Chemistry Education Research and Practice最新文献

Solving organic chemistry reactions requires reasoning with multiple concepts and data (i.e., multivariate reasoning). However, studies have reported that organic chemistry students typically demonstrate univariate reasoning. Case comparisons, where students compare two or more tasks, have been reported to support students’ multivariate reasoning. Using a case-comparison task, we explored students’ multivariate reasoning. Our study was guided by the resources framework. One conceptual resource activates another conceptual resource and, successively, a set of conceptual resources. This successively activated set of resources is expressed in a line of reasoning. Pairing this framework with qualitative methods, we interviewed eleven second-semester organic chemistry students while they compared two substitution reaction mechanisms and chose the mechanism with the lower activation energy. We analysed what conceptual resources and lines of reasoning were activated and the variation to which students engaged in multivariate reasoning. Students activated multiple conceptual resources and, moreover, extended their activated resources into both developed and undeveloped lines of reasoning. When constructing their explanations, most students engaged in univariate reasoning. These students provided a developed line of reasoning selected from multiple activated resources, or they provided an undeveloped line of reasoning constructed from only one activated resource. Few students engaged in multivariate reasoning. These students provided both developed and undeveloped lines of reasoning from multiple activated resources. Our findings highlight the variation with which students engage in both univariate and multivariate reasoning. Therefore, we recommend that case-comparison activities scaffold engagement with multiple lines of reasoning in addition to activating and developing them.

Multilingual learners face significant challenges when navigating the linguistic complexities of chemistry assessments. This study, employing the Equitable Framework for Classroom Assessment, identified these specific challenging features in general chemistry assessment items on the topics of limiting reactant and percent yield. Through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with multilingual students, we discovered critical barriers to comprehension: lack of metacognitive support, complex vocabulary and syntax, dense text layout, and extraneous information. These findings emphasize the need to better understand and alleviate these types of linguistic features in assessment items to more accurately measure chemistry knowledge, rather than linguistic proficiency. By addressing these challenges, instructors can design more accessible assessment items for a diverse group of students. The results also offer valuable insights and practical guidance for writing equitable assessment items.

Graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) hold a unique positionality as instructors and research mentors to undergraduate students, research mentees to faculty members, and employees to an institution. With limited pedagogical training and teaching resources, the enactment of planned teaching activities and learning resources may be influenced by how GTAs conceptualize their teacher identity, role, and experiences. In this study, we explored how chemistry GTAs enacted a scaffolded, cooperative-learning case-comparison activity in a second-semester organic chemistry laboratory course. Our study was guided by the conceptual framework of teacher noticing. Teacher noticing – an instructor observing “important” instructional moments and connecting their observations to theory and practice – is a part of developing instructional responses based on students’ reasoning. Pairing this conceptual framework with a case study methodology, we recruited two GTAs, and conducted a pre-observation interview, two observations, and a post-observation interview. We explored GTAs’ teacher noticing – what they observed and interpreted as well as how they shaped and responded. We exposed the tension and the resolution between learning objectives (i.e., objectives set by the instructional team for students) and teaching objectives (i.e., objectives set by the GTAs for themselves and their students). GTAs’ framing seemed to influence their shaping, and their shaping seemed to balance the instructional team's learning objective and GTAs’ teaching objectives. Because chemistry GTAs serve as instructors in many science undergraduate courses, understanding the unique GTA framing may support both graduate and undergraduate learning experiences. Furthermore, our study has implications for researchers who design organic chemistry learning resources to consider different ways GTAs may support students’ learning. This study additionally has implications for faculty instructors to develop transformative, consistent professional development opportunities focused on transparency, collaboration, and community in teacher learning.

The formation of chemistry identities among students is closely linked to the norms and practices prevalent in their chemistry learning environments. However, these norms may not be equally accessible or aligned with formal assessment criteria, leading to disparities for students in cultivating a positive chemistry identity. This study investigates how students conceptualise chemistry and the opportunities it affords for identity formation. Drawing upon the theoretical frameworks of figured worlds and science identity, data were collected from 45 upper secondary school students across three Danish schools through classroom observations and focus groups. The findings reveal that students perceive the laboratory and classroom settings as distinct in purpose, nature, and relevance, with varying degrees of celebration for enacted performance in each. While work in and related to the laboratory is highly valued by both students and teachers, individual enacted performance in the classroom is often equated with proficiency in chemistry. However, implicit norms for example governing the division of labour in laboratories indicate an inequitable distribution of tasks and underscore the need for a more equitable approach to identity formation in chemistry education.

Two generative approaches to reaction mechanism instruction for novice students were compared to lecture instruction. In both approaches, students were coached to propose selected reaction mechanisms based on prior knowledge. New instructional methods were correlated with increased skill in representations of electron movements and other gains. Students who saw a larger amount of new pedagogy showed stronger abilities to propose mechanisms for unfamiliar reactions. In the group that saw a larger amount of new pedagogy, first-generation college student (FGS) grades rose to match non-FGS grades. Learning gains were interpreted with respect to cognitive load theory, flagging high element interactivity as a likely obstacle for novice students. Problem solving during mechanism instruction for novice students offers the potential to improve learning outcomes.

Much research on women of color in STEM has treated women of color as a collective, giving little attention to the nuanced differences in the experiences of the women within this larger group. Research on women of color in STEM has also given insufficient attention to disciplinary differences, and has often applied unidimensional, rather than intersectional approaches, to examining the experiences of these women. This study takes a nuanced approach to examining the recognition experiences of four undergraduate women of color in chemistry, and how those experiences are shaped by the intersection of their multiple marginalized identities, using an intersectional lens. Interpretive phenomenological analysis is used to center the women's voices and focus on capturing both the convergences and divergences in their experiences. Our findings illustrate the value of using an intersectional approach, and provide explicit examples of how recognition, especially negative recognition, manifests itself in these women's experiences. The findings have implications for how institutions and disciplines can support women of color to persist in science disciplines, as well as implications for research.

Mindset is a construct of interest for challenging learning environments, as science courses often are, in that, it has implications for behavioral responses to academic challenges. Previous work examining mindset in science learning contexts has been primarily quantitative in nature, limiting the theoretical basis for mindset perspectives specific to science domains. A few studies in physics education research have revealed domain-specific complexities applying to the mindset construct that suggest a need to explore undergraduate perspectives on mindset within each science domain. Here we present a multiple case study examining chemistry-specific mindset beliefs of students enrolled in general and organic chemistry lecture courses. A between-case analysis is used to describe six unique perspectives on chemistry mindset beliefs. This analysis revealed that students’ beliefs about their own ability to improve in chemistry intelligence or regarding chemistry-specific cognitive abilities did not consistently match their views on the potential for change for other students in chemistry. The nature of the abilities themselves (whether they were naturally occurring or developed with effort), and the presence of a natural inclination toward chemistry learning were observed to play a role in students’ perspectives. The findings from this analysis are used to propose a more complex model for chemistry-specific mindset beliefs to inform future work.

Despite problem solving being a core skill in chemistry, students often struggle to solve chemistry problems. This difficulty may arise from students trying to solve problems through memorising algorithms. Goldilocks Help serves as a problem-solving scaffold that supports students through structured problem solving and its elements, such as planning and evaluation. In this study, we investigated how first-year chemistry students solved problems, when taught with Goldilocks Help, and whether their problem-solving success and approaches changed over the course of one semester. The data comprised of student written problem-solving work, and was analysed using frequency analysis and grouped based on the problem-solving success and the extent of the demonstrated problem-solving elements. Throughout the course of semester, students exhibited increasingly consistent demonstration of structured problem solving. Nonetheless, they encountered difficulties in fully demonstrating such aspects of problem solving as understanding and evaluating concepts, which demand critical thinking and a firm grasp of chemistry principles. Overall, the study indicated progress in successful and structured problem solving, with a growing proportion of students demonstrating an exploratory approach as time progressed. These findings imply the need for incorporation of metacognitive problem-solving scaffolding, exposure to expert solutions, reflective assignments, and rubric-based feedback into wide teaching practice. Further research is required to extend the exploration of the effectiveness of metacognitive scaffolding, in particular via think-aloud interviews, which should help identify productive and unproductive uses of the problem-solving elements.

Inclusion of a diverse group of students, both regular learners and learners with special needs in chemistry classrooms is an important goal of chemistry educators. However, alternative conceptions in chemistry among high-school students can be a barrier for completing the learning process in the classroom, especially in a heterogeneous class. This study aimed to examine differentiated instruction (DI) in a chemistry classroom. We evaluated how customized pedagogical kits (CPKs) for DI, which aim to overcome alternative conceptions found during chemistry instruction, affected students and teachers. This paper presents the findings of a mixed-method study that was conducted with 9 high-school chemistry teachers, and 551 chemistry students. We used a pre-post questionnaire to investigate the impact of CPKs on teachers’ and students’ self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes towards chemistry and differentiated instruction, in addition to students’ achievements. The findings indicated the significantly higher averages of self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes towards DI in chemistry among teachers and high-school students, in addition to the significantly higher performance of students in chemistry tasks after implementing CPKs in classrooms. Being aware of the limitations of DI, we discussed customized pedagogical kits as a means that can support better inclusion in chemistry education.

Chemical thinking is widely acknowledged as a core competency that students should develop in the context of school chemistry. This study aims to develop a measurement instrument to assess students’ chemical thinking. We employed the Essential Questions-Perspectives (EQ-P) framework and Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) classification to construct a hypothetical model of chemical thinking. This model comprises three aspects and each aspect includes five cognitive levels to assess students’ chemical thinking. Accordingly, we developed an initial instrument consisting of 27 items in multiple formats, including multiple-choice, two-tier diagnostic, and open-ended questions. We applied the partial credit Rasch model to establish the validity and reliability of measures for the final instrument. Following the process of pilot test, revision, and field test, we finalized the instrument with a refined 20-item instrument. Two hundred and twenty-one Chinese high school students (Grade 12) participated in the pilot and field tests. The results demonstrate that the final instrument effectively produces reliable and valid measures of students’ chemical thinking. Furthermore, the empirical results align well with the hypothetical model, suggesting that the SOLO classification can effectively distinguish the levels of proficiency in students’ chemical thinking.