An investigation of college chemistry students' understanding of structure-property relationships

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 50, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 699-721

  Cooper, Melanie M ^a   Corley, Leah M ^a   Underwood, Sonia M ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

cognitive science; conceptual change; evaluation and theory; misconceptions

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SCIENCE; CONCEPTUAL CHANGE; EVALUATION AND THEORY; FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS; MACROSCOPIC PROPERTIES; MISCONCEPTIONS; ORGANIC CHEMISTRY COURSE; STRUCTURE PROPERTY RELATIONSHIPS;

EDUCATION COMPUTING;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84880545817     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.21093     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., &, Tytler, R., (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333 (6046), 1096-1097.
2. American Chemical Society. (2013). ACS examinations institute. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from http://chemexams.chem.iastate.edu/
3. Barke, H., Hazari, A., &, Yitbarek, S., (2009). Misconceptions in chemistry: Addressing perceptions in chemical education. Berlin: Springer.
4. Bodner, G., (1991). I have found you an argument: The conceptual knowledge of beginning chemistry graduate students. Journal of Chemical Education, 68 (5), 385.
5. 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. (Pubitemid 128460257)
6. Chi, M. T. H., (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In, S. Vosniadou, (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-682). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Cooper, M. M., Grove, N., Underwood, S. M., &, Klymkowsky, M. W., (2010). Lost in Lewis structures: An investigation of student difficulties in developing representational competence. Journal of Chemical Education, 87 (8), 869-874.
8. Cooper, M. M., &, Klymkowsky, M. W., (2012). Chemistry, life, the universe and everything. Retrieved June 29, 2012 from http://besocratic. colorado.edu/CLUE-Chemistry/index.html
9. Cooper, M. M., &, Klymkowsky, M. W., (2013). The trouble with chemical energy: Why understanding bond energies requires an interdisciplinary systems approach. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12 (2), 306-312.
10. Cooper, M. M., Underwood, S. M., &, Hilley, C. Z., (2012). Development and validation of the implicit information from Lewis structures instrument (IILSI): Do students connect structures with properties ? Chemical Education Research and Practice, 13 (3), 195-200.
11. Cooper, M. M., Underwood, S. M., Hilley, C. Z., &, Klymkowsky, M. W., (2012). Development and assessment of a molecular structure and properties learning progression. Journal of Chemical Education, 89 (11), 1351-1357.
12. Corbin, J., &, Strauss, A., (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13 (1), 3-21.
13. Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., &, Rogat, A., (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence based approach to reform. College-Columbia University: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
14. Creswell, J. W., &, Plano Clark, V. L., (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
15. diSessa, A. A., (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10 (2 & 3), 105-225.
16. diSessa, A. A., (2006). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In, R. K. Sawyer, (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (pp. 265). New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
17. diSessa, A. A., (2008). A bird's-eye view of the "pieces" versus "coherence" controversy (from the "pieces" side of the fence). In, S. Vosniadou, (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 35-60). New York: Routledge Taylor, & Francis Group.
18. diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., &, Esterly, J. B., (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28 (6), 843-900. (Pubitemid 39620371)
19. Duis, J. M., (2011). Organic chemistry educators' perspectives on fundamental concepts and misconceptions: An exploratory study. Journal of Chemical Education, 88 (3), 346-350.
20. Evans, J. S. B., (2003). In two minds: Dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (10), 454-459.
21. Genter, D., (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In, S. Vosniadou, &, A. Ortony, (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 199-241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Gilhooly, K. J., (2004). Working memory and reasoning. In, J. Leighton, &, R. Sternberg, (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 49-77). Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK.
23. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., &, Kahneman, D., (2002). Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
24. Glaser, B. G., &, Strauss, A. L., (1965). Awareness of dying. Chicago: Aldine Pub., Co.
25. Greenbowe, T. J., Rudd, J. A., &, Hand, B. M., (2007). Using the science writing heuristic to improve students' understanding of general equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 84 (12), 2007.
26. Hammer, D., (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions ? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5 (2), 97-127. (Pubitemid 126416353)
27. Hammer, D., (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, (68), S52-S59.
28. Henderleiter, J., Smart, R., Anderson, J., &, Elian, O., (2001). How do organic chemistry students understand and apply hydrogen bonding ? Journal of Chemical Education, 78 (8), 1126-1130.
29. Horton, C., (2007). Student alternative conceptions in chemistry. California Journal of Science Education, 7 (2), 1-85.
30. Jin, H., &, Anderson, C. W., (2012). A learning progression for energy in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (9), 1149-1180.
31. Johnson, P., &, Tymms, P., (2011). The emergence of a learning progression in middle school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (8), 849-877.
32. Johnson-Laird, P. N., (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Johnstone, A. H., (1982). Macro and microchemistry. School Science Review, 64 (227), 377-379.
34. Johnstone, A. H., &, Selepeng, D., (2001). A language problem revisited. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2 (1), 19-29.
35. Justi, R., &, Gilbert, J., (2003). Models and modelling in chemical education. In, J. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, J. H. Van Driel, (Eds.), Chemical Education: Towards Research-Based Practice, (pp. 47-68). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
36. Kahneman, D., (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. NewYork: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
37. Kind, V., (2004). Beyond appearances: Students' misconceptions about basic chemical ideas (2nd ed.). London: Royal Society of Chemistry.
38. Linenberger, K. J., &, Bretz, S. L., (2012). A novel technology to investigate students' understandings of enzyme representations. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42 (1), 45-49.
39. Linn, M. C., (2006). The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction. In, R. K. Sawyer, (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 243-264). New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
40. Maeyer, J., &, Talanquer, V., (2010). The role of intuitive heuristics in students' thinking: Ranking chemical substances. Science Education, 94 (6), 963-984.
41. Nakhleh, M. B., (1991). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69 (3), 979-985.
42. Neumann, K., Viering, T., Boone, W. J., &, Fischer, H. E., (2013). Towards a learning progression of energy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50 (2), 162-188.
43. Nicoll, G., (2001). A report of undergraduates' bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (7), 707-730. (Pubitemid 33595638)
44. Othman, J., Treagust, D. F., &, Chandrasegaran, A., (2008). An investigation into the relationship between students' conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (11), 1531-1550.
45. Ozmen, H., (2004). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13 (2), 147-159.
46. Pierri, E., Karatrantou, A., &, Panagiotakopoulos, C., (2008). Exploring the phenomenon of'change of phase'of pure substances using the microcomputer-based-laboratory (MBL) system. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9 (3), 234-239.
47. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., &, Gertzog, W. A., (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66 (2), 211-227.
48. Roberts, M. J., Gilmore, D. J., &, Wood, D. J., (1997). Individual differences and strategy selection in reasoning. British Journal of Psychology, 88 (3), 473-492.
49. Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D,., Krajcik, J., (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (6), 632-654.
50. Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R., &, Schweingruber, H. A., (2012). Discipline based education research. Washington, DC: The National Academies.
51. Smith, K. C., &, Nakhleh, M. B., (2011). University students' conceptions of bonding in melting and dissolving phenomena. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12 (4), 398-408.
52. Stanovich, K. E., &, West, R. F., (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate ? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23 (5), 645-665.
53. Taber, K. S., (2002). Chemical misconceptions-prevention, diagnosis and cure: Vol. 1: Theoretical background, London Royal Society of Chemistry. London: Royal Society of Chemistry.
54. Taber, K. S., (2008). Conceptual resources for learning science: Issues of transience and grain-size in cognition and cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 30 (8), 1027-1053.
55. Taber, K. S., (2009a). College students' conceptions of chemical stability: The widespread adoption of a heuristic rule out of context and beyond its range of application. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (10), 1333-1358.
56. Taber, K. S., (2009b). Learning at the symbolic level. In, D. F. Treagust, &, J. K. Gilbert, (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 27-108). Dordrecht: Springer.
57. Vázquez, A. V., McLoughlin, K., Sabbagh, M., Runkle, A. C., Simon, J., Coppola, B. P., &, Pazicni, S., (2012). Writing-to-teach: A new pedagogical approach to elicit explanative writing in undergraduate chemistry students, Journal of Chemical Education, 89 (8), 1025-1031.
58. Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., &, Skopeliti, I., (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In, S. Vosniadou, (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3-34). New York: Routledge.
59. Wilson, M., (2009). Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (6), 716-730.