An analysis of gender difference on students’ misconceptions in learning the material classification and its changes

Muhammad Agung Safari Cahyanto, Ashadi Ashadi, Sulistyo Saputro

Abstract


Every teacher has experiences to identify and find out students who have misconceptions in their classrooms. Misconceptions that occur can differ between male and female students. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of gender on misconceptions in the lesson of the material classification and its changes. The survey-aiming method was used in this study. A total of 62 students from one of the state junior high schools in the city of Surakarta consisting of 34 male students and 28 female students were involved as the subjects in this study. Identification of misconceptions was conducted using the Two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument that was equipped with the Certainty of Response Index method. The formulation of this study problem was: “How are the differences of misconceptions between male and female students in learning the material classification and its changes?” This study showed that female students tended to have misconceptions on the competency achievement indicator vis-a-vis explaining the understanding of elements, compounds and mixtures, while male students tended to have misconceptions on the competency achievement indicator pertinent to distinguishing elements, compounds, and mixtures. In general, female students had better conceptual knowledge than male students. The two-tier multiple-choice instrument could be used as an alternative instrument to identify misconceptions among students. The results of this study are expected to be a reference for educators to identify and resolve students’ misconceptions.


Keywords


gender difference; misconceptions; two-tier multiple choice; certainty of response index; material classification and its changes

Full Text:

FULLTEXT PDF

References


Adadan, E., & Savasci, F. (2012). An analysis of 16–17-year-old students’ understanding of solution chemistry concepts using a two-tier diagnostic instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 34(4), 513–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.636084

Adodo, S. O. (2013). Effects of two-tier multiple choice diagnostic assessment items on students’ learning outcome in basic science technology (BST). Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(2), 201–210. https://doi.org/10.5901/ajis.2013.v2n2p201

Atasoy, B., Akkus, H., & Kadayifci, H. (2009). The effect of a conceptual change approach on understanding of students’ chemical equilibrium concepts. Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(3), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140903162587

Aydin-Gunbatar, S., Tarkin-Celikkiran, A., Kutucu, E. S., & Ekiz-Kiran, B. (2018). The influence of a design-based elective STEM course on pre-service chemistry teachers’ content knowledge, STEM conceptions, and engineering views. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 954–972. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8rp00128f

Babai, R., & Amsterdamer, A. (2008). The persistence of “Solid” and “Liquid” naive conceptions: A reaction time study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 553–559. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10956-008-9122-6

Bar, V., & Travis, A. S. (1991). Children’s views concerning phase changes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(4), 363–382.

Boo, H. K. (1998). Students’ understandings of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)35:5<569::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-N

Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical , and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 955–970. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20249

Chandrasegaran, a. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293. https://doi.org/10.1039/b7rp90006f

Coll, R. K., 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-005-9007-6

Cullinane, A. (2011). Two-tier multiple choice questions (MCQS)-How effective are they: A pre-service teachers’ perspective. In The International Organization for Science and Technology Education (Vol. 7, pp. 611–624).

Diani, R., Alfin, J., Anggraeni, Y. M., Mustari, M., & Fujiani, D. (2019). Four-tier diagnostic test with certainty of response index on the concepts of fluid. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1155(012078), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1155/1/012078

Farenga, S. J., & Joyce, B. A. (1999). Intentions of young students to enroll in science courses in the future: An examination of gender differences. Science Education, 83(1), 55–75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199901)83:1<55::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-O

Fisher, K., & Moody, D. (2002). Student misconceptions in biology. Mapping Biology Knowledge, 55–75.

Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Introduction: Macro, submicro and symbolic representations and the relationship between them: Key models in chemical education. In J. K. Gilbert & D. F. Treagust (Eds.), Multiple Representations in Chemical Education (4th ed., pp. 1–8). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0449-7

Greenfield, T. A. (1996). Gender- and grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81(3), 259–276. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199706)81:3<259::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-C

Griffiths, A. K., & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade‐12 students’ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611–628. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290609

Hasan, S., Bagayoko, D., & Kelley, E. L. (1999). Misconceptions and the certainty of response index (CRI). Physics Education, 34(5), 294–299. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/34/5/304

Hasan, S., Bagayoko, D., & Kelley, E. L. (2016). The use of astronomy questions as an instrument to detect student’s misconceptions regarding physics concepts at high school level by using CRI (Certainty of Response Index) as identification methods. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 771(012027), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/771/1/012027

Heintz, C. (2012). From core cognition to intuitive theories: A psychologist’s account of conceptual change. Metascience, 21, 439–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11016-011-9605-6

Helmi, H., Rustaman, N. Y., Tapilow, F. S., & Hidayat, T. (2019). Preconception analysis of evolution on pre-service biology teachers using certainty of response index. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 1157(022033), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022033

Hsu, C. Y., Tsai, C. C., & Liang, J. C. (2011). Facilitating preschoolers’ scientific knowledge construction via computer games regarding light and shadow: The effect of the prediction-observation-explanation (POE) strategy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 482–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9298-z

Ilardi, B. C., & Bridges, L. J. (1988). Gender differences in self-system processes as rated by teachers and students. Sex Roles, 18(5-6), 333–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00288295

Johnstone, A. H. (1974). Evaluation of chemistry syllabuses in Scotland. Studies in Science Education, 1(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267408559806

Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 75–83.

Johnstone, A. H., & El-Banna, H. (1989). Understanding learning difficulties-A predictive research model. Studies in Higher Education, 14(2), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075078912331377486

Jones, C., & Levin, J. (1994). Primary/elementary teachers’ attitudes toward science in four areas related to gender differences in students’ science performance. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 6(I), 46–66.

Kaiser, M. K., Mccloskey, M., & Proffitt, D. R. (1986). Development of intuitive theories of motion: Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces. Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.1.67

Lai, A.-F. (2007). The development of computerized two-tier diagnostic test and remedial learning system for elementary science learning. In Seventh IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2007). Niigata: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2007.242

Lemmer, M. (2013). Changes in Velocity Nature, Cause and effect of students ’ intuitive conceptions regarding changes in velocity. International Journal of Science Education, 35(May), 239–261.

Lickel, B., Rutchick, A. M., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, S. J. (2006). Intuitive theories of group types and relational principles. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.01.007

Lin, S. W. (2004). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test for high School Students’ understanding of flowering plant growth and development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 175–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-6484-y

Lin, Y. C., Yang, D. C., & Li, M. N. (2016). Diagnosing students’ misconceptions in number sense via a web-based two-tier test. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1420a

Lubben, F., Netshisaulu, T., & Campbell, B. (1999). Students’ use of cultural metaphors and their scientific understandings related to heating. Science Education, 83(6), 761–774. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199911)83:6<761::AID-SCE7>3.0.CO;2-O

Marzabal, A., Delgado, V., Moreira, P., Barrientos, L., & Moreno, J. (2018). Pedagogical content knowledge of chemical kinetics: experiment selection criteria to address students ’ intuitive conceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(8), 1245–1249. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00296

Mattern, N., & Schau, C. (2002). Gender differences in science attitude-achievement relationships over time among white middle-school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10024

Modell, H., Michael, J., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2005). Helping the learner to learn: the role of uncovering misconceptions. The American Biology Teacher, 67(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2005)067[0020:HTLTLT]2.0.CO;2

Mohammad, H., Shahzad, S., & Sohail, S. (2010). Gender differences in Pakistani high school students ’ views about science. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 4689–4694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.751

Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p191

Nakiboglu, C. (2003). Instructional Misconceptions of Turkish Prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbitals and hybridization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1039/B2RP90043B

Novak, J. D. (1995). Concept mapping to facilitate teaching and learning. Prospects, XXV(1).

Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A method for investigating concept understanding in science. European Journal of Science Education, 2(3), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528800020311

Osman, K., & Sukor, N. S. (2013). Conceptual understanding in secondary school chemistry: A discussion of the difficulties experienced by students. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(5), 433–441. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2013.433.441

Othman, J., Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2008). An investigation into the relationship between students’ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11), 1531–1550. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701459897

Ratnasari, D., Sukarmin, S., Suparmi, S., & Aminah, N. S. (2017). Students’ conception on heat and temperature toward science process skill. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012044

Reiner, M., Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Resnick, L. B. (2000). Naive physics reasoning: a commitment to substance-based conceptions naive physics reasoning: A commitment to substance-based conceptions. Cognition and Instruction, 18(1), 1–34.

Satriana, T., Yamtinah, S., Ashadi, & Indriyanti, N. Y. (2018). Student’s profile of misconception in chemical equilibrium. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1097(012066), 1–8.

Saunders, J., Davis, L., Williams, T., & Williams, J. H. (2004). Gender differences in self-perceptions and academic outcomes: A study of African American High School students. Journal ofYouth and Adolescence, 33(1), 81–90.

Sen, I. V, & Einstein, A. (1973). Correcting the prescientific conceptions of schoolchildren. Soviet Education, 16(2), 152–156. https://doi.org/10.2753/RES1060-9393160102152

Shemesh, M. (1990). Gender-related differences in reasoning skills and learning interests of junior high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(1), 27–34.

Shidiq, A. S., Masykuri, M., & Susanti, E. (2014). Pengembangan instrumen penilaian two-tier multiple choice untuk mengukur keterampilan berpikir tingkat tinggi (Higher order thinking skills) pada materi kelarutan dan hasil kali kelarutan untuk siswa SMA/MA kelas XI. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 3(4), 83–92.

Shidiq, A. S., Masykuri, M., & Susanti, E. (2015). Analisis higher order thinking skills (HOTS) menggunakan instrumen two-tier multiple choice pada materi kelarutan dan hasil kali kelarutan untuk siswa kelas XI SMA N 1 Surakarta. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains, (November), 2015–2159.

Skelly, K. M. (1993). The development and validation of a categorization of sources of misconceptions in chemistry. In Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (pp. 1–40). Ithaca, NY: Misconceptions Trust.

Soll, J. B. (1999). Intuitive theories of information: beliefs about the value of redundancy. Cognitive Psychology, 346, 317–346.

Stains, M., & Talanquer, V. (2007). Classification of chemical substances using particulate representations of matter: An analysis of student thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 643–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600931129

Taasoobshirazi, G., & Carr, M. (2008). Gender differences in science: An expertise perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 149–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9067-y

Taber, K. S. (2009). Challenging misconceptions in the chemistry classroom: resources to support teachers. Educació Química EduQ, 4, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.2346/20.2003.02.27

Tan, K.-C. D., Taber, K. S., Goh, N.-K., & Chia, L.-S. (2005). The ionisation energy diagnostic instrument: A two-tier multiple-choice instrument to determine high school students’ understanding of ionisation energy. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(4), 180–197. Retrieved from http://www.rsc.org/images/Tanpaper_tcm18-41069.pdf

Treagust, D., Chittleborough, G., & Mamiala, T. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353–1368. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070306

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students ’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science, 10, 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069880100204

Treagust, D. F., & Centre, M. E. (2001). Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching , learning and retention. UniServe Science Assessment Symposium Proceedings, (1998), 1–9.

Tümay, H. (2016). Reconsidering learning difficulties and misconceptions in chemistry: emergence in chemistry and its implications for chemical education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(2), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp00008h

Tüysüz, C. (2009). Development of two-tier diagnostic instrument and assess students’ understanding in chemistry. Scientific Research and Essay, 4(6), 626–631. Retrieved from http://www.academicjournals.org/SRE

Tyson, L., Treagust, D. F., & Bucat, R. B. (1999). The complexity of teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 554. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p554

Walker, P. (2012). Cross-sensory correspondences and naive conceptions of natural phenomena. Perception, 41, 620–622. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7195

Wang, T. (2014). Developing an assessment-centered e-Learning system for improving student learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 73, 189–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.002

Winkelmann, H., Van Den Heuvel-panhuizen, M., & Robitzsch, A. (2008). Gender differences in the mathematics achievements of German primary school students : results from a German large-scale study. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 601–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0124-x

Wulandari, R. A., Yamtinah, S., & Saputro, S. (2015). Instrumen two tier test aspek pengetahuan untuk mengukur ketrampilan proses sains (KPS) pada pembelajaran kimia untuk siswa SMA/MA kelas XI. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia (JPK), 4(4), 147–155.

Yamtinah, S., Indriyanti, N. Y., Saputro, S., Mulyani, S., Ulfa, M., Mahardiani, L., … Shidiq, A. S. (2019). The identification and analysis of students’ misconception in chemical equilibrium using computerized two-tier multiple-choice instrument. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1157). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042015

Yamtinah, S., Masykuri, M., Ashadi, & Shidiq, A. S. (2017). Gender differences in students’ attitudes toward science: An analysis of students' science process skill using testlet instrument. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1868). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995102




DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v5i2.26613

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2019 Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA indexed by:

Creative Commons License
Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA by http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jipi/index is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

All rights reserved. p-ISSN: 2406-9205 | e-ISSN: 2477-4820

View My Stats