Journals / Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2

The Examination of Prospective Chemistry and Physics Teachers’ Cognitive Structure Related to Quantum Numbers

Pages
649–664
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was concluded that prospective teachers in general had wrong concepts in addition to partial understanding the subject.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study firstly aimed to analyse prospective chemistry and physics teachers’ comprehension levels to quantum numbers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, qualitative research method was used and purposeful sampling method was employed in the selection of the participants in this study. 8 prospective chemistry and 9 prospective physics teachers were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was concluded that prospective teachers in general had wrong concepts in addition to partial understanding the subject.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study firstly aimed to analyse prospective chemistry and physics teachers’ comprehension levels to quantum numbers. Secondly, the study analysed the changes in both groups of prospective teachers’ levels of comprehending quantum numbers. In this context, qualitative research method was used and purposeful sampling method was employed in the selection of the participants in this study. 8 prospective chemistry and 9 prospective physics teachers were included in the study. The prospective teachers’ responses to the seven open-ended questions were analysed separately by the two researchers according the classification made by Abraham, Grybowsky, Renner and Marek (1992). First, prospective chemistry and physics teachers’ level of understanding quantum numbers was determined. Then, variability in their levels of understanding was examined. In addition to that, prospective teachers’ probable misconceptions/alternative concepts/wrong concepts and deficient knowledge was also determined. It was concluded that prospective teachers in general had wrong concepts in addition to partial understanding the subject. It was also found that there were considerable changes in their comprehension levels. In this context, the nature of prospective teachers’ understanding of quantum numbers was discussed in details.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZCAN, Ö., TEMEL, S. (2022). The Examination of Prospective Chemistry and Physics Teachers’ Cognitive Structure Related to Quantum Numbers. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 2, 649–664. https://ajindex.com/articles/496966

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (4)

  1. Abraham, M. R., Gryzybowski, E. B., Renner, J. W., & Marek, A.E. (1992). Understanding and misunderstanding of eighth graders of five chemistry concepts found in textbooks, Journal of Research in Science Teaching,29, 105-120. Anderson,O. R. (1992). Some interrelationships between constructivist models of learning and current neurobiological theory, with implications for science education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29,1037-1058. Ardac,D. (2002). Solving quantum number problems: an examination of novice performance in terms of conceptual base requirements, Journal of Chemical Education,79(4), 510-513. Ausubel,D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive ViewNew York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Bayram, H., Sökmen, N., & Savcı, H. (1997). Temel fen kavramlarının anlaşılma düzeyinin saptanması [Determining the understanding level of basics science concepts], Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 9, 89-100. Bodner,G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge, Journal of Chemical Education,63, 873-878. Bretz,S. L. (2001). Novak’s theory of education: human constructivism and meaningful learning, Journal of Chemical Education,78(8), 1107. Charles, T. P.& Peterson,D. L.(1989). Another quantum number?, Journal of Chemical Education,66(8), 623-624. Choda,J. & Chenprakhon,P. (2015). A hands-on physical model for teaching quantum numbers and rules for writing electron configuration 3rd Global Summit on Education GSE 2015. Coppo,P. (2016).
  2. Visualizing, Rather than Deriving, Russell−Saunders Terms: A Classroom Activity with Quantum Numbers, Journal of Chemical Education,93, 1085−1090. Dobson,K., Lawrence, I.& Britton,P. (2000).
  3. The A to B of quantum physics, Physics Education,35, 400–405.
  4. Fraenkel, J. R.& Wallen,N. E. (2000). How to design & evaluate research in education, Boston MA: McGraw Hill. Garik P., Kelley P., Crosby,A., Dill D., Golger,A., & Hoffman,M. Z. (2005). Modernizing General Chemistry for the Year 2050: Why Are General Chemistry Instructors Hesitant to Teach Quantum Concepts? NARST 2005. Gillespie,R. J., Spencer,J. N., & Moog,R. S. (1996). Electron Configurations from Experiment, Journal of Chemical Education,73(7), 617-622. Garofalo,A. (1997). Housing Electrons: Relating Quantum Numbers, Energy Levels, and Electron Configurations, Journal of Chemical Education, 74, 709-710. Hadzidaki,P., Kalkanis, G.& Stavrou,D. (2000). Quantum mechanics: A systemic component of the modern physics paradigm, Physics Education, 35,