(a) object to cross-posting as a way to tunnel through intra- and
inter-disciplinary barriers, or
(b) have zero or less interest in the CA Standards Test in Physics, or
(c) have any other reason for trashing this post.
And if you respond to this long (11 kB) post, please don't hit the
reply button unless you prune the original message normally contained
in your reply down to a few lines, otherwise you may inflict this
entire post yet again on suffering list subscribers.
In a 5 January 2005 Phys-L post, Larry Woolf (2005a) wrote [bracketed
by lines "LLLLLLLLLLL. . . ."]:
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
"The following released test questions are taken from the Physics Standards
Test. This test is one of the California Standards Tests administered
as part of the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program
policies set by the State Board of Education [(CDE)
<http://www.cde.ca.gov>].
All questions on the California Standards Tests are evaluated by committees
of content experts, including teachers and administrators, to ensure
their appropriateness for measuring the California academic content
standards in
Physics. In addition to content, all items are reviewed and approved to
ensure their adherence to the principles of fairness and to ensure no
bias exists with respect to characteristics such as gender,
ethnicity, and language
<http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/documents/css05rtqphysics.pdf> (100
kB).
What do you folks think of the following questions:
********************************
3. A student wires a series circuit that includes a block of rubber
and a light bulb. She states that she does not expect the light bulb
to light up
when current is applied to the circuit. Which of the following best
describes her statement?
A. It is a conclusion based on observed data about electrical phenomena.
B. It is a hypothesis based on knowledge of the theory of electrical
phenomena.
C. It is a procedure based on her hypothesis about electrical phenomena.
D. It is a theory based on her observations of electrical phenomena.
********************************
8. A ball is thrown straight up and then falls straight back down.
When it attains maximum height, the ball's velocity is
A. equal to its displacement.
B. equal to its displacement divided by the time.
C. at its maximum.
D. at its minimum.
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Woolf's post stimulated a barrage of test-question criticisms that
can be accessed on the January 2005 Phys-L archives
<http://lists.nau.edu/archives/phys-l.html> at the threads
"California standards test in physics" (47 messages) and "Action
regarding Dr. Wolf's recent post [CA Stds. Test in Physics" (5
messages).
For Woolf's own criticisms (with which I agree) of the STAR questions
see [Woolf (2005b)].
Activist Bernard Cleyet (would there were more cleating Cleyet's)
sent the Phys-L criticisms to the CDE. Yesterday, 17 February 2005,
Cleyet (2005) quoted the response he had received from the CDE's
Diane Hernandez [bracketed by lines "HHHHHHH. . . . ."]:
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
". . . thank you for sharing your concerns and the collective
responses . . . your colleagues regarding the California Standards
Test (CST) Released Test Questions in Science.
As you know, the task of developing the CSTs is complex and we, the
California Department of Education (CDE), our testing contractor,
Educational Testing Service, (ETS), and the STAR Content Review Panel
(CRP) for science, strive to ensure that the tests align to
standards, are based on accurate science, employ appropriate grade
level vocabulary, include questions with a range of difficulty, and
meet certain psychometric criteria.
Though students statewide performed quite well on both of these
questions, I have indeed forwarded your comments to ETS and the CRP
for their review. We value your comments and analysis of the
questions as it assists us in the improvement of the CSTs. Thank you.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Cleyet commented: "My interpretation is the students 'psyched' the
test developers, not that they understood the Physics." Another
possibility is that the students had been so poorly instructed in
physics that they thought the questions were OK and simply parroted
the responses they had heard from their teachers.
Jack Uretsky (2005) responded to Cleyet (2005) as follows: "Clearly
we need a more formal organization (the AAPT?) for dealing with this
[CDE] bureaucracy"
Don't get your hopes up! Judging from their program scheduling at
meetings, neither the AAPT nor the APS has shown much interest in the
sad state of CA and U.S. K-12 science education. For example, both
the AAPT nor the APS have taken a casual attitude towards the attempt
of radical direct instructionists of the Mathematically Correct type
[see its antediluvian "Science Corner"
<http://mathematicallycorrect.com/science.htm>] to take over
science/math education in the U.S. [see e.g., Hake (2004a,b;
2005a,b,c)].
Hake, R.R. 2005a. "Will the NCLB Tend to Propagate California's
Direct Science Instruction Throughout the Entire Nation?" online at
<http://lists.asu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0501&L=aera-l&P=R1893&I=-3>.
Post of 14 Jan 2005 17:58:55-0800 to AERA-C, AERA-D, AERA-G, AERA-H,
AERA-J, AERA-K, AERA-L, AP-Physics, ASSESS, Biopi-L, Chemed-L,
EvalTalk, Phys-L, Physhare, POD, & STLHE-L.
Hake, R.R. 2005b. "Will Evidence and Logic Reform Education? (was
California standards test in physics)," online at
<http://lists.nau.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0502&L=phys-l&P=R1541>. Post
of 3 Feb 2005 11:29:26-0800 to AERA-D, AERA-H, AERA-K, AERA-L,
AP-Physics, ASSESS, Chemed-L, EvalTalk, Math-Learn, Phys-L, Physhare,
POD.
Hake, R.R. 2005c. "Will The No Child Left Behind Act Promote Direct
Instruction Of Science?" Contributed paper to be presented at 21-25
March 2005 American Physical Society in Los Angeles, CA; abstract
online at
<http://absimage.aps.org/image/MWS_MAR05-2004-003151.pdf> (40 kB).