Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The goal of this study was to understand how six college biology students complete the tasks of a traditional paper and pencil instrument designed to detect alternative conceptions about photosynthesis. Participants responded to relevant items in a two-tier diagnostic instrument in a think-aloud task. Responses to the traditional content question (first tier) were correct more often than reasons (second tier). However the participants' verbal data indicated that they relied upon test-taking strategies, not retrieval from memory, to choose their reasons. Some distractors caused participants to accept incorrect propositions being considered for the first time (rather than eliciting a misconception from extant knowledge). They also considered relevant exceptions and subtle language cues that justified their choices of incorrect reasons. Participants voiced concerns about the conscientiousness with which students complete such instruments. These findings raise concerns about the validity of using such instruments for diagnosing alternative conceptions.
Griffard et al. (Mon,) studied this question.