Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry

Extant research on the efficacy of drawing for assessing learning in chemistry suggests it may provide richer information on the quality of students’ mental models. Here, we examine the relative utility of formative assessments that involve drawing modalities as well as verbal and symbolic modalitie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of chemical education 2019-09, Vol.96 (9), p.1813-1820
Hauptverfasser: Ryan, Stephanie A. C, Stieff, Mike
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1820
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1813
container_title Journal of chemical education
container_volume 96
creator Ryan, Stephanie A. C
Stieff, Mike
description Extant research on the efficacy of drawing for assessing learning in chemistry suggests it may provide richer information on the quality of students’ mental models. Here, we examine the relative utility of formative assessments that involve drawing modalities as well as verbal and symbolic modalities. We analyzed the drawings, written explanations, and symbolic notations made by 36 students learning about chemical reactivity from a dynamic visualization. Our analysis demonstrates that drawing affords the emphasis of different conceptual features across different representational modalities. Students represented spatiotemporal structures (i.e., particle composition and location) more frequently in their drawings but represented spatiotemporal transformations (i.e., particle motion and interaction) more frequently in their written explanations. Students represented more conceptual features in both their drawings and written explanations than they did in the symbolic notation commonly used in the chemical sciences. Our findings suggest that assessment items that involve drawing can help evaluators construct richer models of student knowledge, but they should not be used in isolation from verbal or symbolic modalities.
doi_str_mv 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00361
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2298542646</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1228029</ericid><sourcerecordid>2298542646</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-f6c7307f736c79ac0f37bae3a2fd64d15c2da2c00ca11f8da85dbb4e2c09d0b13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UMlOwzAQtRBIlMIXIKRInNOO7Sz2sSplU6Ve4Gw5XiAVTYonFerf45DAkdO8mXmL9Ai5pjCjwOhcG5xtzbvbOTuTFQAv6AmZUMlFSjkTp2QCkZbKXGTn5AJxC0BZLsWEZHdBf9XNW-LbkCwQHWK_rZ0OTQ82h860O4dJ3STLGFBjF46X5MzrD3RX45yS1_vVy_IxXW8enpaLdao5l13qC1NyKH3JI5DagOdlpR3XzNsiszQ3zGpmAIym1AurRW6rKnPxJC1UlE_J7eC7D-3nwWGntu0hNDFSMSZFnrEiKyKLDywTWsTgvNqHeqfDUVFQfT0q1qPGetRYT1TdDCoXavOnWD1TxgQwGf_z4f8j_o39z_EbhKt0qA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2298542646</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry</title><source>ACS Publications</source><creator>Ryan, Stephanie A. C ; Stieff, Mike</creator><creatorcontrib>Ryan, Stephanie A. C ; Stieff, Mike</creatorcontrib><description>Extant research on the efficacy of drawing for assessing learning in chemistry suggests it may provide richer information on the quality of students’ mental models. Here, we examine the relative utility of formative assessments that involve drawing modalities as well as verbal and symbolic modalities. We analyzed the drawings, written explanations, and symbolic notations made by 36 students learning about chemical reactivity from a dynamic visualization. Our analysis demonstrates that drawing affords the emphasis of different conceptual features across different representational modalities. Students represented spatiotemporal structures (i.e., particle composition and location) more frequently in their drawings but represented spatiotemporal transformations (i.e., particle motion and interaction) more frequently in their written explanations. Students represented more conceptual features in both their drawings and written explanations than they did in the symbolic notation commonly used in the chemical sciences. Our findings suggest that assessment items that involve drawing can help evaluators construct richer models of student knowledge, but they should not be used in isolation from verbal or symbolic modalities.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9584</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-1328</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00361</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Easton: American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</publisher><subject>Chemical Education Research ; Chemical reactions ; Chemistry ; College students ; Evaluators ; Formative Evaluation ; Freehand Drawing ; Function words ; Learning ; Learning outcomes ; Organic chemistry ; Outcomes of Education ; Particle motion ; Schemata (Cognition) ; Science Instruction ; Scientific Concepts ; Student Evaluation ; Students ; Teaching methods ; Test Items ; Visualization ; Writing (Composition)</subject><ispartof>Journal of chemical education, 2019-09, Vol.96 (9), p.1813-1820</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Chemical Society Sep 10, 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-f6c7307f736c79ac0f37bae3a2fd64d15c2da2c00ca11f8da85dbb4e2c09d0b13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-f6c7307f736c79ac0f37bae3a2fd64d15c2da2c00ca11f8da85dbb4e2c09d0b13</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1639-891X</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.9b00361$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00361$$EHTML$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,2752,27053,27901,27902,56713,56763</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1228029$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ryan, Stephanie A. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stieff, Mike</creatorcontrib><title>Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry</title><title>Journal of chemical education</title><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><description>Extant research on the efficacy of drawing for assessing learning in chemistry suggests it may provide richer information on the quality of students’ mental models. Here, we examine the relative utility of formative assessments that involve drawing modalities as well as verbal and symbolic modalities. We analyzed the drawings, written explanations, and symbolic notations made by 36 students learning about chemical reactivity from a dynamic visualization. Our analysis demonstrates that drawing affords the emphasis of different conceptual features across different representational modalities. Students represented spatiotemporal structures (i.e., particle composition and location) more frequently in their drawings but represented spatiotemporal transformations (i.e., particle motion and interaction) more frequently in their written explanations. Students represented more conceptual features in both their drawings and written explanations than they did in the symbolic notation commonly used in the chemical sciences. Our findings suggest that assessment items that involve drawing can help evaluators construct richer models of student knowledge, but they should not be used in isolation from verbal or symbolic modalities.</description><subject>Chemical Education Research</subject><subject>Chemical reactions</subject><subject>Chemistry</subject><subject>College students</subject><subject>Evaluators</subject><subject>Formative Evaluation</subject><subject>Freehand Drawing</subject><subject>Function words</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning outcomes</subject><subject>Organic chemistry</subject><subject>Outcomes of Education</subject><subject>Particle motion</subject><subject>Schemata (Cognition)</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Scientific Concepts</subject><subject>Student Evaluation</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Teaching methods</subject><subject>Test Items</subject><subject>Visualization</subject><subject>Writing (Composition)</subject><issn>0021-9584</issn><issn>1938-1328</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UMlOwzAQtRBIlMIXIKRInNOO7Sz2sSplU6Ve4Gw5XiAVTYonFerf45DAkdO8mXmL9Ai5pjCjwOhcG5xtzbvbOTuTFQAv6AmZUMlFSjkTp2QCkZbKXGTn5AJxC0BZLsWEZHdBf9XNW-LbkCwQHWK_rZ0OTQ82h860O4dJ3STLGFBjF46X5MzrD3RX45yS1_vVy_IxXW8enpaLdao5l13qC1NyKH3JI5DagOdlpR3XzNsiszQ3zGpmAIym1AurRW6rKnPxJC1UlE_J7eC7D-3nwWGntu0hNDFSMSZFnrEiKyKLDywTWsTgvNqHeqfDUVFQfT0q1qPGetRYT1TdDCoXavOnWD1TxgQwGf_z4f8j_o39z_EbhKt0qA</recordid><startdate>20190910</startdate><enddate>20190910</enddate><creator>Ryan, Stephanie A. C</creator><creator>Stieff, Mike</creator><general>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</general><general>Division of Chemical Education, Inc</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/0000-0002-1639-891X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20190910</creationdate><title>Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry</title><author>Ryan, Stephanie A. C ; Stieff, Mike</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a339t-f6c7307f736c79ac0f37bae3a2fd64d15c2da2c00ca11f8da85dbb4e2c09d0b13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Chemical Education Research</topic><topic>Chemical reactions</topic><topic>Chemistry</topic><topic>College students</topic><topic>Evaluators</topic><topic>Formative Evaluation</topic><topic>Freehand Drawing</topic><topic>Function words</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning outcomes</topic><topic>Organic chemistry</topic><topic>Outcomes of Education</topic><topic>Particle motion</topic><topic>Schemata (Cognition)</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Scientific Concepts</topic><topic>Student Evaluation</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Teaching methods</topic><topic>Test Items</topic><topic>Visualization</topic><topic>Writing (Composition)</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ryan, Stephanie A. C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stieff, Mike</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>Ryan, Stephanie A. C</au><au>Stieff, Mike</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1228029</ericid><atitle>Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry</atitle><jtitle>Journal of chemical education</jtitle><addtitle>J. Chem. Educ</addtitle><date>2019-09-10</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>96</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1813</spage><epage>1820</epage><pages>1813-1820</pages><issn>0021-9584</issn><eissn>1938-1328</eissn><abstract>Extant research on the efficacy of drawing for assessing learning in chemistry suggests it may provide richer information on the quality of students’ mental models. Here, we examine the relative utility of formative assessments that involve drawing modalities as well as verbal and symbolic modalities. We analyzed the drawings, written explanations, and symbolic notations made by 36 students learning about chemical reactivity from a dynamic visualization. Our analysis demonstrates that drawing affords the emphasis of different conceptual features across different representational modalities. Students represented spatiotemporal structures (i.e., particle composition and location) more frequently in their drawings but represented spatiotemporal transformations (i.e., particle motion and interaction) more frequently in their written explanations. Students represented more conceptual features in both their drawings and written explanations than they did in the symbolic notation commonly used in the chemical sciences. Our findings suggest that assessment items that involve drawing can help evaluators construct richer models of student knowledge, but they should not be used in isolation from verbal or symbolic modalities.</abstract><cop>Easton</cop><pub>American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc</pub><doi>10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00361</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1639-891X</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-9584
ispartof Journal of chemical education, 2019-09, Vol.96 (9), p.1813-1820
issn 0021-9584
1938-1328
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2298542646
source ACS Publications
subjects Chemical Education Research
Chemical reactions
Chemistry
College students
Evaluators
Formative Evaluation
Freehand Drawing
Function words
Learning
Learning outcomes
Organic chemistry
Outcomes of Education
Particle motion
Schemata (Cognition)
Science Instruction
Scientific Concepts
Student Evaluation
Students
Teaching methods
Test Items
Visualization
Writing (Composition)
title Drawing for Assessing Learning Outcomes in Chemistry
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T20%3A34%3A37IST&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=Drawing%20for%20Assessing%20Learning%20Outcomes%20in%20Chemistry&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20chemical%20education&rft.au=Ryan,%20Stephanie%20A.%20C&rft.date=2019-09-10&rft.volume=96&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1813&rft.epage=1820&rft.pages=1813-1820&rft.issn=0021-9584&rft.eissn=1938-1328&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00361&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2298542646%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=2298542646&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1228029&rfr_iscdi=true