Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate secondary students' understanding of the descriptive and predictive nature of teaching models used in representing compounds in introductory organic chemistry. Of interest were the relationships between teaching models, scientific models, and students' mental models and expressed models. The results from classroom observations, interviews with students, and completion of student questionnaires showed that the majority of students involved in this study had a sound understanding of the descriptive nature of teaching models but their understanding of the predictive nature of those models was limited, despite their experience in using a variety of representations in chemistry class. The data suggest that teaching models can play a pivotal role in initiating students' development of scientific models, mental models, and expressed models. In light of these results, it is suggested that teaching models be used to predict, test and evaluate conceptions similar to the way that scientists use scientific models so that students appreciate the similarities of teaching models and scientific models.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aikenhead, G. S., & Ryan, A. G. (1992). The development of a new instrument: 'Views of Science – Technology – Society' (VOSTS). Science Education, 76, 477–491.
Anderson, G. (1997). Fundamentals of educational research. Hampshire, UK: Falmer Press.
Barnea, N. (2000). Teaching and learning about chemistry and modelling with a computer managed modelling system. In J. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Developing models in science education (pp. 307–323). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Boulter, C. J. (2000). Language, models and modelling in the primary school classroom. In J. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Developing models in science education (pp. 289–306). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Burns, R. B. (1997). Introduction to research methods. Melbourne, Australia: Longman.
Coakes, S. J., & Steed, L. G. (1996). SPSS for Windows: Analysis without anguish. Milton, Qld: Jacaranda Wiley.
Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education. NewYork: Routledge.
Coll, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Learners' mental models of chemical bonding. Research in Science Education, 31, 357–382.
Copolo, C. F., & Hounshell, P. B. (1995). Using three dimensional models to teach molecular structures in high school chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(4), 295–305.
Cosgrove, M., & Schaverien, L. (1997). Models of science education. In J. K. Gilbert <nt>(Ed.)</nt>, Exploring models and modelling in science and technology education(pp. 20–34). Reading, UK: The University of Reading.
Duit, R., & Glynn, S. (1996). Mental modelling. In G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Research in science education in Europe: Current issues and themes (pp. 166–176). London: The Falmer Press.
Gabel, D., & Sherwood, R. (1980). The effect of student manipulation of molecular models on chemistry achievement according to Piagetian level. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 75–81.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction(6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longmans Publishers.
Gergen, K. J. (1995). Social construction and the educational process. In L. P. Steffe & J.Gale <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Constructivism in education (pp. 17–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gilbert, J. K. (1997). Models in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert <nt>(Ed.)</nt>, Exploring models and modelling in science and technology education (pp. 5–19). Reading, UK: The University of Reading.
Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C., & Rutherford, M. (1998). Models in explanations, part 1: Horses for courses. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 83–97.
Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. J. (1998). Learning science through models and modelling. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, International handbook of science education (pp. 53–66). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gilbert, S. W. (1991). Model building and a definition of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 73–79.
Giordan, A. (1991). The importance of modelling in the teaching and popularisation of science. Impact of Science on Society, 164, 321–338.
Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799–822.
Hardwicke, A. J. (1995). Using molecular models to teach chemistry: Part 2. Using models. School Science Review, 77(279), 47–56.
Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509–534.
Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1011–1026.
Ingham, A. I., & Gilbert, J. K. (1991). The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 203–215.
Linn, M. C., Songer, N. B., & Lewis, E. L. (1991). Overview: Students' models and epistemologies of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 729–732.
Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13–17.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Mental models (pp. 7–14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Raghavan, K., & Glaser, R. (1995). Model-based analysis and reasoning in science: The MARS curriculum. Science Education, 79(1), 37–61.
Selley, N. J. (1981). The place of alternative models in school science. School Science Review, 63, 252–259.
Silverman, D. (2000). Analysing talk and text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln <nt>(Eds.)</nt>, Handbook of Qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 821–834). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Smit, J. J. A., & Finegold, M. (1995). Models in physics; Perceptions held by final year prospective physical science teachers studying at South African universities. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 621–634.
Stephens, S., McRobbie, C. J., & Lucas, K. B. (1999). Model-based reasoning in a year 10 classroom. Research in Science Education, 29, 189–208.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. L. (2002). Students' understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 357–368.
Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G., & Venville, G. J. (1998). Teaching science effectively with analogies: An approach for preservice and inservice teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(2), 85–101.
Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers' knowledge of models and modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1141–1153.
Yager, R. E. (1991). The constructivist learning model: Towards real reform in science education. The Science Teacher, 58(6), 52–57.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Treagust, D.F., Chittleborough, G.D. & Mamiala, T.L. Students' Understanding of the Descriptive and Predictive Nature of Teaching Models in Organic Chemistry. Research in Science Education 34, 1–20 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000020885.41497.ed
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000020885.41497.ed