No abstract

No abstract

Abstract:We present selected results from the January 1999 semester pre-course administration of the Astronomy Diagnostic Test (ADT), a research-based, multiple-choice instrument that assesses student knowledge and understanding about selected concepts in astronomy. The ADT is valid for undergraduate non-science majors taking an introductory astronomy course. This paper briefly summarises the development and validation processes, which included pre-course administration to 1557 students in 22 classes attending 17 various post-secondary institutions across the USA in the January 1999 semester. Two interesting results of the ADT's pre-course administration are (1) the average class score of the ADT is about the same (32%) regardless of type of post-secondary institution or class size and (2) there is a significant gender difference, with women scoring an average of 28% and men 38%, with the standard errors both less than 1%. The current version of the ADT (Version 2 dated 21 June

Seventy undergraduate class sections were examined from the database of Astronomy Diagnostic Test (ADT) results of Deming and Hufnagel to determine if course format correlated with ADT normalized gain scores. Normalized gains were calculated for four different classroom scenarios: lecture, lecture with discussion, lecture with lab, and lecture with both lab and discussion. Statistical analysis shows that there are no significant differences in normalized gain among the self-reported classroom formats. Prerequisites related to mathematics courses did show differences in normalized gain. Of all reported course activities, only the lecture and the readings for the course correlate significantly with the normalized gain. This analysis suggests that the ADT may not have enough sensitivity to measure differences in the effectiveness of different course formats because of the wide range of topics that the ADT addresses with few questions. Different measures of gain and their biases are discussed. We argue that the use of the normalized gain is not always warranted because of its strong bias toward high pretest scores.