Investigating High School Students’ Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium Concepts

APA 6th edition
In-text: (Karpudewan, Treagust, Mocerino, Won & Chandrasegaran, 2015)
Your Bibliography: Karpudewan, M., Treagust, D.F., Mocerino, M., Won, M. & Chandrasegaran, A.L. (2015). Investigating High School Students’ Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium Concepts. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(6), 845-863. doi: 10.12973/ijese.2015.280a

Harvard
In-text: (Karpudewan, Treagust, Mocerino, Won and Chandrasegaran, 2015)
Your Bibliography: Karpudewan, M., Treagust, D., Mocerino, M., Won, M. and Chandrasegaran, A. (2015). Investigating High School Students’ Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium Concepts. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(6), pp. 845-863.

Chicago 16th edition
In-text: (Karpudewan, Treagust, Mocerino, Won and Chandrasegaran 2015)
Your Bibliography: Karpudewan, Mageswary, David F. Treagust, Mauro Mocerino, Mihye Won and A. L. Chandrasegaran (2015). "Investigating High School Students’ Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium Concepts". International Journal of Environmental and Science Education 10 (6):845-863. doi:10.12973/ijese.2015.280a.

Abstract

This study investigated the year 12 students’ (N = 56) understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts after instruction using two conceptual tests, the Chemical Equilibrium Conceptual Test 1(CECT-1) consisting of nine two-tier multiple-choice items and the Chemical Equilibrium Conceptual Test 2(CECT-2) consisting of four structured questions. Both these tests were administered before and after the intervention. Students’ responses to the items in both the instruments indicated limited understanding of the various concepts related to chemical equilibrium. Less than 50% of the students provided correct responses to four of the nine items in the CECT-1. The total scores in the CECT-1 ranged from 0 to 8 with a mean score of 4.14 (out of a maximum of 9). In the CECT-2 the total scores ranged from 7 to 17 with a mean score of 11.0 out of a maximum score of 22. Almost half the number of students (44.6%) scored less than 50% of the total marks in the CECT-2; only 0% to 42.9% of students scored the maximum possible marks for each of the four items while achievement in all four items of the CECT-2 was below 50%. The findings will be valuable and assist teachers in planning their instruction on chemical equilibrium by taking into consideration students’ preconceptions about the topic.

Keywords: chemical equilibrium, dynamic equilibrium, Le Chatelier’s Principle, reversible reactions

References

Banerjee, A.C. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487-494.

Bergquist, W., & Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(12), 1000-1003.

Canagaratna, S. G. (2003). Approaches to the treatment of equilibrium perturbations. Journal of Chemical Education,80(10), 1211-1219.

Cheung, D. (2009). The adverse effects of Le Chatelier’s principle on teacher understanding of chemical equilibrium.Journal of Chemical Education,, 86(4), 514-518.

Cheung, D., Ma H.-J, & Yang, J. (2009). Teachers’ misconceptions about the effects of addition of more reactants or products on chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 7(6), 1111-1133.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th edn.). Oxford, UK: Routledge.

Finley, F.N., Stewart, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers’ perceptions of important and difficult science content. Science Education, 66(4), 531-538.

Hackling, M. W., & Garnett, P.J. (1985). Misconceptions of chemical equilibrium. European Journal of Science Education,7(2), 205-214.

Khan, S. (2011). New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 20(3), 215-232.

Khatri, S. S. (2013). Qatar’s education system grapples with language challenges. http://www.al-fanarmedia.org/2013/10/zig-zagging-education-policies-leave-qatari-studetns-behind/ Accessed 4 January 2014.

Kousathana, M., & Tsaparlis, G. (2002). Students’ errors in solving numerical chemical equilibrium problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 3(1), 5-17.

Liu, H. C., Andre, T., & Greenbowe, T. (2008). The impact of learners’ prior knowledge on their use of chemistry computer simulations: A case study. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 17(5), 466-482.

Loh, Y. L., & Sivaneson, N. (2004). STPM Physical Chemistry (Volume 2). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Penerbitan Pelangi Sdn. Bhd.

Malaysian Examinations Council. (2003). Teaching courseware chemistry Lower 6. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Author.

Malaysian Examinations Council. (2011). Malaysian Higher School Certificate Chemistry Syllabus 2012/2013. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Author.

Nunally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd. edn.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Özmen, H. (2008). Determination of students’ alternative conceptions about chemical equilibrium: A review of research and the case of Turkey. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 9(3), 225-223.

Pedrosa, M. A., & Dias, M. H. (2000). Chemistry textbook approaches to chemical equilibrium and student alternative conceptions. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 1(2), 227-236.

Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R.W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63(2), 167-199.

Piquette, J.S., & Heikkinen, H. W. (2005). Strategies reported used by instructors to address student alternative conceptions in chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1112-1134.

Posner, G.J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.

Quílez, J. (2004). Changes in concentration and partial pressure in chemical equilibria: Students’ and teachers’ misunderstandings. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 5(3), 281-300.

Quilez-Pardo, J., & Solaz-Portoles, J. (1995). Students’ and teachers’ misapplications of Le Chatelier’s Principle: Implications for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(9), 939-957.

Russo, S., & Silver, M. E. (2010). Introduction to chemistry (4th edn.). San Francisco, CA: Prentice Hall.

Tan, Y. T. (2012). Chemistry first term. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Oxford Fajar Sdn. Bhd.

Thomas, P. L., & Schwenz, R. W. (1998). College physical chemistry students’ conceptions of equilibrium and fundamental thermodynamics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1151-1160.

Torres, E. M. (2007). Effect of a perturbation on the chemical equilibrium: Comparison with Le Chatelier’s Principle. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(3), 516 -519.

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science.International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159-169.

Treagust, D. F. (2006). Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching, learning and retention. In UniServe science – symposium proceedings: Assessment in science teaching and learning (pp. 1–9). Sydney, NSW: Uniserve Science.

Tyson, L., Treagust, D. F., & Bucat, R. (1999). The complexity of teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 554-558.

Van Driel, J. H., De Vos, W., Verloop, N., & Dekkers, H. (1998). Developing secondary students’ conceptions of chemical reactions: The introduction of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 379-392.

Voska, K. W., & Heikinnen, H. W. (2000). Identification and analysis of student conceptions used to solve chemical equilibrium problems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 160-176.