Concept inventory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A concept inventory is a multiple choice test designed to evaluate whether a person has an accurate and working knowledge of a specific set of concepts [1]. Concept inventories are built in a multiple choice format to insure that they can be scored in an objective manner. Unlike a typical multiple choice test, however, both the question and the response choice are the subject of extensive research designed to determine both what a range of people thinks a particular question is asking and what the most common answers are. In its final form, the concept question is presented both a correct answer as well as distractors, that is, incorrect answers based on commonly held misconceptions.
Because the distractors are based on common held student views, identified through various research methods, e.g. responses to open-ended essay questions and "think-aloud" interviews with students, which distractors are chosen by students is often informative when it comes to understanding student thinking. An important role for concept inventories is in fact to provide instructors with clues as to the ideas, Scientific misconceptions, and/or conceptual lacunae, with which students are working, and which may be actively interfering with learning.
Because of their focus on concept mastery, which may or may not be achieved in a particular instructional situation, concept inventories are not equivalent to standardized tests nor are they subject to the same statistical tests of validity. The validity of a concept inventory rest upon the probability that i) when a student selects the correct answer they actually understand the underlying concept and ii) when they select a distractor, they believe the concept embodied in that statement is correct. In general, evidence for concept inventory validity comes from direct interviews with students.
The pioneering effects of David Hestenes, Ibrahim Halloun and Malcolm Wells led to the first of the concept inventories to be widely disseminated, the Force Concept Inventory. The FCI was designed to assess student understanding of the Newtonian concepts of force. The dramatic result of using the FCI with students completing an introductory college level physics courses was the realization that while “nearly 80% of the student’s could state Newton’s Third Law of at the beginning of the course … FCI data showed that less than 15% of them fully understood it at the end” (Hestenes, 1998. Am. J. Phys. 66:465). These results have been replicated in a wide number of studies of students at a range of institutions (see Hake, 1998). Am. J. Phys. 66:66), and have led to recognition in the Physics education research community of the importance of "active engagement" of students with the materials to be mastered.
In recent years, the FCI has been joined by other instruments in physics. These include the (1998) Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) developed by Thorton & Sokoloff and the Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment (BEMA) developed by Chabay & Sherwood. A discussion of how these tests are developed is in R. Beichner, "Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs," Am. J. Phys., 62, 750-762, (1994).
Information about physics concept tests is available at the NC State Physics Education Research Group website. Concept inventories have been developed in Statistics,Chemistry, Astronomy, Basic Biology, Natural Selection, and a number of engineering disciplines [2]. A comparative review of many of these concept inventories can be found in the dissertation by Kirk Allen[3] (refer to Chapter XI, on page 442 of the pdf). There have also been instruments that transcend disciplinary boundaries. For example, Odom and Barrow (1995) have developed a test to specifically evaluate understanding of diffusion and osmosis
[edit] Sources
Allen, K (2006) The Statistics Concept Inventory: Development and Analysis of a Cognitive Assessment Instrument in Statistics. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Oklahoma. [4]
Anderson DL, Fisher KM, Norman GJ (2002) Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory natural selection. Journal of Research In Science Teaching 39: 952-978.
Ding L, Chabay R, Sherwood B, Beichner R (2006) Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: . Phys Rev ST Phys Educ Res 2: 010105 (010107 pages)
Hake RR (1998) Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am J Physics 66: 64-74. [5]
Hestenes D, Wells M, Swackhamer G (1992) Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher 30: 141-166.
Odom AL, Barrow, L. H. (1995) Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. Journal of Research In Science Teaching 32: 45-61.
Thornton RK, Sokoloff DR (1998) Assessing student learning of Newton's laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula. . Amer J Physics 66: 338-352.
