Search

Item banks are generally considered the basis of a new generation of educational measurement. In combination with specialized software, they can facilitate the computerized assembling of multiple pre-equated test forms. However, for advantages of item banks to become fully realized it is important that the item banks store a relatively large number of valid test items. In this paper, we demonstrate how the Rasch model is used for integrating new items into an existing wave optics item bank. First, we identified and applied a set of criteria for selecting 18 linking items from our initial item bank. In order to integrate 12 newly developed items, we combined the 18 linking items with the 12 newly developed ones into one test and administered this test to 106 postinstruction physics students from 4 universities in Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was determined that the 12 new items measure the same construct as items from the initial item bank. In addition, all items exhibited good item fit, item reliability was excellent and person reliability was fair. The ratio of standard deviations of linking item difficulties for the new test and existing item bank amounted to 0.89 and correlation of these difficulties amounted to 0.93 which indicated good linking precision. We could conclude that good linking precision can be obtained if linking items are chosen based on the following set of criteria: number of items, item fit, range and spacing of item difficulties, content representativeness, position in test form and interuniversity DIF contrasts.

Even graduate physics students have many misconceptions about basic wave optics phenomena. This suggests that there is much room for improvement of the traditional wave optics curriculum. An effective way for initiating a curriculum change is to reconsider and revise the expected learning outcomes and corresponding assessment instruments. By systematically enriching our wave optics instruction and assessment with conceptual tasks, we may increase the probability of students actively engaging in learning the conceptual aspects of wave optics. In this paper, we present the process of developing an item bank for measuring understanding of wave optics in typical introductory physics courses at universities. Thereby, the Rasch modeling approach has been used. The development of the item bank has been guided by results from multiple expert and student surveys, as well as from group interviews and think aloud interviews. Altogether 65 multiple-choice items with a single correct answer and three distractors have been prepared for field testing. Until now, 35 out of 65 items have been field tested by means of a paper and pencil survey which included 188 participants from five universities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Slovenia. The field test showed that 32 out of 35 items have good psychometric characteristics and that they may be very useful for uncovering students’ misconceptions in wave optics.

In this study, we investigated students’ understanding of concepts related to the microscopic model of gas. We thoroughly reviewed the relevant literature and conducted think alouds with students by asking them to answer open-ended questions about the kinetic molecular theory of gases. Thereafter, we transformed the open-ended questions into multiple-choice questions, whereby distractors were based on the results of the think alouds. Thus, we obtained a set of 22 questions, which constitutes our current version of the kinetic molecular theory of gases concept inventory. The inventory has been administered to 250 students from different universities in Croatia, and its content validity has been investigated trough physics teacher surveys. The results of our study not only corroborate the existence of some already known student misconceptions, but also reveal new insights about a great spectrum of students’ misconceptions that had not been reported in earlier research (e.g., misconceptions about intermolecular potential energy and molecular velocity distribution). Moreover, we identified similar distribution of students’ responses across the surveyed student groups, despite the fact that they had been enrolled in different curricular environments.

Research has shown that students have tremendous difficulties developing a qualitative understanding of wave optics, at all educational levels. In this study, we investigate how three different approaches to visualizing light waves affect students’ understanding of wave optics. In the first, the conventional, approach light waves are represented by sinusoidal curves. The second teaching approach includes representing light waves by a series of static images, showing the oscillating electric field vectors at characteristic, subsequent instants of time. Within the third approach phasors are used for visualizing light waves. A total of N=85 secondary school students were randomly assigned to one of the three teaching approaches, each of which lasted a period of four class hours. Students who learned with phasors and students who learned from the series of static images outperformed the students learning according to the conventional approach, i.e., they showed a much better understanding of basic wave optics, as measured by a conceptual survey administered to the students one week after the treatment. Our results suggest that visualizing light waves with phasors or oscillating electric field vectors is a promising approach to developing a deeper understanding of wave optics for students enrolled in conceptual level physics courses.

In this study we investigated how two different approaches to drawing free body diagrams influence the development of students’ understanding of Newton’s laws, including their ability to identify real forces. For this purpose we developed a 12-item two-tier multiple choice survey and conducted a quasiexperiment. This experiment included two groups of first-year physics students from Rijeka (RG) (n_{e}=27) and Split (SG) (n_{c}=25) Universities. Students from both groups solved mechanics problems for a period of two class hours. The only difference was that RG students used the superposition of forces approach to solving mechanics problems and in SG the decomposition of forces approach has been used. The ANCOVA (n_{c}=17, n_{e}=17) showed a statistically significant difference in favor of RG, whereby the effect sizes were moderate to large, and the largest differences have been observed in the ability of identifying real forces. Students from the control group (SG) more often exhibited the misconception that forces and their components act on a body independently and simultaneously. Our results support the idea that the practice of resolving forces into the components may not be the most effective way to develop understanding of Newton’s laws and the concept of force.