A Cross-National Review of the Studies on the Particulate Nature of Matter and Related Concepts
Abstract views: 372
/ 
PDF downloads: 281
Keywords:
Chemistry education, the particulate nature of matter (PNM), students’ understanding, reviewAbstract
This study has reviewed the last three decades of students’ conception researches on the particulate nature of matter (PNM). To achieve this, criteria were developed to summarize and present the findings by focusing on insights derived from the related studies. The criteria incorporated the following themes: year, type (students’ understanding, comparative, experimental, or review), aim, sample and data collection tools. Seventy nine papers were examined in the study. These papers were related to students’ understanding and alternative conceptions of the PNM and the effects of different methods on students’ learning. The results of the studies reports that traditional teaching strategies are ineffective in helping students to develop a complete understanding of the matter, phase changes and the PNM, to alleviate alternative conceptions, and to promote conceptual change. And also, most of the new methods have positive effect on students’ conceptual understanding and alternative conceptions. This study intends to provide useful knowledge for teachers, researchers, curriculum developers and textbook writers.
References
Abraham, M.R., Williamson, V. M. & Westbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165.
Adadan, E. (2006). Promoting high school students’ conceptual understanding of the particulate nature of matter through multiple representations. Doctoral Dissertations, Ohio State University, Ohio.
Adadan, E., Irving, K.E. & Trundle, K.C. (2009). Impacts of multi-representational instruction on high school students’ conceptual understandings of the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 31(13), 1743-1775.
Adadan, E., Trundle, K.C. & Irving, K.E. (2010). Exploring grade 11 students’ conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multi-representational instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 1004-1035.
Adadan, E. (in press). Using multiple representations to promote grade 11 students’ scientific understanding of the particle theory of matter. Research in Science Education. http://www.springerlink.com/content/b157w50767m815w0/fulltext.pdf
Adbo, K. & Taber, K.S. (2009). Learners’ mental models of the particle nature of matter: A study of 16-year-ols Swedish science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(6), 757-786.
Albanese, A. & Vicentini, M. (1997). Why do we believe that an atom is colorless? Reflections about the teaching of the particle model. Science Education, 6, 251-261.
Ardac, D. & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 317-337.
Ayas, A. & Özmen, H. (2002). A study of students’ level of understanding of the particulate nature of matter at secondary school level. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 19(2), 45-60.
Ayas, A., Özmen, H. & Çalık, M. (2010). Students’ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter at secondary and tertiary level. International Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 165-184.
Bar, V. (1989). Children’s views about the water cycle. Science Education, 73(4), 481–500.
Bar, V & Travis, A. S. (1991). Children’s views concerning phase changes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(4), 363-382.
Beerenwinkel, A., Parchmann, I. & Grasel, C. (2011). Conceptual change texts in chemistry teaching: A study on the particle model of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 9(5), 1235-1259.
Benson, D.L., Wittrock, M.C. & Baur, M.E. (1993). Students’ preconceptions of the nature of gases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 587-597.
Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B. & Silberstein, J. (1986). Is an atom of copper malleable? Journal of Chemical Education, 63(1), 64-66.
Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B. & Silberstein, J. (1988). Theories, principles and laws. Education in Chemistry, 25, 89–92.
Bouwma-Gearhart, J., Stewart, J. & Brown, K. (2009). Student misapplication of a gas-like model to explain particle movement in heated solids: Implications for curriculum and instruction towards students’ creation and revision of accurate explanatory models. International Journal of Science Education, 31(9), 1157-1174.
Boz, Y. (2006). Turkish pupils’ conception of the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(2), 203-213.
Boz, N. & Boz, Y. (2008). A qualitative case study of prospective chemistry teachers’ knowledge about instructional strategies: Introducing particulate theory. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(2), 135-156.
Bunce, D. M. & Gabel, D. (2002). Differential effects on the achievement of males and females of teaching the particulate nature of chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 911-927.
Chang, H.Y., Quintana, C. & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94(1), 73-94.
Devetak, I., Vogrinc, J. & Glazar, S. A. (2010). States of matter explanations in Slovenian textbooks for students aged 6 to 14. International Journal of Environmental Science Education, 5(2), 217-235.
de Jong, O., van Driel, J. H. & Verloop, N. (2005). Preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of using particle models in teaching chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 946-964.
de Vos, W. & Verdonk, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 657–664.
Durmuş, J. & Bayraktar, Ş. (2010). Effect of conceptual change texts and laboratory experiments on fourth grade students’ understanding of matter and change concepts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(5), 498-504.
Edwards, L. & Soyibo, K. (2003). Relationships among selected Jamaican ninth-graders’ variables and knowledge of matter. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(3), 259-281.
Eskilsson, O. & Hellden, G. (2003). A longitudinal study on 10-12-year-olds’ conceptions of the transformations of matter. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(3), 291-304.
Fensham, P. (1994). Beginning to teach chemistry. In: P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, R. White (Eds.), The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning (pp. 14-28), London: Falmer.
Flores-Camacho, F., Gallegos-Cazares, L., Garritz, A. & Garcia-Franco, A. (2007). Incommensurability and multiple models: Representations of the structure of matter in undergraduate chemistry students. Science & Education, 16(7-8), 775-800.
Gabel, D. (1993). Use of the particle nature of matter in developing conceptual understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 193-194.
Gabel, D. (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Gabel, D., Samuel, K. & Hunn, D. (1987). Understanding the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(8), 695-697.
Griffiths, A. K. & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristic of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 611-628.
Gomez Crespo, M.A. & Pozo, J. I. (2004). Relation between everyday knowledge and scientific knowledge: Understanding how changes matter. International Journal of Science Education, 26(11), 1325-1343.
Haidar, A. H. (1997). Prospective chemistry teachers’ conceptions of the conservation of matter and related concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 181–197.
Haidar, A. H. & Abraham, M. R. (1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919–938.
Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509-534.
Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352–381.
Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: Challenges in understanding the microscopic world. In J. K. Gilbert et al. (Eds.), Chemical Education: Towards Research-Based Practice, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
Hatzinikita, V., Koulaidis, V. & Hatzinikitas, A. (2005). Modeling pupils’ understanding and explanations concerning changes in matter. Research in Science Education, 35(4), 471-495.
Hinton, M. E. & Nakhleh, M. B. (1999). Students’ microscopic, macroscopic, and symbolic representations of chemical reactions. Chemistry Education, 4(5), 158-167.
Holgersson, I. & Löfgren, L. (2004). A long-term study of students’ explanations of transformations of matter. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(1), 77-96.
Jimenez Gomez, E. J., Benarroch, A. & Marin, N. (2006). Evaluation of the degree of coherence found in students’ conceptions concerning the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(6), 577-598.
Johnson, P. (1998a). Progression in children’s understanding of a basic particle theory: a longitudinal study. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 393-412.
Johnson, P. (1998b). Children’s understanding of changes of state involving the gas state, Part 1: Boiling water and the particle theory. International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 567-583.
Johnson, P. (1998c). Children’s understanding of changes of state involving the gas state, Part 2: Evaporation and condensation below boiling point. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 695-709.
Johnson, P. & Papageorgiou, G. (2010). Rethinking the introductory of particle theory: A substance-based framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 130-150.
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). ‘‘Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem”. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75–83.
Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701-704.
Johnstone, A. H. (1999). The nature of chemistry. Education in Chemistry, 36, 45–47.
Jones, L. L., Jordan, K. D. & Stillings, N. A. (2005). Molecular visualization in chemistry education: the role of multidisciplinary collaboration. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(3), 136-149.
Kelly, R. M. & Jones, L. L. (2007). Exploring how different features of animations of sodium chloride dissolution affect students’ explanations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(5), 413-429.
Krnel, D., Glazar, S. A. & Watson, R. (2003). The development of the concept of “matter”: A cross age study how children classify materials. Science Education, 87(5), 621-639.
Krnel, D., Watson, R. & Glazar, S. (1998). Survey of research related to the development of the concept of “matter”. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 257-289.
Kokkotas, P., Vlachos, I. & Koulaidis, V. (1998). Teaching the topic of the particulate nature of matter in prospective teachers training courses. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 291-303.
Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D. & Blakeslee, T. D. (1993). Changing middle school students’ conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(3), 249–270.
Liu, X. & Lesniak, K. M. (2005). Students’ progression of understanding the matter concept from elementary to high school. Science Education, 89(3), 433-450.
Liu, X. & Lesniak, K. M. (2006). Progression in children’s understanding of the matter concept from elementary to high school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 320-347.
Lorenzo, M. (2005). The development, implementation and evaluation of a problem solving heuristic. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3(1), 33–58.
Löfgren, L. & Hellden, G. (2008). Following young students’ understanding of three phenomena in which transformations of matter occur. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 481-504.
Madden, S. P., Jones, L. L. & Rahm, J. (2011). The role of multiple representations in the understanding of ideal gas problems. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(3), 283-293.
Margel, H., Eylon, B. S. & Scherz, Z. (2008). A longitudinal study of junior high school students’ conceptions of the structure of materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 132-152.
Maskill, R., Cachapuz, A. F. C. & Koulaidis, V. (1997). Young pupils ideas about the microscopic nature of matter in three different European countries. International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 631-645.
Meheut, M. (2004). Designing and validating two teaching-learning sequences about particle models. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 605-618.
Miller, L. S. (2008). Prospective elementary school teachers’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Doctoral Dissertations, Purdue University, Indiana.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191–196.
Nakhleh, M. B. & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). Concept learning vs. problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 190-192.
Nakhleh, M. B. & Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children’s beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 777-805.
Nakhleh, M. B., Samarapungavan, A. & Saglam, Y. (2005). Middle school students’ beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 581-612.
Nelson, P. G. (1999). Levels of description in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(12), 1622.
Noh, T. & Scharmann, L. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students’ conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 199-217.
Novick, S. & Nussbaum, J. (1981). Pupils’ understanding of particulate nature of matter: A cross-age study. Science Education, 65(2), 187–196.
Nyachwayaa, J. M., Mohameda, A.R., Roehriga, G.H., Woodb, N.B., Kernc, A.L. & Schneiderd, J. L. (2011). The development of an open-ended drawing tool: an alternative diagnostic tool for assessing students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 121-132.
Onwu, G. O. & Randall, E. (2006). Some aspects of students’ understanding of a representational model of the particulate nature of matter in chemistry in three different countries. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(4), 226-239.
Osborne, R. J. & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Children’s conceptions of the changes of the state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825–838.
Othman, J., Treagust, D. F. & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2008). An investigation into the relationship between students’ conceptions of the particulate nature of matter and their understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 30(11), 1531-1550.
Özmen, H. (2011a). Effect of animation enhanced conceptual change texts on 6th grade students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and transformation during phase changes. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1114-1126.
Özmen, H. (2011b). Turkish primary students’ conceptions about the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 6(1), 99-121.
Özmen, H., Ayas, A. & Coştu, B. (2002). Determination of the science student teachers’ understanding level and misunderstandings about the particulate nature of the matter. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 2(2), 507-529.
Özmen, H., Demircioğlu, H. & Demircioğlu, G. (2009). The effects of the conceptual change texts accompanied with the animations on overcoming 11th grade students’ alternative conceptions of chemical bonding. Computers & Education, 52(3), 681-695.
Özmen, H. & Kenan, O. (2007). Determination of the Turkish primary students’ views about the particulate nature of matter. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(1), Article 1.
Paik, S. H., Kim, H. N., Cho, B. K. & Park, J. W. (2004). K-8th grade Korean students’ conceptions of “changes of state” and “conditions for changes of state”. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 207-224.
Papageorgiou, G. & Johnson, P. (2005). Do particle ideas help or hinder pupils’ understanding of phenomena? International Journal of Science Education, 27(11), 1299-1317.
Papageorgiou, G., Johnson, P. & Fotiades, F. (2008). Explaining melting and evaporation below boiling point. Can software help with particle ideas? Research in Science and Technology Education, 26(2), 165-183.
Pereira, M. P. & Pestana, M. E. (1991). Pupils’ representations of water. International Journal of Science Education, 13(3), 313-319.
Pierri, E., Karatrantou, A. & Panagiotakopoulos, C. (2008). Exploring the phenomenon of “change of phase” of pure substances using the microcomputer-based-laboratory (MBL) system. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(3), 234-239.
Pimthong, P., Yutakom, N., Roadrangka, V. & Sanguanruang, S., Cowie, B., Cooper, B. (2012). Teaching and learning about matter in grade 6 classrooms: A conceptual change approach. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(1), 121-137.
Pozo, J. I. & Gomez Crespo, M. A. (2005). The embodied nature of implicit theories: The consistency of ideas about the nature of matter. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 351-387.
Rahayu, S. & Kita, M. (2010). An analysis of Indenosian and Japanese students’ understandings of macroscopic and submicroscopic levels of representing matter and its changes. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(4), 667-688.
Raviola, A. (2001). Assessing students’ conceptual understanding of solubility equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 629–631.
Sanger, M., Phelps, A. & Fienhold, J. (2000). Using a computer animation to improve students’ conceptual understanding of a can-crushing demonstration. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(11), 1517-1520.
Sere, M. G. (1986). Children’s conceptions of the gaseous state, prior to teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 8(4), 413-425.
Shepherd, D. L. & Renner, J. W. (1982). Student understandings and misunderstandings of states of matter and density changes. School Science and Mathematics, 82(8), 650-665.
Singer, J. E., Tal, R. & Wu, H. K. (2003). Students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter. School Science and Mathematics, 103(1), 28-44.
Sirhan, G. (2007). Learning difficulties in chemistry: An overview. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 4(2), 2–20.
Snir, J., Smith, C. L. & Raz, G. (2003). Linking phenomena with competing underlying models: A software tool for introducing students to the particulate model of matter. Science Education, 87(6), 794–830.
Stains, M. & Talanquer, V. (2007). Classification of chemical substances using particulate representations of matter: An analysis of students thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 643-661.
Stavy, R. (1990). Children’s conception of changes in the state of matter: From liquid (or solid) to gas. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 247-266.
Stavy, R. & Stachel, D. (1985). Children’s ideas about solids and liquid. European Journal of Science Education, 7(4), 407-421.
Stern, L., Barnea, N. & Shauli, S. (2008). The effect of a computerized simulation on middle school students’ understanding of the kinetic molecular theory. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(4), 305-315.
Stieff, M. & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemistry: Incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 285-303.
Symington, D. & Kirkwood, V. (1996). Lecturer perceptions of student difficulties in a first year chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(4), 339–343.
Taber, K. S. (2002). Alternative conceptions in chemistry-prevention, diagnosis and cure: Volume I: Theoretical background. London: The Royal Society of Chemistry.
Taber, K. S. & Garcia-Franco, A. (2010). Learning processes in chemistry: Drawing upon cognitive resources to learn about the particulate structure of matter. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 99-142.
Talanquer, V. (2009). On cognitive constraints and learning progression: The case of “structure of matter”. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 2123-2136.
Tan, K. C. & Treagust, D. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81(294), 75–84.
Tasker, R. & Dalton, R. (2006). Research into practice: Visualization of the molecular world using animations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(2), 141-159.
Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Crowley, J., Yung, B. H. W., Cheong, I. P. & Othman, J. (2010). Evaluating students’ understanding of kinetic particle theory concepts relating to the states of matter, changes of state and diffusion: A cross-national study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(1), 141-164.
Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Zain, A. N. M., Ong, E. T., Karpudewan, M. & Halim, L. (2011). Evaluation of an intervention instructional program to facilitate understanding of basic particle concepts among students enrolled in several levels of study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(2), 251-261.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. & Mamiala, T. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanation. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353-1368.
Tsai, C. C. (1999). Overcoming junior high school students’ misconceptions about microscopic views of phase change: A study of an analogy activity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(1), 83–91.
Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Atomic and molecular structure in chemical education: A critical analysis from various perspectives of science education. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(8), 922–925.
Tsaparlis G. & Sevian H. (eds.) (2013). Concepts of matter in science education. Springer.
Tsitsipis, G., Stamovlasis, D. & Papageorgiou, G. (2010). The effect of three cognitive variables on students’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and its changes of state. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 987-1016.
Valanides, N. (2000). Primary student teachers’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter and its transformations during dissolving. Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 1(2), 249-262.
Wu, H., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842.
Yezierski, E. J. (2003). The particulate nature of matter and conceptual change: A cross-age study. Doctoral Dissertation, Arizona State University, USA.
Yezierski, E. J. & Birk, J. P. (2006). Misconceptions about the particulate nature of matter: using animations to close the gender gap. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(6), 956-960.
Yılmaz, A. & Alp, E. (2006). Students’ understanding of matter: the effect of reasoning ability and grade level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(1), 22-31.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright © Authors
