{"title":"Empirical recovery of argumentation learning progressions in scenario-based assessments of English language arts","authors":"Peter W. van Rijn , E. Aurora Graf , Paul Deane","doi":"10.1016/j.pse.2014.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We investigate methods for studying learning progressions in English language arts using data from scenario-based assessments. Particularly, our interest lies in the empirical recovery of learning progressions in argumentation for middle school students. We collected data on three parallel assessment forms that consist of scenario-based task sets with multiple item formats, where students randomly took two of the three assessments. We fitted several item response theory models, and used model-based measures to classify students into levels of the argumentation learning progression. Although there were some differences in difficulty between parallel tasks, good agreement was found among the classifications of the parallel forms. Overall, we managed to recover empirically the order of the levels in the argumentation learning progression as they were assigned to tasks of the assessments by the theoretical framework.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45361,"journal":{"name":"Psicologia Educativa","volume":"20 2","pages":"Pages 109-115"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.pse.2014.11.004","citationCount":"35","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psicologia Educativa","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1135755X14000153","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35
Abstract
We investigate methods for studying learning progressions in English language arts using data from scenario-based assessments. Particularly, our interest lies in the empirical recovery of learning progressions in argumentation for middle school students. We collected data on three parallel assessment forms that consist of scenario-based task sets with multiple item formats, where students randomly took two of the three assessments. We fitted several item response theory models, and used model-based measures to classify students into levels of the argumentation learning progression. Although there were some differences in difficulty between parallel tasks, good agreement was found among the classifications of the parallel forms. Overall, we managed to recover empirically the order of the levels in the argumentation learning progression as they were assigned to tasks of the assessments by the theoretical framework.
期刊介绍:
La Revista Psicología Educativa es una revista científico-profesional española, de carácter multidisciplinar, que promueve tanto la aportación teórica como la investigación experimental y profesional del psicólogo y profesiones afines en el ámbito educativo. Su objetivo es compartir temas de común interés en procesos cognitivos, afectivos y culturales en la adquisición de conocimiento, como en áreas de intervención e innovación educativa. Por ello invita a investigadores relacionados con el ámbito educativo (psicólogos, antropólogos, sociólogos, tecnólogos educativos, TCs) a educadores y orientadores en diversos ámbitos, a psicólogos educativos, a evaluadores, a técnicos de computación y tecnologías de la información aplicadas a la educación a enviar sus trabajos a esta revista. Psicología Educativa acepta manuscritos inéditos y originales de interés para los psicólogos y que sean una contribución al conocimiento correspondiente al ámbito de la Psicología de la Educación. Psicología Educativa publica principalmente en castellano, pero admite contribuciones originales en inglés. Revista Psicología Educativa publica principalmente en castellano, pero admite igualmente contribuciones originales en inglés. La revista admite originales libres y también puede solicitar trabajos específicos a autores relevantes. Los manuscritos originales recibidos en castellano o inglés serán sometidos al proceso de revisión externa por expertos, anónima por pares doble ciego (Peer Review). En función de las valoraciones de los expertos, el equipo directivo de la revista tomará la decisión sobre los artículos que podrán ser aceptados, rechazados o solicitadas modificaciones para la mejora de los mismos y la aceptación o rechazo definitivos. Los autores que envían su trabajo a la revista, nunca lo deben postular simultáneamente a otras publicaciones.