Measuring Knowledge of Natural Selection: A Comparison of the CINS, an Open-Response Instrument, and an Oral Interview
Measuring Knowledge of Natural Selection: A Comparison of the CINS, an Open-Response Instrument, and an Oral Interview
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/tea.20251
复制
发表时间：
2008-12-01
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Schonfeld, Irvin Sam
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nehm, Ross H.;Schonfeld, Irvin Sam
越来越多的人认识到促进对自然选择的深入理解的核心重要性，令人惊讶的是，未能刺激开发和严格评估衡量自然选择知识的工具的工作。我们使用了三种不同的方法工具，自然选择概念清单（CINS），Bishop和安德森的（Bishop和安德森[ 1990]科学教学研究杂志27：415-427）开放反应测试，我们称之为开放反应工具（ORI），以及来自两种工具的口头采访，以衡量生物学专业学生对自然选择的理解和替代概念。我们探讨了这些工具如何差异通知科学教育工作者的知识和替代概念，他们的学生港。总体而言，CINS和ORI都为耗时的口头访谈提供了很好的替代品，并产生了关键概念多样性的可比措施，在较小程度上，关键概念频率。相反，ORI和CINS产生了显着不同的措施，替代概念的多样性和频率，与ORI的结果完全一致的口头采访结果。我们的研究表明，修订，无论是CINS和ORI是必要的，因为许多仪器项目的特点是低辨别力，高和/或重叠的难度，和不匹配的样本。虽然我们的研究结果表明，这两种工具是有效的，一般可靠的措施的知识和替代概念的自然选择，测试结合特定组件的两种工具的修改版本的CINS测试的关键概念，和修改版本的ORI评估学生的替代概念，应该使用，直到一个更合适的工具开发和严格的评估。(C)2008 Wiley Periodicals，Inc. J Res Sci Teach 45：1131-1160，2008
Growing recognition of the central importance of fostering an in-depth understanding of natural selection has, Surprisingly, failed to stimulate work on the development and rigorous evaluation of instruments that measure knowledge of it. We used three different methodological tools, the Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection (CINS), a modified version of Bishop and Anderson's (Bishop and Anderson [ 1990] Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27: 415-427) open-response test that we call the Open Response Instrument (ORI), and an oral interview derived from both instruments, to measure biology majors' understanding of and alternative conceptions about natural selection. We explored how these instruments differentially inform science educators about the knowledge and alternative conceptions their students harbor. Overall, both the CINS and ORI provided excellent replacements for the time-consuming process of oral interviews and produced comparable measures of key concept diversity and, to a lesser extent, key concept frequency. In contrast, the ORI and CINS produced significantly different measures of both alternative conception diversity and frequency, with the ORI results completely concordant with oral interview results. Our study indicated that revisions, of both the CINS and ORI are necessary because of numerous instrument items characterized by low discriminability, high and/or overlapping difficulty, and mismatches with the sample. While Our results revealed that both instruments are valid and generally reliable measures of knowledge and alternative conceptions about natural selection, a test combining particular components of both instruments-a modified version of the CINS to test for key concepts, and a modified version of the ORI to assess student alternative conceptions-should be used until a more approprite instrument is developed and rigorously evaluated. (C) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 45: 1131-1160, 2008