一直以來，來自不同領域的教育者皆把批判性思考視為理想的教學結果（例如，Dewey, 1910; Ennis, 1993）。在英語為外語的英語教學中，批判性思考也被視為重要的一環（Davidson, 1998），更被定義為作判斷的思維(Alagozlu, 2007)、使以知識解決問題、提出問題和下結論(Liaw, 2007)，或以質疑、邏輯和創意維持民主社會(Atkinson, 1997)。雖然批判性思考最常透過辯論式寫作來檢驗(Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004; Ennis, 1993; Stapleton, 2001)，我們卻缺乏統一的定義來測驗辯論式寫作中的批判性思考(Atkinson, 1997; Sternberg, 1986)，更缺乏了測驗批判性思考的分數量表 (Stapleton, 2001; Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004)。另外，批判性思考的測驗也常被歸納於語言使用測驗中(Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004)。然而，語言使用與批判性思考卻似乎有著反向關係(Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004)。
為了改善辯論式寫作中批判性思考的教學與測驗，發展其清楚的定義及了解批判性思考與語言使用的關係是必要的。此論文藉由回答以下的研究問題來探索這些議題：
1) 英文為外語的英語教師如何在批改辯論式文章時操作批判性思考？
2) 這些批判性思考的定義與反映出現下的批判性思考評分標準之間的契合程度為何？
3) 在英文為外語的辯論式寫作中，批判性思考與語言使用的關係為何？
為了回答第一個問題，研究者邀請五位來自高等教育的教師參與研究，請他們以自身對批判性思考的觀念為基礎來對十五份英文為外語的辯論式文章進行評分，並且事後針對批判性思考進行訪談。至於第二及第三個研究問題，研究者請五位教師以融合批判性思考與語言使用測驗的分析評分表來對相同的文章進行評分。於事後訪談中，研究者請五位教師對於他們自己的以及評分表裡的批判性思考的定義進行比較。批判性思考與語言使用的關係透過斯皮爾曼相關係數以及頻率統計來進行計算與分析。
本研究發現英文為外語的寫作教師通常會把辯論式寫作中的批判性思考定義為擁有有邏輯的、清楚的、完整發展的和有支撐點的論述、專注在議題上且跟隨指示寫作的。本研究發現研究對象會根據他們自己的定義去解釋批判性思考的測驗標準，而大部分的研究對象發現在他們自己對批判性思考的概念與批判性思考測驗標準的定義之間有很多相似之處。在原先的批判性思考的定義與研究對象對批判性思考測驗標準的釋義中的個別的差異有可能是兩次評分差異的原因。批判性思考與語言使用整體而言是有相關性的，兩者關係的強度以文章獲得的批判性思考分數與特殊的指標而定，若文章獲得的批判性思考分數較高，兩者關係則較強，反之亦然。
本研究對於改善英文為外語的辯論式寫作之批判性思考測驗有重要的啟示。對於在英文為外語寫作中的批判性思考的定義而言，越準確、相關性越高的定義可以輔助發展寫作的批判性思考的標準化評分表。然而，要有效應用評分表，使用方式的訓練是必要的。如果沒有相關訓練的話，英文為外語的英語教師或許可以用個人對批判性思考的定義提供自己更縝密一致的測驗方式。最後，本研究建議語言使用及批判性思考與英文為外語的辯論式寫作之間的關係應該分別量測。

Educators across disciplines have long seen critical thinking (CT) as a desirable educational outcome (for example, Dewey, 1910; Ennis, 1993). CT is an important part of EFL instruction as well (Davidson, 1998) and is defined as, for example, reasoning in making judgements (Alagozlu, 2007), using knowledge for problem-solving, posing questions and making inferences (Liaw, 2007), or as using skepticism, logic, and creativity for maintaining a democratic society (Atkinson, 1997). CT is mostly assessed through argumentative writing (Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004; Ennis, 1993; Stapleton, 2001). However, there is a lack of a unified CT definition (Atkinson, 1997; Sternberg, 1986) to guide CT assessment in EFL argumentative writing, and hereby a lack of CT scoring guides and rubrics (Stapleton, 2001; Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004). Another issue is that CT is often considered to be included in the language use assessment (Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004). However, there seems to be a negative correlation between CT and language use (Condon & Kelly-Riley, 2004).
In order to improve CT instruction and assessment in EFL argumentative writing it is necessary to develop a clear definition of CT and to understand the relationship between CT and language use. These goals are explored in this thesis by answering the following research questions:
1) How do EFL writing teachers operationalize CT in grading EFL argumentative essays?
2) To what extent do these definitions match the one reflected in existing CT scoring rubrics?
3) What is the relationship between CT and language use in EFL argumentative essays?
To answer the first research question, five tertiary EFL writing teachers were asked to score 15 EFL argumentative essays based on their own conceptualizations of CT which were discussed in follow-up interviews. To answer the second and third research questions, the teachers were asked to score the same essays again using an analytic scoring rubric which combines CT and language use assessment. In the follow-up interviews, the teachers compared their original CT definition with the one reflected in the rubric. The relationship between CT and language use was analyzed by computing Spearman correlations and frequency statistics.
The study found that the EFL writing teachers commonly define CT in EFL argumentative writing as having an argument which is logical, clear, developed and supported, focusing on the issue, and following guidelines. The participants were found to interpret the CT rubrics according to their own original definitions, and most participants found considerable similarities between their own and the rubric’s definitions. The individual differences in the original CT definitions and in the participants’ interpretations of the rubric were likely causes of little rater agreement in both rounds of rating. CT and LU in EFL argumentative writing were found to be related overall, with the strength of the relationship being contingent on the essay’s CT level and a particular rater. The relationship between LU and CT was stronger in essays with higher CT scores and weaker in essays with lower CT scores.
The study has important implications for improving CT assessment in EFL argumentative writing. The more precise and relevant definition of CT in EFL writing may assist in developing a standardized CT scoring rubric for EFL writing assessment. However, training is necessary for the effective application of the rubric. In the absence of training, EFL teachers’ individual definitions of CT may provide a more fine-grained and consistent assessment. Finally, it is recommended that language use and CT elements relevant to EFL argumentative writing should be assessed separately.

ABSTRACT (Chinese)……………………………………………………………………i
ABSTRACT (English)…………………………………………………………………iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………………v
TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………………viii
LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………………………………xi
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………1
1.1 Background of the Study ………………………………………………………1
1.2 Significance of the Study ……………………………………………………6
1.3 Definition of Terms ……………………………………………………………7
1.4 Outline of the Thesis …………………………………………………………8
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ……………………………………………………10
2.1 Definitions of Critical Thinking …………………………………………10
2.1.1 Critical Thinking in Philosophy …………………………………………11
2.1.2 Critical Thinking in Psychology …………………………………………18
2.1.3 Critical Thinking in Education …………………………………………22
2.1.4 Critical Thinking in TESOL ………………………………………………34
2.2 Assessment of Critical Thinking ……………………………………………41
2.2.1 CT and Summary and Response Writing Task ……………………………43
2.2.2. Issues in CT Assessment in Argumentative Writing…………………47
2.2.2.1 CT Assessment Rubrics……………………………………………………47
2.2.2.2 The Relationship between CT and Language Use………………………52
2.3 The Link between Literature Review and this Study.……………………56
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY……………………………………………………………58
3.1 Research Design …………………………………………………………………59
3.2 Participants ……………………………………………………………………60
3.3 Instruments ………………………………………………………………………62
3.4 Data Collection Procedures …………………………………………………70
3.5 Data Analysis ……………………………………………………………………72
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS……………………………………………………………………75
4.1 Operationalization of CT in Grading EFL Argumentative Essays……………………………………………………………………………………75
4.1.1 Rater’s Evaluation of the Appropriateness of the SR Task as a Measure of CT…………………………………………………………………………76
4.1.1.1 The Role of a Summary in Assessing CT………………………………78
4.1.1.2 The Role of the Reading Passage in Assessing CT…………………80
4.1.1.3 Raters’ Evaluation of the Prompt……………………………………82
4.1.2 CT Elements and Definitions………………………………………………87
4.1.3 Definition of an A-grade paper……………………………………………92
4.1.3.1 Definition of a Convincing Argument…………………………………97
4.1.3.2 Types of Convincing Evidence…………………………………………104
4.1.4 Definition of a C-grade paper……………………………………………110
4.1.5 Written Comments……………………………………………………………119
4.1.5.1 Common CT Core Comments…………………………………………………119
4.1.5.2 Non-common CT Core Comments……………………………………………122
4.2 Comparison of EFL writing teacher’s Operationalization of CT in Grading EFL Argumentative Essays with Existing CT Scoring Rubrics……130
4.2.1 Evaluating and Understanding the Scoring Rubric……………………134
4.2.1.1 Benefits of Using the Scoring Rubric ………………………………134
4.2.1.2 Issues with Using the Scoring Rubric ………………………………137
4.2.1.3 Understanding the Scoring Rubric..…………………………………146
4.2.2 Comparing the Participants’ and the Scoring Rubric’s CT Definitions…………………………………………………………………………152
4.2.2.1 Comparing the Participants’ and the Scoring Rubric’s CT Elements………………………………………………………………………………152
4.2.2.2 Comparing Round 1 and Round 2 CT Scores…………………………168
4.3 Relationship between Language Use and CT in EFL Argumentative Essays…………………………………………………………………………………180
4.4 Summary of the Chapter………………………………………………………194
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION…………………………………………195
5.1 Defining CT in EFL Argumentative Writing………………………………197
5.2 Assessing CT in EFL Argumentative Writing……………………………205
5.3 The Relationship between LU and CT in EFL Argumentative Essays…210
5.4 Contribution and implications……………………………………………213
5.5 Limitations and Future Research…………………………………………217
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………221
APPENDIX A……………………………………………………………………………234
APPENDIX B……………………………………………………………………………237
APPENDIX C……………………………………………………………………………239
APPENDIX D……………………………………………………………………………241
APPENDIX E……………………………………………………………………………245
APPENDIX F……………………………………………………………………………256
APPENDIX G……………………………………………………………………………259
APPENDIX H……………………………………………………………………………264
APPENDIX I……………………………………………………………………………265
APPENDIX J……………………………………………………………………………266
APPENDIX K……………………………………………………………………………267
APPENDIX L……………………………………………………………………………271

Alagozlu, N. (2007). Critical thinking and voice in EFL writing. Asian EFL journal, 9(3), 118-136.
Applebee, A. N. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of educational research, 54(4), 577-596.
Asencion, Y. (2004). Validation of reading-to-write assessment tasks performed by second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
Asencion, Y. (2008). Investigating the reading-to-write construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(3), 140-150.
Atkinson, D. (1997). A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOL quarterly, 31(1), 71-94.
Bailin, S. (2002). Critical thinking and science education. Science & Education, 11(4), 361–375.
Bailin, S., Case, R., Coombs, J. R., & Daniels, L. B. (1999). Conceptualizing critical thinking. Journal of curriculum studies, 31(3), 285-302.
Barnawi, O. (2011). Finding a place for critical thinking and self-voice in college English as a foreign language writing classrooms. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 190.
Bartell, T., Elder, L., & Paul, R. W. (1997). California teacher preparation for instruction in critical thinking: Research findings and policy recommendations. Sacramento, CA: California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.
Bean, J. C. (2011). Engaging ideas: the professors guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Benesch, S. (1993). Critical thinking: A learning process for democracy. TESOL quarterly, 27(3), 545-548.
Bennett, W. J. (1988). American Education: Making It Work. A Report to the President and the American People. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Bers, T. (2005). Assessing critical thinking in community colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2005(130), 15-25.
Bestor, A., Jr. (1953). Educational wastelands. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Black, B. (Ed.) (2012). An A to Z of critical thinking. London, New York: Continuum Books.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay, 20-24.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals (Handbook 1: Cognitive domain). New York: David McKay.
Boostrom, R. E. (2005). Thinking: The foundation of critical and creative learning in the classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Broad, B. (2003). What we really value: Beyond rubrics in teaching and assessing writing. Louisville, CO: University Press of Colorado.
Brubacher, J. S. (1947). A history of the problems of education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., & Snow, M. A. (2014). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chaffee, J. (2012). Thinking critically (10th ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning.
Cohen, S. A. (1987). Instructional alignment: Searching for a magic bullet. Educational Researcher, 16(8), 16-20.
Condon, W., & Kelly-Riley, D. (2004). Assessing and teaching what we value: The relationship between college-level writing and critical thinking abilities. Assessing Writing, 9(1), 56-75.
Cottingham, J., Murdoch, D., & Stoothoff, R. (1985). The Philosophical Writings of Descartes.
Cottrell, S. (2011). Critical thinking skills: Developing effective analysis and argument (2nd ed.). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cumming, A. (1990). Expertise in evaluating second language compositions.
Language Testing, 7, 31–51.
Davidson, B. W. (1998). Comments on Dwight Atkinson's" A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL": A case for critical thinking in the English language classroom. TESOL quarterly, 32(1), 119-123.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: DC Heath.
Diederich, P. B., French, J. W., & Carlton, S. T. (1961). Factors in judgments of writing ability. ETS Research Bulletin Series, 1961(2), i-93.
Durst, R. K. (1987). Cognitive and linguistic demands of analytic writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 347-376.
Educational Testing Service (ETS). (n.d.). Retrieved June 12, 2017, from https://www.ets.org/
Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College composition and communication, 28(2), 122-128.
Ennis, R. H. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard educational review.
Ennis, R. H. (1985). A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational Leadership, 43(2), 44–48.
Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into practice, 32(3), 179-186.
Ennis, R. H. (2011). Critical thinking: reflection and perspective part 1. Inquiry, 26(2), 4-18.
Ennis, R. H., & Weir, E. E. (1985). The Ennis-Weir critical thinking essay test: An instrument for teaching and testing. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Erickson, H. L. (2007). Stirring the head, heart, and soul: Redefining curriculum, instruction, and concept-based learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Millbrae, CA: The California Academic Press.
Finken, M., & Ennis, R. H. (1993). Illinois Critical Thinking Essay Test. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
Garside, C. (1996). Look who's talking: A comparison of lecture and group discussion teaching strategies in developing critical thinking skills. Communication Education, 45, 212-227.
Gonsior, M. (2011). Critical Thinking and Global Issues in the ESL Writing Classroom. In MITESOL Conference Proceedings, 77-89.
Graman, T. (1988). Education for humanization: Applying Paulo Freire's pedagogy to learning a second language. Harvard Educational Review, 58(4), 433-449.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1991). Assessing Second Language Writing in Academic Contexts. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449–455.
Halpern, D. F. (2007). The nature and nurture of critical thinking. Critical thinking in psychology, 1-14.
Hidi, S. E., & Hildyard, A. (1983). The comparison of oral and written productions in two discourse types∗. Discourse processes, 6(2), 91-105.
Holyoak, K. J., & Morrison, R. G. (2013). Thinking and reasoning: a reader’s guide. The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B., & Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: Literature review and needed research. In L. Idol & B.F. Jones (Eds.), Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform (pp. 11-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The Skills of Argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kurfiss, J. G. (1988). Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and Possibilities. Washington, DC: George Washington University.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson's Research Report. Retrieved from http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/Critical
ThinkingReviewFINAL.pdf
Levine, D. U., & Ornstein, A. C. (1985). An introduction to the foundations of education (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 131–137.
Liaw, M. L. (2007). Content-based reading and writing for critical thinking skills in an EFL context. 英語教學期刊, 31(2), 45-87.
Lipman, M. (1988). Critical thinking: What can it be? Educational Leadership, 46(1), 38–43.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Luria, A. R. (1999). Speech development and the formation of mental processes. Lev Vygotsky: Critical Assessments, 2, 84-122.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (Eds.). (2008). Designing and assessing educational objectives: Applying the new taxonomy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Mayfield, M. (2010). Thinking for yourself: developing critical thinking skills through reading and writing. Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
McLaughlin, F., & Moore, M. (2012). Integrating critical thinking into the assessment of college writing. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 40(2), 145.
McLeod, S. H. (1992). Writing across the curriculum: An introduction. In: S. H. McLeod & M. Soven (Eds.), Writing across the curriculum: A guide to developing programs (pp. 1–11). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
McPeck, J. E. (1990a). Teaching critical thinking. New York, NY: Routledge.
McPeck, J. E. (1990b). Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 10-12.
Moore, B. N., & Parker, R. (2012). Critical thinking (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Mulnix, J. W. (2012). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and theory, 44(5), 464-479.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A Nation at Risk: The Imperative For Education Reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., Duthie, J. K., & Mansfield, T. C. (2005). Conversational versus expository discoursea study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48(5), 1048-1064
Nosich, G. M., & Paul, R. (1992). Using Intellectual Standards to Assess Student Reasoning. In J. Willsen & A.J.A. Binker (Eds.), Critical Thinking: how to prepare students for a rapidly changing world (pp. 153 – 164). Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
North, B., & Schneider, G. (1998). Scaling descriptors for language proficiency scales. Language Testing, 15(2), 217-262.
Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how. New directions for community colleges, 1992(77), 3-24.
Paul, R. W., Elder, L., & Bartell, T. (1997). California teacher preparation for instruction in critical thinking: Research findings and policy recommendations. Sacramento, CA: California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.
Pennycook, A. (1999). Introduction: Critical approaches to TESOL. TESOL quarterly, 33(3), 329-348.
Pithers, R. T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational research, 42(3), 237-249.
Prater, D., & Padia, W. (1983). Effects of modes of discourse on writing performance in grades four and six. Research in the Teaching of English, 127-134.
Ramanathan, V., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Some problematic" channels" in the teaching of critical thinking in current LI composition textbooks: Implications for L2 student-writers. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 7(2).
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Richards, J. C. & Schmidt (2010). Longman Dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Harlow, UK: Longman.
Rose, M. (1983). Remedial writing courses: A critique and a proposal. College English, 45(2), 109-128.
Rost, M. (2016). Teaching and researching: Listening (3d ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rotherham, A. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2010). “21st-Century” Skills. American Educator, 17.
Ruminski, H. J., & Hanks, W. E. (1995). Critical thinking lacks definition and uniform evaluation criteria. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 50(3), 4-11.
Sakyi, A. A. (2000). Validation of holistic scoring for ESL writing assessment: How raters evaluate compositions. Fairness and validation in language assessment, 129-152.
Schneider, D. (2007). The belief machine. Critical thinking in psychology, 251-270.
Schwalm, D. E. (1985). Degree of difficulty in basic writing courses: Insights from the oral proficiency interview testing program. College English, 47(6), 629-640.
Stanovich, K. E. (2013). On the distinction between rationality and intelligence: Implications for understanding individual differences in reasoning. The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning, 433-455.
Stapleton, P. (2001). Assessing critical thinking in the writing of Japanese university students insights about assumptions and content familiarity. Written Communication, 18(4), 506-548.
Stapleton, P. (2011). A survey of attitudes towards critical thinking among Hong Kong secondary school teachers: Implications for policy change. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1), 14-23.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Critical thinking: Its nature, measurement, and improvement. National Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272882.pdf.
Stroupe, R. R. (2006). Integrating critical thinking throughout ESL curricula. TESL Reporter, 39(2), 42-60.
Thayer-Bacon, B. J. (2000). Transforming critical thinking: Thinking constructively. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Thomas, J. (2008). (Ed.) Global Issues in the ELT classroom. Brno, Czech Republic: Society for Free Trade (Společnost pro Fair Trade).
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College teaching, 53(1), 41-48.
Vaughan, C. (1991). Holistic assessment: What goes on in the rater’s mind. Assessing second language writing in academic contexts, 111-125.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and language. (E. Hanfmann, Gertrude, & Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT press. (Original work published 1934)
Wade, C. (1995). Using writing to develop and assess critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 24-28.
Wade, C., & Tavris, C. (1987). Psychology (1st ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? American Educator, 31(3), 8-19.
Wilson, M. (2006). Rethinking rubrics in writing assessment. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wingate, U. (2012). ‘Argument!’ helping students understand what essay writing is about. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 145-154.
Woodward-Kron, R. (2002). Critical analysis versus description? Examining the relationship in successful student writing. Journal of English for academic purposes, 1(2), 121-143.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative Assessment. Designing Assessments To Inform and Improve Student Performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
WSU (2009). Guide to Rating Critical and Integrative Thinking. Center for teaching, Learning, and Technology. Retrieved from: https://web.uri.edu/assessment/files/WSU-Critical-Thinking-Rubric-2009.pdf