Paper detail

Alternative model for the administration and analysis of research-based assessments

Research-based assessments represent a valuable tool for both instructors and researchers interested in improving undergraduate physics education. However, the historical model for disseminating and propagating conceptual and attitudinal assessments developed by the physics education research (PER) community has not resulted in widespread adoption of these assessments within the broader community of physics instructors. Within this historical model, assessment developers create high quality, validated assessments, make them available for a wide range of instructors to use, and provide minimal (if any) support to assist with administration or analysis of the results. Here, we present and discuss an alternative model for assessment dissemination, which is characterized by centralized data collection and analysis. This model provides a greater degree of support for both researchers and instructors in order to more explicitly support adoption of research-based assessments. Specifically, we describe our experiences developing a centralized, automated system for an attitudinal assessment we previously created to examine students' epistemologies and expectations about experimental physics. This system provides a proof-of-concept that we use to discuss the advantages associated with centralized administration and data collection for research-based assessments in PER. We also discuss the challenges that we encountered while developing, maintaining, and automating this system. Ultimately, we argue that centralized administration and data collection for standardized assessments is a viable and potentially advantageous alternative to the default model characterized by decentralized administration and analysis. Moreover, with the help of online administration and automation, this model can support the long-term sustainability of centralized assessment systems.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.