Exploring tertiary students' understanding of covalent bonding

Research in Science and Technological Education

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 241-267

  Coll, Richard K ^a   Treagust, David F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

^b CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750420475     PISSN: 02635143     EISSN: 14701138     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0263514022000030480     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. ANDERSON, W.P., BURDETT, J.K., and CZECH, P.T., 1994. What is the metallic bond?. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 116(19): 8808–8809.
2. BlRK, J.P., and KURTZ, M.J., 1999. Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1): 124–128.
3. Boo, H.K., 1998. Students' understandings of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5): 569–581.
4. BORGES, A.T., and GILBERT, J.K., 1999. Mental models of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1): 95–117.
5. FRANCO, C., DE BARROS, H.L., COUNVAUX, D., KRAPAS, QUEIROZ, G., and ALVES, F., 1999. From scientists' and inventors' minds to some scientific and technological products: relationships between theories, models, mental models and conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 21(3): 277–291.
6. GALLUP, G.A., 1988. The Lewis electron-pair model, spectroscopy, and the role of the orbital picture in describing the electronic structure of molecules. Journal of Chemical Education, 65(8): 671–674.
7. GlLBERT, J.K., 1980. The use of models in science and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 2(1): 3–13.
8. GILBERT, J.K., BOULTER, C.J., and ELMIER, R., 2000. “ Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
9. GILBERT, J.K., BOULTER, C.J., and RUTHERFORD, M., 2000. “ Explanations with models in science education ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
10. GILBERT, J.K., and OSBORNE, R.J., 1980. The use of models in science and science teaching. European Journal of Science Teaching, 2(1): 3–13.
11. GILBERT, J.K., and RUTHERFORD, M., 1998a. Models in explanations Part 1: horses for courses?. International Journal of Science Education, 20(1): 83–97.
12. GILBERT, J.K., and RUTHERFORD, M., 1998b. Models in explanations Part 2: whose voice? Whose ears?. International Journal of Science Education, 20(2): 187–203.
13. GILBERT, J.K., WATFS, D.M., and OSBORNE, R.J., 1985. “ Eliciting student views using an interview-about-instances technique ”. In Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change, Edited by: WEST, L.H.T., and PlNES, A.L., Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
14. GILLESPIE, R.J., and ROBINSON, E.A., 1995. Hypervalence and the octet rule. Inorganic Chemistry, 34(4): 978–979.
15. GILLESPIE, R.J., SPENCER, J.N., and MOOG, R.S., 1996a. Demystifying introductory chemistry Part 1: electron configurations from experiment. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(7): 617–622.
16. GILLESPIE, R.J., SPENCER, J.N., and MOOG, R.S., 1996b. Demystifying introductory chemistry Part 2: bonding and molecular geometry without orbitale--the electron domain model. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(7): 622–627.
17. GLYNN, S.M., and DUTT, R., 1995. Learning Science in the Schools: Research Reforming Practice, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. GOBERT, J.D., 2000. Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 891–894.
19. GOH, N.K., KHOO, L.E., and CHIA, L.S., 1993. Some misconceptions in chemistry: a cross-cultural comparison, and implications for teaching. Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 39(3): 65–68.
20. GOOD, R.G., WANDERSEE, J.H., and ST.JULIEN, J., 1993. “ Cautionary notes on the appeal of the new ism (constructivism) in science education ”. In The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education, Edited by: TOBIN, K., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. GRECA, LM., and MOREIRA, M.A., 2000. Mental models, conceptual models, and modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 1–11.
22. GRIFFITHS, A.K., and PRESTON, K.R., An investigation of grade 12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of molecules and atoms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Francisco. March.
23. GROSSLIGHT, L., UNGER, C., JAY, E., and SMITH, C., 1991. Understanding models and their use in science: conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9): 799–822.
24. HARRISON, A.G., and TREAGUST, D.F., 1996. Secondary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5): 509–534.
25. HARRISON, A.G., and TREAGUST, D.F., 2000. A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 1011–1026.
26. HAWKES, S.J., 1996. Salts are mostly NOT" ionized. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(5): 421–423.
27. JUSTI, R., and GILBERT, J.K., 2000. History and philosophy of science through models: some challenges in the case of 'the atom'. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 993–1009.
28. JUSTI, R., and GlLBERT, J.K., Teachers' views about models and modelling in science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. St Louis, Missouri. March.
29. JOHNSON, P., and GOTT, R., 1996. Constructivism and evidence from children's ideas. Science Education, 80(5): 561–577.
30. KING, R.B., ed. 1994. Encyclopedia of Inorganic Chemistry, Chichester: Wiley.
31. KLEINMAN, R.W., GRIFFIN, H.C., and KERNER, NK., 1987. Images in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(9): 766–770.
32. LAING, M., 1996. Bonding in ozone. Education in Chemistry, 33(2): 46–50.
33. MALVERN, D., 2000. “ Mathematical models in science ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GIIBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
34. MURRELL, J.N., KETTLE, S.F.A., and TEDDER, J.M., 1985. The Chemical Bond, 2nd edn, Chichester: Wiley.
35. NlCOLL, G., 2001. A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7): 707–730.
36. NICOLL, G., and FRANCISCO, J.S., 2001. An investigation of the factors influencing student performance in physical chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(1): 99–102.
37. NICOLL, G., FRANCISCO, J.S., and NAKHLEH, M.B., 2001. Narrowing the gap between concepts and algorithms in freshman chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(8): 1111–1116.
38. NORMAN, D.N., 1983. “ Some observations on mental models ”. In Mental Models, Edited by: GENTNER, D., and STEVENS, A.L., Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39. OGILVIE, J.F., 1990. The nature of the chemical bond-1990. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(4): 280–289.
40. OVERSBY, J., 2000. “ Models in explanations of chemistry ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
41. PALMER, D.H., 1999. Exploring the link between students' scientific and nonscientific conceptions. Science Education, 83: 639–653.
42. PALMER, D., 2001. Students' alternative conceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about gravity. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7): 691–706.
43. PEREIRA, M.P., and PESTANA, M.E.M., 1991. Pupils' representations of models of water. International Journal of Science Education, 13(3): 313–319.
44. PETERSON, R.F., and TREAGUST, D.F., 1989. Grade-12 students' misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6): 459–460.
45. PETERSON, R.F., TREAGUST, D.F., and GARNETT, P., 1989. Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and grade-12 students' concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4): 301–314.
46. PFUNDT, H., and DUIT, R., 1994. Bibliography: Student's Alternative Frameworks and Science Education, 3rd edn, Kiel: University of Kiel.
47. PFUNDT, H., and DUIT, R., 1997. Bibliography: Student's Alternative Frameworks and Science Education, 4th edn, Kiel: University of Kiel.
48. PURSER, G.H., 1989. The significance of the bond angle in sulfur dioxide. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(9): 710–713.
49. REINER, M., 2000. “ Thought experiments and embodied cognition ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
50. SCHMIDT, H.-J., 1997. Students' misconceptions--looking for a pattern. Science Education, 81(2): 123–135.
51. VAN DRIEL, J.H., and VERLOOP, N., 1999. Teachers' knowledge of models and modeling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11): 1141–1153.
52. WALTON, A., 1978. Molecular and Crystal Structure Models, Chichester: Ellis Horwood.
53. WELLER, C.M., 1970. The role of analogy in teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7(2): 113–119.
54. WILLIAMSON, V.M., and ABRAHAM, M.R., 1995. The effects of computer animation on particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5): 521–534.
55. ZIMMERMANN, E., 2000. “ The structure and development of science teachers' pedagogical models: Implications for teacher education ”. In Developing Models in Science Education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
56. ZUMDAHL, S.S., and ZUMDAHL, S., 2000. Chemistry, 5th edn, Lexington, DC: Heath.
57. COLL, R.K., and TREAGUST, D.F., 2002. Learners' use of analogy and alternative conceptions for chemical bonding: a cross-age study. Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 48(1): 24–35.
58. CURNOW, O.W., 1996. The rise and decline of d orbitale: bonding in hypervalent compounds. Chemistry in New Zealand, 6(5): 10–14.
59. CURNOW, O.W., 1998. A simple qualitative molecular-orbital/valence-bond description of the bonding in main group 'hypervalent' molecules. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(7): 910–915.
60. De JONG, O., and VAN DRIEL, J., Developing preservice teachers' content knowledge and PCK of models and modeling. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. St Louis, Missouri. March.
61. DE POSADA, J.M., 1997. Conceptions of high school students concerning the internal structure of metals and their electric conduction: structure and evolution. Science Education, 81(4): 445–467.
62. DIAS, J.R., 1989. A facile Hückel molecular orbital solution of buckminsterfullene using chemical graph theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(12): 1012–1015.
63. DUNNE, B.J., MORRIS, R.B., and ORPEN, A.G., 1991. Structural systematics Part 3. Geometry deformations in triphenylphosphine fragments: a test of bonding theories in phosphine complexes. Journal of the Chemical Society: Dalton Transactions,: 653–661.
64. DYKSTRA, C.E., 1988. “ Ab initia calculation of the structures and properties of molecules ”. In Studies in Physical and Theoretical Chemistry, Vol. 58, Amsterdam: Elsevier.
65. ESHACH, H., and GARIK, P., Students' conception about atoms and atom-building. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. St Louis, Missouri. March.
66. FENSHAM, P.J., and KASS, H., 1988. Inconsistent or discrepant events in science instruction. Studies in Science Education, 15: 1–16.
67. FISCHLER, H., and SEIFERT, S., How to help teachers and students to deal with models in science teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. St Louis, Missouri. March.
68. FRANCO, C., and COLINVAUX, D., 2000. “ Grasping mental models ”. In Developing models in science education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
69. SNYDER, J.L., 2000. An investigation of the knowledge structures of experts, intermediates and novices in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 979–992.
70. STRAUB, D.K., 1995. Lewis structures of boron compounds involving multiple bonds. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(6): 494–497.
71. TABKR, K.S., 1995a. An analogy for discussing progression in learning chemistry. School Science Review, 76(276): 91–95.
72. TABER, K.S., 1995b. Development of student understanding: a case study of stability and lability in cognitive structure. Research in Science and Technological Education, 13(1): 89–99.
73. TABER, K.S., 1997. Student understanding of ionic bonding: molecular versus electrostatic framework. School Science Renew, 78(285): 85–95.
74. TABER, K.S., 1998. An alternative conceptual framework from chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5): 597–608.
75. TABER, K.S., 2000. Multiple frameworks? Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 22(4): 399–417.
76. TABER, K.S., 2001. Shifting sands: a case study of conceptual development as competition between alternative conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7): 731–753.
77. TABER, K.S., and WATTS, M., 1997. Constructivism and concept learning in chemistry: perspectives from a case study. Research in Education, 58: 10–20.
78. TAYLOR, N., and LUCAS, K., 1997. The trial of an innovative science programme for preservice primary teachers in Fiji. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 25(3): 325–343.
79. TREAGUST, D.F., CHITTLEBOROUGH, G., and MAMIALA, T.L., The role of models and the development of scientific ideas in learning organic chemistry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. St Louis, Missouri. March.
80. TSAPARLIS, G., 1997. Atomic orbitals, molecular orbitale and related concepts: conceptual difficulties among chemistry students. Research in Science Education, 27(2): 271–287.
81. BOULTER, C.J., and BUCKLEY, B.C., 2000. “ Constructing a typology of models for science education ”. In Developing models in science education, Edited by: GILBERT, J.K., and BOULTER, C.J., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
82. BUTTS, B., and SMITH, R., 1987. HSC chemistry students' understanding of the structure and properties of molecular and ionic compounds. Research in Science Education, 17: 192–201.
83. CHALMERS, A.F., 1999. What is Ms thing called science?, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Press.
84. CLEMENT, J., 1998. Expert novice similarities and instruction using analogies. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10): 1271–1286.
85. CLEMENT, J., 2000. Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9): 1041–1053.
86. Cou, R.K., 1999a. “ Learners' mental models of chemical bonding ”. Perth, Western Australia: Curtin University of Technology. Unpublished Doctor of Science Education thesis.
87. COLL, R.K., Learners' mental models of chemical bonding: a cross age study. Paper presented at the 30th Annual Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association. Rotorua, New Zealand. July.
88. GOLL, R.K., and TAYLOR, N., 2001a. Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19(2): 171–191.
89. COLL, R.K., and TAYLOR, N., 2001b. Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding amongst senior secondary and tertiary students: nature and origins. Teaching and Learning, 22(1): 48–60.
90. Cou, R.K., and TREAGUST, D.F., Learners' mental models of metallic bonding: a cross-age study. Paper presented at the 31st Annual Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association. Fremantle, Western Australia. July.
91. Cou, R.K., and TREAGUST, D.T., 2001a. Learners' mental models of chemical bonding. Research in Science Education, 31: 357–382.
92. COLL, R.K., and TREAGUST, D.T., Learners' mental models of ionic bonding: a cross-age study. Paper presented at the annual National Association for Research in Science Teaching meeting. St Louis, Missouri. March.