The relationship between learning styles and students` chemistry achievement

Stanislava Olić, Jasna Adamov

Abstract


This research aimed to determine the chemical content which is the most challenging for students, and also to study the differences in chemistry achievement among students who prefer different learning styles. The study was carried out on the sample of 265 second grade students (aged 15–16 years) from seven grammar schools in Vojvodina (Serbia). Two instruments were applied in the study to determine the learning styles: chemistry knowledge test and Learning Style Inventory (LSI version 3.1). According to the findings, students have difficulty learning the contents of the topics Chemical Equilibrium, Salt Hydrolysis and Oxidation-Reduction Reactions. The findings show that there is a significant relationship between achievements in chemistry and students’ learning styles. The findings obtained in this research represent a step towards improving chemistry education since they identified the topics that students find it the most difficult to learn.


Keywords


chemistry achievement; learning difficulties; students; learning style

Full Text:

PDF

References


M. Prince, R. Felder, The Many Faces of Inductive Teaching and Learning, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 36, 14–20 (2007). DOI:2200/20080506115505992T.

Strategy of development of education in Serbia to 2020 (2012). Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije [RS Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia], No. 107/2012.

S. Olić, J. Adamov, Nastavne strategije i učeničko postignuće, Nastava i vasp., 66, 55–66 (2017).

DOI:10.5937/nasvas1701055O.

D. Pavlović Babić, A. Baucal, Podrži me, inspiriši me, Institut za psihologiju, Beograd, 2012.

O. De Jong, J. Acampo, A. H. Verdonk, Problems in teaching the topic of redox reactions, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 32, 1097–1110 (1995). DOI: 10.1002/tea.3660321008.

G. Sirhan, Learning Difficulties in Chemistry: An Overview, J. Turkish Sci. Educ., 4, 2–20 (2007).

A. H. Johnstone, Teaching of Chemistry – Logical or Psychological?, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 1, 9–15 (2000). DOI:10.1039/a9rp90001b.

J. D. Bradley, M. D. Mosimege, Misconceptions in acids and bases: a comparative study of student teachers with different chemistry backgrounds., South African J. Chem., 51, 137–145 (1998).

T. Pinarbasi, Turkish Undergraduate Students’ Mis-conceptions on Acids and Bases, J. Balt. Sci. Educ., 6, 23–34 (2007).

K. Orwat, P. Bernard, A. Migdał-mikuli, Alternative Conceptions of Common Salt Hydrolysis Among Upper-Secondary-school Students, J. Balt. Sci. Educ., 16, 64–76 (2017).

L. Tyson, D. F. Treagust, R. B. Bucat, The Complexity of Teaching and Learning Chemical Equilibrium, J. Chem. Educ., 76, 554–558 (1999).

DOI:10.1021/ed076p554.

J. H. Van Driel, W. Gräber, The teaching and learning of chemical equilibrium in: Chemical Education: Towards Research-Based Practice, J. K. Gilbert, O. de Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, J. H. van Driel (Eds.), Springer Science & Business Media, pp. 271–292, 2002.

N. Yildirim, S. Kurt, A. Ayas, The effect of the worksheets on students’ achievement in chemical equilibrium, J. Turkish Sci. Educ., 8, 44–58 (2011).

K. Doymus, Teaching chemical equilibrium with the jigsaw technique, Res. Sci. Educ., 38, 249–260 (2008).

DOI:10.1007/s11165-007-9047-8.

O. De Jong, D. F. Treagust, The teaching and learning of electrochemistry in: Chemical education: Towards re-search-based practice, J. K. Gilbert, O. de Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, J. H. van Driel (Eds.), Springer Science & Business Media, 2002, pp. 317–337.

R. M. Felder, R. Brent, Understanding student differences, J. Eng. Educ., 94, 57–72 (2005).

DOI:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00829.x.

M. H. Towns, Kolb for chemists: David A. Kolb and experiential learning theory, J. Chem. Educ., 78, 1107-1117 (2001). DOI:10.1021/ed078p1107.7.

E. Collinson, A survey of elementary students’ learning style preferences and academic success, Contemp. Educ. 71, 42–48 (2000).

M. Abdulwahed, Z. K. Nagy, Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for laboratory education, J. Eng. Educ., 98, 283–294 (2009).

DOI:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01025.x.

S. Pfeifer, D. Borozan, Fitting Kolb’s learning style theory to entrepreneurship learning aims and contents, Int. J. Bus. Res., 11, 216–223 (2011).

C. Manolis, D. J. Burns, R. Assudani, R. Chinta, Assessing experiential learning styles: A methodological reconstruction and validation of the Kolb Learning Style Inventory, Learn. Individ. Differ., 23, 44–52 (2013). DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.009.

O. O. Demirbas, H. Demirkan, Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education, Learn. Instr., 17, 345–359 (2007). DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.007.

B. Heffler, Individual learning style and the learning Style Inventory, Educ. Stud., 27, 307–316 (2001).

DOI:10.1080/03055690120076583.

A. Kolb, D. Kolb, The Kolb Learning Style Inventory – Version 3.1 2005 Technical Specifications, LSI, Tech. Man., 1–72 (2005). DOI:10.1016/S0260-6917(95)80103-0.

A. Kolb, D. Kolb, Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education, Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ., 4, 193–212 (2005).

A. Y. Kolb, D. A. Kolb, A. Passarelli, G. Sharma, On becoming an experiential educator the educator role profile, Simul. Gaming., 45, 204–234 (2014).

DOI:10.1177/1046878114534383.

M. H. Towns, Guide to developing high-quality, reliable, and valid multiple-choice assessments, J. Chem. Educ. 91, 1426–1431 (2014). DOI:10.1021/ed500076x.

.

T. M. Haladyna, M. C. Rodriguez, Developing and Validating Test Items, Routledge, London, 2013.

S. Đukić, R. Nikolajvić, M. Šurjanović, Opšta hemija, Zavod za udžbenike, Beograd, 2011.

D. Kolb, Kolb Learning Style Inventory (LSI Workbook), Hay Group, Boston MA, 2010.

M. Segedinac, M. Segedinac, Z. Konjovic, G. Savic, A formal approach to organization of educational objectives, Psihologija. 44, 307–323 (2011).

DOI:10.2298/PSI1104307S.

A. Field, Discovering statistics using SPSS, Sage, London, 2009.

L. Ding, R. Chabay, B. Sherwood, R. Beichner, Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment, Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. Phys. Educ. Res., 2, 1–7 (2006).

DOI:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010105.

R. Ebel, D. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, Pretince-Hall of India, New Delhi, 1991.

D. C. Kayes, Internal validity and reliability of Kolb’s learning style inventory version 3 (1999), J. Bus. Psychol., 20, 249–257 (2005).

DOI:10.1007/s10869-005-8262-4.

C. McCabe, Preferred Learning Styles among College Students: Does Sex Matter?, N. Am. J. Psychol., 16, 89–104 (2014).

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506200710779521.

D. A. Kidanemariam, Do Learning Styles Influence Students’ Understanding of Chemistry Concepts and Academic Performance in Chemistry ?, Mediter. J. Soc. Sci., 3, 167–172 (2013).

DOI:10.5901/jesr.2013.v3n5p167.

V. Kind, Beyond Appearances: Students’ miscon¬ceptions about basic chemical ideas, Sch. Educ. 1–84 (2004). DOI:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

K. W. Voska, H. W. Heikkinen, Identification and analysis of student conceptions used to solve chemical equilibrium problems, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 37, 160–176 (2000).

DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200002)37:2<160::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-M.

D. Treagust, R. Duit, M. Nieswandt, Sources of students’ difficulties in learning Chemistry, Educ. Química., 6, 228–235 (2000).

M. Stuckey, I. Eilks, Increasing student motivation and the perception of chemistry’s relevance in the classroom by learning about tattooing from a chemical and societal view, Chem. Educ. Res. Pr., 15, 156–167 (2014). DOI:10.1039/C3RP00146F.

S. Olić, J. Adamov, Relationship between learning styles grammar students and school achievement, Teme - Časopis za društvene nauk., 40, 1223–1240 (2016). DOI:10.22190/TEME1604223O.

Y. Yamazaki, Learning styles and typologies of cultural differences: A theoretical and empirical comparison, Int. J. Intercult. Relations., 29, 521–548 (2005). DOI:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.07.006.

N. E. Cagiltay, Using Learning Style Theory in Engineering Education, Eur. J. Eng. Educ., 33, 415–424 (2008).




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20450/mjcce.2018.1400

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Stanislava Olić, Jasna Adamov

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.