critical essay test

Critical thinking definition

Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process, which is why it's often used in education and academics.

Some even may view it as a backbone of modern thought.

However, it's a skill, and skills must be trained and encouraged to be used at its full potential.

People turn up to various approaches in improving their critical thinking, like:

• Developing technical and problem-solving skills
• Engaging in more active listening
• Actively questioning their assumptions and beliefs
• Seeking out more diversity of thought
• Opening up their curiosity in an intellectual way etc.

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Critical thinking can help in planning your paper and making it more concise, but it's not obvious at first. We carefully pinpointed some the questions you should ask yourself when boosting critical thinking in writing:

• What information should be included?
• Which information resources should the author look to?
• What degree of technical knowledge should the report assume its audience has?
• What is the most effective way to show information?
• How should the report be organized?
• How should it be designed?
• What tone and level of language difficulty should the document have?

Usage of critical thinking comes down not only to the outline of your paper, it also begs the question: How can we use critical thinking solving problems in our writing's topic?

Let's say, you have a Powerpoint on how critical thinking can reduce poverty in the United States. You'll primarily have to define critical thinking for the viewers, as well as use a lot of critical thinking questions and synonyms to get them to be familiar with your methods and start the thinking process behind it.

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

We understand that it's difficult to learn how to use critical thinking more effectively in just one article, but our service is here to help.

We are a team specializing in writing essays and other assignments for college students and all other types of customers who need a helping hand in its making. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

• Select the topic and the deadline of your essay.
• Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the essay writing process you struggle with.
• Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.
• Select your prefered payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed essay writers , online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.

The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test

The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test is a general test of critical thinking ability in the context of argumentation. In this test, a complex argument is presented to the test taker, who is asked to formulate another complex argument in response to the first.

This can be used both as a test of writing mastery as well as a teaching device for critical thinking. To access the resource, visit https://www.academia.edu/1847582/The_Ennis_Weir_Critical_Thinking_Essay_Test_An_Instrument_for_Teaching_and_Testing.

Open-ended questions

High school and college studentsopen

Ennis, R. H., & Weir, E. (1989). The Ennis-Weir critical thinking essay test: Test, manual, criteria, scoring sheet : an instrument for teaching and testing. Cheltenham, Vic: Hawker Brownlow. Hollis, H., Rachitskiy, R., van der Leer, L., and Elder, L. (in press) Validity and reliability testing of the International Critical Thinking Essay Test form A (ICTET-A). Psychological Reports

For more guidance on measuring student learning and best practices in adapting measurement tools to your contexts, check out the Portal page on Monitoring and Evaluation . You can also contact Alvin Vista (Knowledge Lead, Student Outcomes) and Robbie Dean (Director of Research) for specific questions.

• Practice Tests
• Predictive Index
• Firefighter
• Hogan Assessments
• Leadership Assessment
• Ramsay Technician Assessments
• Watson-Glaser
• Raven's Progressive Matrix
• NEO Personality Inventory
• Texas Success Initiative
• Birkman Personality Test
• TSA Prep Booster™ Course
• TSA Practice Test
• TSA Written Skills Assessment
• TSA CBT X-Ray Object Recognition Test
• TSA Connect the Dots
• SHL Assessment Prep Course
• Practice Test & Answers
• SHL Practice Tests
• SHL Test Answers
• SHL Inductive Reasoning Test
• SHL Numerical Reasoning Test
• SHL Verbal Reasoning Test
• SHL Verify G+ Test
• SHL Mechanical Comprehension Test
• SHL Situational Judgment Test
• SHL OPQ Personality Test
• Predictive Index Master (Cognitive & Behavioral)
• Predictive Index Cognitive Assessment
• Predictive Index Behavioral Assessment
• Predictive Index Practice Test
• Predictive Index Results
• Caliper Course
• Caliper Test Prep With Real Practice Test
• USPS Postal Exam
• Postal Exam 474
• Postal Exam 475
• Postal Exam 476
• Postal Exam 477
• USPS Postal Exam Prep
• Pass the 2024 Postal Exam With Practice Tests
• Virtual Entry Assessment (VEA)
• General Police Prep Course
• Police Situational Judgement Test
• Police Psychological Exam Course
• Massachusetts State Police Exam
• Pennsylvania Police Exam
• Philadelphia Police Exam
• Nassau County Police Exam Course
• Suffolk County Police Exam
• Correctional Officer Exam
• MTA Police Exam
• New York State Police Exam Prep Course
• School Safety Agent Course
• Police Officer NYPD Exam
• Police Fitness Prep Course
• Exam Formats
• EB Jacobs Law Enforcement Aptitude Battery
• CJBAT Study Guide
• DELPOE Police Exam
• Texas LEVEL Test With Expert Guides
• PELLETB Course
• FBI Test Phase 1 (Special Agent Exam): Guide with Practice Test [2024]
• Police Test Preparation Suite
• Pass a Polygraph Test (Lie Detector): Expert Tips & Questions – 2024
• Firefighter Test
• FDNY Firefighter Prep Course
• Firefighter Psych Test
• NFSI Firefighter Prep Course
• FCTC Firefighter Prep Course
• Firefighter Aptitude and Character Test
• FireTeam Prep Course
• Master Course
• Hogan Assessments Master Course
• Personality Courses
• Hogan Personality Inventory (HPI)
• Hogan Development Survey (HDS)
• Hogan Motives, Values & Preferences Inventory (MVPI)
• Busines Reasoning Course
• Hogan Business Reasoning Inventory (HBRI)
• Leadership Assessment Test
• GardaWorld Pre Board Primer
• Bennett Mechanical Comprehension Test II (BMCT-II) Success Prep Course
• Beat the 2024 BMCT With Industry Expert Guides & Realistic Practice Tests
• 911 Dispatcher
• CHP Dispatcher
• Exam Format
• Criticall Dispatcher
• Criticall Dispatcher Test
• Criteria Cognitive Aptitude Test - CCAT Course
• Universal Cognitive Aptitude Test - UCAT Course
• CCAT Practice Test
• Criteria Pre-employment Testing: Personality, Aptitude & Skill Tests
• Korn Ferry Course
• Ace the 2024 Korn Ferry Assessment With Practice Test & Expert Guides
• Ramsay Electrical Assessment
• Ramsay Maintenance Assessment
• Ramsay Mechanical Assessment
• Ramsay Multicraft Assessment
• Ramsay Electrical Practice Test
• Ramsay Maintenance Practice Test
• Ramsay Mechanical Practice Test
• Ramsay Multicraft Practice Test
• Ramsay Test Prep
• AFOQT Study Guide
• ASTB Study Guide
• SIFT Study Guide
• Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Course
• Beat the Watson Glaser and Upgrade Your Career
• Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices
• Texas Success Initiative Course
• TSI Practice Test 2024: Math, Reading & Writing
• TSI Reading Practice Test: 15 Q&A with Explanations
• Pass our Free TSI Math Practice Test (2024 Update)
• Take our Free TSI Writing Practice Test (2024)
• Birkman Personality Course
• How it Works

Critical Thinking Test: Sample Questions with Explanations (2024)

Employers value and seek candidates who demonstrate advanced critical thinking skills. They often administer critical thinking tests as part of their hiring process. Critical thinking tests can be very difficult for those who don’t prepare. A great way to start practicing is by taking our critical thinking free practice test.

What Does The Critical Thinking Test Include?

The Critical Thinking Test assesses your capacity to think critically and form logical conclusions when given written information. Critical thinking tests are generally used in job recruitment processes, in the legal sector. These tests measure the analytical critical thinking abilities of a candidate.

Why Is Critical Thinking Useful?

Critical thinking is put into action in various stages of decision-making and problem-solving tasks:

• Identify the problem
• Choose suitable information to find the solution
• Identify the assumptions that are implied and written in the text
• Form hypotheses and choose the most suitable and credible answers
• Form well-founded conclusions and determine the soundness of inferences

What is Watson Glaser Test and what Critical Thinking Skills it Measures?

The most common type of critical thinking test is the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (W-GCTA). Typically used by legal and financial organizations, as well as management businesses, a Watson Glaser test is created to assess candidates’ critical thinking skills.

The test consists of 10 questions to be answered in 10 minutes approx (although there is no timer on the test itself). Our test is slightly harder than the real thing, to make it sufficiently challenging practice.

You need to get 70% correct to pass the test. Don’t forget to first check out the test techniques section further down this page beforehand.

Questions          25

Pass percentage          70%.

The test is broken down into five central areas:

• Assumptions
• Interpretation

Critical Thinking Course

• 1 BONUS Interview Prep Video Guide Buy this Course: Get full access to all lessons, practice tests and guides.

The Five Critical Thinking Skills Explained

1. recognition of assumption.

You’ll be presented with a statement. The statement is then followed by several proposed assumptions. When answering, you must work out if an assumption was made or if an assumption was not made in the statement. An assumption is a proclamation that an individual takes for granted. This section of the tests measures your ability to withhold from forming assumptions about things that are not necessarily correct.

• 1: Assumption Made
• 2: Assumption Not Made

Although the passage does state that Charlie’s fundraising team is doing its best so that the charity event can meet its goal, nowhere did it state that their team is leading the event.

2. Evaluation of Arguments

You will be presented with an argument. You will then be asked to decide whether the argument is strong or weak. An argument is considered strong if it directly connects to the statement provided, and is believed to be significant.

No, participation awards should not be given in every competition because studies have shown that this would cause the participants to put in less effort because they will get a prize no matter what the outcome is.

• 1: Strong Argument
• 2: Weak Argument

This is a strong argument as it provides evidence as to why participation awards should not be given in every competition

3. Deductions

In deduction questions, you will need to form conclusions based solely on the information provided in the question and not based on your knowledge. You will be given a small passage of information and you will need to evaluate a list of deductions made based on that passage. If the conclusion cannot be formed for the information provided, then the conclusion does not follow. The answer must be entirely founded on the statements made and not on conclusions drawn from your knowledge.

In a surprise party for Donna, Edna arrived after Felix and Gary did. Kelly arrived before Felix and Gary did.

• 1: Conclusion Follows
• 2: Conclusion Does not Follow

For questions like this, jot down the clues to help you out. Use initials as a quick reference.

K | F&G | E

Looking at the simple diagram, “K”, which stands for “Kelly,” arrived before Edna “E” did. The answer is A.

4. Interpretation

In these questions, you are given a passage of information followed by a list of possible conclusions. You will need to interpret the information in the paragraph and determine whether or not each conclusion follows, based solely on the information given.

A number of students were given the following advice:

“The use of powerful words is a technique, which makes you a better writer. Your choice of words is very important in molding the way people interaction with the article. You should use powerful words to spice up your article. Power words should be used liberally to enhance the flavor of what you write! ”

In the fourth sentence, it is stated, “Power words should be used liberally to enhance the flavor of what you write!”

Thus, if you were to write an essay, using powerful words can give more flavor to it.

5. Inferences

An inference is a conclusion made from observed or supposed facts and details. It is information that is not apparent in the information provided but rather is extracted from it. In this section, you will be provided with a passage of information about a specific scene or event. A list of possible inferences will then be given, and you will need to decide if they are ‘true’, ‘false’, ‘possibly true’, ‘possibly false’, or whether it is not possible to say based on the information provided.

With the advancement of technology, the need for more infrastructure has never been higher. According to the plan of the current U.S. Administration, it aims to put a $1 trillion investment on improving infrastructure, a portion of which will include priority projects and technologies that can strengthen its economic competitiveness such as transportation, 5G wireless communication technology, rural broadband technologies, advanced manufacturing technologies, and even artificial intelligence.

It stated that it expects to work with Congress to develop a comprehensive infrastructure package, which is expected to have a budget of $200 billion for certain priorities.

• 2: Probably True
• 3: Not Enough Information
• 4: Probably False

Although it was mentioned in the passage that the U.S. government is to allocate $200 billion on certain priorities, it did not specify if these certain priorities were for ‘transportation, 5G wireless communication technology, rural broadband technologies, advanced manufacturing technologies, and artificial intelligence’ or if the aforementioned priorities will have a different allocation.

What we can be sure of, however, is that at least a portion of the $1 trillion infrastructure budget will be used on the mentioned priorities regardless, meaning that there is a chance that $200 billion will be used on those aforementioned areas.

Improve Your Score with Prepterminal’s Critical Thinking Course

The Critical Thinking test is difficult, but not impossible to overcome with practice. At PrepTerminal our psychometric test experts have developed a critical thinking preparatory test to provide you with the material you need to practice for your critical thinking test. Prepare with us to increase your chance of successfully overcoming this hurdle in the recruitment process.

Prepterminal’s preparatory critical thinking course features a structured study course along with critical thinking practice tests to help you improve your exam score. Our course includes video and text-based information presented in a clear and easy-to-understand manner so you can follow along at your own pace with ease.

Created by: Matt

Psychometric tutor, prepterminal test expert, 414 students, 4.7 , 73 reviews.

Critical Thinking test

By 123test team . Updated May 12, 2023

Critical Thinking test reviews

This Critical Thinking test measures your ability to think critically and draw logical conclusions based on written information. Critical Thinking tests are often used in job assessments in the legal sector to assess a candidate's  analytical critical  thinking skills. A well known example of a critical thinking test is the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal .

Need more practice?

Score higher on your critical thinking test.

The test comprises of the following five sections with a total of 10 questions:

• Analysing Arguments
• Assumptions
• Interpreting Information

Instructions Critical Thinking test

Each question presents one or more paragraphs of text and a question about the information in the text. It's your job to figure out which of the options is the correct answer.

Below is a statement that is followed by an argument. You should consider this argument to be true. It is then up to you to determine whether the argument is strong or weak. Do not let your personal opinion about the statement play a role in your evaluation of the argument.

Statement: It would be good if people would eat vegetarian more often. Argument: No, because dairy also requires animals to be kept that will have to be eaten again later.

Is this a strong or weak argument?

Strong argument Weak argument

Statement: Germany should no longer use the euro as its currency Argument: No, because that means that the 10 billion Deutschmark that the introduction of the euro has cost is money thrown away.

Overfishing is the phenomenon that too much fish is caught in a certain area, which leads to the disappearance of the fish species in that area. This trend can only be reversed by means of catch reduction measures. These must therefore be introduced and enforced.

Assumption: The disappearance of fish species in areas of the oceans is undesirable.

Is the assumption made from the text?

Assumption is made Assumption is not made

As a company, we strive for satisfied customers. That's why from now on we're going to keep track of how quickly our help desk employees pick up the phone. Our goal is for that phone to ring for a maximum of 20 seconds.

Assumption: The company has tools or ways to measure how quickly help desk employees pick up the phone.

• All reptiles lay eggs
• All reptiles are vertebrates
• All snakes are reptiles
• All vertebrates have brains
• Some reptiles hatch their eggs themselves
• Most reptiles have two lungs
• Many snakes only have one lung
• Cobras are poisonous snakes
• All reptiles are animals

Conclusion: Some snakes hatch their eggs themselves.

Does the conclusion follow the statements?

Conclusion follows Conclusion does not follow

(Continue with the statements from question 5.)

Conclusion: Some animals that lay eggs only have one lung.

In the famous 1971 Stanford experiment, 24 normal, healthy male students were randomly assigned as 'guards' (12) or 'prisoners' (12). The guards were given a uniform and instructed to keep order, but not to use force. The prisoners were given prison uniforms. Soon after the start of the experiment, the guards made up all kinds of sentences for the prisoners. Insurgents were shot down with a fire extinguisher and public undressing or solitary confinement was also a punishment. The aggression of the guards became stronger as the experiment progressed. At one point, the abuses took place at night, because the guards thought that the researchers were not watching. It turned out that some guards also had fun treating the prisoners very cruelly. For example, prisoners got a bag over their heads and were chained to their ankles. Originally, the experiment would last 14 days. However, after six days the experiment was stopped.

The students who took part in the research did not expect to react the way they did in such a situation.

To what extent is this conclusion true, based on the given text?

True Probably true More information required Probably false False

(Continue with the text from 'Stanford experiment' in question 7.)

The results of the experiment support the claim that every young man (or at least some young men) is capable of turning into a sadist fairly quickly.

• A flag is a tribute to the nation and should therefore not be hung outside at night. Hoisting the flag therefore happens at sunrise, bringing it down at sunset. Only when a country flag is illuminated by spotlights on both sides, it may remain hanging after sunset. There is a simple rule of thumb for the time of bringing down the flag. This is the moment when there is no longer any visible difference between the individual colors of the flag.
• A flag may not touch the ground.
• On the Dutch flag, unless entitled to do so, no decorations or other additions should be made. Also the use of a flag purely for decoration should be avoided. However, flag cloth may be used for decoration - for example in the form of drapes.
• The orange pennant is only used on birthdays of members of the Royal House and on King's Day. The orange pennant should be as long or slightly longer than the diagonal of the flag.

Conclusion: One can assume that no Dutch flag will fly at government buildings at night, unless it is illuminated by spotlights on both sides.

Does the conclusion follow, based on the given text?

(Continue with the text from 'Dutch flag protocol' in question 9.)

Conclusion: If the protocol is followed, the orange pennant will always be longer than the horizontal bands/stripes of the flag.

Please answer the questions below. Not all questions are required but it will help us improve this test.

My educational level is

-- please select -- primary school high school college university PhD other

How to Write a Critical Essay

Hill Street Studios / Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation

Olivia Valdes was the Associate Editorial Director for ThoughtCo. She worked with Dotdash Meredith from 2017 to 2021.

• B.A., American Studies, Yale University

A critical essay is a form of academic writing that analyzes, interprets, and/or evaluates a text. In a critical essay, an author makes a claim about how particular ideas or themes are conveyed in a text, then supports that claim with evidence from primary and/or secondary sources.

In casual conversation, we often associate the word "critical" with a negative perspective. However, in the context of a critical essay, the word "critical" simply means discerning and analytical. Critical essays analyze and evaluate the meaning and significance of a text, rather than making a judgment about its content or quality.

What Makes an Essay "Critical"? 

Imagine you've just watched the movie "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory." If you were chatting with friends in the movie theater lobby, you might say something like, "Charlie was so lucky to find a Golden Ticket. That ticket changed his life." A friend might reply, "Yeah, but Willy Wonka shouldn't have let those raucous kids into his chocolate factory in the first place. They caused a big mess."

These comments make for an enjoyable conversation, but they do not belong in a critical essay. Why? Because they respond to (and pass judgment on) the raw content of the movie, rather than analyzing its themes or how the director conveyed those themes.

On the other hand, a critical essay about "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" might take the following topic as its thesis: "In 'Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,' director Mel Stuart intertwines money and morality through his depiction of children: the angelic appearance of Charlie Bucket, a good-hearted boy of modest means, is sharply contrasted against the physically grotesque portrayal of the wealthy, and thus immoral, children."

This thesis includes a claim about the themes of the film, what the director seems to be saying about those themes, and what techniques the director employs in order to communicate his message. In addition, this thesis is both supportable  and  disputable using evidence from the film itself, which means it's a strong central argument for a critical essay .

Characteristics of a Critical Essay

Critical essays are written across many academic disciplines and can have wide-ranging textual subjects: films, novels, poetry, video games, visual art, and more. However, despite their diverse subject matter, all critical essays share the following characteristics.

• Central claim . All critical essays contain a central claim about the text. This argument is typically expressed at the beginning of the essay in a thesis statement , then supported with evidence in each body paragraph. Some critical essays bolster their argument even further by including potential counterarguments, then using evidence to dispute them.
• Evidence . The central claim of a critical essay must be supported by evidence. In many critical essays, most of the evidence comes in the form of textual support: particular details from the text (dialogue, descriptions, word choice, structure, imagery, et cetera) that bolster the argument. Critical essays may also include evidence from secondary sources, often scholarly works that support or strengthen the main argument.
• Conclusion . After making a claim and supporting it with evidence, critical essays offer a succinct conclusion. The conclusion summarizes the trajectory of the essay's argument and emphasizes the essays' most important insights.

Tips for Writing a Critical Essay

Writing a critical essay requires rigorous analysis and a meticulous argument-building process. If you're struggling with a critical essay assignment, these tips will help you get started.

• Practice active reading strategies . These strategies for staying focused and retaining information will help you identify specific details in the text that will serve as evidence for your main argument. Active reading is an essential skill, especially if you're writing a critical essay for a literature class.
• Read example essays . If you're unfamiliar with critical essays as a form, writing one is going to be extremely challenging. Before you dive into the writing process, read a variety of published critical essays, paying careful attention to their structure and writing style. (As always, remember that paraphrasing an author's ideas without proper attribution is a form of plagiarism .)
• Resist the urge to summarize . Critical essays should consist of your own analysis and interpretation of a text, not a summary of the text in general. If you find yourself writing lengthy plot or character descriptions, pause and consider whether these summaries are in the service of your main argument or whether they are simply taking up space.
• 100 Persuasive Essay Topics
• Null Hypothesis Examples
• An Introduction to Academic Writing
• Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
• How to Write a Good Thesis Statement
• The Ultimate Guide to the 5-Paragraph Essay
• How To Write an Essay
• Critical Analysis in Composition
• Tips on How to Write an Argumentative Essay
• What an Essay Is and How to Write One
• How to Write and Format an MBA Essay
• Higher Level Thinking: Synthesis in Bloom's Taxonomy
• How To Write a Top-Scoring ACT Essay for the Enhanced Writing Test
• What Is a Critique in Composition?
• How to Structure an Essay
• How to Write a Solid Thesis Statement

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: An Instrument for Teaching and Testing

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Critical Thinking Tests

Developing critical thinking is one of the main goals of most educational institutions around the world. But testing critical thinking is a significant challenge especially if we consider the debate that is still ongoing around the issue of what is critical thinking.

As such, the list below presents an inventory of the current critical thinking tests (in English) used around the world by educational institutions or businesses.

The list is organized in an alphabetical order by the organization owning it, as some tests are owned by the same institution and are in this way displayed together.

• Cambridge Assessment- Thinking Skills Assessment (TSA) Oxford – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Center for Assessment and Improvement of Learning- Critical Thinking Assessment Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Centro Escolar University, Philippines- CEU Lopez Critical Thinking Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• College Outcome Measures Program, The American College Testing Program (ACT)- Assessment of Reasoning and Communication – General Content, Multi Aspect
• College Outcome Measures Program, The American College Testing Program (ACT)- ACT Science Reasoning – Subject Specific, Multi Aspect
• Cornell University- Cornell Class Reasoning Test – General Content, Aspect-Specific
• Cornell University- Cornell Conditioning Reasoning Test – General Content, Aspect-Specific
• Critical Thinking Press and Software- Ennis Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Educational Testing Service- ETS Proficiency Profile – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Foundation for Critical Thinking- Online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Foundation for Critical Thinking- International Critical Thinking Essay Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- The California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College Level – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- Health Science Reasoning Package – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- Business Critical Thinking Skills Package – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- Everyday Reasoning Package – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Insight Assessment- Quantitative Reasoning Skills Package – Subject Specific, Multi Aspect
• Marguerite Finken and Robert H. Ennis- Illinois Critical Thinking Essay Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Oxford, Cambridge and RSA- OCR AS/A Level GCE Critical Thinking- H052 – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Oxford, Cambridge and RSA- OCR AS/A Level GCE Critical Thinking- H452 – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Pearson- Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Pearson- Watson-Glaser II Critical Thinking Appraisal – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Pearson- Watson-Glaser III Critical Thinking Appraisal – General Content, Multi Aspect
• PRO-ED, Inc.- Test of Problem Solving 2: Adolescent (TOPS-2:A) – General Content, Multi Aspect
• Schuhfried Publishing- Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) – General Content, Multi Aspect
• State University of New York- The Smith-Sturgeon Conditional Reasoning Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• The College of Business Administration- Texas Assessment of Critical Thinking Skills – Subject Specific, Multi Aspect
• The Council for Aid to Education (CAE)- Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+) – General Content, Multi Aspect
• The Council for Aid to Education (CAE)- College and Work Readiness Assessment (CWRA+) – General Content, Multi Aspect
• The Critical Thinking Company- Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X – General Content, Multi Aspect
• The Critical Thinking Company- Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z – General Content, Multi Aspect
• The Critical Thinking Company- James Madison Critical Thinking Test – General Content, Multi Aspect
• University of Alberta- Test of Inference Ability in Reading Comprehension – General Content, Multi Aspect
• University of Alberta- Test on Appraising Observations – General Content, Aspect-Specific
• WPS- Test of Problem Solving 3:Elementary (TOPS-3:E) – General Content, Multi Aspect

CRITICAL THINKING TESTS DETAILS

Thinking skills assessment (tsa) oxford.

First created in : 1996

Created by : Alec Fisher

Owned/ Used by : Cambridge Assessment

Test Type : General Content, Multi Aspect

Test Target :

•currently used for entry to a wide range of undergraduate courses, including Economics, Engineering, Politics, and Psychology

Test Details :

2 Sections:

90 minute 50 multiple choice items:

•numerical and spatial reasoning

•understanding arguments

•reasoning using everyday language

Candidates must answer one essay question from a choice of four. Skills evaluated:

•ability to organise ideas in a clear and concise manner

•communicate ideas effectively in writing

More information here .

Preparation resources :

Critical Thinking Assessment Test

Owned/ Used by : Center for Assessment and Improvement of Learning

•no specific target

1 hour essay

•targets the elements from Bloom’s taxonomy : knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, evaluation and synthesis

•evaluation of information (facts vs inferences, numerical relationships in graphs, limits of correlational data, evidence evaluation, incorrect conclusions)

•critical thinking (alternative data interpretation, finding new information that supports or contradicts a given hypothesis, describe how new information can change a problem)

•problem solving (relevant vs irrelevant information, information integration for problem solving, learning and application of new information, usage of math to solve real world problems) 

•effective communication of ideas

CEU Lopez Critical Thinking Test

Created by : Marcos Y. Lopez

Owned/ Used by : Centro Escolar University, Philippines

•students in tertiary level

87 multiple choice items which can be taken between 90 and 120 minutes:

•assumption identification

•meanings and fallacies

•credibility/ observation judgment

Assessment of Reasoning and Communication

Owned/ Used by : College Outcome Measures Program, The American College Testing Program (ACT)

•students finishing college

32 Item, 40 minute multiple choice consisting of:

•clarifying arguments

•analysing arguments

•extending arguments

Includes 4 passages that are representative of the kinds of issues encountered in a post secondary curriculum. Each passage presents one or more arguments in a variety of formats, including case studies, debates, dialogues, overlapping positions, statistical arguments, experimental results or editorial.

Test participants will be required to:

•identify conclusions, inconsistencies and loose implications

•judge direction of support, strength of reasons and representativeness of data

•make predictions

•notice alternatives

•hypothesize about what a person thinks.

Preparation resources here .

ACT Science Reasoning

Test Type : Subject Specific, Multi Aspect

40 multiple-choice items, 35 minutes

Natural science content

Includes reading graphs, interpreting data on tables, diagrams, figures and scatterplots

Pre-requisite: familiarity with scientific vocabulary and concepts

•reading with comprehension

•identifying conclusions

•interpreting data

•evaluating experiments

•drawing probably conclusions from data

•hypothesizing best explanations

Cornell Class Reasoning Test

Created by : Robert H. Ennis, William L. Gardiner, Richard Morrow, Dieter Paulus, Lucille Ringel

Owned/ Used by : Cornell University

Test Type : General Content, Aspect Specific

•grades 4-14

•developed for research purposes, but usable in standard classrooms

Offered free of charge

Multiple choice

•assesses a variety of forms of (deductive) class reasoning (the elementary predicate calculus without material implication and its associated concepts

Cornell Conditioning Reasoning Test

Ennis weir critical thinking essay test.

Created by : Robert H. Ennis and Eric Weir

Owned/ Used by : Critical Thinking Press and Software

•7th grade through college students

Constructed-response test:

•getting the point

•identifying reasons and assumptions

•stating one’s point

•offering good reasons

•seeing other possibilities(including other possible explanations)

•responding to and avoiding equivocation

•irrelevance

•circularity

•reversal of “if-then” conditional relationship

•overgeneralization

•credibility

•emotive language used for persuasion

More information here and here .

ETS Proficiency Profile

Owned/ Used by : Educational Testing Service

•college students

Assesses four core skill areas — reading, writing, mathematics and critical thinking for students of humanities, natural sciences and social sciences.

The critical thinking section is a 2 hour or 40 minute multiple choice based on a non-fiction excerpt:

•distinguish between rhetoric and argumentation

•recognize assumptions

•recognize best hypothesis to account for information presented

•infer and interpret relationship between variables

•draw conclusions

Online Critical Thinking Basic Concepts Test

Created by : Linda Elder, Richard Paul, Rush Cosgrove

Owned/ Used by : Foundation for Critical Thinking

•high school

•university

3 part, 100 item, multi-choice test, duration- 45 minutes:

•The analysis of thought

•The assessment of thought

•The dispositions of thought

•The skills and abilities of thought

•The obstacles or barriers to critical thought

International Critical Thinking Essay Test

Essay writing on a given theme

Each student exam must be graded individually by a person competent to assess the critical thinking of the test taker and trained in the grading called for in this examination. In evaluating student exams the grader is attempting to answer two questions:

•Did the student clearly understand the key components in the thinking of the author, as exhibited in the writing sample? (Identifying Purpose, Question at Issue, Information, Conclusions, Assumptions, Concepts, Implications, Point of View) .

•Was the student able to effectively evaluate the reasoning, as appropriate, in the original text and present his/her assessment effectively? (Pointing out strengths and possible limitations and/or weaknesses of the reasoning in the writing sample).

Grading done by checking the understanding and correct inclusion of the following elements:

•Information

•Ideas (concepts)

•Assumptions

•Conclusions

•Point of View

•Implications

The California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College Level

First created in : 1990

Created by : Peter Facione

Owned/ Used by : Insight Assessment

35 item, multiple choice:

•Overall reasoning skills

•Interpretation

•Evaluation

•Explanation

The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory

First created in : 1992

•self evaluation

•research and evaluation of groups

Multiple choice:

•Critical thinking dispositions:

    Truth-seeking

    Open-mindedness

    Analyticity

    Systematicity

    Confidence in Reasoning

    Inquisitiveness

    Maturity of Judgment

Health Science Reasoning Package

•trainees in undergraduate and graduate health science educational programs

Measures both skills and dispositions:

    Analysis

    Interpretation

    Inference

    Evaluation

    Explanation

    Induction

    Deduction

    Numeracy

Dispositions:

    the disposition toward truth-seeking or bias,

    the disposition toward open-mindedness or intolerance,

    the disposition toward anticipating possible consequences or being heedless of them,

    the disposition toward proceeding in a systematic or unsystematic way,

    the disposition toward being confident in the powers of reasoning or mistrustful of thinking,

    the disposition toward being inquisitive or resistant to learning

    the disposition toward mature and nuanced judgment or toward rigid simplistic thinking.

Business Critical Thinking Skills Package

•college and graduate level students

    Overall Reasoning

Everyday Reasoning Package

•high-school students

•community college

•first two years of post- secondary education

2 assessment tools

•the Test of Everyday Reasoning (TER) 35 multiple-choice items, 50 minutes:

    Overall Reasoning Skills

•the California Measure of Mental Motivation (CM3, Level III)

    Mental Focus

    Learning Orientation

    Creative Problem Solving

    Cognitive Integrity

    Scholarly Rigor

    Technological Orientation.

Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric

Created by : Peter Facione and Noreen Facione

Rates critical thinking within:

•presentations

•classroom discussions

•panel presentations

•portfolios

•other ratable events or performances

Quantitative Reasoning Skills Package

•for students with strength in math and science

•used in colleges and universities as well as in selective college preparatory schools

Measures both skills and dispositions

Skills Assessed by Quant Q (quantitative reasoning integrated with critical thinking)

28 items, 50 minutes:

    Pattern Recognition

    Probability Combinatorics

    Out-of-the-Box Algebra

    Geometry and Optimization

    Quant Q Overall

Dispositions assessed by CCTDI

30 minutes:

    the disposition toward truth-seeking or bias

    the disposition toward open-mindedness or intolerance

    the disposition toward anticipating possible consequences or being heedless of them

    the disposition toward proceeding in a systematic or unsystematic way

    the disposition toward being confident in the powers of reasoning or mistrustful of thinking

    the disposition toward mature and nuanced judgment or toward rigid simplistic thinking

Illinois Critical Thinking Essay Test

Created by : Marguerite Finken and Robert H. Ennis

Owned/ Used by : Marguerite Finken and Robert H. Ennis

•high school students, but can be used above and below this level

The test guides the participant through:

•evaluating focus

•supporting reasons

•organization

•argumentative essay

OCR AS/A Level GCE Critical Thinking- H052

Owned/ Used by : Oxford, Cambridge and RSA

•Heads of departments and teachers involved in teaching critical thinking

Requirement for qualification of candidates that completed the first year of study of the GCE course

2* 90 minute units:

•introduction to critical thinking (language of reasoning and credibility)

•assessing and developing an argument (writing arguments in response to given material and evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of an argument)

OCR AS/A Level GCE Critical Thinking- H452

Requirement for qualification of candidates that completed the second year of study of the GCE course

4* 90 minute units:

•ethical reasoning and decision making (analysis and evaluation of conflicting ideas and arguments from a range of source material)

•critical reasoning (including analysis and evaluation of materials and typical arguments found in newspapers, journals, books, magazines)

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal

Created by : Goodwin Watson and Edward Maynard Glaser

Owned/ Used by : Pearson

2 formats: standard- 40-60 minutes; short- 30-45 minutes

RED model (recognize assumptions, evaluate arguments, draw conclusions)

•Drawing inferences: Rating the probability of the truth of inferences based on the information given.

•Recognising assumptions: Identifying unstated assumptions or presuppositions underlying given statements.

•Deducing: Determining whether conclusions follow logically from given information.

•Interpreting: Weighing the evidence and deciding if generalizations or conclusions based on data are warranted.

•Evaluating arguments: Evaluating the strength and relevance of arguments with respect to a particular question or issue.

Watson-Glaser II Critical Thinking Appraisal

•professionals (both executives and individual contributors)

•college undergraduate

•graduate students

40 items, 35 minutes

More contemporary and business-relevant items than the Watson-Glaser I, higher proportion of difficult items

•Classifies individuals as low, average and high

•Suggests critical thinking based job behaviours

•Separates the “bright ” from the “exceptional”

Watson-Glaser III Critical Thinking Appraisal

40 items, 30 minutes

Large item bank of business-relevant items suitable for international use

Questions are randomly selected from a large pool, making it unlikely that two individuals receive the same test

Test of Problem Solving 2: Adolescent (TOPS-2:A)

Created by : Linda Bowers, Rosemary Huisignh, Carolyn LoGiudice

Owned/ Used by : PRO-ED, Inc.

•grades 7-12

40 minutes, 5 subtests (18 written passages)

Serves as basis for an effective therapy program (assessment used for troubled teens)

•Subtest A: Making Inferences

•Subtest B: Determining Solutions

•Subtest C: Problem Solving

•Subtest D: Interpreting Perspectives

•Subtest E: Transferring Insights

Focused on the following cognitive processes:

•understanding/comprehension

•interpretation

•self-regulation

•evaluation

•explanation

•inference/insight

•decision-making

•intent/purpose

•problem solving

•acknowledgment

Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA)

Created by : Diane Halpern

Owned/ Used by : Schuhfried Publishing

•ages 15 through adulthood

4 test formats with a duration between 15 and 50 minutes

20 everyday scenarios. For each scenario, respondents have to first

provide brief constructed responses and then select answers from a list of possible forced choice options.

Both open ended and forced choice questions

The test assesses the five dimension of critical thinking:

•verbal reasoning (recognizing the use of persuasive or misleading language)

•argument analysis (reasons, assumptions and conclusions)

•thinking as hypothesis testing (sample size, generalizations)

•likelihood and uncertainty (applying relevant principles of probability such as base rates)

•decision making and problem solving (identifying the problem goal, generating and selecting solutions among alternatives)

The Smith-Sturgeon Conditional Reasoning Test

Created by : Edward Smith and Joanne Sturgeon

Owned/ Used by : State University of New York

•deductive logic competence of children in grades 1-3

•conditional logic ability

•verbal intelligence

Texas Assessment of Critical Thinking Skills

Owned/ Used by : The College of Business Administration

•business students

•business workforce

Multiple choice, 45 minutes:

•applying the rules of probability calculus

•interpreting what inferences can be made from quantitative information presented in a chart or diagram

•distinguishing data showing a correlation from information needed to establish a cause and effect relation

•recognizing the logical components involved in the process of hypothesis testing

•determining logically possible combinations given a set of constraints

•recognizing argument structure and being able to use appropriate concepts such as premise, conclusion, and intermediate conclusions to identify the parts

•distinguishing a successful paraphrase from an idea that does not say the same thing

•identifying an essential unstated premise or conclusion of an argument

•evaluating how strongly a particular set of premises supports a specific conclusion

•evaluating the degree of relevance of particular pieces of evidence to determine the truth or falsity of a conclusion

•evaluating the degree of relevance of particular criticisms to the validity or invalidity of an argument

Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+)

Owned/ Used by : The Council for Aid to Education (CAE)

2 parts, 90 minutes:

•problem and associated documents provided to which a written response containing reasons and consideration of alternatives must be provided

•multiple choice

Evaluating:

•critical thinking

•analytic reasoning and evaluation

•written communication

College and Work Readiness Assessment (CWRA+)

•grades 6-12

Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X

First created in : 2005

Created by : Robert H. Ennis and Jason Millman

Owned/ Used by : The Critical Thinking Company

50 minute- can be administered timed or untimed

•credibility of sources

•observation

Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level Z

•prediction and experimental planning

•fallacies (equivocation)

•definition

•prediction in planning experiments

James Madison Critical Thinking Test

•Grade 7 through College

50 item, 50 minute test, assessing more than 65 critical thinking skills and concepts, including:

•Evaluating whether an inductive argument is strong or weak

•Assessing the relevance of claims to other claims and to questions, descriptions, representations, procedures, information etc.

•Identifying and avoiding errors in reasoning

•Informal fallacies (begging the question, equivocations, post hoc, ergo propter hoc, false dilemma/ false dichotomy fallacy, smoke screen/ red herring/ rationalizing, hasty generalization, appeal to ridicule/ sarcasm, ad hominem, appeal to illegitimate authority, loaded question, evidence surrogate, stereotyping, appeal to consequences, “wishful thinking”, genetic fallacy, biased generalization, anecdotal evidence

Test of Inference Ability in Reading Comprehension

Created by : Linda M. Phillips and Cynthia Patterson

Owned/ Used by : University of Alberta

•grades 6-8

Multiple choice version and constructed response version

•ability to infer information and interpretations from short passages

Test on Appraising Observations

Created by : Stephen P. Norris, Ruth King

Test Type : General Content, Aspect-Specific

•grades 7-14

Multiple choice and constructed response versions

•ability to judge the credibility of statements of observation

Supplement to Critical Thinking

How can one assess, for purposes of instruction or research, the degree to which a person possesses the dispositions, skills and knowledge of a critical thinker?

In psychometrics, assessment instruments are judged according to their validity and reliability.

Roughly speaking, an instrument is valid if it measures accurately what it purports to measure, given standard conditions. More precisely, the degree of validity is “the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores for proposed uses of tests” (American Educational Research Association 2014: 11). In other words, a test is not valid or invalid in itself. Rather, validity is a property of an interpretation of a given score on a given test for a specified use. Determining the degree of validity of such an interpretation requires collection and integration of the relevant evidence, which may be based on test content, test takers’ response processes, a test’s internal structure, relationship of test scores to other variables, and consequences of the interpretation (American Educational Research Association 2014: 13–21). Criterion-related evidence consists of correlations between scores on the test and performance on another test of the same construct; its weight depends on how well supported is the assumption that the other test can be used as a criterion. Content-related evidence is evidence that the test covers the full range of abilities that it claims to test. Construct-related evidence is evidence that a correct answer reflects good performance of the kind being measured and an incorrect answer reflects poor performance.

An instrument is reliable if it consistently produces the same result, whether across different forms of the same test (parallel-forms reliability), across different items (internal consistency), across different administrations to the same person (test-retest reliability), or across ratings of the same answer by different people (inter-rater reliability). Internal consistency should be expected only if the instrument purports to measure a single undifferentiated construct, and thus should not be expected of a test that measures a suite of critical thinking dispositions or critical thinking abilities, assuming that some people are better in some of the respects measured than in others (for example, very willing to inquire but rather closed-minded). Otherwise, reliability is a necessary but not a sufficient condition of validity; a standard example of a reliable instrument that is not valid is a bathroom scale that consistently under-reports a person’s weight.

Assessing dispositions is difficult if one uses a multiple-choice format with known adverse consequences of a low score. It is pretty easy to tell what answer to the question “How open-minded are you?” will get the highest score and to give that answer, even if one knows that the answer is incorrect. If an item probes less directly for a critical thinking disposition, for example by asking how often the test taker pays close attention to views with which the test taker disagrees, the answer may differ from reality because of self-deception or simple lack of awareness of one’s personal thinking style, and its interpretation is problematic, even if factor analysis enables one to identify a distinct factor measured by a group of questions that includes this one (Ennis 1996). Nevertheless, Facione, Sánchez, and Facione (1994) used this approach to develop the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI). They began with 225 statements expressive of a disposition towards or away from critical thinking (using the long list of dispositions in Facione 1990a), validated the statements with talk-aloud and conversational strategies in focus groups to determine whether people in the target population understood the items in the way intended, administered a pilot version of the test with 150 items, and eliminated items that failed to discriminate among test takers or were inversely correlated with overall results or added little refinement to overall scores (Facione 2000). They used item analysis and factor analysis to group the measured dispositions into seven broad constructs: open-mindedness, analyticity, cognitive maturity, truth-seeking, systematicity, inquisitiveness, and self-confidence (Facione, Sánchez, and Facione 1994). The resulting test consists of 75 agree-disagree statements and takes 20 minutes to administer. A repeated disturbing finding is that North American students taking the test tend to score low on the truth-seeking sub-scale (on which a low score results from agreeing to such statements as the following: “To get people to agree with me I would give any reason that worked”. “Everyone always argues from their own self-interest, including me”. “If there are four reasons in favor and one against, I’ll go with the four”.) Development of the CCTDI made it possible to test whether good critical thinking abilities and good critical thinking dispositions go together, in which case it might be enough to teach one without the other. Facione (2000) reports that administration of the CCTDI and the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) to almost 8,000 post-secondary students in the United States revealed a statistically significant but weak correlation between total scores on the two tests, and also between paired sub-scores from the two tests. The implication is that both abilities and dispositions need to be taught, that one cannot expect improvement in one to bring with it improvement in the other.

A more direct way of assessing critical thinking dispositions would be to see what people do when put in a situation where the dispositions would reveal themselves. Ennis (1996) reports promising initial work with guided open-ended opportunities to give evidence of dispositions, but no standardized test seems to have emerged from this work. There are however standardized aspect-specific tests of critical thinking dispositions. The Critical Problem Solving Scale (Berman et al. 2001: 518) takes as a measure of the disposition to suspend judgment the number of distinct good aspects attributed to an option judged to be the worst among those generated by the test taker. Stanovich, West and Toplak (2011: 800–810) list tests developed by cognitive psychologists of the following dispositions: resistance to miserly information processing, resistance to myside thinking, absence of irrelevant context effects in decision-making, actively open-minded thinking, valuing reason and truth, tendency to seek information, objective reasoning style, tendency to seek consistency, sense of self-efficacy, prudent discounting of the future, self-control skills, and emotional regulation.

It is easier to measure critical thinking skills or abilities than to measure dispositions. The following eight currently available standardized tests purport to measure them: the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (Watson & Glaser 1980a, 1980b, 1994), the Cornell Critical Thinking Tests Level X and Level Z (Ennis & Millman 1971; Ennis, Millman, & Tomko 1985, 2005), the Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test (Ennis & Weir 1985), the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (Facione 1990b, 1992), the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (Halpern 2016), the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning 2017), the Collegiate Learning Assessment (Council for Aid to Education 2017), the HEIghten Critical Thinking Assessment (https://territorium.com/heighten/), and a suite of critical thinking assessments for different groups and purposes offered by Insight Assessment (https://www.insightassessment.com/products). The Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) is unique among them in being designed for use by college faculty to help them improve their development of students’ critical thinking skills (Haynes et al. 2015; Haynes & Stein 2021). Also, for some years the United Kingdom body OCR (Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations) awarded AS and A Level certificates in critical thinking on the basis of an examination (OCR 2011). Many of these standardized tests have received scholarly evaluations at the hands of, among others, Ennis (1958), McPeck (1981), Norris and Ennis (1989), Fisher and Scriven (1997), Possin (2008, 2013a, 2013b, 2013c, 2014, 2020) and Hatcher and Possin (2021). Their evaluations provide a useful set of criteria that such tests ideally should meet, as does the description by Ennis (1984) of problems in testing for competence in critical thinking: the soundness of multiple-choice items, the clarity and soundness of instructions to test takers, the information and mental processing used in selecting an answer to a multiple-choice item, the role of background beliefs and ideological commitments in selecting an answer to a multiple-choice item, the tenability of a test’s underlying conception of critical thinking and its component abilities, the set of abilities that the test manual claims are covered by the test, the extent to which the test actually covers these abilities, the appropriateness of the weighting given to various abilities in the scoring system, the accuracy and intellectual honesty of the test manual, the interest of the test to the target population of test takers, the scope for guessing, the scope for choosing a keyed answer by being test-wise, precautions against cheating in the administration of the test, clarity and soundness of materials for training essay graders, inter-rater reliability in grading essays, and clarity and soundness of advance guidance to test takers on what is required in an essay. Rear (2019) has challenged the use of standardized tests of critical thinking as a way to measure educational outcomes, on the grounds that  they (1) fail to take into account disputes about conceptions of critical thinking, (2) are not completely valid or reliable, and (3) fail to evaluate skills used in real academic tasks. He proposes instead assessments based on discipline-specific content.

There are also aspect-specific standardized tests of critical thinking abilities. Stanovich, West and Toplak (2011: 800–810) list tests of probabilistic reasoning, insights into qualitative decision theory, knowledge of scientific reasoning, knowledge of rules of logical consistency and validity, and economic thinking. They also list instruments that probe for irrational thinking, such as superstitious thinking, belief in the superiority of intuition, over-reliance on folk wisdom and folk psychology, belief in “special” expertise, financial misconceptions, overestimation of one’s introspective powers, dysfunctional beliefs, and a notion of self that encourages egocentric processing. They regard these tests along with the previously mentioned tests of critical thinking dispositions as the building blocks for a comprehensive test of rationality, whose development (they write) may be logistically difficult and would require millions of dollars.

A superb example of assessment of an aspect of critical thinking ability is the Test on Appraising Observations (Norris & King 1983, 1985, 1990a, 1990b), which was designed for classroom administration to senior high school students. The test focuses entirely on the ability to appraise observation statements and in particular on the ability to determine in a specified context which of two statements there is more reason to believe. According to the test manual (Norris & King 1985, 1990b), a person’s score on the multiple-choice version of the test, which is the number of items that are answered correctly, can justifiably be given either a criterion-referenced or a norm-referenced interpretation.

On a criterion-referenced interpretation, those who do well on the test have a firm grasp of the principles for appraising observation statements, and those who do poorly have a weak grasp of them. This interpretation can be justified by the content of the test and the way it was developed, which incorporated a method of controlling for background beliefs articulated and defended by Norris (1985). Norris and King synthesized from judicial practice, psychological research and common-sense psychology 31 principles for appraising observation statements, in the form of empirical generalizations about tendencies, such as the principle that observation statements tend to be more believable than inferences based on them (Norris & King 1984). They constructed items in which exactly one of the 31 principles determined which of two statements was more believable. Using a carefully constructed protocol, they interviewed about 100 students who responded to these items in order to determine the thinking that led them to choose the answers they did (Norris & King 1984). In several iterations of the test, they adjusted items so that selection of the correct answer generally reflected good thinking and selection of an incorrect answer reflected poor thinking. Thus they have good evidence that good performance on the test is due to good thinking about observation statements and that poor performance is due to poor thinking about observation statements. Collectively, the 50 items on the final version of the test require application of 29 of the 31 principles for appraising observation statements, with 13 principles tested by one item, 12 by two items, three by three items, and one by four items. Thus there is comprehensive coverage of the principles for appraising observation statements. Fisher and Scriven (1997: 135–136) judge the items to be well worked and sound, with one exception. The test is clearly written at a grade 6 reading level, meaning that poor performance cannot be attributed to difficulties in reading comprehension by the intended adolescent test takers. The stories that frame the items are realistic, and are engaging enough to stimulate test takers’ interest. Thus the most plausible explanation of a given score on the test is that it reflects roughly the degree to which the test taker can apply principles for appraising observations in real situations. In other words, there is good justification of the proposed interpretation that those who do well on the test have a firm grasp of the principles for appraising observation statements and those who do poorly have a weak grasp of them.

To get norms for performance on the test, Norris and King arranged for seven groups of high school students in different types of communities and with different levels of academic ability to take the test. The test manual includes percentiles, means, and standard deviations for each of these seven groups. These norms allow teachers to compare the performance of their class on the test to that of a similar group of students.

Copyright © 2022 by David Hitchcock < hitchckd @ mcmaster . ca >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2024 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

• Corpus ID: 140788435

The Ennis-Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test: An Instrument for Testing and Teaching (Test Review).

• Published 1991
• The Journal of Reading

27 Citations

Logic, emotion and closure: motivations for choices of faith.

• Highly Influenced

Developing a rubric to assess critical thinking in a multidisciplinary context in higher education

The mediating effects of critical thinking on the motivation and creativity of business english learners in the age of ai: cognitive flexibility theory, structuring a new socioscientific issues (ssi) based instruction model: impacts on pre-service science teachers’ (psts) critical thinking skills and dispositions, predicting critical thinking ability of sultan qaboos university students, the impact of teaching critical thinking on iranian students’ writing performance and their critical thinking dispositions, translation, adaptation, and validation of the halpern critical thinking assessment to portugal: effect of disciplinary area and academic level on critical thinking, using equivalence‐based instruction to teach college students to identify logical fallacies, development of a chemistry critical thinking test: initial reliability and validity studies, a formative assessment model of critical thinking in mathematics learning in junior high school, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

The Personal Statement Topics Ivy League Hopefuls Should Avoid

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Yale University

A compelling personal statement is a critical component of an Ivy League application, as it offers students the unique opportunity to showcase their personality, experiences, and aspirations. Kickstarting the writing process in the summer can give students a critical advantage in the admissions process, allowing them more time to brainstorm, edit, and polish standout essays. However, as students begin drafting their essays this summer, they should bear in mind that selecting the right topic is crucial to writing a successful essay. Particularly for students with Ivy League aspirations, submitting an essay that is cliche, unoriginal, or inauthentic can make the difference between standing out to admissions officers or blending into the sea of other applicants.

As ambitious students embark on the college application process, here are the personal statement topics they should avoid:

1. The Trauma Dump

Many students overcome significant hurdles by the time they begin the college application process, and some assume that the grisliest and most traumatic stories will attract attention and sympathy from admissions committees. While vulnerability can be powerful, sharing overly personal or sensitive information can make readers uncomfortable and shift focus away from a student’s unique strengths. Students should embrace authenticity and be honest about the struggles they have faced on their path to college, while still recognizing that the personal statement is a professional piece of writing, not a diary entry. Students should first consider why they want to share a particular tragic or traumatic experience and how that story might lend insight into the kind of student and community member they will be on campus. As a general rule, if the story will truly enrich the admissions committee’s understanding of their candidacy, students should thoughtfully include it; if it is a means of proving that they are more deserving or seeking to engender pity, students should consider selecting a different topic. Students should adopt a similar, critical approach as they write about difficult or sensitive topics in their supplemental essays, excluding unnecessary detail and focusing on how the experience shaped who they are today.

2. The Travelogue

Travel experiences can be enriching, but essays that merely recount a trip to a foreign country without deeper reflection often fall flat. Additionally, travel stories can often unintentionally convey white saviorism , particularly if students are recounting experiences from their charity work or mission trips in a foreign place. If a student does wish to write about an experience from their travels, they should prioritize depth not breadth—the personal statement is not the place to detail an entire itinerary or document every aspect of a trip. Instead, students should focus on one specific and meaningful experience from their travels with vivid detail and creative storytelling, expounding on how the event changed their worldview, instilled new values, or inspired their future goals.

3. The Superhero Narrative

Ivy League and other top colleges are looking for students who are introspective and teachable—no applicant is perfect (admissions officers know this!). Therefore, it’s crucial that students be aware of their strengths and weaknesses, and open about the areas in which they hope to grow. They should avoid grandiose narratives in which they cast themselves as flawless heroes. While students should seek to put their best foot forward, depicting themselves as protagonists who single-handedly resolve complex issues can make them appear exaggerated and lacking in humility. For instance, rather than telling the story about being the sole onlooker to stand up for a peer being bullied at the lunch table, perhaps a student could share about an experience that emboldened them to advocate for themselves and others. Doing so will add dimension and dynamism to their essay, rather than convey a static story of heroism.

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024, 4. the plan for world peace.

Similarly, many students feel compelled to declare their intention to solve global issues like world hunger or climate change. While noble, these proclamations can come across as unrealistic and insincere, and they can distract from the tangible achievements and experiences that a student brings to the table. Instead, applicants should focus on demonstrable steps they’ve taken or plan to take within their local community to enact positive change, demonstrating their commitment and practical approach to making a difference. For instance, instead of stating a desire to eradicate poverty, students could describe their extended involvement in a local charity and how it has helped them to discover their values and actualize their passions.

5. The Sports Story

While sports can teach valuable lessons, essays that focus solely on athletic achievements or the importance of a particular game can be overdone and lack depth. Admissions officers have read countless essays about students scoring the winning goal, dealing with the hardship of an injury, or learning teamwork from sports. Students should keep in mind that the personal essay should relay a story that only they can tell—perhaps a student has a particularly unique story about bringing competitive pickleball to their high school and uniting unlikely friend groups or starting a community initiative to repair and donate golf gear for students who couldn’t otherwise afford to play. However, if their sports-related essay could have been written by any high school point guard or soccer team captain, it’s time to brainstorm new ideas.

6. The Pick-Me Monologue

Students may feel the need to list their accomplishments and standout qualities in an effort to appear impressive to Ivy League admissions officers. This removes any depth, introspection, and creativity from a student’s essay and flattens their experiences to line items on a resume. Admissions officers already have students’ Activities Lists and resumes; the personal statement should add texture and dimension to their applications, revealing aspects of their character, values and voice not otherwise obvious through the quantitative aspects of their applications. Instead of listing all of their extracurricular involvements, students should identify a particularly meaningful encounter or event they experienced through one of the activities that matters most to them, and reflect on the ways in which their participation impacted their development as a student and person.

7. The Pandemic Sob Story

The Covid-19 pandemic was a traumatic and formative experience for many students, and it is therefore understandable that applicants draw inspiration from these transformative years as they choose their essay topics. However, while the pandemic affected individuals differently, an essay about the difficulties faced during this time will likely come across as unoriginal and generic. Admissions officers have likely read hundreds of essays about remote learning challenges, social isolation, and the general disruptions caused by Covid-19. These narratives can start to blend together, making it difficult for any single essay to stand out. Instead of centering the essay on the pandemic's challenges, students should consider how they adapted, grew, or made a positive impact during this time. For example, rather than writing about the difficulties of remote learning, a student could describe how they created a virtual study group to support classmates struggling with online classes. Similarly, an applicant might write about developing a new skill such as coding or painting during lockdown and how this pursuit has influenced their academic or career goals. Focusing on resilience, innovation, and personal development can make for a more compelling narrative.

Crafting a standout personal statement requires dedicated time, careful thought, and honest reflection. The most impactful essays are those that toe the lines between vulnerability and professionalism, introspection and action, championing one’s strengths and acknowledging weaknesses. Starting early and striving to avoid overused and unoriginal topics will level up a student’s essay and increase their chances of standing out.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

• Thinker's Guides

International Critical Thinking Essay Test

The purpose of the International Critical Thinking Test is to provide an assessment of the fundamentals of critical thinking that can be used with content from any subject. The goal of the test is two-fold. The first goal is to provide a reasonable way to pre- and post-test students to determine the extent to which they have learned to think critically. The second goal is to provide a test instrument that stimulates the faculty to teach their discipline so as to foster critical thinking in the students. Once faculty become committed to pre- and post-testing their students using the exam, it is natural and desirable for them to emphasize analysis and assessment of thinking in their routine instruction within the subjects they teach. The exam, therefore, is designed to have a significant effect on instruction. The test is designed to have high consequential validity; that is, the consequence of using the test is significant: faculty tend to re-structure their courses to put more emphasis on critical thinking within the disciplines (to help students prepare for the test). It also has the consequence that faculty think through important critical thinking principles and standards (which they otherwise take for granted) The International Critical Thinking test differs from traditional critical thinking tests in that traditional tests tend to have low consequential validity; that is, the nature of the test items is such that faculty, not seeing the relevance of the test to the content they teach, ignore it. The International Critical Thinking Test is the perfect test to teach to. For one, the structure and standards for thought explicit in the test are relevant to thinking in all departments and divisions. The English Department can test their students using a literary prompt. The History Department can choose an excerpt from historical writing; Sociology from sociological writing; etc. In one case, a section from a textbook may be chosen; in another, an editorial, in a third, a professional essay. In short, the writing prompt can be chosen from any discipline or writing sample. What is more, since to make the test reliable the faculty must be intimately involved in the choosing of the writing prompt and in the grading of tests, faculty are primed to follow up on the results. Results are seen to be relevant to assessing instruction within the departments involved. The International Critical Thinking Essay Test is divided into two parts: 1) analysis of a writing prompt, and 2) assessment of the writing prompt. The analysis is worth 80 points; the assessment is worth 20. In the Analysis segment of the test, the student must accurately identify the elements of reasoning within a written piece (each response is worth 10 points). In the Assessment segment of the test, the student must construct a critical analysis and evaluation of the reasoning (in the original piece).

Each student exam must be graded individually by a person competent to assess the critical thinking of the test taker and trained in the grading called for in this examination. In evaluating student exams the grader is attempting to answer two questions:

• Did the student clearly understand the key components in the thinking of the author, as exhibited in the writing sample? (Identifying Purpose, Question at Issue, Information, Conclusions, Assumptions, Concepts, Implications, Point of View)
• Was the student able to effectively evaluate the reasoning, as appropriate, in the original text and present his/her assessment effectively? (Pointing out strengths and possible limitations and/or weaknesses of the reasoning in the writing sample).

The International Critical Thinking Test Is Available to Educational Institutions Under Three Different Options

• Direct License. You may elect to be licensed directly to use the exam. The cost for this is $1000. In this case, you must take responsibility for training the graders and the appropriate use of the exam.
• With a Training Session For Faculty Graders. You may schedule a training session for faculty to use and grade the test. The cost for this depends on the cost of a workshop in your area of the country. Contact us for professional development workshop information if you are interested in this option. If you schedule this professional training, the test is provided free.
• Pilot Site. You may elect to become a pilot site for the exam. In this case, you must submit a plan as to how you will field test the exam, specifying what your purpose is and how you will structure your pilot project. To be accepted as a pilot site, you must provide evidence that you will train the graders appropriately and carefully control the conditions under which you pilot the exam. Once you have used the test you must also provide a written report explaining the results of your project. If we accept your plan, the exam will be provided to you free.

Test: Quiz 3: The Critical Essay

10 multiple choice questions.

Term What is the importance of the Rectangle to the novel? Choose matching definition to provide a plane for characters to move and to enhance character and action. Know the text, select the limits, write the thesis, find evidence, revise the original outline, and write the essay. Both are well respected, both are intelligent, and both are secure characters. contrast for evaluation of one's own spiritual properties, focal point of earthly depravation, and focal point of man's low sinful state. Don't know? 1 of 10

Term What do the descriptions of Maxwell and Marsh tell you about them? Choose matching definition Both are well respected, both are intelligent, and both are secure characters. to provide a plane for characters to move and to enhance character and action. contrast for evaluation of one's own spiritual properties, focal point of earthly depravation, and focal point of man's low sinful state. Know the text, select the limits, write the thesis, find evidence, revise the original outline, and write the essay. Don't know? 2 of 10

Term What is the significance of background description? Choose matching definition to provide a plane for characters to move and to enhance character and action. Know the text, select the limits, write the thesis, find evidence, revise the original outline, and write the essay. Both are well respected, both are intelligent, and both are secure characters. contrast for evaluation of one's own spiritual properties, focal point of earthly depravation, and focal point of man's low sinful state. Don't know? 3 of 10

Term What is the significance about the shabby stranger's visit to Raymond? Choose matching definition Know the text, select the limits, write the thesis, find evidence, revise the original outline, and write the essay. contrast for evaluation of one's own spiritual properties, focal point of earthly depravation, and focal point of man's low sinful state. He provides a link to the settlement, his prescence challenged the townspeople to reflect on what it means to actually follow Jesus, and he awakened the spiritual conscience of the town. to provide a plane for characters to move and to enhance character and action. Don't know? 4 of 10

Term What does the writer say? Choose matching definition organization analysis interpretation evaluation Don't know? 5 of 10

Term How does the writer say it? Choose matching definition analysis synthesis evaluation interpretation Don't know? 6 of 10

Term Was what the writer said worthwhile? Choose matching definition interpretation evaluation analysis assessment Don't know? 7 of 10

Term a type of evaluation essay Choose matching definition evaluation poetry fictional story book review Don't know? 8 of 10

Term the substance of interpretation. Choose matching definition content and meaning. book review interpretation analysis Don't know? 9 of 10

Term What is the process for writin a critical book review in order? Choose matching definition Both are well respected, both are intelligent, and both are secure characters. contrast for evaluation of one's own spiritual properties, focal point of earthly depravation, and focal point of man's low sinful state. to provide a plane for characters to move and to enhance character and action. Know the text, select the limits, write the thesis, find evidence, revise the original outline, and write the essay. Don't know? 10 of 10

• Artificial Intelligence
• Generative AI
• Cloud Computing
• Data Management
• Emerging Technology
• Technology Industry
• Software Development
• Microsoft .NET
• Development Tools
• Open Source
• Programming Languages
• Enterprise Buyer’s Guides
• Newsletters
• Foundry Careers
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Copyright Notice
• Member Preferences
• About AdChoices
• E-commerce Affiliate Relationships
• Your California Privacy Rights

Our Network

• Computerworld
• Network World

How to test large language models

Companies investing in generative ai find that testing and quality assurance are two of the most critical areas for improvement. here are four strategies for testing llms embedded in generative ai apps..

There’s significant buzz and excitement around using AI copilots to reduce manual work, improving software developer productivity with code generators, and innovating with generative AI . The business opportunities are driving many development teams to build knowledge bases with vector databases and embed large language models (LLMs) into their applications.

Some general use cases for building applications with LLM capabilities include search experiences , content generation, document summarization, chatbots, and customer support applications. Industry examples include developing patient portals in healthcare, improving junior banker workflows in financial services, and paving the way for the factory’s future in manufacturing.

Companies investing in LLMs have some upfront hurdles, including improving data governance around data quality, selecting an LLM architecture , addressing security risks , and developing a cloud infrastructure plan .

My bigger concerns lie in how organizations plan to test their LLM models and applications. Issues making the news include one airline honoring a refund its chatbot offered , lawsuits over copyright infringement , and reducing the risk of hallucinations .

“Testing LLM models requires a multifaceted approach that goes beyond technical rigor, says Amit Jain, co-founder and COO of Roadz . “Teams should engage in iterative improvement and create detailed documentation to memorialize the model’s development process, testing methodologies, and performance metrics. Engaging with the research community to benchmark and share best practices is also effective.”

4 testing strategies for embedded LLMs

Development teams need an LLM testing strategy. Consider as a starting point the following practices for testing LLMs embedded in custom applications:

Create test data to extend software QA

Automate model quality and performance testing, evaluate rag quality based on the use case, develop quality metrics and benchmarks.

Most development teams won’t be creating generalized LLMs, and will be developing applications for specific end users and use cases. To develop a testing strategy, teams need to understand the user personas, goals, workflow, and quality benchmarks involved. 

“The first requirement of testing LLMs is to know the task that the LLM should be able to solve,” says Jakob Praher, CTO of Mindbreeze . “For these tasks, one would construct test datasets to establish metrics for the performance of the LLM. Then, one can either optimize the prompts or fine-tune the model systematically.”

For example, an LLM designed for customer service might include a test data set of common user problems and the best responses. Other LLM use cases may not have straightforward means to evaluate the results, but developers can still use the test data to perform validations. 

“The most reliable way to test an LLM is to create relevant test data, but the challenge is the cost and time to create such a dataset,” says Kishore Gadiraju, VP of engineering for Solix Technologies . “Like any other software, LLM testing includes unit, functional, regression, and performance testing. Additionally, LLM testing requires bias, fairness, safety, content control, and explainability testing.”

Once there’s a test data set, development teams should consider several testing approaches depending on quality goals, risks, and cost considerations. “Companies are beginning to move towards automated evaluation methods, rather than human evaluation, because of their time and cost efficiency,” says Olga Megorskaya, CEO of Toloka AI . “However, companies should still engage domain experts for situations where it’s crucial to catch nuances that automated systems might overlook.”

Finding the right balance of automation and human-in-the-loop testing isn’t easy for developers or data scientists. “We suggest a combination of automated benchmarking for each step of the modeling process and then a mixture of automation and manual verification for the end-to-end system,” says Steven Hillion, SVP of data and AI at Astronomer . “For major application releases, you will almost always want a final round of manual validation against your test set. That’s especially true if you’ve introduced new embeddings, new models, or new prompts that you expect to raise the general level of quality because often the improvements are subtle or subjective.”

Manual testing is a prudent measure until there are robust LLM testing platforms. Nikolaos Vasiloglou, VP of Research ML at RelationalAI , says, “There are no state-of-the-art platforms for systematic testing. When it comes to reliability and hallucination, a knowledge graph question-generating bot is the best solution.”

Gadiraju shares the following LLM testing libraries and tools:

• AI Fairness 360 , an open source toolkit used to examine, report, and mitigate discrimination and bias in machine learning models
• DeepEval , an open-source LLM evaluation framework similar to Pytest but specialized for unit testing LLM outputs
• Baserun , a tool to help debug, test, and iteratively improve models
• Nvidia NeMo-Guardrails , an open-source toolkit for adding programmable constraints on an LLM’s outputs

Monica Romila, director of data science tools and runtimes at IBM Data and AI , shared two testing areas for LLMs in enterprise use cases:

• Model quality evaluation assesses the model quality using academic and internal data sets for use cases like classification, extraction, summarization, generation, and retrieval augmented generation (RAG).
• Model performance testing validates the model’s latency (elapsed time for data transmission) and throughput (amount of data processed in a certain timeframe).

Romila says performance testing depends on two critical parameters: the number of concurrent requests and the number of generated tokens (chunks of text a model uses). “It’s important to test for various load sizes and types and compare performance to existing models to see if updates are needed.”

DevOps and cloud architects should consider infrastructure requirements to conduct performance and load testing of LLM applications. “Deploying testing infrastructure for large language models involves setting up robust compute resources, storage solutions, and testing frameworks,” says Heather Sundheim, managing director of solutions engineering at SADA . “Automated provisioning tools like Terraform and version control systems like Git play pivotal roles in reproducible deployments and effective collaboration, emphasizing the importance of balancing resources, storage, deployment strategies, and collaboration tools for reliable LLM testing.”

Some techniques to improve LLM accuracy include centralizing content, updating models with the latest data, and using RAG in the query pipeline. RAGs are important for marrying the power of LLMs with a company’s proprietary information.

In a typical LLM application, the user enters a prompt, the app sends it to the LLM, and the LLM generates a response that the app sends back to the user. With RAG, the app first sends the prompt to an information database like a search engine or a vector database to retrieve relevant, subject-related information. The app sends the prompt and this contextual information to the LLM, which it uses to formulate a response. The RAG thus confines the LLM’s response to relevant and contextual information.

Igor Jablokov, CEO and founder of Pryon , says, “RAG is more plausible for enterprise-style deployments where verifiable attribution to source content is necessary, especially in critical infrastructure.”

Using RAG with an LLM has been shown to reduce hallucinations and improve accuracy. However, using RAG also adds a new component that requires testing its relevancy and performance. The types of testing depend on how easy it is to evaluate the RAG and LLM’s responses and to what extent development teams can leverage end-user feedback.

I recently spoke with Deon Nicholas, CEO of Forethought , about the options to evaluate RAGs used in his company’s generative customer support AI. He shared three different approaches:

• Gold standard datasets, or human-labeled datasets of correct answers for queries that serve as a benchmark for model performance
• Reinforcement learning , or testing the model in real-world scenarios like asking for a user’s satisfaction level after interacting with a chatbot
• Adversarial networks , or training a secondary LLM to assess the primary’s performance, which provides an automated evaluation by not relying on human feedback

“Each method carries trade-offs, balancing human effort against the risk of overlooking errors,” says Nicholas. “The best systems leverage these methods across system components to minimize errors and foster a robust AI deployment.”

Once you have testing data, a new or updated LLM, and a testing strategy, the next step is to validate quality against stated objectives.

“To ensure the development of safe, secure, and trustworthy AI, it’s important to create specific and measurable KPIs and establish defined guardrails,” says Atena Reyhani, chief product officer at ContractPodAi . “Some criteria to consider are accuracy, consistency, speed, and relevance to domain-specific use cases. Developers need to evaluate the entire LLM ecosystem and operational model in the targeted domain to ensure it delivers accurate, relevant, and comprehensive results.”

One tool to learn from is the Chatbot Arena , an open environment for comparing the results of LLMs. It uses the Elo Rating System , an algorithm often used in ranking players in competitive games, but it works well when a person evaluates the response from different LLM algorithms or versions.

“Human evaluation is a central part of testing, particularly when hardening an LLM to queries appearing in the wild,” says Joe Regensburger, VP of research at Immuta . “Chatbot Arena is an example of crowdsourcing testing, and these types of human evaluator studies can provide an important feedback loop to incorporate user feedback.”

Romila of IBM Data and AI shared three metrics to consider depending on the LLM’s use case.

• F1 score is a composite score around precision and recall and applies when LLMs are used for classifications or predictions. For example, a customer support LLM can be evaluated on how well it recommends a course of action.
• RougeL can be used to test RAG and LLMs for summarization use cases, but this generally needs a human-created summary to benchmark the results.
• sacreBLEU is one method originally used to test language translations that is now being used for quantitative evaluation of LLM responses , along with other methods such as TER, ChrF, and BERTScore.

Some industries have quality and risk metrics to consider. Karthik Sj, VP of product management and marketing at Aisera , says, “In education, assessing age-appropriateness and toxicity avoidance is crucial, but in consumer-facing applications, prioritize response relevance and latency.”

Testing does not end once a model is deployed, and data scientists should seek out end-user reactions, performance metrics, and other feedback to improve the models. “Post-deployment, integrating results with behavior analytics becomes crucial, offering rapid feedback and a clearer measure of model performance,” says Dustin Pearce, VP of engineering and CISO at Amplitude .

One important step to prepare for production is to use feature flags in the application. AI technology companies  Anthropic, Character.ai, Notion, and Brex build their product with feature flags to test the application collaboratively, slowly introduce capabilities to large groups, and target experiments to different user segments.

While there are emerging techniques to validate LLM applications, none of these are easy to implement or provide definitive results. For now, just building an app with RAG and LLM integrations may be the easy part compared to the work required to test it and support enhancements. 

Related content

Beyond the usual suspects: 5 fresh data science tools to try today, generative ai won’t fix cloud migration, hr professionals trust ai recommendations, safety off: programming in rust with `unsafe`.

Isaac Sacolick, President of StarCIO , a digital transformation learning company, guides leaders on adopting the practices needed to lead transformational change in their organizations. He is the author of Digital Trailblazer and the Amazon bestseller Driving Digital and speaks about agile planning , devops, data science, product management, and other digital transformation best practices. Sacolick is a recognized top social CIO, a digital transformation influencer, and has over 900 articles published at InfoWorld, CIO.com, his blog Social, Agile, and Transformation , and other sites.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of Isaac Sacolick and do not necessarily represent those of IDG Communications, Inc., its parent, subsidiary or affiliated companies.

More from this author

7 steps to improve analytics for data-driven organizations, how to choose a data analytics and machine learning platform, advanced ci/cd: 6 steps to better ci/cd pipelines, 12 principles for improving devsecops, 10 principles for creating a great developer experience, 7 innovative ways to use low-code tools and platforms, what is agile methodology modern software development explained, what is ci/cd continuous integration and continuous delivery explained, most popular authors.

Show me more

Opensilver 3.0 previews ai-powered ui designer for .net.

How to use FastEndpoints in ASP.NET Core

How Azure Functions is evolving

How to use dbm to stash data quickly in Python

How to auto-generate Python type hints with Monkeytype

How to make HTML GUIs in Python with NiceGUI

Sponsored Links

• Get Cisco UCS X-Series Chassis and Fabric Interconnects offer.

• WEATHER ALERT Heat Advisory Full Story
• WEATHER ALERT Excessive Heat Watch Full Story
• ABC7 New York 24/7 Eyewitness News Stream Watch Now
• THE LOOP | NYC Weather and Traffic Cams Watch Now

Key moments from President Joe Biden's critical press conference

Biden said 'I've gotta finish the job,' but there was a glaring gaffe when he mixed up Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

President Joe Biden, under the microscope as Democrats debate his political future, tried to make the case that he is best suited to take on Donald Trump this November and finish what he's started in a second term.

In a nearly hourlong solo press conference, Biden faced a room full of reporters for the first time since his poor debate performance two weeks ago sent his party into a panic about his mental fitness and ability to carry out his campaign.

Almost all questions posed to the president focused on those issues, with Biden on defense on everything from his cognitive health to whether he believes his vice president could take on the role.

The president remained adamant that he believes he is the most qualified person to go up against Trump.

"I beat him once, and I will beat him again," Biden said.

Here are several key takeaways Biden's press conference.

The gaffes continue

Answering the first question of the night, Biden made a glaring error when he confused Vice President Kamala Harris with Trump.

"Look, I wouldn't have picked Vice President Trump to be vice president, if I didn't think that she's not qualified to be president, so let's start there, number one," Biden said after being asked if he had concerns about Harris' ability to beat Trump if she ever found herself at the top of the ticket.

He also addressed the mistake he made earlier Thursday during the NATO summit when he introduced Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as "President Putin."

A reporter asked him about the gaffe and whether, when paired with some reports that world leaders privately expressed concern about his age, America's standing on the world stage was being damaged.

"Do you see any damage by me leading this conference?" Biden responded. "Have you seen a more successful conference? I was talking about Putin and I said -- at the very end -- I said, 'Putin. I'm sorry, Zelenskyy.'"

Biden: 'I've gotta finish the job'

Biden said he realizes the importance of allaying fears and plans to do so by letting the American people see him out on the trail making the case for why he should get a second term.

He spent considerable time railing against gun violence, attacks on reproductive rights and the broader dangers that he said would be posed by a Trump presidency.

"Do you think our democracy is under siege based on this (Supreme) Court? Do you think democracy is under siege based on Project 2025?" Biden said. "Do you think he means what he says when he says he is going to do away with the civil service and eliminate the Department Education?"

RELATED: Trump seeks to distance himself from Project 2025, a plan to transform government

"I mean, we've never been here before," Biden said. "And that's the other reason why I didn't, as you say, 'hand-off to another generation.' I've got to finish this job. I've got to finish this job. Because there's so much at stake."

Biden says he needs to 'pace' himself

Biden said he needs to "pace myself a little more" when pressed on how he is up to the 24/7 nature of the presidency, but argued that he is kept busy while his 2024 rival is not.

"Since I made that stupid mistake in the campaign -- in the debate, I mean, my schedule has been full-bore," Biden said.

"Where has Trump been? Riding on his golf cart and filling out his scorecard?" Biden said. "He has done virtually nothing. I've had roughly 20 major events, some with thousands of people showing up."

Biden said he has always had an inclination to "keep going" and that his staff is always adding events.

Biden cedes others could beat Trump but argues he's most qualified

Biden's long argued that he alone can defeat Trump after having done so in 2020.

"I think I am the best qualified -- I know -- I believe I'm the best qualified to govern," Biden said. "And I think I am the best qualified to win."

"But there are other people who could beat Trump, too," he acknowledged before quickly adding that it would be "hard" for Democrats to start from the beginning.

A reporter then followed up by asking Biden if he would reconsider his decision to stay in the race if his team showed him polling data that Vice President Harris would fare better against Trump.

"No, unless they came back and said there is no way you could win. Me," Biden said. "No one's saying that. No poll says that."

A new ABC News/Washington Post/Ipsos poll found Biden continues to run evenly with Trump: Americans were divided 46-47% between Biden and Trump if the election were held today. Were Harris to replace Biden as the Democratic nominee, the poll found Harris leading Trump 49-46% among all adults and 49-47% among registered voters.

On taking a cognitive test, Biden says 'no one's going to be satisfied'

Asked if he was going to take a cognitive test before the election, Biden said that he would take one if his doctor advised him he needed one.

Biden said he has taken three "significant" neurological exams during his presidency, most recently in February.

"They say I am in good shape," he said. He then reiterated that he is tested "every single day" on his neurological capacity by simply doing his job as commander in chief.

"And I'll ask you another question, no matter what I did, no one's going to be satisfied," Biden said. "Did you have seven (doctors)? Did you have two? Who'd you have? Did you do this? How many times did you -- so, I am not opposed if my doctors told me I should have another neurological exam, I'll do it. But that's where I am."

Biden takes tough stance on Russia, China

The press conference came off the heels of a weeklong gathering of NATO leaders in Washington, and Biden took the opportunity to emphasize his leadership on the world stage during several exchanges.

On Russia and China, Biden said he is "ready to deal with them now and three years from now."

Biden said no world leader has spent more time with Chinese President Xi Jinping than him, and that they will continue to negotiate. When it comes to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Biden said he saw "no good reason" to speak with him now but would be prepared to do so.

"There isn't any world leader I'm not prepared to deal with," Biden said.

ABC News' Meredith Deliso and Ivan Pereira contributed to this report.

Related Topics

• U.S. & WORLD
• KAMALA HARRIS

Top Stories

FDNY's first woman commissioner announces resignation

• 42 minutes ago

Iconic sex therapist Dr. Ruth Westheimer dies at 96

Measles cases found at migrant shelter

Man arrested in connection to deadly Albany Houses shooting

Woman escapes Upper East Side rape attempt, NYPD searching for suspect

• 2 hours ago

Judge dismisses state trooper's retaliation claim against Andrew Cuomo

AccuWeather Alert: Downpours with late breaks

Vigil for murdered woman found in sleeping bag in Kips Bay

• Fact sheets
• Facts in pictures
• Publications
• Questions and answers
• Tools and toolkits
• Endometriosis
• Excessive heat
• Mental disorders
• Polycystic ovary syndrome
• All countries
• Eastern Mediterranean
• South-East Asia
• Western Pacific
• Data by country
• Country presence 
• Country strengthening 
• Country cooperation strategies 
• News releases
• Feature stories
• Press conferences
• Commentaries
• Photo library
• Afghanistan
• Cholera 
• Coronavirus disease (COVID-19)
• Greater Horn of Africa
• Israel and occupied Palestinian territory
• Disease Outbreak News
• Situation reports
• Weekly Epidemiological Record
• Surveillance
• Health emergency appeal
• International Health Regulations
• Independent Oversight and Advisory Committee
• Classifications
• Data collections
• Global Health Estimates
• Mortality Database
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Health Inequality Monitor
• Global Progress
• Data collection tools
• Global Health Observatory
• Insights and visualizations
• COVID excess deaths
• World Health Statistics
• Partnerships
• Committees and advisory groups
• Collaborating centres
• Technical teams
• Organizational structure
• Initiatives
• General Programme of Work
• WHO Academy
• Investment in WHO
• WHO Foundation
• External audit
• Financial statements
• Internal audit and investigations 
• Programme Budget
• Results reports
• Governing bodies
• World Health Assembly
• Executive Board
• Member States Portal

WHO prequalifies the first self-test for hepatitis C virus

The World Health Organization (WHO) has prequalified the first hepatitis C virus (HCV) self-test which can provide a critical support in expanding access to testing and diagnosis, accelerating global efforts to eliminate hepatitis C.

The product, called OraQuick HCV self-test, manufactured by OraSure Technologies, is an extension of the pre-qualified, OraQuick® HCV Rapid Antibody Test which was initially prequalified by WHO in 2017 for professional use . The self-test version, specifically designed for use by lay users, provides individuals with a single kit containing the components that are needed to perform the self-test.

WHO recommended HCV self-testing (HCVST) in 2021 , to complement existing HCV testing services in countries.  The recommendation was based on evidence demonstrating its ability to increase access to and uptake of services, particularly among people who may not otherwise test.

National-level HCVST implementation projects, largely supported by Unitaid, have shown high levels of acceptability and feasibility, as well as empowering people through personal choice, autonomy and access to stigma-free self-care services.

“Every day 3500 lives are lost to viral hepatitis. Of the 50 million people living with hepatitis C, only 36% had been diagnosed, and 20% have received curative treatment by the end of 2022,” says Dr Meg Doherty, WHO Director for the Department of Global HIV, Hepatitis and STI Programmes. “The addition of this product to the WHO prequalification list provides a safe and effective way to expand HCV testing and treatment services, ensuring more people receive the diagnoses and treatment they need, and ultimately contributing to the global goal of HCV elimination.”

WHO’s prequalification (PQ) programme for in vitro diagnostics (IVDs) evaluates a range of tests, including those used for the detection of antibodies to HCV. The programme assesses IVDs against quality, safety and performance standards. It is a cornerstone in supporting countries in achieving high-quality diagnosis and treatment monitoring.

“The availability of a WHO prequalified HCV self-test enables low- and middle-income countries have access to safe and affordable self-testing options which is essential to achieving the goal of 90% of all people with HCV to be diagnosed,” says Dr Rogério Gaspar, WHO Director for the Department of Regulation and Prequalification. “This achievement contributes to improving access to quality-assured health products for more people living in low-income countries.”

WHO will continue to assess additional HCV self-tests, support evidence-based implementation, and work with communities to expand available options to all countries.

Media Contacts

WHO Media Team

World Health Organization