Development and evaluation of the organic chemistry‐specific achievement emotions questionnaire (AEQ‐OCHEM)

Abstract

Affect is associated with success and persistence in STEM courses and degree programs. Measurement tools that produce valid and reliable data are essential to capturing the impact of evidenced‐based instructional practices and reformed curricula on learning. We report the development of the Achievement Emotions Questionnaire for use in postsecondary organic chemistry courses (AEQ‐OCHEM). Instrument development was based on the control‐value theory of achievement emotions and included a revision of the seminal Achievement Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ) used to measure institutional‐level learning. A thorough psychometric evaluation of the AEQ‐OCHEM was conducted including alternative measurement models and an extensive investigation of the nomological framework. All AEQ‐OCHEM subscales were determined to be coherent and distinct. Implications for future research using the AEQ‐OCHEM are offered. A call for the development of more discipline‐ and course‐based instruments is made. Finally, tools that measure achievement emotions in the context of instructional laboratories and undergraduate research are needed for more robust considerations of affect in STEM contexts.

Game‐based learning has good chemistry with chemistry education: A three‐level meta‐analysis

“…(3) more research into emotions (e.g., Raker et al, 2019) since the most desirable instruction is that learners learn most from what they enjoy most (Clark, 1982); (4) further research regarding which game genre is best for which type of learning outcome; and (5) more research on the relationships between cognition, motivation, and emotion (e.g., in GBL.…”

“…Regarding learning outcomes, more considerations are needed: (1) for cognitive outcomes, more delayed tests measuring retention (Mayer, 2014b; Wood & Donnelly‐Hermosillo, 2019) to avoid the novelty effect (Clark, 1983); (2) more research in motivation to learn chemistry, which could be a common but questionable appeal of chemistry GBL (Clark & Feldon, 2005, 2014); (3) more research into emotions (e.g., Raker et al, 2019) since the most desirable instruction is that learners learn most from what they enjoy most (Clark, 1982); (4) further research regarding which game genre is best for which type of learning outcome; and (5) more research on the relationships between cognition, motivation, and emotion (e.g., Gibbons & Raker, 2019) in GBL.…”

Findings From a Pilot Study Examining the Positive and Negative Achievement Emotions Associated With Undergraduates’ First-Year Experience

“…The depth and breadth of the AEQ not only considers the individual emotional reaction to the same scenario (i.e., enjoyment vs. anxiety of going to class) but also considers that the same emotion may be experienced differently in various situations (enjoyment of classroom instruction vs. enjoyment of taking an exam). Second, the AEQ has been subjected to rigorous multinational and multilanguage use and validation with versions available in English, German, and Chinese and can be adapted to measure emotions in single courses, specific situations, or specific points of time (Frenzel, Thrash, Pekrun, & Goetz, 2007; Peixoto, Mata, Monteiro, Sanches, & Pekrun, 2015; Pekrun, Elliot, & Maier, 2009; Raker, Gibbons, & Cruz-Ramírez de Arellano, 2019).…”

“…Studies of both general and specific affect from a control-value theory perspective exist with the AEQ used, in some studies, to analyze the achievement emotions both generally and specifically. This includes, but is not limited to, elementary (Lichtenfeld, Pekrun, Stupnisky, Reiss, & Murayama, 2012; Peixoto et al., 2015) and undergraduate students (Webster & Hadwin, 2015), cross-cultural analyses (Frenzel et al., 2007), students in discipline-specific contexts such as mathematics (Vega, 2018) and organic chemistry (Raker et al., 2019) courses, and context-specific situations such as testing (Pekrun et al., 2004) or doing homework (Goetz et al., 2012). The tactical use of the AEQ has been used effectively to gauge students’ emotional responses at a particular point in their college careers (i.e., after midterm or final exams, just prior to graduation), the experiences of specific groups of students (i.e., students transferring from community college to 4-year university, graduating seniors, racial minorities in the sciences), and to correlate emotional responses to gender, race, age, and academic success (Frenzel et al., 2007; Hong et al., 2016; Lichtenfeld et al., 2012; Peixoto et al., 2015; Webster & Hadwin, 2015).…”

Teaching stereoisomers through gesture, action, and mental imagery

“…Others focus on interventions that can benefit learners by meeting them where they are. Some focus on socio-emotional dimensions such as asking students to take an additional support course (Lee et al, 2018), or reducing anxiety or negative affect (Raker et al, 2019). Others focus on building skills (Pribyl and Bodner, 1987;Uttal et al, 2013) or teaching concepts more effectively by introducing specialized teaching tools (e.g., virtual models, Stull and Hegarty, 2016;transparent whiteboards, Stull et al, 2018, etc.).…”