Critical Thinking

Evaluator last updated September 3, 2026.

Overview

The Critical Thinking evaluator rates a student’s source-based argumentative essay for critical thinking, treated as distinct from writing quality.

At a glance


Supported grades	8–10
Rubric	Project rubric adapted from the Carnegie Foundation / ETS Skills Progressions, informed by the SFF critical-thinking framework
Model used	Claude Opus 5 (`claude-opus-5-20260723`) - no configurable temperature The evaluator was built and validated using this specific model and temperature. Other configurations will produce different results and may have lower accuracy.

Getting started

Follow the Quickstart to start using this evaluator:

Access method
Evaluators playground	Not yet supported
SDK	Not yet supported
Other	Python notebook ↗ Prompts: `system.txt` ↗ and `user.txt` ↗ Schemas: `input_schema.json` ↗ and `output_schema.json` ↗

Inputs

Input	Description	Required
Assignment text	Writing assignment or prompt given to the student	Yes
Sources	Source passage(s) given to the student as text	Yes
Source count	Number of source passages provided by the prompt (rates Indicator 2.1 “Synthesizing sources” only when there is more than 1 source)	Yes
Essay text	Student’s essay, which may contain spelling and grammar errors (200–800 words recommended)	Yes

Output

Field	Description
Critical thinking score	Overall rating, formed as the median of the indicator ratings Uses the same 5-level scale: Not Evident, Exploring, Analyzing, Integrating, Extending
Reasoning	How the median was formed over the indicator ratings, and any tie handling
Indicators	List of indicators that contributed to the critical thinking score (e.g., evidence strength, synthesizing sources, counterarguments, facts over opinions, drawing conclusions), each with: Rating — Uses 5-level scale (Not Evident, Exploring, Analyzing, Integrating, Extending) Reasoning — Explains the rating against the rubric and rules Evidence — Verbatim quote(s) from the essay, each with a comment explaining why it matters (may be empty for a Not Evident rating)

Interpreting results

Output	How to use
Indicator rating + evidence/reasoning	Formative signal on where an essay sits on a specific critical-thinking skill Example: Flag essays that rate low on Counterarguments or Facts over opinions for targeted instruction; show the quotes so a teacher can check the rating
Overall rating	Cohort- or portfolio-level signal on critical thinking, distinct from writing quality Example: Research or program-level analysis of critical-thinking trends across a set of essays, rather than an individual grade

Evaluator release history

Date	Changed
September 3, 2026	First release

Durable skills evaluators

Explore evaluators that rate student work against a construct’s indicators.

Quickstart

Run an evaluator in the Evaluators playground, a Python notebook, or with the SDK.

Understanding evaluators

Getting started

SDK API reference

Text Complexity evaluators

Graphics evaluators

Feedback evaluators

Academic standards evaluators

Durable skills evaluators

Datasets

Resources

Overview

At a glance

Getting started

Inputs

Output

Interpreting results

Evaluator release history

Durable skills evaluators

Quickstart

​Overview

​At a glance

​Getting started

​Inputs

​Output

​Interpreting results

​Evaluator release history

​Related topics

Durable skills evaluators

Quickstart

Overview

At a glance

Getting started

Inputs

Output

Interpreting results

Evaluator release history

Related topics