Holistic rubrics for Holistic, Critical, and Writing
Holistic Rubrics for Evaluating 3 ELOs: Holistic Thinking, Critical Thinking, and Writing
| 4 pts – Advanced
(capstone courses & senior projects) |
3 pts – Proficient
(intermediate courses) |
2 pts – Progressing
(introductory courses) |
1 pt – Beginning; 0 pts – Missing
(college entry) |
|
| Holistic Thinking | The work identifies a common principle operating in analogous ways in different disciplines or subject areas. The expression of the principle shows a broad and deep familiarity with the Science and Technology of Consciousness. It connects disciplinary content to personal experience in and out of meditation; to the world outside of college; and to the author’s own development of higher states of consciousness. The work shows the beginning of one unified view of the modern disciplines, Maharishi Vedic Science, and personal experience. | The work identifies patterns within content and expresses these patterns in terms of a more limited range of STC principles taught in previous courses. These unifying principles are explained in terms of their own experience of meditation and in terms of the benefits of regular meditation practice. They can use unifying principles to relate what they learn in the context of classroom study to the world of practical experience outside of class. | The work is brimming with the anticipation of unifying patterns and principles, such that, with guidance, students can find similar patterns in more than one content area and with support can connect these patterns to daily experience. Their work occasionally expresses these patterns as unifying principles, but not consistently or precisely, and only sporadically to STC. It shows an understanding that classroom content can be applied outside the classroom, but does not show actual evidence of doing so. | The work recognizes the idea of interdisciplinary principles, but has not had sufficient opportunities to discover or apply them to disciplinary content. It makes reference to some of the 16 SCI principles with relation to their own meditation and in terms of daily life, and in relation to academic content. The connection between content and these principles is unclear, superficial, and/or forced. Academic content remains largely siloed in the academic disciplines, with their separate methodologies and languages. |
| Critical Thinking | The reasoning is clear, logical, evidence-based, and demonstrates a solid grasp of relevant disciplinary knowledge. Sources are selected and assessed according to their relative authority in the discipline. Assumptions (including one’s own) and alternative points of view are fair-mindedly examined within their larger contexts. The thinking develops diverse ways — known and original — of seeing and solving an issue. | The reasoning is clear, logical, and evidence-based. Sources are selected for their credibility, with some awareness of their relative authority in the discipline. Assumptions (including one’s own) and alternative points of view are fair-mindedly acknowledged. The thinking explores diverse ways — known and original — of seeing and solving an issue. | The reasoning is mostly clear, with only minor logical gaps. Major claims are backed by evidence, but some minor statements are unsubstantiated. Sources are identified with some awareness of their credibility. Some assumptions are identified but one’s own are taken as fact. the value of examining them fair-mindedly is recognized. The thinking acknowledges diverse, known ways of seeing and solving an issue. | The reasoning is unclear or contains logical gaps. Major claims are unsubstantiated. There are few or no attempts to verify the accuracy of evidence or the credibility of sources. Shows an emerging awareness of assumptions. Alternative points of view are downplayed; there is low tolerance for positions that differ from one’s own or those of one’s group. The overall approach is fairly one-sided. |
| 4 pts – Advanced
(capstone courses & senior projects) |
3 pts – Proficient
(intermediate courses) |
2 pts – Progressing
(introductory courses) |
1 pt – Beginning; 0 pts – Missing
(college entry) |
|
| Writing | This writing demonstrates a thorough understanding of context, audience, and purpose that is responsive to the assigned task throughout the work. It organizes with some subtlety appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to fulfill this purpose. It shows mastery of the evidence and conventions appropriate to the discipline in which it is written and has a graceful command of language that is virtually error-free. | This writing demonstrates an adequate consideration of context, audience, and purpose together with a focus on the assigned task. It organizes without strain appropriate and relevant content to explore ideas that address its purpose. It demonstrates awareness of the evidence and conventions appropriate to the discipline in which it is written, while not always able to summon the most convincing evidence. It displays a straightforward use of language that conveys its meaning without vagueness or ambiguity and has only a few errors. | This writing demonstrates awareness of context, audience, and purpose in the context of the assigned task. It organizes, sometimes a bit clumsily, appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas through most of the work. It attempts, not always successfully, to use credible and/or relevant ideas that are appropriate to the discipline and genre of the writing. It uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include errors and ambiguities. | While initially addressing the assigned task, the writing may show minimal attention to context, audience, and purpose, and may not complete the assigned task. It develops content that is relatively simple, general, or ill-defined. It attempts to use a consistent system for basic organization, but is not yet aware of genres or disciplinary conventions. There are enough errors in syntax and usage to impede meaning and undermine credibility. |