A Macro-Micro-Symbolic Teaching to Promote Relational Understanding of Chemical Reactions

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 973-998

  Jaber, Lama Ziad ^a   BouJaoude, Saouma ^a  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

Author keywords

Chemical reactions; Chemistry education; Epistemic discourse; Macroscopic microscopic symbolic levels; Nature of chemistry

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860740519     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2011.569959     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ahtee, M. and Varjola, I. 1998. Students' understanding of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 20: 305-316.
2. Anderson, B. 1990. "Pupils' conceptions of matter and its transformations (Age 12-16)". In Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles, Edited by: Lijnse, P. L., Licht, P., De Vos, W. and Waarlo, A. J. 12-35. Utrecht: CDß Press.
3. Ben-Zvi, R., Silberstein, J. and Mamlok, R. 1990. "Macro-micro relationships: A key to the world of chemistry". In Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles, Edited by: Lijnse, P. L., Licht, P., De Vos, W. and Waarlo, A. J. 183-197. Utrecht: CDß Press.
4. Bodner, G. M. and Domin, D. S. 2000. Mental models: The role of representations in problem solving in chemistry. University Chemistry Education, 4(1): 24-30. (Proceedings, Purdue University, West Lafayette)
5. Brosnan, T. 1990. "Categorizing macro and micro explanations of material change". In Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles, Edited by: Lijnse, P. L., Licht, P., De Vos, W. and Waarlo, A. J. 198-211. Utrecht: CDß Press.
6. Brosnan, T. and Reynolds, Y. 2001. Students' explanations of chemical phenomena: Macro and micro differences. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19: 69-78.
7. Cakmakci, G., Leach, J. and Donnelly, J. 2006. Students' ideas about reaction rate and its relationship with concentration or pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 28: 1795-1815.
8. Chi, M. T. H. 1992. "Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Examples from learning and discovery in science". In Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, Edited by: Giere, R. 129-186. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
9. Chi, M. T. H. 2005. Common sense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14: 161-199.
10. Cokelez, A., Dumon, A. and Taber, K. S. 2007. Upper secondary French students, chemical transformations and the 'Register of Models': A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Science Education, 30: 806-836.
11. Dori, J. Y. and Hameiri, M. 2003. Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems: Symbol, macro, micro and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40: 278-302.
12. Duit, R. 2006. Bibliography STCSE-Teachers' and students' conceptions and science education, Kiel: IPN-Leibniz Institute for Science Education. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html
13. Gabel, D. 1998. "The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching". In International handbook of science education, Edited by: Fraser, B. J. and Tobin, K. G. 233-248. Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
14. Georgiadou, A. and Tsaparlis, G. 2000. Chemistry teaching in lower secondary school with methods based on: A) psychological theories; B) the macro, representational and submicro levels of chemistry. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1: 217-226.
15. Gómez Crespo, M. A. and Pozo, J. I. 2004. Relationships between everyday knowledge and scientific knowledge: Understanding how matter changes. International Journal of Science Education, 26: 1325-1344.
16. Hinton, M. E. and Nakhleh, M. B. 1999. Students' microscopic, macroscopic, and symbolic representations of chemical reactions. The Chemical Educator, 4: 158-167.
17. Horton, C. 2001. Student preconceptions and misconceptions in chemistry (Student alternative conceptions in chemistry) Retrieved February 8, 2008, fromhttp://www.daisley.net/hellevator/misconceptions/misconceptions.pdf
18. Johnson, P. 2002. Children's understanding of substances, Part 2: Explaining chemical change. International Journal of Science Education, 24: 1037-1054.
19. Johnstone, A. H. 1982. Macro- and microchemistry. School Science Review, 64: 377-379.
20. Johnstone, A. H. 1991. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2): 75-90.
21. Johnstone, A. H. 2000. Teaching of chemistry-Logical or psychological?. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 1: 9-15.
22. Justi, R. and Gilbert, J. 2002. "Models and modeling in chemical education". In Chemical education: Towards research-based practice, Edited by: Gilbert, J., De Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D. F. and Van Driel, J. 47-68. Dordrecht/Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
23. Kind, V. 2004. Beyond appearance: Students' misconceptions about basic chemical ideas. A report prepared for the Royal Society of Chemistry Retrieved February 11, 2008, fromhttp://assessment-ws.wikispaces.com/file/view/Beyond-appearances.pdf
24. 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.
25. Laugier, A. and Dumon, A. 2000. Travaux pratiques en chimie et représentation de la réaction chimique par l'équation-bilan dans les registres macroscopique et microscopique: une étude en classe de seconde (15-16 ans). Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 2: 57-65.
26. Levy Nahum, T., Hofstein, A., Mamlok, R. N. and Bar, Z. D. 2004. Can final examinations amplify students' misconceptions in chemistry?. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5: 301-325.
27. Mulford, R. D. 1996. An inventory for measuring college students' level of misconceptions in first semester chemistry, West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University. (Unpublished masters' thesis)
28. Nakhleh, M. B. 1992. Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3): 191-196.
29. Novak, J. and Gowin, D. B. 1984. Learning how to learn, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
30. Paradis, J. 2007. Explorations in conceptual chemistry: A student activity manual, San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
31. Ruiz-Primo, M. A. and Shavelson, R. J. 1996. Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33: 569-600.
32. Russell, J. W., Kozma, R. B., Jones, T., Wykoff, J., Marx, N. and Davis, J. 1997. Use of simultaneous-synchronized macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic representations to enhance the teaching and learning of chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74: 330-334.
33. Salloum, S. L. 2000. The relationship between students' learning orientation, formal operational reasoning and mental capacity, and their ability to solve conceptual and algorithmic problems in chemistry, Beirut, Lebanon: American University of Beirut. (Unpublished masters' thesis)
34. Sequeira, M. and Leite, L. 1990. "On relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles at the junior high school". In Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles, Edited by: Lijnse, P. L., Licht, P., De Vos, W. and Waarlo, A. J. 220-232. Utrecht: CDß Press.
35. Stavridou, H. and Solomonidou, C. 1998. Conceptual reorganization and the construction of the chemical reaction concept during secondary education. International Journal of Science Education, 20: 205-211.
36. Taber, K. S. 2002a. Chemical misconceptions: Prevention, diagnosis and cure. Vol. 1: Theoretical background, London: Royal Society of Chemistry.
37. Taber, K. S. 2002b. Chemical misconceptions: Prevention, diagnosis and cure. Vol. 2: Resource for classroom teachers, London: Royal Society of Chemistry.
38. Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. and Mamiala, T. L. 2003. The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25: 1353-1368.
39. Tsaparlis, G. 2000. The states-of-matter approach (SOMA) to introductory chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 1: 161-168.