CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Chemistry Education and ResearchScience Education and PedagogyEducational Methods and Outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

DEVELOPING THE CONTEXT-BASED CHEMISTRY MOTIVATION SCALE: VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS

Open access
Önen, Ayşem Seda, Ulusoy, Fatma Merve·2014·Journal of Baltic Science Education
DOI 10.33225/jbse/14.13.809
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

In order to explain chemistry subjects by linking them to everyday life and accordingly, to improve the quality of education, context-based learning has come into use widely in chemistry teaching recently. The aim of this study is to develop a scale to determine secondary school students’ motivations towards chemistry activities supported with context-based learning. Validity and reliability analysis of the scale were done with the participation of 525 high school students. To determine the structural validity of the scale, exploratory factor analysis was done. The factor analysis concluded that the scale had a three-factor structure with 20 items. Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficient of the scale was calculated to be 0.91. Cronbach Alpha internal consistency coefficients of sub dimensions were found to be 0,84; 0,80 and 0.81 respectively. In the light of the findings of this study, the scale developed is concluded to be of use in determining high school students’ motivations towards context-based chemistry. Key words: context-based chemistry, high school students, motivation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.33225/jbse/14.13.809

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY-NC · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Byman, R. (2005). Curiosity and sensation seeking: a conceptual and empirical examination. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1365-1379. · DOI
  2. Acar, B., & Yaman, M. (2011). The effects of context-based learning on students’ levels of knowledge and interest. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 40, 1-10.
  3. Balcı, A. (2001). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler (Research in social sciences: Method, techniques and principles (3. Ed). Ankara: PegemA Publication. · DOI
  4. Barker, V., & Millar, R. (1999). Students’ reasoning about basic chemical reactions: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal Science Education, 21 (6), 645-665. · DOI
  5. Bennett, J., & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based chemistry: The Salters approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (9), 999-1015. · DOI
  6. Bulte, A. M. W., Westbroek, H. B., De Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2006). A research approach to designing chemistry education using authentic practices as contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (9), 1063-1086. · DOI
  7. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı (Data analysis for social sciences) (12.ed). Ankara: PegemA. · DOI
  8. Coştu, B., Ünal, S. & Ayas, A. (2007). The use of daily-life events in science teaching. Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 8 (1), 197-207.
  9. Demirci, B. (2000). Liselerde uygulanan kimya dersinin verimliliği (The performance of chemistry courses in high schools). 4th Congress of Science Education (pp.423-426). Hacettepe University Faculty of Education, Ankara.
  10. Demircioğlu, H., Demircioğlu, G., & Çalık, M. (2009). Investigating effectiveness of storylines embedded within context based approach: A case for the periodic table. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 241- 249. · DOI
  11. Dunteman, G. H. (1989). Principal component analysis. Quantitative applications in the social sciences, 69. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. · DOI
  12. Fraenkel, J. R., &Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6.ed).New York: McGraw-Hill International Edition.
  13. Gilbert, J. K., Justi, R., Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O., & Treagust, D. F. (2004). Securing a future for chemical education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5 (1), 5-14. · DOI
  14. Huntemann, H., Haarmann, E. M., & Parchmann, I. (2000). Schüleraussagen zur unterrichtsreihe «treibstoffe in der diskussion» eine erste untersuchung zur konzeption chemie im kontext. Chemkon, 7 (3), 131-136. · DOI
  15. Huntemann, H., Paschmann, A., Parchmann, I., & Ralle, B. (1999). Chemie im kontext-ein neues konzept für den chemieunterricht? darstellung einer kontextorientierten konzeption für den 11. jahrgang. Chemkon, 6 (4), 191-196. · DOI
  16. Karagölge, Z., & Ceyhun, İ. (2002). Öğrencilerin bazı kimyasal kavramları günlük hayatta kullanma becerilerinin tespiti (Determination of students’ using skills of some chemical concept in daily life). Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 10 (2), 287-290.
  17. Keller, J. M. (1999). Motivation in cyber learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technology, 1 (1), 7- 30.
  18. Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide for factor analysis. London: Routledge.
  19. Osborne, R. J., & Collins, J. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: a focus group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (5), 441-467. · DOI
  20. Özay-Köse, E., & Çam-Tosun, F. (2011). Effect of context based learning in students’ achievement about nervous system. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 2, 91-106.
  21. Özden, M. (2007). Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of chemistry teachers’ problems encountered during chemistry teaching: Samples of Adıyaman and Malatya. Pamukkale University Journal of Education, 22, 40-53.
  22. Özmen, H. (2003). Chemistry student teachers’ levels of linking their knowledge with daily life about acid and base concepts. Kastamonu Education Journal, 11 (2), 317- 324.
  23. Palmer, D. (1997). The effect of context on students’ reasoning about forces. International Journal of Science Education, 19 (6), 681-696. · DOI
  24. Pekdağ, B. (2010). Alternative methods in learning chemistry: learning with animation, simulation, video and multimedia. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7 (2), 79-110.
  25. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
  26. Ramsden, M. J. (1997). How does a context‐based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? International Journal of Science Education, 19 (6), 697-710. · DOI
  27. Schwartz, A. T. (2006). Contextualised chemistry education: The American experience. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (9), 977-998. · DOI
  28. Shaw, D. G., & Dybdahl, C. S. (2000). Science and the popular media. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 37 (20), 22-31. · DOI
  29. Simon, S. (2000). Student attitudes towards science. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (Eds), Good practice in science teaching: what research has to say (104-119). Buckingham: Open University Press.
  30. Thompson, B. (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington:American Psychological Association. · DOI · Paper page
  31. Van Driel, J. H., Bulte, A. M. W., & Verloop, N. (2005). The conceptions of chemistry teachers about teaching and learning in the context of a curriculum innovation. International Journal of Science Education, 27 (3), 303-322. · DOI
  32. Vos, M. A. J., Taconis, R., Jochems, W. M. G. & Pilot, A. (2011). Classroom implementation of context-based chemistry education by teachers: the relation between experiences of teachers and the design of materials. International Journal of Science Education, 33 (10), 1407-1432. · DOI
  33. Yücel, S., Seçken, N. & Morgil, İ. (2001). Öğrencilerin lise kimya derslerinde öğretilen semboller, sabitler ve birimlerini öğrenme derecelerinin ölçülmesi (Measurement of students’ learning level of symbols, constants and unitsin chemistry courses). Gazi University Journal of gazi Educational Faculty, 21(2), 113-123.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Önen, A. S., & Ulusoy, F. M.
Affiliations
Hacettepe University (TR)
Venue
Journal of Baltic Science Education
Publisher
Scientia Socialis Ltd
Published
2014-12-15
Volume
13
Issue
6
Pages
809-820
ISSN
  • 1648-3898 (ISSN-L)
  • 2538-7138
DOI
10.33225/jbse/14.13.809
OpenAlex
W2254388139
Cited by
15
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
Journal of Baltic Science Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
Hacettepe Üniversitesi
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Chemistry Education and Research
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Outcomes
Keywords
scale development, high school students, motivation measurement, everyday situations, chemistry education

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