使用批判性思维的智力标准来评价学生

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
David Johnson, Rishtya M. Kakar, Robin Zahrndt, Pete Walton
{"title":"使用批判性思维的智力标准来评价学生","authors":"David Johnson, Rishtya M. Kakar, Robin Zahrndt, Pete Walton","doi":"10.1177/23733799211070544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Development of critical thinking skills is an important outcome in education, though pedagogies to both promote and evaluate critical thinking present challenges and vary greatly. In this article, we describe the development and use of a formative and generalizable rubric that leverages the Paul-Elder model for critical thinking, and in particular, Intellectual Standards. When used consistently, this Intellectual Standards Rubric for Critical Thinking (ISRCT) provides regular and specific insight to students about strengths and weaknesses, related to critical thinking, that are reflected in their work. The ISRCT can also be used to assess multiple components of the same assignment, which allows instructors to measure critical thinking competency development in greater detail and provide this feedback to students. Though Public Health is the discipline and context for the development and application of this evaluation methodology, the ISRCT is adapted from an agnostic critical thinking framework and model, and thus, could be utilized for a variety of disciplines and diverse assignments.","PeriodicalId":29769,"journal":{"name":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Student Evaluation Using an Intellectual Standards Rubric for Critical Thinking\",\"authors\":\"David Johnson, Rishtya M. Kakar, Robin Zahrndt, Pete Walton\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23733799211070544\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Development of critical thinking skills is an important outcome in education, though pedagogies to both promote and evaluate critical thinking present challenges and vary greatly. In this article, we describe the development and use of a formative and generalizable rubric that leverages the Paul-Elder model for critical thinking, and in particular, Intellectual Standards. When used consistently, this Intellectual Standards Rubric for Critical Thinking (ISRCT) provides regular and specific insight to students about strengths and weaknesses, related to critical thinking, that are reflected in their work. The ISRCT can also be used to assess multiple components of the same assignment, which allows instructors to measure critical thinking competency development in greater detail and provide this feedback to students. Though Public Health is the discipline and context for the development and application of this evaluation methodology, the ISRCT is adapted from an agnostic critical thinking framework and model, and thus, could be utilized for a variety of disciplines and diverse assignments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29769,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pedagogy in Health Promotion\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pedagogy in Health Promotion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23733799211070544\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23733799211070544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

批判性思维技能的发展是教育的一个重要成果,尽管促进和评估批判性思维的教学方法存在挑战,差异很大。在这篇文章中,我们描述了一个形成性和可概括的准则的开发和使用,该准则利用Paul Elder模型进行批判性思维,特别是智力标准。如果持续使用,本《批判性思维智力标准准则》(ISRCT)为学生提供了关于批判性思维的优势和劣势的定期和具体的见解,这些优势和劣势反映在他们的工作中。ISRCT还可用于评估同一作业的多个组成部分,这使教师能够更详细地衡量批判性思维能力的发展,并向学生提供反馈。尽管公共卫生是开发和应用这种评估方法的学科和背景,但ISRCT是根据不可知论的批判性思维框架和模型改编的,因此可以用于各种学科和不同的任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Student Evaluation Using an Intellectual Standards Rubric for Critical Thinking
Development of critical thinking skills is an important outcome in education, though pedagogies to both promote and evaluate critical thinking present challenges and vary greatly. In this article, we describe the development and use of a formative and generalizable rubric that leverages the Paul-Elder model for critical thinking, and in particular, Intellectual Standards. When used consistently, this Intellectual Standards Rubric for Critical Thinking (ISRCT) provides regular and specific insight to students about strengths and weaknesses, related to critical thinking, that are reflected in their work. The ISRCT can also be used to assess multiple components of the same assignment, which allows instructors to measure critical thinking competency development in greater detail and provide this feedback to students. Though Public Health is the discipline and context for the development and application of this evaluation methodology, the ISRCT is adapted from an agnostic critical thinking framework and model, and thus, could be utilized for a variety of disciplines and diverse assignments.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信