International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research
Subscribe to IJSTER
Full Name*
Email Address*

Article Number - 761B57659623


Vol.7(2), pp. 18-24 , July 2016
DOI: 10.5897/IJSTER2016.0357
ISSN: 2141-6559



Full Length Research Paper

Instructional misconceptions of prospective chemistry teachers in chemical bonding



Fatokun K.V.F.
  • Fatokun K.V.F.
  • Department Science, Technology and Mathematics Education, Faculty of Education, Nasarawa State University, Keffi, Nigeria.
  • Google Scholar







 Received: 16 December 2015  Accepted: 23 June 2016  Published: 31 July 2016

Copyright © 2016 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0


This paper is a report of an action research which attempts to detect and correct various misconceptions in chemical bonding retained by some pre-service chemistry teachers who were in their third and fourth year in the university. At systematic and elaborate instructional sessions, questioning approach, micro teaching, and structured essay test were employed to detect misconceptions while concept mapping blended with cooperative learning was used to correct the identified misconceptions. 64 pre-service chemistry teachers (which have gone on teaching practice in some Nigerian secondary schools) from a state university participated in the study. Similar chemical concepts were identified by over 90% of the pre-service teachers as topics often being regarded as both difficult to understand by learners and teach by graduate teachers but sources of misconceptions were highlighted in only one major concept among those listed, namely; chemical bonding. The study revealed a high level of varied chemical misconceptions among the pre-service teachers which did not alter significantly through their four years of training.  However, during groups’ interaction and with the aid of concept maps, some of the misconceptions were removed as they were enabled to apply their knowledge of concepts and their interrelations, as well as formulate appropriate theoretical explanations for the observed changes they viewed. 

Key words: Misconceptions, prospective teachers, concept maps, difficult chemical concepts.

Adodo SO (2014). An evaluation of secondary school teachers' competence in evaluating students cognitive and psychomotor achievement in basic science and technology (BST). J. Emerging Trends Educ. Res. Policy Stud. 5(3):48-53

 

Al-Rawi I (2013). Teaching methodology and its effects on quality learning. J. Educ. Practice, 4(6):100-105

 

Benjamin MA (2004). Nigerian science teachers' beliefs, their Pedagogical Content Knowledge and how these influence their classroom practices. Unpublished Phd thesis, Edith Cowan University, Perth Australian Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 4, No. 25,2013, 83

 

Ben-Zvi R, Eylon B, Silberstein J (1986). Is an atom of copper malleable? J. Chem. Educ. 63:64-66.
Crossref

 

Chamber S, Andre T (1997). Gender, prior knowledge, Interest and Experience in elecricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 34(2):107-123.
Crossref

 

Coll RK, Neil Taylor TG 2001. Using constructivism to inform tertiary chemistry pedagogy. Chemistry education: Research and practice in Europe, 2(3):215-226.

 

Fatokun KVF (2006): Application of Computer-Aided Instruction in the Teaching of Mole Concept at secondary School level. J. Educ. Stud. 12(1):169-174.

 

Fatokun KVF (2012). Effect of Concept Mapping- Guided Discovery Integrated Teaching Approach on Chemistry Students' Learning Style, Achievement and Retention. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis Nasarawa State University, Keffi.

 

Fatokun KV, Eniayeju PA (2014a). The effect of Concept Mapping- Guided Discovery Integrated Teaching Approach on Chemistry Students' achievement and Retention. Educ. Res. Rev. 9(22):1218-1223 doi: 10.5897/ERR2014.1848. 

 

Fatokun KV, Eniayeju PA (2014b). The effect of Concept Mapping-Guided Discovery Integrated Teaching Approach on Chemistry Students' Learning styles and Achievement in Electrochemistry. FUDMA J. Sci. Educ. Res. 1(2):18-32.

 

Gabel D (1996). The complexity of chemistry: Research for teaching in the 21st century. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Chemical Education, Brisbane, Australia.

 

Haidar AH (1997). Prospective chemistry teachers' conception of the conservation of matter and related concepts J. Res. Sci. Teach. 34(2):181-197
Crossref

 

Horton C (2001). Students Preconceptions and Misconceptions in Chemistry. 

View

 

Hurst O (2002). How we teach molecular structure to freshmen. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6): 763 – 764.
Crossref

 

Johnstone AH, Otis KH (2006). Concept Mapping in problem based learning: a cautionary tale. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 7(2):84-95
Crossref

 

Kind V (2009). A conflict in your head: An exploration of a trainee science teacher subject matter knowledge development and its impact on teacher's self confidence. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 11:1529 -1562
Crossref

 

Lee M (1992). Misconception of some selected topics in physics among Malayan pupils. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 15(1):55-62.

 

Nakiboglu C (2003). Instructional misconception of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about atomic orbital and hybridization Chemistry Educ. Res. Pract. 4(2):171
Crossref

 

Okebukola P (2005). The race against obsolescence.STAN Memorial Lecture series. No 17:28-30. Delivered at the Annual STAN Conference, Jos.

 

Oni JO (2014). Teacher quality and students academic achievement in basic technology in junior secondary schools in South –West, Nigeria. J. Educ. Soc. Res. 4(3):397-402

 

Robinson W (2003). Chemistry problem solving: Symbol, macro, micro, and process aspects J. Chem. Educ. 80:978-982.
Crossref

 

Settlage J, Southerland SA (2007). Teaching science to every child: Using culture as a starting point, New York: Routledge.

 

Taber KS 1997. Student understanding of ionic bonding: Molecular versus electrostatic framework? School Sci. Rev. 78:85-95.

 

Taber KS (2002). Chemical Misconceptions- prevention, diagnosis and cure. Vol. 1: theoretical and background, London, RS.C

 

Taber KS, Coll R (2002). Bonding. In: J. K. Gilbert, O. D. Jong, R. Justy, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer. pp. 213-234.

 

Taber KS, Watts M (2000). Learners' explanations for chemical phenomena. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe 1(3):329-353.
Crossref

 

Tan K, Taber KS (2009). Ionization Energy: Implication of preservice teachers conceptions. J. Chem. Educ. 86(5):623-629
Crossref

 

Tan KD, Treagust FD (1999). Evaluatin students' understanding of chemical bonding. School Sci. Rev. 81(294):75-84

 

Wickman PO (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning making as situated talk and action. Mahwah, NJ: Eribaum

 

Yager RE (2000). The constructivist learning model. Sci. Teacher 67(1):44-45.

 


APA Fatokun, K.V.F. (2016). Instructional misconceptions of prospective chemistry teachers in chemical bonding. International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research, 7(2), 18-24.
Chicago Fatokun K.V.F.. "Instructional misconceptions of prospective chemistry teachers in chemical bonding." International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research 7, no. 2 (2016): 18-24.
MLA Fatokun K.V.F.. "Instructional misconceptions of prospective chemistry teachers in chemical bonding." International Journal of Science and Technology Education Research 7.2 (2016): 18-24.
   
DOI 10.5897/IJSTER2016.0357
URL http://academicjournals.org/journal/IJSTER/article-abstract/761B57659623

Subscription Form