identification is required to test.  A silent, hand-held, non-graphing, non-programmable, non-alphanumeric calculator is permitted but not required.  Scratch paper and a pencil will be provided.  Be on time.  Late arrivals will not be admitted. 

Rescheduling, refunds, and fees

  1. You may reschedule a test registration a maximum of three times per fee payment.
  2. A refund can be processed only if it is made before the day of the test.  We cannot honor requests for refunds made on or after the test date, or after the third reschedule.
  3. Exam fees which are not rescheduled or refunded within one calendar year are subject to forfeiture.
  4. Test fees are subject to change without notice.

Retaking the examination

You may take the Critical Thinking Competency Examination once per semester.

Examination schedule

Winter 2018

Day

Date

Time

Notes

Friday

01/05/18

9:00 a.m.

Exam Full

Friday

01/05/18

10:30 a.m.

Exam Full

Friday

01/12/18

2:00 p.m.

Friday

01/12/18

3:30 p.m.

Thursday

01/18/18

2:00 p.m.

Thursday

01/18/18

3:30 p.m.

Monday

01/29/18

3:30 p.m.

Friday

02/09/18

2:00 p.m.

Exam Full

Thursday

02/15/18

10:30 a.m.

Exam Full

Tuesday

02/20/18

2:00 p.m.

Exam Full

Tuesday

02/20/18

3:30 p.m.

Monday

02/26/18

2:00 p.m.

Monday

02/26/18

3:30 p.m.

Exam Full

Wednesday

03/07/18

10:30 a.m.

Exam Full

Thursday

03/22/18

10:30 a.m.

Thursday

03/22/18

2:00 p.m.

Exam Full

Monday

03/26/18

3:30 p.m.

Exam Full

Friday

04/06/18

10:30 a.m.

Exam Full

Wednesday

04/11/18

2:00 p.m.

Wednesday

04/11/18

3:30 p.m.

Thursday

04/19/18

2:00 p.m.

Tuesday

04/24/18

9:00 a.m.

Tuesday

04/24/18

10:30 a.m.

Spring/Summer 2018

Day

Date

Time

Notes

Friday

05/04/18

9:00 a.m.

Friday

05/04/18

10:30 a.m.

Thursday

05/10/18

2:00 p.m.

Thursday

05/10/18

3:30 p.m.

Wednesday

05/16/18

10:30 a.m.

Monday

05/21/18

2:00 p.m.

Tuesday

05/29/18

10:30 a.m.

Friday

06/08/18

9:00 a.m.

Thursday

06/14/18

2:00 p.m.

Wednesday

06/20/18

3:30 p.m.

Tuesday

06/26/18

10:30 a.m.

Thursday

07/12/18

3:30 p.m.

Tuesday

07/17/18

2:00 p.m.

Monday

07/23/18

10:30 a.m.

Friday

08/03/18

2:00 p.m.

Thursday

08/09/18

2:00 p.m.

Monday

08/13/18

9:00 a.m.

Wednesday

08/22/18

2:00 p.m.

How to register for an examination

This examination is not administered on a walk-in basis.  You must register to reserve a seat for the examination at least one business day in advance of the desired test date provided room capacity has not already been reached.

  1. In Person Registration:  If you wish to pay your test fee(s) with a check, money order, or WSU OneCard, come to Testing, Evaluation and Research Services, Room 686 Student Center Building, 5221 Gullen Mall (click here for map). Make your check or money order payable to Wayne State University. You may also use our public computer to make your credit card payment. Cash will not be accepted.
  2. Online registration: Click the "Register for a test" button at the bottom of this page.  This will lead you to the online registration system where you may pay with a credit or debit card and choose your test date. You will receive an email confirmation of your payment and registration.

Special accommodations

If you have a documented disability that requires testing accommodations, you will need to register with Student Disability Services for coordination of these accommodations. The Student Disability Services (SDS) office is located at 1600 David Adamany Undergraduate Library in the Student Academic Success Services Department. To schedule an appointment, call 313-577-1851. Information about SDS can be found at http://studentdisability.wayne.edu/ .

Register or Reschedule a test

0 comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *