Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Misconceptions in Chemistry of High School Teachers and its Origin

Faith Micah D. Abenes, Dennis G. Caballes

Abstract


Misconceptions are the barriers in the learning of the students. Concepts can be identified in two kinds, namely abstract and concrete ones. Concrete ideas can provide students with direct experience on it while it is difficult for students to perceive abstract ideas due to indirect practices towards it. Teachers take part in a crucial part in the understanding of the students. Therefore, teachers must be mindful of the misconceptions and potential practice to work out the misconceptions. This research aims to identify the misconceptions of science teachers in Chemistry. The study was conducted with 54 science teachers in one of the cities in Metro Manila, Philippines. The mixed-method approach was chosen for the study wherein quantitative data was collected through online google form with 92% retrieval rate from the chosen respondents. A multiple-choice identification test consisting of questions from Earth Science, Chemistry, Physics and Biology adopted from the research of Biilent and Esra study. The 25 items each survey was pilot tested with the 35 science teachers in public schools in Pasig City, Philippines.  The Cronbach Alpha coefficient was found to be .971 to test the coefficient of reliability or consistency of the questions in the survey while the qualitative data was collected from the focus group discussion. This research reveals that there are 19 misconceptions out of 25 questions identified in Chemistry. Furthermore, research shows that the number one source of the misconceptions of Science Teachers is the Electronic Media, followed by Textbooks, then the teachers and other sources of misconceptions are peers, parents and colleagues. The researcher suggested that there should be a series of seminars to correct the misconceptions of teachers, there should be a list of credible websites for the teachers’ reference and to provide rigorous seminars for the Secondary School Science Teachers.

Keywords


Chemistry, Content-Knowledge, Faculty Development, Misconceptions, Science Teachers

Full Text:

PDF

References


Schmidt, A. L. (2011). Creativity in science: Tensions between perception and practice. Creative Education, 2(5), 435.

Morgil, I., Seyhan, H. G., & Secken, N. (2009). Overcoming the determined misconceptions in melting and dissolution through question & answer and discussion methods. Chemistry Education, 18(3), 53-60.

Ausebel, David P., Novak, Joseph D., Hanesian, Helen. (1978). Educational Psychology: A cognitive View, 2nd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Shulman, Lee S., (1986). “Those who Understand: Knowledge growth in teaching,” Educational Researcher15, no. 2. New York: Teacher College Press.

Taber, K. S. (2000). Challenging chemical misconceptions in the classroom. British Educational Research Association Annual conference (pp. 1-16). England: Cardiff University press.

Akerson, V., Flick, L., & Lederman, N. (2000). The influence of primary children’s ideas in science on teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 363 – 385.

Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., (2010). Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge, Cognitive Activation in the Classroom, and Student Progress, American Educational Journal.

Sadler. Psychometric Models.

Clement, J., (1982) “Students’ Preconceptions in Introductory Mechanics,” American Journal of Physics.

Sadler, Philip M., Sonnert, Gerhard., (2016) Understanding Misconceptions Teaching and learning in Middle School Physical Science. American Educator. Spring.

Duit, R. (2014). Teaching and learning the physics energy concept. In Teaching and Learning of Energy in K–12 Education (pp. 67-85). Springer International Publishing.

Ayas, A., and Demirba ̧s, A. (1997). Turkish secondary students’conceptions of introductory chemistry concepts.Journal ofChemical Education74: 518–521.

Bergquist, W., and Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regardingchemical equilibrium.Journal of Chemical Education67: 1000–1003

Johnstone, A. H., and Kellett, N. C. (1980). Learning difficultiesin school science-toward a working hypothesis.InternationalJournal of Science Education2: 171–181.

Ozmen, H., and Ayas, A. (2003). Students’ difficulties in under-standing of the conservation of the matter in open and closed-system chemical reactions.Chemistry Education: Research andPractice4: 279–290

Ceyhan, I., Üce, M., (2019). Misconception in Chemistry Education and Practices to Eliminate Them: Literature Analysis. Journal of Education and Training Studies. Vol. 7, No. 3

Coll, R. K., &Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Res. Sci. Technol. Education, 19, 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140120057713

Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates bonding misconceptions. Int. J. Sci. Educ., 23(7), 707-730. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010025012

Butts, B., and Smith, R. (1987). HSC chemistry students’ under-standing of the structure and properties of molecular and ioniccompounds.Research in Science Education17: 192–201.

Peterson, R., and Treagust, D. F. (1989). Grade-12 students’ miscon-ceptions of covalent bonding and structure.Journal of Chem-ical Education66: 459–460.

Goh, N. K., Khoo, L. E., and Chia, L. S. (1993). Some miscon-ceptions in chemistry: A cross-cultural comparison, and impli-cations for teaching.Australian Science Teachers Journal39:65–68

Taber, K. S. (2001). Constructing chemical concepts in the class-room?: Using research to inform the practice.Chemistry Ed-ucation: Research and Practice in Europe2: 43–51

Boo, H. K., and Watson, J. R. (2001). Progression in high schoolstudents’ (aged 16–18) conceptualizations about chemical re-actions in solution.Science Education85: 568–585.

Birk, J. P., and Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retentionand elimination of misconceptions about molecular structureand bonding.Journal of Chemical Education76: 124–128

Valanides, N. (2000). Primary student teachers’ understanding ofthe particulate nature of matter and its transformations dur-ing dissolving.Chemistry Education: Research and Practice inEurope1: 249–262

Teichert, M. A., and Stacy, A. M. (2002). Promoting understandingof chemical bonding and spontaneity through student expla-nation and integration of ideas.Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching39: 464–496

Osborne, R. J., and Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: Agenerative process.Science Education67: 489–508.

Krishnan, S. R., and Howe, A. C. (1994). The mole concept: Developing an instrument to assess conceptual understanding.Journal of Chemical Education71(8): 653–658.

De Jong, O. (2000). Crossing the borders: Chemical education re-search and teaching practice.University Chemistry Education4: 29–32

Chu Chit Kay, Hong Koh Yiin. (2010). Misconceptions In The Teaching Of Chemistry In Secondary Schools In Singapore & Malaysia. Department of Pre-University Programmes Sunway College Johor Bahru.

Coll, R. K., and Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigation of secondaryschool, undergraduate, and graduate learners’ mental modelsof ionic bonding.Journal of Research in Science Teaching40:464–486.

Southerland, S. A., Abrams, E., Cummins, C. L., and Anzelmo,J. (2001). Understanding students’ explanations of biologicalphenomena: Conceptual frameworks or P-prims?Science Ed-ucation85: 328–348

Guzzetti, B. J. (2000). Learning counter intuitive science concepts:What have we learned from over a decade of research?Read-ing, Writing, Quarterly16: 89–95

Stavy, R. (1991). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions aboutconservation of matter.Journal of Research in Science Teaching28: 305–313

Lin, J. W., Yen, M. H., Liang, J. C., Chiu, M. H., & Guo, C. J. (2016). Examining the Factors That Influence Students’ Science Learning Processes and Their Learning Outcomes: 30 Years of Conceptual Change Research. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(9), 2617-2646.

DepEd. Statement on buffer stock learning materials, errors in textbooks. (2019)Luz, J.M. “Baseline Study of DepEd’s Readiness to Provide and Sustain Basic Education Services to Disadvantaged IP Communities,” AIM Center for Development, 2014.

Creswell, J.W. Research design. London: SAGE Publication (2003)


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.