The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development and application of a two‐tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction
Abstract
This study involved the development and application of a two‐tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. The development procedure had three general steps: defining the content boundaries of the test, collecting information on students' misconceptions, and instrument development. Misconception data were collected from interviews and multiple‐choice questions with free response answers. The data were used to develop 12 two‐tier multiple choice items in which the first tier examined content knowledge and the second examined understanding of that knowledge. The conceptual knowledge examined was the particulate and random nature of matter, concentration and tonicity, the influence of life forces on diffusion and osmosis, membranes, kinetic energy of matter, the process of diffusion, and the process of osmosis. The diagnostic instrument was administered to 240 students (123 non‐biology majors and 117 biology majors) enrolled in a college freshman biology laboratory course. The students had completed a unit on diffusion and osmosis. The content taught was carefully defined by propositional knowledge statements, and was the same content that defined the content boundaries of the test. The split‐half reliability was .74. Difficulty indices ranged from 0.23 to 0.95, and discrimination indices ranged from 0.21 to 0.65. Each item was analyzed to determine student understanding of, and identify misconceptions about, diffusion and osmosis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., & Kahle, J. B. (1984) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173469 · Cited by 5,199
Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science
Treagust, D. F. (1988) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/0950069880100204 · Cited by 844
Cited by
Where's the evidence that active learning works?
Michael, J. (2006) · Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00053.2006 · Cited by 1,648
A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Students’ Misconceptions in Science
Kaltakci Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015) · EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education · doi:10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a · Cited by 432
Metadata
- Authors
- Odom, A. L., & Barrow, L. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 45-61
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2068231696
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development and application of a two‐tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.3660320106
- The paper
- Odom, A. L., & Barrow, L. H. (1995). Development and application of a two‐tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320106
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.