Mental model and scientific reasoning ability of chemistry education students during Covid-19 Pandemic online learning
DOI:
10.29303/jpm.v17i3.3106Published:
2022-05-31Issue:
Vol. 17 No. 3 (2022): May 2022Keywords:
Mental Model, Scientific Reasoning Ability, Online LearningArticles
Downloads
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
Abstract
This study aims to find: (1) the development of students' scientific reasoning abilities; (2) mental models developed by students in understanding the concept of dissolving weak acids and weak bases; and (3) the relationship between scientific reasoning abilities and mental models. The research approach is a descriptive study. The research subjects were 38 first-year students of the Chemical Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, The University of Mataram. The research data collected were scientific reasoning ability data and student mental model data on the concept of dissolving weak acids and weak bases. Students' scientific reasoning ability was measured using the revised Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (CTSR) instrument in 2000, developed by Lawson and translated into Indonesian. The translation test has a reliability coefficient, calculated by the KR-20 formula, of 0.74. Identification of mental models using written tests and interviews. The content validity of the mental model test instruments is 94.2%. The data obtained were analyzed descriptively. The identification of mental models is made by using a constant comparative technique. The results showed a delay in developing students' scientific reasoning abilities compared to the criteria set by Lawson. Most of the students developed initial mental models in understanding dissolving weak acids and bases. In addition, the higher the student's scientific reasoning ability, the mental model developed tends to approach the scientific mental model.
References
Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners' mental models of ionic bonding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 464-486.
Jansoon, N., Coll, R. K., & Somsook, E. (2009). Understanding Mental Models of Dilution in Thai Students. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(2), 147-168.
Supriadi, S., Ibnu, S., & Yahmin, Y. (2018). Analisis model mental mahasiswa pendidikan kimia dalam memahami berbagai jenis reaksi kimia. Jurnal Pijar MIPA, 13(1), 1-5.
Cin, M. (2013). Undergraduate Students' Mental Models of Hailstone Formation. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 8(1), 163-174.
Ariani, S. (2017). Analisis model mental mahasiswa pendidikan kimia dalam memahami topik elektrokimia ditinjau dari kemampuan bernalar ilmiah mahasiswa (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Malang).
Nersessian, N. J. (2010). Creating scientific concepts. MIT press.
Lawson, A. E. (2005). What is the role of induction and deduction in reasoning and scientific inquiry?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 716-740.
Lawson, A. E., Banks, D. L., & Logvin, M. (2007). Self‐efficacy, reasoning ability, and achievement in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 706-724.
Coletta, V. P., & Phillips, J. A. (2005). Interpreting FCI scores: Normalized gain, preinstruction scores, and scientific reasoning ability. American Journal of Physics, 73(12), 1172-1182.
Lawson, A. E., Alkhoury, S., Benford, R., Clark, B. R., & Falconer, K. A. (2000). What kinds of scientific concepts exist? Concept construction and intellectual development in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 996-1018.
Nnorom, N. R. (2013). The effect of reasoning skills on students achievement in biology in anambra state. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 4(12), 2102-2104.
Pavelich, M. J., & Abraham, M. R. (1979). An inquiry format laboratory program for general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 56(2), 100.
Lawson, A. E. (1978). The development and validation of a classroom test of formal reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15(1), 11-24.
Valanides, D. M. N. (1997). Antecedent variables for sociomoral reasoning development: Evidence from two cultural settings. International Journal of Psychology, 32(5), 301-313.
Esnawi. (2006). Analisis Pemahaman Konseptual dan Algoritmik Materi Laju Reaksi Ditinjau dari Tingkat Berpikir Formal Mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia Universitas Haluoleo. Tesis tidak diterbitkan. Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang.
Oloyede, O. I., & Adeoye, F. A. (2012). The relationship between acquisition of science process skills, formal reasoning ability and chemistry achievement. International Journal of African & African-American Studies, 8(1), 1-4.
Asnawi, R. (2015). Miskonsepsi pada materi elektrokimia ditinjau dari kemampuan berpikir ilmiah siswa (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Malang).
Creswell, J.W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research Fourth Edition. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Kurnaz, M. A., & Eksi, C. (2015). An analysis of high school students’ mental models of solid friction in physics. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(3).
Schönborn, K. J., & Anderson, T. R. (2009). A model of factors determining students’ ability to interpret external representations in biochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 193-232.
Sunyono, S., Leny, Y., & Muslimin, I. (2015). Supporting students in learning with multiple representation to improve student mental models on atomic structure concepts. Science Education International, 26(2), 104-125.
Russell, J. (1997). How Executive Disorders can Bring About an Inadequate “Theory of Mind.” In J. Russell (Ed.), Autism as an Executive Disorder (pp. 256–304). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Treagust, D., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International journal of science education, 25(11), 1353-1368.
Lawson, C., Lenz, G. S., Baker, A., & Myers, M. (2010). Looking like a winner: Candidate appearance and electoral success in new democracies. World Politics, 62(4), 561-593.
Pavelich, M. J., & Abraham, M. R. (1977). Guided Inquiry Laboratories for General Chemistry Students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 7(1), 23-26.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2001). Mental models and deduction. Trends in cognitive sciences, 5(10), 434-442.
Seel, N.M. (2008). Understanding Models for Learning and Instruction. New York: Springer.Sunyono, Yuanita, L., Ibrahim, M. 2015. Supporting Students in Learning with Multiple Representation to Improve Student Mental Models on Atomic Structure Concepts. Science Education International, 26(2): 104–125.
Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2002). Constraints to the development of first year university chemistry students’ mental models of chemical phenomena. Focusing on the student, 43-50.
Adadan, E. (2013). Using multiple representations to promote grade 11 students’ scientific understanding of the particle theory of matter. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1079-1105.
Author Biographies
Supriadi Supriadi, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
Wildan Wildan, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
Aliefman Hakim, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
Jeckson Siahaan, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
Mukhtar Haris, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
Sunniarti Ariani, Program Studi Pendidikan Kimia, Universitas Mataram
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Supriadi Supriadi, Wildan Wildan, Aliefman Hakim, Jeckson Siahaan, Mukhtar Haris, Sunniarti Ariani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The following terms apply to authors who publish in this journal:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal first publication rights, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License (CC-BY License) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and first publication in this journal.
2. Authors may enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., posting it to an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), acknowledging its initial publication in this journal.
3. Before and during the submission process, authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website), as this can lead to productive exchanges as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
