Learning electrochemistry through scientific inquiry. Conceptual modelling as learning objective and as scaffold

Figures & data

Table 1. Key principles of action research present in the current study.

Action research principles	Current study
Improving education by changing it	Intervention design and implementation
Participatory: improvement of the own practices in the first place	Teachers as initiators and further involved in various aspects of the action research
Self-reflective spiral: planning, acting, observing, reflecting	Built in the research design and assisted by the researchers
Collaboration	Teachers-researcher close collaboration
Theorising, being inquisitive, coming to understand relationships	Plausible explanations will be discussed after evidence-based conclusions are drawn
Own practices put to the test, gathering compelling evidence	Built in the research design and assisted by the researchers
Keeping records, also collecting, and analysing own judgements, reactions, and impressions	Keeping a personal journal is recommended to the teachers involved
Reasoned justification: a developed, tested and critically examined rationale for what we are doing	Evidential trail constructed throughout the project, based on the gathered evidence and critical reflection

Table 2. Overall sequence of the intervention.

ID	Section	Comment
	Introduction: Overall aims & learning objectives	For students
	Workshop on conceptual modelling	For learning assistants (and interested teachers)
	Interactive lecture: Introduction to conceptual modelling	For students
	Interactive lecture: Activating theoretical concepts	For students, before each practicum
1	Practicum: Potentiometric meter	Sequence shown in Table 3
2	Practicum: Electrochemical cell	Sequence shown in Table 3
	Intervision meeting	For learning assistants (and interested teachers)
3	Practicum: Solubility	Sequence shown in Table 3
4	Practicum: Acid-base reactions & electricity	Sequence shown in Table 3
	Feedback on groups’ conceptual models on submission of lab reports	For students, after each practicum
	Interactive lecture: Anchoring connections & drawing new ones	For students, after each practicum
5	Practicum: Voltammetry	Sequence shown in Table 3
	Feedback on groups’ conceptual model on submission of the final lab report	For students, formative closure
	Exam & Composition of process evaluation	Summative assessment

Table 3. Sequence of learning activities of per practicum (summary).

ID	Activity	By whom
a	Brief theoretical introduction	Lecturer
b	Preparing the practicum + C.Model0	Students groups
c	Meeting the LA before the practicum	Students groups + LA
d	Conducting the practicum	Individual students
e	Processing and interpreting the data + C.Model1	Students groups
f	Meeting the LA	Students groups + LA
g	Short recap of previous week	Lecturer
h	Theoretical self-instruction	Students (indiv. or in group)
i	Reporting + C.Model2	Students groups
j	Feedback on reports & C.Model2 to all S	Practicum teacher

Note: C.Model_i denotes the various versions of the conceptual model.

Table 4. Research design seeking exploration.

Research question I	How do students learn electrochemistry under the proposed intervention?
Focus	Elicit the students’ reasoning and hands-on activity, during lab practicums	Observe behaviour and conduct recall interviews
		Content analysis (rather than motor skills) in terms of conceptual modelling learning objectives
	Elicit students’ progress in reasoning, during the construction of conceptual models	Collect lab journals and practicum reports (including students’ reflections)
		Content analysis (rather than writing and presentational skills) in terms of conceptual modelling learning objectives
	Elicit students’ reasoning and discursive activity, during discussions with their learning assistants	Observe preparatory and feedback meetings
		Content analysis (rather than conversational) in terms of conceptual modelling learning objectives
Contribution	The answer will provide fundamental understandin on the interaction of the intervention with the process of learning.

Table 5. Research design seeking description.

Research question II	In what ways is student learning embedded in the learning environment?
Focus	Build on the findings related to RQ1 and RQ3: behavioural aspects of learning	Collect indicators of progress in reasoning
		Comparative analysis
	Relate behavioural aspects of learning to assessment results	Collect process and product evaluation by learning assistants and teachers
		Comparative analysis, including all learning objectives
	Provide a ‘thick description’ of the contextual conditions	Synthesise in writing
		Highlight key elements as tools for generalisation
Contribution	The answer will contextualise the findings and provide tools for generalisation.

Table 6. Research design seeking evaluation.

Research question III	To what extent does the intervention have any effect on the learning outcomes?
IIIa	To what extent does the intervention have any effect on the near-reaching and far-reaching learning outcomes?
Focus	Near-reaching outcomes: reproducing, solving well-structured problems	• Collect teachers’ perceptions in M4 • Collect last and this years’ exams (evaluate the feasibility of comparison) • Analyse the exams comparatively (between cohorts), using the learning objectives as criteria • Triangulate in the light of teachers’ perceptions
	Far-reaching outcomes: inferring, solving ill-structured problems
IIIb	To what extent does the intervention have any effect on mastery of concepts and on the transfer of knowledge to scientific-problem solving?
Focus	Mastery of concepts in terms of connections to new and/or more encompassing concepts (e.g., inferential connection of ‘cell potential’ to ‘Gibbs free energy’)	• Collect teachers’ perceptions in M5 • Follow-up students from M4 to M5: collect exams, quizzes, reports • Analyse the documents comparatively (within the same cohort)
	Mastery of concepts in terms of their use in generative/scientific problem-solving
Contribution	The answer will constitute evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention (to the extent that observed differences can be attributed to the intervention, e.g., by means of triangulation)