Identifying Obstacles Using Critical Thinking

July 29, 2021

Identifying Obstacles Using Critical Thinking

Table of Contents

Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457	Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%	Writer Classification: PhD competent
Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago	Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours	Revision: Permitted
Sources: 4-6	Course Level: Masters/University College	Guarantee Status: 96-99%

Instructions

Worksheet for Critical Thinking: Identifying Barriers

Before you respond, read Chapter 1 of THiNK: Critical Thinking and Logic Skills for Everyday Life to review the definition of critical thinking, the barriers to critical thinking, and the three stages of cognitive development in college students.

Respond to each of the following prompts with a 75- to 125-word response:

1. How does critical thinking help you in your daily life? In your response, think about your personal, professional, and academic lives. In Chapter 1 of THiNK: Critical Thinking and Logic Skills for Everyday Life, review the definition of critical thinking.

To enter text, click or tap here.

2. Give an example of a time in your life when critical thinking could have been useful. In that case, why would critical thinking be beneficial?

To enter text, click or tap here.

3. Identify 34 critical thinking roadblocks that you can relate to. In your own words, describe the barriers. Give an example of a time when you’ve encountered each barrier, or when you might encounter it in the future.

It’s important to note that you don’t have to explain how you’ll get around the obstacles you’ve identified. In a future assignment, you will have the opportunity to do so. Concentrate on the obstacles to critical thinking as well as examples that are relevant to you.

To enter text, click or tap here.

4. Are you in one of the three stages of cognitive development (dualism, relativism, or commitment)? Explain why you’ve arrived at this point in your development. If you’re at stage 1 or 2, how might you progress to the next stage, or how might you keep stage 3 going?

To enter text, click or tap here.

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.

Methodology

58-53 points

Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.

83-76 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.

52-49 points

Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.

75-1 points

Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.

48-1 points

There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met