Modeling meaningful learning in chemistry using structural equation modeling

被引:34
|
作者
Brandriet, Alexandra R. [1 ]
Ward, Rose Marie [2 ]
Bretz, Stacey Lowery [1 ]
机构
[1] Miami Univ, Dept Chem & Biochem, Oxford, OH 45056 USA
[2] Miami Univ, Dept Kinesiol & Hlth, Oxford, OH 45056 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
COVARIANCE STRUCTURE-ANALYSIS; GENERAL-CHEMISTRY; SUPPRESSOR VARIABLES; SELF-CONCEPT; STUDENTS; ACHIEVEMENT; ATTITUDE; INSTRUMENT; MISCONCEPTIONS; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1039/c3rp00043e
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Ausubel and Novak's construct of meaningful learning stipulates that substantive connections between new knowledge and what is already known requires the integration of thinking, feeling, and performance (Novak J. D., (2010), Learning, creating, and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.). This study explores the integration of these three domains using a structural equation modeling (SEM) framework. A tripartite model was developed to examine meaningful learning through the correlational relationships among thinking, feeling, and performance using student responses regarding Intellectual Accessibility and Emotional Satisfaction on the Attitudes toward the Subject of Chemistry Inventory version 2 (ASCI V2) and performance on the American Chemical Society exam. We compared the primary model to seven alternatives in which correlations were systematically removed in order to represent a lack of interconnectedness among the three domains. The tripartite model had the strongest statistical fit, thereby providing statistical evidence for the construct of meaningful learning. Methodological issues associated with SEM techniques, including problems related to non-normal multivariate distributions (an assumption of traditional SEM techniques), and causal relationships are considered. Additional findings include evidence for weak configural invariance in the pre/post implementation of the ASCI(V2), mainly due to the poor structure of the pretest data. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for teaching and learning.
引用
收藏
页码:421 / 430
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Computerized molecular modeling: Enhancing meaningful chemistry learning
    Dori, YJ
    Barak, M
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF ICLS 2000 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF THE LEARNING SCIENCES, 2000, : 185 - 192
  • [2] Toward equation structural modeling: an integration of interpretive structural modeling and structural equation modeling
    Amini, Alireza
    Alimohammadlou, Moslem
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT ANALYTICS, 2021, 8 (04) : 693 - 714
  • [3] Measuring Learning Outcomes of Entrepreneurship Education Using Structural Equation Modeling
    Kozlinska, Inna
    Mets, Tonis
    Roigas, Kart
    [J]. ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, 2020, 10 (03)
  • [4] Testing Hypotheses about Language Learning Using Structural Equation Modeling
    Winke, Paula
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF APPLIED LINGUISTICS, 2014, 34 : 102 - 122
  • [5] Genetic path modeling using genomic structural equation modeling
    Nivard, Michel
    Grotzinger, Andrew
    Ip, Hill
    Tucker-Drob, Elliot
    Boomsma, Dorret I.
    [J]. BEHAVIOR GENETICS, 2018, 48 (06) : 501 - 502
  • [6] Structural Equation Modeling: Possibilities for Language Learning Researchers
    Hancock, Gregory R.
    Schoonen, Rob
    [J]. LANGUAGE LEARNING, 2015, 65 : 160 - 184
  • [7] Variables that Affect Language Learning: Structural Equation Modeling
    Fernando Gomez, Juan
    Emiro Restrepo, Jorge
    Diaz Larenas, Claudio
    [J]. REICE-REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA SOBRE CALIDAD EFICACIA Y CAMBIO EN EDUCACION, 2022, 20 (03): : 45 - 62
  • [8] Modeling Dynamic Functional Neuroimaging Data Using Structural Equation Modeling
    Price, Larry R.
    Laird, Angela R.
    Fox, Peter T.
    Ingham, Roger J.
    [J]. STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING-A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, 2009, 16 (01) : 147 - 162
  • [9] Modeling motor connectivity using TMS/PET and structural equation modeling
    Laird, Angela R.
    Robbins, Jacob M.
    Li, Karl
    Price, Larry R.
    Cykowski, Matthew D.
    Narayana, Shalini
    Laird, Robert W.
    Franklin, Crystal
    Fox, Peter T.
    [J]. NEUROIMAGE, 2008, 41 (02) : 424 - 436
  • [10] Modeling confrontation naming and discourse informativeness using structural equation modeling
    Fergadiotis, Gerasimos
    Kapantzoglou, Maria
    Kintz, Stephen
    Wright, Heather Harris
    [J]. APHASIOLOGY, 2019, 33 (05) : 544 - 560