Search for: All records

Instructional materials in organic chemistry include a wide variety of representations, such as chemical formulas, line-angle diagrams, ball-and-stick diagrams, and electrostatic potential maps (EPMs). Students tend to focus on explicit features of a representation while they are reasoning about chemical concepts. This study examined the affordances of electrostatic potential maps in students’ approaches when the maps were integrated into four foundational organic chemistry problems using an experimental design approach. First-semester organic chemistry students were surveyed from two different institutions, where they made predictions and explained their reasoning behind identifying an electrophilic site, predicting the product, selecting the faster reaction, and classifying a mechanism. Students were randomly assigned to one of four surveys that differed by the representation they were given for the prompts: chemical formula, line-angle diagram, ball-and-stick diagram, and EPM. Responses from students with EPMs were analyzed and compared to responses from students with the non-EPM representations. Results indicated that students with EPMs had higher performance depending on the problem. They were also more likely to cite electronic features such as electron density, nucleophilicity, etc., and were more likely to use causal reasoning in their explanations. This study offers evidence in support of affordances of EPMs in promoting students’ use of electronic features and causal reasoning. This evidence adds to the chemistry education literature by offering a potential means for promoting students’ use of electronic features and causal reasoning by incorporating EPMs into assessment items. Implications for instruction include using EPMs in both instruction and assessment as a tool to help students build skills around invoking electrostatics and causal reasoning to solve problems in organic chemistry. 

Representations in chemistry are the tools by which students, instructors, and chemists reason with chemical concepts that are abstract. Although representations are regularly used within the chemistry classroom, there is more to uncover regarding the ways students interact with representations when given chemistry tasks. This study aimed to address this gap in knowledge. In this study, eighteen students enrolled in second semester general chemistry were recruited for data collection. Semi-structured interviews were utilized to observe how students approached a similar set of dipole–dipole interaction tasks when given four distinct representations. Analysis of the data revealed that students’ approaches to these tasks were affected by the newly explicit features present within each representation. Additionally, the ordering in which the representations were presented to the students influenced the specific features students took notice of and implemented into their approaches to the tasks. These findings can better inform instruction and future research involving chemical representations such that students will form a solid foundation in working with and pulling relevant information from various representations when solving chemistry tasks. 

Studies investigating chemistry students’ understanding of intermolecular forces have listed alternative conceptions; however, there is a call to investigate why students might have these alternative conceptions. This study describes how second semester general chemistry students predict the location of dipole–dipole forces between two molecules from a resource activation perspective. During interviews, 18 students were asked to describe the location of forces between four pairs of molecules. Students relied on one or more of the following approaches in determining location: (1) attraction between opposite charges, (2) electronegativity differences, (3) biggest electronegativity values, (4) largest atomic size, and (5) molecular shape. Each student’s approach is characterized by the resources being activated and, in particular, students’ use of electronegativity. Students’ use of electronegativity varied, including comparing electronegativity values between unbonded atoms within a molecule and between atoms present on different molecules. The findings suggest future research directions and teaching implications that could improve students’ understanding of intermolecular forces including the explicit integration and assessment of the concepts of electronegativity and intermolecular forces. 

Education in organic chemistry is highly reliant on molecular representations. Students abstract information from representations to make sense of submicroscopic interactions. This study investigates relationships between differing representations: bond-line structures, ball-and-stick, or electrostatic potential maps (EPMs), and predicting partial charges, nucleophiles, and electrophiles. The study makes use of students’ answers in hot-spot question format, where they select partially charged atoms on the image of a molecule and explanations. Analysis showed no significant difference among students when predicting a partially positive atom with each representation; however, more students with EPMs were able to correctly predict the partially negative atom. No difference was observed across representations in students predicting electrophilic character; while representations did influence students identifying nucleophilic character. The affordance of EPMs was that they cued more students to cite relative electronegativity indicating that such students were able to recognize the cause for electron rich/poor areas. This recognition is central to rationalizing mechanisms in organic chemistry. This study offers implications on incorporating EPMs during instruction and provides evidence-based support in how EPMs could be useful in promoting learning on topics that relate to an uneven charge distribution.