Prevalence of Random and Null-modal Students’ Responses using Concentration Analysis: An Example from Electromagnetism Concepts
Abstract
Science concepts, like electromagnetism, involve abstract relations, which are often problematic in students’ learning. Electromagnetism concepts are crosscutting concepts across science disciplines. A standardized Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism, which is a 32-item multiple-choice test, was used to collect data from 117 first-year science students newly enrolled in a university in Ethiopia. Concentration analysis was used to analyze the student’s responses to the test. A paired samples t-test was conducted to evaluate the difference between the concentrations of the student’s responses to the scientific and alternative conceptions. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two concentrations of the student’s responses (t = 0.23, p = 0.82). In addition, three-level categorization of student’s responses on the test showed that more than four-fifth of the student’s responses were in the null non-model state, less than one-fifth of the student’s responses were in the mixed bimodal state, and none of the students’ response was in the pure state. These results showed that the student’s responses to the electromagnetism concepts were nearly all in the null-model and random response states. This study argues that teacher educators need to use concept learning strategies to develop significantly students’ conceptual knowledge of electromagnetismScience concepts, like electromagnetism, involve abstract relations, which are often problematic in students’ learning. Electromagnetism concepts are crosscutting concepts across science disciplines. A standardized Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism, which is a 32-item multiple-choice test, was used to collect data from 117 first-year science students newly enrolled in a university in Ethiopia. Concentration analysis was used to analyze the student’s responses to the test. A paired samples t-test was conducted to evaluate the difference between the concentrations of the student’s responses to the scientific and alternative conceptions. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two concentrations of the student’s responses (t = 0.23, p = 0.82). In addition, three-level categorization of student’s responses on the test showed that more than four-fifth of the student’s responses were in the null non-model state, less than one-fifth of the student’s responses were in the mixed bimodal state, and none of the students’ response was in the pure state. These results showed that the student’s responses to the electromagnetism concepts were nearly all in the null-model and random response states. This study argues that teacher educators need to use concept learning strategies to develop significantly students’ conceptual knowledge of electromagnetism.References
Bao, L., & Redish, E. F. (2001). Concentration Analysis: A Quantitative Assessment of Student States. Phys. Edu. Res., American Journal of Physics.69 (7), S45-53.
Baser, M., & Geban, O. (2007).Effect of instruction based on conceptual change activities on students’ understandings of static electricity concepts. Research in Science & Technological Education, 25(2), 243- 267.
Bulunuz, N., Bulunuz,M. & Peker, H.(2014). Effects of formative assessment probes integrated in extracurricular hands-on science: middle school students’ understanding. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(2), 243-258.
Chabay, R., & Sherwood, B. (2006). Restructuring the introductory Electricity & Magnetism course. American Journal of Physics, 74(4), 329-336.
Dega, B. G. (2012). Conceptual change through cognitive perturbation using simulations in electricity and magnetism: a case study in Ambo University, Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation).
Dega, B. G., Kriek, J., & Mogese, T. F. (2013a). Categorization of alternative conceptions in electricity and magnetism: The case of Ethiopian undergraduate students. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1891-1915.
Dega, B. G., Kriek, J., &Mogese, T. F. (2013b). Students' conceptual change in electricity and magnetism using simulations: A comparison of cognitive perturbation and cognitive conflict. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(6), 677-698.
Duit, R. and Treagust, D.F. (2003) Conceptual change: a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688.
Dykstra, D.I., Boyle, C.F., & Monach, I. A., (1992). Studying conceptual change in learning physics. Science Education, 76 (6), 615-652.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M. K., & Hamlett, C. L. (2003). The potential for diagnostic analysis within curriculum-based measurement. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28(3&4), 13-22.
Galili, I. (1995). Mechanics Background Influences Students’ Conceptions in Electromagnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 17 (3), 371-387.
Getenet, T. (2006). Causes of high attrition among physics PPC students. The Ethiopian Journal of Education, 26(1), 53-66.
Grayson, D.J. (1994). Concept Substitution: An instructional Strategy for Promoting Conceptual Change. Research in Science Education, 24, 102-111.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
Leighton, J. P., & Gierl, M. J. (2007). Why cognitive diagnostic assessment? In J. P. Leighton & M. J. Gierl (Eds), Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment for Education: Theory and Applications (pp. 3-18). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Leppävirta, J. (2012). The Effect of Naïve Ideas on Students’ Reasoning about Electricity and Magnetism. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 753-767.
Maloney, D. P., O’Kuma, T. L., Hieggelke C. J., & Heuvelen, A.V., (2001). Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity & magnetism. American Journal of Physics, S69 (7), 12-23.
McDermott, L.C., (2001). Oersted Medal Lecture 2001: Physics Education Research: The key to student Learning. American Journal of Physics, 69 (11) 1127- 1137.
PISA (2009). What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Volume I). [Online] Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa2009keyfindings.htm.
Planinic, M. (2006). Assessment of difficulties of some conceptual areas from Electricity & magnetism using the Conceptual survey of Electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics. 73(12), 1143-1148.
Planinic, M. (2007). Conceptual change requires insight and intervention. Physics Education, 42 (2), 222-223
Saglam, M., & Millar, R. (2006). Upper High School Students’ Understanding of Electromagnetism. International Journal of Science Education. 28 (5), 543-566.
Scaife, T. M., & Heckler, A. F. (2010). Student understanding of the direction of the magnetic force on a charged particle. American Journal of Physics, 78 (8), S69-S76.
Semela, T. (2010).Who is joining physics and why? Factors influencing the choice of physics among Ethiopian university students. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 5(3), 319-340.
Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R., & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds.). (2012). Discipline-based education research. National Academies Press.
Soto-Lombana, C., Otero, J., & Sanjosé,V. (2005). A review of conceptual change research in science education. Journal of Science Education, 6, (1), 5-8.
