Chemistry Education Research - From Personal Empiricism to Evidence, Theory, and Informed Practice

Chemical Reviews

Volumn 118, Issue 12, 2018, Pages 6053-6087

  Cooper, Melanie M ^a   Stowe, Ryan L ^a  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMISTRY;

CHEMISTRY EDUCATION; EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS; KNOW-THAT; LEARNING THEORY; TEACHING AND LEARNING; THEORIES OF LEARNING;

STUDENTS;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; EMPIRICISM; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING THEORY; PHYSICIAN; STUDENT; TEACHING;

EID: 85049132096     PISSN: 00092665     EISSN: 15206890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00020     Document Type: Review

References (341)

1. Patrick, W. A. What Kind of Research Is Essential to Good Teaching?. J. Chem. Educ. 1924, 1, 16, 10.1021/ed001p16
2. The National Research Council. Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
3. NIH, National Cancer Institute. Randomized Control Trial-National Library of Medicine; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMHT0025811/ (accessed Dec 8, 2017).
4. Cooper, M. M. The Replication Crisis and Chemistry Education Research. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 1-2, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00907
5. Towns, M. H. New Guidelines for Chemistry Education Research Manuscripts and Future Directions of the Field. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1107-1108, 10.1021/ed400476f
6. Towns, M. H.; Kraft, A. Review and Synthesis of Research in Chemical Education from 2000-2010. A white paper for the National Academies National Research Council Board on Science Education, Committee on Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline Based Education Research; 2011.
7. Teo, T. W.; Goh, M. T.; Yeo, L. W. Chemistry Education Research Trends: 2004-2013. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 470-487, 10.1039/C4RP00104D
8. Bain, K.; Moon, A.; Mack, M. R.; Towns, M. H. A Review of Research on the Teaching and Learning of Thermodynamics at the University Level. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 320-335, 10.1039/C4RP00011K
9. Bain, K.; Towns, M. H. A Review of Research on the Teaching and Learning of Chemical Kinetics. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2016, 17, 246-262, 10.1039/C5RP00176E
10. Graulich, N. The Tip of the Iceberg in Organic Chemistry Classes: How Do Students Deal with the Invisible?. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2015, 16, 9-21, 10.1039/C4RP00165F
11. Harle, M.; Towns, M. A Review of Spatial Ability Literature, Its Connection to Chemistry, and Implications for Instruction. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 351-360, 10.1021/ed900003n
12. Powers, S. Chapter XIII. Chemical Education. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1926, 48, 237-254, 10.1021/ja01419a812
13. Hale, H. The History of Chemical Education in the United States from 1870 to 1914. J. Chem. Educ. 1932, 9, 729, 10.1021/ed009p729
14. Mabery, C. F. How Chemistry Is Best Taught. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1893, 15, 463-475, 10.1021/ja02118a006
15. Royce, J. Is There a Science of Education?. Educ. Rev. 1891, 1, 15-25
16. Johnstone, A. H. The Development of Chemistry Teaching: A Changing Response to Changing Demand. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 701, 10.1021/ed070p701
17. Cornog, J.; Colbert, J. C. What We Teach Our Freshmen in Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1924, 1, 5, 10.1021/ed001p5
18. Momsen, J.; Offerdahl, E.; Kryjevskaia, M.; Montplaisir, L.; Anderson, E.; Grosz, N. Using Assessments to Investigate and Compare the Nature of Learning in Undergraduate Science Courses. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 2013, 12, 239-249, 10.1187/cbe.12-08-0130
19. Scouller, K. The Influence of Assessment Method on Students' Learning Approaches: Multiple Choice Question Examination versus Assignment Essay. High. Educ. 1998, 35, 453-472, 10.1023/A:1003196224280
20. Scouller, K. M.; Prosser, M. Students' Experiences in Studying for Multiple Choice Question Examinations. Stud. High. Educ. 1994, 19, 267-279, 10.1080/03075079412331381870
21. Snyder, M. D. B. R. The Hidden Curriculum, 1 st ed.; Knopf: New York, 1971.
22. Entwistle, N. J. Approaches to Learning and Perceptions of the Learning Environment. High. Educ. 1991, 22, 201-204, 10.1007/BF00132287
23. Crooks, T. J. The Impact of Classroom Evaluation Practices on Students. Rev. Educ. Res. 1988, 58, 438-481, 10.3102/00346543058004438
24. Plane, R. A.; Sienko, M. J. Chemistry: Principles and Properties, 1 st ed.; Mcgraw-Hill: New York, 1957.
25. Borman, S. A Tale of Two Textbooks-History and Influence of Sienko & Plane and Morrison and Boyd Detailed at Symposium. Chem. Eng. News 2005, 83, 48-51
26. diSessa, A. A. Knowledge in Pieces. In Constructivism in the computer age; Forman, G. E., Pufall, P. B., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, NJ, 1988; pp 49-70.
27. diSessa, A. A. Toward an Epistemology of Physics. Cogn. Instr. 1993, 10, 105-225, 10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
28. Vosniadou, S. Examining Cognitive Development from a Conceptual Change Point of View: The Framework Theory Approach. Eur. J. Dev. Psychol. 2014, 11, 645-661, 10.1080/17405629.2014.921153
29. Vosniadou, S.; Skopeliti, I. Conceptual Change from the Framework Theory Side of the Fence. Sci. Educ. 2014, 23, 1427-1445, 10.1007/s11191-013-9640-3
30. Posner, G. J.; Strike, K. A.; Hewson, P. W.; Gertzog, W. A. Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Sci. Educ. 1982, 66, 211-227, 10.1002/sce.3730660207
31. Chi, M. T. H. Commonsense Conceptions of Emergent Processes: Why Some Misconceptions Are Robust. J. Learn. Sci. 2005, 14, 161-199, 10.1207/s15327809jls1402-1
32. 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, 10.1002/tea.21093
33. Cooper, M. M.; Williams, L. C.; Underwood, S. M. Student Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Multimodal Study. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1288-1298, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00169
34. Bretz, S. L.; McClary, L. Students' Understandings of Acid Strength: How Meaningful Is Reliability When Measuring Alternative Conceptions?. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 212-219, 10.1021/ed5005195
35. Cruz-Ramírez de Arellano, D.; Towns, M. H. Students' Understanding of Alkyl Halide Reactions in Undergraduate Organic Chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 501-515, 10.1039/C3RP00089C
36. Yan, F.; Talanquer, V. Students' Ideas about How and Why Chemical Reactions Happen: Mapping the Conceptual Landscape. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2015, 37, 3066-3092, 10.1080/09500693.2015.1121414
37. Bodner, G. M. Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline-Based Education Research: The Development of Research in Chemical Education as a Field of Study. A white paper for the National Academies National Research Council Board on Science Education, Committee on Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline Based Education Research; 2011.
38. Holmes, H. N. College Research. J. Chem. Educ. 1924, 1, 81, 10.1021/ed001p81
39. Karplus, R. Part III. Curriculum Project Reports: The Science Curriculum Improvement Study-Report to the Piaget Conference. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1964, 2, 236-240, 10.1002/tea.3660020317
40. Karplus, R. Chemical Phenomena in Elementary School Science. J. Chem. Educ. 1966, 43, 267-269, 10.1021/ed043p267
41. Furth, H. G. Piaget and Knowledge: Theoretical Foundations; Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1969.
42. Piaget, J.; Duckworth, E. Genetic Epistemology. Am. Behav. Sci. 1970, 13, 459-480, 10.1177/000276427001300320
43. Flavell, J. H. The Developmental Psychology of Jean Piaget; The University Series in Psychology; Van Nostrand and Co., Inc.: Princeton, NJ, 1964; Vol. 2.
44. Piaget, J. Structuralism; Psychology Press: New York, 2015.
45. Dewey, J. Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education; Macmillan: New York, 1916.
46. Piaget, J.; Brown, T.; Thampy, K. J. Equilibration of Cognitive Structures: The Central Problem of Intellectual Development; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1985.
47. diSessa, A. A. A History of Conceptual Change Research: Threads and Fault Lines. In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences; Cambridge University Press: New York, 2014; pp 88-108.
48. Karplus, R. The Science Curriculum Improvement Study. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1964, 2, 293-303, 10.1002/tea.3660020406
49. Craig, B. S. The Philosophy of Jean Piaget and Its Usefulness to Teachers of Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1972, 49, 807, 10.1021/ed049p807
50. Bodner, G. M. Constructivism: A Theory of Knowledge. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63, 873, 10.1021/ed063p873
51. Windschitl, M. Framing Constructivism in Practice as the Negotiation of Dilemmas: An Analysis of the Conceptual, Pedagogical, Cultural, and Political Challenges Facing Teachers. Rev. Educ. Res. 2002, 72, 131-175, 10.3102/00346543072002131
52. Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes; Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., Souberman, E., Eds.; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1978.
53. Gosser, D. K.; Roth, V. The Workshop Chemistry Project: Peer-Led Team-Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 185-187, 10.1021/ed075p185
54. Wilson, S. B.; Varma-Nelson, P. Small Groups, Significant Impact: A Review of Peer-Led Team Learning Research with Implications for STEM Education Researchers and Faculty. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 1686-1702, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00862
55. Gosser, D. K.; Cracolice, M. S.; Kampmeier, J. A.; Roth, V.; Strozak, V. S.; Varma-Nelson, P. Peer-Led Team Learning: A Guidebook; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2000.
56. Ebenezer, J. V. Making Chemistry Learning More Meaningful. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 464-467, 10.1021/ed069p464
57. Ausubel, D. P. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, 1968.
58. Ausubel, D. P. The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning; Grune & Stratton: New York, 1963.
59. Bretz, S. L. Novak's Theory of Education: Human Constructivism and Meaningful Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78, 1107-1115, 10.1021/ed078p1107.6
60. Novak, J. D.; Gowin, D. B.; Kahle, J. B. Learning How to Learn, 1 st ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, U.K., 1984.
61. The National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded ed., 2 nd ed.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2000.
62. Herron, J. D. Piaget for Chemists. Explaining What "Good" Students Cannot Understand. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 52, 146-150, 10.1021/ed052p146
63. Johnstone, A. H. Macro- and Microchemistry. Sch. Sci. Rev. 1982, 64, 377-379
64. Teichert, M. A.; Stacy, A. M. Promoting Understanding of Chemical Bonding and Spontaneity through Student Explanation and Integration of Ideas. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39, 464-496, 10.1002/tea.10033
65. Johnstone, A. H. Why Is Science Difficult to Learn? Things Are Seldom What They Seem. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 1991, 7, 75-83, 10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x
66. Taber, K. S. Revisiting the Chemistry Triplet: Drawing upon the Nature of Chemical Knowledge and the Psychology of Learning to Inform Chemistry Education. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2013, 14, 156-168, 10.1039/C3RP00012E
67. Talanquer, V. Macro, Submicro, and Symbolic: The Many Faces of the Chemistry "Triplet". Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33, 179-195, 10.1080/09500690903386435
68. Gabel, D. Improving Teaching and Learning through Chemistry Education Research: A Look to the Future. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 548-554, 10.1021/ed076p548
69. Multiple Representations in Chemical Education, 1 st ed.; Gilbert, J. K., Treagust, D. F., Eds.; Models and Modeling in Science Education; Springer: Dordrecht, 2009; Vol. 4.
70. Greene, J.; Hicks, C. Basic Cognitive Processes; Milton Keynes, Open University Press: 1984.
71. Baddeley, A. Working Memory: Looking Back and Looking Forward. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2003, 4, 829-839, 10.1038/nrn1201
72. Miller, G. A. The Magical Number Seven, plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychol. Rev. 1956, 63, 81-97, 10.1037/h0043158
73. De Ribaupierre, A.; Fagot, D.; Lecerf, T. Working Memory Capacity and Its Role in Cognitive Development: Are Age Differences Driven by the Same Processes Across the Lifespan? In Cognitive Development and Working Memory: A Dialogue between Neo-Piagetian Theories and Cognitive Approaches; Barrouillet, P., Gaillard, V., Eds.; Psychology Press: Hove, East Sussex, 2011; pp 105-133.
74. Cowan, N.; Chen, Z.; Rouder, J. N. Constant Capacity in an Immediate Serial-Recall Task: A Logical Sequel to Miller (1956). Psychol. Sci. 2004, 15, 634-640, 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00732.x
75. Mathy, F.; Feldman, J. What's Magic about Magic Numbers? Chunking and Data Compression in Short-Term Memory. Cognition 2012, 122, 346-362, 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.11.003
76. Johnstone, A. H. Chemistry Teaching-Science or Alchemy?. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 262-268, 10.1021/ed074p262
77. Johnstone, A. H. Chemical Education Research in Glasgow in Perspective. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2006, 7, 49-63, 10.1039/B5RP90021B
78. Johnstone, A. H. You Can't Get There from Here. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 22-29, 10.1021/ed800026d
79. Kozma, R.; Russell, J. Multimedia and Understanding: Expert and Novice Responses to Different Representations of Chemical Phenomena. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1997, 34, 949-968, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199711)34:9<949::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-U
80. de Jong, T.; Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. Cognitive Structures of Good and Poor Novice Problem Solvers in Physics. J. Educ. Psychol. 1986, 78, 279-288, 10.1037/0022-0663.78.4.279
81. Smith, J. I.; Combs, E. D.; Nagami, P. H.; Alto, V. M.; Goh, H. G.; Gourdet, M. A. A.; Hough, C. M.; Nickell, A. E.; Peer, A. G.; Coley, J. D. et al. Development of the Biology Card Sorting Task to Measure Conceptual Expertise in Biology. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 2013, 12, 628-644, 10.1187/cbe.13-05-0096
82. Ben-Zvi, R.; Eylon, B.-S.; Silberstein, J. Is an Atom of Copper Malleable?. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63, 64-66, 10.1021/ed063p64
83. Novick, S.; Nussbaum, J. Junior High School Pupils' Understanding of the Particulate Nature of Matter: An Interview Study. Sci. Educ. 1978, 62, 273-281, 10.1002/sce.3730620303
84. Novick, S.; Nussbaum, J. Pupils' Understanding of the Particulate Nature of Matter: A Cross-Age Study. Sci. Educ. 1981, 65, 187-196, 10.1002/sce.3730650209
85. Cros, D.; Maurin, M.; Amouroux, R.; Chastrette, M.; Leber, J.; Fayol, M. Conceptions of First-year University Students of the Constituents of Matter and the Notions of Acids and Bases. Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 1986, 8, 305-313, 10.1080/0140528860080307
86. Cros, D.; Chastrette, M.; Fayol, M. Conceptions of Second Year University Students of Some Fundamental Notions in Chemistry. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1988, 10, 331-336, 10.1080/0950069880100308
87. Treagust, D. F. Development and Use of Diagnostic Tests to Evaluate Students' Misconceptions in Science. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1988, 10, 159-169, 10.1080/0950069880100204
88. Mas, C. J. F.; Perez, J. H.; Harris, H. H. Parallels between Adolescents' Conception of Gases and the History of Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 616-618, 10.1021/ed064p616
89. Stavy, R. Children's Conception of Gas. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1988, 10, 553-560, 10.1080/0950069880100508
90. Yarroch, W. L. Student Understanding of Chemical Equation Balancing. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1985, 22, 449-459, 10.1002/tea.3660220507
91. Andersson, B. Pupils' Explanations of Some Aspects of Chemical Reactions. Sci. Educ. 1986, 70, 549-563, 10.1002/sce.3730700508
92. de Vos, W.; Verdonk, A. H. A New Road to Reactions. Part 4. The Substance and Its Molecules. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 692-694, 10.1021/ed064p692
93. Stavridou, H.; Solomonidou, C. Physical Phenomena - chemical Phenomena: Do Pupils Make the Distinction?. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1989, 11, 83-92, 10.1080/0950069890110108
94. de Vos, W.; Verdonk, A. H. A New Road to Reactions: Part III. Teaching the Heat Effect of Reactions. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63, 972-974, 10.1021/ed063p972
95. Gussarsky, E.; Gorodetsky, M. On the Concept "Chemical Equilibrium": The Associative Framework. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27, 197-204, 10.1002/tea.3660270303
96. Garnett, P. J.; Garnett, P. J.; Hackling, M. W. Students' Alternative Conceptions in Chemistry: A Review of Research and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Stud. Sci. Educ. 1995, 25, 69-96, 10.1080/03057269508560050
97. Mulford, D. R.; Robinson, W. R. An Inventory for Alternate Conceptions among First-Semester General Chemistry Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 739-744, 10.1021/ed079p739
98. Pedrosa, M. A.; Dias, M. H. Chemistry Textbook Approaches to Chemical Equilibrium and Student Alternative Conceptions. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2000, 1, 227-236, 10.1039/A9RP90024A
99. Pozo, R. M. D. Prospective Teachers' Ideas about the Relationships between Concepts Describing the Composition of Matter. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2001, 23, 353-371, 10.1080/09500690121334
100. Nicoll, G. A Report of Undergraduates' Bonding Misconceptions. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2001, 23, 707-730, 10.1080/09500690010025012
101. Özkaya, A. R. Conceptual Difficulties Experienced by Prospective Teachers in Electrochemistry: Half-Cell Potential, Cell Potential, and Chemical and Electrochemical Equilibrium in Galvanic Cells. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 735-738, 10.1021/ed079p735
102. Niaz, M.; Aguilera, D.; Maza, A.; Liendo, G. Arguments, Contradictions, Resistances, and Conceptual Change in Students' Understanding of Atomic Structure. Sci. Educ. 2002, 86, 505-525, 10.1002/sce.10035
103. Özmen, H.; Ayas, A. Students Difficulties in Understanding of the Conservation of Matter in Open and Closed-System Chemical Reactions. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2003, 4, 279-290, 10.1039/B3RP90017G
104. Treagust, D. F.; Tan, K. C. D.; Goh, N. K.; Chia, L. S. Major Sources of Difficulty in Students' Understanding of Basic Inorganic Qualitative Analysis. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 725-732, 10.1021/ed081p725
105. Gopal, H.; Kleinsmidt, J.; Case, J.; Musonge, P. An Investigation of Tertiary Students' Understanding of Evaporation, Condensation and Vapour Pressure. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2004, 26, 1597-1620, 10.1080/09500690410001673829
106. Canpolat, N.; Pinarbasi, T.; Sözbilir, M. Prospective Teachers' Misconceptions of Vaporization and Vapor Pressure. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 1237-1242, 10.1021/ed083p1237
107. Canpolat, N. Turkish Undergraduates' Misconceptions of Evaporation, Evaporation Rate, and Vapour Pressure. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2006, 28, 1757-1770, 10.1080/09500690600779957
108. Chiu, M.-H. A National Survey of Students' Conceptions of Chemistry in Taiwan. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2007, 29, 421-452, 10.1080/09500690601072964
109. Özmen, H. Determination of Students' Alternative Conceptions about Chemical Equilibrium: A Review of Research and the Case of Turkey. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2008, 9, 225-233, 10.1039/B812411F
110. Cakmakci, G. Identifying Alternative Conceptions of Chemical Kinetics among Secondary School and Undergraduate Students in Turkey. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 449-455, 10.1021/ed8001336
111. Villafañe, S. M.; Loertscher, J.; Minderhout, V.; Lewis, J. E. Uncovering Students' Incorrect Ideas about Foundational Concepts for Biochemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2011, 12, 210-218, 10.1039/C1RP90026A
112. Naah, B. M.; Sanger, M. J. Student Misconceptions in Writing Balanced Equations for Dissolving Ionic Compounds in Water. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2012, 13, 186-194, 10.1039/C2RP00015F
113. Turányi, T.; Tóth, Z. Hungarian University Students' Misunderstandings in Thermodynamics and Chemical Kinetics. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2013, 14, 105-116, 10.1039/C2RP20015E
114. Eymur, G.; Cetin, P.; Geban, Ö. Analysis of the Alternative Conceptions of Preservice Teachers and High School Students Concerning Atomic Size. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 976-980, 10.1021/ed300027f
115. Cooper, M. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W. The Trouble with Chemical Energy: Why Understanding Bond Energies Requires an Interdisciplinary Systems Approach. CBE Life Sci. Educ 2013, 12, 306-312, 10.1187/cbe.12-10-0170
116. Boo, H. K. Students' Understandings of Chemical Bonds and the Energetics of Chemical Reactions. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1998, 35, 569-581, 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)35:5<569::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-N
117. Brown, D.; Hammer, D. Conceptual Change in Physics. In International handbook of research on conceptual change; Vosniadou, S., Ed.; Routledge: New York, 2008; pp 127-154.
118. Ioannides, C.; Vosniadou, S. The Changing Meaning of Force. Cogn. Sci. Q. 2002, 2, 5-61
119. Chi, M. T. H.; Slotta, J. D.; De Leeuw, N. From Things to Processes: A Theory of Conceptual Change for Learning Science Concepts. Learn. Instr. 1994, 4, 27-43, 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90017-5
120. Minstrell, J. Explaining the ''at Rest'' Condition of an Object. Phys. Teach. 1982, 20, 10-14, 10.1119/1.2340924
121. Minstrell, J. Teaching Science for Understanding. In Toward the thinking curriculum: current cognitive research; Resnick, L. B., Klopfer, L., Eds.; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Alexandria, VA, 1989; pp 129-149.
122. diSessa, A. Alternative Conceptions and P-Prims. In Encyclopedia of Science Education; Gunstone, R., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, 2015; pp 34-37.
123. Taber, K. S. Conceptual Resources for Learning Science: Issues of Transience and Grain-size in Cognition and Cognitive Structure. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2008, 30, 1027-1053, 10.1080/09500690701485082
124. Taber, K. S.; García-Franco, A. Learning Processes in Chemistry: Drawing Upon Cognitive Resources to Learn About the Particulate Structure of Matter. J. Learn. Sci. 2010, 19, 99-142, 10.1080/10508400903452868
125. McCloskey, M. Naive Theories of Motion. In Mental Models; Genter, D., Stevens, A. L., Eds.; Psychology Press: New York, 2014; pp 299-322.
126. Kahneman, D. Thinking, Fast and Slow; Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York, 2011.
127. Evans, J. Bias in Human Reasoning: Causes and Consequences, 1 st ed.; Psychology Press: Hove, 1990.
128. Wason, P. C.; Evans, J. S. B. T. Dual Processes in Reasoning?. Cognition 1974, 3, 141-154, 10.1016/0010-0277(74)90017-1
129. Evans, J. S. B. T.; Stanovich, K. E. Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition: Advancing the Debate. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2013, 8, 223-241, 10.1177/1745691612460685
130. Sana, F.; Weston, T.; Cepeda, N. J. Laptop Multitasking Hinders Classroom Learning for Both Users and Nearby Peers. Comput. Educ. 2013, 62, 24-31, 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003
131. Junco, R. In-Class Multitasking and Academic Performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 2236-2243, 10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.031
132. Dietz, S.; Henrich, C. Texting as a Distraction to Learning in College Students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 36, 163-167, 10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.045
133. Talanquer, V. Chemistry Education: Ten Heuristics To Tame. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 1091-1097, 10.1021/ed4008765
134. Maeyer, J.; Talanquer, V. Making Predictions about Chemical Reactivity: Assumptions and Heuristics. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2013, 50, 748-767, 10.1002/tea.21092
135. Chandrasegaran, A. L.; Treagust, D. F.; Waldrip, B. G.; Chandrasegaran, A. Students' Dilemmas in Reaction Stoichiometry Problem Solving: Deducing the Limiting Reagent in Chemical Reactions. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2009, 10, 14-23, 10.1039/B901456J
136. Talanquer, V. When Atoms Want. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1419-1424, 10.1021/ed400311x
137. Spencer, J. N. General Chemistry Course Content. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 182-186, 10.1021/ed069p182
138. Cooper, M.; Klymkowsky, M. 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, 10.1021/ed300456y
139. Burdge, J.; Overby, J. Chemistry: Atoms First; McGraw Hill: Boston, MA, 2012.
140. Zumdahl, S. S.; Zumdahl, S. A. Chemistry: An Atoms First Approach; Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, 2011.
141. McMurrey, J.; Fay, R. C. General Chemistry Atoms First; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010.
142. Esterling, K. M.; Bartels, L. Atoms-First Curriculum: A Comparison of Student Success in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1433-1436, 10.1021/ed300725m
143. Cooper, M. The Case for Reform of the Undergraduate General Chemistry Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 231-232, 10.1021/ed800096m
144. Lloyd, B. W.; Spencer, J. N. The Forum: New Directions for General Chemistry: Recommendations of the Task Force on the General Chemistry Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 206-209, 10.1021/ed071p206
145. Havighurst, R. J. Reform in the Chemistry Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 1929, 6, 1126-1129, 10.1021/ed006p1126
146. Nameroff, T. J.; Busch, D. H. Exploring the Molecular Vision: Report from a SOCED Invitational Conference. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 177-179, 10.1021/ed081p177
147. Gillespie, R. J. The Great Ideas of Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 862-864, 10.1021/ed074p862
148. Atkins, P. Chemistry: The Great Ideas. Pure Appl. Chem. 1999, 71, 927-929, 10.1351/pac199971060927
149. The College Board. AP Chemistry: Course and Exam Description; The College Board: New York, 2014.
150. Murphy, K.; Holme, T.; Zenisky, A.; Caruthers, H.; Knaus, K. Building the ACS Exams Anchoring Concept Content Map for Undergraduate Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 715-720, 10.1021/ed300049w
151. Holme, T.; Murphy, K. The ACS Exams Institute Undergraduate Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map I: General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 721-723, 10.1021/ed300050q
152. Cooper, M. M.; Posey, L. A.; Underwood, S. M. Core Ideas and Topics: Building Up or Drilling Down?. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 541-548, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00900
153. Bodner, G. M. Research on Problem Solving in Chemistry. In Chemistry Education; García-Martínez, J., Serrano-Torregrosa, E., Eds.; Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2015; pp 181-202.
154. Bodner, G. M.; Herron, J. D. Problem-Solving in Chemistry. In Chemical Education: Towards Research-based Practice; Gilbert, J. K., de Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D. F., van Driel, J. H., Eds.; Science & Technology Education Library; Springer: Dordrecht, 2002; pp 235-266.
155. Gabel, D.; Bunce, D. M. Research on Problem Solving: Chemistry. In Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning; Gabel, D. L., Ed.; MacMillan: New York, 1994; pp 301-326.
156. Martinez, M. E. Learning and Cognition: The Design of the Mind, 1 st ed.; Pearson: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2010.
157. Bassok, M.; Novick, L. R. Problem Solving. In The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning; Holyoak, K. J., Morrison, R. G., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, U.K., 2012.
158. Camacho, M.; Good, R. Problem Solving and Chemical Equilibrium: Successful versus Unsuccessful Performance. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1989, 26, 251-272, 10.1002/tea.3660260306
159. Tingle, J. B.; Good, R. Effects of Cooperative Grouping on Stoichiometric Problem Solving in High School Chemistry. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27, 671-683, 10.1002/tea.3660270707
160. Tang, H.; Kirk, J.; Pienta, N. J. Investigating the Effect of Complexity Factors in Stoichiometry Problems Using Logistic Regression and Eye Tracking. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 969-975, 10.1021/ed4004113
161. Knaus, K.; Murphy, K.; Blecking, A.; Holme, T. A Valid and Reliable Instrument for Cognitive Complexity Rating Assignment of Chemistry Exam Items. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 554-560, 10.1021/ed900070y
162. Raker, J. R.; Trate, J. M.; Holme, T. A.; Murphy, K. Adaptation of an Instrument for Measuring the Cognitive Complexity of Organic Chemistry Exam Items. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1290-1295, 10.1021/ed400373c
163. Clair-Thompson, H. S.; Overton, T.; Bugler, M. Mental Capacity and Working Memory in Chemistry: Algorithmic versus Open-Ended Problem Solving. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2012, 13, 484-489, 10.1039/C2RP20084H
164. The National Research Council. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
165. Justi, R.; Gilbert, J. Models and Modeling in Chemical Education. In Chemical education: Towards research-based practice; Gilbert, J., De Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D. F., Van Driel, J. H., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publisher: Dortrecht, Netherlands, 2003; pp 47-68.
166. Tomasi, J. Models and Modeling in Theoretical Chemistry. J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM 1988, 179, 273-292, 10.1016/0166-1280(88)80128-3
167. Nersessian, N. J. Model-Based Reasoning in Conceptual Change. In Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery; Magnani, L., Nersessian, N. J., Thagard, P., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: New York, 1999; pp 5-22.
168. Gilbert, J. K.; Justi, R. Models of Modeling. In Modelling-based Teaching in Science Education; Gilbert, J. K., Justi, R., Eds.; Models and Modeling in Science Education; Springer: Dordrecht, 2016; pp 17-40.
169. Grosslight, L.; Unger, C.; Jay, E.; Smith, C. L. Understanding Models and Their Use in Science: Conceptions of Middle and High School Students and Experts. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1991, 28, 799-822, 10.1002/tea.3660280907
170. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.; Erduran, S. Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview. In Argumentation in science education: perspectives from classroom-based research; Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Erduran, S., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, 2008; pp 3-27.
171. Erduran, S.; Simon, S.; Osborne, J. TAPping into Argumentation: Developments in the Application of Toulmin's Argument Pattern for Studying Science Discourse. Sci. Educ. 2004, 88, 915-933, 10.1002/sce.20012
172. Pabuccu, A.; Erduran, S. Beyond Rote Learning in Organic Chemistry: The Infusion and Impact of Argumentation in Tertiary Education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2017, 39, 1154-1172, 10.1080/09500693.2017.1319988
173. Osborne, J. F.; Patterson, A. Scientific Argument and Explanation: A Necessary Distinction?. Sci. Educ. 2011, 95, 627-638, 10.1002/sce.20438
174. Talanquer, V. Exploring Dominant Types of Explanations Built by General Chemistry Students. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2010, 32, 2393-2412, 10.1080/09500690903369662
175. Talanquer, V. Explanations and Teleology in Chemistry Education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2007, 29, 853-870, 10.1080/09500690601087632
176. Cooper, M. M.; Kouyoumdjian, H.; Underwood, S. M. Investigating Students' Reasoning about Acid-Base Reactions. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 1703-1712, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00417
177. Becker, N.; Noyes, K.; Cooper, M. Characterizing Students' Mechanistic Reasoning about London Dispersion Forces. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 1713-1724, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00298
178. Domin, D. S. A Review of Laboratory Instruction Styles. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 543-547, 10.1021/ed076p543
179. Buck, L. B.; Bretz, S. L.; Towns, M. H. Characterizing the Level of Inquiry in the Undergraduate Laboratory. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2008, 38, 52-58
180. Bloom, B. S. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, 1 st ed.; Longman Group: London, 1956.
181. Cook, E.; Kennedy, E.; McGuire, S. Y. Effect of Teaching Metacognitive Learning Strategies on Performance in General Chemistry Courses. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 961-967, 10.1021/ed300686h
182. Towns, M. H. Developing Learning Objectives and Assessment Plans at a Variety of Institutions: Examples and Case Studies. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 91-96, 10.1021/ed8000039
183. Zoller, U.; Nahum, T. L. From Teaching to KNOW to Learning to THINK in Science Education. In Second International Handbook of Science Education; Springer International Handbooks of Education; Springer: Dordrecht, 2012; pp 209-229.
184. Zoller, U. The Fostering of Question-Asking Capability: A Meaningful Aspect of Problem-Solving in Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 510-512, 10.1021/ed064p510
185. Zoller, U. Are Lecture and Learning Compatible? Maybe for LOCS: Unlikely for HOCS. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 195-197, 10.1021/ed070p195
186. Zoller, U. Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (Chemistry) Exam Questions: Performance and Attitudes of College Students. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2002, 24, 185-203, 10.1080/09500690110049060
187. Cooper, M. M.; Caballero, M. D.; Ebert-May, D.; Fata-Hartley, C. L.; Jardeleza, S. E.; Krajcik, J. S.; Laverty, J. T.; Matz, R. L.; Posey, L. A.; Underwood, S. M. Challenge Faculty to Transform STEM Learning. Science 2015, 350, 281-282, 10.1126/science.aab0933
188. Sevian, H.; Talanquer, V. Rethinking Chemistry: A Learning Progression on Chemical Thinking. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 10-23, 10.1039/C3RP00111C
189. The National Research Council. Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2001.
190. Holme, T. Assessment and Quality Control in Chemistry Education. J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80, 594-596, 10.1021/ed080p594
191. ACS Examinations Institute. A Short History, ACS Exams; https://uwm.edu/acs-exams/about-us/history/ (accessed Aug 17, 2017).
192. Brandriet, A.; Reed, J. J.; Holme, T. A Historical Investigation into Item Formats of ACS Exams and Their Relationships to Science Practices. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1798-1806, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00459
193. Raker, J. R.; Holme, T. A. A Historical Analysis of the Curriculum of Organic Chemistry Using ACS Exams as Artifacts. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1437-1442, 10.1021/ed400327b
194. Kendhammer, L.; Holme, T.; Murphy, K. Identifying Differential Performance in General Chemistry: Differential Item Functioning Analysis of ACS General Chemistry Trial Tests. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 846-853, 10.1021/ed4000298
195. Embretson, S. E.; Reise, S. P. Item Response Theory for Psychologists, 1 st ed.; Psychology Press: Mahwah, NJ, 2000.
196. Nurrenbern, S. C.; Pickering, M. Concept Learning versus Problem Solving: Is There a Difference?. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 508-510, 10.1021/ed064p508
197. Holme, T. A.; Luxford, C. J.; Brandriet, A. Defining Conceptual Understanding in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1477-1483, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00218
198. Lobato, J. Alternative Perspectives on the Transfer of Learning: History, Issues, and Challenges for Future Research. J. Learn. Sci. 2006, 15, 431-449, 10.1207/s15327809jls1504-1
199. ACS Division of Chemical Education Examinations Institute. Diagnostic of Undergraduate Chemistry Knowledge Exam; 2013.
200. Treagust, D. F. Diagnostic Assessment of Students' Science Knowledge. Learn. Sci. Sch. Res. Reforming Pract. 1995, 1, 327-436
201. Hestenes, D.; Wells, M.; Swackhamer, G. Force Concept Inventory. Phys. Teach. 1992, 30, 141-158, 10.1119/1.2343497
202. Brandriet, A. R.; Bretz, S. L. The Development of the Redox Concept Inventory as a Measure of Students' Symbolic and Particulate Redox Understandings and Confidence. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 1132-1144, 10.1021/ed500051n
203. Luxford, C. J.; Bretz, S. L. Development of the Bonding Representations Inventory To Identify Student Misconceptions about Covalent and Ionic Bonding Representations. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 312-320, 10.1021/ed400700q
204. Bretz, S. L.; Linenberger, K. J. Development of the Enzyme-substrate Interactions Concept Inventory. Biochem. Mol. Biol. Educ. 2012, 40, 229-233, 10.1002/bmb.20622
205. Dick-Perez, M.; Luxford, C. J.; Windus, T. L.; Holme, T. A Quantum Chemistry Concept Inventory for Physical Chemistry Classes. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 605-612, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00781
206. Wren, D.; Barbera, J. Psychometric Analysis of the Thermochemistry Concept Inventory. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 380-390, 10.1039/C3RP00170A
207. Wren, D.; Barbera, J. Gathering Evidence for Validity during the Design, Development, and Qualitative Evaluation of Thermochemistry Concept Inventory Items. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1590-1601, 10.1021/ed400384g
208. Yezierski, E. J.; Birk, J. P. Misconceptions about the Particulate Nature of Matter. Using Animations To Close the Gender Gap. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 954-960, 10.1021/ed083p954
209. Novak, J. D. A Theory of Education; Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY, 1977.
210. Ausubel, D. P.; Novak, J. D.; Hanesian, H. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View; Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, 1978.
211. Magnusson, S.; Krajcik, J.; Borko, H. Nature, Sources, and Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Science Teaching. In Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge; Gess-Newsome, J., Lederman, N. G., Eds.; Science & Technology Education Library; Springer: Dordrecht, 1999; pp 95-132.
212. Linn, R. L. Educational Measurement, 3 rd ed.; Macmillan: New York, 1989.
213. Hubbard, J. K.; Potts, M. A.; Couch, B. A. How Question Types Reveal Student Thinking: An Experimental Comparison of Multiple-True-False and Free-Response Formats. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 2017, 16, ar26, 10.1187/cbe.16-12-0339
214. Hammer, D.; Elby, A. On the Form of a Personal Epistemology. In Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing; Hofer, B. K., Pintrich, P. R., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, 2002; pp 169-190.
215. Hammer, D. Misconceptions or P-Prims: How May Alternative Perspectives of Cognitive Structure Influence Instructional Perceptions and Intentions?. J. Learn. Sci. 1996, 5, 97-127, 10.1207/s15327809jls0502-1
216. Talanquer, V. Concept Inventories: Predicting the Wrong Answer May Boost Performance. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 1805-1810, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00427
217. Jorion, N.; Gane, B. D.; James, K.; Schroeder, L.; DiBello, L. V.; Pellegrino, J. W. An Analytic Framework for Evaluating the Validity of Concept Inventory Claims. J. Eng. Educ. 2015, 104, 454-496, 10.1002/jee.20104
218. Hake, R. R. Interactive-Engagement versus Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses. Am. J. Phys. 1998, 66, 64-74, 10.1119/1.18809
219. Shepard, L. A. The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture. Educ. Res. 2000, 29, 4-14, 10.3102/0013189X029007004
220. The National Research Council. Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2013.
221. Underwood, S. M.; Posey, L. A.; Herrington, D. G.; Carmel, J. H.; Cooper, M. M. Adapting Assessment Tasks To Support Three-Dimensional Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 207-217, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00645
222. Harris, C. J.; Krajcik, J. S.; Pellegrino, J. W.; McElhaney, K. W. Constructing Assessment Tasks That Blend Disciplinary Core Ideas, Crosscutting Concepts, and Science Practices for Classroom Formative Applications; SRI International: Menlo Park, CA, 2016.
223. Laverty, J. T.; Underwood, S. M.; Matz, R. L.; Posey, L. A.; Carmel, J. H.; Caballero, M. D.; Fata-Hartley, C. L.; Ebert-May, D.; Jardeleza, S. E.; Cooper, M. M. Characterizing College Science Assessments: The Three-Dimensional Learning Assessment Protocol. PLoS One 2016, 11, e0162333, 10.1371/journal.pone.0162333
224. Stowe, R.; Cooper, M. M. Practice What We Preach: Assessing "Critical Thinking" in Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 1852-1859, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00335
225. Jin, H.; Anderson, C. W. Developing Assessments For A Learning Progression on Carbon-Transforming Processes in Socio-Ecological Systems. In Learning Progressions in Science; SensePublishers: Rotterdam, 2012; pp 151-181.
226. 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, 115-136, 10.1080/08957347.2011.554604
227. Claesgens, J.; Scalise, K.; Wilson, M.; Stacy, A. Mapping Student Understanding in Chemistry: The Perspectives of Chemists. Sci. Educ. 2009, 93, 56-85, 10.1002/sce.20292
228. Becker, N. M.; Rupp, C. A.; Brandriet, A. Engaging Students in Analyzing and Interpreting Data to Construct Mathematical Models: An Analysis of Students' Reasoning in a Method of Initial Rates Task. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2017, 18, 798-810, 10.1039/C6RP00205F
229. Williams, L. C.; Underwood, S. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W.; Cooper, M. M. Are Noncovalent Interactions an Achilles Heel in Chemistry Education? A Comparison of Instructional Approaches. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1979-1987, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00619
230. Stanger-Hall, K. F. Multiple-Choice Exams: An Obstacle for Higher-Level Thinking in Introductory Science Classes. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 2012, 11, 294-306, 10.1187/cbe.11-11-0100
231. Zeidner, M. Essay versus Multiple-Choice Type Classroom Exams: The Student's Perspective. J. Educ. Res. 1987, 80, 352-358, 10.1080/00220671.1987.10885782
232. Ioannidis, J. P. A. Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLOS Med. 2005, 2, e124, 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
233. Grove, N.; Bretz, S. L. CHEMX: An Instrument To Assess Students' Cognitive Expectations for Learning Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 1524-1529, 10.1021/ed084p1524
234. Bauer, C. F. Attitude toward Chemistry: A Semantic Differential Instrument for Assessing Curriculum Impacts. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 1440-1445, 10.1021/ed085p1440
235. Xu, X.; Lewis, J. E. Refinement of a Chemistry Attitude Measure for College Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 561-568, 10.1021/ed900071q
236. Hazari, Z.; Sadler, P. M.; Sonnert, G. The Science Identity of College Students: Exploring the Intersection of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2013, 42, 82-91
237. Galloway, K. R.; Bretz, S. L. Development of an Assessment Tool to Measure Students' Meaningful Learning in the Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1149-1158, 10.1021/ed500881y
238. Cooper, M. M.; Sandi-Urena, S. Design and Validation of an Instrument To Assess Metacognitive Skillfulness in Chemistry Problem Solving. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86, 240-245, 10.1021/ed086p240
239. Linnenbrink-Garcia, L.; Patall, E. A.; Pekrun, R. Adaptive Motivation and Emotion in Education: Research and Principles for Instructional Design. Policy Insights Behav. Brain Sci. 2016, 3, 228-236, 10.1177/2372732216644450
240. Bodner, G.; Klobuchar, M.; Geelan, D. The Many Forms of Constructivism. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78, 1107-1133, 10.1021/ed078p1107.4
241. Bowen, C. W. A Quantitative Literature Review of Cooperative Learning Effects on High School and College Chemistry Achievement. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 116-119, 10.1021/ed077p116
242. Freeman, S.; Eddy, S. L.; McDonough, M.; Smith, M. K.; Okoroafor, N.; Jordt, H.; Wenderoth, M. P. Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2014, 111, 8410-8415, 10.1073/pnas.1319030111
243. Springer, L.; Stanne, M. E.; Donovan, S. S. Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 1999, 69, 21-51, 10.3102/00346543069001021
244. Gibbons, R. E.; Laga, E. E.; Leon, J.; Villafañe, S. M.; Stains, M.; Murphy, K.; Raker, J. R. Chasm Crossed? Clicker Use in Postsecondary Chemistry Education. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 549-557, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00799
245. Apple, T.; Cutler, A. The Rensselaer Studio General Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 462-463, 10.1021/ed076p462
246. Schwartz, D. L.; Bransford, J. D. A Time For Telling. Cogn. Instr. 1998, 16, 475-5223, 10.1207/s1532690xci1604-4
247. Hockings, S. C.; DeAngelis, K. J.; Frey, R. F. Peer-Led Team Learning in General Chemistry: Implementation and Evaluation. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 990-996, 10.1021/ed085p990
248. Lewis, S. E. Retention and Reform: An Evaluation of Peer-Led Team Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 703-707, 10.1021/ed100689m
249. Shields, S. P.; Hogrebe, M. C.; Spees, W. M.; Handlin, L. B.; Noelken, G. P.; Riley, J. M.; Frey, R. F. A Transition Program for Underprepared Students in General Chemistry: Diagnosis, Implementation, and Evaluation. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 995-1000, 10.1021/ed100410j
250. Smith, M. K.; Wood, W. B.; Adams, W. K.; Wieman, C.; Knight, J. K.; Guild, N.; Su, T. T. Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions. Science 2009, 323, 122-124, 10.1126/science.1165919
251. Tien, L. T.; Roth, V.; Kampmeier, J. a. Implementation of a Peer-Led Team Learning Instructional Approach in an Undergraduate Organic Chemistry Course. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39, 606-632, 10.1002/tea.10038
252. Varma-Nelson, P.; Coppola, B. P. Team Learning. Chemists' Guide to Effective Teaching; Pienta, N. J., Cooper, M. M., Greenbowe, T. J., Eds; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2005; pp 155-169.
253. Chan, J. Y. K.; Bauer, C. F. Effect of Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL) on Student Achievement, Attitude, and Self-Concept in College General Chemistry in Randomized and Quasi Experimental Designs. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2015, 52, 319-346, 10.1002/tea.21197
254. Walker, L.; Warfa, A.-R. M. Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL®) Marginally Effects Student Achievement Measures but Substantially Increases the Odds of Passing a Course. PLoS One 2017, 12, e0186203, 10.1371/journal.pone.0186203
255. Slavin, R. E. Synthesis of Research of Cooperative Learning. Educ. Leadership 1991, 48, 71-82
256. Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T. An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning. Educ. Res. 2009, 38, 365-379, 10.3102/0013189X09339057
257. Roadrangka, V. The Construction and Validation of the Group Assessment of Logical Thinking (GALT); University of Georgia: Athens, GA, 1985.
258. Cooper, M. M.; Cox, C. T.; Nammouz, M.; Case, E.; Stevens, R. An Assessment of the Effect of Collaborative Groups on Students' Problem-Solving Strategies and Abilities. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 866-872, 10.1021/ed085p866
259. Cen, L.; Ruta, D.; Powell, L.; Ng, J. Does Gender Matter for Collaborative Learning? In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE); 2014; pp 433-440.
260. Stump, G. S.; Hilpert, J. C.; Husman, J.; Chung, W.; Kim, W. Collaborative Learning in Engineering Students: Gender and Achievement. J. Eng. Educ. 2011, 100, 475-497, 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00023.x
261. Cole, R.; Becker, N.; Towns, M.; Sweeney, G.; Wawro, M.; Rasmussen, C. Adapting a Methodology from Mathematics Education Research to Chemistry Education Research: Documenting Collective Activity. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 2012, 10, 193-211, 10.1007/s10763-011-9284-1
262. Becker, N.; Rasmussen, C.; Sweeney, G.; Wawro, M.; Towns, M.; Cole, R. Reasoning Using Particulate Nature of Matter: An Example of a Sociochemical Norm in a University-Level Physical Chemistry Class. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2013, 14, 81-94, 10.1039/C2RP20085F
263. Kulatunga, U.; Moog, R. S.; Lewis, J. E. Argumentation and Participation Patterns in General Chemistry Peer-Led Sessions. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2013, 50, 1207-1231, 10.1002/tea.21107
264. Rickey, D.; Stacy, A. M. The Role of Metacognition in Learning Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 915-920, 10.1021/ed077p915
265. Schraw, G. Promoting General Metacognitive Awareness. In Metacognition in Learning and Instruction; Neuropsychology and Cognition; Hartman, H. J., Ed; Springer: Dordrecht, 2001; pp 3-16.
266. Cook, E.; Kennedy, E.; McGuire, S. Y. Effect of Teaching Metacognitive Learning Strategies on Performance in General Chemistry Courses. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 961-967, 10.1021/ed300686h
267. Sandi-Urena, S.; Cooper, M. M.; Stevens, R. H. Enhancement of Metacognition Use and Awareness by Means of a Collaborative Intervention. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33, 323-340, 10.1080/09500690903452922
268. Sandi-Urena, S.; Cooper, M.; Stevens, R. Effect of Cooperative Problem-Based Lab Instruction on Metacognition and Problem-Solving Skills. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 700-706, 10.1021/ed1011844
269. Christiansen, M. A.; Lambert, A. M.; Nadelson, L. S.; Dupree, K. M.; Kingsford, T. A. In-Class Versus At-Home Quizzes: Which Is Better? A Flipped Learning Study in a Two-Site Synchronously Broadcast Organic Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 157-163, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00370
270. Eichler, J. F.; Peeples, J. Flipped Classroom Modules for Large Enrollment General Chemistry Courses: A Low Barrier Approach to Increase Active Learning and Improve Student Grades. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2016, 17, 197-208, 10.1039/C5RP00159E
271. Fautch, J. M. The Flipped Classroom for Teaching Organic Chemistry in Small Classes: Is It Effective?. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2015, 16, 179-186, 10.1039/C4RP00230J
272. Flynn, A. B. Structure and Evaluation of Flipped Chemistry Courses: Organic & Spectroscopy, Large and Small, First to Third Year, English and French. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2015, 16, 198-211, 10.1039/C4RP00224E
273. Hartman, J. R.; Dahm, D. J.; Nelson, E. A. ConfChem Conference on Flipped Classroom: Time-Saving Resources Aligned with Cognitive Science To Help Instructors. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1568-1569, 10.1021/ed5009156
274. Hibbard, L.; Sung, S.; Wells, B. Examining the Effectiveness of a Semi-Self-Paced Flipped Learning Format in a College General Chemistry Sequence. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 24-30, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00592
275. MacArthur, J. R.; Jones, L. L. A Review of Literature Reports of Clickers Applicable to College Chemistry Classrooms. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2008, 9, 187-195, 10.1039/B812407H
276. It is important to emphasize that, throughout this section, "models" refers to physical or virtual representations of atoms and molecules, not simplifications based on scientific principles that serve to predict or explain phenomena.
277. Stull, A. T.; Gainer, M.; Padalkar, S.; Hegarty, M. Promoting Representational Competence with Molecular Models in Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 994-1001, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00194
278. Stull, A. T.; Barrett, T.; Hegarty, M. Usability of Concrete and Virtual Models in Chemistry Instruction. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2013, 29, 2546-2556, 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.012
279. Stull, A. T.; Hegarty, M.; Dixon, B.; Stieff, M. Representational Translation with Concrete Models in Organic Chemistry. Cogn. Instr. 2012, 30, 404-434, 10.1080/07370008.2012.719956
280. Padalkar, S.; Hegarty, M. Models as Feedback: Developing Representational Competence in Chemistry. J. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 107, 451-467, 10.1037/a0037516
281. Williamson, V. M.; Hegarty, M.; Deslongchamps, G.; Williamson, K. C.; Shultz, M. J. Identifying Student Use of Ball-and-Stick Images versus Electrostatic Potential Map Images via Eye Tracking. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 159-164, 10.1021/ed200259j
282. Cox, C. T. An Investigation of the Effects of Interventions on Problem Solving Strategies and Abilities. Ph.D. Dissertation, Clemson University: Clemson, SC, 2006.
283. Jones, L. L. How Multimedia-Based Learning and Molecular Visualization Change the Landscape of Chemical Education Research. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1571-1576, 10.1021/ed4001206
284. Jones, L. L.; Kelly, R. M. Visualization: The Key to Understanding Chemistry Concepts. In Sputnik to Smartphones: A Half-Century of Chemistry Education; Orna, M. V., Ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, U.K., 2015; Vol. 1208, pp 121-140.
285. Williamson, V. M.; Abraham, M. R. The Effects of Computer Animation on the Particulate Mental Models of College Chemistry Students. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1995, 32, 521-534, 10.1002/tea.3660320508
286. Velázquez-Marcano, A.; Williamson, V. M.; Ashkenazi, G.; Tasker, R.; Williamson, K. C. The Use of Video Demonstrations and Particulate Animation in General Chemistry. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2004, 13, 315-323, 10.1023/B:JOST.0000045458.76285.fe
287. Tasker, R. Using Multimedia to Visualize the Molecular World: Educational Theory into Practice. Chemists' Guide to Effective Teaching; Pienta, N. J., Cooper, M. M., Greenbowe, T. J., Eds; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2005; pp 195-211.
288. Rosenthal, D. P.; Sanger, M. J. How Does Viewing One Computer Animation Affect Students' Interpretations of Another Animation Depicting the Same Oxidation-reduction Reaction?. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2013, 14, 286-296, 10.1039/C3RP00006K
289. Wu, H.-K.; Shah, P. Exploring Visuospatial Thinking in Chemistry Learning. Sci. Educ. 2004, 88, 465-492, 10.1002/sce.10126
290. VisChem. Visualising the Chemical world; http://vischem.com.au/ (accessed Aug 18, 2017).
291. Kelly, R. M.; Jones, L. L. Investigating Students' Ability To Transfer Ideas Learned from Molecular Animations of the Dissolution Process. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 303-309, 10.1021/ed085p303
292. Kelly, R. M.; Jones, L. L. Exploring How Different Features of Animations of Sodium Chloride Dissolution Affect Students' Explanations. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2007, 16, 413-429, 10.1007/s10956-007-9065-3
293. Tasker, R. Molecular-Level Visualisation for Educational Purposes. In Chemical Modelling; Springborg, M., Joswig, J.-O., Eds.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2017; Vol. 17, pp 261-282.
294. Stieff, M. Drawing for Promoting Learning and Engagement with Dynamic Visualizations. In Learning from Dynamic Visualization; Lowe, R., Ploetzner, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, 2017; pp 333-356.
295. Bodner, G. M.; Guay, R. B. The Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test. Chem. Educ. 1997, 2, 1-17, 10.1007/s00897970138a
296. Pribyl, J. R.; Bodner, G. M. Spatial Ability and Its Role in Organic Chemistry: A Study of Four Organic Courses. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1987, 24, 229-240, 10.1002/tea.3660240304
297. Lopez, E. J.; Shavelson, R. J.; Nandagopal, K.; Szu, E.; Penn, J. Factors Contributing to Problem-Solving Performance in First-Semester Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 976-981, 10.1021/ed400696c
298. Stieff, M. Sex Differences in the Mental Rotation of Chemistry Representations. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 165-170, 10.1021/ed300499t
299. Ainsworth, S.; Prain, V.; Tytler, R. Drawing to Learn in Science. Science 2011, 333, 1096-1097, 10.1126/science.1204153
300. Tien, L. T.; Teichert, M. A.; Rickey, D. Effectiveness of a MORE Laboratory Module in Prompting Students To Revise Their Molecular-Level Ideas about Solutions. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 175-181, 10.1021/ed084p175
301. 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, 10.1021/ed900004y
302. Flynn, A. B.; Featherstone, R. B. Language of Mechanisms: Exam Analysis Reveals Students' Strengths, Strategies, and Errors When Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism (Curved Arrows) in New Reactions. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2017, 18, 64-77, 10.1039/C6RP00126B
303. Grove, N. P.; Cooper, M. M.; Rush, K. M. Decorating with Arrows: Toward the Development of Representational Competence in Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 844-849, 10.1021/ed2003934
304. Cooper, M. M.; Stieff, M.; DeSutter, D. Sketching the Invisible to Predict the Visible: From Drawing to Modeling in Chemistry. Top. Cogn. Sci. 2017, 9, 902-920, 10.1111/tops.12285
305. Chi, M. T. H. Active-Constructive-Interactive: A Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities. Top. Cogn. Sci. 2009, 1, 73-105, 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01005.x
306. Teichert, M. A.; Tien, L. T.; Anthony, S.; Rickey, D. Effects of Context on Students' Molecular-Level Ideas. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2008, 30, 1095-1114, 10.1080/09500690701355301
307. Underwood, S. M.; Reyes-Gastelum, D.; Cooper, M. M. When Do Students Recognize Relationships between Molecular Structure and Properties? A Longitudinal Comparison of the Impact of Traditional and Transformed Curricula. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2016, 17, 365-380, 10.1039/C5RP00217F
308. Bhattacharyya, G.; Bodner, G. M. It Gets Me to the Product": How Students Propose Organic Mechanisms. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 1402-1407, 10.1021/ed082p1402
309. Grove, N. P.; Cooper, M. M.; Cox, E. L. Does Mechanistic Thinking Improve Student Success in Organic Chemistry?. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 850-853, 10.1021/ed200394d
310. Bhattacharyya, G. Trials and Tribulations: Student Approaches and Difficulties with Proposing Mechanisms Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2014, 15, 594-609, 10.1039/C3RP00127J
311. Bhattacharyya, G. From Source to Sink: Mechanistic Reasoning Using the Electron-Pushing Formalism. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1282-1289, 10.1021/ed300765k
312. Lack, K. A. Current Status of Research on Online Learning in Postsecondary Education; Ithaka S+R: 2013; p 72.
313. Online Learning: Does It Help Low-Income and Underprepared Students?; Assessment of Evidence Series; http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/online-learning-low-income-underprepared.html (accessed Sep 14, 2017).
314. MOOCs: Expectations and Reality; https://library.educause.edu/resources/2014/5/moocs-expectations-and-reality (accessed Sep 14, 2017).
315. Xu, D.; Jaggars, S. S. The Effectiveness of Distance Education across Virginia's Community Colleges: Evidence from Introductory College-Level Math and English Courses. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 2011, 33, 360-377, 10.3102/0162373711413814
316. Mintz, B. S. Lifting All Boats: How MOOCs Can Bring Higher Ed Together; https://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/07/24/lifting-all-boats-how-moocs-can-bring-higher-ed-together.aspx; 2013 (accessed Jan 2, 2018).
317. Smith, J.; Wilson, S. B.; Banks, J.; Zhu, L.; Varma-Nelson, P. Replicating Peer-Led Team Learning in Cyberspace: Research, Opportunities, and Challenges. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2014, 51, 714-740, 10.1002/tea.21163
318. Leontyev, A.; Baranov, D. Massive Open Online Courses in Chemistry: A Comparative Overview of Platforms and Features. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1533-1539, 10.1021/ed400283x
319. PhET Chemistry Simulations; https://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/category/chemistry.
320. The National Research Council. Learning Science through Computer Games and Simulations; Honey, M. A., Hilton, M. L., Eds.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2011.
321. Wiggins, G. P.; McTighe, J. Understanding by Design, 2 nd ed.; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Alexandria, VA, 2005.
322. Brown, A. L. Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings. J. Learn. Sci. 1992, 2, 141-178, 10.1207/s15327809jls0202-2
323. Barab, S.; Squire, K. Design-Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground. J. Learn. Sci. 2004, 13, 1-14, 10.1207/s15327809jls1301-1
324. Corcoran, T.; Mosher, F. A.; Rogat, A. Learning Progressions in Science: An Evidence Based Approach to Reform; RR-63; Consortium for Policy Research in Education, Teachers College, Columbia University: 2009.
325. Duncan, R. G.; Hmelo-Silver, C. E. Learning Progressions: Aligning Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2009, 46, 606-609, 10.1002/tea.20316
326. 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, 10.1021/ed300083a
327. Talanquer, V.; Pollard, J. Reforming a Large Foundational Course: Successes and Challenges. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 1844-1851, 10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00397
328. Osborne, J.; Collins, S. Pupil's and Parents' Views of the School Science Curriculum. Sch. Sci. Rev. 2000, 82, 23-31
329. Van Aalsvoort, J. Logical Positivism as a Tool to Analyse the Problem of Chemistry's Lack of Relevance in Secondary School Chemical Education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2004, 26, 1151-1168, 10.1080/0950069042000205369
330. Marks, R.; Eilks, I. Promoting Scientific Literacy Using a Sociocritical and Problem-Oriented Approach to Chemistry Teaching: Concept, Examples, Experiences. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2009, 4, 231-245
331. Stuckey, M.; Hofstein, A.; Mamlok-Naaman, R.; Eilks, I. The Meaning of 'Relevance'in Science Education and Its Implications for the Science Curriculum. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2013, 49, 1-34, 10.1080/03057267.2013.802463
332. Relevant Chemistry Education: From Theory to Practice; Eilks, I., Hofstein, A., Eds.; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, 2015.
333. Gilbert, J. K.; Bulte, A. M. W.; Pilot, A. Concept Development and Transfer in Context-Based Science Education. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33, 817-837, 10.1080/09500693.2010.493185
334. Fahlman, B. D.; Purvis-Roberts, K. L.; Kirk, J. S.; Bentley, A. K.; Daubenmire, P. L.; Ellis, J. P.; Mury, M. T. Chemistry in Context: Applying Chemistry to Society, 9 th ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, 2017.
335. Smith, C. L.; Wiser, M.; Anderson, C. W.; Krajcik, J. Implications of Research on Children's Learning for Standards and Assessment: A Proposed Learning Progression for Matter and the Atomic-Molecular Theory. Meas. Interdiscip. Res. Perspect. 2006, 4, 1-98, 10.1080/15366367.2006.9678570
336. Krajcik, J. S. The Importance, Cautions and Future of Learning Progression Research. In Learning Progressions in Science; Alonzo, A. C., Gotwals, A. W., Eds.; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, 2012; pp 27-36.
337. Roblin, N. P.; Schunn, C.; McKenney, S. What Are Critical Features of Science Curriculum Materials That Impact Student and Teacher Outcomes?. Sci. Educ. 2018, 102, 260-282, 10.1002/sce.21328
338. Baker, L. A.; Chakraverty, D.; Columbus, L.; Feig, A. L.; Jenks, W. S.; Pilarz, M.; Stains, M.; Waterman, R.; Wesemann, J. L. Cottrell Scholars Collaborative New Faculty Workshop: Professional Development for New Chemistry Faculty and Initial Assessment of Its Efficacy. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 1874-1881, 10.1021/ed500547n
339. Dancy, M.; Henderson, C. Pedagogical Practices and Instructional Change of Physics Faculty. Am. J. Phys. 2010, 78, 1056-1063, 10.1119/1.3446763
340. Ebert-May, D.; Derting, T. L.; Hodder, J.; Momsen, J. L.; Long, T. M.; Jardeleza, S. E. What We Say Is Not What We Do: Effective Evaluation of Faculty Professional Development Programs. BioScience 2011, 61, 550-558, 10.1525/bio.2011.61.7.9
341. Cooper, M. M. Data-Driven Education Research. Science 2007, 317, 1171, 10.1126/science.317.5842.1171