scholarly journals Concept Inventory Development Reveals Common Student Misconceptions about Microbiology †

Author(s):  
Amy G. Briggs ◽  
Lee E. Hughes ◽  
Robert E. Brennan ◽  
John Buchner ◽  
Rachel E. A. Horak ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
pp. 895-907 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sukalyan Sengupta ◽  
Sarina Ergas ◽  
Jeffrey Cunningham ◽  
Ramesh Goel ◽  
Allan Feldman ◽  
...  

PLoS Biology ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W Klymkowsky ◽  
Kathy Garvin-Doxas

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy Garvin-Doxas ◽  
Michael Klymkowsky ◽  
Susan Elrod

The meeting “Conceptual Assessment in the Biological Sciences” was held March 3–4, 2007, in Boulder, Colorado. Sponsored by the National Science Foundation and hosted by University of Colorado, Boulder's Biology Concept Inventory Team, the meeting drew together 21 participants from 13 institutions, all of whom had received National Science Foundation funding for biology education. Topics of interest included Introductory Biology, Genetics, Evolution, Ecology, and the Nature of Science. The goal of the meeting was to organize and leverage current efforts to develop concept inventories for each of these topics. These diagnostic tools are inspired by the success of the Force Concept Inventory, developed by the community of physics educators to identify student misconceptions about Newtonian mechanics. By working together, participants hope to lessen the risk that groups might develop competing rather than complementary inventories.


2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 655-664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Kalas ◽  
Angie O’Neill ◽  
Carol Pollock ◽  
Gülnur Birol

We have designed, developed, and validated a 17-question Meiosis Concept Inventory (Meiosis CI) to diagnose student misconceptions on meiosis, which is a fundamental concept in genetics. We targeted large introductory biology and genetics courses and used published methodology for question development, which included the validation of questions by student interviews (n = 28), in-class testing of the questions by students (n = 193), and expert (n = 8) consensus on the correct answers. Our item analysis showed that the questions’ difficulty and discrimination indices were in agreement with published recommended standards and discriminated effectively between high- and low-scoring students. We foresee other institutions using the Meiosis CI as both a diagnostic tool and an instrument to assess teaching effectiveness and student progress, and invite instructors to visit http://q4b.biology.ubc.ca for more information.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document