A Comparison of the Relative Validity of a Measure of Piagetian Cognitive Development and a Set of Conventional Prognostic Measures in the Prediction of the Future Success of Ninth- and Tenth-Grade Students in Algebra

Abstract

For a total sample of 290 ninth- and tenth-grade students enrolled in the first-year algebra course at a suburban Los Angeles high school situated in a relatively affluent community, the major focus of this study was to compare the predictive validity of chronological age, a standardized algebra prognosis test, standardized scales of verbal and quantitative abilities derived from an achievement test battery, and an objective measure of formal or concrete stages of Piagetian cognitive development. Criterion variables included both final examination scores and course grades. It was concluded that chronological age, an algebra prognosis test, and mathematics subtests from a standardized achievement test battery appear to be the most promising predictors of success in algebra (with the relationship between age and the criterion measures being substantially negative). In addition, the conclusion was reached that when used in combination with readily available scores on several standardized tests of mathematics achievement and quantitative abilities, the developmental Piagetian measure can be expected to contribute very little to the strength of prediction of algebra success or to the accuracy of differentiation between successful and nonsuccessful students. On the other hand, if the developmental scale is employed as a single predictor or in combination with another predictor such as a standardized mathematics achievement test, then the Piagetian measure can be anticipated to afford a significant contribution to a valid forecast of performance in beginning algebra.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arlin, P. K. (1982a). A multi-trait/multi-method validity study of a test of formal reasoning. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 1077-1088.

Arlin, P. K. (1982b). An objective test of formal reasoning (1982 rev.). Unpublished test.

Barnes, W. , and Asher, J. (1962). Predicting students' success in first year algebra. Mathematics Teacher, 55, 651-654.

Bates, M. (1978). An investigation of the relation between certain reasoning abilities and the ability to learn certain algebraic operations (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1978). Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 2110-211 IA.

Beard, R. M. (1972). The growth of logical thinking. In L. R. Chapman (Ed.), The process of learning mathematics (pp. 155-182). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Carpenter, T. P. , Corbitt, M. K. , Kepner, H. S., Jr. , Lindquist, M. M. , and Reys, R. E. (1982). Student performance in algebra: Results from the national assessment. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 514-531.

Collis, K. F. (1975). A study of concrete and formal operations in school mathematics: A Piagetian viewpoint. Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Forman, S. L. (1980). The relations between age, certain reasoning abilities and the ability to learn selected algebraic operations: An exploratory study (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 575A.

Hanna, G. , Bligh, H. , and Lenke, J. (1970). Student reported grades as predictors. The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 48, 465-468.

10.

Hieronymus, A. N. , Lindquist, E. F. , and Hoover, H. D. (1982a). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills. Chicago: Houghton Miffin.

11.

Hieronymus, A. N. , Lindquist, E. F. , and Hoover, H. D. (1982b). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills manual for school administrators. Chicago: Houghton Mifflin.

12.

Higgins-Trenk, A. , and Gaite, A. J. H. (1971). Elusiveness of formal operational thought in adolescence. Proceedings of the 79th Convention of the American Psychological Association, 6, 201-202.

13.

Inhelder, R. , and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. New York: Basic Books.

14.

Lawson, A. E. , and Wollman, W. T. (1980). Developmental level and learning to solve problems of proportionality in the class-room. School Science and Mathematics, 80, 69-75.

15.

Mogull, R. G. , and Rosengarten, W. (1974). Predicting success in elementary algebra. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 20, 34-38.

16.

Orleans, J. B. , and Hanna, G. S. (1982). Orleans-Hanna Algebra Prognosis Test. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

17.

Pallrand, G. J. (1979). The transition to formal thought. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 445-451.

18.

Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

19.

Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R. E. Ripple and V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered: A report on the conference on cognitive studies and curriculum development (pp. 7-19). Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University, School of Education.

20.

Reed, R. B. (1978). The relationship between the level of cognitive development and success in first-year algebra. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.

21.

Shayer, M. , and Wylam, H. (1978). The distribution of Piagetian stages of thinking in British middle and secondary school children. II: 14- to 16-year olds and sex differentials. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 62-70.