DEVELOPMENT AND DELPHI-BASED CONTENT VALIDATION OF A CHEMISTRY LEARNING QUESTIONNAIRE: EVIDENCE FROM STEM FOUNDATION STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS, ATTITUDES, INTEREST, AND LEARNING CHALLENGES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJMOE.831008Keywords:
Chemistry Learning, Delphi Method, Learning Challenges, Questionnaire Validation, Student Perceptions, STEM Foundation StudentsAbstract
Chemistry is often perceived as a complex subject requiring conceptual understanding and analytical skills, which may affect students’ engagement and performance. This study developed and validated a questionnaire to assess the chemistry learning experiences of STEM Foundation students at Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (UMT). The questionnaire covered five domains: attitudes and interest towards chemistry, teaching methods and learning resources, conceptual understanding, laboratory practices and learning challenges, and students’ perceptions of chemistry. A two-round Delphi method involving five experts was used to establish content validity and refine the questionnaire items. Content validity was assessed using the Item Content Validity Index (I-CVI) and Scale Content Validity Index (S-CVI/Ave). In the second round, all items achieved acceptable I-CVI values of 0.80–1.00, while S-CVI/Ave values ranged from 0.97 to 1.00, indicating excellent content validity. The validated questionnaire was administered to 142 STEM Foundation students, and the data were analysed descriptively. Students reported generally positive chemistry learning experiences, with mean scores ranging from 3.84 to 4.11 across the five domains. However, the comparatively lower score for attitudes and interest suggests that greater attention should be given to student motivation and active engagement.
Downloads
References
Abidin, N. N. Z. (2025). Student perspectives on chemistry learning and teaching in a STEM foundation course. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counselling, 10(61), 54–68.
Agustian, H. Y., Finne, L. T., Jørgensen, J. T., Pedersen, M. I., Christiansen, F. V., Gammelgaard, B., & Nielsen, J. A. (2022). Learning outcomes of university chemistry teaching in laboratories: A systematic review of empirical literature. Review of Education, 10(2), e3360.
Chen, G., Zhang, X., & Lin, S. (2026). Social support and students’ interest in chemistry: Unpacking the roles of chemistry self-efficacy and learning strategies. Journal of Chemical Education, 103(2), 737–751.
Chestnut, J., & Johnson, C. C. (2025). Factors influencing students’ academic success in introductory chemistry: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 15(4), 413.
Dragostinov, Y., Harðardóttir, D., McKenna, P. E., Robb, D., Nesset, B., Ahmad, M. I., Romeo, M., Lim, M. Y., Yu, C., Jang, Y., Diab, M., Cangelosi, A., Demiris, Y., Hastie, H., & Rajendran, G. (2022). Preliminary psychometric scale development using the mixed methods Delphi technique. Methods in Psychology, 7, 100103.
Glenn, C. D., & Odeleye, O. O. (2024). Exploring factors within an introductory course that influence students’ perception of chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 25(3), 775–785. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4RP00008K
Grancharova, D. (2024). The role of STEM lab experiments in building science literacy in chemistry education. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research in Arts, Science and Technology, 2(8), 42–50.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8.
James, N. M., Anachebe, K., & LaDue, N. D. (2025). This class definitely changed my opinion of chemistry: How a pedagogical course reform improved students’ chemistry attitudes. ACS Omega, 10(31), 34506–34521.
Laohapornchaiphan, J., & Chenprakhon, P. (2024). A review of research on learning activities addressing the submicroscopic level in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(11), 4552–4565.
Leong, E., Mercer, A., Danczak, S. M., Kyne, S. H., & Thompson, C. D. (2021). The transition to first year chemistry: Student, secondary and tertiary educator's perceptions of student preparedness. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(4), 923–947.
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382–386.
Moju, M., Taylor, L., & Iweuno, B. (2025). Tackling the challenge of chemical representations through sensemaking practices in chemistry education. Discover Education, 4(1), 352.
Montes, L. H., Rocabado, G. A., Ferreira, R. A., & Rodríguez, C. (2025). Attitudes toward chemistry in Chilean university students: Investigating academic performance, sex differences, and emotional satisfaction through the ASCI-UE. Journal of Chemical Education, 102(10), 4233–4242.
Montes, R., Zuheros, C., Morales, J. M., Zermeño, N., Duran, J., & Herrera, F. (2023). Design and consensus content validity of the questionnaire for b-learning education: A 2-Tuple Fuzzy Linguistic Delphi based Decision Support Tool. Applied Soft Computing, 147, 110755.
Musengimana, J., Kampire, E., & Ntawiha, P. (2021). Factors affecting secondary school students’ attitudes toward learning chemistry: A review of literature. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1).
Ndiaye, B., & Diop, O. (2026). Effect of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education on technological innovation: The role of institutions. Sustainability, 18(14), 7085.
Nelsen, I., Riordan, A., & Lewis, S. E. (2026). Organic chemistry students’ resource selection across the submicroscopic and macroscopic domains. Chemistry Education Research and Practice
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing.
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489–497.
Polit, D. F., Beck, C. T., & Owen, S. V. (2007). Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 30(4), 459–467.
Pontigon, D., & Talanquer, V. (2025). Examining student engagement in the organic chemistry laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 26(3), 780–793.
Rahmawati, Y., Zulhipri, Z., Hartanto, O., Falani, I., & Iriyadi, D. (2022). Students’ conceptual understanding in chemistry learning using PhET interactive simulations. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(2), 303–326.
Ramirez, H. J. M., & Paderna, E. E. S. (2025). Investigating students’ perceptions of their performance and the relevance of chemistry to sustainable development. Journal of Chemical Education, 102(3), 1019–1029.
Reyes, R. L. (2025). Addressing common student errors and misconceptions in chemical stoichiometry: Insights for enhanced instruction in introductory general chemistry. International Journal of Science, Mathematics & Technology Learning, 32(2), 167.
Rubio, D. M. G., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., Lee, E. S., & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94–104.
Taber, K. S. (2013). Revisiting the chemistry triplet: Drawing upon the nature of chemical knowledge and the psychology of learning to inform chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(2), 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00012E
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179–195.
Vuorio, E., Pernaa, J., & Aksela, M. (2024). Lessons for sustainable science education: A study on chemists’ use of systems thinking across ecological, economic, and social domains. Education Sciences, 14(7), 741.
