A Performance-Based Assessment for Limiting Reactants

Walker, Joi Phelps; Sampson, Victor; Zimmerman, Carol O.; Grooms, Jonathon

doi:10.1021/ed1006629

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A performance task was previously designed to evaluate student understanding of limiting reactants in a simple chemical reaction (Walker, Sampson, Grooms, & Zimmerman, ). Performance‐based assessments such as this allow students to demonstrate their inquiry and reasoning skills as well as their understanding of the content (Doran, Chan, & Tamir, ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning to Argue and Arguing to Learn: Argument‐Driven Inquiry as a Way to Help Undergraduate Chemistry Students Learn How to Construct Arguments and Engage in Argumentation During a Laboratory Course

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines whether students enrolled in a general chemistry I laboratory course developed the ability to participate in scientific argumentation over the course of a semester. The laboratory activities that the students participated in during the course were designed using the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) an instructional model. This model gives a more central place to argumentation and the role of argument in the social construction of scientific knowledge. The development of the students' ability to construct a scientific argument and to participate in scientific argumentation was tracked over time using three different data sources. These data sources included a performance task, which was administered at the beginning, middle, and end of the course, video recording of the students participating in episodes of argumentation, and the lab reports the students wrote as part of each lab activity. As time was the independent variable in this study, a repeated measure ANOVA was used to evaluate changes in the ways students performed on each task over the course of the semester. The results of the analysis indicate that there was significant growth in the quality of the students' written arguments and nature of their oral argumentation. There also was a significant correlation between written and oral arguments. These results suggest that the use of an integrated instructional model that places emphasis on argument and argumentation can have a positive impact on the quality of the arguments students include in their investigation reports, the argumentation they engage in during lab activities, and their overall performance on tasks that require them to develop and support a valid conclusion with genuine evidence. # Science educators, with the goal of increased science literacy, have developed numerous new curricula and instructional approaches over the last decade in order to give students a more

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning to Argue and Arguing to Learn: Argument‐Driven Inquiry as a Way to Help Undergraduate Chemistry Students Learn How to Construct Arguments and Engage in Argumentation During a Laboratory Course

2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results from these studies are currently under review or in preparation. 56 ' ASSOCIATED CONTENT b S Supporting Information An example of an ADI lab activity handout; investigation design worksheet; peer-review guide; rubric used to score investigation reports. This material is available via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.…”

Section: ' Implications For the Teaching And Learning Of Chemistry At...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Argument-Driven Inquiry: An Introduction to a New Instructional Model for Use in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs

2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents a new instructional model called Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) that can be used in undergraduate college chemistry laboratory courses. ADI is designed to provide students with an opportunity to develop their own method to generate data, to carry out investigations, use data to answer research questions, write, and be more reflective as they work. In addition, the ADI instructional model integrates opportunities for students to engage in scientific argumentation and peer review. This article describes the ADI instructional model, provides the empirical and theoretical foundation for it, and presents a detailed semester pacing schedule for general chemistry I laboratories, peer-review guides, and instructor scoring rubrics.

show abstract

“…Since scientific argumentation develops the individual's self-efficacy (Eymur & Çetin, 2017), argumentation skills (İnaltekin & Akçay, 2017;Osborne et al, 2004), academic achievements (Erkol et al, 2017;Koçak, 2014), willingness to debate (Baydaş et al, 2018), scientific process skills (Er & Kırındı, 2020), conceptual understanding (Akyüz, 2018;Hasnunidah et al, 2020), critical thinking (Rosidin et al, 2019;Sönmez, 2017), and attitudes towards science (Walker et al, 2012) occupy an important place in science education. For this reason, scientific argumentation has been included in many reforms in science both in Turkey and all over the world (Erduran & Msimanga, 2014;Heng et al, 2015).…”

Section: Scientific Argumentation In Science Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Self-Efficacy for Argumentation Scale

Kıran¹,

Feyzioğlu²

2021

Kuramsal Eğitimbilim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the study is to develop a "Self-Efficacy Scale for Argumentation" (SEAS). The participants of the study consisted of 879 pre-service elementary teachers. In order to examine construct validity of SEAS, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were utilized. The initial solution of the EFA results revealed that three-factor structure consisting of 24 items called "Effort", "Confidence" and "Determination" for argumentation was obtained. Since the factor-item correlations were not significant for the "Determination" scale (p>.05), the two-factor structure consisting of the "Effort" and "Confidence" for argumentation was validated by the repeated CFA. The accepted fit indices for the repeated CFA results were X 2 /sd=2.62; p<.001; RMSEA=.07; S-RMR=.05; NFI=.86; CFI=.91; GFI=.87. The moderate and significant correlation coefficients between the scores of the SEAS with the scale of "Inquiry Learning Skills Perception in Science" (Taşkoyan, 2008) proved the criterion validity of the SEAS. The test-retest reliability of the SEAS was found to be moderate and significant. The internal consistency of SEAS is .93. Finally, a significant difference between the upper and lower groups means that the item discrimination of the SEAS is high.

show abstract

A Performance-Based Assessment for Limiting Reactants

Cited by 12 publications

References 3 publications

Learning to Argue and Arguing to Learn: Argument‐Driven Inquiry as a Way to Help Undergraduate Chemistry Students Learn How to Construct Arguments and Engage in Argumentation During a Laboratory Course

Learning to Argue and Arguing to Learn: Argument‐Driven Inquiry as a Way to Help Undergraduate Chemistry Students Learn How to Construct Arguments and Engage in Argumentation During a Laboratory Course

Argument-Driven Inquiry: An Introduction to a New Instructional Model for Use in Undergraduate Chemistry Labs

Development of Self-Efficacy for Argumentation Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About