Validation and structural analysis of the kinematics concept test

Andreas Lichtenberger, Clemens Wagner, S. Hofer, Elsbeth Stern, A. Vaterlaus
{"title":"Validation and structural analysis of the kinematics concept test","authors":"Andreas Lichtenberger, Clemens Wagner, S. Hofer, Elsbeth Stern, A. Vaterlaus","doi":"10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.13.010115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The kinematics concept test (KCT) is a multiple-choice test designed to evaluate students' conceptual understanding of kinematics at the high school level. The test comprises 49 multiple-choice items about velocity and acceleration, which are based on seven kinematic concepts and which make use of three different representations. In the first part of this article we describe the development and the validation process of the KCT. We applied the KCT to 338 Swiss high school students who attended traditional teaching in kinematics. We analyzed the response data to provide the psychometric properties of the test. In the second part we present the results of a structural analysis of the test. An exploratory factor analysis of 664 student answers finally uncovered the seven kinematics concepts as factors. However, the analysis revealed a hierarchical structure of concepts. At the higher level, mathematical concepts group together, and then split up into physics concepts at the lower level. Furthermore, students who seem to understand a concept in one representation have difficulties transferring the concept to similar problems in another representation. Both results have implications for teaching kinematics. First, teaching mathematical concepts beforehand might be beneficial for learning kinematics. Second, instructions have to be designed to teach students the change between different representations.","PeriodicalId":49697,"journal":{"name":"Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research","volume":"8 1","pages":"010115"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1103/PHYSREVPHYSEDUCRES.13.010115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

The kinematics concept test (KCT) is a multiple-choice test designed to evaluate students' conceptual understanding of kinematics at the high school level. The test comprises 49 multiple-choice items about velocity and acceleration, which are based on seven kinematic concepts and which make use of three different representations. In the first part of this article we describe the development and the validation process of the KCT. We applied the KCT to 338 Swiss high school students who attended traditional teaching in kinematics. We analyzed the response data to provide the psychometric properties of the test. In the second part we present the results of a structural analysis of the test. An exploratory factor analysis of 664 student answers finally uncovered the seven kinematics concepts as factors. However, the analysis revealed a hierarchical structure of concepts. At the higher level, mathematical concepts group together, and then split up into physics concepts at the lower level. Furthermore, students who seem to understand a concept in one representation have difficulties transferring the concept to similar problems in another representation. Both results have implications for teaching kinematics. First, teaching mathematical concepts beforehand might be beneficial for learning kinematics. Second, instructions have to be designed to teach students the change between different representations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
运动学概念试验的验证和结构分析
运动学概念测试(KCT)是一项多项选择题测试,旨在评估高中学生对运动学概念的理解。测试包括49个关于速度和加速度的选择题,这些选择题基于七个运动学概念,使用三种不同的表示。在本文的第一部分中,我们描述了KCT的开发和验证过程。我们将KCT应用于338名参加运动学传统教学的瑞士高中生。我们分析了反应数据,以提供测试的心理测量特性。在第二部分,我们给出了测试的结构分析结果。通过对664名学生答案的探索性因素分析,最终揭示了七个运动学概念作为影响因素。然而,分析揭示了概念的层次结构。在较高的层次上,数学概念组合在一起,然后在较低的层次上分解成物理概念。此外,似乎在一种表征中理解概念的学生很难将概念转移到另一种表征中的类似问题中。这两个结果对运动学教学都有启示意义。首先,事先教授数学概念可能对学习运动学有益。其次,指令的设计必须让学生了解不同表征之间的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research (PRST-PER) is a peer reviewed electronic-only journal sponsored by The American Physical Society (APS), the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) and the APS Forum on Education. The journal covers the full range of experimental and theoretical research on the teaching and/or learning of physics. PRST-PER is distributed without charge and financed by publication charges to the authors or to the authors" institutions. The criteria for acceptance of articles include the high scholarly and technical standards of our other Physical Review journals.
期刊最新文献
Exploring Special Education Teachers’ Perceptions and Suggestions for the Desirable Operation of the High School Credit System in Special Schools A Study of Special Education Teachers’ Experiences on Software Education for Students with Disabilities Present and Future of Inclusive Education in Korean Kindergartens: A Qualitative Inquiry on Experiences and Perceptions of Teachers and Administrators Installation Status and Support Needs of Facilities for the Disabled in Inclusive Child Care and Education Centers via Child Care and Education Teachers and Special Education Teachers A Grounded Theoretical Approach of Individualized Counseling Planning Process of Professional Counseling Teachers for Special Child Counseling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1