Using a mechanistic framework to characterise chemistry students' reasoning in written explanations

Abstract

The central goal of this research study was to characterise the different types of reasoning manifested by high school chemistry students when building initial written explanations of a natural phenomenon. In particular, our study participants were asked to explain why a mixture of water and alcohol works as an antifreeze. Data collected in the form of written explanations were analysed using a mechanistic reasoning framework based on the characterisation of system components (e.g., entities, properties, activities, organisation) and paying attention to the causal models invoked by the participants in their explanations. Our analysis revealed that students at the same educational level construct a wide range of explanations for the same phenomenon that are indicative of different reasoning modes going from descriptive to relational to simple causal to emerging mechanistic. Although the explanations generated by students in our sample were not very sophisticated in terms of the causal models on which they relied, some participants were capable of generating mechanistic explanations using particulate models of matter. The framework for analysis introduced in this contribution can be of use to teachers and researchers in the characterisation of student reasoning.

Constructing Scientific Explanations for Chemical Phenomena through Drawings among 8th-grade Students

“…Despite the importance of casual-mechanistic explanations in learning chemistry (Cooper, 2015;Talanquer, 2018), many studies have highlighted students' difficulties in constructing such explanations. Either students tend to simply describe the phenomena 2 / 13 at the macroscopic level without discussing how and why it is produced or they intuitively interpret the submicroscopic-level mechanisms directly from the observed behavior of the phenomenon, failing to establish a coherent connection between the phenomenon and its underlying mechanisms (Andrade et al, 2019;Becker, Noyes, & Cooper, 2016;Moreira, Marzabal, & Talanquer, 2018;Rappoport & Ashkenazi, 2008;Talanquer, 2010).…”

Modelle als Mittel der Erkenntnisgewinnung im Chemieunterricht der Sekundarstufe I. Entwicklung und quantitative Dimensionalitätsanalyse eines Testinstruments aus epistemologischer Perspektive

“…Wie in den Abschnitten 4.4.1 und 5.3.3 beschrieben, können die Steigungsparameter von IRT-skalierten Aufgaben als Analoga von Faktorladungen aus konrmatorischen Faktoranalysen interpretiert werden (Bühner, 2011;Chalmers, 2012 Einklang mit Ergebnissen aus quantitativen (Grünkorn, 2014;Nehring et al, 2015) und qualitativen (Moreira et al, 2019;Oliva et al, 2015) Studien zur Untersuchung naturwissenschaftlicher Denkprozesse. Das kann auch aus konzeptuellen (Gilbert & Justi, 2016) und kompetenzorientierten (Upmeier zu Belzen Wir behaupten, daÿ die Fragen, die sich an den Begri der Hypothesenwahrscheinlichkeit knüpfen, durch wahrscheinlichkeitslogische Überlegungen überhaupt nicht berührt werden: sagt man von einer Hypothese, sie sei nicht wahr, aber 'wahrscheinlich', so kann diese Aussage unter keinen Umständen in eine Aussage über eine Ereigniswahrscheinlichkeit umgeformt werden.…”

Ten Essential Delocalization Learning Outcomes: How Well Are They Achieved?

“…To analyze the written responses of questions requiring a justification in this study, we used the modes of reasoning framework proposed by Sevian and Talanquer (2014). This framework has been used to determine modes of reasoning in several studies, 11,[28][29][30][31] including similar studies that analyze students' written responses. [29][30][31] The framework described four modes of reasoning, two non-causal modes (descriptive and relational) and two causal modes (linear and multi-component).…”