Patterns in Explanations of Organic Chemistry Reaction Mechanisms: A Text Analysis by Level of Explanation Sophistication

IF 2.5 3区 教育学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Caroline J. Crowder,  and , Jeffrey R. Raker*, 
{"title":"Patterns in Explanations of Organic Chemistry Reaction Mechanisms: A Text Analysis by Level of Explanation Sophistication","authors":"Caroline J. Crowder,&nbsp; and ,&nbsp;Jeffrey R. Raker*,&nbsp;","doi":"10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c0104210.1021/acs.jchemed.4c01042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Learning the language of organic chemistry, i.e., how to describe reaction mechanisms, is crucial to success in any postsecondary organic chemistry course. However, it is well-known that learners struggle with reasoning about and explaining reaction mechanisms beyond surface-level features. Multiple studies have sought to aid learners in developing these skills. Investigating the connections that learners make regarding reaction mechanisms through their explanations provides insight into how we can better promote the development of learners’ reasoning skills. In this study, we evaluate 20,000+ learner explanations of 90 reaction mechanisms. We use network analysis to explore patterns in keywords used by learners and visualize the word connections between them, based on their co-occurrence, within our entire data set, by reaction type, and by levels of explanation sophistication. Our results indicate that learners consistently rely on explicit surface-level features in their explanations with expected contextual variance by reaction type. This trend persists across the levels of sophistication, however, with improvements in the use of vocabulary and coherency as sophistication progresses. We hypothesize that this is evidence of learners actively working toward constructing understanding as they experiment with and refine their vocabulary until they are able to pare down their explanations in a coherent manner. This work offers insights for instructors seeking to promote the development of learners’ reasoning skills and for researchers interested in the development of machine-learning models to assist in evaluating learner explanations of reaction mechanisms.</p>","PeriodicalId":43,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chemical Education","volume":"101 12","pages":"5203–5220 5203–5220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chemical Education","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c01042","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Learning the language of organic chemistry, i.e., how to describe reaction mechanisms, is crucial to success in any postsecondary organic chemistry course. However, it is well-known that learners struggle with reasoning about and explaining reaction mechanisms beyond surface-level features. Multiple studies have sought to aid learners in developing these skills. Investigating the connections that learners make regarding reaction mechanisms through their explanations provides insight into how we can better promote the development of learners’ reasoning skills. In this study, we evaluate 20,000+ learner explanations of 90 reaction mechanisms. We use network analysis to explore patterns in keywords used by learners and visualize the word connections between them, based on their co-occurrence, within our entire data set, by reaction type, and by levels of explanation sophistication. Our results indicate that learners consistently rely on explicit surface-level features in their explanations with expected contextual variance by reaction type. This trend persists across the levels of sophistication, however, with improvements in the use of vocabulary and coherency as sophistication progresses. We hypothesize that this is evidence of learners actively working toward constructing understanding as they experiment with and refine their vocabulary until they are able to pare down their explanations in a coherent manner. This work offers insights for instructors seeking to promote the development of learners’ reasoning skills and for researchers interested in the development of machine-learning models to assist in evaluating learner explanations of reaction mechanisms.

Abstract Image

有机化学反应机理的解释模式:基于解释复杂程度的文本分析
学习有机化学的语言,即如何描述反应机制,是任何高等教育有机化学课程成功的关键。然而,众所周知,学习者很难推理和解释表面特征之外的反应机制。多项研究试图帮助学习者发展这些技能。研究学习者通过他们的解释建立的关于反应机制的联系,为我们如何更好地促进学习者推理技能的发展提供了见解。在这项研究中,我们评估了20,000多个学习者对90种反应机制的解释。我们使用网络分析来探索学习者使用的关键词模式,并根据它们在我们的整个数据集中的共现情况、反应类型和解释复杂程度,将它们之间的单词连接可视化。我们的研究结果表明,学习者在解释中始终依赖于显性表面特征,并存在不同反应类型的预期语境差异。然而,这种趋势在复杂程度的各个层次上持续存在,随着复杂程度的提高,词汇的使用和连贯性也有所改善。我们假设,这是学习者在实验和提炼词汇的过程中积极努力构建理解的证据,直到他们能够以连贯的方式减少他们的解释。这项工作为寻求促进学习者推理技能发展的教师和对开发机器学习模型以帮助评估学习者对反应机制的解释感兴趣的研究人员提供了见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Chemical Education
Journal of Chemical Education 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
50.00%
发文量
465
审稿时长
6.5 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Chemical Education is the official journal of the Division of Chemical Education of the American Chemical Society, co-published with the American Chemical Society Publications Division. Launched in 1924, the Journal of Chemical Education is the world’s premier chemical education journal. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed articles and related information as a resource to those in the field of chemical education and to those institutions that serve them. JCE typically addresses chemical content, activities, laboratory experiments, instructional methods, and pedagogies. The Journal serves as a means of communication among people across the world who are interested in the teaching and learning of chemistry. This includes instructors of chemistry from middle school through graduate school, professional staff who support these teaching activities, as well as some scientists in commerce, industry, and government.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信