Pre‐service teachers’ conceptions of basic inorganic qualitative analysis

Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 7-20

  Tan, Kim Chwee Daniel ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011480501     PISSN: 14926156     EISSN: 19424051     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14926150509556641     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Abraham, M.R., Williamson, V.M., & Westbrook, S.L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165.
2. Boo, H.K. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3.5(5), 569-581.
3. BouJaoude, S.B. (1991). A study of the nature of students’ understanding about the concept of burning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 689-704.
4. Birk, J.P. & Kurtz, M.J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 124-128.
5. Brosnan, T. (1999). When is a chemical change not a chemical change? Education in Chemistry, 36(2), 56.
6. Butts, B. & Smith, R. (1987). HSC chemistry students’ understanding of the structure and properties of molecular and ionic compounds. Research in Science Education, 17, 192-201.
7. De Jong, O., Acampo, J., & Verdonk, A. (1995). Problems in teaching the topic of redox reaction: Actions and conceptions of chemistry teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1097-1110.
8. Ebenezer, J.V. & Erickson, GL. (1996). Chemistry students’ conceptions of solubility: A phenom-enography. Science Education, 85(5), 509-535.
9. Fensham, P.J. (1994). Beginning to teach chemistry. In P.J. Fensham, R.F. Gunstone, & R.T. White (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 14-28). London: Falmer Press.
10. Garnett, P.J., Garnett, P.J., & Hackling, M.W. (1995). Students’ alternative conceptions in chemistry: A review of research and implications for teaching and learning. Studies in Science Education, 25, 69-95.
11. Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675.
12. Hodson, D. (1992). Redefining and reorienting practical work in school science. School Science Review, 73(264), 65-78.
13. Lenton, G & Turner, L. (1999). Student-teachers’ grasp of science concepts. School Science Review, 5/(295), 67-72.
14. Lin, H.S., Cheng, H.J., & Lawrenz, F. (2000). The assessment of students’ and teachers’ understanding of gas laws. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(2), 235-237.
15. Nakhleh, M.B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry: chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196.
16. Nakhleh, M.B. & Krajcik, J.S. (1994). Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students’ understanding of acid, base and pH concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5/(10), 1077-1096.
17. Novick, S. & Nussbaum, J. (1978). Junior high school pupils’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter: an interview study. Science Education, 62(3), 273-281.
18. Palmer, D.H. (1999). Exploring the link between students’ scientific and nonscientific conceptions. Science Education, 53(6), 639-653.
19. Peterson, R.F. & Treagust, D.F. (1989). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding and structure. Journal of Chemical Education, 66(6), 459-460.
20. Peterson, R.F., Treagust, D.F. & Garnett, P. (1989). 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. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301-314.
21. Quilez-Pardo, J. & Solaz-Portoles, J.J. (1995). Students’ and teachers’ misapplication of Le Chate-lier’s principle: Implications for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(9), 939-957.
22. Ribeiro M.GT.C., Pereira, D.J.V.C., & Maskill, R. (1990). Reaction and spontaneity: the influence of meaning from everyday language on fourth year undergraduates’ interpretations of some simple chemical phenomena. International Journal of Science Education, 12(4), 391-401.
23. Russel, J.W., Kozma, R.B., Jones, T., Wykoff, J., Marx, N., & Davis, J. (1997). Use of simulta-neous-synchronized macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic representations to enhance the teaching and learning of chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(3), 330-334.
24. SPSS (2002). SPSSfor Windows (Release 11.5.1) [Computer Software], Chicago: SPSS Inc.
25. Tan, K.C.D., Goh, N.K., Chia, L.S., & Treagust, D.F. (2001). Secondary students’ perceptions about learning qualitative analysis in inorganic chemistry. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 223-234.
26. Tan, K.C.D., Goh, N.K., Chia, L.S., & Treagust, D.F. (2002). Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 283-301.
27. Tan, K.C.D., Goh, N.K., Chia, L.S., & Treagust, D.F. (in press). Qualitative analysis practical work. School Science Review.
28. Tan, K.C.D. & Treagust, D.F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 5/(294), 75-83.
29. Tasker, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Facing the mismatches in the classroom. In R. Osborne & P. Freyberg (Eds.), Learning in science: The implications of children s science, (pp. 66-80). Auckland, London: Heinemann.
30. Valanides, N. (2000). Primary student teachers’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and its transformation during dissolving. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1(2), 249-262 [Available at http://www.uoi.gr/cerp/]
31. Wandersee, J.H., Mintzes, J.J., & Novak, J.D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In D.L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 177-210). New York: Macmillan.
32. Watson, R., Prieto, T., & Dillon, J.S. (1997). Consistency of students’ explanations about combustion. Science Education, 5/(4), 425-444.
33. White, R.T. (1994). Dimensions of content. In P.J. Fensham, R.F. Gunstone, & R.T. White (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning, (pp. 225-262). London: Falmer Press.
34. Woolnough, B. & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 821-842.