Our Project Critical thinking and civic responsibility are among the most commonly identified student learning goals for institutions of higher education but these learning outcomes are usually treated as separate entities and often fussily defined. This project addresses these desired student-learning outcomes (SLOs) and requires students to develop knowledge and skills while reconsidering their beliefs and attitudes. Historically, most institutions interested in these desired SLOs have independently tried to define and measure them within their own institutional context. Given the growing evidence that traditional norm-referenced, multiple-choice tests fail to measure complex cognitive and performance ability (Darling-Hammond, 1995, p. 465), it becomes essential to develop assessment tools to address these SLOs that transcend disciplinary and institutional boundaries. Faculty from a consortium of diverse campuses, ranging from small private colleges to comprehensive urban institutions will collaborate to undertake reform of a variety of introductory courses to explicitly include a series of critical thinking assignments that will foster the development of civic thinking skills. In the context of this project, we define critical thinking as represented by deep learning approaches that focus on what, rather than how much, is learned. Civic thinking represents an element of civic engagement, but is not explicitly limited to - or even necessarily inclusive of - bettering the community. Civic thinking involves critical analysis, engagement with policy development issues, skills in developing multi-sided argumentation, that move more deeply into the issues beyond the more superficial, political, media headline - driven level of analysis. Civic engagement is the action that is taken to impact the community; civic thinking is what prepares students to participate in civic action (Ehrlich, 2000)

Assessment Tools and Resource Development We will apply an existing research tool, the Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO; Biggs & Collis, 1982) to gather data on students' critical thinking skills (see diagram). The SOLO taxonomy will be used to place student responses to higher order questions into one of five categories indicative of cognitive complexity. Lower levels (prestructural, unistructural, multistructural) of the taxonomy define how many facts have been learned, while higher levels (relational, extended astract) are characterized by how these facts are marshaled to reveal a deep understanding of critical concepts. While it is relatively straightforward to use the SOLO taxonomy to assess the degree of critical thinking, it is more challenging to track the development of civic thinking among our students. However, it is not sufficient for the student to just understand important concepts but it is vital that they understand how such concepts are relevant to their lives and to broader problems affecting their community. This also works in reverse. It is not sufficient to have a deep commitment to community involvement if that commitment is not harnessed in the search for practical solutions to real problems. Unfortunately, there has been little research on the dispositions of students to engage in civic thinking outside the context of specific civic engagement activities. Consequently, it would be more fruitful for us to seek to identify the elements of civic thinking that become evident in student responses to critical thinking problems through interviews and focus groups, rather than to try to measure improvements in civic thinking skills when we have no benchmark for civic thinking to use as a datum (see diagram).

Assessment of Student Thinking A series of open ended critical thinking questions with civic components that address critical "bottleneck" concepts will be embedded in class assignments. Student answers will be assessed using the SOLO taxonomy. A pilot study involving 29 students in a biology class at a cluster institution answered the following example exercise. Student responses were assessed using the SOLO taxonomy and sample answers correponding to different SOLO levels are presented under "Examples of Students' Work". Please read the following passage. What connections can you draw between the purchase of a third car by a two-person family and the carrying capacity of Earth? Exponential Growth and Earth's Carrying Capacity A population is a group of individuals of the same species living in a particular area, such as a population of a species of fish living in a particular pond. As long as there are enough resources around to allow everyone to survive, and as long as there is reproduction, this size of the population (e.g., number of fish in the pond) increases exponentially. Exponential growth is the population growth that occurs when a quantity increases by a fixed percentage of the whole in a given time, . . . The carrying capacity is exceeded when the resources are being consumed or used up at a rate faster than they are being replenished. . . Like a pond, Earth has a fixed amount of resources that humans need: there is only so much food available each year, only so much drinking water, only so much oxygen produced each year, only so much livable habitat available each year. While technological advances can increase there resources (often at an energy cost and/or health cost due to pollution), they cannot be increased to infinity, so the population size cannot increase indefinitely. All populations are limited in size by the carrying capacity of the environment relative to the overall consumption of resources.

Cluster Institutions The consortium of insitutions, titled, Critical Thinking for Civic Thinking (CT)2 consists of six schools: Indiana University Purdue University--Indianapolis, University of Akron, Portland State University, Wagner College, Central Connecticut State University, and Miami University. The consortium is sponsored and endorsed by the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning - a collaboration between the American Association for Higher Education and the Carnegie Foundation. An overarching goal of the collaboration is promote scholarly approaches to teaching and learning that 1) improve the learning of all students; 2) advance the profession and practice of teaching; and 3) bring to teaching the recognition and rewards afforded to other forms of scholarly work in higher education. Aligned with this, the general goals of (CT)2 are to better serve students by preparing them with the skills, knowledge, and attitudes that enable them to become critical and reflective thinkers with the skills necessary to be effective community, national, and global citizens. The ultimate aim of the project is to develop models of pedagogical and assessment tools that will enable faculty to infuse critical thinking and civic thinking throughout the undergraduate curriculum. Contact Information: Cluster Co-Director, Don Stearns, Assistant Provost, Wagner College, One Campus Road, Staten Island, NY 10301, dstearns@wagner.edu Cluster Co-Director, David McConnell, Co-Director of the Institute for Teaching and Learning, 412 Leigh Hall, University of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-6236, 330 972 8047 (phone), 330 972 5728 (fax), dam6@uakron.edu Sharon Hamilton, Director of Assessment, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, 425 University Blvd., Indianapolis, IN 46202-5143, shamilton@iupui.edu Steve Adair, Associate Professor of Sociology, Central Connecticut State University, CCSU 1615 Stanley St., New Britain, CT 06050, adairs@ccsu.edu Karl Schilling, Associate Director, Center for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching, Miami University of Ohio, Oxford, OH, 513 529 9266, schillkl@muohio.edu Jeff Gerwing, Asst. Professor, University Studies, Portland State University, Box 751, Portland, OR 97207, 503.725.4482, jgerwing@pdx.edu

Examples of student work Pre-structural Response: Response 9049 - A two person family who buys a third car and the carrying capacity of Earth show a similar relevance. A two person family has bought one car then two cars so their exponential growth has gone up rapidly. The carrying capacity of the earth can only hold so many people w/o using up all its resources faster then they could be replenished. Sooner or later the population would decrease and earth would run out of resources. Two person families carrying capacity has bought on car they don’t need. Maybe they need two because they both need cars for the week. Not three though. That just uses up more resources then there is needed. Unistructural Response: Response 0443 - The purchase of a third car by a two person family will reduce the carrying capacity of the Earth because these people will then be using more resources than they need, and possibly adding more pollution. In nature, carrying capacity is often balanced, humans however are very wasteful and many of us, especially in the U.S., consume more than our fair share of resources. In our society, if we wanted to encourage people to reduce, reuse, and recycle there will have to be some benefit offered to them. However, we can’t keep going on as we are. The world’s population growth is astounding and we can’t afford to continue doing things, such as having more cars than people in a family, that essentially make the world smaller by reducing its carrying capacity. Multi-structural Response: Response 5793 - As inhabitants of the Earth, everything we do affects the amount of time we have left until we reach the carrying capacity of the Earth. Both by having many children, which increases the population, and by using many of the Earths resources, we are decreasing the amount of time left until the Earth reaches it’s carrying capacity. For example, if a two-person family buys a third car, they are not only using up the resources needed to make the car, but they are also going to be increasing the amount of gasoline or oil that they will be needing. By requiring more oil, they will be using up one of the Earth’s non-replenishaible resources. If one looks at the larger picture, one will understand that everything we do, whether it be letting the water in our sinks run for hours or buying a third car, is affecting the amount of time until the Earth reaches its carrying capacity. Relational Response: Response 2638 - A two person family purchasing a third car is a prime example of how resources are being used up and not even as a necessity but out of lavish and unidealistic reason. It is physically possible to operate with two cars and if worked out and with minor inconveniences possibly even 1 car for a family of three. If every family made a conscience effort to buy/have only what they need resources would drastically be more available. Simple things like how many pairs of shoes, letting the water run while you brush your teeth for 3 mins or simply even turning off the lights when you leave the room. Like the carrying capacity of the earth if we continue to use more than we truly need we will not be able to replenish in time this threatening our resources in the future. Slowing the time of resource using will increase the time for resource renewal and inventions to save or substitute for nonrenewable substantances. Keep in mind the first step in the right direction toward saving the world is an open mind and accepting minor inconveniences. Extended Abstract Response: There were no responses in this category.

What results have emerged? A pilot study involving 29 students in a biology class at a cluster institution answered the example exercise included in the "What was you approach . . . " section. Student responses were assessed by four reviewers using the SOLO taxonomy. All reviewers agreed on the same rating for approximately a third of students' responses and at least three reviewers agreed on the same score for about half of the essays. Analysis of inter-rater reliability yielded a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.879. Most of the student work was rated as unistructural or multistructural: Taxonomy Level - Number of Students Prestructural - 1 Pre/Unistructural - 3 Unistructural - 14 Uni/Multistructural - 2 Multistructural - 8 Multi/Relational - 0 Relational - 1 Extended Abstract - 0