Pasi Nieminen

The Structured Assessment Dialogue

The two key purposes of assessment, formative and summative, are often in a contradictory position if they are used concurrently. The summative assessment of learning will often prevent the formative assessment for learning to be realised (Butler, J Educ Psychol 79(4):474, 1987), meaning that the learning potential of the assessment will often be minimal. It is therefore a central challenge to find ways to combine the dual use of assessment. The structured assessment dialogue (SAD) is a candidate for such a combination.

Learning About Forces Using Multiple Representations

We present two research-based interventions to measure upper secondary student learning of forces using multiple representations (MRs). The first intervention is the Representational Variant of the Force Concept Inventory (R-FCI) – a multiple-choice test for evaluating students’ representational consistency in answering triplets of isomorphic items in the context of forces. The second intervention is an interaction diagram (ID) – a visual representation that helps students to identify forces resulting from interactions between two objects. Students’ representational consistency on the R-FCI pre-test correlated with their normalised learning gain on the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) suggesting that students representational skills before the intervention were related to their conceptions of forces. The interaction diagram (ID) for indentifying relevant interactions and constructing a corresponding free-body diagram (FBD) involved different instruction groups –– called heavy ID, light ID and no ID – depending on the extent that IDs were utilised in teaching. The heavy ID groups outperformed the light ID and the no ID groups in identifying forces and constructing the correct FBDs. In addition, the heavy ID groups learned Newton’s third law better than the other ID groups. Our studies provide further evidence of the benefits of MRs in learning the concept of force.