Thursday, June 17, 2010

Is Psychometrics Pathological Science?

Some blog followers might be interested in a post of the above title [Hake (2010)]. The abstract reads:


ABSTRACT: PhysLrnR's Noah Podolefsky (2010) cited "Is Psychometrics Pathological Science?'' [Michelle (2008)] and "Beyond romantic versus sceptic: a microanalysis of conceptual change in kinematics" [Roschelle (1998)] to clarify his questions about "whether the FCI (and other instruments) are 'quantitative'." In my opinion, neither of above references nor Robert Mislevy's “sociocognitive” perspective contradict the premise that the *normalized* pre-to posttest gain on the Force Concept Inventory is a valid and consistently reliable quantitative gauge of the effectiveness of an introductory mechanics course in promoting students conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics.


To access the complete 11 kB post please click on .

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University

Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands

President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize theInvention of the Internet (PEDARRII)

REFERENCES [[URL's shortened by .]

Hake, R.R. 2010. "Is Psychometrics Pathological Science?" online on the OPEN AERA-L archives at . Post of 17 Jun 2010 15:34:11-0700 to AERA-L, Net-Gold, and PhysLrnR. The abstract and URL are being transmitted to various discussion lists.

No comments: