Class graphs from the test are judged sufficiently reliable, while individual graphs are usefully suggestive but the least reliable conclusion¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1918 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Conclusions expressed by graphs for classes of pupils would be sufficient in reliability, but for individuals the graphs are only usefully suggestive, since a precise measurement of one trait in one individual is not contemplated from three exercises. → Herring 1918

Evidence¶

Herring 1918¶

Herring, J. P. (1918). Measurement of some abilities in scientific thinking. The Journal of Educational Psychology, IX(10), 535-558. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0075736

q2 · i? · design · r2

The author's stated reliability judgment in the RELIABILITY section: class graphs sufficient, individual graphs usefully suggestive, with only four scores possible per ability (none right to three right). No effect size is printed.

"The reliability of conclusions expressed, upon the basis of the present test, by graphs for classes of pupils, would be sufficient; for individuals, usefully suggestive."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The test yields an analytical diagnosis of classes and individuals, illustrated by a pupil profile identifying specific abilities needing improvement — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The editor predicts NRC group tests will make intelligence testing a routine school measure and open the way for adjusting school work to pupil needs — a broader claim this one bears on