American Journal of Educational Research
ISSN (Print): 2327-6126 ISSN (Online): 2327-6150 Website: http://www.sciepub.com/journal/education Editor-in-chief: Ratko Pavlović
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Educational Research. 2020, 8(6), 360-366
DOI: 10.12691/education-8-6-1
Open AccessArticle

Relationship of the Variables affecting the Students Utilizing the Peer Led Team Learning 7e Chemical Bonding Worksheets

Carina B. Orden1, and Maricar S. Prudente2

1Education Department, Bicol University Tabaco Campus, Tabaco City, Philippines

2Science Education Department, De La Salle University Manila, Manila City, Philippines

Pub. Date: May 28, 2020

Cite this paper:
Carina B. Orden and Maricar S. Prudente. Relationship of the Variables affecting the Students Utilizing the Peer Led Team Learning 7e Chemical Bonding Worksheets. American Journal of Educational Research. 2020; 8(6):360-366. doi: 10.12691/education-8-6-1

Abstract

The Peer Led Team Learning (PLTL) and 7E approaches are proven strategies in developing concepts, spatial ability, self-concept, group interaction and problem-solving skill but very few studies assessed its combined effects. The combined pedagogical approach - cognitive, psychomotor, and affective nexus needs to be assessed to support the improvement in the teaching practice of chemical bonding. Students independent variables include sex, Senior High School (SHS) track, and college entrance test science score (SS). Adapted instruments measured the dependent variables: conceptual understanding (CU), spatial ability (SA), self-concept (SC), group interaction (GI) and problem-solving approach (PSA). The score from the chemical bonding worksheet (CBW) was gathered as well. From the set of independent and dependent variables, the present study determined the relationship of sex, SHS track, SS, CU, SA, SC, GI, PSA and CBW scores. Action research paradigm was employed to 71 preservice science teachers that were divided into 10 peer groups that experienced the 30 hours activities of the CBW. The variables were tested by Pearson Correlation to show significant relationships. Results showed significant relationship between SHS track and CU, SA, SC, SS, CBW, GI and PSA. CU to SA, CBW to SA and GI, and SS to SC. Differing from most study sex was not significantly related to SA and SC. Implications of the findings to improving the CBW and teaching of chemical bonding were explained.

Keywords:
peer led team learning 7E chemical bonding worksheets conceptual understanding spatial ability self-concept group interaction problem-solving approach

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]  CHED Memo. No. 77, 2017. Policies Standards and Guideline for Bachelor of Secondary Education. http://ched.gov.ph/cmo-75-s-2017.
 
[2]  Tsaparli, G., Pappa, E. & Byers, B. Proposed pedagogies for teaching and learning Chemical Bonding in secondary education. Chemistry Teacher International, 2019002, 2019.
 
[3]  Burrows, N.L. & Mooring, S.R. Using concept mapping to uncover students’ knowledge structures of chemical bonding concepts. Chemistry Education Research and practice, 16(1), 53-66, 2015.
 
[4]  Tsaparlis, G., Pappa, E. & Byers, B. Teaching and Learning chemical bonding research-based evidence for misconceptions and conceptual difficulties experienced by students in Upper Secondary Schools and the effect of an enriched text. Chemistry Education research and practice, 19(4), 1253-1269, 2018.
 
[5]  Prodjosantoso, A. K., Hertina, A. M. & Irwanto, I. The Misconception Diagnosis on Ionic and Covalent Bonds Concepts with Three Tier Diagnostic Test. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1477-1488, 2019.
 
[6]  Cooper, M.M., Underwood, J.M. & Hilley C.Z. Development and validation of the implicit information from Lewis Structure instrument (IILSI). Do students connect structures with properties? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 195-200, 2012.
 
[7]  Akkuzu, N. An Insight Towards Conceptual Understanding: Looking into the Molecular Structures of Compounds.net/publications/315380269, 2018.
 
[8]  Uyulgan, A. & Akkuzu, N. An Insight Towards Conceptual Understanding: Looking into the Molecular Structures of Compounds. Acta: Didactica Napocensia, 9(4), 49-70, 2016.
 
[9]  Calis, S. An Examination of the Achievement levels of Acquisitions in Hybridization: High School Sample. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(8), 1659-1666, 2018.
 
[10]  Perez, J. R., Perez, M.E., Calatayod, M. L., Lopera, R., Montesinos, J.V. & Gil E. Students’ misconceptions on Chemical Bonding: A comparative Study between High School and First Year University Students. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning, 05, 01, 2017.
 
[11]  Wuttisela, K. Authentic assessment tool for the measurement of students understanding of the Valence Shell Electron Pair Repulsion Theory. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1549-1553, 2017.
 
[12]  Zohar, A. R. & Levy, S. T. Attraction vs Repulsion - learning about forces and energy in chemical bonding with the ELI-Chem stimulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2019.
 
[13]  Harle, M. & Towns, M. A Review of Spatial Ability Literature, its connection to chemistry and implications for instructions. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(3), 351-360, 2011.
 
[14]  Davis, J., Leslie, R., Bellington, S. & Slater, P. Origami: A versatile modeling system for Visualizing Chemical Structure and Exploring Molecular Function. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11, 43-47, 2010.
 
[15]  Donaghy, K. J. & Saxton, K. J. Connecting geometry and Chemistry: A three-step approach to three-dimensional thinking. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(7), 917-920, 2012.
 
[16]  Gecar, V. The Self-Concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 8, 1-33, 1982.
 
[17]  Lewis, S. E., Shaw, J. L., Heitz, J. D. & Webster, G. H. Attitude counts: Self-concept and success in General Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 86(6), 744-750, 2009.
 
[18]  Hurst, B., Wallace, R. & Nixon, S. The Impact of Social Interaction on Student learning. The Impact Interaction, 52(4), 375-396, 2013.
 
[19]  Routman, R. Writing Essentials: Raising Expectations and results while simplifying teaching. Portmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2005.
 
[20]  Snyder, J., Sloane, J., Dunk, R. & Wiles, J. Peer-Led Team Learning Helps Minority of the Students Succeed. PLOS Biology, (14)3, 1-7, 2016.
 
[21]  Pazos, P., Micari, M. & Light, G. Developing an instrument to characterize peer-led groups in collaborative learning environment: Assessing problem-solving approach and group interaction. Assessment in Higher Education, 1-18, 2009.
 
[22]  Tinto, V. Dropout from Higher Education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125, 1975.
 
[23]  Balim, A., Turkoguz, S., Aydin, G. & Evrekli, E. Activity Plans Based on 7E Model and Constructivist Approach on the subject of “Matter and Heat” in Science and Technology Course. Bartin Universal Journal of Faculty Education, 1(1), 128-129, 2012.
 
[24]  Primanda, A., Abderrahman, I.W. D. The Impact of 7E learning Cycle-Based Workshops Towards Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Problem-Solving Ability on Newton’s Las of Motion. Journal of Science Education, 2(19), 95-1106, 2018.
 
[25]  Lee, C. Worksheet Usage, Reading Achievement, Classes’ Lack of Readiness, and Science Achievement: A Cross Country Comparison, International Journal of Education, Science and technology, 2(2), 96-106, 2014.
 
[26]  scidridmobile@gmail.com, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.scidroidmobilecomputing.lewislite&hl=en.
 
[27]  Chardine, M. A. 2017. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.miragestudio.geometrie.
 
[28]  Anuragand.gupta@gmail.com, https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.enteriosoft.vsepr&hl=en.
 
[29]  Uyulgan, A., Akkuzu, N. & Alpat, S. Assessing students’ understanding related to molecular geometry by using a Two-Tier Diagnostic Test. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13 (6), 839-855, 2014.
 
[30]  Ebel, R. L. & Frisbie, D. A. Essentials of Educational Measurement 5th Education, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1991.
 
[31]  Liu, W. C. & Wang, C. K. Academic Self-concept: A cross-sectional study of grade and gender difference in a Singaporean secondary school. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6(1), 20-27, 2005.
 
[32]  Carlisle, D., Tyson, J. & Nieswandlt, M. Fostering spatial skill acquisition by General Chemistry students. Chemistry Education and Practice, 1(1), 1-49, 2013.
 
[33]  Wai, J., Lubinski, D. & Benbow, C. P. Spatial Ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 817-835, 2009.
 
[34]  Black, A. Spatial Ability and Earth Science Conceptual Understanding, Journal of Geoscience Education, 53:4, 402-414, 2005.
 
[35]  Muller - Kalthoff, T. & Moller, J. The effects of Graphical Overviews, Prior Knowledge and Self-Concept on Hypertext Disorientation and Learning Achievement. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(2), 117-134, 2003.
 
[36]  K to 12 Updates (2014). Updates on the Implementation of the K to 12. Ceap.org.ph/upload/download/201310/3131514367_pdf. Accessed April 20, 2019.
 
[37]  Stieff, M., Ryu, M., Dixon, B. & Hegarty, M. The Role of Spatial Ability and Strategy Preference for Problem Solving in Organic Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(7), 854-859, 2012.