Instruments in Identifying Representational Competence in Chemistry A Systematic Literature Review
Abstract
Abstract This literature review research aims to determine the instrument test in identifying representational competence in chemistry. The identified abilities involve how students can use, interpret, translate, and connect multiple representations to improve representation competence. The method used in this present study is SLR method by using meta-analysis approach by comparing information in some research literature study from 2011-2021 in the ERIC database, google scholar, and SINTA. Based on the results of research on 7 reviewed articles, it showed that several open-ended questions (57.14 percent) and multiple-choice instruments (57.14 percent) are the most widely used instruments to identify students' representational competence. The findings of the research show that there are several instruments that are combined with other instruments to strengthen the analytical method in obtaining data and completing the shortcomings of other instruments. In addition, there are several instruments made by aspects to measure how far the students' representational competence are. The information obtained from the use of the instrument can be used to determine the development of students' abilities in understanding chemistry using representations.
Keywords representational competence in chemistry, instrument test, literature review.
Abstrak Penelitian literature review ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui efektivitas instrumen tes dalam mengidentifikasi kemampuan representasi dalam kimia. Kemampuan yang diidentifikasi melibatkan bagaimana pebelajar mampu menggunakan, menafsirkan, menerjemahkan, dan menghubungkan beberapa representasi untuk meningkatkan kompetensi representasi, Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu metode SLR menggunakan pendekatan metaanalisis dengan membandingkan informasi pada beberapa studi literatur penelitian dari tahun 2011 sampai 2021 yang terdapat pada database ERIC, google schoolar, dan SINTA. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian pada 7 artikel yang direview menunjukkan bahwa beberapa instrumen pertanyaan terbuka (57,14 persen) dan pilihan ganda (57,14 persen) merupakan instrumen yang paling banyak digunakan untuk mengidentifikasi kemampuan representasi pebelajar. Temuan hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat beberapa instrumen yang dikombinasikan dengan instrumen lain untuk memperkuat metode analisis dalam memperoleh data dan dapat melengkapi kekurangan dari instrumen lain. Selain itu, terdapat beberapa instrumen dibangun oleh aspek-aspek untuk mengukur seberapa jauh kemampuan representasi pada pelajar. Informasi yang diperoleh dari penggunaan instrumen dapat digunakan untuk mengetahui perkembangan kemampuan pebelajar dalam memahami kimia menggunakan representasi.
Kata kunci: kompetensi representasi kimia, instrumen tes, tinjauan literatur.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Chandrasegaran, A.L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice The findings in this study suggest that this research suggests further research, called; 1) the selection of instruments can be seen from the advantages and disadvantages; and 2) can combine other instruments to strengthen and improve the quality of the instrument.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), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1039/B7RP90006F
Chang, H. Y. (2018). Students’ representational competence with drawing technology across two domains of science. Science Education, 102(5), 1129–1149. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21457
Chi, S., Wang, Z., Luo, M., Yang, Y., & Huang, M. (2018).. Student progression on chemical symbol representation abilities at different grade levels (Grades 10-12) across gender. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(4), 1055–1064. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8rp00010g
Gabel, D. L. (1999). Improving Teaching and Learning Through Chemistry Educational Research: A Look to The Future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 548–554. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p548
Gkitzia, V., Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2019). Students’ competence in translating between different types of chemical representations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 307–330. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8rp00301g
Hilton, A., & Nichols, K. (2011). Representational Classroom Practices that Contribute to Students’ Conceptual and Representational Understanding of Chemical Bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 33(16), 2215–2246. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.543438
Irby, S. M., Phu, A. L., Borda, E. J., Haskell, T. R., Steed, N., & Meyer, Z. (2016). Use of a card sort task to assess students’ ability to coordinate three levels of representation in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(2), 337–352. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5rp00150a
Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The Development of Chemistry Teaching: A Changing Response To Canging Deman. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701–705. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p701
Kitchenham, et al. (2005). The use and usefulness of the ISO/IEC 9126 quality standard. Proceeding of International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, ISESE 2005, pp. 126–132.
Kean & Middlecamp. (2010). Panduan Belajar Kimia dasar. Jakarta: Gramedia
Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students Becoming Chemists : Developing Representationl Competence. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in Science Education, 7, 121–145.
Mathewson J.H. (2005). The Visual Core of Science: Definitions and applications to education. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 529–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500060417
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D.G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
Olimpo, J. T., Kumi, B. C., Wroblewski, R., & Dixon, B. L. (2015). Examining the relationship between 2D diagrammatic conventions and students’ success on representational translation tasks in organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(1), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4rp00169a
Perry & Hammond. (2002). Systematic Reviews: The Experiences of a PhD Student. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 2(1), 32–35. https://doi.org/10.2304/plat.2002.2.1.32
Rahayu, S. & Kita, M. (2010). An Analysis of Indonesian and Japanese Student's Understandings of Macroscopic and Submicroscopic Levels of Representing Matter and Its Changes. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(4), 667–688.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9180-0
Sim, J. H., Gnanamalar, E., & Daniel, S. (2014). Representational competence in chemistry : A comparison between students with different levels of understanding of basic chemical concepts and chemical representations A comparison between students with different. Cougent Education, 991180(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2014.991180
Susilaningsih, E., Alawiyah, N., Sulistyaningsih, T., Nada, E. I., & Drastisianti, A. (2019). An analysis of students conceptual understanding of submicroscopic level in solubility and solubility product constant (Ksp) using three-tier multiple choice test. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1321(2). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1321/2/022046
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro , Submicro , and Symbolic : The many faces of the chemistry “ triplet .” International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
Wang, Z., Chi, S., Luo, M., Yang, Y., & Huang, M. (2017). Development of an instrument to evaluate high school students’ chemical symbol representation abilities. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 875–892. https://doi.org/10.1039/c7rp00079k
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright is reserved to The Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.