Verification of causal influences of reasoning skills and epistemology on physics conceptual learning

Ding, Lin

doi:10.1103/physrevstper.10.023101

Cited by 57 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a well-known example, Lawson (1978) developed a test of formal reasoning, later revised into the Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (CTSR; Lawson 2000). The CTSR has been examined in combination with tests of conceptual understanding such as the Force Concept Inventory (Bao et al 2009;Ding 2014). Two-tier items have also been proposed that incorporate rating scale measures.…”

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.

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

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.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is seen reflected even more strongly in the performance of the teachers in the area of sciences and mathematics, which has been evidenced in the last international studies, where the Chilean students still have not reached the scientific and logic standards of the students of the OCDE countries (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2013) which could indicate that there is still a lot of work to be done in the training of teachers and in thus the achievement of critical thinking would be highly relevant (Ding, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientific reasoning should permit the systematization in an ordered and logical manner of a set of analysis (Ding, 2014), using strategies, rules and plans that permit the devel-to judge the validity of knowledge that is generated, determining when to permit reaching a more accurate level of validity (Bao et al, 2009) which is also related to critical thinking (Saiz & Nieto, 2002).…”

Section: The Scientific Reasoning As An Ability In the University Formentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The inquiry based learn-ing promotes research and reflections on the pedagogical practice and its relationship with critical thinking (Ding, 2014).…”

Section: Scientific Inquirymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientific reasoning is a set of cognitive abilities that permits analysis and evaluation of data that is obtained before a determined situation (Ding, 2014). It implies recognizing information that is obtained, distinguishing the elements that make it up, verifying the sources where it originates, and evaluating its coherence and relevance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Psychometric properties of the Scientific Inquiry Scale

Cornejo¹,

Mújica²,

Aedo-Saravia³

et al. 2017

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Measuring epistemologies in science learning and teaching: A systematic review of the literature

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promoting understanding of the epistemologies of science has long been the primary objective in science education, and can be viewed as a form of science learning outcome.Many studies have attempted to understand learners' conceptions of epistemology in science from various perspectives and methods; however, no recent reviews have focused on the measurement of various constructs and variables of epistemologies of science. The main purpose of this review study is to understand how these epistemologies in science teaching and learning were measured, and to provide an overview of recent developments with respect to the measurement issue in the epistemology of science. We searched for articles that were published between 2010 and 2019 and retained 225 eligible studies passing all review criteria for inclusion in this review. Major constructs of epistemologies of science emerging from the studies include epistemic beliefs and views, nature of science, epistemic

show abstract

Verification of causal influences of reasoning skills and epistemology on physics conceptual learning

Cited by 57 publications

References 20 publications

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

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

Psychometric properties of the Scientific Inquiry Scale

Measuring epistemologies in science learning and teaching: A systematic review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About