Four Piagetian group tests called the Science Reasoning Tasks (SRT) were administered to 201 subjects. For each test, a unidimensional latent trait analysis confirmed a single factor hypothesis. Comparison with a similar analysis of Lawson's Classroom Test of Formal Reasoning (CTFR) led to the conclusion that the SRT's succeeded where the CTFR failed, in providing a valid measure of the unitary formal reasoning construct. This success was attributed to aspects to test format.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andrich, D. and Sheridan, B. E. (1980). RATE: A Fortran IV program for analysing rated data according to a Rasch model. Research Report No. 5, Measurement and Statistics Laboratory, Department of Education, The University of Western Australia.
2.
Hacker, R. G. , Pratt, C., and Matthews, M. (1985). Selecting science reasoning tasks for classroom use. Education Research and Perspectives, 12, 19-32.
3.
Inhelder, B. and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Books.
4.
Lawson, A. E. (1978). Classroom Test of Formal Operations: Testing and scoring procedures and answer key. Tempe: Arizona State University: Unpublished.
5.
Lawson, A. E. (1979). Relationships among performances on group administered items of formal reasoning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 48, 71-78.
6.
Lumsden, J. (1978). Tests are perfectly reliable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 31, 19-26.
Pratt, C. and Hacker, R. G. (1984). Is Lawson's Test of Formal Reasoning valid?Educational And Psychological Measurement, 44, 441-448.
9.
Rasch, G. (1966). An item analysis which takes individual differences into account. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 19, 49-57.
10.
Rasch, G. (1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Shayer, M. (1979). Has Piaget's construct of formal operational thinking any utility?British Journal of Educational Psychology, 49, 265-276.
12.
Shayer, M. and Adey, P. (1981). Towards a Science of Science Teaching. London: Heinemann Educational.
13.
Wylam, H. and Shayer, M. (1980). CSMS Science Reasoning Tasks, General Guide, Windsor, U.K.: NFER Publishing Company.
14.
Wright, B. D. and Stone, M. H. (1979). Best test design. Chicago: MESA Press.
