ABSTRACT
It is commonly accepted that informal reasoning is characterized by multiple reasoning approaches and multiple solutions to problems. This diversity of approaches and outcomes creates problems for informal reasoning assessment. These problems are particularly acute for multiple-choice assessments, because they show examinees’ answers but not the reasoning that led to them. If answers that are different from those keyed correct can be justified, it is difficult to infer the quality of examinees’ reasoning from their answers alone. If an examinee chooses the keyed answer, how justified is it to infer that some acceptable reasoning process was followed? Alternatively, if an examinee chooses an un-keyed response, how sound is it to infer that an unacceptable reasoning process was followed?
