Predicting at-risk students in general chemistry: comparing formal thought to a general achievement measure

Lewis, Scott E.; Lewis, Jennifer E.

doi:10.1039/b6rp90018f

Cited by 97 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…for secondary school pupils. Similar results have been reported with US students in their first year of college (Lewis & Lewis, 2007), although the mean was 6.8.…”

Section: Formal Thought Levelsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…A number of papers demonstrate that formal thought is at the root of mathematics and chemistry problem solving (Aguilar et al, 2002;Boujaoude, Salloum & Abd-El-Khalick, 2004;Lewis & Lewis, 2007), being therefore a predictor of academic achievement and conceptual change in these fields (Oliva, 2003). The Piagetian methodology, based on interviews and real instruments, provides reliable information on thinking levels, enabling researchers to grasp the subjects' thinking processes by considering the strategies used to solve different situations and the reasons given in each case.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, research (Mwamwenda, 1993;Valanides, 1996) indicates that formal operations scores correlate significantly with performance in physics, chemistry and biology. More recently, Lewis and Lewis (2007) have found that the TOLT, administered to 3000 1 st year college students enrolled in a chemistry course, predicted success rather than failure. Thus, formal thought level would serve to identify barriers to success.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Academic achievement and formal thought in engineering students

Vázquez

Anglat

2017

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…for secondary school pupils. Similar results have been reported with US students in their first year of college (Lewis & Lewis, 2007), although the mean was 6.8.…”

Section: Formal Thought Levelsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Academic achievement and formal thought in engineering students

Vázquez

Anglat

2017

EJREP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This project aims to develop a regression model for the early prediction of risk of failing CMY 117, hence identifying students at risk within the first few weeks after lectures have commenced. Wagner et al, 2002;Lewis and Lewis, 2007). Students' prior academic performances in mathematics and chemistry have a moderately strong correlation with performance in first-year chemistry (McFate and Olmsted, 1999;Evans, 2000;McKenzie and Schweitzer, 2001;Wagner et al, 2002;Thai et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our study contributes to a large collection of predictor papers, but it has the specific focus of prediction of risk of failing first semester General Chemistry for which only a handful of previous studies have been reported (Legg et al, 2001;Wagner et al, 2002;Lewis and Lewis, 2007). Furthermore, we have explored the predictive power of accuracy of self-evaluation as a measure of metacognitive ability, for risk of failing, which has not been reported before.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inaccuracy of self-evaluation as additional variable for prediction of students at risk of failing first-year chemistry

Potgieter¹,

Ackermann²,

Fletcher³

2010

Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early identification of students at risk of failing first-year chemistry allows timely intervention. Cognitive factors alone are insufficient predictors for success; however, non-cognitive factors are usually difficult to measure. We have explored the use of demographic and performance variables, as well as the accuracy of self-evaluation as an indicator of metacognitive ability, as possible indicators for students at risk of failing the first semester course in General Chemistry (CMY 117) at the University of Pretoria. Variables with a strong correlation with performance in CMY 117 were used to develop a prediction model based on logistic regression. Three variables, i.e. prior performance in mathematics and in physical science, and the extent of overconfidence expressed as the ratio between expected and actual performance in a chemistry pre-test written at the start of the semester, were shown to be significant predictors for risk of failing. The highest overall accuracy of prediction (76%) was obtained for a subset of students with a C or D grade for their high school leaving examination in mathematics when high risk students were defined as those with a final mark for CMY 117 as 51% or lower. The prediction model, based on the model building data set, had a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 46%; whilst the sensitivity and specificity using the validation data set were 88% and 38% respectively.

show abstract

The role of intuitive heuristics in students' thinking: Ranking chemical substances

Maeyer

Talanquer

2010

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The characterization of students' cognitive biases is of central importance in the development of curriculum and teaching strategies that better support student learning in science. In particular, the identification of shortcut reasoning procedures (heuristics) used by students to reduce cognitive load can help us devise strategies to foster the development of more analytical ways of thinking. The central goal of this study was thus to investigate the reasoning heuristics used by undergraduate chemistry students when solving a traditional academic task (ranking chemical substances based on the relative value of a physical or chemical property). For this purpose, a mixed-methods research study was completed based on quantitative results collected using a ranking-task questionnaire and qualitative data gathered through semistructured interviews. Our results revealed that many study participants relied frequently on one or more of the following heuristics to make their decisions: recognition, representativeness, one-reason decision making, and arbitrary trend. These heuristics allowed students to generate answers in the absence of requisite knowledge; unfortunately, they often led students astray. Our results suggest the need to create more opportunities for college chemistry students to monitor their thinking, develop and apply analytical ways of reasoning, and evaluate the effectiveness of shortcut reasoning procedures in different contexts.

show abstract

Predicting at-risk students in general chemistry: comparing formal thought to a general achievement measure

Cited by 97 publications

References 64 publications

Academic achievement and formal thought in engineering students

Academic achievement and formal thought in engineering students

Inaccuracy of self-evaluation as additional variable for prediction of students at risk of failing first-year chemistry

The role of intuitive heuristics in students' thinking: Ranking chemical substances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About