See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266143231

Enhancing students'' critical thinking skill and Learning achievement of

chemical reaction rate by using science inquiry process

Article · January 2011

CITATIONS READS

2 729

3 authors, including:

Saksri Supasorn
Ubon Ratchathani University
45 PUBLICATIONS   280 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of inquiry chemistry experiments in conjunction with molecular animations (ICEMA) to promote secondary school students’ conceptual understanding at
molecular level View project

Development of the inquiry skills building chemistry experimental units (ISB-Chem) for secondary school students View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Saksri Supasorn on 28 September 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 «“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’) ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554

ENHANCING STUDENTSû CRITICAL THINKING SKILL AND

LEARNING ACHIEVEMENT OF CHEMICAL REACTION RATE BY
USING SCIENCE INQUIRY PROCESS
T. Yasukham1,2, S. Supasorn1*, K. Wongkhan1
1
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Ubon Ratchathani University, Warinchamrab,
Ubonratchathani, Thailand.
2
Umphang Wittayakom School, Umphang, Umphang, Tak, Thailand.

*Corresponding Author E-Mail: saksri.supasorn@gmail.com

Abstract
The National Test (NT) scores for Chemistry at Umphang Wittayakom School have been
lower than the national standard for the past few years. Moreover, the traditional teaching approach
has failed to enhance studentsû critical thinking skills. The science inquiry learning approach and critical
thinking situations were introduced in the topic of chemical reaction rate for 15 hours. The target
group of this study was 34 M5/2 students in academic semester 1-2010. The data collecting
tools included the multiple choice achievement test and the critical thinking tests of chemical reaction.
The paired samples t-test analysis indicated that the students obtained the post-achievement score
(mean=27.82, S.D.=4.37, total=40) statistically higher than the pre-achievement score (mean=21.26
out of 40, S.D.=4.37) at p<0.01 as the percentage of progression was 16.40. In the same fashion,
The paired samples t-test analysis indicated that the students obtained the post-critical thinking
score (mean=28.53, S.D.=4.37, total=40) statistically higher than the pre-critical thinking score
(mean=23.56 out of 40, S.D.=3.06) at p<0.01 as the percentage of progression was 12.42.
In addition, the E1/E2 effectiveness of the achievement and the critical thinking scores were 72.60/
70.29 and 73.78/71.32, respectively Instructor observation revealed that POE activity can
effectively engage students in the science inquiry process. The critical thinking situations
proposed during the class also promoted their critical thinking skills. However, science inquiry is
time-consuming so an instructor should effectively manage the time in each step. It is advisable
that a variety of situations be proposed to make it more challenging for students. Studentsû knowledge
retention will be investigated in the next phase of the study.

Keywords: Critical thinking skill, Chemical reacting rate

320
«“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’)
Introduction
The National Test (NT) average scores
for Chemistry of Mathayom 6 students at
Umphang Wittayakom School in academic
semesters 2009 and 2010 were 4.70 and 4.93,
respectively. These scores were lower than
the average provincial, Tak Education Service
Area 2, and national scores, 4.96, 5.13 and
5.15 in academic semester 2009, and 5.17,
5.30 and 5.31 in academic semester 2010,
respectively [1]. Moreover, the evaluation report
of effective learning in the NT in academic
semester 2009 showed that students had
a low level of achievement in chemical learning.
Most of the students are ethnic Karen and
Hmong, from villages dispersed throughout the
forests and mountains of Umphang district.
Many have not enjoyed a satisfactory primary
level of education, and have problems with the
Thai language, communication and searching
for appropriate information. At present, teachers
have to place more emphasis on the subject
matter than in nurturing effective thinking skills,
such as creativity and critical thinking, skills
useful for all students in the future. Moreover,
the objective of educational reform places
emphasis on developing higher order cognitive
skills including thinking and problem-solving
skills.
Science inquiry learning approach has
been proven to be an effective way to enhance
studentsû learning achievement and scientific
process skills in learning chemistry and highly
advocated in the last 2-3 decades [2]. The 5Eûs
ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554
model is the most familiar science inquiry learning
process in Thailand. It is most often implemented
in many science classes including chemistry. The
Es learning cycle consists of 5 steps of learning
as follows [3]:
- Engagement: Students are engaged
to scientific oriented questions.
- Exploration: Students explore the
answer of the engaged question by collecting
evidence from the involved investigation or
experiment.
- Explanation: Students make an
explanation from the collected evidence to answer
the question.
- Elaboration: Students elaborate or
apply the learned concepts to other phenomena
or contexts.
- Evaluation: Students assess or be
assessed their knowledge, skills and abilities.
The inquiry approach has advantages
over traditional approach since the students
are challenged to practice how to inquire
the answer for the engaged scientific problems.
This can enhance their analytical and critical
thinking skills. In addition, they have an opportunity
to practice chemistry research and to do
science [4].
It is important for teachers to get the
message across to students that they can acquire
knowledge and problem solving skills to enhance
their learning capability. The researchers believe
that science inquiry learning process can be an
effective means to enhance both studentsû
achievement in Chemistry and critical thinking skills
321
 «“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’) ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554

for the students at Umphang Wittayakom School
since this student-centered approach is central
to science and can promote meaningful learning,
conceptual understanding, and understanding
the nature of science when properly developed
and implemented [5]. Chemical reaction rate
was raised in the study since it contains more
factors that could promote studentsû critical
thinking.
Materials and Methods
Research Questions
1. Do students who participate in science
inquiry process of chemical reaction rate obtain
the post-achievement score on chemical
reaction rate statistical higher than the pre-
achievement score?
2. Do students who participate in science
inquiry process obtain the post-critical thinking
score chemical reaction rate statistical higher
than the pre-critical thinking score?
Methodology
Samples and Population
The sample group of this study was
34 M.5/2 students, purposively randomized from
three M.5 Science-Math classes at Umphang
Wittayakom School in academic semester
1-2010.
Research Tools
1. The science inquiry lesson plans on
chemical reaction rate. Seven science inquiry
lesson plans (15 hours) were developed based
on 5Es learning cycle; engagement, exploration,
explanation, elaboration or extension, and
evaluation. The lesson plan contained some key
science inquiry activities as shown in Table 1.
These plans and activities were approved by the
research advisor and professors in the field.

Table 1 Key learning activities in each lesson plans.

Plan key activities periods
1. Meaning and measure of reaction rate Reactions of CaCO3 and HCl 3
2. Theory of reaction The erosion of acid 2
3. Energy of reaction Reaction of indicator 2
4. Conc. and rate Reaction of eggshell 2
5. Surface area and rate Reaction of sell 2
6. Temperature and rate Recycle of PS2
7. Catalysts and rate What does the liver work? 2
total - 15

2. The chemical reaction rate achievement 20 items in each set. The difficulty level,
test. Forty 4-choice items were developed and discrimination power, and reliability of the test were
approved by the research advisor and professors 0.45-0.80, 0.27-0.64 and 0.761, respectively.
in the field. The test was separated into two sets,

322
«“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’)
3. The critical thinking test on chemical
reaction rate. Forty 4-choice test items were
developed and approved by the research advisor
and professors in the field. It was separated into
two sets, 20 items in each set. The difficulty
level, discrimination power, and reliability of
the test were 0.65-0.83, 0.27-0.73 and
0.816, respectively. Examples of test items are
illustrated in Figure 1.
Implementation
The process of this one group pre-test
post-test design study was separated as two
phases.
Phase 1: Students completed the learning
achievement and the critical thinking tests on
chemical reaction rate part 1, called pretest 1.
Then, the 1st to 3rd science inquiry lesson plans
were implemented. Finally, they completed
the same learning achievement and critical thinking
tests, called post-test 1.
Phase 2: Students completed the
chemical reaction rate learning achievement and
the critical thinking tests part 2, called pretest 2.
Then, the 4th to 7th science inquiry learning plans
were implemented. Finally, they completed the
same learning achievement and the critical thinking
tests, called post-test 2.
ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554
Case 1: These three Erlenmeyer flasks contain
calcium carbonate and different concentrations
of acid.
Q1. What is the independent variable of this case?
a) Concentrations of acid.
b) Quantity of calcium carbonate.
c) Solubility of calcium carbonate.
d) Crystallization of calcium carbonate
Q2. What will be the result of this case?
a) Coarse of CaCO3 will react the fastest.
b) High CaCO3 quantity will react the fastest.
c) Low concentration of acid will react the
fastest.
d) High concentration of acid will react the
fastest.
Figure 1 Examples of items in the critical
thinking test.
Results
The results of this study were discussed
in two aspects, learning achievement and critical
thinking.
1. The learning achievement score
on chemical reaction rate. The paired-samples
t-test analysis indicated that the students who
participated in the science inquiry learning
implementation obtained the post-achievement
scores of Set 1 (mean=13.53, S.D.=2.18) and
Set 2 (mean=14.59, S.D.=2.22) significantly
higher than those of the pre-achievement scores
of Set 1 (mean= 10.21, S.D.=1.63) and Set 2
323
 «“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’) ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554

(mean=10.97, S.D.=2.01) at p-value less of this learning process was 72.60/70.29,

than 0.01 (t=18.70) and p-value less than 0.01 higher than the proposed E1/E2 standard at
(t=25.82), respectively (Table 2). The process 70/70. The gain in content knowledge of the
effectiveness (E1) and the learning outcome whole science inquiry lesson plans was 6.56
effectiveness (E2) calculated as the E1/E2 or 16.40%.

Table 2 Learning achievement scores in Set 1 and Set 2.

LP* Set 1 Set 2
pretest posttest LP* pretest posttest
mean S.D. mean S.D. mean S.D. mean S.D.
1 4.29 0.50 6.00 0.43 4 3.12 0.49 3.94 0.41
2 2.44 0.50 2.88 0.50 5 2.53 0.50 3.38 0.44
3 3.47 0.50 4.68 0.47 6 2.56 0.50 3.74 0.47
7 2.68 0.50 3.50 0.46
total 10.21 1.50 13.56 1.40 10.97 1.99 14.56 1.77
t-test t = 18.70, p < .01 t = 25.28, p < .01
LP* stands for lesson plan.

It is noted that the average post-
achievement score of chemical reaction rate of
Set 1 is lower than that in Test Set 2, and so did
the average pre-achievement score. This was
due to the fact that topics in Test Set 1 involved
calculation of reaction rate in which the students
were not competent enough. On the other hand,
the topics in Test Set 2 were about factors
affecting chemical reaction rate which were less
involve calculation.
The research findings indicated that
the science inquiry learning was an effective
way to improve studentsû learning achievement.
This improvement may be arisen from to the fact
that this learning process emphasizes on the
enhancement of student intelligence based on the
intelligence enhancement theory of Piaget and
consistent with learning principle stated that
students play the most important role in the
learning process. In addition, Predict-Observe-
Explain (POE) activities were implemented as
the first activity in each lesson plan to engage
student into the raised scientific questions.
This can encourage them to inquiry the answer
and able to construct new knowledge and
incorporate it into their existing knowledge.
In this case, they can make an explanation of
everyday phenomena with scientific knowledge
or find the answer by using science inquiry
process [6].
2. The critical thinking score on chemical
reaction rate. The paired-samples t-test analysis

324
«“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’)
indicated that the students who participated in
the science inquiry learning implementation
obtained the post-critical thinking scores of
Set 1 (mean=13.94, S.D.=2.65) and Set 2
(mean=14.59, S.D.=2.02) significantly
higher than the pre-critical thinking score of
Set 1 (mean=11.44, S.D. =1.76) and Set 2
(mean=12.12, S.D.=1.55) at p-value less
than 0.01 (t=11.56) and less than 0.01
(t=11.21), respectively (Table 3). The process
effectiveness (E1) and the learning outcome
Table 3 Critical thinking scores of Set 1 and 2.
Scores Set 1 (Plan 1-3)
mean S.D.
pretest 11.44 1.76
posttest 13.94 2.65
t-test t = 11.56, p < .01
It is noted that the average post-critical
thinking score of chemical reaction rate of Set 2
was a bit higher that of Set 1, so did the
pre-critical thinking score. This may be due to
the fact that the students began to understand
the critical thinking process in Set 2 so they
can score the critical thinking test.
Conclusions and Discussion
The results of this study verified that
inquiry-based learning is an effective approach
in learning chemistry. This approach can effectively
improve student learning achievement as well
as critical thinking skills. In addition, the students
participated in the science learning process with
ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554
effectiveness (E2) calculated as the E1/E2 of
this learning process was 73.78/71.32,
higher than the proposed E1/E2 standard at 70/
70. The gain in content knowledge of the
whole science inquiry lesson plans was 12.42
or 31.05%. This was consistent with the
previous study that variables influencing studentsû
critical thinking is learning environments.
An instructor should provide students with variety
of situations and allow them to inquiry the way
to solve problems with minimal guiding [7-8].
Set 2 (Plan 4-7)
mean S.D.
12.12 1.55
14.59 2.02
t = 11.21, p < .01
enjoyment and self-encouragement. They gained
and constructed new knowledge as they carefully
went through each step of inquiry process [9].
This study may have implications to
chemistry teachers to consider implementing
inquiry learning process in their chemistry class.
However, science inquiry process is time-
consuming so the instructor should be flexible
for each activity. A variety of situations is advised,
depending on the capability of the students since
each student has a different learning skill. Finally,
the instructor should be observing and suggesting
some part that may cause a problem during
an activity and never allow students to complete
a learning activity without understanding.
325
 «“√ “√¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬»√’π§√‘π∑√«‘‚√≤ ( “¢“«‘∑¬“»“ μ√å·≈–‡∑§‚π‚≈¬’) ªï∑’Ë 3 (©∫—∫摇»…∑’Ë 1) ¡°√“§¡ 2554

Figure 2 The assigned group of students Figure 4 Each group of students applying
illustrating POE activity in the the concepts learned from the
engagement step (acid erosion). previous steps in the elaboration step
(temperature and rate).

Figure 3 Each group of students conducting an

experiment in the exploration step
(What does the saliva work?).

References
[1] The National Institute of Educational Testing Service. (n.d.). from http://www.niets.or.th
[2] M. Sanger. (2008). J. Chem. Educ. 85: 297-302.
[3] National Institutes of Health Office of Science Education. (n.d.). from http://science.education.
nih.gov
[4] S.L. Black. (1996). J. Chem. Educ. 73: 776-778.
[5] M. Kipnis; & A. Hofstein. (2007). Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 6: 601-627.
[6] S. Moonsrikaew. (2010). Grade 11 studentsû representation about fluid in learning based on
constructivist theory through predict-observe-explain (POE). In 11th Graduate Research
Conf. Proc., Khon Kaen University. Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University.
[7] P. Klahan. (2005). Masterûs Thesis. Mahasarakham: Mahasarakham University. Photocopied.
[8] S. Appamaraka. (2009). Doctoralûs Dissertation. Mahasarakham: Mahasarakham University.
Photocopied.
[9] S. Supasorn. (2010). Inquiry-based experiments to enhance student conceptual understanding
of organic acid-base extraction and purification. In Pure and Applied Chemistry International
Conf. Proc. Ubonratchathani: n.p.
326
View publication stats