Evaluation of Czech non-chemical vocational school chemistry textbooks’ text difficulty

• Autorzy: Rusek Martin , Vosyková Lucie

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/cdem-2021-0008

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The paper follows the first author’s continuous work on chemistry textbook analysis. In the previous paper published in CERP, attention was given to the procedure and results for analysing text-difficulty in lower-secondary chemistry textbooks in Czechia. In this paper, attention was given to non-chemical vocational school chemistry textbooks. They are intended for the most numerous group of upper-secondary students. The goal of the study was to assess the to what extent could students read the textbook texts on their own with appropriate understanding. Therefore, only the textual component was evaluated. The same method (Nestler-Prucha-Pluskal) as in the previous paper was used to analyse the textbooks’ text-difficulty (readability). The results show there are two books which are suitable for students’ own learning. However, there are four textbooks which contain text of high difficulty, including too many scientific terms that they are suitable as teacher’s guide through terms rather than student’s textbooks. The analysis may serve teachers with their textbook choice as well as researchers who operate in the same field who can easily adopt the methodology and compare results.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

textbook analysis; text; difficulty; vocational school; chemistry; education

PL

podręcznik; analiza; trudności; chemia; edukacja

• Wydawca: Towarzystwo Chemii i Inżynierii Ekologicznej
• Czasopismo: Chemistry-Didactics-Ecology-Metrology
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: R. 26, NR 1-2
• Strony: 99--108
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 49 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Rusek Martin

• Charles University, Faculty of Education, Department of Chemistry and Chemistry Education, Magdalény Rettigové 4, 116 39 Prague 1, Czech Republic

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6919-9076

autor

Vosyková Lucie

• Charles University, Faculty of Education, Department of Chemistry and Chemistry Education, Magdalény Rettigové 4, 116 39 Prague 1, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• [1] Vojtěch J, Štěpánek, M. Vývoj vzdělanostní a oborové struktury žáků a studentů ve středním a vyšším odborném vzdělávání v ČR a v krajích ČR a postavení mladých lidí na trhu práce ve srovnání se stavem v Evropské unii 2019/20. [Educational and professional structure development of students’ in secondary education in Czechia and Czech districts and young people's position on the labour market in comparison with the European Univon 2019/20]. Praha: Národní pedagogický institut České Republiky; 2020. Available from: https://www.infoabsolvent.cz/Temata/Download?Soubor=F-9.0.167_Vyvoj_vzdelanostni_a_oborove_struktury_zaku_a_studentu_ve_strednim_a_vyssim_odbornem_vzdel.pdf.
• [2] Mullis IV, Martin MO, Foy P, Arora A. TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. Chestnut ill, MA: TIMSS PIRLS International Study Center; 2012. Available from: https://timss.bc.edu/timss2011/downloads/T11_IR_Mathematics_FullBook.pdf.
• [3] Horsley M. Textbooks, Teaching and learning materials and teacher education. In: Horsley M, McCall J, editors. Book Textbooks, Teaching and Learning Materials and Teacher Education. Richmond, NSW: Biriwa Education Services; 2009. Available from: http://www.iartem.no/documents/9thiartemconferencevolume.pdf.
• [4] Loewenberg-Ball D, Cohen D. Educ Researcher. 1996;25:6-14. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X025009006.
• [5] Johansson M. Teaching Mathematics with Textbooks: A Classroom and Curricular Perspective. [Doctoral thesis]. Luleå, Sweden: Luleå Tekniska Universitet; 2006.
• [6] Chou P-I. Int J Sci Math Educ. 2021;19:727-45. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-020-10083-9.
• [7] Lepik M, Grevholm B, Viholainen A. Nord Stud Math Ed. 2015;20:129-56. Available from: http://arkiv.ncm.gu.se/node/7993.
• [8] Bakken AS. Educ Res. 2019;61:105-22. DOI: 10.1080/00131881.2018.1561202.
• [9] OECD, What types of challenges do countries face in addressing curriculum time lag, and what strategies do they use to address these challenges? What Students Learn Matters: Towards a 21st Century Curriculum. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2020. DOI: 10.1787/7c5b3d7d-en.
• [10] Vojíř K, Rusek M. Int J Sci Educ. 2019; 41:1496-516. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1613584.
• [11] Gegios T, Salta K, Koinis S. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2017;18:151-68. DOI: 10.1039/C6RP00192K.
• [12] Österlund L-L, Berg A, Ekborg M. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2010;11:182-92. DOI: 10.1039/C005467B.
• [13] Karásková N, Doležal R, Maltsevskaya N, Kolář K. Chem Didact Ecol Metrol. 2019;24(1-2):61-76. DOI: 10.2478/cdem-2019-0005.
• [14] Simon SM, Meldrum H, Ndung'u E, Ledley FD. Cbe-Life Sci Educ. 2018;17(4). DOI: 10.1187/cbe.17-03-0057.
• [15] Majidi S. Int J Sci Math Educ. 2014;12:1281-314. DOI: 10.1007/s10763-013-9457-1.
• [16] Irez S. Sci Educ. 2009;93:422-47. DOI: 10.1002/sce.20305.
• [17] Vesterinen V-M, Aksela M, Lavonen J. Sci Educ-Netherlands. 2013;22:1839-55. DOI: 10.1007/s11191-011-9400-1.
• [18] Nyachwaya JM, Gillaspie M. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2016;17:58-71. DOI: 10.1039/C5RP00140D.
• [19] Bergqvist A, Drechsler M, De Jong O, Rundgren S-NC. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2013;14:589-606. DOI: 10.1039/C3RP20159G.
• [20] Dimopoulos K, Koulaidis V. Sci Educ. 2003;87:241-56. DOI: 10.1002/sce.10054.
• [21] Gillette G, Sanger MJ. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2014;15:787-99. DOI: 10.1039/c4rp00115j.
• [22] Overman M, Vermunt JD, Meijer PC, Bulte AMW, Brekelmans M. Textbook Questions in Context-Based and Traditional Chemistry Curricula Analysed from a Content Perspective and a Learning Activities Perspective. Int J Sci Educ. 2013;35(17):2954-78. DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2012.680253.
• [23] Vojíř K. What tasks are included in chemisry tectbooks for lower-secondary schools: A qualitative view. In: Rusek M, Tóthová M, Vojíř K, editors. What Tasks are Included in Chemisry Textbooks for Lower-secondary Schools: A Qualitative View. Prague: Charles University, Faculty of Education; 2021. Available from: https://pages.pedf.cuni.cz/pbe/files/2021/05/ProceedingsPBE2020_final.pdf.
• [24] Bakken J, Andersson-Bakken E. J Curriculum Stud. 2021;1-20. DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2021.1929499.
• [25] Hsu WH. Engl Specif Purp. 2014;33:54-65. DOI: 10.1016/j.esp.2013.07.001.
• [26] Ciascai L, Haiduc L. Metacognitive strategies that Romanian pupils use when reading science textbooks. Book Metacognitive strategies that Romanian pupils use when reading science textbooks; 2011. Available from: http://ipedr.com/vol5/no2/86-H10218.pdf.
• [27] Tóthová M, Rusek M. The use of eye-tracking in science textbook analysis: A literature review. Scientia in Educatione. 2021;12:63-74. DOI: 10.14712/18047106.1932.
• [28] Kaya ON. Res Sci Educ. 2008;38:91-110. DOI: 10.1007/s11165-007-9048-7.
• [29] Granger EM, Bevis TH, Saka Y, Southerland SA, Sampson V, Tate RL. Science. 2012;338:105-8. DOI: 10.1126/science.1223709.
• [30] Mikk J. Educ Stud. 2008;34:119-27. DOI: 10.1080/03055690701811164.
• [31] Cohen SA, Steinberg JE. Read Res Quart. 1983;19:86-101. DOI: 10.2307/747339.
• [32] Markic S, Childs PE. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2016;17:434-8. DOI: 10.1039/C6RP90006B.
• [33] Wellington J, Osborne J. Language and Literacy in Science Education. Buckingham: McGraw-Hill Education; 2001.
• [34] Průcha J. Učebnice: Teorie a analýzy edukačního média. Příručka pro studenty, učitele, autory učebnic a výzkumné pracovníky [Textbooks: Education medium theories and analyses]. Brno: Paido; 1998.
• [35] Blažek J, Fabini J. Chemie pro studijní obory SOŠ a SOU nechemického zaměření. [Chemistry for vocational and apprentice schools of non-chemical focus]. Praha: SPN; 1999.
• [36] Eisner W, Fladt R, Gietz P. Chemie pro střední školy 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b. [Chemistry for upper-secondary schools 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b]. Praha: Scientia; 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000.
• [37] Banýr J, Beneš P, Hally J, Holada K, Novotný P, Pospíšil J. Chemie pro střední školy. [Chemistry for upper-secondary schools]. Praha: SPN; 1995.
• [38] Pumpr V, Adamec M, Beneš P, Scheuerová V. Základy přírodovědného vzdělávání: chemie. [Basics of science education: chemistry]. Praha: Fortuna; 2008.
• [39] Čapek Adamec M. Chemie pro SOŠ nechemického zaměření. [Chemistry for vocational schools of non-chemical character]. Praha: Eduko; 2019.
• [40] Průcha J. Moderní pedagogika [Modern pedagogy]. Portál; 2002.
• [41] Rusek M, Stárková D, Metelková I, Beneš P. Chem Listy. 2016;110:953-8. Available from: http://chemicke-listy.cz/docs/full/2016_12_953-958.pdf.
• [42] Rusek M, Vojíř K. Chem Educ Res Pract. 2019;20:85-94. DOI: 10.1039/C8RP00141C.
• [43] Beneš P, Janoušek R, Novotný M. Pedagogika. 2009;59:291-7. Available from: https://pages.pedf.cuni.cz/pedagogika/?attachment_id=1002&edmc=1002.
• [44] Klečka M, Čtrnáctová, H. Biol Chem Zem. 2011;20:306-10.
• [45] Hrabí L, Náročnost textu v učebnicích přírodopisu. [Text difficulty of biology textbooks] In: Maňák J, Knecht P, editors. Hodnocení učebnic [Textbook evaluation]. Brno: Paido; 2007.
• [46] Vojíř K, Rusek M. J Balt Sci Educ. 2021;20:316-31. DOI: 10.33225/jbse/21.20.00.
• [47] Chiappetta EL, Fillman DA. Int J Sci Educ. 2007;29:1847-68. DOI: 10.1080/09500690601159407.
• [48] Škoda J, Doulík P. Pedag Orientace. 2009;19:24-44. Available from: https://journals.muni.cz/pedor/article/download/1258/950.
• [49] Rusek M, Vojíř K, Šubová Š. Chem Didact Ecol Metrol. 2020;25:69-77. DOI: 10.2478/cdem-2020-0004.