Assessing Inference Skills

Four major problem areas inhibit the standardized assessment of critical thinking (CT): (1) content validity; (2) construct validity; (3) technical jargon; and (4) background knowledge. Practical examples of framing multiple-choice items for assessment are suggested. In the area of content validity, new agreement about the definition of CT now allows it to be seen as a combination of personality traits, cognitive affects, and cognitive skills. Construct validity is a more troublesome problem because it presumes that one can write,uestions focusing on the process of thinking as distinct from other factors. Avoiding jargon is a necessity in framing multiple-choice questions. The background knowledge problem can only be addressed by trying to write CT items that presume only the most universal social and human experiences. Specific multiple-choice items that might resolve these difficulties also serve as paradigm frames for targeting three core CT abilities--analyzing, drawing, and evaluating inferences. Every aspect of CT may not be amenable to multiple-choice testing, but the question of whether or not multiple-choice assessment tools framed as suggested above might be suitable is an empirical question that can be addressed by research. A 64-item list of references is provided. (SLD) ******.********x*******1********.************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the Last that can be made from the original document