Students' reasoning about basic chemical thermodynamics and chemical bonding: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course?

By V. Barker, R. Millar. 2000

176 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Physical and Theoretical Chemistry

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b4ec6af78008bbe405b9d2effbda909b0e1811c1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Muammer Çalık
2. Neslihan Ültay
3. Ghassan Sirhan
4. R. Coll
5. Alipasa Ayas
6. Suat Ünal
7. J. Othman
8. A. Chandrasegaran

In Education

1. Muammer Çalık
2. Cengiz Tüysüz
3. Ghassan Sirhan
4. Neslihan Ültay
5. Alipasa Ayas
6. R. Coll
7. Suat Ünal
8. J. Othman

In Physical and Theoretical Chemistry

1. Muammer Çalık
2. Cengiz Tüysüz
3. Alipasa Ayas
4. Ghassan Sirhan
5. Neslihan Ültay
6. R. Coll
7. Suat Ünal
8. J. Othman

Citations in the corpus

• An Investigation into the Relationship between Students’ Conceptions of the Particulate Nature of Matter and their Understanding of Chemical Bonding (2008, background): “Covalent bonds have also been thought to be relatively weak as discrete molecules usually have low melting and boiling points (Barker & Miller, 2000).”
• Learning Difficulties in Chemistry: An Overview (2007, background): “…2001a), intermolecular forces (Treagust, 1988; Peterson & Treagust, 1989; Peterson et al., 1989; Taber, 1997; Boo, 1998; Tan & Treagust, 1999; Barker & Millar, 2000), chemical bonds and energetic (Boo, 1998; Barker & Millar, 2000), use of anthropomorphic language and analogies (Harrison &…”
• A review of chemical bonding studies: needs, aims, methods of exploring students’ conceptions, general knowledge claims and students’ alternative conceptions (2006, methodology): “…and analogies (Harrison & Treagust, 2000; Coll & Treagust, 2001a; Eshach & Garik, 2001; Nicoll, 2001), mental models (Coll & Treagust, 2001a, b, 2003; Coll & Taylor, 2002; Taber & Coll, 2002) and enhancing students’ conceptual understanding (Barker & Millar, 2000; Harrison & Treagust, 2000).”
• Context-based and Conventional Approaches to Teaching Chemistry: Comparing teachers' views (2005, background): “…foundation as conventional courses for further chemistry or chemically-related studies at university, is that the ‘spiral curriculum’ approach does not hinder (or may even improve) students’ ability to build up a clear picture of key science/chemical ideas (Barker & Millar, 2000; Ramsden, 1997).”
• Development of two-tier diagnostic instrument and assess students' understanding in chemistry (2009, background): “Studies in which students’ alternative conceptions were described cover a wide range of subject areas including science (Garnett et al., 1995; Barker and Millar, 2000; Pedrosa and Dias, 2000; Schmidt, 2000; Taber et al., 2000; Taber, 2001; De Jong and Treagust, 2002; Harrison and Treagust, 2002).”
• A Thematic Review of Studies into the Effectiveness of Context-Based Chemistry Curricula (2012, background): “The context-based approach to science/chemistry teaching has become increasingly popular (Winther and Volk 1994; Barker and Millar 1999; Yager and Weld 1999; Tsai 2000); the context-based chemistry curricula including Salters Advanced Chemistry in the UK (Barker and Millar 2000; Bennett and Lubben 2”