Examining the Exam

Abstract
This paper examines the content of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal exam (1980). Our report is not a statistical review. We find the content of this exam defective in a number of areas. The exam consists of five “tests” of 16 questions for a total of 80 questions. Of these, we cannot recommend test 1, test 2, test 4, and test 5; and, we cannot recommend questions 4, 5, 14, 16, 37, 45, 60, 63, 64, 65, 66, and 67. As shown in this report, the exam creates confusion and makes basic errors in critical thinking in a number of areas, and therefore, lacks content quality in these areas. Hence, no statistical results pertaining to the administration of these areas to students can be informative. We find the remaining areas acceptable as to content. But until the problems are corrected, we can only recommend that those who may use the exam remove the defective parts from test administration or from data collection and reporting. We recommend the former, because of the wasted time involved in the latter. This would amount to administering only 14 questions, i.e. test 3 with questions 37 and 45 eliminated.We also find the scope of the exam to be quite limited, but allow that this may be unavoidable for any instrument designed to be completed in about an hour. We further recommend the use of several tests, rather than one; and, that any such results be understood only as a measure of minimal competency (below which remediation likely is needed) for the skills tested, but not as an adequate measure of critical thinking
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/inquiryctnews200120415
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,071
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
The Goals and Merits of a Business Ethics Competency Exam.Earl W. Spurgin - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 50 (3):279-288.
Student Perceptions of Faculty Use of Cheating Deterrents.Robert Liebler - 2012 - Journal of Academic Ethics 10 (4):327-333.
The Solution to the Surprise Exam Paradox.Ken Levy - 2009 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 47 (2):131-158.
Essay Writing and Exam Preparation.Elizabeth Burns & Michael Lacewing - 2004 - In Elizabeth Burns & Stephen Law (eds.), Philosophy for AS and A2. Routledge.
Questions About Critical Thinking.Lori Richter - 2011 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 26 (2):37-43.
Logic for the LSAT.Nancy Slonneger Hancock - 2006 - Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):125-155.
Cognitive Success and Exam Preparation.Matthew Elton - 1997 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (1):72-73.
Cheating on Exams in the Iranian EFL Context.Alireza Ahmadi - 2012 - Journal of Academic Ethics 10 (2):151-170.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2011-12-02

Total downloads

32 ( #161,134 of 2,171,687 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #326,424 of 2,171,687 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums