CCTST and WGCTA: Critical Thinking Tools for DNP Nursing

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive evaluation of two prominent empirical critical thinking assessment tools: (1) the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and (2) the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA), within the specific context of the DNP program. Validated critical thinking assessment instruments such as the CCTST and the WGCTA provide nursing leaders with objective metrics to quantify and compare the reasoning capacities of both current and prospective nurses across multiple healthcare settings, as well as for ongoing self-assessment. Following this evaluation, the paper describes the implications of empirical critical thinking tools for the nursing profession in general and nursing leaders in particular. Finally, the paper presents a summary of the findings that emerged from the foregoing evaluations and analyses.

California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)

The CCTST is a validated, standardized instrument developed by a team of educational psychologists to measure critical thinking abilities. It provides an overall score for critical thinking skill as well as scores on cognitive skill subsets — including deduction, interpretation, explanation, and self-regulation capacities — that facilitate sound reasoning. The CCTST has been extensively tested for validity and correlates highly with other critical thinking metrics and academic success (Bycio & Allen, 2009).

The questions on the CCTST were intentionally designed to objectively assess capabilities such as properly identifying assumptions, drawing accurate conclusions, assessing credibility, and avoiding logical fallacies. The instrument quantifies strengths and deficiencies in both the cognitive and attitudinal dispositions underpinning exceptional critical thought. It has proven useful in academic contexts to evaluate student development as well as in professional environments to assess personnel capacities for complex decision-making. By providing a norm-based measurement of critical thinking capabilities, the CCTST seeks to support the improvement of essential skills for ongoing analysis and evaluation (Facione, 1990).

Developed in the early 1990s by a team of educational psychologists headed by Peter Facione, the CCTST was informed by a large, nationwide Delphi consensus study that defined critical thinking and identified its core skills. Guided by this consensus, Facione's team developed and validated multiple-choice test questions to objectively measure each of the key skill dimensions (Knox, 2013). The development process involved writing and empirically trial-testing hundreds of questions; only those items that demonstrated the requisite qualitative characteristics and quantitative measurement properties were retained (Facione, 1990). This rigorous approach ensured that the final CCTST possessed content and face validity, reliably covered all aspects of critical thought as conceptualized by the Delphi framework, and exhibited sensitivity to developmental changes in individual critical thinking abilities over time (Facione, 1990).

The CCTST first became commercially available in 1994 through Insight Assessment, a company co-founded by Facione specifically to market this critical thinking assessment tool. The company continues to publish the test for individual or bulk purchase for degree program evaluation and other testing purposes (CCTST, 2023).

The test comprises 34 multiple-choice questions describing scenarios that require the application of critical thought across areas such as analysis, evaluation, inference, logic, and reflection at increasing levels of complexity (Facione, 1990). According to Facione (1990), "Twenty of the questions offer four choices, fourteen offer five. For purposes of CT skill assessment, one answer has been designated the superior choice on each question" (p. 4). Evaluation of the instrument subsequently identified three core skill subsets — analysis, evaluation, and inference — that align with consensus understanding in the field and relate closely to overall critical thinking capability (Facione, 1990).

Two additional facets, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning, were also shown to have strong connections to the measured critical thinking skills. Performance on these category-specific competencies largely correlates with total scores achieved on validated critical thinking assessments administered both before and after instructional interventions. By segmenting aggregate scores into percentile rankings across the five narrow skill types as well as a broad critical thinking score, normative benchmarks offer indicative interpretations at the subdomain level. These subgroup metrics allow identification of relative strengths and weaknesses that can inform personalized improvement in discrete areas of critical thought tied to the generally recognized components framework (Facione, 1990).

Improving critical thinking capabilities provides DNP students with an enhanced ability to thoroughly analyze the theoretical bases and research methodologies that support their clinical project proposals. Moreover, continuously honed analytical skills enable DNP candidates to better synthesize the findings that emerge from their projects within the broader scope of evidence-based practice.

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA)

The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) evaluates the ability to judiciously examine written content, comprehend corresponding implications, and make sound determinations by testing for essential reasoning skills aligned with real-world decision contexts across continuing education, human resources, and workplace settings. The assessment provides a norm-referenced baseline metric of current critical thinking capabilities while informing targeted improvement efforts (WGCTA, 2023).

The first version of this instrument was developed nearly a century ago and ultimately published in 1937 by Goodwin Watson and Edward Glaser. Since that time, the WGCTA has undergone many modifications and developments, including internationalization (WGCTA, 2023). The tool is currently available through Pearson, which publishes both the standard and short forms of the assessment.

The WGCTA features a sequence of readings and hypothetical situations that pose issues for analysis. Test-takers must address a series of multiple-choice questions corresponding to each scenario, with compatibility for both proctored and unsupervised self-administration (WGCTA, 2023). The assessment includes 80 items in the standard form and 40 items in the short form, spanning five subareas that check for skills in drawing reasonable inferences, identifying unstated assumptions, evaluating lines of argumentation, demonstrating deductive logic, and interpreting semantic meaning. Both forms come in parallel variants allowing pre- and post-administration, with the short form containing a subset of standard test content.

Extensive normative scoring data stratified across industries (e.g., healthcare, technology), functions (e.g., managers, sales), and job levels (e.g., director, professional) facilitates meaningful performance comparisons. This inventory delivers standardized accountability for key facets of critical thought while offering assessment efficiency through its concise alternative form (Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, 2023).

Besides providing an aggregate score reflecting overall proficiency, individual performance reports give examinees personal percentile ratings across the three "RED facets" — Recognize assumptions, Evaluate arguments, and Draw conclusions — that identify areas of relative strength versus areas needing improvement. By framing results in relation to subgroup norms and breaking down capacities across core constructs of competent analysis, interpretation, and deduction, those assessed using the WGCTA receive targeted guidance for improving skills essential to judicious evaluation and decision-making in educational, workplace, and interpersonal contexts (WGCTA, 2023).

Conclusion

The research demonstrated that validated tools for the assessment of critical thinking skills — such as the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) — can provide meaningful metrics of analysis, evaluation, and reasoning capacities. Both instruments were thoughtfully constructed and empirically tested for reliability and validity with target groups; their trustworthy scoring systems benchmark capability levels, highlight growth areas, and provide guidance for strengthening nursing competencies. While both require administration time and careful result interpretation, these measurements can inform teaching interventions, workforce development, and self-monitoring practices, as well as help shape patient-centered organizational policies.

References

Bycio, P., & Allen, J. S. (2009). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test and business school performance. American Journal of Business Education, 2(8), 1–8.

CCTST. (2023). Insight Assessment. Retrieved from

Facione, P. A. (1990). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test — College Level. Technical Report #4: Interpreting the CCTST, group norms, and sub-scores.

Facione, P. A. (1991). Using the California Critical Thinking Skills Test in research, evaluation and assessment. California Academic Press.

Hassan, K., & Madhum, G. (2007). Validating the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. Higher Education, 54(3), 361–383.

Knox, D. K. (2013). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test. [University].

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. (2023). Statistics Solutions. Retrieved from https://www.statisticssolutions.com/free-resources/directory-of-survey-instruments/watson-glaser-critical-thinking-appraisal-wgcta/

WGCTA. (2023). Pearson. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/efficacy-and-research/reports/Watson-Glaser_One_Page_Summary.pdf