“We have assembled the commission so that the experts can objectively evaluate the compliance of the task with the physics program taught in schools, the level of complexity and the time allotted. The experts expressed the opinion that the tasks may have appeared unexpected and too complicated for the eleventh graders according to the time allotted for completing the tasks.
For me, the most important interest of the students is that their results cannot suffer due to incorrect tasks, therefore we obliged the National Education Agency to take into account the recommendations of experts and change the assessment of some tasks”, says Minister of Education, Science and Sports Gintautas Jakštas.
According to the commission’s conclusions, although the physics midterm test tasks were unusual and different from those used in the preparation of physics state exams in previous years, they correspond to the physics general education curriculum – no tasks were found that exceeded the requirements of the general education program.
The commission noticed that the task contains incorrectly worded questions, imprecise use of terms, redundant and confusing information, imprecise labeling, and technical obstacles preventing the student from choosing the correct answer.
It was also noticed that the answers to some of the questions depended on the answers given in the previous questions. A wrong answer in the previous question could lead to a wrong answer in the next question.
While evaluating the task of the physics midterm examination, the commission also made specific recommendations regarding the evaluation of the task. It is suggested that students be awarded extra points for certain answers that may not have been counted due to technical barriers, different use of symbols, etc.
At the Commission’s suggestion, a total of 12 tasks will be reviewed. The National Education Agency will provide students with final assessments by St. Easter.
Specific proposals of the commission regarding tasks:
- 1st class a point is awarded if all five statements are marked correctly, but it is suggested to award a point for three correctly marked statements, excluding statements attributed to a pseudoscientific approach.
- 3rd grade and 18th grade due to technical obstacles, it is suggested to award a point to all students who answered the question.
- 7th grade due to the missing information helping to determine the nature of the movement of the jellyfish, it is suggested to count the answers that properly describe the movement and whose ending corresponds to the answer format, that is, the following possible answer options should be counted as correct: reactive, even, uneven.
- 22 cl. two answers are required: a numerical and a formula, for which two points are awarded. It is suggested to credit the answer requiring a formula for those students whose numerical answer is given correctly. Students may have encountered difficulties in presenting the correct formula, because the template for presenting it is presented incorrectly (the phenomenon must be presented in the root) and the notation of physical quantities to be used in this case is not specified.
- 23 cl. due to the presented unnecessary and misleading graphs, it is suggested to award a point to all students who solved the task, regardless of the answer given.
- 24th class it is proposed to give one point to all students who have given an answer. The students were confused by the fact that the same letters are used in both graphs, and also that the second graph was completely unnecessary to solve the problem.
- 25th class the answer is related to cl. 23 and 24. answers. It is suggested to give a point for this question to all students who have given an answer.
- 27 cl. the condition is incorrectly formulated (it is indicated that the results of the study are presented in the graphs, but it is not clear which study it is about), and the answer depends on cl. 26. a reply. It is suggested to count the first two answer options (“More elastic”; “Not so elastic”), because the other suggested answer options are not related to elasticity.
- 28 cl. the numbers of the thermometer shown in the picture go beyond the limits of the thermometer, so it is suggested to additionally count the answer – 275.
- 29 cl. the answer could be determined by cl. 28. an incorrect answer was obtained (the 0 on the other side of the thermometer was not noticed), so it is suggested to read the answer – 1.43 kJ.
- 31 cl. due to technical obstacles, it is suggested to give a point to everyone who correctly calculated the amount of heat. Another point is proposed to be given not only to students who indicated the correct answer of 16 kJ, but also to 1.6 kJ due to the same temperature determination error.
#Ministry #Education #Science #Sports #evaluations #physics #midterm #test #tasks #change
2024-04-03 21:09:24