Some subscribers to TIPS and TeachEdPsych might be interested in "No 
Standard Outcome Measures For Science Education? #2" [Hake (2011)].

The abstract reads:

*************************************************
ABSTRACT: Robin Millar and Jonathan Osborne in Chapter 3 of "Research 
and Practice: A Complex Relationship" [Shelley et al. (2009)] claimed 
that: (a) NO STANDARD OR COMMONLY AGREED OUTCOME MEASURES EXIST FOR 
ANY MAJOR TOPIC IN SCIENCE EDUCATION. . . . [[my CAPS]]. . . , (b) 
the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) reflects a choice of *values* that 
is arguable, and (c) the FCI has not been subjected to the same 
rigorous scrutiny of factorial structure and content validity as have 
standard measures in psychology.

That no standard outcome measures exist for any major topic in 
science education is negated by the existence of Concept Inventories 
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_inventory> for astronomy, 
biology, chemistry, economics, engineering, geoscience, and math . . 
. . [[BUT NOT PSYCHOLOGY! :-(]]. . . .

That the FCI reflects *values* that are arguable is correct only if 
the arguers think that there's little value in students' learning the 
basic concepts of Newtonian mechanics.

That the FCI has not been subjected to rigorous scrutiny of factorial 
structure ignores the 1995 factor analyses of Huffman & Heller and 
Heller & Huffman, and responses to those analyses by Hestenes & 
Halloun and Halloun & Hestenes.

That the FCI has not been as not been subjected to rigorous scrutiny 
of content validity ignores section IIB. "Validity and reliability of 
the mechanics test" (Mechanics Diagnostic) in Halloun & Hestenes 
(1985a) - that verification of validity applies also to the FCI since 
it's almost the same as the Mechanics Diagnostic.
*************************************************

To access the complete 24 kB article please click on <http://bit.ly/rfyamc>.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the
       Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
<rrh...@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
<http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com>
<http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake>

"50 years of research, curriculum development, and implementation 
have not presented consistent and compelling patterns of outcomes."
         Shelley et al. (2009, p. 4) summarizing a claim by Osborne (2007)

"Physics educators have led the way in developing and using objective 
tests to compare student learning gains in different types of 
courses, and chemists, biologists, and others are now developing 
similar instruments. These tests provide convincing evidence that 
students assimilate new knowledge more effectively in courses 
including active, inquiry-based, and collaborative learning, assisted 
by information technology, than in traditional courses."
          Wood & Gentile (2003) "Teaching in a research context"


REFERENCES [All URL's shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 
16 Oct 2011.]

Hake, R.R. 2011. "No Standard Outcome Measures For Science Education? 
#2" online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://bit.ly/rfyamc>.. 
Post of 16 Oct 2011 11:04:41-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The 
abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various 
discussion lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at 
<http://bit.ly/pFXc32>.

Osborne, J. 2007. "In praise of armchair science education," 
contained within E-NARST News 50(2), online as a 3.2 MB pdf at 
<http://bit.ly/qsRwaK>. The talk itself is online as a 112 kB pdf at 
<http://bit.ly/r4Khl7>.

Shelley, M.C., L.D. Yore, & B. Hand, eds. 2009. "Quality Research in 
Literacy and Science Education: International Perspectives and Gold 
Standards." Springer, publisher's information at 
<http://bit.ly/b58vbP>. Amazon.com information at 
<http://amzn.to/97OVJx>, note the searchable "Look Inside" feature. 
Barnes & Noble information at <http://bit.ly/p40bKu>. An expurgated 
(teaser) version is online as a Google "book preview" at 
<http://bit.ly/qK8T9P>.

Wood, W.B., & J.M. Gentile. 2003. "Teaching in a research context," 
Science 302: 1510; 28 November; online as a 209 kB pdf at 
<http://bit.ly/oK46p7>.
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org.
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=13470
or send a blank email to 
leave-13470-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to