Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?

An impediment to conducting high-quality quantitative research studies in education is the paucity of valid measures of learning gains. Studies often seek to investigate students’ deep, conceptual understanding yet many measures assess only surface, procedural understanding. One reason is that the d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ian Jones, Marie-Josee Bisson, Camilla Gilmore, Matthew Inglis
Format: Default Article
Published: 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/2134/37721
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id rr-article-9367286
record_format Figshare
spelling rr-article-93672862019-06-01T00:00:00Z Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help? Ian Jones (1384110) Marie-Josee Bisson (7157723) Camilla Gilmore (1256451) Matthew Inglis (1384290) Other education not elsewhere classified Assessment Comparative judgement Quantitative research methods Mathematics education An impediment to conducting high-quality quantitative research studies in education is the paucity of valid measures of learning gains. Studies often seek to investigate students’ deep, conceptual understanding yet many measures assess only surface, procedural understanding. One reason is that the development of validated measures of conceptual understanding is resource intensive, time consuming, and success is not guaranteed. We evaluated a novel and efficient technique, based on comparative judgement, for assessing conceptual understanding. We applied the technique to a randomised controlled trial in which students were taught simple algebra based on either the Grid Algebra or the MiGen software package. The participants were Year 5 students (N = 188) drawn from four primary schools who had not encountered algebra previously. An instrument from the literature (Concepts in Secondary Mathematics and Science: Algebra Scale), and a novel comparative judgement assessment were administered following the intervention. Students in the Grid Algebra condition outperformed those in the MiGen condition on both post-test measures. The comparative judgement technique performed similarly to the standard instrument but was far more efficient to design and implement. The technique can, in principle, be quickly applied to any target concept of interest. We conclude that comparative judgement is a valid, reliable and practical tool that could help to increase both the quantity and quality of quantitative research in education. 2019-06-01T00:00:00Z Text Journal contribution 2134/37721 https://figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Measuring_conceptual_understanding_in_randomised_controlled_trials_can_comparative_judgement_help_/9367286 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
institution Loughborough University
collection Figshare
topic Other education not elsewhere classified
Assessment
Comparative judgement
Quantitative research methods
Mathematics education
spellingShingle Other education not elsewhere classified
Assessment
Comparative judgement
Quantitative research methods
Mathematics education
Ian Jones
Marie-Josee Bisson
Camilla Gilmore
Matthew Inglis
Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
description An impediment to conducting high-quality quantitative research studies in education is the paucity of valid measures of learning gains. Studies often seek to investigate students’ deep, conceptual understanding yet many measures assess only surface, procedural understanding. One reason is that the development of validated measures of conceptual understanding is resource intensive, time consuming, and success is not guaranteed. We evaluated a novel and efficient technique, based on comparative judgement, for assessing conceptual understanding. We applied the technique to a randomised controlled trial in which students were taught simple algebra based on either the Grid Algebra or the MiGen software package. The participants were Year 5 students (N = 188) drawn from four primary schools who had not encountered algebra previously. An instrument from the literature (Concepts in Secondary Mathematics and Science: Algebra Scale), and a novel comparative judgement assessment were administered following the intervention. Students in the Grid Algebra condition outperformed those in the MiGen condition on both post-test measures. The comparative judgement technique performed similarly to the standard instrument but was far more efficient to design and implement. The technique can, in principle, be quickly applied to any target concept of interest. We conclude that comparative judgement is a valid, reliable and practical tool that could help to increase both the quantity and quality of quantitative research in education.
format Default
Article
author Ian Jones
Marie-Josee Bisson
Camilla Gilmore
Matthew Inglis
author_facet Ian Jones
Marie-Josee Bisson
Camilla Gilmore
Matthew Inglis
author_sort Ian Jones (1384110)
title Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
title_short Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
title_full Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
title_fullStr Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
title_full_unstemmed Measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
title_sort measuring conceptual understanding in randomised controlled trials: can comparative judgement help?
publishDate 2019
url https://hdl.handle.net/2134/37721
_version_ 1799634339358572544