Article Sidebar

Submitted
December 21, 2021
Accepted
April 18, 2022
Published
April 18, 2022
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 485 Download : 399

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examined the effect of concept mapping teaching strategy on Senior Secondary Students’ misconceptions about chemical bonding in Rivers State. Mixed method design, specifically, exploratory mixed method design was adopted. The sample comprised 174 SS2 Students. The instruments were Chemical Bonding Misconceptions Diagnostic Test and Interview Schedule validated by two Science Education Lecturers. The reliability coefficient of 0.87 for the Chemical Bonding Misconceptions Diagnostic Test was determined by test-retest method using Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient formula. Careful piloting of the interview schedule was carried out, and the use of scientific terms as well as discussions were avoided to ensure reliability of the interview schedule. Research questions were answered using percentage and hypotheses tested at 0.05 level of significance using Analysis of Covariance. Findings of the study revealed a remarkable reduction in the high extents of students’ misconceptions about chemical bonding on the use of concept mapping strategy while negligible reduction was found with lecture teaching method. Also, statistically significant difference in the misconceptions of students taught with concept mapping strategy and those with lecture method was found.  This suggests that students’ misconceptions about chemical bonding were corrected on application of concept mapping strategy. There was gender related difference in misconceptions of students taught chemical bonding using concept mapping strategy. It was recommended among others that; teachers should embrace the use of conceptual change strategies such as concept mapping in teaching chemical bonding and other abstract concepts in chemistry. Also, students’ misconceptions should be identified at the beginning of the lesson to facilitate correction.


Keywords: misconceptions, concept mapping, chemical bonding, and teaching strategy

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Etokeren, I. S., & ABOSEDE, Olufunso Olumide. (2022). Effect of Concept Mapping Teaching Strategy on Students’ Misconceptions about Chemical Bonding in Rivers State . IJCER (International Journal of Chemistry Education Research), 6(1), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijcer.vol6.iss1.art3
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. J. I. Alamina, Fundamental principles of science teaching and learning, Port Harcourt: Votex Publisher, 2008.
  2. J.I. Alamina, Exploiting misconceptions towards optimum teaching and learning, An Inaugural Lecture, Series no 55, Port Harcourt: Rivers State University, 2018.
  3. I. M. R. Al – sheer, employing concept map as a prewriting strategy to help EFL learners better generate argumentative composition. International Journal for scholarship of Teaching and Learning, vo. 8 issue 2 no 10, pp.1-13. , 2014.
  4. G. M. Bodner, Constructivism: a theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education. Vo.63 issue 10, p 873, 1986.
  5. D. P. Ausubel, Educational psychology: a cognitive view, New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston,1968.
  6. P. Scott, H. Asoko, and R. Driver, Teaching for conceptual change: A review of strategies. In Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies R. Duit, F. Goldberg & H. Neidder (Eds), Kiel Germany: Institute for Science Education at University of Keil, 1992, 310 – 329.
  7. K. Ozkaya, R. Ali, U. Musa, and S. Musa, Prospective teachers’ conceptual understanding of electrochemistry: Galvanic and electrolytic cells. The Royal Society of Chemistry Journal. U.Chem.Ed. pp7-12, 2003.
  8. R., Driver, E. Guesne and A.Tiberghien, Children’s ideas and The learning of science. In Children’s ideas in science R. Driver, E. Guesne and A. Tiberghien (eds.). London: Open University Press, 1985.
  9. D. J. Novak, & D. B. Gowin, Learning How to Learn. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
  10. M. McCloskey, Naive Theories of Motion, in Mental Models, D. Gentner and A. Stevens (Eds.), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 299-324, 1983.
  11. J. K. Gilbert, R. J. Osborne, and P. J. Fensham, Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66 (4), 623-633, 1982. .
  12. S. Ardiansah, Colleges students' misconception about type of bonding in conf. MATEC Web of Conferences San Josse, CA, pp150 -157, 2018.
  13. K. S. Taber, (2011). ‘’Constructivism as educational theory: contingency in learning, and optimally guided instruction’’ Educational theory, in J. Hasskhah. Hauppauge, N. Y: Nova science Publishers, 2011.
  14. A. Fadillah and D. Salirawati, Analysis of misconceptions of chemical bonding among tenth grade senior high school students using a two-tier test, AIP Conference Proceedings, New York, pp113 -120, 2021,
  15. G., Tsaparlis, E. T. Pappa and B. Byers, Proposed pedagogies for teaching and learning chemical bonding in secondary education. Chemistry Teacher International, pp1-14, 2019.
  16. American Association of Advanced Sciences (AAS). Benchmark for scientific literacy. New York NY: Oxford University Press, 1998.
  17. A. Milligan, & B. Wood, Conceptual understandings as transition points: Making sense of a complex social world. Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol.42 issue 4, pp487-501, 2010.
  18. R. Hanson, Identifying students’ alternative concept in basic chemical bonding – a case study of teacher’s trainee in university of education Winneba. International Journal of Innovative Research & Development, vol. 4, issue 1, pp115 – 122, 2015.
  19. S. Unal, C. Bayram and A. Ayas, Secondary school students’ misconceptions of covalent bonding. Turkish Science Education, vol. 7 issue 2, pp 4 -29, 2010.
  20. T. Kazembe, Use of portfolios to correct alternative conceptions and enhance learning. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, vol. 2, issue 1, pp 26 – 43, 2010.
  21. K. S. Taber, Learning at the symbolic level. In Multiple Representations in Chemical Education, J. K. Gilbert and D. F. Treagust (Eds), (pp. 75-108). Dordrecht: Springer, 2009b.
  22. E. Von Glaserfeild, Cognition, construction of knowledge and teaching. Synthese, vol. 80, pp 121-140, 1989.
  23. J. I. Alamina and N. Ukwa, Nigerian students’ conception of genetics and teaching strategy for enhancing understanding of genetics. European Journal of Scientific Research, vol.16 issue 21, pp 282 -289, 2007.
  24. G. J. Posner, K. A. Strike, Hawson, P. W and W. A. Gretzog, Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, vol. 66, pp 211-2227, 1982.
  25. I. Stioca, S. Moraru and C. Miron, Concept maps, a must for the modern teaching –learning process. Romanian Reports in Physics, vol. 63, pp567-576, 2011.
  26. J. D. Novak, & A. J. Canas, The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them, Technical report IHMC Cmaps Tools 20006-01 January, 2008, Florida Institute and Machine Cognition (2006).
  27. R. Hanson and T. A. Kwarteng, Using concept map to remediate chemistry teacher trainees’ understanding of chemical phenomenon. International Journal of Scientific Research in Science and Technology, vol. 2 no. 4, pp214-221, 2016.
  28. J. Piaget, Origin of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1936.
  29. I. S. Etokeren and Alamina, J. I. “Towards elimination of students’ misconceptions in science: Case of drama and concept mapping strategies on chemical bonding in Nigeria”, in conf. Clute International Conference on Education (ICE), Colorado, USA, (2021) pp .
  30. Alamina, J. I. & Etokeren, I. S. (2018). Effectiveness of imagination stretch teaching strategy in correcting misconceptions of students about particulate nature of matter. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 27(1), 1-1.
  31. K.V.F. Fatokun, Instructional misconceptions of prospective teachers in chemical boarding. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, vol.7 , no. 2, pp18-24, 2016.
  32. N.I. Daminar, Remediating Flippino engineering students’ misconceptions concerning ionic bonding through outcomes-based teaching and learning computer assisted instructional material. Journal of Engineering and Science Research, vol.1, issue 12, pp157-162, 2017.
  33. J. N. Adzape and Akpogol, T. V. Correcting students’ chemical misconceptions based on two conceptual change strategies and their effect on their achievement. Journal of Research & Method in Education, vol.5, issue 6, pp58-65, 2015.
  34. A. I. Ihuarulam, Remedying students’ misconceptions in learning of chemical bonding and spontaneity through intervention discussion learning model (IDLM). International Journal of Education and Pedagogical Sciences, vol.5, pp 2351- 2354, 2014.
  35. V.D. Chong, S. M Salleh and Aichong, IUsing activity worksheet to remediate students’ alternative conceptions of metallic bonding. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, vol.3 no.11, pp39-52, 2013.
  36. Aytul, S. “Conceptual change-oriented instruction and students’ misconceptions in chemical bonding concepts,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Science Education, Middle East Technical University: Turkey, 2012.
  37. J. D. Trifone, To what extent can concept mapping motivate students to take a more meaningful approach to learn biology. The science Education Reviews, vol. 5, issue 4, pp122:1 – 122:23, 2006.
  38. Davis, J. (2001). Conceptual Change, in Engineering perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology [online], November 12 2017. Available: http://epltt.coe.uga.edu/.