login - create an account - help

• AAPT ComPADRE
• Events
• Collaborate
• About
• Contact Us

Materials Similar to Replicating analyses of item response curves using data from the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation

• 53%: Validity of Force Concept Inventory evaluated by students’ explanations and confirmation using modified item response curve
• 41%: Rural and First Generation Performance Differences on the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation
• 39%: Data sharing model for physics education research using the 70 000 response Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Experimental Physics dataset
• 38%: What does the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation pretest measure?
• 37%: Comparing the force and motion conceptual evaluation and the force concept inventory
• 36%: The Reliability of the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation
• 36%: Is the Force Concept Inventory Biased? Investigating Differential Item Functioning on a Test of Conceptual Learning in Physics
• 36%: Comparing pre/post item response curves to identify changes in misconceptions
• 36%: Multidimensional item response theory and the Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment
• 35%: Applying a resources framework to analysis of the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation
• 34%: Exploratory factor analysis of a Force Concept Inventory data set
• 34%: Item response theory analysis of the mechanics baseline test
• 34%: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation
• 34%: Multidimensional Item Response Theory and the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism
• 32%: Validity and reliability of the force and motion conceptual evaluation
• 31%: Assessing student learning of Newton's laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula
• 31%: Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism: Analysis of the items and recommendations for improvement
• 30%: Exploring the CLASS with Item Response Theory
• 29%: Testing the test: Item response curves and test quality