Comparing the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the force concept inventory
114
TL;DR: In this article, the authors compare and contrast student's pretest/post-test performance on the Halloun-Hestenes force concept inventory (FCI) to the Thornton-Sokoloff force and motion conceptual evaluation (FMCE).
read more
Abstract: In this paper we compare and contrast student's pretest/post-test performance on the Halloun-Hestenes force concept inventory (FCI) to the Thornton-Sokoloff force and motion conceptual evaluation (FMCE). Both tests are multiple-choice assessment instruments whose results are used to characterize how well a first term, introductory physics course promotes conceptual understanding. However, the two exams have slightly different content domains, as well as different representational formats; hence, one exam or the other might better fit the interests of a given instructor or researcher. To begin the comparison, we outline how to determine a single-number score for the FMCE and present ranges of normalized gains on this exam. We then compare scores on the FCI and the FMCE for approximately 2000 students enrolled in the Studio Physics course at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute over a period of eight years (1998--2006) that encompassed significant evolution of the course and many different instructors. We found that the mean score on the FCI is significantly higher than the mean score on the FMCE, however there is a very strong relationship between scores on the two exams. The slope of a best fit line drawn through FCI versus FMCE data is approximately 0.54, and the correlation coefficient is approximately $r=0.78$, for preinstructional and postinstructional testings combined. In spite of this strong relationship, the assessments measure different normalized gains under identical circumstances. Additionally, students who scored well on one exam did not necessarily score well on the other. We use this discrepancy to uncover some subtle, but important, differences between the exams. We also present ranges of normalized gains for the FMCE in a variety of instructional settings.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Detecting the influence of item chaining on student responses to the Force Concept Inventory and the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation
Philip Eaton,Barrett Frank,Shannon D. Willoughby +2 more
- 01 Oct 2020
TL;DR: The assumption of local item independence is not valid for many items on the Force Concept Inventory and the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation as mentioned in this paper, and this assumption may not be valid for all items.
Secondary Implementation of Interactive Engagement Teaching Techniques: Choices and Challenges in a Gulf Arab Context.
G. W. Hitt,Abdel F. Isakovic,O. Fawwaz,M. S. Bawa'aneh,Nayla El-Kork,S. Makkiyil,I. A. Qattan +6 more
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a case study of a novel context and use it to determine if PER-based instruction can be successfully implemented far from the cultural context of the primary developer and, if so, how might such SIs differ from SIs within the US.
Students’ proficiency scores within multitrait item response theory
Terry F. Scott,Daniel Schumayer +1 more
TL;DR: A five-trait model is presented that assigns proficiency scores to all respondents for each of the five traits of the Force Concept Inventory and a correlation matrix is constructed between the proficiencies in each of these traits.
An Exploration of Diversity and Inclusion in Introductory Physics
Rachel J. Henderson
- 01 Jan 2018
TL;DR: Henderson et al. as mentioned in this paper explored the gender gap in the electricity and magnetism conceptual inventories and found that male students outperform female students by 3.7% on the pretest and 8.5% on post-test.
References
Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses
TL;DR: In this paper, a survey of pre/post test data using the Halloun-Hestenes Mechanics Diagnostic test or more recent Force Concept Inventory is reported for 62 introductory physics courses enrolling a total number of students.
Force concept inventory
TL;DR: In this paper, it has been established that commonsense beliefs about motion and force are incompatible with Newtonian concepts in most respects, and conventional physics instruction produces little change in these beliefs, and this result is independent of the instructor and the mode of instruction.
•Book
Peer Instruction: A User's Manual
Eric Mazur,Robert C. Hilborn +1 more
- 29 Jul 1996
TL;DR: A step-by-step guide to preparing for a peer instruction lecture is given in this article, with a focus on motivating the students and presenting concepts to motivate them during the lecture.
1.9K
Assessing student learning of Newton’s laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula
TL;DR: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FME) test as mentioned in this paper is a research-based, multiple-choice assessment of student conceptual understanding of Newton's Laws of Motion, which is used to evaluate student learning of dynamics concepts in introductory physics courses.
Using interactive lecture demonstrations to create an active learning environment
TL;DR: In this paper, a general strategy for making the learning environment in large (and small) lectures more effective by increasing student involvement is reported, and specific examples of ILDs which enhance learning of kinematics and Newton's Laws are presented.
486