How to develop tiered tests: A developmental framework using statistical indexes and four tier types in secondary physics
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the era of the outcome-based education, multiple-choice tests have been widely employed owing to the efficiency that enables educators to evaluate a quantity of students with much objectiveness. However, the prevalent test has not been reconsidered enough to overcome its apparent shortcomings: examiners’ effort for developing plausible and faultless distracters defending from every falsification, and students’ random guessing on key choices. For alleviating such defects, tiered test as an experimental format of multiple-choice tests has been suggested in science education. Since there has not accumulated much study on the implementation of tiered tests, our research aim is set to construct a framework suggesting statistical indexes for rationally discerning tiered units that develop an effective tiered test. Graded both by our tiered-scoring and by the conventional partial-scoring, the preliminary tiered test in secondary physics attests the improvement in its discrimination and difficulty distribution. The findings reveal that the two indexes discern effective tiered items: discrimination increase (Ct-p) and difficulty decrease (Dp-t). Based on the index information, 4 heterogeneous tier types are suggested in the content of secondary physics: directional manipulation, repeated calculation, diverse explanation, and plural variables.
Abstract
In the era of the outcome-based education, multiple-choice tests have been widely employed owing to the efficiency that enables educators to evaluate a quantity of students with much objectiveness. However, the prevalent test has not been reconsidered enough to overcome its apparent shortcomings: examiners’ effort for developing plausible and faultless distracters defending from every falsification, and students’ random guessing on key choices. For alleviating such defects, tiered test as an experimental format of multiple-choice tests has been suggested in science education. Since there has not accumulated much study on the implementation of tiered tests, our research aim is set to construct a framework suggesting statistical indexes for rationally discerning tiered units that develop an effective tiered test. Graded both by our tiered-scoring and by the conventional partial-scoring, the preliminary tiered test in secondary physics attests the improvement in its discrimination and difficulty distribution. The findings reveal that the two indexes discern effective tiered items: discrimination increase (Ct-p) and difficulty decrease (Dp-t). Based on the index information, 4 heterogeneous tier types are suggested in the content of secondary physics: directional manipulation, repeated calculation, diverse explanation, and plural variables.
참고문헌 (36)
- Andersson, B., "National evaluation forthe improvement of science teaching in Improving science education: The contribution of research", pp.62~78 (2000), Open University Press
- Atkin, J. M., "Designing everyday assessment in the science classroom" (2005), Teachers College Press
- "Massive lawsuits expected over college test. The Korea Times" (2007)[URL]
- Bak, H., "A study on analysis of novice's protocol in solving physics problems", Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 10(1), pp.57~64 (1990)
- Barr, B. B., "Research on problem solving: Elementary school in Handbook of research on science teaching and learning", pp.237~247 (1993), Macmilian Publishing Company
- Bell, B., "Classroom assessment of science learning in Handbook of research on science education", pp.965~1006 (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Burton, R. F., "Quantifying the effects of chance in multiple choice and true", false tests: Question selection and guessing of answers, 2001, pp.26(1), 41~50
- Dimes, R. E., "Objective tests and their construction", Physics Education, 8, pp.251~254 (1973)
- Engelhart, M. D., "A comparison of several item discrimination indices", Journal of Educational Measurement, 2(1), pp.69~76 (1965)
- Gronlund, N. E., "Measurement and evaluation in teaching" (1971), The Macmillan Company
- Hargreaves, A., "Learning to change: Teaching beyond subjects and standards" (2001), Jossey-Bass
- Harlen, W., "On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes in Assessment and learning", pp.103~118 (2005), Sage
- Haslam, F., "Diagnosing secondary students' misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument", Journal of Biological Education, 21(3), pp.203~210 (1987)
- Haynes, S. N., "Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods", Psychological Assessment, 7(3), pp.238~247 (1995)
- Herman, J. L., "The effects of standardized testing on teaching and schools", Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12(4), pp.20~25 (1993)
- Hudson, H. T., "Suggestions on the construction of multiplechoice tests", American Journal of Physics, 49(9), pp.838~841 (1981)
- Minkee Kim, "Developing a Web-Based System for Testing Students' Physics Misconceptions (WEBSYSTEM) and its Implementation", 한국과학교육학회지, 27(2), pp.105~119 (2007), 한국과학교육학회
- Knight, P., "A briefing on key concepts: Formative and summative, criterion and normreferenced assessment" (2001), Learning and Teaching Support Network
- Kwon, J., "A comparative analysis of expert's and novice's thinking processes in solving physics problems", Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 8(1), pp.43~55 (1987)
- Lawrenz, F., "Review of science education program evaluation in Handbook of research on science education", pp.943~963 (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers
- Lee, M., "Development of the three-tier test items for the thinking skills of the scientific inquiry", Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 18(4), pp.643~650 (1998)
- Lee, M., "A comparative study on multiple choice items of 4 options and 5 options for the thinking skills of the scientific inquiry", Journal of Science Education in Seoul National University, 20(1), pp.151~160 (1995)
- Lee, M., "Development of twotier test items for the thinking skills of the scientific inquiry", Journal of Science Education in Seoul National University, 21(1), pp.19~33 (1996)
- Linn, R. L., "Measurement and evaluation in teaching (10th ed.)" (1993), The Macmillan Company
- Maloney, D. P., "Research on problem solving: Physics in Handbook of research on science teaching and learning", pp.327~354 (1994), MacMillan Publishing Company
- McDermott, L. C., "Students' conceptions and problem solving in mechanics in Connecting research in physics education with teacher education", pp.1~6 (1998), International Commission on Physics Education
- Mitchell, I., "Teaching, learning and curriculum 1: The influence of content in science", Research in Science Education, 16, pp.141~149 (1986)
- 박윤배, "정성적, 정량적 문제에 대한 고등학생들의 물리 문제해결과정 분석", 한국과학교육학회지, 25(4), pp.526~532 (2005), 한국과학교육학회
- Rebello, N. S., "The effect of distracters on student performance on the force concept inventory", American Journal of Physics, 72(1), pp.116~125 (2004)
- Sahlberg, P., "Teaching and globalization", Managing Global Transitions, 2(1), pp.65~83 (2004)
- Sangster, A., "Computer-based instruction in accounting education", Accounting Education, 1(1), pp.13~32 (1992)
- Scott, B. L., "A defense of multiple choice tests", American Journal of Physics, 53(11), pp.1035~1035 (1985)
- Stark, R., "Measuring science standards in Scottish schools: The assessment of achievement programme", Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 6(1), pp.27~41 (1999)
- Taber, K. S., "Examining structure and context—Questioning the nature and purpose of summative assessment", School Science Review, 85(311), pp.35~41 (2003)
- Tamir, P., "Assessment and evaluation in science education: Opportunities to learn and outcomes in International handbook of science education", Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp.761~790 (1998)
- Tan, K. C. D., "Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students' understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis", Journal of Research in Science Teaching,, 39(4), pp.283~301 (2002)