Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2002.46.6.550

Students’ Thought Patterns on Problem and Problem Solving in the Course of General Chemistry  

Lee, Seon Gyeong (Department of Science Education, Dankook University)
Park, Hyeon Ju (Division of Science Education, Chosun University)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Chemical Society / v.46, no.6, 2002 , pp. 550-560 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study was to explore students' thought patterns on problem and problem solving in the course of general chemistry. The participants were 9 students taking the course of general chemistry in a university in Seoul. Data were collected from various sources; three individual interviews, classroom observations, and essays written by students.Data were all transcribed and then analyzed circularly in constant component analysis. As the results of this study, six thought patterns of students in the context of learning general chemistry were presented. These thought patterns were common and existed important component within most of students' conceptual ecologies about learning chemistry. Implications of chemistry and science learning related to this results were discussed.
Keywords
Conceptual Change; Conceptual Ecology; Conception; Thought Pattern;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Noh, T. H.; Jeon, K. M. Chemical Education 1996, 23, 102.
2 Jeon, K. M.; Seo, K. H.; Noh, T. H. Journal of theKorean Chemical Society 2001, 45, 370.
3 Thorley, N. R. The role of the conceptual change modelin the interpretation classroom interactions; Universityof Wisconsin-Madison: Wisconsin-Madison, U.S.A. 1990.
4 Tingle, J. B.; Good, R. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching 1990, 27, 671.   DOI
5 Bunce, D. M.; Gable, D. L.; Samuel, J. V. Journal ofResearch in Science Teaching 1991, 28, 505.   DOI
6 Eylon, B.-S.; Linn, M. C. Review of EducationalResearch, 1988, 58, 251-301.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Noh, T. H.; Jeon, K. M.; Han, I. O.; Kim, C. M. J. of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education 1996, 16, 389.
8 Pintrich, P. R.; Max, W. M.; Boyle, R. A. Review ofEducational Research, 1993, 63, 167-199.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Strike, K. A.; Posner, G. J. In Philosophy of science,cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice;Duschl, R. A.; Hamilton, R. J., Eds.; State Universityof New York Press: New York, U.S.A., 1992.147-176.
10 Hewson, M. G. A'B. European Journal of Science Education,1984, 6, 245-262.   DOI
11 Hesse, J. J.; Anderson, C. W. Journal of Research inScience Teaching. 1992, 29, 277-299.   DOI
12 von Glasersfeld, E. Syntheses, 1989, 80, 121-140.   DOI
13 Demasters, S. S.; Good, R. G.; Peebles, P. Science Education,1995, 79, 637-666.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Noh, T.; Scharmann, L. C. Journal of Research in ScienceTeaching 1997, 34, 199.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Hewson, P. W.; Tabachnick, B. R.; Zeichner, K. M.; Blomker,K. B.; Meyer, H.; Lemberger, J.; Marion, R.; Park, H.; Toolin,R. Science Education, 1999, 83, 247-273.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Posner, G. J.; Strike, K. A.; Hewson, P. W.; Gertzog, W.A. Science Education, 1982, 66, 211-227.   DOI
17 Tyson, L. M.; Venville, G. J.; Harrison, A. G. ScienceEducation, 1997, 81, 387-403.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Hewson, et al. National Association For Research in Science Teaching. 156. 2002.