ANALYZING OF STUDENTS MISCONCEPTIONS ON ACID-BASE CHEMISTRY AT SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS IN MEDAN.

ii

BIOGRAPHY

Harizal was born on 03rd February 1990 in Tanjung Tiram, Batu Bara. His mother’s name is Asmah Anwar and his father’s name is Nurdin. The writer is the second child of five brothers. In 1996 the writer entered the Elementary School in SDN 010163 Tanjung Tiram and graduated in 2002. In 2002 the writer continued his study in SMP Negeri 1 Talawi and graduated in 2005. In 2005 the writer continued his study to SMA Negeri 1 Talawi and graduated in 2008. In 2008 the writer was accepted in Chemistry Department, Bilingual Chemistry Education study program, Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan. During the time of college, the writer actively followed some intracurricular and extracuricular activities e.g. HMJ (Himpunan Mahasiswa Jurusan) Kimia and FORSIMKA (Forum Silaturrahim Muslim Kimia). The writer was one of the winners of PKM-GT (Program Kreatifitas Mahasiswa-Gagasan Tertulis) in 2010, and Student Grant in 2012. The writer was also active in National Seminar and Training.

iv

ACKNOWLEDMENT

First of all I would like to devote his greatest thankfulness to The Almighty Allah SWT, He is The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful for His blessing, guidance, strength, health and His favor which have been given so that I could finally finish this thesis entitled: Analyzing of Students’ Misconceptions on Acid-Base Chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan.

In this opportunity, I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis supervisor, Dr. Zainuddin Muchtar, M.Si., for giving me his guidance, support, and chance in doing this research. I also thank to Prof. Dr. Albinus Silalahi, M.S., Dr. Simson Tarigan, M.Pd., and Drs. Eddyanto, Ph.D., as my examiners for their advices, suggestions, guidance, and constructive critics in the process of completing this thesis.

I also like to say thanks tofor Dr. Iis Siti Jahro, M.Si., Dra. Ani Sutiani, M.Si., and Drs. Asep Wahyu Nugraha, M.Si. as my instrument valuators for their times and suggestion in development of my research instrument, for Prof. Motlan Sirait, M.Sc., Ph.D., as the dean of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, Prof. Dr. Herbert Sipahutar, M.Sc. as coordinator of Bilingual Program, Drs. Jamalum Purba, M.Si. as the head of Chemistry Department, and Prof. Drs. Manihar Situmorang, M.Sc., Ph.D. as my academic supervisor for all their help in completing my study and this thesis. The work was also made possible through Student Grant from Research Institute, State University of Medan.

I give special gratitude for my beloved mother, Asmah Anwar and father, Nurdin, and also for my brothers and sister; Zulkarnain, Ervi Agustini Muhammad Ilham, and Wahyudi. No other could replace all of your love for me.

Many colleagues have also been an integral part of my thesis. Those are my team in Student Grant for their help in doing this research. To my lovely Onna, thank you for sharing everything with me. My other friends and colleagues, firstly at Bilingual Chemistry Education ’08 class especially for Vika, Ayu, Roma, Iqy, and Icit and more latterly in Teaching Experience Program in School; Dian, Nawi, Rahmad, Ginda, Eva, Sity, and Laila, I love them. Thanks are also

v

addressed to all SMA Negeri 1 Matauli Pandan students 16th force. They are always in my mind. Thank you all.

I have attempted as maximal as I can in doing this thesis. However, in my humble heart the writer hope construct suggestions and critics from the reader for the perfection of this thesis. The writer hopes this thesis can be useful and gives many function to the readers knowledge especially about subject matter which is researched in this thesis.

Medan, 23rd July 2012 The Writer,

Harizal

vi

LIST OF CONTENTS

Page

LEGALIZATION PAGE i

BIOGRAPHY ii

ABSTRACT iii

ACKNOWLEDMENT iv

LIST OF CONTENTS vi

LIST OF FIGURES viii

LIST OF TABLES iiix

LIST OF APPENDIXES xi

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Background 1

1.2. Problem Identification 4

1.3. Scope of Research 4

1.4. Problem Statements 4

1.5. Research Objectives 4

1.6. Research Significances 5

1.7. Operational Defenitions 5

CHAPTER II. LITERATURE REVIEW 6

2.1. Nature of Chemistry Concept 6

2.2. Misconception in Chemistry 8

2.3. The Source of Misconception 13

2.4. Misconceptions in Acid-Base Chemistry 16

2.6. Conceptual Framework 21

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODS 22

3.1. Overview of the Research 22

3.2. Research Location and Research Time 22

vii

3.4. Research Instruments 24

3.5. Technique of the Data Collection 25

3.6. Technique of the Data Analysis 25

CHAPTER IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 28

4.1. Description of Result 28

4.2. Students’ Achievement 28

4.3. Students’ Understanding 29

4.3.1. Acid and Base 30

4.3.2. pH and pOH 39

4.3.3. Ionization Degree and Equilibrium Constant (Ka and Kb) 48

4.3.4. Acid-base Indicators 54

4.3.5. Acid-Base Titration 56

4.4. Discussion 61

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGESTIONS 63

5.1. Conclusions 63

5.2. Suggestions 63

ix

LIST OF TABLES

Page Table 2.1. Misconceptions in acid-base chemistry listed by Halstead

,(2009) from various researches 18

Table 3.1. The distribution of population and samples in the selected Senior

,High Schools 24

Table 4.1. The average of students’ achievement 28

Table 4.2. Grouping criteria based on students’ achievement for each school 29

Table 4.3. Number of students for each group based on students’ achievement 29

Table 4.4. Question 1 and its answer in ACMT 30

Table 4.5. Percentage of students’ responses for question 1 in ACMT 31

Table 4.6. Students’ reasons corresponding to CH4 as an acid 32

Table 4.7. Question 2 and its answer in ACMT 33

Table 4.8. Percentage of students’ responses for question 2 in ACMT 33

Table 4.9. Question 8 and its answer in ACMT 34

Table 4.10. Percentage of students’ responses for question 8 in ACMT 35

Table 4.11. Question 10 and its answer in ACMT 37

Table 4.12. Percentage of students’ responses for question 10 in ACMT 37

Table 4.13. Percentage of students’ misconceptions in acid and base concepts 39

Table 4.14. Question 3 and its answer in ACMT 39 Table 4.15. Percentage of students’ responses for question 3 in ACMT 40 Table 4.16. Question 6 and its answer in ACMT 42 Table 4.17. Question 12 and its answer in ACMT 42 Table 4.18. Percentage of students’ responses for question 6 in ACMT 43 Table 4.19. Percentage of students’ responses for question 12 in ACMT 43 Table 4.20. Question 9 and its answer in ACMT 46 Table 4.21. Percentage of students’ responses for question 9 in ACMT 46 Table 4.22. Percentage of students’ misconceptions in pH and pOH concepts 48 Table 4.23. Question 4 and its answer in ACMT 48 Table 4.24. Percentage of students’ responses for question 4 in ACMT 49

x

Table 4.25. Question 5 and its answer in ACMT 52 Table 4.26. Percentage of students’ responses for question 5 in ACMT 52 Table 4.27. Percentage of students’ misconceptions in ionization degree and

equilibrium constant (Ka and Kb) concepts 53 Table 4.28. Question 7 and its answer in ACMT 54 Table 4.29. Percentage of students’ responses for question 7 in ACMT 55 Table 4.30. Question 11 and its answer in ACMT 57 Table 4.31. Percentage of students’ responses for question 11 in ACMT 57 Table 4.32. Percentage of students’ misconceptions identified in acid-base

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

Page Figure 3.1.,The overview of research planning of analyzing of students’

misconceptions on acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools

xi

LIST OF APPENDIXES

Page Appendix 1. Acid-Base Chemistry Misconception Test (ACMT) 68 Appendix 2. Expected Answer of Acid-Base Chemistry Misconception Test

(ACMT) 72

Appendix 3. Lattice of Acid-Base Chemistry Misconception Test (ACMT) 75 Appendix 4. Concept Analysis of Chemistry for XI Grade of SHS

(Acid-Base Chemistry Topic) 77

Appendix 5. Acid-Base Chemistry Material 81 Appendix 6. Tabulation of Students’ Responses in ACMT 110

Appendix 7. Data of Students’ Achievement in School A 112

Appendix 8. Data of Students’ Achievement in School B 113

Appendix 9. Data of Students’ Achievement in School C 114

Appendix 10. Data of Students’ Achievement in School D 115

Appendix 11. Data of Students’ Achievement in School E 116

Appendix 12. Data of Students’ Achievement in School F 117 Appendix 13. Certificates of Content Validation of Instruments 118

Appendix 14. Documentations 121

Appendix 15. Letter of Approval to Supervisor 125 Appendix 16. License for Conducting Research from FMIPA Unimed 126 Appendix 17. License for Conducting Reserch from Dinas Pendidikan Kota

,Medan 131

1

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

Learning process starts from the beginning and occurs in every day of human life. Human beings, especially students, learn from their own explorations of the environment (parents, siblings, peers, electronic media, printed media, museums etc.) Consequently, students do not enter the classrooms as blank board, but they enter classrooms with a preexisting knowledge or ideas of science concepts (Gonen and Kocakaya, 2010). These ideas are logical, sensible, and valuable from the students’ point of view, strongly held by the students. These ideas may be significantly different from accepted scientific viewpoints or may be same with the true or the scientific explanation (Osborne, 1982; Schoon and Boone, 1998, cited in Ozmen, 2004).

When learning science at school students sometimes relate their prior knowledge to what teacher explains inappropriately, and hence the meanings or concepts they construct are incorrect, incomplete or ineffective to explain the scientific phenomena (Osborne and Wittrock, 1983, cited in Pinarbasi et al., 2009). These inconsistencies between the students’ views and the scientifically accepted views are called misconceptions (Ozmen, 2004; Barke et al., 2009), alternative conceptions (Pedrosa and Dias, 2000) (Talanquer, 2006), commonsense reasoning (Talanquer, 2006), preconceptions (Barke et al., 2009), alternative framework (Kuiper, 1994; Maskill and de Jesus, 1997), or naive conception (Reiner et al., 2000) (for simplicity, the term of misconception is used in this thesis.) In general, these misconceptions may be highly resistant to change, and remain intact for many years essentially unaffected by classroom teaching because these are something students believe. If the misconceptions are not corrected, new learning can be encumbered or it might not take place at all (Gonen and Kocakaya, 2010).

Chemistry is sometimes viewed as a difficult subject. It requires students to go between (1) macroscopic representations that describe properties of tangible

2

and visible phenomena in the everyday experiences of learners, (2) submicroscopic (or molecular) representations that provide explanations at the particulate level in which matter is described as being composed of atoms, molecules and ions, and (3) symbolic (or iconic) representations that involve the use of chemical symbols, formulas and equations, as well as every media that symbolize matter (Chandrasegaran et al., 2007). Most chemistry teaching operates at the macro (or laboratory) level and the symbolic level, but it’s known that many misconceptions in chemistry stem from an inability to visualize structures and processes at the submicroscopic level (Tasker and Dalton, 2006). Submicroscopic (molecular level) views are particularly challenging because students must think about something abstract that cannot be seen. Therefore, many students do not construct appropriate understandings fundamental chemical concepts from the very beginning of their studies (Gabel et al., 1987, cited in Erdemir et al., 2000). In general, any chemistry teaching that can not relate these three chemistry representation properly will have great possibility to create misconceptions in students and make them cannot fully understand the more advanced concepts that build upon the fundamentals.

Identifying misconception of students is the first step for preventing misconceptions in chemistry. The identification of the students’ understandings and misconceptions has been the goal of many of the studies carried out over the last years (Ozmen, 2004). Some of the conceptual areas in which most studies have been conducted are chemical equilibrium (Erdemir et al., 2000; Sendur et al., 2010; Husseini, 2011), acid-base (Ross and Munby, 1991; Kousathana et al., 2005; Sheppard, 2006), chemical bonding (Peterson et al., 1986; Coll and Taylor, 2002; Ozmen, 2004; Smith and Nakhleh, 2011), nuclear chemistry (Nakibog˘Lu and Tekin, 2006), atomic orbital and hybridization (Nakiboglu, 2003), buffer solution (Orgil and Sutherland, 2008), solutions and their components (Çalık and Ayas, 2005; Pinarbasi and Canpolat, 2003), colligative properties (Pinarbasi et al., 2009), and electrochemistry (Sanger and Greenbowe, 1999; Huddle and White, 2000).

3

As mentioned above, there are some topics that chemistry students find more difficult to understand. One of those topics is acid-base chemistry. The topic of acids and bases is dense with concept and requires an integrated understanding of many areas of introductory chemistry, such as the particulate nature of matter, molecular kinetic theory, the nature and composition of solutions, atomic structure, ionization, ionic and covalent bonding, symbols, formulae and equations, chemical equilibrium, and collision theory (Sheppard, 2006). Many students rely on formulas and use their calculators without thinking. Students often gain knowledge of acid-base concepts through memorization. Students are also unable to remember what they had memorized because the topics hadn’t actually been learned (Lin et al., 2004).

Several published studies have investigated students’ conceptions of acid-base chemistry (Huang, 2003; Sheppard, 2006; Schmidt and Chemie, 2007; Cartrette and Mayo, 2010; Chaiyapha et al., 2011; Rahayu, 2011). Sheppard (2006) found that students had considerable difficulty with acid-base chemistry, were unable to describe accurately acid-base concepts, such as pH, neutralization, strength, and the theoretical descriptions of acids and bases. Chaiyapha et al. (2011) also reported that many students also exhibited misconceptions for several concepts, consisting of electrolytic and non-electrolytic solution, ion in acid and base solutions, acid and base theory, dissociation of strong and weak acids and bases, dissociation of water, and neutralization. Given these reported issues, it seems likely that students have difficulty with understanding what is happening in submicroscopic and symbolic terms even in macroscopic term of acid-base chemistry.

Therefore, based on the condition described above, the researcher chose the research entitled Analyzing of Students’ Misconceptions on Acid-Base Chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan. The aim of this research was to investigate students’ misconceptions about acid-base chemistry at senior high schools in Medan.

4

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background, some problems have been identified as the following.

1. Teaching methods implemented tended to not relate between macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic level in chemistry properly.

2. The complext and abstract nature of chemistry potentially create misconceptions.

3. Students tended to gain knowledge of acid-base concepts by memorizing the generalization of concepts in acid-base chemistry.

1.3. Scope of Research

In order to keep this research became more focused and directed; researcher limited the problems as the following.

1. In this research, study was limited to the investigation of students’ misconception in Senior High Schools.

2. This study was limited to XI grade students in Senior High Schools in Medan.

3. This study was limited to the unit of acid-base chemistry topic.

1.4. Problem Statement

To give the direction of this research, the problem statements in this research were formulated as the following.

1. What misconceptions did students acquire about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan?

2. How much was the percentage of students’ misconceptions about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan?

1.5. Research Objectives

The objective of this research was to identify High School students’ misconceptions in concepts of acid-base chemistry and to determine which misconceptions in basic chemistry concepts causing difficulties in learning the

5

concepts of acid-base chemistry. The specific objectives that have been achieved in this research were the following.

1. Identifying students’ misconceptions about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan.

2. Investigating the percentage of students’ misconception about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan.

1.6. Research Significances

This study was expected as the following.

1. This study was expected as reference about students’ misconception on acid-base chemistry in development of curriculum and teaching method. 2. This study was expected to be an input and information in improving the

quality of teaching and learning chemistry especially about acid-base chemistry in Senior High Schools.

3. For researcher, this research was expected as consideration material in conducting teaching and learning process by identifying students’ misconceptions.

1.7. Operational Defenitions

Operational defenition of the keywords used in this thesis are presented as the following.

1. Concept is an abstraction that represents thoughts, ideas, senses, notions, believes or entities in order to describe categories or classes of entities and events.

2. Conception is personal interpretation or mental representations of a concept.

3. Misconception is any conceptions that are in disagreement or different with currently accepted scientific view.

64

REFERENCES

Azliandry, H., (2007), Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa Kelas XI MAN 1 Medan dan Upaya Penanggulangannya pada Pokok Bahasan Termokimia, Thesis, Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan, Medan.

Barke, H.D., Hazari, A., and Yitbarek, S., (2009), Misconceptions in Chemistry, Addressing Perceptions in Chemical Education, Springer, Berlin.

Bowen, C.W., and Bunce, D.M., (1997), Testing for Conceptual Understanding in General Chemistry, The Chemical Educator 2(2): 1-17.

Çalık, M., and Ayas, A., (2005), A Cross-Age Study on the Understanding of Chemical Solutions and Their Components, International Education Journal 6(1): 30-41.

Cartrette, D.P., and Mayo, P.M., (2010), Students’ Understanding of Acids/Bases

in Organic Chemistry Contexts, Chemistry Education Research Practice 12: 29–39.

Chaiyapha, P., Chayajarus, K., and Chairam, S.; Investigation of High School

Students’ Understanding of Acid-Base Chemistry Based on Jigsaw Method, Pure and Applied Chemistry International Conference 2011. Chandrasegaran, A.L., Treagust, D.F., and Mocerino, M., (2007), The

Development of A Two-Tier Multiple-Choice Diagnostic Instrument for Evaluating Secondary School Students’ Ability to Describe and Explain Chemical Reactions Using Multiple Levels of Representation, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 8(3): 293-307.

Chiu, M.H., (2005), A National Survey of Students’ Conceptions in Chemistry in

Taiwan, Chemical Education International 6(1): 1-8

Coll, R.K., and Taylor, N., (2002), Mental Models in Chemistry: Senior Chemistry Students Mental Models of Chemical Bonding, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe 3(2): 175-184.

Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, (1997), Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.

Drechsler, M., and Schmidt, H. J., (2005), Textbooks’ and Teachers’

Understanding of Acid-Base Models Used in Chemistry Teaching, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 6 (1): 19-35

Erdemir, A., Geban, O., and Uzuntiryaki, E., (2000), Freshman Students' Misconceptions in Chemical Equilibrium, Journal of Chemical Education 18: 79-84.

65

Gonen, S., and Kocakaya, S., (2010), A Physics Lesson Designed According to 7E Model with the Help of Instructional Technology (Lesson Plan), Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 11(1): 98-113.

Gütl, C., and Garsia-Barrios, V. M., (2005), The Application of Concepts for Learning and Teaching,

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.161.6605&rep =rep1&type=pdf

Halstead, S.E., (2009), A Critical Analysis of Research Done to Identify Conceptual Difficulties in Acid-Base Chemistry., Dissertation, School of Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, University of Kwazulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg.

Herron, J.D., Cantu, L.L., Ward, R., and Srinivasan, V., (1977), Problems Associated with Concept Analysis, Journal of Science Education, (61)2: 185 – 199.

Huang, W.; The Misconceptions on Acid and Base Held by the Elementary Students in Northern Taiwan, World Conference on Science & Technology Education ICASE 2003

Huddle, P.A., and White, M.D., (2000), Using a Teaching Model to Correct Known Misconceptions in Electrochemistry, Journal of Chemical Education 77(1): 104-110.

Husseini, A., (2011), Analyzing of Students’ Misconceptions on Chemical Equilibrium at Senior High School in Medan., Thesis, Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan, Medan.

Johnstone, A.H., (2000), Teaching of Chemistry-Logical or Psychological?, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe 1(1): 9-15. Jordan, A., Carlile, O., and Stack, A., (2008), Approaches to Learning: A Guide

for Teachers, Open University Press, Berkshire.

Kousathana, M., Demerouti, M., and Tsaparlis, G., (2005), Instructional Misconceptions in Acid-Base Equilibria: An Analysis from a History and Philosophy of Science Perspective, Science and Education 14: 173-193. Kuiper, J., (1994), Student Ideas of Science Concepts: Alternative Frameworks?,

International Journal of Science Education 16(3): 279-292.

Lin, J.W., Chiu, M.H., and Liang, J.C.; Exploring Mental Models and Causes of

Students’ Misconceptions in Acids and Bases, NARST 2004.

Maskill, R., and de Jesus, H.P., (1997), Pupils’ Questions, Alternative Frameworks and The Design of Science Teaching, International Journal of Science Education 19(7): 781-799.

66

Nakibog˘Lu, B., and Tekin, B. B., (2006), Identifying Students’ Misconceptions

about Nuclear Chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education 83(11): 1712-1718.

Nakiboglu, C., (2003), Instructional Misconceptions of Turkish Prospective Chemistry Teachers about Atomic Orbitals and Hybridization, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice 4(2): 171-188.

Orgil, M., and Sutherland, A., (2008), Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Perceptions of and Misconceptions about Buffers and Buffer Problems, Chemistry Education Research Practice 9:131-143.

Ozmen, H., (2004), Some Student Misconceptions in Chemistry: A Literature Review of Chemical Bonding, Journal of Science Education and Technology 13(2):147-159.

Pedrosa, M.A., and Dias, M.H., (2000), Chemistry Textbooks Approaches to Chemical Equilibrium and Student Alternative Conceptions, Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe 1(2): 227-236.

Peterson, R., Treagust, D., and Garnett, P., (1986), Identification of Secondary Students' Misconceptions of Covalent Bonding and Structure Concepts Using A Diagnostic Instrument, Research in Science Education 16: 40-48.

Pinarbasi, T., and Canpolat, N., (2003), Students’ Understanding of Solution

Chemistry Concepts, Journal of Chemical Education 80(11): 1328-1332. Pinarbasi, T., Sozbilir, M., and Canpolat, N., (2009), Prospective Chemistry

Teachers’ Misconceptions about Colligative Properties: Boiling Point

Elevation and Freezing Point Depression, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 10: 273–280.

Pritchard, A., (2009), Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning Styles in the Classroom 2nd edition, Taylor & Francis Routledge, New York. Rahayu, I., (2011), Analysis of Student's and Teacher's Misconceptions on

Acid-Base Reactions of SMAN RSBI in Malang and The Effect for Their Improvement Using Conflict Cognitive Strategy., Thesis, Chemistry Education Study Program, Faculty of Graduate Study, State University of Malang, Malang.

Reiner, M., Slotta, J.D., Chi, M.T.H., and Resnick, L.B., (2000), Naive Physics Reasoning: A Commitment to Substance-Based Conceptions, Cognition and Instruction, 18(1): 1–34.

Ross, B., and Munby, H., (1991), Concept Mapping and Misconceptions: A Study of High‐School Students’ Understandings of Acids and Bases, International Journal of Science Education 13(1): 11-13.

67

Sanger, M.J., and Greenbowe, T.J., (1999), An Analysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry, Journal of Chemical Education 76(6): 853-860.

Schmidt, H.J., and Chemie, F., (1995), Applying the Concept of Conjugation to the Br⊘nsted Theory of Acid‐Base Reactions by Senior High School Students from Germany, International Journal of Science Education 17(6): 733-741.

Sendur, G., Toprak, M., and Pekmez, E.S.; Analyzing of Students’’

Misconceptions about Chemical Equilibrium, International Conference on New Trends in Education and Their Implications November 2010. Sesen, B.A., and Ince, E., (2010), Internet as A Source of Misconception:

“Radiation and Radioactivity,” Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 9(4): 94-100.

Sheppard, K., (2006), High School Students’ Understanding of Titrations and Related Acid-Base Phenomena, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 7(1): 32-45.

Sirhan, G., (2007), Learning Difficulties in Chemistry: An Overview, Journal of Turkish Science Education 4(2): 2-20.

Smith, K.C., and Nakhleh, M.B., (2011), University Students’ Conceptions of

Bonding in Melting and Dissolving Phenomena, Chemistry Education Research Practice 12: 398-408.

Stieff, M., and Wilensky, U., (2003), Connected Chemistry-Incorporating Interactive Simulations into the Chemistry Classroom, Journal of Science Education and Technology 12(3): 285-302.

Suparno, P., (2005), Miskonsepsi dan Perubahan Konsep dalam Pendidikan Fisika, Grasindo, Jakarta.

Talanquer, V., (2006), Commonsense Chemistry: A Model for Understanding

Students’ Alternative Conceptions, Journal of Chemical Education 83(5): 811-816.

Tasker, R., and Dalton, R., (2006), Research into Practice: Visualization of the Molecular World Using Animations, Chemistry Education Research and Practice 7(2): 141-159.

4

1.2. Problem Identification

Based on the background, some problems have been identified as the following.

1. Teaching methods implemented tended to not relate between macroscopic, submicroscopic, and symbolic level in chemistry properly.

2. The complext and abstract nature of chemistry potentially create misconceptions.

3. Students tended to gain knowledge of acid-base concepts by memorizing the generalization of concepts in acid-base chemistry.

1.3. Scope of Research

In order to keep this research became more focused and directed; researcher limited the problems as the following.

1. In this research, study was limited to the investigation of students’ misconception in Senior High Schools.

2. This study was limited to XI grade students in Senior High Schools in Medan.

3. This study was limited to the unit of acid-base chemistry topic.

1.4. Problem Statement

To give the direction of this research, the problem statements in this research were formulated as the following.

1. What misconceptions did students acquire about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan?

2. How much was the percentage of students’ misconceptions about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan?

1.5. Research Objectives

The objective of this research was to identify High School students’ misconceptions in concepts of acid-base chemistry and to determine which misconceptions in basic chemistry concepts causing difficulties in learning the

concepts of acid-base chemistry. The specific objectives that have been achieved in this research were the following.

1. Identifying students’ misconceptions about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan.

2. Investigating the percentage of students’ misconception about acid-base chemistry at Senior High Schools in Medan.

1.6. Research Significances

This study was expected as the following.

1. This study was expected as reference about students’ misconception on acid-base chemistry in development of curriculum and teaching method. 2. This study was expected to be an input and information in improving the

quality of teaching and learning chemistry especially about acid-base chemistry in Senior High Schools.

3. For researcher, this research was expected as consideration material in conducting teaching and learning process by identifying students’ misconceptions.

1.7. Operational Defenitions

Operational defenition of the keywords used in this thesis are presented as the following.

1. Concept is an abstraction that represents thoughts, ideas, senses, notions, believes or entities in order to describe categories or classes of entities and events.

2. Conception is personal interpretation or mental representations of a concept.

3. Misconception is any conceptions that are in disagreement or different with currently accepted scientific view.

64

REFERENCES

Azliandry, H., (2007), Analisis Miskonsepsi Siswa Kelas XI MAN 1 Medan dan

Upaya Penanggulangannya pada Pokok Bahasan Termokimia, Thesis,

Mathematics and Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan, Medan.

Barke, H.D., Hazari, A., and Yitbarek, S., (2009), Misconceptions in Chemistry,

Addressing Perceptions in Chemical Education, Springer, Berlin.

Bowen, C.W., and Bunce, D.M., (1997), Testing for Conceptual Understanding in General Chemistry, The Chemical Educator 2(2): 1-17.

Çalık, M., and Ayas, A., (2005), A Cross-Age Study on the Understanding of

Chemical Solutions and Their Components, International Education

Journal 6(1): 30-41.

Cartrette, D.P., and Mayo, P.M., (2010), Students’ Understanding of Acids/Bases

in Organic Chemistry Contexts, Chemistry Education Research Practice 12: 29–39.

Chaiyapha, P., Chayajarus, K., and Chairam, S.; Investigation of High School

Students’ Understanding of Acid-Base Chemistry Based on Jigsaw

Method, Pure and Applied Chemistry International Conference 2011. Chandrasegaran, A.L., Treagust, D.F., and Mocerino, M., (2007), The

Development of A Two-Tier Multiple-Choice Diagnostic Instrument for Evaluating Secondary School Students’ Ability to Describe and Explain Chemical Reactions Using Multiple Levels of Representation, Chemistry

Education Research and Practice 8(3): 293-307.

Chiu, M.H., (2005), A National Survey of Students’ Conceptions in Chemistry in

Taiwan, Chemical Education International 6(1): 1-8

Coll, R.K., and Taylor, N., (2002), Mental Models in Chemistry: Senior Chemistry Students Mental Models of Chemical Bonding, Chemistry

Education: Research and Practice in Europe 3(2): 175-184.

Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, (1997), Science Teaching

Reconsidered: A Handbook, National Academies Press, Washington,

D.C.

Drechsler, M., and Schmidt, H. J., (2005), Textbooks’ and Teachers’

Understanding of Acid-Base Models Used in Chemistry Teaching,

Chemistry Education Research and Practice 6 (1): 19-35

Erdemir, A., Geban, O., and Uzuntiryaki, E., (2000), Freshman Students' Misconceptions in Chemical Equilibrium, Journal of Chemical

Gonen, S., and Kocakaya, S., (2010), A Physics Lesson Designed According to 7E Model with the Help of Instructional Technology (Lesson Plan),

Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 11(1): 98-113.

Gütl, C., and Garsia-Barrios, V. M., (2005), The Application of Concepts for Learning and Teaching,

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.161.6605&rep =rep1&type=pdf

Halstead, S.E., (2009), A Critical Analysis of Research Done to Identify

Conceptual Difficulties in Acid-Base Chemistry., Dissertation, School of

Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, University of Kwazulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg.

Herron, J.D., Cantu, L.L., Ward, R., and Srinivasan, V., (1977), Problems Associated with Concept Analysis, Journal of Science Education, (61)2: 185 – 199.

Huang, W.; The Misconceptions on Acid and Base Held by the Elementary Students in Northern Taiwan, World Conference on Science &

Technology Education ICASE 2003

Huddle, P.A., and White, M.D., (2000), Using a Teaching Model to Correct Known Misconceptions in Electrochemistry, Journal of Chemical

Education 77(1): 104-110.

Husseini, A., (2011), Analyzing of Students’ Misconceptions on Chemical

Equilibrium at Senior High School in Medan., Thesis, Mathematics and

Natural Sciences Faculty, State University of Medan, Medan.

Johnstone, A.H., (2000), Teaching of Chemistry-Logical or Psychological?,

Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe 1(1): 9-15.

Jordan, A., Carlile, O., and Stack, A., (2008), Approaches to Learning: A Guide

for Teachers, Open University Press, Berkshire.

Kousathana, M., Demerouti, M., and Tsaparlis, G., (2005), Instructional Misconceptions in Acid-Base Equilibria: An Analysis from a History and Philosophy of Science Perspective, Science and Education 14: 173-193. Kuiper, J., (1994), Student Ideas of Science Concepts: Alternative Frameworks?,

International Journal of Science Education 16(3): 279-292.

Lin, J.W., Chiu, M.H., and Liang, J.C.; Exploring Mental Models and Causes of

Students’ Misconceptions in Acids and Bases, NARST 2004.

Maskill, R., and de Jesus, H.P., (1997), Pupils’ Questions, Alternative Frameworks and The Design of Science Teaching, International Journal

66

Nakibog˘Lu, B., and Tekin, B. B., (2006), Identifying Students’ Misconceptions

about Nuclear Chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education 83(11): 1712-1718.

Nakiboglu, C., (2003), Instructional Misconceptions of Turkish Prospective Chemistry Teachers about Atomic Orbitals and Hybridization, Chemistry

Education: Research and Practice 4(2): 171-188.

Orgil, M., and Sutherland, A., (2008), Undergraduate Chemistry Students’ Perceptions of and Misconceptions about Buffers and Buffer Problems,

Chemistry Education Research Practice 9:131-143.

Ozmen, H., (2004), Some Student Misconceptions in Chemistry: A Literature Review of Chemical Bonding, Journal of Science Education and

Technology 13(2):147-159.

Pedrosa, M.A., and Dias, M.H., (2000), Chemistry Textbooks Approaches to Chemical Equilibrium and Student Alternative Conceptions, Chemistry

Education: Research and Practice in Europe 1(2): 227-236.

Peterson, R., Treagust, D., and Garnett, P., (1986), Identification of Secondary Students' Misconceptions of Covalent Bonding and Structure Concepts Using A Diagnostic Instrument, Research in Science Education 16: 40-48.

Pinarbasi, T., and Canpolat, N., (2003), Students’ Understanding of Solution

Chemistry Concepts, Journal of Chemical Education 80(11): 1328-1332. Pinarbasi, T., Sozbilir, M., and Canpolat, N., (2009), Prospective Chemistry

Teachers’ Misconceptions about Colligative Properties: Boiling Point

Elevation and Freezing Point Depression, Chemistry Education Research

and Practice 10: 273–280.

Pritchard, A., (2009), Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning Styles

in the Classroom 2nd edition, Taylor & Francis Routledge, New York.

Rahayu, I., (2011), Analysis of Student's and Teacher's Misconceptions on

Acid-Base Reactions of SMAN RSBI in Malang and The Effect for Their Improvement Using Conflict Cognitive Strategy., Thesis, Chemistry

Education Study Program, Faculty of Graduate Study, State University of Malang, Malang.

Reiner, M., Slotta, J.D., Chi, M.T.H., and Resnick, L.B., (2000), Naive Physics Reasoning: A Commitment to Substance-Based Conceptions, Cognition

and Instruction, 18(1): 1–34.

Ross, B., and Munby, H., (1991), Concept Mapping and Misconceptions: A Study of High‐School Students’ Understandings of Acids and Bases,

Sanger, M.J., and Greenbowe, T.J., (1999), An Analysis of College Chemistry Textbooks as Sources of Misconceptions and Errors in Electrochemistry,

Journal of Chemical Education 76(6): 853-860.

Schmidt, H.J., and Chemie, F., (1995), Applying the Concept of Conjugation to the Br⊘nsted Theory of Acid‐Base Reactions by Senior High School Students from Germany, International Journal of Science Education 17(6): 733-741.

Sendur, G., Toprak, M., and Pekmez, E.S.; Analyzing of Students’’

Misconceptions about Chemical Equilibrium, International Conference

on New Trends in Education and Their Implications November 2010.

Sesen, B.A., and Ince, E., (2010), Internet as A Source of Misconception:

“Radiation and Radioactivity,” Turkish Online Journal of Educational

Technology 9(4): 94-100.

Sheppard, K., (2006), High School Students’ Understanding of Titrations and Related Acid-Base Phenomena, Chemistry Education Research and

Practice 7(1): 32-45.

Sirhan, G., (2007), Learning Difficulties in Chemistry: An Overview, Journal of

Turkish Science Education 4(2): 2-20.

Smith, K.C., and Nakhleh, M.B., (2011), University Students’ Conceptions of

Bonding in Melting and Dissolving Phenomena, Chemistry Education

Research Practice 12: 398-408.

Stieff, M., and Wilensky, U., (2003), Connected Chemistry-Incorporating Interactive Simulations into the Chemistry Classroom, Journal of Science

Education and Technology 12(3): 285-302.

Suparno, P., (2005), Miskonsepsi dan Perubahan Konsep dalam Pendidikan

Fisika, Grasindo, Jakarta.

Talanquer, V., (2006), Commonsense Chemistry: A Model for Understanding

Students’ Alternative Conceptions, Journal of Chemical Education

83(5): 811-816.

Tasker, R., and Dalton, R., (2006), Research into Practice: Visualization of the Molecular World Using Animations, Chemistry Education Research and