Views of Prospective Chemistry Teachers on the Use of Graphic Organizers Supported with Interactive PowerPoint Presentation Technology in Teaching Electrochemistry Concepts
Abstract views: 583
/ 
PDF downloads: 436
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v13i3.216Keywords:
Electrochemistry teaching, graphic organizers , interactive PowerPoint presentation technology, prospective chemistry teachersAbstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the views and experiences of the prospective chemistry teachers (PCTs) about the use of graphic organizers (GOs) supported with interactive PowerPoint presentation technology in teaching electrochemistry concepts. Ten GOs were developed and a pair of slides for all of them which contains partial and complete versions of the GOs was constructed. Participants of this study consisted of two different study groups. The preliminary trial of the study was carried out with four senior PCTs who have previously taken both an Electrochemistry course and an elective course concerning graphic organizers. Data from the first group of the study were collected by semi-structured interview and the experiences of the first group regarding the difficulties experienced during traditional electrochemistry teaching (didactic lecture) were examined. The second study group was eight PCTs who were in the fifth semester and were taking the Electrochemistry course while the study was being undertaken. In the last three weeks of the Electrochemistry course in the second study group, the course was taught with GOs supported with interactive PowerPoint presentation technology, and then the views of them were taken by a written opinion form. At the end of the study, three themes emerged regarding the experiences of the PCTs for the traditionally taught electrochemistry course. These are "difficulties", "inadequacy", and "not being beneficial". It was also concluded that the PCTs thought that the use of GOs supported with interactive PowerPoint presentation technology in teaching electrochemistry could enhance the comprehension and motivation of students.
References
Aguiara, J. G., & Correia, P. R. M. (2016). Using concept maps as instructional materials to foster the understanding of the atomic model and matter–energy interaction. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 756-765.
Ahmad, N. J., Yakob, N., Bunyamin, M. A. H., Winarno, N., Akmal, W. H. (2021). The effect of interactive computer animation and simulation on students' achievement and motivation in learning electrochemistry. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10 (3), 311-324.
Allsop, R. T., & George, N. H. (1982). Redox in Nuffield advanced chemistry. Education in Chemistry, 19, 57-59.
Alvermann, D. N., & Boothby, P. R. (1986). Children's transfer of graphic organizer instruction. Reading Psychology, 7(2), 87-100.
Amponsah, K. D. (2020). South African twelfth grade students’ conceptions regarding Electrochemistry. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 14(3), 362-368.
Anders, P. L., & Bos, C. S. (1986). Semantic Feature Analysis: An interactive strategy for vocabulary development and text comprehension. Journal of Reading, 29(7), 610–616.
Brandriet, A. R., & Bretz, S. L. (2014). Measuring meta-ignorance through the lens of confidence: examining students’ redox misconceptions about oxidation numbers, charge, and electron transfer. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15, 729-746.
Butts, B., & Smith, R. (1987). HSC chemistry students’ understanding of the structure and properties of molecular and ionic compounds. Research in Science Education, 17, 192–201.
Cala, R. F. (2019). Integrating graphic organizers in lesson packages and its effect to students’ levels of conceptual understanding. International Journal of Secondary Education, 7(4), 89-100.
Cheung, D. (2011). Using diagnostic assessment to help teachers understand the chemistry of the lead-acid battery. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 228–237.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293–332.
Chamizo, J.A. (2012). Heuristic Diagrams as a Tool to Teach History of Science. Science & Education, 21, 745–762 (2012).
Cofer, K. (2021). The efficacy of graphic organizers in an inner-city high school self-contained chemistry classroom for students with disabilities. Unpublished Master of Education Thesis, William Paterson University of New Jersey.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches I John W. Creswell-2nd ed, Sage Publications, Inc.
Davidowitz, B., & Rollnick, M. (2001). Effectiveness of flow diagrams as a strategy for learning in laboratories. Australian Journal of Education in Chemistry, 57, 18-24.
De Jong, O., & Treagust, D. (2003). The teaching and learning of electrochemistry. In J.K. Gilbert et al. (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice, (pp. 317-337). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
DeMeo, S. (2007). Constructing a graphic organizer in the classroom: introductory students’ perception of achievement using a decision map to solve aqueous acid-base equilibria problems. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(3), 540-546.
Dye, G. A. (2000). Graphic organizers to the rescue! Helping students link and remember information. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 72-76.
Ellis, E., & Howard, P. (2007). Graphic organizers: Power tools for teaching students with learning disabilities. Current Practice Alerts, 13, 1–4.
Ezeh, D. N., & Okeke, O. J. (2018). Effect of mend mapping teaching strategy (MMTS) on chemistry students’ achievement, interest, and retention in Enugu. International Journal of Research in Medical and Basic Sciences, 4(11), 48-70.
Ezzeldin, S. M.Y. (2017). The effectiveness of using graphic organizers in development of achievement, reduction of cognitive load associated with solving algorithm problems in analytical chemistry and favored learning styles among female secondary school students in Saudi Arabia. International Journal for Research in Education, 41(2), 77-124.
Foley, K., & O'Donnell, A. (2002). Cooperative learning and visual organisers: effects on solving mole problems in high school chemistry. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(1), 38-50.
Fitzgerald, W. J., Elmore, J., Kung, M., & Stenner, A. J. (2017). The conceptual complexity of vocabulary in elementary-grades core science program textbooks. Reading Research Quarterly, 52(4), 417-442.
Frayer, D., Frederick, W. C., & Klausmeier, H. J. (1969). A schema for testing the level of cognitive mastery. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research
Gallavan, N. P., & Kottler, E. (2007). Eight types of graphic organizers for empowering social studies students and teachers. The Social Studies, 98(3), 117-128.
Garnet, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electrochemical (Galvanic) and electrolytic cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(10), 1079-1099.
Garnet, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation-reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121-142.
Gay, L. R., & Airasion, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Ghirardi, G., Marchetti, F., Pettinari, C., Regis, A., & Roletto, E. (2014). A teaching sequence for learning the concept of chemical equilibrium in secondary school education. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(1), 59-65.
Gil-Garcia, A., & Villegas, J. (2003). Engaging minds, enhancing comprehension and constructing knowledge through visual representations. Paper presented at the Conference on Word Association for Case Method Research and Application, Bordeaux, France.
Giorgi, A. (1992). Description versus Interpretation: Competing Alternative Strategies for Qualitative Research. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 23(2), 119–135.
Habiddin, H., & Page, E.M. (2021). Examining students’ ability to solve algorithmic and pictorial style questions in chemical kinetics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 65–85.
Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1990). The effectiveness of graphic organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classes. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(1), 12-22.
Isabirye, A. K. & Makoe, M. (2018) Phenomenological Analysis of the Lived Experiences of Academics who Participated in the Professional Development Programme at an Open Distance Learning (ODL) University in South Africa, Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 18(1), 29-39.
Iksan, Z. H., & Daniel, E. (2015). Emerging model of questioning through the process of teaching and learning electrochemistry. International Education Studies, 8(10), 137-149
Johnstone, A. H. (1997). Chemistry teaching, science or alchemy? Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 262–8.
Kong, Y. T. (2016). An analysis of the recognition on definition and mechanism of electrolysis for university students major in science education. International Journal of Applied Chemistry, 12(3), 463-481.
Kumar R. (1999). Research methodology: a step by step guide for beginners, Sage Publications, 2nd ed.
Kummari, V. (2017). To what extent do graphic organizers influence the academic achievement of ninth-grade chemistry students? A professional paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Science Education, Montana State University. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/13674/KummariV0817.pdf?sequence=5, 21.11.2021.
Kwon, K., Shin, S., & Park, S. J. (2018). Effects of graphic organizers in online discussions: comparison between instructor-provided and student-generated. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66, 1479–1503
Lu, S., & Bi, H. (2016). Development of a measurement instrument to assess students’ electrolyte conceptual understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1030–1040.
Maziadi, H. A. (2018). Impact of visual graphic organizer in the study of information action research. Journal of Education and Practice, 9(3), 5-17.
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43–52.
McKnight, K. S. (2010). The teacher’s big book of graphic organizer, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Moyses, D. D., Rivet, J. L., &. Fahlman, B. D. (2010). Using concept maps to teach a nanotechnology survey short course. Journal of Chemical Education, 87(3), 285-290.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191- 196.
Nakiboğlu, C. (2003), Instructional misconceptions of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbitals and hybridisation, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 171-188.
Nakiboğlu, C. (2008), Using word associations for assessing nonmajor science students’ knowledge structure before and after general chemistry instruction: the case of atomic structure. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 309-322.
Nakiboğlu, C., & Ertem, H. (2010). Atom ile ilgili kavram haritalarının yapısal, ilişkisel ve öneri doğruluğu puanlaması analiz sonuçlarının kıyaslanması. Türk Fen Eğitimi Dergisi, 7(3), 60-77.
Nakiboğlu, C., & Yıldırır, H. E. (2011), Analysis of Turkish high school chemistry textbooks and teacher-generated questions about gas laws. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1047-1071.
Nakiboğlu, C., Şen, A. Z., Akgün, İ., & Fidan, M. (2016). Genel Kimya laboratuarında akış diyagramı kullanımına yönelik öğretmen adaylarının görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Journal of the Turkish Chemical Society-C: Chemistry Education, 1(1), 63-86.
Nakiboğlu, N., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2017a), Kimya öğretmen adaylarinin elektrokimya kavramlarını anlama düzeylerinin incelenmesi, In N. Akpinar Dellal ve S. Tican Başaran (Ed.), Uluslararası Çağdaş Eğitim Araştırmaları Kongresi Bildiri Özetleri Kitabi (pp. 108). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık Eğitim ve Danışmanlık San. Tic. Ltd. Şti.
Nakiboğlu, N., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2017b), Investigation of high school students’ understanding about electrochemistry concepts. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education in Mathematics, Science & Technology, Kusadasi/Turkey.
Nakiboğlu, N., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2018), Examination of 12th Grade Students’ Cognitive Structures about Electrochemical Concepts through Word Association Test, In H. Arslan et al. (eds.), Educational Policy and Research, (pp 293-300). Kraków: Jagiellonian University Institute of Public Affairs.
Nakiboğlu, N., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2016). An investigation of university chemistry students’ understanding of precipitation titrations and related concepts thorough Vee-diagrams. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 4, 564-567
Nakiboğlu, N. & Nakiboğlu, C. (2017c). University chemistry students’ views about use of vee-diagram in analytical chemistry laboratory. In International Symposium on Philosophy, Education, Arts and History of Science, pp. 246-526. Mayıs, 2017, Muğla.
Nakiboğlu, C. (2017). Use of Graphic Organizers Secondary Chemistry Lessons. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 7, 72-75. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/epess/issue/30770/332658
Nakiboğlu, N, Filiz, F., & Nakiboğlu, C. (2017). Investigatıon of universıty chemistry students' views about flow diagram usage in analytical chemistry laboratory I. International Conference on Education in Mathematics, Science & Technology (ICEMST), Ephesus-Kusadasi/Turkey, 268-272.
Nakiboğlu, C., Erdurmazlı, İ, Kızmaz, B., Hepöz, Ş. (2018) Kimya Öğretmen Adaylarının Organik Kimya Laboratuarında Akış Diyagramı Kullanımına Yönelik Görüşlerinin Araştırılması. Journal of the Turkish Chemical Society-C: Chemistry Education, 3(1), 31-58.
Nakiboğlu, C., & Nakiboğlu, N. (2019). Exploring prospective chemistry teachers’ perceptions of precipitation, conception of precipitation reactions and visualization of the sub-microscopic level of precipitation reactions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(4), 873-889.
Nengsi, A. F., & Narius, D. (2016). Increasing students’ vocabulary mastery by using concept defınıtıon map strategy through reading activity to junior high school students. Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(1) 112-119.
Nurrenbern, S. C., & Pickering, M. (1987). Concept learning versus problem solving: Is there a difference? Journal of Chemical Education, 64(6), 508-510.
Nyachwaya J. M., Mohamed A-R., Roehrig G. H., Wood N. B., Kern A. L., & Schneider J. L. (2011). The development of an open-ended drawing tool: an alternative diagnostic tool for assessing students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12, 121–132.
Nyachwaya, J. M., Warfa, A. R. M., Roehrig, G. H., & Schneider, J. L. (2014). College chemistry students’ use of memorized algorithms in chemical reactions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(1), 81–93.
Nyagblormase, G. A., Gyampoh, A. O., Hinson, J., Aidoo, B., & Yeboah, E. (2021). Effect of mind mapping as a learning tool on online learning of chemistry. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 47-58.
Ogude, A.N., Bradley, J. D. (1994). Ionic conduction and electrical neutrality in operating electrochemical cells: pre-college and college student interpretations. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(1), 29-34.
Ogude, A.N., & Bradley, J. D. (1996). Electrode processes and aspects relating to cell emf, current, and cell components in operating electrochemical cells: Precollege and college student interpretation. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(12), 1145-49.
Osman, K., & Lee, T. T. (2014). Impact of interactive multimedia module with pedagogical agents on students understanding and motivation in the learning of electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 395-421.
Özkaya, A. R. (2002). Conceptual difficulties experienced by prospective teachers in electrochemistry: Half-cell potential, cell potential, and chemical and electrochemical equilibrium in galvanic cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 735-738.
Özkaya, A. R., Üce, M., & Şahin, M. (2003). Prospective teachers’ conceptual understanding of electrochemistry: Galvanic and electrolytic cells. University Chemistry Education, 7, 1- 12.
Papaphotis, G., & Tsaparlis, G. (2008). Conceptual versus algorithmic learning in high school chemistry: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts, Part 2. Students’ common errors, misconceptions and difficulties in understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 332–340.
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 3rd Edn.
Phelps, A. J. (1996). Teaching to enhance problem solving: it’s more than the numbers. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(4), 301.
Phillips, K. L. (1989). Relating the Mole Concept and Fundamental Mathematics. ERIC Document, ED 325 392.
Pickering, M. (1990). Further studies on concept learning versus problem solving: Is there a difference? Journal of Chemical Education, 67, 254–255.
Polancos, D. T. (2013). Effects of Vee diagram and concept mapping on the achievement of students in chemistry. Liceo Journal Higher Education Research, 7(1), 160.
Ponce, H. R., Mayer, R. E., López, M. J., & Loyola, M. S. (2018). Adding interactive graphic organizers to a whole-class slideshow lesson. Instructional Scence, 46, 973-988.
Prihastyanti, N., Rokhim, D. A., Subandi, S., & Sigit, D. (2020). Development of contextual teaching and learning (CTL) based learning materials to facilitate students in improving critical thinking ability in redox and electro chemical topics. Jurnal Pembelajaran Sains, 4(2), 67-73.
Rahayu, S., Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A.L, Kita, M., & Ibnu, S. (2011). Assessment of electrochemical concepts: a comparative study involving senior high-school students in Indonesia and Japan. Research in Science & Technology Education, 29(2). 169–188.
Rahayu, S., Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2021). High School and Preservice Chemistry Teacher Education Students’ Understanding of Voltaic and Electrolytic Cell Concepts: Evidence of Consistent Learning Difficulties across Years. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-24, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10226-6.
Raymond, T. M. F., Khang, G. N., & Sai, C. L. (2001). Some thoughts on designing multimedia courseware as a tool for enhancing process and thinking skills in chemical education. Teaching and Learning, 22(1), 74-83.
Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., Beth, A., Odom, S., Hsieh, Y., & Vanderveen, A. (2006). Increasing text comprehension and graphic note taking using a partial graphic organizer. The Journal of Educational Research, 100, 103-111.
Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A. D., Dubois, N. F., & Devaney, T. (1998). Interactive effects of graphic organizers and delayed review on concept application. The Journal of Experimental Education, 67(1), 17-31.
Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997a). Students’ misconceptions in electrochemistry: Current flow in electrolyte solutions and the salt bridge. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(7), 819-823.
Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, I. J. (1997b). Common students’ misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 377-398.
Schwartz, R. M., & Raphael, T. E. (1985). Concept of definition: A key to improving students' vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 39(2), 198–205.
Singh, I. S., & Moono, K. (2015). The effect of using concept maps on student achievement in selected topics in chemistry at tertiary level. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(15), 106-116.
Stahl, S. A. (1986). Three principles of effective vocabulary instruction. Journal of Reading, 29(7), 662–668.
Stahl, S. A. (1985). To teach a word well: A framework for vocabulary instruction. Reading World, 24(3), 16–27. doi:10.1080/19388078509557828
Stull, A. T., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Learning by doing versus learning by viewing: Three experimental comparisons of learner-generated versus author-provided graphic organizers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 808–820.
Taber, K.S. (1994). Misunderstanding the ionic bond. Education in Chemistry, 31(4), 100–103.
Taber, K.S, Tsaparlis, G. (2012). Student conceptions of ionic bonding: Patterns of thinking across three European contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2843-2873.
Torres, M. O., España, R. C. N., & Orleans, A. V. (2014). Integrating graphic organizers in facilitating learning chemistry. International Journal of Educational Studies, 1(1), 1-8.
Virk, J., & Wik, H. (2011). Graphic Organizers: Cognitive Origins, Constructivist Implications. Retrieved from http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Graphic_Organizers:_Cognitive_Origins,_Constructivist_Implications
Wills, S., & Ellis, E. (2008). Theoretical and Empirical Basis for Graphic Organizer Instruction, Retrieved February 12, 2021, from http://docplayer.net/25253424-The-theoretical-and-empirical-basis-for-graphic-organizerinstruction.html
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315-327). New York: Macmillan
Yang, E. M., Greenbowe, T. J., & Andre, T. (2004). The effective use of an interactive software program to reduce students’ misconceptions about batteries. Journal of Chemical Education, 81(4), 587-595.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Canan Nakiboğlu, Nuri Nakiboğlu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright © Authors
