Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Critical thinking framework - Coggle Diagram
Critical thinking framework
ACER critical thinking skill development
framework
Strand 3: Decision-making
Aspect 3.2: Evaluates options
It is necessary to evaluate which option best fits the problem
without going outside the established limits
Sometimes there is no perfect solution but you should choose the
one most likely to succeed
It is important to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of each
option before making a decision
Aspect 3.3: Tests and monitors implementation
The results should be compared with what was expected and
possible problems should be identified
If necessary, adjustments are made to improve the decision
After deciding it is important to evaluate the actual effects
Aspect 3.1: Identifies criteria for decision-marking
To decide well, you must first understand the problem or situation
It is important to define criteria for evaluating the options
You must also recognize what would be the best possible
outcome
Strand 2: Evaluating ideas
Aspect 2.1 Applies logic
Logic can be applied reflectively to evaluate the truth or validity of
a given conclusion
It requires the ability to apply concepts
Being able to reason through sets of propositions, rules,
conditions, statements, and premises
Aspect 2.2 Identifies assumptions
It involves recognizing hidden assumptions and questioning
whether they are reasonable
Critical thinking evaluates not only what is said but also what is
not mentioned
It helps to detect biases and beliefs that may influence an idea or
argument
Aspect 2.3 Justifies arguments
Demands the ability to predict, both accurately and logically
It requires an ability to explain the evidence and reasoning that
leads one to make a claim
Justifying arguments involves the ability to formulate one’s idea
Strand 1: Knowledge construction
Aspect 1.1 Identifies gaps in knowledge
It involves analyzing and evaluating what one already knows
Involves a disposition towards considering
Discerning what information or evidence one needs in order to
know or believe something
Aspect 1.2 Discriminates amongst information
It may include distinguishing fact from opinion
Evaluate the information by applying criteria
Discriminating information and evidence involves evaluating
several factors.
Aspect 1.3 Identifies patters and makes connection
Act of reflecting on and organising information
Requires the ability to analyse and sort information
Involves the recognition of exceptions and counter-examples
The dispositions of critical thinker
Skills
Interpretation
Inference
Evaluation
Explanstion
Analysis
Self regulation
Experts' consensus description
Assess the credibility of statements or other representations that are accounts or descriptions of a person's perception
Identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions;
Identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements,
To state the results of one's reasoning, to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological and contextual considerations
Comprehend and express the meaning or
significance of a wide variety of experiences,
Self-consciously to monitor one's cognitive activities, the elernents used in those activities, and the results educed,
Sub skills
Evaluation
• Query evidence
• Conjecture alternatives
• Draw logically valid or justified conclusions
Interference
• Asses credibility of claims
• Assess quality of arguments using inductive and deductive reasoning
Analysis
• Examine ideas
• Identify arguments
• Identify reasons and
Explanation
•State results
•Justify procedures
• Present arguments
Interpretation
• Categorisation
• Decode significance
• Clarify meaning
Self-regulation
•Self-monitor
•Self-correct
Detailed definitions of critical thinking
Concept
To think critically is to analyze and interpret information and ideas,
evaluating them in order to construct new knowledge
It has been described as the ability to question, recognize and
test previously held assumptions
o think critically is to analyze and interpret information and ideas,
evaluating them in order to construct new knowledge
Key elements
Problem of solving and decision making
nowledge obtaining and elaboration
Reflective analysis of reasoning
Critical thinkers
Become one of the goals of education as this skill is belived to
further develop the capabilities and potential of nation satates.
People capable of using critical thinking to take advantage of
opportunities
Is reserved by some particularly from the philosophical tradition to
refer to a form of reflective thinking
Skill development levels
Strand 1: Knowledge construction
Aspect 1.1 Identifies gaps in knowledge
Medium
They can identify and distinguish pertinent from less-pertinent questions or information
In less constrained or familiar problems or contexts, they can articulate deficiencies in knowledge only in broad terms when undertaking investigation.
Able to identify some of the limits of their existing knowledge relating to a problem, issue or question, with topics both familiar and unfamiliar to them.
Can recognize the benefit of investigating information from within the most salient fields, or range of perspectives, related
Low
Learners are able to identify their existing knowledge relating to a problem, issue or question.
With topics unfamiliar to them they acknowledge their existing understanding is insufficient
They can ask questions to gain information that will be useful within a simple, constrained problem.
High
Formulate and articulate their information needs a precise statements for research.
Can consider possible misconceptions in their understanding and can recognize possible benefits of considering information from diverse sources and perspectives
Identify the knowledge requirements necessary to solve a problem and evaluate the limits of their knowledge in relation to it
Aspect 1.2 Discriminates amongst information
Medium
In familiar, constrained contexts, learners can distinguish more reliable from less reliable information using objective criteria
In less familiar contexts, learners rely on established reliable sources.
They can distinguish statements of fact from statements of opinion, and favour facts.
Learners have an awareness that information may be biased, hyperbolic or misrepresent opinion as fact.
Low
Learners discriminate between information sources using subjective criteria such as familiarity, accessibility or alignment with their own views.
In simple and familiar contexts, they can identify information inconsistent with other information and question
Learners can distinguish obvious or common knowledge facts from obvious statements of opinion
High
They accurately compare the relative strength of different information as evidence for a given claim, and can identify multiple valid reasons to accept or reject information.
Can distinguish factual information from opinions and assertions, while recognizing the potential value of each.
Learners selectively apply the most pertinent criteria to evaluate sources of information depending on the information needed.
They can accurately describe how elements of texts and information can have a persuasive effect
Aspect 1.3 Identifies patters and makes connection
Medium
Learners identify plausible patters and connections in data and information that are not obvious,
They can identify when new information confirms or accords with prior knowledge.
Learners can form simplistic generalizations based on recognized patterns in information.
They can recognize data or information that does not conform to
identified patterns or conceptual categories
Low
Learners make simple connections or recognise obvious patterns within data and information from a single source.
They can derive inferences in the context of scaffolded tasks or content with obvious and explicit connections.
Learners can organize explicitly stated information or data into simple categories.
High
They find rational and useful ways of conceptually organising information from different sources.
Learners associate and integrate new and potentially conflicting information with their previous understanding.
Identify logical patterns and subtle connections within and across data and information from a range of sources.
They form reasonable generalizations or hypotheses based on patterns in information
Learners recognize and consider the significance of data or information that does not conform to identified pattens os conceptual categories.
Strand 3: Decision-making
Strand 2: Evaluating reasoning
Aspect 2.2 Discriminates amongst information
Medium
Identify reasonable common sense assumptions that underpin claims.
Recognize logically invalid conclusions in arguments dealing with convencional wisdom when caused by a suppressed premise.
Identify motivation for other's reasoning as bias when it reflects less-obvious self interest
Low
Struggle to articulate the assumptions that underpin simple claims or arguments.
Can identify other's motivations and reasoning and action when it reflects obvious self-interest
High
They can identify opaque, implied conclusions from sets of propositions.
Employ assumptions when required to progress an argument or problem-solving activity.
Their own motivation cause bias in arguments and can identify the subtle motivations of others as potencial bias
Aspect 2.3 Discriminates amongst information
Medium
They develop structured arguments for or against a proposition with some reasons and explanation
Use interference to develop a plausible interpretation
Reflect on and explain their reasoning for claims they make
Low
Construct simple arguments supported by subjective reasoning or plausible reasoning in familiar concrete contexts
Tend to use induction from experience of the world rather than deduction rules
Circular logic to articulate an argument in more abstrarct contexts
High
For competing propositions supporting evidence, rebuttal and counter rebuttal
They can use interference to develop multiple plausible interpretations
Learners can construct cogent arguments for and against a proposition with explanations
Aspect 2.1 Identifies gaps in knowledge
Low
Can develop basic strategies in problem-solving contexts that have simple objectives and limited variables
Medium
They can identify obvious implied conclusions from sets of propositions.
Concepts of causality, contradiction, and consistency to evaluate situations with conflicting evidence.
Explain logical deductions used to identify a correct solution
High
They can do arguments that may have the appearance of being sound.
They use logic to identify subtle and unstated, or problematic and unintended, conclusions in arguments
Logical deduction to complex multi-faceted problems to arrive at correct solution.