Learning Demand and Classroom Discourse Design Tools to Improve Students' Conceptual Understanding of the Nature of Electrolytes
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper reports on two design tools used in a teaching sequence (module) based on the Leeds Model Framework. This model framework draws upon theoretical insights into perspectives on learning and empirical studies to improve the teaching of electrochemistry by using the learning demand and the communicative approach. The learning demand identifies the differences between everyday social language and the school scientific language in terms of both content and the nature of the knowledge that are used to represent the same phenomena. The communicative approach focuses on the classroom discourse, especially on how the teacher interacts with the students when new ideas are introduced on the social plane of the classroom. These two design tools present the fundamental guidelines that could be utilised in designing a teaching sequence to improve students’ conceptual understanding in any specific learning of science content. A study on two intact groups that had similar academic ability was carried out. The experimental class was conducted using the design teaching whilst the baseline group (comparison group) had followed the normal classroom teaching. The students’ conceptual understanding in both classes was tested using a post-diagnostic test. The evaluation of students’ responses of the items in the post diagnostic test was carried out using the ideographic and nomothetic approaches. The results show that there were significant differences in the experimental students’ performances in comparison to the students in the baseline group. The findings suggest that the learning demand and different types of discourses had enabled students to explain some aspects of electrolytic cell content in details. The experimental students had demonstrated better conceptual scientific understanding than the baseline group in the learning area concerning the nature of electrolytes in the electrolytic cell.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Acar, B., & Tarhan, L. (2007). Effect of cooperative learning strategies on students' understanding of concepts in electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(2), 349–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9046-7
Ahmad, N. J., & Lah, Y. C. (2013). A designed teaching sequence as a tool to improve students' conceptual understanding of the conductivity in the electrolytic cell. Asian Social Science, 9(2), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n2p298
Allsop, R. T., & George, N. H. (1982). Redox in Nuffield advanced chemistry. Education in Chemistry, 19, 57–59.
Ametller, J., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2007). Using perspective on subject learning to inform the design of subject teaching: An example from science education. The Curriculum Journal, 18(2), 479–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170701687928
Amponsah, K. D., & Ochonogor, C. E. (2018). Facilitating conceptual change in students' comprehension of electrochemistry concepts through collaborative teaching strategy. American Journal of Educational Research, 6(6), 596–601.
Bakhtin, M. (1934). Discourse in the novel. Literary Theory: An Anthology, 2, 674–685. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. In M. Holquist (Eds.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Brandriet, A. R., & Bretz, S. L. (2014). The development of the redox concept inventory as a measure of students’ symbolic and particulate redox understandings and confidence. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(8), 1132–1144. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500051n
Buty, C., Tiberghien, A., & Le Maréchal, J-FL. (2004). Learning hypotheses and an associated tool to design and to analyse teaching-learning sequence. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690310001614735
Cazden, C. B. (2001). The language of learning and teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Cazden, C. B., & Beck, S. W. (2003). Classroom discourse. In C. Graesser, M. A. Gernbascher, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), Handbook of Discourse Processes (pp. 165–197). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
De Jong, O., Acampo, J., & Verdonk, A. (1995). Problems in teaching the topic of redox reactions: actions and conceptions of chemistry teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(10), 1097–1110. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660321008
Doymus, K., Karacop, A., & Simsek, U. (2010). Effects of jigsaw and animation techniques on students’ understanding of concepts and subjects in electrochemistry. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(6), 671–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9157-2
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X023007005
Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267808559857
Forman, E. A., & Kraker, M. J. (1985). The social origins of logic: The contributions of Piaget and Vygotsky. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1985(29), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219852904
Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J., & Hackling, M. (1995). Students’ alternative conceptions in chemistry: a review of research and implications for teaching and learning. Studies in Science Education, 25, 69–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269508560050
Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1990). Implications of research on students’ understanding of electrochemistry for improving science curricula and classroom practise. International Journal of Science Education, 12(2), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069900120203
Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation-reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290204
Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electrochemical (galvanic) and electrolytic cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(10), 1079–1099. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660291006
Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Modelling in science lessons: Are there better ways to learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1998.tb17434.x
Hawkins, I., & Phelps, A. J. (2013). Virtual laboratory vs. traditional laboratory: Which is more effective for teaching electrochemistry? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 516–523. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00070B
Huddle, P. A., White, M. D., & Rogers, F. (2000). Using a teaching model to correct known misconceptions in electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(1), 104–110. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p104
Iksan, Z. H., & Daniel, E. (2015). Emerging model of questioning through the process of teaching and learning electrochemistry. International Education Studies, 8(10), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n10p137
Jones, M. C. (1998). Language obsolescence and revitalization: Linguistic change in two sociolinguistically contrasting welsh communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kabapinar, F. M. (2009). Multi-frame illustrations: A molecular visual strategy in learning and teaching chemistry concepts. Australian Journal of Education in Chemistry, 69, 11–16.
Kabapinar, F., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2004). The design and evaluation of a teaching– learning sequence addressing the solubility concept with Turkish secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690310001614000
Kanadl?, S., & Sa?lam, Y. (2016). Investigating the effectiveness of a professional development program designed to improve science teachers' classroom discourse. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(3), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2016.03.010
Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: an approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560189
Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2003). Individual and sociocultural perspectives on learning in science education. Science Education, 12, 91–113. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022665519862
Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2008). Teaching for conceptual understanding: An approach drawing on individual and sociocultural perspectives. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 647–675). London: Routledge.
Leach, J., Scott, P., Ametller, J., Hind, A., & Lewis, J. (2006). Implementing and evaluating teaching interventions. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Improving subject teaching: Lessons from research in science education (pp. 79–99). London: Taylor and Francis.
Leach, J., Ametller, J., & Scott, P. (2010). Establishing and communicating knowledge about teaching and learning scientific content: The role of design briefs. In K. Kortland, & K. Klaasen (Eds.), Designing theory-based teaching-learning sequences for science education (pp. 7–36). Utrecht, NL: CDBeta Press
Lee, O., Quinn, H., & Valdés, G. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with implications for Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X13480524
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Lewis, E. B., Baker, D. R., & Helding, B. A. (2015). Science teaching reform through professional development: Teachers’ use of a scientific classroom discourse community model. Science Education, 99(5), 896–931. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21170
Marais, A. F. (2011). Overcoming conceptual difficulties in first-year chemistry students by applying concrete teaching tools. South African Journal of Chemistry, 64(1), 151–157.
Michaels, S., & O’Connor, C. (2015). Conceptualizing talk moves as tools: Professional development approaches for academically productive discussion. Socializing intelligence through talk and dialogue (e-book), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.3102/978-0-935302-43-1_27
Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (2014). The study of talk between teachers and students, from the 1970s until the 2010s. Oxford Review of Education, 40(4), 430–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.934087
Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
Morton, T. (2012). Classroom talk, conceptual change and teacher reflection in bilingual science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.07.006
Ogude, A. N., & Bradley, J. D. (1994). Ionic conduction and electrical neutrality in operating electrochemical cells: Pre-college and college student interpretations. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(1), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed071p29
Onder, ?. (2017). The effect of conceptual change texts supplemented instruction on students' achievement in electrochemistry. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(4), 969–975. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2017.04.006
Özmen, H. (2007). The effectiveness of conceptual change texts in remediating high school students’ alternative conceptions concerning chemical equilibrium. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(3), 413–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026470
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207
Ringnes, V. (1995). Oxidation-reduction-learning difficulties and choice of redox models. School Science Review, 77, 74–77.
Rollnick, M., & Mavhunga, E. (2014). PCK of teaching electrochemistry in chemistry teachers: A case in Johannesburg, Gauteng Province, South Africa. Educación Química, 25(3), 354–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(14)70551-8
Rosenthal, D. P., & Sanger, M. J. (2012). Student misinterpretations and misconceptions based on their explanations of two computer animations of varying complexity depicting the same oxidation–reduction reaction. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 471–483. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20048A
Salloum, S., & BouJaoude, S. (2019). The use of triadic dialogue in the science classroom: A teacher negotiating conceptual learning with teaching to the test. Research in Science Education, 49(3), 829–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9640-4
Schmidt, H. J. (1991). A label as a hidden persuader: chemists’ neutralization concept. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 459–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069910130409
Scott, P., Leach, J., Hind, A., & Lewis, J. (2006). Designing research evidence informed teaching interventions. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Improving subject teaching: Lessons from research in science education (pp. 60–78). London: Taylor and Francis.
Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605–631. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20131
Schegloff, E. A. (1978). On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In W. U. Dressler (Ed.), Current trends in textlinguistics (Vol. 2, pp. 81–102). Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110853759.81
Schunk, D. H. (2000). Learning theories: An educational perspective (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Shemwell, J. T., & Furtak, E. M. (2010). Science classroom discussion as scientific argumentation: A study of conceptually rich (and poor) student talk. Educational Assessment, 15(3–4), 222–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2010.530563
Silverman, D. (1997). The logics of qualitative research. In G. Miller, & R. Dingwall (Eds.), Context and method in qualitative research (pp. 12–25). London: Sage Publications.
Su, K. D. (2018). Enhancing students’ corresponding reasoning of cognitive performances by animated Concept mapping in electrochemistry. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(4), 662–673.
Tobin, K. (1993). Referents for making sense of science teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 15(3), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069930150302
Tytler, R., & Aranda, G. (2015). Expert teachers’ discursive moves in science classroom interactive talk. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 425–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9617-6
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J., & Tulviste, P. (1992). L. S. Vygotsky and developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 28, 548–557. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.28.4.548
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Harvard: Harvard University Press.