Linking the Macro with the Submicro Levels of Chemistry: Demonstrations and Experiments that can Contribute to Active/Meaningful/Conceptual Learning

One of the most important ideas about meaningful learning in chemistry—the triple nature of chemical concepts is further developed in this chapter by Tsaparlis. His text entitled “Linking the Macro with the Submicro Levels of Chemistry: Demonstrations and Experiments that Can Contribute to Active/Meaningful/Conceptual Learning” discusses the chemistry as a multirepresentational structure. Studies have shown that students have great difficulties when trying to grasp concepts at the submicro level. In this chapter, a set of demonstrations and experiments is proposed that, if properly used in teaching by means of active-learning methodology, can contribute to meaningful learning and conceptual understanding of the particulate concepts of matter by properly linking the macro with the submicro levels. Different laboratory work is presented, and the importance of linking different levels of chemical concepts presentations is proposed.

[1]  D. Treagust,et al.  Multiple Representations in Chemical Education , 2009 .

[2]  A. H. Johnstone,et al.  You Can’t Get There from Here1 , 2010 .

[3]  Alan K. Griffiths,et al.  Grade-12 Students' Misconceptions Relating to Fundamental Characteristics of Atoms and Molecules. , 1992 .

[4]  G. Warnock,et al.  Thinking About Thinking , 1975 .

[5]  Keith S. Taber.  The sharing‐out of nuclear attraction: or ‘I can't think about physics in chemistry’ , 1998 .

[6]  Charles Rop.  STUDENT PERSPECTIVES ON SUCCESS IN HIGH SCHOOL CHEMISTRY , 1999 .

[7]  Peter J. Fensham,et al.  The Content Of Science: A Constructive Approach To Its Teaching And Learning , 1994 .

[8]  Mansoor Niaz,et al.  TEACHING CHEMISTRY AS RHETORIC OF CONCLUSIONS OR HEURISTIC PRINCIPLES - A HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE , 2000 .

[9]  R. Gillespie.  Multiple bonds and the VSEPR model , 1992 .

[10]  R. Gillespie.  The VSEPR model revisited , 1992 .

[11]  A. Montuschi,et al.  Investigation of secondary school students' understanding of the mole concept in Italy , 1982 .

[12]  C. Bonwell,et al.  Active learning : creating excitement in the classroom , 1991 .

[13]  Alex H. Johnstone,et al.  TEACHING OF CHEMISTRY - LOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL? , 2000 .

[14]  Patrick J. Garnett,et al.  Refocusing the Chemistry Lab: A Case for Laboratory-Based Investigations. , 1995 .

[15]  Mansoor Niaz,et al.  DO WE HAVE TO INTRODUCE HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE OR IS IT ALREADY ‘INSIDE’ CHEMISTRY? , 2001 .

[16]  S. J. Sherman,et al.  Chemistry and our Changing World , 1983 .

[17]  Ronald G. Gillespie.  Commentary: Reforming the General Chemistry Textbook , 1997 .

[18]  S. Novick,et al.  A Study of Student Perceptions of the Mole Concept. , 1976 .

[19]  Helge Strömdahl,et al.  'Students' conceptions of 1 mol and educators' conceptions of how they teach 'the mole' , 1994 .

[20]  Robbie Case,et al.  Implications of Developmental Psychology for the Design of Effective Instruction , 1978 .

[21]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  QUANTUM-CHEMICAL CONCEPTS: ARE THEY SUITABLE FOR SECONDARY STUDENTS? , 2002 .

[22]  Georgios Tsaparlis.  Atomic orbitals, molecular orbitals and related concepts: Conceptual difficulties among chemistry students , 1997 .

[23]  Rick Toomey,et al.  HELPING STUDENTS TO MAKE INFERENCES ABOUT THE ATOMIC REALM BY DELAYING THE PRESENTATION OF ATOMIC STRUCTURE , 2001 .

[24]  Alex H. Johnstone,et al.  Chemistry About Us , 1981 .

[25]  H. Bent.  Should the mole concept be x-rated? , 1985 .

[26]  H. T. Hudson,et al.  Correlation between mathematical skills and success in physics , 1977 .

[27]  Peter G. Nelson,et al.  TEACHING CHEMISTRY PROGRESSIVELY: FROM SUBSTANCES, TO ATOMS AND MOLECULES, TO ELECTRONS AND NUCLEI , 2002 .

[28]  E. Glasersfeld.  Cognition, Construction of Knowledge, and Teaching , 1989 .

[29]  Joseph Nussbaum,et al.  History and Philosophy of Science and the Preparation for Constructivist Teaching: The Case of Particle Theory , 2005 .

[30]  A content analysis of the presentation of the mole concept in chemistry textbooks , 1993 .

[31]  Georgios Tsaparlis.  The chemical bond as an atomic tug-of-war , 1984 .

[32]  Ej Wood.  European journal of science education , 1979 .

[33]  Mary Ratcliffe,et al.  Difficulties in teaching the concepts of 'amount of substance' and 'mole' , 2000 .

[34]  H. Odabasi,et al.  Atomic Structure , 1980 .

[35]  R. Gillespie,et al.  Electron Configurations from Experiment , 1996 .

[36]  TEACHING THE VSEPR MODEL AND ELECTRON DENSITIES , 2001 .

[37]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  CHEMISTRY TEACHING IN LOWER SECONDARY SCHOOL WITH METHODS BASED ON: A) PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORIES; B) THE MACRO, REPRESENTATIONAL, AND SUBMICRO LEVELS OF CHEMISTRY , 2000 .

[38]  J. Bruner.  The act of discovery. , 1961 .

[39]  R. Gillespie,et al.  Electron densities and the VSEPR model of molecular geometry , 1992 .

[40]  Hans-Jürgen Schmidt.  Stoichiometric problem solving in high school chemistry , 1994 .

[41]  John R. Staver,et al.  Two investigations of students' understanding of the mole concept and its use in problem solving , 1995 .

[42]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  Atomic and Molecular Structure in Chemical Education: A Critical Analysis from Various Perspectives of Science Education. , 1997 .

[43]  J. Mintzes,et al.  Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View , 1998 .

[44]  R. Gillespie.  Atoms, Molecules, and Reactions: An Introduction to Chemistry , 1994 .

[45]  W. Dierks.  Teaching the Mole , 1981 .

[46]  J. Dudley Herron,et al.  Piaget in the classroom. Guidelines for applications , 1978 .

[47]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  Lower-secondary introductory chemistry course: a novel approach based on science-education theories, with emphasis on the macroscopic approach, and the delayed meaningful teaching of the concepts of molecule and atom , 2010 .

[48]  The combined effect of mathematics skills and formal operational reasoning on student performance in the general physics course , 1982 .

[49]  David P. Ausubel,et al.  The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View , 2000 .

[50]  D. S. Rustad.  Demystifying Introductory Chemistry , 1998 .

[51]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  Conceptual versus Algorithmic Learning in High School Chemistry: The Case of Basic Quantum Chemical Concepts--Part 1. Statistical Analysis of a Quantitative Study. , 2008 .

[52]  Ronald J. Gillespie.  What is wrong with the general chemistry course , 1991 .

[53]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  Learning at the Macro Level: The Role of Practical Work , 2009 .

[54]  The qualitatively different conceptions of 1 mol , 1994 .

[55]  M. Shayer,et al.  Conceptual Demands in Nuffield 0 - Level Chemistry. , 1971 .

[56]  R. Bruning.  Cognitive Psychology and Instruction , 1998 .

[57]  Milton Schwebel,et al.  Piaget In The Classroom , 1973 .

[58]  Georgios Tsaparlis,et al.  Conceptual versus algorithmic learning in high school chemistry: the case of basic quantum chemical concepts. Part 2. Students’ common errors, misconceptions and difficulties in understanding , 2008 .

[59]  W. Griffith.  Factors affecting performance in introductory physics courses , 1985 .