Now you can compare them all! Ahmed Ibrahim 1 , Sameer Arabasi 2

1. Now you can compare them all! Ahmed Ibrahim1, Sameer Arabasi2 1. Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, Learning Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada2. Department of Physics, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada Method and Analysis: Science Conceptual Understanding Measurement Instruments Comparison Results: Introduction: Theoretical Background • Instruments vary in the disciplines in which they measure the construct • Variability in the criteria of comparison such as the number of dimensions, the targeted population, and the reliability factor • Force Concept Inventory (FCI) test is by far the most cited in the ISI Web of Science, followed by the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) • Observability is the dividing line between the behaviorist and cognitivist approaches in Psychology • Behaviorists concluded that psychology should concentrate on understanding directly observable behavior • Behaviorists’ approach to observabililty and measurability is to examine “observable” and “measurable” responses to stimuli • Cognitive psychology emphasize the importance of “a science of the unobservable events that take place in the head, not just a science of directly observable behavior” • The cognitive psychologists’ approach is to observe the effects of “unobservable” internal processes that are manifested through talk or eye-movement for example • Agreement about measurability. • instruments were developed to measure constructs • A measurement instrument is a standard tool with its associated procedures to quantify observations Objective: Comparison of instruments which measure conceptual understanding • A large number of measurement instruments are available to scientists and educators to use for measuring various constructs of interest • The aim is to compare instruments that measure and assess “conceptual understanding” of students’ learning. • The purpose of the examined instruments is to measure the cognitive process, namely, “understanding of conceptual knowledge”. • Factors of Comparison: • Concept measured by the instrument • Number of items in the instrument • Number of dimensions (or factors) the instrument is composed of • Targeted population • Reliability (Cronbach’s alpha or KR-20) • Popularity of use (as reported in number of citations to the reference in ISI Web of Science) Conclusion: • Different measurement instruments exist to measures the “conceptual understanding” of different concepts in science • It is important to compare and asses the different instruments and to critically evaluate their characteristics such as their reliability, validity, factor analysis, and popularity before using them . • The two most cited instruments show that there is: • Active physics education research • Increasing emphasis on critical thinking and conceptual understanding in physics • A shift from problem solving and rote learning • These measurement instruments are used to measure the effect of deploying new instructional strategies such as Reflective Writing and Peer Instruction.