Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] Indicators of quality teaching : some necessities



No, it is just that a high score has a very good probability of being right,
which is the opposite of what JD claims. But a low score does not is as
good as an indicator. I do not remember the factors, but they were
certainly not at the point of making low scores meaningless.

Actually this indicates that it is probably a pretty good test because even
on a good test it is possible for people to mess up, but it is difficult to
get a good score by random chance. And all evaluations have a false
positive and negative rate. This is even true of medical tests.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



??? A low score can result from good teaching? (False
negative) So you're saying a low FCI score is meaningless?
Isn't that what many have been claiming right along?

Bob at PC
________________________________________
From: Phys-l [phys-l-bounces@phys-l.org] on behalf of John
Clement [clement@hal-pc.org]
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:04 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] Indicators of quality teaching : some
necessities

Actually I forgot something. This opinion is flat wrong
according to research. There was a study which showed that
the FCI had a low false positive rate, but a higher false
negative rate. So the one sidedness is actually in the
opposite direction. I do not recall where that study was
published, so perhaps someone else can remind me.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


4) It is a one-sided test: A low score is a reliable
indicator of lousy teaching, but a high score is not a
reliable indicator of quality teaching, because the test
is too simple. The gains that people brag about are so
low as to prove that the students do not understand
"conceptual physics". If they understood the fundamental
concepts, they would score much higher.



_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l