Critical Decision-Making Model: Applying The Critical Thinking Model
APPLYING THE CRITICAL THINKING MODEL
Rubric for the Critical Thinking Application Paper
Applied Ethics/St. Petersburg College
NOTE: Chapter 4 “Critical Thinking” in your textbook has a detailed explanation of the critical thinking model and how to apply it.
1. Identification (10 points possible)
You have been given a central ethical issue to use throughout the paper – What should Augustine do ?
In this section you must identify as many OTHER ethical issues, questions, or problems as you can find in the scenario. Distinguish the central issue from the others you identified. Use details and examples to explain your response. Be sure to use the central issue - What should Augustine do ?-as the central issue - throughout the rest …show more content…
of this paper.
Rubric: The following is a rubric.
A rubric tells you how you will be graded for this assignment. For example, in this section you can earn 8-10 points for identifying ethical ideas or issues with numerous supporting details and examples which are organized logically and coherently.
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas|Does not identify the main|
|issues with numerous supporting |issues with some supporting details |issues with few details or examples|or issues poorly with few or|idea or issue and/or |
|details and examples which are |and examples in an organized manner |in a somewhat organized manner |no details with little |includes no other ethical |
|organized logically and coherently| | |organization |issues. |
| | | | | |
2. Research (10 points
possible)
Gather information relevant to the central ethical issue. Use a minimum of three outside sources to gain a better understanding of the issue and potential solutions/options. Explain relevance of information found. (Your instructor will provide specific details regarding appropriate sources and citation format. You can also check with a college librarian for help with research and citations.)
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Insightfully relates concepts and |Accurately relates concepts and |Inaccurately or incompletely |Poorly integrates |Does not identify new |
|ideas from multiple sources; uses |ideas from multiple sources; uses |relates concepts and ideas from |information from more than |information |
|new information to better define |new information to better define |multiple sources; shallow |one source to support final | |
|issue and identify options; |issue and identify options; |determination of effect of new |solution; Incorrectly | |
|recognizes missing information; |correctly identifies potential |information; or limited sources |predicts the effect of new | |
|correctly identifies potential |effects of new information | |information | |
|effects of new information | | | | |
1. Analysis (15 points)
Compare and contrast available solution/ options relevant to the central ethical issue. Using logical (inductive or deductive) moral reasoning, clearly explain the ethical implications the potential solutions/options may have on the stakeholders.
| 15-12 points | 11-8 points | 7-4 points | 3-1 point(s) | 0 points |
2. Application (30 points)
Apply two ethical theories to reach a resolution of the central ethical issue. What would the central principles of each theory imply is the morally right or best course of action or option? A. Apply one (1) consequential theory (Act or Rule Utilitarianism) 15pts. B. Apply one (1) non-consequential theory (Deontology (KANT), Contractarianism, Natural Rights, Natural Law or Virtue Ethics) 15 pts.
For each (A and B) you are to resolve the central ethical issue using the central principles of the theory. A brief summary of the theory should be included and you are encouraged to use the “Steps in Applying” the theories presented in Chapters 5 and 6.
| 15-12 points | 11-8 points | 7-4 points | 3-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Central principles of the theories |Central principles of the |Applications of the central |Applications of the central |Does not apply central |
|are logically and systematically |theories are explained and |principles of the theories |principles of the theories and the |principles to reach a |
|explained and applied to the |applied, but may not be |and the summary may be |theory summaries are either missing |resolution of main issue. |
|central ethical issue to reach a |logically consistent or |shallow, cursory, or too |or are not connected to the central |Summary of theory missing. |
|resolution of the main problem. |applied to specifics of case. |general. |issue and options in the case. | |
3. Decision-Making (10 points)
Choose the wisest, most ethical option and justify your decision. This is NOT an opinion. Using your research and analysis of the options and stakeholders and your applications of the ethical theories, laws, and rules, select and defend the morally right (or most ethical) resolution to the central ethical issue. Using facts and relevant evidence from your research and analysis, thoroughly explain why this is the best solution.
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
4. Evaluation (10 points)
Identify and provide a minimum of three counter arguments against the option that you selected as being morally right (or ethically best). What are the possible arguments against the resolution/option you chose? How would you defend against those arguments?
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Insightfully interprets data or |Accurately interprets data or |Makes some errors in data|Interprets data or information |Does not evaluate data, |
|information; |information; |or information |incorrectly; |information, or evidence |
|identifies obvious as well as |identifies obvious assumptions, |interpretation; makes |Supports conclusions or solutions |related to best option. |
|hidden assumptions, establishes |establishes credibility of sources |arguments using weak |without evidence or logic; uses | |
|credibility of sources on points |on points other than authority |evidence; provides |data, information, or evidence | |
|other than authority alone, avoids|alone, avoids fallacies in |superficial support for |skewed by invalid assumptions; uses | |
|fallacies in reasoning; |reasoning; distinguishes appropriate|conclusions or solutions |poor sources of information; uses | |
|distinguishes appropriate |arguments from extraneous elements; | |fallacious arguments | |
|arguments from extraneous |provides sufficient logical support | | | |
|elements; provides sufficient | | | | |
|logical support | | | | |
5. Reflection (5 points)
Reflect on your own thought process. What did you learn from this process? What could you do differently next time to improve the problem-solving process?
| 5 points | 4 points | 3-2 points | 1 point | 0 points |
Writing/Composition (10 points)
Remember that this is a Gordon Rule writing assignment; your paper must be at least 2,000 words long. 10 points of your grade will be based on the writing skills you demonstrate in the paper. So organize your thoughts carefully, explain them clearly, and proof-read carefully for errors in grammar and spelling.
|10-8 points |7-4 points |3-0 points |
|Writing is clear, coherent, and well-organized. Very|Overall writing is acceptable, but clear |Writing is unacceptable. Poor organization, meanings are not |
|few grammar or spelling errors. Format meets college|weaknesses in organization, clarity, |clear, and/or numerous errors in grammar or spelling. Format |
|standards. All sources are cited. |grammar or spelling. Format is acceptable. |is poor. No sources cited. |
| |Some sources are cited. | |
NOTE: Make sure to review the “Instructor Guidelines for Success” and the information on Gordon Rule assignments that your instructor has also provided.
Rubric for the Critical Thinking Application Paper
Applied Ethics/St. Petersburg College
NOTE: Chapter 4 “Critical Thinking” in your textbook has a detailed explanation of the critical thinking model and how to apply it.
1. Identification (10 points possible)
You have been given a central ethical issue to use throughout the paper – What should Augustine do ?
In this section you must identify as many OTHER ethical issues, questions, or problems as you can find in the scenario. Distinguish the central issue from the others you identified. Use details and examples to explain your response. Be sure to use the central issue - What should Augustine do ?-as the central issue - throughout the rest …show more content…
of this paper.
Rubric: The following is a rubric.
A rubric tells you how you will be graded for this assignment. For example, in this section you can earn 8-10 points for identifying ethical ideas or issues with numerous supporting details and examples which are organized logically and coherently.
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas or |Identifies the ethical ideas|Does not identify the main|
|issues with numerous supporting |issues with some supporting details |issues with few details or examples|or issues poorly with few or|idea or issue and/or |
|details and examples which are |and examples in an organized manner |in a somewhat organized manner |no details with little |includes no other ethical |
|organized logically and coherently| | |organization |issues. |
| | | | | |
2. Research (10 points
possible)
Gather information relevant to the central ethical issue. Use a minimum of three outside sources to gain a better understanding of the issue and potential solutions/options. Explain relevance of information found. (Your instructor will provide specific details regarding appropriate sources and citation format. You can also check with a college librarian for help with research and citations.)
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Insightfully relates concepts and |Accurately relates concepts and |Inaccurately or incompletely |Poorly integrates |Does not identify new |
|ideas from multiple sources; uses |ideas from multiple sources; uses |relates concepts and ideas from |information from more than |information |
|new information to better define |new information to better define |multiple sources; shallow |one source to support final | |
|issue and identify options; |issue and identify options; |determination of effect of new |solution; Incorrectly | |
|recognizes missing information; |correctly identifies potential |information; or limited sources |predicts the effect of new | |
|correctly identifies potential |effects of new information | |information | |
|effects of new information | | | | |
1. Analysis (15 points)
Compare and contrast available solution/ options relevant to the central ethical issue. Using logical (inductive or deductive) moral reasoning, clearly explain the ethical implications the potential solutions/options may have on the stakeholders.
| 15-12 points | 11-8 points | 7-4 points | 3-1 point(s) | 0 points |
2. Application (30 points)
Apply two ethical theories to reach a resolution of the central ethical issue. What would the central principles of each theory imply is the morally right or best course of action or option? A. Apply one (1) consequential theory (Act or Rule Utilitarianism) 15pts. B. Apply one (1) non-consequential theory (Deontology (KANT), Contractarianism, Natural Rights, Natural Law or Virtue Ethics) 15 pts.
For each (A and B) you are to resolve the central ethical issue using the central principles of the theory. A brief summary of the theory should be included and you are encouraged to use the “Steps in Applying” the theories presented in Chapters 5 and 6.
| 15-12 points | 11-8 points | 7-4 points | 3-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Central principles of the theories |Central principles of the |Applications of the central |Applications of the central |Does not apply central |
|are logically and systematically |theories are explained and |principles of the theories |principles of the theories and the |principles to reach a |
|explained and applied to the |applied, but may not be |and the summary may be |theory summaries are either missing |resolution of main issue. |
|central ethical issue to reach a |logically consistent or |shallow, cursory, or too |or are not connected to the central |Summary of theory missing. |
|resolution of the main problem. |applied to specifics of case. |general. |issue and options in the case. | |
3. Decision-Making (10 points)
Choose the wisest, most ethical option and justify your decision. This is NOT an opinion. Using your research and analysis of the options and stakeholders and your applications of the ethical theories, laws, and rules, select and defend the morally right (or most ethical) resolution to the central ethical issue. Using facts and relevant evidence from your research and analysis, thoroughly explain why this is the best solution.
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
4. Evaluation (10 points)
Identify and provide a minimum of three counter arguments against the option that you selected as being morally right (or ethically best). What are the possible arguments against the resolution/option you chose? How would you defend against those arguments?
| 10-8 points | 7-5 points | 4-3 points | 2-1 point(s) | 0 points |
|Insightfully interprets data or |Accurately interprets data or |Makes some errors in data|Interprets data or information |Does not evaluate data, |
|information; |information; |or information |incorrectly; |information, or evidence |
|identifies obvious as well as |identifies obvious assumptions, |interpretation; makes |Supports conclusions or solutions |related to best option. |
|hidden assumptions, establishes |establishes credibility of sources |arguments using weak |without evidence or logic; uses | |
|credibility of sources on points |on points other than authority |evidence; provides |data, information, or evidence | |
|other than authority alone, avoids|alone, avoids fallacies in |superficial support for |skewed by invalid assumptions; uses | |
|fallacies in reasoning; |reasoning; distinguishes appropriate|conclusions or solutions |poor sources of information; uses | |
|distinguishes appropriate |arguments from extraneous elements; | |fallacious arguments | |
|arguments from extraneous |provides sufficient logical support | | | |
|elements; provides sufficient | | | | |
|logical support | | | | |
5. Reflection (5 points)
Reflect on your own thought process. What did you learn from this process? What could you do differently next time to improve the problem-solving process?
| 5 points | 4 points | 3-2 points | 1 point | 0 points |
Writing/Composition (10 points)
Remember that this is a Gordon Rule writing assignment; your paper must be at least 2,000 words long. 10 points of your grade will be based on the writing skills you demonstrate in the paper. So organize your thoughts carefully, explain them clearly, and proof-read carefully for errors in grammar and spelling.
|10-8 points |7-4 points |3-0 points |
|Writing is clear, coherent, and well-organized. Very|Overall writing is acceptable, but clear |Writing is unacceptable. Poor organization, meanings are not |
|few grammar or spelling errors. Format meets college|weaknesses in organization, clarity, |clear, and/or numerous errors in grammar or spelling. Format |
|standards. All sources are cited. |grammar or spelling. Format is acceptable. |is poor. No sources cited. |
| |Some sources are cited. | |
NOTE: Make sure to review the “Instructor Guidelines for Success” and the information on Gordon Rule assignments that your instructor has also provided.