Analysis of Conceptual Readiness in Chemical Bonding Concepts among Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers Using a Three-Tier Diagnostic Test

Allika Haya Fahrunisa; Nahadi Nahadi; Soja Siti Fatimah

doi:10.63081/uejtl.v2i3.79

Authors

Allika Haya Fahrunisa Universita Pendidikan Indonesia
Nahadi Nahadi Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0975-7419
Soja Siti Fatimah Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3575-3764

chemical bonding, three tier diagnostic test, misconception, pre-service chemistry teacher, conceptual readiness

Abstract

The conceptual readiness of pre-service chemistry teachers regarding chemical bonding plays a crucial role in supporting pedagogical competence and deep content understanding. This study aims to analyze the level of students’ conceptual readiness in understanding chemical bonding concepts using a three-tier diagnostic test. A qualitative research method with a descriptive approach was employed, involving 27 students from the chemistry education program at a private university in North Sumatra. The results indicate that most students are at a partial understanding level, with a dominance of misconceptions particularly in concepts such as ionic bonding, compound polarity, and valence bond theory. These findings highlight the urgent need to strengthen pedagogical strategies and enhance instructional design to improve conceptual literacy and prepare future teachers to face the challenges of 21st-century science education. The study recommends the integration of diagnostic assessment into teacher education curricula to support the development of chemistry instruction that is conceptually grounded and sustainability-oriented.

References

Agatha, B., Amiza, R. F., & Sulistyaningsih, Y. (2022). Analisis miskonsepsi calon guru kimia dengan menggunakan two tier multiple choice diagnostic test pada materi kesetimbangan kimia. Dalton: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia dan Ilmu Kimia, 5(2), 9-21.

Ardiansyah, Jahro, I. S., & Darmana, A. (2021). Identification of high school students’ misconceptions on chemical bonding with three-tier test. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Kimia, 10(3), 171-179. https://doi.org/10.23960/jppk.v10.i3.2021.17

Azura, S. J. C., & Abdullah. (2017). Identification of misconceptions in chemical bonding materials using three tier diagnostic test. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia Indonesia, 1(2), 23–32.

Baldi, F., & Pandimiglio, A. (2022). The role of ESG scoring and greenwashing risk in explaining the yields of green bonds: A conceptual framework and an econometric analysis. Global Finance Journal, 52, 100711. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2022.100711

Baltieri, R. S., Bego, A. M., & Cebim, M. A. (2021). Why the covalent bond is such a complex concept: a conceptual profile proposal. International Journal of Science Education, 43(12), 2007-2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1949070

Bretz, S. L. (2013). Moving beyond definitions: what student-generated models reveal about learning chemical bonding. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 14(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20154F

Buzzo, R., & Montecinos, A. M. (2014). Proposal of an enriched three tier test to assess learning risks in students. Physics Education. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1409.1742

Cooper, M. M., Grove, N., Underwood, S. M., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2012). Lost in Lewis structures: An investigation of student difficulties in developing representational competence. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(7), 844–849. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed2006184

Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305016

Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x

Jusniar, J., Effendy, E., Budiasih, E., & Sutrisno, S. U. T. R. I. S. N. O. (2020). Developing a three-tier diagnostic instrument on chemical equilibrium (TT-DICE). Educación química, 31(3), 84-102. https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2020.3.72133

Kind, V. (2014). A degree is not enough: A quantitative study of aspects of pre-service science teachers’ chemistry content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1313-1345. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.860497

Laksono, P. J. (2020). Pengembangan three tier multiple choice test pada materi kesetimbangan kimia mata kuliah kimia dasar lanjut. Orbital: Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia, 4(1), 44-63. https://doi.org/10.19109/ojpk.v4i1.5649

Levy Nahum, T., Mamlok‐Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Taber, K. S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46(2), 179-207. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2010.504548

Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge. In Gess-Newsome & Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge (pp. 95–132). Springer

Mellyzar, M. (2021). Analysis of understanding chemical bond concepts in students with three-tier multiple choice. Journal of Educational Chemistry (JEC), 3(1), 53-66. https://doi.org/10.21580/jec.2021.3.1.7560

Mulford, D. R., & Robinson, W. R. (2002). An inventory for alternate conceptions among first-semester general chemistry students. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(6), 739. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed079p739

Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815572747

Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.

Prodjosantoso, A. K., Hertina, A. M., & Irwanto. (2019). Misconception diagnosis on ionic and covalent bond concepts with three-tier diagnostic test. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 1477–1488. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1201190.pdf

Rahmawati, Y., Widhiyanti, T., & Mardiah, A. (2019). Analisis miskonsepsi mahasiswa calon guru kimia pada konsep particulate of matter menggunakan two tier diagnostic test. Jurnal Tadris Kimiya, 4(2), 121-135. http://doi.org/10.15575/jtk.v4i2.4824

Şen, Şenol, & Yılmaz, A. (2017). The Development of a three-tier chemical bonding concept test. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1), 110-126.

Şenol, Ş. (2020?). The development of a three tier chemical bonding concept test. TUSED: Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(1), 110-126. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1344312.pdf

Setiawan, N. C. E., & Ilahi, P. R. (2022). Identification of misconceptions in chemical bonding materials using three tier diagnostic test. Journal of Natural Science and Integration, 5(1), 77–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.24014/jnsi.v4i2.11445

Taber, K. S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46.

Taber, K. S. (2018). The nature of the chemical concept: Re-thinking good teaching in chemistry. Royal Society of Chemistry

Wuttig, M., Schön, C. F., Lötfering, J., Golub, P., Gatti, C., & Raty, J. Y. (2023). Revisiting the nature of chemical bonding in chalcogenides to explain and design their properties. Advanced Materials, 35(20), 2208485. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202208485