Studies have shown that many students do not attain the subject-specific
proficiency required in chemistry classes; therefore, their basic knowledge of
chemistry is lacking. However, this deficit cannot easily be compensated for in
the further years of learning because of the hierarchical structure of chemistry
as a subject. To support cumulative teaching and learning, this study developed
a learning progression for the beginning of chemistry instruction in close
collaboration with school practice. This study focused on core ideas, which are
fundamental chemistry concepts logically linked in a strand map. This study
investigated the dependence of the understanding of one core idea on that of
another to empirically validate possible learning pathways. Subject knowledge
items were developed for each core idea, piloted, and administered to students
in the first 3 years of learning at the lower secondary level in a
quasi-longitudinal study combined with a true longitudinal study. The quality
of the subject knowledge test was satisfactory, as determined using item response
theory models. Many of the hypothesized dependencies were confirmed using the
McNemar test. Simultaneously, students were shown to have low knowledge
relative to curricular specifications.
References
[1]
Adedokun, O. A., & Burgess, W. D. (2012). Analysis of Paired Dichotomous Data: A Gentle Introduction to the McNemar Test in SPSS. Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Evaluation, 8, 125-131. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v8i17.336
[2]
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2007). Applying the Rasch Model Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[3]
Boone, W. J. (2013). Rasch Analysis in the Human Sciences. Spirnger.
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-94-007-6857-4.pdf
[4]
Boone, W. J. (2016). Rasch Analysis for Instrument Development: Why, When, and How? CBE Life Sciences Education, 15, rm4. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0148
[5]
Boone, W. J. (2020). Advances in Rasch Analyses in the Human Sciences. Moremedia. Springer. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kxp/detail.action?docid=6273693
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43420-5
[6]
Boone, W. J., & Scantlebury, K. (2006). The Role of Rasch Analysis When Conduction Science Education Research Utilizing Multiple-Choice Tests. Science Education, 90, 253-269. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20106
[7]
Briggs, D., Alonzo, A., Schwab, C., & Wilson, M. (2006). Diagnostic Assessment with Ordered Multiple-Choice Items. Educational Assessment, 11, 33-63.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326977ea1101_2
[8]
Chen, J., Gotwals, A. W., Anderson, C. W, & Reckase, M. D. (2016). The Influence of Item Formats When Locating a Student on a Learning Progression in Science. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 3, 101-122.
https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.245196
[9]
Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning Progressions in Science: An Evidence-Based Approach to Reform. CPRE Research Report # RR-63, Teachers College—Columbia University. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ed506730.pdf
https://doi.org/10.12698/cpre.2009.rr63
[10]
Duschl, R., Maeng, S., & Sezen, A. (2011). Learning Progressions and Teaching Sequences: A Review and Analysis. Studies in Science Education, 47, 123-182.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2011.604476
[11]
Emden, M., Weber, K., & Sumfleth, E. (2018). Evaluating a Learning Progression on “Transformation of Matter” on the Lower Secondary Level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 1096-1116. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00137E
[12]
Goecke, B., Staab, M., Schittenhelm, C., & Wilhelm, O. (2022). Stop Worrying about Multiple-Choice: Fact Knowledge Does Not Change with Response Format. Journal of Intelligence, 10, Article No. 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10040102
[13]
Gotwals, A. W. (2012). Learning Progressions for Multiple Purpose. Challenging in Using Learning Progressions. In A. C. Alonzo, & A. W. Gotwals (Eds.), Learning Progressions in Science: Current Challenges and Future Directions (pp. 461-472). Sense Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-824-7_19
[14]
Gunckel, K. L., Mohan, L., Covitt, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (2012). Addressing Challenges in Developing Learning Progressions for Environmental Science Literacy. In A. C. Alonzo, & A. W. Gotwals (Eds.), Learning Progressions in Science: Current Challenges and Future Directions (pp. 39-75). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-824-7_4
[15]
Hadenfeldt, J. C., Neumann, K., Bernholt, S., Liu, X., & Parchmann, I. (2016). Students’ Progression in Understanding the Matter Concept. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53, 683-708. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21312
[16]
Harris, L. R., Adie, L., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2022). Learning Progression-Based Assessments: A Systematic Review of Student and Teacher Uses. Review of Educational Research, 92, 996-1040. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221081552
[17]
Jin, H., Shin, H. J., & Cisterna, D. (2023). Systematic Validation in Science Learning Progression Research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22, 189-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-023-10396-5
[18]
Jin, H., Zhan, L., & Anderson, C. W. (2013). Developing a Fine-Grained Learning Progression Framework for Carbon-Transforming Processes. International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1663-1697. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.782453
[19]
Johnson, P., & Tymms, P. (2011). The Emergence of a Learning Progression in Middle School Chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 849-877.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20433
[20]
Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Shivraj, P., Basaraba, D., & Yovanoff, P. (2019). Considerations for Using Mathematical Learning Progressions to Design Diagnostic Assessments. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research & Perspective, 17, 1-22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2018.1479087
[21]
Krajcik, J., & Shin, N. (2023). Student Conceptions, Conceptual Change, and Learning Progressions. In N. G. Lederman, D. L. Zeidler, & J. S. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (37 p.). Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367855758-7
[22]
Lee, H.-S., & Liu, O. L. (2010). Assessing Learning Progression of Energy Concepts across Middle School Grades: The Knowledge Integration Perspective. Science Education, 94, 665-688. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20382
[23]
Linacre, J. M. (2023). A User’s Guide to Winsteps? Ministep: Rasch-Model Computer Programs. Program Manual 5.5.1. https://www.winsteps.com/winman/copyright.htm
[24]
Neumann, K., Viering, T., Boone, W. J., & Fischer, H. E. (2013). Towards a Learning Progression of Energy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 162-188.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21061
[25]
Pembury Smith, M. Q. R., & Ruxton, G. D. (2020). Effective Use of the McNemar Test. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 74, 1-9.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-020-02916-y
[26]
Prenzel, M., Walter, O., & Frey, A. (2007). PISA Misst Kompetenzen: Eine Replik Auf Rindermann (2006): Was Messen Internationale Schulleistungsstudien? Psychologische Rundschau, 58, 128-136. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042.58.2.128
[27]
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainmenttests. Studies in Methematical Psychology. Nielsen & Lydiche.
[28]
Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a Learning Progression for Scientific Modeling: Making Scientific Modeling Accessible and Meaningful for Learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 632-654. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20311
[29]
Shi, G., & Bi, H. (2023). A Systematic Review of Learning Progressions for the Concept of Matter in Science Education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 24, 793-806.
https://doi.org/10.1039/D3RP00047H
[30]
Shihusa, H., & Keraro, F. N. (2009). Using Advance Organizers to Enhance Students’ Motivation in Learning Biology. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5, 413-420. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75290
[31]
Smith, C., Wiser, M., Anderson, C. W., & Krajcik, J. (2006). FOCUS ARTICLE: Implications of Research on Children’s Learning for Standards and Assessment: A Proposed Learning Progression for Matter and the Atomic-Molecular Theory. Measurement, 14, 1-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2006.9678570
[32]
Stanat, P., Schipolowski, S., Mahler, N., Weirich, S., Henschel, S., & Lorz, R. A. (2019). IQB-Bildungstrend 2018: Mathematische Und Naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenzen Am Ende Der Sekundarstufe I Im Zweiten Landervergleich. Waxmann.
[33]
Stevens, S. Y., Delgado, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). Developing a Hypothetical Multi-Dimensional Learning Progression for the Nature of Matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 687-715. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20324
[34]
Talanquer, V. (2006). Commonsense Chemistry: A Model for Understanding Students’ Alternative Conceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 83, 811-816.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p811
[35]
Teo, T. W., Goh, M. T., & Yeo, L. W. (2014). Chemistry Education Research Trends: 2004-2013. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15, 470-487.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00104D
[36]
Todd, A., Romine, W. L., & Cook Whitt, K. (2017). Development and Validation of the Learning Progression-Based Assessment of Modern Genetics in a High School Context. Science Education, 101, 32-65. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21252
[37]
Wickman, P.-O. (2014). Teaching Learning Progressions: An International Perspective. In S. K. Abell (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Volume II (pp. 159-178.). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267-16
[38]
Yuan, L., Liu, Y., Chen, P., & Xin, T. (2022). Development of a New Learning Progression Verification Method Based on the Hierarchical Diagnostic Classification Model: Taking Grade 5 Students’ Fractional Operations as an Example. Educational Measurement, 41, 69-82. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12488
[39]
Zhou, S., & Traynor, A. (2022). Measuring Students’ Learning Progressions in Energy Using Cognitive Diagnostic Models. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article ID: 892884.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.892884
