猜测:一种可选择的调整的正学习估计量,并与蒙特卡罗模拟的概率错配比较。

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Applied Psychological Measurement Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-07-27 DOI:10.1177/01466216211013905
Ben O Smith, Dustin R White
{"title":"猜测:一种可选择的调整的正学习估计量,并与蒙特卡罗模拟的概率错配比较。","authors":"Ben O Smith,&nbsp;Dustin R White","doi":"10.1177/01466216211013905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Practitioners in the sciences have used the \"flow\" of knowledge (post-test score minus pre-test score) to measure learning in the classroom for the past 50 years. Walstad and Wagner, and Smith and Wagner moved this practice forward by disaggregating the flow of knowledge and accounting for student guessing. These estimates are sensitive to misspecification of the probability of guessing correct. This work provides guidance to practitioners and researchers facing this problem. We introduce a transformed measure of true positive learning that under some knowable conditions performs better when students' ability to guess correctly is misspecified and converges to Hake's normalized learning gain estimator under certain conditions. We then use simulations to compare the accuracy of two estimation techniques under various violations of the assumptions of those techniques. Using recursive partitioning trees fitted to our simulation results, we provide the practitioner concrete guidance based on a set of yes/no questions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48300,"journal":{"name":"Applied Psychological Measurement","volume":"45 6","pages":"441-458"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01466216211013905","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Guessing: An Alternative Adjusted Positive Learning Estimator and Comparing Probability Misspecification With Monte Carlo Simulations.\",\"authors\":\"Ben O Smith,&nbsp;Dustin R White\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01466216211013905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Practitioners in the sciences have used the \\\"flow\\\" of knowledge (post-test score minus pre-test score) to measure learning in the classroom for the past 50 years. Walstad and Wagner, and Smith and Wagner moved this practice forward by disaggregating the flow of knowledge and accounting for student guessing. These estimates are sensitive to misspecification of the probability of guessing correct. This work provides guidance to practitioners and researchers facing this problem. We introduce a transformed measure of true positive learning that under some knowable conditions performs better when students' ability to guess correctly is misspecified and converges to Hake's normalized learning gain estimator under certain conditions. We then use simulations to compare the accuracy of two estimation techniques under various violations of the assumptions of those techniques. Using recursive partitioning trees fitted to our simulation results, we provide the practitioner concrete guidance based on a set of yes/no questions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\"45 6\",\"pages\":\"441-458\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01466216211013905\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211013905\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216211013905","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在过去的50年里,科学领域的从业者一直使用知识“流”(测试后分数减去测试前分数)来衡量课堂上的学习情况。Walstad和Wagner, Smith和Wagner通过分解知识的流动和计算学生的猜测推动了这一实践。这些估计对猜测正确概率的错误说明很敏感。这项工作为面临这一问题的从业者和研究人员提供了指导。我们引入了一种真正学习的变换度量,在某些已知条件下,当学生的正确猜测能力被错误指定时,它表现得更好,并在某些条件下收敛于Hake的归一化学习增益估计量。然后,我们使用模拟来比较两种估计技术在各种违反这些技术假设的情况下的准确性。利用拟合仿真结果的递归划分树,我们基于一组是/否问题为从业者提供具体的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

On Guessing: An Alternative Adjusted Positive Learning Estimator and Comparing Probability Misspecification With Monte Carlo Simulations.

On Guessing: An Alternative Adjusted Positive Learning Estimator and Comparing Probability Misspecification With Monte Carlo Simulations.

On Guessing: An Alternative Adjusted Positive Learning Estimator and Comparing Probability Misspecification With Monte Carlo Simulations.

On Guessing: An Alternative Adjusted Positive Learning Estimator and Comparing Probability Misspecification With Monte Carlo Simulations.

Practitioners in the sciences have used the "flow" of knowledge (post-test score minus pre-test score) to measure learning in the classroom for the past 50 years. Walstad and Wagner, and Smith and Wagner moved this practice forward by disaggregating the flow of knowledge and accounting for student guessing. These estimates are sensitive to misspecification of the probability of guessing correct. This work provides guidance to practitioners and researchers facing this problem. We introduce a transformed measure of true positive learning that under some knowable conditions performs better when students' ability to guess correctly is misspecified and converges to Hake's normalized learning gain estimator under certain conditions. We then use simulations to compare the accuracy of two estimation techniques under various violations of the assumptions of those techniques. Using recursive partitioning trees fitted to our simulation results, we provide the practitioner concrete guidance based on a set of yes/no questions.

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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
期刊介绍: Applied Psychological Measurement publishes empirical research on the application of techniques of psychological measurement to substantive problems in all areas of psychology and related disciplines.
×
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