The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students' ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation

Chemistry Education Research and Practice

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 293-307

  Chandrasegaran, A L ^a   Treagust, David F ^a   Mocerino, Mauro ^a  

^a CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Chemical reactions; Macroscopic; Student conceptions; Submicroscopic and symbolic representations

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547194275     PISSN: None     EISSN: 11094028     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1039/B7RP90006F     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Andersson B., (1986), Pupils' explanations of some aspects of chemical reactions, Science Education, 70, 549-563.
2. Ardac D. and Akaygun S., (2005), Using static and dynamic visuals to represent chemical change at molecular level, International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1269-1298.
3. Ardac D. and Akaygun S., (2006), Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 317-337.
4. Ausubel D.P., (1968), Educational psychology: a cognitive view, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
5. Ben-Zvi R., Eylon B. and Silberstein J., (1986), Is an atom of copper malleable? Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 64-66.
6. Ben-Zvi R., Eylon B. and Silberstein J., (1987), Students' visualisation of a chemical reaction, Education in Chemistry, 24, 117-120.
7. Ben-Zvi R., Eylon B. and Silberstein J., (1988), Theories, principles and laws, Education in Chemistry, 25, 89-92.
8. Chandrasegaran A.L., (2004), Diagnostic assessment of secondary students' use of three levels of representation to explain simple chemical reactions, PhD Thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia.
9. th International Conference on Chemical Education, Istanbul, Turkey.
10. Driver R. and Easley J., (1978), Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science studies, Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
11. Duit R. and Treagust D.F., (1995), Students' conceptions and constructivist teaching approaches. In B.J. Fraser and H.J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education, The National Society for the Study of Education, Chicago, IL, pp. 46-49.
12. Duncan I.M. and Johnstone A.H., (1973), The mole concept, Education in Chemistry, 10, 213-214.
13. Gabel D., (1998), The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B.J. Fraser and K.G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (Vol. 1), Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, Great Britain, pp. 233-248.
14. Gabel D., (1999), Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research: A look to the future, Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 548-554.
15. Gabel D.L., Samuel K.V. and Hunn D., (1987), Understanding the particle nature of matter, Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 695-697.
16. Griffiths A.K. and Preston K.R., (1992), Grade-12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 611-628.
17. Haslam F. and Treagust D.F., (1987), Diagnosing secondary students' misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument, Journal of Biological Education, 21, 203-211.
18. Johnstone A.H., (1991), Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, I, 75-83.
19. Johnstone A.H., (1993), The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand, Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 701-705.
20. Keig P.F. and Rubba P.A., (1993), Translations of the representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 883-903.
21. Kozma R.B. and Russell J., (1997), Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 949-968.
22. Lien A.J., (1971), Measurement and evaluation of learning (2nd ed.), William C Brown & Co., Dubuque, 10.
23. Merriam S.B., (1998), Qualitative research and case study applications in education, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
24. Nakhleh M.B., (1992), Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions, Journal of Chemical Education, 69, 191-196.
25. Nakhleh M.B. and Krajcik J.S., (1994), Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base, and pH concepts, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1077-1096.
26. Nunally J., (1978), Psychometric theory (2nd ed.), McGraw Hill, New York.
27. Odom A.L. and Barrow L.H., (1995), Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test measuring college biology students' understanding of diffusion and osmosis after a course of instruction, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 45-61.
28. Osborne R.J., Bell B.F. and Gilbert J.K., (1983), Science teaching and children's view of the world, European Journal of Science Education, 2, 311-321.
29. Peterson R.F., Treagust D.F. and Garnett P.J., (1989), Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade 11 & 12 students' concepts of covalent bonding and structure after a course of instruction, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 301-314.
30. Seddon G.M. and Eniaiyeju P.A., (1986), The understanding of pictorial depth cues, and the ability to visualise the rotation of three-dimensional structures in diagrams, Research in Science and Technological Education, 4, 29-37.
31. Tamir P., (1971), An alternative approach to the construction of multiple-choice test items, Journal of Biological Education, 5, 305-307.
32. Tamir P., (1989), Some issues related to the use of justifications to multiple-choice answers, Journal of Biological Education, 23, 285-292.
33. Tan K.C.D., Goh N.K., Chia L.S. and Treagust D.F., (2002), Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students' understanding of inorganic qualitative analysis, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 283-301.
34. Tan K.C.D. and Treagust D.F., (1999), Evaluating students' understanding of chemical bonding, School Science Review, 81 (294), 75-83.
35. Tasker R. and Dalton R., (2006), Research into practice: Visualisation of the molecular world using animations, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7, 141-159.
36. Treagust D.F., (1988), Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students' misconceptions in science, International Journal of Science Education, 10, 159-169.
37. Treagust D. F., (1995), Diagnostic assessment of students' science knowledge. In S.M. Glynn and R. Duit (Eds.), Learning in science in the schools: Research reforming practice (Vol. 1), Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 327-346.
38. Treagust D.F., (2006), Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching, learning and retention. UniServe Science - Symposium Proceedings: Assessment in science teaching and learning, Uniserve Science, Sydney, Australia, pp. 1-9.
39. Treagust D. F. and Chittleborough G., (2001), Chemistry: A matter of understanding representations. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Subject-specific instructional methods and activities (Vol. 8), Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, UK, pp. 239-267.
40. Treagust D.F., Duit R. and Fraser B.J., (1996), Overview: Research on students' preinstructional conceptions - the driving force for improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. In D.F. Treagust, R. Duit and B.J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics, Teachers College Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 1-14.
41. Tytler R., (2002), Teaching for understanding: student conceptions research, & changing views of learning, Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 48, 14-21.
42. Wang J.R. (2004), Development and validation of a two-tier instrument to examine understanding of internal transport in plants and the human circulatory system, Internal Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 131-157.
43. Yarroch W.L., (1985), Student understanding of chemical equation balancing, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 449-459.