Critical
thinking. Tests of critical thinking. Critical thinking tests. Critical
thinking skills. IQ. Tests. CT.
|
 The
California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College Level -- Technical
Report #1 --Experimental Validation and Content Validity (14 Pages),
Facione, PA, (1990). ERIC Document ED 327-549. [PDF of this
article made available with the permission of the author and the copyright
holder, The California Academic Press, to make copies for individual
noncommercial usage.]
Abstract:
Technical Report #1 presents the findings of four experiments to
determine if the "California Critical Thinking Skills Test:
College Level," (CCTST) measured the growth in critical thinking
skills achieved by college students completing approved critical
thinking courses. Conducted at California State University, Fullerton
during the 1989/90 academic year, these four experiments involved
1169 college students, five courses, three departments, 20 instructors,
and 45 sections. The theoretical construct grounding the CCTST is
the consensus conceptualization of critical thinking articulated
by the panel of 46 national experts who participated in a Delphi
research project conducted during 1987-1989 for the American Philosophical
Association. The CCTST targets five cognitive skills as defined
in that Delphi research: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, explanation,
and inference. The theoretical construct for the CCTST is directly
compatible with the conceptualization of CT promulgated by the California
State University System. The CCTST reports six scores: an overall
score on CT cognitive skills and five sub-scores named analysis,
evaluation, inference, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning.
The first experiment compared the pretest and posttest means for
two independent groups of CT students enrolled in 39 sections of
four different campus approved CT courses. The CCTST succeeded in
detecting the statistically significant growth in CT skills hypothesized
to have resulted from CT instruction. As a control, the second experiment
related CCTST score of two independent groups enrolled in six sections
of introduction to philosophy. The null hypothesis was retained.
In the third experiment, using paired pretest/posttest scores, the
CCTST measured the growth in CT skills assumed to have occurred
as a result of one semester of approved CT instruction. The fourth
experiment retained the null hypothesis for the control group using
paired pretest/posttest CCTST scores. Generalizing the results,
with a confidence interval of 95%, the range of the mean improvement
in the CCTST scores of college students completing approved lower
division general education CT courses at public comprehensive universities
will be bounded by +1.9071 and +.9861. Regression analyses and correlations
with GPA, SAT scores, Nelson-Denny Reading Test scores, and other
standard measures of academic preparation or ability are presented
in Technical Report #2. That report also discusses instructor related
factors, such as CT teaching experience, and the impact of English
language ability on the CCTST. Technical Report #3 discusses student-related
factors such as academic major, CT self-esteem, gender, and ethnicity.
Technical Report #4 provides group norms for the CCTST overall score
and for its five sub-scores.
The
California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College level -- Technical
Report #2 -- Factors Predictive of CT Skills (17 Pages),
Facione, PA, (1990). ERIC Document ED 327-550. [PDF of this
article made available with the permission of the author and the copyright
holder, The California Academic Press, to make copies for individual
noncommercial usage.]
Abstract:Technical
Report #2 builds on Technical Report #1 which discussed the content
validity and the four experiments used to determine that the California
Critical Thin king Skills Test: College Level (CCTST) measures improvements
in the core CT skills of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference
and explanation. During 1989/90, data was collected on a variety
of variables related to the 1196 subjects who participated in these
experiments. Critical thinking skills, as measured on the CCTST,
can be predicted by a combination of SAT verbal, SAT math, and GPA
data with R-square =.41 If CCTST pretest data are included in the
regression model the R-square =.71. The college student's age, units
of college work completed, and high school subject matter preparation,
and the instructor's teaching experience contribute nothing of significance
to the regression models which predicts CCTST posttest results.
CCTST results positively correlated with Nelson-Denny reading scores
for vocabulary, comprehension, and total score. Non-native English
speakers show virtually no gain from pretest to posttest and, hence,
use of the CCTST for this group of students is strongly counter-indicated.
Of six instructor-factors which are thought to be related to effectiveness
in teaching CT skills, only years of teaching experience and recent
experience teaching CT are related, and these in non-linear ways.
Applying the CCTST to the hypothesis that CT skill development is
a natural outcome of baccalaureate education, no evidence for that
hypothesis, either in general, or by reference to the control groups,
could be discovered. This result is not viewed negatively. Not all
professors should be expected to teach all skills. Technical Report
#3 discusses student-related factors such as academic major, CT
self-esteem, gender, and ethnicity. Technical Report #4 provides
group norms and discusses CCTST sub-scores on analysis, evaluation,
inference, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning skills.
The
California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College level -- Technical
Report #3 -- Gender, Ethnicity, Major, CT Self-esteem and the CCTST
(12 Pages), Facione, PA, (1990). ERIC Document ED
326-584. [PDF of this article made available with the permission
of the author and the copyright holder, The California Academic Press,
to make copies for individual noncommercial usage.]
Abstract:
of the possible impact of student gender, ethnicity, academic major
and CT self-esteem on CT skill performance. Analyses of pretest
data and control group data show that the CCTST is not gender-biased.
Statistically significant gender differences emerge only after students
complete their college level CT course. ANCOVA also indicates that
the CCTST does not favor or disadvantage any particular ethnic or
racial group. However, not all groups appear to benefit equally
from having completed a college level CT course. While academic
major was not a significant factor on the CCTST pretest, scores
on the posttest did vary significantly by major. Student CT self-confidence,
which appears unrealistically high, does correlate with relative
success on the CCTST. However, when SAT and native language are
controlled, CT self-confidence is not a significant factor in explaining
pretest or posttest results. The emergence of significant differences
by gender, ethnicity and major on the CT posttests indicates an
urgent need for research on student learning relative to CT curriculum
and CT pedagogy. To more effectively and more equitably serve diverse
groups of students, the sources of the differential impact of college
level CT courses on CT skill acquisition must be discovered and
remedied. Technical Report #1 reports on the content validity of
the CCTST and its experimental validation. Technical Report #2 describes
its concurrent validity and its correlations with SAT verbal, SAT-math,
college GPA, and Nelson-Denny Reading Test scores. Technical Report
#4 provides group norms and discusses CCTST sub-scores on analysis,
evaluation, inference, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning
skills.
The
California Critical Thinking Skills Test: College Level -- Technical
Report #4 -- Interpreting the CCTST, Group Norms and Sub-Scores (13
Pages), Facione, PA, (1990). ERIC Document ED 327-566.
[PDF of this article made available with the permission of the author
and the copyright holder, The California Academic Press, to make copies
for individual noncommercial usage.]
Abstract: Technical Report #4, in a series of four,
provides group norms for the California Critical Thinking Skills
Test: College Level , a standardized testing instrument designed
to assess the core critical thinking skills associated with baccalaureate
general education. The CCTST offers three sub tests conceptualized
in terms of the recently completed national Delphi study, Critical
Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational
Assessment and Instruction. These three sub-tests, "Analysis,"
"Evaluation," and "Inference," correlate strongly
with each other and with the overall CCTST. The CCTST also offers
sub-tests based on the more traditional division of the reasoning
arts into "Deductive Reasoning" and "Inductive Reasoning."
Complete statistical analyses, correlations and recommended percentile
rankings for raw scores on each of the five sub-tests as well as
for the CCTST overall, used either in a pretest or posttest context,
are presented in tabularized form in this technical report. These
norms have been developed on the basis of analyses of 1673 test
forms completed by representative samples of college students during
the 1989/90 academic year at a comprehensive urban state university.
Technical Report #1 in this series reports on the content validity
of the CCTST and its experimental validation during 1989/90. Technical
Report #2 describes the concurrent validity of the CCTST in terms
of its correlations with SAT-verbal, SAT-math, college GPA, and
Nelson-Denny Reading Test scores. Technical Report #3 reports on
the relationship between CCTST and four student-related variables:
gender, ethnicity, academic major and CT self-esteem.
Thirty
Great Ways to Mess up a Critical Thinking Test (9 Pages),
Facione, PA, REVISED Nov. 15, 1989 for published in Informal Logic,
Volume 12, Number 2. PP 106-111. (1990) [This PDF download file is
being made available here with the permission of the author, journal
editor / publisher.]
Abstract:
This humorous guide offers quick, practical advice on assessment,
especially CT testing. Eleven rules, like "Set no instructional
priorities," and "Emphasize the trivial," apply to
all educational testing. Fourteen apply to multiple-choice strategies.
"No stems should avoid stating things negatively," and
"Tip off wrong answers by category mistakes," rival PDQ
Bach. Five rules apply directly to CT assessment. To ruin your next
CT test write questions which: target information recall about CT
but don't require CT itself; ignore differences in gender interests,
domain-specific knowledge, etc.; are boring, time-consuming and
yet entirely uncomplicated; require official CT vocabulary; and
presume students think like trained experts.
Image
© 2005 Peter A. Facione
|
