Strong Critical Thinking in Groups

USE THIS TOOL TO EVALUATE KEY PLANNING OR EVALUATION SESSIONS

We all participate in group presentations. Improve your thinking by developing the habit of listening more actively and providing honest feedback on group discussions or presentations. If you work hard to provide true ratings and work to improve them over time, both you and your group members will develop stronger critical thinking skills. Use this form (even if you were a part of the presentation) to reflect back on the thinking process that occurred during the group discussion.

It’s enough to think well about each aspect of the group discussion, but perhaps you will want to rate the quality of the session. In this case: Score each area with a 4, 3, 2, or 1 to rate the discussion:

“Definitely Strong” (Very supportive of new learning and new information development). = 4
“Acceptably Strong” (Somewhat supportive of learning, most information was clear and added to my knowledge in this area). = 3
“Somewhat Lacking” (On the whole, not enough relevant data presented and many key relationships inadequately discussed). = 2
“Definitely Lacking” (Not supportive of new learning. Many missing, inaccurate, biased, or poorly presented ideas on this topic).
= 1

Achieving a clear idea of the scope and nature of the problem:

  1. The early discussion of the problem made key aspects for consideration clear. ___________
  2. ‘Key terms’ being used in the discussion were defined accurately and clearly. ___________
  3. The ‘key issues’ were presented accurately and clearly. ___________
  4. Theories, models, and examples used to understand the problem were accurate and clear. ___________

Briefly diagram, concept map or summarize the problem being discussed.

Analyzing the problem being discussed:

  1. Relevant evidence/data/documents about the problem were retrieved and presented when available.
  2. All relevant positions on both sides of the issue were considered.
  3. There was honesty in the presentation (at this stage there was no observable bias or effort to persuade).
  4. Reasons were provided for any conclusions or opinions they presented.
  5. Key problem aspects were analyzed and fairly evaluated in relationship to the problem being discussed.

What potentially key issues were left out or inadequately addressed?

Considering the conclusions or solutions developed by the group:

  1. The relevant ethical/social values/laws/regulations were identified, and their relevance explained.
  2. The group identified and weighed any opposing values or rules, connecting them accurately to the case.
  3. The relative feasibility of varying solutions was identified and evaluated.
  4. In evaluating solutions, consequences of both action and inaction were considered.
  5. Sound reasons were given to justify any conclusions or recommendations.
  6. The group reviewed their thinking process while presenting their conclusion(s).

What solutions were identified (conclusions reached)?

The final position taken by the group was (reason-based solution plan):

I will continue to reflect on this group position for these reasons (limitations or new implications):