Content Analysis of Chemistry Textbooks in the Chapter on Thermochemistry
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze the aspects of the general chemistry textbook in the chapter on thermochemistry. We reviewed three general chemistry textbooks commonly used in basic chemistry courses. This study used a qualitative approach by content analysis. The focus of this study was the thermochemistry chapter because this topic was considered to be difficult by students. Data analysis was carried out descriptively by combining similar data within the chemical literacy framework. The analysis results indicated that the three textbooks fulfilled most of the chemical content knowledge indicators, except for chemistry as an experimental discipline. The textbooks provided insights that chemistry can be used to explain phenomena in everyday life, to make decisions and participate in social debates on chemistry-related issues, and to understand the relationship between innovations in chemistry and sociological processes. The textbooks also presented knowledge that can encourage the enhancement of high-order learning skills, particularly in the review problems section.
Keywords: chemistry, textbook, thermochemistry
References
[1] Roth DL. Several centuries of centrality. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci. 5b00198.
[2] Mahaffy PG, Ho FM, Haack JA, Brush EJ, Can chemistry be a central science without systems thinking? 2019. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00991.
[3] Hartings MR, Fahy D. Communicating chemistry for public engagement. Nat Chem. 2011 Aug;3(9):674–7.
[4] Rollini R, Falciola L, Tortorella S. Chemophobia: a systematic review. Tetrahedron. 2022;113:132758.
[5] Siegrist M, Bearth A. Chemophobia in Europe and reasons for biased risk perceptions. Nat Chem. 2019 Dec;11(12):1071–2.
[6] Begum DA. Role of literacy in people’s lives and its importance. Int J Sci Res. 2020;9(9):2019–20.
[7] Celik S. Chemical literacy levels of science and mathematics teacher candidates. Aust J Teach Educ. 2014;39(1):1–15.
[8] Rao CN. The two faces of chemistry in the developing world. Nat Chem. 2011 Aug;3(9):678–80.
[9] Shwartz Y, Ben?Zvi R, Hofstein A. The importance of involving high?school chemistry teachers in the process of defining the operational meaning of ‘chemical literacy,’. Int J Sci Educ. 2005;27(3):323–44.
[10] Robinson TJ, Fischer L, Wiley D, Hilton J 3rd. The impact of open textbooks on secondary science learning outcomes. Educ Res. 2014;43(7):341–51.
[11] Irez S. Nature of science as depicted in Turkish biology textbooks. Sci Educ. 2009;93(3):422–47.
[12] Devetak I, Vogrinc J. The criteria for evaluating the quality of the science textbooks. Critical analysis of Science textbooks: Evaluating instructional effectiveness. Springer; 2013. pp. 3–15.
[13] Chiappetta EL, Sethna GH, Fillman DA. A quantitative analysis of high school chemistry textbooks for scientific literacy themes and expository learning AIDS. J Res Sci Teach. 1991;28(10):939–51.
[14] Shiland TW. Quantum mechanics and conceptual change in high school chemistry textbooks. J Res Sci Teach. 1997;34(5):535–45. DOI
[15] Stern L, Roseman JE. Can middle?school science textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum evaluation study: life science. J Res Sci Teach. 2004;41(6):538–68.
[16] Abd?El?Khalick F, Myers JY, Summers R, Brunner J, Waight N, Wahbeh N, et al. A longitudinal analysis of the extent and manner of representations of nature of science in US high school biology and physics textbooks. J Res Sci Teach. 2017;54(1):82–120.
[17] Shultz GV, Gottfried AC, Winschel GA. Impact of general chemistry on student achievement and progression to subsequent chemistry courses: A regression discontinuity analysis. J Chem Educ. 2015;92(9):1449–55.
[18] Vojír K, Rusek M. Science education textbook research trends: a systematic literature review. Int J Sci Educ. 2019;41(11):1496–516.
[19] Chiappetta EL, Fillman DA. Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. Int J Sci Educ. 2007;29(15):1847– 68.
[20] Phillips MC, Vowell JE, Lee YH, Plankis BJ. How do elementary science textbooks present the nature of science? The Educational Forum. Taylor & Francis; 2015. p. 148–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2015.1004210.
[21] Ramnarain UD, Chanetsa T. An analysis of South African Grade 9 natural sciences textbooks for their representation of nature of science. Int J Sci Educ. 2016;38(6):922–33.
[22] Chua JX, Tan AL, Ramnarain U. Representation of NOS aspects across chapters in Singapore grade 9 and 10 biology textbooks: insights for improving NOS representation. Res Sci Technol Educ. 2019;37(3):259–78.
[23] Zhuang H, Xiao Y, Liu Q, Yu B, Xiong J, Bao L. Comparison of nature of science representations in five Chinese high school physics textbooks. Int J Sci Educ. 2021;43(11):1779–98.
[24] Goedhart MJ, Kaper W. “From chemical energetics to chemical thermodynamics. Chemical education: towards research-based practice. Springer; 2022. p. 339–362.
[25] Cigdemoglu C, Geban O. Improving students’ chemical literacy levels on thermochemical and thermodynamics concepts through a context-based approach. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2015;16(2):302–17.
[26] Wester FP. K. Krippendorff, Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology: 2005 9780761915447. Communications. 2005;30:124–6.
[27] Liu Y, Khine MS. Content analysis of the diagrammatic representations of primary science textbooks. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ. 2016;12(8):1937–51.
[28] Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277–88.
[29] Silberberg M. Principles of general chemistry. Boston: McGraw-Hill Education; 2012.
[30] Jespersen ND, Hyslop A. Chemistry: The molecular nature of matter. John Wiley & Sons; 2021.
[31] Chang R. Chemistry. The McGraw-Hill Companies; 2010.
[32] Güngör BA, Metin M, Saraçoglu S. A content analysis study towards researches regarding context-based learning approach in science education by between years 2010 and 2020 in Turkey. Journal of Science Learning. 2022;5(1):69–78.
[33] Cooper MM, Klymkowsky MW. The trouble with chemical energy: why understanding bond energies requires an interdisciplinary systems approach. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2013 Jun;12(2):306–12.
[34] Wei B, Chen Y. The meaning of ‘experiment’in the intended chemistry curriculum in China: the changes over the period from 1952 to 2018. Int J Sci Educ. 2020;42(4):656–74.
[35] Aydogdu B. The investigation of science process skills of science teachers in terms of some variables. Educ Res Rev. 2015;10(5):582–94.
[36] Hardy JG, Sdepanian S, Stowell AF, Aljohani AD, Allen MJ, Anwar A, et al. Potential for chemistry in multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary teaching activities in higher education. J Chem Educ. 2021;98(4):1124–45.
[37] Bond D. In pursuit of chemical literacy: A place for chemical reactions. J Chem Educ. 1989;66(2):157.
[38] Rius-Alonso C, Quezada YG. Explaining the chemical basis of everyday phenomena using molecular modeling. INTED2015 Proceedings. 2015. p. 2594–2599.
[39] Tsaparlis G. The states-of-matter approach (SOMA) to introductory chemistry. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2000;1(1):161–8.
[40] Reichmanis E. The chemistry innovation process: breakthroughs for electronics and photonics,” in reducing the time from basic research to innovation in the chemical sciences: a workshop report to the chemical sciences roundtable., Washington, 2003.
[41] Englund T.“Towards a citizenship literacy.: contribution to the symposium literacies across the school subjects within network 27 didactics-learning and teaching at the ECER-conference in Helsinki, Finland Aug 24-26 20+ 10.,” In: EERA European Educational Research Assocation (2010).