Student Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Multimodal Study

Journal of Chemical Education

Volumn 92, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 1288-1298

  Cooper, Melanie M ^a   Williams, Leah C ^a   Underwood, Sonia M ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemical Education Research; Communication Writing; First Year Undergraduate General; Hydrogen Bonding; Noncovalent Interactions

Indexed keywords

EID: 84938921605     PISSN: 00219584     EISSN: 19381328     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00169     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Cooper, M. M.; Grove, N.; Underwood, S. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W. Lost in Lewis Structures: An Investigation of Student Difficulties in Developing Representational Competence J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 869-874
2. Cooper, M. M.; Underwood, S. M.; Hilley, C. Z. Development and Validation of the Implicit Information from Lewis Structures Instrument (IILSI): Do Students Connect Structures with Properties? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2012, 13, 195-200
3. Cooper, M. M.; Underwood, S. M.; Hilley, C. Z.; Klymkowsky, M. W. Development and Assessment of a Molecular Structure and Properties Learning Progression J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1351-1357
4. Cooper, M. M.; Corley, L. M.; Underwood, S. M. An Investigation of College Chemistry Students' Understanding of Structure-Property Relationships J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2013, 50, 699-721
5. Underwood, S. M.; Reyes-Gastelum, D.; Cooper, M. M. Answering the Questions of Whether and When Student Learning Occurs: Using Discrete-Time Survival Analysis to Investigate How College Chemistry Students' Understanding of Structure-Property Relationships Evolves. Sci. Educ. Accepted for publication.
6. National Research Council. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
7. Novak, J. D. Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, 1998.
8. Bretz, S. L. Novak's Theory of Education: Human Constructivism and Meaningful Learning J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78, 1107-1117
9. McClary, L.; Talanquer, V. Heuristic Reasoning in Chemistry: Making Decisions about Acid Strength Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33 (10) 1433-1454
10. Maeyer, J.; Talanquer, V. The Role of Intuitive Heuristics in Students' Thinking: Ranking Chemical Substances Sci. Educ. 2010, 94, 963-984
11. Cooper, M. M.; Williams, L. C.; Underwood, S. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W. Student Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Comparison of Instructional Approaches. J. Chem. Educ. Manuscript in preparation.
12. Henderleiter, J.; Smart, R.; Anderson, J.; Elian, O. How Do Organic Chemistry Students Understand and Apply Hydrogen Bonding? J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78 (8) 1126-1130
13. Schmidt, H.-J.; Kaufmann, B.; Treagust, D. F. Students' Understanding of Boiling Points and Intermolecular Forces Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2009, 10, 265-272
14. Villafañe, S. M.; Bailey, C. P.; Loertscher, J.; Minderhout, V.; Lewis, J. E. Development and Analysis of an Instrument to Assess Student Understanding of Foundational Concepts before Biochemistry Coursework Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2011, 39, 102-109
15. Peterson, R. F.; Treagust, D. F.; Garnett, P. Development and Application of a Diagnostic Instrument to Evaluate Grade-11 and -12 Students' Concepts of Covalent Bonding and Structure Following a Course of Instruction J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1989, 26, 301-314
16. Goh, N. K.; Khoo, L. E.; Chia, L. S. Some Misconceptions in Chemistry: A Cross-Cultural Comparison, and Implications for Teaching Aust. Sci. Teach. J. 1993, 39 (3) 65-68
17. Barker, V.; Millar, R. Students' Reasoning about Basic Chemical Thermodynamics and Chemical Bonding: What Changes Occur during a Context-Based Post-16 Chemistry Course? Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2000, 22, 1171-1200
18. Bodner, G. M. I Have Found You an Argument: The Conceptual Knowledge of Beginning Chemistry Graduate Students J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68 (5) 385-388
19. Osborne, R. J.; Cosgrove, M. M. Children's Conceptions of the Changes of State of Water J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1983, 20 (9) 825-838
20. Mislevy, R. J.; Almond, R. G.; Lukas, J. F. A Brief Introduction to Evidence-Centered Design; The National Center for Research on Evaluations, Standards, Student Testing (CRESST), Center for Studies in Education, UCLA: Los Angeles, CA, 2003.
21. Lee, H.-S.; Liu, O. L.; Linn, M. C. Validating Measurement of Knowledge Integration in Science Using Multiple-Choice and Explanation Items Appl. Meas. Educ. 2011, 24 (2) 115-136
22. Moreno, R.; Mayer, R. Interactive Multimodal Learning Environments Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2007, 19 (3) 309-326
23. Ainsworth, S. E.; Prain, V.; Tytler, R. Drawing to Learn in Science Science 2011, 333, 1096-1097
24. Leenaars, F. A. J.; van Joolingen, W. R.; Bollen, L. Using Self-Made Drawings to Support Modelling in Science Education Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2013, 44, 82-94
25. Schwamborn, A.; Mayer, R. E.; Thillmann, H.; Leopold, C.; Leutner, D. Drawing as a Generative Activity and Drawing as a Prognostic Activity J. Educ. Psychol. 2010, 102, 872-879
26. Van Meter, P.; Aleksic, M.; Schwartz, A.; Garner, J. Learner-Generated Drawing as a Strategy for Learning from Content Area Text Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2006, 31, 142-166
27. Zhang, Z. H.; Linn, M. C. Can Generating Representations Enhance Learning with Dynamic Visualizations? J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2011, 48 (10) 1177-1198
28. Stieff, M. When Is a Molecule Three- Dimensional? A Task-Specific Role for Imagistic Reasoning in Advanced Chemistry Sci. Educ. 2011, 95, 310-336
29. Gobert, J. D.; Clement, J. J. Effects of Student-Generated Diagrams versus Student-Generated Summaries on Conceptual Understanding of Causal and Dynamic Knowledge in Plate Tectonics J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1999, 36, 39-53
30. Akaygun, S.; Jones, L. L. Words or Pictures: A Comparison of Written and Pictorial Explanations of Physical and Chemical Equilibria Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2014, 36 (5) 783-807
31. MasteringChemistry http://masteringchemistry.com/site/index.html (accessed Sep 1, 2013).
32. American Chemical Society Examinations Institute http://chemexams.chem.iastate.edu/ (accessed Jan 9, 2015).
33. Bryfczynski, S. P. BeSocratic: An Intelligent Tutoring System for the Recognition, Evaluation, and Analysis of Free-Form Student Input; Doctoral Dissertation, Clemson University, 2012.
34. Cooper, M. M.; Underwood, S. M.; Bryfczynski, S. P.; Klymkowsky, M. W. A Short History of the Use of Technology to Model and Analyze Student Data for Teaching and Research. In Tools of Chemistry Education Research; Cole, R.; Bunce, D., Eds.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washingtn, D.C., 2014; Vol. 1166, pp 219-239.
35. Corbin, J.; Strauss, A. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3 rd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, 2008.
36. Glaser, B. G.; Strauss, A. L. Awareness of Dying; Aldine: Chicago, 1965.
37. Cokelez, A.; Dumon, A. Atom and Molecule: Upper Secondary School French Students' Representations in Long-Term Memory Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2005, 6 (3) 119-135
38. Hammer, D. Misconceptions or P-Prims: How May Alternative Perspectives of Cognitive Structure Influence Instructional Perceptions and Intentions? J. Learn. Sci. 1996, 5 (2) 97-127
39. diSessa, A. A. Toward an Epistemology of Physics Cogn. Instr. 1993, 10 (2 & 3) 105-225
40. diSessa, A. A. A Bird's-Eye View of the "Pieces" versus "Coherence" Controversy (from the "Pieces" Side of the Fence). In International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change; Vosniadou, S., Ed.; Routledge: New York, 2008; pp 35-60.
41. McMurry, J. E.; Fay, R. C. General Chemistry: Atoms First; Pearson Education, Inc: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010.
42. Novak, J. D. Meaningful Learning: The Essential Factor for Conceptual Change in Limited or Inappropriate Propositional Hierarchies Leading to Empowerment of Learners Sci. Educ. 2002, 86, 548-571
43. Ausubel, D. P. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, 1968.
44. National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 1999.
45. Cooper, M. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W. Chemistry, Life, the Universe and Everything: A New Approach to General Chemistry, and a Model for Curriculum Reform J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1116-1122
46. Nahum, T. L.; Mamlok-Naaman, R.; Hofstein, A.; Krajcik, J. S. Developing a New Teaching Approach for the Chemical Bonding Concept Aligned with Current Scientific and Pedagogical Knowledge Sci. Educ. 2007, 91, 579-603
47. Johnstone, A. H.; Selepeng, D. A Language Problem Revisited Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2001, 2 (1) 19-29