A majority (56%) of non-STEM students are classified as transitional reasoners, while formal operational reasoners predominate among STEM majors¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2016: baselines and conditions change

Subclaims¶

q2 i? 56% of non-STEM students fall in the transitional Piagetian category on the LCTSR, whereas most science majors would on average be classified formal operational. → Moore 2011

Evidence¶

Moore 2011¶

Moore, J. C., & Rubbo, L. J. (2011). Scientific reasoning abilities of non-science majors in physics-based courses. https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2764 doi:10.48550/arxiv.1110.2764

q2 · i1 · associational · r1

Classification of non-STEM students (N = 109) into concrete operational, transitional, and formal operational levels using LCTSR scores and Lawson's cutoffs; the figure-reported distribution shows 56% transitional, consistent with prior studies of non-major introductory biology populations.

"Figure 1 shows the distribution of non-STEM students within Piagetian formal reasoning levels. A significant majority of non-STEM students (56%) are classified as transitional reasoners."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Non-STEM majors in conceptual physics and astronomy courses score significantly lower pre-instruction on the LCTSR than STEM majors — related
• Non-STEM students show the poorest performance on proportional reasoning (25%) and score 30% on hypothetico-deductive reasoning items — related
• Kolb's inventory successfully differentiated group learning styles by students' subject majors — related
• In physics-based courses for non-science majors taught with active-engagement pedagogy, normalized gains were 0.38–0.42 on content tests but 0.06 on a scientific-reasoning test — related