{"title":"Enhancing Learners’ Conceptual Understanding of Reaction Kinetics Using Computer Simulations – A Case Study Approach","authors":"Samuel Jere, Mamotena Mpeta","doi":"10.1007/s11165-024-10182-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>One of the critical goals of teaching chemistry is to enable learners to gain conceptual understanding. Traditional instruction has often been associated with rote memorisation, resulting in learners failing to explain observed chemical phenomena, make predictions based on acquired concepts, advance convincing arguments, and engage in meaningful problem-solving and critical thinking. Therefore, the study aimed to describe the conceptual understanding of the learners taught Reaction Kinetics using computer simulations supported by the Predict-Observe-Explain strategy. The study was guided by Holme, Luxford, and Brandriet’s five categories of conceptual understanding—transfer, translation, problem-solving, prediction, and depth as the conceptual framework. This was a descriptive study in which a case study research approach was used. Five purposively sampled grade 12 learners participated in the study, representing the range of cognitive abilities from a secondary school class of 53 learners. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. The responses of the five participants were analysed using the qualitative content analysis. The findings were that most of the learners’ responses were in the sound understanding sub-category, some were in the partial understanding sub-category, and a few were in the no understanding sub-category, which made us conclude that computer simulations supported by the Predict-Observe-Explain strategy assisted the learners in conceptual understanding. The learners gained an understanding of most concepts, although their responses in the partial understanding sub-category showed difficulties related to depth, transfer, and translation. These findings are expected to assist chemistry teachers, teacher educators, and curriculum planners in improving learners’ conceptual understanding of chemistry.</p>","PeriodicalId":47988,"journal":{"name":"Research in Science Education","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-024-10182-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
One of the critical goals of teaching chemistry is to enable learners to gain conceptual understanding. Traditional instruction has often been associated with rote memorisation, resulting in learners failing to explain observed chemical phenomena, make predictions based on acquired concepts, advance convincing arguments, and engage in meaningful problem-solving and critical thinking. Therefore, the study aimed to describe the conceptual understanding of the learners taught Reaction Kinetics using computer simulations supported by the Predict-Observe-Explain strategy. The study was guided by Holme, Luxford, and Brandriet’s five categories of conceptual understanding—transfer, translation, problem-solving, prediction, and depth as the conceptual framework. This was a descriptive study in which a case study research approach was used. Five purposively sampled grade 12 learners participated in the study, representing the range of cognitive abilities from a secondary school class of 53 learners. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect data. The responses of the five participants were analysed using the qualitative content analysis. The findings were that most of the learners’ responses were in the sound understanding sub-category, some were in the partial understanding sub-category, and a few were in the no understanding sub-category, which made us conclude that computer simulations supported by the Predict-Observe-Explain strategy assisted the learners in conceptual understanding. The learners gained an understanding of most concepts, although their responses in the partial understanding sub-category showed difficulties related to depth, transfer, and translation. These findings are expected to assist chemistry teachers, teacher educators, and curriculum planners in improving learners’ conceptual understanding of chemistry.
期刊介绍:
2020 Five-Year Impact Factor: 4.021
2020 Impact Factor: 5.439
Ranking: 107/1319 (Education) – Scopus
2020 CiteScore 34.7 – Scopus
Research in Science Education (RISE ) is highly regarded and widely recognised as a leading international journal for the promotion of scholarly science education research that is of interest to a wide readership.
RISE publishes scholarly work that promotes science education research in all contexts and at all levels of education. This intention is aligned with the goals of Australasian Science Education Research Association (ASERA), the association connected with the journal.
You should consider submitting your manscript to RISE if your research:
Examines contexts such as early childhood, primary, secondary, tertiary, workplace, and informal learning as they relate to science education; and
Advances our knowledge in science education research rather than reproducing what we already know.
RISE will consider scholarly works that explore areas such as STEM, health, environment, cognitive science, neuroscience, psychology and higher education where science education is forefronted.
The scholarly works of interest published within RISE reflect and speak to a diversity of opinions, approaches and contexts. Additionally, the journal’s editorial team welcomes a diversity of form in relation to science education-focused submissions. With this in mind, RISE seeks to publish empirical research papers.
Empircal contributions are:
Theoretically or conceptually grounded;
Relevant to science education theory and practice;
Highlight limitations of the study; and
Identify possible future research opportunities.
From time to time, we commission independent reviewers to undertake book reviews of recent monographs, edited collections and/or textbooks.
Before you submit your manuscript to RISE, please consider the following checklist. Your paper is:
No longer than 6000 words, including references.
Sufficiently proof read to ensure strong grammar, syntax, coherence and good readability;
Explicitly stating the significant and/or innovative contribution to the body of knowledge in your field in science education;
Internationalised in the sense that your work has relevance beyond your context to a broader audience; and
Making a contribution to the ongoing conversation by engaging substantively with prior research published in RISE.
While we encourage authors to submit papers to a maximum length of 6000 words, in rare cases where the authors make a persuasive case that a work makes a highly significant original contribution to knowledge in science education, the editors may choose to publish longer works.