Multi-representation Analysis of General Chemistry Books on Chemical Bonding Subject

Article Sidebar

pdf
Published: Jun 28, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19109/ojpk.v8i1.21609
Keywords:
Chemical bonding, Macroscopic, Multi-representation, Sub microscopic, Symbolic

Main Article Content

Rizal
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Wiji
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Tuszie Widhiyanti
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Novianti Islahiah
SMAN Sumatera Selatan

Abstract

This research is a preliminary study that focuses on multi-representation analysis of the chemical bonding topic in three general chemistry of text books. The analysis was carried out to find out how concepts are explained based on the three levels of chemical representation, especially on ionic and covalent bonding, which are the basis for further research in developing intertextual-based learning strategies. Analysis was carried out at the macroscopic-symbolic and sub microscopic-symbolic levels usingmulti-representation analysis table that was adopted from Gkitzia et al., 201 for three general chemistry books, that are 1) Whitten, K.W, et.al. (2014).  Chemistry 10th edition. English: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning; 2) Chang, R. (2010). Chemistry 10th edition. New York : The McGraw-Hill Companies; and 3) Silberberg, M.S, and Amateis, P.G. (2021). Chemistry: the molecular nature of matter and change 9th edition.  New York : The McGraw-Hill Companies. The analysis results show that book: Silberberg, M.S, and Amateis, P.G. (2021). Chemistry: the molecular nature of matter and change 9th edition.  New York : The McGraw-Hill Companies has the most complete macroscopic-symbolic and sub microscopic-symbolic representation levels on the four main concept labels of chemical bonding, so that they can become standard reference material in developing chemical representations that will be used in intertextual learning strategies.

Article Details

How to Cite
Rizal, Wiji, Tuszie Widhiyanti, & Novianti Islahiah. (2024). Multi-representation Analysis of General Chemistry Books on Chemical Bonding Subject. Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 8(1), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.19109/ojpk.v8i1.21609
Issue
Vol. 8 No. 1 (2024): Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia
Section
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Rizal, Wiji, Tuszie Widhiyanti, & Novianti Islahiah. (2024). Multi-representation Analysis of General Chemistry Books on Chemical Bonding Subject. Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 8(1), 61-70. https://doi.org/10.19109/ojpk.v8i1.21609

References

BSKAP. (2022). Keputusan Kepala Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, riset, dan Teknologi Nomor 033/H/KR/2022 tentang Perubahan atas Keputusan Kepala Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, riset, dan Teknologi Nomor 008/H/KR/2022 tentang Capaian Pembelajaran pada Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar, dan Jenjang Pendidikan Menengah pada Kurikulum Merdeka. Jakarta: Subbagian Tata Usaha Kemdikbudristek.

Chandrasegaran, A.L., Treagust, D.F. & Mocerino, M. (2009). Emphasizing multiple levels of representation to enhance students’ understandings of the changes occurring during chemical reactions. Journal of Chemical Education, 26 (12), hlm. 1433-1436.

Chang, R. (2010). Chemistry 10th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Gudyanga. (2014). Students’ Misconceptions about Bonding and Chemical structure in Chemistry.

Guzel, B.Y. & Adadan, E. (2013). Use of multiple representations in developing preservice chemistry teachers’ understanding of the structure of matter. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 8 (1), 109-130.

Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, Context, and Text: Aspect of Language in a Social Semiotic Perspective. Melbourne: Deakin University Press.

Herawati, R.F., Mulyani, S. & Redjeki, T. (2013). Pembelajaran kimia berbasis multiple representasi ditinjau dari kemampuan awal terhadap prestasi belajar laju reaksi siswa SMA Negeri I karanganyar tahun pelajaran 2011/2012. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia (JPK), 2 (2), hlm. 38-43.

Jespersen, N.D., Brady, J.E. & Hyslop, A. (2012). Chemistry: The Molecular Nature of Matter 6th Edition. USA: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

Johnstone, A. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Symposium on Revolution and Evolution in Chemical Education, 70 (90), hlm. 701-705.

Lemke, J.L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning and Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Madden, S.P., Jones, L.L. & Rahm, J. (2011). The role of multiple representations in the understanding of ideal gas problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. 12, 283–293.

Nikat, et.al. (2021). Kajian Pendekatan Multirepresentasi Dalam Konteks Pembelajaran Fisika. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Ilmu Fisika. 1 (2), 45-53.

Permendikbud. (20013). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 69 Tahun 2013 tentang Kerangka Dasar dan Struktur Kurikulum Sekolah Menengah Atas/Madrasah Aliyah. Jakarta: Biro Humas Kemdikbud.

Pinarbaşi, T. (2006). An Investigation of Effectiveness of Conceptual Change Text Oriented Instruction on Students’ Understanding of Solution Concepts. Research in Science Education. 36, hlm. 313-335.

Rokhim, D.A., Rahayu, S. & Dasna, I.W. (2023). Analisis Miskonsepsi Kimia dan Instrumen Diagnosisnya: Literatur Review. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Kimia. 17(1), 23-34.

Silberberg, M.S. & Amateis, P.G. (2021). Chemistry: the molecular nature of matter and change 9th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sirhan, G. (2007). Learning difficulties in chemistry: an overview. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4 (2), hlm. 2-20.

Sugiyono, 2009, Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R&D, Bandung : Alfabeta.

Suprapto, N. 2020. Do We Experiience Misconceptionss? An Ontological Review of Misconceptions in Science. Sipose. 1 (2), 50-55.

Whitten, K.W., Davis, R.E., Peck, M.L. & Stanley, G.G. (2014). Chemistry 10th edition. USA: Brooks/Cole.

Woldeamanuel, et.al, 2014. What makes chemistry difficult. AJCE, 2014, 4(2), Special Issue (Part I)

Wu, H. K., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting Understanding of Chemical Representations: Students' Use of a Visualization Tool in the Classroom. Journal of Research In Science Teaching. 38(7), 821-842.

Wu, H.K. (2003). Linking the Microscopic View of Chemistry to Real-Life Experiences: Intertextuality in a High-School Science Classroom. Science Education. 87: 868-891. doi: 10.1002/sce.10090.