ABSTRACT
High school students are challenged to interpret data and reference
tables to answer questions. Although this is a common occurrence,
especially in chemistry, students still struggle to use diagrams to solve
the problems and answer the questions on exams. Having students
correctly use the reference table for chemistry is not only a valuable
skill in the classroom but being able to use a diagram or picture to
make connections is a skill that can be applied to reading and to
personal experience when analyzing the content in front of them. A
major concern for the disconnect between the information from the
diagram and the interpretation of the student could be the lack of
understanding for the “hints” or context clues found in the questions.
Students often do not understand the vocabulary of the question and
therefore cannot fully identify not only what the question is asking but
also where the information can be found. This major problem of
having students not identify the key terms and context clues was a
significant issue at Dobbs Ferry High School in New York in an
eleventh grade classroom. To change the results, I decided to have
students take apart the components of a common New York State
Chemistry regents exam question to identify first, the “key terms”,
second the “table used” and third the “context clues” to figure out
exactly how to answer each question and use information given to
make the appropriate connections to identify the answer.
SIGNIFICANCE TO EDUCATION
Teachers far to often do not allow student to make their own
connections to the material and interpret the data. They instead have
students memorize how to answer a question for the sole purpose of
getting the answer correct. If it is not hard enough to have students
understand the concepts discussed in a chemistry classroom, adding a
reference table with almost twenty different tables, diagrams and
graphs only complicates the material further. Far too often students are
intimidated by the dense amount of information packed into this
reference table and cannot get the full understanding of how beneficial
this tool is to not only getting the most out of their learning but also
making connections and inferences. For educators, by taking the time
to explain and analyze exactly what the table is offering, the students
can think critically about chemistry concepts and use the scientific
language to explain and answer questions on a deeper level.
PROBLEM
How can students who have the information organized in a table,
diagram or graph struggle to find the correct information to
determine the answer?
RESEARCH
In one research study, it was acknowledged that many students, both on
level and those with learning disabilities, struggle to use a diagram
effectively and apply the concepts to a word problem. When two fourth
grade students were interviewed by the teacher to determine the
understanding of a math diagram and how students chose to use it to
answer questions, the teacher was made aware of how each student
approaches a problem differently and not all students use the diagram in
the same way to establish their own answers. By having students
verbalize their own interpretation of the diagram they each summarized
their learning and connected their prior knowledge with the material at
hand. (Poch, van Garderen &Scheurmann, 2015) In science, the major
concern is to have students question the material and draw conclusions
and by having each child justify their steps and verbalize their findings,
learning has been taken out of the teachers hands and placed in control
of the learner. The issue is not only found within the study of the
diagram but on the type of questions asked in regards to the tables. (van
Garderen, Scheurmann, Jackson, 2013)
Upon observation of approaching, on level and beyond students, after
giving each student time to study the diagram, each type of learner was
asked to answer both prompted and non-prompted questions and define
what a diagram was. The findings indicated that for prompted
questions, both the on level and beyond students scored lower and for
the non- prompted questions, these students scored higher. The majority
of both on level and beyond students could correctly identify the
definition of a diagram. For the approaching students tested, the
students had the most difficulty identifying the definition of a diagram
and scored lower than both the on-level and beyond students for both
types of questions. Their reports are not surprising, yet they lead to the
conclusion that no matter the type of student in the classroom, the
struggle to correctly use a diagram will always be relevant and must be
correctly taught before students can draw their own conclusions.
METHOD
This study focused on 23 male and female 11th grade students
preparing to take the NYS chemistry regents in June of 2015. The
study was conducted over a ten-hour observation period, under
the supervision of the classroom teacher. The school itself is located
in a suburban area, Dobbs Ferry, New York, with students ranging
from approaching, to on level and some beyond. The majority of
the class is on level and no student in the classroom was an English
language learner. The class met every day, one day for 46 minutes
and the next day for a double period of 92 minutes. The study was
performed in one day for a double period session. Nine questions
were assigned, three individually with no use of the strategy, two
as an entire class implementing the strategy, three individually
with the strategy and finally one in pairs with the strategy. At the
beginning of class, students were given an admit slip with three
NYS regents questions to solve. Students were given the NYS
reference table to use any of the diagrams required to solve the
question. All questions used in this study were on topics already
presented and studied in class with no new information for any of
the students. When finished with the three questions, the admit
slips were collected to be reviewed before students were given the
opportunity to explain their findings. This was done to compare
whether dissecting each question would have any impact on
finding the right answer. Before beginning the next set of
questions, students were handed a chart with three columns, one
column for “key terms” the next column for “context clues” and
the final column for “table used”. On the smart board another
multiple-choice question was assigned, this time though students
were asked to work as a class and discuss the best way to find the
answer. Before beginning the problem, it was explained that in
order to solve the next few problems, steps to find the answer must
be justified on their charts. I read aloud the question and allowed
students to write the questions on a sheet of paper or just read the
question from the smart board. Students then were asked to raise
their hands and give the “key terms” they feel are important to
solving the problem. Before students were asked to volunteer their
answers as a class, key terms were identified as “science words” or
“chemistry words”. Students were able to give the words needed
and add them to the key terms column. The next question asked
was what context clues from the problem could be identified?
Before giving the answer, students were asked to correctly identify
terms that explain, “What the question is asking” when finding a
context clue. Students again were able to define the context clues as
a class and add them to the appropriate column. The final step for
the class was to identify the correct part of the reference table to
identify the answer. Students were eager to share their answer
however the students were not able to identify the table correctly
on the first try. Upon further inspection of the question, when
reminded to use the key terms and context clues to determine the
table, students could identify the table and were led to the right
answer.
After reviewing two questions together as a class, three more questions
were assigned to the students to work individually, filling in the three
columns and answering the questions. Again the data was collected and
reviewed to compare the results with the lack of exposure. Finally, a last
question was assigned and students were asked to complete the
questions in pairs and fill in their charts with the correct answer.
through topics that were prior knowledge from lessons done in
class in preparation for the exam.
Data Table of Potential Student Responses
RESULTS
Data was recorded for the nine questions and then used to compare
the results from the graphic organizer and the questions answered
prior to the introduction of the strategy. Students seemed to have a
solid understanding of the strategy by the end of the session and
scores did improve from the initial three questions asked to the three
questions asked individually. When asked to reflect on the use of the
chart and whether they found the organizer useful when answering
questions, students gave mixed reviews. Some students found the
strategy helpful, however, not realistic to use on the actual exam and
too time consuming. Another student expressed that it was helpful
and as a result now looks at the questions exactly that way making
mental note of each key term and context clue and finally if a reference
table can be used to answer. Although some students did find the use
of the table tedious and unnecessary, all the students did say the
organizer was easy to use, leading to my own conclusion that it could
be applicable to approaching, on level and beyond students in any
chemistry classroom.
The chart below shows the scores on each individual question for the
total of the 23 students who were there and answered the questions.
Each questioned is labeled with when the question was answered.
Correct Student Resonses for NYS Reference Table
Questions
25
As a class As a class
20
In pairs
Individually
Individually
Individually
before strategy
before strategy
15
before strategy
10
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
CONCLUSIONS
Through this research it can be shown that students can adapt to the
material or strategy at hand and improvements can be made toward
student understanding versus student memorization. With such a
strong attraction towards passing standardized tests, this strategy will
not only have students discover the right answer through their
diagrams but also have students make sense of the information in
front of them and therefore draw conclusions from the material.
Students should not be memorizing to find the correct answer but
instead should be learning and connecting ideas based on their prior
knowledge and ability to understand what is being asked of them.
Students do face the challenge of “not testing well” and by teaching
these students how to divide a question to conquer the task at hand,
students will be aided in their journey to mastering how to read and
interpret a data table to get the most information possible. The
information expressed from this study will expose teachers to the
diversity that truly lies in the classroom so when creating a lesson
plan, the content not only needs to be expressed in multiple contexts,
but the way students are asked to express understanding must also be
varied. Students will always be faced with summative assessments in
the form of standardized tests, so by taking this challenge head on and
showing students how to read and understand questions, both the
student and teacher have allowed for the most internalization of
knowledge to occur.
Questions asked
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
As can be seen within the chart, correct choices do increase after
the strategy has been implemented. Ideally it would be nice to
assume that the strategy directly correlates to the increase in the
correct choice, however, it cannot be directly related to the break
down of each question. Other factors to consider could be the
direct content of each question. Some students may be more
familiar with the material on a specific question asked and
therefore knew the correct answer. Some students may also be
more confortable with a specific table from the New York State
Reference Table and therefore were more confident in a question
that pertained to that specific diagram. Students could have taken
the last three questions more seriously knowing that these
questions would be collected just as the first three were collected
and therefore more thought and effort went into these three. Even
if the use of the strategy to break down each part of the multiple
choice question was not helpful, students demonstrated that they
still had a solid understanding of how to use the diagrams
FUTURE RESEARCH
Students with IEP’s or ELL students could potentially benefit from the
break down of word problems to determine the correct answer. The
use of diagrams and pictures can help these students visualize and
construct a connection to the content at hand. Students again could
work individually, in a group and in pairs to compare the results for
these types of learners.
REFERENCES
Kragten M., Admiraal W., & Rijlaarsdam G (2015) Students’ Ability to Solve Process- diagram Problems in Secondary Biology
Education, Journal of Biological Education
McLaughlin, M. (2010). Content area reading: teaching and learning in an age of multiple literacies. Boston: Pearson.
Poch, A., van Garderen, D., Scheuermann, A.,(2015) Teaching Exceptional Children. Jan 2015, Vol. 47 Issue 3, p153-162.
10p. Students’ Understanding of Diagrams for Solving Word Problems: A Framework for Assessing Diagram Proficiency.
Van Garderen, D., Scheuermann, A., Jackson, C., (2013) Learning Disability Quarterly.Aug2013, Vol. 36 Issue 3, p145-160.
16p. Examining How Students With Diverse Abilities Use Diagrams to Solve Mathematics Word Problems.
Regents Prep Chemistry. Oswego City School District Regents Exam Prep Center, 1999.Web. 2015.