Coupled Multiple-response vs. Free-response Conceptual assessment: An Example from upper-division Physics
Bethany R. Wilcox, Steven J. Pollock

TL;DR
This paper develops a coupled multiple-response (CMR) assessment for upper-division physics that maintains the insights of free-response formats while offering greater scalability and ease of scoring, comparable to traditional multiple-choice tests.
Contribution
The study introduces the CMR format as a new assessment tool that combines free-response insights with multiple-choice logistics, validated through direct comparison with the original free-response CUE.
Findings
CMR and free-response CUE have similar average scores.
Both formats show comparable validity and reliability.
Nearly 75% of free-response responses match CMR options.
Abstract
Free-response research-based assessments, like the Colorado Upper-division Electrostatics Diagnostic (CUE), provide rich, fine-grained information about students' reasoning. However, because of the difficulties inherent in scoring these assessments, the majority of the large-scale conceptual assessments in physics are multiple-choice. To increase the scalability and usability of the CUE, we set out to create a new version of the assessment that preserves the insights afforded by a free-response format while exploiting the logistical advantages of a multiple-choice assessment. We used our extensive database of responses to the free-response CUE to construct distractors for a new version where students can select multiple responses and receive partial credit based on the accuracy and consistency of their selections. Here, we describe the development of this modified CUE format, which we…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
