The influence of 16-year-old students' gender, mental abilities, and motivation on their reading and drawing submicrorepresentations achievements

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 32, Issue 12, 2010, Pages 1561-1593

  Devetak, Iztok ^a   Glažar, Saša Aleksij ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Intrinsic motivation; Misconceptions; Secondary school students; Students' mental abilities; Submicrorepresentations

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954527360     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690903150609     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.
2. Anderman, E. M., & Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences and classroom effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 811-831.
3. Barke, H.-D., & Engida, T. (2001). Structural chemistry and spatial ability in different cultures. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2, 227-239.
4. Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Bunce, D. M., & Gabel, D. (2002). Differential effects in the achievement of males and females of teaching the particulate nature of chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 911-972.
6. Chittleborough, G., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2002). Constraints to the development of first year university chemistry students' mental models of chemical phenomena. In Focusing on the Student Proceedings of the 11th Annual Teaching Learning Forum. Perth: Edith Cowan University. Retrieved August 11, 2009, from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/abstracts/ chittleborough-abs.html
7. Coll, R. K., Dalgety, J., & Salter, D. (2002). The development of the Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire (CAEQ). Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 3, 19-32.
8. Devetak, I., Vogrinc, J., & Glǎar, S. A. (2009). Assessing 16-year-old students' understanding of aqueous solution at submicroscopic level. Research in Science Education, 39, 157-179.
9. diSessa, A. (2004). Metarepresentation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 293-331.
10. Ferk, V.,Vrta[caron] nik, M., Blejec, A., & Gril, A. (2003). Students' understanding of molecular structure representations. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1227-1245.
11. Gabel, D., Samuel, K. V., & Humm, D. (1987). Understanding the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 695-697.
12. Haidar, A. H., & Abraham, M. R. (1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 919-938.
13. Halakova, Z., & Prokša, M. (2007). Two kinds of conceptual problems in chemistry teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 172-174.
14. Johnson, P. (1998). Children's understanding of changes of state involving the gas state, Part II: Evaporation and condensation below boiling point. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 695-709.
15. Jurǐeviš, M., Devetak, I., Razdevšek-Pičko C., & Glažar, S. A. (2008). Intrinsic motivation of pre-service primary school teachers for learning chemistry in relation to their academic achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 87-107.
16. Keig, P. F., & Rubba, P. A. (1993). Translation of representations of structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 883-903.
17. Kelly, R. M., & Jones, L. L. (2008). Investigating students' ability to transfer ideas learned from molecular animations of the dissolution process. Journal of Chemical Education, 85, 303-309.
18. Longden, K., Black, P., & Solomon, J. (1991). Children's interpretation of dissolving. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 59-68.
19. Margel, H., Eylon, B.-S., Scherz, Z. (2008). A longitudinal study of junior high school students' conceptions of the structure of materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 132-152.
20. Meece, J. L., & Jones, M. G. (1996). Gender differences in motivation and strategy use in science: Are girls rote learners? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 393-406.
21. Moore, D. S., & McCabe, G. P. (1997). Introduction to the practice of statistics. New York: Freeman.
22. Moore, R. W., & Foy, R. L. (1997). The scientific attitude inventory: A revision (SAIII). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 327-336.
23. Napier, J. D., & Riley, J. P. (1985). Relationship between affective determinants and achievement in science for seventeen-years-olds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 365-383.
24. Nieswandt, M. (2007). Students affect and conceptual understanding in learning chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 908-937.
25. Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual. Berkshire: Open University Press.
26. Papageorgioua, G., & Johnson, P. (2005). Do particle ideas help or hinder pupils' understanding of phenomena? International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1299-1317.
27. Pogač nik, V. (1998). Test hitrosti percepcije "Vzorci", Priroč nik [Test of speed of perception "Patterns"]. Ljubljana: Center za psihodiagnostična sredstva [Ljubljana: Centre for psychodiagnosticinstrument].
28. Pogač nik, V (2000). Osebna izkaznica testa-Spacialni test Rotacije [Identification of a test-spatialtest Rotations]. Ljubljana: Center za psihodiagnostična sredstva [Ljubljana: Centre for psycho-diagnostic instruments].
29. Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2006). An exploratory study of teachers' and students' use of multi-modal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1843-1866.
30. Rennie, L. J. (1990). Student participation and motivational orientation: What do students do in science? In K., Tobin, J., Butler & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Windows into science classrooms: Problems associated with higher-level cognitive learning (pp. 164-198). London: The Falmer Press.
31. Russell, T., & McGuigan, L. (2001, August). Promoting understanding through representational rede- scription: An illustration referring to young pupils' ideas about gravity. Paper presented at the 3rd international conference of the ESERA, Thessaloniki.
32. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
33. Sanger, M. J., & Phelps, A. J. (2007). What are students thinking when they pick their answer? A content analysis of students' explanations of gas properties. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 870-874.
34. Shemesh, M., Eckstein, S. F., & Lazarowitz, R. (1992). An experimental study of the develop- ment of formal reasoning among secondary school students. School Science and Mathematics, 92, 26-30.
35. Simpson, R. D., & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A summary of major influences on attitude toward and achievement in science among adolescent students. Science Education, 74, 1-18.
36. Solsona, N., Izquierdo, M., & DeJong, O. (2003). Exploring the development of students' conceptual profiles of chemical change. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 3-12.
37. Stains, M., & Talanquer, V. (2007). Classification of chemical substances using particulate representations of matter: An analysis of students' thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 643-661.
38. Stains, M., & Talanquer, V. (2008). Classification of chemical reactions: Stages of expertise. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 771-793.
39. Stipek, D. (1998). Motivation to learn: From theory to practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
40. Thiele, R. B., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). An interpretative explanation of high school chemistry teachers' analogical explanations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 227-242.
41. Tien, L. T., Teichert M. A., & Rickey, D. (2007). Effectiveness of a MORE laboratory module in prompting students to revise their molecular-level ideas about solutions. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 175-180.
42. Tobin, K. G., & Capie, W. (1981). The development and validation of a group test of logical thinking. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 413-423.
43. Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G., & Venville, G. J. (1998). Teaching science effectively with anal- ogies: An approach for preservice and inservice teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9, 85-101.
44. Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students' motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 639-654.
45. Valanides, N. (1996). Formal reasoning and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 99-107.
46. Valanides, N. (1998). Formal operational performance and achievement of lower secondary school students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 24, 1-23.
47. Vogrinc, J., & ValenčičZuljan, M. (2009). Action research in schools: An important factor in teachers' professional development. Educational Studies, 35, 53-63.
48. Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Carolan, J. (2006). Learning junior secondary science through multi- modal representations. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 11. Retrieved June 30, 2007, from http://ejse.southwestern.edu/volumes/v11n1/articles/art06_waldrip.pdf.
49. Williamson, V. M., & Abraham, M. R. (1995). The effects of computer animation on the particu- late mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 521-534.
50. Wu, H.-K., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88, 465-492.
51. Yang, E., Andre, T., & Greenbowe, T. J. (2003). Spatial ability and the impact of visualiza- tion/animation on learning electrochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 329-349.
52. Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1081-1094.