Article Sidebar

Submitted
January 16, 2025
Accepted
March 12, 2025
Published
April 30, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 235 Download : 139

Main Article Content

Abstract

 


ABSTRACT: This study investigates the competence of pre-service chemistry teachers at Universitas Negeri Makassar in designing psychomotor assessment instruments for basic chemistry laboratory practices. Employing a descriptive quantitative approach, the study aimed to evaluate the alignment of these instruments with laboratory procedural guidelines and identify challenges faced by pre-service teachers. A sample of 30 students, selected through random sampling, participated in project-based tasks to develop psychomotor instruments corresponding to six basic chemistry laboratory activities. Data were collected through skill tests and questionnaires, analyzed descriptively to determine the alignment and effectiveness of the instruments. The findings reveal that most instruments demonstrated strong alignment with procedural steps, particularly in the cases of Solution Preparation and Separation Techniques, which received high scores for clarity, well-structured rubrics, and ease of implementation. However, challenges were noted in integrating explicit safety protocols and balancing the level of difficulty in instruments such as Redox Reactions and Functional Group Identification, which exhibited minor discrepancies. The study underscores the importance of aligning assessment instruments with laboratory standards and enhancing training programs to address both cognitive and psychomotor dimensions effectively.

Keywords

Pre-service chemistry teachers psychomotor assessment instruments basic chemistry laboratory procedural alignment safety protocols

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Munawwarah Munawwarah, Sakinah Zubair

Creative Commons License

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

Author retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the simultaneously licenced under A Creative Commons Attribution (CC-By-SA) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the worsk's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

How to Cite
Munawwarah, M., & Zubair, S. (2025). Analyzing the Competence of Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers in Designing Psychomotor Assessment Instruments for Basic Chemistry Laboratory Practices. IJCER (International Journal of Chemistry Education Research), 9(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijcer.vol9.iss1.art6
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. J. H. Carmel, D. G. Herrington, L. A. Posey, J. S. Ward, A. M. Pollock, and M. M. Cooper, “Helping Students to ‘Do Science’: Characterizing Scientific Practices in General Chemistry Laboratory Curricula,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 423–434, 2019. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00912.
  2. M. K. Seery, “Establishing the Laboratory as the Place to Learn How to Do Chemistry,” 2020. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00764.
  3. M. Feszterová, “The Education of Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers, the Content of Innovation, Methods and Forms During COVID-19,” R&E-SOURCE, no. S24, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.53349/resource.2022.is24.a1104.
  4. GG. Yuliani, H. S. Halimatul, S. Aisyah, and T. Widhiyanti, “The profile of teachers’ performance in designing practical chemistry laboratory works,” in Proc. 4th Asian Education Symp. (AES 2019), Atlantis Press, May 2020, pp. 275–278, doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.200513.062.
  5. M. C. Manyilizu, “Effectiveness of virtual laboratory vs. paper-based experiences to the hands-on chemistry practical in Tanzanian secondary schools,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 28, pp. 4831–4848, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-11327-7.
  6. N. Garner, A. Siol, and I. Eilks, “The Potential of Non-Formal Laboratory Environments for Innovating the Chemistry Curriculum and Promoting Secondary School Level Students Education for Sustainability,” Sustainability, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1798-1818, 2015, doi: 10.3390/su7021798.
  7. K. R. Galloway and S. L. Bretz, “Development of an Assessment Tool to Measure Students’ Meaningful Learning in the Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory,” 2015. doi: 10.1021/ed500881y.
  8. K. N. Hosbein and J. P. Walker, “Assessment of Scientific Practice Proficiency and Content Understanding Following an Inquiry-Based Laboratory Course,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 92, no. 7, pp. 1149–1158, 2022, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00578.
  9. J. An and T. A. Holme, “Evaluation of Augmented Reality Application Usage and Measuring Students’ Attitudes Toward Instrumentation,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 1458–1464, 2021, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01268.
  10. J. A. Arjoon, X. Xu, and J. E. Lewis, “Understanding the State of the Art for Measurement in Chemistry Education Research: Examining the Psychometric Evidence,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 536–545, 2013. doi: 10.1021/ed3002013.
  11. L. A. Hernández, L. A. E. Escobar, A. M. S. Reyes, J. Zepeda, and L. A. V Queijeiro, “Covid-19 School Disruptions as Drivers of Curriculum Change in the Forensic Science Chemistry Laboratory,” 2020. doi: 10.22201/fq.18708404e.2020.5.76857.
  12. W. Ang, “Integrating Green Chemistry Into Teaching Laboratories: Aqueous Suzuki–Miyaura Cross-Coupling Reaction Using a Recyclable Fluorous Precatalyst,” J. Chem. Educ, vol 98, no. 1, 2020. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00072.
  13. K. B. Aubrecht, M. Bourgeois, E. Brush, J. MacKellar, and J. E. Wissinger, “Integrating Green Chemistry in the Curriculum: Building Student Skills in Systems Thinking, Safety, and Sustainability,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 96, no. 12, 2019. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00354.
  14. L. B. Bruck, M. H. Towns, and S. L. Bretz, “Faculty Perspectives of Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory: Goals and Obstacles to Success,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 87, no. 12, 2010. doi: 10.1021/ed900002d.
  15. R. Stoodley, K. J. Knox, and E. A. Gillis, “Application of a Cognitive Task Framework to Characterize Opportunities for Student Preparation for Research in the Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory,” J Chem Educ, vo. 100, no. 5, 2023, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00948.
  16. T. Armstrong, Multiple Intelligences in The Class Room, 4th ed. Alexandria Virginia USA: ASCD, 2018.
  17. S. Kennedy, “Design of a Dynamic Undergraduate Green Chemistry Course,” J Chem Educ, vo. 93, no. 4, 2015. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00432.
  18. M. N. Sarwar et al., “Fostering Conceptual Understanding of Photocatalysis for Sustainable Development: A Social Constructivism Flipped-Classroom Model,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 23, p. 10324, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.3390/su162310324.
  19. S. C. Nwafor, F. N. Ibe, and N. M. Muoneke, “Optimizing information and communication technology applications in chemistry learning,” Journal of Research in Instructional, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 151–162, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.30862/jri.v2i2.92.
  20. A. Shemshack and J. M. Spector, “A systematic literature review of personalized learning terms,” Smart Learning Environments, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 33, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40561-020-00140-9.
  21. P. P. Nechypurenko, S. O. Semerikov, and O. Yu. Pokhliestova, “Cloud technologies of augmented reality as a means of supporting educational and research activities in chemistry for 11th grade students,” Educational Technology Quarterly, vol. 2023, no. 1, pp. 69–91, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.55056/etq.44.
  22. E. A. Alasadi and C. R. Baiz, “Multimodal Generative Artificial Intelligence Tackles Visual Problems in Chemistry,” J Chem Educ, vol. 101, no. 7, pp. 2716–2729, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00138.
  23. G. Wu, Y. Yang, and C. Xu, “Determination of University Students’ Laboratory Safety Awareness: A Cross-Sectional Study,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 100, no. 9, pp. 3402–34092023, 2023, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00305.
  24. S. L. Sonawane, V. J. Patil, and R. A. Tigaa, “Evaluating and Promoting Chemical Safety Awareness in the Chemical Sciences,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 469–478, 2022, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00102.
  25. M. A. Rashidi, S. Khazaei, K. Samimi, S. Khodakarim, A. Khatabakhsh, and M. Pouyakian, “Application of Social Media in Chemical Safety Training: A Case Study of Training GHS Standards to Students and Laboratory Staff at a University,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 517–5272023, 2023, doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00593.
  26. S. Zhou, Y. Wang, and C. Zhang, “Pre-service science teachers’ PCK: Inconsistency of pre-service teachers’ predictions and student learning difficulties in newton’s third law,” EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 373–385, 2016, doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2016.1203a.
  27. L. Plummer, L. Smith, E. Cornforth, and S. Gore, “Teaching Psychomotor Skills in a Virtual Environment: An Educational Case Study,” Educ. Sci, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 537, doi: 10.3390/educsci11090537.
  28. Suparno, Sukardiyono, T. K. Ardiyati, and B. E. Dasilva, “The Effectiveness of Android-Based Interactive Physics Mobile Learning Media to Improve Students’ Psychomotor and Self-Efficacy,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Educational Research and Innovation (ICERI 2019), Paris, France: Atlantis Press, 2020. doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.200204.005.
  29. U. Gaikwad et al., “Educational Intervention to Foster Best Infection Control Practices Among Nursing Staff,” Int J Infect, vol. 5, no. 3, 2018. doi: 10.5812/iji.81531.
  30. A. Y. Zhao, N. E. DeSousa, H. C. Henriksen, A. M. May, X. Tan, and D. S. Lawrence, “An Assessment of Laboratory Safety Training in Undergraduate Education,” J. Chem. Educ, vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 1626–1634, 2024. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c01299.