Le Châtelier’s Principle a Language, Methodological and Ontological Obstacle: An Analysis of General Chemistry Textbooks

IF 2.1 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Juan Quílez
{"title":"Le Châtelier’s Principle a Language, Methodological and Ontological Obstacle: An Analysis of General Chemistry Textbooks","authors":"Juan Quílez","doi":"10.1007/s11191-021-00214-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study discusses how textbook educational approaches concerning Le Châtelier’s principle (LCP) may hinder student comprehension and prediction of chemical equilibrium disturbances. Firstly, after summarising students’ LCP erroneous assertions/explanations, a categorisation of the potential barriers that may originate student misunderstandings is performed. The discussed obstacles are the following: (a) language difficulties; (b) limited range of applicability; (c) official examinations and chemistry syllabi and (d) educational research. Then, it is examined how general chemistry textbooks’ authors deal with the evolution of chemical equilibria when they are disturbed. The different qualitative formulations of LCP provided in textbooks use mainly polysemic teleological vocabulary, which are difficult to understand in this context. Moreover, textbooks’ writers normally do not specify the conditions under which an equilibrium system is disturbed. In this textbook presentation, LCP is introduced as an easy and infallible rule, without limitations. Thus, several problematic perturbations reported in the chemical education research literature are not considered in these materials. Hence, this study concludes that their lacks and misleading use and application of LCP may certainly affect proper student understanding of the concepts related to chemical equilibrium disturbances.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56374,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"30 5","pages":"1253 - 1288"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11191-021-00214-1","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11191-021-00214-1","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: 3

Abstract

This study discusses how textbook educational approaches concerning Le Châtelier’s principle (LCP) may hinder student comprehension and prediction of chemical equilibrium disturbances. Firstly, after summarising students’ LCP erroneous assertions/explanations, a categorisation of the potential barriers that may originate student misunderstandings is performed. The discussed obstacles are the following: (a) language difficulties; (b) limited range of applicability; (c) official examinations and chemistry syllabi and (d) educational research. Then, it is examined how general chemistry textbooks’ authors deal with the evolution of chemical equilibria when they are disturbed. The different qualitative formulations of LCP provided in textbooks use mainly polysemic teleological vocabulary, which are difficult to understand in this context. Moreover, textbooks’ writers normally do not specify the conditions under which an equilibrium system is disturbed. In this textbook presentation, LCP is introduced as an easy and infallible rule, without limitations. Thus, several problematic perturbations reported in the chemical education research literature are not considered in these materials. Hence, this study concludes that their lacks and misleading use and application of LCP may certainly affect proper student understanding of the concepts related to chemical equilibrium disturbances.

勒夏·特列尔原理:语言、方法和本体论障碍——普通化学教材分析
本研究探讨了教科书中有关勒chaltelier原理(LCP)的教学方法如何阻碍学生对化学平衡扰动的理解和预测。首先,在总结了学生的LCP错误断言/解释之后,对可能导致学生误解的潜在障碍进行了分类。讨论的障碍如下:(a)语言困难;(b)有限的适用范围;(c)正式考试及化学教学大纲及(d)教育研究。然后,考察了普通化学教科书的作者如何处理化学平衡受到干扰时的演变。教科书中提供的LCP的不同定性表述主要使用多义词目的论词汇,在这种语境下难以理解。此外,教科书的编写者通常不会具体说明平衡系统被扰乱的条件。在这个教科书的介绍中,LCP是作为一个简单无误的规则介绍的,没有限制。因此,在化学教育研究文献中报道的几个有问题的扰动在这些材料中没有被考虑。因此,本研究得出结论,他们对LCP的缺乏和误导使用和应用肯定会影响学生对化学平衡干扰相关概念的正确理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Science & Education
Science & Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1117
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science & Education publishes research informed by the history, philosophy and sociology of science and mathematics that seeks to promote better teaching, learning, and curricula in science and mathematics. More particularly Science & Education promotes: The utilization of historical, philosophical and sociological scholarship to clarify and deal with the many intellectual issues facing contemporary science and mathematics education.  Collaboration between the communities of scientists, mathematicians, historians, philosophers, cognitive psychologists, sociologists, science and mathematics educators, and school and college teachers. An understanding of the philosophical, cultural, economic, religious, psychological and ethical dimensions of modern science and the interplay of these factors in the history of science.  The inclusion of appropriate history and philosophy of science and mathematics courses in science and mathematics teacher-education programmes.  The dissemination of accounts of lessons, units of work, and programmes in science and mathematics, at all levels, that have successfully utilized history and philosophy.  Discussion of the philosophy and purposes of science and mathematics education, and their place in, and contribution to, the intellectual and ethical development of individuals and cultures.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信