The Development of Matriculation Chemistry Module: Needs Analysis
Keywords:
Needs analysis, matriculation chemistry, module, chemical bonding, difficulty, Augmented RealityAbstract
The needs analysis study was conducted to obtain information from matriculation chemistry students and lecturers about 1) the problems encountered by the students and lecturers during the teaching and learning of matriculation chemistry subject, 2) the most challenging topics in matriculation chemistry syllabus and 3) the needs for the development of the teaching and learning module. This needs analysis study is a survey study involving 127 first semester matriculation students and eight matriculation lecturers selected by random sampling technique. Questionnaire was used as instrument for this study. It was divided into four parts: demographics, matriculation chemistry problems, matriculation chemistry topics difficulty level and suggestions to facilitate the learning of difficult chemistry topics. The results showed that matriculation chemistry is difficult because the subject is abstract. Besides that, feedback on the difficulty of matriculation chemistry topics showed the most difficult topic is the chemical bonding. Therefore, there is a need to develop a module that can be used as supporting materials in the teaching and learning of chemistry for matriculation students. In conclusion, students and lecturers need teaching and learning aids in chemical bonding topic to improve student’s understanding. The implication of the findings provided references to the development of effective teaching and learning module.
Downloads
References
Treagust, D.F, Chittleborough, G. & Mamiala, T.L. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353– 1368.
Ouasri, A. (2017). A study of Moroccan pupils’ difficulties at second Baccalaureat year in solving chemistry problems relating to the reactivity of ethanoate ions and to copper-aluminium cells. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 737–748.
Treagust, D. (2012). Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching, learning and retention. Presented at Australian Conference on Science, 27-29 February 2012, Sydney.
Hussein, F. & Reid, N. (2009). Working memory and difficulties in school chemistry. Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(2), 161-185.
Daniel, T.K-C & Treagust, D.F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding.School Science Review, 81(294), 75-84.
Bergqvist, A., Drechsler, M. & Chang, R. (2016). Upper secondary teachers’ knowledge for teaching chemical bonding models. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 298–318.
Zephrinus C.N. & Phoebe E. (2015). Resolving Nigerian secondary school students’ learning difficulties in nuclear chemistry using computer animation solutions. Procedia Social and Behaviour Science, 176, 1034-1040.
Nahum, T.L., Hofstein, A., Mamlok N.R., & Bar-dov, Z. (2004). Can final examinations amplify students’ misconceptions in chemistry? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 301-325.
Lay, A.N., & Kamisah Osman. (2018). Pendidikan kimia melalui mereka bentuk permainan teori dan Amalan. Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2020). Laporan analisis Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia 2019. Putrajaya, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.
Dani Asmadi Ibrahim, Azraai Othman & Othman Talib. (2015). Pandangan pelajar dan guru terhadap tahap kesukaran tajuk-tajuk kimia. Jurnal Kepimpinan Pendidikan, 2, 32-46.
Mohd Nor Bakar & Nor Hidayah Alias. (2011). Masalah pembelajaran tajuk persamaan kimia dalam konteks penyelesaian masalah di kalangan pelajar sekolah menengah. Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 1-8.
Aziz Nordin & Lin, H.L. (2011). Hubungan sikap terhadap mata pelajaran sains dengan penguasaan konsep asas sains pelajar tingkatan dua. Journal of Science Mathematics Educational, 2, 89-101.
Aiken, L.R. (1976). Update on attitudes and other affective variables in learning Mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 46(2), 293-311.
Cheung, D. (2009). Developing a scale to measure student’s attitudes toward chemistry lessons.International Journal of Science Education, 31(16), 2185-2203.
Turner, S., Ireson, G. & Twidle, J. (2010). Enthusiasm, relevance and creativity: Could these teaching qualities stop us alienating pupils from science? School Science Review, 91(337), 51-57.
Rott, L., & Marohn, A. (2018). Choice2explore – A teaching concept for inclusive science education in primary schools. Presented at 12th ESERA 2017 Conference, Research, Practice and Collaboration in Science Education, 21-25 August 2017, Dublin City University.
Nik Zarini Nik Kar & Salmiza Salleh. (2012). Kesan pendekatan inkuiri penemuan terhadap pencapaian pelajar dalam mata pelajaran kimia. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 27, 159-174.
Adeline, L.S.Y & Lay, Y.F. (2014). Sikap dan kebimbangan kimia dalam kalangan pelajar aliran sains: Satu pendekatan pemodelan persamaan struktural (SEM). Jurnal Pemikir Pendidikan, 5, 99-117.
Zoller, U. (2012). Science education for global sustainability: What is necessary for teaching, learning, and assessment strategies? Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 297-300.
Nor Hidayah Ibrahim & Zanaton Ikhsan. (2018). Level of chemophobia and relationship with attitude towards chemistry among science students. Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(2), 52-65.
Özmen, H. (2007). The effectiveness of conceptual change texts in remediating high school students’ alternative conceptions concerning chemical equilibrium. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8(3), 413- 425.
Nakiboglu, C., & Tekin, B.B. (2006). Identifying students’ misconceptions about nuclear chemistry. A study of Turkish high school students. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(11), 1712-1718. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p1712
Stefani, C., & Tsaparlis, G. (2009). Students’ levels of explanations, models, and misconceptions in basic quantum chemistry: A phenomenographic study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 520-536.
Ünal, S., Costu, B. & Ayas, A. (2010). Secondary school students´ misconceptions of covalent bonding.Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(2), 4-29.
Luxford, C.J. & Bretz, S.L. (2013). Moving beyond definitions: What student-generated models reveal about their understanding of covalent bonding and ionic bonding. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 14(2), 214-222.
Vladusic, R., Bucat, R.B. & Ozic, M. (2016). Understanding ionic bonding- a scan across the Croatian education system. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 17(4), 685-699.
Taber, K.S. (2013). Three levels of chemistry educational research. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14, 151–155.
Uyulgan, M.A., Akkuzu, N. & Alpat, S. (2014). Assessing the students' understanding related to molecular geometry using a two-tier diagnostic test. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 839- 855.
Cooper, M.M., Corley, M.L. & Underwood, S.M. (2013). An investigation of college chemistry students´ understanding of structure-property relationships. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(6), 699-721.
Zephrinus C.N. & Phoebe E. (2015). Resolving Nigerian secondary school students’ learning difficulties in nuclear chemistry using computer animation solutions. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 1034-1040.
Nahum, T.L., Hofstein, A., Mamlok N.R., & Bar-dov, Z. (2004). Can final examinations amplify students’ misconceptions in chemistry? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 301-325.
Jayarajah Kamaleswaran, Rohaidah Mohd Saad & Rose Amnah Abdul Rauf. (2014). A review of Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics (STEM) education research from 1999-2013: A Malaysian perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 155- 163.
Nur Adilah Abdol Samat, Nor Hasniza Ibrahim, Johari Surif, Marlina Ali, Abdul Halim Abdullah, Corrienna Abdul Talib and Muhammad Abdul Hadi Bunyamin. (2019). Chem-a module based on STEM approach in chemical bond. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 7(6S5), 700-710.
Nahum, T.L., Mamlok, N.R., Hofstein, A. & Taber, K.S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46(2), 179-207.
Noraini Idris. (2013). Penyelidikan dalam pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw Hill.
Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Cohen, A., Vigoda, E., & Samorly, A. (2001). Analysis of the mediating effect of personal- psychological variables on the relationship between socioeconomic status and political participation: A structural equations framework. Political Psychology, 22(4), 727-757.
Vasantha, R., N. & Harinarayana, N.S. (2016). Online survey tools: A case study of Google Forms. Paper presented at the National Conference on Scientific, Computational & Information Research Trends in Engineering, GSSS-IETW, 30th Jan 2016, Mysore.
Cobanoglu, C., Warde, B., & Moreo, P.J. (2001). A comparison of mail, fax and web-based survey methods. International Journal of Market Research, 43, 405-410.
Christyowidiasmoro, C. & Sumpeno, S. (2015). Chemical bonds visualization using particle effect and augmented reality. IPTEK Journal of Proceedings Series, 1, 264-268.
Karpudewan, M., & Meng, C.K. (2017). The effects of classroom learning environment and laboratory learning environment on the attitude towards learning science in the 21st-century science lessons. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction (MJLI), 1, 25-45.
Temiz, B.K. (2020). Assessing skills of identifying variables and formulating hypotheses using scenario-based multiple-choice questions. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 7(1), 1-17.
Broman, K., Ekborg, M., Johnels, D. (2011). Chemistry in crisis? Perspectives on teaching and learning chemistry in Swedish upper secondary schools. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 7, 43-60.
Cardellini, L. (2012). Chemistry: Why the subject is difficult? Educación Química, 23, 305-310.
Sukmawati, W. (2019). Analisis level, mikroskopis dan simbolik mahasiswa dalam memahami elektrokimia. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 7(1), 9–19.
Tümay, H. (2016). Reconsidering learning difficulties and misconceptions in chemistry: Emergence in chemistry and its implications for chemical education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17, 229–245.
Ballester, P., M.E., Calatayud, M.L., García, L.R., Sabater M.J.V. & Trilles, G.E. (2017). Student’s misconceptions on chemical bonding: A comparative study between high school and first year university students. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning, 5(1), 1-15.
Bahagian Matrikulasi. (2017). Curriculum specifications: Chemistry. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education.
Khairani, Z., Nasution, D., & Bukit, N. (2021). Analysis of science process skills using learning cycle 7E. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1811, 1-5.
Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M., Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E., & Ivkovic, M. (2011). Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 51(1), 341-377.
Alexander, S., Silvia, R., & Timotius, R.W. (2019). Augmented reality application for chemical bonding based on Android. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE), 9(1), 445-451.
Shelton, B.E., & Hedley, N.R. (2002). Using augmented reality for teaching earth-sun relationships to undergraduate geography students. Paper presented at the 1st IEEE International Augmented Reality Toolkit Workshop, 29 September 2002, Darmstadt, Germany.
Adi Putra Andriyandi, Wahyudin Darmalaksana, Dian Sa’adillah Maylawati, Ferli Septi Irwansyah, Teddy Mantoro & Muhammad Ali Ramdhani. (2020). Augmented reality using features accelerated segment test for learning tajweed. Telkomnika, 18(1), 208-216.
Danakorn Nincarean, Alia Mohamad Bilal, Noor Dayana Abdul Halim & Mohd Hishamuddin Abdul Rahman. (2013). Mobile augmented reality: The potential for education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 657-664.
Azuma, R.T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385.
Wu, H.K., Lee, S.W.Y., Chang, H.Y., & Liang, J.C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41-49.
Singhal, S., Bagga, S., Goyal, P., & Saxena, V. (2012). Augmented chemistry: Interactive education system. International Journal of Computer Application, 49(15), 1–5.
Qassem Lamees Mahmoud, Mohd Said Al Hawai, Hessa Al Shehhi, Shayma Al Zemerly M Jamal & Ng, J., W. P. (2016). Air-edutech: Augmented immersive reality (AIR) technology for high school chemistry education. Presented at 2016 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 11-13 April 2016, Abu Dhabi.
Nor Farhah Saidin, Noor Dayana Halim & Noraffandy Yahaya. (2019). Framework for developing a mobile augmented reality for learning Chemical Bonds. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 13(7), 54-68.
Enyedy, N., Danish, J.A., & DeLiema, D. (2015). Constructing liminal blends in a collaborative augmented-reality learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10, 7-34.
Martin-Gonzalez, A., Chi-Poot, A., & Uc-Cetina, V. (2016). Usability evaluation of an augmented reality system for teaching Euclidean vectors. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(6), 627-636.
Jeřábek, T., Rambousek, V., & Wildová, R. (2015). Perceptual specifics and categorisation of augmented reality systems. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1740-1744.
Khalil, M.K., Paas, F., Johnson, T.E., & Payer, A.F. (2005). Interactive and dynamic visualizations in teaching and learning of anatomy: A cognitive load perspective. The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist, 286B(1), 8-14.
Huda Wahida Rosli, Fauziah Baharum, Harryizman Harun, Ali Yusni Daud., Haslina Mohd & Norida Muhamad Darus. (2010). Using augmented reality for supporting learning human anatomy in science subject for Malaysian primary school. Paper presented at the Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT, INTEGRATION 2010, 2 June 2010, Putrajaya.
Zhang, J., Liu, T.C., Sung, Y.T., Chang, K. (2015). Using augmented reality to promote homogeneity in learning achievement. Paper presented at IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality - Media, Art, Social Science, Humanities and Design (ISMAR-MASH'D), 29th September 2015 to 3rd October 2015, Fukuoka, Japan.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
