Solubility and solubility product phenomena: Papua senior high school students' mental model: Research Article

Albaiti Albaiti; Jukwati; Alex Agustinus  Lepa

doi:10.36681/

Authors

Albaiti Albaiti Universitas Cenderawasih https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3220-1478
Jukwati
Alex Agustinus Lepa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36681/

Keywords:

solubility and solubility product, Mental Models, three senior high school clusters

Abstract

This study aimed at determining the category and analyzes the mental models of the students from three senior high school clusters (low, medium, high) on the solubility and solubility product topic, knowing students' opinions on chemistry subject, knowing learning methods and assessment that teacher used in solubility and solubility products learning. This topic includes 10 concepts, namely the concept of solubility, the effect of temperature on solubility, unsaturated solutions, saturated solutions, supersaturated solutions, solubility equilibrium, the relationship between solubility and solubility product constants, the effect of common ions on the solubility of insoluble salts, the effect of changing pH on solubility, and precipitation prediction. This study involved 122 senior high school students in Jayapura, Papua. The researchers applied the descriptive qualitative research method with the triangulation technique of collecting data by examining the apparent tendency of students to explore their mental models. The instruments were a test of the mental model (linking the macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic level), the documentation of the teachers’ teaching tools, and the interview protocol. Data were analyzed inductively. Hence, the result of the study emphasized meaning rather than generalization. The result revealed that the students’ mental models vary. The majority of the students’ mental models of the high cluster are partial while the majority of the students’ mental models of the medium and low clusters are not intact. The learning of this topic needs to be designed by linking macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic levels for holistic students' knowledge of chemistry.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aktamis, H., & Ergin, Ö. (2008, June). The effect of scientific process skills education on students' scientific creativity, science attitudes and academic achievements. In Asia-Pacific forum on science learning and teaching (Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 1-21). The Education University of Hong Kong, Department of Science and Environmental Studies.

https://www.proquest.com/openview/6f377f7e1b08c91596ac656c3d09a35a/1?pqorigsite=gscholar&cbl=2046135.

Albaiti. (2017). Praktikum Kimia Fisika Berbasis Model Mental untuk Meningkatkan Keterampilan Generik Sains dan Keterampilan Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa Calon Guru. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Albaiti, A., Liliasari, L., & Sumarna, O. (2016). The study of mental model on n-hexane-methanol binary system (the validation of physical chemistry practicum procedure). Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(1), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v5i1.5783.

Ardac, D., & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia‐based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change. Journal of research in science teaching, 41(4), 317-337. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20005.

Batlolona, J. R., Diantoro, M., & LEASA, M. (2020). Students’ mental models of solid elasticity: Mixed method study. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(2), 200-210. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.21.

BSNP. (2018). Panduan Pemanfaatan Hasil UN untuk Perbaikan Mutu Pendidikan. Jakarta : Pusat Penilaian Pendidikan.

Chang, H. Y., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. (2014). Using drawing technology to assess students’ visualizations of chemical reaction processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(3), 355-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9468-2.

Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F., Mamiala, T. L., & Mocerino, M. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the role of models in the process of science and in the process of learning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23(2), 195-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140500266484.

Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2002). Constraints to the development of first year university chemistry students’ mental models of chemical phenomena. Focusing on the student, 43-50. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/abstracts/chittleborough-abs.html.

Coll, R. K. (2009). Do Gifted Students View and Use Mental Models Differently from

Others?. Educación química, 20(1), 18-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(18)30004-1.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage Publications.

Greca, I. M., & Moreira, M. A. (2002). Mental, physical, and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics. Science education, 86(1), 106-121. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10013.

Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple‐model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352-381. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<352::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-J.

Jansoon, N., Coll, R. K., & Somsook, E. (2009). Understanding Mental Models of Dilution in Thai Students. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(2), 147-168. http://www.ijese.com/.

Jun-Young, O. H., & Su-Kyeong, P. A. R. K. (2014). Understanding pre-service elementary school teachers’ mental models about seasonal change. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 11(3), 320.https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10115a.

Lin, J. W., & Chiu, M. H. (2010). The mismatch between students’ mental models of acids/bases and their sources and their teacher’s anticipations thereof. International Journal of Science Education, 32(12), 1617-1646.. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903173643.

Liu, C. J., Hou, I. L., Chiu, H. L., & Treagust, D. F. (2014). An exploration of secondary students’ mental states when learning about acids and bases. Research in science Education, 44(1), 133-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9373-y.

Mayer, R. E. (2022). Multimedia learning. New York, NY.

Park, E. J. (2006). Student perception and conceptual development as represented by student mental models of atomic structure. The Ohio State University.

Park, E. J., & Light, G. (2009). Identifying atomic structure as a threshold concept: Student mental models and troublesomeness. International journal of science education, 31(2), 233-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701675880.

Rahmi, C., Katmiati, S., Wiji, & Mulyani, S. (2017, May). Students’ mental models on the solubility and solubility product concept. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1848, No. 1, p. 030001). AIP Publishing LLC. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4983933.

Raviolo, A. (2001). Assessing students' conceptual understanding of solubility equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 629. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed078p629.

Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and instruction, 13(2), 141-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S09594752(02)00017-8.

Su-Kyeong, P. A. R. K., & Jun-Young, O. H. (2013). Learners’ ontological categories according to their mental models of plate boundaries. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 10(2), 17-34. http://www.tused.org.

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48(6), 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2.

Van der Veer, C. G., & Del Carmen Puerta Melguizo, M. (2003). Mental Models. In J. A. Jacko &

A.Sears (Eds.), The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook: Fundamentals, evolving

Technologies, and Emerging Applications (pp. 52-80). Uitgever: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.

Wang, C. Y., & Barrow, L. H. (2013). Exploring conceptual frameworks of models of atomic structures and periodic variations, chemical bonding, and molecular shape and polarity: a comparison of undergraduate general chemistry students with high and low levels of content knowledge. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(1), 130-146.. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20116J.

Wang, C. Y., & Barrow, L. H. (2011). Characteristics and levels of sophistication: An analysis of chemistry students’ ability to think with mental models. Research in Science Education, 41(4), 561-586. . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-010-9180-7.

Wu, H. K. (2003). Linking the microscopic view of chemistry to real‐life experiences: Intertextuality in a high‐school science classroom. Science education, 87(6), 868-891. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10090.

Yalcin, F. A. (2012). Pre-service primary science teachers' understandings of the effect of temperature and pressure on solid–liquid phase transition of water. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 369-377. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20021J