Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of jigsaw and animation techniques on students’ understanding of concepts and subjects in electrochemistry

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study investigated the effect of jigsaw cooperative learning and animation versus traditional teaching methods on students’ understanding of electrochemistry in a first-year general chemistry course. This study was carried out in three different classes in the department of primary science education during the 2007–2008 academic year. The first class was randomly assigned as the jigsaw group, the second as the animation group, and the third as the control group. Students participating in the jigsaw group were divided into five “home groups” since the topic electrochemistry is divided into five subtopics. Each of these home groups contained four students. The groups were as follows: (1) Home Group A (HGA), representing the fundamental concepts of electrochemistry, (2) Home Group B (HGB), representing the electrochemical cell and energy source, (3) Home Group C (HGC), representing electrolysis, (4) Home Group D (HGD), representing Faraday’s laws, and (5) Home Group E (HGE), representing corrosion. The home groups broke apart, like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and the students moved into jigsaw groups consisting of members from the other home groups, who were each assigned a subtopic. For students in the animation group, their lesson focused on explaining the step-by-step process of electrochemistry through a computer-animated presentation. The main data collection tools were the Test of Scientific Reasoning and the Particulate Nature of Matter Evaluation Test. The results indicated that the jigsaw and animation groups achieved better results than the control group.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abraham, M. R., Grzybowski, E. B., Renner, J. W., & Marek, E. A. (1992). Understandings and misunderstandings of eight graders of five chemistry concepts found in textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 105–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adadan, E. (2006). Promoting high school students’ conceptual understandings of the particulate nature of matter through multiple representations. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University.

  • Appling, J. R., & Peake, L. C. (2004). Instructional technology and molecular visualization. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(3), 361–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ardac, D., & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students’ understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 317–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E., Stephen, C., Sikes, J., Blaney, N., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, Calif: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avsar, Z., & Alkis, S. (2007). The effect of cooperative learning “Jigsaw I” technique on student success in social studies course. Elementary Education Online, 6(2), 197–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayas, A., & Ozmen, H. (2002). A study of students’ level of understanding of the particulate nature of matter at secondary school level. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 19(2), 45–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantine, J., & Larres, P. M. (2007). Cooperative learning: A pedagogy to improve students’ generic skills? Education and Training, 49(2), 126–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnea, N., & Dori, Y. J. (1996). Computerized molecular modeling as a tool to improve chemistry teaching. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, 36(6), 629–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumberger-Henry, M. (2005). Cooperative learning and case study: does the combination improve students’ perception of problem-solving and decision making skills? Nurse Education Today, 25, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearison, D. J., Magzomes, S., & Filardo, E. K. (1986). Socio-cognitive conflict and cognitive growth in young children. Merrill-Polmer Quarterly, 32(1), 51–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B., & Silberstein, J. (1987). Students’ visualization of a chemical reaction. Education in Chemistry, 24(4), 117–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodner, G. M. (1990). Why good teaching fails and hard-working students don’t always succeed. Spectrum, 28(1), 27–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, D. M., & Gabel, D. L. (2002). Differential effects on the achievement of males and females of teaching the particulate nature of chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 911–927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. A., Greenbowe, T. J., & Windschitl, M. A. (1998). Developing and using conceptual computer animations for chemistry instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(12), 1658–1661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, H., & Quintana, C. (2006). Student-generated animations: Supporting middle school students’ visualization, interpretation and reasoning of chemical phenomena. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference of the learning sciences. Bloomington, IN: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colosi, J. C., & Zales, C. R. (1998). Jigsaw cooperative learning improves biology lab course. BioScience, 48(2), 118–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasdemir, I., Doymus, K., Simşek, U., & Karacop, A. (2008). The effects of animation technique on teaching of acids and bases topics. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 5(2), 60–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doymus, K. (2007). The effect of a cooperative learning strategy in the teaching of phase and one-component phase diagrams. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(11), 1857–1860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doymus, K., Simsek, U., & Karacop, A. (2009). The effects of computer animations and cooperative learning methods in micro, macro and symbolic level learning of states of matter. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 36, 109–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebenezer, J. V. (2001). A hypermedia environment to explore and negotiate students conceptions animation of the solution process of table salt. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(1), 73–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebenezer, J., & Erickson, G. (1996). Chemistry students’ conceptions of solubility: Aphenomenography. Science Education, 80, 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finley, N. F., Steward, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers’ perceptions of important and difficult science concepts. Science Education, 66(4), 531–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation reduction reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghaith, G., & El-Malak, M. A. (2004). Effect of Jigsaw II on literal and higher order EFL reading comprehension. Educational Research and Evaluation, 10(2), 105–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization in science education. Netherlands: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haidar, A. H., & Abraham, M. R. (1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 919–938.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: challenges in understanding the submicroscopic world. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 213–234). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedeen, T. (2003). The reverse jigsaw: A process of cooperative learning and discussion. Teaching Sociology, 31(3), 325–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holliday, D. C. (1995). Jigsaw IV: Using student/teacher concerns to improve Jigsaw III. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED495687). Retrieved from ERIC database.

  • Kelly, R. M., & Jones, L. L. (2007). Exploring how different features of animations of sodium chloride dissolution affect students’ explanations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 413–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, R., Phelps, A., & Sanger, M. (2004). The effects of a computer animation on students’ conceptual understanding of a can-crushing demonstration at the macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic levels. Chemical Educator, 9(3), 184–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S., Yoon, M., Whang, S.-M., Tversky, B., & Morrison, J. B. (2007). The effect of animation on comprehension and interest. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 260–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 949–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Large, A. (1996). Computer animation in an instructional environment. Library and Information Science Research, 18, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C., & Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for intermediate statistics: Use and interpretation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijnse, P., Licht, P., de Vos, W., & Waarlo, A. L. (Eds.). (1990). Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles: A central problem in secondary science education. The Netherlands: Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H. S., Yang, T. C., Chiu, H. L., & Chou, C. Y. (2002). Students’ difficulties in learning electrochemistry. Proceedings of the National Science Council R.O.C.: Part D, 12(3), 100–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X. (2006). Effects of combined hands-on laboratory and computer modeling on student learning of gas laws: A quasi-experimental study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merritt, J., Shwartz, Y., & Krajcik, J. (2007). Middle school students’ development of the particle model of matter. Annual meeting of the national association for research in science teaching, New Orleans.

  • National Science Foundation (NSF). (2001). Molecular visualization in science education. Report from the molecular visualization in science education workshop. Arlington, VA: NCSA access center, National Science Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noh, T., & Scharmann, L. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students’ conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novick, S., & Nusbaum, J. (1981). Pupils’ understanding of particulate nature of matter: A cross-age study. Science Education, 65(2), 187–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R., Cosgrove, M., & Schollum, B. (1982). Chemistry and the learning in science project. Chemistry in New Zealand, 10, 104–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Othman, J., Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2008). An investigation into the relationship between students’ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11/3), 1531–1550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ploetzner, R., Lippitsch, S., Galmbacher, M., Heuer, D., & Scherrer, S. (2009). Students’ difficulties in learning from dynamic visualisations and how they may be overcome. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2008). Using a computer animation to teach high school molecular biology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanger, M. J. (1996). Identifying, attributing and dispelling students misconceptions in electrochemistry. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Iowa State University.

  • Sanger, M. J., & Badger, S. M. (2001). Using computer-based visualization strategies to improve students’ understanding of molecular polarity and miscibility. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(10), 1412–1416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 377–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (2000). Addressing student misconceptions concerning electron flow in aqueous solutions with instruction including computer animations and conceptual change strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 521–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanger, M. J., Phelps, A. J., & Fienhold, J. (2000). Using a computer animation to improve students’ conceptual understanding of a can-crushing demonstration. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(11), 1517–1520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schank, P., & Kozma, R. (2002). Learning chemistry through the use of a representation-based knowledge building environment. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(3), 253–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schollum, B., & Osborne, R. (1985). Relating the new to the familiar. In R. Osborne, et al. (Eds.), Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seel, N. M. (2003). Model centered learning and instruction. Technology, Instruction Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 59–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, C. (2005). Implementing a research-based model of cooperative learning. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(6), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1986). Using student team learning (p. 109). Washington, DC: Professional Library National Education Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souvignier, E., & Kronenberger, J. (2007). Cooperative learning in third graders’ Jigsaw groups for mathematics and science with and without questioning training. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 755–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, R. (1994). Cooperative learning in social studies: A handbook for teachers. Menlo Park, Calif: Addison-Wesley Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talib, O., Matthews, R., & Secombe, M. (2005). Computer-animated instructions and students conceptual chance in electrochemistry: Preliminary qualitative analysis. International Education Journal, 5(5), 29–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theall, R. M. (2003). The effectiveness of computer-generated 3D animations in inquiry chemistry laboratory, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University.

  • Vermaat, H., Kramers-Pals, H., & Schank, P. (2003). The use of animations in chemical education. In Proceedings of the international convention of the association for educational communications and technology (pp. 430–441). Anaheim, CA.

  • Wang, H.-C., Chang, C.-Y., & Li, T.-Y. (2007). The comparative efficacy of 2D- versus 3D-based media design for influencing spatial visualization skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1943–1957.

    Article  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. K. (2003). Linking the microscopic view of chemistry to real-life experiences: Intertextuality in a high-school science classroom. Science Education, 87(6), 868–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(7), 821–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, H.-K., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88, 465–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yezierski, E. J. (2003). The particulate of matter and conceptual change a cross-age study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University.

  • Yezierski, E. J., & Birk, J. P. (2006). Misconceptions about the particulate nature of matter using animations to close the gender gap. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(6), 954–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kazim Karabekir Education Faculty, Department of Elementary Science Education, Ataturk University, 25240, Erzurum, Turkey

    Kemal Doymus & Ataman Karacop

  2. Education Faculty, Department of Elementary Science Education, Agri Ibrahim Cecen University, Agri, Turkey

    Umit Simsek

Authors
  1. Kemal Doymus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ataman Karacop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Umit Simsek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kemal Doymus.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doymus, K., Karacop, A. & Simsek, U. Effects of jigsaw and animation techniques on students’ understanding of concepts and subjects in electrochemistry. Education Tech Research Dev 58, 671–691 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9157-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9157-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation