Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency
This study investigates students’ ability to interpret multiple representations consistently (i.e., representational consistency) in the context of the force concept. For this purpose we developed the Representational Variant of the Force Concept Inventory (R-FCI), which makes use of nine items from...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
American Physical Society
2010-08-01
|
Series: | Physical Review Special Topics. Physics Education Research |
Online Access: | http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020109 |
id |
doaj-0cfe3dfa5aa34a9c8666411c5415ecad |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-0cfe3dfa5aa34a9c8666411c5415ecad2020-11-24T22:08:40ZengAmerican Physical SocietyPhysical Review Special Topics. Physics Education Research1554-91782010-08-0162Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistencyPasi NieminenAntti SavinainenJouni ViiriThis study investigates students’ ability to interpret multiple representations consistently (i.e., representational consistency) in the context of the force concept. For this purpose we developed the Representational Variant of the Force Concept Inventory (R-FCI), which makes use of nine items from the 1995 version of the Force Concept Inventory (FCI). These original FCI items were redesigned using various representations (such as motion map, vectorial and graphical), yielding 27 multiple-choice items concerning four central concepts underpinning the force concept: Newton’s first, second, and third laws, and gravitation. We provide some evidence for the validity and reliability of the R-FCI; this analysis is limited to the student population of one Finnish high school. The students took the R-FCI at the beginning and at the end of their first high school physics course. We found that students’ (n=168) representational consistency (whether scientifically correct or not) varied considerably depending on the concept. On average, representational consistency and scientifically correct understanding increased during the instruction, although in the post-test only a few students performed consistently both in terms of representations and scientifically correct understanding. We also compared students’ (n=87) results of the R-FCI and the FCI, and found that they correlated quite well.http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020109 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Pasi Nieminen Antti Savinainen Jouni Viiri |
spellingShingle |
Pasi Nieminen Antti Savinainen Jouni Viiri Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency Physical Review Special Topics. Physics Education Research |
author_facet |
Pasi Nieminen Antti Savinainen Jouni Viiri |
author_sort |
Pasi Nieminen |
title |
Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
title_short |
Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
title_full |
Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
title_fullStr |
Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
title_full_unstemmed |
Force Concept Inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
title_sort |
force concept inventory-based multiple-choice test for investigating students’ representational consistency |
publisher |
American Physical Society |
series |
Physical Review Special Topics. Physics Education Research |
issn |
1554-9178 |
publishDate |
2010-08-01 |
description |
This study investigates students’ ability to interpret multiple representations consistently (i.e., representational consistency) in the context of the force concept. For this purpose we developed the Representational Variant of the Force Concept Inventory (R-FCI), which makes use of nine items from the 1995 version of the Force Concept Inventory (FCI). These original FCI items were redesigned using various representations (such as motion map, vectorial and graphical), yielding 27 multiple-choice items concerning four central concepts underpinning the force concept: Newton’s first, second, and third laws, and gravitation. We provide some evidence for the validity and reliability of the R-FCI; this analysis is limited to the student population of one Finnish high school. The students took the R-FCI at the beginning and at the end of their first high school physics course. We found that students’ (n=168) representational consistency (whether scientifically correct or not) varied considerably depending on the concept. On average, representational consistency and scientifically correct understanding increased during the instruction, although in the post-test only a few students performed consistently both in terms of representations and scientifically correct understanding. We also compared students’ (n=87) results of the R-FCI and the FCI, and found that they correlated quite well. |
url |
http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020109 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT pasinieminen forceconceptinventorybasedmultiplechoicetestforinvestigatingstudentsrepresentationalconsistency AT anttisavinainen forceconceptinventorybasedmultiplechoicetestforinvestigatingstudentsrepresentationalconsistency AT jouniviiri forceconceptinventorybasedmultiplechoicetestforinvestigatingstudentsrepresentationalconsistency |
_version_ |
1716591350843965440 |