Development of the Investigation Design, Explanation, and Argument Assessment for General Chemistry I Laboratory

Hosbein, Kathryn N.; Alvarez-Bell, Rosa; Callis‐Duehl, Kristine; Sampson, Victor; Wolf, S. F.; Walker, Joi Phelps

doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01075

Cited by 11 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The central role of assessments in conveying instructional priorities has been broadly recognized by the community of curriculum developers focused on 3D learning. As such, articles have been published on crafting 3D tasks from existing assessments (Stowe & Cooper, 2017; Underwood et al, 2017) and assessing scientific practices in the laboratory (Hosbein et al, 2020; Stephenson et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond instructional practices: Characterizing learning environments that support students in explaining chemical phenomena

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many conversations surrounding improvement of large‐enrollment college science, technology, engineering & mathematics (STEM) courses focus primarily (or solely) on changing instructional practices. By reducing dynamic, complex learning environments to collections of teaching methods, we neglect other meaningful parts of a course ecosystem (e.g., curriculum, assessments). Here, we advocate extending STEM education reform conversations beyond “active versus passive learning.” We argue communities of researchers and instructors would be better served if what we teach and assess was discussed alongside how we teach. To enable nuanced conversations about the characteristics of learning environments that support students in explaining phenomena, we defined a model of college STEM learning environments which attends to the intellectual work emphasized and rewarded on exams (i.e., assessment emphasis), what is taught in whole‐class meetings (i.e., instructional emphasis), and how those meetings are enacted (i.e., instructional practices). We subsequently characterized three distinct chemistry courses and qualitatively examined the characteristics of chemistry learning environments that effectively supported students in explaining why a beaker of water warms as a white solid dissolves. Furthermore, we quantitatively investigated the extent to which measures of incoming preparation explained variance in students’ explanations relative to enrollment in each learning environment. Our findings demonstrate that learning environments that effectively supported learners in explaining dissolution emphasized how and why salts dissolve in‐class and on assessments. Changing teaching methods in an otherwise traditionally structured course (i.e., a course organized by topics that primarily assesses math and recall) did not appear to impact the sophistication of students’ explanations. Additionally, we observed that learning environment enrollment explained substantially more of the variance observed in students’ explanations than measures of precollege math preparation. This finding suggests that emphasizing and rewarding the construction of causal accounts for phenomena in‐class and on assessments may support more equitable achievement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond instructional practices: Characterizing learning environments that support students in explaining chemical phenomena

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…From CER literature describing the use of cognitive interviews, sample sizes have ranged from 5 to 25 (Supporting Information). 9,[37][38][39][40][41][42][43] Recommendations from other sources range from 5 to 15, [44][45][46] with some research suggesting that increasing sample sizes beyond this range does not seem to uncover new response process problems. 47 Using sequential rounds of interviewing can also be advantageous when collecting evidence of response process, 28,36 as some have done in CER.…”

Section: Samplingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response Process Validity Evidence in Chemistry Education Research

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response process validity evidence can provide researchers with insight into how and why participants interpret items on instruments (e.g., tests, questionnaires). In the chemistry education research literature and in the social sciences more broadly, there has been variable use and reporting of response process aspects of studies. This manuscript's objective is to support researchers in developing purposeful, theory-driven protocols to investigate response processes. We highlight key considerations for researchers who are interested in using cognitive interviews in their research, including: the theoretical basis for response process, collecting response process validity evidence through cognitive interviews, and using that evidence to inform instrument modifications.

show abstract

“…Practical skills include handling specific equipment or instruments, making observations, interpreting data, and being able to apply safety precautions in experimental work. , Practical skills in chemistry courses are commonly evaluated by a formative assessment in laboratory and fieldwork through an experiment or project according to the learning topics. Students must demonstrate competence in using apparatuses and chemical reagents, techniques, types of equipment, and instrumentation in laboratory works .…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Practical and Scientific Writing Skills for Pre-University Students through Project-Based Learning

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemistry is one of the STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subjects that has been perceived as an unattractive subject among students due to its scientific theories and practices in a laboratory. Practical and scientific writing skills are two crucial components in chemistry courses, including at the Pre-University level, thus requiring educators to design activities that integrate both skills in chemistry learning. This article describes the assessment using a projectbased learning approach to assess students' practical and scientific writing skills for the Organic Chemistry course at the Universiti Malaysia Sarawak Foundation in Science program. A total of 72 Pre-University science students participated in a Chemistry Group Project assessment. The students were divided into 6 groups and asked to write a proposal on the basis of a chosen title, conduct laboratory work, collect data, and prepare a final report. The assessment was conducted in a single semester from learning week 1 to learning week 17. Results of this study were collected through the submitted proposal, final reports, practical sessions, and students' feedback. Students obtained good marks for practical and scientific writing with average marks of 84.9% and 84.4%, respectively. The results revealed that implementing the Chemistry Group Project as project-based learning leads to increased performance in practical and scientific writing skills and social skills among Pre-University students. Therefore, the Chemistry Group Project should be conducted as one of the learning activities and practical approaches at the Pre-University level.

show abstract

Development of the Investigation Design, Explanation, and Argument Assessment for General Chemistry I Laboratory

Cited by 11 publications

References 46 publications

Beyond instructional practices: Characterizing learning environments that support students in explaining chemical phenomena

Beyond instructional practices: Characterizing learning environments that support students in explaining chemical phenomena

Response Process Validity Evidence in Chemistry Education Research

Assessment of Practical and Scientific Writing Skills for Pre-University Students through Project-Based Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About