Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM

In a recent article, Nadelson and Southerland (2010. Development and preliminary evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 151-190) reported on their development of a multiple-choice concept inventory intended to ass...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of science education 2012-01, Vol.34 (17), p.2679-2703
Hauptverfasser: Novick, Laura R., Catley, Kefyn M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2703
container_issue 17
container_start_page 2679
container_title International journal of science education
container_volume 34
creator Novick, Laura R.
Catley, Kefyn M.
description In a recent article, Nadelson and Southerland (2010. Development and preliminary evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 151-190) reported on their development of a multiple-choice concept inventory intended to assess college students' understanding of macroevolutionary concepts, the Measure of Understanding Macroevolution (MUM). Given that the only existing evolution inventories assess understanding of natural selection, a microevolutionary concept, a valid assessment of students' understanding of macroevolution would be a welcome and necessary addition to the field of science education. Although the conceptual framework underlying Nadelson and Southerland's test is promising, we believe the test has serious shortcomings with respect to validity evidence for the construct being tested. We argue and provide evidence that these problems are serious enough that the MUM should not be used in its current form to measure students' understanding of macroevolution.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/09500693.2012.727496
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_eric_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_eric_primary_EJ994355</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ994355</ericid><sourcerecordid>2817777401</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d595597dac59b3407d73b462ac07a639c78fb1864ac9128ca42a422e8e5c60043</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoWKv_oIcFD5625nsTLyKlftHiQXsOaTZbt2yTmqSV_nt3XfUoDAwz87wzzAvACMExggJeQ8kg5JKMMUR4XOCCSn4EBohymjMs5DEYdEjeMafgLMY1hJDygg-AuovRxli7VfaadqV1KV5lC1faEJN2Zdf3VTbXJni7980u1d7dZBPvjA0uZsGudPim0rvN9rqpyzodOklXzxfzc3BS6Sbai588BIv76dvkMZ-9PDxN7ma5IUKmvGSSMVmU2jC5JBQWZUGWlGNtYKE5kaYQ1RIJTrWRCAujKW4DW2GZ4e0vZAgu-73b4D92Nia19rvg2pMKISYg5gSzlqI91b4TY7CV2oZ6o8NBIag6K9WvlaqzUvVWtrJRL7OhNn-S6bOUlLBu620_rl3lw0Z_-tCUKulD40MVtDN1VOTfA18oR4Nc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1158026325</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM</title><source>Taylor &amp; Francis Journals Complete</source><creator>Novick, Laura R. ; Catley, Kefyn M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Novick, Laura R. ; Catley, Kefyn M.</creatorcontrib><description>In a recent article, Nadelson and Southerland (2010. Development and preliminary evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 151-190) reported on their development of a multiple-choice concept inventory intended to assess college students' understanding of macroevolutionary concepts, the Measure of Understanding Macroevolution (MUM). Given that the only existing evolution inventories assess understanding of natural selection, a microevolutionary concept, a valid assessment of students' understanding of macroevolution would be a welcome and necessary addition to the field of science education. Although the conceptual framework underlying Nadelson and Southerland's test is promising, we believe the test has serious shortcomings with respect to validity evidence for the construct being tested. We argue and provide evidence that these problems are serious enough that the MUM should not be used in its current form to measure students' understanding of macroevolution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-0693</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-5289</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2012.727496</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ISEDEB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Routledge</publisher><subject>Biology ; College Students ; Concept inventory ; Construct Validity ; Educational evaluation ; Evidence ; Evolution ; Evolution education ; Knowledge ; Macroevolution ; Probability ; Reliability ; Science Education ; Science Teachers ; Scores ; Test Items ; Validity</subject><ispartof>International journal of science education, 2012-01, Vol.34 (17), p.2679-2703</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2012</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d595597dac59b3407d73b462ac07a639c78fb1864ac9128ca42a422e8e5c60043</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d595597dac59b3407d73b462ac07a639c78fb1864ac9128ca42a422e8e5c60043</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09500693.2012.727496$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2012.727496$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,59646,60435</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ994355$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Novick, Laura R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catley, Kefyn M.</creatorcontrib><title>Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM</title><title>International journal of science education</title><description>In a recent article, Nadelson and Southerland (2010. Development and preliminary evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 151-190) reported on their development of a multiple-choice concept inventory intended to assess college students' understanding of macroevolutionary concepts, the Measure of Understanding Macroevolution (MUM). Given that the only existing evolution inventories assess understanding of natural selection, a microevolutionary concept, a valid assessment of students' understanding of macroevolution would be a welcome and necessary addition to the field of science education. Although the conceptual framework underlying Nadelson and Southerland's test is promising, we believe the test has serious shortcomings with respect to validity evidence for the construct being tested. We argue and provide evidence that these problems are serious enough that the MUM should not be used in its current form to measure students' understanding of macroevolution.</description><subject>Biology</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Concept inventory</subject><subject>Construct Validity</subject><subject>Educational evaluation</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Evolution education</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Macroevolution</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Science Education</subject><subject>Science Teachers</subject><subject>Scores</subject><subject>Test Items</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>0950-0693</issn><issn>1464-5289</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1LAzEQhoMoWKv_oIcFD5625nsTLyKlftHiQXsOaTZbt2yTmqSV_nt3XfUoDAwz87wzzAvACMExggJeQ8kg5JKMMUR4XOCCSn4EBohymjMs5DEYdEjeMafgLMY1hJDygg-AuovRxli7VfaadqV1KV5lC1faEJN2Zdf3VTbXJni7980u1d7dZBPvjA0uZsGudPim0rvN9rqpyzodOklXzxfzc3BS6Sbai588BIv76dvkMZ-9PDxN7ma5IUKmvGSSMVmU2jC5JBQWZUGWlGNtYKE5kaYQ1RIJTrWRCAujKW4DW2GZ4e0vZAgu-73b4D92Nia19rvg2pMKISYg5gSzlqI91b4TY7CV2oZ6o8NBIag6K9WvlaqzUvVWtrJRL7OhNn-S6bOUlLBu620_rl3lw0Z_-tCUKulD40MVtDN1VOTfA18oR4Nc</recordid><startdate>20120101</startdate><enddate>20120101</enddate><creator>Novick, Laura R.</creator><creator>Catley, Kefyn M.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120101</creationdate><title>Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM</title><author>Novick, Laura R. ; Catley, Kefyn M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-d595597dac59b3407d73b462ac07a639c78fb1864ac9128ca42a422e8e5c60043</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Biology</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Concept inventory</topic><topic>Construct Validity</topic><topic>Educational evaluation</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Evolution education</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Macroevolution</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Science Education</topic><topic>Science Teachers</topic><topic>Scores</topic><topic>Test Items</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Novick, Laura R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Catley, Kefyn M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>International journal of science education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Novick, Laura R.</au><au>Catley, Kefyn M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ994355</ericid><atitle>Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM</atitle><jtitle>International journal of science education</jtitle><date>2012-01-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>17</issue><spage>2679</spage><epage>2703</epage><pages>2679-2703</pages><issn>0950-0693</issn><eissn>1464-5289</eissn><coden>ISEDEB</coden><abstract>In a recent article, Nadelson and Southerland (2010. Development and preliminary evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 151-190) reported on their development of a multiple-choice concept inventory intended to assess college students' understanding of macroevolutionary concepts, the Measure of Understanding Macroevolution (MUM). Given that the only existing evolution inventories assess understanding of natural selection, a microevolutionary concept, a valid assessment of students' understanding of macroevolution would be a welcome and necessary addition to the field of science education. Although the conceptual framework underlying Nadelson and Southerland's test is promising, we believe the test has serious shortcomings with respect to validity evidence for the construct being tested. We argue and provide evidence that these problems are serious enough that the MUM should not be used in its current form to measure students' understanding of macroevolution.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/09500693.2012.727496</doi><tpages>25</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0950-0693
ispartof International journal of science education, 2012-01, Vol.34 (17), p.2679-2703
issn 0950-0693
1464-5289
language eng
recordid cdi_eric_primary_EJ994355
source Taylor & Francis Journals Complete
subjects Biology
College Students
Concept inventory
Construct Validity
Educational evaluation
Evidence
Evolution
Evolution education
Knowledge
Macroevolution
Probability
Reliability
Science Education
Science Teachers
Scores
Test Items
Validity
title Assessing Students' Understanding of Macroevolution: Concerns regarding the validity of the MUM
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T05%3A29%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_eric_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessing%20Students'%20Understanding%20of%20Macroevolution:%20Concerns%20regarding%20the%20validity%20of%20the%20MUM&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20science%20education&rft.au=Novick,%20Laura%20R.&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=17&rft.spage=2679&rft.epage=2703&rft.pages=2679-2703&rft.issn=0950-0693&rft.eissn=1464-5289&rft.coden=ISEDEB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/09500693.2012.727496&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_eric_%3E2817777401%3C/proquest_eric_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1158026325&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ994355&rfr_iscdi=true