Tahap Kefahaman Asas Kimia Organik dalam Kalangan Pelajar Kolej Matrikulasi Aliran Teknikal
The Level of Understanding the Basic of Organic Chemistry Among College Student of Technical Matriculation
Keywords:
Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran, Kimia Organik, Tahap Kefahaman Pelajar, Program Matrikulasi Teknikal, Ujian Pencapaian Kimia OrganikAbstract
Kajian ini dijalankan bertujuan untuk melihat tahap kefahaman pelajar dalam asas kimia organik di peringkat matrikulasi berdasarkan jantina, jurusan dan juga kumpulan pelajar (cemerlang, sederhana dan lemah). Kajian tinjauan dijalankan secara rawak keatas 75 orang pelajar program matrikulasi aliran teknikal di sebuah kolej matrikulasi. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah Ujian Pencapaian Kimia Organik yang terdiri daripada set soalan-soalan tutorial dan peperiksaan tahun lepas yang telah diubahsuai untuk menilai tahap kefahaman pelajar dalam kimia organik. Daripada analisis ke atas dapatan kajian, didapati tahap kefahaman asas kimia organik pelajar adalah di tahap sederhana. Di samping itu juga, tidak terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan di antara jantina dan jurusan pelajar dengan tahap kefahaman mereka, dan terdapat hubungan negatif yang sangat lemah antara kumpulan pelajar dengan tahap kefahaman pelajar dalam asas kimia organik. Sebagai rumusan, perlu dibuat penambahbaikan daripada segi kaedah pengajaran guru dan pembelajaran pelajar supaya pengajaran dan pembelajaran kimia organik akan menjadi lebih bermakna.
Downloads
References
Bayrak, B. K. (2013). Using Two-Tier Test to Identify Primary Students ’ Conceptual Understanding and Alternative Conceptions in Acid Base. Mevlana International Journal of Education, 3(2), 19–26.
Bodner, G., & Klobuchar, M. (2001). The Many Forms of Constructivism. Journal Of Chemical Education, 78(1107).
Ellis, J. W. (1994). How Are We Going To Teach Organic if Task Force Has its Way? Journal of Chemical Education, 71(5), 399–403.
Gabel, D. (1999). Improving Teaching and Learning through Chemistry Education Research: A Look to the Future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 548. http://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p548.
Garcia, T., L.Yu, S., & P.Coppola, B. (1993). Women and minorities in science: Motivational and cognitive correlates of achievement. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
Grove, N. P., Hershberger, J. W., & Bretz, S. L. (2008). Impact of a spiral organic curriculum on student attrition and learning. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(2), 157. http://doi.org/10.1039/b806232n.
Hegarty, M., Stieff, M., & Dixon, B. L. (2013). Cognitive change in mental models with experience in the domain of organic chemistry. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 220–228. http://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2012.725044.
Jabeen, S., & Ahmad, M. (2013). A Study on Need Achievement of High and Low Achievers. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(4), 225–235.
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). “Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, (7), 75–83.
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Cifuentes, L., Kwok, O., & Davis, T. J. (2013). Exploring 3-D virtual reality technology for spatial ability and chemistry achievement. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 579–590. http://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12018.
MOE. (2012). Engineering Chemistry TK015 and TK025 syllabus specification. Syllabus SK015/SK025. Matriculation Division, Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Nieswandt, M., & West, B. S. (2007). Student Affect and Conceptual Understanding in Learning Chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 908–937. http://doi.org/10.1002/tea.
Osman, K., & Sukor, N. S. (2013). Conceptual Understanding in Secondary School Chemistry: A Discussion. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(5), 433–441. http://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2013.433.441.
Potgieter, M., & Davidowitz, B. (2011). Preparedness for tertiary chemistry: multiple applications of the Chemistry Competence Test for diagnostic and prediction purposes. Chemical Education Research & Practice, 12, 193–204. http://doi.org/10.1039/C1RP90024B.
Rauschenberger, M. M., & Sweeder, R. D. (2010). Gender performance differences in biochemistry. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 38(6), 380–384. http://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20448.
Reid, N. (2008). A scientific approach to the teaching of chemistry. Chemical Education Research & Practice, 9, 51–59. http://doi.org/10.1039/b801297k.
Steiner, R., & Sullivan, J. (1984). Variables correlating with student success in organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 61(12), 1072. http://doi.org/10.1021/ed061p1072.
Taber, K. S. (2000). Chemistry lessons for universities?: a review of constructivist ideas. Journal of the Tertiary Education Group of the Royal Society of Chemistry, 4(2), 63–72.
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, Submicro, and Symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “ triplet” International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179–195. http://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435.
Turner, R. C., & Lindsay, H. a. (2003). Gender Differences in Cognitive and Noncognitive Factors Related to Achievement in Organic Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(5), 563. http://doi.org/10.1021/ed080p563.
Xu, X., Villafane, S. M., & Lewis, J. E. (2013). College students’ attitudes toward chemistry, conceptual knowledge and achievement: structural equation model analysis. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(2), 188. http://doi.org/10.1039/c3rp20170h
