Schooling traditionally affords students more experience in learning and practicing procedures than in identifying what a situation calls for. When asked to choose appropriate numerical data to support their causal claims, college students perform surprisingly poorly. In one case we describe, almost all chose limited, inconclusive data as sufficient evidence, despite having available the more comprehensive data needed to support their claim and despite their established competence to employ such data for this purpose. Our objective in highlighting this weakness is to make a case that choosing one’s evidence warrants the status of an important metacognitive intellectual skill and educational objective, one central to but that extends well beyond the domains of scientific and mathematical reasoning and hence warrants greater attention both in and beyond the science curriculum. People may choose evidence to justify their assertions in an ill-considered way, with potential adverse effects in both private and public communication.

传统上，上学给学生提供了更多的学习和实践程序的经验，而不是确定情况的要求。当要求他们选择适当的数字数据来支持其因果主张时，大学生的表现令人惊讶地差。在一个案例中，尽管可以提供支持其主张所需的更全面的数据，并且已经建立了为此目的使用此类数据的能力，但我们几乎将所有选择的有限，不确定的数据作为足够的证据。我们强调这一弱点的目的是提出一个证据，即选择证据可以证明重要的元认知智力和教育目标的地位，一个中心，但远远超出了科学和数学推理的范围，因此在科学课程中以及在科学课程之外都需要更多的关注。人们可能会选择证据不足以证明其主张合理的证据，从而对私人和公共交流产生潜在的不利影响。