Abstract
This paper discusses the significance of model-based teaching on the topic of ionic and metallic bonding in Year 12 Chemistry in a New Zealand secondary school. Based on the conceptualization of the sub-macro level understanding of the bonding structure and properties of ionic and metallic compounds, models and drawings were used as an effective visual aid tool to support students’ learning. Based on performances during four sequential classes and the results obtained from a pre-test and post-test, a vast improvement was seen in students’ understanding of the concepts of ionic and metallic bonding. The results in the post-test also show that the concept of ionic bonding was easier to grasp compared to metallic bonding. This is attributed to the misconceptions developed by the students while learning metallic bonding without the use of visual strategies. This paper argues that teaching Chemistry concepts, such as metallic and ionic bonding, without the use of visual strategies results in students’ inability to clearly grasp the topic. The research demonstrates that models and drawings have many advantages while teaching such abstract concepts in Year 12 Chemistry. The students in this research were non-native speakers of English, therefore, this may have further impacted upon their inability to grasp the concepts when taught without concrete visual strategies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahtee, M., & Varjola, I. (1998). Students’ understanding of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 305–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200304
Bergvisit, A., Drechsler, M., Jong, D. O., & Rundgren, S. N. C. (2013). Representations of chemical bonding models in school textbooks- help or hindrance for understanding? Chemical Education Research and Practice, 14, 589–606. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20159G
Bergqvist, A., Drechsler, M., & Rundgren, C. (2016). Upper secondary teachers’ knowledge for teaching chemical bonding models. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 298–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1125034
Canan, N. (2016). Investigation of University Chemistry students’ mental models of metallic bonding and structure of metals. International Conference on Education in Mathematics, Science & Technology, 4, 490–492.
Cheng, W. M., & Gilbert, K. J. (2014). Students’ visualization of metallic bonding and malleability of metals. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.867089
Cheng, W. M., & Gilbert, K. J. (2017). Modelling students’ visualisation of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 39(9), 1173–1193. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1319989
Cheng, W. M., & Tee Oon, P. (2016). Understanding metallic bonding: Structure, process and interaction by Rasch analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 38(12), 1923–1944. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1219926
Cooper, M. M., & Stieff, M. & Desutter, D. (2017). Sketching the invisible to predict the visible: From drawing to modeling in Chemistry. Cognitive Science Society. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12285
Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Investigation of secondary school, undergraduate, and graduate learners’ mental models of ionic bonding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 464–486. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10085
Eilam, B. (2012). Teaching, learning, and visual literacy: The dual role of visual representation. https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/lib/waikato/reader.action?docID=989158
Eilam, B. & Gilbert, K. J. (2014). Science teachers use of visual representations. https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/book/10.1007%2F978-3-319-06526-7
Gilbert, J. K. (2004). Models and modelling: Routes to more authentic science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–130.
Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The role of visual representations in the learning and teaching of science: An introduction. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 1–19.
Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 28(9), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280907
Ingham, A. M., & Gilbert, J. K. (1991). The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1011–1026.
Johnson, A. (2012). A short guide to action research (4th ed.). Mankato: Pearson.
Justi, S. R., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110110142
Mammino, L. (2014). The interplay between language and visualization: The role of the teacher. In B. Eilam & J. K. Gilbert (Eds.), Science teachers’ use of visual representations (1st ed., pp. 195–226). https://link-springercom.ezproxy.waikato.ac.nz/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-319-06526-7.pdf.
Ministry of Education. (n.d). How to undertake teaching as Inquiry. https://cdn.theeducationhub.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/How-to-undertake-inquiry.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education. (2011).Chemistry. Retrieved from https://scienceonline.tki.org.nz/Teaching-science/Teaching-strategies/Teaching-with-models
Nahum, L., & T., Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., & Taber, K. S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46(2), 179–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2010.504548
O’Bannon, B., Puckett, K., & Rakes, G. (2006). Using technology to support visual learning strategies. Computers in Schools, 23, 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v23n01_11
Özmen, H. (2004). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical bonding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 147–159. https://doi.org/10.1023/B%3AJOST.0000031255.92943.6d.pdf
Pande, P., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2017). Representational competence: Towards a distributed and embodied cognition account. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627
Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: A frame-work of representational constructions affordance. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.626462
Quillin, K., & Thomas, S. (2015). Drawing to learn: A framework for using Drawing to promote model-based reasoning in Biology. Life Science Education, 14(1), 2
Rendle, J., & Nash, P. (2014). Level 2 Chemistry: SciPAD, The essential workbook for NCEA Chemistry students. https://cdn.scipad.co.nz/2014%20Answers%20Flip%20book/New%20chem/Level%202%20Chemistry%20(Externals).html#p=2
Robinson, W. R. (1998). An alternative framework for chemical bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(9), 1074–1075. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed075p1074
Scheiter, K., Schleinschok, K., & Ainsworth, S. (2017). Why sketching may aid learning from science texts: Contrasting sketching with written explanations. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 9(4), 866–882. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12261
Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337–1470. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182
Stavridou, H., & Solomonidou, C. (1998). Conceptual reorganization and construction of the chemical reaction concept during secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 205–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200206
Taber, K. S. (1997). Student understanding of ionic bonding: Molecular versus electrostatic framework? School Science Review, 78(285), 85–95.
Taber, K. S., & Coll, R. K. (2002). Chemical bonding. In J. K. Gilbert, O. de Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Research-based practice (pp. 213–234). Kluwer Academic Publishers B.
Taber, K. S. (2003). Mediating mental models of metals: Acknowledging the priority of the learner’s prior learning. Science Education, 87, 732–758.
Taber, K. S. (2013). A common core to chemical conceptions: Learners’ conceptions of chemical stability, change and bonding. In G. Tsaparlis & H. Sevian (Eds.), Concepts of matter in science education (pp. 391–418). Springer.
Tripp, D. (2005). Action research: A methodological introduction. Educacao e Pesquisa, 31(3), 444–467.
Tippett, C. D. (2016). What recent research on diagrams suggests about learning with rather than learning from visual representations in science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(5), 725–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1158435
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following people who have helped me in the completion of this research: Mrs Cheryl Dibley who was my mentor teacher during the time this research was undertaken and my families and friends who supported me in times of need.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
I declare that this research has been conducted by me without any funding from any donor agency. The research has been conducted with ethics approval from the University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dayal, P.D., Ali-Chand, Z. Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in a Chemistry Classroom. NZ J Educ Stud 57, 425–443 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-022-00242-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-022-00242-7