ome subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in a post "Is
Psychometrics Pathological Science?" [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.
*********************************************