Determining cognitive structure of students’ knowledge with using Knowledge Space Theory

Author
علی یاسینی
دانشگاه ایلام
Abstract
This study examined the effect of concept maps and traditional ways of teaching to students’ learning about the concepts of third year high school chemistry course and to analyze this effect, knowledge space theory is used. Semi – experimental method with pre and post test were used and the population of this study consisted of all students (N=250) in the third year of secondary school in the city of Ilam. The sample used in this study selected via convenience sampling and two high school class were selected randomly to investigate the traditional and inquiry teaching methods. To collect the data, learning and attitude research made questionnaire was done in which their validity were approved by five professors of education and ten chemistry professors and teachers. Reliability assessed via Cronbach Alpha and the amount of 0.79 and 0.74 estimates to knowledge and attitude respectively. To analyze the data, knowledge space theory and Potter software was used. Comparison between groups was performed using t-test and results of post test showed significant difference between the groups' attitudes and knowledge structures of inquiry method more cohesive and its training critical path is different than the traditional group.
Keywords
Knowledge space theory
Stoichiometry
inquiry training
Ahmadian, M., Aghazadeh, M. (2000). Manual for new methods of teaching. 2ed, Aeeje publication.[Persian].

Amand, M.( 1995) Active teaching methods. Journal of teacher development, 12, 2, 33-36. [Persian].

Arasasingham R., Taagepera M., Potter F. and Lonjers S., (2004). Using knowledge space theory to assess student understanding of stoichiometry, Journal of Chemical Education, 81(2). 15-17.
Arasasingham R., Taagepera M., Potter F., Martorell I. and Lonjers S., (2005). Assessing the effect of web-based learning tools on student understanding of stoichiometry using knowledge space theory, Journal of Chemical Education, 82: 1251-1262.

Badryan, A. (2006). WWW.Bardian. Blogfa.com./2009/4/11. [Persian].

Blair, K., Schwartz, D.L., Biswas, G., & Leelawong, K. (2007). Pedagogical agents for learning by teaching: Teachable Agents. Educational Technology, 47(1), 56-61.

Jahnifar, M,.(2008). Effectiveness Study of work and energy with Inquiry method for problems with resolving the way students learn according to their talent, MA thesis, University of Tehran Shahid Rajai.[Persian].

Khalili, M. (1986).Structures in learning and education in a explanatory ways. Journal of education,4,2,23-34.[Persian].

Leon, M. R.(2015).Science teachers understanding of inquiry-based science teaching (IBST): Case of Rwandan lower secondary school science teachers. Rwandan Journal of Education, 2(1), 77-90.
Liu, C., & Long, F. (2014, January). The Discussion of Traditional Teaching and Multimedia Teaching Approach in College English Teaching. In 2014 International Conference on Management, Education and Social Science (ICMESS 2014). Atlantis Press.

Mirzaee, A., Kouhi, R. (2008). Active approaches in education and learning. The first national conference on education. Shahid Rajaee university.[Persian].

Monire, G,.(2004). Investigating of Inquiry educational effect in science course on student Academic achievement and creativity, MA thesis of Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabatabaei University.[Persian].

Palmer W. (2003). Simple, surprising, useful. Three questions for judging teaching methods. Journal of Pedagogy, 3(2), 285-7.

PourSabhian,M,.(2008). Investigating of physics learning, attitudes and skills in with Inquiry method teaching and compare it with the conventional method in laboratory lesson electricity, MA thesis, University of Tehran Shahid Rajai.[Persian].

Safawi, A,A.(2013).methods and teaching techniques, Contemporary Publication.[Persian].

Shabani, H. (2005).Educational skills, methods and teaching skills, 3ed, Samt Publication. [Persian].
Taagepera, M. & Noori, S. (2000). Mapping students’ thinking patterns in learning organic chemistry by the use of knowledge space theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 77: 1224-1229.

Taagepera, M., Arasasingham, R., Potter, F., Soroudi, A., & Lam, G. (2002). Following the development of the bonding concept using knowledge space theory. J. Chem. Educ, 79(6), 756.

Tóth, Z. & Ludányi, L. (2007). Combination of phenomenography with knowledge space theory to study students’ thinking patterns in describing an atom.Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 8: 327-336.
Wang, J. R., & Lin, S. W. (2008). Examining reflective thinking: A study of changes in methods students’ conceptions and understandings of inquiry teaching. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 459-479.

Wildy, H. & Wallace, J., (1995). Teaching for understanding , Journal Research Science Teaching: 17-21