Improving Representational Competence with Concrete Models

Science Education

Volumn 100, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 344-363

  Stieff, Mike ^a   Scopelitis, Stephanie ^a   Lira, Matthew E ^a   Desutter, Dane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84958641895     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.21203     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Cooper, 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.
2. Copolo, C. E., & Hounshell, P. B. (1995). Using three-dimensional models to teach molecular structures in high school chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(4), 295-305.
3. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 385-398.
4. Dougherty, R. C. (1997). Grade/study-performance contracts, enhanced communication, cooperative learning, and student performance in undergraduate organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(6), 722-726.
5. Ealy, J. B. (1999). A student evaluation of molecular modeling in first year college chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(4), 309-321.
6. Ealy, J. B. (2004). Students' understanding is enhanced through molecular modeling. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(4), 461-471.
7. Ege, S. N., Coppola, B. P., & Lawton, R. G. (1997). The University of Michigan undergraduate chemistry curriculum. 1. Philosophy, curriculum, and the nature of change. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(1), 74-83.
8. Ferk, V., Vrtacnik, M., Blejec, A., & Gril, A. (2003). Students' understanding of molecular structure representations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), 1227-1245.
9. Gabel, D., & Sherwood, R. (1980). The effect of student manipulation of molecular models on chemistry achievement according to Piagetian level. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(1), 75-81.
10. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799-822.
11. Grove, N., Cooper, M., & Rush, K. M. (2012). Decorating with arrows: Toward the development of representational competence in organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(7), 844-849.
12. Hagen, J. P. (2000). Cooperative learing in organic II. Increased retention on a commuter campus. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(11), 1441-1444.
13. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352-381.
14. Jacobson, N. (2001). A method for normalizing students' scores when employing multiple graders. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(4), 35-38.
15. Kirsh, D., & Maglio, P. (1994). On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science, 18, 513-549.
16. Kohl, P. B., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2005). Student representational competence and self-assessment when solving physics problems. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 1(010104), 1-11.
17. Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The role of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-143.
18. Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In J. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 121-146). London, UK: Kluwer.
19. Nathan, M. J., Stephens, A. C., Masarik, K., Alibali, M. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). Representational fluency in the middle school: A classroom study. In D. S. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, D. Y. White, H. G. Wiegel, R. L. Bryant, & K. Nooney (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting of the North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 463-472). Columbus, OH: ERIC.
20. Nitz, S., Ainsworth, S. E., Nerdel, C., & Prechtl, H. (2014). Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development of representational competence and biological knowledge?. Learning and Instruction, 31, 13-22.
21. Padalkar, S., & Hegarty, M. (2012). Improving representational competence in chemistry with model-based feedback. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles, & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp. 2162-2167). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
22. Raje, S., & Stieff, M. (2009). An examination of the cognitive mechanisms underlying chemistry misconceptions. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
23. Springer, M. (2014). Improving students' understanding of molecular structure through broad-based use of computer models in the undergraduate organic chemistry lecture. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(8), 1162-1168.
24. Stieff, M. (2011). Fostering representational competence through argumentation with multi-representational displays. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (Vol. 1, pp. 288-295). Hong Kong: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
25. Strauss, S., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Stull, A. T., Hegarty, M., Dixon, B. L., & Stieff, M. (2012). Use it or lose it: Representational translation with concrete models. Cognition & Instruction, 30(4), 404-434.
27. Tien, L. T., Roth, V., & Kampmeier, J. A. (2002). Implementation of a peer-led team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 606-632.
28. Urhahne, D., Nick, S., & Schanze, S. (2009). The effect of three-dimensional simulations on the understanding of chemical structures and their properties. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 495-513.
29. Wilder, A., & Brinkerhoff, J. (2007). Supporting representational competence in high school biology with computer-based biomolecular visualizations. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(1), 5-26.
30. Wu, H.-k., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting conceptual understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842.
31. Wu, H.-k., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465-492.