Download file 59 KB Texto completo en español More of: Francisca  Dussaillant L.

These pages summarize the debate that has been taking place on the graduated questions contained in the higher education admission tests forming part of the SIES project. The controversy was triggered by the circulation of a May 2002 study by CEP researcher Francisca Dussaillant entitled "Strategic behavior and graduated replies in the SIES". The study’s allegation of technical shortcomings, in the graduated questions that form part of the SIES test, provoked a number of reactions from academics responsible for the project.
The first came by way of a public statement on June 1, 2002, signed by Erika Himmel, Ricardo Rosas, David Bravo and Jorge Manzi, which is reproduced here under the title "Public Clarification by the Academics in Charge".
The polemic then moved to the letters section of El Mercurio, starting with "Errors in the SIES test" by Ricardo Rosas, Director of the Psychology School at the Catholic University. In this letter Professor Rosas uses a counter-example to refute the claim that the questions in part II of SIES could be answered by using logical strategies. Francisca Dussaillant’s rebuttal "The Director doesn’t seem to have understood" claimed that Rosas’ counter-example was not valid since it was not a question with a graduated response. Rosas countered with "Yes, the Director did understand", defending his stance and insisting on the validity of his original reply. In the final letter in this debate, Dussaillant claims that the argument used by Professor Rosas would only be applicable if the graduated response question model defined by the SIES were to be completely changed.