Integrating Nanoscience Activities in Enhancing Malaysian Secondary School Students’ Understanding of Chemistry Concepts
More details
Hide details
University of Malaya, MALAYSIA
Universiti Sains Malaysia, MALAYSIA
Kah-Heng Chua   

University of Malaya
Online publish date: 2019-09-16
Publish date: 2019-09-16
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2020;16(1):em1801
This study reports the effectiveness of nanoscience activities in enhancing secondary school students’ understanding of two chemistry concepts: structure of atom and acid and bases. For the purpose of this study, quasi experiment was employed to 163 Grade 10 students from the Northern Region of Malaysia. Sample from the experimental group was exposed to a series of nanoscience activities lasted for 10 weeks. Students’ understanding on the two chemistry concepts was tested using Chemistry Achievement Test (CAT). The CAT consists of multiple-choice questions and open-ended questions. Data obtained from CAT was analysed using one-way ANCOVA to identify the effectiveness of nanoscience activity in enhancing students’ understanding of chemistry concepts. The findings show that there were statistically significant differences between experimental and control groups’ mean scores (F (1,160) = 167.82, p < 0.05 ηp2 = 0.512) with the experimental group students reporting higher mean. The ANCOVA result indicated experimental group students’ understanding of chemistry concepts significantly higher than the comparison group. The qualitative analysis of open-ended responses further supports findings obtained from the quantitative analysis. The study suggests that integrating nanoscience into the contemporary teaching of chemistry is relevant and appropriate.
Agung, S., & Schwartz, M. S. (2007). Students’ understanding of conservation of matter, stoichiometry and balancing equations in Indonesia. International Journal of Science Education, 29(13), 1679-1702.
Allamel-Raffin, C. (2011). The meaning of a scientific image: Case study in nanoscience a semiotic approach. NanoEthics, 5(2), 165-173.
Arends, D., & Kilcher, A. (2010). Teaching for student learning: Becoming an accomplished teacher. New York: Routledge.
Aydeniz, M., & Kotowski, E. L. (2012). What do middle and high school students know about the particulate nature of matter after instruction? Implications for practice. School Science and Mathematics, 112(2), 59–65.
Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B., & Silberstein, J. (1988). Theories, principles and laws. Education in Chemistry, 65(25), 89-92.
Blonder, R., & Dinur, M. (2012). Teaching nanotechnology using student-centered pedagogy for increasing students’ continuing motivation. Journal of Nano Education, 3(1), 51-61.
Blonder, R., & Sakhnini, S. (2012). Teaching two basic nanotechnology concepts in secondary school by using a variety of teaching methods. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 500-516.
Bradley, E. L., Castle, L., & Chaudhry, Q. (2011). Applications of nanomaterials in food packaging with a consideration of opportunities for developing countries. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 22(11), 604–610.
Burns, J. R. (1982). An evaluation of 6th and 7th form chemistry in terms of the needs of the students and the community: Report to the Department of Education. Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Education.
Canpolat, N. (2006). Turkish undergraduates’ misconceptions of evaporation, evaporation rate, and vapour pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1757-1770.
Cetin-Dindar, A., & Geban, O. (2017). Conceptual understanding of acids and bases concepts and motivation to learn chemistry. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(1), 85-97.
Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293-307.
Chari, D. N., Howard, R., & Bowe, B. (2012). Disciplinary identity of nanoscience and nanotechnology research: A study of postgraduate researchers’ experiences. International Journal for Digital Society, 3(1), 619-616.
Cheung, D. (2011). Evaluating student attitudes toward chemistry lessons to enhance teaching in the secondary school. Educ. quím, 22(2), 117-122.
Chiu, M. H. (2004). An investigation of exploring mental models and causes of secondary school students’ misconceptions in acids-bases, particle theory, and chemical equilibrium. Annual report to the National Science Council in Taiwan, Taiwan: National Science Council.
Chiu, M. H. (2007). A national survey of students’ conceptions of chemistry in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 421-454.
Chua, K. H & Karpudewan, M. (2017). Facilitating primary school students’ understanding of water cycle through guided inquiry-based learning. In M. Karpudewan, A. N. M. Zain, & A. L. Chandrasegaran (Eds.), Overcoming students’ misconceptions in science strategies and perspectives from Malaysia (pp. 29 – 49). Singapore: Springer.
Chua, K. H., Karpudewan, M., & Chandrakesan, K. (2017). Climate change activities: A possible means to promote understanding and reduce misconceptions about acid rain, global warming, greenhouse effect and ozone layer depletion among secondary school students. In M. Karpudewan, A. N. M. Zain, & A. L. Chandrasegaran (Eds.), Overcoming students’ misconceptions in science strategies and perspectives from Malaysia (pp. 323 – 344). Singapore: Springer.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis: A computer program: Routledge.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, USA: Taylor & Francis.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). California, USA: SAGE Publications.
Dai, Y. (2004). Using new teaching strategies to improve teaching and learning in organic chemistry. The China Papers, 4(4), 6-9.
Demircioglu, G., Ayas, A., & Demircioglu, H. (2005). Conceptual change achieved through a new teaching program on acids and bases. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(1), 36-51.
Dori, Y. J., Dangur, V., Avargil, S., & Peskin, U. (2014). Assessing advanced high school and undergraduate students’ thinking skills: The chemistry--from the nanoscale to microelectronics module. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(9), 1306-1317.
Furlan, P. Y. (2009). Engaging students in early exploration of nanoscience topics using hands-on activities and scanning tunneling microscopy. Journal of Chemical Education, 86(6), 705-711.
Gabel, D. L. (1988). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 233-249). Great Britain: Klewer Academic Press.
Gabel, D. L. (1993). Use of the particle nature of matter in developing conceptual understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 193-194.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies is and applications (9th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Ghattas, N. I., & Carver, J. S. (2012). Integrating nanotechnology into school education: A review of the literature. Research in Science and Technological Education, 30(3), 271-284.
Hand, B. M. (2008). Introducing the science writting heuristic approach. In B. M. Hand (Ed.), Science inquiry, argument and language: A case study for the science writing heuristic Rotterdam, Netherlands: SENSE Publishers.
Hey, J. H. G., Joyce, C. K., Jennings, K. E., Kalil, T., & Grossman, J. C. (2009). Putting the discipline in interdisciplinary: Using speedstorming to teach and initiate creative collaboration in nanoscience. Journal of Nano Education, 1(1), 75-85.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Holme, T. A., Luxford, C. J., & Brandriet, A. (2015). Defining conceptual understanding in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(9), 1477–1483.
Huang, W. C. (2004). The types and causes of misconceptions of elementary students on acids-bases. Annual Report to the National Science Council in Taiwan, Taiwan: National Science Council.
Hudgins, D. W., Prather, E. E., Grayson, D. J., & Smits, D. P. (2006). Effectiveness of collaborative ranking tasks on student understanding of key astronomy concepts. Astronomy Education Review, 5(1), 1-22.
Ibrahim, N. R. M., & Karpudewan, M. (2013). Nanoscience activities improves students’ attitude towards learning biology. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Science and Mathematics Education, CoSMEd 2013, Penang, Malaysia.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
Jones, M. G., Andre, T., Superfine, R., & Taylor, R. (2003). Learning at the nanoscale: The impact of students’ use of remote microscopy on concepts of viruses, scale, and microscopy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 303-322.
Kala, N., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2013). The effectiveness of Predict-Observe-Explain technique in probing students’ understanding about acid-base chemistry: A case for the concepts of pH, pOH and strength. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(1), 555-574.
Karpudewan, M., Treagust, D. F., Mocerino, M., Won, M., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2015). Investigating high school students’ understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(6), 845-863.
Kennedy, M. M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(3), 249–263.<249::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-R.
Kirbulut, Z. D., & Beeth, M. E. (2013). Representations of fundamental chemistry concepts in relation to the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(2), 96-106.
Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205-226.
Laherto, A. (2012). Nanoscience education for scientific literacy: Opportunities and challenges in secondary school and in out-of-school settings. (Doctoral Dissertation Unpublished thesis), University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Levy Nahum, T., Hofstein, A., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Bar-Dov, Z. (2004). Can final examinations amplify students’ misconceptions in chemistry? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 301-325.
Levy Nahum, T., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2007). Developing a new teaching approach for the chemical bonding concept aligned with current scientific and pedagogical knowledge. Science Education, 91(4), 579–603.
Levy Nahum, T., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Taber, K. S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46(2), 179-207.
Mbajiorgu, N., & Reid, N. (2006). Factors influencing curriculum development in higher education physics: A Physical sciences practice guide. Hull: Higher Education Academy, Physical Sciences Centre Press.
McWeeny, R. (2007). Atoms, molecules, matter– the stuff of chemistry. Italy.
Mehraban, Z. (2016). Investigating into the learning process of nanoscience and technology concepts based on the constructivist learning. Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, 8(3S), 2158-2171.
Meyer, H. (2005). Is it molecules? Again! A review of students’ learning about particle theory. The Chemical Education Journal, 9(2), 9-10.
Muhamad Damanhuri, M. I., Treagust, D. F., Won, M., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2016). High school students’ understanding of acid-base concepts: An ongoing challenge for teachers. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(1), 9-27.
National Nanotechnology Initiative. (2008). Nanotechnology: Big things from a tiny world. Arlington, VA: NNI Publications and Reports, Educational and Societal Dimensions.
Osman, K., & Sukor, N. S. (2013). Conceptual understanding in secondary school chemistry: A discussion of the difficulties Experienced by students. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(5), 433-441.
Ozmen, H. (2004). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 147-159.
Ozmen, H., Demircioglu, G., Burhan, Y., Naseriazar, A., & Demircioglu, H. (2012). Using laboratory activities enhanced with concept cartoons to support progression in students’ understanding of acid-base concepts. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 13(1), Article 8.
Park, E. J., Light, G., Swarat, S., & Denise, D. (2009). Understanding learning progression in student conceptualization of atomic structure by variation theory for learning. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science Conference, Iowa City, Iowa.
Salame, I. I., Sarowar, S., Begum, S., & Krauss, D. (2011). Students’ alternative conceptions about atomic properties and the periodic table. The Chemical Educator, 16, 190-194.
Santiago, L., & Morell, G. (2006). The need for promoting nanotechnology awareness in higher education. Cuaderno de Investigación en la Educación, 21, 91-102.
Sarikaya, M. (2007). Prospective teachers’ misconceptions about the atomic structure in the context of electrification by friction and an activity in order to remedy them. International Education Journal, 8(1), 40-63.
Schank, P., Wise, A., Stanford, T., & Rosenquist, A. (2009). Can high school students learn nanoscience? An evaluation of the viability and impact of the nanoscience curriculum. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Sequeira, M., & Leite, L. (1991). Alternative conceptions and history of science in physics teacher education. Science Education, 75(1), 45-56.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Shamuganathan, S. & Karpudewan, M. (2017). Science writing heuristics embedded in green chemistry: a tool to nurture environmental literacy among pre-university students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(2), 386-396.
Sim, J. H., & Daniel, E. G. S. (2014). Representational competence in chemistry: A comparison between students with different levels of understanding of basic chemical concepts and chemical representations. Cogent Education, 1(1), 991180.
Snyder, R. F. (2000). The relationship between learning styles/multiple intelligences and academic achievement of high school students. The High School Journal, 83(2), 11-20.
Supasorn, S. (2012). Enhancing undergraduates’ conceptual understanding of organic acid-base-neutral extraction using inquiry-based experiments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 4643–4650.
Surif, J., Ibrahim, N. H., & Mokhtar, M. (2012). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in problem solving. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 56, 416–425.
Tal, R. T. (2004). Using a field trip to a wetland as a guide for conceptual understanding in environmental education – A case study of a pre-service teacher’s research. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(2), 127-142.
Tobin, K. G., & Gallagher, J. J. (1987). What happens in high school science classrooms? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(6), 549-560.
Varadan, V. K., Pillai, A. S., Mukherji, D., Dwivedi, M., & Chen, L. (2010). Introduction Nanoscience and Nanotechnology in Engineering (pp. 1-25). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
Vockell, E. L., & Asher, J. W. (1995). Educational Research (2nd ed.). Ohio, USA: Prentice Hall.
Yakmaci-Guzel, B., & Adadan, E. (2013). Use of multiple representations in developing preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding of the structure of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 8(1), 109-130.
Zangori, L., Vo, T., Forbes, C. T., & Schwarz, C. V. (2017). Supporting 3rd-grade students model-based explanations about groundwater: A quasiexperimental study of a curricular intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1421–1442.