Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Research Trends in Technology-Enhanced Chemistry Learning: A Review of Comparative Research from 2010 to 2019

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

Abstract

Chemistry is a subject which involves a number of abstract concepts, making it a difficult and frustrating learning process for many students. Educators and researchers believe that technology could provide an opportunity to address this problem. However, it is challenging to find a model for appropriately and successfully integrating technology into chemistry education. Therefore, in this study, a review was conducted on the technology-enhanced chemistry learning studies published in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) journals from 2010 to 2019. This study searched the target articles from the Web of Science (WOS) database and excluded those studies that did not adopt a comparative research design. Finally, 60 studies were included in this research trend analysis. A coding scheme was developed for the types of technology, the types of learning tools, the roles of technology in chemistry learning, learning topics, learning environments, participants, research designs, and the learning outcomes the researchers evaluated. From the analysis results, it was found that (1) inorganic chemistry and physical chemistry courses were the main learning topics, while the formal classroom was most often referred to as the research setting. The most frequently discussed issue was students’ learning achievement. (2) Regarding technology integration, offering students learning content through personal computers was the main activity mode. The technology was used for lower-level implementation, that is, providing supplementary materials for students. (3) Finally, using keyword analysis, it is possible to extract the recent concerns of the researchers, and from the results of the study, it is clear that the researchers are placing increasing emphasis on learners’ experience and skill development in the learning process. Accordingly, this study highlights the features of the research trends and then provides suggestions for researchers in the technology-enhanced chemistry learning field.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

As the data were collected from an online database rather than a group of subjects, there is no privacy or personal rights problem in this study. The analyzed data can be provided upon requests via sending e-mails to the corresponding author.

References

  • Abell, T. N., & Bretz, S. L. (2019). Macroscopic observations of dissolving, insolubility, and precipitation: general chemistry and physical chemistry students’ ideas about entropy changes and spontaneity. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(3), 469–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akaygun, S., & Jones, L. L. (2013). Research-based design and development of a simulation of liquid–vapor equilibrium. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 14, 324–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alegre, F., Moliner, L., Maroto, A., & Lorenzo-Valentin, G. (2019). Peer tutoring in mathematics in primary education: a systematic review. Educational Review, 71(6), 767–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alegre, F., Moliner, L., Maroto, A., & Lorenzo-Valentin, G. (2019). Peer tutoring in mathematics in primary education: a systematic review. Educational Review, 71(6), 767–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakan, U., & Bakan, U. (2018). Game-based learning studies in education journals: a systematic review of recent trends. Actualidades Pedagógicas, 72(72), 119–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barak, M. (2007). Transition from traditional to ICT-enhanced learning environments in undergraduate chemistry courses. Computers & Education, 48(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.11.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, R., Gandhi, H. A., Naganathan, A., Daniels, D., Zhang, Y., Onwunaka, C., et al. (2018). Social and tactile mixed reality increases student engagement in undergraduate lab activities. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(10), 1755–1762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baye, A., Inns, A., Lake, C., & Slavin, R. E. (2019). A synthesis of quantitative research on reading programs for secondary students. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(2), 133–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, N., & Towns, M. (2012). Students’ understanding of mathematical expressions in physical chemistry contexts: an analysis using Sherin’s symbolic forms. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 209–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, J., & Smith, E. S. C. (2017). Flipped Learning 3.0: The Operating System for the Future of Talent Development. FL: Global Publishing.

  • Biesinger, K., & Crippen, K. (2010). The effects of feedback protocol on self-regulated learning in a web-based worked example learning environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1470–1482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning - sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 369–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodily, R., Leary, H., & West, R. E. (2019). Research trends in instructional design and technology journals. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 64–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: a review of the empirical research. Computers & Education, 87, 218–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1983). The art of problem posing: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Chang, C. Y., Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Trends and research issues of mobile learning studies in nursing education: a review of academic publications from 1971 to 2016. Computers & Education, 116, 28–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, J. L., & Linn, M. C. (2014). Supporting knowledge integration in chemistry with a visualization-enhanced inquiry unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9449-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, S. K. W., Tse, S. K., & Chow, K. (2011). Using collaborative teaching and inquiry project-based learning to help primary school students develop information literacy and information skills. Library & Information Science Research, 33(2), 132–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. J., Hwang, G. J., & Lai, C. L. (2019). A review of experimental mobile learning research in 2010–2016 based on the activity theory framework. Computers & Education, 129, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. J., Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2019). Roles and research trends of flipped classrooms in nursing education: a review of academic publications from 2010 to 2017. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, J., & Yu, S. (2019). Fostering deeper learning in a flipped classroom: effects of knowledge graphs versus concept maps. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2308–2328. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dohrn, S. W., & Dohn, N. B. (2018). The role of teacher questions in the chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 352–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, P. L., Enneking, K. M., Gampp, T. W., Amir Hakim, K., Coleman, A. F., Laforest, K. V., et al. (2018). Form versus function: a comparison of Lewis Structure drawing tools and the extraneous cognitive load they induce. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(2), 238–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewais, A., & De Troyer, O. (2019). A usability and acceptance evaluation of the use of augmented reality for learning atoms and molecules reaction by primary school female students in palestine. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1643–1670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fidan, M., & Tuncel, M. (2019). Integrating augmented reality into problem based learning: the effects on learning achievement and attitude in physics education. Computers & Education, 142 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103635

  • Finlayson, K., & McCrudden, M. T. (2019). Teacher-implemented writing instruction for elementary students: a literature review. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 1–18 https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1604278

  • Flynn, A. B. (2014). How do students work through organic synthesis learning activities? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(4), 747–762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frailich, M., Kesner, M., & Hofstein, A. (2009). Enhancing students’ understanding of the concept of chemical bonding by using activities provided on an interactive website. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 289–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu, Q. K., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Trends in mobile technology-supported collaborative learning: a systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2016. Computers & Education, 119, 129–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(1), 109–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Leech, N. L. (2011). Research methods in applied settings: an integrated approach to design and analysis. Routledge.

  • Hale-Hanes, C. (2015). Promoting student development of models and scientific inquiry skills in acid–base chemistry: an important skill development in preparation for AP chemistry. Journal of Chemical education, 92(8), 1320–1324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halverson, L. R., Graham, C. R., Spring, K. J., Drysdale, J. S., & Henrie, C. R. (2014). A thematic analysis of the most highly cited scholarship in the first decade of blended learning research. Internet and Higher Education, 20, 20–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon, R. J., Morgan, G. A., Gliner, J. A., & HARMON, R. J. (1999). Definition, purposes, and dimensions of research. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 38(2), 217–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinojo-Lucena, F. J., Aznar-Díaz, I., Cáceres-Reche, M. P., & Romero-Rodríguez, J. M. (2019). Artificial intelligence in higher education: a bibliometric study on its impact in the scientific literature. Education Sciences, 9(1), 51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, H. Y., Ma, L., Lin, P. Y., & Lee, K. Y. H. (2020). Advancing third graders’ reading comprehension through collaborative Knowledge Building: a comparative study in Taiwan. Computers & Education, 157, 103962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, Y. C., Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, C. C., Hwang, G. J., Chu, H. C., Wang, C. Y., & Chen, N. S. (2012). Research trends in technology-based learning from 2000 to 2009: a content analysis of publications in selected journals. Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 354–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G. J. (2014). Definition, framework and research issues of smart learning environments-a context-aware ubiquitous learning perspective. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G. J., & Chen, C. H. (2017). Influences of an inquiry-based ubiquitous gaming design on students’ learning achievements, motivation, behavioral patterns, and tendency towards critical thinking and problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 950–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G. J., Chu, H. C., & Lai, C. L. (2017). Prepare your own device and determination (PYOD): a successfully promoted mobile learning mode in Taiwan. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 11(2), 87–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Yang, S. J. (2008). Criteria, strategies and research issues of context-aware ubiquitous learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 81–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irby, S. M., Borda, E. J., & Haupt, J. (2018). Effects of implementing a hybrid wet lab and online module lab curriculum into a general chemistry course: impacts on student performance and engagement with the chemistry triplet. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(2), 224–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom: mindtools for critical thinking. Columbus OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karacop, A., & Doymus, K. (2013). Effects of jigsaw cooperative learning and animation techniques on students’ understanding of chemical bonding and their conceptions of the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 186–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao, G. Y. M., Chiang, C. H., & Sun, C. T. (2017). Customizing scaffolds for game-based learning in physics: impacts on knowledge acquisition and game design creativity. Computers & Education, 113, 294–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiste, A. L., Scott, G. E., Bukenberger, J. P., Markmann, M., & Moore, J. (2017). An examination of student outcomes in studio chemistry. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 18, 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku, H. Y. (2009). Twenty years of productivity in ETR&D by institutions and authors. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(6), 801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuehl, R. O. (2000). Design of experiments: statistical principles of research design and analysis. CA: Duxbury Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyza, E. A., & Georgiou, Y. (2019). Scaffolding augmented reality inquiry learning: the design and investigation of the TraceReaders location-based, augmented reality platform. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(2), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, C. L. (2020). Trends of mobile learning: a review of the top 100 highly cited papers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(3), 721–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, R. L., & Annetta, L. (2013). The use of online modules and the effect on student outcomes in a high school chemistry class. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(5), 603–613.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lavi, R., Shwartz, G., & Dori, Y. J. (2019). Metacognition in chemistry education: a literature review. Israel Journal of Chemistry, 59(6–7), 583–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into practice, 32(3), 131–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, C. P., & Chai, C. S. (2004). An activity-theoretical approach to research of ICT integration in Singapore schools: orienting activities and learner autonomy. Computers & Education, 43(3), 215–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindquist, E. F. (1953). Design and analysis of experiments in psychology and education.

  • Limniou, M., Papadopoulos, N., & Whitehead, C. (2009). Integration of simulation into pre-laboratory chemical course: computer cluster versus WebCT. Computers & Education, 52(1), 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H. C., Hwang, G. J.  (2018) Research trends of flipped classroom studies for medical courses: A review of journal publications from 2008 to 2017 based on the technology-enhanced learning model. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–17 https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1467462

  • Marson, G. A., & Torres, B. B. (2011). Fostering multirepresentational levels of chemical concepts: a framework to develop educational software. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(12), 1616–1622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCollum, B. M., Regier, L., Leong, J., Simpson, S., & Sterner, S. (2014). The effects of using touch-screen devices on students’ molecular visualization and representational competence skills. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(11), 1810–1817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillanH, & Schumacher, S., J. (2010). Research in education: evidence-based inquiry. Pearson: MyEducationLab Series.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Cifuentes, L., Kwok, O., & Davis, T. J. (2013). Exploring 3-D virtual reality technology for spatial ability and chemistry achievement. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 579–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Msonde, S. E., & Van Aalst, J. (2017). Designing for interaction, thinking and academic achievement in a Tanzanian undergraduate chemistry course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(5), 1389–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature Index (2019). Nature Index 2019 Annual tables. from https://www.natureindex.com/faq#journals

  • Newmann, F. M. (1990). Higher order thinking in teaching social studies: a rationale for the assessment of classroom thoughtfulness. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(1), 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noce, A. M. (2018). Green chemistry and the grant challenges of sustainability. In M. A. Benvenuto & L. Kolopajlo (Eds.), Green Chemistry Education: Recent Developments (pp. 2–11). Berlin, Germeny: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partanen, L. (2020). How student-centred teaching in quantum chemistry affects students’ experiences of learning and motivation-a self-determination theory perspective. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1039/c9rp00036d.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez-Alvarez, L., Ruiz-Rubio, L., & Vilas-Vilela, J. L. (2018). Determining the deacetylation degree of chitosan: opportunities to learn instrumental techniques. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(6), 1022–1028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plass, J. L., Milne, C., Homer, B. D., Schwartz, R. N., Hayward, E. O., Jordan, T., et al. (2012). Investigating the effectiveness of computer simulations for chemistry learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3), 394–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryoo, K., Bedell, K., & Swearingen, A. (2018). Promoting linguistically diverse students’ short-term and long-term understanding of chemical phenomena using visualizations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 508–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9739-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seery, M. K., & McDonnell, C. (2013). The application of technology to enhance chemistry education. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 14, 227–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seery, M. K. (2015). Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16, 758–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2014). Which setting to choose: comparison of whole-class vs. small-group computer simulation use. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(4), 481–495.

  • Srisawasdi, N., & Panjaburee, P. (2019). Implementation of game-transformed inquiry-based learning to promote the understanding of and motivation to learn chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(2), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9754-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, K. Y., Chou, T. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2020). A content analysis of computational thinking research: an international publication trends and research typology. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00442-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taskin, V., & Bernholt, S. (2014). Students’ understanding of chemical formulae: a review of empirical research. International Journal of Science Education, 36(1), 157–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G. (2016). The logical and psychological structure of physical chemistry and its relevance to graduate students’ opinions about the difficulties of the major areas of the subject. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(2), 320–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urhahne, D., Nick, S., & Schanze, S. (2009). The effect of three-dimensional simulations on the understanding of chemical structures and their properties. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 495–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C.-Y., Wu, H.-K., Lee, S.W.-Y., Hwang, F.-K., Chang, H.-Y., Wu, Y.-T., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). A review of research on technology-assisted school science laboratories. Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 307–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, J., & Donnelly-Hermosillo, D. F. (2019). Learning chemistry nomenclature: Comparing the use of an electronic game versus a study guide approach. Computers & Education, 141.

  • World Economic Forum. (2019). Global competitiveness report 2019: how to end a lost decade of productivity growth. from https://www.weforum.org/reports/how-to-end-a-decade-of-lost-productivity-growth

  • Xie, H., Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Wang, C. C. (2019). Trends and development in technology-enhanced adaptive/personalized learning: a systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2017. Computers & Education, 140, 103599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Z. H., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Can generating representations enhance learning with dynamic visualizations? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1177–1198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zydney, J. M., & Warner, Z. (2016). Mobile apps for science learning: Review of research. Computers & Education, 94, 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate Institute of Information and Computer Education, National Taiwan Normal University, No. 162, Sec. 1, Heping E. Rd., Da-an Dist, Taipei City, 10610, Taiwan

    Shu-Hao Wu

  2. Department of Education, National Taipei University of Education, No. 134, Sec. 2, Heping E. Rd., Da-an District, Taipei City, 106, Taiwan

    Chiu-Lin Lai

  3. Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, No. 43, Sec. 4, Keelung Rd., Taipei, 106, Taiwan

    Gwo-Jen Hwang

  4. Department of Medical Humanities and Education, School of Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University, No. 100, Shih-Chuan 1st Road, Sanmin Dist., Kaohsiung City, 80708, Taiwan

    Gwo-Jen Hwang

  5. Program of Learning Sciences and Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University, No. 162, Sec. 1, Heping E. Rd., Da-an Dist., Taipei City, 10610, Taiwan

    Chin-Chung Tsai

Authors
  1. Shu-Hao Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chiu-Lin Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gwo-Jen Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chin-Chung Tsai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: Shu-Hao Wu, Chiu-Lin Lai; Methodology: Shu-Hao Wu, Chiu-Lin Lai, Gwo-Jen Hwang, Chin-Chung Tsai; Formal analysis and investigation: Shu-Hao Wu, Chiu-Lin Lai; Writing-original draft preparation: Shu-Hao Wu, Chiu-Lin Lai; Writing - review and editing: Gwo-Jen Hwang, Chin-Chung Tsai.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shu-Hao Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, SH., Lai, CL., Hwang, GJ. et al. Research Trends in Technology-Enhanced Chemistry Learning: A Review of Comparative Research from 2010 to 2019. J Sci Educ Technol 30, 496–510 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09894-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09894-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation