Validation of Learning Progressions for Earth's Motion and Solar System in Elementary grades: Focusing on Construct Validity and Consequential Validity

초등학생의 지구의 운동과 태양계 학습 발달과정의 타당성 검증: 구인 타당도 및 결과 타당도를 중심으로

  • Received : 2016.02.06
  • Accepted : 2016.02.26
  • Published : 2016.02.29


The purpose of this study is to validate learning progressions for Earth's motion and solar system from two different perspectives of validity. One is construct validity, that is whether a hypothetical pathway derived from our study of LPs is supported by empirical evidence of children's substantive development. The other is consequential validity, which refers to the impact of LP-based adaptive instruction on children's improved learning outcomes. For this purpose, 373 fifth-grade students and 17 teachers from six elementary schools in Seoul, Kangwon province, and Gwangju participated. We designed LP-based adaptive instruction modules delving into the unit of 'Solar system and stars.' We also employed 13 ordered multiple-choice items and analyzed the transitions of children's achievement levels based on the results of pre-test and post-test. For testing construct validity, 64 % of children in the experimental group showed improvement according to the hypothetical pathways. Rasch analysis also supports this results. For testing consequential validity, the analysis of covariance between experimental and control groups revealed that the improvement of experimental group is significantly higher than the control group (F=30.819, p=0.000), and positive transitions of children's achievement level in the experimental group are more dominant than in the control group. In addition, the findings of applying Rasch model reveal that the improvement of students' ability in the experimental group is significantly higher than that of the control group (F=11.632, p=0.001).


learning progressions;Rasch analysis Earth' motion;solar system;construct validity;consequential validity


  1. Alonzo, A. C., & Steedle, J. T. (2009). Developing and assessing a force and motion learning progression. Science Education, 93(3), 389-421.
  2. Alonzo, A. C., Neidorf, T., & Anderson, C. W. (2012). Using learning progression to inform large-scale assessment. In Alonzo, A. C., & Gotwals, A. W. (Eds.). Learning science in science: Current challenges and future directions (pp. 211-240). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Purblishers.
  3. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd edtion). New York, NY: Routledge.
  4. Briggs, D. C., Alonzo, A. C., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic assessment with ordered multiple-choice items. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 33-63.
  5. Corcoran, T., & Silander, M. (2009). Instruction in high schools: The evidence and the challenge. The Future of Children: America's High Schools, 19, 157-183.
  6. Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. Consortium for Policy Research in Education Report #RR-63. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
  7. Ji, E., & Chae, S. (2000). Theory and practices of Rasch model. Seoul: Kyoyook-Kwahak-Sa.
  8. Kim, Y., Lee, K., Maeng, S., & Lee, J. (2014). Development of assessment items for learning progressions on cross-cutting concepts and its application to physics and Earth science. Report submitted to Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science & Creativity.
  9. Krajcik, J. S. (2012). The importance, cautions and future of learning progression research. In Alonzo, A. C., & Gotwals, A. W. (Eds.). Learning science in science: Current challenges and future directions (pp. 27-36). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Purblishers.
  10. Liu, X. (2010). Using and developing measurement instruments in science education: A Rasch modeling approach. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
  11. Maeng, S., & Lee, K. (2015). Cross-sectional item response analysis of geocognition assessment for the development of plate tectonics learning progressions: Rasch model. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 35(1), 37-52.
  12. Maeng, S., Lee, K., Park, Y., Lee, J., & Oh, H. (2014). Development and validation of a learning progression for astronomical system using ordered multiple-choice assessment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(8), 703-718.
  13. Maeng, S., Seong, Y., & Jang, S. (2013). Present states, methodological features, and an exemplar study of the research on learning progressions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33, 161-180.
  14. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47(2), 149-174.
  15. Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology. (2011). 2009 revised science curriculum. Seoul: MEST.
  16. National Research Council (NRC). (2006). Learning to think spatially. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  17. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. (R.A. Duschl, H.A. Schweingruber, & A.W. Shouse, Eds.). Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
  18. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  19. NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards. Achieve, Inc.
  20. Oh, H., Lee, K., Park, Y-S., Maeng, S., & Lee, J-A. (2015). An analysis of systems thinking revealed in middle school astronomy classes: The case of science teachers' teaching practices for the unit of stars and universe. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 36(6), 591-608.
  21. Plummer, J. D. (2014). Spatial thinking as the dimension of progress in an astronomy learning progression, Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 1-45.
  22. Seong, Y., Maeng, S., & Jang, S. (2013). A learning progression for water cycle from fourth to sixth graders with ordered multiple-choice items. Elementary Science Education, 32(2), 139-158.
  23. Shin, N., Koh, E. J., Choi, C. I., & Jeong, D. H. (2014). Using a learning progression to characterize Korean secondary students' knowledge and submicroscopic representations of the particle nature of matter. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 34(5), 437-447.
  24. Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 716-730.

Cited by

  1. A Proposal of Curriculum and Teaching Sequence for Seasonal Change by Exploring a Learning Progression vol.39, pp.3, 2018,
  2. Exploring 6th Graders Learning Progression for Lunar Phase Change: Focusing on Astronomical Systems Thinking vol.39, pp.1, 2018,


Supported by : 한국연구재단