PhysPort Assessments: Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment

Assessments » Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment

Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment (BEMA)

Developed by Ruth Chabay and Bruce Sherwood

Purpose	To assess students’ qualitative understanding of basic concepts in electricity and magnetism.
Format	Pre/post, Multiple-choice
Duration	45 min
Focus	Electricity / Magnetism Content knowledge (circuits, electrostatics, magnetic fields and forces)
Level	Upper-level, Intro college

Login or Register to Download Downloads are restricted to high school and college faculty.

Sample questions from the BEMA:
BEMA Sample Question

BEMA Implementation and Troubleshooting Guide

Everything you need to know about implementing the BEMA in your class.

L. Ding, R. Chabay, B. Sherwood, and R. Beichner, Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2 (1), 7 (2006).

RESEARCH VALIDATION
more details

Gold Star Validation
This is the highest level of research validation, corresponding to all seven of the validation categories below.

Research Validation Summary

Based on Research Into:

Student thinking

Studied Using:

Student interviews
Expert review
Appropriate statistical analysis

Research Conducted:

At multiple institutions
By multiple research groups
Peer-reviewed publication

The multiple-choice questions on the BEMA were developed using student reponses to open-ended versions of the questions and expert review. Appropriate statistical analyses were conducted and the difficulty of the items was found to be in the optimal range, most individual items on the BEMA are able to satisfactorily distinguish students who know the material well from those who don’t and almost all were found to be consistent with the rest of the test. The total scores on the BEMA were found to be broadly distributed over the possible range, meaning that the BEMA as a whole has can discriminate well between students. The BEMA has been used to compare the effectiveness of different teaching methods and the results published in peer-reviewed publications. It has been administered at many different institutions.

References

R. Chabay and B. Sherwood, Restructuring the introductory electricity and magnetism course, Am. J. Phys. 74 (4), 329 (2006).
R. Chabay and B. Sherwood, Matter & Interactions, in Research-Based Reform of University Physics (2007), Vol. 1.
S. Chasteen, Teasing out the effect of tutorials via multiple regression, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2011, Omaha, Nebraska, 2011.
S. Chasteen, R. Pepper, M. Caballero, S. Pollock, and K. Perkins, Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics diagnostic: A conceptual assessment for the junior level, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8 (2), 020108 (2012).
S. Chasteen and S. Pollock, Transforming Upper-Division Electricity and Magnetism, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2008, Edmonton, Canada, 2008.
S. Chasteen, S. Pollock, R. Pepper, and K. Perkins, Transforming the junior level: Outcomes from instruction and research in E&M, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8 (2), 020107 (2012).
C. Crouch and K. Heller, Teaching physics to life science students - Examining the role of biological context, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2011, Omaha, Nebraska, 2011.
C. Crouch, P. Wisittanawat, and K. Renninger, Initial Interest, Goals, and Changes in CLASS Scores in Introductory Physics for Life Sciences, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2013, Portland, OR, 2013.
L. Ding, Applying Rasch theory to evaluate the construct validity of brief electricity and magnetism assessment, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2011, Omaha, Nebraska, 2011.
L. Ding, R. Chabay, B. Sherwood, and R. Beichner, Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2 (1), 7 (2006).
C. Keller, N. Finkelstein, K. Perkins, and S. Pollock, Assessing the Effectiveness of a Computer Simulation in Introductory Undergraduate Environments, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2006, Syracuse, New York, 2006.
C. Keller, N. Finkelstein, K. Perkins, and S. Pollock, Assessing the Effectiveness of a Computer Simulation in Conjunction with Tutorials in Introductory Physics in Undergraduate Physics Recitations, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2005, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2005.
M. Kohlmyer, M. Caballero, R. Catrambone, R. Chabay, L. Ding, M. Haugan, M. Marr, B. Sherwood, and M. Schatz, Tale of two curricula: The performance of 2000 students in introductory electromagnetism, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5 (2), 020105 (2009).
L. Kost-Smith, S. Pollock, and N. Finkelstein, Gender disparities in second-semester college physics: The incremental effects of a "smog of bias", Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6 (2), 020112 (2010).
S. Pollock, Comparing Student Learning with Multiple Research-Based Conceptual Surveys: CSEM and BEMA, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2008, Edmonton, Canada, 2008.
S. Pollock, Transferring Transformations: Learning Gains, Student Attitudes, and the Impacts of Multiple Instructors in Large Lecture Courses, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2005, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2005.
S. Pollock, A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of Curriculum on Conceptual Understanding in E&M, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2007, Greensboro, NC, 2007.
S. Pollock, Longitudinal study of student conceptual understanding in electricity and magnetism, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5 (2), 020110 (2009).
S. Pollock and S. Chasteen, Longer term impacts of transformed courses on student conceptual understanding of E&M, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2009, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2009.
S. Pollock and N. Finkelstein, Impacts of curricular change: Implications from 8 years of data in introductory physics, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2012, Philadelphia, PA, 2012.
S. Pollock and N. Finkelstein, Sustaining Change: Instructor Effects in Transformed Large Lecture Courses, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2006, Syracuse, New York, 2006.
S. Pollock and N. Finkelstein, Sustaining educational reforms in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4 (1), 010110 (2008).

PhysPort provides translations of assessments as a service to our users, but does not endorse the accuracy or validity of translations. Assessments validated for one language and culture may not be valid for other languages and cultures.

Language	Translator(s)
Chinese	Mi Su
Japanese	Sachiko Tosa
Portuguese	Ronai Lisboa and José Brás Barreto de Oliveira
Spanish	Genaro Zavala, Julio Benegas, Olivier Espinosa, and Hugo Alarcon
Swedish	David Nordman

If you know of a translation that we don't have yet, or if you would like to translate this assessment, please contact us!

Typical Results

Typical results from studies at two universities in calculus-based introductory physics courses using different teaching methods from Pollock 2007 and Kohlmeyer et. al 2009.

Course Type	Pre ± std. err. (n)	Post ± std. err. (n)	‹g› ± std. err. (n)
Interactive Engagement¹	26% ± 1% (1584)	56% ± 2% (1845)	40% ± 2% (1845)
Matter & Interactions²	26% ± 2% (321)	58% ± 3% (612)	43% ± 2% (612)
Traditional²	25% ± 2% (1319)	46% ± 3% (1246)	30% ± 1% (1246)