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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of chemical education 2017-09, Vol.94 (9), p.1195-1208 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
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 & 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 |