Special Issue - (2016)
Special Issue - (2015)
Special Issue - (2012)
Comparison of the Main Determinants Affecting Environmental Literacy in Singapore, Estonia and Germany
Volkan Hasan Kaya, & Doris Elster
pp. 373-389 | Article Number: ijese.2018.031
The purpose of this research is to determine and compare the variance of the main factors affecting the environmental literacy of fifteen-years-old students studying in Singapore, Estonia and Germany. The relational model, which is one of the quantitative research approaches, has been adopted in this study. Through the relational model, the main factors affecting the environmental literacy averages of the sample countries and the degree of the effect of these factors have been investigated. As the research design, a survey method that provides the opportunity to work with a large sample was used. In this study, the universe was 15-years-old German, Singaporean and Estonian students. The sample consisted of 6.504 German, 6.115 Singaporean and 5.587 Estonian students. The data based on the findings of the PISA 2015. In this study, the researchers used Environmental Literacy Scale developed by researchers. It was also classified by the researchers to determine the basic determinants affecting environmental literacy. In the light of the selected determinants, it is concluded that in all three countries there is a low but significant relationship between environmental literacy and the determinants affecting the environmental literacy. In Estonian case, there are various factors affecting environmental literacy furthermore, the total variance ratio is lower than the other two countries. In German case, the determinants (extra-curricular activities, teacher’s teaching skills etc.) affecting environmental literacy were few and the variance rate was about the same as that of Singaporean. “Extra-curricular activities” is the determinant which had the most significant positive impact on environmental literacy among students in all three countries.
Keywords: environmental literacy, science education, country-comparative study
Abdi, A. (2014). The Effect of Inquiry-based Learning Method on Students’ Academic Achievement in Science Course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(1), 37-41.
Abu-Hilal, M. M. (2000). A Structural Model of Attitudes towards School Subjects, Academic Aspiration and Achievement. Educational Psychology, 20(1), 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/014434100110399
Acisli, S., Altun Yalcin, S., & Turgut, U. (2011). Effects of the 5E Learning Model on Students’ Academic Achievements in Movement and Force Issues. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2459–2462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.128
Adeyemo, S. A. (2010). The Relationship Between Students’ Participation in School Based Extracurricular Activities and Their Achievement in Physics. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, 1(6), 111 – 117.
Akdemir, H., & Karakus, M. (2016). The Effect of Creative Drama Method on Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analysis Study. International Journal of Active Learning, 1(2), 55-67.
Akiri, A. A. (2013). Effects of Teachers’ Effectiveness on Students’ Academic Performance in Public Secondary Schools; Delta State – Nigeria. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 3(3), 105-111. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n3p105
Akpınar, E., Yıldız, E., Tatar, N., & Ergin, Ö. (2009). Students’ Attitudes toward Science and Technology: An Investigation of Gender, Grade Level, and Academic Achievement. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 2804–2808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.498
Ali, M. S., Iqbal, A., & Akhtar, M. M. S. (2015). Students’ Attitude towards Science and its Relationship with Achievement Score at Intermediate Level. Journal of Elementary Education, 25(2), 61-72.
Anıl, D. (2009). Factors Effecting Science Achievement of Science Students in Programme for International Students’ Achievement (PISA) in Turkey. Education and Science, 34(152).
Anıl, D. (2011). Investigation of Factors Influencing Turkey’s Pisa 2006 Science Achievement with Structural Equation Modelling. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(3), 1253-1266.
Aslanargun, E. (2007). The Revıew of Lıterature on School-Parent Cooperatıon and Students’ School Success. Journal of Social Science, 18, 119-135.
Ay, Y., Anagün, Ş. S., & Demir, Z. M. 2015). Pre-Service Primary School Teachers’ Opinions about Out-of-School Learning in Science Teaching. International Periodical for the Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 10/15, 103-118. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.8702
Batdi, V., & Batdi, H. (2015). Effect of Creative Drama on Academic Achievement: A Meta-analytic and Thematic Analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(6), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.6.0156
Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2002). Social–Emotional Factors Affecting Achievement Outcomes among Disadvantaged Students: Closing the Achievement Gap. Educ Psychol., 37(4), 197–214, https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3704_1
Bennett, N. J., & Roth, R. (Eds.) (2015). The Conservation Social Sciences: What?, How? and Why?, Vancouver, BC: Canadian Wildlife Federation and Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, University of British Columbia.
Bostan Sarioglan, A., & Kucukozer, Y. (2017). Investigation of Preservice Science Teachers’ Opinions Regarded to Outdoor School Learning Environments. Journal of Research in Informal Environments, 2(1), 1-15.
Buyukozturk, S. (1997). İki Faktörlü Varyans Analizi, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 141-158.
Buyukozturk, S. (2009). Sosyal Bilimleri İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı İstatistik Araştırma Deseni-SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum (10. Ed.). Ankara: Pegema Yayıncılık.
Buyukozturk, S., Kilic Cakmak, E., Akgun, Ö. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2008). Bilimsel Arastırma Yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
Cagdas, A., Ozel, E., & Konca, A. S. (2016). Investigating Parental Involvement at Beginning of Elementary School. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 12(4), 891-908.
Can, N. (2004). Öğretmenlerin Geliştirilmesi ve Etkili Öğretmen Davranışları, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 103-119.
Crider, J. C. (2013). The 5E Learning Cycle vs. Traditional Teaching Methods and How They Affect Student Achievement, Interest, and Engagement in a Third Grade Science Classroom (Masters of Science), Montana State University.
Criker, D. E. (2006). Attitudes Toward Science of Students Enrolled in Introductory Level Science Courses at UW-La Crosse. UW-L Journal of Undergraduate Research IX, 1-6.
Demir, I., Kılıç, S., & Depren, Ö. (2009). Factors affecting Turkish Students’ Achievement in Mathematics, US-China Education Review, 6(6) (Serial No.55)
Department for Children, Schools and Families. (2008). The Impact of Parental Involvement on Children’s Education, DCSF Publications.
Eastwell, P., & Rennie, L. (2002). Using Enrichment and Extracurricular Activities to Influence Secondary Students’ Interest and Participation in Science. The Science Education Review, 1(4), 1-16.
Farooq, M. S., Chaudhry, A. H., Shafiq, M., & Berhanu, G. (2011). Factors Affecting Students’ Quality of Academic Performance: A Case of Secondary School Level, Journal of Quality and Technology Management, VII(II), 01‐14.
Habibullah, S., & Ashraf, J. (2013). Factors Affecting Academic Performance of Primary School Children. Pakistan Journal of Medical Research, 52(2), 47-52.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). A synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement, Routledge.
Henderson, A. T. (1987). The evidence continues to grow: Parent involvement improves student achievement. Columbia, MD: National Committee for Citizens in Education.
Hevedanlı, M., & Akbayın, H. (2006). The Effects of Cooperative Learning on Students’ Achievement, Retention and Attitudes in Biology Teaching. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 6, 21-31.
Karagoz, Y. (2016). SPSS and AMOS 23 Applied Statistical Analyzes. Ankara: Nobel Publishing.
Kaya, H., & Boyuk, U. (2011). Attitude towards Physics Lessons and Physical Experiments of the High School Students. European Journal of Physics Education, 2(1), 23-31.
Kaya, V. H., & Elster, D. (2017a). German Students’ Environmental Literacy as a Starting Point for Science Teacher Education. International Teacher Education and Accreditation Congress, Istanbul, Turkey.
Kaya, V. H., & Elster, D. (2017b). Change in the Environmental Literacy of German Students in Science Education between 2006 and 2015. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, Special Issue for INTE 2017, 505-524.
Kaya, V. H., & Godek, Y. (2016). Perspectives in regard to Factors Affecting the Professional Development of Science Teachers. International Journal of Human Science, 13(2), 2625-2641. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v13i2.3769
Kaya, V. H., Godek Altuk, Y., & Bahceci, D. (2012). Elementary School Students’ Views and Images Concerning Science Teachers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 433-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.676
Kısakurek, M. (2009). Öğretmen Eğitiminde Ulusal Yeterlikler Çerçevesi ve Kalite Güvence Sistemi, Eğitimde Yansımalar: IX, Türkiye’nin Öğretmen Yetiştirme Çıkmazı Ulusal Sempozyumu, Ankara.
Kose, E. (2013). Eğitim Kurumlarında Gerçekleştirilen Ders Dışı Etkinliklerin Sınıflandırılmasına Yönelik Bir Öneri. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 2/2(2013), 336-353.
Lamb, S., & Fullarton, S. (2001). Classroom And School Factors Affecting Mathematics Achievement: a Comparative Study of the US and Australia Using TIMSS, Australian Council for Educational Research ACEReSearch.
Loubser, C.P., Swanepoel, C. H., & Chacko, C. P. C. (2001). Concept Formulation for Environmental Literacy, South African Journal of Education, 21(4).
McBeth, W., & Volk, T. L. (2010). The National Environmental Literacy Project: A Baseline Study of Middle Grade Students in the United States. The Journal of Environmental Education, 41(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960903210031
Modupe, O. D. (2012). A Dummy Varıable Regressıon on Students’ Academıc Performance. Transnational Journal of Science and Technology, 2(6), 47-54.
Moè, A., Pazzaglia, F., Tressoldi, P., & Toso, C. (2009). Attitude towards School, Motivation, Emotions and Academic Achievement. In Educational Psychology (Editor: Jonathon E. Larson), Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Moore, M. M. (2004). Using Drama as an Effective Method to Teach Elementary Students, Senior Honors Theses. 113. Retrieved from http://commons.emich.edu/honors/113
Morrone, M., Mancl, K., & Carr, K. (2001) Development of a Metric to Test Group Differences in Ecological Knowledge as One Component of Environmental Literacy. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(4), 33-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960109598661
O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors, Quality & Quantity, 41, 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 PISA Results in Focus, Retrieved on 29.07.2017 from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf
Olatoye, R. A. (2009). Students’ test anxiety, motivation for examinations and science achievement in junior secondary schools in Ogun State, Nigeria, International Journal of Psychology and Counselling, 1(10), 194-198.
Ozturk, G., Tuzun, Ö. Y., & Teksoz, G. (2013). Exploring Environmental Literacy through Demographic Variables. Elementary Education Online, 12(4), 926-937.
Park, H. M. (2006). Univariate Analysis and Normality Test Using SAS, STATA, and SPSS, 2002-2006 The Trustees of Indiana University.
Rana, R. A., & Mahmood, N. (2010). The Relationship between Test Anxiety and Academic Achievement, Bulletin of Education and Research, 32(2), 63- 74.
Roth, C. E. (1992). Environmental Literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s., ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education, Columbus, Ohio.
Rudy, K. (2011). Checking Assumptions about Residuals in Regression Analysis, Retrieved on 28.11.2017 from http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/checking-the-assumption-of-constant-variance-in-regression-analyses
Sahin, A. (2011). Effective Teacher’s Attitudes According to Teacher’s Perceptions. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(1), 239-259.
Sarier, Y. (2016). The Factors That Affects Students’ Academic Achievement in Turkey: A Meta-Analysis Study. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 31(3), 609-627.
Savas, E., Tas, S., & Duru, A. (2010). Factors Affecting Students’ Achievement in Mathematics. Inonu University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 11(1), 113-132.
Sayin, A., & Gelbal, S. (2014). Başariyi Etkileyen Faktörlerin Önem Derecelerinin Ardışık Aralıklar Yöntemiyle Ölçeklenmesi, Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(1), 1-26.
Schneider, A., Hommel, G., & Blettner, M. (2010). Linear Regression Analysis. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 107(44), 776–782. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2010.0776
Sezer, E. (2016). Öğretmenlerin Kişisel ve Mesleki Niteliklerinin 4 ve 8. Sinif Öğrencilerinin TIMSS 2011 Matematik Başarisina Etkisinin İncelenmesi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Ana Bilim Dali (Masters Thesis), Ankara.
Simsek, H., Hirca, N., & Coskun, S. (2012). Primary Science and Technology Teachers’ Selection of Using Teaching Methods and Techniques and the Levels of Their Applications: The Sample Of Şanliurfa City. Mustafa Kemal University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 9(18), 249-268.
Simsek, P., & Kabapinar,F. (2010). The Effects of Inquiry-Based Learning on Elementary Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Matter, scientific Process Skills and Science Attitudes. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1190–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.170
Singh, S. P., Malik, S., & Singh, P. (2016). Factors Affecting Academic Performance of Students. Indian Journal of Research, 5(4), 176-178.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L.S. (2015).Using Multivariate Statistics (6th. Edition) (Translate Edit. Mustafa Baloglu), Pearson Education.
Taherdoost, H., Sahibuddin, S., & Jalaliyoon, N. (2014). Exploratory Factor Analysis; Concepts and Theory, International Conference on Mathematical Computational and Statistical-Sciences, GdanskWrzeszcz, Poland.
Tatar, M. (2004). Etkili Öğretmen, Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2).
Tomal, N. (2010). High school students’ attitudes towards geography and the questions they wonder about, Scientific Research and Essays, 5(13), 1729-1733.
Unal, G., & Ergin, O. (2006). Buluş Yoluyla Fen Öğretiminin Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarılarına, Öğrenme Yaklaşımlarına ve Tutumlarına Etkisi, Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 3(1), 36-51.
Usher, A., & Kober, N. (2012). What Roles Do Parent Involvement, Family Background, and Culture Play in Student Motivation? Center on Education Policy.
Verešová, M., & Malá, D. (2016). Attitude toward School and Learning and Academic Achievement of Adolescents. 7th International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology, Published by Future Academy.
Wisconsin Department of Public Administration. (1991). Environmental Education. A Guide to Curriculum Planning (Authors: D. C. Engleson and D. H. Yockers), Wisconsin State Dept. of Public Instruction, Madison.
Yasar, S., & Anagun, Ş. S. (2008). Validity and Reliability Studies of Fifth Grade Science and Technology Course Attitude Scale. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 223-236.
Yasul, A. F., & Samancı, O. (2015). Examining Views of Classroom Teachers about ‘Group Works’. Iğdır University Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 131-156.
Yavuz, S. (2009). Hataları Ardışık Bağımlı (Otokorelasyonlu) Olan Regresyon Modellerinin Tahmin Edilmesi, Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 23(3), 123-140.
Yildirim, İ. (2000). Akademik başarının yordayıcısı olarak yalnızlık, sınav kaygısı ve sosyal destek, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 18, 167-176.
Yildirim, K. (2012). PISA 2006 verilerine göre Türkiye’de Eğitimin Kalitesini Belirleyen Temel Faktörler, Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(2), 229-255.
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A Beginner’s Guide to Factor Analysis: Focusing on Exploratory Factor Analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79-94. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.09.2.p079
|View Abstract References Full text PDF|
Which are More Effective to Stop Burning Land: Subsidies or Taxes? Evidences from Laboratory Experiment
Restiatun Massardi, Eddy Suratman, Yarlina Yacoub, & Yanto
pp. 391-399 | Article Number: ijese.2018.032
The amount of losses incurred by smog encourages all parties to participate in risk mitigation efforts. Law enforcement is one step that is often taken by the authority to reduce the number of entrepreneurs who open plantations by burning land. In addition to the punitive policy, efforts to prevent the burning of land are also required, for example, by providing subsidies for the planters. By utilizing laboratory experiments, this research aims to determine the effect of some treatments that might reduce the proportion of the population who burn the land and increase the proportion who perform manual land clearing, which is environmentally friendly. The treatments given are subsidizing, taxing, and the combined provision of subsidies and taxation. The results from the test of the population differences showed that there is no difference in behavior between the participants working as civil servants and non-civil servants in terms of choosing the investment method. Another finding of this study is that only the provision of subsidies was able to increase the proportion of entrepreneurs who choose environmentally friendly investment activities.
Keywords: taxes, subsidies, land burning, laboratory experiment
Becker, G. S. (1968). Crime and punishment: an economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 169-217. https://doi.org/10.1086/259394
Bodman, P. M., & Maultby, C. (1997). Crime, Punishment and Deterrence in Australia A further empirical investigation. International Jour. of Social Economics, 24(7/8/9), 884-901. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004335
Brock, W., & Evans, D. (1985). The economics of regulatory tiers. Rand Journal of Economics, 16(3), 398-409. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555566
Burrows, P. (1979). Pigovian taxes, polluter subsidies, regulation and the size of a polluting industry. This Journal, 12, 494-501. https://doi.org/10.2307/134738
D’Souza, C. (2001). Integrating environment management in small enterprise in India. Electronic Green Journal, 14. Available at: www.egj.lib.uidaho.edu/egj14/souza1.html
D’Souza, C., & Peretiatko, R. (2002). The nexus between industrialization and environment: A case study of Indian enterprises. Environmental Management and Health, 13(1), 80-97, https://doi.org/10.1108/09566160210417859
Dean, T., & Brown, R. (1995). Pollution regulation as a barrier to new firm entry: initial evidence and implication for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), 288-303. https://doi.org/10.5465/256737
Dean, T., Brown, R., & Stango, V. (2000). Environment regulation as s barrier to the formation of small manufacturing establishment: a longitudinal examination. Journal of Environment Economics and Management, 40(1), 56-75. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1999.1105
Detiknews, Several editions. (2013).
Fischbacher, U. (2007). The Z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Exp Econonomics, 10(2), 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4
Iskandar, U. (2000). Pola Pengelolaan hutan Tropika. Alternatif Pengelolaan Hutan yang Selaras dengan Desentralisasi dan Otonomi Daerah. Bigraf Publishing.
Meiselman, D., & Tullock, G. (1973). The Economics of Crime and Punishment, American Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington, DC.
O’Hagan, C. (1984). Pigouvian Taxes, polluter Subsidies Regulation, and The Size of polluting Industries: A Note. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 17(Aug 3), 588-592. https://doi.org/10.2307/135194
Otoritas Semu. Hukum vs Penguasa HPH di Indonesia. https://yuokysurinda.wordpress.com/2016/01/16/hukum-vs-penguasa-hph-di-indonesia/
Polinsky, M. (1979). Notes on the symmetry of taxes in pollution control. This Journal, 12, 75-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/134572
Potter, L., Lee, J., & World Wildlife Fund. Indonesia Programme. (1999). Oil-palm in Indonesia: it’s role in forest conversion and the fires of 1997/98. Jakarta: WWF Indonesia.
Pradiptyo, R. (2006). Does Punishment matters? A Refinement of the Inspection Game. German Working Papers in Law and Economics, 1(9), 1-29.
Restiatun, & Suratman, E. (2015). Effect of Injured Acute Respiratory Infection (ARI) and Having Toddler in household to the willingness to pay of Smog Risk Mitigation in District of Pontianak and Pontianak City, West Kalimantan. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 336–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.043
Ryan, M. J., & Vaithianathan, R. (2003). Medical Insurance with Rank-Dependent Utility. Economics Theory, 22(3), Oktober, 689-698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-002-0336-1
Viscussi, W. K., & Evans, W. N. (1990). Utility Function that Depend on The Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implication. American Economic Review, 80(3), June, 353-374.
World Bank. (1997). Clear Water, Blue Skies: China Environment in 21st Century, World bank paper, No. EA2, Washington, DC, September.
Zweifel, P., Breyer, F., & Kifmann, M. (1997). Health Economics. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
|View Abstract References Full text PDF|
Methodology of Solving Tasks in Chemistry
Milena Novica Miljkovic, Vojkan Miljkovic, Jelena Mitrovic, & Sofija Rancic
pp. 401-405 | Article Number: ijese.2018.033
For learning chemistry is very important to make connection between theory and practice. Ability to solve problems represents the well learned theory knowledge, and good methodology in work on theory classes. Usually the strategy of solving of the problem consists from three parts: studying the conditions of the task and its analysis, formation of the opinion, solving the task and its check. In order to better understand the significance and advantages which methodical preparation gives during solving of the problem, we have made two groups with fourteen students of the second year high school-course agricultural technician. The first group of the students had the opportunity to have methodical explanation of ways and means of problems solving in chemistry. The second group only got the problems to be solved without methodical preparation. The aim of our experimental work was to establish the contribution of methodical preparation during task solving. Group of the students that got methodically explained exercises have achieved significantly better results, so it serves as a proof of the assumption in theoretical part that methodical preparation in problem solving is inevitable and necessary, and its practical importance is multiple.
Keywords: chemistry learning, methodology, tasks
Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: cognitive view, 2nd ed. New York: Rinehart and Winston.
Eilks, I., & Hofstein, A. (2013). Teaching Chemistry - A studybook: A practical guide and textbook for student teachers, teacher trainees and teachers. Rotterdam; Boston, Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-140-5
Fach, M. de Boer, T., & Parchmann, I. (2007). Results of an interview study as basis for the development of stepped supporting tools for stoichiometric problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(1), 13-31. https://doi.org/10.1039/B6RP90017H
Friedman, R. S., & Deek, F. P. (2002). Problem-based learning and problem-solving tools: Synthesis and direction for distributed education environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 13(3), 239-257.
Gabel, D. (1999). Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research: A look to the future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 548-553. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p548
Greenfield, L. B. (1987) Teaching thinking through problem solving. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1987(30), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219873003
Herron, J. D. (1996). The chemistry classroom: Formulas for successful teaching. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. A. (1989). Analysis and use of a task for identifying conceptions of teaching science. Journal of Education for Teaching: International research and pedagogy, 15(3), 191-209. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260747890150302
Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. W. (1997). Multimedia and understanding expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949-968. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199711)34:9<949::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-U
Polya, G. (1985). How to Solve It. 2nd ed. Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ.
Russell, J. W., Kozma, R. B., Jones, T., Wykoff, J., Marx, N., & Davis, J. (1997) Use of simultaneous-synchronized macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic representations to enhance the teaching and learning of chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(3), 330-335. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed074p330
Sandlin, B., Harshman, J., & Yezierski, E. (2015). Formative assessment in high school chemistry teaching: Investigating the alignment of teachers’ goals with their items. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(10), 1619-1625. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00163
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 334-370.
Spencer, J. N. (2006). New approaches to chemistry teaching. 2005 George C. Pimentel Award. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(4), 528. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p528
Stieff, M. (2011). When is a molecule three dimensional? A task-specific role for imagistic reasoning in advanced chemistry. Science Education, 95(2), 310-336. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20427
Zhou, Q., Shen, N., & Tian, H. (2010). Developing critical thinking disposition by task-based learning in chemistry experiment teaching. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 4561-4570. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.731
Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and will: The role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1081-1094. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000052207
|View Abstract References Full text PDF|