Skip to main content
Article
Assessing Conceptual versus Algorithmic Knowledge: Are We Engendering New Myths in Chemical Education?
Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning
  • Thomas Holme, Iowa State University
  • Kristen Murphy, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Document Type
Book Chapter
Publication Version
Published Version
Publication Date
1-1-2011
DOI
10.1021/bk-2011-1074.ch012
Abstract
Studies over the past two decades have emphasized a gap between relatively weak student performance on conceptual items versus traditional items. The ACS Examinations Institute has released a pair of exams for general chemistry in which items are intentionally paired with one conceptual and one traditional item. This paper describes data from statistical analysis of the item pairs, and notes that for these exams, this gap is not evident, as overall performance is better on conceptual items. Possible implications for teaching and for research in Chemistry Education are noted.
Comments

Reprinted (adapted) with permission from ACS Symposium Series, Chapter 12, pp 195–206 Vol. 1074. Copyright 2011 American Chemical Society.

Copyright Owner
American Chemical Society
Language
en
File Format
application/pdf
Citation Information
Thomas Holme and Kristen Murphy. "Assessing Conceptual versus Algorithmic Knowledge: Are We Engendering New Myths in Chemical Education?" Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning Vol. 1074 Iss. 12 (2011) p. 195 - 206
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/thomas_holme/29/