Research Article
Assessing misconceptions in astronomy: The use of ordered multiple-choice items
More Detail
1 School of Data Science and Analytics, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA2 Department of Health Care Management and Informatics, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GA, USA* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 6(1), January 2025, ep25004, https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/15885
Submitted: 26 November 2024, Published: 28 January 2025
OPEN ACCESS 130 Views 80 Downloads
ABSTRACT
This study pilots a unique test item known as the ordered multiple-choice (OMC) item. These OMC items were administered to two high school astronomy classrooms participating in a NASA classroom of the future: Astronomy village program. The OMC items were included on a pre- and post-test to assess common misconceptions in astronomy, as part of study employing a quasi-experimental design. Each answer choice in an OMC item is linked to varying levels of student understanding, allowing for diagnostic interpretation of student responses. Results from the items indicated that although students did improve in their levels of understanding at the end of the program, there were still gaps in the students’ knowledge. We anticipate these items will allow for a unique and comprehensive assessment of student understanding of science.
CITATION (APA)
Taasoobshirazi, G., & Sneha, S. (2025). Assessing misconceptions in astronomy: The use of ordered multiple-choice items. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 6(1), ep25004. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/15885
REFERENCES
- Barbieri, C., & Bertini, I. (2020). Fundamentals of astronomy. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429287305
- Bitzenbauer, P., Navarrete, S., Hennig, F., Ubben, M. S., & Veith, J. M. (2023). Cross-age study on secondary school students’ views of stars. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19, Article 020165. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020165
- Briggs, D. C., & Alonzo, A. C. (2012). The psychometric modeling of ordered multiple-choice item responses for diagnostic Assessment with a learning progression. In A. C. Alonzo, & A. W. Gotwals (Eds.), Learning progressions in science (pp. 293–316). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-824-7_13
- Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 33–63. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1101_2
- Chew, C. M., & Chin, H. (2024). Online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for grade four topic of time. In Proceedings of the 14th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 103–117). https://doi.org/10.1142/9789811287183_0008
- Chin, H., & Chew, C. M. (2023). Cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for word problems involving ‘time’. Current Psychology, 42, 17042–17061. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02965-8
- Chin, H., Chew, C. M., & Lim, H. L. (2021). Development and validation of online cognitive diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items for ‘multiplication of time’. Journal of Computers in Education, 8, 289–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00180-7
- Clifton, J. D. W. (2020). Managing validity versus reliability trade-offs in scale-building decisions. Psychological Methods, 25(3), 259–270. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000236
- Coletta, V. P., & Steinert, J. J. (2020). Why normalized gain should continue to be used in analyzing preinstruction and postinstruction scores on concept inventories. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16, Article 010108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010108
- Gali, F. (2021). Secondary school children’s understanding of basic astronomy concepts. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences and Humanities, 7(3), 328–342.
- Hadenfeldt, J. C., Bernholt, S., Liu, X., Neumann, K., & Parchmann, I. (2013). Using ordered multiple-choice items to assess students’ understanding of the structure and composition of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(12), 1602–1608. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed3006192
- Herman, B. C., Poor, S., Clough, M. P., Rao, A., Kidd, A., De Jesús, D., & Varghese, D. (2024). It’s not just a science thing: Educating future STEM professionals through mis/disinformation responsive instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(8), 1925–1974. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21934
- Jones, B. L. (2024). Science teachers’ conceptions of science: An analysis at the intersection of nature of science and culturally relevant science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 62(2), 525–552. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21984
- Karademir, A., & Yıldırım, B. (2021). A different perspective on preschool STEM education: Preschool STEM education and engineering for preservice teachers. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(3), 338–350. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.77
- Karakaya, F., Yilmaz, M., & Ince Aka, E. (2021). Examination of pre-service science teachers conceptual perceptions and misconceptions about photosynthesis. Pedagogical Research, 6(4), Article em0104. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11216
- Kulgemeyer, C., & Wittwer, J. (2023). Misconceptions in physics explainer videos and the illusion of understanding: An experimental study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 21, 417–437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10265-7
- Lengkong, M., Istiyono, E., Rampean, B. A. O., Tumanggor, A. M. R., & Nirmala, M. F. T. (2021). Development of two-tier test instruments to detect student’s physics misconception. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Research, Implementation, and Education of Mathematics and (pp. 561–566). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210305.082
- Mathews, G., & Tang, G. (2025). Introduction to particle physics and cosmology. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781032683546
- Özmen, K. (2024). Health science students’ conceptual understanding of electricity: Misconception or lack of knowledge? Research in Science Education, 54, 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10136-3
- Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2023). Learning to teach science. In N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1162–1196). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367855758-42
- Salimpour, S., Fitzgerald, M., & Hollow, R. (2024). Examining the mismatch between the intended astronomy curriculum content, astronomical literacy, and the astronomical universe. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20, Article 010135. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.010135
- Serttaş, S., & Türkoğlu, A. Y. (2020). Diagnosing students’ misconceptions of astronomy through concept cartoons. Participatory Educational Research, 7(2), 164–182. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.27.7.2
- Suprapto, N. (2020). Do we experience misconceptions?: An ontological review of misconceptions in science. Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 1(2), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.46627/sipose.v1i2.24
- Yonemoto, G., Kashani, M., Benoit, E. B., Weiss, J. J., & Barbosa, P. (2023). Changing answers in multiple-choice exam questions: Patterns of TOP-tier versus BOTTOM-tier students in podiatric medical school. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 10, Article 23821205231179312. https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205231179312