Facilitating Concept Map Analysis: Generating and Evaluating Representative General Chemistry Concept Maps with a Novel Use of Image J, Gephi, JPathfinder, and R
More details
Hide details
Chemistry, University of California, USA
Publication date: 2022-01-03
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2022;18(1):em2063
Concept maps are powerful tools used to reveal challenges in students’ learning. However, their use introduces complexities when a large group of students’ conceptualizations need to be examined. In this study, concept maps of 344 general chemistry students were analyzed after grouping them based on achievement in chemistry, math proficiency, and gender. The analysis was also expanded with the consideration of eccentricity values and the extended chemistry triplet. Although some similarities exist between the map of high-achieving students in chemistry and that of high-performing students in the Mathematics Placement Test (MPT), the calculated eccentricity values show interesting variations. On the other hand, the analysis of the map of the low-performing students in MPT and that of low-achieving students in chemistry revealed no clear patterns of symbolic, macroscopic, and submicroscopic terms. Practical suggestions were included to increase the use of representative maps in different assessment and teaching scenarios.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M., & Norman, M. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Jossey-Bass.
Andrews, M. H., & Andrews, L. (1979). First-year chemistry grades and SAT math scores. Journal of Chemical Education, 56(4), 231-232.
Bada, S. O. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66-70.
Becker, N., Stanford, C., Towns, M., & Cole, R. (2015). Translating across macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic levels: the role of instructor facilitation in an inquiry-oriented physical chemistry class. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 769-785.
Boujaoude, S., & Attieh, M. (2008). The effect of using concept maps as study tools on achievement in chemistry. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(3), 233.
Burrows, N. L., & Mooring, S. R. (2015). Using concept mapping to uncover students’ knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 53-66.
Caine, G., & Caine, R. N. (2006). Meaningful learning and the executive functions of the brain. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2006(110), 53-61.
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121-152.
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (1988). The nature of expertise. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, R., & Kelly, A. M. (2019). Community college chemistry coursetaking and STEM academic persistence. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(1), 3-11.
Coll, R., Ali, S., Bonato, J., & Rohindra, D. (2006). Investigating first-year chemistry learning difficulties in the South Pacific: A case study from Fiji. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(3), 365-390.
Cotes, S., & Cotuá, J. (2014). Using audience response systems during interactive lectures to promote active learning and conceptual understanding of stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(5), 673.
de Astudillo, L. R., & Niaz, M. (1996). Reasoning strategies used by students to solve stoichiometry problems and its relationship to alternative conceptions, prior knowledge, and cognitive variables. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(2), 131-140.
diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman, P. B. Pufall, G. Forman, & P. B. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age. (pp. 49-70). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Dori, Y. J., & Hameiri, M. (2003). Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems: Symbol, macro, micro, and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 278-302.
Dori, Y. J., & Sasson, I. (2008). Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case‐based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(2), 219-250.
Earl, B. L. (2007). Concept maps for general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(11), 1788-1789.
Ekmekci, A., Sahin, A., Gulacar, O., & Almus, K. (2018). High school students’ semantic networks of scientific method in an international science Olympiad context. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10), em1604.
Ezeudu, F. O. (2015). A SWOT analysis of male and female students’ performance in chemistry: A comparative study. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(28), 53-60.
Gadner, J., & Ohnesorge, D. (2004). Conceptual knowledge organisation and the problem of understanding. In J. Gadner, R. Buber, & L. Richards (Eds.), Organising knowledge: Methods and case studies (pp. 60-74). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Gerstner, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2009). Concept map structure, gender and teaching methods: An investigation of students’ science learning. Educational Research, 51(4), 425-438.
Gulacar, O., Eilks, I., & Bowman, C. R. (2014). Differences in general cognitive abilities and domain-specific skills of higher- and lower-achieving students in stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(7), 961-968.
Gulacar, O., Milkey, A., & Eilks, I. (2020). Exploring cluster changes in students’ knowledge structures throughout general chemistry. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(6), em1850.
Gulacar, O., Milkey, A., & McLane, S. (2019). Exploring the effect of prior knowledge and gender on undergraduate students’ knowledge structures in chemistry. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(8), em1726.
Gulacar, O., Sinan, O., Bowman, C., & Yildirim, Y. (2015). Exploring the changes in students’ understanding of the scientific method using word associations. Research in Science Education, 45(5), 717-726.
Heron, M., Kinchin, I. M., & Medland, E. (2018). Interview talk and the co-construction of concept maps. Educational Research, 60(4), 373-389.
Johnston, P. R., Watters, D. J., Brown, C. L., & Loughlin, W. A. (2016). An investigation into student perceptions towards mathematics and their performance in first year chemistry: Introduction of online maths skills support. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1203-1214.
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75-83.
Kaya, O. (2008). A student-centred approach: Assessing the changes in pospective science teachers’ conceptual understanding by concept mapping in a general chemistry laboratory. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 91-110.
Kibar, Z. B., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2013). Assessing prospective chemistry teachers’ understanding of gases through qualitative and quantitative analyses of their concept maps. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 542-554.
Kodali, T. (2016). Hierarchical clustering in R.
Kohn, K. P., Underwood, S. M., & Cooper, M. M. (2018). Energy connections and misconnections across chemistry and biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(1), Article 3.
Krabbe, H. (2014). Digital concept mapping for formative assessment. In D. Ifenthaler, & R. Hanewald (Eds.), Digital knowledge maps in education: Technology-enhanced support for teachers and learners (pp. 275-297). Springer New York + Business Media.
Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. Sage Publications.
Luxford, C. J., & Bretz, S. L. (2014). Development of the bonding representations inventory to identify student misconceptions about covalent and ionic bonding representations. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(3), 312-320.
Luxford, C. J., & Holme, T. A. (2015). What do conceptual holes in assessment say about the topics we teach in general chemistry? Journal of Chemical Education, 92(6), 993.
Meijers, F. (1998). The development of a career identity. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 20(3), 191-207.
Murphy, K., Holme, T., Zenisky, A., Carithers, H., & Knaus, K. (2012). Building the ACS exams anchoring concept content map for undergraduate chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(6), 715-720.
Neiles, K. Y. (2014). Measuring knowledge: Tools to measure students’ mental organization of chemistry information. ACS Symposium Series, 1166, 169-190.
Nicoll, G., Francisco, J., & Nakhleh, M. B. (2001). An investigation of the value of using concept maps in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(8), 1111.
Ørom, A. (2003). Knowledge organization in the domain of art studies – history, transition and conceptual changes. Knowledge Organization, 30(3), 128-143.
Paideya, V., & Sookrajh, R. (2010). Exploring the use of supplemental instruction: Supporting deep understanding and higher-order thinking in chemistry. South African Journal of Higher Education, 24(5), 758-770.
Pirnay-Dummer, P. (2014). Gainfully guided misconception. In D. Ifenthaler, & R. Hanewald (Eds.), Digital knowledge maps in education: Technology-enhanced support for teachers and learners (pp. 253-273). Springer New York.
Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it a new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.
Preininger, A. (2017). Embedded mathematics in chemistry: A case study of students’ attitudes and mastery. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(1), 58-69.
Ralph, V. R., & Lewis, S. E. (2018). Chemistry topics posing incommensurate difficulty to students with low math aptitude scores. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 867-884.
Schreiber, D. A., & Abbeg, G. L. (1991). Scoring student- generated concept maps in introductory college chemistry. Paper prepared for The National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting, Lake Geneva, WI.
Sharara, H. (2011). How structural assessment of knowledge can be used for the identification of specific alternative conceptions and for assessing domain competence in physics [M.A. thesis, University of Ottawa].
Smith, G. A., & Bermea, S. B. (2012). Using students’ sketches to recognize alternative conceptions about plate tectonics persisting from prior instruction. Journal of Geoscience Education, 60(4), 350-359.
Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
Taber, K. S. (2013). Revisiting the chemistry triplet: Drawing upon the nature of chemical knowledge and the psychology of learning to inform chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(2), 156-168.
Tait, H., & Entwistle, N. (1996). Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. Higher Education, 31(1), 97-116.
Talanquer, V. (2011a). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179-195.
Talbert, L. E., Bonner, J., Mortezaei, K., Guregyan, C., Henbest, G., & Eichler, J. F. (2020). Revisiting the use of concept maps in a large enrollment general chemistry course: implementation and assessment. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 37-50.
Teichert, M. A., Schroeder, M. J., Lin, S., Dillner, D. K., Komperda, R., & Bunce, D. M. (2020). Problem-solving behaviors of different achievement groups on multiple-choice questions in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(1), 3-15.
Trumpower, D. L., Filiz, M., & Sarwar, G. S. (2014). Assessment for learning using digital knowledge maps. In D. Ifenthaler, & R. Hanewald (Eds.), Digital knowledge maps in education: Technology-enhanced support for teachers and learners (pp. 221-237). Springer New York.
van Kesteren, M. T. R., Krabbendam, L., & Meeter, M. (2018). Integrating educational knowledge: reactivation of prior knowledge during educational learning enhances memory integration. NPJ Science of Learning, 3(11), 1-8.
Van Zele, E., Lenaerts, J., & Wieme, W. (2004). Improving the usefulness of concept maps as a research tool for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(9), 1043-1064.
Von Der Heidt, T. (2015). Concept maps for assessing change in learning: a study of undergraduate business students in first-year marketing in China. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(2), 286-308.
Vrabec, M., & Prokša, M. (2016). Identifying misconceptions related to chemical bonding concepts in the Slovak school system using the bonding representations inventory as a diagnostic tool. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(8), 1364-1370.
Williamson, V. M., Walker, D. R., Chuu, E., Broadway, S., Mamiya, B., Powell, C. B., Shelton, G. R., Weber, R., Dabney, A. R., & Mason, D. (2020). Impact of basic arithmetic skills on success in first-semester general chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 51-61.
Wilson, J. (1996). Concept maps about chemical equilibrium and students’ achievement scores. Research in Science Education, 26(2), 169-185.
Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2015). Assessing changes in high school students’ conceptual understanding through concept maps before and after the Computer-Based Predict-Observe-Explain (CB-POE) tasks on acid-base chemistry at the secondary level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 843.
Yeh, Y.-C. (2004). Seventh graders’ academic achievement, creativity, and ability to construct a cross-domain concept map-A brain function perspective. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 38(2), 125.
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top