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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of chemical education 2019-09, Vol.96 (9), p.1813-1820 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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 & 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 |