Chemistry Misconceptions

Student Preconceptions and Misconceptions in Chemistry
Integrated Physics and Chemistry Modeling Workshop
Arizona State University, J une 2001
Version 1.35
Introduction
The workshop which met at ASU in J une, 2001, to design an integrated physics and chemistry
course using modeling methods, took as one of its tasks the identification of the key
misconceptions in chemistry. To this end a literature search was undertaken and the results were
discussed by the participants. The purposes of this effort were fourfold:
1. Identifying key misconceptions could help in designing the course, by identifying where
breakthroughs are most needed. Key misconceptions are those which, if resolved, lead to a
breakthrough in understanding some aspect of chemistry and to the eventual uncovering and
clearing away of lesser misconceptions.
2. Success in moving students beyond the key misconceptions is an essential task of a modeling
method course and the Chemistry Concept Inventory (CCI) must be carefully engineered to
expose these misconceptions where they still are present.
3. The world of misconceptions is a window into how our students actually think, and studying
these misconceptions is thus valuable training in listening to student dialogues powerfully.
4. Lesser and illustrative misconceptions have their place in designing the CCI by informing the
design of a powerful set of distractors – irresistible wrong answers for the students who don’t
understand the principle being probed.
Focusing on misconceptions in the design of a course is naturally only meaningful in the context
of discussing what are the key concepts which students are to learn and understand. Building a
course around misconceptions would be absurd; but designing a course based solely on the
concepts to be mastered is like building castles in the air.
The following compilation was the work of several members of the workshop who
rearched the literature and organized the results. It incorporates some of the excellent
review of misconceptions in energy compiled and written by Gregg Swackhamer while
on sabbatical at Arizona State University, ([email protected]) which is
highly recommended reading.
I should add at this point that it incorporates the list of physics misconceptions compiled
by the C3P project (http://phys.udallas.edu/C3P/altconcp.html) and a list of physics
misconceptions compiled by a group at the University of Toronto:
(http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~science/miscon.htm).
“Preconceptions in Chemistry" has not been reviewed. There are certainly many errors
and omissions lurking within it, waiting for you to find them. Let’s have them.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Misconceptions – the problem:
Preconceptions in chemistry, as in physics, are extremely persistent. Authors describing the
evolution of preconceptions described a rapid evolution in fundamental ideas about chemistry
between the ages of 6 and 12, but only very slow change thereafter, in spite of intensive
instruction in chemistry. Thus misconceptions present at age 12 are likely to still be present in
12th grade or in college freshmen. Ahtee and Varjoli (1998) found that approximately 10% of
eighth graders in Finland failed to distinguish between substances and atoms. The same
percentage of secondary school students and university students made the same mistake! Bodner
et al. (1992) reported that fully 30% of entering graduate students in chemistry failed to identify
the bubbles in water that had been boiling for over an hour as consisting of water vapor (!) and
20% indicated that they contained air and/or oxygen.
Lewis et al. (’94, ‘96) studied misconceptions in thermodynamics in 8
th
graders,
secondary students, college students and a group of “experts” holding Ph.D. degrees in
various sciences and found all held similar misconceptions about the natural world. Only
among those with Ph.D.’s was the incidence of misconceptions significantly lower.
These preconceptions form the mental framework, the scaffolding on which students build all
subsequent knowledge, unless they are distinguished, confronted and replaced or reconstructed in
line with modem scientific thinking. New information and ideas which students receive is
reinterpreted and rearranged to fit within this scaffolding. Many authors have commented on how
clear students are during exit interviews that their answers make sense and are right, even while
recognizing sometimes that they don't agree with current scientific thought.
Students often acquire a significant ability to solve problems in chemistry courses without
understanding the principles the problems were intended to teach. For example, Peterson and
Treagust (1989) found that of a group of secondary school students, 74% were unable to answer
conceptual questions about electron repulsion in valence shells, but 78% were able to successfully
answer test questions designed to test this understanding. Similarly Yarroch (1985) found that of
“A and B level” high school chemistry students virtually all could balance the equation
H
2
+N
2
->NH
3
but half could not draw a correct molecular diagram to explain this result.
Nature and Origins of Misconceptions
Hesse and Anderson ('92) and Tabor ('98) point to the strong preference of most of their subjects
for common sense reasoning, everyday analogies, visible effects and changes, and common (non-
scientific) word usage. They observed that students actively rejected the use of scientific
vocabulary (“fancy scientific words”) in favor of colloquial speech, which led them into
many misunderstandings. They called for teachers to lead students in careful
examination of the limits of analogies and metaphors. They also called attention to the
need to have students include both conservation of mass and conservation of atoms in
their reasoning.
Along this line, Schmidt ('97) discusses how misconceptions form a meaningful and
coherent alternative framework in students' minds, which is very hardy and difficult to
change. He then focuses on the role of everyday meanings of words in fostering
misconceptions. He traces some of these misuses of words--for example oxidation--to the
way they were historically used in chemistry.
Tabor ('97) points to anthropomorphic thinking in students' reasoning about the behavior of
electrons in chemical interactions. It was also observed in students' reasoning about chemical
reactions. What electrons "want" to do is used as a primitive force concept.
Herbert Beall (1994) lectured college freshmen on the second law of thermodynamics
and the ideal gas laws. After the lecture only 11% were able to answer correctly: “predict
the effect that opening a cylinder of compressed gas would have on the temperature of
the gas.” There was no dominant misconception, but rather a whole spectrum of wrong
ideas.
Harrison and Treagust (1996) classified the kinds of models which can be built of a physical
phenomenon, and then observed how the students used various models and types of models to
build a picture of the phenomenon. They deduced that none of the 48 students completing a
chemistry course had come to understand that the models they were using were only models,
which "... served the development and testing of ideas, not the depiction of reality." Only one of
the 48 seemed to even be on the verge of achieving this understanding. The authors call for
teachers to lead their students in a thorough study of the process of model construction and the
limitations of the models so constructed.
Many authors observed the ways in which students confuse models and images with reality, and
the ways in which concepts learned (or misunderstood) in earlier grades form the framework of
later misconceptions. Harrison et at. ('96) discuss at length the model of the atom as being like a
living cell with a nucleus that divides which a significant minority of students use as their
framework for understanding chemistry.
Underlining the importance of understanding the nature of models, D. Cross, et al. (1986)
noted that university students who used the Bohr model to describe an atom failed to
move beyond this picture, and this apparently caused their understanding of interactions
between subatomic particles to fail to grow.
Kmel et al. {1998) points to a " ...hierarchy of increasing cognitive demand [in describing
chemical processes:]
1. Disappearance
2. Displacement
3. Modification
4. Transmutation
5. Chemical reaction {interaction).”
They observe the gradual progress of students from age 8 through 18 in moving up this hierarchy,
which is also a movement away from a "model of matter which is homogeneous, static and
continuous."
R. Stary (1988) followed a cohort of students, and observed that while they were taught atomic
theory repeatedly in 4
th
through 7
th
grades, when questioned about physical phenomena in 8
th
grade they still made no reference to atomic theory in their explanations. Only in grade 9,
beginning with explanations about gasses, did they start to refer to it. From this he questions the
efficacy of teaching atomic theory before the students have fully explored the nature of matter at
a macroscopic level.
Similarly, Dorothy Gabel (1999) refers to “three levels of expressing matter … macro, sub-micro
(particle models) and symbolic [chemical notation].”. She observes that “chemistry instruction
occurs predominantly on the most abstract level, the symbolic level” and marshals the evidence
that this is ineffective.
Hong Kwen Boo emphasizes that students have a difficult time understanding the abstract
concept of energy, and urges that more emphasis be given to the concept of the “driving force
involving the concept of free energy/entropy,” and to the difficulty students have in bridging the
gap between perceptual thinking and the use of “concepts about particles and their interactions.”
“Students [failed to] understand the nature of sciences as a process of construction of predictive
conceptual models … and the nature of scientific concepts and principles … [i.e.] their
applicability across the entire range of [chemical] phenomona.”
Ricardo Trumper (1993) finds that “we can start teaching students about energy in about the 5
th
grade, since they have good cognitive building blocks associated with a good energy concept.”
Kokotas, Vlachos and Kardaidis ('98) and Tabor ('99, '97) observe that many misconceptions
have underlying them primitive concepts such as "conservation of force”. This and other such
primitive concepts do not appear to be something the students have been taught. Kokotas et al.
('98) further suggests that more recently acquired misconceptions will be found to have been
grafted onto a foundation of more primitive and intuitive preconceptions, such as the view that
heat has weight.
For a seminal popularly written article expounding this idea of primitive preconceptions see
McCloskey (1983).
Thomas et al. (’95) working with groups of secondary students in the UK, reported that
92% to 97% of the students “… revealed a great difficulty in accepting that different
objects are at the same temperature when in contact with the surroundings for a long
time.” They focused on this as the central concept in their highly successful project using
constructivist methods to teach thermodynamics.
L. Viennot (1997), E. Clough and R. Driver (1985), and J . Solomon (1985) outline the
varieties of student misunderstandings about energy. Solomon argues for a new way of
presenting conservation of energy; not “energy can neither be created nor destroyed”, but
rather “there is the same amount of energy at the end as at the beginning.”
C. Gayford (1986) and Solomon (1985) outline the ways students confuse energy with
the “life force” in biological systems. C. Kruger (1990) found the same confusion about
energy among primary school teachers.
van Huis and van den Berg (1993) and van Roon et al., (1994) focus on the central
importance of teaching students to identify the system within which energy is being
accounted for, the boundaries of the system, and the meaning of “state”.
Trumper (1990) lays out a framework of levels of thinking about energy, with the final
level being “the accepted scientific concept:” “when two systems interact … something
… is transferred from one system to the other.” (Ministry of Education, Israel.)
Marilia Thomaz, et al., L. Lewis et al. (1994) and Clough and Driver (1985) focus on
students’ concepts about heat and temperature. Clough and Driver find a “steaming
swamp there” and argue for ignoring preconceptions and focusing on building a new
coherent structure. Thomaz et al. argue that this is ineffective and we need to go into that
swamp.
deVos, et al. (1994) identify the key concepts in chemistry as being the “chemical
substance” and the “chemical reaction”. To them the key difficulty faced by students was
“the incoherence and incompleteness of all chemistry curricula studied.” They call for a
“chemistry curriculum that will lead students on a quest for the hidden factors that
determine chemical change and the creation of new substances.”
Mary Nakhleh (1992) identifies the central misconception of chemistry as being that
matter is a continuous medium which is static and space filling.
Aarons identifies the idea that “something (electricity, charge or energy) is used up in
electric circuits” as the key misconception on this subject.
Common Chemistry Misconceptions
The preconceptions and misconceptions listed in Appendix 1 are categorized by topic. Following
the structure of the modeling methods in chemistry curriculum, it is divided into essential
physical concepts (background), macroscopic chemistry and sub-microscopic chemistry. Most
grade school and high school curricula start with the atomic theory. In our view this fails to move
outward from models anchored in sensory experience to more abstract levels of model building
and thus it tends to leave intact a defective foundation.
I took the liberty of using J ohn Bernier’s class handout on misconceptions and Gregg
Swackhamer’s excellent review of energy misconceptions as two of my sources. I have tried to
edit the list to include only misconceptions held by 8-10% or more of students, ages 12 and
above, but have not otherwise attempted to sort or cull them by importance, origin or structure.
All are presumed to be considered important by someone by virtue of their appearance in the
refereed literature.
The information about in which cohorts of students the misconceptions were observed and with
what frequency has been reported where it was preserved, but the haste with which this project
was begun and the fact that it is being finished without access to a research library has resulted in
much of this information being omitted. The evaluations from both researchers and workshop
participants on the importance of the misconception being reported are flawed by the absence of a
clear uniform weighting standard, but are included to help begin the evaluation process.
When this list is fully filled out and trimmed, and the categories fully discussed and reviewed, a
numbering scheme could prove helpful.
Rating the Misconceptions
It is hoped that this work will be used as a starting point for a process of identifying the key
misconceptions.
In searching for key misconceptions there is in the end no substitute for the experience of the
teachers in the classroom. Only practice will determine which misconceptions persist in spite of
contradictory information and experiences, and which ones fall by the wayside when other “key”
misconceptions are overcome, which misconceptions prove fatal to an understanding of the
structure of chemistry and which prove irrelevant or trivial. Some guidelines may help this initial
inquiry, however.
1. The proportion of students who hold a misconception is one dimension of its significance.
2. Persistence over time, where it has been measured, provides another measure.
3. The degree to which a misconception is “primitive”, rooted in the child’s self-taught (and
strongly held) system for understanding the world, or to which it is an overlay from more
recent, ill conceived or misunderstood instruction, gives another measure.
4. Redundancy vs. uniqueness: is a misconception an illustration or instance of another more
fundamentally stated misconception? Or does it contain some unique feature which allows it
to stand alone?
5. Rating by the workshop participants, while highly preliminary and tentative, gives a first look
at the teacher’s eye view of these misconceptions.
For example, how do we evaluate the belief that “when butter melts, water is formed”? This is
primitive in the sense that it arises directly from the child’s observation of nature and logical
inferences formed from that. Its frequency and persistence are unknown, as only one researcher
has bothered to note it, but since it flows from what may be a very common observation it could
be quite widespread, and since it is never challenged it could be quite persistent. It is certainly
unique in this list. The teachers in the workshop dismissed it as trivial or rare. Probably it is
unimportant; as once the principles of conservation of mass and stability of molecules during
physical processes are established it should drop away. Would it make a good distractor in the
CCI? Maybe. Would it be a good inquiry for – say – a 7
th
grade class investigating the
conservation of mass? Probably not. But since no one has previously asked these questions, we
don’t really know.
“Anodes are always on the left” is an example of a misconception which is both trivial and non
primitive, a simple artifact of the habit of some textbook writers of always illustrating anodes in
this way. This sort of misconception will clear up when students actually understand what an
anode is from their own experience. Yet it might be a useful distractor for a CCI test.
“Breaking chemical bonds releases energy.” Of a group of high school chemistry students 48%
claimed this. This concerns a most fundamental issue. However, it is not a primitive
misconception in the sense that it refers to a concept (the chemical bond) which is several steps
removed from the child’s experience of the world. It is a taught misconception, re-enforced by
repetition and by illustrations in textbooks. Once the concept has been acquired, however, it
would be put into service for explaining observations and would become self-reenforcing.
Moreover it has a kind of intuitive attraction. It would seem intuitively obvious for example that
energy is stored in the chemical bonds of a firecracker. This misconception could become a
serious obstacle to further progress in chemistry. Thus IMHO it merits designation as a key
misconception.
“Heat has the properties of matter” and “heating an object adds mass to it” are both important
misconceptions, widespread, persistent and having significant consequences. Are they
redundant? The former appears to be the fundamental statement of the misconception, and would
thus rate designation as a key misconception, but the latter would be the example that a student
would recognize their own ideas in. Whether it is a “primitive” concept or arises out of a process
of analogy formation is open to inquiry, but its similarity to the medieval phlogiston theory is
intriguing.
“Temperature is a property of the object being measured” and “two objects in the same
environment don’t eventually reach a common temperature.” Of a group of secondary students
95% gave each of these responses. Here we have a misunderstanding which is primitive and
fundamental in that it arises inevitably out of observations, is extremely widespread, extremely
persistent and has profound consequences for the student’s further progress in chemistry. Clearly
these are worthy of designation as key misconceptions.
Summary and Conclusions
There remains work to be done in reviewing the literature, especially in the areas of
models of chemical bonds and chemical equilibrium. Much work would have to be done
rounding out this review before it could be published. This would involve pursuing other
leads, actually reading the referenced material reported by other authors, properly
attributing the reported misconceptions, noting the age cohorts in which they were found,
and recording frequency statistics.
At this point it would seem far more urgent to have research material available before the
start of the 2001-2002 school year. A more complete view of student misconceptions
will come out of careful observation, questioning and testing by the many teachers
involved in the Modeling Methods in Chemistry project.
Five projects come to mind.
First, a choice must be made using available information, evaluations and experience, of
a set of key concepts to be mastered and a set of key misconceptions which if addressed
will result in the others falling away. (My nominations for this latter set are marked in the
list of misconceptions with a double dollar sign {$$}, for whatever this is worth, but I
recognize that much work remains to be done in settling on a final list – CH)
Second, the Chemistry Concept Inventory should be reviewed or revamped to assure that
it will test these key concepts. Other misconceptions should be used to come up with an
irresistible set of distractors.
In addition a Chemistry Misconceptions Inventory (CMI) could be developed specifically
to get statistics on the frequency and tenacity with which the misconceptions on this list
occur. It might be administered to a limited number of students both before and after
their courses, with post test interviews with selected students.
Fourth, the Modeling Methods in Chemistry Curriculum must be carefully evaluated for
its ability to address the key misconceptions identified.
Finally the results must be transmitted in easily digested form (since time is so short) to the
participants in the Chemistry Modeling project so that input can be gathered from the experience
of the 2001-2002 school year.
*******************************************************************
Appendix 1: The Misconceptions
Key
Many entries are followed by a set of letters and numbers inside curly brackets. {} The large
letters are reports of the education researcher’s evaluation, explicit or inferred, of the significance
of particular misconception. Needless to say, the researchers who reported these preconceptions
and their referees considered them at least worth noting, so the absence of a capital letter rating
should be given no particular significance.
A: A key misconception, typically deeply rooted and an obstacle to progress in learning.
B: An especially important misconception.
This list of misconceptions was evaluated by small groups of science teachers at the Integrated
Physics and Chemistry Modeling Methods Workshop at Arizona State University in J une, 2001,
and then discussed by the group as a whole. The small letters indicate their evaluation of the
topic. Where more than one letter is reported for an item, it is usually because different groups or
individuals reached different conclusions.
a: A key misconception, typically deeply rooted and an obstacle to progress in learning.
b: An important or very common misconception.
c: A secondary misconception.
d: Trivial or unimportant.
e: Participants doubt anyone believes this.
t: Participants doubt that this is a misconception, or think it is arguably true.
r: Redundant. (Possibly useful as a distractor.)
x: Not evaluated by participants; added to compilation since the last workshop meeting.
x,r (Compiler’s note) Identified as redundant by compiler (CH).
* (Compiler’s note) Cross-listed, listed under more than one category.
$$ (Compiler’s note) Compiler’s preliminary nomination for “key misconception”.
Square brackets: Where this information has been preserved, the age or grade of the cohort in
which a misconception was found is given, followed by the percent of respondents holding it.
For example:
[17%]: found in 17% of a sample; age/grade information lost but probably secondary students.
[13-15: 22%] means found in 22% of a group of 13-15 year olds.
[M7: 70%] means found in 70% of a group of middle school students, 7
th
grade.
[S] means observed in a group of secondary students, grade and percent holding this not recorded.
[C1]: first year college students.
[C1b]/[C1a]: tested before/after studying topic.
[C4]: fourth year college chemistry majors.
[G1]/ [GA]: entering/advanced graduate students in chemistry.
[F]: college faculty.
[ST]: Secondary chemistry teacher.
[MT] Middle school teacher.
The Preconceptions
I. Essential Physical Concepts
Big, Heavy, Strong
# Big means the same thing as heavy.
# Massive means big.
# A small steel paperclip floats better than a large steel paperclip.
# There are 100 cm
3
in 1 m
3
. { b }
# A strong solution of a salt contains more of that salt than a weak solution, without regard to
the quantity of solution.
Air
# Air has no mass. {a,b}
# Air is everywhere, fills all space. [S9:80%] {x} $$
# Air is different from other gasses: it resembles other invisible quantities such as energy, heat
and gravity. {e}
# Air consists of two types of air, hot and cold. * {x}
Weight, Pressure and Buoyancy
# Objects float because they are light (without regard to volme or density).
# A candle will sink in water faster than half a candle.
# Things sink if they have holes in them.
# A lead bar will displace more water than an aluminium bar of the same size.
# A kilogram of lead weighs more than a kilogram of water.
# Weight and mass are the same thing.
# Weight is proportional to air pressure.
# Weight is caused by air pressure, and disappears in a vacuum. *
# Weight increases with distance above the ground.
# Weight increases if an object is compressed.
# Fluids exert a bigger pressure downward.
# Fluids exert bigger up forces on lighter objects.
# Air pressure is a downward influence.
Heat
# Heat has the properties of matter. {A, d,t}
# Heat is just energy that is added to something. {x}
# Heat can add weight to the object being heated. {A, d}
# Heat is something that adds heat to other things. {B, x}
# Heat is a sensation. {A, a,b} [S: 34%]
# Hot and cold are different kinds of substance. {A,x} $$
# Heated copper is heavier than cold copper. {r}
# Heat is in the fuel being burned and is not formed during combustion. * {a,b}
# Heat is a substance residing in a body which can pass from one body to another, like a fluid.
{A, a,b} [S: 45%] $$
# The state of hotness or coldness depends on the material from which a body is made. {A,
a,b}[S: 67%] $$
# Wool is warm, and warms things. {x}
# Metal is cold, and cools things. {x}
# Metals hold cold better than wood does. {e}
# Metals attract cold better than wood does. * {e}
# Metals hold heat better than wood does. [Very common]
# Conductors conduct heat more slowly than do insulators. * {x}
# Water needs a force, heat, to force it upward in evaporation. * {b}
# A cup of coffee and the room around it have the same heat level. * [S: 50%] {x}
# Two liquids heated with equally hot flames to the same temperature will receive the same
amount of heat. [Sa: 44%] {x}
# Heating a body always means raising its temperature.* {A, a} $$
# A change in temperature is synonymous with a flow of heat. * {x}
# A cold body contains no heat. {x}
Temperature
# Temperature is a property of the material from which a body is made. {A} [S: 95%] $$
# Temperature is a measure of a body’s heat. [S: 35%] {A, a}
# Temperature is the amount of heat in a space. It tells you the hotness of the stuff in that space.
{B, x}
# Two objects sitting in the same environment for a long period of time don’t necessarily reach
the same temperature. [S a: 95%] {A, x} $$
# Temperature is something which can be transferred. [S: 17%] {x}
# Heating a body always means raising its temperature.* {A, a}
# A change in temperature is the same thing as a flow of heat. * [C1a]{x}
# The temperature at which water boils is the maximum temperature to which it can be raised. *
{a,e}
# A cup of coffee and the room around it have the same heat level. * [S: 50%] {x}
Heat Insulation and Conduction
# A conductor is something that keeps things cold.
# Substances which insulate hot objects won’t insulate cold objects.
# Foil is better for keeping things cold than is a blanket, because metal is cold and blankets are
warm. *
# Electrical and heat conductivity are the same thing.
# Metals attract cold better than wood does. * {e}
# Conductors conduct heat more slowly than do insulators. * {x}
Conservation of Mass:
# When the form of something changes, its weight (mass) changes. {A} $$
# When the color of something changes, its weight (mass) changes.
# The weight of a substance changes when it changes phase. {B}
# The products of chemical reactions need not have the same mass as the reactants. {A} $$
# Weight (mass) is lost in dissolving. * {B, e}
# Water disappears as it evaporates. *
# A sealed container with a bit of liquid in it weighs more than after the liquid has evaporated.
*{a,r}
Energy – Nature of
# Energy is the life force. * [MT] {A,x}
# Energy is liveliness. [MT] {x}
# Energy is caused by life, animal activity. * [MT] {B,x}
# Energy is stored in a light bulb, and causes things to happen when present. {x}
# Energy is an activity. {x}
# Work is a form of energy. {B,x}
# Kinetic energy does not depend on the speed of the object that causes it. [MT] {x}
# Energy is not a property of stationary systems. [MT} {x}
# Something not moving can’t have any energy. {x,r}
# Energy is produced. {A,x}
# Energy can disappear. {A,x}
# Energy can be recycled. {x}
# Conservation of energy means energy should be conserved.
# Energy and force are the same thing. * {A,x}
Force
# Force is conserved.
# Water has the force to dissolve salt. * {e}
# Energy and force are the same thing. * {A,x} $$
# Something has a certain amount of force available or in it. {x}
# Pressure is the same as force. {x}
Electric Charge
# There is only one kind of charge. {B, e}
# Positive charge is actually a deficit of negative charge. {B, b}
# Positive charge is actually no charge at all; negative charges are attracted to uncharged bodies.
[Very common] {e}
# Designation of +and – are absolute.
# A charged body has only one kind of charge.
Electrical Force
# Forces at a point exist without a charge there.
# The electrical force is the same as the gravitational force.
# Fields don’t exist unless there is something to detect them.
# A moving charge will always follow a field line as it accelerates.
Electrical Circuits
# “Electricity” is used up in electric circuits. {A, x}
# Charge is used up in electric circuits. {A, x} $$
# Energy is used up in electric circuits. {A, x}
# A potential difference between two points is solely due to differences in the concentration of
charge at the points.
# More devices on a series circuit means more current in it because devices “draw” current. {x}
Electric Current in Conductors
# Protons flow in metallic conductors. {e}
# Current flow is how fast electricity flows. {x}
# Conventional current is the flow of protons. {e}
# Electric current is different in physics and chemistry because they current flows in opposite
directions. {e}
# The Electric Company supplies the electrons for your household current.
# Electrons flow at the speed of light in electrical circuits.
II. Macroscopic Chemistry
Physical vs. Chemical Phenomena:
# Freezing and boiling are examples of chemical reactions. { A, a, d } $$
# Physical changes are reversible while chemical changes are not. [S10: “most”] { A, a, d } $$
# The original substance vanishes "completely and forever" in a chemical reaction. [S10:
“most”] { A, a, d }
# When reversibility of a chemical reaction is observed, it can be explained as phase changes
which occur as the temperature fluctuate. [S10: “most”] { B, x }
# Mass is conserved, but not the number or species of atoms. {A, a}
Rusting:
# A rusting nail won’t change weight. The rust was already in it. {B, a, b }
# Rusting is something the nail draws out of the air. {x}
# Coldness causes a nail to rust, drawing the rust out of the nail. ( B, a, e}
# In rusting, iron turns into other elements. [12-15 yo] { x }
Dissolving
# Things dissolve by crushing and mixing them in water. {x}
# Salt is not hard (or dense) enough to resist dissolving.
# Chalk won't dissolve because it is too heavy (or hard). {r}
# Water has the force to dissolve salt. * {e}
# Melting and dissolving are the same thing. {A,a} $$
# Salt becomes liquid salt when it dissolves. {r}
# Dissolving sugar becomes melted. {r}
# When sugar is dissolved in water the water takes on properties of the sugar.
# When sugar is dissolved in water the sugar takes on properties of the water. {r}
# Weight is lost in dissolving. {A, e *}
Evaporation and condensation.
# Water disappears as it evaporates. {B, a,t}
# The weight of a substance changes as it melts or evaporates. [12: 91%;18: 54%] $$
# A sealed container with a bit of liquid in it weighs more than after the liquid has evaporated.
*{a,r}
# Water is “modified” into vapour. {r,t}
# Vapour is something different from water. {r} $$
# Bubbles from boiling water consist of air. {B, a,r}
# Bubbles from boiling water consist of air and oxygen gas. {G1b: 20% (!)] {B, a, r}
# Bubbles from boiling water consist of hydrogen gas. [G1b: 5%] {a,r}
# Bubbles from boiling water are made of heat. {a,r}
# Boiling water becomes smoke. {e,r}
# Drops of water on the outside of a cold bottle of water comes from inside the bottle. {A,a}
# Drops of water on the outside of a bottle are made by the cold. {a,r}
# Water needs a force, heat, to force it upward [in evaporation]. * {b}
# The temperature at which water boils is the maximum temperature to which it can be raised. *
{a,e}
# (None of a group of 15-year-olds mentioned water vapour in the air when discussing
condensation.)
Freezing and melting.
# Freezing is like drying. {A}
# When butter melts, water is formed. [M] {e}
# Water from melting ice is different from running water. {a}
# If ice is melted the resulting water will weigh less. * {e}
# Solid, liquid and gas are three types of same substance. One disappears as the other appears.
{A}
First Law of Thermodynamics
# The change in internal energy from heating and work is not reversible. (88%/C) $$
# Heat is just energy that is added to something.
# Energy is conserved because the internal energy of the system does not change.
Ideal Gas Laws
# A gas expanding against the atmosphere is in free expansion. [C1a:17%]{x}
Chemical Reactions
# Chemical reactions are reactions which produce irreversible change. [Very common. Taught in
MS texts.]{A,B, a}
# Chemical reactions are caused by mixing of substances. {b,t}
# Reactions that proceed more rapidly also proceed further (more completely.) {a,b,t} $$
# Reactions between two chemical species in a solution may be analyzed without considering
the effects of other species present. {a,b,t}
# The concentrations of all species in a reaction mixture are equal. [S:<50%]{a,b,t}
# Chemical reactions will continue until all the reactants are exhausted. {A, a,b,e} $$
# Chemical reactions must be driven by external intervention, e.g. heat. [S12a: 85%] {A, x} $$
# Chemical reactions are caused by active agents acting on passive agents. [S: common] {x}
# The “driving force” in a chemical reaction refers to an external causitive agent. * {A,x} $$
Spontaneous Change and Gibbs Free Energy
# (Conservation of mass is not considered in looking for the free energy in a process. ) [C:100%]
# Endothermic reactions cannot be spontaneous. [C:75%] $$
# The internal energy of a system goes to zero at equilibrium.
# A candle burning is endothermic, since heat is needed to initiate the reaction. {A} [Very
common, all ages.]
Energy in Chemical Reactions
# Energy is used up in chemical reactions. [S:33%] $$
# Energy is created in chemical reactions. {x} $$
# Chemical bonds store energy. {x} $$
# Energy from gasoline is not really energy until it has been released. {x,r}
# Gasoline causes energy, but does not contain it. {x,r}
# Energy could suddenly erupt out of something that does not itself have energy.[M]{x}
# Energy is a reactant which is added to a reaction. [C:50%]
# Heat is in the fuel being burned and is not formed during combustion. * {a,b}
Energy in Biological Processes.
# Energy is the life force. * [MT] {A,x}
# Energy is caused by life, animal activity. * [MT] {B,x}
# Energy is produced by reactions that take place in living things. {x,r}
# Food doesn’t store energy but gives you energy when you eat it. {x,r}
# ATP contains “high energy bonds” which release energy when they are broken. {x}
# Energy from a golf ball which bounces to a halt is still available. [S12:35%] {x}
Combustion
# Air above a flame is the same as air going into the burner. [50%, all ages.]
# Only air is above the flame. [40%]
# If water appears during burning it was present in the wood.
# Colors in a flame were present in one of the reactants.
# Smoke formed during combustion was already present in the wood.
# Combustion of alcohol, wood, or a candle are different phenomena.
# Combustion is a change of state of matter – solid or liquid to gaseous.
# Combustion is a color change. [13-14: 33%]
# Oxygen aids combustion but does not participate.
# Products of combustion are so changed that the reaction is not reversible.
# Heat is in the fuel being burned and is not formed during combustion. * {a,b}
# A candle burning is endothermic, since heat is needed to initiate the reaction. {A} [Very
common, all ages.]
Electric Cells and Batteries
# Batteries and cells have electric charge stored in them.
# Batteries and cells use up their charge in use.
# Batteries and cells can be revived by recharging them, which involves putting charge back into
them.
# Dry cells are fundamentally different from wet cells.
III. Sub-microscopic Chemistry
Nature of Matter:
# Matter is continuous, but contains particles. { a, r }
# Copper consists of atoms of copper embedded in a matrix like raisins in bread. { r }
# The space between molecules contains air. {B, a}
# Matter is continuous, homogeneous and static. {A, a} $$
# Grinding is how one makes “matter” from “objects”. {a}
# Substances and atoms are different names for the same things. [M8:10%;S10:10%;
C1a:10%]
Atoms
# Copper atoms have the properties of bulk copper. [S10:~50%] {x} $$
# Gold atoms are gold in color {b,r}
# Atoms are alive (because they move.) [S12:>50%]{A, e}
# Atoms can disappear (decay). {x}
# Atoms are hard, like billiard balls. [S:54%] {a,c}
# Atoms are soft and fuzzy. [S:38%] {a}
# Atoms are like building blocks. {x}
# Atoms can be seen with a microscope. [S] {e}
# Atoms can be seen with an electron microscope. [S] {e}
# Collisions between atoms affect their size. [S12:>50%] {x,t}
Molecules
# (Size of molecules greatly overestimated) [S12: >50%] {x}
# Molecules are basic, simple, indivisible entities. {x} $$
# N
2
+O
2
->2NO is not allowed because N
2
and O
2
can’t be decomposed.
# Molecules are small particles formed by successive partitioning of matter and hence keep their
macro properties such as hard, soft, etc. {a,b}
# The properties of molecules depend on the phase of the material composed of them. $$
# Water vapor molecules weigh less than ice molecules. * [S12: >50%] {b}
# Molecules of solids are hard, molecules of gasses are soft. {b}
# Water is something different from H
2
0 molecules. * {x}
# Gas molecules are round, molecules of solids are cubes. {e}
# Molecules of solids are biggest, molecules of gas are the smallest. {e}
# There is no space between molecules in solid objects. {B, b}
# There is matter between molecules. {B, b}
# Molecules expand when heated. [S12: >50%] {b}
# Pressure affects the shape of a molecule. [S12:>50%] {x}
# In a chemical equation, 3N
2
can be represented as NNNNNN. {x}
Molecular model of Heat
# Particles in solid bodies will slow down and eventually stop, due to inertia or friction. {e} $$
# Heat is produced by particles rubbing against each other.
# Objects at higher pressure have higher temperature because molecules collide more often.
[C1a:17%]{x}
Water Molecules (Largely redundant)
# Water is something different from H
2
0 molecules. * {x}
# Water molecules contain components besides O and H. {e}
# Water molecules are not all composed of the same atoms. {e}
# Water molecules are composed of two or more spheres. [S12:>50%] {d}
# Water molecules contain different numbers of atoms. {e}
# Water molecules can be seen with an optical microscope. {r}
# Water molecules may have different sizes and shapes. [S12:>50%] {e,t}
# Water molecules are largest and heaviest when in the solid phase. {b}
# Water molecules are heavy enough to be weighed individually in a high school lab. {e,r}
# The size and shape of a water molecule is affected by temperature. {a,b}
# There is no space between water molecules in ice. {a,b} $$
# In electrolysis of water the entire tube of water has been changed to hydrogen. [S] {x}
# Water vapour molecules weigh less than ice molecules. * [S12: >50%] {b}
# The "skin" of a water drop or a water surface is a different kind of water. {e}
# Oil doesn’t mix with water because oil and water molecules repel each other. {a,b,t}
Chemical Equilibrium
# (Many chemistry students unable to state that a balanced chemical equation represents a
rearrangement of atoms.)
# Chemical equilibrium and a chemical steady state are static conditions.
Acid-Base Reactions
# Mixing an acid with a base (without regard to quantities) neutralizes the base resulting in a
neutral solution.
# In neutralisation all the H and OH ions are cancelled. $$
# Mixing equal molar quantities of H
3
O and OH to distilled water results in neutral water.
# When Mg is placed in aqueous HCl, the acid is the driving force, because it is very strong. *
[S12a: 9%] {x}
Oxidation States
# The oxidation state of an element is the same as the charge of the monatomic ion of that
element.
# Oxidation numbers or states can be assigned to polyatomic molecules and ions.
# The charge on a polyatomic species indicates the oxidation state of the molecule or ion.
Oxidation and Reduction
# Oxidation is the addition of oxygen in a reaction. [S: common] $$
# Reduction is the removal of oxygen in a reaction. [S: common] $$
# If a reaction includes oxygen, then it is an oxidation reaction. [s: common]
# Sometimes a reaction can be both oxidation (because it includes oxygen) and reduction
(because an electron is donated.) [S]
# Oxidation and reduction operations can occur independently. [S] {x}
# Changes in the charges of polyatomic species can be used to identify oxidation or reduction
equations.
# Changes in the charges of polyatomic species can be used to determine the number of
electrons removed from or gained by reacting species.
Driving Force
# The “driving force” in a chemical reaction refers to an external causative agent. * {A,x} $$
# Heat supplied or absorbed is the driving force in a burning candle. [S12a: 81%] {B,x}
# When Mg is placed in aqueous HCl, Mg is the driving force. It is very reactive and so drives
the reaction. [S12a: 27%] {x}
# When Mg is placed in aqueous HCl, the acid is the driving force, because it is very strong. *
[S12a: 9%] {x}
# When lead nitrate reacts with aqueous sodium chloride, sodium replaces the lead because it is
more reactive. [S12a: 50%] {x}
Electric Current in Electrolytes
# In a cell the anions and cations attract each other and this affects the movement of ions to the
electrodes. [S12] {B, c}
# Electrons move through electrolytes by being attracted to positive ions in the solution. {B, b}
# Protons flow in electrolytes, whether acidic, base or neutral. {e}
# Electrons flow in electrolytes.
# Protons and electrons flow in opposite directions in electrolytes. {e}
# The movement of ions in a current does not constitute an electric current.
# Electrons move through solution by being attracted from one ion to another.
# When an Electrolyte conducts a current, electrons move onto an ion at the cathode and are
carried by that ion to the anode.
# There is a high electron concentration at the anode, because electrons go there. $$?
# There is a low electron concentration at the cathode, because electrons are drained from there.
# Electrons move from high concentration region at anode to low concentration region at
cathode.
Galvanic Cells
# The anode is always on the left. [C1a] {x}
# Standard reduction potentials list metals by decreasing activity. [C1a] {x}
# The identity of the anode and the cathode depends on the physical placement of the half-cells.
[C1a] {x}
# Anodes, like anions, are always negatively charged, and cathodes, like cations, are always
positively charged. [C1a] {x}
# Half-cell potentials are absolute in nature and can be used to predict the sponteneity of the
half-cells. [C1a] {x}
# There is no need for a standard half cell. [C1a] {x}
# Electrons enter the solution from the cathode, travel through the solutions and the salt bridge,
and emerge at the anode to complete the circuit. [C1a] {x}
# Cations and anions move until their concentrations are uniform. [C1a] {x} $$?
# Electrons can flow through aqueous solution without assistance from the ions. [C1a] {x}
# Only negatively charged ions constitute a flow of current in the electrolyte and the salt bridge.
[C1a] {x}
# The anode is negatively charged and releases electrons. The cathode is positively charged and
attracts electrons. [C1a] {x}
# The anode is positively charged because it has lost electrons. The cathode is negatively
charged because it has gained electrons. [C1a] {x}
# Cell potentials are obtained by adding individual reduction potentials. [C1a] {x}
Electrolytic Cells
# In electrolysis, the direction of the applied voltage has no effect on the reaction or the site of
the anode and cathode. [C1a] {x}
# No reaction will occur if inert electrodes are used. [C1a] {x}
# In electrolytic cells, oxidation now occurs at the cathode and reduction at the anode. [C1a] {x}
# In electrolytic cells with identical electrodes connected to the battery, the same reactions will
occur at both electrodes. [C1a] {x}
# In electrolytic cells, water is unreactive toward oxidation and reduction. [C1a] {x}
# The calculated cell potentials in electrolytic cells can be positive. [C1a] {x}
# There is no relationship between the calculated cell potentials and the magnitude of the
applied voltage. [C1a] {x}
# Inert electrodes can be oxidised or reduced. [C1a] {x}
# Electrolytic cells can force non-spontaneous reactions that do not involve electron transfer to
happen. [C1a] {x}
Atomic Structure
# Atoms have electrons circling them like planets around a star. [A, a,c] $$
# Atoms “own” their electrons. [C1] {B, x}
# Atoms are like cells with a membrane and nucleus. [S:10%] {B, e}
# Atoms can reproduce after the nuclei divide. [S:<10%] {e}
# The size of an atom depends on the number of protons it has. [S12:>50%] {x}
# There is only one correct model of an atom. {x} $$
# Hydrogen is a typical atom.
Atomic shell and electron cloud models.
# An Electron Shell is like an eggshell or clamshell, thin and hard.
# The electron shell is there to protect the nucleus, like an eggshell and a yolk.
# The force attracting electrons in the first shell would be much greater if the other shells of
electrons were removed. $$
# The electron cloud is like a rain cloud, with electrons suspended in it like droplets of water.
The cloud contains the electrons but is made of something else.
# The electron shell is a matrix of some kind of stuff with electrons embedded in it. [S] {x}
Atomic Structure: Electrical force
# A charged body gives rise to a certain amount of force which is available to be shared among
oppositely charged bodies around it.
# The nucleus attracts all electrons around it equally.
# Nuclear force gets spread over a number of electrons; none is left over to attract another
electron.
# Nuclear forces are like tentacles: each one is attached to an electron. {a}
# If there are fewer electrons than protons the attraction felt by each electron increases.
# As electrons are removed from an atom the net nuclear charge acting on the remaining
electrons will increase.
# Because a negative ion has more electrons than protons, the effective nuclear charge attracts
more electrons and pulls them in closer to the nucleus.
# The second ionization energy is greater than the first as there are fewer electrons in the shell to
share the attractive force of the nucleus.
# Coulomb's law doesn't work inside the atom. It works in physics but not in chemistry. {a}
# The wave function describes the trajectory of an electron. {x}
Chemical bonds
# Molecules are glued together.
# Bonds store energy.
# Breaking chemical bonds releases energy. [S12a: 48%] $$
# Bond making requires energy. [S12a: 48%] {x} $$
# Ionic pairs such as Na
+
and CI
-
are molecules. $$
# The strengths of covalent bonds and intermolecular forces are similar.
# The chemical bond is a physical thing made of matter. [S12a: common] $$
Chemical Bonds: Ionic
# Ionic compounds form neutral molecules, such as Na
+
Cl
-
molecules, in water. {x} $$
# H
+
Cl
-
bonds form in hydrochloric acid [S12a: 31%] {x}
# Bonds within “ionic molecules” are stronger than inter-molecular forces. {x}
# Na
+
Cl
-
bonds are not broken in dissolving; only inter-molecular bonds are broken. {x,r}
Chemical Bonds: Covalent
# Electrons know which atom they came from. {d}
# Atoms know who owes them an electron. {d}
# Atoms are held together because they share electrons, so sharing electrons is like a force. * $$
# Atoms form bonds in order to satisfy the octet rule.
# Atoms lend and borrow electrons to satisfy the octet rule.
# Sharing an electron means one atom donates an electron which is shared by both atoms. *
{A,x} $$
# The shape of a molecule is due only to repulsion between non-bonding electron pairs. [AG:
27%; F:14%] {x}
# The shape of a molecule is due only to repulsion between bonding electrons. [C1: 17%] {x}
# Bond polarity determines shape of molecule. {x}
# Electron pars are equally shared in all covalent bonds. * [C1a:52%;C4:18%;GA:20%] {x}
# Van der Waals force bonds aren't really chemical bonds, they are really just a force.
*****************************************************************************
Appendix 2: References
Web Links
The modeling methods in chemistry project web page is at http://hellevator.daisley.net
Modeling Instruction Program web site: <http://modeling.asu.edu>
Or contact J ane J ackson, Co-Director,
Box 871504, Dept.of Physics & Astronomy,ASU,Tempe,AZ 85287
480-965-8438/fax:965-7331
A list of alternate conceptions from the C3P Project It was borrowed from in compiling
this list. The list is not annotated, but it covers a lot of ground. The URL is
http://phys.udallas.edu/C3P/altconcp.html.
http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~jossem/ICPE/C3.html, (The International
Commission on Physics Education, 1997-98)
“Science Education Misconceptions”, “a well-researched source of discussions about
misconceptions in science” (Comments of JJ) , reflected in this list, out of the
University of Toronto: http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/~science/miscon.htm
Facets of Thinking in Physics, by J im Minstrell “This is a HUGE site! J im is a master
high school teacher/researcher.” (J J ) A number of misconceptions were taken from this
site for our list.
http://www.talariainc.com/facet/PhysicsFacetCodes.htm
A study of misconceptions is reported from J .P. Birk of the Chemistry Dept. at ASU:
http://www.public.asu.edu/~jpbirk/lsu_sem/tsld001.htm
“Bad Chemistry”: an entertaining and useful discussion of misconceptions, from which
several contributions to our list were taken, from Kevin Lehmann of Princeton
University. http://www.princeton.edu/~lehmann/BadChemistry.html
“Chemistry: Common Misconceptions and Fairytales”, “a collection of wrong
interpretations and beliefs regarding chemistry and its concepts” which informed some of
the items on our list, from Edward Lindley, [email protected].
http://people.we.mediaone.net/elindley/commiscn.htm
Concept test questions from the University of Wisconsin are available online at
http://www.chem.wisc.edu/`concept
Common Student Difficulties with Forces, graphing, position, velocity, acceleration, and
problem solving.
http://www.physics.montana.edu/phyed/misconceptions
Journal References:
Items marked with an asterisk (*) were not reviewed directly by the compilers of this list, but are
known and incorporated into this compilation from other peoples’ articles
Ahtee, M. and Varjola, I. (1998) “Students’ Understanding of Chemical Reactions ….”,
International Journal of Science Education 20(3) 305-316.
*Andersson, B. (1986), [Student understanding of chemical reactions.] Science Education 70,
549-563.
*Andersson, B. (1990) “Pupils’ conceptions of matter and its transformations (age 12-16), Studies
in Science Education 18, 53-85.
*Barral, F.L., and Fernandez, E.G.-F. (1992), “Secondary Students’ Interpretations of the Process
occurring in an Electrochemical Cell.” Journal of Chemical Education 69, 635-657.
Beall, Herbert (1994), “Probing Student Misconceptions in Thermodynamics with In-Class
Writing”, Journal of Chemical Education 71(12) 1056-1057.
*Ben-Zvi, R.; Eylon, B.; and Silbestein, J . (1986), “Is an atom of copper malleable?”, Journal of
Chemical Education 63(1), 64-66. Referred to by Nakhleh (1992).
*Ben-Zvi, Eylan and Silberstein (1987), “Students’ visualization of a chemical reaction.”
Education in Chemistry 24, 117-120.
*Ben-Zvi, Eylan and Silberstein (1988), [The “tacking together” theory of reactions.] Journal of
Chemical Education 65, 89-92.
Birk, J ames.P. and Kurtz, Martha J . (1999), “Effects of Experience on Retention and Elimination
of Misconceptions about Molecular Structure and Bonding”, Journal of Chemical Education
76(1) 124-128.
*Bodner, G.M. (1992), [Change of state], Journal of Chemical Education 69, 191-196.
Boo, H.K. (1998), “Student Understandings of Chemical Bonds and the Energetics of Chemical
Reactions”, Journal of Research on Science Teaching 35(5), 569-581.
*Broznan, T. (1992), “Explanation of Charge”, Technical Paper #3, London: University of
London, London Mental Models Group, Working Group 6237: Children’s and Teachers’
Explanations.
*Cachapaz, A.F., and Martins, I.P. (1987), “High School Students’ Ideas about Energy of
Chemical Reactions”, in Novak, J ., and Helm, H., (Eds.) Proceedings of the International
Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mechanics, Vol. 3, 60-68. Reported in Boo (1998).
*Clough,E., and Driver, R. (1985), “Secondary Students’ Conceptions of the Conduction of Heat:
bringing together scientific and personal views.” Physics Education 20, 176-182.
*Cros, D.; Mauvan, M.; Chastrette, M.; Leher, J .; and Fayol, M. (1986), [Atomic models],
European Journal of Science Education 8, 305-313.
deVos, W., van Berkel, B., and Verdonk, H. (1994); “A Coherent Conceptual Structure of the
Chemistry Curriculum”, Journal of Chemical Education 71(9), 743-746.
*deVos, W., and Verdonk, A. (1986), “A New Road to Reactions, Part 3: Teaching the Heat
Effect of the Reaction,” Journal of Chemical Education 63, 972-974.
*Duit, Reinders (1984), “Learning the energy concept in school – empirical results from The
Philippines and West Germany,” Physics Education 19, 59-66.
*Finegold, M., and Trumper, Ricardo (1989), “Categorizing Pupils’ Explanatory Frameworks in
Energy as a Means to the Development of a Teaching Approach,” Research in Science
Teaching,19, 97-110.
Gabel, Dorothy (1999), “Improving Teaching and Learning through Chemistry Education
Research, a Look to the Future”, Journal of Chemical Education 76(4), 548-554.
*Gayford, C.G. (1986), “Some aspects of the problems of teaching about energy in school
biology,” European Journal of Science Education 8, 443-450.
Garnett, Paula S. and Treagust, D. (1992), “Conceptual Difficulties Experienced by Senior High
School Students of Electrochemistry, Electric Circuits and Oxidation-Reduction Reactions”,
Journal of Research on Science Teaching 29(2), 121-142.
*Griffiths, A.K., and Preston, K.R. (1989), [Models of molecules and atoms], Paper presented at
National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Referred to by Nakhleh (1992).
*Hack (?), M.W. and Garnett, P.J . (1985), [Australian HS students’ understanding of chemical
equilibrium.] European Journal of Science Education 205-214.
Halloun, Ibrahim, and Hestenes, David (1985), "Common Sense Concepts about Motion",
American Journal of Physics 53, 11ff.
Harrison, Alan G. and Treagust, D. (1996), “Secondary Students’ Mental Models of
Atoms and Molecules: Implications for Teaching Chemistry,” Science Education 80(5), 509-534.
Hestenes, David; Wells, Malcolm; and Swackhamer, Gregg (1992); "Force Concept Inventory",
The Physics Teacher 30: 141-158
Hesse and Anderson (1992), “Students’ Conceptions of Chemical Change”, Journal of Research
on Science Teaching 29, 277-99.
Kesidou, S. and Duit, R. (1993), “Students’ Conceptions of the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
an Interpretive Study”, Journal of Research on Science Teaching 30(1), 85-106.
Kokotas, Panagiotas; Vlachos, I; and Koudiadis, V. (1998) “Teaching the Topic of the Particulate
Nature of Matter …”), International Journal of Science Education 20(3) 291-303.
*Krajcik, J .S. (1989), Paper presented at American Anthropological Association, Washington,
D.C. Referred to by Nakhleh (1992).
Krnel, D.; Watson, R. ; and Glazar, S.A. (1998); “Survey of Research Related to the
Development of the Concept of Matter”, International Journal of Science Education 20(3) 257-
289.
Lewis, E. and Linn, M. (1994), “Heat, Energy and Temperature Concepts of Adolescents, Adults
and Experts: Implications for Curriculum Development”, Journal of Research on Science
Teaching 31(6) 657-77.
*Lythcott, J . (1990), “Problem Solving and the requisite knowledge of chemistry, Journal of
Chemical Education 67, 248-252, reported in Boo (1998).
McCloskey, M. (1983), “Intuitive Physics”, Scientific American 248, 122-130.
Nakhleh, Mary (1992), “Why Some Students Don’t Learn Chemistry”, Journal of Chemical
Education 69(3) 191-196.
*Peterson, R.F. and Treagust, D.F.(1989a), [Atomic models], Journal of Chemical Education 66,
459-460.
Peterson, R.F., Treagust, D.F. et al. (1989b), [Test on models of bonding], Journal of Research
on Science Teaching 26, 301-314.
Sanger, M., and Greenbowe, T. (1999), “Analysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of
Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education 76(6), 853-60.
Schmidt, H.J . (1997), “Students’ Misconceptions … Looking for a Pattern,” Science Education
81(2).
Solomon, J . (1985), “Teaching the Conservation of Energy,” Physics Education 20, 165-170.
*Stary, R. (1988), [On the ineffectiveness of early instruction in the atomic model.] International
Journal of Science Education 10, 553-60.
Tabor, K.S. (1997), (“ … Truth about ionisation energy diagnostic … “) ?
Tabor, K. S. (1998a), (“ … Physics in Chemistry…. “ [Key concept: the chemical bond]),
International Journal of Science Education 20(5) 597 ff.
Tabor, K.S. (1998 b), (“ … Alternative Conceptual Framework … “) International Journal of
Science Education 20(8), 1001 ff.
Thomas and Schwenz (1998), “College Physical Chemistry Students’ Concepts ….”, Journal of
Research on Science Teaching 35(10), 1151-60.
*Thomaz, Marilia; Valente, M.C., Maliquias, I. M.; and Aritanes, M. (1995); [ H.S. Students’
conceptions of heat and temperature.] Physics Education 30(1), 19-27.
*Thomaz, Marilia; Maliquias, I. M.; Valente, M. C., and Aritanes, M.J . (date?) “An attempt to
overcome alternative conceptions related to heat and temperature,” in New Approaches to Science
Teaching.
*Trumper, Ricardo (1990), “Being Constructive: an alternative approach to the teaching of the
energy concept – part one,” International Journal of Science Education 12, 343-354.
*Trumper, Ricardo (1993), “Children’s energy concepts: a cross-age study,” International
Journal of Science Education 15, 139-48.
*Trumper, Ricardo (1997a), “A survey of the conceptions of energy in Israeli pre-service high
school biology teachers,” International Journal of Science Education 19, 31-46.
Tyson, Louise, and Treagust, David (1999), “Complexity of Teaching … Equilibrium”, Journal
of Chemical Education 76(4), 554ff.
van Driel, J .; deVos, W.; van der Coop, N.; and Dekkers, H. (1998) , “Developing … Students’
Conceptions of Chemical Reactions … Equilibrium ….”, International Journal of Science
Education 20(4) 379ff.
*van Huis, Cor, van den Berg, Eds. (1993), “Teaching Energy, a systems approach,” Physics
Education 28, 146-153.
*Viennot, Lawrence (1998), “Experimental Facts and Ways of Reasoning in
Thermodynamics: Learners' Common Approach,” in Connecting Research in Physics
Education with Teacher Education, Tiberghian, Andree, J ossem, E. Leonard, Barojas,
J orge, eds., http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~jossem/ICPE/C3.html, (The International
Commission on Physics Education, 1997-98)
Wheeler, A. and Kass, H. (1978), “Student Misconceptions in Chemical Equilibrium,” Science
Education 62(2), 223ff.
Yarroch, W.L. (1985), “Student understanding of chemical equation balancing”, Journal of
Research on Science Teaching 22, 449-459.
Additional J ournal References used by J ohn Bernier in compiling his list of
misconceptions:
International Journal of Science Education [v10,N2,p.159], [v.13, N1, p11], [v13, N13, p355]
Journal of Chemical Education [v62, N4, p318], [v62, N10, p847], [v64, N8, p695], [v64, N12,
p1010], [v71, N1, p9]
Journal of Research on Science Teaching [v25, N9, p709], [v29, N4, p301]
Science Education [v81, N2, p123]
The Sccience Teacher [v57, N9, p16], [v58, N3, p24], [v59, N3, p58]
Research in Science and Technological Education [v81, N2, p123]
Book-length references:
Arons, Arnold (1997), Teaching Introductory Physics, J ohn Wiley and Sons, New York, cf. Part
I: Chapter 5 section 5-10, Chapter 6 Section 12, Chapter 7 Sections 1-4, and Chapter 8, Section 1,
Chapter 10, Section 1 and 7 and Chapter 11 Sections 1-4.
Camp, Charles W., and Clement, J ohn J ., Preconceptions in Mechanics ,Lessons Dealing with
Students’ Conceptual Difficulties, Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque Iowa, 1994. Scientific Reasoning
Research Institute, U. of Massachusetts Amherst.
Review Articles – Not seen by these compilers:
Anderson (1990), Studies in Science Education 18, 53-85
Driver, R., and Easley, J . (1978) “Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept
development in adolescent science students.” Studies in Science Education 5, 61-84.
Gabel and Bruce (1994), in Handbook of Research in Science Teaching and Learning,
Macmillan, NY, 301-326.
Helm and Novak, eds., “Proceedings of the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science
and Mathematics”, Ithaca, N.Y., Cornell, 1983
Nakhleh, M.B. (1992), Journal of Chemical Education 69, 191-196.
Stavy, R. (1991), Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28, 305-313.
Windersee, et al. (1994), in Handbook of Research in Science Teaching and Learning,
Macmillan, NY, 177-210.
Other works worth pursuing, not seen by these compilers:
Boo (1998) has a set of references which includes many articles not otherwise encountered by
this compiler.
Cohen, et al. (1983), “Potential Difference and Current in Simple Electric Circuits”, American
Journal of Physics 51, 407.
Fredette and Clement (1981), “Misconceptions … Electric Circuit ….”, Journal of College
Science Teaching 10, 280.
Kurtz, M.J . (1995), “Using Analogies to teach College Chemistry”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Arizona
State University.
McDermott, L., and Shaffer, “Electricity … Student Understanding …”, American Journal of
Physics 60(11), 994.
Piaget, J ., and Inhelder, B. (1958), Growth of Logical Thinking, Basic Books, New York.
Tabor, K. (1994), “Misunderstanding the Ionic Bond”, Education in Chemistry 31, 100-102.
Tragust, et al. (1992), “Bridging Analogies in Chemistry”, International Journal of Science
Education 14, 413-422.
J ournal issues from 2000, which were out to be bound.
***************************************************************
Communications
Send suggestions, additions, comments, your favorite misconceptions, anecdotes, corrections,
further references, criticisms, recriminations and protests to:
Chris Horton [email protected]
RR3, #4158
Amherst, NS, B4H 3Y1 (902) 447-2109
CANADA