Skip to main content

Active Learning in Computerized Chemical Education Environments

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Learning with Understanding in the Chemistry Classroom

Abstract

In this chapter, Dori, Barak, and Carmi presents active learning in computerized chemical education environments. Authors presented results of some studies that involved the integration of innovative learning environments as part of the chemistry curriculum. Taking into account curriculum reforms dealing also with the applications of the ICT authors developed such learning environments that should promote more active chemistry learning from the perspective that students actively process information in order to learn in a meaningful way. Studies that were designed researched chemistry students’ and teachers’ learning outcomes in two technology-enhanced environments that enable active learning: Case-based Computerized Laboratories (CCL) and Computerized Molecular Modeling (CMM). The three studies presented in this chapter along with the tools for evaluating the effect of active learning on chemistry students and teachers will enable teachers, educators, and researchers, to investigate students’ higher order thinking skills both qualitatively and quantitatively, teachers’ professional development, and the process of implementation of a new learning unit in the classroom.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
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

  • Abed, A. & Dori, Y. J. (2007). Fostering question posing and inquiry skills of high school Israeli Arab students in a bilingual chemistry learning environment. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), New Orleans, LA, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abed, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2013). Inquiry, chemistry understanding levels, and bilingual learning. Educación Química—Emergent topics on chemistry education, 24(1), 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barak, M., & Dori, Y. J. (2005). Enhancing undergraduate students’ chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89(1), 117–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barak, M., & Hussein-Farraj, R. (2013). Integrating model-based learning and animations for enhancing students’ understanding of proteins’ structure and function. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 619–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnea, N., & Dori, Y. J. (1999). High-school chemistry student’s performance and gender differences in a computerized molecular modeling learning environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(4), 257–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(1), 109–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnea, N., Dori, Y. J., & Hofstein, A. (2010). Development andimplementation of Inquiry-based and computerized-based laboratories: Reforming high school chemistry in Israel. Chemistry Education Research and Practice (CERP), 11, 218–228. http://www.rsc.org/Education/CERP

  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals; Handbook I, cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2008). An evaluation of a teacher intervention to promote students’ ability to use multiple levels of representation when describing and explaining chemical reactions. Research in Science Education, 38(2), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigations of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners’ mental models of ionic bonds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 464–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, A. J., Belloni, M., Dancy, M., & Christian, W. (2003). Physlets in introductory physics. Physics Education, 38(5), 433–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, W. J., & Nakhleh, M. B. (2001). Students’ use of Web-based tutorial materials and their understanding of chemistry concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 975–980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dori, Y. J., & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual and physical molecular modeling: Fostering model perception and spatial understanding. Educational Technology & Society, 4(1), 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. W. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect students’ understanding of scientific concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(3), 278–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dori, Y. J., & Kaberman, Z. (2012). Assessing high school chemistry students’ modeling sub-skills in a computerized molecular modeling learning environment. Instructional Science, 40(1), 69–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(2), 219–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(9), 1084–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dori, Y. J., Barak, M., Herscovitz, O., & Carmi, M. (2005). Prepraring 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 perspective on applied information technologies. Charlotte :Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Giddings, G. J. (1993). Development and cross-national validation of a laboratory classroom environment instrument for senior high school science. Science Education, 77(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (2002). The change. Educational Leadership, 59(8), 16-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M., & Hargreaves, A. (Eds.). (1992). Teacher development and educational change. London: FalmerPress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Education Research Journal, 6, 207–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabel, D. (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implication for teaching. In B. J Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education, Part One (pp. 233-248). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henze, I., van Driel, H. J., & Verloop, N. (2009). Experienced science teachers’ learning in the context of educational innovation (Report). Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. (2004). The laboratory in chemistry education: thirty years of experience with developments, implementation and evaluation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 247–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., Cohen, I., & Lazarowitz, R. (1996). The learning environment of high school students in chemistry and biology laboratories. Research in Science and Technological Education, 14(1), 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopson, M. H., Simms, R. L., & Knezek, G. A. (2001). Using a technology-enriched environment to improve higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), 109–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horsley, D. L., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). Tornado of change. Journal of Staff Development, 19(4), 17–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsi, S., Linn, M. C., & Bell, J. (1997). The role of spatial reasoning in engineering and the design of spatial instruction. Journal of Engineering Education, 86(2), 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A Design Retrospective. In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.), Advanced designs for the technologies of learning: Innovations in science and mathematics education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina: Interaction Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009a). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of high school chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 597–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009b). Metacognition in chemical education: Question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment. Instructional Science, 37(5), 403–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantardjieff, K. A., Hardinger, S. A., & Van Willis, W. J. (1999). Introducing computers early in the undergraduate chemistry curriculum. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(5), 694–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyser, M. W. (2000). Active learning and cooperative learning: understanding the difference and using both styles effectively. Research Strategies, 17(1), 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarowitz, R., & Tamir, P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 94–130). New-York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Layman, J. W., & Nachmias, R. (1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputer-based laboratories: Graphing skills development. Contemporary Education Psychology, 12(3), 244–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipkowitz, K. B., Jalaie, M., Robertson, D., & Barth, A. (1999). Interdisciplinary learning with computational chemistry: A collaboration between chemistry and geology. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(5), 684–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohman, M. C., & Woolf, N. H. (2001). Self-initiated learning activities of experienced public school teachers: Methods, sources, and relevant organizational influences. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 7(1), 59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marjieh, C. (2007). Assessing the learning environment of computerized case-based laboratory of high school chemistry students. Master Thesis, Technion, Haifa, Israel (In Hebrew with Abstract in English).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Jiménez, P., Pontes-Pedrajas, A., Climent-Bellido, M. S., & Polo, J. (2003). Learning in chemistry with virtual laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(3), 346–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, H. (2002). Active learning – a cultural change needed in teacher education and schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7), 763–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, D. W., Lucas, K. B., & McRobbie, C. J. (2004). Role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understanding in thermal physics. Journal of Research in Science Education, 41(2), 165–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harward Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Secondary students’ dynamic modeling processes: analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(3), 215–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towns, M. H., & Grant, E. R. (1997). “I believe I will go out of this class actually knowing something”: Cooperative learning activities in physical chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(8), 819–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J.H., & De Jong, O. (2001). Investigating the development of preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented during the NARST Annual Meeting, St. Louis, MO, March 25–28, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, V. M., & Abraham, M. R. (1995). The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 521–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, H., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students’ use of visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yagi, S. M. (2000). Language labs and translation booths: Simultaneous interpretation as a learner task. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 13(2), 154–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yehudit Judy Dori .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dori, Y.J., Barak, M., Carmi, M. (2014). Active Learning in Computerized Chemical Education Environments. In: Devetak, I., Glažar, S. (eds) Learning with Understanding in the Chemistry Classroom. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4366-3_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics