CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test

IF 0.9 3区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

Informal Logic Pub Date : 2020-08-29 DOI:10.22329/il.v40i30.6243

Kevin Possin

引用次数: 1

Abstract

The CAT is entirely dedicated to assessing the critical-thinking skills involved in scientific reasoning and practical problem solving. While the test is found to have reasonable content validity, various issues with its prompts are discussed, along with significant issues with its scoring. The CAT’s recommended use as a “model” for curricular changes, called CAT Apps, is criticized as “teaching to the test.”

查看原文本刊更多论文

CAT扫描：批判性思维评估测试的批判性回顾

CAT完全致力于评估科学推理和实际问题解决中涉及的批判性思维技能。虽然测试被发现具有合理的内容有效性，但讨论了提示的各种问题，以及评分的重要问题。CAT建议将其作为课程改革的“模式”，称为CAT应用程序，被批评为“应试教学”

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Informal Logic PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Informal Logic publishes articles that advance the dialectic in reasoning and argumentation theory and practice. Primary criteria for the acceptance of articles with a theoretical focus or interest are: (1) the article advances the dialectic or constitutes an interesting comment on it: it presents a cogent argument, objection, interpretation or position that is an advance in relation to the background of issues and controversies on the topic; or it casts the issue addressed in a new and worthwhile light; and (2) the article makes explicit reference to the pertinent literature on its topic, and it discharges the burden of proof imposed by that scholarship. Primary criteria for acceptance of articles devoted to the teaching of informal logic, critical thinking or argumentation include: originality; utility; timeliness; and evidence of the effectiveness of the methods, materials, technologies, etc., proposed. The standard criteria for scholarly publication—topical fit with the subjects covered in the journal; adequacy of coverage to the issue addressed; clarity, organization and literateness of the prose; conceptual clarity and cogency of argumentation—apply ceteris paribus to the selection of all articles, notes and reviews.