OVERVIEW
Summary | |
---|---|
Original author(s) |
|
Original publication |
|
Year original instrument was published | 2016 |
Inventory | |
Number of items | 8 |
Number of versions/translations | 1 |
Cited implementations | 1 |
Language |
|
Country | United States |
Format |
|
Intended population(s) |
|
Domain |
|
Topic |
|
EVIDENCE
Information in the table is given in four different categories:
- General - information about how each article used the instrument:
- Original development paper - indicates whether in which paper(s) the instrument was developed initially
- Uses the instrument in data collection - indicates whether an article administered the instrument and collected responses
- Modified version of existing instrument - indicates whether an article has modified a prior version of this instrument
- Evaluation of existing instrument - indicates whether an article explicitly provides evidence that attempt to evaluate the performance of the instrument; lack of a checkmark here implies an article that administered the instrument but did not evaluate the instrument itself
- Reliability - information about the evidence presented to establish reliability of data generated by the instrument; please see the Glossary for term definitions
- Validity - information about the evidence presented to establish reliability of data generated by the instrument; please see the Glossary for term definitions
- Other Information - information that may or may not directly relate to the evidence for validity and reliability, but are commonly reported when evaluating instruments; please see the Glossary for term definitions
Publications: | 1 |
---|---|
General |
|
Original development paper | ✔ |
Uses the instrument in data collection | ✔ |
Modified version of existing instrument | |
Evaluation of existing instrument | ✔ |
Reliability |
|
Test-retest reliability | |
Internal consistency | |
Coefficient (Cronbach's) alpha | |
McDonald's Omega | |
Inter-rater reliability | ✔ |
Person separation | |
Generalizability coefficients | |
Other reliability evidence | |
Validity |
|
Expert judgment | ✔ |
Response process | ✔ |
Factor analysis, IRT, Rasch analysis | |
Differential item function | |
Evidence based on relationships to other variables | ✔ |
Evidence based on consequences of testing | |
Other validity evidence | |
Other information |
|
Difficulty | |
Discrimination | ✔ |
Evidence based on fairness | |
Other general evidence |
REVIEW
This review was generated by a CHIRAL review panel. Each CHIRAL review panel consists of multiple experts who first individually review the citations of the assessment instrument listed on this page for evidence in support of the validity and reliability of the data generated by the instrument. Panels then meet to discuss the evidence and summarize their opinions in the review posted in this tab. These reviews summarize only the evidence that was discussed during the panel which may not represent all evidence available in the published literature or that which appears on the Evidence tab.
If you feel that evidence is missing from this review, or that something was documented in error, please use the CHIRAL Feedback page.
Panel Review: Assessment on Protein Structure & Enzyme Inhibition
(Post last updated June 16, 2022)
Review panel summary
The Assessment on Protein Structure & Enzyme Inhibition is an eight-item assessment instrument with a combination of true/false, multiple choice, and open-ended items. The instrument was designed to assess students’ understanding of biochemistry concepts. It has been evaluated with undergraduate students enrolled in introductory biochemistry courses in seven U.S. institutions, including four small, private four-year colleges, two private masters-granting universities, and one public masters-granting university [1]; additionally, one of the seven institutions is classified as a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). Several aspects of validity and reliability have been assessed for the data generated by the instrument. In terms of validity, test content evidence was provided by 30 biochemistry faculty members (five of which were extensively involved in the item generation) in a biochemistry Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) community, all with a minimum of five years of teaching experience [1]. Additionally, topics/subject matter essential to be included in an undergraduate biochemistry degree plan were initially selected for instrument items based on recommendations and guidelines from the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (ASBMB) [1]. Items were revised based on reviews by two independent raters upon initial collection of data [1]. All eight items on the instrument have also been assigned to levels of Bloom’s taxonomy by a panel of 18 biochemistry faculty members [1]. Following initial collection of data, revisions were made to items based on students’ responses to the open-ended items, as well as instructor feedback, and this was used to provide some evidence in support of response process validity [1]; however, as students were not interviewed in order to clarify details within their open responses, it is difficult to evaluate this evidence. In terms of reliability, a sample of 36 responses were evaluated with Cohen’s kappa to provide evidence for interrater reliability for open response items through two independent raters [1].
Recommendations for use
The Assessment on Protein Structure & Enzyme Inhibition was designed to assess students’ understanding of biochemistry concepts [1]. Items have been scored as correct or incorrect for the true/false and multiple choice; scoring for the open-response items uses a developed rubric [1], which assigns items a score of 0 (incorrect), 1 (partially correct), or 2 (correct). In many instances, the evidence provided in the literature has limited details provided; therefore, the continued generation of evidence of validity and reliability of the data generated via this instrument is recommended.
Details from panel review
The developers of the Assessment on Protein Structure & Enzyme Inhibition instrument gathered and reported some aspects of validity and reliability evidence for the instrument [1]; however, some of the evidence provided is limited since a lack of details have been reported. For example, for interrater reliability, there was limited detail provided on the development of the rubric used to evaluate students’ responses to the open-response items. In terms of internal structure validity, future studies might involve exploratory evaluations of how individual items are related, especially given the group scoring based on Bloom’s levels. In terms of relation to other variables, there is currently no documented evidence regarding how the instrument is related to variables such as performance, achievement, and/or progression in the course content area, which may provide further support for the data from this instrument.
References
[1] Villafañe, S.M., Heyen, B.J., Lewis, J.E., Loertscher, J., Minderhout, V., & Arnold Murray, T. (2016). Design and testing of an assessment instrument to measure understanding of protein structure and enzyme inhibition in a new context. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 44(2), 179-190. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20931
VERSIONS
CITATIONS
Villafañe, S.M., Heyen, B.J., Lewis, J.E., Loertscher, J., Minderhout, V., & Arnold, Murray T. (2016). Design and testing of an assessment instrument to measure understanding of protein structure and enzyme inhibition in a new context. Biochemistry and Mo