Promoting Pre-service Elementary Students' Understanding of Chemical Equilibrium through Discussions in Small Groups

  • Ibrahim BilginEmail author
Original Paper


The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of small group discussion on students' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. Students' understanding of chemical equilibrium concepts was measured using the Misconception Identification Test. The test consisted of 30 items and administered as pre-posttests to a total of 81 pre-service elementary students in two intact classes of the same university. One of the classes was randomly assigned as experimental group (n = 40) which was instructed with discussion propositions related to chemical equilibrium concepts in small group and the other class was assigned as control group (n = 41) which was instructed through traditionally designed chemistry instruction. Analysis of covariate (ANCOVA) was used to determine treatment effects on students' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium when pre-test result was used a covariate. The analysis of results showed a statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups' posttest mean scores in favor of the experimental group after treatment (F(1,78) = 47,77; P < 0.05). The results indicated that while the average percentage of students in the experimental group holding a scientifically correct concept had risen from 35.0% to 59.1%, a gain of 24.1%, the percentage of correct responses of the students in the control group had increased from 32.5% to 43.82%, a gain of 11.32% after treatment. In addition, the percentages of students' correct responses and keyed misconceptions on posttest results were discussed for six areas related to: (1) the mass vs. concentration, (2) rate vs. extent, (3) constancy of the equilibrium constant, (4) misuse of Le Chatelier's principle, (5) constant concentration, and (6) competing equilibria related to chemical equilibrium concepts in experimental and control groups.

Key Words

chemical equilibrium misconception propositional knowledge small group discussions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alvermann, D.E., Hynd, C.R. & Qian, G. (1985). Effects of interactive discussion and text type on learning counterintuitive science concepts. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 146–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  3. Banerjee, A. (1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 487–494.Google Scholar
  4. Banerjee, A. & Power, C. (1991). The development of modules for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 355–362.Google Scholar
  5. Barnes, D. (1976). From communication to curriculum. Middlesex, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  6. Basili, P.A. & Sanford, J.P. (1991). Conceptual change and cooperative group work in chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Begquist, W. & Heikkinen, H. (1990). Student ideas regarding chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 67, 1000–1003.Google Scholar
  8. Brophy, J. (1986). Teacher effects research and teacher quality. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 22, 14–23.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, D.E. & Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions by analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18, 237–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camacho, M. & Good, R. (1989). Problem solving and chemical equilibrium: Successful versus unsuccessful performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 251–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cheek, D.W. (1992). Thinking constructively about science, technology, and society education. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  12. Chiu, M.H., Chou, C.C. & Liu, C.J. (2002). Dynamic processes of conceptual change: Analysis of constructing mental models of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 688–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cosgrove, M. & Osborne, R. (1985). Lesson frameworks for changing children's ideas. In: Osborne, R. & Freyberg, P. (Eds.), Learning in science. Auckland: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  14. De heer, J. (1957). The principle of LeChatelier and Braun. Journal of Chemical Education, 34, 375–380.Google Scholar
  15. Driver, R. & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science student. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61–84.Google Scholar
  16. Duit, R. & Treagust, D.F. (1998). Learning in science – From behaviourism toward social constructivism and beyond. In Fraser, B. & Tobin, K. (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3–26). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  17. Duit, R. & Treagust, D.F. (2003). Conceptual change: a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25,671–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elby, A. (2001). Helping physics students learn how to learn. American Journal of Physics, Physics Education; Research Supplement, 69(S1), 54–64.Google Scholar
  19. Ernest, P. (1995). The one and the many. In Steffe, L.P. & Gale, J. (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 459–86). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbraum.Google Scholar
  20. Fisher, K.M. (1985). A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22, 53–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Furio, C., Calatayud, M.L., Barcenas, S.I. & Padilla, O.M. (2000). Functional fixedness and functional reduction as common sense reasonings in chemical equilibrium and in geometry and polarity of molecules. Science Education, 84, 545–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Garnett, P.J. & Treaqust, D.F. (1992a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation–reduction equation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 121–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Garnett, P.J. & Treaqust, D.F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electrochemical (galvanic) and electrolytic cell. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 1079–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garnett, P.J., Garnett, P.J. & Treaqust, D.F. (1990). Implication of research on students' understanding of electrochemistry for improving science curricula and classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 147–156.Google Scholar
  25. Gussarsky, E. & Gorodetsky, M. (1986). Misconceptions of the chemical equilibrium concept as revealed by different evaluation methods. European Journal of Science Education, 8, 427–441.Google Scholar
  26. Griffiths, A.K. & Preston, K.R. (1992). Grade-12 students' misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Education, 29, 611–628.Google Scholar
  27. Gussarsky, E. & Gorodetsky, M. (1990). On the concept “chemical equilibrium”: The associative framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hackling, W.M. & Garnett, J.P. (1985). Misconception of chemical equilibrium. European Journal of Science Education, 7, 205–214.Google Scholar
  29. Hammeed, H., Hackling, M.W. & Garnett, P.J. (1993). Facilitating conceptual change in chemical equilibrium using a CAI strategy. International Journal of Science Education, 15, 221–230.Google Scholar
  30. Harrison, A.G., Grayson, D.J. & Treagust, D.F. (1999). Investigating a grade 11 student's evolving conception of heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 55–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Helfferich, F.G. (1985). LeChatelier – right or wrong? Optimizing chemical reaction equilibria. Journal of Chemical Education, 62, 305–308.Google Scholar
  32. Hewson, P.W. & Hewson, M.G. (1987). Science teacher's conception of teaching: Implications for teacher education. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 425–440.Google Scholar
  33. Hewson, P.W. & Hewson, M.G. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A review from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kousathana, M. & Tsaparlis, G. (2002). Students' error in solving numerical chemical equilibrium problems. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 3, 5–17.Google Scholar
  35. Limon, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11, 357–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Linn, M.C. (1987). Establishing a research base for science education: Challenges, trends, and recommendations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 191–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. McCoy, S.H. (1996). A study of the use of analogy and models to promote conceptual change and overcome misconceptions about chemical equilibrium. Approved by the committee on the degree of Doctor of Education. Teacher College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  38. Nakhleh, B.N. (1994). Students' models of matter in the context of acid–base chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 71, 495–499.Google Scholar
  39. Nakhleh, M.W. & Mitchell, R.C. (1993). Concept learning versus problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 190–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Niaz, M. (1995a). Cognitive conflict as a teaching strategy in solving chemistry problems: A dialectic-constructivist perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 959–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Niaz, M. (1995b). Relationship between student performance on conceptual and computational problems of chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 343–355.Google Scholar
  42. Niaz, M. (1998). A Lakatosian conceptual change teaching strategy based on students' ability to build models with varying degrees of conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium. Science and Education, 7, 107–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Niaz, M. (2001). Response to contradiction: Conflict resolution strategies used by students in solving problems of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10, 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Niaz, M. & Robinson, W.R. (1993). Teaching algorithmic problem solving or conceptual understanding: Role of developmental level, mental capacity and cognitive style. Journal of Science Education and Technolog, 2, 407–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy. Instructional Science, 11, 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ogude, A.N. & Bradley, J.D. (1996). Electrode processes and aspects relating to cell EMF, current, and cell components in operating electrochemical cells. Journal of Chemical Education, 73, 1145–1149.Google Scholar
  47. Osborne, R.J., Bell, B.F. & Gilbert, Y.K. (1983). Science teaching and children's view of the world. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 1–14.Google Scholar
  48. Peterson, R.F., Treaqust, D.F. & Garnett, P. (1989). Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade -11 and -12 students' concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pintrich, P.R., Marx, R.W. & Boyle, R.A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W. & Gertzag, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Quilez, P.J. & Solaz, J.J. (1995). Students' and teachers' misapplication of LeChatelier's principle: Implications for the teaching of chemical equilibrium. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 939–957.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sanger, M.J. & Greenbowe, T.J. (1997). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 377–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sinatra, G.M. & Pintrich, P.R. (2003). Intentional conceptual change. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  54. Stavy, R. & Berkovitz, B. (1980). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature. Science Education, 64, 679–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Taylor, P. & Campbell, W.M. (1993). Discourse towards balanced rationally in the high school mathematics classroom: Ideas from Habermas's critical theory. In Taylor, P.S.C. & Malone, A.J. (Eds.), Constructivist interpretations of teaching and learning mathematics. Preth, Australia: Curtin University of Technology.Google Scholar
  56. Tobin, K., Tippins, D.J., Gallard, A.J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In Gabel, D.L. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 45–93). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  57. Tyson, L., Venville, G.J., Harrison, A.G. & Treaqust, D.F. (1997). A multidimensional framework for interpreting conceptual change in the classroom. Science Education, 81, 387–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tyson, L., Treagust, D.F. & Bucat, R.B. (1999). The complexity of teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 554–558.Google Scholar
  59. Uzuntiryaki, E. (2003). Constructivist approach: Removing misconceptions about chemical bonding. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, March 23–26).Google Scholar
  60. 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, 32, 160–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wheeler, A.E. & Kass, H. (1978). Student misconception in chemical equilibrium. Science Education, 62, 223–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zirbel, E.L. (2004). Framework for conceptual change. The Astronomy Education Review, 3, 62–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Elementary EducationAbant Izzet Baysal UniversityBoluTurkey

Personalised recommendations