the california critical thinking disposition inventory (cctdi)

You are using an outdated browser.

• About Wabash
• Majors & More
• Admissions & Aid
• Student Life
• Give to Wabash
• Event Calendar
• Directories
• Wabash Employment
• Alumni & Friends
• Parents & Families

by Thomas F. Nelson Laird, Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research

Summer 2005

Highlights of the CCTDI:

• Straightforward 75-question survey; relatively inexpensive to administer; takes about 20 minutes to complete; questionnaire can be completed by paper and pencil or online.
• Survey addresses the "dispositional" dimension of critical thinking—as opposed to the "skills" dimension, which is evaluated in the Critical Thinking Skills Test ( CCTST ). Survey assesses how students feel they approach these seven qualities: truth-seeking, open-mindedness, analytical tendencies, systematic tendencies, critical thinking self-confidence, inquisitiveness, and cognitive maturity.

Uses of the CCTDI:

• As a one-time test to gain understanding of how students view themselves as critical thinkers. Students’ strengths toward critical thinking are noted and areas for improvement identified.  
• As a pre- and post-test of a particular curricular or co-curricular experience in order to study how a student’s attitude toward critical thinking develops in relation to that experience.  
• Can be combined with demographic surveys to examine the relationship between student attitudes toward critical thinking and student characteristics (such as socioeconomic status or major).

Jill Cellars Rogers Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College

Introduction

The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results that are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit.                                           – American Philosophical Association, The Delphi Report [1]

Experts from several fields agree that a critical thinker must possess both a set of thinking skills and the habits of mind necessary to use those skills. The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory ( CCTDI ) is a survey instrument designed to measure whether a person habitually exhibits the mindset of an ideal critical thinker. (A companion survey, the California Critical Thinking Skills Test, measures actual critical thinking skills.) The CCTDI, a 75-item questionnaire designed by Peter and Noreen Facione, is available through Insight Assessment (formerly the California Academic Press). The survey is designed for use with students in postsecondary settings (undergraduate, graduate, and professional) and with adults outside of educational environments. The CCTDI is used for student assessment as well as program evaluation, professional development, and training.

The following review provides a summary of several aspects of the CCTDI, including how it is used, how much it costs, what it measures, how it can be used for the purposes of student assessment, and why someone would use it when assessing liberal arts education.  

Administration and Cost

The CCTDI must be ordered from Insight Assessment. It is a tool that can be used with groups of any size (a class, a department, or an entire campus). It is available in paper form or as a web-based survey. Either version takes 20 minutes or less to complete. A "specimen kit" containing a manual, a copy of the instrument, and a copy of the fill-in answer form is available for purchase ($60). For those seriously considering using the CCTDI, it is advisable to obtain the specimen kit prior to ordering the surveys and answer sheets. The manual describes the survey’s history and properties as well as procedures for its administration.

Paper Version

The paper version of test/tool booklets (six-page documents that contain directions and the 75 statements about which students will rate their level of agreement/disagreement) and answer forms (scannable forms on which students fill in bubbles corresponding to their responses) must be ordered. At this writing, answer forms can be ordered in bundles of 25 ($150), 50 ($275), or 100 ($485). Because the booklets are separate from the answer forms, they can be used more than once. For this reason, answer forms can also be ordered on their own in packets of 25 ($110), 50 ($190), and 100 ($335).

Booklets and answer forms are shipped to the purchaser, who determines to whom and how the CCTDI will be administered (e.g., in class, by mail, at orientation). A student filling out the paper form will receive a test/tool booklet and an answer form. Answer forms are then collected from the students and shipped back to Insight Assessment, where they are scanned and scored using a system called CapScore. Insight Assessment then sends the investigator a data file and a report summarizing the survey results.

Online Version

To use the online version, an order needs to be placed with Insight Assessment. The cost is $6 per student. The software application is made available to the administrator by Insight Assessment and needs to be set up on a computer or group of computers. (For specifics on the application or for a demo version contact Insight Assessment.) The software application administers the CCTDI and compiles students’ responses. The data and reporting of the results are available instantly. The system can also be set up to give each student a critical thinking "dispositions profile" immediately upon completion of the instrument. A computer lab is an ideal setting for administering the online version.

About the CCTDI

In 1990, with sponsorship from the American Philosophical Association, a group of scholars from several disciplines developed a definition of critical thinking that had a skills dimension and a dispositional (i.e., affective and attitudinal) dimension. Building on the scholars' definition regarding the habits of mind of an ideal critical thinker, Peter and Noreen Facione developed and tested the CCTDI as a measure of the dispositional side of critical thinking. In its final form, the CCTDI has 75 items. Each respondent can choose from six responses, ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." Since 1990, the CCTDI have been developed in several languages, including English, Spanish, and Chinese. The instrument uses seven sub-scales to capture different aspects of the disposition to think critically: truth-seeking, open-mindedness, critical thinking self-confidence, inquisitiveness, cognitive maturity, and the inclination to analyze and systematize. (For a brief definition of each, visit Insight Assessment.) Examples of survey items are listed below, under the corresponding sub-scale.

Example Items for Each CCTDI Sub-scale

The CCTDI total score is the sum of the scores for each of the seven sub-scales. The total score indicates whether a person is generally disposed to think critically—whether the individual habitually exhibits the characteristics of an ideal critical thinker. The total score ranges from 70 to 420. Students who score less than 210 are defined as negatively disposed toward critical thinking, students with scores between 210 and 280 are defined as ambivalently disposed, and students with scores above 280 are defined as positively disposed. [4,6]  The score range for each of the seven sub-scales is from 10–40, and students can be considered negatively (scores less than 30), ambivalently (scores between 30 and 40), or positively (scores greater than 40) disposed to each of the characteristics.

The CCTDI has been tested by its developers and by several independent researchers. [2, 4, 6, 7, 9] Among those who have examined the instrument, there is general agreement that the survey validly and reliably measures the disposition toward critical thinking and is therefore appropriate for inclusion in research and assessment. In contrast to some of the findings of the survey developers, several researchers have identified concerns about the appropriate number of sub-scales and some of the statistical properties of particular sub-scales. [2, 7, 9]  Further work is needed to review these concerns, though the issues raised do not appear to be serious, and using the seven sub-scales defined by the instrument’s authors still appears to be appropriate.

How the CCTDI Can Be Used in Assessment

The CCTDI can be used at a single point in time to gain an understanding of how students view themselves as critical thinkers. This information can be useful in determining whether individual students or groups of students have the dispositions deemed necessary for a class, at the end of a program, or for entry into a particular professional setting. For example, in the field of nursing, which has recommended CCTDI scores [3] , it may be useful to know a student's disposition toward critical thinking upon entry into a program or prior to his or her entry into a clinical setting. Scores can be used to identify strengths and areas for improvement. (A person's predisposition and motivation to think critically is interrelated with actual critical thinking ability; both work together to create a critical thinker. Therefore, institutions interested in assessing critical thinking characteristics of their students might choose to consider using both the CCTDI for attitude and the CCTST for ability.)

In addition, the instrument can be used to test how an experience or set of experiences influence students’ dispositions toward critical thinking. Positive changes in individual predisposition to critical thinking linked to curricular programs have been demonstrated. Students can be tested in their first year of college and again at the end of their senior year to determine how the entire collegiate experience affected their dispositions to think critically. [6] One can also test the effects of specific collegiate programs, courses, or experiences. For this purpose, it is important to measure carefully different student characteristics and differences in what students have done at college in addition to the experiences under study. In one of my own studies [8] , I looked at the effects of students’ experiences with diversity on several outcomes, including the disposition toward critical thinking, as measured by the CCTDI.

The CCTDI is useful because it is a relatively short survey that captures a meaningful concept (the disposition to think critically) with clear connections to valued educational outcomes. It is adaptable to different settings and can be administered to any size group. For these reasons, it can play a valuable role in the assessment of a liberal arts education. However, because it measures a single outcome, the CCTDI is most helpful when combined with information gathered from other instruments and methods. It is a valuable tool to keep in one’s assessment "toolkit."

References  

• American Philosophical Association. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. The Delphi Report Executive Summary: Research findings and recommendations prepared for the committee on pre-college philosophy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED315423)
• Bondy, K. N., Koenigseder, L. A., Ishee, J. H., & Williams, B. G. (2001). Psychometric properties of the California critical thinking tests. Journal of Nursing Measurement , 9, 309–328.
• Facione, N. C. & Facione, P. A. (1997). Critical thinking assessment in nursing education programs: An aggregate data analysis . Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• Facione, P. A., Facione, N. C., & Giancarlo, C. A. (1998). The California critical thinking disposition inventory test manual (Revised) . Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
• Facione, P. A., Sánchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. The Journal of General Education, 44 , 1–25.
• Giancarlo, C. A. & Facione, P. A. (2001). A look across four years at the disposition toward critical thinking among undergraduate students. The Journal of General Education , 50 , 29–55.
• Kakai, H. (2003). Re-examining the factor structure of the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 96 , 435–438.
• Nelson Laird, T. F. (2005). College students’ experiences with diversity and their effects on academic self-confidence, social agency, and disposition toward critical thinking. Research in Higher Education, 46 , 365–387.
• Walsh, C. M. & Hardy, R. C. (1997). Factor structure stability of the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory across sex and various students’ majors. Perceptual & Motor Skills , 85 , 1211–1228.  
• The Bachelor
• Audio Podcasts
• Commencement Marks New Beginning for Wabash’s Class of 2024
• Fincher ’24: Discovering God’s Plan in the Gym
• Kanetkar ’24: Never Afraid of a Challenge
• The Class of 2024 Commencement Speakers
• Pickett ’26 Receives “Realizing the Dream” Scholarship

News Archives

Wabash College Communications and Marketing

Video player.

California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory

Get data for Admissions Assessing Critical Thinking Mindset Student Advising and Success Accreditation Curricular Evaluation Educational Research

The  California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI)  is the premier instrument for assessing critical thinking mindset and provides valid and reliable data for individuals and for groups. The  CCTDI  is an educational assessment of the mindset dimension of critical thinking.  It is designed for use with undergraduate and graduate students. Independent scholars have demonstrated the importance of these mindset attributes in cultures around the world.  Clients most commonly use the  CCTDI  for admissions, advising, studies of curriculum effectiveness, and the documentation of student learning outcomes.

For assessment specs, administration, metrics reported, and more, scroll down. Contact us by using the “Request A Quote” button to ask a question. Or phone us at 650-697-5628 to speak with an assessment services client support specialist.

Seamless Testing. Results You Can Trust.

Higher education.

The CCTDI is calibrated for undergraduate, graduate level college students and the adult learners across all fields of study.

Administration

Administered online with a secure, multi-lingual interface, it’s user-friendly and accessible anywhere.

Support Materials

User Manual includes all needed information about administering the assessment and interpreting the resulting individual and group scores.

Assessment Specs

30 minutes timed administration; 75 engaging, Likert-style agree/disagree items.

Deliverables

Group graphics with statistical summary of scores; Excel spreadsheet of responses to all custom demographic questions, and all scores for each person tested. Optional individual score reports for administrators and/or test takers.

Results Reported

Metrics include scores for 7 critical thinking mindset attributes: truth-seeking, open-mindedness, analyticity, systematicity, Confidence in Reasoning, Inquisitiveness, and Cognitive Maturity.

All of the CCTDI metrics are on a 60-point scale with a corresponding qualitative rating (Superior, Strong, Moderate, Weak, Not Manifested).

Available in English, Arabic, Chinese Simplified, Chinese Traditional, Dutch, Farsi, Finnish, French, German, Hebrew, Icelandic, Indonesian-Bahasa, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Malay, Norwegian, Portuguese, Portuguese-Brazil, Spanish, Thai, and Turkish languages.

CCTDI provides seven mindset attributes needed by the critical thinker. Items are drawn from a scientifically developed and tested item pool.

• Truth-seeking:  Courage to follow reasons and evidence wherever they lead
• Open-mindedness: Willingness to consider a variety of alternative opinions
• Analyticity (Foresight): Consistent effort to anticipate consequences
• Systematicity (Focus): Habit of taking an orderly and organized approach to problem-solving
• Confidence in Reasoning: Disciplined reliance on well-reasoned judgment
• Inquisitiveness:  Continuous attention to and desire for learning
• Cognitive Maturity:  Expectation of making timely, well considered judgments

The  California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory  Report Package includes an individual test-taker report for each person assessed and group summary reports for each group and sub-group in the sample.

Reports are generated immediately after the conclusion of testing and are available for clients to download making real time assessment possible. Read more about how our  customer support specialists work with clients to select their reporting options on our Services tab or contact us for a consultation.

Group Analytics

• Clients can generate and download Excel spreadsheet files of all scores (Truth-seeking, Open-mindedness, Analyticity, Systematicity, Confidence in Reason, Inquisitiveness, and Maturity of Judgment- the seven mindset attributes needed by the critical thinker). At the option of the client, these also include the responses to optional custom demographic questions added by the client to the assessment profile.
• Presentation-ready tables and graphic representations of the score distribution for each of the seven CCTDI mindset metrics.
• Customers who have added custom demographic questions can generate sub-group reports for these variables, or for specific testing sessions or time periods. 

Optional Individual Test-Taker Reports

• Scores for each of the seven CCTDI mindset metrics are reported on a 60-point scale accompanied with a qualitative interpretation (Strong Negative, Negative, Inconsistent, Positive, Strong Positive).
• The Individual Test Taker Report can be pushed to an email address of the client’s choosing (for example, to an admissions office email, institutional assessment email, dean’s office email, etc.).
• The client controls whether individual reports are made available to the test-taker.

Need to expedite your project?  We can have your first online testing assignment available for your students within 24 hours.  Request a Quote or get started by calling 650-697-5628 and speaking with one of our assessment specialists today.

Unlock your exclusive access to our resource library, training tools.

 Understand the depth of our metrics with hands-on tools designed to elucidate the reasoning behind our results. These tools empower you to interpret and apply our data in your professional journey.

Published Articles

Explore how our products are used in real-world scenarios, with comprehensive studies that showcase their impact and effectiveness.

Analytical Reports

Delve into critical thinking insights from our founders, offering fresh perspectives and groundbreaking approaches.

Your subscription includes access to our resource library and periodic emails that keep you informed and ahead in your field. Your privacy is important to us. We promise to keep your information safe and never spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.

•   UMB Digital Archive
• School, Graduate
• Theses and Dissertations All Schools

Translation and validation of the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory

Description, identifier to cite or link to this item, collections.

entitlement

The Relationship Between the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory and Student Learning Outcomes in Baccalaureate Nursing Students

• PMID: 27023893
• DOI: 10.3928/01484834-20160316-08

Background: Critical thinking is the foundation for nurses' decision making. One school of nursing used the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) to document improvement in critical thinking dispositions.

Method: A retrospective study of 96 nursing students' records examined the relationships between the CCTDI and learning outcomes. Correlational statistics assessed relationships between CCTDI scores and cumulative grade point averages (GPA) and scores on two Health Education Systems Incorporated (HESI) examinations. Ordinal regression assessed predictive relationships between CCTDI scores and science course grades and NCLEX-RN success.

Results: First-year CCTDI scores did not predict first-year science grades. Senior-year CCTDI scores did not correlate with cumulative GPA or HESI RN Exit Exam scores, but were weakly correlated with HESI Pharmacology Exam scores. CCTDI scores did not predict NCLEX-RN success.

Conclusion: This study did not identify meaningful relationships between critical thinking dispositions, as measured by the CCTDI, and important learning outcomes. The results do not support the efficacy of using the CCTDI in nursing education.

Copyright 2016, SLACK Incorporated.

• Clinical Competence
• Education, Nursing, Baccalaureate*
• Educational Measurement / methods*
• Educational Measurement / statistics & numerical data
• Nursing Education Research
• Nursing Evaluation Research
• Nursing Methodology Research
• Retrospective Studies
• Students, Nursing / psychology*
• Students, Nursing / statistics & numerical data

• ADEA Connect

• Communities
• Career Opportunities
• New Thinking
• ADEA Governance
• House of Delegates
• Board of Directors
• Advisory Committees
• Sections and Special Interest Groups
• Governance Documents and Publications
• Dental Faculty Code of Conduct
• ADEAGies Foundation
• About ADEAGies Foundation
• ADEAGies Newsroom
• Gies Awards
• Press Center
• Strategic Directions
• 2023 Annual Report
• ADEA Membership
• Institutions
• Faculty and Staff
• Individuals
• Corporations
• ADEA Members
• Predoctoral Dental
• Allied Dental
• Nonfederal Advanced Dental
• U.S. Federal Dental
• Students, Residents and Fellows
• Corporate Members
• Member Directory
• Directory of Institutional Members (DIM)
• 5 Questions With
• ADEA Member to Member Recruitment
• Students, Residents, and Fellows
• Information For
• Deans & Program Directors
• Current Students & Residents
• Prospective Students
• Educational Meetings
• Upcoming Events
• 2025 Annual Session & Exhibition
• eLearn Webinars
• Past Events
• Professional Development
• eLearn Micro-credentials
• Leadership Institute
• Leadership Institute Alumni Association (LIAA)
• Faculty Development Programs
• ADEA Scholarships, Awards and Fellowships
• Academic Fellowship
• For Students
• For Dental Educators
• For Leadership Institute Fellows
• Teaching Resources
• ADEA weTeach®
• MedEdPORTAL

Critical Thinking Skills Toolbox

• Resources for Teaching
• Policy Topics
• Task Force Report
• Opioid Epidemic
• Financing Dental Education
• Holistic Review
• Sex-based Health Differences
• Access, Diversity and Inclusion
• ADEA Commission on Change and Innovation in Dental Education
• Tool Resources
• Campus Liaisons
• Policy Resources
• Policy Publications
• Holistic Review Workshops
• Leading Conversations Webinar Series
• Collaborations
• Summer Health Professions Education Program
• Minority Dental Faculty Development Program
• Federal Advocacy
• Dental School Legislators
• Policy Letters and Memos
• Legislative Process
• Federal Advocacy Toolkit
• State Information
• Opioid Abuse
• Tracking Map
• Loan Forgiveness Programs
• State Advocacy Toolkit
• Canadian Information
• Dental Schools
• Provincial Information
• ADEA Advocate
• Books and Guides
• About ADEA Publications
• 2023-24 Official Guide
• Dental School Explorer
• Dental Education Trends
• Ordering Publications
• ADEA Bookstore
• Newsletters
• About ADEA Newsletters
• Bulletin of Dental Education
• Charting Progress
• Subscribe to Newsletter
• Journal of Dental Education
• Subscriptions
• Submissions FAQs
• Data, Analysis and Research
• Educational Institutions
• Applicants, Enrollees and Graduates
• Dental School Seniors
• ADEA AADSAS® (Dental School)
• AADSAS Applicants
• Health Professions Advisors
• Admissions Officers
• ADEA CAAPID® (International Dentists)
• CAAPID Applicants
• Program Finder
• ADEA DHCAS® (Dental Hygiene Programs)
• DHCAS Applicants
• Program Directors
• ADEA PASS® (Advanced Dental Education Programs)
• PASS Applicants
• PASS Evaluators
• DentEd Jobs
• Information For:

• Introduction
• Overview of Critical Thinking Skills
• Teaching Observations
• Avenues for Research

CTS Tools for Faculty and Student Assessment

• Critical Thinking and Assessment
• Conclusions
• Bibliography
• Helpful Links
• Appendix A. Author's Impressions of Vignettes

A number of critical thinking skills inventories and measures have been developed:

     Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA)      Cornell Critical Thinking Test      California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI)      California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)      Health Science Reasoning Test (HSRT)      Professional Judgment Rating Form (PJRF)      Teaching for Thinking Student Course Evaluation Form      Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric      Peer Evaluation of Group Presentation Form

Excluding the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Facione and Facione developed the critical thinking skills instruments listed above. However, it is important to point out that all of these measures are of questionable utility for dental educators because their content is general rather than dental education specific. (See Critical Thinking and Assessment .)

Table 7. Purposes of Critical Thinking Skills Instruments

  Reliability and Validity

Reliability means that individual scores from an instrument should be the same or nearly the same from one administration of the instrument to another. The instrument can be assumed to be free of bias and measurement error (68). Alpha coefficients are often used to report an estimate of internal consistency. Scores of .70 or higher indicate that the instrument has high reliability when the stakes are moderate. Scores of .80 and higher are appropriate when the stakes are high.

Validity means that individual scores from a particular instrument are meaningful, make sense, and allow researchers to draw conclusions from the sample to the population that is being studied (69) Researchers often refer to "content" or "face" validity. Content validity or face validity is the extent to which questions on an instrument are representative of the possible questions that a researcher could ask about that particular content or skills.

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal-FS (WGCTA-FS)

The WGCTA-FS is a 40-item inventory created to replace Forms A and B of the original test, which participants reported was too long.70 This inventory assesses test takers' skills in:

     (a) Inference: the extent to which the individual recognizes whether assumptions are clearly stated      (b) Recognition of assumptions: whether an individual recognizes whether assumptions are clearly stated      (c) Deduction: whether an individual decides if certain conclusions follow the information provided      (d) Interpretation: whether an individual considers evidence provided and determines whether generalizations from data are warranted      (e) Evaluation of arguments: whether an individual distinguishes strong and relevant arguments from weak and irrelevant arguments

Researchers investigated the reliability and validity of the WGCTA-FS for subjects in academic fields. Participants included 586 university students. Internal consistencies for the total WGCTA-FS among students majoring in psychology, educational psychology, and special education, including undergraduates and graduates, ranged from .74 to .92. The correlations between course grades and total WGCTA-FS scores for all groups ranged from .24 to .62 and were significant at the p < .05 of p < .01. In addition, internal consistency and test-retest reliability for the WGCTA-FS have been measured as .81. The WGCTA-FS was found to be a reliable and valid instrument for measuring critical thinking (71).

Cornell Critical Thinking Test (CCTT)

There are two forms of the CCTT, X and Z. Form X is for students in grades 4-14. Form Z is for advanced and gifted high school students, undergraduate and graduate students, and adults. Reliability estimates for Form Z range from .49 to .87 across the 42 groups who have been tested. Measures of validity were computed in standard conditions, roughly defined as conditions that do not adversely affect test performance. Correlations between Level Z and other measures of critical thinking are about .50.72 The CCTT is reportedly as predictive of graduate school grades as the Graduate Record Exam (GRE), a measure of aptitude, and the Miller Analogies Test, and tends to correlate between .2 and .4.73

California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI)

Facione and Facione have reported significant relationships between the CCTDI and the CCTST. When faculty focus on critical thinking in planning curriculum development, modest cross-sectional and longitudinal gains have been demonstrated in students' CTS.74 The CCTDI consists of seven subscales and an overall score. The recommended cut-off score for each scale is 40, the suggested target score is 50, and the maximum score is 60. Scores below 40 on a specific scale are weak in that CT disposition, and scores above 50 on a scale are strong in that dispositional aspect. An overall score of 280 shows serious deficiency in disposition toward CT, while an overall score of 350 (while rare) shows across the board strength. The seven subscales are analyticity, self-confidence, inquisitiveness, maturity, open-mindedness, systematicity, and truth seeking (75).

In a study of instructional strategies and their influence on the development of critical thinking among undergraduate nursing students, Tiwari, Lai, and Yuen found that, compared with lecture students, PBL students showed significantly greater improvement in overall CCTDI (p = .0048), Truth seeking (p = .0008), Analyticity (p =.0368) and Critical Thinking Self-confidence (p =.0342) subscales from the first to the second time points; in overall CCTDI (p = .0083), Truth seeking (p= .0090), and Analyticity (p =.0354) subscales from the second to the third time points; and in Truth seeking (p = .0173) and Systematicity (p = .0440) subscales scores from the first to the fourth time points (76). California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)

Studies have shown the California Critical Thinking Skills Test captured gain scores in students' critical thinking over one quarter or one semester. Multiple health science programs have demonstrated significant gains in students' critical thinking using site-specific curriculum. Studies conducted to control for re-test bias showed no testing effect from pre- to post-test means using two independent groups of CT students. Since behavioral science measures can be impacted by social-desirability bias-the participant's desire to answer in ways that would please the researcher-researchers are urged to have participants take the Marlowe Crowne Social Desirability Scale simultaneously when measuring pre- and post-test changes in critical thinking skills. The CCTST is a 34-item instrument. This test has been correlated with the CCTDI with a sample of 1,557 nursing education students. Results show that, r = .201, and the relationship between the CCTST and the CCTDI is significant at p< .001. Significant relationships between CCTST and other measures including the GRE total, GRE-analytic, GRE-Verbal, GRE-Quantitative, the WGCTA, and the SAT Math and Verbal have also been reported. The two forms of the CCTST, A and B, are considered statistically significant. Depending on the testing, context KR-20 alphas range from .70 to .75. The newest version is CCTST Form 2000, and depending on the testing context, KR-20 alphas range from .78-.84.77

The Health Science Reasoning Test (HSRT)

Items within this inventory cover the domain of CT cognitive skills identified by a Delphi group of experts whose work resulted in the development of the CCTDI and CCTST. This test measures health science undergraduate and graduate students' CTS. Although test items are set in health sciences and clinical practice contexts, test takers are not required to have discipline-specific health sciences knowledge. For this reason, the test may have limited utility in dental education (78).

Preliminary estimates of internal consistency show that overall KR-20 coefficients range from .77 to .83.79 The instrument has moderate reliability on analysis and inference subscales, although the factor loadings appear adequate. The low K-20 coefficients may be result of small sample size, variance in item response, or both (see following table).

Table 8. Estimates of Internal Consistency and Factor Loading by Subscale for HSRT

Professional Judgment Rating Form (PJRF)

The scale consists of two sets of descriptors. The first set relates primarily to the attitudinal (habits of mind) dimension of CT. The second set relates primarily to CTS.

A single rater should know the student well enough to respond to at least 17 or the 20 descriptors with confidence. If not, the validity of the ratings may be questionable. If a single rater is used and ratings over time show some consistency, comparisons between ratings may be used to assess changes. If more than one rater is used, then inter-rater reliability must be established among the raters to yield meaningful results. While the PJRF can be used to assess the effectiveness of training programs for individuals or groups, the evaluation of participants' actual skills are best measured by an objective tool such as the California Critical Thinking Skills Test.

Teaching for Thinking Student Course Evaluation Form

Course evaluations typically ask for responses of "agree" or "disagree" to items focusing on teacher behavior. Typically the questions do not solicit information about student learning. Because contemporary thinking about curriculum is interested in student learning, this form was developed to address differences in pedagogy and subject matter, learning outcomes, student demographics, and course level characteristic of education today. This form also grew out of a "one size fits all" approach to teaching evaluations and a recognition of the limitations of this practice. It offers information about how a particular course enhances student knowledge, sensitivities, and dispositions. The form gives students an opportunity to provide feedback that can be used to improve instruction.

Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric

This assessment tool uses a four-point classification schema that lists particular opposing reasoning skills for select criteria. One advantage of a rubric is that it offers clearly delineated components and scales for evaluating outcomes. This rubric explains how students' CTS will be evaluated, and it provides a consistent framework for the professor as evaluator. Users can add or delete any of the statements to reflect their institution's effort to measure CT. Like most rubrics, this form is likely to have high face validity since the items tend to be relevant or descriptive of the target concept. This rubric can be used to rate student work or to assess learning outcomes. Experienced evaluators should engage in a process leading to consensus regarding what kinds of things should be classified and in what ways.80 If used improperly or by inexperienced evaluators, unreliable results may occur.

Peer Evaluation of Group Presentation Form

This form offers a common set of criteria to be used by peers and the instructor to evaluate student-led group presentations regarding concepts, analysis of arguments or positions, and conclusions.81 Users have an opportunity to rate the degree to which each component was demonstrated. Open-ended questions give users an opportunity to cite examples of how concepts, the analysis of arguments or positions, and conclusions were demonstrated.

Table 8. Proposed Universal Criteria for Evaluating Students' Critical Thinking Skills 

Aside from the use of the above-mentioned assessment tools, Dexter et al. recommended that all schools develop universal criteria for evaluating students' development of critical thinking skills (82).

Their rationale for the proposed criteria is that if faculty give feedback using these criteria, graduates will internalize these skills and use them to monitor their own thinking and practice (see Table 4).

• Application Information
• ADEA GoDental
• ADEA AADSAS
• ADEA CAAPID
• Events & Professional Development
• Scholarships, Awards & Fellowships
• Publications & Data
• Official Guide to Dental Schools
• Data, Analysis & Research
• Follow Us On:

• ADEA Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Website Feedback
• Website Help