| This Doctor of Arts thesis uses the concept analysis methods which were developed by Tiemann and Markle for instructional design. By comparing several examples (and non-examples) of a concept, one can find the critical attributes and the variable attributes of that concept. These attributes allow one to: (1) write better definitions, (2) prepare matched sets of equivalent criterion-based test items, and (3) plan a logical sequence for concept instruction.;With the aid of these powerful analysis tools, chemistry topic analysis sheets were constructed that could assist a chemist or chemistry teacher to consider areas that might otherwise have been overlooked. The thesis proposes that teachers' use of products of these systematic analysis sheets and the required concept analyses will improve both instruction and learning.;The thesis has seven parts: (1) introduction; (2) how the systematic analysis sheets were developed; (3) how to use the systematic method; (4) an educational experiment performed to determine whether the use of a product of such an analysis can improve teachers' instruction and their students' performance on criterion-based tests; (5) an algorithm for instructional development; (6) conclusions; (7) explanations and examples of detailed analysis and analysis products (teaching aids) that are helpful in teaching difficult chemistry topics.;The classroom experiment tested students' learning of the isomer concept, when taught by two methods. These students were taking the course "Chemistry and Life", a chemistry course for non-scientists at UIC. A lecture class of 251 students was divided into eleven discussion sections. Five sections were given Treatment 1, T1, and the other six were given Treatment 2, T2. T2 sections were taught using a diagram summary derived by a concept analysis, while T1 sections were taught using a traditional approach. T2 students showed a greater improvement between pretest and posttest scores. The T2 students' improvements were shown to be significantly higher than those of T1 students. Analysis of variance showed F = 47.18 (p < 0.001) between treatments. It was also determined by correlation in linear regression analysis that the students had retained the concept when tested five weeks later on their final exam. |
