Adv Physiol Educ iWorx LabsByDesign Physiology Teaching Solutions
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Advan. Physiol. Edu. 276: 93S-101S, 1999;
1043-4046/99 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rovick, A. A.
Right arrow Articles by Whitescarver, S. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Rovick, A. A.
Right arrow Articles by Whitescarver, S. A.

Vol. 276, Issue 6, S93-S101, 6-1-99

HOW ACCURATE ARE OUR ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT OUR STUDENTS' BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE?

Allen A. Rovick, Joel A. Michael, Harold I. Modell, David S. Bruce, Barbara Horwitz, Thomas Adamson, Daniel R. Richardson, Dee U. Silverthorn, and Shirley A. Whitescarver

Teachers establish prerequisites that students must meet before they are permitted to enter their courses. It is expected that having these prerequisites will provide students with the knowledge and skills they will need to successfully learn the course content. Also, the material that the students are expected to have previously learned need not be included in a course. We wanted to determine how accurate instructors' understanding of their students background knowledge actually was. To do this, we wrote a set of multiple-choice questions that could be used to test students' knowledge of concepts deemed to be essential for learning respiratory physiology. Instructors then selected 10 of these questions to be used as a prerequisite knowledge test. The instructors also predicted the performance they expected from the students on each of the questions they had selected. The resulting tests were administered in the first week of each of seven courses. The results of this study demonstrate that instructors are poor judges of what beginning students know. Instructors tended to both underestimate and overestimate students' knowledge by large margins on individual questions. Although on the average they tended to underestimate students' factual knowledge, they overestimated the students' abilities to apply this knowledge. Hence, the validity of decisions that instructors make, predicated on the basis of their students having the prerequisite knowledge that they expect, is open to question.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Adv. Physiol. Educ.Home page
N. J. Pelaez
PROBLEM-BASED WRITING WITH PEER REVIEW IMPROVES ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN PHYSIOLOGY
Advan Physiol Educ, September 1, 2002; 26(3): 174 - 184.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online