A paper-and-pencil test of seven of Inhelder and Piaget's formal operational schemes was developed. This objective assessment of formal operational thought was cross-validated clinically. The multitrait-multimethod procedures indicated that the objective test is a valid and reliable measure of formal operational thought. It has the advantage of being administered in large groups, of being easily scored, and of not requiring special training for its administration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arlin, P. K.Performance time lags in the development of formal operations . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Association, Los Angeles, April, 1981. (a)
2.
Arlin, P. K.Piagetian operations as predictors of reading and mathematics readiness in grade K-1 children . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1981, 73, 712-721. (b)
3.
Arlin, P. K.Adolescent intellectual development: A revision of the Piagetian model and its instructional implications . Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 1982, in press. (a)
4.
Arlin, P. K.An objective test of formal reasoning. Preliminary version (Unpublished), 1982. (b)
5.
Campbell; D. T. and Fiske, D. W.Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 1959, 56, 81-105.
6.
Epstein, H. T. and Toepfer, C. F.A neuroscience basis for reorganizing middle grades education. Educational Leadership, 1978, 35, 656-658, 660.
7.
Epstein, H. T.Growth spurts during brain development: Implications for educational policy. In J. Chall (Ed.) Education and the brain, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
8.
Epstein, H. T.Correlated brain and intelligence development in humans. In M. Hahn (Ed.) Development and evolution of brain size: behavioral implications. New York: Academic Press, 1979.
9.
Epstein, H. T.Learning to learn: Matching instruction to cognitive levels , Principal, 1981, 12, 25-30.
10.
Fusco, E.Matching curriculum to students cognitive levels , Educational Leadership, 1981, 39, 47.
11.
Gallagher, J. M.Problems in applying Piaget to reading . Journal of Education: Boston University School of Education, 1979, 161, 72-86.
12.
Inhelder, B. and Piaget, J.The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books, 1958.
13.
Karplus, R. and Peterson, R. W.Intellectual development beyond elementary school II: Ratio, a survey. School Science and Mathematics, 1970, 70, 398-406.
14.
Martorano, S. C.A developmental analysis of performance on Piaget's formal operations tasks . Developmental Psychology, 1977, 13, 666-672.
15.
Neimark, E. D.Current status of formal operations research . Human Development, 1979, 22, 60-67.
16.
Piaget, J.The child's conception of movement and speed. New York, Ballantine Books, 1971.
17.
Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B.The Child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul, 1974.
18.
Shayer, M. and Wylam, H.The distribution of Piagetian stages of thinking in British middle and secondary school children: 14-16 year-olds and sex differentials, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1978, 48, 62-70.
19.
Shayer, M.Has Piaget's construct of formal operational thinking any utility?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1979, 49, 265-276.
20.
Sills, T. W. and Herron, J. D.Study of an elecronic analogue to the combinations of chemical bodies Piagetian task. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1976, 129, 267-272.
21.
Tomlinson-Keasey, C. , Eisert, D. C., Kahle, L. R., Hardy-Brown, K. and Keasey, B.The structure of concrete operational thought. Child Development, 1979, 50, 1153-1163.
