Relationship of formal reasoning to achievement, aptitudes, and attitudes in preservice teachers

Lawson, Anton E.; Nordland, Floyd H.; DeVito, Alfred

doi:10.1002/tea.3660120414

Cited by 41 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nagy and Griffiths are critical of studies by Lawson and Renner (1974) and Lawson, Nordland, and DeVito (1975) in which factor analyses are reported and interpreted. The crux of the Nagy and Griffiths' criticism centers around allegedly inconsistent loadings for the conservation of volume with clay task in three analyses.…”

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nagy and Griffiths give the clear impression that the authors are either unaware of these important "inconsistencies" in the pattern of loadings of this task, or, more seriously, are deliberately not discussing these inconsistencies because they do not fit theoretical expectations. With reference to the Lawson, Nordland, and DeVito (1975) study, Nagy and Griffiths state:…”

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Theoretically such a result is entirely unexpected. The reason Lawson, Nordland, and DeVito (1975) did not discuss the result "at any length" was simply because it did not occur! What actually occurred, and what was clearly reported, was that the task loaded by itself on a fourth factor which accounted for only 7.7 percent of the variance.…”

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Misrepresentations in Nagy and Griffiths’ Review of Piagetian Research

Lawson

1983

Review of Educational Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I wish to call attention to what I consider to be extremely serious misrepresentations of the facts in a review article that recently appeared in this journal (Nagy & Griffiths, 1982). Not only are facts misrepresented, but the review demonstrates serious limitations in its treatment of several critical methodological and theoretical issues as well. First, I will elaborate on the misrepresentations of the facts. Then, for those who are interested, I will discuss limitations of their treatment of important methodological and theoretical issues in a companion rebuttal. As my work was most heavily misrepresented and criticized, I will generally limit my remarks to its treatment by Nagy and Griffiths. It should be noted, however, that other researchers received extensive and, in my judgment, unjustified criticism as well. Factual Misrepresentation OneIn discussing a study by Lawson and Renner (1975), which examined the relationship between developmental level and the understanding of science concepts classified as concrete and formal, Nagy and Griffiths quote the following findings from page 352 of the Lawson and Renner report:Concrete-operational subjects are unable to develop understanding of formal concepts. Also, support is demonstrated for the other major premises of the study: concrete-operational subjects are able to demonstrate understanding of concrete concepts, and formal-operational subjects are able to demonstrate understanding of both concrete and formal concepts, (p. 542) Nagy and Griffiths then comment on these findings in the following way:Two aspects of these findings merit comment. First, the results do not show that concrete subjects are unable to develop understanding of formal concepts, but merely that in this study they did not. (p. 542) I will not comment on the second aspect of their comment in that the misrepresentation has already been made and the second comment merely represents opinion, not criticism. Note that Lawson and Renner are being accused of overgeneralization from their data. The statement that "Concrete-operational subjects are unable to develop understanding of formal concepts" is a strong one. Surely Nagy and Griffiths are correct that the study merely showed that the concrete 133 at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 29, 2015 http://rer.aera.net Downloaded from

show abstract

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Factual Misrepresentation Fourmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Misrepresentations in Nagy and Griffiths’ Review of Piagetian Research

Lawson

1983

Review of Educational Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During the seventies many researchers (Griffi ths, 1976;Killian, 1979;Kolody, 1975;Lawson, Nordland, & Devito, 1975;McKinnon & Renner, 1971;Renner & Lawson, 1973) tested college students in this country and found only 25 to 50% were consistently using formal reasoning patterns. Yet proportional reasoning, an important pattern of formal thought (Lawson, 1978;Lawson, Karplus, & Adi, 1978;Renner, 1979;Walker, Hendrix, & Mertens, 1979) is often assumed to be used by nearly all college science students.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do college students solve proportion problems?

Thornton

Fuller

1981

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problems which could be solved using proportional reasoning were administered nationwide by college faculty to their own science classes during a three year period. The reasoning of more than 8000 students covering three sections of the country was classifi ed as concrete, transitional, or formal using Piagetian categories. Data from the West closely replicated that from the Midwest on similar metric conversion tasks. Student performance changed noticeably with a different problem format. The percentages of students using a ratio formula, ratio attempt, or intuitive methods of solution held approximately constant over time, task, and section of the country. The data shows the use of additive and conversion methods of solution depends upon the problem presentation.

show abstract

“…As a first level test of the validity of these findings and the suggested course modifications, studies by Agne et al (1977); Barnes ( I 977); Bauman (1976); Griffiths (1 976); Kolodiy (1 975); and Lawson et al (1975) have sought to determine the relationship between grades awarded in college science courses and students' apparent level of intellectual development. The results of these studies have been inconsistent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship of formal reasoning to achievement, aptitudes, and attitudes in preservice teachers

Cited by 41 publications

References 8 publications

Misrepresentations in Nagy and Griffiths’ Review of Piagetian Research

Misrepresentations in Nagy and Griffiths’ Review of Piagetian Research

How do college students solve proportion problems?

Relationships among level of intellectual development, cognitive style, and grades in a college biology course

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About