The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation

Chandrasegaran, A. L.; Treagust, David F.; Mocerino, Mauro

doi:10.1039/b7rp90006f

Cited by 267 publications

(213 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This also means that when students learn Chemistry practical only very few of them have the inquisitiveness to ask the reason for the visible changes that occur. This result is in line with that of Chandrasegaran et al (2007) that students are always confused between macroscopic and submicroscopic representations, and have the tendency to extrapolate bulk macroscopic properties of substances to the submicroscopic level, and have limited understanding of the symbolic representational system. It is also in line with Onwu and Randall (2006) which found out that students are always inconsistent their reasoning about the particulate nature of matter because they have no appropriate representational models.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

A comparison of secondary schools students’ levels of conception of qualitative and quantitative inorganic analysis

Adesoji¹,

Omilani²

2012

AJSIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study constructed a two tier multiple choice questions to assess the levels of conception of students in qualitative and quantitative inorganic analysis. The study is an ex-post facto. The population consisted of all S.S.S.3 students in Ibadan south-west local government area of Oyo state, Nigeria. The sample is made of five public and five private schools selected from the local government and a total of 500 students attempted the test. The data were analysed using Analysis Of Variance and Tukey to ascertain the direction of difference in the three levels of conception. Results showed that there was a significant difference in the three levels of conception by the secondary school students in Chemistry. More students were discovered to be at the macroscopic level which was the farthest from the meaningful learning of the concepts. Furthermore, very few were at the submicroscopic and symbolic levels of conception which was the closest to the meaning of those concepts in qualitative and quantitative analysis. Recommendations based on the importance of proper and high level of conception were made.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

A comparison of secondary schools students’ levels of conception of qualitative and quantitative inorganic analysis

Adesoji¹,

Omilani²

2012

AJSIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two-tier items have been widely used not only in Western settings but also throughout Asia. For example within the Singapore context, Chandrasegaran et al (2007) developed TTMC items that could identify secondary school students' alternative conceptions when describing and reasoning about chemical reactions using multiple representations. Furthermore, TTMC items have been incorporated into a national project on Taiwan students' conceptual understanding (see Chiu et al 2007, for an introduction on this national project and findings).…”

Section: Types and Uses Of Two-tier Itemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Fulmer

Chu

Treagust

et al. 2015

Asia Pac. Sci. Educ.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.Keywords: Science education, Two-tier items, Rasch measurement models, Optics, Scientific reasoning Assessing student learning-of scientific concepts, practices, or habits of mind-is one of the central topics for research and development in science education. Such assessments can serve as formative or diagnostic tools for planning instruction and working with students, or as summative tools for gauging the effectiveness of our instructional practices, curriculum materials, or teacher education efforts. However, we observe an ongoing tension in science education assessment between our ability to construct conventional test items (e.g., multiple choice questions) that can be highly reliable but are perceived to be incapable of providing richer insights into students' conceptions and ways of thinking. Research addressing this includes efforts to make better sense of how students' responses to test items can be understood from a broader view of conceptual understanding, ability, or skill Neumann et al. 2011).One solution proposed that can address this tension are two-tier items (Treagust 1988). The two tiers in two-tier items act together to uncover students' understanding of core concepts because the student must choose a seemingly "factual" knowledge response for the first tier (Taber and Tan 2011), and then choose for the second tier what reasoning about the concept they used to arrive at the first-tier response. A large body of research across contexts has applied two-tier items to uncover students' understanding of scientific ...

show abstract

“…Pengembangan butir soal pada penelitian ini mengadaptasi dan memodifikasi tahapan pengembangan tes diagnostik two-tier yang dilakukan Chandrasegaran et al (2007) dengan berpedoman pada tahapan yang diusulkan Treagust (1986), yaitu (a) penentuan isi materi, (b) tahap pengumpulan data miskonsepsi siswa, dan (c) tahap pengembangan TDM-LENON.…”

Section: Metodeunclassified

Pengembangan Tes Diagnostik Two-Tier Berbasis Piktorial Untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Materi Larutan Elektrolit Dan Nonelektrolit

Siswaningsih¹,

Firman²,

Rofifah³

2015

JPMIPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengembangkan tes diagnostik two-tier berbasis piktorial yang dapat mengidentifikasi miskonsepsi siswa pada materi larutan elektrolit dan nonelektrolit, atau disebut Tes Diagnostik Miskonsepsi Larutan Elektrolit dan Nonelektrolit (TDM-LENON). Penelitian ini menggunakan metode Development and Validation. Validasi butir soal meliputi validitas isi dan reliabilitas. Berdasarkan validitas isi, 19 butir soal dinyatakan valid dengan nilai CVR (Content Validity Ratio) untuk masing-masing butir soal sebesar 1. Berdasarkan uji reliabilitas, diperoleh 18 soal yang secara keseluruhan memiliki nilai Cronbach's Alpha sebesar 0,706 yang menunjukkan bahwa tes yang dikembangkan masuk ke dalam kategori dapat diterima. Butir soal yang telah memenuhi kriteria validitas isi dan reliabilitas diaplikasikan kepada 34 siswa kelas X di salah satu SMA Negeri di Kota Bandung. Berdasarkan hasil aplikasi tersebut, teridentifikasi miskonsepsi yang yang dialami siswa pada materi larutan elektrolit dan nonelektrolit, dengan miskonsepsi bahwa semua elektrolit merupakan senyawa ion adalah miskonsepsi yang paling banyak terjadi (64,7%). Kata kunci: miskonsepsi, larutan elektrolit dan nonelektrolit, tes diagnostik two-tier berbasis piktorial ABSTRACTThe aim of of this research was to develop two-tier pictorial-based diagnostics test to identify students' misconception about the concept of electrolyte and non-electrolyte, or Diagnostics Test for Misconception about Electrolyte and Non-Electrolyte Solution (TDM-LENON). Research method was Development and Validation. Questions were validated its content validity and reliability. Based on content validity, 19 questions were deemed valid with 1 Content Validity Ratio (CVR) value. In terms of its reliability, 18 questions were deemed reliable with Cronbach's Alpha value 0,706. All validated questions were applied to 34 students in one of Senior High Schools in Bandung. Based on this application results, students' misconceptions regarding electrolyte and non-electrolyte solution were discovered, with misconception that all electrolyte are ionic compound was found as common misconception in the students (64,7%).

show abstract

The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation

Cited by 267 publications

References 30 publications

A comparison of secondary schools students’ levels of conception of qualitative and quantitative inorganic analysis

A comparison of secondary schools students’ levels of conception of qualitative and quantitative inorganic analysis

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

Pengembangan Tes Diagnostik Two-Tier Berbasis Piktorial Untuk Mengidentifikasi Miskonsepsi Siswa Pada Materi Larutan Elektrolit Dan Nonelektrolit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About