Evaluation of questions in general chemistry textbooks according to the form of the questions and the Question-Answer Relationship (QAR): the case of intra- and intermolecular chemical bonding

Abstract

One way of checking tο what extent instructional textbooks achieve their aim is to evaluate the questions they contain. In this work, we analyze the questions that are included in the chapters on chemical bonding of ten general chemistry textbooks. We study separately the questions on intraand on intermolecular bonding, with the former outnumbering the latter by far. Two aspects of the questions are examined: their form (closed or open type, including their various forms), and the kind of knowledge they test (declarative or procedural knowledge). Questions were further partitioned into four categories, following Pearson and Johnson's and Raphael's schemes of Question-Answer Relationship (QAR) in which: (1) text-centered questions are divided into (a) 'precisely there', and (b) 'think and search'; and (2) cognition-centered questions that are divided into 'you and the author' and 'on your own'. The following conclusions were drawn: closed-type questions outnumber by far the open-type ones, and are mainly of the 'short answer' category; the majority test for declarative knowledge, with fewer questions testing for procedural knowledge; there was complete lack of metacognitive questions; no questions were found that deal with relevant experimental processes. Implications for textbook authors and teachers are discussed.

Are History Textbooks More “Considerate” After 20 Years?

“…This is consistent with other research findings that a disproportionate quantity of content in textbooks focuses on more factual versus inferential and higher order skills desired by educators who use those texts (Davila & Talanquer, 2010;Jitendra et al, 2001;Jo & Bednarz, 2011). As a result, educators are responsible for ensuring that students have access to sufficiently challenging questions, which may mean educators need to construct the questions themselves if they are not present in the text (Pappa & Tsaparlis, 2011).…”

Expert vs. novice: approaches used by chemists when solving open-ended problems

“…In addition to identifying and framing the problem, Table 4 shows that expert participants engaged in more evaluation than the undergraduate participants (Table 3). It is not surprising that a large number of participants utilised an arithmetic process, as their previous experience in problem solving will have focussed around using algorithms and calculations to solve most problems (Bennett, 2008;Pappa and Tsaparlis, 2011). In this study it appears evaluation processes did occur toward the end of a solution, although some graduate participants used an evaluation approach during their solution in a continual review process.…”

Concept Inventories as a Complement to Learning Progressions

“…Students’ arrival to each step of an LP—whether linearly or not—has been assessed by a variety of tools ( NRC, 2007 ; Bernholt and Parchmann, 2011 ; Pappa and Tsaparlis, 2011 ). Assessment tools of growing interest include concept inventories (CIs).…”