首页> 外文期刊>Asia-Pacific Science Education >Is it harder to know or to reason? Analyzing two-tier science assessment items using the Rasch measurement model
【24h】

Is it harder to know or to reason? Analyzing two-tier science assessment items using the Rasch measurement model

机译:更难于了解或推理吗?使用Rasch测量模型分析两级科学评估项目

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Two-tier multiple-choice (TTMC) items are used to assess students’ knowledge of a scientific concept for tier 1 and their reasoning about this concept for tier 2. But are the knowledge and reasoning involved in these tiers really distinguishable? Are the tiers equally challenging for students? The answers to these questions influence how we use and interpret TTMC instruments. We apply the Rasch measurement model on TTMC items to see if the items are distinguishable according to different traits (represented by the tier), or according to different content sub-topics within the instrument, or to both content and tier. Two TTMC data sets are analyzed: data from Singapore and Korea on the Light Propagation Diagnostic Instrument (LPDI), data from the United States on the Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (CTSR). Findings for LPDI show that tier-2 reasoning items are more difficult than tier-1 knowledge items, across content sub-topics. Findings for CTSR do not show a consistent pattern by tier or by content sub-topic. We conclude that TTMC items cannot be assumed to have a consistent pattern of difficulty by tier—and that assessment developers and users need to consider how the tiers operate when administering TTMC items and interpreting results. Researchers must check the tiers’ difficulties empirically during validation and use. Though findings from data in Asian contexts were more consistent, further study is needed to rule out differences between the LPDI and CTSR instruments.
机译:两层选择题(TTMC)用于评估学生对第1层科学概念的知识以及对第2层科学概念的推理。但是,这些层中涉及的知识和推理真的可区分吗?这些等级对学生同样具有挑战性吗?这些问题的答案会影响我们如何使用和解释TTMC仪器。我们对TTMC项应用Rasch度量模型,以根据不同特征(由等级表示)或根据仪器中不同的内容子主题,或者根据内容和层来区分项是否可区分。分析了两个TTMC数据集:来自新加坡和韩国的光传播诊断仪器(LPDI)上的数据,来自美国的科学推理课堂测试(CTSR)上的数据。 LPDI的发现表明,在内容子主题中,第2层推理项目比第1层知识项目困难。 CTSR的结果按层或按内容的子主题显示的模式不一致。我们得出的结论是,不能假定TTMC项目按层具有一致的难度模式,并且评估开发人员和用户在管理TTMC项目和解释结果时需要考虑层如何工作。研究人员必须在验证和使用过程中凭经验检查层的困难。尽管亚洲背景下的数据发现更加一致,但仍需要进一步研究以排除LPDI和CTSR仪器之间的差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号