Comparison of Students’ Performance on Algorithmic, Conceptual and Graphical Chemistry Gas Problems

Ashmore AD, Frazer MJ, Casey RJ (1979) Problem solving and problem solving networks in chemistry. J Chem Edu 56:377–379

Ates S, Stevens JT (2003) Teaching line graphs to tenth grade students having different cognitive developmental levels by using two different instructional modules. Res Sci Technol Edu 21(1):55–66

Beichner RJ (1994) Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. Am J Phys 62: 750–762

Berg CA, Smith P (1994) Assessing students’ abilities to construct and interpret line graphs: disparities between multiple-choice and free-response instruments. Sci Edu 78:527–554

Bilgin İ (2006) The effects of pair problem solving technique incorporating Polya’s problem solving strategy on undergraduate students’ performance in chemistry. J Sci Edu 7(2):101–106

Bodner GM, Herron JD (2002) Problem-solving in chemistry. In: Gilbert JK, De John O, Justi R, Treagust DF, Van Driel JH (eds) Chemical education: towards research-based practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 235–266

Bowen GM, Roth W-M, McGinn MK (1999) Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. J Res Sci Teaching 36(9):1020–1043

Bunce DM (1993) Introduction: symposium: lecture and learning: are they compatible? J Chem Edu 70(3):179–180

Chiu MH (2001) Algorithmic problem solving and conceptual understanding of chemistry by students at a local high school in Taiwan. Proc Nat Sci Council, ROC (D) 11(1):20–38

Clement J. (1985) Misconceptions in graphing. Proceedings of the 9th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education 1:369–375

Forster PA (2004) Graphing in physics: Processes and sources of error in tertiary entrance examinations in Western Australia. Res Sci Edu 34:239–265

Frazer MJ, Sleet RJ (1984) A study of students’ attempts to solve chemical problems. Eur J Sci Edu 6:141–152

Gabel DL, Bunce DM (1994) Research on problem solving: chemistry. In: Gabel DL (eds) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, pp 301–326

Gabel D, Sherwood R, Enochs L (1984) Problem-solving skills of high school chemistry students. J Res Sci Teaching 21(2):221–233

Hadjidemetriou C, Williams JS (2001) Children’s graphical conceptions: Assessment of learning for teaching. Proceedings of the 25th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education 3:89–96

Leinhardt G, Zaslavsky O, Stein MK (1990) Function, graphs, and graphing: tasks, learning and teaching. Rev Edu Res 60:1–64

Lenton G, Stevens B, Illes R. (2000). Numeracy in science: pupils’ understanding of graphs. School Sci Rev 82(299):15–23

Lin Q, Kirsch P, Turner R (1996) Numeric and conceptual understanding of general chemistry at a minority institution. J Chem Edu 73(10):1003–1005

Lythcott J (1990). Problem solving and requisite knowledge of chemistry. J Chem Edu 67(3):248–252

Mason DS, Shell DF, Crawley FE (1997) Differences in problem solving nonscience majors in introductory chemistry on paired algorithmic-conceptual problems. J Res Sci Teaching 34(9):905–923

McKennzie DL, Padilla MJ (1986) The construction and validation of the test of graphing in science (TOGS). J Res Sci Teaching 23(7): 571–579

Nakhleh MB (1993). Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? J Chem Edu 70(1):52–55

Nakhleh MB, Mitchell RC (1993) Concept learning versus problem solving: there is a difference. J Chem Edu 70(3):190–192

Niaz M (1987). Relation between M-space of students and M-Demand of different items of general chemistry and its interpretation based upon the neo-Piagetian theory of Pascual-Leone. J Chem Edu 64:502–505

Niaz M (1988). Manipulation of M-demand of chemistry problems and its effect on student performance: a neo-Piagetian study. J Res Sci Teaching 25:643–657

Niaz M (1989). The relation between M-demand, algorithms, and problem solving: a neo-Piagetian analysis. J Chem Edu 66:422–424

Niaz M (1995). Progressive transitions from algorithmic to conceptual understanding in student ability to solve chemistry problems: a Lakatosian interpretation. Sci Edu 79:19–36

Niaz M, Robinson WR (1992). From ‘algorithmic mode’ to ‘conceptual gestalt’ in understanding the behavior of gases: an epistemological perspective. Res Sci Technol Edu 10:53–64

Niaz M, Robinson WR (1993). Teaching algorithmic problem solving or conceptual understanding: role of development level, mental capacity, and cognitive style. J Sci Edu Technol 2(2):407–416

Nurrenbern S, Pickering M (1987) Concept learning versus problem solving. Is there a difference? J Chem Edu 64(6):508–510

Pascual-Leone J (1987) Organismic process for neo-Piagetian theories: a dialectic causal account of cognitive development. Int J Psychol 22:531–570

Piaget J (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures: the central problem of intellectual development. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Pickering M (1990) Further studies on concept learning versus problem solving. J Chem Edu 67(3):254–255

QCA (1998) Standards at key stage 3: Science. Report on the 1997 National Curriculum Assessments for 14-year-olds. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, London

Roth WM, McGinn MK (1998) Inscriptions: a social practice approach to “representations”. Rev Edu Res 68:35–59

Sawrey BA (1990). Concept learning versus problem solving: Revisited. J Chem Edu 67(3):253–254

Tsaparlis G, Kausathana M, Niaz M (1998). Molecular-equilibrium problems: manipulation of logical structure and M-Demand, and their effect on students performance. Sci Edu 82:437–454

Widjaja YB, Heck A (2003). How a realistic mathematics education approach and microcomputer-based laboratory worked in lessons on graphing at an Indonesian junior high school. J Sci Mathematics Edu Southeast Asia 26(2):1–51