化学动力学领域考试项目认知复杂性数值评定策略的验证

Saša A. Horvat, Dušica D. Rodić, Neven Jović, Tamara N. Rončević, Snežana S. Babić-Kekez
{"title":"化学动力学领域考试项目认知复杂性数值评定策略的验证","authors":"Saša A. Horvat, Dušica D. Rodić, Neven Jović, Tamara N. Rončević, Snežana S. Babić-Kekez","doi":"10.26529/cepsj.1235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main goal of this study was to validate the strategy for the assessment of the cognitive complexity of chemical kinetics exam items. The strategy included three steps: 1) assessment of the difficulty of concepts, 2) assessment of distractor value. and 3) assessment of concepts’ interactivity. One of the tasks was to determine whether there were misconceptions by students that might have influenced their achievement. Eighty-seven students in the first year of secondary school participated in the study. A knowledge test was used as a research instrument to assess the performance, and a five-point Likert-type scale was used to evaluate the perceived mental effort. The strategy was validated using regression analysis from which significant correlation coefficients were obtained between selected variables: students’ achievement and invested mental effort (dependent variables) and a numerical rating of cognitive complexity (independent variable).","PeriodicalId":38159,"journal":{"name":"Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Strategy for Determining the Numerical Rating of the Cognitive Complexity of Exam Items in the Field of Chemical Kinetics\",\"authors\":\"Saša A. Horvat, Dušica D. Rodić, Neven Jović, Tamara N. Rončević, Snežana S. Babić-Kekez\",\"doi\":\"10.26529/cepsj.1235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The main goal of this study was to validate the strategy for the assessment of the cognitive complexity of chemical kinetics exam items. The strategy included three steps: 1) assessment of the difficulty of concepts, 2) assessment of distractor value. and 3) assessment of concepts’ interactivity. One of the tasks was to determine whether there were misconceptions by students that might have influenced their achievement. Eighty-seven students in the first year of secondary school participated in the study. A knowledge test was used as a research instrument to assess the performance, and a five-point Likert-type scale was used to evaluate the perceived mental effort. The strategy was validated using regression analysis from which significant correlation coefficients were obtained between selected variables: students’ achievement and invested mental effort (dependent variables) and a numerical rating of cognitive complexity (independent variable).\",\"PeriodicalId\":38159,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的主要目的是验证化学动力学试题认知复杂性的评估策略。该策略包括三个步骤:1)概念难度评估;2)分心物价值评估。3)概念互动性评价。其中一项任务是确定学生是否存在可能影响他们成绩的误解。87名中学一年级的学生参加了这项研究。运用知识测验作为研究工具评估绩效,采用李克特五分制量表评估感知心理努力。采用回归分析对该策略进行了验证,从回归分析中获得了选择变量之间的显著相关系数:学生的成绩和投入的精神努力(因变量)和认知复杂性的数值评级(自变量)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Validation of the Strategy for Determining the Numerical Rating of the Cognitive Complexity of Exam Items in the Field of Chemical Kinetics
The main goal of this study was to validate the strategy for the assessment of the cognitive complexity of chemical kinetics exam items. The strategy included three steps: 1) assessment of the difficulty of concepts, 2) assessment of distractor value. and 3) assessment of concepts’ interactivity. One of the tasks was to determine whether there were misconceptions by students that might have influenced their achievement. Eighty-seven students in the first year of secondary school participated in the study. A knowledge test was used as a research instrument to assess the performance, and a five-point Likert-type scale was used to evaluate the perceived mental effort. The strategy was validated using regression analysis from which significant correlation coefficients were obtained between selected variables: students’ achievement and invested mental effort (dependent variables) and a numerical rating of cognitive complexity (independent variable).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Student-Centred Approaches in Higher Education from the Student Perspective Perceived Change in Job Demands and Resources and Teacher Well-Being during the Pandemic Digital-inclusive Transformation and Teacher Preparedness for Foreign Language Education – A Bilateral German-Norwegian Perspective Supporting Preservice Teachers’ Civic Competence as a Strategy for Internationalisation in the Digital Era Promoting Interaction to Enhance Student Perceived Learning and Satisfaction in a Large e-Flipped Accounting Classroom
×
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