Assessing Critical Thinking in STEM and Beyond

  • Barry Stein
  • Ada Haynes
  • Michael Redding
  • Theresa Ennis
  • Misty Cecil

Abstract

This paper reports the latest findings of a project to refine the CAT© instrument, a new interdisciplinary assessment tool for evaluating students’ critical thinking skills. Tennessee Technological University partnered with six other institutions across the U.S. (University of Texas, University of Colorado, University of Washington, University of Hawaii, University of Southern Maine, and Howard University) to evaluate and refine the CAT instrument. The results of this project reveal the CAT instrument has high face validity when evaluated by a broad spectrum of faculty across the U.S. in STEM and non-STEM disciplines, has good criterion validity when compared to other instruments that measure critical thinking and intellectual performance, has good reliability, and good construct validity using expert evaluation in the area of learning sciences.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    S.A. Forawi, “Critical Thinking and the National Science Standards.” Transactions of the Missouri Academy of Science, Annual, 62.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    International Society for Technology Education. National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers: Preparing Teachers to Use Tech-nology. Eugene, Oregon: International Society for Technology Education, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    D. Bok, Our Underachieving Colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. Halpern, Assessing the Effectiveness of Critical-Thinking Instruction. Journal of General Education vol. 42., pp 251-255, 1993.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    B. Stein, A. Haynes, and T. Ennis, (2003). “Assessing Critical Thinking”. Paper presented at Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Annual Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia in December 2005.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    R. Castellini, “Survey: More to See Pay Increase in 2006. http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/Careers/01/04/cb.aol.survey/index.html.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. The NPEC Sourcebook on Assessment, Volume 1: Definitions and Assessment Methods for Critical Thinking, Problem Solving, and Writing, NCES 2000—172, prepared by T. Dary Erwin for the Council of the National Postsecondary Education Cooperative Student Outcomes Pilot Working Group: Cognitive and Intellectual Development. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. Bransford, A. Brown, and R. Cocking, (Eds.) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. 2000.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Pellegrino, N. Chudowski, and R. Glaser (Eds.) Knowing What Students Know. Washington, D.C., 2001.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology, Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Effective for Evaluations During the 2006-2007 Accreditation Cycle. Baltimore, MD: Accreditation Board of Engineering and Technology, 2005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barry Stein
    • 1
  • Ada Haynes
    • 1
  • Michael Redding
    • 1
  • Theresa Ennis
    • 1
  • Misty Cecil
    • 1
  1. 1.Tennessee Technological UniversityEstes Park CO

Personalised recommendations