Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36017436›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022

Measuring students' learning progressions in energy using cognitive diagnostic models.

Shuqi Zhou, Anne Traynor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Shuqi ZhouCollege of Foreign Languages, Donghua University, Shanghai, China.
Anne TraynorDepartment of Educational Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study applied cognitive diagnostic models to assess students' learning progressions in energy. A Q-matrix (i.e., an item attribute alignment table) was proposed based on existing literature about learning progressions of energy in the physical science domain and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) assessment framework. The Q-matrix was validated by expert review and real data analysis. Then, the deterministic inputs, noisy 'and' gate (DINA) model with hierarchical relations was applied to data from three jurisdictions that had stable, defined science curricula (i.e., Australia, Hong Kong, and Ontario). The results suggested that the hypothesized learning progression was consistent with the observed progression in understanding the energy concept. We also found similarities in students' attribute mastery across the three jurisdictions. In addition, we examined the instructional sensitivity of the selected item. We discuss several curriculum-related issues and student misconceptions that may affect students' learning progressions and mastery patterns in different regions of the world.

Indexed as

cognitive diagnostic modelenergy conceptinstructional sensitivitylearning progressionmastery pattern

Identifiers

PMID36017436
PMCPMC9396370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.