NET Teachersinfluenceonstudentsmotivation

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/311597317
TEACHERS’ INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION FOR LEARNING

SCIENCE WITH UNDERSTANDING
Chapter · January 2011
CITATION READS
1 892
2 authors, including:
Iztok Devetak
University of Ljubljana
32 PUBLICATIONS 303 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
The use of eye-tracker for investigating of students` succesfulness in solving of chemistry tasks based on submicroscopic representations View project
Motivation to Learn Science and Cognitive Style View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Iztok Devetak on 13 December 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

In: Progress in Education, Volume 19 ISBN: 978-1-60876-169-2
Editor: Roberta V. Nata, pp. 77-103 © 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Cliapter 3
T e a c h e r s ’ I n f l u e n c e o n S t u d e n t s ’ M o t iv a t io n
f o r L e a r n in g S c ie n c e w it h U n d e r s t a n d in g
Iztok Devetak and Saša A. Glažar

U niversity o f Ljubljana, Faculty o f Education, D epartm ent o f biology,
chem istry and hom e econom ics, K ardeljeva pl. 16, 1000 Ljubljana.
A bstract
It is argued between Science education researchers and teacher practitioners at ali

levels of science education that motivation towards Science learning is low. This may
result also in students’ low achievements in science. Different theories of motivation,
cognition and educational strategies are now being adopted, especially from psychology
and didactics, to illuminate and put into a new perspective science education research.
Furthermore, science education researchers in recent years have been using more
qualitative approaches or combinations of qualitative and quantitative methodology to
study educational influences on students’ academic development. These approaches to
the research can lead to more in-depth understanding of students’ perception of what they
have leamt and what strategies they use to leam science. According to these trends in
science education research, there is stili not enough influence on teachers’ practices in the
classroom, leading to students not seeing the benefits from research findings. But some
attempts to develop new educational strategies, with their basis in research results, are
now being developed and implemented. In this chapter, some research from the last eight
years will be presented with specific application to teachers’ methods of presenting
abstract science concepts to students (for stimulating intrinsic motivation for learning
science with understanding). The synthesis of different research on intrinsic motivation
for learning science, misconceptions of chemical concepts at submicroscopic level, and
novice chemistry teacher-mentor relationship, is presented. In the conclusion some
proposals for application of the research findings and some insights for further research
are suggested.
*
C orresponding au th o r: E -m ail: Izto k .d ev etak @ p ef.u n i-lj.si
78 Iztok Devetak and Saša A. Glažar
Keywords: Leam ing Science with understanding, motivation for leaming Science, Science
teacher education.
IN T R O D U C T IO N
The central goal for Science education ali over the World is developing the so-called
“scientifically literate society”, vvhether pursued formally or informally (Gilbert & Treagust,
2009). The scientifically literate person knows science to a specific degree or, in other words,
we can say “what the public understands about science”. Some general aspects o f scientific
literacy can be summarized from the literature (Laugksch, 2000; Shvvartz, Ben-Zvi &
Hofstein, 2006, Gilbert & Treagust, 2009) in nine points: (1) Leaming science that has direct
application in everyday live; (2) Learning about science as a cultural force in the modem
world; (3) Leaming science for a person to be a more informed citizen; (4) Leaming science
for a person to understand and discuss nevvs about science that appears in the media and being
able to communicate (read and write) about science; (5) Appreciating the role o f science in
the world o f peoples’ employment; (6) Learning about science as a particulate way of
exploring the nature; (7) Leam ing science for its aesthetic appeal (being able to appreciate the
beauty o f coral reefs, crystals, space nebulas, etc); (8) Becoming more sympathetic towards
science as a field o f scientific enquiry; and (9) Leaming about the nature o f technology and its
relation to different scientific fields.
Hovvever, a scientifically illiterate person cannot relate to, or respond to a reasonable
question about science; he/she does not have the vocabulary, concepts, contexts, or cognitive
capacity to identify the question as scientific (Shwartz et al., 2006). It is unreasonable to
assume that ali individuals in a specific society would develop the same and/or the highest
level o f scientific literacy; therefore different degrees o f scientific literacy should be taken
into account (Gilbert & Treagust, 2009). According to Shvvartz, Ben-Zvi & Hofstein (2006)
there are four degrees o f scientific literacy: (1) Nominal scientific literacy (e.g. recognizing
some concepts as being related to science, but the level o f understanding clearly indicates
misconceptions; (2) Functional scientific literacy (e.g. correct description o f a concept, but its
understanding is limited; (3) Conceptual scientific literacy (e.g. has developed some
understanding o f the major conceptual schemes o f a scientific discipline and procedural
abilities and understanding o f the processes o f scientific inquiry and technological design);
and (4) M ultidimensional scientific literacy (e.g. has developed an understanding o f science
that extends beyond the concepts o f scientific disciplines and procedures o f scientific
investigation, including philosophical, historical, and social dimensions o f science and
technology and their relationship to individuals’ everyday lives).
It can be concluded that understanding o f science phenomena can be put under the wider
umbrella o f scientific literacy. The main question about how students develop and to what
extend do they develop scientific literacy can be ansvvered by research in science education.
Science learning research is well developed, and numerous research joum als exist in which
studies are published. Authors vvho publish papers in respected science education research
journals always try to make some effort to bridge the gap betvveen science education research
results and applications in the educational process at ali levels o f education. Ali over the
vvorld researchers and teacher trainers (Costa Marques & Kempa, 2000; Kempa, 2002;
Teachers’ Influence on Students’ M otivation for Learning Science. 79
Gilbert, Justi, Van Driel, De Jong & Treagust, 2004; De Jong, 2005; Ferk Savec, Devetak &
Wissiak, 2007) try to emphasize the importance o f applying new evidence o f how students
learn chemistry and which factors influence their meaningful learning with deeper
understanding, and how teachers should steer the educational process to reach these goals.
Science in general and also chemical education research studies try to generate data that
would be useful for teachers, regardless o f the country where the research was conducted, and
to ensure that the results would be implemented into the school system. Researchers have to
do their vvork in a way that provides useful results connected to the learning theories that were
developed by psychologists. Consequently, Science education researchers have to follovv
some general methodological guidelines o f pedagogical research. The methodology o f
pedagogical research has two major domains - qualitative and quantitative - in the context o f
which the researchers study the educational processes in the špirit o f obtaining data to
improve Science education and to make students more interested in Science.
The selection o f the appropriate methodological approach is always an important step in
the science education research planning process. The Science education researcher should,
before choosing the method, precisely address or identify the research problem. According to
the identified research problem the researcher should ask research questions about it in such a
way that the problem is dissected into the logical and researchable units.
The research questions asked should be researchable, take into account the subjects who
are participating in the study, ought to address the research problem, and measure the
variables that you wish to measure, and should also give some clear ansvvers or - in other
words - should have a clear »take home« message (Bunce, 2008).
Research problems and research questions provide an important guideline for the
researcher in selecting the appropriate research methodology and ali the process o f research
that follovvs (data gathering techniques; data analyzing; contrasting the results with other
research literature and theory(ies) and making the conclusions and guidelines for implications
for teaching), and should have reasons in the research questions.
When anticipating the research process, the science education researchers may apply
triangulation. Triangulation is a strategy enabling researchers to understand the observational
object significantly better and in a more comprehensive manner. Multiple triangulation,
assuming the combination o f multiple triangulation forms, i.e. the triangulation o f
investigators, theories, data sources, methods and/or disciplines, provides for exhaustive data
interpretation (Vogrinc, Glažar & Devetak, in press). Triangulation also gives the researchers
conformation that the techniques o f data gathering did not miss any competing variables
(independent covariables) that can influence the dependent (measuring one), and that the
conclusions (solutions to the research problem) are valid.
A qualitative research approach is used in science education research recreantly, because
the depth in which explorations are conducted and descriptions are written, usually resulting
in sufficient details for the reader to grasp the idiosyncrasies o f the situation. The ultimate aim
of qualitative research is to offer a perspective o f a situation and to provide well-written
research reports that reflect the researcher's ability to illustrate or describe the corresponding
phenomenon. It can be expected that, in the future, the majority o f the research is going to be
based upon the qualitative research paradigm, because o f the advantages that the qualitative
approach introduces into science education research. The disadvantages o f the qualitative
research approach (e.g. inability to generalize the research findings from the sample to the
population, pure objectivity etc.) could be diminished by using a combination o f qualitative
and quantitative research approaches in so called mixed research and by using triangulation of
different data gathering techniques (Vogrinc, Glažar & Devetak, in press).
From the research results researchers should develop concrete implications for teachers to
use directly in the science classroom. The positive and collaborative relationship between
researcher and teacher-practitioner is very important. Without this collaboration research
results are meaningless. It is also important that teacher educators at university level try to
teach pre-service teachers how to apply research conclusions and also how to conduct their
own research. From the teachers’ point o f view, action research as an approach to classroom
practice research is the most convenient.
L e a r n in g S c ie n c e w it h U n d e r s t a n d in g
Science learning, and especially chemical concepts learning, is a complex cognitive

process. Research (Bradley et al., 1998; Gabel, 1999; Johnson, 1998; Sanger, 2000;
Chittleborough et al., 2002; Harrison & Treagust, 2002; Solsona et al., 2003; Papageorgiou &
Johnson, 2005; Stains & Talanquer, 2008; Devetak et al., 2009) shows that it is important that
the leam er understands different levels o f representations o f chemical concepts. These levels
o f representations are so-called macroscopic, submicroscopic and symbolic representations
that were first introduced by Alex Johnstone in the paper published in School Science Review
in 1982.
The phenomenological type o f representations refers to the observable real phenomena
that can be described by human senses or measured by some sort o f instruments. The second
type o f representations is designed to explain the first one by the interactions o f real particles
(atoms, ions, molecules and free radicals), but it is given by some sort o f pictures (Gilbert &
Treagust, 2009). Symbolic levels o f chemical concepts (symbols o f elements, chemical
formulae and equations, mathematical equations, graphical representations etc.) are used by
scientifically literate people to communicate easily about the phenomena at the abstract level,
this being the most difficult one for students to comprehend, especially if they lack the
understanding o f the submicroscopic level o f chemical concepts.
Deeper understanding o f the natural chemical phenomena is established when ali three
levels o f concepts overlap one another, supported by visualization elements, in a specific way
in students’ working memory. These relationships are presented in the Interdependence o f the
Three Levels o f Science Concepts Model (ITLS) {Figure 1). Students participating in
chemistry teaching in such an organization and supported by different visualization methods
(physical models, 2D or 3D static or dynamic representations o f particles’ interactions -
submicrorepresentations etc.) easily develop mental models with fewer misconceptions of
chemical phenomena.
The ITLS (Interdependence o f Three Levels o f Science concepts) model draws on
different theories, such as Paivio's dual coding theory, (Paivio, 1986), Mayer's SOI model of
meaningful learning (Mayer, 1996) upgraded by Johnstone (Johnstone et al., 1994), cognitive
theory of multimedia learning (Moreno & Mayer, 2000) and M ayer’s theory o f effective
illustrations (Mayer, 1993).
Teachers’ Influence on Students’ Motivation for Leaming Science. 81
Figure 1. Model representing Interdependence o f Three Levels o f Science Concepts - ITLS model
(Devetak, 2005).
The dual coding theory assumes that there are two cognitive subsystems, one specialized
for the representation and processing o f nonverbal objects or events, and the other specialized
for dealing with language (Paivio, 1986).
The three processes o f the SOI (Selecting relevant information; Organizing information
in a meaningful way to the learner; Integrating the new information with the learner's prior
knowledge) model the prime cognitive processes in the learner that are needed for sense
making and support constructivist leaming to the extent that they promote active cognitive
processing (Mayer, 1996).
M ayer’s theory o f effective illustrations and cognitive theory o f multimedia leaming
builds on the implementation o f simple illustrations to help direct the studenfs attention to
specific elements and guide the students to build their own internal connections among the
parts. These activities help students to build a “runnable mental model” by which students
acquire knovvledge and proceed toward meaningful knovvledge (Mayer & Moreno, 2001).
According to M ayer and Moreno (2001) when constructing meaningful knowledge we should
follovv the multiple representation principle. This means that it is better to present an
explanation in vvords and pictures than only in words. From this perspective, leaming science
is also strongly connected with building knovvledge through understanding and concept
linking in students’ long-term memory by interpreting multi-modal representations o f science
phenomena (Ainsworth, 1999; Dolin, 2001; Russell & McGuigan, 2001; Lemke, 2004) and
reveals that students who recognized relationships between different representations
demonstrated better conceptual understandings than students who lacked this knovvledge
(Prain & Waldrip, 2006). In order to achieve better understanding o f science concepts
students should be able to translate one representation into another one and co-ordinate their
use in representing scientific knovvledge (Ainsvvorth, 1999). Russell and McGuigan (2001)
argue that leamers need opportunities to generate various representations o f a concept, and to
recode these representations in different modes, as they refine and make more explicit their
understanding. In the process o f science learning, the teacher should therefore incorporate
students’ “rich pool o f representational competence” in creating lessons that are motivating
for students (diSessa, 2004, p. 298), but diSessa also points out that the quality o f the
representation ought to be evaluated according to its purpose. Waldrip et al. (2006) argue that
in order to maximize the effectiveness o f designed representational environments, it is
necessary to take into account the diversity o f learner background knowledge, expectations,
preferences, and interpretive skills.
Submicrorepresentations (SM Rs) are one representational mode or model for illustrating
chemical concepts at the particulate level, in order to make connections between the three
levels o f concept representations. Using SMRs, chemical phenomena could be represented
either qualitatively or quantitatively (Devetak & Glažar, 2001).
Studies o f the educational practices, regularly over the last 15 years, show that teachers
often explain chemical concepts only at the most abstract level, the symbolic level and they
do not combine macroscopic and submicroscopic levels with the symbolic one (Williamson &
Abraham, 1995; Ebenezer & Erickson, 1996; Lee, 1999; Georgiadou & Tsaparlis, 2000;
Treagust et al., 2001; Bunce & Gabel, 2002; Eskilsson & Hellden, 2003; Devetak, 2005; Tien
et al., 2007). Treagust et al. (2001) concluded that submicrorepresentations are successful
tools in chemical education only when students are capable o f applying their macroscopic
chemistry knowledge to the submicroscopic level. Representations also influence students’
reasoning during solving problems with submicrorepresentations. The more familiar
representations o f chemical reactions in symbolic form seemed to trigger the recognition o f a
larger number o f chemically meaningful features, whereas most students struggled in
assigning chemical meaning to the submicrorepresentations o f chemical reactions. The
complexity o f and the lack o f familiarity with the submicrorepresentations made most
students analyze more carefully the nature o f the chemical processes that were represented
(Stains & Talanquer, 2008). Bučat and Mocerino (2009) and Barkel, Pilot and Bulte (2009)
also stressed that the teachers and textbooks should carefully use the language to distinguish
between the three levels; for example protein is not a long molecule (macro-submicro
inconsistency), CH3CH2OH is not ethanol (symbolic-macro inconsistency) and CC>2(g) is not
a carbon dioxide molecule (symbolic-submicro inconsistency). This is especially important
because students at ali levels o f chemical education should be aware that the submicro world
o f particles interacting betvveen each other is imaginary and students’ visualization abilities
become important.
Our research (Devetak& Glažar, in press) shovvs that in the contrast with formal
reasoning ability and its influence on students’ achievements in solving problems at the
particulate level, where students had to read or draw submicrorepresentations, it can be
concluded that visualization abilities (speed o f perception and spatial relations) are not
strongly correlated with chemistry knowledge that refers to 2-D submicrorepresentations.
Only a small portion o f variance on the chemistry knowledge test achievements scores can be
explained by students’ visualization abilities (only 2.6 % o f students’ chemistry knowledge
scores can be explained by spatial relations and even less - only 1.4 % - by speed o f
perception). Further analysis o f variance shows that differences betvveen students with low
and average, and average and superior visualization abilities are not statistically significant in
most cases. It can, for that reason, be emphasized that students can solve particulate problems
even if their visualization abilities are not so highly developed. Hovvever it is important to
emphasize that there is no statistically significant difference betvveen students with different
speeds o f perception abilities in solving problems regarding reading or dravving SMRs. On the
other hand, somevvhat bigger differences can be determined regarding the use o f 2-D
Teachers’ Influence on Students’ Motivation for Learning Science. 83
submicrorepresentations between students with different levels o f spatial relations. The

difference is not statistically significant betvveen students with average and superior spatial
relations abilities. The difference between students with poor and average spatial relations
abilities is statistically significant in the total chemistry knowledge score and reading SMRs
score.
These results are similar to the conclusions reported by Wu and Shah (2003), who
discovered that there are no statistically significant correlations between students’
achievements on the test with static SMRs and spatial abilities. They anticipated that the
knowledge achievement is more dependent on students’ prior knovvledge and the general
cognitive factor than on visualization abilities. Thiele and Treagust (1994) report that students
who cannot visualize chemical phenomena, and/or do not have properly developed formal
reasoning abilities, cannot properly understand chemical concepts; thus those concepts are
hard to understand, unattractive and pointless for them.
With our research (Devetak& Glažar, in press) we also confirmed these anticipations. We
concluded that the correlations between students’ achievements on the chemical knovvledge
test comprising SMRs and students’ level o f formal reasoning abilities are statistically
significant (p < 0 .000) and higher than the correlations betvveen knovvledge achievements and
visualization abilities. 28.1 % o f students’ success in solving the items that demand reading
SMRs, and 25.0 % o f students’ ability to solve the problems that require dravving SMRs, can
be explained by the formal reasoning ability test score. The 31.8 % variance on the overall
successes in solving problems requiring understanding the ITLS model can be explained by
students’ formal reasoning abilities. Statistically significant correlations have been proven
betvveen formal reasoning abilities and students’ chemical knovvledge especially on submicro
level also in some other research (Haidar & Abraham, 1991; Williamson & Abraham, 1995).
Research studies in science education in the last two decades (Gabel 1999; Lee 1999;
Treagust et al. 2003; Bunce & Gabel 2002; Chittleborough et al. 2002; Glažar & Devetak,
2002; Harrison & Treagust 2002; Eskilsson & Hellden 2003; Devetak, et al. 2004; Devetak,
2005; Juriševič et al., 2008; Devetak, et al., 2009; Devetak & Glažar, in press) have
emphasized using different educational strategies to overcome the gap betvveen ali three
levels o f chemical concepts using different models especially physical models and SMRs to
represent the substance particles and its interaction. Researchers try to identify students’
misconceptions o f chemical concepts at ali levels o f education, from elementary school to
university, vvith SMRs. SMRs vvere proven to be useful tools for detecting misconceptions at
higher cognitive levels (Devetak et al., 2004).
A sample o f a chemistry problem comprising SMR is presented in figure 2. When
analyzing this problem it can be seen that, before solving the problem, the študent has to read
the introduction part describing the photo. This is a macroscopic part o f the problem,
illustrating the chemical phenomena (ionic reaction in the aqueous solution o f tvvo substances
soluble in vvater). In part A o f the problem, the študent has to connect the macroscopic level
and reagents’ names vvith submicroscopic representations. Students have to analyze the
particles in both solutions o f vvater soluble ionic substances. They have to understand that
• 2+ • _ +
four ions (lead(II) ions - Pb ; nitrate(V) ions - NO3 ; potassium ions - K , and iodide ions -
I ) exist in tvvo aqueous solutions. In part A students had to dravv the particles in both reacting
solutions and elaborate their scheme using the legend o f ali particles used in the picture. The
particles in the legend should be equipped vvith their formulae and names. In part B students
have to dravv the submicrorepresentation o f the mixture at the end o f chemical reaction. They
have to put correctly together the particles they draw in part A o f the problem. The correct
scheme should comprise an illustration o f the crystalline structure o f lead iodine and
nitrate(V) ions (already shown in the picture) and potassium ions separately shovvn in the
whole volume o f the solution. Students have to analyze vvhich ions form the yellow
precipitate and what is the State o f the resulting matter (lead iodine - Pbl2 solid substance).
The submicro level o f chemical concepts is represented by parts A and B o f the problem. In
the last part o f the problem (part C) students have to write a net ionic equation for the reaction
representing the symbolic level o f the chemical reaction shovvn in the photo. The correct net
ionic equation is: Pb2^(aq) + 2 I (aq) -» Pbl2(s). This part, as the first one, represents the
symboV\c level. The presented problem falls mto the higher level of Bloom’s cognitive
category (analvsisV
Colorless aqueous solution oflead(II) nitrate(V) was added into theaqueous solution of potassium iodide Chemical reaction occurred
as show on the photo below
A) Select the correct formula of the forme d si&stance.
A KI(s)
B KNOj(aq)
C Pbl(a^)
D Pbl:(s)
E PbK(aq)
ET) Drew the scheme of particles in each reagent. Use the legend to illustrate the particles which you h are used in the scheme with
their fonnulae and names. You need not draw vrater molecules.
Legend
Aqueous solution of Aqueous solution of

lead(II) nitrate(V) potassium iodide
C) Drew the scheme of particles present in the beaker afler both solutions were mixed. You need not draw water molecules. One
sort of particles is alread^ drawn.m scheme.
Elaborate yuur scheme
Mixture at the endof chemical

reaction.
D) Writ-e an equation for ionic net reaction.
Figure 2. Chemistry problem at higher cognitive level comprising ali three levels o f chemical concept
representations.
Table 1. Some examples o f students’ drawings of SM Rs for difficulties about

understanding the chemical concepts presented above.
Misconception description Students’ SMRs or SMRs presented

in a problem, for students to
analyze
Representing different states o f matter; > s i 1 i
§
A Particles in solid State are too far apart and !»# » !
unarranged. * # ®
B Particles in liquid State are too far apart and A s ih u m i b
arranged. solid liquid
Distinguish between pure substances and mixtures;
submicrorepresentation of molecules of one substance
represents a mixture.
Representing the ionic substance aqueous solutions at

particulate level; there are molecules of a water
soluble ionic compound in the solution.
1 ^ ®o
Ij Sj SELss ..
Representing acidic solution at the submicroscopic
o c7
level; the acid strength is associated with the number
of acid molecules in the aqueous solution (illustrated č> (5 * &
by študent in scheme A) !) A O f' f
* A
* - Students had to read the SM R presented in a problem and than according to that drew their SMR.
Studies conducted by our research group in the last five years (Devetak et al., 2004;
Devetak, 2005; Juriševič et al., 2008; Devetak, et al., 2009; Devetak & Glažar, in press) show
that students’ chemical concepts understanding at ali three levels o f representations is rather
poor. Ali the studies were done with problems similar to that presented in Figure 2 or easier,
which means that students had to take into account fewer variables to solve the problem than
for the problem presented in Figure 2, which is quite demanding.
In our study (Devetak et al., 2004) 350 secondary school students' (average age o f 18),
and 339 first year university students' (average age o f 19) knovvledge about concentrations of
aqueous solutions, base strength o f anions in three different aqueous solutions o f sodium
salts, and equilibrium reactions was evaluated. It was concluded that students performed
better on the problems that involved reading submicrorepresentations. They were less
successful in solving tasks which require dravving o f particulate schemas and translations of
the submicrorepresentation o f the phenomena to their symbolic representation. Similar
fmdings were also described in the study by Devetak and Glažar (in press). Younger students
(16 years old) scored significantly higher (by 14.1%) on items that require reading SMRs than
on items that include dravving them. These results are consistent with some other researches
(Kelly & Jones, 2008; Margel, Eylon, & Scherz, 2008) which indicate that students have
specific problems with dravving the correct submicrorepresentations o f the natural
phenomena. The study by Devetak and Glažar (in press) also identified and described
numerous misconceptions o f 16-year-old students. These misconceptions can be categorized
in different groups, such as difficulties: ( 1) in representing different states o f matter
(misconceptions representing the liquids); (2) distinguishing between pure substances and
mixtures (those particles that are represented by tvvo circles represent a compound, no matter
what sort o f atoms are bonded in the molecule); (3) regarding chemical reactions (reactant
that is not used completely in the chemical reaction, is written into the chemical equation); (4)
in connecting the macroscopic phenomena to submicroscopic particles (attributing the
macroscopic name o f an element to the substance particle); (5) correctly representing the
ionic substance water solutions at particulate level (dravving potassium bromide -soluble in
vvater - molecules in aqueous solution instead o f ions); and (6) representing acidic solution at
the submicroscopic level (the acid strength is not associated vvith acid dissociation ability, but
often vvith the concentration o f acid particles in the aqueous solution). Some examples o f
students’ dravvings o f SMRs presenting their misconceptions o f some chemical concepts are
presented in Table 1.
Misconceptions o f solution chemistry vvere published in more detail in the study by
Devetak, Vogrinc and Glažar (2009). We summarized from the results that the average
achievement in solution chemistry items vvas lovver (43%), compared vvith the average overall
success on the knovvledge test (49%) comprising different topics (pure substances and
mixtures, chemical reaction, acid-base chemistry and solution chemistry). The most common
misconceptions o f aqueous solutions detected in the analyzed item could be classified into
nine major groups (the percentage o f students vvith a specific misconception is shovvn in
brackets; see also Table 2 vvith some students’ SMRs dravvings): (1) particles o f the solvent
and solute are too far apart in the solution (79% o f students); (2) misconceptions o f saturated
solution (70% o f students); (3) misconceptions about the concentration at submicro level (up
to 67% o f students); (4) ion name vvritten as a name o f the element or its symbol (48% o f
students); (5) incomplete understanding o f the concept o f electrolyte dissociation (46% o f
students); (6) misconceptions o f the ratio betvveen the number o f solute and solvent particles
in the solution (25% o f students); (7) ordered distribution o f the particles o f the solute in the
solutions (15% o f students); and (8) particles o f the solute arranged at the bottom o f the SMR
presentation (5% o f students).
Our research group also conducted a study (Devetak, Drofenik Lorber, Juriševič, &
Glažar, submitted for publication) vvith even younger students (aged 14), in vvhich vve
analyzed their understanding o f some basic electrolyte chemistry concepts. Pupils solve four
multiple choice questions vvith their additional explanation o f the selected ansvver. It vvas
concluded that on average only 57 % o f the pupils understand that strong acids almost
completely decompose into ions in aqueous solutions. The rest o f the pupils are not able to
connect the abstract concept o f the strength o f acid vvith the concrete example o f a strong
acid, as set in the task. On average as many as 78 % o f the 14-year-olds do not knovv the
particles in base aqueous solutions. Thus, pupils believe that, apart from hydroxide ions,
aqueous solutions also contain a considerable amount o f oxonium ions (an average o f 46.5
%). The findings o f the study also shovv that almost tvvo thirds o f the respondents understand
the concept o f the solution concentration. Among the vvrong responses, the majority o f the
pupils (an average o f 21.5 %) chose the vvrong submicroscopic representation, as they did not
take into account the volume o f the solution vvhen deciding on the solution concentration, but
only the number o f the particles o f the solute. When solving this problem, pupils vvere
supposed to consider tvvo variables and connect the submicro- and macro levels to understand
the solution concentration: the number o f particles and the solution volume. Almost one third
o f the pupils do not connect the concept o f the concentration vvith its volume. On the basis o f
the analysis o f the vvrong responses to the task dealing vvith the sodium chloride composition,
it can be concluded that almost half o f the pupils believe that the aqueous solution contains
sodium chloride molecules, in which sodium and chlorine atoms are bound in 1:1 proportion.
Similar misconceptions are also observed with secondary school (16-year-olds) students
(Devetak, 2005) and university (18-year-olds) students (Devetak et al., 2004). Hovvever,
attention should also be paid to the fact that on average as many as 72.2 % o f the pupils did
not justify their responses. This is probably due to the fact that in multiple choice tasks in
school tests students are not used to justifying their answers, whereby they would learn to
express themselves in a scientific manner and the teacher would gain useful information on
their understanding o f the subject matter, vvhich is not always possible to conjecture from
their selected answers. The justifications show pupils’ imprecise ability to express
themselves. They do not provide answers in terms o f particles, i.e. atoms, ions and molecules
of substances, but at the macroscopic level vvhen they State the names of substances. This is
mainly the consequence o f teachers’ expressing themselves in an imprecise manner vvhen
they deliver lectures on concepts and their connections.
In our research (Devetak & Glažar, in press) it was also summarized that female students
score significantly lower than male students in drawing or reading submicrorepresentations
vvhile solving particulate problems. Bunce and Gabel (2002) reported similar findings and
they said that females score lower than males on the pre-test, but after implementing the
educational strategies that connect ali three levels o f chemical concepts the significant gender
score difference diminished. The results reported by Barke and Engida (2001) can explain the
results found in this research. They anticipated that girls have lower developed visualization
abilities than boys, and they propose that students should use different models and
visualization material very early in the science education process to stimulate development o f
visualization abilities. It can be speculated that visualization abilities can influence
motivation, and then hence the science problem solving achievements by both males and
females.
When we evaluated students’ formal reasoning abilities and visualization abilities on
understanding o f chemical concepts at ali three levels we discovered that formal reasoning
abilities have a greater effect on students’ chemical knovvledge than their visualization
abilities (Devetak & Glažar, in press) Results show that students with higher formal reasoning
abilities are slightly more successful in problems that require reading than drawing SMRs.
Dravving SMRs seems to be more intellectually demanding than reading them, but the results
o f our study did not confirm this assumption. It is also evident that students with developed
formal reasoning abilities are equally successful in reading or dravving submicrorep
resentations as are those students that reach transitional level, but there is a statistically
significant difference between concrete and formal reasoners. The difference between
concrete and transitional reasoners in reading or dravving SMRs is not significant. Hovvever, it
is important to stress that even students at the concrete level o f reasoning abilities are
sufficiently capable o f solving some problems at submicro level. It is also evident that those
students vvho fall into the group o f concrete or transitional reasoners had more difficulties
vvith solving problems that involve reading or dravving SMRs than those vvho fall into the
group o f formal reasoners. A lovver percent o f explained variance vvas obtained by Gabel,
Samuel, and Humm (1987) and Haidar and Abraham (1991), vvhich vvas attributed to the
results on chemical concepts test 22.8 % and 17.5 % respectively o f the variance by the
students’ reasoning abilities. The findings o f our study are consistent vvith the findings o f the
study by Williamson and Abraham (1995), who reported that 27 % o f variance can be
explained by formal reasoning abilities. Valanides (1998) also reported similar results.
On the other hand, hovvever, it vvas concluded (Devetak & Glažar, in press) that
visualization abilities are not so strongly correlated vvith chemistry knovvledge that refers to 2-
D submicrorepresentations. This is shovvn by the results, and only a small portion o f variance
on the chemistry knovvledge test score can be explained by students’ visualization abilities.
Further analysis o f variance shovvs that differences betvveen students vvith lovv and average,
and average and superior visualization abilities are not significant in most cases. It can, for
that reason, be emphasised that students can solve particulate problems even if their
visualization abilities are not so highly developed. Flovvever it is important to stress that there
is no statistically significant difference betvveen students vvith different speeds o f perception
abilities in solving problems regarding reading or dravving SMRs. On the other hand,
somevvhat bigger differences can be determined regarding the use o f 2-D
submicrorepresentations betvveen students vvith different levels o f abilities for spatial
relations. The difference is not statistically significant betvveen students vvith average and
superior spatial relations abilities. The difference betvveen students vvith poor and average
spatial relations abilities is significant in the total knovvledge test achievements score and
reading SMRs score. It can be concluded that chemical problems vvhich include just 2-D
submicrorepresentations do not pose great difficulties in solving them, even for those students
vvith lovver visualization abilities. These results confirmed the predictions o f Wu and Shah
(2003) and Keig and Rubba (1993) that secondary school students’ chemical concepts test
scores variance vvould not be in a very large percentage accounted for by students’
visualization abilities, but by more general reasoning abilities. Gabel et al. (1987) also
reported no significant correlation betvveen students’ visualization abilities and achievements
on the chemistry test that comprises items at submicroscopic level.
Influence of Motivation for Learning Science with Understanding
Chemical educators from primary school to university level from ali over the vvorld find
students uninterested in chemistry learning. This lack o f interest can influence students’
ability to achieve good results at chemistry courses. Research shovvs (Harrison & Treagust,
2002; Devetak, 2005; Juriševič et al., 2008; Devetak & Glažar, in press; Devetak et al.,
submitted) that the experimental part o f chemistry education is interesting for most students
and plays an important role in their motivation to leam. On the other hand, it poses a great
challenge for the teachers to maintain a high level o f motivation vvith students, also to learn at
the submicroscopic and symbolic levels (Flarrison & Treagust, 2002).
A negative relationship tovvards chemistry - or negative motivation - does not enable
proper concept change and/or modification o f students’ mental models o f chemical
phenomena. Students often do not have a proper knovvledge base that vvould make it possible
to upgrade their knovvledge o f more and more abstract chemical concepts vvhen they make
progress on the educational vertical (Treagust, Harrison, & Venville, 1998). Learning
motivation is defined as a construct vvhich includes different motivational elements (interests,
goals, attributes, self-image, external enticements, etc.). Some o f these form a more extrinsic
stimulus for learning (e.g., learning for grades, praise, avoiding punishment, social
acceptance, etc.), vvhile others are manifested more intrinsically (i.e., learning for mastering,
learning for knowledge) (Juriševič et al., 2008). According to Ryan and Deci (2000), intrinsic
motivation is an individuafs inherent inclination from which stems his/her tendency to leam
about particular areas o f life regardless o f the presence o f external enticements. This
construction encourages humans to ‘... assimilate, control, generate spontaneous interests and
to research which makes it essential for the individuaPs social and cognitive development,
while on the other hand it represents the fundamental source o f personal satisfaction and life
energy.’ (p. 70).
Highly intrinsically motivated students are more successful in learning new concepts and
show better understanding o f the learning matter (Stipek, 1998). Rennie (1990), on the basis
of the research on science learning, also concluded that higher results in science are related to
the learner’s active engagement in learning tasks, to his/her positive attitude towards the
subject and to a highly positive self-concept in science, which ali imply the learner’s intrinsic
motivation to learn. This is especially important, since many researchers (Anderman &
Young, 1994; Zusho, Pintrich, & Coppola, 2003) report that the decrease in intrinsic
motivation with years o f schooling is particularly noticeable in mathematics and science and
is at its peak in the period o f early adolescence. This situation may be attributed to a number
of incorrectly or incompletely understood scientific concepts (misconceptions), as pupils and
students do not study science in-depth.
Keig and Rubba (1993) have pointed out that motivation can be a potential source o f
variance on students’ chemistry knowledge achievements. These claims were confirmed by
Tuan et al. (2005). They reported that from 7 to 16% o f variance on the science knovvledge
test could be explained by students’ motivation. But on the other hand Niesvvandt (2007)
reported no statistically significant effect o f students’ affective variables (situational interest,
attitudes tovvards chemistry and students’ chemistry-specific self-concept) on their
understanding o f grade 9 (age 15 to 16) chemistry concepts. Chittleborough et al. (2002),
according to their qualitative research, reported that students are not motivated for learning
chemistry more than is necessary for passing the exam, so students are only extrinsically
motivated for chemistry learning. Theile and Treagust (1994) reported that students’
motivation for learning science and chemistry can, for that matter, be stimulated by using
different visualization elements and analogies because this element o f the lessons increases
students’ attention.
It was also established that girls show lovver interest in science, that science is boring for
them, especially because they just have to learn everything by heart (Anderman & Young,
1994). Results also show that adolescent girls possess lovver levels o f self-confidence in
demonstrating their science knovvledge (Simpson & Oliver, 1990). On the other hand, Meece
and Jones (1996) did not confirm these results; they established that there is no difference
betvveen girls and boys, in grades six to ten, regarding the interest in learning science, and
they also pointed out that gender influence on motivation and in its effect on the
manifestation o f science knovvledge are more complex processes than other researchers try to
shovv.
Table 2. Some examples of students’ drawings o f £MZ?.s presented above for

misconceptions about solution chemistry.
Misconception description Students’ example to illustrate

misconception about solution
chemistry
Particles o f the solvent and solute are too fa r apart in the .? »
f 4 t
solution.
¥m0 *t>
, »l
* * 9 * i
Misconceptions o f saturated solution; the only difference f » *

| a ^ # C/ ' o . , 1" 3
betvveen the solution presented in scheme A (unsaturated) *0 \ <3
and B (saturated) is in the number of solute and solvent i # m i/
Vi * ' ' * ........... * . B o« v
particles.
f
Misconceptions about the concentration at submicro
level; submicrorepresentation should represent the same # ♦ * i
concentration of a solution in both beakers; the number of * * # i
particles is the same, but the solution volume is not taken * * j- « m m|
into account.
Misconception about the arrangement o f solute particles
in the solution.
Misconception o f the concept o f electrolyte dissociation
m
(example: the right studenfs dravving represents an
aqueous solution of potassium iodide and the left one an "f-
aqueous solution of lead(II) nitrate(V); the particles in the
solution are presented as molecules and not ions. mmm
Misconceptions o f the ratio between the number o f solute
and solvent particles in the solution (vvhite ellipses
represent sucrose molecules; solute, and black circles fy
represent vvater molecules; solvent).
For the learning process, and therefore also for the development o f understanding o f
chemical concepts, the mere combination o f ali three levels o f understanding o f chemical
concepts is not enough; in these processes intrinsic motivation is crucial (Pintrich & Schunk,
1996; Stipek, 1998). Students reaching a very high level o f intrinsic motivation, vvho are
actively involved in leaming tasks, adopt a positive attitude tovvards the subject and,
consequently, those vvho have a good self-concept for science are also higher achievers in this
area. In the literature on educational psychology (Eccles et al., 1998; Pintrich & Schunk,
1996; Stipek, 1998), intrinsic motivation is most frequently described in terms o f three
interconnected elements the študent vvill have developed by the end o f elementary school (age
14): (1) as a special inclination to tackle more demanding tasks vvhich present a challenge; (2)
as learning triggered off by curiosity or special interests; (3) as the development o f
competence and mastering learning tasks in vvhich leaming is seen as a value. Research
(Zusho et al., 2003) shovvs that school performance has an impact on future interests and
motivation for the selected area o f study, as correlations betvveen those variables are
significant (p < 0,001). Students vvho are more self-confident in solving difficult or complex
problems are more successful in school vvork, because they apply profound learning strategies
leading them tovvards building up more solid knovvledge (Pintrich, 1999). Apart from
enabling a clearer understanding o f concepts, different visualization instruments can stimulate

discussion among students about the learning materials, and they can also improve
concentration during lessons (Theile & Treagust, 1994, Wu et al., 2001), leading to a higher
level o f m otivation to leam science.
In order to improve learning motivation in the classroom, Meece and Jones (1996)
recommend that teachers should create a learning environment that vvould: ( 1) provide
learning support for students, (2) monitor students’ development, (3) recognize and revvard
personal development in students’ knovvledge, and (4) minimize social differences among
students.
Juriševič et al. (2008) found that university students (i.e., pre-service primary teachers)
vvere most m otivated to learn biology, follovved by physics, maths, foreign languages and
chemistry. It vvas also concluded that pre-service primary school teachers shovv the highest
levels o f intrinsic motivation for learning chemistry at the macroscopic level and the lovvest at
the symbolic level. It vvas also concluded that the level o f intrinsic motivation decreased in
subjects vvith more abstract contents. Most students consider chemistry to be an interesting
subject because o f the experimental vvork, vvhich is an important external motivator.
Hovvever, the aim o f maintaining a high level o f motivation vvith students to learn chemistry
at the submicro and symbolic levels o f chemical concepts is considered to be very difficult for
teachers to fulfill.
In one o f our recent research studies (Devetak & Glažar, in press) vve discovered that the
correlations betvveen chemical knovvledge test scores, either in reading, dravving or overall
scores and intrinsic motivation for learning chemistry, are the highest regarding motivation
for the submicro level o f chemical concepts, and the lovvest regarding macro level. From the
ANO V A results it can be summarized that the differences betvveen the groups o f students
vvith different levels o f intrinsic motivation is significant almost in ali cases, except for
reading SMRs and intrinsic motivation for the experimental level o f chemical education.
Flovvever it is important to emphasize that at ali levels o f the ITLS model o f intrinsic
motivation for learning chemistry, the difference betvveen poor and average intrinsically
motivated students is not significant. According to these results, students vvith higher general
or specific chemical intrinsic motivation achieve higher scores on the chemistry test
comprising reading or dravving submicrorepresentations.
It vvas also discovered in our research group (Devetak et al., submitted) that 13-year-old
students do not shovv significantly different motivation for learning chemistry at submicro
level and at symbolic level. These students also find the macroscopic level to be closest to
their perception, most interesting and understandable. The biggest drop in motivation vvas
noticed on changing over to the submicro level, whereby pupils should develop mindsets for
the vvorld o f particles, vvhich they perceive as the most abstract one. The transfer from the
concrete to the abstract level caused an average drop in intrinsic motivation by as many as
11.4 points. Consequently, students are least intrinsically motivated for the symbolic level.
Ali correlations betvveen students’ achievements in the total test score and intrinsic motivation
to learn chemistry vvere statistically insignificant.
Similar results o f several studies vvere reported by Tuan et al. (2005), but their research
shovvs a slightly higher correlation betvveen school science achievement and motivation (r =
0.40; p < 0.01). The results obtained in this study can confirm K eigs’ and Rubbas’ (1993)
predictions, i.e. that motivation can be a potential source o f variance regarding students’
success on the chemical concepts test. On the other hand, Niesvvandt (2007) reports the result
of her study, that affective variables (students’ interest in and attitudes towards chemistry and
their chemistry-specific self-concepts) do not have a statistically significantly effect on
conceptual understanding, but the results do reveal the importance o f a strong and positive
self-concept for developing a meaningful understanding o f science concepts.
Developing the Novice Science Teacher for Teaching Science with

Understanding
After a fresh out-of-university teacher enters the school environment it is important that
he/she is stili engaged in active learning situations about his/her pedagogical knovvledge and
also about contents (science) knovvledge. Approaches to learning and the outcomes of
learning are interconnected and related to differences in how learning is conceptualized
(Marton et al., 1993). Teachers’ conception o f teaching is also developed through their direct
experiences in the classroom (Larsson, 1986). Effective teaching is at the centre o f effective
learning, and unique mentoring is required for effective teaching (Hudson et al., 2005).
Lave and W enger (1990) discuss that learning as it normally occurs is a function o f the
activity, context and culture in which it takes plače, and is therefore situated. Situated
learning is related to Vygotsky’s notion o f learning through social development. Lave and
Wenger (1990) also argue that social interaction is a critical component o f situated learning;
this means that leam ers become involved in a "community o f practice" which embodies
certain beliefs and behaviors to be acquired. Furthermore, situated learning is usually
unintentional rather than deliberate. Learning, both outside and inside school, advances
through collaborative social interaction and the social construction o f knovvledge. The
situated learning theory represents a theoretical framevvork for interpreting and enhancing the
classroom and providing broader school experiences for novice teachers (Cobern, 1996).
Many o f the positive effects achieved during the time o f study and preparation for the
pedagogical profession are nullified vvith the commencement o f professional vvork. Ali this
confirms the need for forming a systematic model for a 'culture o f initiation' o f trainee
teachers into the profession (Valenčič-Zuljan & Vogrinc, 2007).
The mentor plays a key role in supporting the professional development o f a novice
teacher, but it is necessary to differentiate betvveen quality teaching and quality mentoring
(Lindgren, 2005). For quality mentoring, it is necessary, among other things, to be familiar
vvith the goals o f m entoring and the tasks o f a mentor. In order to be able appropriately to
plan an individual’s professional development, a mentor has to recognize the characteristics
o f novice teachers and their professional development. The professional development o f
novice teachers depends on their beliefs, conceptions o f instruction, knovvledge and the role
o f a teacher. It is important to be avvare that novice teachers’ classroom actions are
significantly determined by their ovvn experience as learners (Calderhead & Robson, 1991).
For this reason, it is important to ask vvhat these competences are in pre-service and novice
teachers, and hovv we can affect them.
When involved in classroom experiences, novice science teachers have the opportunity to
observe others teach, interact vvith students, teach lessons themselves, and reflect on teaching
experiences and students’ learning (Van Driel et al., 2002). According to Volkmann and
Anderson (1998), the mentor must provide opportunities for novice teachers to experience
classroom conflict and the dilemmas o f teaching. Conceptions o f the role o f mentor include:
Teachers’ Influence on Students’ M otivation for Learning Science. 93
coach, model, instructional supporter, evaluator, confidant, information source, feedback-

giver, and explicator o f personal teaching knovvledge and beliefs (Cameron-Jones & 0 ’Hara,
1995); and also the follovving responsibilities; introducing novice teachers to school life,
school customs, and school culture, stimulating them to reflect on their ovvn teaching; and
bridging the gap betvveen theory and practice (Zanting et al., 2001).
Mentoring also benefits the veteran teachers, vvho serve as mentors by enhancing their
commitment to teaching and providing them vvith insight into their ovvn professional grovvth
(Hunter & Kieman, 2005). According to Hudson, Škamp and Brooks (2005), novice and
mentor teachers should have an active and productive role in the process for the mentoring to
be successful. There are five key factors describing effective mentoring in science teaching:
(1) personal attributes: complex personal interactions betvveen novice teacher and mentor,
novice teacher and students, mentor and students, and betvveen students themselves, take
plače in the classroom environment; (2) system requirements: provide the direction and the
framevvork for regulating the quality o f science teaching practices; (3) pedagogical
knovvledge: novice teachers have to develop the knovvledge for teaching science vvith the
guidance o f an experienced teacher; (4) modelling: the mentor is expected effectively to
model the teaching practice vvith high levels o f teaching competency (i.e. a rapport vvith the
students, lesson planning, syllabus language, hands-on lessons and classroom management)
so that the beginning teacher can learn from it; (5) feedback: this is a vital part o f the
mentoring, novice teachers have to reflect on their ovvn teaching according to the m entor’s
oral or vvritten feedback to improve teaching practice.
In our research vve try to investigate m entors’ vievvs on novice teachers’ general
competences (e.g. Development o f science reasoning; Knovving, understanding and applying
science concepts, their connections and theories; Connecting macroscopic observations vvith
submicroscopic explanations and symbolic records; Understanding and solving basic
qualitative and quantitative problems; Developing visualization abilities for presenting and
understanding substance structure; Experimental vvork organization and managing;
Understanding the influence o f chemistry and chemical technology on society development;
Understanding environmental problems and measures for solving these problems ...)
(Devetak & Glažar, 2007).In the Republic o f Slovenia the novice chemistry teachers can
begin their teaching in tvvo vvays after they graduate at the Faculty o f Education (for primary
school chemistry teacher; pupils age 14 and 15) or at the Faculty o f Chemistry and Chemical
Technology (for secondary school chemistry; students age 15 to 18). A teacher trainee is
deflned by the Lavv on Organizing and Financing Education (Offlcial Gazette, Republic o f
Slovenia, 12/96) as a skilled vvorker vvho is commencing his/her career in a school or
kindergarten in a direction and at a level commensurate vvith his/her professional education
and vvith the aim o f enabling independent vvork. With the coming into force o f the revised
Regulations on in-service teacher training and the professional exam for experts in the fleld of
education (Offlcial Gazette, 30/1996), the State has begun to devote more attention than
before to the initiation o f trainee teachers.
A total o f 48 primary and secondary school teachers - mentors (91.7% females; 8.3%
males) participated in this study: 77.1% o f teachers teach in primary school (students’ age 13
and 14), and 22.9% in secondary school (students’ age 15 to 17). Most o f these teachers
graduated from the four-year program at the Faculty o f Education and became teachers o f
chemistry and another subject (biology, physics, home economics) (83.3%), vvhile others
finished the Faculty o f Chemistry and Chemical Technology (16.7%). The teachers
participating in this study had 23.1 years (SD=7.96 years) o f teaching experience on average,
but ali o f them had taught for more than 6 years, 70.8% o f them had taught chemistry for
more than 20 years.
According to Slovenian school legislation, a teacher can become a mentor to the
beginning teacher after receiving the title o f mentor, adviser or counselor. In this study,
16.7% o f teachers were mentors, 72.9% were advisers and 8.3% were counselors. In this
paper ali teachers will be referred to as mentor, regardless o f their actual title.
The 107-item questionnaire assesses m entors’ opinions about mentoring practices to
beginning chemistry teachers according to the competences for effective teaching. The
response to each item (competences) is on a five-point Likert-type scale.
The first part o f the results shovvs m entors’ grades o f their efficiency in the mentoring
process. M ore than a half (58.3%) o f mentors think that they are very successful in mentoring
the beginning teachers (Group 1); 41.7% o f them have the opinion that they achieve medium
success in mentoring the novice teacher (Group 2). The differences betvveen the two groups
o f mentors (regarding their grade o f successfulness in the mentoring process) for evaluating
the meaning o f the specific competences for an effective chemistry teacher, the novice
teacher’s competences and m entors’ help for the beginning teacher to reach higher
competences for being a chemistry teacher are not statistically significant.
According to mentors an effective chemistry teacher should have well developed
competences (level over 7) that are connected vvith experimental work in the classroom and
those that are referring to developing science reasoning and understanding chemical concepts
during their university education.
M entors’ opinion o f novice teachers’ qualifications for an effective chemistry teacher
show that beginning teachers are rather well educated only for assuring safety in the
classroom during experimental work. Novice teachers are also the most qualified to interpret
experimental data and its implication in theory according to the mentors. For other
competences (see some examples above) novice chemistry teachers have not been sufficiently
educated (grades do not exceed grade 4, vvhich means rather good qualification) to be
effective chemistry teachers. Novice teachers have the poorest qualification for competences
such as: understanding the influence o f chemistry and chemical technology on society
development, experimental work organization and managing, developing visualization
abilities for presenting and understanding substance structure, connecting macroscopic
observations vvith submicroscopic explanations and symbolic records and evaluation,
interpretation and connecting information and data. The paired-sample t-test, used to compare
the differences in novice teachers’ qualification for a specific competence, and the importance
o f a competence for the effective chemistry teacher according to the m entors’ view, showed
that the differences are in ali cases statistically significant (p < 0.001). This means that in no
specific competence are the beginning teachers sufficiently educated to meet the standards for
an effective chemistry teacher according to the m entors’ vievvs.
Results also show how much help is devoted by the veteran teachers to novice ones in
developing their competences for being an effective chemistry teacher. Mentors, according to
their opinions, offer medium help to novice teachers regarding specific competences.
Beginning teachers get the lovvest support from mentors on those competences that are
connected vvith experimental work, especially interpreting the experimental data, and assuring
safe laboratory work, using mathematics in solving chemistry problems, and topics that refer
to environmental chemistry. The novice teachers are getting more help from mentors in the
field of developing students’ different mental abilities (science reasoning, visualization

ability, developing the strategy for teaching, connecting the three levels o f chemical concepts
and the ability to plan the experimental vvork in chemistry lessons). It is important to
emphasize that, comparing the results o f ranges for competences important for the effective
chemistry teacher, novice teacher qualification and m entors’ help, the beginning teachers get
more help from mentors in those competences that mentors feel are not vvell developed in the
novice teacher (macro, submicro, symbolic; visualization) but are also not very important for
the effective chemistry teacher according to m entors’ vievvs.
Comparing the grades that mentors assigned to the competences, it can be said that,
nevertheless, mentors think that beginning teachers are not vvell educated for performing as an
effective chemistry teacher and do not offer a great deal o f help to them.
Overall, the data o f this study seem to provide evidence that mentors should be
adequately educated in the mentoring process for novice teachers. The findings suggest that
mentors should develop the feeling as to vvhen and hovv they detect the novice teachers’
problems during their classroom interactions vvith students. In the next step, mentors should
be able to adequately intertvvine vvith the beginning teachers’ teaching process and mentor
them to reach more effective teaching strategies. In this process the mentor must be able to
coach, model, support, evaluate, give information and feedback to the novice teacher.
C O N C L U S IO N
From the results o f ali research data presented above it can be concluded that teachers
have different channels for influencing students’ science (chemistry) concepts learning vvith
understanding on higher levels o f cognition. Teachers have different tools inside numerous
educational strategies that can be applied in science education for emphasizing students’
motivation for learning concepts, because it is obvious that positive intrinsic motivation for
learning has a great impact on students’ learning achievements.
The incorporation o f SMRs in the educational process in the chemistry classroom at ali
levels o f education, according to the ITLS model is important from the perspective o f learning
theories (e. g. Paivio's dual coding theory, Mayer's SO I model o f meaningful learning,
cognitive theory o f m ultimedia learning and M ayer’s theory o f effective illustrations) and
from the perspective o f making science (chemistry) concepts meaningful for students. Using
the ITLS model helps students to develop a deeper understanding o f the concepts, mentally
organizing them into a coherent cognitive structure, and interpreting them vvith relevant
already existing knovvledge in their long-term memory, and it is also reflected in the ability to
apply vvhat vvas taught to nevv situations; developed problem solving ability. The ITLS model
could be also used as a medium for applying different active learning approaches into the
teaching situation vvhere students need to connect macro, submicro and symbolic levels o f
concepts in reaching the aims o f a specific learning unit (e.g. follovving structured learning
chemistry unit (questions that lead students in the process o f learning) vvith describing the
experiment (for example: sodium reaction vvith vvater), explaining the observation using
particle interactions (executing model based learning; using submicrorepresentations as
models for particles (for example: sodium atoms and ions, hydroxide ions, vvater and
hydrogen molecules, involved in the reaction), representing the phenomena by some sort o f
symbols (chemical symbols, formulae and equations; for example: 2Na(s) + 2H20(1) —>
2Na+(aq) + 2 0 H “(aq) + 2H2(g)).
Before making such attempts, the teacher should be aware that it is also important for
students to be familiar vvith SMRs, so that they do not have problems reading them, but
simply apply the concepts knovvledge to a nevv situation presented by the particulate level. It
is also important to emphasize the meaning o f legends in such problems, so that students use
proper particles presented in the legend, or that students accurately present the particles that
they dravv in an SMR vvith proper chemical symbols or names o f the particles. Students’
misconceptions or incomplete understanding could be avoided if teachers combined those tvvo
levels. This vvould be a common way o f upgrading študent knovvledge vvhich vvould lead to a
better comprehension o f chemical concepts, vvhich is a precondition for understanding nevv
ones that students come across in their advanced chemical education. The results from the
intervievvs vvith students that vvere conducted in the study by Devetak, Vogrinc and Glažar
(2009) shovv that they vvould better understand the concepts o f aqueous solutions if the
concepts vvere explained also at the submicro level. It is important to emphasize that the
teacher should direct the discourse vvith students vvhen developing their mental model o f
solution chemistry. Teachers should be very precise in using correct concepts and adequate
descriptions o f the phenomena. They ought to combine the vvritten and oral evaluation to gain
a more entire picture o f students’ knovvledge. During this process teachers should pay
attention to students’ expressions vvhen describing specific phenomena. It is also important to
lay stress on the item text vvhen evaluating students’ knovvledge. Teachers should in this case
use only one variable for the študent to consider when solving the specific task (e. g. one
variable to consider is the arrangement o f particles and another one is the correct
concentration o f the solution presented by the number o f solute particles).
The overall conclusions indicate that teachers should devote more time to the activities
vvhere students, and especially females, are engaged in dravving submicrorepresentations and
explaining their meaning (e.g. using particles’ names). They should also emphasize the
meaning o f correct and accurate reading o f the chemistry problem text. Teachers should be
avvare that students can develop the understanding o f SMRs also vvhen their formal reasoning
abilities and/or visualization abilities are not highly developed in relation to their age.
Teachers can collect useful data about students’ incomplete comprehension and/or
misunderstandings o f chemical concepts by analyzing students’ dravvings o f SMRs, and also
by analyzing their ovvn classroom instructions and their pedagogical knovvledge obtained
through action research; especially if they see the teaching as transfer o f knovvledge or as a
process o f building the students’ knovvledge (Vogrinc & Valenčič Zuljan, 2009).
It can be concluded that chemistry teachers, vvhen presenting chemistry concepts, should
more frequently combine the three levels: macro-, submicro-, and the symbolic level and
more efficiently link the students’ pre-knovvledge vvith the nevv topics, keeping in mind that
some topics are repeated later at higher levels o f education, therefore suitable upgrading o f
knovvledge is necessary. Upgrading knovvledge and linking the contents should be in the
forefront o f teaching, not only in chemistry but also in science teaching in general.
Active vvorking methods (students’ active engagement in constructing their ovvn
knovvledge in an environment that stimulates teamvvork) also enable the connection o f
experimentation results vvith their interpretations at the submicro level and vvith symbolic
records. To support these nevv approaches nevv educational materials for pupils and teachers
were developed and in-service professional development programs on how to apply new
teaching methods were organized for chemistry teachers.
It is important that teachers evaluate students’ understanding o f these chemical concepts,
vvhich are related to the concepts to be upgraded in the future lessons. If teachers conclude
that students’ understanding o f specific concepts is not sufficient, they have to provide
enough time to consolidate the knovvledge to prepare the basis for further concepts
development in students’ mental model o f specific science phenomena.
Conclusions from numerous research studies conducted by our research group (Devetak
et al., 2004; Devetak, 2005; Devetak & Glažar, 2007; Juriševič et al, 2008; Devetak et al.,
2009; Devetak & Glažar, in press; Devetak et al., submitted) indicate that teachers should be
encouraged to use submicrorepresentations in classrooms for evaluating students’ knovvledge,
vvithout being concerned that students vvith lovver abilities vvould be discriminated. It is also
recommended according to the research results that teachers should devote more o f their time
to teaching students proper problem solving strategies using SMRs and their prior knovvledge.
It vvas also confirmed by our studies (Juriševič et al, 2008; Devetak & Glažar, in press;
Devetak et al., submitted) that most students at ali levels o f education do like chemistry at the
macro level, so teachers should take advantage o f this and extrinsically motivate students
through practical vvork. After this activity most students vvould have the chance to develop
intrinsic motivation for the macro level o f chemical concepts, and after that the intrinsic
motivation for the other tvvo more abstract levels o f ITLS model vvould evolve. To achieve
this goal, teachers encounter a difficult task in achieving a sufficient level o f extemal
stimulation for students to become interested in chemistry, because students, at ali levels o f
the educational system, often do not realize the meaning o f submicroscopic explanations o f
the phenomena and their symbolic representations. It can be summarized that the most
successful in solving chemistry problems at different levels o f the ITLS model vvould be those
students that are highly intrinsically motivated for learning chemistry at the particulate level.
It should be emphasized, as indicated by the findings o f our research that teachers should,
nevertheless, encourage students to learn chemistry at the particulate level. Such attempts are
going to be only external, and for students mostly unnecessary or even discouraging and
highly difficult to understand at the beginning; hovvever, vvith progress in the understanding
of the basic chemical concepts (e.g. atom structure, chemical bond, etc.) in context, students’
interest in understanding chemistry at submicro level vvill increase and deeper knovvledge
vvith understanding vvould develop.
From the overall summary o f the research results and importance o f teachers’ application
of these results in the educational strategies that they use in the classrooms, it is important
that constant teacher education is crucial. It is also important that novice chemistry teachers
receive adequate mentoring from experienced teachers vvhen they enter the educational
system after graduating from the University. The findings o f our study (Devetak & Glažar,
2007) imply that conceptions o f mentoring held by experienced chemistry teachers should be
considered vvhen organizing the in-service professional development programs for mentors.
The institutions that educate teachers, especially university lectures on special didactics,
should prepare programs that consider the m entors’ and novice teachers’ vievvs on the
mentoring process. The results o f this study suggest that in the process o f developing the
educational programs for mentors, the novice teachers’ opinion o f the mentoring process must
be obtained. The findings also indicate that more contextualized education for mentors must
be put forvvard vvith illustration o f the real problems that mentors and beginning teachers
come across during their classroom practice. Teacher trainers should lay great stress on
development o f the harmonious and productive relationship betvveen mentor and novice
teacher, and mentors should be avvare that the role o f the moderator in this relationship lies on
their side.
In the end, it is important to emphasize that in order to achieve the complex goals of
modern chemistry instruction, where the focus is on gaining a deeper understanding of
concepts, developing the sensitivity needed to perceive problem situations, and problem-
solving strategies, quality teacher training is crucial. The teacher's role is no longer just to
transmit knovvledge, but to organize a modern cognitive-constructivist model o f instruction
through vvhich intrinsic m otivation for learning science and especially chemistry vvould
develop. To be able to do so, the teachers need a pre-service education based on modem
approaches, in vvhich the studenfs conceptions and stimulation motivation development play
a key role. Teachers also need to be offered permanent in-service development to support
them practically in organizing instructions in vvhich leamers vvill play an active and
responsible role, and they have to be trained to be able adequately to research their
pedagogical practices in order to improve their teaching. Such approaches in teacher training
could develop responsible chemistry teachers, so that also those students vvho are not
interested in chemistry learning can develop a more positive attitude tovvards chemistry,
especially when they realize and understand the context in vvhich chemical knovvledge is
applied.
R eferences
Ainsvvorth, S. (1999). The functions o f multiple representations. Computers & Education,,

33(2), 131-152.
Anderman, E. M. & Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and Strategy Use in Science: Individual
Differences and Classroom Effects. Journal o f Research in Science Teaching., 3/(8),
811-831.
Barke, H. D. & Engida, T. (2001). Structural Chemistry and Spatial Ability in Different
Cultures. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe., 2(3), 227-239.
Bradley, J. D., Brand, M. & Gerrans, G. G. (1998). Stages o f Development in Studenfs
Concepts about Macroscopic Properties and Microscopic Structure o f Matter: An
Analysis o f Data form South Afričan Secondary Schools. South Afričan Journal o f
Chemistry„ 51(2), 85-93.
Bučat, B. & Mocerino, M. (2009). Learning at the Sub-micro Level: Structural
Representation. In J. K. Gilbert, & D. F. Treagust (Eds)., Models and M odeling in
Science Education, M ultiple Representations in Chemical Education., (11-29).
Dordrecht: Springer.
Bunce, D. M. & Gabel, D. (2002). Differential effects on the achievement o f males and
females o f teaching the particulate nature o f chemistry. Journal o f Research in Science
Teaching., 39(10), 911-927.
Bunce, D. M. (2008). Constructing Good and Researchable Questions. In D. M. Bunce, & R.
S. Cole (Eds.). Nuts and Bolts o f Chemical Education Research., Washington, DC:
American Chemical Society.
Teachers’ Influence on Students' Motivation for Learning Science. 99
Calderhead, J. & Robson, M. (1991). Images o f teaching: Študent teachers’ early conceptions
o f classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education., 7(1), 1-8.
Cameron-Jones, M. & 0 ’Hara, P. (1995). M entors’ perceptions o f their roles with students in
initial teacher training. Cambridge Journal o f Education, 25(2), 189-200.
Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F. & Mocerino, M. (2002). Constraints to the
Development o f First Year University Students' Mental Models o f Chemical Phenomena.
Teaching and Learning Teaching and Learning Forum 2002: Focusing on the Študent, [e-
text type] http://www.ecu.edu.au/conferences/tlf/2002/pub/docs/ Chittleborough.pdf
Cobern, W. (1996). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science
Education., 80(5), 579-610.
Costa, N., Marques, L. & Kempa, R. F. (2000). Science teachers.awareness o f findings from
educational research. Research in Science and Technology Education., 18(1), 37-44.
De Jong, O. (2005). Research and Teaching practice in Chemical Education: Living Apart or
Together? Chemical Education International., 6(1), 1-6.
Devetak, I. & Glažar, S. A. (in press). The Influence o f 16-year-old Students’ Gender, Mental
Abilities, and M otivation on their Reading and Drawing Submicrorepresentations
Achievements. International Journal o f Science Education.
Devetak, I. (2005). Explaining the latent structure o f understanding submicrorepresentations
in science. Ph. D. Thesis, Ljubljana: University o f Ljubljana.
Devetak, I., Drofenik Lorber, E., Juriševič, M. & Glažar, S. A. (submitted). comparing
slovenian eight-year and nine-year elementary school pupils’ electrolyte chemistry
knowledge and intrinsic motivation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice.
Devetak, I. & Glažar, S. A. (2007). Chemistry teachers' mentoring in Slovenian primary and
secondary school. In M. Valenčič Zuljan, & J. Vogrinc (Eds.). Professional inductions o f
teachers in Europe and elswhere., Ljubljana: Faculty o f Education., 102-115.
Devetak, I., Urbančič, M., W issiak Grm, K. S., Krnel, D. & Glažar, S. A. (2004).
Submicroscopic representations as a tool for evaluating students' chemical conceptions.
Acta Chimica Slovenica., 51(4), 799-814.
Devetak, I., Vogrinc, J. & Glažar, S. A. (2009). Assessing 16-year-old students'
understanding o f aqueous solution at submicroscopic level. Research in Science
Education., 39(2), 157-179.
diSessa, A. (2004). Metarepresentation: Native competence and targets for instruction.
Cognition and Instruction., 22(3), 293-331.
Dolin, J. (2001). Representational forms in physics. Paper presented at the 3rd International
Conference o f the ESERA, Thessaloniki.
Ebenezer, J. V. & Erickson, G. L. (1996). Chemistry Students' Conceptions o f Solubility: A
Phenomenography. Science Education., 80(2), 181-201
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A. & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon, & N.
Eisenberg (Eds.) Handbook o f child psychology, (pp. 1017-1095). New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Eskilsson, O. & Hellden, G. (2003). A Longitudinal Study on 10-12-year-olds' Conceptions
o f the Transformations o f Matter. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in
Europe., 4(3), 291-304.
Ferk Savec, V., Devetak, I. & Wissiak Grm, K. S. (2007). Raziskovanje v naravoslovnem
izobraževanju - pot do znanja naravoslovja z razumevanjem?. In M. Vrtačnik, I. Devetak,
I. Sajovic (Eds.). Akcijsko raziskovanje za dvig kvalitete pouka naravoslovnih

predmetov. Ljubljana: Naravoslovnotehniška fakulteta, Pedagoška fakulteta, 35-48.
Gabel, D., Samuel, K. V. & Humm, D. (1987). Understanding the Particulate Nature o f
Matter. Journal o f Chemical Education., 64 (8), 695-697.
Gabel, D. (1999). Improving Teaching and Learning through Chemistry Education Research:
A Look to the Future. Journal o f Chemical Education., 76(4), 548-554.
Georgiadou, A. & Tsaparlis, G. (2000). Chemistry Teaching in Lower Secondary School vvith
Methods based on: A) Psychological Theories; B) the Macro, Representational, and
Submicro Levels o f Chemistry. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe.,
1(2), 217-226.
Gilbert, J. K, Justi, R., Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O. & Treagust, D. F. (2004). Securing a
Future for Chemical Education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice., 5(1), 5-
14.
Gilbert, J. K. & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Introduction: Macro, Submicro, Symbolic
Representations and the Relationship Betvveen Them: Key Models in Chemical
Education. In J. K. Gilbert, & D. F. Treagust (Eds)., Models and M odeling in Science
Education, Multiple Representations in Chemical Education., (1-8). Dordrecht: Springer.
Glažar, S. A. & Devetak, I. (2002). Secondary school students' knovvledge o f stoichiometry.
Acta Chimica Slovenica., 49(1), 43-53.
Haidar, A. H. & Abraham, M. R. (1991). A Comparison o f Applied and Theoretical
Knovvledge o f Concepts Based on the Particulate Nature o f Matter. Journal o f Research
in Science Teaching., 28(10), 919-938.
Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The Particulate Nature o f Matter: Challenges in
Understanding the Submicroscopic World. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi., D. F.
Treagust, & K. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical Education: Towards Research - Based
Practice (189-212). Netherlands: Kluvver Academic Publishers.
Hudson, P., Škamp, K. & Brooks, L. (2005). Development o f an Instrument: Mentoring for
Effective Primary Science Teaching. Science Education., 89(4), 657-674.
Hunter, A. & Kiernan, H. G. (2005). The Reflective Mentor: Case Studies in Creating
Learning Partnerships, Norvvood: Christopher-Gordon Publisher.
Johnson, P. (1998). Progression in Children’s Understanding o f a "Basic” Particle Theory: A
Longitudinal Study. International Journal o f Science Education., 20(4), 393-412.
Johnstone, A. H. (1982). Macro- and Micro-chemistry. The School Science Review., 64(221),
377-379.
Johnstone, A. H., Sleet, R. J. & Vianna, J. F. (1994). An Information Processing Model o f
Learning: its Application to an Undergraduate Laboratory Course in Chemistry. Studies
in Higher Education, 19(1), 77-87.
Juriševič, M., Devetak, I., Razdevšek-Pičko, C. & Glažar, S. A. (2008). Intrinsic motivation
o f pre-service primary school teachers for learning chemistry in relation to their academic
achievement. International Journal o f Science Education., 30(1), 87-107.
Keig, P. F. & Rubba, P. A. (1993). Translation o f Representations o f Structure o f Matter and
its Relationship to Reasoning, Gender, Spatial Reasoning, and Specific Prior Knovvledge.
Journal o f Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), 883-903.
Kelly, R. M. & Jones, L. L. (2008). Investigating Students’ Ability to Transfer Ideas Learned
from M olecular Animations o f the Dissolution Process. Journal o f Chemical Education,,
85(2), 303-309.
Kempa, R. (2002). Research and research utilization in chemical education. Chemistry

Education: Research and Practice in Europe., 3(3), 327-343.
Larsson, S. (1986). Learning from experience: Teachers’ conceptions o f changes in
professional practice. Journal o f Curriculum Studies., 19(1), 35-43.
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual Overvievv. Science Education.,
84(1), 71-94.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, K. W. L. (1999). A Comparison o f University Lecturers' and Pre-service Teachers'
Understanding o f a Chemical Reaction at the Particulate Level. Journal o f Chemical
Education., 76(10), 1008-1012.
Lemke, J. (2004). The literacies o f science. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy
and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice, (33-47), Arlington:
International Reading Association/National Science Teachers Association.
Lindgren, U. (2005). Experiences o f beginning teachers in a school-based mentoring program
in Svveden. Educational Studies., 31(3), 251-263.
Margel, H., Eylon, B. S. & Scherz, Z. (2008). A Longitudinal Study o f Junior High School
Students’ Conceptions o f the Structure o f Materials. Journal o f Research in Science
Teaching., 45(1), 132-152.
Marton, F., Beaty, E. & DalFAlba, G. (1993). Conceptions o f learning. International Journal
o f Educational Research., 19(3), 277-300.
Mayer, R. E. & M oreno, R. (2001). A Cognitive Theory o f Multimedia Learning:
Implications for Design Principles [e-text type] http://www.unm.edu/~moreno/
PDFS/chi.pdf.
Mayer, R. E. (1993). Illustrations that instruct. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional
psychology (253-284). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learning strategies for making sense out o f expository text: The SOI
model for guiding three cognitive processes in knowledge construction. Educational
Psychology Review., 8(4), 357-371.
Meece, J. L. & Jones, M. G. (1996). Gender Differences in M otivation and Strategy Use in
Science: Are Girls Rote Learners?. Journal o f Research in Science Teaching., 33(4), 393-
406.
Moreno, R. & M ayer, R. E. (2000). A Leamer-Centered Approach to Multimedia
Explanations: Deriving Instructional Design Principles from Cognitive Theory.
Interactive M ultimedia Electronic Journal o f Computer - Enhanced Learning., 2, 78-107.
Nieswandt, M. (2007). Students Affect and Conceptual Understanding in Learning
Chemistry. Journal o f Research in Science Teaching., 44(9), 908-937.
Paivio, A. (1986). M ental Representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Papageorgiou, G. & Johnson, P. (2005). Do Particle Ideas Help or Hinder Pupils’
Understanding o f Phenomena? International Journal o f Science Education., 27(11),
1299-1317.
Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and
applications. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The Role o f Motivation in Promoting and Sustaining Self-Regulated
Learning. International Journal o f Educational Research., 31(6), 459-470.
Prain, V. & Waldrip, B. (2006). An Exploratory Study o f Teachers' and Students' Use o f
Multi-modal Representations o f Concepts in Primary Science. International Journal o f
Science Education., 28(15), 1 8 4 3 - 1866.
Rennie, L. J. (1990). Študent participation and motivational orientation: What students do in
science? In K. Tobin, J. Butler, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.) Windows into science classrooms:
Problems associated with higher-level cognitive learning. (164-198). London: The
Falmer Press.
Russell, T. & McGuigan, L. (2001). Promoting understanding through representational
redescription: an illustration referring to young pupils’ ideas about gravity. Paper
presented at the 3rd International Conference o f the ESERA, Thessaloniki.
Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: Classic Definitions and
Nevv Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology., 25(1), 54-67.
Sanger, M. J. (2000). Using Particulate Dravvings to Determine and improve Students'
Conceptions o f Pure Substances and Mixtures. Journal o f Chemical Education, 77(6),
762-766.
Shvvartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R. & Hofstein, A. (2006). The use o f scientific literacy taxonomy for
assessing the development o f chemical literacy among high-school students. Chemistry
Education Research and Practice., 7(4), 203-225.
Simpson, R. D. & Oliver, J. S. (1990). A Summary o f M ajor Influences on Attitude tovvard
and Achievement in Science among Adolescent Students. Science Education, 74(1), 1-18.
Solsona, N., Izquierdo, M. & De Jong, O., (2003). Exploring the Development o f Students'
Conceptual Profiles o f Chemical Change. International Journal o f Science Education,
25(1), 3-12.
Stains, M. & Talanquer, V. (2008). Classification o f Chemical Reactions: Stages o f Expertise.
Journal o f Research in Science Teaching, 45(7), 771-793.
Stipek, D. (1998). M otivation to learn: From theory to practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Thiele, R. B. & Treagust, D. F. (1994). An Interpretative Explanations o f High School
Chemistry Teachers' Analogical Explanations. Journal o f Research in Science Teaching,
31(3), 227-242.
Tien, L.T., Teichert M. A. & Rickey, D. (2007). Effectiveness o f a MORE Laboratory Module
in Prompting Students to Revise Their Molecular-Level Ideas about Solutions. Journal o f
Chemical Education, 84(2), 175-180.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborought, G. & Mammiala, T. L. (2001). The Function of
Macroscopic, Symbolic and Sub-microscopic Representations in Explaining Concepts in
High School Chemistry. Science Teaching and Learning, [e-text type].
http://tigersystem.net/aera2002/viewproposaltext.asp?propID=5854
Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G. & Venville, G. J. (1998). Teaching Science Effectively With
Analogies: An Approach for Preservice and Inservice Teacher Education. Journal o f
Science Teacher Education., 9(2), 85-101.
Tuan, H.-L., Chin, C.-C., Shieh, S.-H. (2005). The development o f a questionnaire to measure
students’ motivation tovvards science learning. International Journal o f Science
Education, 27(6), 639-654.
Valanides, N. (1998). Formal Operational Performance and Achievement o f Lower
Secondary School Students. Studies in Educational Evaluation., 24(1), 1-23.
Valenčič-Zuljan, M. & Vogrinc, J. (2007). A mentor's aid in developing the competences o f
teacher trainees. Educational Studies., 33(4), 373-384.
Van Barkel, B., Pilot, A. & Bulte, A. M. W. (2009). Micro-Macro Thinking in Chemical
Education: Why and How to Escape. In J. K. Gilbert, & D. F. Treagust (Eds.)., Models
and M odeling in Science Education, Multiple Representations in Chemical Education,
(pp. 31-54). Dordrecht: Springer.
Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O. & Verloop, N. (2002). The Development o f Preservice
Chemistry Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Knovvledge. Science Education., 86(4), 572-
590.
Vogrinc, J., Glažar, S. A. & Devetak, I. (in press). The Role o f Qualitative Research in
Science Education. Eurasia Journal o f Mathematics, Science & Technology Education.
Vogrinc, J. & Valenčič Zuljan, M. (2009). Action research in schools - an important factor in
teachers' professional development. Educational Studies, 35(1), 53-63.
Volkmann, M. J. & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Creating Professional Identity: Dilemmas and
Metaphors o f a First-Year Chemistry Teacher. Science Education., 82(3), 293-310.
Waldrip, B., Prain, V. & Carolan, J. (2006). Learning Junior Secondary Science through
Multi-Modal Representations. Electronic Journal o f Science Education., 11(1), 86-105.
Williamson, V. M. & Abraham, M. R. (1995). The Effects o f Computer Animation on the
particulate Mental Models o f College Chemistry Students. Journal o f Research in
Science Teaching., 32(5), 521-534.
Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting Understanding o f Chemical
Representations: Students' Use o f a Visualisation Tool in the Classroom. Journal o f
Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842.
Wu, H.-K. & Shah P. (2003). Exploring Visuospatial Thinking in Chemistry Learning, [E-
type text]. http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:X783aG4W MzoJ:web.cc.ntnu.edu.tw/
~hkwu/SciEd000262002R.pdf+visuospatial+thinking+in+chemistry&hl=en
Zanting, A., Verloop, N. & Vermunt, J. D. (2001). Študent teachers' beliefs about mentoring
and learning to teach during teaching practice. British Journal o f Educational
Psychology., 71(1), 57-80.
Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R. & Coppola, B. (2003). Skill and Will: the Role o f Motivation and
Cognition in the Learning o f College Chemistry. International Journal o f Science
Education, 25(9), 1081-1094.
View publication stats

NET Teachersinfluenceonstudentsmotivation

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

NET Teachersinfluenceonstudentsmotivation

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

TEACHERS’ INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION FOR LEARNING

Chapter · January 2011

Motivation to Learn Science and Cognitive Style View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Iztok Devetak and Saša A. Glažar

It is argued between Science education researchers and teacher practitioners at ali

Science learning, and especially chemical concepts learning, is a complex cognitive

submicrorepresentations between students with different levels o f spatial relations. The

A) Select the correct formula of the forme d si&stance.

Aqueous solution of Aqueous solution of

Elaborate yuur scheme

Mixture at the endof chemical

D) Writ-e an equation for ionic net reaction.

Table 1. Some examples o f students’ drawings of SM Rs for difficulties about

Misconception description Students’ SMRs or SMRs presented

Representing the ionic substance aqueous solutions at

Influence of Motivation for Learning Science with Understanding

Table 2. Some examples of students’ drawings o f £MZ?.s presented above for

Misconception description Students’ example to illustrate

Misconceptions o f saturated solution; the only difference f » *

enabling a clearer understanding o f concepts, different visualization instruments can stimulate

Developing the Novice Science Teacher for Teaching Science with

coach, model, instructional supporter, evaluator, confidant, information source, feedback-

field of developing students’ different mental abilities (science reasoning, visualization

Ainsvvorth, S. (1999). The functions o f multiple representations. Computers & Education,,

I. Sajovic (Eds.). Akcijsko raziskovanje za dvig kvalitete pouka naravoslovnih

Kempa, R. (2002). Research and research utilization in chemical education. Chemistry

View publication stats

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi