Aea critical thinking past papers

Use separate sheets of paper so that you have room for elaboration. What is the author focused on and from what angle?

Critical Thinking Insight App

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. 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? Purpose: Is the purpose well-stated or implied? Is it clear and justifiable? Are the question and purpose directly relevant to each other? Is the information accurate? Are the complexities of the issue addressed?

Ideas concepts : Are key ideas clarified when necessary? Are the concepts used justifiably? 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? Conclusions : Is a line of reasoning well developed explaining the main conclusions?

Are alternative conclusions considered? Are there any apparent inconsistencies in the reasoning? 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? Implications: Is sensitivity shown to the implications and consequences of the position taken?

  • the american boy a photographic essay.
  • research paper on alcohol ads.
  • generation x essay thesis;
  • mildred dresselhaus thesis;

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. 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.

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. 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.

Critical thinking question stems

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 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.


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 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.

Then you should carefully review the editorial, article, or essay the students are going to analyze and comment on. 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. Make sure there is agreement of the faculty graders on these strengths and weaknesses.

Practice grading with two other graders until the scoring of the three of you fall consistently within this range. 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.

Improved Memory, Increase IQ Exam, Success, Clarity and Critical Thinking Subliminal Affirmations

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.

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.

  1. youth crime in canada essay;
  2. taekwondo thesis 4th dan;
  3. Essay Writing Service #1 | Custom Papers -!
  4. 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.

    Do My Homework for Me | Pay for Expert on

    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. 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.