85
Programmatic Assessment of Critical Thinking
and assessing the 10 APA learning goals proposed by the Task Force on Undergraduate
Psychology Major Competencies was to appeal to administration for more resources that
are necessary for quality education and reaching each of the 10 goals.
Suggestions For Assessing Critical Thinking
At JMU, we assess critical thinking through a variety of measures. Faculty outside of psychol-
ogy are responsible for assessing critical thinking skills from the general education courses,
but by sharing data at JMU, we are able to benefit from other perspectives trying to measure
the same construct. Perhaps faculty from other institutions can incorporate how other
departments at their institution assess critical thinking into their programmatic strategy.
Even within our department assessments, we assess critical thinking with multiple
measures. We have obtained useful information in both a behavior checklist and a self-
reflection exercise. These assessment tools are easy to administer. An institution without a
formalized assessment day could embed these instruments in a senior-level course.
Although our approach is multifaceted, we realize that it is limited. We could evaluate
critical thinking in the psychology classroom. Many of our colleagues use writing assign-
ments, exam questions, and projects that assess one or more critical thinking skills. We
could select a random sample of assignments and projects and review the products for
evidence of critical thinking. Another strategy would be to have a specific critical thinking
writing activity that all students complete as a part of assessment day activities. On paper
these approaches seem promising, but in reality they can be problematic. Finding faculty
to review and evaluate these products can be a challenge.
Another strategy worthy of consideration for future assessment plans might be a
standardized critical thinking test not specific to major content. There are a variety of
tests suitable for college students, and each covers different critical thinking skills.
Some tests are multiple choice only, and others include an essay component (see Norris &
Ennis, 1989). A limitation of this approach for our department would be the cost of
these assessment instruments. We currently graduate approximately 225 students each
year, and paying for an assessment instrument would be costly. We encourage readers
to weigh the pros and cons of each of these strategies and to review additional resources
available on the Web, like the Assessment CyberGuide for Learning Goals and
Outcomes in the Undergraduate Psychology Major, at APA’s Educational Directorate
(http://www.apa.org/ed/guidehomepage.html) and through other readings (such as
Halonen et al., 2003).
Conclusions
Unlike the men in the parable that introduced our chapter, we are not blind to the maj-
esty of the elephant. Our approaches to assess critical thinking examine only limited
components, but we do not conclude in haste that we have fully defined or captured all