Rasch model based analysis of the Force Concept Inventory

Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2010, Pages

  Planinic, Maja ^a   Ivanjek, Lana ^a   Susac, Ana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954869822     PISSN: 15549178     EISSN: 15549178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.010103     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhammer, Force concept inventory, Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992). 10.1119/1.2343497
2. R. R. Hake, Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, Am. J. Phys. 66, 64 (1998). 10.1119/1.18809
3. D. Hestenes and I. Halloun, Interpreting the force concept inventory: A response to March 1995 critique by Huffman and Heller, Phys. Teach. 33, 502 (1995). 10.1119/1.2344278
4. T. Wilhelm, Verständnis der newtonschen mechanik bei bayerischen elftklässlern-ergebnisse beim test "force concept inventory" in herkömmlichen klassen und im würzburger kinematik-/dynamikunterricht, Physik und Didaktik in Schule und Hochschule, PhyDid 4, 47 (2005).
5. I. A. Halloun and D. Hestenes, The initial knowledge state of college physics students, Am. J. Phys. 53, 1043 (1985). 10.1119/1.14030
6. http://modeling.la.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html
7. D. Huffman and P. Heller, What does the force concept inventory actually measure? Phys. Teach. 33, 138 (1995). 10.1119/1.2344171
8. P. Heller and D. Huffman, Interpreting the force concept inventory: A reply to Hestenes and Halloun, Phys. Teach. 33, 503 (1995). 10.1119/1.2344279
9. J. Stewart, H. Griffin, and G. Stewart, Context sensitivity in the force concept inventory, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 010102 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.010102
10. G. A. Morris, L. Branum-Martin, N. Harshman, S. D. Baker, E. Mazur, S. Dutta, T. Mzoughi, and V. McCaley, Testing the test: Item response curves and test quality, Am. J. Phys. 74, 449 (2006). 10.1119/1.2174053
11. R. K. Thornton, D. Kuhl, K. Cummings, and J. Marx, Comparing the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the force concept inventory, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5, 010105 (2009). 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.010105
12. V. P. Coletta, J. A. Phillips, and J. J. Steinert, Interpreting force concept inventory scores: Normalized gain and SAT scores, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 010106 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.010106
13. V. P. Coletta and J. A. Phillips, Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability, Am. J. Phys. 73, 1172 (2005). 10.1119/1.2117109
14. G. Rasch, Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests (Danmarks Paedagogiske, Copenhagen, 1960).
15. M. Planinic, L. Ivanjek, A. Susac, P. Pecina, R. Krsnik, M. Planinic, Z. Jakopovic, and V. Halusek, GIREP-EPEC Conference 2007: Selected Contributions (Zlatni rez, Rijeka, 2008), pp. 295-300.
16. J. M. Linacre, WINSTEPS Rasch measurement computer program, Winsteps.com, Chicago, 2006.
17. R. Dittrich and R. Hatzinger, Using "GLIM" for computing the Rasch model and the corresponding multiplicative Poisson model, http://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/ihsfo/fo167.pdf
18. B. D. Wright and M. H. Stone, Best Test Design (MESA Press, Chicago, IL, 1979).
19. T. G. Bond and C. M. Fox, Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences (Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 2001).