Skip to main content
Log in

TEACHERS’ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF ADDITION OF MORE REACTANTS OR PRODUCTS ON CHEMICAL EQUILIBRIUM

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The importance of research on misconceptions about chemical equilibrium is well recognized by educators, but in the past, researchers’ interest has centered on student misconceptions and has neglected teacher misconceptions. Focusing on the effects of adding more reactants or products on chemical equilibrium, this article discusses the various misconceptions held by high school teachers. A misconception test was administered to two samples of chemistry teachers in Nanjing, China. Of the 109 teachers who participated in the test, only one understood that adding more CS2 gas to the equilibrium system CS2(g) + 4H2(g) ⇌ CH4(g) + 2H2S(g) at constant pressure and temperature can shift the equilibrium to the reactant or product side, depending upon the amount of CS2 in the initial equilibrium system. Most of the teachers relied on Le Châtelier’s principle and thus made erroneous predictions. The misconception test also revealed that those teachers who managed to compute equilibrium constants had a limited conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. Implications of these findings for teacher education and chemistry curriculum development are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allsop, R. T., & George, N. H. (1984). Le Châtelier – a redundant principle? Education in Chemistry, 21, 54–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, M., & Hill, M. (2008). Queensland Chemistry: Context to concept. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. C. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, T. G., & Mellon, E. K. (1996). A mutlistep equilibria-redox-complexation demonstration to illustrate Le Châtelier’s principle. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(8), 783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergquist, W., & Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium: What written test answers do not reveal. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(12), 1000–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Board of Studies. (2002). Chemistry: Stage 6 syllabus. Sydney, Australia: Board of Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgart, G. J., & Kemp, H. R. (1985). A limitation on the use of Le Châtelier’s principle. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 31, 60–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., LeMay, H. E., Bursten, B. E., & Murphy, C. J. (2006). Chemistry: The central science (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucat, R. (2004). Pedagogical content knowledge as a way forward: Applied research in chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 215–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canagaratna, S. G. (2003). Approaches to the treatment of equilibrium perturbations. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(10), 1211–1219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, D. (2004). The scientific inadequacy of Le Châtelier’s principle. Hong Kong Science Teachers’ Journal, 22(1), 35–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, D. (2008). Improving the teaching and learning of chemical equilibrium in high schools. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Brisbane, Australia.

  • De Heer, J. (1957). The principle of Le Châtelier and Braun. Journal of Chemical Education, 34(8), 375–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Heer, J. (1958). Le Châtelier, scientific principle, or “sacred cow”. Journal of Chemical Education, 35(3), 133–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, O., Veal, W. R., & Van Driel, J. H. (2002). Exploring chemistry teachers’ knowledge base. In J. K. Gilber, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 369–390). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenfest, P. (1911). Das prinzip von Le Châtelier-Braun und die reziprozitatssatze der thermodynamic. Zeitschrift für physikalische Chemie, 77, 227–244 (in German).

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, P. S. (1937). Textbook of thermodynamics. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganaras, K., Dumon, A., & Larcher, C. (2008). Conceptual integration of chemical equilibrium by prospective physical sciences teachers. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 240–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about subject matter and their impact on instruction. In J. Gess-Newsome, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 51–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.) (1999). Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Gold, J., & Gold, V. (1984). Neither Le Châtelier’s nor a principle? Chemistry in Britain, 20, 802–803 & 806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, J., & Gold, V. (1985). Le Châtelier’s principle and the laws of van’t Hoff. Education in Chemistry, 22, 82–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. W. (1984). Cobalt complexes and Le Châtelier. Journal of Chemical Education, 61(5), 466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackling, M. W., & Garnett, P. J. (1985). Misconceptions of chemical equilibrium. European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewson, P. W. (2007). Teacher professional development in science. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1179–1203). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, D., Farrelly, R., Vitlin, D., & Garnett, P. (2006). Chemistry contexts. Melbourne: Pearson Education Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, A. H., MacDonald, J. J., & Webb, G. (1977). Chemical equilibrium and its conceptual difficulties. Education in Chemistry, 14(6), 169–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, L. (1961). A systematic way to avoid Le Châtelier’s principle in chemical reactions. Journal of Chemical Education, 38(7), 375–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemp, H. R. (1987). The effect of temperature and pressure on equilibria: A derivation of the van’t Hoff rules. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(6), 482–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, J. E. (2005). Equilibria that shift left upon addition of more reactant. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(8), 1192–1193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Last, A. M., & Slade, P. W. (1997). A colorful demonstration of Le Châtelier’s principle. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27(2), 143–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, I. N. (2002). Physical chemistry. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A. J. (1954). Le Châtelier’s principle and the equilibrium constant. Journal of Chemical Education, 31, 455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özmen, H. (2008). Determination of students’ alternative conceptions about chemical equilibrium: A review of research and the case of Turkey. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9, 225–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piquette, J. S., & Heikkinen, H. W. (2005). Strategies reported used by instructors to address student alternate conceptions in chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1112–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posthumus, K. (1933). The application of the van’t Hoff-Le Châtelier-Braun principle to chemical equilibria. II. Recueil des Travaux Chimiques des Pays Bas, 53, 308–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quílez, J. (2004). Changes in concentration and in partial pressure in chemical equilibria: Students’ and teachers’ misunderstandings. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(3), 281–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quílez-Pardo, J., & Solaz-Portolés, J. J. (1995). Students’ and teachers’ misapplication of Le Châtelier’s principle: Implications for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(9), 939–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raveau, M. C. (1909). Les lois du déplacement de l’équilibre et le principle Le Châtelier. Journal de Physique Théorique et Appliquée, 8(1), 572–579 (in French).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, J. M. (1988). Simple models for teaching equilibrium and Le Châtelier’s principle. Journal of Chemical Education, 65(10), 871–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, S. I. (1999). Chemical and engineering thermodynamics (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverstein, T. P. (2005). The reaction quotient (Q) is useful after all. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(8), 1149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solaz, J. J., & Quílez, J. (2001). Changes of extent of reaction in open chemical equilibria. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 2(3), 303–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solaz-Portolés, J. J., & Quílez-Pardo, J. (1995). Thermodynamics and the Le Châtelier’s principle. Revista Mexicana de Fisica, 41(1), 128–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talanquer, V. (2002). Minimizing misconceptions. Science Teacher, 69(8), 46–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, P. L., & Schwenz, R. W. (1998). College physical chemistry students’ conceptions of equilibrium and fundamental thermodynamics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1151–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres, E. M. (2007). Effect of a perturbation on the chemical equilibrium: Comparison with Le Châtelier’s principle. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(3), 516–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uline, M. J., & Corti, D. S. (2006). The ammonia synthesis reaction: An exception to the Le Châtelier principle and effects of nonideality. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(1), 138–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., De Jong, O., & Verloop, N. (2002). The development of preservice chemistry teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 86, 572–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Driel, J. H., De Vos, W., Verloop, N., & Dekkers, H. (1998). Developing secondary students’ conceptions of chemical reactions: The introduction of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 379–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kessel, H., Jenkins, F., Davies, L., Plumb, D., Di Giuseppe, M., Lantz, O., & Tompkins, D. (2003). Nelson chemistry 12. Toronto: Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Someren, M. W., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modeling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voska, K. W., & Heikkinen, H. W. (2000). Identification and analysis of student conceptions used to solve chemical equilibrium problems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 160–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, Y. C., & Wong, C. T. (2005). New way chemistry for Hong Kong A-level. Hong Kong: Manhattan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, P. G. (1969). A Châtelierian infelicity. Education in Chemistry, 6, 9 & 18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zumdahl, S. S., & Zumdahl, S. A. (2007). Chemistry (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Derek Cheung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cheung, D., Ma, Hj. & Yang, J. TEACHERS’ MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF ADDITION OF MORE REACTANTS OR PRODUCTS ON CHEMICAL EQUILIBRIUM. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 7, 1111–1133 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9151-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-009-9151-5

Key words

Navigation