Development of a teaching guide to promote the learning of chemistry in students of the night section of the La Concordia Educational Unit
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: The teaching of chemistry in secondary education presents persistent challenges that are aggravated in contexts of night shifts due to the socio-labor conditions of the students. Objectives: This study evaluated the efficacy of an active and contextualized didactic guide to teach hydrocarbons in night high school. Methodology: quasi-experimental pre-test-post-test design with a non-equivalent comparison group and mixed integration of methods. Two intact courses (intervention, n = 23; comparison, n = 5) were involved for 12 weeks. A 20-item conceptual test, the Science Motivation Questionnaire II (SMQ-II) and classroom observation with RTOP were used; the quantitative analysis included paired t-tests, Welch's t-test and ANCOVA with the pre-test as a covariate, complemented by a satisfaction questionnaire and brief interviews. Results: The intervention group showed substantial improvements in performance; the post-test ANCOVA, adjusted for pretest, indicated a relevant group effect (ηp² = 0.34). In motivation, the mean increase in SMQ-II was Δ = 10.3 points, compared to minimal changes in the comparison group. The RTOP observations showed high fidelity in the implementation of student-centered practices, while the control group maintained a mainly expository approach. Conclusions: Qualitative evidence was consistent with quantitative results, highlighting satisfaction, relevance, and greater participation. Despite the limitations of the design (non-equivalent groups and small control size), the findings suggest that low-cost materials with high local relevance can improve learning and motivation in night-time contexts; Its curricular integration should include teacher training and implementation monitoring.
General area of study: Education
Specific area of study: Chemistry pedagogy
Article type: Narrative literature review
Downloads
Article Details
dssfdsf
dsfdsf
References
Cabrera Borges, C. (2017). ¿Cómo retener a los jóvenes y adultos en el sistema educativo público? Análisis de las estrategias desplegadas en tres liceos nocturnos del Uruguay. Páginas de Educación, 10(2), 57–78. https://doi.org/10.22235/pe.v10i2.1424
Cardellini, L. (2012). Chemistry: Why the subject is difficult? Educación Química, 23(2), 305–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(17)30158-1
Toro Rodríguez, L. F. (2023). Caracterización de los niveles de representación de la química en textos escolares utilizados para la enseñanza de reacciones químicas en grado décimo (Tesis doctoral, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales).
Cooper, M. M., & Stowe, R. L. (2018). Chemistry education research—From personal empiricism to evidence, theory, and informed practice. Chemical Reviews, 118(12), 6053–6087. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00020
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Jiménez-Liso, M. R., López-Banet, L., & Dillon, J. (2020). Changing how we teach acid–base chemistry: A proposal grounded in studies of the history and nature of science education. Science & Education, 29(5), 1291–1315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00142-6
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., Chambwe, N., et al. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476–6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Glynn, S. M., Brickman, P., Armstrong, N., & Taasoobshirazi, G. (2011). Science Motivation Questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1159–1176. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20442
Otzen, T., & Manterola, C. (2017). Técnicas de muestreo sobre una población a estudio. International Journal of Morphology, 35(1), 227–232. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022017000100037
Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J. B., Falconer, K. A., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x
Merizalde, A. M. A., Balarezo, M. A. A., Oña, Z. E. S., & Montero, R. E. O. (2024). Estrategias didácticas activas para fomentar el aprendizaje significativo en la educación. Un análisis de métodos innovadores. Ciencia y Educación, 201-216. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13864428