Development of Process-Image-Based Chemistry Worksheets for Learning Colligative Properties of Solutions

Imam  Nursamsudin

doi:10.47239/pm8rq511

Authors

Imam Nursamsudin SMA Negeri 1 Bangorejo, Banyuwangi, East Java, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47239/pm8rq511

Keywords:

chemistry worksheet, process images, colligative properties, visual representation, conceptual understanding

Abstract

This educational research and development study developed a process-image-based chemistry worksheet for senior high school learning on the colligative properties of solutions and examined its validity, practicality, and effectiveness. The worksheet presents sequential images in which each image represents a stage in the change of an object, event, or phenomenon, enabling students to analyze chemical processes through visual evidence. The study involved Grade XII MIPA 4 students at SMA Negeri 1 Bangorejo. A limited trial involved 10 students, followed by a class trial involving 34 students using a one-group pretest–posttest design. Product validity was evaluated through expert judgment by three validators, practicality through student responses and classroom implementation, and effectiveness through conceptual-understanding tests, normalized gain, classical mastery, and a retention test administered three weeks after the posttest. The worksheet obtained an overall validation mean of 4.05 and was categorized as valid. Student responses were positive across both trials, while classroom implementation reached 76.36% in the third topic. The mean conceptual-understanding score increased from 44.28 on the pretest to 79.01 on the posttest, with a mean N-gain of 0.58 (moderate). Classical mastery reached 85.29%. The retest mean was 77.96, indicating strong retention, although mastery declined slightly to 82.35%. These findings support the feasibility of process-image worksheets as a visual scaffold for colligative-properties learning; however, causal claims remain limited by the single-group design and the small, single-school sample.

Abstract Views: 0PDF Downloads: 0

References

Agarwal, P. K., Nunes, L. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2021). Retrieval practice consistently benefits student learning: A systematic review of applied research in schools and classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1409–1453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9

Akram, H., Abdelrady, A. H., Al-Adwan, A. S., & Ramzan, M. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of technology integration in teaching-learning practices: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 920317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.920317

Alpizar, D., Adesope, O. O., & Wong, R. M. (2020). A meta-analysis of signaling principle in multimedia learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 2095–2119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09748-7

Backfisch, I., Lachner, A., Hische, C., Loose, F., & Scheiter, K. (2020). Professional knowledge or motivation? Investigating the role of teachers’ expertise on the quality of technology-enhanced lesson plans. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101300

Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O., & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8

Brod, G. (2021). Generative learning: Which strategies for what age? Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1295–1318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09571-9

Carpenter, S. K., Pan, S. C., & Butler, A. C. (2022). The science of effective learning with spacing and retrieval practice. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 496–511. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00089-1

Castro-Alonso, J. C., de Koning, B. B., Fiorella, L., & Paas, F. (2021). Five strategies for optimizing instructional materials: Instructor- and learner-managed cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1379–1407. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9

Cromley, J. G., Du, Y., & Dane, A. P. (2020). Drawing-to-learn: Does meta-analysis show differences between technology-based drawing and paper-and-pencil drawing? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09807-6

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

Fiorella, L. (2023). Making sense of generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 35, 50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09769-7

Hake, R. R. (2002). Relationship of individual student normalized learning gains in mechanics with gender, high-school physics, and pretest scores on mathematics and spatial visualization. Physics Education Research Conference, 8(1), 1–14.

Hillmayr, D., Ziernwald, L., Reinhold, F., Hofer, S. I., & Reiss, K. M. (2020). The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 153, 103897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897

Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2021). Ready, set, go! Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching in secondary education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(1), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1839543

Jamet, E., & Michinov, E. (2022). Effects of verbal and visual support on learning by tablet-based drawing. Computers & Education, 181, 104460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104460

Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of chemistry—logical or psychological? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1039/A9RP90001B

Kervinen, A., & Aivelo, T. (2023). Secondary school students’ responses to epistemic uncertainty during an ecological citizen science inquiry. Science Education, 107, 1352–1379. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21809

König, J., Jäger-Biela, D. J., & Glutsch, N. (2020). Adapting to online teaching during COVID-19 school closure. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 608–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1809650

Lakens, D. (2022). Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 33267. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.33267

Langbroek, S., Duchatelet, D., Joosten-ten Brinke, D., & Camp, G. (2024). Enhancing teachers’ instruction on how to study. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1340120. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1340120

Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077

Lucas, M., Bem-Haja, P., Siddiq, F., Moreira, A., & Redecker, C. (2021). The relation between in-service teachers’ digital competence and personal and contextual factors. Computers & Education, 160, 104052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104052

Mann, J., Gray, T., Truong, S., et al. (2022). Getting out of the classroom and into nature: A systematic review of nature-specific outdoor learning. Frontiers in Public Health, 10, 877058. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.877058

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009

Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., & Stull, A. (2020). Five ways to increase the effectiveness of instructional video. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 837–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09749-6

McDermott, K. B. (2021). Practicing retrieval facilitates learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 72, 609–633. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-051019

Meulenbroeks, R., van Rijn, R., & Reijerkerk, M. (2024). Fostering secondary school science students’ intrinsic motivation by inquiry-based learning. Research in Science Education, 54, 339–358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10139-0

Mónus, F. (2022). Environmental education policy of schools and socioeconomic background affect environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior of secondary school students. Environmental Education Research, 28(2), 169–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2021.2023106

Noetel, M., Griffith, S., Delaney, O., Sanders, T., Parker, P., del Pozo Cruz, B., & Lonsdale, C. (2021). Video improves learning in higher education: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 91(2), 204–236. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321990713

Noetel, M., Griffith, S., Delaney, O., Harris, N. R., Sanders, T., Parker, P., del Pozo Cruz, B., & Lonsdale, C. (2022). Multimedia design for learning: An overview of reviews with meta-meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 92(3), 413–454. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543211052329

Pettersson, F. (2021). Understanding digitalization and educational change in school by means of activity theory and the levels of learning concept. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10239-8

Rau, M. A. (2020). Comparing multiple theories about learning with physical and virtual representations. Computers & Education, 143, 103685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103685

Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2020). Online university teaching during and after the COVID-19 crisis. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 923–945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y

Scherer, R., Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., & Siddiq, F. (2021). Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching and learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 118, 106675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106675

Seufert, S., Guggemos, J., & Sailer, M. (2021). Technology-related knowledge, skills, and attitudes of pre- and in-service teachers. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106552

Sims, S., & Fletcher-Wood, H. (2021). Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: A critical review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1772841

Skulmowski, A. (2024). Learning by doing or doing without learning? The potentials and challenges of activity-based learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36, 28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09869-y

Sundararajan, N., & Adesope, O. (2020). Keep it coherent: A meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 707–734. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09522-4

Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09701-3

Taber, K. S. (2019). The nature of the chemical concept: Re-constructing chemical knowledge in teaching and learning. Royal Society of Chemistry.

Talanquer, V. (2018). Progressions in reasoning about structure–property relationships. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19, 998–1009. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00187H

Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., et al. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate STEM. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117

Tondeur, J., Petko, D., Christensen, R., Drossel, K., Starkey, L., Knezek, G., & Schmidt-Crawford, D. A. (2021). Quality criteria for conceptual technology integration models in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 2187–2208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09911-0

Urdanivia Alarcon, D. A., Talavera-Mendoza, F., Rucano Paucar, F. H., Cayani Caceres, K. S., & Machaca Viza, R. (2023). Science and inquiry-based teaching and learning: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1170487. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1170487

van de Wetering, J., Leijten, P., Spitzer, J., & Thomaes, S. (2022). Does environmental education benefit environmental outcomes in children and adolescents? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 81, 101782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782

Wan, Z. H., Zhan, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Positive or negative? The effects of scientific inquiry on science achievement via attitudes toward science. Science Education, 108(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21825

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3087. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087

Wohlfart, O., & Wagner, I. (2023). Teachers’ role in digitalizing education: An umbrella review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71, 339–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10166-0

Wong, R. M., & Adesope, O. O. (2021). Meta-analysis of emotional designs in multimedia learning: A replication and extension study. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 357–385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09545-x.