References

Alexander, P.A. (1996). The past, present and future of knowledge research:
A re-examination of the role of knowledge in learning and instruction.
Educational Psychologist 31, pp. 89-92.

Alexander, P.A. (1992). Domain knowledge: Evolving themes and emerging

concerns. Educational Psychologist 27(1), pp. 33-51.

Alexander, PA., Schallert, D.L., & Hare, V.C. (1991). Coming to terms: How
researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of
Educational Research 61, pp. 315-343.

Anderson, R.C., Reynolds. R.C., Schallert, D.L., & Goetz, E.T. (1977).
Frameworks for comprehending. American Educational Research
Journal 14, pp. 367-381.

Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York:

Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Avis, M. (2005). Is there an epistemology for qualitative research? In

Holloway. I. (Ed.). Qualitative research in health care. New York: Open
University Press.

Bailey, P.D., & Garratt, J. (2002). Chemical education: Theory and practice.
University Chemistry Education, 6, Journal of the Royal Society of
Chemistry.

Barnett, R. (2000). Realise the University in an Age of Super-complexity.

Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

Barnett, R., & Hallam, S. (1999). Teaching for super-complexity: Pedagogy for
higher education. In Mortimore, P. (Ed.). Understanding Pedagogy and
its Impact on Learning. London: Paul Chapman.

200
Barsalou, L.W. (1993). Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts-
manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In
Collins A.F., Gathercole. S.E., Conway, M.A. & Morris, P.E. (Eds.).
Theories of Memory. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Bennett, S.W., & O'Neale, K. (1998). Skills development and practical work in
chemistry. University Chemistry Education, 2(2), pp.58-62.

Berry, S.Y. (1999). Collecting data by in-depth interviewing. Paper presented

at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference,
University of Sussex at Brighton, 2-5 September, 1999. [Available on
Internet] http://www.Leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000001172.htm
[Date of access: 9 February 2007].

Bettencourt, E.M. (1993). The construction of knowledge: A radical

constructivist view. In Tobin, K. (Ed.) The Practice of Constructivism in
Science Education (pp. 39-50). Washington DC: AAAS Press.

Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for Quality at University: What the Student Does
(2nd ed.). London: McGraw-Hill Education.

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification

of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. White Plains, NY:
Longman.

Bodner, G.M. (1991). A view from chemistry. In Smith, M.U. (Ed.). Toward a
Unified Theory of Problem Solving: Views from the Content Domains.
Hillsdale: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.

Bodner, G.M. (1986). Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of

chemical education, 63(10), pp. 873-878.

201
Bransford, J., Sherwood, R., Vye, N. & Rieser, J. (1986). Teaching, thinking
and problem solving: Research foundations. American Psychologist, 41,
pp. 1078-1089.

Bransford, J.D. (1979). Human Cognition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Brown, T.L., Le May jr, H.E., Bursten, B.E., & Burdge, J.R. (2003). Chemistry:
The Central Science (9th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.

Burns, R.B. (2000). Introduction to research methods. London: Sage

Publication.

Cambridge International Dictionary of English. (2002). Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Castells, M. (1996). The new global economy. In Muller, J., Cloete, N. &
Badat, S. (Eds.). Challenges of Globalisation: South African Debates
with Manuel Castells. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman (Pty) Ltd.

Champagne, A.B., & Bunce, D.M. (1991). Learning-theory-based Science

Teaching. In Glynn, S.M., Yeany, R.H. & Britton, B.K. (Eds.). The
Psychology of Learning Science. London: Lawrence Associates
Publishers.

Champagne, A.B., Gunstone, R.F., & Klopfer, L.E. (1985). Instructional

consequences of students' knowledge about physical phenomena. In
West, L.H.T. & Pines, A.L. (Eds.). Cognitive Structure and Conceptual
Change, pp. 61-68. New York: Academic Press.

Chittleborough, G.D., Treagust, D.F., & Mocerino, M. (2002). Constraints to

the Development of First Year University Chemistry Students' Mental
Models of Chemical Phenomena. Teaching and Learning Forum 2002:
Focusing on the student.

202
Cobern, W.W., & Aikenhead, G.S. (2003). Cultural aspects of learning. In
Fraser, B.J. & Tobin K.G. (Eds.). International Handbook of Science
Education. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Cochran, R.F., De Ruiter, J.A., & King, R.A. (1993). Pedagogical content
knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of
Teacher Education (4), pp. 263-272.

Concise Oxford English Dictionary. (2006). (11th ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press Inc.

De Jong, O. (2000). Crossing borders: Chemical education research and

teaching practice. University Chemistry Education 2000, 4(1), pp. 31-34.

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2003). Introduction - The discipline and practice
of qualitative research. In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). Strategies
of qualitative enquiry (2nd ed). London: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2000).The discipline and practice of qualitative
research. In Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds) Handbook of Qualitative
Research (2nd Ed). London: Sage Publications. Inc.

Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1998). Entering the field of qualitative research.
In Denzin, N.K., and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) Collecting and interpreting
qualitative materials. London: Sage Publications.

Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1990). The Systematic Design of Instruction (3rd ed.).
Florida: Harper Collins Publishers.

Dochy, F. (1995). The role of prior knowledge in learning for teacher

education. In Anderson, L.W. (Ed.). International Encyclopaedia of
Teaching and Teacher Education (in press). Oxford, New York: Elsevier
Sciences Ltd.
Dochy, J.R.C., & Alexander, P.A. (1995). Mapping prior knowledge: A
framework for discussion among researchers. European Journal of
Psychology of Education, X (3), pp. 225-242.

Dochy, F. (1994). Investigating the use of knowledge profiles in a flexible

learning environment: Analysing student prior knowledge states. In
Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). Psychological and Educational Foundations of
Technology-based Learning Environments (p.182-189). NATO ASI
Series, Special Programme AET, Berlin, New York: Springer Verlag.

Dochy, J.R.C. (1992). Assessment of Prior Knowledge as a Determinant for

Future Learning. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Dochy, F., Valke, M., & Wagemans, L. (1991). Learning economics in higher
education: An investigation concerning the quality and impact of
expertise. Higher Education in Europe, 4, pp. 123-136.

Dochy, F., & Kulikowich, J.M. (n.d.). Knowledge Profiles of European and
American Students: Applications of profile analysis. Unpublished
manuscript.

Driver, R., & Bell, B. (1986). Students' thinking and learning of science. The
School Science Review, 67(240), pp. 443-456.

Dunkin, M.J., & Biddle, B.J. (1974). The Study of Teaching. New York: Holt,
Reinhart & Winston.

Edmondson, K., & Novak, J.D. (1993). The interplay of epistemological views,
learning strategies, and attitudes of college students. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), pp. 547-559.

Erduran, S., & Scerri, E. (2003). The nature of chemical knowledge and
chemical education. In Gilbert, J.K., De Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust,

204
 D.F., & Van Driel, J.H. (Eds.). Chemical Education: Towards Research-
based Practice Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Evertson, C.M., & Green, J.L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. In
Wittrock, M.C. (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Teaching (3rd ed.). (pp.
162-213).

Fensham, P.J. (1991). Development and Dilemmas in Science Education.

Philadelphia: Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc.

Fosnot, C.T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In

Fosnot, C.T. (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice.
(pp. 8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.

Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2003). How to Design and Evaluate Research
in Education (5th ed.). London: McGraw-Hill.

Freysen, J.B., Briel, R.M., Potgieter, C., Van Graan, E.S.J., & Van Niekerk,
L.J. (1989). Media Science. Kempton Park: Audio Visual Aids.

Gabel, D. (1999). Improving teaching and learning through chemistry

educational research: A look to the future. Journal of Chemical
Education, 76 (4), pp. 548-554.

Gabel, D.L. (1998). Complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In

Fraser, B.J., & Tobin, K. (Eds.). International Handbook of Science
Education Research. (pp. 233-248). London: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.

Gage, N.L., & Berliner, D.C. (1992). Educational Psychology (5th ed.).
Princeton, New Jersey: Houghton Mifflin Company.
.
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Culture. New York: Basic Books.

205
Gelman, R., & Greeno, J.G. (1989). On the nature of competence: Principles
for understanding in a domain. In Resnick, L.B. (Ed.). Essays in Honor of
Robert Glaser. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Publishers.

Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American

Psychologist, 39, pp. 93-104.

Glynn, S.M., & Duit, R. (1995). Learning science meaningfully: Constructing

conceptual models. In Glynn, S.M. & Duit, R. (Eds.). Learning Science in
Schools: Research Reforming Practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc. Publishing.

Glynn, S.M., Yeanny, R.H., & Britton, B.K. (1991). A constructive view of
learning science. In Glynn, S.M., Yeanny, R.H. & Britton, B.K. (Eds.).
The Psychology of Learning Science. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.

Graesser, A.C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences

during narrative text comprehension. Psychology Review, 101(3), pp. 37-
395.

Gravett, S. (2004). Teaching and learning: Establishing communities of inquiry

and interpretation. In Gravett, S. & Geyser, H. (Eds.). Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.

Greeno, J.G., Collins, A.M., & Resnick, L.B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In
Berliner, D.C. (Ed.). Handbook of Educational Psychology. (pp. 15-96).
New York: MacMillan Press.

Gunstone, R., & White, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. London: Falmer

Press.

206
Harrison, A.G., & Treagust, D.F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter:
Challenges in understanding the sub-microscopic world. In Gilbert, J.K.,
O. De Jong., Justi R., Treagust, D.F & Van Driel, J.H. Chemical
Education: Towards Research-based Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.

Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, P., & Gunstone, J. (2000). What is
the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from
doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37,
pp. 655-675.

Hart, C. (1998). Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science

Research Imagination. London: Sage Publications.

Hegarty-Hazel, E. (1990). The student laboratory and the science curriculum:

An overview. In Hegarty-Hazel, E. (Ed.). The Student Laboratory and the
Science Curriculum. London: Routledge.

Hoepfl, M.C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology

education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9(1), pp. 47-63
[Available on Internet:] http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/
hoepfl.html [Date of access: 15 February 2005].

Hofstein, A. (2004). The laboratory in chemistry education: Thirty years of

experience with developments, implementation, and research. Chemistry
Education: Research and Practice, 5, pp. 247-264.

Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V.N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science
teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational
Research, 52(2), pp. 201-217.

Howie, S.J., & Pietersen, J.J. (2001). Mathematics literacy of final year
students: South African realities. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27,
pp. 7-25.

207
Ishii, D.K. (2003). Constructivist views of learning in science and
mathematics. Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and
Environmental Education. Columbus: Educational Resources Information
Centre/CSMEE.

Janesick, V.J. (2003). The choreography of qualitative research design:

Minuets, improvisation and crystallization. In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S.
(Eds). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.).London: Sage
Publications Ltd.

Johnstone, A.H. (2000a). Chemical education research: Where from here?

University Chemistry Education, 4(1).

Johnstone, A.H. (1991a). Thinking about thinking – A practical approach to

practical work. Proceedings of the International Conference on Chemical
Education. (pp. 69-76.) Glasgow: University of Glasgow

Johnstone, A.H. (1991b). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom
what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, pp. 75-83.

Jonassen, D.H., & Grabowski, B.L. (1993). Handbook of Individual

Differences, Learning and Instruction. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers.

Kahn, M. (2005). A class act – Mathematics as filter of equity in South Africa's

schools. Perspectives in Education: Speaking the Curriculum: Learner
Voices and Silences – Challenges for Mathematics and Science
Education in the Twenty-first Centuries, 23(3), pp. 139-148.

Karlsson, P., & Mansory, A. (2003). Western Learning: An Overview of

Theories of Learning. Stockholm University: Institute of International
Education.

208
Kemp, J.E., Morrison, G.R., & Ross S.M. (1998). Designing effective
instruction, (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Merril.

Kirschner, P.A., & Meester, M.A.M. (1988). The laboratory in higher science
education: Problems, premises and objectives. Higher Education,
pp. 81-98.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of

Learning and Development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Klainin, S. (1991). Practical work and science education 1. In Fensham P.J.

(Ed.). Development and Dilemmas in Science Education. Philadelphia:
The Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc.

Krajcik, J.S. (1991). Developing students' understanding of chemical

concepts. In Glynn, R.H.S.M., & Britton, B.K. (Eds.). The Psychology of
Learning Science: International Perspective on Psychological
Foundations of Technology-based Learning Environments (pp. 117-145).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lawson, A.E. (1994). Research on the acquisition of science knowledge:

Epistemological foundations of cognition. In Gabel, D. (Ed.). Handbook
of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 131-176). New
York: MacMillan Press.

Leach, J. (1999). Learning science in the laboratory: The importance of

epistemological understanding. In Leach, J. & Paulsen, A.C. (Eds.).
Practical Work in Science Education – Recent Research Studies.
Dordrecht: Roskilde University Press.

Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications.

209
Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquire Within: Implementing Inquiry-based Science
Standards. California: Crown Press Inc.

Loughgran, J., Mulhal, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical

content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and
documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 41(4), pp. 370-391.

Lunetta, V.N. (1998). The school science laboratory: Historical perspectives

and contexts for contemporary teaching. In Fraser, B., & Tobin, K. (Eds.).
International Handbook for Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Maddock, M.N. (1981). Science education: An anthropological view point.

Studies in Science Education, 8, pp. 1-26.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, B.R. (1995). Designing Qualitative Research (2nd
ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world

around us. Instructional Science, 10, pp. 177-200.

Mason, S.F. (1953). A History of the Sciences: Main Currents of Scientific

Thought. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.

Marzano, R.J., & Kendall, J.S. (2007). The new taxonomy of Educational
objectives. (2nd ed).Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.

Mehl, M.C. (1990). Science education in South Africa: Future directions from
present realities. In Nkomo, M. (Ed.). Pedagogy of Domination: Towards
a Democratic Education in South Africa. New Jersey: Africa World Press
Inc.

Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in

Education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers.

210
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An
Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.

Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of
science. Paper prepared for the meeting of High school science
laboratories: Role and vision. National Academy of Sciences,
Washington DC, 3 to 4 June 2004.

Millar, R. (1998). Students' understanding of procedures of scientific enquiry.

In Tiberghien, A., Jossem, E.L., & Arojas, J. (Eds.). Connecting
Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education: An ICPE Book
[Available on Internet:] http://www.physics.ohio-
state.edu/~jossem/ICPE/C$.html [Date of access: 7 February 2005].

Millar, R., Lubben, F., Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1994). Investigating in the
school science laboratory: Conceptual and procedural knowledge and
their influence on performance. Research Papers in Education, 9(2),
pp. 207-248.

Morse, J.M. (1994). Emerging from data: The cognitive processes of analysis
in qualitative inquiry. In Morse, J.M. (Ed.). Critical Issues in Qualitative
Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Nkomo, M. (1990). Pedagogy of Domination: Towards a Democratic

Education in South Africa. New Jersey: Africa World Press Inc.

Norman, D.A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In Gentner, D., &
Stevens, A.L. (Eds.). Mental Models. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc.

Norman, D.A. (1982). Learning and Memory. San Francisco: Freeman.

211
Novak, J.D. (1991). The interplay of theory and methodology. In Hegarty-
Hazel, E. (Ed.). The Student Laboratory and the Science Curriculum.
London: Routledge.

Ormrod, J.E. (2000). Educational Psychology: Developing Learners (3rd ed.).

New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Patton, M.Q.(2002).Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed).

London: Sage Publications.

Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed.).
London: Sage Publications.

Patton, M. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. London:

Sage Publications.

Perkins, D. (1993). Teaching for understanding. American Educator: The

Professional Journal of the American Federation of Teachers, 17(13),
pp. 28-35.

Petrucci, R, H., Harwood, W.S. & Herring, F.G. (2002). General Chemistry:
Principles and Modern Applications (8th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall
Publishers.

Phye, G.D. (1997). Learning and remembering: The basis for personal
knowledge construction. In Phye, G.D. (Ed.). Handbook of Academic
Learning: Construction of Knowledge. San Diego: Academic Press.

Piaget, J. (1964). To understand is to invent. New York: Viking.

Pines, A.L., & West, L.H.T. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science
learning: An interpretation of research within a source-of-knowledge
framework. Science Education, 70(5), pp. 583-604.

212
Pines, A.L. (1985). Toward a taxonomy of conceptual relations and the
implications for the evaluation of cognitive structures. In West, L.H.T., &
Pines, A.L. (Eds.). Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. London:
Academic Press Inc.

Polya, G. (1973). Induction analogy in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton

University Press.

Posner, G.M. (1978). Cognitive science: Implications for curriculum research

and development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Research Association, Toronto.

Prawat, R.S. (1989). Promoting access to knowledge, strategy and disposition

in students: A research synthesis review of educational research. Spring
1989, 59(1), pp. 1-41.

Raghubir, K.P. (1979). The laboratory investigation approach to science

instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, pp. 13-18.

Reif, F. (1985). Acquiring an effective understanding of scientific concepts. In

West, L.H.T. & Pines, A.L. (Eds.). Cognitive Structure and Conceptual
Change. London: Academic Press Inc.

Reif, F., & St. John, M. (1979). Teaching physics thinking skills in the
laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 47(11), pp. 273-276.

Resnick, L.B. (1989). Knowing, Learning and Instruction: Essays in Honor of

Robert Glaser. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Resnick, L.B. (1986). The development of mathematical intuition. In

Perlmutter, M. (Ed.). Perspectives on Intellectual Development: The
Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, 19, pp. 159-194.

213
Santrock, J.W. (2001). Educational Psychology. London: McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.

Schunk, D.H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational

Psychologist, 26, pp. 207-231.

Schwartz, B., & Reisberg, D. (1991). Learning and Memory. New York:
Norton.

Science for All Americans Online. (2007). [Available on Internet:]

www.project2061.org/tools/sfaaol/chpl.html [Date of access: 24 July
2007].

Shavelson, R., Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Li, M., & Ayala, C.C. (2003). Evaluating new
approaches to assessing learning. National center for research on
evaluation, standards, and student testing (CRESST), Center for the
study of evaluation (CSE). Graduate School of Education & Information
Studies. University of Carlifornia.

Shuell, T.J. (1985). Knowledge representation, cognitive structure and school

learning: A historical perspective. In West, L.H.T. & Pines, A.L. (Eds.).
Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. London: Academic Press
Inc.

Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new

reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), pp. 1-22.

Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.

Educational Research, 15(2), pp. 4-14.

Shulman, L.D., & Tamir, P. (1973). Research on the natural sciences. In

Travers, R.M.W. (Ed.). Second Handbook on Research on Teaching,
p. 1098-1140. Chicago: Rand McNally.

214
Slavings, R., Cochran, N., & Bowen, C.W. (1997). Results of a national survey
on college chemistry faculty beliefs and attitudes of assessment-of-
students learning practices. Chem. Educator, 2(1), pp. 1430-1471.

Smith, E.L. (1991). A conceptual change model of learning science. In Glynn,

S.M., Yeany, R.H. & Britton, B.K. (Eds.). The Psychology of Learning
Science. London: Lawrence Associates Publishers.

South African Department of Education. (2002a). Revised National Curriculum

Statement Grades R-9 (Schools), Natural Sciences. Pretoria:
Department of Education.

Spady, W.G. (1994). Outcomes-based Education: Critical Issues and

Answers. USA: American Association of School Administrators.

Stake, R.E. (2003). Case studies. In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds).
Strategies of qualitative inquiry. London: Sage Publications, Inc.

Steffe, L., & Gale, J. (1995). Constructivism in Education. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Taber, K.S. (2000). Chemistry lessons for universities? A review of

constructivist ideas. University Chemistry Education, 4(2), pp. 26-35.

Taylor, M.C. (2005). Interviewing. In Holloway, I. (Ed.). Qualitative research in

health care. New York: Open University Press.

Taylor, J.T., & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to Qualitative Research

Methods: A Guide and Resource (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons
Inc.

Tobin, K., Tippins, D.J., & Gallard, A.J. (1994). Research on instructional
strategies for teaching science. In Gabel, D.L. (Ed.). Handbook of

215
 Research on Science Teaching and Learning: A Project of the National
Science Teacher Association. Macmillan Publishing Company.

Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better

questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and
Mathematics, 90(5), pp. 403-418.

Treagust, D.F. (1995). Diagnostic assessment of students' science

knowledge. In Glynn, S.M., & Duit, R. (Eds.). Learning Science in
Schools: Research Reforming Practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Inc. Publishing.

Vanderstraeten, R., & Biesta, G.J.J. (2006). How is education possible? A

pragmatist account of communication and the social organisation of
education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54(2), pp. 160-174.

Vianna, J.F., Sleet, R.J., & Johnstone, A.H. (1999). Qum. Nova 22, p. 11.

von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and

learning. London: Falmer Press.

von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Introductions: Aspects of constructivism. In

Fosnot, C.T. (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory Perspectives and Practice.
London: Teachers College Press.

Wallace, S. (2005). Observing method: Recognising the significance of belief,

discipline, position and documentation in observational studies. In
Holloway, I. (Ed.). Qualitative research in health care. New York: Open
University Press.

Wandersee, J.H., & Griffard, P.B. (2002). The history of chemistry: Potential
and actual contributions to chemical education. In Gilbert, J.K., De Jong.,
O., Justi, R., Treagust, D.F., & Van Driel, J.H. (Eds.). Chemical

216
 Education: Towards Research-based Practice Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.

Ware, S.A. (2001). Teaching chemistry from societal perspective. Lecture

presented at the 8th International Chemistry Conference in Africa (8th
ICCA), 30July-4 August 2001, Dakar, Senegal. Pure and Applied
Chemistry 73, pp.1209-1214.

Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopaedia. (2006). Epistemology. [Available on

Internet:] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/epistemology [Date of access:
24 July 2006].

Wilson, A. (1993). The promise of situated cognition. New Directions for

Adults and Continuing Education, Spring Edition, pp. 71-79.

Woolfolk, A.E. (1998). Educational Psychology (7th ed.). London: Allyn &
Bacon.

Woolnough, B., & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical Work in Science. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

217
 APPENDIX A

Observation and Interview Schedule

Event and/or observation Question Clarification (of question; Response (by either first (S1) or

expectation; intention; second (S2) respondents

action; activity)

APPENDIX B

218
 Prior Knowledge State Test

Instruction: Answer all the questions and explain (or elaborate on) your answers where
applicable.

1. You are told that an aqueous solution is acidic. What does this mean?

2 Which 0.1 M solution among HBr (aq); CO2 (aq); LiOH (aq); CH3OH (aq) will turn
phenolphthalein pink?

3. As the hydrogen ion concentration of an aqueous solution increases, the hydroxide

ion concentration of this solution will (1) increase (2) decrease (3) remain the same.

4 Calculate the pH of a solution with a hydronium ion concentration of 0.01 moles per
liter.

5. Differentiate between a dilute solution of a weak acid and a concentrated solution of a

weak acid? Illustrate your answer with a relevant example.

6. Differentiate between an Arrhenius and a Bronsted-Lowry acid.

7 Why does ammonia behave both as an Arrhenius base and as a Bronsted-Lowry

base when dissolved in water?

8 In terms of Bronsted-Lowry definition of acids and bases what is a strong acid and a
weak acid?

-
9 What is meant by an amphoteric substance? Use the hydrogen oxalate ion (HC2O4 )
in water for your explanation.

10 An unknown salt is NaF, NaCl, or NOCl. When 0.05 mol of salt is dissolved in water
to form 0.500 dm3 of solution, the pH of solution is 8.08. Identify the salt and explain
your choice.

11 When HCl (aq) is exactly neutralized by NaOH (aq), the hydrogen ion concentration
in the resulting solution is (1) always less than the concentration of the hydroxide ions
(2) always greater than the concentration of the hydroxide ions (3) always equal to

219
 the concentration of the hydroxide ions (4) sometimes greater and sometimes less
than the concentration of the hydroxide ions.

12 Presume that you are titrating a weak acid and a strong base (e.g. NaOH). What
would the expression "equivalence point" mean in this process?

13 A 25.0 cm3 0.10 M CH3COOH (aq) was titrated with 0.20 M NaOH (aq). Calculate the
total volume at the equivalence point was reached?

14 Solutions which contain a weak conjugate acid-base pair can resist drastic changes
in pH upon the addition of small amounts of strong acid or base. What are these
solutions called and how do they resist the change in pH?

15 Calculate the molality of 49.0 mg of H2SO4 in 10.0ml of solution.

16 Calculate the molarity of HCl, density 1.057 g/ml, 12.0% by mass.

17 Calculate the concentration of a 150 ml of a 0.1200 M solution diluted to 200.0ml

18. A 20 ml sample of vinegar having a density of 1.055 g/ml requires 40.34 ml of 0.3024
M NaOH base for titration. Calculate the percentage of acetic acid (HC2H3O2) in the
sample.

19 Define the term standardization.

20. Illustrate how a 500 ml 6 M solution of an acid is diluted by a factor of 25.

220
 APPENDIX C

Practical work task

Practical Work Task

Aim
To determine % content of ethanoic acid in a solution of commercial vinegar.
Objective
‰ To determine the % content of ethanoic acid in commercial vinegar by titrimetric methods.

Useful information
‰ Commercial vinegar generally contains % ethanoic acid of between 4% and 6%.
‰ Density of vinegar is 1.045g/cm3
‰ Ethanoic acid is a weak acid.
‰ Estimate end-point at 25.00 cm-3
‰ Determinations should be in duplicate.
Experimental
‰ Work in pairs
‰ Prepare an experimental plan that outlines how you are going to :
o Perform the experiment.
o Analyse the data in order to extract the required information.
‰ Have your plan reviewed before you start with your practical work
‰ Analyse results (Individually)
‰ Write report (Individually). In your report include:
o Title.
o Aim.
o The procedure or method.
o Observation and/or explanation of phenomena.
o Results of weighing and titrations (in tabular form and calculations).
o Conclusions.

Summary of the activity

¾ Formulate plan.
¾ Discuss plan with the instructor before proceeding.
¾ Perform the task.
¾ Analyse results.
¾ Write report.

221
 APPENDIX D

Propositional statements representing knowledge of acids

and bases and titration processes

PCKS 1: Early known facts about acids

1.1 Acids when dissolved in water have a sour taste (The name acid comes from the Latin
word acidus, which means "sour").
1.2 Acids cause the dye litmus to change from a blue to a red colour. (Litmus is a naturally
occurring vegetable dye obtained from linchens).
1.3 When certain metals, such as zinc and iron, are placed in acids, they dissolve with the
liberation of gas.

PCKS 2: Early known characteristics of bases

2.1 Water solutions of bases feel slippery or soapy to the touch and have a bitter taste.
2.2 Bases cause the dye litmus to change from a red to a blue colour.
2.3 When certain greases are placed in a base solution, they dissolve.

PCKS 3: Definitions of acids and bases

3.1 Arrhenius definition: Acid is a substance that releases the hydrogen ions (H+) in
aqueous solution (water).
e.g. HNO3 (l) + H2O → H+ (aq) + NO3-(aq)

Arrhenius acids when in the pure state (not in solution) are covalent compounds, that is, they
do not contain H+ ions. These ions are formed through a chemical reaction, when the acid is
mixed with water.
Base is a substance that releases hydroxide ions (OH-) in aqueous solution (aq).

e.g. NaOH (s) + H2O → Na+ (aq) + OH-(aq)

Arrhenius bases are usually ionic in the pure state, in direct contrast to acids. When bases
dissolve in water, the ions separate to yield OH- ions.

222
3.2 Bronsted- Lowry definitions:

Acid is a substance that donates a proton (H+) to some other substance.

Base is any substance that can accept a proton from some other substance. Bronsted –
Lowry acid is therefore a proton donor and a Bronsted – Lowry base is a proton acceptor.

e.g. HCl (g) + H2O (l) → H3O+ (aq) + Cl- (aq)

The HCl behaves like a Bronsted – Lowry acid by donating a proton to a water molecule. The
hydronium ion is formed in this reaction:
H+ + H2O → H3O+
The base in this reaction is water since it has accepted a proton; no hydroxide ions are
involved.

4 A substance that behaves both as an acid and a base (a substance that can donate
and accept a proton) is an amphoteric substance

e.g. H2O (l) + H2O (l) ⇌ H3O+ (aq) + OH- (aq)

PCKS 4: Strengths of acids and bases:

4.1 Acids may be classified as strong or weak depending on the number of H+ ions (or
H3O+ ions) they produce in aqueous solution
4.2 A strong acid dissociates 100% (completely) in solution; that is, all of the acid
molecules present dissociate into ions. Because of this extensive dissociation, many
hydrogen ions are present in the solution of a strong acid
4.3 A weak acid dissociates only slightly (partially) in solution; that is, most of the acid
molecules are present in solution in un-dissociated form.

PCKS 5: Ionic and net ionic equations

5.1 Soluble acids and soluble bases and soluble salts all produce ions in aqueous solution
5.2 An ionic equation is an equation in which the formulas of the predominant form of each
compound in aqueous solution are used; dissociated compound are written as ions, un-
dissociated compounds are written in molecular form

e.g. CH3COOH + H2O (l) ⇌ CH3COO-(aq) + H3O+ (aq)

5.3 A net ionic equation is an ionic equation from which nonparticipating (spectator)
species have been eliminated
e.g.AgNO3 (aq) + KCl (aq) → KNO3 (aq) + AgCl (s)
Molecular equation

223
Three substances AgNO3, KCl and AgCl are soluble salts and thus exist in solution in
dissociated ionic form.
Potassium and nitrate ions appear on either side of the equation, that is, they did not undergo
any chemical change. They are spectator ions.
Net ionic equation is written by canceling all spectator ions from the ionic equation:
Ag+ (aq) + Cl- (aq) → AgCl (s)
Net ionic equation

PCKS 6: Reactions of acids, bases, salts and water

6.1 When acids and bases are mixed they react with each other. Their acidic and basic
properties disappear when equivalent amounts have reacted to produce a neutral
solution
6.2 Neutralization is the reaction between equivalent amounts of an acid and a base to
form a salt and water
6.3 The hydrogen ions from the acid combine with the hydroxide ions from the base to form
water
e.g. HNO3 + NaOH → NaNO3 + H2O

Molecular equation
H+ + OH- → H2O
Net ionic equation
6.4 Reactions of acids with salts result in the formation of weaker acid, a new insoluble salt
or a gaseous compound is formed
e.g. AgNO3 (aq) + HCl (aq) → AgCl (s) + HNO3 (aq)
6.5 When an acid neutralises a base an ionic compound called a salt is formed. Salt
solutions can be acidic, or basic depending on the acid base properties of the
constituent cations and anions
6.6 Salts that yield basic solutions: Salts such as NaF that are derived from a strong base
(NaOH) and a weak acid (HF) yield basic solutions. In this case the cation is neither an
acid nor a base but the anion is a weak base

e.g. F-(aq) + H2O (l) ⇌F (aq) + OH-(aq)

PCKS 7: Dissociation of water:

7.1 In a sample of pure water a small percentage of the water molecules undergo
dissociation to produce ions
7.2 The dissociation reaction of water involves the transfer of a proton from one water
molecule to another H2O+

H2O ⇌ H3O+ + OH- (Bronsted-Lowry theory)

224
 or

H2O ⇌H+ + OH- (Arrhenius theory)

7.3 The dissociation of water molecules is part of an equilibrium situation. Individual water
molecules are continually dissociating.
7.4 At equilibrium (at 25°C), the H+ and OH- ion concentration 1.00 X 10-7 M
7.5 At any given temperature the product of the concentrations of H+ ion and OH- ion in
water is a constant.
[H+] X [OH-] = constant = (1.00X10-7) (1.00X10-7) = 1.0X10-14
7.6 All acidic solutions have a higher [H+] than [OH-]. In a similar manner, a base is a
substance that increases the OH- ion concentration in water.
7.7 All basis solutions have a higher [OH-] than [H+]. In a neutral solution the
concentrations of both the H+ ions and OH- ions are equal.

PCKS 8: The pH scale:

8.1 The term pH is derived from the French puissance d'hydrogene ("power of hydrogen")
and refers to the power of 10 (the exponent) used to express the molar H3O+
concentration.
8.2 The pH of a solution is defined as the negative base-10 logarithm (log) of the molar
hydronium ion concentration.
pH = -log [H3O+] or H3O+(-pH) = 10-pH
thus and acidic solution having [H3O+] = 10-2 M has a pH of 2, a basic solution having [OH-] =
10-2M has a pH of 12 and a neutral solution having [H3O+] = 10-7 has a pH of 7.

PCKS 9: Acid-Base titrations:

9.1 The concentration of an acid or base in a solution and the pH of the solution are two
different entities.
9.2 The pH of a solution gives information about the concentration of hydrogen ions in
solution. Only dissociated molecules influence the pH value.
9.3 The concentration of an acid or base solution gives information about the total number
of acid/base molecules present: both dissociated and un-dissociated molecules are
counted.
9.4 The procedure most frequently used to determine the concentration of an acidic or
basic solution is that of titration.
9.5 Titration is the gradual adding of one solution to another until the solute in the first
solution has reacted completely with the solute in the second solution.
9.6 In order to complete a titration successfully the endpoint must be detected. Endpoint is
detected with the help of an indicator.

225
9.7 An indicator is a compound that exhibits different colours depending on the pH of the
surroundings.
9.8 Typically, an indicator is one colour in basic solutions and another colour in acidic
solutions.
9.9 An indicator is selected based on the pH at which it will change colour.

PCKS 10: Acid – base calculations (expressed in molarity and/ or percent).

10.1 Concentration refers (in molarity) to the number of moles per given volume of solution
C= n/v where
n= number of moles, v= volume
Molarity = n/dm3
10.2 Concentration can also be expressed as % mass/mass; % mass/volume; %
volume/volume.
10.3 A concentrated solution is a solution with more moles per given volume whereas a
dilute solution is a solution with less number of moles per given volume.

226
 APPENDIX E

Geographical map of South Africa

227
 APPENDIX F
Approval to conduct interviews

228
 APPENDIX G

Ethics clearance certificate

229