Alternative model for the administration and analysis of research-based assessments

TL;DR

This paper proposes a centralized, automated system for administering and analyzing research-based assessments in physics education, aiming to improve adoption, support, and sustainability compared to traditional decentralized models.

Contribution

It introduces an alternative centralized assessment model with automated data collection and analysis, demonstrating its advantages and discussing implementation challenges.

Findings

Centralized system improves assessment adoption and support.

Automation enhances sustainability of assessment practices.

System effectively analyzes students' epistemologies in physics.

Abstract

Research-based assessments represent a valuable tool for both instructors and researchers interested in improving undergraduate physics education. However, the historical model for disseminating and propagating conceptual and attitudinal assessments developed by the physics education research (PER) community has not resulted in widespread adoption of these assessments within the broader community of physics instructors. Within this historical model, assessment developers create high quality, validated assessments, make them available for a wide range of instructors to use, and provide minimal (if any) support to assist with administration or analysis of the results. Here, we present and discuss an alternative model for assessment dissemination, which is characterized by centralized data collection and analysis. This model provides a greater degree of support for both researchers and instructors in order to more explicitly support adoption of research-based assessments. Specifically, we describe our experiences developing a centralized, automated system for an attitudinal assessment we previously created to examine students' epistemologies and expectations about experimental physics. This system provides a proof-of-concept that we use to discuss the advantages associated with centralized administration and data collection for research-based assessments in PER. We also discuss the challenges that we encountered while developing, maintaining, and automating this system. Ultimately, we argue that centralized administration and data collection for standardized assessments is a viable and potentially advantageous alternative to the default model characterized by decentralized administration and analysis. Moreover, with the help of online administration and automation, this model can support the long-term sustainability of centralized assessment systems.