Abstract

The study was conducted to explore the impact of conceptual change texts integrated instruction on 10th class students’ understanding of chemical bonding concepts. It mainly aimed to investigate how conceptual change texts stimulate students’ prior knowledge, identifying misconceptions, and to help them to understand the chemical bonding concepts by using analogies, explanations, and examples. In conceptual changes text, analogies were used to deal with students’ misconceptions. The results analysis revealed that conceptual change texts-oriented instructions have a positive impact on students’ understanding of scientific conceptions related to chemical bonding and also helpful in resolving the misconceptions. Mean scores of both groups showed that students in the experimental group performed better with respect to chemical bonding concepts.

Keywords: chemical bonding, misconception, analogy, conceptual change, conceptual change text

Impact Statement

Students’ have difficulty in understanding the chemical conceptions due to its abstract nature and conceptual framework is found with numerous misconceptions. Teachers are not trained on the innovative pedagogy and to identify the misconceptions. The current study explores the conceptual change approach and its impact on eliminating the misconception in chemical bonding conceptions. The study conclude that conceptual change text, analogies, explanations and experiential learning could be the powerful pedagogical tools in elimination the misconceptions related to chemical bonding. It further recommends to imply the approach in real classroom as socio-demographic might cause data variation. 

About author

Dr Sandeep Kumar

Professor of Chemistry and, by courtesy, of Psychology, School of Applied and Behavioral Sciences, NIILM University Kaithal India

Dr Sandeep Kumar have more than one decade experience in teaching, research, curriculum development, counselling and leadership. His areas of interest are chemical education, research, behavioral science, teacher education and practices. As resource person, he has conducted more than 225 training programs for the school and higher education teachers. He has been awarded with numerous prestigious National and International Awards. He has participated and presented research articles in more than 200 National and International conferences. He has been invited as keynote speaker, guest of honor, conference chair, and resources person in various National and International Conferences. He is associated with various National and International Organizations. 

References

1. Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 22, 53-62.

2. Chambers, S. K. & Andre, T. (1997). Gender, prior knowledge, interest, and experience in electricity and conceptual Change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2),107-123.

3. Novak, J. D. (1988). Leaming science and the science of learning. Studies in Science Education, 15,77-101.

4. Tsai, C. (2000). Enhancing science instruction: the use of ‘conflict maps’. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 285-302.

5. Griffiths, A. K, & Grant, BA.C. (1985). High school students’ understanding of food webs: Identification of a learning hierarchy and related misconceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 421-436.

6. Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 22, 53-62.

7. Taber, K. S. (2000). Multiple frameworks? Evidence of manifold conceptions in individual cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 22,4, 399 -417.

8. Palmer, D. (2001). Students’ alternative conceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about gravity. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 691-706.

9. Kumar, S. (2019). CASE STUDY ON UNTRAINED TEACHERS IN SCHOOLS (ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS) IN JIND AND HISAR DISTRICTS OF HARYANA. International Journal of Engineering Research and Modern Education, 4 (1), 7-9. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.2656138

10. Boo, K. H. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical bond and the energetic of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5),569-581.

11. Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates’ bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707-730.

12. Taber, K. S. (2003). Mediating mental models of metals: acknowledging the priority of the learner’s prior learning. Science Education, 87,732-758.

13. Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Leaming about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: a case study of multiple model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352-381.

14. Coll, R.K. and Taylor, T.G.N. (2001) Using constructivism to inform tertiary chemistry pedagogy. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2 (3), 215-226.

15. Kumar S. (2021). Psychosocial impact of Covid-19 Pandemic on school educators’ mental health and role of cognitive competence in coping with such adversities. International Journal of Biological Innovations. 3(2):323-330. https://doi.org/10.46505/IJBI.2021.3212

16. Adesina, A. E., & Gabriel, E. T. (2023). Emerging Trends and challenges in science Education. Shodh Sari, 02(03), 358–371. https://doi.org/10.59231/sari7612

17. Luera, GR, Otto, CA., & Zitzewitz, P.W. (2005). A conceptual change approach to teaching energy & thermodynamics to pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 2(4), 3-8.

18. Dhindsa, H.S. & Anderson, O.R. (2004). Using a Conceptual-Change Approach to Help Preservice Science Teachers Reorganize Their Knowledge Structures for Constructivist Teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(1),63-85

19. Ovie, A. F. (2023). Remediating students’ misconception and achievement in chemistry via science writing heuristics and peer review instructional strategies in Delta State. Shodh Sari, 02(04), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.59231/sari7625

20. Dorji, P. & Chophel, Y. (2022). Rectifying misconceptions on covalent bonding using cooperative learning, concrete models, and computer simulation: A case study. International Research Journal of Science, Technology, Education, and Management, 2(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6975643

21. Tekkaya, C. (2003). Remediating high school students’ misconceptions concerning diffusion and osmosis through concept mapping and conceptual change text. Research in Science & Technological Education, 21(1), 5-16.

22. Rule, A. C. & Furletti, C., (2004). Using form and function analogy object boxes to teach human body systems, School Science and Mathematics, 104, 155-169.

23. Heywood, D. (2002). The Place of Analogies in Science Education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32 (2), 233-247.

24. Naqsyahbandi, F., Mulyatun, M., Drastisianti, A., & Muhariyansah, J. (2022). Analysis of the use of analogy of chemical Education students on the concept of chemical bond. Jurnal Pembelajaran Kimia/J-PEK (Jurnal Pembelajaran Kimia), 7(2), 58–72. https://doi.org/10.17977/um026v7i22022p058

25. Ndukwu, D. E., & Ogbu, M. O. (2023). Effective use of chemical games: a panacea to difficulties in learning chemistry concepts in secondary schools. Edumania, 01(03), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.59231/edumania/8998

26. Kumar, S. (2023). Artificial intelligence: learning and creativity. Eduphoria, 01(01), 13–1 https://doi.org/10.59231/eduphoria/230402