ERIC Number: ED483390
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2004-Mar
A Comparison of Two. Construct-a-Concept-Map Science Assessments: Created Linking Phrases and Selected Linking Phrases. CSE Report 624.
Yin, Yue; Vanides, Jim; Ruiz-Primo, Maria Araceli; Ayala, Carlos C.; Shavelson, Richard
US Department of Education
This paper examines the equivalence of two construct-a-concept-map techniques. construct-a-map with created linking phrases (C) and construct-a-map with selected linking phrases (S). The former places few constraints on the respondent and has been considered the gold standard; the latter is cost- and time-efficient. They are compared in terms of both concept map products and processes. Both quantitative and qualitative variables are used for comparison: total accuracy score, individual proposition scores, proposition choice, map structure complexity, proposition generation rate, and proposition generation procedures. It is concluded that the two mapping techniques are not equivalent: The C mapping technique is better than S in capturing students? partial knowledge, even though the S mapping technique could be scored more efficiently than C. Based on the characteristics of the two techniques, if used as an assessment tool, the C mapping technique is suitable for formative assessment, and the S mapping technique is a better fit for large-scale assessments.
Descriptors: Evaluation Methods, Science Education, Scientific Concepts, Formative Evaluation, Concept Mapping, Student Evaluation, Scientific Literacy, Scores
Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE), National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST), Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1522. Tel: 310-206-1532.
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Sponsor: Institute of Education Sciences (IES), Washington, DC.
Authoring Institution: California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation.