June 2009, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 597-625
Date: 22 Apr 2008
Question Posing, Inquiry, and Modeling Skills of Chemistry Students in the Case-Based Computerized Laboratory Environment
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
A new learning unit in chemistry, Case-based Computerized Laboratories (CCL) and Computerized Molecular Modeling (CMM) was developed at the Technion. The CCL and CMM curriculum integrates computerized desktop experiments and molecular modeling with an emphasis on scientific inquiry and case studies. Our research aimed at investigating the effect of the CCL and CMM learning environment on students’ higher-order thinking skills of question posing, inquiry, and modeling. The experimental group included 614 honors 12th grade chemistry students from high schools in Israel who studied according to this learning unit. The comparison group consisted of 155 12th grade chemistry honors students who studied other chemistry programs. Pre- and post-tests questionnaires were used to assess students’ higher-order thinking skills. Students’ responses were analyzed using content analysis rubrics and their statistical analysis. Our findings indicated that the scores of the experimental group students improved significantly in question posing, inquiry and modeling skills from the pre-test to the post-test. The net gain scores of the experimental group students were significantly higher than those of their comparison peers in all three examined skills. In modeling skills, experimental group students significantly improved their achievements in making the transfer from 3D models to structural formulae, but only about half of them were able to transfer from formulae to 3D models. By presenting a case-based chemistry assessment tool and content analysis of students’ responses in this paper, we enable teachers and educators to analyze their students’ higher-order thinking skills both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Arzi, H. & White, R.T. (1986). Questions on students’ questions. Research in Science Education, 16, 82–91.CrossRef
Barak, M. & Dori, Y.J. (2005). Enhancing undergraduate students’ chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89, 117–139.CrossRef
Barnea, N. (2004). Towards the new chemistry curriculum in high-schools. Alchemy- Bulletin For Chemistry Teachers, 5, 3–4. (in Hebrew).
Barnea, N. (2002). Updating high school chemistry syllabus: the process of change. Paper presented at the 17th International Conference on Chemical Education (17th ICCE), Beijing, China.
Barnea, N. & Dori, Y.J. (2000). Computerized molecular modeling–The new technology for enhancing model perception among chemistry educators and learners. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 1, 109–120.
Becker, R. (2000). The critical role of students’ questions in literacy development. The Educational Forum, 64, 261–271.CrossRef
Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook 1 the Cognitive Domain. New York: Mckay.
Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, D.C.: National Research council, National Academy press.
Chandrasegaran, A.L., Treagust, D.F. & Mocerino, M. (2007). An evaluation of a teaching intervention to promote students’ ability to use multilple levels of representation when describing and explaining chemical reactions. Research in Science Education, On line first.
Coll, R.K. & Treagust, D.F. (2003). Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners’ mental models of ionic bonds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 464–486.CrossRef
Dillon, J.T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20, 197–210.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J. (2003). From nationwide standardized testing to school-based alternative embedded assessment in Israel: Students’ performance in the “Matriculation 2000” project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 34–52.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J. & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual and physical molecular modeling: Fostering model perception and spatial understanding. Educational Technology & Society, 4, 61–74.
Dori, Y.J., Barak, M. & Adir, N. (2003). A web-based chemistry course as a means to foster freshmen learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 80, 1084–1092.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J., Barak, M., Herscovitz, O. & Carmi, M. (2006). Preparing pre- and in-service teachers to teach high school science with technology. In C. Vrasidas & G.V. Glass (Eds.), Preparing teachers to teach with technology, 2nd Volume of the book series: Current perspectives on applied information technologies. Greenwich, CT, USA: Information Age Publishing.
Dori, Y.J. & Hameiri, M. (1998). The “Mole environment” studyware: Applying multidimensional analysis to quantitative chemistry problems. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 317–333.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J. & Hameiri, M. (2003). Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems –symbol, macro, micro and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 278–302.
Dori, Y.J. & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environment case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 411–430.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J. & Herscovitz, O. (2005). Case-based long-term professional development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1413–1446.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J. & Sasson, I. (2008). Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 219–250.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J., Sasson, I., Kaberman, Z. & Herscovitz, O. (2004). Integrating case-based computerized laboratories into high school chemistry. The Chemical Educator, 9, 1–5.
Dori, Y.J. & Tal, R.T. (2000). Formal and informal collaborative projects: Engaging in industry with environmental awareness. Science Education, 84, 95–113.CrossRef
Dori, Y.J., Tal, R.T. & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies Can we improve higher order thinking skills of non–science majors? Science Education, 87, 767–793.CrossRef
Furio, C., Calatayud, M.L., Barcenas, S.L. & Padilla, O.M. (2000). Functional fixedness and functional reductions as common sense reasonings in chemical equilibrium and in geometry and polarity of molecules. Science Education, 84, 545–565.CrossRef
Gabel, D.L. (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B.J. Fraser & K.J. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 233–248). Great Britain: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
German, P.J., Aram, R. & Burke, J. (1996). Identifying patterns and relationships among the responses of seventh–grade students to the science process skill of designing experiments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 79–99.CrossRef
Gilbert, J.K., De Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D.F. & Van Driel, J.H. (2002). Research and development for the future of chemical education.. In J.K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justy, D.F. Treagust & J.H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (391–408). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Harrison, A.G. & Treagust, D.F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352–381.CrossRef
Harrison, A.G. & Treagust, D.F. (1998). Modelling in science lessons: Are there better ways to learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98, 420–429.CrossRef
Hofstein, A., Levy Nahum, T. & Shore, R. (2001). Assessment of the learning environment of inquiry-type laboratories in high-school chemistry. Learning Environments Research, 4, 193–207.CrossRef
Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V.N. (1982). The role of laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 201–217.
Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28–54.CrossRef
Hofstein, A., Shore, R. & Kipnis, M. (2004). Providing high school chemistry students with opportunities to develop learning skills in an inquiry-type laboratory–A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 47–62.CrossRef
Johnstone, A.H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 75–83.CrossRef
Kaberman, Z. & Dori, Y.J. (2008). Metacognition in chemical education: Question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment. Instructional Science. In press.
Keig, P.F. & Rubba, P.A. (1993). Translation of representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 883–903.CrossRef
Kozma, R. & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence.. In J.K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 121–145). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRef
Kozma, R.B. & Russel, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 949–968.CrossRef
Marbach–Ad, G. & Claassen, L. (2001). Improving students’ questions in inquiry labs. American Biology Teacher, 63, 410–419.CrossRef
Marbach–Ad, G. & Sokolove, P. G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 854–870.CrossRef
Mathewson, J. H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: An aspect of science overlooked by educators. Science Education, 83, 33–54.CrossRef
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (1996). National education standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Pintrich, P.R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41, 219–225.CrossRef
Sasson, I. & Dori, Y.J. (2006). Fostering near and far transfer in the chemistry case-based laboratory environment.. In G. Clarebout & J. Elen (Eds.), Avoiding simplicity, confronting complexity: Advance in studying and designing powerful (computer-based) learning environments (pp. 275–286). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Singer, H. (1978). Active comprehension: From answering to asking questions. Reading Teacher, 31, 901–908.
Small, M.Y. & Morton, M.E. (1983). Research in college science teaching: Spatial visualization training improves performances in organic chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 13, 41–43.
Tamir, P., Nussinovitz, R. & Friedler, Y. (1982). The design and use of a practical tests assessment inventory. Journal of Biological Education, 16, 42–50.
Tobin, K. (1990). Teacher mind frames and science learning.. In K. Tobin, J.B. Kahle & B.J. Fraser (Eds.), Windows into science classrooms (pp. 33–91). New York, Philadelphia: The Falmer Press, London.
White, R.T. & Arzi, H.J. (2005). Longitudinal studies: Designs, validity, practicality, and value. Research in Science Education, 35, 137–149.CrossRef
Woodward, C. (1992). Raising and answering questions in primary science: Some considerations. Evaluation and Research in Education, 6, 145–153.CrossRef
Wu, H.K., Krajcik, J.S. & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 821–842.CrossRef
Wu, H.K. & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuo-spatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88, 465–492.CrossRef
Zohar, A. & Dori, Y.J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 145–182.CrossRef
Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62.CrossRef
Zoller, U. (1993). Are lecture and learning compatible? Maybe for LOCS: Unlikely for HOCS. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 195–197.CrossRef
Zoller, U. (2002). Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: performance and attitudes of college students. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 185–203.CrossRef
- Question Posing, Inquiry, and Modeling Skills of Chemistry Students in the Case-Based Computerized Laboratory Environment
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education
Volume 7, Issue 3 , pp 597-625
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- chemistry laboratory
- computerized learning
- question posing
- thinking skills