Development of the high school wave optics test: Research Article

Nuri Balta; Nursultan  Dzhapashov; Dzana  Salibasic; Vanes  Mesic

doi:10.36681/tused.2022.123

Authors

Nuri Balta Suleyman Demirel University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6364-5346
Nursultan Dzhapashov https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6338-8132
Dzana Salibasic https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7648-8207
Vanes Mesic https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3337-3471

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.123

Keywords:

Wave optics, test development, Rasch analysis, Conceptual Understanding

Abstract

In this paper, we described the development of the High School Wave Optics Test (HSWOT). Firstly, 56 conceptual, multiple-choice items with a single correct answer and three distractors were created. Next, we conducted an initial review of the items which resulted in reducing the item pool to 44 highest quality items. Validity evidence and feedback on the quality of these 44 items were collected through an expert survey and small-scale item try-out which included 3 subject-matter experts and 13 high school students, respectively. This process helped us to reduce our item pool to 30 technically improved conceptual items, which were eventually administered to 164 high-school students, from Kazakhstan. Finally, a Rasch analysis of the students' answers resulted in a 24-item scale for measuring conceptual understanding in high-school students. The item reliability proved to be good, person reliability was acceptable, and the difficulty of items was approximately person-independent. All distractors were chosen by at least 5% of students and 8 distracters were chosen by more than 35% of students. We could conclude that HSWOT may be effectively used for measuring conceptual understanding in advanced high-school physics courses and for identifying students' misconceptions in wave optics, in general.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah, E. M., Shukor, A. A. A., Abdullah, N., & Arip, M. A. S. M. (2016). Developing and validating instrument of alignment understanding with school assessment practice. International journal of advanced and applied sciences, 3(11), 16-22. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2016.11.004

Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 191-208). Springer.

Ambrose, B. S., Shaffer, P. S., Steinberg, R. N., & McDermott, L. C. (1999). An investigation of student understanding of single-slit diffraction and double-slit interference. American journal of physics, 67(2), 146-155. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19210

Balta, N., & Eryilmaz, A. (2020). Development of Modern Physics Achievement Test: Validity and Reliability Study. The European Educational Researcher, 3(1), 29-38. https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.313

Barniol, P., & Zavala, G. (2016). Mechanical waves conceptual survey: Its modification and conversion to a standard multiple-choice test. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010107. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010107

Basu, S. J., Barton, A. C., Clairmont, N., & Locke, D. (2009). Developing a framework for critical science agency through case study in a conceptual physics context. Cultural studies of science education, 4(2), 345-371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9135-8

Bejar, I. I. (1980). A procedure for investigating the unidimensionality of achievement tests based on item parameter estimates. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17(4), 283-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1980.tb00832.x

Bezen, S., & Bayrak, C. (2020). Teaching mechanical waves by inquiry-based learning. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(6), 875-892. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.875

Bond, T., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. London: Routledge.

Bowling, A. (2005). Techniques of questionnaire design. In A. Bowling & S. Ebrahim (Eds.), Handbook of health research methods: Investigation, measurement and analysis (pp. 394-428). Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Buongiorno, D., Michelini, M., Santi, L., & Stefanel, A. (2018, September). From one slit to diffraction grating: optical physics lab by means of computer on-line sensors. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1076, No. 1, p. 012011). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/17426596/1076/1/012011

Coetzee, A., & Imenda, S. N. (2012). Alternative conceptions held by first year physics students at a South African university of technology concerning interference and diffraction of waves. Research in Higher Education Journal, 16(1).

Colin, P., & Viennot, L. (2001). Using two models in optics: Students’ difficulties and suggestions for teaching. American Journal of Physics, 69(S1), S36-S44. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1371256

Ding, L. (2014). Seeking missing pieces in science concept assessments: Reevaluating the Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment through Rasch analysis. Physical Review Special TopicsPhysics Education Research, 10(1), 010105.

Elby, A. (2001). Helping physics students learn how to learn. American Journal of Physics, 69(S1), S54S64.

Goldberg, F. M., & McDermott, L. C. (1987). An investigation of student understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens or concave mirror. American journal of physics, 55(2), 108119.

Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (1997). The kinds of mental representations‐‐models, propositions and images‐‐used by college physics students regarding the concept of field. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 711-724. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190607

Haladyna, T. M. (2004). Developing and validating multiple-choice test items. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hecht, E. (2017). Optics (Global edition). Harlow: Pearson Education.

Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Development and application of a fourtier test to assess pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions about geometrical optics.

Research in science & Technological Education, 35(2), 238-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1310094

Kaltakci-Gurel, D. (2021). Turkish Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey (CLASS) in Physics. The European Educational Researcher, 4(3), 355 -372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.435

Kartalopoulos, S. V. (2003). DWDM: networks, devices, and technology. Wiley: IEEE Press.

Kline, T. J. (2005). Psychological testing: A practical approach to design and evaluation. Sage Publications.

Linacre, J. M. (2017). A User’s Guide to Winsteps: Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.

Liu, X. (2010). Using and developing measurement instruments in science education: A Rasch modeling approach. IAP

Malik, H. K., & Singh, A. K. (2010). Engineering physics. McGraw-Hill Education.

Maurines, L. (2010). Geometrical Reasoning in Wave Situations: The case of light diffraction and coherent illumination optical imaging. International Journal of Science Education, 32(14), 18951926. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903271389

Maurines, L. (1999). Students and the Wave Geometrical Model of the Wave Propagation in a Three Dimensional Medium. In Research in Science Education in Europe (pp. 103-112). Springer, Dordrecht.

McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2010). Design and validation of the quantum mechanics conceptual survey. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020121.

Mešić, V., Hajder, E., Neumann, K., & Erceg, N. (2016). Comparing different approaches to visualizing light waves: An experimental study on teaching wave optics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010135.

Mešić, V., Neumann, K., Aviani, I., Hasović, E., Boone, W. J., Erceg, N., Grubelnik, V., Sušac, A., Salibašić-Glamočić, Dž., Karuza, M., Vidak, A, Alihodžić, A., & Repnik, R. (2019a). Measuring students’ conceptual understanding of wave optics: A Rasch modeling approach. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15, 010115.

Mešić, V., Vidak, A., Hasović, E., & Đekić, M. (2019b). University students’ ideas about the role of the aperture and laser beam dimensions in formation of diffraction patterns. European Journal of Physics, 40(5), 055701.

Mešić, V., Škaljo, E., Mitrevski, B., Nešić, L., Hatibović, S., & Maličević, M. (2021). Seeking missing pieces in learning about single slit diffraction: results from a teacher survey. Physics Education, 56(3), 035024.

Michelini, M., Santi, L., & Stefanel, A. (2016). Research-based proposals to build modern physics way of thinking in secondary students. K. A & T. T (Eds.) Teaching Physics Innovatively (Budapest: University of Budapest) pp, 331-50.

NIS. (2020). Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools. Retrieved from https://www.nis.edu.kz/en/

Salibašić-Glamočić, Dž., Mešić, V., Neumann, K., Sušac, A., Boone, W. J., Aviani, I., ... & Grubelnik, V. (2021). Maintaining item banks with the Rasch model: An example from wave optics. Physical

Review Physics Education Research, 17(1), 010105. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010105

Silverman, M. P. (2008). Quantum superposition: counterintuitive consequences of coherence, entanglement, and interference. Springer Science & Business Media.

Steinberg, R. N., Oberem, G. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1996). Development of a computer‐based tutorial on the photoelectric effect. American Journal of Physics, 64(11), 1370-1379. Test. (2020). Retrieved from http://dbserc.pitt.edu/Assessment/Assessments-Physics

Thoads, T. R., & Roedel, R. J. (1999, November). The wave concept inventory-a cognitive instrument based on Bloom's taxonomy. In FIE'99 Frontiers in Education. 29th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Designing the Future of Science and Engineering Education. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No. 99CH37011 (Vol. 3, pp. 13C1-14). IEEE.

Tongchai, A., Sharma, M. D., Johnston, I. D., Arayathanitkul, K., & Soankwan, C. (2009). Developing, evaluating, and demonstrating the use of a conceptual survey in mechanical waves. International Journal of Science Education, 31(18), 2437-2457.

Voronov, V. K., & Gerashchenko, L. A. (2018). Development of Methodical Materials for Teaching of Modern Physics. The European Educational Researcher, 1(1), 35-41. https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.113

Wittmann, M. C, Steinberg, R. N. & Redish, E. F. (1999). Making sense of how students make sense of mechanical waves. Physics Teacher 37, 15–21 https://doi.org/10.1119/1.880142

Wittmann, M. C. (1998). Making sense of how students come to an understanding of physics: An example from mechanical waves (Doctoral dissertation, research directed by Dept. of Physics. University of Maryland, College Park, Md.).

Wosilait, K., Heron, P. R., Shaffer, P. S., & McDermott, L. C. (1999). Addressing student difficulties in applying a wave model to the interference and diffraction of light. American Journal of Physics, 67(S1), S5-S15. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19083

Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370.

Wright, B., & Panchapakesan, N. (1969). A procedure for sample-free item analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 29(1), 23-48.

Yao, S. Y., Muñez, D., Bull, R., Lee, K., Khng, K. H., & Poon, K. (2017). Rasch modeling of the test of early mathematics ability–third edition with a sample of K1 children in Singapore. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(6), 615-627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282916651021