Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context

This study investigated relationships between the thinking processes that 28 undergraduate chemistry students engaged in during guided discovery and their subsequent success at reasoning through a transfer problem during an end-of-semester interview. During a guided-discovery laboratory module, stud...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of chemical education 2017-09, Vol.94 (9), p.1195-1208
Hauptverfasser: Teichert, Melonie A, Tien, Lydia T, Dysleski, Lisa, Rickey, Dawn
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1208
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1195
container_title Journal of chemical education
container_volume 94
creator Teichert, Melonie A
Tien, Lydia T
Dysleski, Lisa
Rickey, Dawn
description This study investigated relationships between the thinking processes that 28 undergraduate chemistry students engaged in during guided discovery and their subsequent success at reasoning through a transfer problem during an end-of-semester interview. During a guided-discovery laboratory module, students were prompted to use words, pictures, and symbols to make their mental models of chemical compounds added to water explicit, both prior to the start (initial model) and at the end (refined model) of the module. Based on their responses to these model assignments, we characterized students’ knowledge and thinking processes, including the extent to which individual students engaged in (a) constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence; (b) constructing molecular-level models that progressed toward scientific accuracy; (c) constructing molecular-level models that were scientifically correct; (d) making connections between laboratory observations and the molecular-level behavior of particles; (e) accurate metacognitive monitoring of how their molecular-level models changed; and (f) using evidence to justify model refinements. Analyses revealed three thinking processes that were strongly associated with correct reasoning in the transfer context during an end-of-semester interview: constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence, engaging in accurate metacognitive monitoring, and using evidence to justify model refinements. The extent of student engagement in these three key thinking processes predicted correct reasoning in a new context better than the scientific correctness of a student’s content knowledge prior to instruction. Although we did not explore causal relationships, these results suggest that integrating activities that promote the key thinking processes identified into instruction may improve students’ understanding and success at transfer.
doi_str_mv 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1960520076</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1154147</ericid><sourcerecordid>1960520076</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a384t-a75344df11638d5db6d9b77283f714b9afa78a8077c57e20e1a5cdff1a15eda53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kNtKwzAYx4MoOA9PIELA6858bdOkl2N4ZB7A7bpkyVfXWduZpOruBJ_C1_NJzNzw0puE5H-CHyFHwPrAYjhV2vXneobPaPrZlDGRxVukB3kiI0hiuU16LNiinMt0l-w5N2cMYp7LHvkcz6rmqWoe6b1tNTqHjg6ca3WlPBr6VvkZnTQG7aNVpgt_dBhmKuftkj74zmDj3ffHF33o9CpNlaeDxaJerhoVvWlr1F2tbDTCV6zD24SzaoJ0i2902DYe3_0B2SlV7fBwc--TyfnZeHgZje4uroaDUaQSmfpICZ6kqSkBskQabqaZyadCxDIpBaTTXJVKSCWZEJoLjBmC4tqUJSjgaBRP9snJundh25cOnS_mbWebMFlAnjEer8AFV7J2ads6Z7EsFrZ6VnZZACtWtItAu9jQLja0Q-p4nUJb6b_E2TUATyEVQT9d67_hv9l_Gn8ALQuSIQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1960520076</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context</title><source>American Chemical Society Journals</source><creator>Teichert, Melonie A ; Tien, Lydia T ; Dysleski, Lisa ; Rickey, Dawn</creator><creatorcontrib>Teichert, Melonie A ; Tien, Lydia T ; Dysleski, Lisa ; Rickey, Dawn</creatorcontrib><description>This study investigated relationships between the thinking processes that 28 undergraduate chemistry students engaged in during guided discovery and their subsequent success at reasoning through a transfer problem during an end-of-semester interview. During a guided-discovery laboratory module, students were prompted to use words, pictures, and symbols to make their mental models of chemical compounds added to water explicit, both prior to the start (initial model) and at the end (refined model) of the module. Based on their responses to these model assignments, we characterized students’ knowledge and thinking processes, including the extent to which individual students engaged in (a) constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence; (b) constructing molecular-level models that progressed toward scientific accuracy; (c) constructing molecular-level models that were scientifically correct; (d) making connections between laboratory observations and the molecular-level behavior of particles; (e) accurate metacognitive monitoring of how their molecular-level models changed; and (f) using evidence to justify model refinements. Analyses revealed three thinking processes that were strongly associated with correct reasoning in the transfer context during an end-of-semester interview: constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence, engaging in accurate metacognitive monitoring, and using evidence to justify model refinements. The extent of student engagement in these three key thinking processes predicted correct reasoning in a new context better than the scientific correctness of a student’s content knowledge prior to instruction. Although we did not explore causal relationships, these results suggest that integrating activities that promote the key thinking processes identified into instruction may improve students’ understanding and success at transfer.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9584</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-1328</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Easton: American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</publisher><subject>Chemical compounds ; Chemical Education Research ; Chemistry ; Cognition ; Cognitive Processes ; College Science ; College students ; Concept Formation ; Context ; Correlation ; Curricula ; Evidence ; Function words ; Interviews ; Knowledge ; Knowledge Level ; Learner Engagement ; Logical Thinking ; Metacognition ; Molecular Structure ; Monitoring ; Organic Chemistry ; Pictures ; Reasoning ; Science Instruction ; Scientific Concepts ; Student Improvement ; Student Participation ; Students ; Success ; Transfer of Training ; Undergraduate Study</subject><ispartof>Journal of chemical education, 2017-09, Vol.94 (9), p.1195-1208</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2017 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright American Chemical Society Sep 12, 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a384t-a75344df11638d5db6d9b77283f714b9afa78a8077c57e20e1a5cdff1a15eda53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a384t-a75344df11638d5db6d9b77283f714b9afa78a8077c57e20e1a5cdff1a15eda53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9892-6631 ; 0000-0002-4189-611X ; 0000-0001-9624-2239 ; 0000-0002-4653-3174</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762$$EHTML$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,2765,27076,27924,27925,56738,56788</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1154147$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Teichert, Melonie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tien, Lydia T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dysleski, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rickey, Dawn</creatorcontrib><title>Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context</title><title>Journal of chemical education</title><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><description>This study investigated relationships between the thinking processes that 28 undergraduate chemistry students engaged in during guided discovery and their subsequent success at reasoning through a transfer problem during an end-of-semester interview. During a guided-discovery laboratory module, students were prompted to use words, pictures, and symbols to make their mental models of chemical compounds added to water explicit, both prior to the start (initial model) and at the end (refined model) of the module. Based on their responses to these model assignments, we characterized students’ knowledge and thinking processes, including the extent to which individual students engaged in (a) constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence; (b) constructing molecular-level models that progressed toward scientific accuracy; (c) constructing molecular-level models that were scientifically correct; (d) making connections between laboratory observations and the molecular-level behavior of particles; (e) accurate metacognitive monitoring of how their molecular-level models changed; and (f) using evidence to justify model refinements. Analyses revealed three thinking processes that were strongly associated with correct reasoning in the transfer context during an end-of-semester interview: constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence, engaging in accurate metacognitive monitoring, and using evidence to justify model refinements. The extent of student engagement in these three key thinking processes predicted correct reasoning in a new context better than the scientific correctness of a student’s content knowledge prior to instruction. Although we did not explore causal relationships, these results suggest that integrating activities that promote the key thinking processes identified into instruction may improve students’ understanding and success at transfer.</description><subject>Chemical compounds</subject><subject>Chemical Education Research</subject><subject>Chemistry</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognitive Processes</subject><subject>College Science</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>Concept Formation</subject><subject>Context</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Function words</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Knowledge</subject><subject>Knowledge Level</subject><subject>Learner Engagement</subject><subject>Logical Thinking</subject><subject>Metacognition</subject><subject>Molecular Structure</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>Organic Chemistry</subject><subject>Pictures</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Scientific Concepts</subject><subject>Student Improvement</subject><subject>Student Participation</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>Transfer of Training</subject><subject>Undergraduate Study</subject><issn>0021-9584</issn><issn>1938-1328</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kNtKwzAYx4MoOA9PIELA6858bdOkl2N4ZB7A7bpkyVfXWduZpOruBJ_C1_NJzNzw0puE5H-CHyFHwPrAYjhV2vXneobPaPrZlDGRxVukB3kiI0hiuU16LNiinMt0l-w5N2cMYp7LHvkcz6rmqWoe6b1tNTqHjg6ca3WlPBr6VvkZnTQG7aNVpgt_dBhmKuftkj74zmDj3ffHF33o9CpNlaeDxaJerhoVvWlr1F2tbDTCV6zD24SzaoJ0i2902DYe3_0B2SlV7fBwc--TyfnZeHgZje4uroaDUaQSmfpICZ6kqSkBskQabqaZyadCxDIpBaTTXJVKSCWZEJoLjBmC4tqUJSjgaBRP9snJundh25cOnS_mbWebMFlAnjEer8AFV7J2ads6Z7EsFrZ6VnZZACtWtItAu9jQLja0Q-p4nUJb6b_E2TUATyEVQT9d67_hv9l_Gn8ALQuSIQ</recordid><startdate>20170912</startdate><enddate>20170912</enddate><creator>Teichert, Melonie A</creator><creator>Tien, Lydia T</creator><creator>Dysleski, Lisa</creator><creator>Rickey, Dawn</creator><general>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</general><general>Division of Chemical Education, Inc and ACS Publications Division of the American Chemical Society</general><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9892-6631</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4189-611X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9624-2239</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4653-3174</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170912</creationdate><title>Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context</title><author>Teichert, Melonie A ; Tien, Lydia T ; Dysleski, Lisa ; Rickey, Dawn</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a384t-a75344df11638d5db6d9b77283f714b9afa78a8077c57e20e1a5cdff1a15eda53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Chemical compounds</topic><topic>Chemical Education Research</topic><topic>Chemistry</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognitive Processes</topic><topic>College Science</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>Concept Formation</topic><topic>Context</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Function words</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Knowledge</topic><topic>Knowledge Level</topic><topic>Learner Engagement</topic><topic>Logical Thinking</topic><topic>Metacognition</topic><topic>Molecular Structure</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>Organic Chemistry</topic><topic>Pictures</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Scientific Concepts</topic><topic>Student Improvement</topic><topic>Student Participation</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>Transfer of Training</topic><topic>Undergraduate Study</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Teichert, Melonie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tien, Lydia T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dysleski, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rickey, Dawn</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Journal of chemical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Teichert, Melonie A</au><au>Tien, Lydia T</au><au>Dysleski, Lisa</au><au>Rickey, Dawn</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1154147</ericid><atitle>Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context</atitle><jtitle>Journal of chemical education</jtitle><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><date>2017-09-12</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>94</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1195</spage><epage>1208</epage><pages>1195-1208</pages><issn>0021-9584</issn><eissn>1938-1328</eissn><abstract>This study investigated relationships between the thinking processes that 28 undergraduate chemistry students engaged in during guided discovery and their subsequent success at reasoning through a transfer problem during an end-of-semester interview. During a guided-discovery laboratory module, students were prompted to use words, pictures, and symbols to make their mental models of chemical compounds added to water explicit, both prior to the start (initial model) and at the end (refined model) of the module. Based on their responses to these model assignments, we characterized students’ knowledge and thinking processes, including the extent to which individual students engaged in (a) constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence; (b) constructing molecular-level models that progressed toward scientific accuracy; (c) constructing molecular-level models that were scientifically correct; (d) making connections between laboratory observations and the molecular-level behavior of particles; (e) accurate metacognitive monitoring of how their molecular-level models changed; and (f) using evidence to justify model refinements. Analyses revealed three thinking processes that were strongly associated with correct reasoning in the transfer context during an end-of-semester interview: constructing molecular-level models that were consistent with experimental evidence, engaging in accurate metacognitive monitoring, and using evidence to justify model refinements. The extent of student engagement in these three key thinking processes predicted correct reasoning in a new context better than the scientific correctness of a student’s content knowledge prior to instruction. Although we did not explore causal relationships, these results suggest that integrating activities that promote the key thinking processes identified into instruction may improve students’ understanding and success at transfer.</abstract><cop>Easton</cop><pub>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</pub><doi>10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9892-6631</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4189-611X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9624-2239</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4653-3174</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-9584
ispartof Journal of chemical education, 2017-09, Vol.94 (9), p.1195-1208
issn 0021-9584
1938-1328
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1960520076
source American Chemical Society Journals
subjects Chemical compounds
Chemical Education Research
Chemistry
Cognition
Cognitive Processes
College Science
College students
Concept Formation
Context
Correlation
Curricula
Evidence
Function words
Interviews
Knowledge
Knowledge Level
Learner Engagement
Logical Thinking
Metacognition
Molecular Structure
Monitoring
Organic Chemistry
Pictures
Reasoning
Science Instruction
Scientific Concepts
Student Improvement
Student Participation
Students
Success
Transfer of Training
Undergraduate Study
title Thinking Processes Associated with Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Success at Applying a Molecular-Level Model in a New Context
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T19%3A35%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Thinking%20Processes%20Associated%20with%20Undergraduate%20Chemistry%20Students%E2%80%99%20Success%20at%20Applying%20a%20Molecular-Level%20Model%20in%20a%20New%20Context&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20chemical%20education&rft.au=Teichert,%20Melonie%20A&rft.date=2017-09-12&rft.volume=94&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1195&rft.epage=1208&rft.pages=1195-1208&rft.issn=0021-9584&rft.eissn=1938-1328&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00762&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1960520076%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1960520076&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1154147&rfr_iscdi=true