Promoting Representational Competence with Molecular Models in Organic Chemistry

Mastering the many different diagrammatic representations of molecules used in organic chemistry is challenging for students. This article summarizes recent research showing that manipulating 3-D molecular models can facilitate the understanding and use of these representations. Results indicate that students are more successful in translating between diagrams when they have models available, that using a model to enact the translation process in the world is predictive of learning, and that using models as feedback (to check the accuracy of diagram translation) is particularly effective. Model-based feedback is superior to verbal feedback alone, models scaffold learning rather than act as a crutch, learning with model-based instruction is resilient over a delay of several days, and learning with models transfers to performance when models are no longer available. Finally, virtual models are equivalent to hand-held models in promoting learning in the studied contexts.

[1]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  Usability of concrete and virtual models in chemistry instruction , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Colin Ware,et al.  The Importance of Stereo and Eye-Coupled Perspective for Eye-Hand Coordination in Fish Tank VR , 2004, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[3]  Yael Kali,et al.  Spatial abilities of high‐school students in the perception of geologic structures , 1996 .

[4]  Jeff Rose,et al.  Rotating virtual objects with real handles , 1999, TCHI.

[5]  Yehudit Judy Dori,et al.  Computerized Molecular Modeling as a Tool To Improve Chemistry Teaching , 1996, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[6]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Visuospatial Reasoning , 2004 .

[7]  Adam Kraft,et al.  What happens when representations fail to represent? Graduate students’ mental models of organic chemistry diagrams , 2010 .

[8]  Paul P. Maglio,et al.  On Distinguishing Epistemic from Pragmatic Action , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  R. Kozma The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding , 2003 .

[10]  D. Gentner,et al.  Structural Alignment during Similarity Comparisons , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  M. Towns,et al.  A Review of Spatial Ability Literature, Its Connection to Chemistry, and Implications for Instruction , 2011 .

[12]  S. Ainsworth DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[13]  Yehudit Judy Dori,et al.  Virtual and Physical Molecular Modeling: Fostering Model Perception and Spatial Understanding , 2001, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[14]  M. G. Jones,et al.  Haptics in Education: Exploring an Untapped Sensory Modality , 2006 .

[15]  Jennifer Masters,et al.  Rethinking scaffolding in the information age , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[16]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Model Manipulation and Learning: Fostering Representational Competence With Virtual and Concrete Models. , 2016 .

[17]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom , 2001 .

[18]  S. Vandenberg,et al.  Mental Rotations, a Group Test of Three-Dimensional Spatial Visualization , 1978, Perceptual and motor skills.

[19]  Hubert D. Zimmer,et al.  Memory of self-performed tasks: Self-performing during recognition , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[20]  R. Kozma,et al.  Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena , 1997 .

[21]  W. Goodwin Structural formulas and explanation in organic chemistry , 2008 .

[22]  Leonid Rozenblit,et al.  The misunderstood limits of folk science: an illusion of explanatory depth , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Visualization: An Emergent Field of Practice and Enquiry in Science Education , 2008 .

[24]  Elizabeth Ligon Bjork,et al.  Learning how to learn: Can experiencing the outcome of different encoding strategies enhance subsequent encoding? , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. , 1999 .

[26]  D. Gentner Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[27]  M. Y. Small,et al.  Research in College Science Teaching: Spatial Visualization Training Improves Performance in Organic Chemistry. , 1983 .

[28]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Learning to Learn: On Training Students to Learn from Texts , 1981 .

[29]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[30]  Mike Sharples,et al.  An evaluation of multimodal interactions with technology while learning science concepts , 2011, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[31]  G. Schwartz,et al.  Exploring Organic Mechanistic Puzzles with Molecular Modeling , 2004 .

[32]  R. Keen Why People Fail to Recognize Their Own Incompetence , 2010 .

[33]  Mike Stieff,et al.  The role of spatial ability and strategy preference for spatial problem solving in organic chemistry , 2012 .

[34]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  Transfer of training from virtual reality , 1993 .

[35]  E. Bjork,et al.  Processing strategies and the generation effect: Implications for making a better reader , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[36]  Peter A. Rubba,et al.  Translation of representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge , 1993 .

[37]  Martin B. Jones Molecular Modeling in the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum , 2001 .

[38]  Paul B. Hounshell,et al.  Using three-dimensional models to teach molecular structures in high school chemistry , 1995 .

[39]  Christine D. Wilson,et al.  Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  David F. Treagust,et al.  Introduction: Macro, Submicro and Symbolic Representations and the Relationship Between Them: Key Models in Chemical Education , 2009 .

[41]  John W. Moore,et al.  Implementation and Student Testing of a Web-Based, Student-Centered Stereochemistry Tutorial , 2015 .

[42]  Marios Papaevripidou,et al.  Is physicality an important aspect of learning through science experimentation among kindergarten students , 2012 .

[43]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Evaluating the Educational Value of Molecular Structure Representations , 2005 .

[44]  A. Miyake,et al.  The separability of working memory resources for spatial thinking and language processing: an individual differences approach. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[45]  Lena A. E. Tibell,et al.  Do haptic representations help complex molecular learning , 2011 .

[46]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Models as Feedback: Developing Representational Competence in Chemistry. , 2015 .

[47]  Mike T. Springer Improving Students' Understanding of Molecular Structure through Broad-Based Use of Computer Models in the Undergraduate Organic Chemistry Lecture , 2014 .

[48]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Towards a Better Utilization of Diagrams in Research into the Use of Representative Levels in Chemical Education , 2009 .

[49]  P. Shah,et al.  Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning , 2004 .

[50]  Robert Patterson,et al.  Immersive stereo displays, intuitive reasoning, and cognitive engineering , 2009 .

[51]  M. Hegarty,et al.  Representational Translation With Concrete Models in Organic Chemistry , 2012 .

[52]  N. Mulligan,et al.  Memory for actions: Self-performed tasks and the reenactment effect , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[53]  Lara M. Triona,et al.  Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students' Ability to Design Experiments , 2003 .

[54]  R. Satava Emerging technologies for surgery in the 21st century. , 1999, Archives of surgery.

[55]  M. Stieff,et al.  Improving Representational Competence with Concrete Models , 2016 .

[56]  R. L. Cohen Memory for action events: The power of enactment , 1989 .

[57]  Nitza Barnea Teaching and Learning about Chemistry and Modelling with a Computer managed Modelling System , 2000 .