This article explores the work that Moore and Foy (1997) did in revising and field testing the Scientific Attitude Instrument (SAI). I begin by showing that the empirical work with the revised instrument, the SAI II, raises doubts about the instrument's validity, and I suggest that these doubts seem to coincide rather remarkably with ones raised in an extensive study of science attitude instruments published in the early 1980s. I then consider the field testing of the SAI II in light of alternative approaches to validating instruments, and I show that the revisions made to the SAI leave its validity in question. I end by considering how we might develop guidelines for validating the instruments we use in science education research. J Res Sci Teach 34: 337–341, 1997.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hugh Munby (1997) studied this question.