Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Chimica nella Scuola

Università, formazione docenti, orientamento, PLS

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2024): Chimica nella Scuola n. 1 2024

Processi cognitivi e apprendimento della chimica: uno studio pilota sulla popolazione universitaria a sviluppo tipico

Submitted
10 April 2024
Published
10-04-2024

Abstract

The national surveys have observed that Italian students perform significantly worst in the science field compared to their international peers. This is also true when we consider a particular subject, such as chemistry. This is partially explained by teaching practice since the Italian school context rarely allows the possibility to organise and implement interactive teaching strategies. Consequently, most of students learn chemistry by memorizing definitions without reaching a full understanding. Moreover, professors do not have the opportunity to acquire knowledge about the cognitive processes involved in chemistry learning and the teaching strategies that might be used to overcome the conceptual difficulties of the discipline. In addition, they are not aware of the peculiar difficulties of students with Specific Learning Disorder (SLD) and the compensatory measures that could be carried out to improve their learning performance in the science field.
Therefore, the present project has the main goal of extending the knowledge on cognitive processes involved in chemistry learning of undergraduates’ students, to design effective strategies and compensative measure that will improve students’ chemistry learning ability. The present paper reports the results of a pilot investigation, which tested the adequacy of a chemistry learning test on a small sample of Italian undergraduate students.

References

  1. A. H. Johnstone, Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom
  2. what they seem, J. Comput. Assist. Learn., 1991, 7(2), 75–83 (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x).
  3. American Psychological Association: Problem-Solving, APA Dictionary of Psychology.
  4. American Psychological Association: Inhibition, APA Dictionary of Psychology.
  5. R. Bull, G. Scerif, Executive functioning as a predictor of children’s mathematics ability: inhibition, switching, and working memory,
  6. Dev. Neuropsychol, 2001, 19(3), 273–293 (https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326942DN1903_3).
  7. R. D. Latzman, N. Elkovitch, J. Young, L. A. Clark, The contribution of executive functioning to academic achievement among male adolescents, J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol., 2010, 32(5), 455–462 (https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390903164363).
  8. H. L. St Clair-Thompson, S. E. Gathercole, Executive functions and achievements in school: shifting, updating, inhibition, and working memory, Q. J. Exp. Psychol., 2006, 59(4), 745–759 (https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210500162854).
  9. M. Berkowitz, E. Stern, Which cognitive abilities make the difference? Predicting academic achievements in advanced STEM studies, J. Intell., 2018, 6(4), 48 (https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence6040048).
  10. D. H. Uttal, C. A. Cohen, Chapter Four - Spatial thinking and STEM education: when, why, and how?, in The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (B. H. Ross, Ed.), Academic Press, 2012; Vol. 57, pp 147–181 (https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394293-7.00004-2).
  11. A. D. Baddeley, The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?, Trends Cogn. Sci., 2000, 4(11), 417–423 (https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01538-2).
  12. S. M. Rhodes, J. N. Booth, L. E. Palmer, R. A. Blythe, M. Delibegovic, N. J. Wheate, Executive functions predict conceptual learning of science, Br. J. Dev. Psychol., 2016, 34(2), 261–275 (https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12129).
  13. C. S. Carter, M. A. Larussa, G. M. Bodner, A study of two measures of spatial ability as predictors of success in different levels of General Chemistry, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 1987, 24(7), 645–657 (https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240705).
  14. J. R. Pribyl, G. M. Bodner, Spatial ability and its role in Organic Chemistry: a study of four organic courses, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 1987, 24(3), 229–240 (https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240304).
  15. S. A. Sorby, G. Duffy, N. Loney, An examination of the role of spatial ability in the process of problem solving in Chemical Engineering, Australas. J. Eng. Educ., 2020, 25(1), 55–65 (https://doi.org/10.1080/22054952.2020.1785653).
  16. H.-K. Wu, P. Shah, Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning, Sci. Educ., 2004, 88(3), 465–492 (https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10126).
  17. J. B. Carroll, Human cognitive abilities: a survey of factor-analytic studies, Cambridge University Press, 1993 (https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312).
  18. H. Spinnler, G. Tognoni, Standardizzazione e taratura italiana dei test neuropsicologici, Italy J. Neurol. Sci., 1987, 6, 1–120.
  19. R. De Beni, E. Borella, B. Carretti, C. Marigo, L. A. Nava, BAC. Portfolio per la valutazione del benessere e delle abilità cognitive nell’età adulta e avanzata, Giunti OS, 2008.
  20. R. De Beni, C. Zamperlin, C.Meneghetti, C. Cornoldi, M. Fabris, G. D. M. Tona, A. Moè, Test AMOS-abilità e motivazione allo studio: prove di valutazione e orientamento per la scuola secondaria di secondo grado e l’università: Nuova Edizione, Edizioni Centro Studi Erickson, 2014.
  21. E. A. Crone, C. Wendelken, S. Donohue, L. van Leijenhorst, S. A. Bunge, Neurocognitive development of the ability to manipulate information in working memory, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 2006, 103(24), 9315–9320 (https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0510088103).

Most read articles by the same author(s)