H. R. Widarti, A. Permanasari, S. Mulyani


The misconception is one of the obstacles in the concept mastery that needed to be minimalized. This descriptive study was conducted to find the patterns of misconceptions which have occurred on college students who participating in the redox titration course subject. Efforts to minimize misconceptions have been conducted through lectures using the multiple representations with the cognitive dissonance strategies on the 30 students who joined the Fundamentals of Analytical Chemistry course. The research instrument used in this study was 6 multiple-choice tests with reasons. In order to detect the misconception, Certainty of Response Index technique was performed. The preliminary study results showed that 34.30% of students experiencing the misconceptions on redox titration. After treatments, the misconceptions reduced to 28.17%. A misconception that cannot be eliminated was related to the concepts involving in the microscopic and symbolic appearances.


misconceptions, redox titration

Full Text:



Al-Balushi, M., Ambusaidi, K.cA., and Al-Shuaili, H. A., Taylor, N. (2012). Omani twelfth grade students’ most common misconceptions in chemistry. Science Education International, 23(1), 221-240.

Berg, E. (1991). Miskonsepsi Fisika dan Remediasinya. Salatiga: Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana.

Domin, D. & Bodner, G. (2012). Using students’ representationsconstructed during problem solving to infer conceptual understanding. Journal Chemical Education. 89(1), 837-843.

Eymur, G., Cetin, P. & Geban O. (2013).Analysis of the alternative conceptions of preservice teachers and high school students concerning atomic size.90(1), 976-980.

Hakim, A., Liliasari.,& Kadarohman, A. (2012). Student understanding of Natural Product Concept of Primary and Secondary Metabolites Using CRI Modified.International Online Journal of Educational Sciences.4(3), 544-553

Hand, B. & Chio, A. (2010).Examining the impact of student use of multiple modal representations in constructing arguments in organic chemistry laboratory classes.Res Sci Educ. 40(29), 29-44.

Hasan, S., Bagayoko, D., & Kelley, E. L. (1999). Misconceptions and The Certanty of Response Index (CRI). Physics Education.34(5), 294-299.

Kurbanoglu, N. I., & Akin, A. (2010).The Relationships between University Students’ Chemistry Laboratory Anxiety, Attitudes and Self-Effiency Beliefs.Aistralian Journal of Teacher Education.35(18), 48-59.

Linenberger, J. K. and Bretz, L. S. (2012).Generating cognitive dissonance in student interviews through multiple representations.Chemical Education Research & Pracice.13(1), 172-178.

Luoga, N. E., Ndunguru, A. P., & Mkoma, L. S. (2013).High school students’ misconceptions about colligative properties in chemistry.Tanzania Journal of Natural & Applied Sciences.4(1), 575-581.

McDermott, A. M. & Hand, B. (2013).The impact of embedding multiple modes of representationwithin writing tasks on high school students’ chemistry understanding.Instructional Science.41(1), 217-246.

Nakhleh, M.B. & Krajcik, J.S. (1994). Influence of levels of information as presented bydifferent Technologies on students. understanding of acid, base, and pH concepts. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching.34(1), 1077–1096.

Pinarbasi, T. (2007). Turkish undergraduate students misconceptions on acids and bases. Journal of Baltic Science Education.16(1), 23-34.

Pinarbasi, T., Sozbilir, M., & Canpolat, N.(2009). Prospective chemistry teachers’ misconceptions about colligative properties: Boiling point elevationand freezing point depression. Chemistry Education Research and Practice.10(1), 273-280.

Widarti, R.H., Permanasari, A., & Mulyani S. (2014).Analisis Kesulitan Mahasiswa Pada Perkuliahan Dasar-Dasar Kimia Analitik di Universitas Negeri Malang. Malang: Seminar SNKP


  • There are currently no refbacks.