Digital Technologies in Chemistry Teaching in the Journal Chemistry Education Research and Practice: an analysis through a Systematic Literary Review
Abstract
This work describes a systematic literature review (SLR) carried out to explore and describe the use of digital technologies in chemistry teaching, focusing on the journal Chemistry Education Research and Practice (CERP). The study follows a methodological process structured in five stages. The results point to an increase in digital production in chemistry teaching, showing a trend in this research area. A total of 704 articles related to the topic were identified, of which 45 met the criteria in the SLR. By splitting these results according to time span, it was possible to see a variation in the number of articles found in each period, making it possible to note that, even though, the distribution of publications increased by year it was still not uniform. Within the main technological resources identified in the articles, some of them include: Multimedia, Websites, Software, Computers and Mobile Phones.
References
1. Akaygun, S., & Jones, L. L. (2013). based design and development of a simulation of liquid–vapor equilibrium. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 324-344.
2. Antonoglou, L. D., Charistos, N. D., & Sigalas, M. P. (2011). Design, development and implementation of a technology enhanced hybrid course on molecular symmetry: Students' outcomes and attitudes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(4), 454-468.
3. Ardoin, N. M., & Bowers, A. W. (2020). Early childhood environmental education: A systematic review of the research literature. Educational Research Review, 31, 100353.
4. Awad, B. (2014). Empowerment of teaching and learning chemistry through information and communication technologies. African Journal of Chemical Education, 4(3), 34-47.
5. Barnea, N., & Dori, Y. J. (2000). Computerized molecular modeling-The new technology for enhancing model perception among chemistry educators and learners. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 109-120.
6. Bastos, C. C., & Leite, B. S. (2017). Analysis and Validation of Dipole Moment Calculations in Chemistry Teaching. Orbital: The Electronic Journal of Chemistry, 9(5), 360-368.
7. Becker, S. A., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Giesinger, C. H., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
8. Bellou, I., Papachristos, N. M., & Mikropoulos, T. A. (2018). Digital learning technologies in chemistry education: A review. In: Sampson, D., Ifenthaler, D., Spector, J., Isaías, P. (Eds.), Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning (pp. 57-80). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978- 3-319-73417-0_4
9. Blonder, R., Jonatan, M., Bar-Dov, Z., Benny, N., Rap, S., & Sakhnini, S. (2013). Can You Tube it? Providing chemistry teachers with technological tools and enhancing their self-efficacy beliefs. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 269-285.
10. Brooks, D. W. (1993). Technology in chemistry education. Journal of chemical education, 70(9), 705. Cardellini, L. (2012). Chemistry: Why the subject is difficult?. Educación química, 23, 305-310.
11. Carvalho, A. A., & Araújo, I. (2016). What do Portuguese students play on mobile devices: Inputs for the development of educational games. In: Marcelino, M., Mendes, A., Gomes, M. (Eds.), ICT in Education: Multiple and Inclusive Perspectives (pp. 69-95). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-22900-3_5
12. Cook, D. J., Mulrow, C. D., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of internal medicine, 126(5), 376-380.
13. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications.
14. Diederen, J., Gruppen, H., Hartog, R., Moerland, G., & Voragen, A. G. (2003). Design of activating digital learning material for food chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(3), 353-371.
15. Diederen, J., Gruppen, H., Hartog, R., Moerland, G., & Voragen, A. G. J., (2005). Evaluation of computer- based learning material for food chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice., 6(2), 64– 82.
16. Donato, H., & Donato, M. (2019). Stages for undertaking a systematic review. Acta medica portuguesa, 32(3), 227-235.
17. Dorfman, B. S., Terrill, B., Patterson, K., Yarden, A., & Blonder, R. (2019). Teachers personalize videos and animations of biochemical processes: results from a professional development workshop. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(4), 772-786.
18. Ek, Å., Runefors, M., & Borell, J. (2014). Relationships between safety culture aspects–A work process to enable interpretation. Marine Policy, 44, 179-186.
19. Erdmann, M. A., & March, J. L. (2014). Video reports as a novel alternate assessment in the undergraduate chemistry laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(4), 650-657.
20. Guspatni, G. (2021). Student-generated PowerPoint animations: a study of student teachers’ conceptions of molecular motions through their expressed models. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(2), 312- 327.
21. Haderlie, S. (1994). Chemistry Teaching with New Technologies and Strategies: The Synergism of the 90's.
22. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(12), 1058-1062.
23. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable operations and computers, 3, 275-285.
24. Herrington, D. G., Hilborn, S. M., Sielaff, E. N., & Sweeder, R. D. (2022). ChemSims: using simulations and screencasts to help students develop particle-level understanding of equilibrium in an online environment before and during COVID. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 23(3), 644-661.
25. Jennings, K. T., Epp, E. M., & Weaver, G. C. (2007). Use of a multimedia DVD for Physical Chemistry: analysis of its effectiveness for teaching content and applications to current research and its impact on student views of physical chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 308-326.
26. Juntunen, M., & Lehenkari, M. (2021). A narrative literature review process for an academic business research thesis. Studies in higher education, 46(2), 330-342.
27. Kausar, F. N., Khan, Q. U. A., & Haroon, A. (2022). Teaching Methodology As A Cause Of Secondary Level Students’ Learning Difficulty In Chemistry. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(12), 1179-1193.
28. Kelly, R. (2017). Teaching with technology survey. Campus Technology, 30(7).
29. Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University Technical Report.
30. Krause, M., Kienast, S., Witteck, T., & Eilks, I. (2013). On the development and assessment of a computer- based learning and assessment environment for the transition from lower to upper secondary chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 345-353.
31. Lau, P. N. (2020). Enhancing formative and self-assessment with video playback to improve critique skills in a titration laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1), 178-188.
32. Lehtola, S., & Karttunen, A. J. (2022). Free and open source software for computational chemistry education.
33. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science, 12(5), e1610, 1-33.
34. Leite, B. (2018). Active Technological Learning. Revista internacional de educação superior, 4(3), 580-609.
35. Leite, B. S. (2021). Pesquisas sobre as tecnologias digitais no ensino de química. Debates em Educação, 13(Esp2), 244–269
36. Lok, W. F., & Hamzah, M. (2021). Student experience of using mobile devices for learning chemistry.
37. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(3), 893-900.
38. Lopes, J. A., & Leite, B. S. (2023). Research on memes in the teaching of Natural Sciences. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Ciência e Tecnologia, 16(1), 1-19.
39. Maksimenko, N., Okolzina, A., Vlasova, A., Tracey, C., & Kurushkin, M. (2021). Introducing atomic structure to first-year undergraduate chemistry students with an immersive virtual reality experience. Journal Chemical Education, 98(6), 2104-2108.
40. Morgil, İ., Seçil, A. R. D. A., Seçken, N., Yavuz, S., & Oskay, Ö. Ö. (2004). The influence of computer- assisted education on environmental knowledge and environmental awareness. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 5(2), 99-110.
41. Okoli, C. (2015). A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(43).
42. Ollino, M., Aldoney, J., Domínguez, A. M., & Merino, C. (2018). A new multimedia application for teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 364-374.
43. Park, M., Liu, X., Smith, E., & Waight, N. (2017). The effect of computer models as formative assessment on student understanding of the nature of models. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 572-581.
44. Penn, M., & Ramnarain, U. (2019). South African university students’ attitudes towards chemistry learning in a virtually simulated learning environment. Chemistry education research and practice, 20(4), 699-709.
45. Petterson, M. N., Watts, F. M., Snyder-White, E. P., Archer, S. R., Shultz, G. V., & Finkenstaedt-Quinn, S. A. (2020). Eliciting student thinking about acid–base reactions via app and paper–pencil based problem solving. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(3), 878-892.
46. Ping, G. L. Y., Lok, C., Yeat, T. W., Cherynn, T. J. Y., & Tan, E. S. Q. (2018). “Are chemistry educational apps useful?”–a quantitative study with three in-house apps. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 15-23.
47. Potter, N. M., & Overton, T. L. (2006). Chemistry in sport: context-based e-learning in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(3), 195-202.
48. Prensky, M. (2007). How to teach with technology: Keeping both teachers and students comfortable in an era of exponential change. Emerging technologies for learning, 2(4), 40-46.
49. Pribush, R. A. (2015). Impact of technology on chemistry instruction. In M. V.Orna (Eds.) Sputnik to smartphones: a half-century of chemistry education (pp. 155-194). American Chemical Society.
50. Rap, S., Feldman-Maggor, Y., Aviran, E., Shvarts-Serebro, I., Easa, E., Yonai, E., Waldman, R., & Blonder,
51. R. (2020). An applied research-based approach to support chemistry teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
52. Journal of chemical education, 97(9), 3278-3284.
53. Rodrigues, S., Smith, A., & Ainley, M. (2001). Video Clips and Animation in Chemistry CD-ROMS: Student Interest and Preference. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 47(2), 9-16.
54. Sadykov, T., & Čtrnáctová, H. (2019). Application interactive methods and technologies of teaching chemistry. Chemistry Teacher International, 1(2), 20180031.
55. Seery, M. K., & McDonnell, C. (2013). The application of technology to enhance chemistry education.
56. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(3), 227-228.
57. Silva Júnior, J. N., Lima, M. A. S., Sousa, E. H. S., Alexandre, F. S. O., & Leite Júnior, A. J. M. (2014). KinChem: A Computational Resource for Teaching and Learning Chemical Kinetics. Journal Chemical Education, 91(12), 2203-2205.
58. Silva, J. R. R. T., & Lyra, M. C. D. P. (2020). Learning the concept of chemical substance: the role of reconstructive memory. Human Arenas, 3, 99-118.
59. Supalo, C. A., Humphrey, J. R., Mallouk, T. E., Wohlers, H. D., & Carlsen, W. S. (2016). Examining the use of adaptive technologies to increase the hands-on participation of students with blindness or low vision in secondary-school chemistry and physics. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(4), 1174-1189.
60. Tortosa, M. (2012). The use of microcomputer based laboratories in chemistry secondary education: Present state of the art and ideas for research-based practice. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 161- 171.
61. Tsaparlis, G. (1991). Thémata Didaktikís Phisikís kai Khimías sti Mési Ekpaídefsi (Topics in Physics and Chemistry didactics in secondary education). Athens: M. P. Grigori.
62. Turkoguz, S. (2012). Learn to teach chemistry using visual media tools. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 401-409.
63. Tuvi-Arad, I., & Gorsky, P. (2007). New visualization tools for learning molecular symmetry: a preliminary evaluation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(1), 61-72.
64. Tuvi‐Arad, I., & Blonder, R. (2019). Technology in the service of pedagogy: Teaching with chemistry databases. Israel Journal of Chemistry, 59(6-7), 572-582.
65. Tzougraki, C., Sigalas, M. P., Tsaparlis, G., & Spyrellis, N. (2000). ‘Chemical education and new educational technologies’: An inter-university program for graduate studies. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(3), 405-410.
66. Yates, P. C. (2000). Evaluation of different strategies for the effective use of the world wide web in the learning and teaching of university level chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 129- 133.
67. Zohar, A. R., & Levy, S. T. (2019). Attraction vs. repulsion–learning about forces and energy in chemical bonding with the ELI-Chem simulation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(4), 667-684.
