早期数学干预后的数学能力提升测试 (MUST) 题项分析:学生的普通化学成绩与各种算术类别的关系

IF 3.3 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Theodore E. G. Alivio, Claire E. Galloway, Blain Mamiya, Vickie M. Williamson
{"title":"早期数学干预后的数学能力提升测试 (MUST) 题项分析:学生的普通化学成绩与各种算术类别的关系","authors":"Theodore E. G. Alivio, Claire E. Galloway, Blain Mamiya, Vickie M. Williamson","doi":"10.1007/s10956-024-10137-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The link between a student’s math fluency and their success in general chemistry has been thoroughly documented in the literature. One diagnostic instrument that can be used to assess a student’s arithmetic skills is the Math-Up Skills Test (MUST), a 20-question, free-response math test completed in 15 min. The MUST instrument assesses the student’s ability to conduct mathematical operations, including multiplication, division, fraction simplification, logarithms/exponents, and symbol manipulation without the aid of a calculator. In our study, we looked at how score changes per MUST question are affected by an early online math review implemented in a general chemistry class versus the control group that had an early online chemistry review across students of varying logical ability as measured by the online Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT). The Math Group significantly improved on ten questions involving all five types of mathematical operations, including one question in symbol manipulation involving balancing equations. The control Chemistry Group only increased on three questions involving faction simplification and logarithms/exponents beyond the two symbol manipulation questions on balancing equations, which were covered in their review of matter. As a function of logic ability, middle TOLT students benefited the most from the math intervention, as evidenced by a greater number of improved MUST questions post-treatment for that group compared to those for the low and high TOLT groups. Identification of item types affected by the math treatment could help instructors identify key arithmetic topics crucial to a student’s performance, among many other factors, in first-semester general chemistry.</p>","PeriodicalId":50057,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Education and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Item Analysis of Math-Up Skills Test (MUST) Questions After an Early Math Intervention: Student Performance in General Chemistry as a Function of Various Arithmetic Categories\",\"authors\":\"Theodore E. G. Alivio, Claire E. Galloway, Blain Mamiya, Vickie M. Williamson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10956-024-10137-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The link between a student’s math fluency and their success in general chemistry has been thoroughly documented in the literature. One diagnostic instrument that can be used to assess a student’s arithmetic skills is the Math-Up Skills Test (MUST), a 20-question, free-response math test completed in 15 min. The MUST instrument assesses the student’s ability to conduct mathematical operations, including multiplication, division, fraction simplification, logarithms/exponents, and symbol manipulation without the aid of a calculator. In our study, we looked at how score changes per MUST question are affected by an early online math review implemented in a general chemistry class versus the control group that had an early online chemistry review across students of varying logical ability as measured by the online Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT). The Math Group significantly improved on ten questions involving all five types of mathematical operations, including one question in symbol manipulation involving balancing equations. The control Chemistry Group only increased on three questions involving faction simplification and logarithms/exponents beyond the two symbol manipulation questions on balancing equations, which were covered in their review of matter. As a function of logic ability, middle TOLT students benefited the most from the math intervention, as evidenced by a greater number of improved MUST questions post-treatment for that group compared to those for the low and high TOLT groups. Identification of item types affected by the math treatment could help instructors identify key arithmetic topics crucial to a student’s performance, among many other factors, in first-semester general chemistry.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Science Education and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Science Education and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10137-5\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Science Education and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10137-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学生的数学流利程度与他们在普通化学学习中的成功之间的联系已在文献中作了详尽的记载。数学提升技能测试(MUST)是一种可用于评估学生运算技能的诊断工具,它包含 20 个问题,是一种在 15 分钟内完成的自由回答式数学测试。MUST 可评估学生在不借助计算器的情况下进行乘法、除法、分数化简、对数/指数和符号操作等数学运算的能力。在我们的研究中,我们考察了在普通化学课上实施的早期在线数学复习与对照组相比,在逻辑思维测试(TOLT)中对不同逻辑能力的学生进行的早期在线化学复习对每个 MUST 问题的得分变化有何影响。数学组在涉及所有五种数学运算的十道题上都有明显进步,包括一道涉及平衡方程的符号运算题。化学对照组只在三道涉及派系化简和对数/指数的题目上有所提高,超出了两道关于平衡方程的符号运算题目,而这两道题目在他们的物质复习中都有涉及。从逻辑能力的角度来看,中等 TOLT 学生从数学干预中获益最多,这体现在与低 TOLT 组和高 TOLT 组相比,该组学生在治疗后的数学科学实验问题上有更多的提高。确定受数学干预影响的题目类型有助于教师确定对学生在第一学期普通化学中的表现至关重要的关键运算题目,以及许多其他因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Item Analysis of Math-Up Skills Test (MUST) Questions After an Early Math Intervention: Student Performance in General Chemistry as a Function of Various Arithmetic Categories

Item Analysis of Math-Up Skills Test (MUST) Questions After an Early Math Intervention: Student Performance in General Chemistry as a Function of Various Arithmetic Categories

The link between a student’s math fluency and their success in general chemistry has been thoroughly documented in the literature. One diagnostic instrument that can be used to assess a student’s arithmetic skills is the Math-Up Skills Test (MUST), a 20-question, free-response math test completed in 15 min. The MUST instrument assesses the student’s ability to conduct mathematical operations, including multiplication, division, fraction simplification, logarithms/exponents, and symbol manipulation without the aid of a calculator. In our study, we looked at how score changes per MUST question are affected by an early online math review implemented in a general chemistry class versus the control group that had an early online chemistry review across students of varying logical ability as measured by the online Test of Logical Thinking (TOLT). The Math Group significantly improved on ten questions involving all five types of mathematical operations, including one question in symbol manipulation involving balancing equations. The control Chemistry Group only increased on three questions involving faction simplification and logarithms/exponents beyond the two symbol manipulation questions on balancing equations, which were covered in their review of matter. As a function of logic ability, middle TOLT students benefited the most from the math intervention, as evidenced by a greater number of improved MUST questions post-treatment for that group compared to those for the low and high TOLT groups. Identification of item types affected by the math treatment could help instructors identify key arithmetic topics crucial to a student’s performance, among many other factors, in first-semester general chemistry.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Journal of Science Education and Technology EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
45
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Science Education and Technology is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of original peer-reviewed, contributed and invited research articles of the highest quality that address the intersection of science education and technology with implications for improving and enhancing science education at all levels across the world. Topics covered can be categorized as disciplinary (biology, chemistry, physics, as well as some applications of computer science and engineering, including the processes of learning, teaching and teacher development), technological (hardware, software, deigned and situated environments involving applications characterized as with, through and in), and organizational (legislation, administration, implementation and teacher enhancement). Insofar as technology plays an ever-increasing role in our understanding and development of science disciplines, in the social relationships among people, information and institutions, the journal includes it as a component of science education. The journal provides a stimulating and informative variety of research papers that expand and deepen our theoretical understanding while providing practice and policy based implications in the anticipation that such high-quality work shared among a broad coalition of individuals and groups will facilitate future efforts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信