Validating the Force Concept Inventory with Sub-questions

在本研究中，我们对武力概念问卷的效度进行了定量的评估，重点考察了错误答案。我们讨论了正确回答FCI问题的受访者是否真正理解了问题中测试的物理概念。为了检查受访者的理解水平，我们使用子问题来测试他们在问题中测试的概念。我们的样本大小包括635名受访者；我们得出了前学习者和后学习者的假阳性率，然后对它们之间的差异进行了统计检验。然后，我们发现，后学习者有可能在不理解问题中测试的物理概念的情况下回答这两个问题；因此，Q.16和Q.7是无效的。然而，这一结果并不能立即表明这两个问题应该修改。如果我们能够量化问题的不足之处，并将其作为系统误差进行评估，我们就可以使用问题。

In this study, we evaluated the validity of the Force Concept Inventory quantitatively, focusing on the false-answers. We addressed whether respondents who answer the questions of the FCI correctly actually have an understanding of the concepts of physics tested in the questions. To examine respondents' levels of understanding, we used subquestions that test them on concepts tested in the questions. Our sample size comprised totally 635 respondents; we derived false-positive ratios for prelearners and postlearners and then statistically test the difference between them. Then, we found that it is possible for postlearners to answer both questions without an understanding of the concepts of physics tested in the questions; therefore, Q.16 and Q.7 are invalid. However, this result does not indicate immediately that the two questions should be modified. We can use the questions if we can quantify the inadequacy of the questions and evaluate it as systematic errors.