Skip to main content

Assessing for Chemical Thinking

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Research and Practice in Chemistry Education

Abstract

Current educational reform efforts emphasize the importance of developing students’ abilities to engage in a variety of science practices, including creating and using models, generating arguments, and building explanations. To achieve these goals, we need to change more than our instructional methods. It is also critical that we carefully reflect on how to modify our assessment tools to better elicit the types of understandings that we value. In this chapter, I describe a strategy we are using to develop formal formative assessments and summative assessment in a general chemistry course for science and engineering majors in the USA. These assessments seek to evaluate the extent to which students can integrate central ideas, crosscutting ways of reasoning, and core practices in making sense of relevant phenomena and in finding reasonable solutions to real problems. The benefits and challenges of our approach to the assessment of student understanding are highlighted in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cooper, M. M., Underwood, S. M., Hilley, C. Z., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2012). Development and assessment of a molecular structure and properties learning progression. Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 1351–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (EC). (2015). Science education for responsible citizenship. Luxembourg: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laverty, J. T., Underwood, S. M., Matz, R. L., Posey, L. A., Carmel, J. H., Caballero, M. D., et al. (2016). Characterizing college science assessments: The three-dimensional learning assessment protocol. PLoS ONE, 11(9), e0162333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2013). The next generation science standards. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russ, R. S., Scherr, R. E., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science Education, 92(3), 499–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevian, H., & Talanquer, V. (2014). Rethinking chemistry: A learning progression on chemical thinking. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(1), 10–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C., Wiser, M., Anderson, C., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Implications of research on children’s learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and atomic-molecular theory. Measurement, 14(1&2), 1–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2009). On cognitive constraints and learning progressions: The case of structure of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2123–2136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2016). Central ideas in chemistry: An alternative perspective. Journal of Chemical Education, 93, 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2018a). Progressions in reasoning about structure-property relationships. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 998–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2018b). Chemical rationales: Another triplet for chemical thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 1874–1890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2018c). The importance of understanding fundamental chemical mechanisms. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(11), 1905–1911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V., & Pollard, J. (2010). Let’s teach how we think instead of what we know. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(2), 74–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V., & Pollard, J. (2017). Reforming a large foundational course: Successes and challenges. Journal of Chemical Education, 94, 1844–1851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, S. M., Posey, L. A., Herrington, D. G., Carmel, J. H., & Cooper, M. M. (2018). Adapting assessment tasks to support three-dimensional learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(2), 207–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge all the general chemistry instructors, laboratory coordinators, and graduate assistants who are and have been involved in the development and implementation of the Chemical Thinking curriculum at our institution. Support from the Association of American Universities (AAU) through their Undergraduate STEM Education Initiative is also appreciated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vicente Talanquer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Talanquer, V. (2019). Assessing for Chemical Thinking. In: Schultz, M., Schmid, S., Lawrie, G. (eds) Research and Practice in Chemistry Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6998-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6998-8_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6997-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6998-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics