Preparing Modified Bonding Representations Inventory: Challenges and Solution

Collecting data on learners' performance in different chemistry contents and analysing them to identify their knowledge and understanding in related content areas is a major task of Chemistry Education Research. The data collection process on the learners' content knowledge and understanding of content knowledge requires a standard measuring tool. The preparation of standardized tools for measuring academic achievement requires computer software. All software used in the standardization of a tool comes at a cost and requires training for the researcher involved in handling the situation, which can impede the smooth running of a project. The same was the situation when the author was working on modifying the bonding representations inventory (BRI) for its local use in South Africa. The data analysis laboratory was situated in a different city, 500 km away from the researcher's field of work. Owing to the long distance and communication delay, the author was concerned with delays in the project. It is known that necessity, which can create an opportunity. The Microsoft Excel (MS-Excel) platform was used for standardizing the modified BRI because MS-Excel is available as a standard in MS-Office on the Windows platform. This paper presents a fact. That, a tool can be standardized by using MS-Excel without any complexity.

Systems Thinking and Sustainability

A 3-year IUPAC project Systems Thinking in Chemistry for Sustainability: Toward 2030 and Beyond (STCS 2030+, IUPAC Project #2020-014-3-050) [1] launched in late 2020 is breaking important new ground in addressing chemistry’s orientations, roles, and responsibilities in the 21st Century and helping to map out implications for chemistry education, research, and practice. In taking on this ambitious task, STCS 2030+ draws on expertise available within IUPAC’s own structures, as a project co-sponsored by three IUPAC standing committees: the Committee on Chemistry Education (CCE), the Committee on Chemistry and Industry (COCI) and the Interdivisional Committee on Green Chemistry for Sustainable Development (ICGCSD). The project is also working with other organizations, such as the International Organization for Chemical Sciences in Development (IOCD), which is a co-supporter, and involves collaborators with individuals from organizations that include the Stockholm Resilience Centre [2], the American Chemical Society (ACS) Green Chemistry Institute [3], the International Year of Basic Sciences for Sustainable Development (IYBSSD 2022-23) [4], and chemistry educators and chemical industry from around the world.

Student Success and the High School-University Transition: 100 Years of Chemistry Education Research

The 100th anniversary of the first article (published in 1921) examining student success and the high school to university transition in chemistry provides an excellent opportunity to consider what has...

Towards a theoretically sound measure of chemistry students’ motivation; investigating rank-sort survey methodology to reduce response style bias

Prior research has demonstrated the important role of chemistry students’ affect in academic performance. Likert-scale surveys are the most prevalent tools to measure students’ affect within chemistry education research, however, data collected through a Likert-scale survey may exhibit response style bias which can hinder accurately measuring students’ affect. This study investigates the utility of a novel survey methodology, termed rank-sort survey, in understanding students’ academic motivation in a general chemistry course. Informed by Q methodology, in a rank-sort survey participants rank a set of statements in terms of level of agreement with limits in place on how many items can be assigned a particular rank. In this investigation, a rank-sort survey was developed by using statements from an existing Likert-scale instrument, the Academic Motivation Survey in Chemistry. Data collected from the rank-sort surveys, compared to Likert-scale surveys, showed a better alignment with self-determination theory, the underlying theoretical framework, and a better ability to predict students’ academic performance in chemistry. The study also discusses which surveys in chemistry education research are likely to benefit from adopting a rank-sort approach.

The current state of methods for establishing reliability in qualitative chemistry education research articles

The tradition of qualitative research drives much of chemistry education research activity. When performing qualitative studies, researchers must demonstrate the trustworthiness of their analysis so researchers and practitioners consuming their work can understand if and how the presented research claims and conclusions might be transferable to their unique educational settings. There are a number of steps researchers can take to demonstrate the trustworthiness of their work, one of which is demonstrating and reporting evidence of reliability. The purpose of this methodological review is to investigate the methods researchers use to establish and report reliability for chemistry education research articles including a qualitative research component. Drawing from the literature on qualitative research methodology and content analysis, we describe the approaches for establishing the reliability of qualitative data analysis using various measures of inter-rater reliability and processes including negotiated agreement. We used this background literature to guide our review of research articles containing a qualitative component and published in Chemistry Education Research and Practice and the Journal of Chemical Education from the years 2010 through 2019 for whether they report evidence of reliability. We followed this by a more in-depth analysis of how articles from the years 2017 through 2019 discuss reliability. Our analysis indicates that, overall, researchers are presenting evidence of reliability in chemistry education research (CER) articles by reporting reliability measures, describing a process of negotiated agreement, or mentioning reliability and the steps taken to demonstrate it. However, there is a reliance on reporting only percent agreement, which is not considered an acceptable measure of reliability when used on its own. In addition, the descriptions of how reliability was established were not always clear, which may make it difficult for readers to evaluate the veracity of research findings. Our findings indicate that, as a field, CER researchers should be more cognizant of the appropriateness of how we establish reliability for qualitative analysis and should more clearly present the processes by which reliability was established in CER manuscripts.