Skip to Main Content

CAJCS Extended Essay Guide: CRITERIA C- CRITICAL THINKING

Important and relevant information to assist you in writing your Extended Essay.

CRITICAL THINKING

UNPACKING THE CRITERIA

 

Specifically the assessment considers:
1. Are the selection and the application of the research presented both relevant and appropriate to the research question?
2 Are the sources/methods used appropriate in terms of how they have been used in the development of the argument presented?
3. Is the analysis of the research effective and focused on the research question?
4. Does the discussion of the research develops a clear and coherent reasoned argument in relation to the research question?
5. Are the arguments presented in the essay critically evaluated?
6. Are there any unlikely or unexpected outcomes which also demonstrate critical thinking?

COMMON ERRORS MADE BY STUDENTS

Some common errors made by students
 

  • Making unsubstantiated and sweeping claims in the discussion.
  • Deviating from the research question.
  • Giving straightforward descriptions or narrative accounts rather than an argument.
  • Giving unnecessary and trivial details which detract from a logical sequence.
  • Not looking for flaws or weaknesses in their argument.
  • Not considering different approaches or counter-arguments.
  • Not questioning the reliability of sources quoted.
  • Not including the uncertainties associated with all aspects of an experiment.
  • Not questioning underlying assumptions made in arguments.
  • Introducing new material into the final conclusion.
  • Not presenting evidence in the final conclusion that is consistent with the evidence in the body of the essay.
  • Not relating the conclusion directly to the research question.
  • Suggesting unrealistic areas for further investigation.

ASESSMENT CRITERIA- CRITERIA C- RUBRIC

CRITICAL THINKING CHECKLIST

  • Is there a clear thread to the argument presented throughout the essay?
  • Is each point supported by evidence?
  • Does each main point (section) refer back to the RQ and draw a mini conclusion?
  • Are different perspectives addressed? That is, inherent contradictions or alternative viewpoints that may be considered?
  • Is there a critical examination of source material?
  • Have limitations been acknowledged?
  • Has all evidence been referenced?
  • If graphics are used – do they help support the argument? Are they referred to in the text?
  • Does the conclusion directly address the RQ?
  • Is the conclusion definitive?
  • Are there any aspects or factors that have not been taken into account that could be considered for further consideration?
  • Are the conclusions drawn consistent with the argument as it develops in the main body?

CRITICAL THINKING RUBRIC

The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors.

The research is limited.

  • The research presented is limited and its application is not clearly relevant to the RQ.

Analysis is limited.

  • There is limited analysis.
  • Where there are conclusions to individual points of analysis these are limited and not consistent with the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is limited.

  • An argument is outlined but this is limited, incomplete, descriptive or narrative in nature.
  • The construction of an argument is unclear and/or incoherent in structure hindering understanding.
  • Where there is a final conclusion, it is limited and not consistent with the arguments/evidence presented.
  • There is an attempt to evaluate the research, but this is superficial.

If the topic or research question is deemed inappropriate for the subject in which the essay is registered no more than three marks can be awarded for this criterion.

The research is adequate.

  • Some research presented is appropriate and its application is partially relevant to the Research question.

Analysis is adequate.

  • There is analysis but this is only partially relevant to the research question; the inclusion of irrelevant research detracts from the quality of the argument.
  • Any conclusions to individual points of analysis are only partially supported by the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is adequate.

  • An argument explains the research but the reasoning contains inconsistencies.
  • The argument may lack clarity and coherence but this does not significantly hinder understanding.
  • Where there is a final or summative conclusion, this is only partially consistent with the arguments/evidence presented.
  • The research has been evaluated but not critically.

The research is good.

  • The majority of the research is appropriate and its application is clearly relevant to the research question.

Analysis is good.

  • The research is analysed in a way that is clearly relevant to the research question; the inclusion of less relevant research rarely detracts from the quality of the overall analysis.
  • Conclusions to individual points of analysis are supported by the evidence but there are some minor inconsistencies.

Discussion/evaluation is good.

  • An effective reasoned argument is developed from the research, with a conclusion supported by the evidence presented.
  • This reasoned argument is clearly structured and coherent and supported by a final or summative conclusion; minor inconsistencies may hinder the strength of the overall argument.
  • The research has been evaluated, and this is partially critical.

The research is excellent.

  • The research is appropriate to the research question and its application is consistently relevant.

Analysis is excellent.

  • The research is analysed effectively and clearly focused on the research question; the inclusion of less relevant research does not significantly detract from the quality of the overall analysis.
  • Conclusions to individual points of analysis are effectively supported by the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is excellent.

  • An effective and focused reasoned argument is developed from the research with a conclusion reflective of the evidence presented.
  • This reasoned argument is well structured and coherent; any minor inconsistencies do not hinder the strength of the overall argument or the final or summative conclusion.
  • The research has been critically evaluated.

CRITERIA C - SUBJECT SPECIFIC

 

CLICK HERE TO ACCESS- CRITERIA C SUBJECT SPECIFIC 

STRUCTURING ARGUMENTS

How to structure paragraphs using the PEEL method?

 

 

What does PEEL stand for? 

P = Point: start your paragraph with a clear topic sentence that establishes what your paragraph is going to be about. Your point should support your essay argument or thesis statement.

E = Evidence/Example: here you should use a piece of evidence or an example that helps to reaffirm your initial point and develop the argument. 

E = Explain: next you need to explain exactly how your evidence/example supports your point, giving further information to ensure that your reader understands its relevance.

L = Link: to finish the paragraph off, you need to link the point you’ve just made back to your essay question, topic, or thesis.

PEEL in practice

Here’s an example of what you might include in a PEEL structured paragraph: 

Topic: Should infants be given iPads? 
Thesis/argument: Infants should not be given iPads.

Point: Infants should not be given iPads, because studies show children under two can face developmental delays if they are exposed to too much screen time. 

Evidence/Example: A recent paediatric study showed that infants who are exposed to too much screen time may experience delays in speech development.

Explanation: The reason infants are facing these delays is because screen time is replacing other key developmental activities.

Link: The evidence suggests that infants who have a lot of screen time experience negative consequences in their speech development, and therefore they should not be exposed to iPads at such a young age.

Once you’ve written your PEEL paragraph, do a checklist to ensure you have covered off all four elements of the PEEL structure. Your point should be a clear introduction to the argument you are making in this paragraph; your example or evidence should be strong and relevant (ask yourself, have you chosen the best example?); your explanation should be demonstrate why your evidence is important and how it conveys meaning; and your link should summarise the point you’ve just made and link back to the broader essay argument or topic. 

DOWNLOAD PEEL PARAGRAPH PLANNER