No abstract

The theories of Jean Piaget and William Perry provide two different theories of intellectual development with several similiarities, but also with critical differences. In this study a comparison was made to determine whether the two theories describe operation of the same mental structures or two fundamentally different aspects of intellectual development. The results, based upon individual interviews of all participants, indicate that the two theories outline different and independent processes for assessing intellectual development.

This study was designed to investigate the convergent validity of individual clinical task interviews as presented by Piaget and Inhelder paired with three widely used group tests of cognitive development. These tests are designed to assess the acquisition of cognitive abilities. The three group test raw scores paired with summed raw scores on four concrete‐formal task interviews yielded the following Pearson product‐moment correlations: Reasoning Test (Ankney and Joyce), 0.43; Logical Reasoning Test (Burney), 0.61; Classroom Test of Formal Operations (Lawson), 0.37. The raw data was then ranked into cognitive level groups and presented on contingency tables. The following contingency coefficients were determined: Logical Reasoning Test, 0.52; Logical Reasoning Test (adjusted), 0.61; Classroom Test of Formal Operations, 0.50. This study reflects that the Reasoning Test tends to indicate lower cognitive levels of subjects when paired with summed scores on the clinical task interviews, whereas the Logical Reasoning Test and the Classroom Test of Formal Operations tend to indicate higher cognitive levels of subjects when paired with summed scores on the clinical task interviews. In each case the correlations do not appear to be sufficiently strong to warrant selection or categorization of an individual student based on his/her test performance.

No abstract

An understanding of kinematics is predicated upon the ability to understand preliminary notions of movement and speed. This study investigated the order of acquisition of intuitive notions of qualitative speed. The results indicated that an array of prerequisite, equivalent, and independent relationships existed among the tasks administered. The levels of difficulty implied within the hierarchy formed confirmed the evolution of reasoning for notions of qualitative speed found by Piaget. The findings also indicated that the concepts investigated were interrelated and separable into distinct categories based upon spatial and temporal aspects of the motion. The alignment or nonalignment of objects, either spatially or temporally, provide an indication of the difficulty of the task presented and explain the order of acquisition of notions of qualitative speed. 0