CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Science Education and PedagogyVarious Chemistry Research TopicsChemistry Education and Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Linking the Macroscopic, Sub-microscopic and Symbolic Levels: The Case of Inorganic Qualitative Analysis

Tan, Kim Chwee Daniel, Goh, Ngoh Khang, Chia, Lian Sai, Treagust, David F.·2009·Models and Modeling in Science Education
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8_7
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8_7

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 29 · Cited by 25

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Berry, A., Mulhall, P., Gunstone, R., & Loughran, J. (1999). Helping students learn from laboratory work. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 45(1), 27–31.
  2. Boo, H. K. (1994). A-level chemistry students’ conceptions and understandings of the nature of chemical reactions and approaches to learning of chemistry content. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, London.
  3. Butts, B., & Smith, R. (1987). HSC chemistry students’ understanding of the structure and properties of molecular and ionic compounds. Research in Science Education, 17, 192–201. · DOI
  4. Dechsri, P., Jones, L. L., & Heikkinen, H. W. (1997). Effect of a laboratory manual design incorporating visual information-processing aids on student learning and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 891–904. · DOI
  5. Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105–122. · DOI
  6. Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J., & Hackling, M. W. (1995). Students’ alternative conceptions in chemistry: A review of research and implications for teaching and learning. Studies in Science Education, 25, 69–95. · DOI
  7. Goh, N. K., Toh, K. A., & Chia, L. S. (1987). The effect of modified laboratory instruction on students’ achievement in chemistry practicals. Research report, Institute of Education, Singapore.
  8. Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Modelling in science lessons: Are there better ways to learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 420–429. · DOI
  9. Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70(256), 33–40.
  10. Hodson, D. (1992). Redefining and reorienting practical work in school science. School Science Review, 73(264), 65–78.
  11. Johnstone, A. H. & Wham, A. J. B. (1982). The demands of practical work. Education in Chemistry, 19, 71–73.
  12. Pintrich, P. J., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–200. · DOI
  13. Ribeiro M. G. T. C., Pereira, D. J. V. C., & Maskill, R. (1990). Reaction and spontaneity: the influence of meaning from everyday language on fourth year undergraduates’ interpretations of some simple chemical phenomena. International Journal of Science Education, 12(4),391–401. · DOI
  14. Schauble, L., Klopfer, L. E., & Raghavan, K. (1991). Students’ transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 859–882. · DOI
  15. Swartz, R. J. (1991). Infusing the teaching of critical thinking into content instruction. In Costa, L. A. (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. (Vol. 1, pp. 177–184). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  16. Tan, K. C. D. (2000). Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate secondary students’ conceptions of qualitative analysis. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Curtin University of Technology.
  17. Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Secondary students’ perceptions about learning qualitative analysis in inorganic chemistry. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19(2), 223–234. · DOI
  18. Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Development and application of a two-tier multiple choice diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding of inorganic chemistry qualitative analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 283–301. · DOI
  19. Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2004). Qualitative analysis practical work. School Science Review, 85(313), 97–102.
  20. Tasker, R. & Freyberg, P. (1985). Facing the mismatches in the classroom. In Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (Eds.), Learning in science: The implications of children’s science (pp. 66–80). Auckland, London: Heinemann.
  21. Treagust, D. F. (1995). Diagnostic assessment of students’ science knowledge. In S. M. Glynn & R. Duit (Eds.), Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice (pp. 327–346). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  22. University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. (1995). Chemistry: Report on the November 1994 examinations. Cambridge: Author.
  23. University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. (1997). Chemistry: Report on the November 1996 examinations. Cambridge: Author.
  24. Volet, S. E. (1991). Modelling and coaching of relevant metacognitive strategies for enhancing university students’ learning. Learning and Instruction, 1, 319–336. · DOI
  25. Woolnough, B. & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Metadata

Authors
Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F.
Affiliations
Nanyang Technological University (SG)
Corresponding author
Tan, Kim Chwee Daniel
ORCID
Venue
Models and Modeling in Science Education
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published
2009
Pages
137-150
ISSN
1871-2983 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8_7
OpenAlex
W128258250
Cited by
25
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.61
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Models and modeling in science education (publishedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Various Chemistry Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Chemistry Education and Research
Keywords
qualitative inorganic analysis, chemistry education, diagnostic tools, teaching package, classroom assessment, practical skills

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Linking the Macroscopic, Sub-microscopic and Symbolic Levels: The Case of Inorganic Qualitative Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8_7
The paper
Tan, K. C. D., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Linking the Macroscopic, Sub-microscopic and Symbolic Levels: The Case of Inorganic Qualitative Analysis. Models and Modeling in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8_7