Title

Author(s)

The use of variation theory to improve student understanding of

reaction rate through scientific investigation

Lam, Siu-yan.; .

Citation

Issued Date

URL

Rights

2012

http://hdl.handle.net/10722/173837

The author retains all proprietary rights, (such as patent rights)

and the right to use in future works.

The Use of Variation Theory to Improve

Student Understanding of Reaction Rate
through Scientific Investigation

Lam Siu Yan

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
at The University of Hong Kong

March 2012

Abstract of thesis entitled

The use of variation theory to improve student

understanding of reaction rate through scientific
investigation
Submitted by

Lam Siu Yan

for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
at the University of Hong Kong
in March 2012

The reaction rate of a chemical process, and the factors that affect it, is an
important concept in the secondary school chemistry curriculum. A number of
studies have indicated that students have different conceptions of the reaction rate
phenomenon, e.g. that volume is an influential factor. The way in which the
teacher structures the lesson content and the students experience the lesson is
important in helping students to develop appropriate conceptions.

This study explores the efficacy of using variation theory as a pedagogical

tool to improve student understanding of chemical reaction rates at the Secondary
4 level through group-based scientific investigation. A design-based research
approach with a pretest and posttest was chosen, and phenomenography and
variation theory were adopted as the theoretical framework. Learning is defined
as a change in the way of experiencing something. What is to be learnt is defined
as the object of learning, and aspects that are crucial to appropriating the object
of learning are defined as critical aspects. To bring out the critical aspects that
are to be discerned by students, certain patterns of variation, namely,
generalization, contrast, separation and fusion, must be constituted.

Two Secondary 4 chemistry classes in the same school were taught by

one teacher. Lessons comprised three sections: a single period for introduction, a
double period for experimentation and a single period for debriefing. The two
classes were taught in the same way during the introduction and experimentation,
but different debriefing sequences were used after the students experimental
work. During the introduction and experimentation, separation was employed
to help students develop a fair test concept and design an experiment to follow
the progress of a chemical reaction. During experimentation, they were guided in
how to discern the factors that affect two aspects of a reaction, i.e. the reaction
rate and amount of products formed. In the debriefing session of the pilot and
main studies, different sequences of factors and sequences of aspects were
followed, respectively. Comparison was made between the pretest and posttest to
trace students understanding of the reaction aspects. The quantitative data were
analysed and triangulated with the post-lesson interview data and verbatim lesson
record. The students learning outcomes showed that there had been substantial
improvement in understanding of the skills and concepts involved, with the gap
between the low- and high-score groups narrowing. A specific debriefing
sequence was found to be conducive to learning. Further, discussing the interrelated factors tested in the experimental conditions consecutively and separating
the two reaction aspects while fusing the factors appeared effective in
highlighting the part-part and part-whole relationships. Here, whole refers to a
reaction consisting of the parts constituted by the reaction rate and amount of
products which in turn depend on various factors.

The findings of this study suggest that variation theory is a powerful

pedagogical tool in improving the understanding of students of lower academic
ability. They thus have important implications for the planning of teachinglearning sequences in practical science lessons, particularly in scientific
investigations that involve different task-pool results.
(500 words)

ii

DECLARATION

I declare that this thesis represents my own work, except where due
acknowledgement is made, and that it has not been previously included in a
thesis, dissertation or report submitted to this University or to any other
institution for a degree, diploma or other qualifications.

Signed

________________
Lam Siu Yan

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to a
number of people who have had a significant impact on me during the course of
my study. First of all, I wish to thank deeply Dr. Pang Ming-fai, my supervisor,
who has devoted considerable time and patience for scholarly guidance,
encouragement, and insurmountable advice throughout the thesis process.
Without his comments on the pretest and scoring rubrics, the findings would
never be that fruitful for write-up. His expertise and literature were invaluable to
me in completing this thesis, and he gave me much insight to my teaching.

I would also like to express my most sincere thanks to Professor Ference

Marton for his inspiring advice and valuable comments on my study, both in the
initial stage of my research direction and the final stage on my data analysis. I am
also grateful to Professor Lo Mun-ling for her advice when we met in the EARLI
conference 2009 in Amsterdam. She shared with me her insightful ideas in
teaching since I was her P.C. Ed student.

Mrs. Lydia Lam, my chemistry panel head, also lent me a lot of support in
the design of the pretest among other assistance. I would also like to express my
thanks to our laboratory technician for helping me to prepare all the chemicals
and apparatus I needed; and to my students for their participation in the study, in
particular to the students participating the interviews, and the past students who
have helped me to do the interview and lesson-video transcriptions. Without
them, this doctoral research would not have been feasible.

Finally, I am deeply indebted to my parents, my family members and my

friends whose encouragement and support have allowed me to accomplish my
goals. This thesis is dedicated to all of you.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract of thesis entitled ....... i
Declaration ............. iii
Acknowledgements iv
Table of Contents ........... v
List of Tables .. x
List of Figures .... xii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Background of Study . 1

1.2

Rationale and Research Approach . 4

1.3

Aims and Research Questions ........... 7

1.4

Significance of the Study ... 8

1.5

Definition of Terms ... 10

1.6

Structure of the Thesis ... 11

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW ON SCIENCE LEARNING

2.1

Introduction 13

2.2

Literature in Science Education . 13

2.3

2.2.1

Changes of aims of science education .. 13

2.2.2

Nature of science .. 16

Alternative Conceptions of Scientific Phenomena 21

2.3.1

Defining alternative conceptions .. 21

2.3.2

Literature on alternative conceptions in science ... 22

2.3.3

Learning difficulties in science ..... 23

2.3.4

Literature on alternative conceptions of reaction rate and

learning difficulties ... 26

2.3.5
2.4

2.5

Teaching strategies in science learning 29

Experimentation in Science Education .. 30

2.4.1

Research on experimentation in science education ...... 30

2.4.2

Scientific inquiry .. 35

2.4.3

Inquiry-based laboratory work in science education ........ 39

Teaching-learning Sequence .. 45

CHAPTER 3

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY

3.1

Introduction .. 49

3.2

Early Development of Phenomenography ... 49

3.3

3.2.1

View of learning .. 49

3.2.2

Phenomenography as research specialization in learning 51

3.2.3

Research on students ways of experiencing ... 53

Recent Development of Phenomenography . 57

3.3.1

Building theory of variation ..... 57

3.3.2

Structure of awareness . 58

3.3.3

Discernment, variation and simultaneity . 59

3.3.4

Patterns of variation . 61

3.3.5

Using variation theory as a pedagogical design ....... 64

3.3.6

Space of learning .. 68

CHAPTER 4

METHODOLOGY

4.1

Introduction .. 70

4.2

Research Approach .. 70

4.3

Data Collection 75
4.3.1

Participants ... 75

4.3.2

Data collection instruments .. 76

4.3.2.1

Written tasks . 76

4.3.2.2 Interview ... 78

4.3.2.3 Laboratory worksheet ... 79
4.3.2.4 Video-recording lessons 80
4.3.3

4.4

Data collection procedure .... 80

4.3.3.1

Data collection procedure Pilot study (2007) .... 80

4.3.3.2

Data collection procedure Main study (2008) ... 83

Data Analysis ... 85

4.4.1

Quantitative analysis on students conception of reaction rate in

written tests .. 85

4.4.2

Qualitative analysis on interview data ..... 95

4.4.3 Data analysis on lesson video-recordings and laboratory

worksheets ... 96

vi

4.5

Establishing Credibility ... 96

CHAPTER 5

DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PILOT STUDY

5.1

Introduction ...... 99

5.2

Defining Intended Object of Learning ..... 99

5.2.1

Background information - Choice of topic rate of a chemical

99

reaction ...

5.3

5.2.2

Intended object of learning .. 101

5.2.3

Lived object of learning before research lessons . 105

Research Lessons in Pilot Study .. 107

5.3.1

Design of the research lessons . 107

5.3.2

Part 1: Teacher introduction . 109

5.3.3

Part 2: Teacher demonstration and experimental group work . 109

5.3.4 Part 3: Data presentation and whole class debriefing .. 112

5.3.4.1

Class 4A Debriefing sequence: Strength basicity

concentration volume number of moles . 112

5.3.4.2

Class 4B Debriefing sequence: Volume

concentration strength basicity number of
moles . 115

5.3.4.3

Experimental results round-up and conclusion.. 118

5.4

Enacted Object of Learning . 119

5.5

Lived Object of Learning after Research Lessons ... 122

5.5.1

Preliminary analysis of the pretest in the pilot study ... 122

5.5.2

Students laboratory worksheets in the pilot study .. 125

5.5.3

Preliminary analysis of the posttest and delayed posttest in the

pilot study 126

5.5.4
5.6

Preliminary analysis of the selected interview in the pilot study. 131

Summary of Chapter 5 . 132

vii

CHAPTER 6

MAIN STUDY IMPLEMENTATION AND STUDENT

LEARNING OUTCOMES

6.1

Introduction ...... 133

6.2

Re-defining Intended Objects of Learning .. 134

6.2.1

Background information of reaction rate and research

questions of the present study .. 134

6.3

6.2.2

Intended objects of learning . 136

6.2.3

Lived object of learning before research lessons . 137

Research Lessons in Main Study . 138

6.3.1

Research lesson plan and the use of patterns of variation ... 138

6.3.2

Part 1: Teacher introduction . 141

6.3.3

Part 2: Teacher demonstration and experimental group work.. 145

6.3.4 Part 3: Data presentation and whole class debriefing .. 153

6.3.4.1 Class 4C Debriefing sequence:
rate-product-rate-product .. 154
6.3.4.2 Class 4D Debriefing sequence:
rate-rate-product-product .. 161
6.3.4.3 Experimental results round-up .. 167
6.3.4.4

Conclusion of the research lessons ... 169

6.4

Enacted Objects of Learning 171

6.5

Lived Objects of Learning after Research Lessons . 173

6.5.1

Characterization and analysis of responses of written test ...... 173

6.5.2 Preliminary analysis of the selected interview in the main study 174
6.6

Summary of Chapter 6 . 175

viii

CHAPTER 7

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

7.1

Introduction .. 176

7.2

Relationship between Intended, Enacted and Lived Objects of Learning 177

7.2.1

Design of the research lessons . 179

7.2.2

Findings in relation to the first research question 182

7.2.2.1

Use of variation theory to help students learn .. 182

7.2.2.2

Lived object of learning with respect to OL1 ... 183

7.2.2.3

Lived object of learning with respect to OL2 ... 185

7.2.2.4

Comparing different patterns of variation on

191

effectiveness of learning .......

7.2.3

Findings in relation to the second research question ... 207

7.2.4

Findings in relation to the third research question ... 217

7.3

Implications of the Study . 223

7.4

Limitations of the Study ... 228

7.5

Areas for Further Research .. 230

7.6

Concluding Remarks 232

REFERENCES 237

APPENDICES
Appendix 1:

Timeline of Pilot Study (2007) and Main Study (2008) .. 261

Appendix 2:

Pre-Posttest of Pilot Study (2007) .... 262

Appendix 3:

Pre-Posttest of Main Study (2008) ... 264

Appendix 4:

Laboratory Worksheet of Main Study (2008) .. 267

Appendix 5:

Protocol for Selected Interview ... 271

Appendix 6:

Notes of Pilot Study (2007) . 272

Appendix 7:

Laboratory Preparation List and Video-recording Schedule in

Main Study (2008) ... 274

Appendix 8:

Sample Responses of Written Tests and the Corresponding

Scores Awarded in Main Study (2008) 275

Appendix 9:

Lesson Transcription in Debriefing Session Classes 4C and

4D of Main Study (2008) . 285

ix

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1

Basic science processes skills ........ 36

Table 2.2

Variables of various student-designed experiments in searching

relationships for density ......................... 42

Table 5.1

Factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of products

formed in a chemical reaction ... 104

Table 5.2

Lesson plan of the research lessons for classes 4A and 4B in

the pilot study .... 108

Table 5.3

Arrangement of assigned factors for different groups in Part B. 110

Table 5.4

Patterns of variation used in the experimentation . 111

Table 5.5

Preliminary findings of the pretest ........ 122

Table 5.6

Mean score of Question 7 of pre-posttest in classes 4A and 4B 128

Table 5.7

Mean score of Question 7 of pretest and delayed posttest in

classes 4A and 4B .. 129

Table 6.1

Lesson plan of the research lessons for classes 4C and 4D in

the main study .... 139

Table 6.2

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the first part of

introduction .... 142

Table 6.3

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the second part of

introduction .... 145

Table 6.4

Arrangement of assigned factors for the investigation in Part B 148

Table 6.5

Possible choices of chemicals used and their amount used in

the investigation ..... 150

Table 6.6

Patterns of variation used in Part B of the experimentation .. 151

Table 6.7

Patterns of variation used in the experimentation . 152

Table 6.8

Summary table showing debriefing sequence of patterns of

variation used in classes 4C and 4D .. 166

Table 7.1

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the research lessons.. 181

Table 7.2

Mean score of pre-posttest and paired t-tests result of classes

4C to 4D. 183

Table 7.3

Mean score of Questions 1-4 in pre-posttest with respect to

OL1 183

Table 7.4

Paired differences (posttest scores pretest scores) in classes

4C and 4D...... 184

Table 7.5

Mean score of Questions 5-7 in pre-posttest with respect to

OL2............................................................................ 186

Table 7.6

Paired differences (posttest scores pretest scores) in classes

4C and 4D.. 187

Table 7.7

Comparison between classes 4C and 4D on mean gain scores

and standard deviation of Questions 1 to 4 and Questions 5
to 7.............. 201

Table 7.8

Mean pretest score, posttest score and gain score of individual

question for low and high achievers in classes 4C and 4D 208

Table 7.9

Comparison of the mean score of an aspect of Question 7 in

the pretest, posttest and the corresponding gain score between
group investigating that aspect and those without investigating
that aspect (non-group) in the experimentation............. 218

Table 7.10

Performance of group 2 versus non-group 2 on Question 7.. 219

Table 7.11

Accuracy of the experimental results obtained by different

groups in classes 4C and 4D...... 221

Table 7.12(a)

Mean score of Question 7 in the pretest, posttest and the

corresponding gain score for different groups... 222

Table 7.12(b)

Mean score of the whole paper in the pretest, posttest and the
corresponding gain score for different groups....... 223

xi

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1

The essential learning experiences for achieving the aims

of science education are organized into six strands .. 16

Figure 2.2

Framework for the New Senior Secondary science

curriculum in Hong Kong ......................................... 19

Figure 2.3

Experimentation helps students make links between two

domains ..................................................................... 31

Figure 2.4

Components of a laboratory investigation. ............... 41

Figure 5.1

Initial rate of a reaction can be determined from the gradient

to the rate curve at time zero ..................................... 101

Figure 5.2

Interpretation of a rate curve. .................................... 103

Figure 5.3

Laboratory set-up to follow the change in mass of a

reaction mixture ........................................................ 110

Figure 5.4(a)
and 5.4(b)

Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid

(CH3CO2H). .............................................................. 113

Figure 5.5(a)
and 5.5(b)

Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid

(H2SO4) ..................................................................... 113

Figure 5.6(a)
and 5.6(b)

Rate curves of a 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl and a 30 cm3 of

0.25 M HCl ....................................................................... 114

Figure 5.7(a)
and 5.7(b)

Rate curves of a 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl and a 10 cm3 of

0.25 M HCl ............................................................... 115

Figure 5.8(a)
and 5.8(b)

Rate curves of a 15 cm3 and a 30 cm3 of hydrochloric acid

(HCl) ......................................................................... 116

Figure 5.9(a)
and 5.9(b)

Rate curves of a 1 M and 0.5 M of hydrochloric acid

(HCl). ................................................................ 116

Figure 5.10

Debriefing sequence in classes 4A and 4B................ 117

Figure 5.11

Six rate curves fusing together on the same graph with a

summary table. .......................................................... 119

Figure 5.12

Rate curves obtained by some groups of students in the

pilot study ...................................................................... 125

xii

Figure 6.1

Design of the learning conditions for classes 4C and 4D.. 141

Figure 6.2

Diagrams showing the correct way of drawing a tangent to

a rate curve at time zero to determine the initial rate 143

Figure 6.3

Three experimental set-ups used to study the progress of the

reaction between magnesium and dilute hydrochloric acid... 144

Figure 6.4(a)(c)

Different pairs of rate curves to illustrate how to interpret

the curves .................................................................. 147

Figure 6.5(a)
and 6.5(b)

Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid

(CH3CO2H) ................................................................ 155

Figure 6.6(a)
and 6.6(b)

Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid

(H2SO4). ..................................................................... 155

Figure 6.7(a)
and 6.7(b)

Rate curves of a 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl and a 30 cm3 of

0.25 M HCl ................................................................ 156

Figure 6.8(a)
and 6.8(b)

Rate curves of a 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl and a 10 cm3 of

0.25 M HCl ................................................................ 157

Figure 6.9

Debriefing sequence: rate-product-rate-product used in

class 4C ...................................................................... 158

Figure 6.10(a)

Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid

(CH3CO2H). ............................................................... 162

Figure 6.10(b)

Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid

(H2SO4) ..................................................................... 162

Figure 6.11(a)

Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid

(CH3CO2H) ................................................................ 162

Figure 6.11(b)

Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid

(H2SO4) ...................................................................... 162

Figure 6.12

Debriefing sequence: rate-rate-product-product used in

class 4D ..................................................................... 163

Figure 6.13

Explanation on the effect of strength on the initial rate

and the amount of products, followed by the explanation
on the effect of basicity on these 2 aspects 167

xiii

Figure 6.14

Explanation on the effect of strength and basicity on

the initial rate, followed by explanation on the effect of
factors on the amount of products . 168

Figure 6.15

Different rate curves and summary table as conclusion of

the lesson ................................................................... 169

Figure 6.16(a)

Rate curves if zinc carbonate is in excess . 170

Figure 6.16(b)

Rate curves if zinc carbonate is the limiting reactant ... 170

Figure 6.17

A question extracted from 2008 HKCEE Chemistry Paper II... 170

Figure 7.1

Diagram showing the relationship between factors affecting

the reaction rate and the amount of products in an acidinvolved chemical reaction ... 178

Figure 7.2

Design of the learning conditions for classes 4C and 4D ..... 180

Figure 7.3

A pair of rate curves showing the initial rate and the

amount of products .................................................... 193

Figure 7.4

Flow of the debriefing sequence of classes 4C and 4D .... 195

Figure 7.5

Diagrammatic representation showing the interaction

effect between the patterns of variation used in the
experimentation and debriefing in classes 4C and 4D .. 196

Figure 7.6

From the NSS Chemistry and Teaching Strategies Seminars:

Catering for Learner Diversity (July 2008) by Professor
Lo, M. L. ... 198

Figure 7.7(a)

View parts from one perspective forming a whole ... 203

Figure 7.7(b)

View parts from two perspectives forming a whole ..... 203

Figure 7.8

Graphs showing the mean pretest and posttest score for

Questions 3, 4 and 6 .. 211

xiv

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1

Background of Study
Hong Kong is moving towards a knowledge-based economy in the twenty-

first century and education is set as one of its most important long-term social
investments. Since October 2000, the Government has started to implement the
education reform measures. Helping students learn how to learn through
developing generic skills, foundation knowledge, personal values and attitudes is
particularly important for our young generations to face the challenges of a
dynamically

changing

environment

(CDC,

2001).

Congruent

with

recommendations stated in the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996)

and Beyond 2000: Science Education for the Future (Millar & Osborne, 1998), the
Curriculum Development Council (2002a) argues that an understanding of science
concepts and the processes of science (often designated as scientific inquiry) play a
central role in helping our students to acquire important skills and develop
cognitive capacities for social and economic progress. Conducting scientific
inquiry, therefore, has assumed a challenge in science education and a paradigm
shift for better student learning (Curriculum Corporation, 1994; American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 1998). With an inquirybased approach, students are required to identify problems, make hypotheses,
design the experimental procedures, decide what to record, analyse, interpret, draw
conclusions and make evaluation. Students will not only develop initiatives,
creativity, responsibility, and communication abilities, but will also develop
appropriate scientific conceptions and science process skills which are useful in

many everyday applications, for example making socially responsible decisions in

human affairs (NRC, 1996; CDC, 2002a).

In science learning, the context of experimentation can be seen as the

established method for discovery in science (i.e. for learning on the collective
level). Observers who do not have hands-on science risk becoming passive
thinkers who do not know quite how to delve deeply into phenomena, concepts,
and theories (Wellman, 2001). Experimentation involving guided investigation
provides students opportunities to experience the ways in which scientists
investigate the world (Layton, 1990; Lazarowitz & Tamir, 1994), generate
scientific knowledge (Saunders, Cavallo & Abraham, 1999) and change their
misconception (Hwang & Liu, 1994). Evidence has indicated that the performance
of English students in science, relative to their counterparts in other countries, have
shown improvements in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study
(TIMSS), with particularly notable performance in the sub-area of practical
science, when more curriculum time was devoted to providing their students
opportunities for personal inquiry (NRC, 1996, p. 3). However, in an examinationoriented society like Hong Kong, students are usually asked to perform hands-on
activities recommended by laboratory workbooks that typically take the format of
step-by-step instruction. This following a recipe learning mode leaves students
few chances to put forward their own ideas through experimentation to develop
their scientific conceptions.

Students are often found to hold a wide range of alternative conceptions about
many scientific topics (Clement, Brown & Zietsman, 1989; Minstrell, 1992;

Clement, 1993; Garnett, Garnett & Hackling, 1995; Treagust, Duit & Fraser, 1996;
Barker, 2000; Pfundt & Duit, 2000; Taber, 2002; Duit & Treagust, 2003; Duit,
2009). They frequently make very different connections from the same classroom
dialogue and have very different interpretations (Lemke, 1990). Some would see
and record what their preconceptions told them when performing experiments
rather than what they are meant to observe (Driver, 1981). Some would construct
alternative conceptions on the basis of their everyday experience which are quite
different from the currently accepted, scientific explanations of natural phenomena
(Vosniadou, 1999).

Among the many scientific topics taught in the secondary school chemistry
curriculum, reaction rate is considered as a key concept (NRC, 1996) and an
understanding of which is a pre-requisite to the learning of kinetics at the
Advanced Level or undergraduate study. The importance of knowing the concept
of reaction rate and the factors that affect them is featured prominently in most
general chemistry curriculum (Cachapuz & Maskill, 1987; Ragsdale &
Vanderhooft, 1998; akmaki, Donnelly & Leach, 2003; akmaki, Leach, &
Donnelly, 2006). However, Lo (2006) has identified in her empirical study that it is
quite common to find Secondary 4 students in Hong Kong holding a conception
that volume is a factor affecting reaction rate. Other common alternative
conceptions on reaction rate include rate increases with time (Garnett et al., 1995;
Van Driel, 2002; akmaki et al., 2003).

To help students develop appropriate conceptions, the way in which the

teacher structures the lesson content for learning and the students experience the

lesson is found to have substantial influence (Pong & Morris, 2002). In recent
years, Marton and his research group made use of the variation theory, a learning
theory (see Marton & Booth, 1997; Bowden & Marton, 1998; Marton & Tsui,
2004; Lo, Pong & Chik, 2005; Ki, Tse, Shum & Lam, 2005; Pang & Lo, 2012), to
analyse the relationship between teaching and student learning. Results showed
that quality learning was closely related to the patterns of variation that were
enacted by the teacher and experienced by the students (Marton & Tsui, 2004).
Students from teachers who used variation consciously learnt better than the
students from teachers that did not (Pang & Marton, 2003). Yet, how a teacher
structures the teaching-learning sequences during the discussion in a science lesson
is also important for student learning (Andersson & Wallin, 2006; Viiri &
Savinainen, 2008). Consistent with Los (2006) and akmaki et al.s (2003)
findings, the researcher found that many of her S4 students also held the same
alternative conceptions: volume affects reaction rate and rate increases with time,
as revealed from the preliminary analysis of the pretest of her pilot study
conducted in May 2007. Thus, the researcher aims at making it possible for her
students to develop deeper understanding of reaction rate through scientific
investigations using variation theory as a pedagogical design.

1.2

Rationale and Research Approach

The reaction rate of a chemical process, and the factors that affect it, is a

central and important concept in Hong Kong Secondary 4 chemistry curriculum. A

number of studies have indicated that students come to chemistry classes holding
different alternative conceptions about reaction rate (Garnett et al., 1995; Lo, 2006;
akmaki, 2010; alik, Kolomu & Karaglge, 2010). If these pre-existing

alternative conceptions are not diagnosed and taken into account by the teacher,
they may interfere with students further learning. Thus revealing students
qualitatively different ways of conceptualizing reaction rate, identifying their
alternative conceptions, followed by formulating possible and effective
pedagogical instructions to overcome these confusions are necessary to help
students improve their understanding of this topic.

A design-based research approach with a pretest and posttest using

phenomenography and variation theory (see Marton & Booth, 1997) as the
theoretical framework was adopted in this study (see Chapter 3 for details). This
research approach is found appropriate because design-based research is theorygrounded (Wang & Hannafin, 2005), meaning that the researchers need to select a
theory about learning and instruction in the research to establish specific theoretic
claims about teaching and learning. Besides, it is integrative. A variety of research
methods and approaches from both qualitative and quantitative research paradigms
such as interview, comparative analysis and survey can be integrated.

In phenomenography, learning is defined as a change in the way of

experiencing something. What is to be learnt is regarded as the object of learning.
Aspects that are crucial to appropriating the object of learning are called critical
aspects. Phenomenography is a research specialization characterizing a way of
experiencing a phenomenon in terms of the critical aspects of the phenomenon as
discerned by the students. The theoretical concerns being brought in could help
teachers structure the conditions of learning. An extensive research into student
learning which focus on students experiencing has been conducted over the past

30 years. Much evidence of qualitative variation in terms of conceptions within a

range of disciplines has been found. These include studies on balance sheet in
accounting (Lucas, 2000), the mole (Lybeck, Marton, Strhmdahl & Tullberg,
1988; Strmdahl, 1996; Tullberg, 1997) and matter (Renstrm, 1988) in
chemistry, distillation in chemical engineering (Fraser, Linder, Allison,
Coombes & Case, 2006) and price in economics (Dahlgren, 1984; Dahlgren &
Marton, 1978; Pong, 1999; Pang, 2002). In recent years, researchers not only
describe what constitutes a way of experiencing a phenomenon, but also explore
the variations among ways of experiencing the same phenomenon and how those
variations evolve in terms of the simultaneous awareness of the critical aspects of
the phenomenon (Pang, 2003). To bring out the critical aspects that are to be
discerned by the students, certain patterns of variation, namely, generalization,
contrast, separation and fusion, have to be constituted.

A number of studies adopting the variation theory as a pedagogical design in

various subject domains have also been conducted (see Marton & Tsui, 2004; Lo,
Pong & Chik, 2005; Lo, Kwok, Pong, Ko & Wong, 2008). These include Ki, Lam,
Chung, Tse, Ko, Lau, Chou, Lai & Lais (2003) study on Chinese characters,
Pang and Martons (2005) study on price in economics, Linder, Fraser & Pangs
(2006) study on Newtons 3rd Law in physics, Lo, Hung and Chiks (2007)
study on electrochemistry in chemistry as well as Guos (2010) study on
altitude of a triangle in mathematics. In the present study, variation theory is also
adopted as the conceptual framework in the pedagogical design. It is hoped that by
appropriating suitable teaching strategies using different patterns of variation,
students alternative conceptions on reaction rate could be changed to

scientifically acceptable one, as Marton (1992, p. 266) refers, the art of teaching
all things to all men.

1.3

Aims and Research Questions

In the past few decades, there has been an increasing interest in research

related to experimentation and inquiry-based learning in science education (see

Ausubel, 1968; Aikenhead, 1979; Friedler & Tamir, 1986; Goldsworthy, Watson
& Wood-Robinson, 2000; DeMeo, 2001; Rudd, Greenbowe, Hand & Legg, 2001).
It is widely believed that carrying out scientific investigations could be beneficial
to student learning in scientific knowledge and inquiry skills (NRC, 1996; Science
Education Section, EMB, 2005). To date, nonetheless, only a few research studies
have been conducted in the field of phenomenography to deal with the constitution
of the space of learning by groups of students conducting scientific inquiry or
focus specifically on conception of reaction rate (cf. Justi, 2002; Lo, 2006;
akmaki, 2010; Pang & Lo, 2012). As such, the present study attempts to fill this
research gap which aims at improving students understanding of reaction rate
through conducting scientific investigation using variation theory as a pedagogical
design. It aims to firstly help Secondary 4 chemistry students understand the
concept of a fair test and develop the capability of designing an experiment for a
scientific investigation, and secondly improve their understanding of the two
aspects of a reaction, i.e. the reaction rate and amount of products formed. In
particular, the effects of using different patterns of variation in the introduction,
experimentation and debriefing session of the research lessons on the lived object
of learning (student learning outcomes) are investigated. As some factors that
affect the aspects reaction rate and amount of products are common, students

might mix up between them. Thus two experimental groups, instructed with
variations in sequence of factors in the pilot study and variations in sequence of
aspects in the main study, are compared to study the instruction effects. The main
research question in the present study is: Can the use of variation theory, in the
context of doing scientific investigation, help students discern the critical aspects
of reaction rate? The aim of the study can be stated more precisely as the effort to
answer the following three questions:
1. Can the use of variation theory help students appropriate the object of learning?
What patterns of variation are most effective in enhancing student
appropriation of the object of learning?
2. Is there any interaction effect between students level of academic ability and
the patterns of variation?
3. Does the use of scientific investigation afford students greater opportunity to
discern the aspects of the object of learning?

1.4

Significance of the Study

The present study could possibly contribute to the academic field and shed

light to the local curriculum development. In the field of phenomenography, a

number of studies on qualitative variation in terms of conceptions in chemistry
have been conducted in recent decades. Examples include Lybeck et al.s (1988),
Strmdahls (1996) and Tullbergs (1997) studies of the mole, Renstrms
(1988) study of matter, and Fraser et al.s (2006) study of distillation. Also,
there are a fair number of studies on investigating the relationship between the
space of learning (variation) mainly constituted by the teacher and student learning
(e.g. Pang & Marton, 2003; Marton & Tsui, 2004; Ki et al., 2005; Lo et al., 2005;

Carstensen & Bernhard, 2007; Lo et al., 2007; Pang & Lo, 2012). However, very
few studies in this field deal with conception of reaction rate through conducting
scientific inquiry. Experimentation allows students to obtain authentic data and
develop their procedural skills while using an appropriate teaching-learning
sequence helps students develop scientific conceptions. Much research has
reported that separation followed by fusion could be a powerful pattern for
students to learn. Therefore the present study attempts to study specifically what
should be separated first and which debriefing sequence after experimentation is
more conducive to learning. It is hoped that the findings of this study could
advance the variation theory and inform teaching practices, e.g. suggest ways of
planning teaching-learning sequences in practical science lessons, especially in
scientific investigations which involve different task-pool results. They might
possibly provide some insight to the research field of student learning literature,
phenomenography and science education.

Apart from the academic field, how inquiry skills could be developed by using
variation theory is another research interest. Investigative Study, a group-based
scientific investigation, has been added in the New Senior Secondary chemistry
curriculum in Hong Kong as a key component in the School-Based Assessment
(CDC & HKEAA, 2007). The present study could serve to a certain extent as a
pioneer to the NSS chemistry curriculum. The corresponding findings could
possibly inform curriculum developers or teachers the implementation and impact
of Investigative Study on students learning outcomes in the local context and to
match the curriculum to the needs of students.

1.5

Definition of Terms

In this section, terms that are frequently used in this study are briefly defined.
Conception
Conception or a way of seeing is defined as the internal relationship between an
individual and a phenomenon in the research field of phenomenography. It is the
way an individual experiences or sees the phenomenon. The terms ways of
seeing, ways of experiencing and conceptions are used interchangeably in
this study.

Scientific Inquiry
Scientific inquiry is the process in which phenomena are investigated and the
results of the observations are interpreted. In carrying out a scientific investigation,
students could test out their ideas experimentally, develop practical skills, use
collaborative approaches to solve problems and appreciate the importance of
experimental evidence (Minstrell & Van Zee, 2000).

Object of learning
Object of learning is a capability, and any capability has a general aspect and a
specific aspect (Marton & Tsui, 2004). The general aspect (the indirect object of
learning) refers to the nature of the capability, such as remembering, discerning,
interpreting, grasping, or viewing. It relates to the long term educational goals, e.g.
fostering certain generic skills like inquiry and problem-solving. The specific
aspect (the direct object of learning) refers to the subject matter on which these
acts are carried out, such as problems, or concepts upon which the long-term goals
are built (Lo et al., 2007).

10

Patterns of Variation
The patterns of variation, namely, contrast, generalization, separation and fusion
refer to the patterns by which the variation is brought about to the learners. When
certain aspects of a phenomenon vary while other aspects remain invariant, those
aspects that vary are discerned (Pang, 2003). Thus it is necessary to pay close
attention to what varies and what is invariant in a learning situation in order to
understand what it is possible to learn in that situation and what not (Marton &
Tsui, 2004).

1.6

Structure of the Thesis

This thesis consists of seven chapters. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the

thesis. It includes the background, rationales and research approach, research

questions, aims and significance of the study, definition of terms and the structure
of the thesis. Chapter 2 presents in the beginning literatures review on changes of
aims of science education and the nature of science. Alternative conceptions of
scientific phenomena and learning difficulties in science specifically those of
reaction rate are discussed. Teaching strategies commonly used is also included.
Next, literature on experimentation in science education, scientific inquiry and
inquiry-based laboratory work are explored. This chapter is completed with
literature review on teaching-learning sequences.

Chapter 3 introduces the theoretical framework for the present study. It

documents the early development of phenomenography which aims at revealing
the qualitatively different ways of experiencing a phenomenon. Recent
development of phenomenography, which is seen as a shift in emphasis from

11

methodological orientation to theoretical concerns, is explored. The functional

relationship between discernment, variation and simultaneity as well as the patterns
of variation are discussed. Research studies into student learning using variation
theory as a pedagogical design is described at the end.

In Chapter 4, the methodology adopted in this study, including the designbased research approach (both qualitative and quantitative), data collection
methods, testing instruments, scoring methods, and credibility establishment are
depicted. This is followed by the implementation and results of the pilot study
Chapter 5 and those of the main study Chapter 6. In these two chapters, the lived
object of learning before teaching, the intended object of learning, the research
lesson plan and the enacted object of learning are described. The use of different
patterns of variation in the introduction, experimentation and debriefing sessions of
the lessons are justified by literature where appropriate. How variations are used in
the experimentation is demonstrated as a pioneer study in the research field of
phenomenography. The final chapter, Chapter 7, discusses the relationship
between the enacted and lived object of learning. Both quantitative and qualitative
analyses are employed to examine the effectiveness of the use of variation theory
to improve students understanding of reaction rate with respect to the objects of
learning. Different patterns of variation introduced in the two classes with different
debriefing sequences allow the interaction effect between experimentation and
debriefing to be investigated. This chapter also provides readers insights and
suggestions to explore the use of variation theory as a pedagogical design in
teaching. Implications and limitations of the study are included. Finally,
concluding remarks are summarized at the end of the thesis.

12

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW ON SCIENCE
LEARNING
2.1

Introduction
This chapter consists of four parts reviewing literature related to the present

study. First, aims of science education and the nature of science are described.
Second, recent research studies on alternative conceptions of scientific phenomena,
learning difficulties in science and possible teaching strategies are explored. This is
supplemented by the literature related to the topic reaction rate in chemistry
education. Third, literature on experimentation in science education, scientific
inquiry and inquiry-based laboratory work are discussed. The chapter is completed
by reviewing studies on teaching-learning sequences.

2.2 Literature in Science Education

2.2.1 Changes of aims of science education
Over the past few decades, the aims of science education and the science
curriculum have undergone a few prominent changes. In the 20th-century, the
curriculum presented science as a body of knowledge which is value-free,
objective and detached - a succession of facts to be learnt. However, this results
in an insufficient indication of any overarching coherence and a lack of contextual
relevance to the future needs of young people (Millar & Osborne, 1998, p. 4).
Starting from the 1960s, there has been a significant shift of an emphasis of
curriculum from content to method, what thinking scientifically actually entails,

13

and an awareness of what scientists do (Hurd, 1969; Uzzell, 1978; Jones, 1981).
Roberts (1982) identifies seven different curriculum emphases: everyday
coping, structure of science, science, technology and decisions, scientific
skill development, correct explanations, self as explainer and solid
foundation. Thelen (1983) argues about the importance of value issues as well as
concern with the products and processes of science in the curriculum goals.
Hodson (1985) builds on Thelens argument and maintains that a complete science
education programme should consist of the following components: a concern for
scientific knowledge, processes and methods of science, direct experience of
scientific activity, appreciation of the relationships between science and society,
and the fostering of positive attitudes towards science. In other words, content
knowledge, process skills, actual experience or practice, values and attitudes are all
important components in the science curriculum.

On moving towards the 21st century, international debate has suggested that
the primary aim of school science should be scientific literacy. In addition to the
content knowledge of science, scientific literacy implies an understanding of the
nature of scientific knowledge, its production and communication. It represents
cognitive capacities for utilizing science/technology information and making
socially responsible decisions in human affairs and for social and economic
progress (Hurd, 1998). Millar (1989) argues that without science concepts, it
would be difficult for students to follow public discussion of scientific results or
public policy issues related to science and technology. According to National
Science Education Standards developed by the National Research Council (NRC,
1996) in the United States, scientific literacy is of increasing importance in the

14

workplace. Jobs nowadays demand advanced skills such as reasoning, creative

thinking, decision making, problem solving and using technology effectively for
life-long learning. An understanding of science and the processes of science
contribute in an essential way to these skills. Scientific literacy helps people share
in the richness and excitement of comprehending the natural world and participate
in discussions of scientific issues that affect society. This echoes the new
curriculum goals of science education proposed in the United Kingdom (Millar &
Osborne, 1998, p. 8): teaching science is to enable young people to become
scientifically literate able to acquire a broad, general understanding of the
important ideas and explanatory frameworks of science, develop scientific inquiry
skills, and provide evidence and argument to establish reliable knowledge about
our natural world.

The call for scientific literacy as one of the aims of science education in Hong
Kong is also documented in Science Education - Key Learning Area Curriculum
Guide (Primary 1 - Secondary 3) (CDC, 2002b) which states that:
School science education will provide learning experiences through which students
acquire scientific literacy. Students will develop the necessary scientific knowledge
and understanding, process skills, values and attitudes, for their personal
development, for participating actively in a dynamically changing society, and for
contributing towards a scientific and technological world. (p. 17)

The essential learning experiences for achieving the above aims are organised into
six strands, namely, scientific investigation, life and living, the material world,
energy and change, the earth and beyond, and science, technology and society.
Scientific Investigations, which help students to develop science process skills,
understanding of science concepts and the nature of science, is inter-related to the

15

other five strands as follows in a graphical form (CDC, 2002b, p. 21) (see Figure
2.1):

Figure 2.1:

The essential learning experiences for achieving the aims of science

education are organised into six strands

In order to foster scientific literacy in our society, school science learning

should promote students science process skill (often designated as inquiry skill),
abilities to apply what is learnt to new contexts, conceptual understanding and their
understanding of the nature of science (Enger & Yager, 2001).

2.2.2 Nature of science

Nature of science (NOS) refers to the epistemology, sociology and history of
science. Science is regarded as a way of knowing, or the values and beliefs
inherent to scientific knowledge and its development (Lederman, 1992). Science
presumes that the things and events in the world occur in consistent patterns. It
involves systematic ways of asking questions, making careful observations, and
forging connections between present knowledge and new discoveries as they

16

unfold (Wellman, 2001). It is both a method and a set of concepts; both a process
for producing knowledge and a product (Harlen, 1985). The content information of
science is tied to the conceptual framework. The emphasis of content is on its
significance, the questions behind the information, the structural aspects of
disciplines, and is defined by its relation to several interactive processes. Process,
on the other hand, depends both on making careful observations of phenomena and
on inventing theories for making sense out of those observations. It is not just
method; it is learning how to manipulate content in order to extend its relationships.
Crowell (1989) asserts that content and process stand in relation to each other,
and each is embedded in the other (p. 61). Hodson, (1985, p. 35) also put forward
the argument that scientific method should be seen as a dynamic process which
changes and develops in accordance to the scientific knowledge it utilizes. We
could adopt scientific processes that we consider the most appropriate to the
domain in problem-solving.

Scientists share certain basic beliefs and attitudes about what they do and how
they view their work (Hodson, 1985). They believe that through the use of
intelligence, and with the aid of instruments that extend the senses, people can
discover patterns in the nature, describe and predict observable phenomena.
Science knowledge is tentative and subject to change (Johnston & Southerland,
2001). It is because a theory may be replaced by a new one if the latter could
explain a wider range of observations than the former. Osborne and Gilbert (1980)
claim that our understanding of the natural world could never be ascertained. Thus
we should think intelligently and imaginatively on the processes which give rise to
the observed phenomena.

17

There has been growing arguments for science education to provide a more
effective preparation for citizenship (AAAS, 1998; Millar & Osborne, 1998). Apart
from scientific knowledge, many educators argue that it is important to teach
students something about science, i.e. ideas-about-science. Matthews (1997)
further states that the nature of science is inherently found in many educational
issues such as multicultural science, the evolution, feminist critiques of modern
science, the place of religion in science education and environmentalism. Through
learning the nature of science, students could develop the capability in solving their
lives problems. Contemporary academics point out that the nature of science is a
contested domain with little consensus about what should be taught (Alters, 1997;
Laudan, 1990; Taylor, 1996). The Evidence-based Practice in Science Education
(EPSE) Research Network conducted several projects to explore the extent of
consensus amongst scientists, science communicators and educators about those
aspects of the nature of science that should be essential components of science
curriculum (Ratcliffe, Osborne, Collins, Millar & Duschl, 2001). Nine key themes
emerged, many of which being the methods of science. Among these, historical
development of scientific knowledge and science and certainty are two aspects
of the nature of science. In the New Senior Secondary science curriculum
framework in Hong Kong, the nature of science, which is intertwined with key
ideas in science and unifying concepts, is presented as the following framework
(CDC & HKEAA, 2004, p. 210) (see Figure 2.2):

18

Figure 2.2:

Framework for the New Senior Secondary science curriculum in Hong Kong

The nature of science has its four facets being highlighted below (CDC & HKEAA,
2004, p. 211):
1.

Attitude of science - searching for truth; science is based on evidence and

empirical standards; it also encourages innovation and skepticism.

2.

Thinking processes of science - scientific knowledge is built on creative thinking;

there is no fixed sequence of steps that all scientific investigations follow; the
application of deductive and inductive logic leads to the emergence of new
scientific theories, which are then tested empirically; scientific knowledge, while
durable and reliable, has a tentative character.

3.

Practice of science - precise experimental design and proper instrumentation;

prudent gathering and handling of empirical quantitative and qualitative data using
appropriate tools and instruments; honest reporting.

4.

Community of science - making use of collective wisdom, encouraging free

exchange and open-minded discussion and debate; scientists critically assess new
discoveries via the peer-reviewing system.

19

To help students develop appropriate scientific conceptions and become

scientifically literate, content knowledge, inquiry skill and basic process skill are
all important aspects. Millar and Osborne (1998) point out that students should be
led to stand back and examine what happened, to live through some of the
intellectual experience, to analyse, and to assess the line of thought, recognizing
the elements of its logic, its strength, and its limitations. Driver, Leach, Millar &
Scott (1996) also put forward that:
Some explicit reflection on the nature of scientific knowledge, the role of observation
and experiment, the nature of theory, and the relationship between evidence and
theory, is an essential component of this aspect of understanding of science. (p. 14)

Science teachers should therefore engage students effectively in studies of the

philosophy, history and practice of science. They should enable students to
distinguish science from non-science, understand the evolution and practice of
science as a human endeavour, and critically analyse assertions made in the name
of science (National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), 2003, p. 16). However,
many research studies show that students hold a wide range of alternative
conceptions about curriculum topics, and that these ideas often impede learning in
science (Driver, Squires, Rushworth & Wood-Robinson, 1994; Taber, 2003).
Osborne and Wittrock (1983) put forward the view that it is important to identify
students alternative conceptions because their conceptions represent their ways of
making sense of the world. Ausubel (1968) also argues that the most important
single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this
and teach accordingly (p. v).

20

2.3

Alternative Conceptions of Scientific Phenomena

2.3.1 Defining alternative conceptions

The term alternative conceptions refers to experience-based explanations
constructed by a learner to make sense of a range of natural phenomena and
objects (Abimbola, 1988). Differing terms that bear similar meanings, e.g.
mistakes or errors (Gowin, 1983); naive beliefs (Caramazza, McCloskey & Green,
1981); childrens science (Gilbert, Osborne & Fensham, 1982); misconceptions
(Gowin, 1983; Novak, 1987; Nakhleh, 1992; Taber, 2002); preconceptions
(Bodner, 1986; Hashweh, 1988; Clement, 1993); prescientific conceptions (Good,
1991); preinstructional conceptions (Treagust, Duit & Fraser, 1996); alternative
frameworks (Driver & Easley, 1978; Gilbert & Watts, 1983) and students
descriptive and explanatory systems (Nussbaum & Novick, 1982). The variety of
terms used is related to the different underlying idiosyncratic epistemological
backgrounds of researchers, which reflects the complex nature and multiple causes
of learners informal conceptions (Wandersee, Mintzes & Novak, 1994).
Misconceptions refer to student misunderstandings of a concept, ideas that do not
agree with accepted scientific views, and are difficult to teach away.
Preconception is generally used to describe an idea that a student holds before
general science instruction. Preconceptions may or may not be misconceptions,
depending on whether they agree with scientific understandings. Pre-scientific
conception has similar meaning as preconception, and emphasizes that students
ideas may eventually lead them to the current scientific conceptions in a specific
context. Alternative framework is used to describe childrens knowledge
structures that have developed through their experience of the physical world
rather than through science education. In this study, using the neutral term

21

alternative conceptions to denote students understanding of a concept is

preferred to depreciative terms such as mistakes, errors, or misconceptions. The
reason is that alternative conception implies that such conceptions are contextually
valid and rational, and can be used to ground further instruction leading to
more scientifically acceptable conceptions. They can be used as anchors to
bridge to new understanding (Clement, 1993; Clement, Brown & Zietsman, 1989).
Also, Wandersee, Mintzes and Novak (1994) comment that alternative conceptions
appear to be the term of choice for the majority of researchers in this field of study
and is widely used in literature.

2.3.2 Literature on alternative conceptions in science

In mid 1970s, research on students alternative conceptions began to boom
worldwide (Duit, 1999). Many empirical studies (e.g. Minstrell, 1984; Novak,
1987; Clement et al., 1989; Driver et al., 1994; Barker, 1995; Garnett et al., 1995;
Pfundt & Duit, 2000; Duit & Treagust, 2003; Duit, 2009) provide ample evidence
that the alternative conceptions held by students could be substantially different
from the scientific conceptions taught in schools. For example, some 85% of
secondary school physics students were likely to hold an alternative conception
that movement was related to force (Gilbert & Zylbersztajn, 1985; Watts &
Zylbersztajn, 1981). In a biology study, only one third of 15-year-old students were
found to use scientifically acceptable ideas about plant nutrition (Bell & Brook,
1984).

Chemistry is not exempt from its share of alternative conceptions. There is a

wealth of literatures on alternative conceptions relating to various chemistry topics
(Barker, 2000; Furio & Calatayud, 1996; Nakhleh, 1992, 1994; Taber, 2002, 2009;

22

Barke, Hazari & Yitbarek, 2009; Duit, 2009). For instance, high school students
had difficulties in distinguishing between heat and temperature in thermodynamics
lessons (Ben-Zvi, Silberstein & Mamlok, 1993). When students were asked to
interpret a curve showing the relationship between energy added to a sample of ice
and temperature change, some of them used phrases like ice was heated by adding
more and more temperature. Hand and Treagust (1988) identified five key
alternative conceptions about acids and bases among sixty grade 11 students.
Students were found to think that the difference between a strong and weak acid is
that strong acids eat material away faster than a weak acid. In the study done by
Griffiths and Preston (1992) on particulate nature of matter, one third of grade 11
and 12 students claimed that atoms are alive because they move. Alternative
conceptions about chemical bonding among undergraduate and high school
students include the shape of molecules is due only to the repulsion between
bonding pairs (Birk & Kurtz, 1999) and ionic substances such as sodium
chloride possess covalent bonds (Peterson, Treagust & Garnett, 1989). Consistent
with the vague ideas about atoms and molecules, students aged between 8 and 17
were found to have difficulties in explaining phase changes they described the
bubbles formed by boiling water as being made of air, oxygen or hydrogen
(Osborne & Cosgrove, 1983). In electrochemistry, some students thought that
electrons travel around the circuit causing a linear sequence of events in an
electrochemical cell (Talanquer, 2006).

2.3.3 Learning difficulties in science

One of the goals of the Science Education is to develop more effective ways to
teach science students because research has shown that current methods of science

23

instruction are not always effective (Teichert & Stacy, 2002). Students often fail to
develop appropriate scientific conceptions after traditional chemistry instruction
(Bodner, 1991; Herron, 1996; Nakhleh, 1992). Some students learning difficulties
could be explained in terms of teachers conceptions of teaching, which were
influenced by the historically earlier conceptions that were layered in teachers
experience (Tullberg, 1997). For example, Lybeck et al.s (1988) and Strmdahls
(1996) studies point out that even chemistry teachers have different conceptions of
the mole these conceptions could be categorized into 4 qualitatively different
ways of conceptualization. These different conceptions might lead to confusion in
students understanding of the mole. Other learning difficulties rest with the use
of analogies and metaphors, and the problems of communicating the meaning of
some central concepts in science. Lambert (2002) argues that common disorder
metaphors for entropy, such as a messy room having high entropy, could be
quite misleading. Many scientific ideas cannot be explained easily through
definitions but could be acquired by a process of trial-and-error (Thiele & Treagust,
1994). Some learning difficulties are caused by deficiencies/inadequacies in
students knowledge structure (Ben-Zvi, Eylon & Silberstein, 1987; Kempa &
Hodgson, 1976). Some may originate from the use of scientific languages (Halloun,
2004). Words with well-known meaning based on everyday concepts might be
mixed up with formal scientific terms under which scientific concepts were
inherited. For example the word temperature has a formal definition in classical
statistical mechanics, whereas its non-formal daily life conception could refer to
physical sensation of hot water (Strmdahl, 2012). Another example is the word
share used in chemical bonding like atoms share electrons to obtain stable octet

24

structure whereas students can also use it in their social situations (Coll & Taylor,
2001).

Some learning difficulties, on the other hand, might be attributed to the preexisting notions that are inconsistent with the intended new learning in which the
students hold (Taber, 2003). Perceptual experiences from daily lives could be a
cause. For example salt is associated by chemists with the spatial arrangement of
sodium ions and chloride ions, while young children would rather associate it with
its taste (Van Driel, 2002). Also, the abstract nature of science (e.g., Zoller, 1990)
and the high demand on mathematical content (Laws, 1996) might tell why
students find science difficult.

In chemistry learning, it is important for students to see the intertextual link

between the three levels of chemical representations: macroscopic (observable
phenomena), microscopic (arrangement of atoms/molecules), and symbolic levels
(chemical symbols, equations and stoichiometry) (Gabel, 1992; Johnstone, 1993;
Ebenezer, 2001; Wu, Krajcik & Soloway, 2001; Wu, 2003; Tasker & Dalton,
2006). However, research studies indicate that it is not an easy task to achieve
(Novick & Nussbaum, 1978; Pfundt, 1982). Students quite often made the wrong
link between them. For example in Anderssons (1990) study, some students
thought that if the properties of atoms and molecules are the cause of the observed
macroscopic phenomena, these invisible particles should share the feature of the
things being observed (e.g. colour). If teachers did not apply appropriate strategies
to assist students making meaningful links based on their prior knowledge and
experiences, students might find these representations as discrete entities rather

25

than the critical aspects that should be focused on simultaneously in understanding

a scientific phenomenon.

Minstrell (1992) proposes that students have pieces of knowledge which are
closely related to particular problem contexts. These intuitive ideas may have an
internal coherence that is not obvious to the teachers. These conceptions are often
not just different from, but may also contradict, the science to be learnt. Sometimes
students alternative conceptions can be very tenacious, and are not greatly
changed by instruction. No single aspect can account adequately for the whole
spectrum of learning difficulties and their underlying causes (Ben-Zvi & Hofstein,
1996).

2.3.4 Literature on alternative conceptions of reaction rate and

learning difficulties
Though vast empirical studies on alternative conceptions in various chemistry
topics have been conducted, only remarkably few in the domain of chemical
kinetics have been done (Van Driel, 2002; akmaki et al., 2003; akmaki et al.,
2006; Kirik & Boz, 2012). Garnett, Garnett and Hackling (1995) identified an
alternative conception among 17-19-year-old students that the rate of a chemical
reaction increases with time. They argue that this idea could have arisen from the
observation that it takes some seconds for a magnesium surface oxide layer to
dissolve before the surface of the metal is exposed to a dilute acid, or a wood fire
burns slowly at the beginning and goes faster thereafter. Similar findings were
observed in other studies throughout the years. In Van Driels (2002) study, a
group of students was asked to explain why reaction rate increases at higher

26

temperature and reasoned that during collision, fast moving particles would bounce
back without a change or reaction occurring. Some added that the molecules would
not have enough time to exchange atoms.

In akmaki et al.s (2003) study on Turkish students ideas about the

relationship between concentration of reactants and reaction rate, six mutually
exclusive models were deduced. About 23% of the secondary school students
responses were classified as the Increasing Model - reaction rate increases as the
reaction progresses. 8% of them belonged to the Increasing Constant Model reaction rate is zero at the beginning and gradually increases up to a maximum
value, and remains constant at this value. The researchers argue that students might
have confused reaction rate and amount of products.

Los (2006) study on high school students indicated that students often
consider volume as a factor affecting the rate of a chemical reaction. Another
study done by akmaki (2010) found that about 33% of secondary school
students wrongly interpreted reaction rate as the period of time taken for a reaction
to occur. Students could not differentiate between reaction rate and reaction
time. Nearly 60% of them again thought that reaction rate increases with time.
Some students argued that the rate of an exothermic reaction would not be affected
by an increase in temperature because exothermic reactions release energy and thus
did not need energy to proceed. They seemed to confuse the chemical kinetic
concepts with the thermodynamic concepts. Alternative conceptions on factors
affecting reaction rate have also been identified in other studies as exothermic
reactions are faster than endothermic ones (akmaki, 2005; Kirik & Boz, 2012)

27

and a catalyst only speeds up the forward reaction (Voska & Heikkinen, 2000).
Pre-existing alternative conceptions or ways of apprehending the world could be
quite resistant to change by classroom teaching (Preece, 1984). If they are not
diagnosed and taken into account by the teacher, they may act as impediments to
the intended learning (Taber, 2002).

Apart from learning difficulties that might have arisen from alternative
conceptions, technical problems encountered in experimentation could be another
cause hindering students conceptual learning of reaction rate. Many
experiments show qualitatively the effect of concentration, temperature, and a
catalyst on the rates of chemical reactions, but it is difficult to gather quantitative
data in a general chemistry laboratory (Ragsdale & Vanderhooft, 1998). The direct
chemical analysis of the concentration of a reactant or product versus time is
desirable but frequently very labour intensive. Indirect physical methods are easily
applied in advanced courses, but often limited instrumentation is available in
beginning courses. Wood (1975, p. 627) argues that only few reaction systems are
available that allow students to easily determine the concentration of all reaction
species at any instant of time in order to closely examine the state of the system.
Justi (2002) also puts it,
If there is a feeling that students have problems in learning chemical kinetics,
then surely such problems should be clearly characterized It would be
important not only to find out the major difficulties which students at all school
levels meet, but also to investigate whether these difficulties are related to their
misunderstandings of other ideas. (p.306)

28

Thus, further research and appropriate teaching pedagogy is required in order to

give insights into the ways in which students conceptualize chemical kinetics at
school.

2.3.5 Teaching strategies in science learning

If we believe that meaningful learning depends upon understanding something
new with respect to what is already known, opportunities should be provided to
elicit students past experience before teaching a particular science topic (Minstrell,
1989; Treagust et al., 1996). This can be done by conducting paper-and-pencil tests
or interviews. Recording ideas on paper allows students to notice inconsistencies
between their prior understanding and what actually happens. Thus, revealing
students alternative conceptions through written tasks or interviews and
formulating effective pedagogical instructions to overcome the confusions
identified would be needed to help students change their ways of seeing scientific
phenomena so that scientific conceptions could be developed.

One of the common teaching strategies to foster conceptual change is to use

the cognitive conflict model (Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982; Niaz,
1995), i.e. by deliberately presenting the students with discrepant events. This is
intended to invoke a disequilibration (Piaget, 1977) or conceptual conflict that
induces students to reflect on their conceptions as they try to resolve the conflict. It
is hoped that the students will become dissatisfied with their current conceptions
and then search for a new and more fruitful conceptual scheme that replaces the
old ones. Another strategy to elicit and explore students conception in science is
to present pairs of diagrams of chemical species or systems to students and ask

29

them to suggest similarities and differences. It is assumed that the students have
acquired a concept once they are able to correctly identify examples from nonexamples (Kellogg, 1995). Some may use concept mapping to explore students
conceptions (Kinchin & Alias, 2005). Others may use computer animations to help
students visualize dynamic chemical processes at the microscopic level in order to
reduce their alternative conceptions (Tasker & Dalton, 2006; alik et al., 2010).
However, some key scientific ideas might still be too complex when first
encountered by many students and teachers need other strategies for helping
students develop their scientific thinking, such as experimentation.

2.4

Experimentation in Science Education

2.4.1 Research on experimentation in science education

There is now a considerable amount of educational research on work related
to experimentation in science education. An important reason is the distinctive role
and unique potential of the laboratory on the effectiveness of learning in the
science curriculum. Dating back to about 200 years ago, Edgeworth and
Edgeworth (1811) claimed:
Until children have acquired some knowledge of effects, they cannot inquire into
causes. Observation must precede reasoning; and as judgement is nothing more than
a perception of the results of comparison, we should never urge our pupils to judge
until they have acquired some portion of experience. (p. 424)

It is apparent that the comment made by Edgeworth about the importance of

laboratory work in science learning is still valid. The school laboratories have been
seen as the places established by the educational institutions for learning science.
According to the Hegarty-Hazels (1990, p. 4) definition, laboratory work is a form

30

of practical work taking place in a purposely-assigned environment where students

engage in planned learning experiences. Students in the laboratory interact with
materials to observe and understand phenomena. Through the experimentation,
students make links between two domains: the domain of real objects and
observable things, and the domain of ideas (Millar, Tiberghien & Le Marchal,
2002) (Figure 2.3).

domain of real objects

and observable things

Figure 2.3:

domain of ideas

Experimentation helps students make links between two domains

In science learning, the context of experimentation can be seen as the

established method for discovery in science and learning science concepts. Many
of the science programmes developed in the 1960s (e.g. Physical Science Study
Committee (PSSC), Chemical Education Material Study (CHEM Study),
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS), Schools Council Integrated
Science Project (SCISP), Nuffield) regarded laboratory as a place where students
are actively involved in scientific investigations, thereby developing their inquiry
skills and gaining deeper understanding of scientific concepts, laws and theories
(Friedler & Tamir, 1986). Hurd (1969) states that the goals for laboratory
instruction should focus upon the inquiry, discovery, processes of science as well
as its intellectual components. Without the opportunities for manipulation provided
in the laboratory, even high school students may fail to grasp science concepts
(Lawson, 1975; Lawson & Renner, 1975; McNally, 1974). A study conducted by
Shavelson, Baxter, and Pine (1992) found that students having experience with
hands-on activities could reliably note their own progress in laboratory activities.

31

Observers who do not have hands-on science risk becoming passive thinkers
who do not know quite how to delve deeply into phenomena, concepts, and
theories (Wellman, 2001). The laboratory also offers unique opportunities to
identify student misconceptions (Driver & Bell, 1986; Friedler, 1984). Laboratory
work promotes the development of cognitive abilities such as problem solving,
analysis, generalizing (Ausubel, 1968), critical thinking, applying, synthesizing,
evaluating, decision-making, and creativity (Shulman & Tamir, 1973). In an
informal survey of several high schools in United States conducted by Gabel (1993)
in which 64 chemistry students were asked about what they liked best about high
school chemistry, 45 or 70% said that it was the laboratory activities. Students,
when offered a chance to experience meaningful, nontrivial but not too difficult
experiences, become motivated not only in their laboratory activities but also in
studying science (Ben-Zvi, Hofstein, Samuel & Kempa, 1977; Henry, 1975;
Selmes, Ashton, Meredith & Newal, 1969). Olson (1973, p. 41) argues that schools
should provide students direct experience through laboratory work in serving the
educational goals pertaining to the development of skills. Tamir (1990) builds on
Olsons observation and emphasizes that:
The laboratory is certainly expected to provide for the development of motor and
intellectual skills as well as problem solving abilities and affective outcomes (since)
the major learning mode is direct experience. (p. 244)

Woolnough and Allsop (1985) proposed a general classification of laboratory

work into four categories: illustrations (of theory), exercises (to practice standard
procedures), experiences (to give students a feel for phenomena) and
investigations (to allow students to experience scientific inquiry). Kirschner and
Meester (1988) suggested a slightly different one: formal (to illustrate laws and

32

concepts), experimental (open-ended), divergent (from a common start), and

skills/procedures related. Fuhrman, Novick, Lunetta and Tamir (1978) proposed a
more detailed classification. They developed the Laboratory structure and task
Analysis Inventory (LAI) to help characterize laboratory organisation and
laboratory tasks. The organisation categories include the structure of the task
(whether its overall approach is inductive or deductive), the relation to text
(whether it precedes, follows, or is integrated with the related theory), the
cooperation mode (whether it involves common task-pool results or different taskpool results) and the simulations (whether the data are first- or second-hand or
from a simulation). The task analysis categories include Planning and design,
Performance, Analysis and application, each subdivided into specific aspects of
student performance.

In Saunders et al.s (1999) study which focused on studying the relationship

between students laboratory experiences and their understanding of scientific
knowledge, many students reported that they generated scientific knowledge
because they were performing experiments and thinking scientifically. The
researchers concluded that experiencing more inquiry laboratory instruction might
help students bring their own scientific epistemologies closer to their ideas about
professional scientific epistemology and hence learn more about science. Another
study done by Hwang and Liu (1994) was to investigate whether students could
develop a better understanding of specific concepts related to conceptions of
solution in chemistry by engaging them to do experiments. The findings suggested
that strategies involving experimentation and guided investigation to initiate

33

conceptual conflict help students to some extent change their misconception and
promote their better acquisition of solution concepts.

Despite the advantages brought about by experimentation, learning in the

laboratory is still a controversial issue among science educators because it does not
seem to be always successful. The outcomes of studying science by laboratoryoriented programmes sometimes fell short of expectation (Hofstein & Lunetta,
1982; Woolnough & Allsop, 1985). For example, the results of the surveys
conducted by the Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) in England revealed that
many high school students failed to develop basic practical skills such as
describing patterns in data, drawing inferences from presented data and designing
their own experiments (APU, 1984, p. 189). Woolnough and Allsop (1985) argue
that the failure might be due to the practical work being simply focused on
teaching theoretical concepts rather than the aims of practical experience. Basic
process skills should better be developed by exercises, a feel for phenomena by
adequate experiences, and problem-solving skills by planned investigations.
Friedler and Tamir (1986, p. 264) build on their argument and propose that the
mere engagement of students in scientific investigations without explicit reflection
on the underlying concepts is not sufficient. Lunetta (1998, p. 250) put forward the
view that to many students, a lab means manipulating equipment and not
manipulating ideas. Another explanation for the discrepancy between intended
object of learning and the enacted one might be that many teachers prefer to run
smooth demonstration and verification type laboratories rather than the inquirybased lab work (Tamir, 1977). Even when students do carry out the experiments
for themselves, they might fail to produce the phenomena they are meant to
observe, because the lab work is carried out quickly without sufficient care and
34

precision, or because the features of these observations although seemingly

obvious to the teacher could appear less so to the students (Millar et al., 2002).
Hodson (1991) concludes that:
As practiced in many schools, it [lab work] is ill conceived, confused and
unproductive. For many children, what goes on in the laboratory contributes little to
their learning of science or to their learning about science and its methods. Nor does
it engage them in doing science in any meaningful sense. At the root of the problem
is the unthinking use of laboratory work. (p. 176)

Johnstone (1991) suggests another view for the questionable effectiveness of

science learning, particularly in chemistry, through laboratory work. He proposes
that students make observations at the macroscopic level when they engage in the
experiments, but teachers expect them to interpret their findings at the microscopic
level. Nevertheless, there are still a significant number of science educators who
believe that properly designed laboratory activities could have a central role in
science teaching to help students develop appropriate scientific conceptions
(Herron & Nurrenbern, 1999).

2.4.2 Scientific inquiry

Science is an active process. Learning science is something that students do,
not something that is done to them. The science process skills of observing,
communicating, comparing, and organising are the basic doing skills of science.
They are the foundation on which personal science knowledge and thinking are
built (Lowery, 1985). Table 2.1 shows various activities that fall under each of
these skill areas. Students should also learn to question the inferences they draw
from their observations and to reflect on why they think about scientific
phenomena in the way that they do (Costa, 1984).

35

1.

2.

3.

4.

Observing

Seeing

Feeling

Hearing

Smelling

Tasting

Using several senses

Communicating

Describing, speaking, sounding

Formulating operational definitions

Recording, making tables, writing

Researching the literature, reading, referencing

Picturing, drawing, illustrating

Graphing
Comparing

Making general comparisons or comparisons from different perspectives

Estimating

Making numerical comparisons

Measuring lengths, angles

Measuring temperatures

Weighing

Measuring area, volumes, pressures

Making time comparisons, measuring rates

Organizing

Seriating, sequencing, ordering

Sorting, matching, grouping

Classifying

Adapted from Lowery (1985)

Table 2.1

Basic science processes skills

The curriculum project, Science - A Process Approach (SAPA) (Sanderson

& Kratochvil, 1971), offers a similar definition on science process skills. It
classifies process skills into two types - basic and integrated. Basic process skills
include: observing, inferring, measuring, communicating, classifying and
predicting. Integrated process skills include: controlling variables, defining
operationally, formulating hypotheses, interpreting data, experimenting, and
formulating models (Padilla, 1990).

36

Hands-on activities, while essential, are not enough. Students should have
minds-on experiences as well, i.e. inquiry-based activities. The National Science
Education Standards (NRC, 1996) defines scientific inquiry as the diverse ways
in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the
evidence derived from their work. Scientific inquiry also refers to the activities
through which students develop knowledge and understanding of scientific ideas,
as well as an understanding of how scientists study the natural world (p. 23).
Scientific inquiry is an active engaging process that mimics the work done by
actual scientists, integrating the experimentation and science concepts development.
It is central to science learning and reflects how science is done. Fundamentally,
the various scientific disciplines are alike in their reliance on evidence, the use of
hypothesis and theories, the kinds of logic used, and much more. More importantly,
the inquiry skill involved is necessary for dealing with everyday life and plays a
role in the development of an understanding of the natural world (Aikenhead,
1979).

There are different types of scientific inquiry, including fair test, pattern
seeking, classifying and identifying, exploring, making things or developing
systems, and investigating model (Goldsworthy et al., 2000). Fair test refers to
observing and exploring relationships between variables or factors changing one
factor and observing or measuring the effect, whilst keeping other factors the same.
Pattern seeking is considered as observing and recording natural phenomena or
carrying out surveys where variables cannot readily be controlled, and then seeking
patterns in the data. Classifying and identifying is a process of either arranging a
range of objects or events into manageable sets or recognizing objects and events

37

as members of particular sets and allocating names to them. Exploring refers to

making careful observations of objects or events, or making a series of
observations over time. Making things or developing systems is regarded as
designing, testing and adapting an artifact or systems. Investigating models refers
to trying out explanations to see whether they work or make sense. Among all
these types of scientific inquiry, fair tests were found to be carried out more
frequently than other types (Goldsworthy et al., 2000, p. 5).

Different types of scientific inquiry require different strategies for planning

and evaluating. No matter which type of inquiry is used, students identify relevant
information, define questions for study, plan first-hand investigation, choose
equipment and resources, perform first-hand investigation, organise and analyse
information, and draw conclusion based on available experimental evidence. By
going through these procedures, students actively develop their understanding of
scientific knowledge, experiencing of science, as well as inquiry and intellectual
skills which are considered as essential in inquiry curriculum (Schwab, 1962).
Scientific inquiry provides students opportunities to appreciate the spirit of science
(Ausubel, 1968), to promote understanding the nature of science (Shulman &
Tamir, 1973) and to consider the benefits and drawbacks of applications of science
in our daily life. It has potential for improving the pedagogical value of laboratory
work. The recommendations made in the National Science Education Standards
(NRC, 1996) also clearly emphasize the view that learning science is an inquirybased process, and authentic questions generated from student experiences is the
central strategy for teaching science (p. 31). Scientific inquiry, therefore, has a
central role in science, not only because it helps students understand how scientific

38

ideas are developed, but also because it fosters the skills and processes of scientific
inquiry. Thus conducting scientific inquiry with a high degree of authenticity could
be seen as a challenge in science education and is seen as a paradigm shift for
better student learning (CDC, 2002a). Science often is a collaborative endeavour,
and all science depends on the ultimate sharing and debating of ideas. Interactions
among individuals and groups in the classroom can be vital in deepening the
understanding of scientific concepts and the nature of scientific endeavours (NRC,
1996). In small groups, students learn content cooperatively and collectively. Each
student becomes responsible not only for his or her own learning, but also for each
member of the group. In view of the importance of collaboration and scientific
inquiry, a group-based experimental Investigative Study (IS) has been introduced
in the New Senior Secondary (NSS) chemistry curriculum in Hong Kong, as a key
component of School-based Assessment in which students are expected to make
use of their knowledge and understanding of chemistry, together with generic skills,
to design and conduct an investigation with a view to solving an authentic problem
(Science Education Section, EMB, 2005, p. 89). Therefore the present study could
serve, to a certain extent, as a pioneer to the NSS chemistry curriculum and the
findings of the study could possibly inform science educators, curriculum
developers or teachers the implementation and impact of Investigative Study on
students learning outcomes in the local context.

2.4.3 Inquiry-based laboratory work in science education

In science classrooms, students may try to accept the new information given
by the teachers without attempting to integrate it with their prior knowledge.
Scientific epistemology could be more appropriately portrayed when students are

39

given chances to engage in the processes of experimental design and result analysis
(Layton, 1990; Lazarowitz & Tamir, 1994). A number of programmes have been
attempting to put student-centered, inquiry-based practices into action in
classrooms (Minstrell & Van Zee, 2000). Examples include Scientists in Action
developed by The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992), Songers
(1996) Kids As Global Scientists, and Linns (1997) Computers As Learning
Partner. These new approaches to science instruction feature inquiry as essential to
student learning (Krajcik, Blumenfeld, Marx, Bass & Fredricks, 1998; Lunetta,
1998; Roth, 1995).

An inquiry-oriented laboratory lesson could be quite demanding. Johnstone

and Wham (1982) argued that students are expected to apply simultaneously
functional knowledge of subject matter, proficiency in laboratory technique and
intellectual inquiry skills. To help students develop basic command of each
component before having to apply them simultaneously in high school biology
laboratories in Israel, a module entitled Basic concepts of scientific research has
been developed by Friedler and Tamir (1986). The module included a variety of
exercises which guided the students gradually from simple to more complex
problem-solving experiences. It was hoped that students could acquire technical
skill in doing experiment, relevant biological contents and inquiry skills (see
Figure 2.4). Results showed that students who used this module demonstrated
substantial gains in understanding concepts and applying their inquiry skills in
inquiry-oriented practical laboratory tests taken from the matriculation
examinations.

40

Technical skills

Scientific contents

Inquiry skills

Research problem

Figure 2.4

Components of a laboratory investigation

In the study conducted by DeMeo (2001), high school chemistry students

were introduced an inquiry-based laboratory activity which involved searching for
relationships for density of an object. In common practice, students would be asked
to explore the mass and volume relationship through performing experiments when
the concept density was introduced. In his study, however, five properties were
investigated to allow students to determine additional relationships, to learn about
controlling variables, and to explore a new but related experience in applying
elements of experimental design. The teacher led the students to understand that if
one of the particular properties of an object was investigated, e.g. colour, it must be
varied while other properties (e.g. mass, composition, surface area and volume)
were controlled. Students were instructed to perform experiments to investigate the
properties one by one. By constructing variables tables, students were guided to
discover various relationships. DeMeo (2001) argued that through a series of
group-designed experiments, students came to know much more than the
relationship between an objects mass and its volume as was the case with
traditional density experiments in chemistry courses. By focusing on finding the
relationship between a finite set of an objects properties and the displacement of

41

water (see Table 2.2 below), students drew upon higher cognitive processes and
began to see science as an intellectual activity that involved seeking relationships
between variables rather than simply verifying what they learnt in the preceding
lecture.

Table 2.2

Variables of various student-designed experiments in searching

relationships for density
Properties

Experiment

Colour

Mass

Composition

Surface
Area

Volume

Varied

Controlled

Controlled

Controlled

Controlled

Controlled

Controlled

Varied

Controlled

Varied

Controlled

Controlled

Varied

Varied

Research on inquiry-based laboratory work is not limited to high school

students. In the study conducted by Rudd et al. (2001) where undergraduate
chemistry students were involved, two groups of students, one using the standard
laboratory report format while the other the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH)
format were compared based on a lecture examination problem and a laboratory
practical examination task involving physical equilibrium. Instead of having the
title, purpose, procedure, data and observations, calculations and graphs, and
discussion sections as in the standard laboratory reports, the SWH reports had
beginning questions and ideas, tests and procedures, observations, claims, evidence,
and reflection sections. Students in the SWH sections were found to have a slightly
better performance, and have spent less time in completing the laboratory reports.

42

This suggested that inquiry-based component integrated into the formal chemistry
practical work could improve student learning to certain extent.

There are many other literatures describing the benefits of inquiry-based

experimentation on students learning in science, comparing inquiry and
conventional lab methods (Clark, Clough & Berg, 2000; Booth, 2001; Huber &
Moore, 2001), and showing evidence of inquiry methods affecting test scores
(Kurz, 2001; Tretter & Jones, 2003). Still, many teachers do not use inquiry in
their laboratory lessons. Of the 571 responses to the online survey from high
school chemistry teachers all over the United States, 45.5% indicated that they did
not use inquiry labs in their classrooms (Deters, 2005). Tamir (1977) argues that
many teachers prefer to run smooth demonstration and verification type
laboratories. Deters (2005, p. 1178) proposes several reasons for teachers being
reluctant in using inquiry-based lab work. First, teachers do not always have
control over exactly what students do in inquiry-based learning. Second, without
instructor-written protocols to follow, it is possible that students might design an
unsafe procedure. Third, students need more time to write their procedures. Fourth,
students sometimes arrive at erroneous results, or fail to make appropriate
conclusions based upon their experimental results. Fifth, teachers may need longer
time to mark the inquiry reports than the standard laboratory worksheet.

Even when the teachers used inquiry-based lab work, the student learning
outcomes might still be different from the intended object of learning. A possible
reason might be due to the nature of the experiments presented in the laboratory
handbooks (Herron, 1971). Herron developed a four-point scale to distinguish the

43

levels of inquiry of the listed experiments. He commented that the majority of

experiments in physics (80%) and biology (60%) were at the zero level of inquiry.
Many laboratory handbooks guided students in their observations and in the
development of inferences, explanations, and other activities in their investigations.
However, they did not seem to provide students with extended opportunities to
investigate and to inquire, as most of the investigations involved were highly
structured - goals and procedures of laboratory activities were defined for the
students (Tamir & Lunetta, 1981).

As mentioned before, Friedler and Tamir (1986) argue that the mere
engagement of students in scientific investigations without explicit reflection on
the concepts behind the activities is not sufficient. In Jones, Carter and Ruas (2000)
study on examining the relationship and development of students communities of
concepts related to convection, fifth grade students worked in pairs for a series of
three laboratory investigations. They were directed to answer questions about their
observations on laboratory record sheets. The dialog of selected pairs of students
was also recorded during their laboratory work and the pairs were observed by one
of the researchers. Results of the study suggested that students conceptual
ecologies were very complicated and complex. Although there were commonalities
and patterns for interpretive frameworks, the variation and idiosyncratic
application of prior experiences was context-dependent. If students draw on
common knowledge communities of concepts to make sense of a new phenomenon,
teachers could use this information as a tool in designing instruction (Jones, Carter
& Rua, 2000, p. 155). Most education researchers agree that students past
experience are important (Minstrell, 1989; Treagust, Duit & Fraser, 1996). Lo and

44

Pong (2005) also put forward the view that effective teaching requires the
elicitation of students pre-existing understanding, and opportunities must be
provided to students to build on their initial understanding (p. 13). In other words,
students should be given the opportunity to identify their thoughts and make their
prior understanding explicit. The interviews and dyad discourse transcripts were
possibly quite effective in revealing the processes and prior knowledge that
students used as they interpreted new observations in light of preexisting
experiences (Jones et al., 2000).

2.5

Teaching-learning Sequence
Teaching-learning sequence, in a broad sense, is commonly referred to a

sequence of activities presented by teachers to students. Leach and Scott (2000)

however argue that in evaluating the effectiveness of certain teaching-learning
sequence, both teacher talk and student activities should be taken into account.
Teaching sequence is better described in terms of a flow of discourse between the
teacher and the students. Similar argument is put forward by Lijnse (2000) that
interactions of teaching-learning sequences could be interpreted in terms of
didactical theory. Andersson, Bach, Hagman, Olander & Wallin (2003) comment
that the system for teaching and learning is dynamic in nature. It develops over
time through the interaction of teachers, students and artefacts. This interaction is
controlled by the designed teaching sequence which can be seen as a contentspecific theory.

Brown and Clements (1991) study on the evaluation of teaching sequences

on gravity and inertia showed that high school students following the

45

experimental sequence outperformed that of the control counterparts.

Consistent findings were found in Viennot & Rainsons (1999) study which
describes the design and evaluation of a teaching sequence addressing the
superposition of electric fields for French undergraduate students. The researchers
argue that the superior result for students following the experimental teaching
sequence which emphasizes students learning difficulties, causal aspects and
transient phases compared to the control sequence could be attributed to
differences in the organisation of content within the sequences. Andersson and
Bach (2005) gave another example of the significance in examining teaching
sequence in education. They showed that those teachers who stressed the theory of
geometrical optics as the unifying thread running through the sequence and the
importance of using the theory for problem solving could better facilitate student
learning.

For chemistry, teaching-learning sequence can be viewed in a more specific

way. There are three common ways to structure the teaching-learning sequence
which involves experimentation (E), questions (Q) and answers (A) (see De Vos &
Verdonk, 1986). They are namely the Q-A-E, Q-E-A and E-Q-A sequence (other
possible permutations of A, E and Q are left out of consideration because they
were not commonly used). In the first approach, the experiment serves to confirm
the answer. In the second, the experiment is supposed to give the answer for the
question asked by the teacher whereas in the third, the experiment is used to
provoke questions due to the unexpected result. De Vos & Verdonk (1986) argue
that by using the last teaching-learning sequence with an introductory experiment
done at the beginning of the lesson, students attention can be drawn to the more

46

adventurous sides of practicing chemistry. Challenging students initial idea could

be seen as an effective way in changing students view, leading to a new way of
understanding the scientific phenomenon. There are also a number of studies
examining the design of teaching-learning sequences on topics like particle model
for gases, the theory of evolution by natural selection (Andersson & Wallin, 2006)
or the concept of force in physics (Viiri & Savinainen, 2008). Results revealed that
how a teacher structures the teaching-learning sequences during the discussion in a
science lesson is important for student learning. In the present study, the more
specific sense of teaching-learning sequence is adopted.

In science education, much research is based on the constructivist theory the

theory of conceptual change (Posner et al. 1982, Strike & Posner, 1992). Learning
is viewed as the development in the mind of mental modes, which represents the
individuals perception of aspects of the world (Bransford, Brown & Cocking,
2000). The key message of this theory is that learning process is regarded as the
creating of meaning of the world through a series of individual mental constructs,
rather than acting as a passive receiver of knowledge (Driver, 1981; Fensham,
1992). Constructivism emphasizes articulation, cognitive conflicts and coconstruction (Crook, 1994; Jonassen, Peck & Wilson, 1999). It focuses on general
aspects like the types of activity (e.g. problem-based inquiry learning methods, jigsaw approach) or experiments to be done to help grasp certain concepts. These
activities are much student-centred, but they do not focus much on ways of dealing
with the specific content of learning. Students, especially those of lower academic
ability, might not be sensitive to patterns of meaningful information available in
these activities. Phenomenography, which focuses on more specific aspects and on

47

ways of dealing with the specific content of learning, could probably help students
discern the critical aspects of what they are trying to learn.

Alternative conceptions in science education research can be viewed as

qualitatively different ways of experiencing or understanding a certain
phenomenon in the research field of phenomenography. A way of seeing is defined
as an internal relationship between an individual and a phenomenon, i.e. a way an
individual experiences or sees the phenomenon. Helping students to change their
alternative

conceptions

to

scientific

conceptions,

when

expressed

in

phenomenographers words, is helping students to change their ways of seeing from previous views to new ways of understanding which is more scientifically
accepted. In this study, a phenomenographic research approach is adopted because
the study of conceptions has been a major research interest within
phenomenography. It has insisted on a purely descriptive knowledge interest of
investigating the qualitatively different ways in which learners experience certain
phenomena or certain aspects of the world, and describing the variation in those
various aspects of the phenomena (Pang, 2003). Its foundation is pedagogical,
which attempts to identify, formulate and tackle certain types of research questions
about learning and understanding in educational environments (Marton & Booth,
1997). This investigation of students conceptions is crucial as it enables the
teacher-researcher to map students conceptions into descriptive categories and use
these in lesson sequences (Ebenezer & Fraser, 2001). Research studies have
indicated that teachers who can build on students prior understanding and
experiences are more able to bring about meaningful learning by their students (Lo,
Marton, Pang & Pong, 2004).

48

CHAPTER 3
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE
STUDY
3.1

Introduction
This chapter consists of four parts describing the theoretical framework for

this study. First, early development of phenomenography which aims at revealing

the qualitatively different ways of experiencing a phenomenon is described.
Second, research on students ways of experiencing is depicted. Third, recent
development of phenomenography which describes the variation in the different
ways of seeing and characterizes a way of experiencing something in terms of the
critical aspects of the phenomenon as discerned by the learners are investigated.
The functional relationship between discernment, variation and simultaneity as
well as research studies on using variation theory as a pedagogical tool are
depicted.

3.2

Early Development of Phenomenography

3.2.1 View of learning

Phenomenography comes from the Greek words phainemenon, which
means appearance, and graphein, which means description. Phenomenography
views the relationship between people and the world as non-dualistic, meaning that
the internal relationship and the world are not posited as isolated entities (Marton
& Booth, 1997; Slj, 1997). A conception can be seen as the internal relationship
between an individual and a phenomenon. The world, or some part of it as

49

phenomenon, is presented to the individual, whilst the world is experienced by the

individual. As different individuals have different experiences of the world, they
will constitute their own unique internal relationships with the world and
individuals knowledge lies in these relationships. In other words, the same
phenomenon may be experienced in different ways by individuals because the
aspects and the relationships that they discern may be different (Marton & Booth,
1997). The relational quality of conception reflects the context in which the
phenomenon is embedded. A conception is therefore two-dimensional: one
dimension focusing on the content of the subject (the referential aspect), and the
other focusing on how a learner understands the content (the structural aspect)
(Ebenezer & Fraser, 2001).

In phenomenography, learning is defined as a change in the dynamic state of

awareness or the way of experiencing, whereas awareness is an internal relation
between a subject and an object, as experienced or conceptualized by an individual
(Pong & Marton, 2001). Learning something does not mean to receive knowledge
or information, but instead implies a change in the individuals way of
experiencing a particular object or phenomenon. How learning phenomena are
being perceived by students and student learning experiences should be understood
in terms of human-world relationship (Marton & Pang, 2008). With the new
experiences of the phenomenon experienced by the individual, the internal
relationship between the individual and the phenomenon changes, and the move
between different perspectives shapes the individuals thinking and understanding
of the phenomenon. The individual is therefore able to develop a more complex or
sophisticated way of experiencing the phenomenon and learning takes place. In

50

this view, teaching involves helping students to change their conceptions within a
learning context to a more plausible model.

Learning relates to how people make sense of a specific object, thus

developing a certain capability in dealing with it, i.e. the object of learning (Marton
& Tsui, 2004). The object of learning has two aspects, a general aspect and a
specific aspect. The general aspect refers to acts (the indirect object of learning)
which relates to the long term goals of education such as the nurturing of certain
generic skills, whereas the specific aspect refers to what is acted upon (the direct
object of learning) which relates to specific subject/content. Marton and Tsui (2004,
p. 4) argue that the learners focus is normally on what they are trying to learn (the
direct object of learning), but the teachers focus should be on both the direct
object of learning and indirect object of learning (the way in which the learners are
trying to master). So what teachers are trying to work towards to achieve the
teachers intended learning outcomes is the intended object of learning as seen
from the teachers perspective. It might change dynamically during the course of
learning. On the other hand, what students encounter is the enacted object of
learning, i.e. what it is possible to learn in the actual setting as described by the
researchers, whereas what students actually learn, how they make sense of the
object of learning after the lesson is the lived object of learning, i.e. the students
learning outcomes (Marton & Tsui, 2004, pp. 224-225).

3.2.2 Phenomenography as research specialization in learning

Phenomenography was developed by Ference Marton and his research group
in the early 1970s at Gteborg University in Sweden (Booth, 1997; Entwistle, 1997;

51

Marton, 1981; Slj, 1988). It is an empirical study which aims at description,

analysis and understanding of experience, or depicting competence that reflects
changing person-world relations in the Chomskian sense of the word (Chomsky,
1957). The first studies concerned why some university students were better at
learning than others. To investigate this research question the focus was set on how
students experienced and apprehended a text (Marton, 1974; Dahlgren, 1975; Slj,
1975; Svensson, 1976). The results from these first studies indicated that the
students understood the text in qualitatively different ways. These different ways
of understanding the text were seen to be in logical relationship to one another,
thus forming hierarchically ordered categories of description which constituted the
outcome space. By referring to this outcome space, the categories of description
could be compared with one another to judge how appropriate the understanding
they represented was in relation to specified criteria. Also, there was a strong
relationship between students differing understanding of the text and their
differing acts of reading, which supported the principle of intentionality that
Marton (1981) purports. The outcomes of learning were found to be functionally
related to the students different approaches to a learning task. Two distinctly
different approaches were found: surface approach and deep approach. Further
research demonstrated that detailed knowledge of the ways in which students
understand the phenomena, concepts and principles within a domain prior to study
is believed to be critical for developing their understanding of the phenomena,
concepts and principles, and hence for their mastery of the domain (Bowden,
DallAlba, Martin, Masters, Laurillard, Marton, Ramsden & Stephanou, 1992).
The act aspect of learning was also considered in other studies, in which students
conceptions of what learning actually is were found to be crucial for the way in

52

which they experienced the act of learning (Slj, 1982; Marton, Beaty &
DallAlba, 1993). These studies gave the incitement for further development of the
phenomenographic research approach towards a way of describing peoples
qualitatively different ways of experiencing, conceptualizing, understanding,
perceiving and apprehending phenomena in the world around them (Marton, 1994).
The reason for individuals to conceptualize a phenomenon in a limited number
of qualitatively different ways is that their conceptualizations are constrained by
their experiences, the behaviour of the phenomenon, and the biological attributes
of the individual for conceptual processing (Maturana & Varela, 1988, as cited in
Linder & Erickson, 1989). These different ways of understanding, or conceptions,
were then revealed in the form of descriptive categories that capture the critical
differences of understandings from a certain point of view. The descriptions of
peoples different experiences of a certain phenomenon are content-oriented. They
were not seen as the qualities of the individuals but as concrete cases of human
functioning, primarily at the collective level (Marton, 1981). These categories of
descriptions that correspond to those varying understandings are related to each
other hierarchically to form a complex whole and the logical relationships between
them constitute the outcome space of that phenomenon (Marton & Booth, 1997, p.
136). In this manner, teachers could make use of these descriptive categories as
part of the content of teaching and help students to move from their personal
outcome space to the zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978).

3.2.3 Research on students ways of experiencing

The phenomenographic research approach has a strong educational interest.
Vast research into teaching and student learning which focus on students

53

experience has been done for about 30 years. Specifically, a number of studies are
related to qualitative variation in terms of conceptions in various subject domains.
These include Lucass (2000) study of balance sheet in accounting, Lybeck et
al.s (1988), Strmdahls (1996) and Tullbergs (1997) studies of the mole in
chemistry, Renstrms (1988) study of matter in chemistry, Johansson, Marton
& Svenssons (1985) and Linder et al.s (2006) study of mechanics in physics,
Dahlgrens (1984), Pongs (1999), and Pangs (2002) studies of price in
economics, Fraser et al.s (2006) study of distillation in chemical engineering
and Gibbings (2008) study of problem-based learning in virtual space. Some
other studies investigated the variation among qualitatively different ways of
experiencing a phenomenon (Lybeck, 1981; Neuman, 1987; Renstrm, 1988;
Strmdahl, 1996; Tse, Marton, Ki & Loh, 2007; Kwok, 2010).

In Kwoks (2010) study on phenomenographic analysis of variations in

Secondary 5 students conceptions of web authoring techniques and applications,
eight crucial patterns of variations and invariant parameters during inter-student
learning process were identified when students were guided to do projects on
constructing school, school alumni and e-learning websites. One of the patterns
was: students knew that the type of web users should be first set and kept invariant
if they need to study the efficiency concerns on info-seeking, social networking
and e-learning. The researcher argued that the students did experience the
methodological and contextual variations in approaching the problems. These
patterns of variations identified were found insightful in formulating feasible
teaching approaches to help students learn through online discussion forum.

54

In Renstrms (1988) study which focused on conceptions of matter in

chemistry among upper secondary level students, the phenomenographic research
approach was used to analyse transcription of student interviews. Six different
conceptions were identified and the differences in focus constituted the variation in
the internal structure of each conception. The research group argues that variations
could be found between different conceptions. The idea is that when one is
confronted with different problems, different aspects of matter are focused,
stressed, and emphasized. By focusing on certain aspects, certain insights have to
be developed in order to solve the problem and in order to avoid contradictions
(Renstrm, Andersson & Marton, 1990, p. 568). Aspects that are crucial for
learning the object of learning are defined as critical aspects/features. According to
Marton and Tsui (2004), the critical aspects have to be found empirically and they
must be found for every specific object of learning. If every critical aspect could be
discerned and focused on at the same time by the students, everything would be
experienced in exactly the same way. However, the fact is only a limited number
of aspects can be discerned and focused on at the same time and different students
may focus on different aspects (Holmqvist, Gustavsson & Wernberg, 2007). This
suggests that it is crucial for teachers to identify the critical aspects and structure
the learning conditions carefully because teachers instruction of critical aspects,
i.e. the enacted object of learning, is related to students understanding of the
relation between these critical aspects and the subject matter, i.e. the lived object of
learning (Rovio-Johansson, 1999).

Apart from studies which investigated high school students experiencing

science concepts, studies on college or university level have been conducted. An

55

example includes Linder et al.s (2006) study which explored the students
conceptions on Newtons 3rd Law - an area of mechanics that is widely known to
pose learning difficulties for students at the first-year physics level. In particular,
the study attempted to investigate the process and outcomes of learning in
interactive teaching using the variation approach to learning. Results indicated
that systematic use of variation in teaching could enhance physics learning.
Another example is Fraser et al.s (2006) study which investigated third-year
chemical engineering students at the university level regarding their conceptions of
distillation. In-depth interviews were used to gain insights into the learning
outcomes of the redesigned computer simulation experience. The overall finding is
that the students were able to draw on their previous knowledge and expand it in
ways that made them feel positive about the experience.

Furthermore, there are also empirical studies done on teachers conception. In

the studies on teachers understanding of the mole in chemistry in relation to
how their students understand the concept concerned (Strmdahl, Tullberg &
Lybeck,

1994;

Strmdahl,

1996;

Tullberg,

1997),

teachers

ways

of

communicating the mole to the students were found to be influenced by their

personal interpretation of the mole concept. Approaches of teaching the mole were
categorized as restricted perspective, with explanations and analogies referring to
the microscopic world, and current scientific definition, i.e. the macroscopic world.
Results showed that there were similarities between the teachers and their
students way of reasoning and depicting theories about the conceptual context in
which the mole is set. Tullberg (1997) comments that students learn to solve
problems of a certain kind in a certain way (p. 123). Patricks (1998, p. 277) study

56

also supports the above argument, and he asserts that teachers can be seen as
critical in the production and reproduction of disciplines and disciplinary
knowledge and their role deserves significant research attention in relation to the
production of cultural capital.

A phenomenographic research approach has also been employed in the study

of phenomena outside the educational field, such as Themans (1983) study of
conceptions of political power, Wenestams (1982) study of conceptions of death,
and Marton, Fensham & Chaiklins (1994) study of Nobel laureate views of
scientific intuition.

3.3

Recent Development of Phenomenography

3.3.1 Building theory of variation

According to phenomenography, every phenomenon can be experienced in a
limited number of qualitatively different ways. In recent years, there has been a
shift in emphasis from a methodological orientation to theoretical concerns, i.e.
from how to describe to what is described. Researchers not only describe what
constitutes a way of experiencing a phenomenon, but also explore the variations
among ways of experiencing the same phenomenon and how those variations
evolve with respect to the simultaneous awareness of the critical aspects of the
phenomenon (Pang, 2003). Marton and Booth (1997) advanced the theory of
variation in order to address these concerns, which marked the advent of the new
phenomenography.

57

3.3.2 Structure of awareness

Awareness is the totality of a persons experiences of the world, at each point
in time (Marton & Tsui, 2004). It changes dynamically all the time and every
situation is experienced against the background of previous experiences. Marton
and Booth (1997) point out that a way of experiencing something is related to how
a persons awareness is structured. It contains both a what aspect, which
corresponds to the object, and a how aspect, which relates to the act. In
accordance with Gurtwistchs (1964) account, Marton (1988) comments that for
whatever a person sees or experiences, he/she perceives a thematic whole which is
discernible from its surrounding context. At any instant, certain aspects of the
context come into his/her focal awareness to constitute the theme (or figure) whilst
other aspects recede into the background (or ground) of a particular understanding
(Pang & Lo, 2012). Though he/she might be aware of those aspects which form the
background, they have not been in focus and become discerned at the moment
(Pong, 1999). A generalized and ever changing figure-ground structure is thus
characteristic of a persons awareness.

A figure is made up of its component parts, and the interplay of each part
contributes functionally to the whole figure, which carries an overall meaning
(Marton & Booth, 1997). Learning, therefore, will lead to a change in the structure
of awareness and hence peoples way of experiencing the phenomenon. Marton
and Booth (1997) view learning development as a process that goes from the whole
to the parts. The whole must be discerned from its context, and its relationship to
the context as well as to other contexts must be understood (p. 108). In other words,
for the students to develop a way of experiencing a phenomenon, they should be

58

able to discern individual concepts from its context, and relate them to each other
and to the whole of theoretical framework and create meaning in a simultaneous
manner (Carlgren & Marton, 2001). Structure and meaning are dialectically
intertwined and occur simultaneously with regard to experiencing, as Marton and
Booth (1997) refers, Structure presupposes meaning, and at the same time
meaning presupposes structure. The two aspects, meaning and structure, are
dialectically intertwined and occur simultaneously when we experience
something (p. 87). It follows that structure and meaning mutually contribute to
each other in the act of experiencing. In short, bringing out the figure-ground
relationship as well as the part-whole relationship is essential for students to
develop a capability of experiencing a phenomenon.

3.3.3 Discernment, variation and simultaneity

According to variation theory, variation is epistemologically fundamental for
all learning to occur. In the process learning, it is of crucial importance for a
learner to be able to experience what the case is, what the case is not and what the
case could be. An experienced variation is thus a necessary condition for
discernment. People tend to notice things when they vary against a stable
background or when something stays unchanged against a changing background
(Lo & Pong, 2005, p. 19). Marton and Booth (1997) point out that in order to bring
forth a certain aspect of the phenomenon to a learners focus and become discerned,
he/she must experience variability, for discernment assumes experienced variation.
According to Bowden and Marton (1998):
When some aspects of a phenomenon or an event vary while another aspect or
other aspects remain invariant, the varying aspect will be discerned. In order for
this to happen, variation must be experienced by someone as variation. (p. 35)

59

The experience of variation implies that a learner is aware of the critical

aspects/features of the phenomenon simultaneously either at different points in
time, or at one specific time. Learning takes place through experiencing variation
in the critical aspects of a phenomenon, which leads to a discernment of the critical
aspects in the individuals focal awareness in a simultaneous manner. In a
phenomenography workshop in 1997, Marton suggested that the qualitatively
different ways of experiencing various phenomena could be addressed in terms of
the differences in discernment, simultaneity and variation at a deeper layer of the
field of awareness connecting the person and the world. Marton and Tsui (2004)
further elaborate that we can only experience simultaneously that which we can
discern; we can only discern what we experience to vary; and we can only
experience variation if we have experienced different instances previously and are
holding them in our awareness simultaneously. So the three key concepts of the
variation theory are intimately linked, each of them being a function of another.
With the experience of variation, parts are discerned from the whole, and at the
same time in relation to the whole (Tse et al., 2007, p. 386). Chik (2006) also
comments that there are two senses of discernment, namely the discernment of
part-whole-context relationships and the discernment of specific aspects/features.
She emphasizes the significance of the notion of simultaneity in defining the
structure of awareness and thus fostering students discernment. From this
viewpoint, it is very important for teachers to bring the critical aspects of the object
of learning into students focal awareness, i.e. to bring out the figure and ground
relationship by opening variation in classroom teaching. As Marton and Booth
(1997) observed:

60

Paying attention to the relevance structure of the learning situation and the way in
which variation is designed, the teacher can be instrumental to the constitution of
the learners awareness of the phenomena being addressed. (p. 210)

Pang and Marton (2005) further suggest that for a phenomenon to be

experienced in a particular way, certain critical aspects that correspond to the
dimensions of variation of that phenomenon must also be discerned simultaneously.
For example, in order to help students develop a complete way of understanding
Archimedes principle, students should be given chances to be focally aware of the
weight of a body immersed in water as compared to its weight when not immersed,
and of the weight of the water displaced at the same time (Marton & Booth, 1997).
If one does not learn, it may be because he or she does not focus simultaneously on
all the critical aspects which are required for acquiring, rather than due to the lack
of ability. Therefore, what is called for in teaching is the creation of a focus on the
most relevant aspects, or the critical aspects of the object of the learning in order to
explicitly raise them to the fore for the purposes of enabling learning (Fraser et al.,
2006). This could be done by using variation in a systematic way, no matter what
the content is. Once the learner experiences the relevant variations in the critical
aspects simultaneously, the structural features of the object of learning and their
significance could be primarily as something the learner can sense by
himself/herself (Tse et al., 2007).

3.3.4 Patterns of variation

The point of departure for the variation theory is that learning is premised on
the learners dynamic structure of awareness, and it is related to discernment,
variation, and simultaneity (Bowden & Marton, 1998; Marton & Booth, 1997;
61

Marton & Pang, 1999; Marton & Tsui, 2004; Lo & Pong, 2005; Pang & Marton,
2007; Pang & Lo, 2012). When certain aspects of a phenomenon vary while other
aspects remain invariant, those aspects that vary are discerned. Without variation
among the instances, one would not be able to tell what is common across the
instances encountered and see the common, critical aspect (Pang, 2003).

Marton and Booth (1997) and Bowden and Marton (1998) argue that in
relation to every object of learning a necessary pattern of variation, inherent in the
learning environment, can be identified. The patterns of variation, namely, contrast,
generalization, separation and fusion in the critical aspects have to be constituted in
classrooms in order to help students discern the critical features of the object of
learning. Lo et al. (2004) put forward the view that learning to experience
something in a certain way is contingent on the pattern of variation in the critical
aspects of the object of learning (p. 211). In other words, learning rests upon what
patterns of variation are being experienced by the learners. The four patterns of
variation are briefly described in the following:

1.

Contrast: In order to experience something, one must experience something

else to compare it with. For example, in order to understand what red is, one
must experience other colours such as blue or green. This illustrates how a
value (e.g. red) is experienced within a certain dimension of variation, which
corresponds to an aspect (colour).

2.

Generalization: In order to fully understand what red is, one must also
experience varying appearances of red so that he/she can generalize the

62

meaning of red from these cases. This can be done by experiencing a red
apple, a red ball, a red car and so on. This variation is necessary in order
for one to be able to grasp the idea of redness and separate it from irrelevant
features.

3.

Separation: In order to experience a certain aspect of something and separate

this aspect from other aspects, it must vary while other aspects remain
invariant. For example, in studying economics, in order to experience the
variation of demand and put students focal awareness on it, we should vary
the dimension of demand only whilst keeping the supply invariant. Another
example is the experiencing of the aspect numerator of a fraction. We should
keep the denominator invariant while the numerator varied so as to help
students focus on the varying aspect.

4.

Fusion: If there are several critical aspects that the learner has to take into
account at the same time, the teacher needs to vary the variations of different
critical aspects simultaneously (i.e. fusion) so that these aspects will all be
experienced simultaneously. In other words, in studying economics we need to
vary both demand and supply at the same time so that students could focus on
the simultaneous variation of these two critical aspects. In learning fraction,
both the numerator and denominator have to be changed simultaneously in
order to let the students discern the two aspects at the same time.

Marton and Tsui (2004) point out that seeing a phenomenon in terms of a set
of aspects that are analytically separated but simultaneously experienced provides

63

a more effective basis for powerful action than an undifferentiated way of seeing
the same phenomenon. They also propose that separating the aspects first and then
fusing them together through simultaneous variation is more efficient than never
taking the critical aspects apart. This echoed what Ng, Tusi and Marton (2001)
commented, through more extensive variation different aspects become visible,
instances are linked to each other; through simultaneous variation simultaneous
awareness is afforded, through contrast of what is invariant and what varies various
aspects can be separated (p. 137). By using variation theory as a framework for
lesson planning with appropriate use of patterns of variation, a better learning
condition might possibly be created.

3.3.5 Using variation theory as a pedagogical design

A number of studies based on the use of variation theory as a pedagogical
design has been conducted in many disciplines from early to higher education (e.g.
Ki et al., 2003; Pang & Marton, 2003; Lo et al., 2004; Lo, Chik & Pang, 2006;
Carstensen & Bernhard, 2007; Holmqvist et al., 2007; Ki, 2007; Rovio-Johansson
& Lumsden, 2007; Guo, 2010; Holmqvist, 2011; Pang & Lo, 2012). For example,
Holmqvist, Gustavsson & Wernberg study (2007) made use of the variation
pattern contrast in helping younger students to tell time. Results showed that
using contrasting cases allowed the students to look critically upon their prior
knowledge and to find new ways of seeing the object of learning. The researchers
argue that this pattern contrast seems to be a powerful way in preparing students
for generative learning (generate new learning) as perspectives of assessing
transfer.

64

In Chiks (2006) study which examined six Chinese language lessons at

primary school level taken from a two-year research project, she revealed that lived
object of learning were related to the differences between the hierarchical and
sequential organisation of the content and that the differing organisations of the
content afforded different levels of functioning of the enacted patterns of variation
and invariance.

Also, a number of studies have been conducted to investigate how to help

primary school students learn Chinese characters (Ki et al., 2003; 2005; Tse et al.,
2007) using the phenomenographic approach. Ki et al.s (2003) study explored
how information and communication technologies can help increase students
awareness and hence capability in learning the structure and composition of
Chinese characters. Students interest and sensitivity in picking up the structural
features of Chinese characters was found to increase by introducing different
patterns of variations using specially designed software. In Tse et al.s (2007)
study, similarities and variations among related characters in relational clusters
were presented by teachers to highlight and emphasize crucial aspects of Chinese
characters and words. Results showed that learning takes place when special
attention was made systematically to structural features, written form and
pronunciation.

Apart from investigating students learning of Chinese characters, an

interesting study aiming at assisting intonation language speakers to discern
Cantonese tones was done by Ki (2007). By carefully providing suitable words at
the same time and at different stages of the learning programme, with a specific

65

focus on the variation and invariance patterns of features (the tone, the segmental
pattern, the word meaning and their structural relations) among the learning
instances, Ki (2007) argues that structural change in the learners way of
perceiving pitch/tone patterns in Cantonese speech sounds could happen.

Ng, Tsui, and Martons (2001) study aimed at analysing student learning in
secondary school level. They adopted the framework of variation to investigate the
effects of using Chinese versus English as the medium of instruction on learning
reed relay in physics lessons. Results showed that the teacher who taught in
Chinese had introduced variation in the critical aspects to a larger extent, creating a
wider space of learning.

In chemistry, Lo et al. (2007) has done a research project in examining the

effectiveness of using different patterns of variations to help Secondary 4 students
understand how the electro-chemical series was derived. In particular, it is hoped
that students would be able to discern that the order of the metals in the series and
the potential difference between any two given metals are constant and
independent of the reference metal used after the research lessons. The student
learning outcomes showed that there was substantial improvement in the students
understanding of these concepts.

Lam (2004) has demonstrated another example of using variation theory as a

pedagogical tool in lesson design in school chemistry learning. She provided
empirical evidence that the explicit use of variation separation followed by

66

fusion through experiments and diagrams of molecular representation could

enhance students understanding of the concept of acidity in chemistry.

At the college level, a study conducted by Linder, Fraser and Pang (2006) also
indicated that the explicit use of variation made a difference to student learning
outcome in studying Newtons 3rd Law in physics. In their study, two classes were
asked to discuss the argument brought about in a given farmer-horse cartoon
regarding pair of forces acting on different bodies arising from an interaction
between the bodies. In the ad hoc class the discussion was determined by the
students suggestions in an open-ended way, whereas in the variation class the
problem was purposely crafted around variation to emphasize the most critical
feature identified by the teachers. Results showed that the variation class had a
higher gain in their learning outcomes. The researchers reckon that the explicit use
of appropriate patterns of variation could be regarded as a powerful pedagogical
tool for enhancing teaching and learning.

Even in teacher education, research studies indicate the significance of using

variation theory in lesson planning. Through collaborative planning and teaching
of a lesson using the idea of variation theory, student-teachers realize that if they
intend to draw students attention to water as a feature in concrete, they should be
exposed to examples where all aspects like strength or cement should be kept
unchanged except for water. This allows the tutors and student-teachers to have
some in-depth discussion in lesson planning and the implications in using variation
theory as a pedagogical tool (Davies & Dunnill, 2008).

67

3.3.6 Space of learning

As mentioned by Marton and Tsui (2004), learners can only discern that which
varies. In order to develop a certain capability, the learners must encounter a
certain pattern of variation in all the dimensions corresponding to the critical
aspects of the object of learning. Creating a space for the students to perceive the
necessary patterns of variation is thus of crucial importance to their learning. This
space of learning, as argued by Runesson and Marton (2002), describes what
learners can possibly experience and learn in a specific setting from the perspective
of what is intended to be learnt. It is created by challenging the taken-for-granted
nature of the experience of peoples ways of seeing (Marton & Tsui, 2004). It
comprises any number of dimensions of variation and denotes the aspects of a
situation, or the phenomena embedded in that situation, that can be discerned due
to the variation present in the situation, i.e. a space of experiential variation (Fazey
& Marton, 2002). The space of learning is a necessary condition for the learners
experience of that pattern of variation unless the learner can experience that pattern
due to what he/she has encountered in the past. It thus depicts the possibilities of
learning in relation to the capability in question.

Marton and Tsui (2004) proposed that learning is the process of developing a
certain way of seeing and pointed out that different ways of seeing allow for
different ways of acting. In order to facilitate the development of a capability for
seeing things in a powerful way, it is important to constitute in the classroom the
pattern of variation for students to experience the critical aspects of the object of
learning. In this line of thinking, the space of learning is an experiential space.
Halliday and Matthiessen (1999) pointed out that an experiential space is a

68

potential for understanding, seeing and acting in the world. It is in relation to this
potential that the students can make sense of a particular object of learning. As
students do not act in relation to situations in the objective sense, but in relation
to situations as they see them, how the situations are seen is of decisive importance.
Powerful ways of acting originates from powerful ways of seeing (Pang & Marton,
2003). As such, how to shape the space of learning is crucial to helping students
develop powerful ways of seeing. A teacher can never ensure that the intended
object of learning will actually take place, but a teacher should try to ensure that
the space of learning allows for the intended learning to take place. The teacher can
open up the dimensions of variations and widen the space of learning by providing
students learning opportunities to explore the object of learning in a variety of
ways. Therefore finding out what the necessary conditions are, bringing them
about, and widening the space of learning should be the teachers primary
professional task.

In summary students are only able to discern if they experience variations in

the aspects of the object of learning. Learning generally goes from the whole to
parts, or from general to specifics. Through experiencing variation and their
relevance, students awareness of the object of learning develops from an
undifferentiated whole to a more differentiated and more integrated whole (Marton
& Tsui, 2004). Therefore how to structure the lessons is crucial to ensuring the
space of learning is created in order to help students develop powerful ways of
seeing in general situation and precise scientific conceptions in science learning.

69

CHAPTER 4
METHODOLOGY
4.1

Introduction
This chapter describes the research method for the study. First, the research

approach, both qualitative and quantitative, is introduced. Then data collection

methods including participants, instruments and procedures in the pilot and main
studies are outlined. The testing instruments, scoring methods and analytical
framework in data analysis are also provided. Finally, strategies employed to
enhance credibility are depicted.

4.2

Research Approach

The present study adopted a design-based research with a pretest, posttest and
delayed posttest. Design-based research (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003;
Fishman, Marx, Blumenfeld, Krajcik & Soloway, 2004) or design experiment
(Cobb, Confrey, diSessa, Lehrer & Schauble, 2003) is a type of research
methodology commonly employed by researchers in Learning Sciences. It blends
empirical educational research with the theory-driven design of learning
environments, aiming at understanding how, when, and why educational
innovations work in practice.

In the research field of learning sciences, learning scientists make certain

agenda and seek to produce specific results like engaging students in scientific
inquiry, or creating mathematics classrooms to deal with specific concepts like
trigonometry. They attempt to develop technological tools, curriculum, and

70

especially theories that help them systematically understand and predict how
learning occurs (Barab & Squire, 2004). Through this, learning useful construct
and advance new theory with respect to how people learn in complex settings
could be uncovered. Two common research approaches are adopted by learning
scientists, namely, psychological methods and design-based research/design
experiment. Though a vast number of learning scientists have been using
psychological methods as their research approach, design-based research has
several significant advantages over traditional psychological methods. First,
design-based research focuses on understanding the complexity of real-world
practice, taking into account emergent properties that arise from interaction of
variables. Since the researcher considers the role of social context which is more
naturalistic, the corresponding findings could possibly be applied to other
contexts. In psychological methodological framework, researchers examine
processes as isolated variables within laboratory settings. This might lead to an
incomplete understanding of their relevance (Brown, 1992). Second, design-based
research is grounded in both theory and the real-world context, focusing on the
development of a profile or theory that characterizes the design in practice (Wang
& Hannafin, 2005), as opposed to simply testing hypotheses in psychological
methods. Lo et al. (2004) have expressed that the benefits of design experiments
are that we will be able to contribute to theory development, and improve practice
at the same time. Third, design-based research involves flexible design revision,
multiple dependent variables, and capturing social interaction. However,
psychological methods frequently involve a single or a couple of dependable
variables, isolate learners to control interaction (Barab & Squire, 2004). Fourth,
contrasting psychological methods which treat participants as subjects assigned

71

to treatments, design-based research considers participants as co-participants in

both the design and even the analysis (Collins, 1999).

In view of the above benefits brought about by design-based research, this

methodological approach was found appropriate because it is grounded, meaning
that the researchers need to select a theory about learning and instruction in the
research to establish specific theoretic claims about teaching and learning. In the
present study, the variation theory, a learning theory, was chosen to study the
effectiveness to improve student learning. Besides, design-based research is
integrative. A variety of research methods and approaches from both qualitative
and quantitative research paradigms such as interview, comparative analysis and
survey can be integrated. Also, it is systematic, yet flexible in the design. Wang
and Hannafin (2005) remark one of the characteristics of the research-based design
as:
a systematic but flexible methodology aimed to improve educational practices
through iterative analysis, design, development, and implementation, based on
collaboration among researchers and practitioners in real-world settings, and
leading to contextually-sensitive design principles and theories. (p. 7)

Finally, design-based research is contextual. It advocates that research results

need to be connected with both the design process through which results are
generated and the setting where research is conducted (Wang & Hannafin, 2005,
p. 11). In particular, if the research results are validated through the consequences
of their use, they could provide consequential evidence or validity (Messick, 1992).

Phenomenography and variation theory (see Marton & Booth, 1997; Bowden
& Marton, 1998; Marton & Tsui, 2004) is used as the theoretical framework.
72

Phenomenography is an empirical study which aims at revealing students different

ways of seeing a phenomenon. A particular way of experiencing the phenomenon
depends on the students dynamic structure of awareness, and is closely related to
discernment, variation and simultaneity (Marton & Booth, 1997; Marton & Tsui,
2004). Through characterizing a way of experiencing a phenomenon in terms of
the critical aspects of the phenomenon as discerned by the students, learning is
made possible by teachers thoughtfully structuring the students experiencing.

A number of studies have investigated the effectiveness of using variation

theory in as a pedagogical design in classroom teaching in recent years (Pang &
Marton, 2003; Lo et al., 2004; Lo et al., 2006; Holmqvist et al., 2007; RovioJohansson & Lumsden, 2007; Guo, 2010; Pang & Lo, 2012). These studies provide
ample empirical evidence that teachers who used patterns of variation
(generalization, contrast, separation and fusion) consciously could possibly lead to
better student learning. The commonalities of these studies are: first, the objects of
learning and the corresponding critical aspects are identified empirically. The
identification of critical aspects is important because critical aspects are aspects
that cause difficulty for students in the process of learning (Guo, 2010). Then the
teachers try to employ variation in the critical aspects, creating learning conditions
that allow students to bring these critical aspects to their structure awareness,
discerning them in a simultaneous manner. In the present study, the researcher is
trying to go through these processes, hoping to use variation theory as a framework
in planning successful learning situations to improve the student learning
outcomes.

73

The concepts of chemical reaction rates and the factors that affect them are
important concepts in the chemistry curriculum (Cachapuz & Maskill, 1987;
Ragsdale et al., 1998). As some factors that affect the aspects reaction rate and
amount of products are common, it is not surprising to find students having
difficulties in distinguishing them (akmaki et al., 2003). In order to investigate
the effectiveness of the use of variation theory to help Secondary 4 chemistry
students understand reaction rate and to compare the effects of introducing
different patterns of variation in the debriefing, the first and second experimental
groups in the pilot study were instructed with different sequence of factors; the
third and the fourth experimental groups in the main study were instructed with
different sequence of aspects. The pretest and posttest were used to establish the
equivalence of two groups in respective parts of the study and for statistical
control, generating quantitative gain scores to compare effects of the instruction
(Wiersma, 2000, p.132). Attempts were made to control as many variables as
possible to isolate the effects of instructions. Whether in the pilot or main study,
both groups were taught by the same teacher, used the same textbook, conducted
the same laboratory experiment, experienced the same amount of lesson time, and
took the same tests. The pilot and main studies were conducted in year 2007 and
2008 respectively between April and July each lasting for about 4 months. The
work schedule of the entire study is documented in Appendix 1.

Firestone (1987) states that when focused upon the same issue, qualitative and
quantitative data can triangulate and complement each other and hence increase the
creditability of the findings. Thus apart from the quantitative data mentioned above,
qualitative component was also included in the present study. As Merriam (1998, p.

74

5) puts it, qualitative research is an umbrella concept covering several forms of

inquiry that help us understand and explain the meaning of social phenomena with
as little disruption of the natural setting as possible. Qualitative research is
heuristic in nature. It is most powerful in illuminating the understanding of a
phenomenon under investigation and is particularly suitable for research situations
where there are no established theories, or where existing theories are found
inadequate to explain the phenomenon of interest. Its explanatory role allows
researchers to identify unanticipated phenomena and influences, and (generate)
new grounded theories about the latter. (Maxwell, 1996, p. 19). Strauss and
Corbin (1990) point out that qualitative strategy is appropriate if little is known
about the phenomenon of interest that is going to be studied. It will be more likely
to generate rich data capable of being organised into meaningful themes, categories
or patterns. With the adoption of a qualitative strategy, this research could become
strongly illuminative and exploratory, capable of generating propositions and
enriching understanding of students learning of reaction rate.

4.3

Data Collection

4.3.1 Participants
The participants in this study were 142 Secondary 4 (aged 15-16) chemistry
students enrolled in four science classes from a well-established girls Catholic
secondary school using English as the medium of instruction (76 students in the
pilot study and 66 students in the main study). In the pilot study, there were 41
students in class 4A and 35 students in the class 4B; in the main study, 41 and 25
students were in classes 4C and 4D respectively. Classes 4A and 4C had slightly
higher academic ability than classes 4B and 4D based on their performance in

75

Secondary 4 mid-term examination in chemistry. Thus to compare the effects of

instruction, gain scores generated from pretest and posttest of the two classes in the
pilot and main studies were used for analysis. The four classes were taught by the
same teacher, the researcher. Prior permission had been given from the school
principal in advance. Informed consent from the students and parent consent were
also granted.

4.3.2 Data collection instruments

4.3.2.1 Written tasks
The instruments used to collect data in terms of student written tasks included
a pretest, posttest, delayed posttest and laboratory worksheet. As suitable questions
could not be found for use among the small number of studies that have previously
been carried out in this field, a seven-item pre-posttest on conception of reaction
rate of a chemical process was constructed by the researcher in the pilot and main
studies respectively (see Appendix 2 and 3). The test consisted of two categories of
questions. Questions 1 to 4 targeted to test the students fair test concept and their
capability of designing an experiment for a scientific investigation the indirect
object of learning whereas Questions 5 to 7 aimed to test the students
understanding of the 2 aspects of a reaction (i.e. the reaction rate and amount of
products produced) the direct object of learning. In both the pilot and main
studies, the first 4 questions attempted to explore students understanding of the
concept of fair tests (Question 1), their chemical knowledge of general factors
affecting reaction rate (Question 2), their capability of designing a workable
experimental set-up to follow a reaction progress (Question 3) and making
hypotheses predicting experimental results by sketching appropriate rate

76

curves (Question 4). In particular, Questions 1 and 2 tested if students possessed

the prerequisite knowledge for the research lessons. On the other hand, Questions 5
to 7 (the main part of the test) were designed to test students discernment of the
critical aspects of reaction rate and amount of products, as well as their capability
in interpreting and sketching rate curves. In the original version of the written test
(pilot study), students were asked to sketch rate curves in Questions 5 and 6 under
different reaction conditions without any hint given. A preliminary analysis of the
students responses in the pilot study revealed that students were weak in
presenting their understanding of reaction rate through graphical representation; a
modified version of the test had then been developed for the main study. The level
of difficulty for Question 5 was reduced students were asked to match given rate
curves (volume of the gaseous product versus time) with the corresponding
experimental conditions rather than sketching curves based on given conditions.
For Question 6, students were asked to sketch new rate curves upon changes in
various aspects (e.g. basicity and concentration of the acid) simultaneously with
reference to the given curve. For Question 7, instead of asking one reaction
condition (i.e. magnesium is in excess) as in the pilot study, a new dimension of
reaction condition (i.e. magnesium is the limiting reactant) has been introduced in
the main study so that a more complete picture on the students conceptions of
reaction rate and amount of products could be revealed from the written response.
Questions 1 and 7 demanded students to offer explanations because as students
explained, they clarified and reorganised their own conceptions, and were more
likely to discover gaps or inconsistencies in their understanding (Webb, 1989).

77

In the pilot study, the content of the pretest and posttest was identical so as to
enhance the validity of the analysed result. As the overall performance of the
posttest was not so satisfactory, the content of the delayed posttest was deliberately
chosen to be the same as that of the previous tests. It was hoped that by using
exactly the same set of questions, the gain scores could be generated easily with
high validity and any confusions and problems regarding the designed questions
could be identified for modification as necessary. In the main study, the content of
the revised pretest and posttest was identical to allow a thorough investigation of
any change in students conceptions in chemical kinetics after the research lessons.

Students written laboratory worksheets (see Appendix 4) which demonstrated

students learning progress over the research lessons were also collected for
analysis. They were used to triangulate the findings of the written tests and the
interview transcripts.

4.3.2.2 Interview
Instead of having a list of specific questions arranged in sequence as in the
structured interviews, semi-structured interviews were employed in the present
study to allow the informants some freedom in expression, such that possible
alternate perspectives or new information could be revealed. An interview protocol
was designed (see Appendix 5) in which some broad questions about the focus of
the study were included. It helped to provide a framework for the researcher to
investigate the students understanding in a greater depth, to check for appropriate
interpretation or to validate written responses (e.g. pre-posttest) by following the
key questions, and to elicit students ways of understanding scientific phenomena

78

and investigations by posing them open-ended questions and follow-up prompts

(Gay & Airasian, 2000). In other words, the researcher could probe the
interviewees thinking and guide them to clarify specific points whenever and
wherever necessary, hoping to reflect their experience in a state of meta-awareness
(Marton & Booth, 1997). The audio-files recorded of the selected interviews were
then transcribed verbatim. Transcripts of interviews provide information on the
sequencing and evolution of students ideas (Robinson, 2000) and were used to
triangulate students responses in the written tests.

To select appropriate participants for the interviews, responses from pretest,

posttest and delayed posttest were first examined and then a sample of 12 students
in the pilot study and 14 students in the main study, i.e. about 15% and 20% of
the total respondents respectively, were selected. It is quite common to sample 10
to 20% of the population for descriptive research (Gay & Airasian, 2000). In the
pilot study, 6 students were selected from each class (4A and 4B) in which 3
students had good performance and the other half had below-average
performance in the above tests. Similar criteria were used to select the 14 students
from classes 4C and 4D in the main study. This purposive sampling (Patton, 1990)
was used so that the sample was, to a certain extent, representative of the general
Secondary 4 science students in the school.

4.3.2.3 Laboratory worksheet

Students laboratory worksheets were collected right after the research lessons.
A brief analysis on their experimental results (a pair of rate curves) with respect to
their posttest response was made to see if the accuracy of their experimental results

79

would affect the students in identifying factors of initial rate and amount of
products. This might give clue to the third research question.

4.3.2.4 Video-recording lessons

The experimentation and debriefing sessions of the research lessons for all the
4 classes were video-recorded. Attention was made to the nonverbal signs of
students engagement with the lessons by the researcher. The videotapes were then
transcribed verbatim and analysed to examine whether the intended object of
learning was consistent with the enacted object of learning. They were also used to
cross-check the reliability of the researchers estimates of nonverbal indices of
student engagement, and triangulate with the student learning outcomes in a preposttest administered before and after the lesson.

4.3.3 Data collection procedure

4.3.3.1 Data collection procedure Pilot study (2007)
An informal meeting was held among the researcher and the chemistry panel
head in early April 2007. The researcher explained the aims and working plans of
the present study to the panel head, and gave her the pretest for comment or
modification. After an hours discussion, the revised version of the pretest was
administered to the 2 chemistry classes in early May 2007 during their form
periods/chemistry lessons before the topic Rate of Reaction was introduced.
Twenty minutes was found to be adequate for students to complete. New
experiments involving the measurement of reacting masses to study the reaction
rate with the corresponding laboratory worksheet, and two sets of lesson plans for
classes 4A and 4B, were designed by the researcher in April 2007. Each lesson

80

plan, which covered 4 chemistry lessons, consisted of an introduction (introducing

the meaning of reaction rate, fair test concept and design of laboratory set-up),
experimentation (investigating factors affecting the reaction rate and amount of
products) and debriefing sessions. During the experimentation session, each class
of students was divided into 6 groups to perform scientific investigation according
to the different tasks assigned. The laboratory preparation list stating the
equipment and chemicals required in the experimental session was given to the
laboratory technician one month before the lessons. As the experiment was newly
designed by the researcher, the laboratory manual and setting were discussed
among the researcher, the chemistry panel head and the laboratory technician to
examine whether the equipment and chemicals were sufficient and whether the
experiment could be done in a systematic way. The researcher spent about 2 weeks
in doing trial experiments and eventually chose zinc carbonate among different
available carbonates as the reagent because of its solubility property, availability
and low toxicity. Since this new experiment involved the use of a certain amount
of zinc carbonate but there was not much stock in the laboratory, the laboratory
technician had to order some new stock. As there were only 3 electronic balances
in the Chemistry Laboratory (the quantity stated in the standard equipment list
provided by the Education Bureau), the laboratory technician had to borrow 1
electronic balance from the Integrated Science Department and 2 from the Biology
Department to let the 6 groups of students perform experiments simultaneously.
Also, the information technology (I.T.) technician was informed 2 weeks in
advance to ensure that he would be available for video-recording when the lessons
were conducted in mid-May 2007. Timetable and the lesson plans were provided to
facilitate the video-recording.

81

Before the actual lessons, both the laboratory and I.T. technician were
reminded to check if the human and material resources were arranged as planned.
For each class, the teacher first spent a single period (30 minutes) in introducing
the meaning of reaction rate and the measures to follow the progress of a chemical
reaction in mid-May. Then the 1-hour experimentation and debriefing sessions
conducted in the Chemistry Laboratory were video-recorded. The completed
laboratory worksheets were collected and the posttest was administered to the
students right after the lessons in the same venue.

After a brief study of the response of the posttest and the laboratory worksheet,
it was found that some of the conceptions of reaction rate and the amount of
products held by the students, in particular those involving the graphical
representations, were incomplete. Thus a set of teaching notes, which mainly
focused on rate curves, was carefully constructed to enable the teacher to help
those students to discern the critical features of the object of learning. A new
dimension of reaction condition was also included in the notes so that a more
complete picture of the concepts could be shown to the students (see Appendix 6).
The teacher spent a single period in late May 2007 going through the notes with
the 2 classes to help the students consolidate the concept or discern any missing
critical features of the object of learning. As the final examination was approaching,
the delayed posttest was scheduled right after the examination, i.e. in late June
2007.

The responses from the pretest, posttest and delayed posttest were analysed
and a sample of 12 students (6 from each class) was selected for interview. The

82

selected students were interviewed on a one-to-one basis after school in the

Student Activity Centre or Media Laboratory in mid-July 2007. Students
permission was sought to audio-record the interviews for research purposes.
Respondents were told in advance about the interview but were not informed of
any content. They were given the opportunity (about 5 minutes) to re-read their
answers to the pretest, posttest and delayed posttest, and were asked to comment
on any change in their conceptions and the reason behind the change or the
consistency of conceptions. Each student was interviewed for about 20 minutes,
depending on the depth of elaboration of her answer. These interviews were
conducted in mixed-code, Cantonese and English, to facilitate effective
communication between the researcher and the respondents. They were audiorecorded and subsequently transcribed and translated verbatim into English.

4.3.3.2 Data collection procedure Main study (2008)

The initial part of the data collection procedure was similar to that of the pilot
study except that a couple of meetings were held among the researcher and the
chemistry panel head in early April 2008 in order to refine the pretest, the
laboratory worksheet and the lesson plans for classes 4C and 4D. As the revised
pretest contained more sub-questions, three Secondary 6 students were invited to
do a trial in mid-April during the form periods to help the researcher estimate the
amount of time that should be given to the participating students in the main study.
Ultimately 30 minutes was found to be appropriate when the pretest was
administered in late April 2008.

83

The preparatory work involving the experimentation and the video-recording

was basically the same as that of the pilot study. Technical problems were
encountered in data recording in the pilot study: the 2 electronic balances borrowed
from the Biology Department did not work properly - minute changes of mass over
a period of time could not be displayed accurately, resulting in inaccuracy in data
acquisition. 2 new electronic balances were subsequently bought by the Chemistry
Department after obtaining approval from the chemistry panel head and the school
principal. As it was the second academic year in which the experiments for the
research lessons were carried out, the stock of zinc carbonate was quite sufficient
for the experimental session. The laboratory preparation list and the videorecording schedule (see Appendix 7) were given to the laboratory technician and
the I.T. technician respectively two weeks in advance.

The research lessons were conducted in early May 2008. The pilot study
showed that students might not have sufficient time to study the experimental
results from other groups thoroughly, especially the rate curves, within the limited
time. Also, some students did not bring their calculators to the Chemistry
Laboratory and this might have affected their performance in their posttest. Thus in
the main study, the time for experimentation and debriefing sessions was extended
from 1 hours (in the pilot study) to 2 hours (in the main study) to allow the
students to study the graphs more thoroughly. More detailed explanations for the
shapes of rate curves were included. Besides, the debriefing session was
deliberately held in the classrooms such that the students, when being asked to
complete the posttest right after the lessons, had their own calculators with them
and thus would not be deprived of the time in doing certain mole calculations. The

84

2-hour sessions were video-recorded as scheduled. Since one of the students from
class 4C was absent in the experimentation and debriefing sessions and did not
take the posttest, her response in the pretest was omitted in the data analysis.

After the implementation of the research lessons, a preliminary analysis of the

response of pretest, posttest and laboratory worksheet was carried out. Fourteen
students with different performance in terms of gain scores (8 students from class
4C and 6 from class 4D) were selected for interview on an individual basis. The
interviews were conducted in the Chemistry Laboratory during the form periods or
after schools in mid-May 2008, depending on the availability of the students.

4.4

Data Analysis

4.4.1

Quantitative analysis on students conception of reaction

rate in written tests

Students answers to the pretest, posttest (and delayed posttest in the pilot
study) were first scrutinized with the aim at describing the qualitatively different
ways in which the students made sense of fair test and reaction rate. For example
in Question 1, students were asked to evaluate a given case of investigation to see
if they could identify the critical aspects of the fair-test inquiry and recognize how
well relevant variables should be controlled. The variations in the conceptions
revealed from each question were characterized into different hierarchical levels
which were derived by the researcher to indicate the different levels of
understanding. Quantitative scores were assigned such that no mark was awarded
to Level 1 answer, 1 mark was awarded to Level 2 answer and so on. Learning was

85

verified when students moved from one level of understanding to a higher level.
The scoring rubrics of Questions 1 to 4 are described in the following:

Question 1:

In order to investigate the relative strength of hydrochloric acid and

ethanoic acid, a student measures the pH of 50 cm3 of 1 M hydrochloric acid

and 50 cm3 of 2 M ethanoic acid by means of a pH meter. Is it a fair test?
Explain your answer.
Type of answer Features of responses

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

Does not realize that the given scenario is not a fair test.

Level 2

Realizes that the given scenario is not a fair test, but the
explanation provided is not precise enough (e.g. the
number of moles does not keep constant).

Level 3

Shows full understanding of a fair test, i.e. all factors must

be kept constant except the measured one.

Question 2:

What are factors that affect the rate of a chemical reaction?

Type of answer Features of responses

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

No response / wrong answers.

Level 2

States 1 possible factor.

Level 3

States 2 possible factors.

Level 4

States 3 possible factors.

Level 5

States 4 possible factors.

Level 6

States 5 possible factors.

Possible factors include temperature, surface area of solid reactants, concentration

of solution, strength of acids (for reactions involving acids), basicity of acids (for
reactions involving acids), presence of catalyst. No marks would be deducted for
wrong factors proposed.
86

Question 3:

Draw an experimental set-up that would enable you to measure the

rate of the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid in a school

laboratory.
Type of answer Features of responses

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

Non-workable set-up.

Level 2

Set-up for collecting gas but with gas leakage problems.

Level 3

Set-up with minor mistakes like the measuring equipment

without graduation for providing quantitative data (e.g. use
test tube for gas collection rather than gas syringe).

Level 4

Workable set-up (e.g. measure the mass of the reaction

mixture by using an electronic balance / measure the
volume of hydrogen gas by using a gas syringe / measure
the pressure of the closed container by using a pressure
sensor connected to a data-logger).

Question 4:

For the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid, sketch a

graph to show the relationship between (a) mass of reactants against time (b)
volume of hydrogen (H2) gas produced against time.
Type of answer Features of responses

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

No response / wrong graphs.

Level 2

Shows the correct trend of one of the measured variables

(e.g. decreasing trend for mass of reactants / increasing
trend for volume of hydrogen gas) with minor mistakes (e.g.
use straight lines rather curves of correct curvature).

Level 3

Shows the correct trend of one of the measured variables

with correct curvature.
OR
Shows correct trend of both measured variables with minor
mistakes in each curve.

Level 4

Shows the correct trend of both measured variables, but

with minor mistakes in one of the curves.

Level 5

Shows the correct trend and curvature in both curves.

87

For Questions 5 to 7, the contents in the pilot and that of the main study were
slightly different. The scoring rubrics in the pilot study are described as follows:

Excess magnesium (Mg) is added to 15 cm3 of 0.1 M

Question 5 (pilot):

hydrochloric acid. After 5 minutes, a total of 20 cm3 of hydrogen gas has

been collected, which denotes the end of the reaction. Sketch the graph of
the volume of hydrogen gas evolved against time using the axes below.

Question 6 (pilot):

The above experiment is repeated with same amount of

magnesium (in excess), but with acid solution of different situations:

A.

7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

D.

15 cm3 of 0.1 M ethanoic acid

B.

15 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

E.

15 cm3 of 0.1 M sulphuric acid

C.

30 cm3 of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid

F.

7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M sulphuric acid

Sketch, on the same graph above, the results that would be obtained in
repeated experiments A to F. Label the curves clearly.

40

B, E
Volume of
H2(g) evolved
/ cm3

C
30

15 cm3 of 0.1 M HCl

20

D
10

time / minute
0

88

10

Type of answer Features of responses

for each curve
Level 1
No response / wrong gradient and wrong maximum
volume of gas.

Score
awarded
0

Level 2

Understands the effects on either reaction rate or amount

of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient or volume.

Level 3

Understands the effects on either reaction rate or amount

of products due to different changes; and the curve drawn
is precise with respect to gradient or volume.

OR
Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount
of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient and volume.
Level 4

Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount

of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient or volume.

Level 5

Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount

of products due to different changes; and the curve drawn
is precise with respect to gradient and volume.

89

Question 7 (pilot):

Which of the followings below would affect the rate of the

above reaction and the amount of product formed, assuming that Mg is in

excess? Put a in the appropriate boxes. Explain your choice.
Rate of reaction

not certain

No

Yes

not certain

No

Yes

Reason

Amount of product
Reason

Volume of the acid

Concentration of
the acid
Strength of the acid
Basicity of the acid
Number of moles
of the acid

Type of answer Features of responses

for each aspect
Level 1
No response / wrong answers.

Score
awarded
0

Level 2

Identifies the given aspect correctly as critical or noncritical to either the reaction rate or amount of products,
but without the correct explanation.

Level 3

Identifies the given aspect correctly as critical or noncritical to either the reaction rate or amount of products
with the correct explanation.

OR
Identifies the given aspect correctly as critical or noncritical to both the reaction rate and amount of products,
but without the correct explanation.
Level 4

Identifies the given aspect correctly as critical or noncritical to both the reaction rate and amount of products,
but one of the explanations is not correct.

Level 5

Identifies the given aspect correctly as critical or noncritical to both the reaction rate and amount of products
with correct explanations.

90

For the main study, the scoring rubrics of revised Questions 5 to 7 are depicted in
the following section. For Question 5, students were asked to do the matching. One
mark was awarded to each correct answer.

Question 5 (main study): Excess magnesium is added to 15 cm3 of 0.1 M

hydrochloric acid. After 5 minutes, a total of 20 cm3 of hydrogen gas has
been collected, which denotes the end of the reaction as shown in Fig. 1.

40

Volume of
H2(g)
evolved / 30
cm3

II

III

20

15 cm3 of 0.1 M HCl

IV

10

9
10
time / minute

Choose the curve (I, II, III or IV) that matches with the followings if the
experiment is repeated by using
(a)

7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

III

(b)

15 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

(c)
(d)

II

IV

30 cm of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid

15 cm of 0.1 M ethanoic acid

Question 6 (main study): Sketch, in Fig.2, the results that would be obtained if the
experiment in question 5 is repeated with
(a) 15 cm3 of 0.1 M sulphuric acid - label your curve X
(b) 7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M sulphuric acid - label your curve Y
(c) 7.5 cm3 of 0.05 M sulphuric acid - label your curve Z

91

Type of answer Features of responses

for each curve
Level 1
No response / wrong gradient and wrong maximum
volume of gas

Score
awarded
0

Level 2

Understands the effects on either reaction rate or amount

of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient or volume.

Level 3

Understands the effects on either reaction rate or amount

of products due to different changes; and the curve drawn
is precise with respect to gradient or volume.

OR
Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount
of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient and volume.
Level 4

Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount

of products due to different changes; but the curve drawn is
not precise with respect to gradient or volume.

Level 5

Understands the effects on both reaction rate and amount

of products due to different changes; and the curve drawn
is precise with respect to gradient and volume.

92

Question 7 (main study):

For the reaction between magnesium and a dilute

acid, which of the followings are factors affecting the rate of reaction and
the amount of product formed, if

(a)

Mg is in excess?

(b)

Mg is the limiting reactant?

Put a in the appropriate boxes. Explain your choice.

Rate of reaction

not certain

No

Yes

not certain

No

Yes

Concentration of
the acid

Reason

Amount of product
Reason

(a)

(b)
Volume of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Basicity of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Strength of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Number of moles (a)
of the acid
(b)

As the new dimension of reaction condition (i.e. magnesium is the limiting

reactant) added to the revised Question 7 followed the original questions structure,
the scoring rubrics of the revised question were basically the same as that in the
pilot study (see p. 90).

The transformed quantitative data were then analysed using Statistical

Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows (version 11.0). An alpha level of
0.05 was used for all statistical tests reported in this study. In the pilot study, paired
t-test was conducted based on students responses with respect to Question 7
(identifying factors affecting the initial rate and amount of products) to see if
students had statistically significant gain in scores after the research lessons. By

93

computing the mean gain scores in classes 4A and 4B, the effect of different
debriefing sequence of factors on student learning outcomes could be compared.

In the main study, a detailed data analysis was conducted in an attempt to

answer the 3 research questions stated in Chapter 1 of this thesis. Descriptive
summaries of the mean scores of Questions 1 to 4 (focused on the fair test concept
and the experimental design) and those of Questions 5 to 7 (focused on factors
affecting the reaction rate and amount of products, including interpreting and
sketching rate curves) in both the pretest and the posttest were computed. Paired ttest was conducted to examine whether introducing certain patterns of variation in
the introduction, experimentation and debriefing in the research lessons could
improve students understanding of the concept of reaction rate with respect to the
defined objects of learning, i.e. the answer for the first part of the first research
question.

To find the clue for the second part of the first research question, attempts
were made to compare different patterns of variation (different debriefing sequence
of aspects) on effectiveness in enhancing student learning. Independent samples ttests on the pre-posttest were conducted for mean gain scores of Questions 1 to 4
and those of Questions 5 to 7 to assess whether statistically significant differences
existed between classes 4C and 4D.

To examine whether there is any relationship between students level of

academic ability and the patterns of variation (related to the second research
question), students were first categorized as high or low achievers based on their

94

performance in the pretest, with the median score as the cut-off score. Independent
sample t-tests were conducted on the posttest and gain score for individual
questions. These descriptive summaries provided understanding on how students
of different academic abilities differed in relation to the lived object of learning.

For the third research question which asked does the use of scientific
investigation afford students greater opportunity to discern the aspect of the object
of learning?, students written responses from Question 7 were subjected to
analysis. The mean score of Question 7 in the pretest, posttest and the gain score
were compared to see if the group doing the experiment on a particular aspect
outperformed the non-group, i.e. other groups who had not been doing the
experiment on that particular aspect, in identifying whether the aspect was critical
in affecting the initial rate and amount of products.

4.4.2 Qualitative analysis on interview data

Semi-structured interviews were conducted after the research lessons. The
audio-tapes of the selected interviews were transcribed verbatim and translated.
This data were used to confirm that students responses in the written tests had
been interpreted correctly for an accurate assessment of their understanding. The
interview transcripts were used to complement and triangulate the findings of the
written tasks. Selected extracts from these interviews are reported in Chapter 7 to
help highlight and clarify points noted in the data.

95

4.4.3 Data analysis on lesson video-recordings and laboratory

worksheets
Lesson video-recordings and students laboratory worksheets demonstrated
students learning progress over the experimentation and debriefing sessions and
thus were collected to describe the implementation of the research lessons. The
videotapes were analysed to see whether the intended object of learning was
consistent with the enacted object of learning. The verbatim record of the
debriefing sessions of classes 4C and 4D in the main study was examined to see
how the two alternative sequences used affect the teacher in bringing in the
microscopic level model in discussing the macroscopic level observation and
making connections between the two levels of representation. Answers to the
laboratory worksheets were used to examine whether they were coherent with
students responses to posttest and to see if the accuracy of their experimental
results would affect the students in identifying factors altering initial rate and
amount of products. These 2 data resources acted as a triangulation and supplement
to the present study and so were not subject to rigorous analysis.

4.5

Establishing Credibility
Credibility, which is in turn related to validity, reliability and triangulation, is

an important criterion for assessing the quality of a study (Guba & Lincoln, 1989).
Validity is concerned with the extent to which empirical evidence and theoretical
rationales support the adequacy and appropriateness of the interpretations and
actions based on test scores (Wood, 1991, p. 146). Reliability is the consistency of
the instrument in measuring whatever it measures (Wiersma, 2000, p. 297).
Triangulation, on the other hand, refers to the use of multiple methods, multiple

96

researchers, or multiple sources of data to compare the data for accuracy (Denzin,
1978). In the present study, both qualitative and quantitative data from a variety of
data resources are used as triangulation.

This study collected data on students different ways of understanding reaction

rate and compared the effects of introducing different patterns of variation in
classroom teaching on the lived object of learning. In order to enhance validity of
the data, the content of the pretest and posttest was identical. For the purpose of
content validation, the pretest was given to the chemistry panel head in advance for
comment.

With regard to reliability, the 2 groups were taught by the same teacher, used
the same textbook, conducted the same laboratory experiment, experienced the
same amount of lesson time, and took the same tests in both the pilot and main
studies. All the responses in the pre-posttest were coded by the researcher and the
panel head, the other rater, because member checking (Guba & Lincoln, 1989)
could help to enhance reliability of the findings. Both teachers have more than 15
years of teaching experience and they are experienced markers in the public
examinations in Hong Kong. This could ensure the credibility in the marking of
students pretest, posttest and delayed posttest. The scoring rubrics were carefully
explained to the panel head and documented in advance, and were revised once
after preliminary analysis of the result. The ratings were done independently in late
June in the respective academic years, and were found to agree with one another
well.

97

Analysis of the data of delayed posttest in the pilot study (which serves as
evidence to see whether the students could retain successfully the new ways of
seeing the concept of reaction rate after a period of time) was administered to the
students 6 weeks after the posttest. This also helped enhancing reliability of the
findings.

As written tests often merely reflect the students verbal ability or verbal
limitations (Grobman, 1970, p. 192), video-recordings were also used to obtain
valid evaluation data. Videotapes of the lessons were examined to cross-check the
reliability of the researchers estimates of non-verbal indices of student
engagement and whether the intended object of learning was consistent with the
enacted object of learning. Thus this data offered evidence to examine assertions
generated from written tests.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted after the research lessons. The

audio-tapes of the selected interviews were transcribed verbatim and were used to
confirm that students responses in the written tests had been interpreted correctly
for an accurate assessment of their understanding. The interview transcripts were
used to complement and triangulate the findings of other data resources.

As an adjunct, students written laboratory worksheets which demonstrated

students learning progress over the research lessons were also collected for
analysis. They were used to triangulate the findings of written tests and interview
transcripts. This triangulation can enhance the data quality and the credibility of
the findings of the present study.

98

CHAPTER 5
DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PILOT
STUDY
5.1

Introduction
This chapter begins by exploring the lived object of learning before research

lessons to identify students alternative conceptions of reaction rate. The intended

object of learning is thus defined. Then it describes the research lessons of the pilot
study. During the research lessons, some of the different patterns of variation
employed in the introduction, experimentation and debriefing have been described
in literature and will be quoted where appropriate. Experimentation with variations
brought in is demonstrated as a pioneer study in the research field of
phenomenography. Different debriefing sequences were used for classes 4A and
4B to see if a certain pattern of variation was more conducive to student learning.
Enacted object of learning will be next. The chapter ends by depicting the
preliminary analysis of the lived object of learning after the research lessons.

5.2

Defining Intended Object of Learning

5.2.1 Background information - Choice of topic rate of a

chemical reaction
An understanding of science concepts and the processes of science (often
designated as scientific inquiry) plays a central role in helping our students to
acquire important skills and develop cognitive capacities for social and economic
progress (NRC, 1996; Millar & Osborne, 1998). Conducting scientific inquiry,

99

therefore, has become a challenge in science education and a paradigm shift for
better student learning (Curriculum Corporation, 1994; AAAS, 1998). Among the
many science concepts taught in the secondary school chemistry curriculum,
reaction rate is considered as a key concept (NRC, 1996). The characteristics that
the rate of a chemical reaction depends upon the nature of its reactants and the
conditions under which it occurs are featured prominently in the National Science
Education Standards (NRC, 1996). As understanding chemical kinetics is highly
relevant in the understanding of chemical processes in industrial, medical and
environmental areas as well as other interrelated concepts, chemical reaction rates
and the factors that affect them constitute an important part of the secondary school
chemistry curriculum in most countries (Ragsdale et al., 1998; Cachapuz &
Maskill, 1987; Justi, 2002; akmaki, Leach, & Donnelly, 2006; akmaki, 2010).
In Hong Kong, the understanding of chemical reaction rate at Secondary 4 level is
an essential pre-requisite to the learning of chemical kinetics at the Advanced
Level (CDC, 2007) or undergraduate study.

Alternative conceptions on reaction rate are commonly found among high

school students (Garnett et al., 1995; akmaki et al., 2003). An empirical study
done by Lo (2006) found that it is quite common to find Secondary 4 students in
Hong Kong holding a conception that volume is a factor affecting the rate of a
chemical reaction. To help students develop appropriate conceptions, the way in
which the teacher structures the lesson content, like the teaching-learning
sequences, (Andersson & Wallin, 2006; Viiri & Savinainen, 2008) and the students
experience the lesson is found to be substantially influential (Pong & Morris, 2002).
In recent decades, Marton and his research group made use of the variation theory

100

(see Marton & Booth, 1997) to analyse the relationship between teaching and
student learning. Results showed that quality learning was closely related to the
patterns of variation that were enacted by the teacher and experienced by the
students (Marton & Tsui, 2004). Students from teachers who used variation
consciously learnt better than the students from teachers that did not (Pang &
Marton, 2003). Consistent with the findings of Los (2006) study, the researcher
found that many of her S4 students also held the same alternative conception:
volume affects the reaction rate, as revealed from the preliminary analysis of the
pretest of her pilot study conducted in May 2007. Thus, the researcher aimed at
exploring how variation theory can bring about effective learning in reaction rate
through scientific investigations.

5.2.2 Intended object of learning

Rate of reaction tells how quickly a chemical reaction occurs. It cannot be
determined from the stoichiometric equation, but should be determined by doing
experiments. Reaction rate (with respect to a substance) is defined as the change in
amount or concentration of the substance divided by the time taken for the change.
Initial rate, which is defined as the reaction rate at time zero, can be determined
from the gradient of the rate curve (graph of concentration of product versus time)
at time zero (see Figure 5.1).
Slope = initial rate
Concentration
of product

time

Figure 5.1 Initial rate of a reaction can be determined from the gradient to the rate
curve at time zero

101

Factors that affect the reaction rate include concentration of reactants,

temperature of reaction mixture, surface area of solid reactants, presence of
catalyst, etc. It is not difficult to realize from our daily-life experiences that
temperature or surface area could affect the rate of a chemical reaction. For
example, many people know that to slow down the process of decaying, food
should be stored in a refrigerator. To speed up dissolution, cold and flu hot drink
sachets are manufactured with their content in powdered form. Though students
may know that concentrated acids are dangerous, they might not know how
corrosive they are or, in more technical terms, how they affect the rate of chemical
reactions.

To determine the rate of a particular reaction, either a reactant or a product of

the reaction the amount of which is measurable by instrumentation or apparatus
available in the laboratory could be chosen for the investigation. In secondary
school curriculum, an experiment involving the action of a metal (e.g. magnesium)
or a metal carbonate (e.g. calcium carbonate) with a dilute acid (e.g. hydrochloric
acid) is usually chosen as an illustration.
Metal + acid salt + hydrogen gas

reaction (1)

Metal carbonate + acid salt + carbon dioxide gas + water

reaction (2)

The reasons for choosing this example are that students should have been
familiarized with this reaction as they should have learnt it in Secondary 2 level
and that the experimental set-up involved was quite simple. Whether metal or
metal carbonate is used, as both reactions involve the formation of a gaseous
product, three physical parameters related to the reaction mixtures could be
measured quantitatively to determine the amount of products formed or the amount

102

of reactants remained at regular time intervals. For example, we can measure the
volume of the gas produced by using a gas syringe, the loss in mass of the reaction
mixture by using an electronic balance, or the pressure change of the closed system
with the help of a pressure sensor connected to a data-logger. After measuring the
parameter at regular time intervals, the data collected could be plotted graphically
for the determination of the initial rate. From the graph obtained, two aspects of the
reaction can be derived simultaneously, namely the initial rate, and the amount of
products formed at the end of the reaction (see Figure 5.2).
volume of gas
product

Gradient at time 0 = initial rate

Volume of gas
obtained at the
end of reaction

time

Figure 5.2 Interpretation of a rate curve

Since these two types of reaction involve the use of acid, students are expected
to study the effect of change in concentration, volume, strength or basicity of acids
on the reaction rate. However, as some of these factors also affect the number of
moles of reactants and hence the amount of products obtained (see Table 5.1),
students might find it confusing to distinguish which factors are critical to the
initial rate and which are critical to the amount of products. Besides, research
studies done by Tullberg (1997) and Strmdahl (1996) indicated that chemistry
students or even educators held different separate fundamental conceptions of the
meaning of the mole. akmaki et al.s (2006) study also reported that the
number of moles and concentration were often not differentiated by the students,
and in some cases these terms were used interchangeably. This implies that

103

students prior knowledge on scientific terms like mole may be closely-related to

their understanding of the factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of
products. This conjecture seems to be valid, and was reflected in students
response at the interview in the researchers pilot study.
Table 5.1

Factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of products

formed in a chemical reaction
Factors of
Reaction rate

Amount of products

Volume
Concentration

Strength

Basicity

Apart from chemical knowledge, helping students to develop scientific inquiry

skills and positive attitudes towards collaboration through conducting group-based
scientific investigations is seen as one of the educational goals for sciences
(Education Commission, 2000). Many established experiments on rate of a
chemical reaction in Secondary 4 level, however, show only qualitatively the effect
of concentration, temperature, or catalyst on the reaction rates due to difficulties in
obtaining quantitative data in a general chemistry laboratory. For example, the
direct chemical analysis of the concentration of a reactant or product versus time is
frequently very labour intensive (Ragsdale & Vanderhooft, 1998). Indirect physical
methods are more easily applied, but often limited instrumentation and apparatus
(e.g. electronic balance, gas syringe) are available in the secondary schools
chemistry laboratories in Hong Kong. Under such circumstances, more electronic
balances have been installed in the researchers school so that students were
allowed to perform investigations with sufficient hardware and to appreciate the

104

importance of collaboration through group work. Thus the present study aims to
help students understand what factors could affect the reaction rate and the amount
of products respectively for acid-involved reactions. The research questions are:
Can the use of variation theory help students to discern the critical aspects of the
reaction rate and amount of products through conducting scientific investigations?
What patterns of variation are most effective in enhancing student learning of
reaction rate? In the pilot study, the researcher attempted to see if a debriefing
sequence with mole-related items brought together could lead to better students
learning outcome than one with those items being separated.

With regard to the above arguments, the intended object of learning in the
pilot study was defined as the capability of:
(1)

understanding the concept of a fair test and designing an experiment

for a scientific investigation (the indirect object of learning);

(2)

understanding the concept of reaction rate, including discerning

factors that affect the reaction rate and the amount of products
respectively for acid-involved reactions (the direct object of learning).

5.2.3 Lived object of learning before research lessons

A pretest was first piloted with classes 4A and 4B (a total of 75 students) in
early May 2007. The questions were divided into 2 categories Questions 1 to 4
were related to Object of Learning 1 (OL1) whereas Questions 5 to 7 Object of
Learning 2 (OL2). Most of the students did very well in Question 1 (mean score of
nearly 90%) which tested the capability of conducting a scientific investigation
with a fair test concept. The students also demonstrated that they had some basic

105

ideas of factors affecting the rate of a chemical reaction, as reflected in the mean
score of about 40% in Question 2. As expected, the students did not perform well
in Questions 3 and 4 - designing an experimental set-up and predicting the
graphical relationship between the physical parameters and time during a reaction.
For Questions 5 to 7 which tested the understanding of factors affecting the
reaction rate and the amount of products, many students in classes 4A and 4B did
poorly. Quite a number of students thought that the reaction rate would be affected
by the volume of a solution (35% of students) or the number of moles of reactants
(49% of students). They were unable to identify all the factors affecting the
reaction rate and the amount of products. This confirmed that the choice of the
objects of learning (OL1 and OL2) was appropriate. These findings provided input
for the researcher to plan the lessons so as to tackle the existing confusions among
students and to improve their understanding of reaction rate through appropriate
pedagogical instructions, in particular by placing more focus on the sketching and
interpretation of rate curves.

106

5.3

Research Lessons in Pilot Study

5.3.1 Design of the research lessons

This thesis aims at helping students to develop the capability of understanding
the concept of a fair test and designing an experiment for a scientific investigation
(OL1), the concept of reaction rate, including discerning factors that affect the
reaction rate and the amount of products respectively for acid-involved reactions
(OL2). In order to help students appropriate the two OLs, the patterns of variation
for the critical aspects they must necessarily experience had to be constituted in
the classroom, as students can only discern that which varies (Marton & Tsui,
2004). Through the use of variation theory as a pedagogical design, it is hoped that
students will develop the capability of taking into account the notion of
concentration, volume, strength, basicity and number of moles simultaneously in
determining the reaction rate and the amount of products. A number of studies
have already revealed that teaching-learning sequences could have a great impact
on students development of appropriate conceptions (Andersson & Wallin, 2006)
and a particularly designed teaching sequence could lead to a better student
learning (Leach, Scott, Ametller, Hind & Lewis, 2006). Thus in the present study,
two debriefing sequences were employed in the student data presentation session to
see if one was more effective than the other in helping students develop the
appropriate conceptions with respect to OL2. Students existing knowledge
included the understanding of chemical reactions involving acids and the mole
concept involving reacting masses and concentration of solutions. A lesson plan
which comprised 3 sections was designed: a single period for introduction (30
minutes), a double period for experimentation (60 minutes) and a single period for
debriefing (30 minutes). Classes 4A and 4B would follow different debriefing

107

sequences for the discussion. The lesson plan of the pilot study is depicted in Table
5.2.

Table 5.2 Lesson plan of the research lessons for classes 4A and 4B in the pilot study

debriefing

experimentation

introduction

Time

Teacher Activities

Student Activities

Remarks

5 min.

Shows examples of fast

and slow reactions.

Compare the rates of

given pairs of
reactions.

The teacher contrasts fast and

slow reactions.

5 min.

Introduces the meaning

of reaction rate.

Listen to the teacher.

The teacher displays a graph

showing how the concentration
of product increases with time
in a reaction.

20 min.

Introduces different
measures to follow the
progress of a chemical
reaction.

Class participation
and discussion.

The teacher varies

experimental set-ups for
studying the reaction rate of
the same chemical reaction.

5 min.

Revises methods to
follow the progress of a
chemical reaction.

Listen to the teacher.

5 min.

Briefs students the

objectives and safety
precautions of the
experiments.
Demonstrates Expt. A.

Sit around the

teachers bench and
listen to the teacher.

Expt. A: To measure the

change in mass of the reaction
mixture when zinc carbonate is
treated with dilute
hydrochloric acid.

40 min.

Walks around and assists

students in performing
experiments.

Divide into 6 groups

and perform Expts.
A and B.

Expt. B: To investigate
whether the assigned factor is
critical in affecting the reaction
rate. Separation or fusion of
factors is involved.

10 min.

Assists students in
plotting graphs.

Complete the lab

worksheet.

10 min.

Pools the experimental

results from 6 groups
together.

Each group sends a

representative to
report their results in
front of the class.

Classes 4A and 4B follow

different sequences of factors
in their data reporting.

10 min.

Points out the features of

the 6 graphs with brief
explanation and
summarizes the findings.

Study the 6 graphs

and listen to the
teacher.

The teacher uses the same

sequence as in the student data
reporting in explaining the
graphs.

10 min.

Helps students to draw

conclusion from results.

Class discussion.

108

5.3.2 Part 1: Teacher introduction

In the first period, the teacher contrasted examples of fast and slow reactions
(e.g. action of water with potassium versus that with iron). She then introduced the
meaning of reaction rate and displayed a graph showing how the concentration
of a product increased with time in a reaction. From the graph, the meaning of
initial rate was defined graphically. To determine the rate of a chemical reaction
experimentally, the teacher explained to the class that the choice of methods
depended on the nature of the reactants and products of that reaction. For the
reactions which involved the formation of a gaseous product, e.g. the action of
magnesium with dilute hydrochloric acid, three methods could be used to collect
quantitative data so as to determine the reaction rate. The focal awareness, the
different experimental set-ups, was brought forth to the students awareness by
separation as the reaction involved was kept invariant.

5.3.3 Part 2: Teacher demonstration and experimental group work

In the double-period experimentation, the teacher revised with the students the
different methods that could be used to study the rate of the reaction between an
acid and magnesium, and an acid with zinc carbonate. She then explained the
objectives and procedures of the experiments that the students were going to
perform. Students were divided into 6 groups. In Part A, they were asked to follow
the progress of the reaction between 1.5 g of zinc carbonate (ZnCO3) and 15 cm3
of 0.5 M hydrochloric acid. To prepare the students for the investigation, the
teacher demonstrated how to use the electronic balance to follow the change in
mass of the reaction mixture during the course of the reaction (see Figure 5.3).

109

plastic
bottle

empty
bottle

ZnCO3
HCl

reaction
mixture

electronic
balance

stopwatch

Figure 5.3 Laboratory set-up to follow the change in mass of a reaction mixture

The students then performed their own experiments by recording the mass
measured, calculating the change in mass at regular time intervals and plotting a
graph. In Part B, each group of students was asked to investigate whether an
assigned factor (e.g. concentration of the acid) would affect the rate of the reaction
as done in Part A. The arrangement of the assigned task for each group is described
in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3: Arrangement of assigned factors for different groups in Part B

Group
no.

Factor investigated

Group
no.

Factor(s) investigated

Volume of the acid

Basicity of the acid

Concentration of the acid

Volume and concentration, keeping

same no. of moles of the acid

Strength of the acid

Volume and concentration, varying

no. of moles of the acid

Students had to use their fair test concept to choose the appropriate chemicals
among the given six (0.5 M hydrochloric acid, 1 M hydrochloric acid, 0.5 M
ethanoic acid, 0.5 M sulphuric acid, 0.25 M hydrochloric acid, zinc carbonate
powder) and to determine their corresponding amount used to accomplish their
tasks. For example, to investigate whether volume affects the reaction rate,
students of Group 1 should repeat the experiment by using the same acid of the

110

same concentration as in Part A, i.e. 0.5 M hydrochloric acid, but with a different
volume. The pattern of variation created here is separation of factors. When
students focus on what varies (the volume of the acid), a dimension of variation is
separated off and students could discern the effect on rate due to volume changes.
Students of Groups 2 to 4 were to make similar judgement and choice of chemicals:
Group 2 used hydrochloric acid of a different concentration (i.e. 1 M hydrochloric
acid, HCl), Group 3 used a weak acid of the same concentration (i.e. 0.5 M
ethanoic acid, CH3CO2H) and Group 4 used a dibasic acid of the same
concentration (i.e. 0.5 M sulphuric acid, H2SO4). In these 3 groups, the volume of
the acid and the mass of zinc carbonate should be kept unchanged. In contrast,
students of Groups 5 and 6 chose the same acid as in Part A and varied both its
concentration and volume. Through this arrangement, the pattern of variation
created was fusion of factors: two factors, concentration and volume, were varied
simultaneously. The difference between the 2 groups was that the number of moles
of acid was kept unchanged in Group 5, but not in Group 6. The patterns of
variation used were summarized in the Table 5.4.
Table 5.4: Patterns of variation used in the experimentation
Reaction conditions
Mass
Group of
ZnCO3
1
i

Volume
of acid

Conc.
of acid

Strength Basicity
of acid
of acid

No. of
moles
of acid

Experimental
results
Rate of Mass of
reaction products
formed
i
v

Key:

i invariant; v variant

111

5.3.4 Part 3: Data presentation and whole class debriefing

In the debriefing session, each group of students sent a representative to
present their findings in front of the whole class by placing their worksheet on the
Digital Visualizer which was placed on the teachers bench. Students from other
groups could see the 2 rate curves drawn clearly from the screen. Different
debriefing sequences of result reporting (with certain patterns of variation
separation and fusion of factors) were arranged for classes 4A and 4B. The
debriefing sequence of class 4A emphasized the relationship between aspects
concentration, volume and moles whereas that of class 4B stressed on the
aspect volume not a factor of reaction rate.

5.3.4.1

Class 4A Debriefing sequence: Strength basicity

concentration volume number of moles

For class 4A, the first group to present their findings was Group 3 who worked
on strength. When the 2 rate curves were put together on the same axes, the
students could find that the gradients of the 2 curves at time zero were different
(see Figure 5.4(a)). By noting the 2 different initial rates (through varying strength
whilst keeping other factors invariant), the focal awareness, strength, was brought
forth to the students awareness. Through the use of separation, the teacher could
help the students discern the critical aspect strength as a factor which affects the
reaction rate. On the other hand, the students should find that strength would not
affect the final decrease in mass of the reaction mixture as the 2 rate curves
overlapped and met at the same point at the end of the reaction (see Figure 5.4(b)).
That is, no matter how strong the acid was, both hydrochloric acid (a strong acid)

112

and ethanoic acid (a weak acid) would eventually give the same number of moles

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

of the product formed.

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)

(b)

Figure 5.4(a) and 5.4(b): Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid (CH3CO2H)

The discussion proceeded with Group 4 presenting their experimental results

on the effect of basicity. By showing their 2 rate curves, one of a monobasic acid
(hydrochloric acid) and the other of a dibasic acid (sulphuric acid) as in Figure
5.5(a), the students could find that a change in basicity did vary the initial rate
(different gradients of the curves at time zero) whilst other factors were kept
unchanged. From Figure 5.5(b), they could also see that the amount of product
formed was different (the curves ended with different decrease in mass). This time,
the factor basicity was separated from other factors and it was found to be

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

critical to both the reaction rate and the amount of product.

(a)

Time/minute

(b)

Time/minute

Figure 5.5(a) and 5.5(b): Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid (H2SO4)

113

The presentation was followed by Group 2 concentration and then Group

1 volume. For the remaining 2 groups (Group 5 on volume and concentration,
keeping the same number of moles and Group 6 on volume and concentration,
varying the number of moles), students varied both factors volume and
concentration of the hydrochloric acid at the same time. From the results of
Group 5 as shown in Figure 5.6(a) and (b), it was found that by using a greater
volume (30 cm3) and a lower concentration (0.25 M) whilst keeping the same
number of moles, the initial rate was reduced whereas the decrease in mass

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

remained unchanged (see Figure 5.6(a) and (b)).

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)

(b)
3

Figure 5.6(a) and 5.6(b): Rate curves of a 15 cm of 0.5 M HCl and a 30 cm3 of 0.25 M HCl

Lastly, for Group 6, when the volume, concentration and number of moles of
acid had been changed, both the initial rate and the amount of product would be
changed. This phenomenon could be reflected in Group 6s experiment results in
the data presentation as shown in Figure 5.7(a) and (b).

114

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)
(b)
3
Figure 5.7(a) and 5.7(b): Rate curves of a 15 cm of 0.5 M HCl and a 10 cm3 of 0.25 M HCl

Through this fusion, students could observe the effect on the initial rate and
the decrease in mass of the reaction mixture upon the changes of the two factors
simultaneously and hence might be able to develop a deeper understanding of the
part-whole relationship between reaction rate, amount of product and their
corresponding factors.

5.3.4.2

Class 4B Debriefing sequence: Volume concentration

strength basicity number of moles

For class 4B, the data presentation process was similar to that of class 4A
except that the sequence of factors brought forth to the whole class was different.
Instead of starting from the group working on strength, this time the first group
to present was the one working on volume (Group 1). Students could see that
when the volume of the acid increased, the initial rate remained unchanged
whereas the amount of product would increase (see Figure 5.8(a) and (b)).

115

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

(a)

Time/minute

(b)

Time/minute

Figure 5.8(a) and 5.8(b): Rate curves of a 15 cm3 and a 30 cm3 of hydrochloric acid (HCl)

The second group to present was the group working on concentration

(Group 2). From the graphs shown in Figure 5.9(a) and (b), students would realize
that an increase in concentration of the acid would lead to an increase in both the

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

initial rate and the amount of product.

(a)

Time/minute

(b)

Time/minute

Figure 5.9(a) and 5.9(b): Rate curves of a 1 M and 0.5 M of hydrochloric acid (HCl)

The third group was working on strength (Group 3) and the fourth on
basicity (Group 4). The last two groups, Group 5 and Group 6, were those
working on number of moles. In other words, different sequences of factors
were adopted in the data presentation of the 2 classes so as to compare the effects
of sequencing (see Figure 5.10).

116

Debriefing sequence in class 4B

Debriefing sequence in class 4A

Strength (Group 3)

Volume (Group 1)

Basicity (Group 4)

Concentration (Group 2)

Concentration (Group 2)

Strength (Group 3)

Volume (Group 1)

Basicity (Group 4)

Volume and concentration,

same number of moles

Volume and concentration,

same number of moles

(Group 5)

(Group 5)

Volume and concentration,

different number of
moles (Group 6)

Volume and concentration,

different number of
moles (Group 6)

Fig. 5.10 Debriefing sequence in classes 4A and 4B

The two different debriefing sequences have their own characteristics. The
reasons underpinned for the sequence used in class 4A was that discrete factors
like strength and basicity which were specific to acid-involved reactions (but
not to other chemical reactions like redox or displacement reactions) could be
discussed first so as to avoid confusion between factors for different types of
reactions. The remaining four inter-related factors, including concentration,
volume, same moles and different moles which could be applied to any
chemical reactions involving aqueous reagent(s), could be discussed consecutively
so that their part-part relationship could possibly be brought out more clearly to the
students. If students could internalize their mole concept and see clearly the

117

relationship between concentration, volume and mole, they might also discern the
part-whole relationship between these factors and their effect on the rate and the
amount of product in a more sophisticated way.

Research showed that many students hold the alternative conception that
volume was a factor affecting the reaction rate (e.g. Lo, 2006). By bringing out at
the beginning the experimental result regarding volume as in class 4B, it might
bring a large impact on students understanding of factors affecting the reaction
rate because this unexpected finding might not only dig into students minds but
also raise their interests in this topic. After the discussion of the factor volume,
discussion on concentration, strength and basicity were followed. Indeed,
most textbook writers adopted a similar sequence when they introduced the topic
reaction rate. It might be because the factor concentration was valid for all
reactions whereas the factors strength and basicity were limited to acidinvolved reactions. Highlighting first a more common, important and easily
understandable factor concentration could help students establish a good
foundation for later development of a more complex concept when a complicated
scenario was brought forth.

5.3.4.3

Experimental results round-up and conclusion

After the data presentation, the teacher discussed with classes 4A and 4B the
experimental results obtained from the 6 groups of students by going through the
characteristics of each pair of rate curves again with brief explanation, following
the same sequence of factors as in the data presentation in the respective class.
Finally the 6 rate curves were fused together and compared with the reference

118

curve (15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl) on the same graph (see Figure 5.11). By making use
of the combined graphs and the summary table, the teacher asked the students to
state all the factors that affect the initial rate and the amount of product
respectively at the conclusion of the lesson. At the end, students were asked to
hand in their experimental worksheets and then do the posttest. They were also

Decrease in mass / g

requested to complete a delayed posttest one month later.

Time/minute

Figure 5.11 Six rate curves fusing together on the same graph with a summary table

After a preliminary analysis of the pretest, posttest and delayed posttest, it was
found that class 4A had a greater gain scores, implying that the sequence used in
class 4A could possibly bring out the critical aspects of the reaction rate and the
amount of products better, and hence was used thereafter in the main study.

5.4

Enacted Object of Learning

In the pilot study, the enacted object of learning was basically found to be

similar to the intended object of learning, except that several problems were
encountered during the lessons. First, the experimentation session for class 4A was

119

a bit behind schedule because it was the first time the lesson plan was implemented.
The I.T. technician initially was not so familiarized with the laboratory setting such
that about 5 minutes were wasted in arranging the position of the video camera and
the lighting system.

The lesson overran for about 5 minutes consequently. Having gone through
that experience, no more technical problems regarding the video-recording was
found in class 4B. Another problem encountered was that two of the electronic
balances did not work properly minute changes of mass over a period of time
could not be displayed accurately, resulting in fluctuation and error in measuring
data. Although those 2 electronic balances were newly bought by the Biology
Department, the model was less advanced than that bought by the Chemistry
Department. The teacher then had to replace those 2 with others only after certain
groups of students had completed their investigation. Subsequently, 2 new
electronic balances of the more advanced model were bought by the Chemistry
Department for the main study upon approval by the chemistry panel head and the
school principal. Thus the problem of equipment variation was solved and did not
appear in the main study.

The third problem was that some students had difficulties in plotting rate
curves from raw data due to scattered points. As they spent much time in graphical
treatment, they might not have enough time to study their own graphs for later
discussion. More instruction or guidelines from the teacher on curve sketching and
more time given in the experimentation might help to ease the problem.

120

Yet another problem was that some students might not have sufficient time to
study the experimental results and rate curves from other groups thoroughly within
the limited time in the debriefing session. They might need more time to study and
explain the rate curves presented by other groups. The lack of thorough
understanding with respect to OL2 was reflected in the mediocre performance in
Questions 5 to 7 of the posttest. A set of teaching notes, which mainly focused on
the rate curves, was then compiled by the teacher to help students discern the
missing critical features of the object of learning. A new dimension of the
reaction condition, magnesium reacting with an excess acid, was included in the
notes so that a more complete picture of the concepts could be shown to the
students. The teacher then spent an additional period to go through the notes with
the students. In the main study, more time was given to the debriefing session and
this new dimension of variation acid in excess was discussed in the class.

Lastly, some students did not bring their calculators to the Chemistry
Laboratory when they were asked to complete the posttest. This might have
affected the corresponding performance for those students who were exceptionally
weak in simple calculation. Thus in the main study, the debriefing was held in the
classroom so that students had their calculators with them when they were asked to
do the posttest.

Overall, the lessons for classes 4A and 4B ran smoothly. Students were found
to be attentive, responsive, well-disciplined and cooperative. They were actively
engaged in the class discussion as well as in the laboratory work.

121

5.5

Lived Object of Learning after Research Lessons

5.5.1 Preliminary analysis of the pretest in the pilot study

The pretest was administered to the 2 classes of students in early May 2007
during their form periods/chemistry lessons before the topic Rate of reaction was
introduced. The posttest was then taken right after the research lessons. General
responses observed in the pretest are depicted in Table 5.5.

Table 5.5

Preliminary findings of the pretest

General responses observed in the pretest

Q.1

Most students had the concept of a fair test, but they did not discern all the
critical aspects that affect the pH of a solution. Some students thought that
number of moles of the acid should be kept constant for a fair test. Instead,
concentration of the acid should be kept constant rather than the number of
moles because the critical aspects which affect the pH of an acid solution
involve concentration, strength and basicity.

Q.2

Quite a number of students knew that temperature, surface area and reactivity
of substances (metals) were factors affecting the rate of a chemical reaction,
but some had the alternative conceptions that volume, number of moles of
substances or humidity affects the reaction rate.

Q.3

When students were asked to design an experimental set-up to determine the

rate of the reaction between magnesium and a dilute mineral acid in a school
laboratory, some set-ups were workable (e.g. measuring the volume of the
gaseous product at regular time intervals), but some were not (e.g. measuring
the temperature of the reaction mixture).

122

General responses observed in the pretest

Q.3

(4B0127)

Q.4

(4B0115)
In the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid, students were weak in
graphical representation of the rate curves. In general, they could not show the
correct relationship between (a) mass of the reactants against time, and (b)
volume of hydrogen gas produced against time. e.g. Many gave straight line
graphs, or curves with wrong curvatures.

(4B0120)

(4B0127)

123

General responses observed in the pretest

Q.5

Nearly all students were unable to display graphically the correct relationships

&6

between rate / amount of products versus time upon changes in certain factors
(e.g. volume, concentration) of the reacting acid.

(4A0129)
Q.7

Most students could not discern all the critical aspects of the rate of reaction
and amount of products. e.g. They got 4 correct choices out of 10 in identifying
factors.

(4A0117)

124

5.5.2 Students laboratory worksheets in the pilot study

In the first part of the experimentation, i.e. Part A, students were asked to
follow the change in mass of the reaction mixture of zinc carbonate and dilute
hydrochloric acid by recording the mass displayed on an electronic balance at
regular time intervals and plotting a rate curve. In Part B, different groups were
assigned to investigate a different aspect (e.g. concentration, volume, basicity,
strength or number of moles) to see if that aspect was a factor affecting the reaction
rate and the amount of product. By choosing the correct choice and amount of
materials, students could obtain data and hence plot the second rate curve for
comparison. Some of the experimental results were shown in Figure 5.12.

Figure 5.12

Rate curves obtained by some groups of students in the pilot study

Not all experimental results obtained by the students were satisfactory because
some electronic balances did not work properly, giving rise to error in the data
measured. As a result, some students could not construct a smooth rate curve and

125

hence found it difficult to observe the correct relationship between the varying
factor and the corresponding effect on the initial rate and the amount of product.
Therefore sample results were also used by the teacher in interpreting and
explaining the experimental findings in the debriefing.

5.5.3 Preliminary analysis of the posttest and delayed posttest in

the pilot study
A posttest was conducted right after the research lessons. After a preliminary
analysis of the pre-posttest, it was found that the students performance was not so
satisfactory, in particular for Questions 4 to 6 which involved the graphical
representation. In general, students had shown some improvement in Question 4.
For example, the majority of students gave curves instead of straight lines in the
posttest. Some were able to show the correct relationship between the mass of
reactants-time graph and the volume of product-time graph.

(4B0220)

For Questions 5 and 6, however, a majority of students were still weak in sketching
the correct rate curves to show the relationship between the reaction rate/amount of
products and their corresponding factors.

126

(4A0229)
For Question 7 which tested whether students could identify the factors affecting
the reaction rate and the amount of product during the course of a chemical
reaction, the response of the posttest was much better. Quite a number of students
could discern some or most of the factors, e.g. some students got 8 correct choices
out of 10.

(4A0217)

127

As the performance of the students on graphical representation was not so

good while the second object of learning OL2 was mainly related to Question 7,
the analysis of the pilot study was therefore based on their responses with respect
to Question 7 (choice of factors). Quantitative data were analysed using Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows (version 11.0). An alpha level of
0.05 was used for all statistical tests reported in this study. From the result of the
paired t-tests as shown in Table 5.6, it was found that both classes had a
statistically significant increase in mean score in the posttest, implying that the
patterns of variation employed in the research lessons could possibly help students
identify the factors that affect the reaction rate and the amount of products through
conducting group-based scientific investigation. Comparing the pre-posttest mean
scores of the 2 classes, class 4A was found to have performed better, with 16.8%
increase in mean score in the posttest compared to 10% increase in class 4B. This
suggested that the debriefing sequence employed in class 4A with inter-related
factors concentration, volume and mole discussed consecutively might help
highlighting the part-part relationship better and hence facilitate students in
discerning part-whole relationship between the factors and their effect on the
reaction rate and the amount of products.

Table 5.6: Mean score of Question 7 of pre-posttest in classes 4A and 4B

Class

No. of
mean
mean
students score of score of
pretest posttest

change
in mean
score

paired differences
between pretest
and posttest mean
score

t
value

Sig.
Level
(p value)

4A

40

5.85

7.53

+16.8%

1.68

7.022

0.000

4B

35

5.77

6.77

+10.0%

1.00

2.191

0.035

128

Overall speaking, the students performance of classes 4A and 4B in the

posttest was not very satisfactory. The weighing errors due to the electronic
balances, the limited time allowed in the experimentation and the reporting of
experimental results without detailed explanation could be some possible reasons.
Thus a set of teaching notes was then designed. The notes summarized different
critical aspects which affect the reaction rate, and showed the changes in rate
curves when one critical aspect varied (separation) or when 2 critical aspects
varied simultaneously (fusion). It was hoped that through the consolidation with
the help of the teaching notes, students could develop a better understanding of the
concepts involved. A delayed posttest was then administered about one month later.

In the delayed posttest, similar data analysis which based on their responses
with respect to Question 7 (choice of factors) was done. Consistent result was
observed, with class 4A ( x = 21.8%) outperformed class 4B ( x = 16.3%), as shown
in Table 5.7. This further supports that it is better to put related (and interacting)
factors close together in temporality (e.g. concentration, volume, number of moles
being same, number of moles being different) for students to discern the two
aspects of a chemical reaction, i.e. the reaction rate and amount of products.

Table 5.7: Mean score of Question 7 of pretest and delayed posttest in classes 4A and 4B
Class

No. of
mean
mean
students score of score of
pretest delayed
posttest

change
in mean
score

paired differences
between pretest and
delayed posttest
mean score

t
value

Sig.
Level
(p value)

4A

39

5.85

8.03

+21.8%

2.18

8.487

0.000

4B

32

5.75

7.38

+16.3%

1.63

4.847

0.000

(The number of absentee in classes 4A and 4B are 1 and 3 respectively.)

129

It was encouraging to find that students performed much better in Questions 5

to 7, as reflected in their more accurate graphical representations and the increasing
number of correct factors of the reaction rate and the amount of products being
identified. Though only less than one-fifth of the students could sketch all the 7
curves correctly, quite a number of them could have 3 or more curves correctly
drawn.

(4A0317)

For Question 7, it was found that most students could discern nearly all the critical
aspects of the reaction rate and the amount of products in the delayed posttest, e.g.
one of the students got all the 10 choices correct.

130

(4A0317)

5.5.4 Preliminary analysis of the selected interview in the pilot

study
In addition to the written measures mentioned in the previous section, 6
students from each class, 4A and 4B, were selected to conduct an individual
interview (15 to 20 minutes). This group of 6 students consisted of 3 poorer
performers and 3 higher performers based on the pre-posttest results. Students
were interviewed after school in the Student Activity Centre or Media Laboratory
in mid-July 2007. Students were asked to comment on any change in their
conceptions of factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of products with
respect to the written responses and the reason behind the change or the
consistency of conceptions during the interview. Many of them said that they had
achieved a better understanding of reaction rate by performing experiments. Some
mentioned that the revision notes were very useful in helping them to discern the
critical aspects of the concepts.

131

5.6

Summary of Chapter 5
This chapter showed the developmental process of the present study. The

intended object of learning was first defined. Then it described how the research
lessons which comprised introduction, experimentation and debriefing were
conducted. Various patterns of variation like separation and fusion were brought
into the lessons to see if the use of variation theory could help S4 students learn the
topic reaction rate effectively. Different debriefing sequences were used for class
4A (strength basicity concentration volume number of moles) and
class 4B (volume concentration strength basicity number of moles) in
order to compare the effect of instruction on student learning outcomes.
Preliminary analysis of the written tests, laboratory worksheets and interview data
of the pilot study suggested that the debriefing sequence employed in class 4A with
inter-related factors concentration, volume and mole brought close together
might help highlighting the part-part relationship between various factors better
and hence facilitate students in discerning part-whole relationship between the
factors and their effect on the reaction rate and the amount of products. This
sequence of factors was thus adopted in the main study and a new dimension of
variation would be introduced in the debriefing as sequence of aspects. The fair
performance in students graphical representation also informed the researcher the
need to modify the objects of learning, the content of the written test as well as the
lesson plan. The details of the main study and the corresponding findings are
described in Chapters 6 and 7 respectively.

132

CHAPTER 6
MAIN STUDY IMPLEMENTATION AND
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
6.1

Introduction
This chapter consists of four parts addressing the three research questions

designed for the main study. The first part explores the background information of
the main study and the revised objects of learning. A brief analysis of the lived
object of learning before the research lessons, i.e. the result of the pretest, is
included. The second part describes the revised lesson plan which comprises 3
sessions, introduction, experimentation and debriefing, with different patterns of
variation employed, especially in the debriefing sequence. The researcher
attempted to see if the use of variation theory as a pedagogical design could
effectively help students appropriate the objects of learning and whether a specific
debriefing sequence (fusion of aspects: rate-product-rate-product in class 4C versus
separation of aspects: rate-rate-product-product in class 4D) is more conducive to
student learning. The third part depicts the enacted objects of learning. The final
session of this chapter discusses the characterization of written responses and a
preliminary analysis of the interview responses.

133

6.2

Re-defining Intended Objects of Learning

6.2.1 Background information of reaction rate and research

questions of the present study
Reaction rate is defined as the change in amount of a substance in a chemical
reaction divided by the time taken. Initial rate is the reaction rate at time zero, and
can be determined from the gradient of a rate curve at time zero. Factors that affect
the reaction rate include concentration of reactants, temperature, surface area,
presence of catalyst, etc. In the senior secondary school chemistry curriculum, the
reaction of a metal with an acid is usually chosen to study the concentration effect
on reaction rate because this reaction was taught in junior secondary and the
experimental set-up involved is simple. To study the initial rate of this reaction,
quantitative data (e.g. volume of the gas produced) at regular time intervals could
be collected and be represented in a graphical form a rate curve. From the rate
curve, the 2 aspects of a reaction, the initial rate and total amount of products,
can be obtained. As this reaction involves acids, students are expected to study the
effect of concentration, volume, strength and basicity of acids on the initial rate.
However, as some of these factors also affect the number of moles of reactants and
hence the amount of products obtained, students might find it difficult to
distinguish which factors are critical to the initial rate, and which are critical to the
amount of products. Research studies have shown that students quite often hold
different conceptions of the mole (Strmdahl, 1996) and volume is commonly
considered as a factor affecting the rate of a chemical reaction among high school
students (Lo, 2006). If students do not have a clear conception of mole and its
relationship between concentration and volume as their prior knowledge, they may
have difficulty in learning the topic reaction rate and the effect of different factors

134

on initial rate and amount of products. Preliminary analysis of the written tests
as well as students interview response in the researchers pilot study done in May
2007 provided evidence on this conjecture.

Helping students to develop scientific inquiry skills and positive attitudes

towards collaboration through conducting group-based scientific investigations is
seen as one of the educational goals for sciences (Education Commission, 2000).
To encourage the implementation of scientific investigations, Investigative Study,
a group-based investigation has been introduced in the New Senior Secondary
chemistry curriculum in Hong Kong as a key component in the School-based
Assessment (Curriculum Development Council & Hong Kong Examinations and
Assessment Authority, 2007). However, in an examination-oriented society like
Hong Kong, using cookbook-like experimental workbook for chemistry practical
lessons is quite common. To study reaction rate in S4 level, many workbooks
suggest experiments which involve the study of the effect of concentration,
temperature, or a catalyst on the reaction rate only qualitatively or as teachers
demonstrations owing to the fact that the instrumentation and apparatus (e.g.
electronic balance, gas syringe) employed are often limited in secondary schools
chemistry laboratories (Ragsdale & Vanderhooft, 1998). Under such circumstances,
more electronic balances have been purchased in the researchers school so that
students were given chances to perform investigations with sufficient hardware and
to appreciate the importance of collaboration through group work.

The present study aims to help students understand the concept of reaction rate,
and what factors could affect the reaction rate and the amount of products

135

respectively for acid-involved chemical reactions. The researcher attempts to see if

the use of variation theory could be an effective pedagogy in enhancing student
learning of reaction rate through experimentation and whether a debriefing
sequence fusion of aspects is more conducive to better student learning than a
sequence separation of aspects.

The three research questions are:

1. Can the use of variation theory help students appropriate the object of
learning? What patterns of variation are most effective in enhancing student
appropriation of the object of learning?
2. Is there any interaction effect between students level of academic ability
and the patterns of variation?
3. Does the use of scientific investigation afford students greater opportunity
to discern the aspect of the object of learning?

6.2.2 Intended objects of learning

Following the findings from the pilot study that students in general were weak
in presenting their understanding of reaction rate through graphical representation,
the intended objects of learning in the main study was modified by adding the
capability of interpreting rate curves as listed below:
(1)

understanding the concept of a fair test and designing an experiment

for a scientific investigation (the indirect object of learning);

(2)

discerning factors that affect the reaction rate and the amount of
products of acid-involved reactions, as well as sketching and
interpreting rate curves (the direct object of learning).

136

6.2.3 Lived object of learning before research lessons

A modified version of the pretest built on the one used in the pilot study was
developed in the main study. Seven questions were used to elicit students
understanding of reaction rate and amount of products. Questions 1 to 4 dealt
with Object of Learning 1 (OL1) whereas Questions 5 to 7 Object of Learning 2
(OL2). The content was basically the same as that of the original version, except
that the level of difficulty of Question 5 was reduced instead of asking students
to sketch rate curves (volume of gaseous product versus time) based on given
experimental conditions, students in the main study were asked to match given rate
curves with the corresponding conditions. As for Question 6, the level of difficulty
was increased. In the original question, students were asked to sketch rate curves
when one or two factors varied simultaneously. In the modified version, they were
asked to sketch rate curves based on a change of up to 3 factors simultaneously. As
for Question 7, apart from asking students to identify and explain factors affecting
the reaction rate and the amount of products when magnesium was in excess, one
more situation, magnesium being the limiting reactant, was added.

The pretest was administered to two classes of S4 students, classes 4C and 4D,
(n = 66) in late April 2008 during their form periods before the topic Rate of
reaction was introduced. Since one student from class 4C was absent in the
research lessons and hence did not do the posttest, the total number of students
subjected to analysis was only 65. Results of the pretest showed that students did
well in Question 1 - all the 65 students recognized that the scenario as stated in the
question was not a fair test, though some might not be able to explain the critical
aspect involved. For Question 2, students were able to state some basic ideas of

137

factors affecting the reaction rate. The reasonably good performance in these 2
questions showed that students had the pre-requisite knowledge for the research
lessons. Yet, many students in classes 4C and 4D did not perform well in
Questions 6 and 7, indicating that they were weak in sketching and interpreting
rate curves, and were not able to identify factors affecting the reaction rate and the
amount of products. Similar to the result of the pilot study, about 40% and 54% of
students thought that volume and number of moles respectively was a factor
affecting the rate of a chemical reaction. These findings confirmed that the revised
OL2 was appropriate - the researcher should place more focus on pedagogical
methods to help students attain the capability of sketching and interpreting rate
curves apart from identifying factors.

6.3

Research Lessons in Main Study

6.3.1 Research lesson plan and the use of patterns of variation

In the main study, a lesson plan (160 minutes) which comprised a single
period for introduction, a double period for experimentation and a single period for
debriefing was designed (see Table 6.1). Compared to the pilot study, an extra 40
minutes was added (the original lesson plan consisted of 120 minutes only) so that
more in-depth discussion was possible. In the introduction, more examples were
used to illustrate the fair test concept and the way of determining the initial rate
from a rate curve. In the experimentation and debriefing, students would have
sufficient time to study both their own graphs and the graphs from other groups to
identify the different factors. The discussion would be supplemented with detailed
explanation provided by the teacher. The two classes, classes 4C and 4D, were
taught by the same teacher using the same teaching materials. The learning

138

conditions for classes 4C and 4D were the same in the introduction and
experimentation, but different in the debriefing. In the debriefing session where
students were presenting and interpreting their rate curves, the 2 classes would
follow the same sequence of factors (as in class 4A - with better students learning
outcomes as reflected in the findings of the pilot study), but with different
sequences of aspects: rate-product-rate-product (class 4C) versus rate-rateproduct-product (class 4D). A layout of the design of the learning conditions for
classes 4C and 4D is illustrated as in Figure 6.1. The details of the design of the
research lessons are depicted in the next section.

Table 6.1 Lesson plan of the research lessons for classes 4C and 4D in the main study
Time

Student Activities
Watch the videos.

Remarks
The teacher contrasts the rate
of evolution of gas bubbles of
a slow and a fast reaction and
separates the factor
reactivity of metal.

10 min. Introduces the meaning of

average rate and initial
rate and shows how to
determine the initial rate
from a rate curve (graph
of concentration versus
time).

Listen to the
teacher.

The teacher displays several

graphs showing the changes
of certain physical parameters
(e.g. mass, pressure) during a
chemical reaction.

25 min. Introduces different

measures to follow the
progress of a chemical
reaction.

Class participation
and discussion.

The teacher varies

experimental set-ups for
studying the reaction rate of
the same chemical reaction.

introduction

5 min.

Teacher Activities
Shows videos of a slow
and a fast reaction.

139

Time

Teacher Activities

Revises methods to follow

the progress of a chemical
reaction.
5 min. Briefs students the
objectives and safety
precautions of the
experiments.
Demonstrates Expt. A.
40 min. Walks around and assists
students in performing
experiments.

Listen to the
teacher.

15 min. Assists students in

plotting graphs.
15 min. Pools the experimental
results from 6 groups
together.

Complete the lab

worksheet.
Each group sends a
representative to
report their results
in front of the class
by using a Digital
Visualizer.

20 min. Points out the features of

the 6 graphs with detailed
explanation and
summarizes the findings.

Study the 6 graphs

and listen to the
teacher.

10 min. Helps students to draw

conclusion from
experimental results.

Class discussion.

Experimentation

5 min.

debriefing

Student Activities

Remarks

Sit around the

Expt. A: To measure the
teachers bench and change in mass of the reaction
listen to the teacher. mixture when zinc carbonate
is treated with dilute
hydrochloric acid.
Divide into 6
groups to perform
Expt. A and B.

10 min. Helps students to

Class discussion.
consolidate the concept by
asking what would happen
to the rate curves if zinc
carbonate is the limiting
reactant rather than in
excess.
Discuss a public exam
question on rate.

Expt. B: To investigate
whether the assigned factor is
critical in affecting the
reaction rate and the amount
of products. Separation or
fusion of factors is involved.

A specific sequence (a certain

pattern of variation) of
result reporting is followed.
Classes 4C and 4D follow the
same sequence of factors as
in class 4A, but different
sequences of aspects (rateproduct-rate-product versus
rate-rate-product-product).
The teacher uses the same
sequence as in the student
data reporting in explaining
the graphs.

The teacher opens up a new

situation for students to
review the relationship
between reaction rate and the
amount of products upon
changes in factors such as
concentration.
The public exam question
helps students revise what
they have learnt.

Note: New components of the lesson plan added in the main study are put in italics.

140

Class 4D

Class 4C

Introduction: fair test and design of laboratory set-up

Target at
OL1
Experimentation: investigation of the effect of a
factor (e.g. concentration) on the initial rate and the
amount of product of an acid-involved reaction
Target at
OL2
Debriefing
sequence 1: rateproduct-rate-product

Debriefing
sequence 2: raterate-product-product

Figure 6.1 Design of the learning conditions for classes 4C and 4D

6.3.2 Part 1: Teacher introduction

In both learning conditions (classes 4C and 4D), the pattern of variation
constituted in the introduction part was the same. To help students develop and
consolidate the fair test concept and recognize that reactivity of a metal was a
factor affecting the rate of a metal-involved reaction, the teacher showed two
videos in the first part of the lesson the reaction of rubidium and magnesium on
water separately. By juxtaposing and contrasting the rate of evolution of
colourless gas bubbles between rubidium and magnesium, and separating
reactivity by varying the metal used while keeping the reagent water invariant,
the notion reactivity would affect the rate of a reaction could be brought forth to
the students focal awareness. If rubidium mixing with water was compared to
magnesium treated with a concentrated acid, the factor reactivity could hardly be

141

discerned. On the other hand, the teacher tried to bring the reaction rate through
observing a phenomenon (from a macroscopic view) and the readiness of metals to
lose electrons (from a microscopic view) simultaneously to the focal awareness of
the students as it is important for students to see the relationship between the
macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic levels in studying chemistry (Johnstone,
1993; Wu et al., 2001). The pattern of variation and invariance used in the first part
of introduction is shown in Table 6.2.

Table 6.2

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the first part of

introduction

Object of
learning 1

Type of
chemical
reaction

Reagent used
(water)

Reactivity
of metal

What is
discerned

Fair test
concept

Invariant

Invariant

Varies

Reactivity of
metal affects the
rate

The teacher then introduced the meaning of reaction rate and displayed a rate
curve showing how the concentration of a product increased with time during the
course of a chemical reaction. From the rate curve, the meaning of average rate
and initial rate was defined graphically. The technique of drawing a suitable
tangent to the rate curve at time zero to determine the initial rate was illustrated.
The teacher showed three lines drawn on the same extrapolated rate curve, one
intersecting the curve at one point, one intersecting at two separate points and one
touching at exactly one point. By contrasting the intersection point(s) and
touching point created as shown in Figure 6.2, the teacher brought forth the
concept of a tangent a straight line touching the curve at exactly one point.

142

Figure 6.2 Diagrams showing the correct way of drawing a tangent to a rate curve
at time zero to determine the initial rate

In order to determine the rate of a chemical reaction experimentally, the

teacher told the class that the choice of method depended on the nature of the
reactants and the products of that reaction. If a reaction involves a change in light
transmittance, we could measure the time for the reaction to proceed to a certain
point for the determination of average rate. Alternatively, we could construct a rate
curve to determine the initial rate by following the change in colour intensity of the
reaction mixture if a reactant/product is a coloured substance, or by following the
change in gas volume if the reaction gives a gaseous product. It is interesting to
note that in most of the textbooks that were commonly used in Hong Kong,
different methods were used to follow the rates of different chemical reactions. For
example, to determine the rate of the reaction between magnesium and dilute
hydrochloric acid, the volume of the hydrogen gas produced was measured. To
determine the rate of the reaction between calcium carbonate and dilute
hydrochloric acid, the mass of the reaction mixture was measured. To determine
the rate of the reaction between sodium thiosulphate and dilute hydrochloric acid
giving solid sulphur, the time for a black cross drawn at the bottom of the reaction
vessel to be blotted out was measured. Since one particular method was introduced
for each individual reaction, students might think that these hard facts, the type of
method employed, must be remembered without alternatives.
143

To avoid this kind of misunderstanding and to help students discern the

critical aspect laboratory set-up for designing an experiment in relation to the
characteristics of a given reaction, students should be given chances to experience
different laboratory set-ups while keeping other aspects like the type of chemical
reaction invariant. Thus in the second part of the lesson, the investigation of the
reaction rate was exemplified by only one reaction, the action of dilute
hydrochloric acid on magnesium to produce hydrogen gas. By keeping the type of
reaction (a gas is formed), the reactivity of metal (quite reactive magnesium) and
the concentration of acid (2 M hydrochloric acid) invariant, the focal awareness,
the different experimental set-ups, could be brought forth to the students
awareness by separation. Students could possibly discern the critical features of
an appropriate experimental set-up in relation to the characteristics of the reaction
(e.g. mass of mixture decreases, volume of gas increases, pressure of system
increases). They might realize that there could be more than one possible method
to determine the rate of a given chemical reaction. Three different laboratory setups were introduced to collect quantitative data so as to follow the progress of this
reaction, including measuring (i) the volume of the gaseous product by using a gas
syringe, (ii) the mass of the reaction mixture by using an electronic balance, and
(iii) the pressure of the closed system by using a pressure sensor connected to a
data-logger at regular time intervals (see Figure 6.3).

electronic
balance

pressure
sensor

to computer
data-logger

gas syringe

Figure 6.3 Three experimental set-ups used to study the progress of the reaction
between magnesium and dilute hydrochloric acid

144

Through the comparison of different laboratory set-ups, students should

realize that to study the rate of a chemical reaction, we could follow the change in
mass of a reaction mixture if a gas is released and allowed to escape, but the mass
measurement would be of no use if no chemicals are lost throughout the reaction. It
is hoped that through the teachers thoughtful instruction, students could discern
the critical features of the experimental set-ups (measure the mass of the reaction
mixture) in relation to the characteristics of the reaction (there is a change in mass
when the gaseous product escapes). The pros and cons for each individual method
were discussed so that students might be able to develop the capability of choosing
or designing the most appropriate method or set-up for determining the reaction
rate. The pattern of variation and invariance used in the second part of introduction
is shown in Table 6.3.

Table 6.3

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the second part of

introduction

Object of Type of Reactivity Concentration Laboratory What is discerned

learning 1 chemical of metal
of acid
set-up
reaction
Design of Invariant
laboratory
set-up

Invariant

Invariant

Varies

Different set-ups are

required to measure
different physical
parameters,
depending on the
characteristics of the
reaction

6.3.3 Part 2: Teacher demonstration and experimental group work

In both the learning conditions in classes 4C and 4D, the pattern of variation
constituted in the experimentation part was identical. In the double periods of the
experimentation, the teacher first revised with the students the different methods

145

used to study reaction rates and explained the objectives and procedures of the
experiments that the students were going to perform. In the first part of the
experimentation, each group of students (a total of 6 groups) was asked to study
the rate of the reaction between zinc carbonate (ZnCO3) and dilute hydrochloric
acid (HCl) by following the change in mass of the reaction mixture. The reaction is
summarized by the following chemical equation:
ZnCO3(s) + 2HCl(aq) ZnCl2(aq) + CO2(g) + H2O(l)

In Part A, students were asked to follow the progress of the reaction between
1.5 g of zinc carbonate (ZnCO3) and 15 cm3 of 0.5 M hydrochloric acid. To
prepare the students for the investigation, the teacher demonstrated how to use the
electronic balance to follow the change in mass of the reaction mixture during the
course of the reaction. Before carrying out the experiment, the teacher instructed
the class how to interpret rate curves to focus on (i) the initial rate by comparing
the gradient of the curves at time zero, and (ii) the amount of product/the decrease
in mass at the end of the reaction (by comparing the final level of the curves) with
the aid of the guiding questions listed in the laboratory worksheet. Several
examples were used as an illustration. As shown in Figure 6.4(a), the 2 rate curves
A and B did not overlap with each other, whether it was at time zero or when the
curve flattened. This indicated that the reaction in experiments A and B had
different initial rate and gave different amount of products. When moved to Figure
6.4(b) where the final level of the 2 rate curves were kept unchanged, the gradient
of the 2 curves at time zero varied from different initial rate as in Figure 6.4(a) to
same initial rate in Figure 6.4(b), as shown by overlapping the curves at time zero.
This variation created helped students discern the meaning of different and same
initial rate in the graphs. Moving further to Figure 6.4(c) where the 2 curves finally

146

met at the end of the reaction rather than being separated at 2 different levels as in
Figure 6.4(a) and (b), this variation brought forth to students awareness helped
them to visualize the meaning of same amount of products in a graphical
representation.

(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 6.4(a)-(c) Different pairs of rate curves to illustrate how to interpret the curves
Through comparing and contrasting these 3 figures, students were guided
to grasp the idea of same/different initial rates and amount of products from given
rate curves. Also, they might recognize that in interpreting rate curves, they need to
focus on both the critical aspects initial rate and amount of products at the
same time, i.e. fusion. Following this line of thinking, if students were able to
focus on the initial rate and the amount of products simultaneously based on a
given set of data, they would be able to sketch a correct rate curve. In short, the
learning conditions for students to interpret and sketch rate curves - a part of OL2
were created through presenting the above figures by the teacher.

In the second part of the experimentation, each group was assigned to

investigate a certain factor, say concentration, to see whether the factor was critical
in affecting the initial rate and the amount of products for the reaction between
zinc carbonate and a dilute acid. After considering the characteristics of the
reaction and the availability of the equipment provided in the school laboratory,

147

following the change in mass of the reaction mixture by using an electronic

balance was chosen as the choice of the investigation. The arrangement of the
assigned task for each group is described in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4: Arrangement of assigned factors for the investigation in Part B

Group Factor investigated
no.
1
Strength of the acid

Group Factor(s) investigated

no.
4
Volume of the acid

Basicity of the acid

Volume and concentration, keeping

same no. of moles of the acid

Concentration of the acid 6

Volume and concentration, varying

no. of moles of the acid

Students had to use the fair test concept to choose appropriate chemicals
among 6 given chemicals (0.5 M hydrochloric acid, 1 M hydrochloric acid, 0.5 M
ethanoic acid, 0.5 M sulphuric acid, 0.25 M hydrochloric acid, zinc carbonate
powder) and to determine the corresponding amount used to accomplish their tasks.
For Group 1 students who were assigned the factor strength, they needed to
change the strength of the acid by choosing a weak acid, i.e. ethanoic acid
(CH3CO2H) in Part B because in Part A, they had used a strong acid, hydrochloric
acid. They should repeat the steps by using same amount of zinc carbonate, i.e. 1.5
g, and ethanoic acid of the same concentration (0.5 M) and same volume (15 cm 3).
The pattern of variation created here is separation of factors. When students
focused on what varies (the strength of the acid), a dimension of variation was
separated off and students could discern the effect on rate due to a change in
strength. By plotting and comparing the 2 rate curves, they should be able to see
whether strength affects the rate and the amount of products formed.

148

Students of Groups 2 to 4 were to make similar judgement and choice of

chemicals: Group 2 used a dibasic acid of the same concentration and same volume
(i.e. 15 cm3 of 0.5 M sulphuric acid (H2SO4)), Group 3 used hydrochloric acid of
the same volume but of a different concentration (i.e. 15 cm3 of 1 M hydrochloric
acid (HCl)), and Group 4 used hydrochloric acid of the same concentration but of a
different volume. Basically instead of using 15 cm3 of acid, students were allowed
to use any other volume they like, but for safety reasons, they were reminded not to
use acid of volume greater than 30 cm3. In these 3 groups, the mass of zinc
carbonate should be kept unchanged, i.e. 1.5 g.

For students of Groups 5 and 6, they should use 1.5 g of zinc carbonate and
choose the same acid as in Part A, i.e. hydrochloric acid, and vary both its
concentration and volume. From this arrangement, the pattern of variation created
here is fusion of factors: two factors, concentration and volume, were varied
simultaneously. The difference between the 2 groups was that the number of moles
of acid was kept unchanged in Group 5, but not in Group 6. Group 5 needed to
determine the number of moles of acid previously used before they perform Part B
of the experiment i.e. 0.0075 mol.

As they had to change both the concentration and volume of the acid, they
could do this either by doubling the concentration and halving the volume (7.5 cm3
of 1.0 M HCl), or halving the concentration and doubling the volume (30 cm3 of
0.25 M HCl) so as to keep the total number of moles of acid used unchanged. For
Group 6, students could simply just vary both the concentration and volume of the
acid, changing its number of moles in many ways, like increasing both, decreasing

149

both, increasing one whilst decreasing the other, just to make sure that the number
of moles used in Part B was different from that in Part A. Possible choices of
chemicals used and their amount are listed in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5

Part

Possible choices of chemicals used and their amount used in the

investigation
Group

Mass of
ZnCO3
1.5 g

Volume
of acid
15 cm3

Concentration Acid used

of acid
0.5 M
HCl(aq)

1.5 g

15 cm3

0.5 M

CH3CO2H(aq)

1.5 g

15 cm

0.5 M

H2SO4(aq)

HCl(aq)

A
2
B

1.5 g

15 cm

1.5 g

30 cm3

1.0 M
0.5 M

1.5 g

30 cm3

0.25 M

HCl(aq)

1.5 g

1.0 M

HCl(aq)

20 cm

separation

HCl(aq)
fusion

In short, Groups 1 to 4 were asked to tackle a single factor while keeping other
factors invariant (separation) so as to help students separate and focus on this
particular factor from other unfocused factors. Groups 5 to 6 were asked to
perform experiments by varying 2 factors, volume and concentration, at the same
time (fusion) so as to see whether students could discern clearly the relationship
between concentration, volume and mole and their effects on the reaction rate and
amount of products through simultaneous variation. The patterns of variation used
in the 6 groups of students are listed in Table 6.6.

150

Table 6.6: Patterns of variation used in Part B of the experimentation

Reaction conditions

Experimental
results

Mass of Volume Conc.

of
acid

Strength Basicity No. of

Initial Mass of
of acid
of acid moles of rate
products
H+(aq)
formed

v
i

v
i

v
i

Group ZnCO3 of acid

separation

v
fusion

i invariant; v variant

Key:

Through the experimentation, the teacher provided students hands-on

experience to investigate whether the factor assigned would affect the initial rate
and the amount of products of an acid-involved chemical reaction by conducting a
fair test, both conceptually and procedurally, using an appropriate laboratory set-up.
Students needed to vary the factor under investigation whilst keeping other factors
unchanged. They could also test the appropriateness of following the change in
mass of the reaction mixture as a means to study the initial rate of this particular
reaction. It is hoped that students could develop the generic skills in relation to
OL1 and realize that fair test and design of the laboratory set-up are both
critical aspects of conducting a scientific investigation through active engagement
in the experiment as wisdom cant be told (Bransford, Franks, Vye & Sherwood,
1999).

Through collecting authentic data and plotting rate curves in the

experimentation, students were given opportunities to learn the skills or techniques
in sketching rate curves. Instead of being told, students should realize how the

151

mass changed with time and hence the correct curvature of the curves, i.e. with a
decreasing rate over time rather than a constant rate or an increasing rate. To see
whether the assigned factor would affect the initial rate and the amount of products,
a part of the whole investigation, students needed to know how to interpret rate
curves by comparing the critical aspects gradient of the 2 curves at time zero and
final level of the curves reached at the same time. Although at that moment they
did not know whether there were any other factors (for they had not yet
experienced the whole before the debriefing), they should at least be able to
identify a factor a part of OL2 from their own data. The pattern of variation
introduced in the experimentation is shown in Table 6.7.

Table 6.7

Patterns of variation used in the experimentation

Object of
learning 2

Chemical
reaction

Laboratory
set-up

Factor
Factors not What is
assigned for under
discerned
investigation investigation

Factors
affecting
initial rate
and amount
of products

Invariant

Invariant

Varies

Invariant

Factor under
investigation
is/is not a
factor

While students were performing the experiments, the teacher walked about to
see if students had any problems in operating the electronic balance or cooperating
with each other. In experiment B, the teacher needed to check whether each group
had made the correct choice of chemicals (e.g. type of acid, concentration and
volume of acid) and provided guidance, if necessary. If students had made the right
judgement, the teacher would not intervene in their discussion. It is important to
ensure that the students were on the right track because if they had made the wrong
choice, they would not be able to obtain the required curve for later discussion or
they would need to redo the experiment which was time-consuming. Correcting
152

their mistakes was thus required. To help monitoring the progress of the
experiment smoothly, the laboratory worksheet was designed such that the teacher
could take a quick glance of the worksheet and know the choice made by the
students. Only in the later part of the experiment when students had difficulties in
drawing a smooth curve from the error-plagued data (most likely due to turbulent
air blowing from the air-conditioners) would the teacher assist them by telling
them how to make the judgment.

After obtaining all the data in Part A and B, students had to plot the 2 rate
curves on the laboratory worksheet and to determine whether the initial rates and
the mass of the carbon dioxide formed at the end of the 2 reactions were the same
by circling appropriate answers.

6.3.4 Part 3: Data presentation and whole class debriefing

After the experimentation, each group of students was asked to show their
graphs (with 2 rate curves plotted) to the whole class by means of a Digital
Visualizer placed on the teachers bench. The teacher pooled the classs results by
calling out different groups to present their findings based on a specific sequence.
In both learning conditions for classes 4C and 4D, the pattern of variation
constituted in the debriefing session was basically different, with two common
learning arrangements. The first common arrangement was the sequence of factors
followed in the discussion same as that adopted in class 4A of the pilot study, i.e.
strength basicity concentration volume same mole different mole.
The reason for choosing the sequence of class 4A for the main study was that class
4A outperformed class 4B in the pilot study. This implied that the sequence with

153

intertwined aspects concentration, volume and mole following one-by-one

consecutively was conceived to be more conducive to student learning than the
sequence with these three intertwined aspects being separated by some other
aspects (volume concentration strength basicity same mole
different mole). The aspect-aspect relationship between concentration, volume
and mole (mole equals concentration times volume) could possibly be brought
out more clearly to the students if these 3 aspects were discussed consecutively
since the line of thinking seems to be more coherent. Another common
arrangement was the way the conclusion was made depicted later in this chapter.

6.3.4.1

Class 4C Debriefing sequence: rate-product-rate-product

In the debriefing session, the difference between classes 4C and 4D was the
sequence of presenting and discussing the effect of the factors on the initial rate
and the amount of products. In the learning condition for class 4C, as shown in
Figure 6.5, the individual factor was kept invariant whereas the aspects initial
rate and amount of products were fused together; i.e. when a pair of rate curves
was displayed, the effect of the factor (say strength for Group 1) on the initial rate
(by contrasting the gradients of the 2 curves at time zero) and the amount of
products (by comparing the final levels of the 2 curves) was focused and discussed
simultaneously before the second factor (and the second pair of rate curves) was
put forward. As the graph indicated that the 2 curves have different initial rates
(see Figure 6.5(a)) but same amount of products whether a strong or a weak acid
was used (see Figure 6.5(b)), students could realize that strength of acid would
only affect the rate, but not the amount of products.

154

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)

(b)

Figure 6.5(a) and 6.5(b): Rate curves of a strong acid (HCl) and a weak acid (CH3CO2H)

The discussion then proceeded with the second group presenting their
experimental results on basicity. By showing their 2 rate curves, one of a
monobasic acid (hydrochloric acid) and the other a dibasic acid (sulphuric acid),
the students could find that the change in basicity did vary the reaction rate (the 2
curves in Figure 6.6(a) had different gradients at time zero) and the amount of
products formed (the 2 curves in Figure 6.6(b) ended with different decrease in
mass) when other aspects were kept unchanged. This time, the factor basicity
was separated from other factors and it was shown that basicity was critical to

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

both the reaction rate and the amount of products formed.

(a)

Time/minute

(b)

Time/minute

Figure 6.6(a) and 6.6(b): Rate curves of a monobasic acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid (H2SO4)

155

Afterwards, the third and the fourth group, concentration and volume,
followed, i.e. they were asked to present their data by comparing the initial rate and
then the amount of products formed when acids of different concentration or
volume were used.

For the fifth group volume and concentration, keeping same number of
moles and the sixth group volume and concentration, varying number of moles,
students had varied both factors, volume and concentration, of the hydrochloric
acid at the same time. From the result graphs of Group 5, it was found that by using
a greater volume (30 cm3), a lower concentration (0.25 M) while keeping the same
number of moles of the acid, the initial rate would be reduced (see Figure 6.7(a))

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

whilst the amount of products remained unchanged (see Figure 6.7(b)).

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)
(b)
3
Figure 6.7(a) and 6.7(b): Rate curves of a 15 cm of 0.5 M HCl and a 30 cm3 of 0.25 M HCl

On the other hand, when the volume, concentration and number of moles of
acid had been changed, both the initial rate and the amount of products would be
changed (see Figure 6.8(a) and (b)). This phenomenon could be reflected in Group
6s experiment results in the data presentation.

156

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

Time/minute

(a)

(b)

Figure 6.8(a) and 6.8(b): Rate curves of a 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl and a 10 cm3 of 0.25 M HCl

Through this fusion of aspects, students could observe the effect on the initial
rate and the amount of products upon the changes of various factors
simultaneously and hence might be able to develop a deeper understanding of the
part-whole relationship between reaction rate, amount of products and their
corresponding factors. The sequence depicted here is denoted as rate-productrate-product (see Figure 6.9).

157

Decrease in mass / g

rate

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

product

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

rate

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

product

Time/minute

Figure 6.9

Debriefing sequence: rate-product-rate-product used in class 4C

158

The following excerpt shows how the data reporting in the debriefing session
of class 4C was done:

Teacher: I would like each group of you to send a representative, come out and show us
your graph. Just take out your worksheet, turn to page 3 and put it on the
Digital Visualizer, so that we can have a look at the results. And the
representative, would you please tell us the answers that follow? Maybe start
from group number 1.

Student 1: Do I say the answer out or?

Teacher: Yes. First of all, state the factors that you are investigating.

Student 1: We are investigating the strength of the acid. We use 1.5 gram of zinc
carbonate and 15 cm3 of the acid, which is 2.5 moles of ethanoic acid.

Teacher: And how about the result?

Student 1: The initial rate is different and the decrease in mass is also different.

Teacher: Thank you. Lets move on to group number 2.

Student 2: [The student places her laboratory report on the Digital Visualizer.] Our group
did the experiment for the basicity of the acid. We added 15 cm3 of sulphuric
acid to zinc carbonate. And we find that the initial rates of A and B are different,
and the decreases in mass at the end of the reactions are also different.

Teacher: Okay. Thank you. And then group number 3.

Student 3: [Putting her laboratory report on the Digital Visualizer.] Our group is
investigating the concentration of the acid. We

Teacher: And how about the result?

Student 3: We find that the initial rate and the decrease in mass are both different.

159

Teacher: Okay. And group number 4.

Student 4: [Showing the whole class her reaction rate curves obtained.] Our group is
investigating on the volume of the acid. We used the same kind of acid, of the
same molarity. And we used the same amount of zinc carbonate, except we
used 25 cm3 of acid instead of 15 [cm3]. And we find that they do not have the
same initial rate or the same decrease in mass at the end of the reaction.

Teacher: Okay. And then group number 5.

Student 5: [Placing her laboratory report on the Digital Visualizer.] We are group 5. We
are investigating the volume and concentration of the acid, but keeping the
same number of mole. We found that we have the same initial rate, but
different decrease in mass.

Teacher: Thank you. The last group, group number 6.

Student 6: [The student shows the whole class her laboratory report.] For curve B, we
used 25 cm3 of 1 M hydrochloric acid, and found that it got a different initial
rate and different decrease in mass.

Through separating the individual factors, e.g. varying the strength of the acid
and comparing the rate curves produced by using a strong acid versus a weak acid
while keeping other factors invariant, students could possibly discern the effect of
the factor under investigation on the initial reaction rate and the amount of
products. When different groups were presenting their pair of rate curves, students
who did not actually take part in the experiment on a particular factor could now
have a chance of studying others experimental results. Students might appreciate
the importance of collaborative work because time could be saved for detailed
discussion rather than repeating the experiments procedurally. Most importantly,
after all the groups had presented their findings, the class could put all the factors
together simultaneously (fusion). The learning condition used in class 4C in the
160

debriefing thus started with the separation of the individual factors, for each
factor fused the aspects initial rate and amount of products simultaneously, and
finally fused all the factors for the individual aspect through collaboration. As
such, a certain pattern of variation was created with a particular debriefing
sequence so as to help students discern the critical aspects of the OL2 identifying
factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of products of an acid-involved
chemical reaction and finally sketching and interpreting rate curves by taking into
account all the factors simultaneously.

6.3.4.2

Class 4D Debriefing sequence: rate-rate-product-product

For class 4D, the effect of different factors on the aspect initial rate was
separated from that on the other aspect amount of products. When a pair of rate
curves was displayed (the factor under investigation was varied whilst other factors
remained unchanged, thus separating a single factor), only the effect of the
varying factor on the initial rate was discussed whilst the effect on the amount of
products was not touched on. The debriefing sequence started with the factor
strength, then basicity and so on until all the individual factors were discussed.
From the experimental results, students would be able to discern whether the factor
would affect the initial rate or not. For example, by using a weak acid (CH3CO2H),
the initial rate was found to be reduced compared with the one using a strong acid
(HCl) of the same concentration and basicity (see Figure 6.10(a)); whereas a
dibasic acid sulphuric acid (H2SO4) could give a faster initial rate than a monobasic
acid (HCl) of the same concentration and strength (Figure 6.10(b)).

161

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

Time/minute

Figure 6.10(a): Rate curves of a strong acid

(HCl) and a weak acid (CH3CO2H)

Figure 6.10(b): Rate curves of a monobasic

acid (HCl) and a dibasic acid (H2SO4)

When a complete discussion on factors affecting the initial rates was done, the
effect of all these factors (following the same sequence of factors as before) on the
amount of products would be talked over, i.e. starting with the factor strength

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass / g

(Figure 6.11(a)), then basicity (Figure 6.11(b)) and so on.

Time/minute

Time/minute

Figure 6.11(b): Rate curves of a monobasic acid

Figure 6.11(a): Rate curves of a strong acid
(HCl) and a dibasic acid (H2SO4)
(HCl) and a weak acid (CH3CO2H)

After the whole class data presentation, students could come up with factors
that affect the initial rate and the amount of products respectively. This sequence
adopted in class 4D is denoted as rate-rate-product-product (see Figure 6.12).

162

Decrease in mass / g

rate

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

rate

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

product

Decrease in mass / g

Time/minute

product

Time/minute

Figure 6.12

Debriefing sequence: rate-rate-product-product used in class 4D

163

The excerpt below shows the sequential organisation of debriefing in class 4D:
Teacher: your laboratory report? Put it here to show us the result. [The teacher helps
the student to fix her laboratory report on the Digital Visualizer so that the
whole class could read the curves obtained by her group on the screen.] And
also would you please describe or give the answers of the experimental results?
This is Group 1. Just simply tell us the result. That means the answers here.
Student 1: They have the same initial rate.
Teacher: So the aspect that you are investigating is about the strength. And you find that
the rate is approximately the same. Maybe you just get the result back. How
about Group 2 basicity? Simply tell us the result about the curvature.
Student 2: [Placing her worksheet on the Digital Visualizer.] The rate in A is faster.
Teacher: The rate in Part A is faster. So this is your experimental result. Thank you.
Group 3 concentration, please show us the results.
Student 3: [Pointing to the rate curves.] For curves A and B, they do not have the same
initial rate.
Teacher: That means if you change the concentration, the rate will be changed. Group
4 volume, please.
Student 4: [Showing the curves.] For curves A and B, they have nearly the same initial rate.
Teacher: Group 4 is investigating whether volume has any effect on the rate. They find
that the rate is approximately the same, if you vary the volume. Thank you.
Group 5 same number of moles.
Student 5: We found that with the different volume and concentration, and same of moles,
the reactions have different initial rate.
Teacher: That means the initial rate in Part B is different from that of Part A. This is the
result. Thank you. The last group, Group 6 different number of moles.
Student 6: [Showing the graphs.] We are investigating the volume and concentration,
varying number of moles of acid. The initial rate has changed.

164

Teacher: So when they change the volume and the concentration, they found that the rate
will be different. Okay, back to Group 1, this time please state the effect of
your investigating factor on the decrease in mass of the reaction mixture.
Student 1: [Placing her worksheet on the Digital Visualizer again.] They do not have the
same decrease in mass at the end of the reaction.
Teacher: That means the answer is No. So this is the result of Group 1. Thank you.
Group 2, simply tell us the result about the change in mass.
Student 2: [Addressing the final levels of the curves.] The changes in mass in both parts
are the same.
Teacher: How about Group 3?
Student 3: [Putting the worksheet on the Digital Visualizer.] They do not have the same
decrease in mass at the end of the reaction.
Teacher: For a different concentration, the decrease in mass is not the same as in Part A.
Okay. And Group 4?
Student 4: [Showing the graphs.] With a different volume, the decrease in mass is
different.
Teacher: Group 5 and Group 6?
Student 5: [Showing the rate curves.] Same decrease in mass.
Student 6: [Pointing to the rate curves.] The number of moles or the amount of product
produced will be different.

By experiencing the changes in the gradients of the rate curves at time zero
across different factors when different pairs of rate curves were compared, the
pattern created here would help students separate the aspect initial rate first and
focus on all the factors on the initial rate, not the amount of products. The
discussion was then followed by experiencing the variation in the final level of the
165

rate curves across different factors, the pattern created here would then help
students discern the effect of all these factors on the amount of products. In short,
the learning condition created for class 4D started with the separation of the 2
aspects initial rate and amount of products, for each aspect separated the
individual factor and then fused all the factors together. At the end, all the
factors affecting the 2 aspects were studied and compared. It is hoped that this
pattern of variation could help students appropriate OL2 when students rate curves
were examined systematically based on a certain teaching-learning sequence. If
students could discern all the factors simultaneously, they should be able to sketch
or interpret rate curves of complicated situations where more than one factor of the
given acid was varied. The different debriefing sequences employed and pattern of
variation constituted in classes 4C and 4D are summarized in Table 6.8.

Table 6.8 Summary table showing debriefing sequence of patterns of variation

used in classes 4C and 4D
patterns of
variation
separate each
single factor,
fuse the 2
aspects rate
and product,
then fuse all the
factors without
separating the
aspects

Debriefing sequence in
class 4C
strength rate
strength product
basicity rate
basicity product
concentration rate
concentration product
volume rate
volume product
same mole rate
same mole product
different mole rate
different mole product

166

patterns of
variation
separate the
aspects rate and
product, for
each aspect,
separate each
single factor, and
then fuse all the
factors while
keeping the
aspects apart

Debriefing sequence in
class 4D
strength rate
basicity rate
concentration rate
volume rate
same mole rate
different mole rate
strength product
basicity product
concentration product
volume product
same mole product
different mole product

6.3.4.3

Experimental results round-up

After the data presentation, the teacher revised with the 2 classes and the
experimental results obtained by the 6 groups of students by going through the
characteristics of rate curves again with detailed explanation. The sequence of
aspects used by the teacher in each class was the same as the one adopted by the
students in their data presentation. For example, for class 4C, explanation on the
initial rate and the amount of products in terms of concentration of hydrogen ions
and the number of moles of acid molecules together with stoichiometry of the
chemical equations was discussed when each pair of rate curves was shown,
starting from strength, then basicity and so on (see Figure 6.13).

Figure 6.13

Explanation on the effect of strength on the initial rate and the

amount of products, followed by the explanation on the effect of
basicity on these 2 aspects

167

For class 4D, explanation on the effect of factors on the initial rate in terms of
concentration of hydrogen ions was first discussed until all the factors had been
covered. After the complete round-up of factors affecting the initial rate, the effect
of factors on the amount of products in terms of the number of moles of acid
molecules together with stoichiometry of the chemical equations was discussed
(see Figure 6.14).

Figure 6.14 Explanation on the effect of strength and basicity on the initial
rate, followed by explanation on the effect of factors on the amount
of products

168

6.3.4.4

Conclusion of the research lessons

After the experimental results round-up, all the rate curves were put together
and compared with the reference curve (15 cm3 of 0.5 M hydrochloric acid, HCl)
on the same graph. The teacher concluded the research lessons by assisting the
students to identify all the factors affecting the initial rate and the amount of
products respectively through a summary table (see Figure 6.15). It is hoped that
through drawing conclusion in the class, students would be aware that if they need
to sketch or interpret a rate curve in a novel situation, they should take into account
all the factors affecting the rate and the amount of products simultaneously
(fusion).

Figure 6.15

Different rate curves and summary table as conclusion of the lesson

Afterwards, the teacher helped the students to consolidate the concept by

asking them to predict what the rate curves would be if zinc carbonate used is the
limiting reactant (Figure 6.16(b)) instead of in excess (Figure 6.16(a)).

169

Figure 6.16(a) Rate curves if zinc

carbonate is in excess

Figure 6.16(b) Rate curves if zinc carbonate

is the limiting reactant

The teacher opened up a new dimension of variation for students to review the
relationship between the reaction rate and amount of products upon changes in
factors such as concentration. Introducing variation in a new dimension means that
a new aspect of the topic dealt with is added (Ng, Tsui & Marton, 2001). Students
would be aware that in order to answer the question when zinc carbonate was the
limiting reactant, they should take into account all the factors simultaneously.
Finally the whole class was asked to discuss a public exam past paper question as
further consolidation of what students had learnt during the research lessons (see
Figure 6.17).

Figure 6.17

A question extracted from 2008 HKCEE Chemistry Paper II

170

At the end, students were asked to hand in their experimental worksheets and
then do the posttest. The researcher then did a preliminary analysis on the preposttest test and chose suitable students for the semi-structured interviews.

6.4

Enacted Objects of Learning

With the experience in the pilot study, procedures or instructions of the lesson

plan were improved and laboratory preparatory work such as arrangement of

chemicals/equipments was better done in the main study. The research lessons
could be run more smoothly and hence the enacted object of learning was very
close to the intended object of learning. Some events or adjustments were worth
mentioning. First, there were no more technical problems regarding the video
recording in classes 4C and 4D in the main study. Second, problems in measuring
weight were solved. In the pilot study, two of the electronic balances did not work
properly minute changes of mass over a period of time could not be displayed
accurately, resulting in erroneous data recording. In view of this problem, two new
electronic balances were bought by the Chemistry Department after obtaining the
approval from the chemistry panel head and the school principal. Thus the problem
was solved and did not appear in the main study.

Third, a student of class 4D asked how to draw a tangent to a rate curve for the
determination of initial rate after the first lesson. In response, the teacher presented
some slides at the beginning of the second lesson by showing a tangent and two
non-tangents to the students to help them understand the meaning of touching
the rate curve this was not intended in the original lesson plan.

171

Fourth, it was found that some students had difficulties in plotting the rate
curves from raw data in the pilot study. More help from the teacher and more time
were given to the students in the main study. The lesson time for introduction,
experimentation and debriefing sessions was extended from 120 minutes to 160
minutes. Consequently, the main study did not overrun. Students had sufficient
time to complete the experiments, plot the 2 rate curves (with the help of the
teacher, if necessary) and study their own curves and curves presented by other
groups. In the debriefing session, more detailed discussion coupled with
explanations on rate curves could be done satisfactorily with the extra time given.
This modification in helping students to appropriate the objects of learning seemed
to be substantial as revealed from students written response in the pilot and main
studies.

Fifth, as some students did not bring their calculators to the Chemistry
Laboratory when they were asked to complete the posttest in the pilot study, their
performance might have been affected if they were weak in simple calculation. In
the main study, the debriefing session was deliberately held in the classrooms so
that the students had their own calculators to do calculation.

Overall, the research lessons for classes 4C and 4D ran smoothly. Students
were found to be attentive, responsive, well-disciplined and cooperative. They
were actively engaged in the class discussion as well as in the laboratory work.
One student of class 4C was absent in the experimentation and debriefing session
and thus the present analysis excluded her pretest data, i.e. the number of students
of class 4C subjected to analysis was 40 instead of 41.

172

6.5

Lived Objects of Learning after Research Lessons

The lessons were video-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A posttest, with

the same questions as the pretest, was administered to the two classes right after
the lessons. Results of the pretest and posttest were compared to trace the students
understanding of reaction rate and amount of products. The quantitative data of the
written tests were analysed and triangulated with qualitative data such as the lesson
transcription and the post-lesson interview with a sample of students. Students
laboratory reports were also used as a side evidence to help interpret the findings.

6.5.1 Characterization and analysis of responses of written test

The responses of the pre-posttest obtained were first characterized into
hierarchical levels to indicate the different levels of understanding. No mark was
given to level 1 answers, 1 mark was awarded to level 2 answers and so on. The
scoring rubrics of each question are described in Chapter 4. Relevant sample
responses for each question as illustration can be found in Appendix 8. After
characterization of the written responses, data analyses including statistical tests
were carried out to answer the 3 research questions in this study. For the first
research question, paired t-test was used to see if students could appropriate the
two objects of learning. Independent sample t-test was employed to examine
whether the debriefing sequence rate-product-rate-product (in class 4C) could
help create a better learning condition than the sequence rate-rate-productproduct (in class 4D). To answer the second research question, independent
sample t-test was conducted to investigate if there was any interaction effect
between students level of academic ability and the patterns of variation. For the
third research question, the same statistical test was applied to see if students

173

investigating a certain factor in the experimentation afforded a greater opportunity

to discern that factor compared to other groups who have not been doing the
experiment on that factor. Details of the data analysis are described in Chapter 7.

6.5.2 Preliminary analysis of the selected interview in the main study

In addition to the written measures mentioned in the previous section, 8
students from class 4C and 6 students from class 4D were selected to conduct an
individual interview (15 to 20 minutes). These 2 groups of students consisted of
half of poorer performers and half of better performers based on the pre-posttest
results. Students were interviewed after school in the Chemistry Laboratory in late
May 2008. They were asked to comment on any change in their conceptions of
factors affecting the reaction rate and the amount of products with respect to the
written responses and the reason behind the change or the consistency of
conceptions during the interview. Many of them said that they could have a better
understanding of reaction rate by performing hands-on experiments. When they
were asked to explain their response in Question 6 about sketching of rate curves,
quite a number of them said that they might have made the wrong calculation, or
simply overlooked/missed out one of the two/three varying factors and thus could
not draw a correct rate curve. For Question 7 regarding identifying factors, some of
them realized that number of moles of acid might or might not affect the reaction
rate, depending on the concentration of the acid while they were interpreting their
written answers orally in the interview. It seems that given sufficient time and
probing questions, students could eventually clarify their thinking/conceptions and
come up with a scientifically acceptable conception. Detailed analysis of the
interview responses are depicted in the next chapter.

174

6.6

Summary of Chapter 6
The main study described in this chapter shows how the revised research

lessons of the present study was conducted. Based on the preliminary findings of
the pilot study, the objects of learning, the content of the written test and the lesson
plan were modified so that a stronger emphasis was placed on the interpretation of
reaction rate curves. One of the objectives of the lessons was to examine the
effectiveness of using variation theory as a pedagogical design in helping students
appropriate the two objects of learning in the topic reaction rate. Another
objective was to investigate which of the two alternative debriefing sequences
rate-product-rate-product (in class 4C) and rate-rate-product-product (in class
4D) with different patterns of variation is more conducive to student learning. The
enacted objects of learning are also described in this chapter. After characterizing
the written responses, transcribing the video-recorded lessons and translating the
interview responses, a detailed data analysis (both quantitative and qualitative) was
done and the findings are reported in Chapter 7.

175

CHAPTER 7
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
7.1

Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to summarize and interpret the major findings of

the present study, premised on the theoretical framework of variation theory,

(detailed in Chapter 3) to help Secondary 4 chemistry students learn reaction rate
through conducting scientific investigation. The first section briefly introduces the
layout of this chapter, including the intended objects of learning in the main study
and the research questions. The intended objects of learning (OLs) were defined as
follows:
(1)

understanding the concept of a fair test and designing an experiment

for a scientific investigation (the indirect object of learning);

(2)

discerning factors that affect the reaction rate and the amount of
products of acid-involved reactions, as well as sketching and
interpreting rate curves (the direct object of learning).

The three research questions are:

1. Can the use of variation theory help students appropriate the object of
learning? What patterns of variation are most effective in enhancing student
appropriation of the object of learning?
2. Is there any interaction effect between students level of academic ability
and the patterns of variation?
3. Does the use of scientific investigation afford students greater opportunity
to discern the aspect of the object of learning?

176

The second section of this chapter discusses the major findings of the present
study - examines the relationship between the intended, enacted and lived objects
of learning (i.e. the student learning outcomes) with respect to the three research
questions. The third section highlights the implications of the study. The fourth
section discusses the limitations of the study. The fifth section explores the areas
for further research. Lastly, the final section summarizes the concluding remarks.

7.2 Relationship between Intended, Enacted and Lived

Objects of Learning
One of the aims of the present study is to help students develop inquiry skills
through conducting scientific investigations so as to prepare students to face the
challenges of a dynamically changing environment. Another aim is to help students
understand the key concepts in the topic reaction rate in a Secondary 4 level
chemistry course as this topic involves some fundamental and difficult concepts in
the discipline of chemistry. If students were to study chemistry in the A-level
course or even related courses in the university level, a good foundation in this
topic is of vital importance. To study the rate of a chemical reaction, using
appropriate laboratory set-ups to follow the reaction progress and knowing the
factors that affect the rate are important. Specifically, for acid-involved reactions,
strength, basicity and concentration of the acid would affect the reaction rate
whereas basicity, concentration and volume (and hence mole) would affect the
amount of products. Yet the factors concentration, volume and mole are
intertwined; students might not be able to discern clearly the part-part relationship
between various factors, and the part-whole relationship between the factors and
the 2 aspects reaction rate and amount of products (See Figure 7.1).

177

volume

strength

concentration

Experimental
set-up

basicity
mole
Amount of
products

Reaction rate

Figure 7.1 Diagram showing the relationship between factors affecting the reaction
rate and the amount of products in an acid-involved chemical reaction

To help students develop inquiry skills through conducting scientific

investigations and to help them understand the key concepts in the topic reaction
rate, the researcher attempted to identify worthwhile objects of learning for the
research lessons. Following the findings from the pilot study and Los (2006) study
that students quite often could not distinguish clearly the factors affecting the
reaction rate and the amount of products formed in a chemical reaction, the two
intended objects of learning in the main study were formulated (see p. 176), and
the critical aspects associated with these two OLs were identified. The pedagogical
design used in the research lessons was based on the variation theory as a
framework (see Marton & Booth, 1997; Marton & Tsui, 2004; Ki, Tse & Lam,
2005; Lo, Pong, & Chik, 2005; Marton & Pang, 2006; Pang, 2010). The study
attempted to explore the effectiveness of using variation theory to bring about
learning of reaction rate through conducting scientific investigations in S4
chemistry classes.

178

7.2.1 Design of the research lessons

Different patterns of variation were introduced in different sessions of the
research lessons. In the introduction, separation was used to help students
achieve OL1 understand the fair test concept and the appropriateness of
laboratory set-ups. In the experimentation, students were asked to conduct a groupbased investigation - to study the effect of assigned factor/factors on the reaction
rate and amount of products formed in the reaction between zinc carbonate and a
dilute acid by separation or fusion. Through collecting data, plotting and
analysing rate curves, students were given chances to develop their skills in
sketching and interpreting rate curves OL2. In the debriefing, different debriefing
sequences

(rate-product-rate-product

versus

rate-rate-product-product)

with

different patterns of variation inherited were used in classes 4C and 4D to see

which pattern would better facilitate students to discern all the factors - OL2. The
relationship between the patterns of variation created in the teacher enactment and
the student learning outcomes was examined by means of a pre-posttest, verbatim
lesson record and selected interviews. The combined effects of the pattern of
variation made available in the experimentation and debriefing as a whole on OL2
were also investigated. A layout of the design of the learning conditions for classes
4C and 4D is illustrated as in Figure 7.2.

179

Class 4D

Class 4C

Introduction: fair test and design of laboratory set-up

Target at
OL1
Experimentation: investigating the effect of a factor
(e.g. concentration) on the initial rate and the amount
of product of an acid-involved reaction
Target at
OL2
Debriefing
sequence 1: rateproduct-rate-product

Debriefing
sequence 2: raterate-product-product

Figure 7.2 Design of the learning conditions for classes 4C and 4D

The patterns of variation used in the introduction, experimentation and debriefing

sessions are described in details in Chapter 6 and are summarized in Table 7.1.

180

Table 7.1

Patterns of variation and invariance used in the research lessons

Object of
learning 1

Type of
chemical
reaction
Invariant

Reactivity
of metal

Reagent used
(water)

Laboratory
set-up

What is
discerned

Varies

Invariant

Invariant

Reactivity of
metal affects the
rate

Type of
chemical
reaction
Invariant

Reactivity
of metal

Concentration Laboratory
of acid
set-up

What is
discerned

Invariant

Invariant

Different set-ups
are required to
measure different
physical
parameters,
depending on the
characteristics of
the reaction

Object of
learning 2

Chemical
reaction

Factors
affecting
initial rate
and amount
of products

Invariant

Laboratory Factor
set-up
assigned for
investigation
(e.g.
strength)
Invariant
Varies

Experimentation (OL2)

Introduction (OL1)

Fair test
concept

Object of
learning 1
Design of
laboratory
set-up

Debriefing (OL2)

patterns of
variation
separate each
single factor,
fuse the 2
aspects rate
and product,
then fuse all
the factors
without
separating the
aspects

Debriefing sequence 1
rate-product-rateproduct in class 4C
strength rate
strength product
basicity rate
basicity product
concentration rate
concentration product
volume rate
volume product
same mole rate
same mole product
different mole rate
different mole product

181

Varies

Factors not What is

under
discerned
investigation
(e.g. volume,
basicity)
Invariant
Factor under
investigation
is/is not a factor

patterns of
variation
separate the
aspects rate
and
product, for
each aspect,
separate each
single factor,
and then fuse
all the factors
while keeping
the aspects
apart

Debriefing sequence 2
rate-rate-productproduct in class 4D
strength rate
basicity rate
concentration rate
volume rate
same mole rate
different mole rate
strength product
basicity product
concentration product
volume product
same mole product
different mole product

7.2.2 Findings in relation to the first research question

7.2.2.1 Use of variation theory to help students learn
The first research question is: Can the use of variation theory help students
appropriate the object of learning? What patterns of variation are most effective in
enhancing student appropriation of the object of learning? Before answering the
first research question, it should be noted that teachers enactment of the research
lesson could affect students learning outcomes due to the dynamic nature of the
classroom situation (Ki et al., 2005; Lo et al., 2005). Having got the experience in
the pilot study, the teacher (i.e. the researcher) had modified the design and the
time arrangement of the lesson plan and had overcome technical problems arisen
like the precision of the electronic balances used in the experimentation; the
enacted objects of learning in the main study were very close to the intended
objects of learning.

Regarding the first part of this research question, responses of the pretest and
posttest were compared to trace the students fair test concept and their capability
in designing an experiment for a scientific investigation (OL1 - the indirect object
of learning), as well as their understanding of reaction rate, including discerning
factors that affect the reaction rate and the amount of products, and their capability
in interpreting and sketching rate curves (OL2 - the direct object of learning). As
seen from Table 7.2, result of paired t-tests indicated that there were significant
gains in scores from the pretest to posttest for classes 4C and 4D: 42.4% to 62.3%
for class 4C (t(39) = 11.066, p < 0.005) and 31.2% to 54.3% for class 4D (t(24) =
7.143, p < 0.005). This signified a substantial improvement in students

182

understanding of the notion of reaction rate in relation to the two objects of

learning after the research lessons.

Table 7.2: Mean score of pre-posttest and paired t-tests result of classes 4C to 4D
Class

No. of
students

mean
mean change in
score of score of
mean
Pretest Posttest
score

Paired differences
between pretest and
posttest mean score

t value

Sig.
Level
(p value)

4C

40

42.4%

62.3%

+19.9%

17.875

11.066

0.000

4D

25

31.2%

54.3%

+23.1%

20.800

7.143

0.000

7.2.2.2

Lived object of learning with respect to OL1

In order to examine whether students in classes 4C and 4D specifically had

appropriated the first object of learning - understanding the concept of a fair test
and designing an experiment for a scientific investigation, written response with
respect to Questions 1 to 4 (see Chapter 4 regarding what they design to test) was
analysed by conducting paired t-tests. As shown in Table 7.3, results showed that
students had a substantial gain in the understanding of the concepts with respect to
OL1, as indicated by the significant change in the sum of mean score of Questions
1 to 4.

Table 7.3 Mean score of Questions 1-4 in pre-posttest with respect to OL1
No. of
students

mean score
of Pretest
Q.1-4

mean score
of Posttest
Q.1-4

Paired differences
between pretest
and posttest mean
score Q.1-4

t value

Sig.
Level
(p value)

4C

40

6.78

10.83

+4.05

14.609

0.000

4D

25

6.56

10.36

+3.80

9.041

0.000

Class

183

Paired t-test on individual questions in the pre-posttests was also conducted

for classes 4C and 4D (see Table 7.4). Students in both classes had substantial gain
in score in most of the questions, in particular for Question 3 which tested for the
design of an appropriate laboratory set-up for rate investigation, with a mean score
of 0.65 (class 4C) and 0.36 (class 4D) out of 3 in the pretest, increasing
significantly to 2.60 (class 4C) and 2.86 (class 4D) in the posttest. This showed
that the patterns of variation created in the introduction lesson, separating the
aspect laboratory set-up by varying the laboratory set-up while keeping other
aspects like the type of chemical reaction and the concentration of chemicals
invariant, could effectively help students discern the critical features of the
laboratory set-ups (e.g. measuring the mass) in relation to the characteristics of the
reaction (a gas evolved and escaped causing a decrease in mass). The hands-on
experience in the experimentation session also helped verify the appropriateness of
the set-up. Students seemed to have developed the capability of choosing or
designing an appropriate set-up for the investigation on reaction rate.
Table 7.4 Paired differences (posttest scores pretest scores) in classes 4C and 4D
Class 4C (n = 40)

Class 4D (n = 25)

Individual questions

Paired differences
between pretest
and posttest score

t
value

t
value

Sig.
Level
(p value)

Q. 1: understanding
of fair tests

0.00

0.000

1.000

0.04

0.327

0.746

Q. 2: knowledge of
general factors
affecting reaction rate

1.25

7.664

0.000

0.92

5.059

0.000

Q. 3: design of an
experimental set-up

1.95

9.635

0.000

2.48

11.431 0.000

Q. 4: graphical
representation of a
reaction progress

0.85

5.369

0.000

0.44

1.438

Highlighted ones p values > 0.05

184

Sig.
Paired differences
Level
between pretest
(p value) and posttest score

0.163

It was noted from Table 7.4 that a statistically significant change in score was
not observed for Question 1 (both classes) and Question 4 (class 4D). A possible
reason might be due to a ceiling effect in Question 1 which tested for students
conception of a fair test. As most of the students in both classes had a good grasp
of this concept before the research lessons (as revealed from the high score in their
pretest results, 1.85 and 1.76 out of 2 in classes 4C and 4D respectively), their
change in score in the posttest observed was not significant.

As for Question 4 which tested for graphical representation of a rate curve,

about a quarter of students in class 4D (all had been academically weaker students
as reflected by the mid-term chemistry exam) might have mixed up the question
stated in the written test and the graphs they obtained in the experimentation
session, the former being mass of reactant against time whereas the latter
decrease in mass against time. Although these 6 students had shown a correct
conception of the shape of rate curves after the research lessons (a curve rather
than a straight line, a decreasing rate rather than an increasing rate), the curves they
gave in the posttest were of the same orientation as that they drew in the lab
worksheet the value of the physical parameter increased when time increased.
This mistake they made could be a major reason why class 4Ds mean score did
not show a significant increase in the posttest.

7.2.2.3

Lived object of learning with respect to OL2

Paired t-test with respect to Questions 5 to 7 in the written response were

conducted to examine whether students in classes 4C and 4D had appropriated the
second object of learning - discerning factors that affect the reaction rate and the

185

amount of products for acid-involved reaction, as well as interpreting and

sketching rate curves. Results from Table 7.5 indicated that students had a
substantial gain in understanding with respect to OL2, as revealed from the
significant change in sum of mean score of Questions 5 to 7.

Table 7.5

Mean score of Questions 5-7 in pre-posttest with respect to OL2

No. of
students

mean score
of Pretest
Q.5-7

mean score
of Posttest
Q.5-7

Paired differences
between pretest
and posttest mean
score Q.5-7

t value

Sig. Level
(p value)

4C

40

31.35

32.83

+1.48

2.765

0.009

4D

25

21.32

23.92

+2.60

3.25

0.003

Class

A more detailed analysis for individual Questions 5 to 7 was conducted by

means of paired t-tests. As shown in Table 7.6, students were found to have
statistical significant gain in scores in these 3 questions, except Question 5 for
class 4C. A possible reason for the insignificant change in score for Question 5
which involved the matching of 4 rate curves might be that a ceiling effect had
occurred. Class 4C was an academically stronger class (as revealed from the S4
mid-term chemistry examination result) and their performance in the pretest had
already been quite good; if they could correctly match 1 or 2 of the rate curves out
of 4, it was not difficult, by elimination, to obtain correct answers for the
remaining curves in the pretest.

186

Table 7.6 Paired differences (posttest scores pretest scores) in classes 4C and 4D
Class 4C (n = 40)
Individual
questions

Class 4D (n = 25)

Paired differences
Sig.
Paired differences
Sig.
between pretest t value Level
between pretest t value Level
and posttest score
and
posttest score
(p value)
(p value)

Q. 5: interpretation
of reaction curves

0.30

1.321

0.194

0.84

2.871

0.008

Q. 6: sketching of
reaction curves

1.17

2.579

0.014

1.76

2.538

0.018

Q. 7: identifying
factors affecting
reaction rate &
amount of products
with explanation

12.35

7.966

0.000

14.40

5.632

0.000

Highlighted ones p values > 0.05

Apart from the written response which indicated that students had an
improvement in the understanding of the effect of different factors on the reaction
rate and the amount of products (as there is a statistically significant gain in score
in Question 7), discourse analysis also showed that the teacher helped the students
to discern the factors by bringing in the microscopic level model when she
discussed with the class the macroscopic level observation the effect of strength
on reaction rate:
Teacher:

ethanoic acid is a weak acid, it cannot ionize completely Suppose the

percentage of ionization, say, is 30 percent. That means only 30 percent of the
molecules can be changed to the hydrogen ions... the molarity of H+
[hydrogen ions] is less than the given molarity, because the given one is the
molarity of the acid molecules, not the hydrogen ion. But for hydrochloric
acid, which is strong acid, the molarity of the H+ [hydrogen ions] is exactly
the same as the given molarity. All the molecules can be changed to the
[hydrogen] ions. So which one has a lower concentration of hydrogen ion?
[Pause] It is the ethanoic acid. With lower concentration of hydrogen ion, the
initial rate will be lower.

187

In this episode, the teacher illustrated the meaning of strength in terms of

percentage of ionization and concentration of hydrogen ion at a microscopic level strong acid molecules ionize completely, whereas weak acid molecules ionize
partially to give hydrogen ions. Through linking up microscopic level and
macroscopic level, the phenomenon higher concentration of hydrogen ions leads
to faster reaction rate could be brought forth to students focal awareness.

To explain whether there is any difference in the amount of products formed

in the acid-carbonate reaction between a strong acid and a weak acid, the teacher
elucidated in terms of stoichiometry (mole ratio) of the chemical equations
involved. Below is an excerpt of the lesson:
Teacher:

...Lets look at the 2 reactions, the 2 equations involved. [The teacher is

pointing to the equations shown on the screen.] If you consider the mole ratio,
1 mole of zinc carbonate reacts with 2 moles of ethanoic acid, and gives out 1
mole of carbon dioxide. By comparing the mole ratio in the chemical equation,
if we have 2 moles of ethanoic acid, it will give 1 mole of carbon dioxide.
Lets look at another equation. Its about the hydrochloric acid. In this case,
we found that the same mole ratio is observed. 2 moles of hydrochloric acid
will give 1 mole of carbon dioxide. As in the experiment, zinc carbonate is in
excess, number of moles of products depends on the number of moles of the
limiting reactant. This time the acid is the limiting reactant. Just determine the
number of moles of the acid. If we use the same volume, same molarity, just
like this case, same numbers of moles of acids are used, so same number of
moles of products can be obtained theoretically.

By discussing the relationship between acids of different strength and mole

ratio of the chemical equation, students were given opportunities to discern the
effect of strength on the amount of products by making connections among the
two levels of representation: macroscopic level (e.g. same number of moles of acid

188

gives same amount of products) and symbolic level (stoichiometry of the chemical
equations involved).

The above two examples illustrated that the teacher tried as far as possible to
help students interpret the experimental findings, visualize chemical phenomena
and comprehend chemical concepts at the microscopic and symbolic level. This is
important in chemistry learning because students often find it difficult to make
links between the macroscopic, microscopic and symbolic levels (Gabel, 1992;
Johnstone, 1993, Ebenezer, 2001; Wu, Krajcik & Soloway, 2001; Tasker & Dalton,
2006). Since the explanation of the experimental findings was basically conducted
through teachers talk and the two classes of students were all listening to the
teacher attentively, the class size difference (40 versus 25) may not have an effect
on the quality of the discussion and hence the learning.

Data from interview also revealed that quite a number of students thought that
they benefited from the research lessons. For example, a student of class 4C
considered herself changed in the conception after the research lessons when she
tried to interpret her written response in the pretest and the posttest:
Since [for the first time] I think if only volume is given without other
information provided, it is difficult for me to judge the amount of products apart
from volume, there should be other factors affecting the amount of products,
thus I choose Not certain as the answer For the second time, I think if
magnesium is in excess, a larger volume will lead to more acid and hence more
products. If magnesium is the limiting reactant, even if you add a greater volume
of acid, the reaction has completed already, the excess reactant would no longer
change to the product. Therefore I choose No as the final answer. (4C09)

189

As mentioned in Chapters 5 and 6 that quite a number of students had the

misconception that volume was a factor affecting the rate of a chemical reaction,
data from interview showed that a conceptual change in students understanding in
this aspect was observed after the research lessons. Two excerpts were listed below
as evidence:
Now I know that volume would not affect the rate of reaction. That is, only
concentration of hydrogen ions would affect [the reaction rate]. Volume should
affect the amount of product, not the reaction rate. (4D07)
Since volume and concentration of acid are not related to each other, then its
the hydrogen ion, the reaction rate depends on the concentration of hydrogen
ions. Therefore, volume would not affect it [the reaction rate] (4D23)

Rovio-Johansson (1999) commented that teachers instruction of specific

aspects, i.e. the enacted object of learning, is closely related to students
understanding of the relation between these specific aspects and the subject matter,
i.e. the lived object of learning. Even for the same subject matter, different
teachers ways of teaching in a lecture would lead to students different ways of
experiencing and understanding particular subject matter. What students actually
experience also varies with what is offered to them to experience. Therefore in the
present study, the teacher carefully planned and implemented the research lessons
through the thoughtful use of different patterns of variation with an aim to create
the necessary learning conditions for the students to discern the critical aspects of
the two objects of learning. In the introduction session, the teacher brought forward
different laboratory set-ups whilst keeping the reaction unchanged (separation)
to deal with OL1. In the experimentation and debriefing session, students were
asked to study the effect of a single factor like concentration on the reaction rate
and the amount of products while keeping other factors invariant (separation),

190

and to discuss the effect of various factors on the reaction rate and the amount of
products simultaneously (fusion) to deal with OL2. The substantial gain in
scores in the written test with respect to OL1 and OL2 together with the lesson
transcription and the positive feedback from the interview response supported the
empirical evidence of a number of studies that varying one at a time (separation)
while keeping the other invariant, and then deal with simultaneous variation in
different features (fusion) is conducive to student learning (e.g. Marton & Tsui,
2004; Lo et al, 2005; Marton & Pang, 2006). Pang and Marton (2003) argue that
no one could discern unless he or she experiences variability; for discernment
assumes experienced variation. What is varied and what remains unchanged is of
decisive importance in determining how effective the lesson will be (Lo et al.,
2004; Pang & Marton, 2007; Pang & Lo, 2012). To conclude, the pedagogical
design based on variation and discernment in this study seems to work well in
bringing about student learning, i.e. students were empowered to see the
phenomenon of reaction rate in a more sophisticated way.

While the researcher had shown that positive effect on the student learning
outcome was closely related to the patterns of variation created in the research
lessons, it should be noted that there was no control group for comparison of gain
in scores due to ethical considerations, and the aim of the present study was to
maximize the learning of all the students involved.

7.2.2.4

Comparing different patterns of variation on effectiveness of learning

Regarding the second part of the first research question: What patterns of
variation are most effective in enhancing student appropriation of the object of

191

learning?, the researcher attempted to explore whether there was any interaction
effect between the arrangement of the experimentation and the debriefing sequence
by designing two teaching-learning sequences for classes 4C and 4D and
comparing their lived object of learning. Would a more powerful way of
understanding be brought out from a certain arrangement?

In the introduction, the patterns of variation created in classes 4C and 4D were

the same: first separating the reactivity of metal to demonstrate the fair test
concept and to show that reactivity could be a factor affecting the rate of a metalinvolved reaction, then separating laboratory set-up to illustrate the
characteristics of the reaction in relation to the design of the set-up.

In the experimentation, the arrangement for classes 4C and 4D was also the
same. Students in each class were divided into 6 groups, and each group of
students was assigned to investigate a factor to see whether the factor would affect
the initial rate and the amount of products in the reaction between zinc carbonate
and an acid. In the experiment, only the factor assigned to each group, e.g. strength
of the acid, was varied while other factors like volume, concentration, etc. were
kept invariant. After the students had got sufficient data by measuring the change
in mass of the reaction mixtures at regular time intervals, they would plot a graph
showing the 2 rate curves. Through separation, students in each group should be
able to discern the effect of the assigned factor (e.g. strength) on the initial rate by
comparing the gradient of the 2 curves at time zero, and the effect on the amount of
products by comparing the final level of the 2 curves reached (see Figure 7.3).

192

Decrease in mass / g

Decrease in mass /
g

Time/minute

Time/minute

Figure 7.3 A pair of rate curves showing the initial rate and the amount of products

The effect on the 2 aspects, the initial rate and the amount of products, was studied
at the same time, i.e. fusion. Knowing just their own rate-product results,
however, students could not discern whether there were other possible factors
affecting the initial rate and the amount of products. Without pooling the results
from different groups, each group could only see the effect of one factor, a part,
not the whole of the phenomenon of how various factors affect the initial rate
and the amount of products. After the whole class had completed their experiments,
each group was asked to present their results in the debriefing.

The pattern of variation in the debriefing sequence for classes 4C and 4D was
different. In the debriefing sequence for class 4C, students were asked to compare
the effect of a factor on the aspects initial rate and amount of products at the
same time. The pattern of variation used was similar to the one used in the
experimentation, i.e. the factor under investigation was varied whilst other factors
were kept invariant. After the first group had shown their pair of rate curves and
studied the effects of the assigned factor, the next group would follow the same
pattern, separating another factor and studying its effects. The sequence adopted by
class 4C was rate-product-rate-product. While the whole class tried to put all the

193

results together to form a whole, the pattern of variation used all the way in the
debriefing was separation of factors, fusion of aspects. In both the
experimentation and the debriefing, the pattern separation of factors and fusion
of aspects was used throughout. Finally, all the factors with respect to the initial
rate and the amount of products were fused together in the conclusion.

In the debriefing sequence of class 4D, the way the students presented their
experimental results was different from that of class 4C. When students of the first
group investigated whether the assigned factor would affect the initial rate by
examining their pair of rate curves, the effect of that factor on the amount of
product was not discussed. This was then followed by the second group, again just
focused on whether another factor would affect the initial rate. The effects on the
amount of products were not touched on until the effects of all the factors on the
initial rate were examined. That is to say, the 2 aspects initial rate and amount
of products were separated. This sequence adopted in class 4D was rate-rateproduct-product. Throughout the discussion when all the groups pooled their
results together to form a whole, the pattern of variation used in the
experimentation was separation of factors and fusion of aspects, while that
involved in the debriefing was separation of factors and separation of aspects.
Similar to that of class 4C, all the factors were fused together at the end of the
lesson to help draw a conclusion. The flow of the debriefing sequence of the 2
classes can be illustrated by Figure 7.4.

194

Figure 7.4

Flow of the debriefing sequence of classes 4C and 4D

195

Figure 7.5 is the diagrammatic representation showing the interaction effect

between the patterns of variation used in the experimentation and debriefing in
classes 4C and 4D.

4D

4C

rate product

rate product
experiment

rate product

separation
of factors
fusion of
aspects

rate product

experiment

rate product

separation
of factors
fusion of
aspects

rate product

rate product

rate product

rate product
rate product
rate product

rate product

4C

4D
rate product

rate product

debriefing

rate product

debriefing

rate product

separation
of factors
fusion of
aspects
fusion of
factors

rate product

rate product

rate product

rate product

separation
of aspects
separation
of factors
fusion of
factors

rate product

rate product
rate product
rate product

Figure 7.5 Diagrammatic representation showing the interaction effect between the
patterns of variation used in the experimentation and debriefing in
classes 4C and 4D

To help students understand an object of learning, teachers should structure

the lessons so that students are given opportunities to discern how the different
critical aspects of the object of learning are related to each other, and how each
aspect is related to the whole (Chik & Lo, 2004). As Marton and Booth (1997, p.

196

180) remark, The whole needs to be made more distinct, and the parts need to be
found and then fitted into place, like a jigsaw puzzle that sits on the table halffinished inviting the passer-by to discover more of the picture. The part with
respect to OL2 in this study is the experimental result obtained by each group the
effect of one factor on the initial rate and the amount of products. Without pooling
the results from different groups together, one could not discern the whole, i.e.
all the factors affecting the initial rate and the amount of products. But which
pattern of variation created in the research lesson could better facilitate the
students discernment of the part-whole relationship between factors and their
effects? The rate-product in each group of the experimentation followed by
rate-product-rate-product in the debriefing as in class 4C, or rate-product in
each group of the experimentation followed by rate-rate-product-product in the
debriefing as in class 4D?

One of the insights in deriving these 2 debriefing sequences came from a

similar study done by Lo (2006) which targeted on teaching the effect of volume
on the rate of a chemical reaction. In the interpretation of rate curves in the
debriefing session of Los study, the fusion of the two laboratory set-ups,
measuring the volume of the gas evolved and the mass of the mixture subjected to
volume and concentration change in the acid (i.e. sequence: volume-mass-volumemass) was found to lead to better student learning outcomes than the separation of
the two laboratory set-ups (i.e. sequence: volume-volume-mass-mass) (see Figure
7.6).

197

volume

volume

volume

volume

mass

volume

mass

mass

volume
mass

Figure 7.6 From the NSS Chemistry and Teaching Strategies Seminars: Catering
for Learner Diversity (July 2008) by Professor Lo, M.L.

In Los (2006) study, class 4A focused on representation (interpretation of rate

curves independent of physical set up and experiment) while class 4B focused on
epistemological question (linking physical, conceptual and representation aspects
together). The former involved separation of laboratory set-ups and the latter
fusion. Based on her findings, class 4A was better at interpretation of rate curves
irrespective of the experiment, while class 4B was better at understanding the
relationship between the rate curves and how factors affect the chemical reaction.
In general, class 4B performed better in the posttest as well as in the delayed
posttest.

198

Back to the present study, there are similarities and differences in the
arrangement of the debriefing session compared to Los (2006) study. Both studies
were similar in that they involved the investigation of the reaction between a
carbonate and an acid. Also, both involved the comparison of the effect between
two debriefing sequences with different patterns of variation inherited on students
learning outcomes. The former involved a fusion versus a separation of aspects
(rate-product) whilst the latter involved a fusion versus a separation of laboratory
set-ups (volume-mass).

Several differences of the lesson design between the 2 studies were found.
First, in the present study, each group of students needed to investigate a factor
assigned to them by conducting the measurement of reaction rate twice so that they
could make use of their own data to discern whether the factor was critical by
comparing the two rate curves obtained, i.e. they were provided an opportunity to
discern a part in the experimentation. For Los (2006) study, students in each
group performed the experiment just once; they could only compare different rate
curves to obtain the answer when different groups pooled the results together, i.e.
the part could only be discerned in the debriefing. Second, the object of learning
in the present study targeted at more factors (including concentration, volume,
strength, basicity and mole) whereas that of Los (2006) study only targeted at
concentration and volume. In other words, more parts were discussed in the
debriefing of the present study to form a larger whole. Third, the laboratory setup was kept invariant in the present study. What were varied were the factors and
one of the debriefing sequences involved was a fusion of aspects (initial rate and
amount of products). Whilst in Los (2006) study, the laboratory set-up was varied

199

and the pattern of variation involved a fusion of set-ups. The amount of product,
however, was not the scope of the investigation.

As there were similarities as well as differences in the pattern of variation

employed in the debriefing of the two studies, would there be any similar findings,
i.e. the fusion of aspects group in class 4C had a greater gain in score in the
posttest, in the present study? To find some clues to the answer, students written
responses were subjected to data analysis.

Independent samples t-tests on the pre-posttest indicated that the mean gain
scores of Questions 1 to 4 (designing an experiment for a scientific investigation)
for class 4C and class 4D were quite close (4.05 versus 3.80 out of 14) (see Table
7.7). As Questions 1 to 4 were specific to OL1 and were related to the patterns of
variation constituted in the introduction part of the research lessons, this suggested
that when the 2 classes were taught in the same way using the same patterns of
variation, the learning outcomes of the 2 classes with respect to that specific object
of learning could be quite similar. Or we may argue that the learning outcome is
closely related to what is discerned for discernment must occur for learning to
happen (Lo et al., 2005; Pang & Marton, 2007); if a certain pattern of variation
helps students to discern the critical aspects of the object of learning, a positive
effect on learning would be expected in any classrooms if that pattern of variation
could be created.

200

Table 7.7:

Comparison between classes 4C and 4D on mean gain scores and

standard deviation of Questions 1 to 4 and Questions 5 to 7

Variable

Class 4C

Class 4D

(n = 40)

(n = 25)

Sig.
Level

SD

SD

Question 1 to 4

4.05

1.75

3.80

2.10

0.497

0.622

Question 5 to 7

13.83

9.81

17.00

14.02

0.991

0.328

Questions 5 to 7 (discerning factors that affect the initial rate and the amount
of products, and sketching as well as interpreting rate curves) which were specific
to OL2 were related to the patterns of variation constituted in the combination of
experimentation and debriefing session. As seen from Table 7.7 again, class 4D
generally performed better than class 4C in Questions 5 to 7 with a higher mean
gain score (13.83 in class 4C versus 17.00 in class 4D), though the difference
between the 2 classes was not statistically significant. This suggested that class 4D
- obtaining rate-product data when doing their own experiments and viewing
others data, with initial rate and amount of products being separated while fusing
the factors together - might be in a better position to see the part-whole
relationship. The part here represents the effect of a single factor and the
whole refers to the phenomenon of how various factors affect the initial rate and
the amount of products of a chemical reaction. Specifically, the sequence
separation of aspects, separation of factors followed by fusion of factors
employed in class 4D, i.e. rate-rate-product-product seemed to better help students
appropriate OL2 than the fusion of aspects, separation of factors followed by
fusion of factors inherited in class 4C, i.e. rate-product-rate-product. In other
words, a specific debriefing sequence used in interpreting rate curves could be seen
as a powerful and effective tool for understanding a scientific phenomenon for a

201

particularly designed teaching sequence could lead to a better student learning

(Ametller, Leach & Scott, 2007). Lijnse and Klaasen (2004, p.538) state that
we do think that some ways are better than others; and therefore that it is
worthwhile to search for evidence of how and why that is the case and for means
that enable students to express and discuss the didactical quality of such teaching
sequences and situations.

It is interesting to note that the above finding was out of the researchers
expectation. The fusion group in the present study did not result in higher gain
score compared to the better performance of the fusion group in Los (2006) study.
One possible reason was that the actual patterns of variation inherited in the two
studies were indeed not the same, though looked alike. The former involved the
fusion of aspects whereas the latter the fusion of laboratory set-ups. To account for
the better performance of class 4D in the present study, an interaction effect might
have existed between the experimentation and the debriefing sessions. In class 4C,
a similar pattern, rate-product-rate-product, was used throughout. In class 4D, a
contrast pattern was formed in the two sessions: rate-product-rate-product in the
experimentation versus rate-rate-product-product in the debriefing. Experiencing a
contrast pattern in the two sessions seems to have led to a more powerful way of
seeing the part-whole relationship. This echoed what Schwartz and Bransford
(1998) have found: analysing the contrasting cases provided students with the
differentiated knowledge structures necessary to understand a subsequent
explanation at a deep level (p. 504).

202

My conjecture is: when one views a part (through separation) from a certain
pattern in the experimentation and sees all the parts (through fusion) in the same
way in the debriefing, he or she might have missed out the interaction effect
between the parts which constitute the whole (see Figure 7.7(a)). Class 4C might
view a part as a set of rate-product, and the whole as all the rate-product put
together. The relationship between the different factors affecting the rate in
different parts could hardly be discerned. On the contrary, if one views a part from
a certain pattern in the experimentation but a contrasting pattern in the debriefing
as in class 4D, one could probably discern what constitutes the parts, the
relationship between the parts (forming new larger parts) and what constitutes the
whole.
whole

whole

part

part

part

part

part

part

part

part

part

part

Figure 7.7(a) View parts from

one perspective forming a whole

Interaction effect
allows the parts to be
viewed from a new
dimension, forming
new larger parts.

Figure 7.7(b) View parts from two

perspectives forming a whole

Marton and Booth (1997) argue that in order to experience something in a

particular way, its parts, the relationship among the parts and the part-whole
structure must be discerned (Marton & Booth, 1997). The above findings have
important implications for ways of planning and improving the teaching-learning
sequence in practical science lessons, especially in scientific investigations which
involve different task-pool results. If the result of each group (each part) consists

203

of two or more aspects, it seems to be better using a debriefing sequence which

focuses on a single aspect of all the parts first instead of focusing on all the aspects
from one part at the same time. By experiencing variation of the same aspect
across different parts (while the variation pattern in the experimentation is just the
opposite same part, different aspects), the parts are allowed to be discerned
from another dimension in a simultaneous manner, generating a more
differentiated and more integrated whole. In other words, if teachers can
structure their practical lessons in ways that allow the students to view the parts
from different dimensions in the experimentation and the debriefing, this
thoughtful arrangement might facilitate students discernment of the part-part
relationships and the part-whole relationship and open up the space of learning.

Analysis of lesson transcription might provide insight from another

perspective to account for the greater effectiveness of the sequence: rate-rateproduct-product. Below is an excerpt of the debriefing session of class 4C when
the teacher explained the effect of concentration and volume on the initial rate and
the amount of product:
Teacher:

Lets look at case number 3, concentration. If we use the same acid HCl and
change [molarity] from 0.5 to 1, we find that the initial rate should be
different. [Pointing to the 2 different tangents at time zero.] Lets look at the
concentration of the hydrogen ion. In 1 molar hydrochloric acid, the
concentration of hydrogen ion is 1 molar. In 0.5 molar hydrochloric acid, the
concentration of H+ is 0.5 M. So having the higher concentration of hydrogen
ion will give a higher initial rate.

If you want to consider the amount of products, lets look at the equation.
[Pointing to the chemical equation.] Same reaction involved, same mole ratio.
Since the number of moles can be calculated by using the molarity and the

204

volume, if you change the concentration, the number of moles [of acid] will be
changed, and therefore, the number of moles of the products will be changed.
Using a higher concentration of the acid will give a greater number of moles
of the carbon dioxide, if the reaction can get to the end.

And the next part is about the volume. This time we find that the volume would
not affect the initial rate. [The teacher showed that the tangent of the 2 curves
at time zero overlapped with each other.] Why? Again lets look at the
concentration of hydrogen ion. If we only change the volume without
changing the molarity of the acid, we find that in both cases, the concentration
of hydrogen ion in 0.5 molar hydrochloric acid is 0.5 M. So they have the
same concentration of hydrogen ion. Therefore, the initial rate should be the
same. You can see that these two curves nearly coincide with each other at the
initial part.

Of course, there should be a difference in the amount of product formed. [The

teacher pointed to the different levels reached by the 2 curves.] Why? Lets
look at the end of the reaction, the level of the two curves. Suppose you do it
by calculation. For example, if we double the volume, the number of moles [of
acid] will be doubled. And the number of moles of carbon dioxide formed will
also be doubled, because the amount of products depends on the amount of
the limiting reactant.

It can be seen that when the teacher in class 4C compared the pairs of rate
curves with respect to concentration and volume, detailed explanations on their
effects on initial rate was made in terms of concentration of hydrogen ions. On
the other hand, stoichiometry of chemical equations and number of moles of
acid were used to explain in detail the effect of concentration and volume on the
amount of carbon dioxide gas formed. As the concentration of hydrogen ions and
the number of moles of acid depend on the factors concentration, volume and
moles, it might be quite demanding to understand and make use of these
relationships well (e.g. mole = concentration volume) within a short period of

205

time in explaining the different phenomena. If students did not have a good grasp
of the concept about these factors before the lesson, they might find it difficult to
focus on the explanation on the initial rate and the amount of products alternately
using these concepts while they were interpreting the different pairs of rate curves.
The interpretation and explanation process in class 4D seemed to be more coherent
or less demanding, when the teacher just simply focused on one single aspect, the
initial rate:
Teacher:

Lets look at case number 2, the basicity. If you choose an acid with a higher
basicity like sulphuric acid, one acid molecule can give 2 hydrogen ions. Lets
work out the concentration of hydrogen ion in each case. Well, the first one is
a dibasic acid. If the given molarity is 0.5 [M], the molarity of hydrogen ion in
sulphuric acid is 0.5 times 2 because each molecule can give 2 hydrogen ions.
That means it should be 1 molar.

How about hydrochloric acid? Of course, hydrochloric acid is a monobasic

acid. One molecule will give only one hydrogen ion. The concentration of
hydrogen ion will be exactly the same as the concentration of the original acid
molecule, and therefore 0.5 [M]. So compare the two data, one is 1 M, the
other one is 0.5 M. [Pointing to the steeper sulphuric acid curve.] Sulphuric
acid has a higher concentration of hydrogen ion, it will give a higher initial
rate. We can compare the curvature, compare the steepness of the curve.

Well, case number 3, concentration. Suppose we change the concentration

from 0.5 molar to 1 molar, in that case, the concentration of acid is doubled.
And of course, the concentration of hydrogen ion will also be doubled. One is
1 molar, the other one is 0.5 molar. [Pointing to the 1 M hydrochloric acid
curve which had a steeper tangent at time zero.] The one which has a higher
concentration of hydrogen ion, that means 1 M in this case, will have a higher
initial rate.

How about case number 4? Well, according to the experimental result, you
have obtained the correct result. If you just simply change the volume without
changing the molarity and basicity of the acid, we find that the first few parts

206

of the curve, that means the initial rate, is the same in both cases. [The
teacher showed that the 2 curves had the same steepness.]

Why? [Pause] The concentration of hydrogen ion in the 0.5 molar

hydrochloric acid is 0.5 molar. If you simply change the volume without
changing the molarity, the concentration of H+ remained 0.5 molar. As the 2
cases have the same molarity of hydrogen ion, they have the same initial rate.

From the above excerpt, it can be seen that the line of thinking involved was
much straightforward. Students were led to focus on the effect of basicity,
concentration and volume on the initial rate in terms of concentration of hydrogen
ions only. Through a comprehensive explanation to relate the single aspect
initial rate and the corresponding factors, the part-whole relationship between
them could be focused on more clearly. This might explain why class 4D
outperformed class 4C. The complete version of the lesson transcription in the
debriefing session in classes 4C and 4D together with a brief data analysis are
recorded in Appendix 9.

7.2.3 Findings in relation to the second research question

The second research question is: Is there any interaction effect between
students level of academic ability and the patterns of variation? To examine
which academic level of students would benefit more from the patterns of variation
used in the respective class, students were first categorized as high or low
achievers based on their performance in the pretest, with the median score of all 65
students in each question as the cut-off score. In a particular question, students
having score higher than the cut-off score were regarded as high achievers and vice
versa. Independent sample t-tests were conducted on the posttest and gain score for

207

individual questions. The mean, standard deviation, t- and p-value of the scores for
low and high achievers in classes 4C and 4D are listed in Table 7.8.

Table 7.8 Mean pretest score, posttest score and gain score of individual question
for low and high achievers in classes 4C and 4D
Q.1
(2 marks)

4C

Pretest Q.1
Posttest Q.1
Gain score Q.1
4D

Q.2
(5 marks)

Pretest Q.1
Posttest Q.1
Gain score Q.1
4C

Pretest Q.2
Posttest Q.2
Gain score Q.2
4D

Pretest Q.2
Posttest Q.2
Gain score Q.2

Low C (marks 1)

High C (marks 2)

(n = 6)

(n = 34)

M
SD
1.00
0.000
1.67
0.516
0.67
0.516
Low D (marks 1)

M
SD
2.00
0.000
1.88
0.409
0.409
0.12
High D (marks 2)

(n = 6)

(n = 19)

M
SD
1.00
0.000
1.67
0.516
0.67
0.516
Low C(marks 1)

M
SD
2.00
0.000
1.74
0.452
0.452
0.26
High C (marks 2)

(n = 15)

(n = 25)

M
SD
1.00
0.000
2.93
0.799
1.93
0.799
Low D (marks 1)

M
SD
2.36
0.569
3.20
0.913
0.84
0.943
High D (marks 2)

(n = 7)

(n = 18)

M
1.00
2.57
1.57

SD
0.000
0.787
0.787

208

M
2.33
3.00
0.67

SD
0.485
0.767
0.840

Sig.
Level
p

0.971 0.368
3.530 0.012
Sig.
Level
t
p
0.299 0.773
3.957 0.005
Sig.
Level
t
p
0.968 0.340
3.911 0.000
Sig.
Level
t
p
1.231 0.244
2.532 0.027

Q.3
(3 marks)

4C

Pretest Q.3
Posttest Q.3
Gain score Q.3
4D

Q.4
(4 marks)

Pretest Q.3
Posttest Q.3
Gain score Q.3
4C

Pretest Q.4
Posttest Q.4
Gain score Q.4
4D

Q.5
(4 marks)

Pretest Q.4
Posttest Q.4
Gain score Q.4
4C

Pretest Q.5
Posttest Q.5
Gain score Q.5
4D

Q.6
(12 marks)

Pretest Q.5
Posttest Q.5
Gain score Q.5
4C

Pretest Q.6
Posttest Q.6
Gain score Q.6
4D

Pretest Q.6
Posttest Q.6
Gain score Q.6

Low C (marks 0)

High C (marks 1)

(n = 28)

(n = 12)

M
SD
0.00
0.000
2.54
0.999
2.54
0.999
Low D (marks 0)

M
SD
2.17
0.835
2.75
0.622
0.58
0.669
High D (marks 1)

(n = 21)

(n = 4)

M
SD
0.00
0.000
0.655
2.86
2.86
0.655
Low C (marks 2)

M
SD
2.25
0.957
2.75
0.500
0.50
0.577
High C (marks 3)

(n = 23)

(n = 17)

M
SD
1.61
0.583
3.04
0.825
1.43
0.896
Low D (marks 2)

M
SD
3.53
0.514
3.59
0.618
0.06
0.429
High D (marks 3)

(n =13)

(n = 12)

M
SD
1.54
0.776
0.899
3.15
1.62
0.650
Low C (marks 2)

M
SD
3.50
0.522
2.67
1.231
1.115
0.83
High C (marks 3)

(n = 16)

(n = 24)

M
SD
1.75
0.447
3.31
1.078
1.56
1.031
Low D (marks 2)

M
SD
4.00
0.000
3.46
0.977
0.977
0.54
High D (marks 3)

(n = 21)

(n = 4)

M
SD
1.76
0.539
2.81
1.209
1.05
1.431
Low C (marks 6)

M
SD
3.75
0.500
3.50
1.000
1.258
0.25
High C (marks 7)

(n = 23)

(n = 17)

M
SD
4.17
1.899
6.70
2.265
2.52
2.626
Low D (marks 6)

M
SD
8.18
1.185
7.53
2.552
2.149
0.65
High D (marks 7)

(n = 15)

(n = 10)

M
3.87
7.60
3.73

SD
2.264
2.586
2.463

209

M
8.20
7.00
1.20

SD
0.632
2.867
2.530

Sig.
Level
p

0.823 0.417
7.230 0.000
Sig.
Level
t
p
0.372
7.318

0.725
0.001
Sig.
Level
p

2.388 0.022
6.437 0.000
Sig.
Level
t
p
1.122
6.638

0.275
0.000
Sig.
Level
p

0.435 0.667
6.457 0.000
Sig.
Level
t
p
1.221 0.278
1.847 0.129
Sig.
Level
t
p
1.071 0.292
4.192 0.000
Sig.
Level
t
p
0.533
4.827

0.601
0.000

Q.7a
4C
(choice)
(20 marks)
Pretest Q.7a
Posttest Q.7a
Gain score Q.7a
4D

Q.7b
(reason)
(40 marks)

Pretest Q.7a
Posttest Q.7a
Gain score Q.7a
4C

Pretest Q.7b
Posttest Q.7b
Gain score Q.7b
4D

Pretest Q.7b
Posttest Q.7b
Gain score Q.7b

Low C (marks 11)

High C (marks 12)

(n = 13)

(n = 27)

M
SD
9.08
1.553
15.15
3.023
6.08
3.593
Low D (marks 11)

M
SD
14.70
1.898
16.41
2.515
1.70
2.893
High D (marks 12)

(n =15)

(n = 10)

M
SD
7.73
1.831
13.27
3.712
5.53
3.662
Low C (marks 7)

M
SD
13.70
2.452
15.10
3.348
1.40
4.115
High C (marks 8)

(n = 17)

(n = 23)

M
SD
4.41
2.181
12.41
6.983
8.00
6.736
Low D (marks 7)

M
SD
13.39
4.065
23.52
8.162
10.13
8.086
High D (marks 8)

(n = 20)

(n = 5)

M
1.10
11.90
10.80

SD
1.483
10.432
9.839

M
14.20
23.60
9.40

SD
4.382
10.761
10.877

1.295 0.210
3.831 0.001
Sig.
Level
t
p
1.284 0.213
2.570 0.019
Sig.
Level
t
p
4.627 0.000
0.907 0.370
Sig.
Level
t
p
2.188 0.071
0.262 0.802

Highlighted ones are those with p values < 0.05.

The ones in italics refer to low achievers who performed exceptionally well in the posttest.

Based on the findings in Table 7.8, low achievers were found to benefit more
than the high achievers for both classes 4C and 4D (except for Question 5 class
4D and Question 7b). In other words, the gap between the low- and high-score
groups has narrowed. This effect was more significant for low achievers in class
4D, with initially lower mean scores in the pretest surpassing the high achievers in
the posttest in Questions 3, 4 and 6 (see Figure 7.8).

210

Sig.
Level
p

3.5

mean score Q3

3
2.5

Q3 low C

Q3 high C
Q3 low D

1.5

Q3 high D

1
0.5
0
pretest

posttest
pre-posttest

mean score Q4

3.5
3
Q4 low C

2.5

Q4 high C

Q4 low D

1.5

Q4 high D

1
0.5
0
pretest

posttest
pre-posttest

mean score Q6

8
7
6

Q6 low C

Q6 high C

Q6 low D

Q6 high D

2
1
0
pretest

posttest
pre-posttest

Figure 7.8 Graphs showing the mean pretest and posttest score for Questions
3, 4 and 6

211

The above results support the findings of a number of studies done by Lo, e.g.
Catering for Individual Difference Building on Variation (CID[v]) project
(2000-2003) and Variation for the Improvement of Teaching and Learning
(VITAL) project (20052008), that while the performance of all the students
improved, the gap between the low- and high-score groups narrowed. In some
cases of the VITAL project, classes with initially lower average scores in the pretest caught up with or even surpassed those with initially higher average scores (Lo,
Kwok, Pong, Ko & Wong, 2008, pp. 2934). Lo (2009) argues that student
learning outcome depend more on how the object of learning is dealt with than on
the perceived abilities of students.

It was noted that some students still did not perform well after the research
lessons. One possible reason might be the presence of too many varying
factors/aspects, whereas each factor/aspect was built on a scientific concept. If
students were weak in grasping the preciseness of these scientific terms before
coming to the research lessons, there might be confusion regarding individual
factors/aspects or could not see the aspect-aspect relationship, for example mole
equals volume times concentration. Consequently they might not be able to discern
all the actual factors with respect to OL2 when the aspects initial rate and
amount of products were fused together during the pooling of experimental
results in the debriefing. The researchers conjecture here is: discernment maybe
relate to students prior knowledge which affects their possibility to experience the
variation. If students were not able to discern all the parts before, it may be more
difficult for them to discern the whole later. Without clear conception between the

212

parts (various factors), it would be more difficult for the less able students to see
the part-whole relationship between the factors and their effects.

In the research lessons of this study, the only time at which students were able
to experience variation in other factors (e.g. volume) was when the teacher pooled
the results of the different groups during the debriefing session, as each group of
students worked with a factor (e.g. concentration) and experienced variation in that
factor in the experimentation. Since there were too many factors for each aspect
involved, students needed to pay attention in time, or they would have missed the
critical moment enabling them to experience simultaneously variation in different
factors and different aspects. Those who did not have a good grasp of the concept
of scientific terms like concentration or basicity might interfere with their learning.
A piece of evidence from the interview data indicated that academically weaker
students considered themselves still a bit confused after the research lessons
because there were so many factors involved:
Teacher:

You think your performance in the first test was better, then why
after a period of time [the research lessons], your performance in the
second test was poorer? What do you think were the reasons behind?

Student:

Becausebecause I dont know. It seems that I always feel

confused about volume, and also excess and limiting, always
confusing.

Teacher:

That means it is quite easy to mix up?

Student:

Yes! And sometimes I will mix up concentration and basicity, as

they look alike. For example, for basicity, I think if the acid is dibasic,
[the amount of product] would be greater, but if the molarity of the
acid is reduced, the amount of product would also be reduced.

Teacher:

You mean that there are several factors that affect the amount of
product, apart from molarity, basicity would also affect the amount.

213

Student:

And then the strength, no matter whether the acid is strong or weak,
it will affect (4D01)

The above excerpt showed that students who did not have a good foundation
in their prior knowledge found it difficult to discern the correct factors affecting
the amount of products in the reaction between magnesium and an acid because
there were so many factors and some factors look alike. It seems that before these
students came to the research lessons, they might not have acquired a good
understanding of the scientific concept of the factors like strength,
concentration and basicity. If they could not distinguish the critical difference
between these factors, it would be rather difficult for them to discern the effects
caused by these factors on the reaction rate and the amount of products. Strmdahl
(2012, p. 76) argues that interpretation and attainment of scientific terms and their
structural relations are foundational in science learning. These elements and
relationships are some critical features that should be discerned by the learners.
Following this line of argument, students who did not have a clear concept of these
scientific terms as their prior knowledge might have difficulty in experiencing the
variation, and hence discernment of the critical aspects of the object of learning.

Another argument put forward by the researcher here is: the level of
difficulties of the object of learning might be closely related to the learning
outcomes which in turn depend on the students academic ability. If the object of
learning is too difficult, students might not be able to see clearly the part-part or
part-whole relationship when an appropriate setting and learning opportunities
were given. To illustrate this argument, the learning outcome with respect to the
effect of mole was chosen. The study done by Tullberg (1997) indicated that
students had difficulty in relating the mole to relevant concepts in a clear and
214

consistent way. Number of moles of an acid, which in turn depends on its volume
as well as its concentration, will affect the number of moles of the products formed.
But whether it affects the reaction rate depends on whether the change in number
of moles is due to a concentration change or a volume change. Concentration
change will lead to a change in reaction rate but volume change will not. Even
academically stronger students might not be able to see this difficult relationship
after the research lessons. A student of class 4C wrote in her posttest that number
of moles of an acid would affect the reaction rate. When she was asked to explain
her choice in the interview, she commented:
In fact I do not quite understand what this number of moles is referring to Im
quite sure that other aspects will affect [the reaction rate], but Im not sure
whether number of moles is the same as number, or concentration. (4C38)

It follows that if students (most probably the high achievers) had a clear
conception of the individual factors like strength of an acid before the research
lessons, it might be easier for them to experience, discern and go deeper into the
corresponding effect when different factors were varied simultaneously. Some
academically stronger students could explain clearly the effect of strength on the
amount of products without difficulty in the interview. The following excerpt
served as evidence:
A stronger acid and a weaker acid, one is completely ionized whereas the other is
slightly ionized. Even when the acid is slightly ionized, even the mass - the
reactant, if hydrogen ions are removed, the acid molecules will continue to ionize
because there are still molecules left behind. It will ionize till all the acid
molecules have been ionized and used up. The other one [strong acid] is
completely ionized initially, but the situation is the same. Finally the amount of
products would be the same, it would not be affected. (4D04)

215

To summarize, an effective pedagogical design/sequence together with a clear

conception of various aspects of the object of learning as their prior knowledge are
important conditions for learning to take place. Otherwise, students might mix up
the different critical aspects of the object of learning and could not see the whole
clearly. Some patterns of variation might be more conducive to learning than
others: in the present study, the sequence of separating an aspect first, separating
the factors and finally fusing all the factors and aspects simultaneously at the end
seems to be a very effective tool in bringing about the concepts involved, in
particular for the low achievers. So which pattern of variation could lead to better
student learning depends not only on the choice and the level of difficulties of the
object of learning, but also on the prior knowledge of the students on specific
scientific terms. Knowing well the students academic abilities, adjusting the
object of learning and the patterns of variation constituted in the lessons is not an
easy task even for experienced teachers. Teachers therefore need to review the
object of learning from time to time, and from class to class, for how to handle the
object of learning in a more effective way is crucial to the student learning
outcomes.

216

7.2.4 Findings in relation to the third research question

The third research question is Does the use of scientific investigation afford
students greater opportunity to discern the aspect of the object of learning? The
researcher conjectured that if a student was assigned to investigate a certain factor,
say volume, through hands-on experiment, it might be easier for her, compared to
other groups who simply listened to the debriefing without actually conducting the
experiment on the particular factor, to discern that critical aspect. Thus the 2
classes of students (n = 65) were re-categorized as the group doing the experiment
on particular factor x and other groups who have not been doing experiment on
factor x, or simply denote as non-group x. Students written responses with
respect to their performance of Question 7 of the pre-posttests were subjected to
analysis. The mean score of Question 7 in the pretest, posttest and the gain score
are listed in Table 7.9.

217

Table 7.9

Comparison of the mean score of a factor of Question 7 in the

pretest, posttest and the corresponding gain score between group
investigating that factor and those without investigating that factor
(non-group) in the experimentation

Factor under Group

investigation

Max.
marks of a
factor of
Q7

Mean score
of that
factor of Q7
in pretest

Mean score
of that
factor of Q7
in posttest

Mean gain
score of
that factor
of Q7

S.D.

Strength

2.64

3.64

1.00

1.483

1.36

2.82

1.45

1.916

2.44

3.39

0.94

1.250

1.02

3.35

2.33

2.128

1.91

3.45

1.55

1.293

0.82

4.36

3.55

1.809

2.46

3.35

0.89

1.269

1.85

3.57

1.72

2.595

Concentration Group 3
4
3.36
(for
choice)
[concentration]
8
2.18
(n = 11)

3.64

0.27

0.786

4.00

1.82

2.714

2.87

3.41

0.54

1.077

1.87

4.22

2.35

2.316

3.20

3.50

0.30

0.675

2.10

4.40

2.30

2.584

2.35

3.22

0.87

1.611

1.33

3.25

1.93

2.372

1.59

1.82

0.23

1.193

1.27

2.18

0.91

1.797

1.51

1.70

0.19

0.906

0.95

1.91

0.95

1.676

Group 1
[strength]
(n = 11)

(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Non-group 1
(n = 54)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Basicity

Group 2
[basicity]
(n = 11)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Non-group 2
(n = 54)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

(for reason)

Non-group 3
(n = 54)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Volume

Group 4
[volume]
(n = 10)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Non-group 4
(n = 55)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Mole

Group 5 & 6
[mole]
(n = 22)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Non-group 5
&6
(n = 43)

4
(for choice)

8
(for reason)

Highlighted ones are those with higher mean gain score compared to the other group.
The ones in italics are those with exceptionally higher pretest mean score.

218

From Table 7.9, it was found that Group 1, which was assigned the factor
strength during their experimentation ( x = 1.00), out-performed Non-group 1
( x = 0.94) in the choice section of Question 7 (i.e. Yes, No or Not certain) with
respect to the factor strength. That might imply that students having done the
experiment on the factor strength had a better position/chance in discerning the
effect of strength on the reaction rate and the amount of products than other
students who simply listened to the debriefing.

Similar results were observed in Group 2 (basicity) and Group 5 & 6 (moles),
again with their mean gain scores (Group 2: x = 1.55; Group 5 & 6: x = 0.23) in
the choice section of Question 7 with respect to the assigned factor higher than
those who have not been doing the experiment on that particular factor (Non-group
2: x = 0.89; Non-group 5 & 6: x = 0.19). Independent samples t-test as shown in
Table 7.10 indicated that Group 2 outperformed Non-group 2 in Question 7
(including both the choice and reasons) with respect to the factor basicity.

Table 7.10

Performance of group 2 versus non-group 2 on Question 7

Variable
Question 7 on
factor basicity

Group 2

Non-group 2

(n = 11)

(n = 54)

Sig.
Level

SD

SD

5.09

2.844

2.61

3.493

2.529

.022

On the contrary, the performance of Group 3 (concentration) on the choice

with respect to the factor concentration was not better than Non-group 3, with
the mean gain scores x = 0.27 of Group 3 less than x = 0.54 of Non-group 3.
The situation for Group 4 (volume) was similar to that of Group 3, (Group 4: x =
219

0.30; Non-group 4: x = 0.87). The reason for Group 3 and 4 having lower mean
gain scores than Non-group 3 and Non-group 4 respectively might be due to
their exceptionally high mean scores in the pretest, with 3.36 and 3.20 out of 4
respectively. Thus it was not easy for these 2 groups to obtain a very high mean
gain scores after the experimentation. Simply by looking at the mean scores of the
posttest, these 2 groups indeed got higher mean scores than their non-group
counterparts.

Another reason that the learning outcome of Group is not necessarily much
better than Non-group could be: in some groups of students (e.g. Group 1), some
of their experimental results/graphs obtained might not be the same as the
theoretical ones due to experimental errors (see Table 7.11). The accuracy of their
experimental result might affect their perception of the correct rate curves and
hence their understanding of the effect of the factor under investigation on the
initial rate and the amount of products.

220

Table 7.11

Accuracy of the experimental results obtained by different groups in

classes 4C and 4D

Group 1
[strength]
Group 2
[basicity]
Group 3
[concentration]
Group 4
[volume]
Group 5
[same mole]
Group 6
[different
mole]

Initial rate
Amount of
products
Initial rate
Amount of
products
Initial rate
Amount of
products
Initial rate
Amount of
products
Initial rate
Amount of
products
Initial rate
Amount of
products

4C
Experimental no. of
Result
students

4D
Experimental no. of
Result
students

-- Experimental result matched with the theoretical one

-- Experimental result deviated from the theoretical one

To summarize, out of all the six groups of students, four groups (Group 1, 2 5
& 6) had their mean gain scores higher than their non-group counterparts. It seems
that overall speaking, those who were involved in doing experiment on a particular
factor performed slightly better than those who simply listened to the debriefing,
though the pattern was not so obvious, or one may argue that the conjecture might
not hold strongly.

Another finding from Table 7.9 is that amongst all the results, it seems that
students performed less satisfactorily on the mole factor of Question 7. One of
the possible reasons is that for the reactions which involve acids, the factors that
directly affect the reaction rate include concentration, strength and basicity
221

whereas volume is not a factor. The mole indeed depends on both the
concentration and volume. Whether mole affects the rate depends on whether the
change in mole is due to a change in concentration, or a change in volume. So
strictly speaking, mole should not be regarded as a primary factor but rather a
secondary factor only. Students often found the relationship between
concentration, volume and mole confusing in the topic reaction rate. As these 3
factors are inter-related to each other (mole = concentration volume), if students
did not discern clearly this cause-effect relationship, they might have difficulties to
judge whether mole affects the reaction rate or not. In fact, the performance of the
students could also be affected by their academic ability. As shown in Table 7.12(a)
and (b), the mean gain score of Question 7 and that of the whole paper obtained by
Group 1 students were relatively low. This might be explained by smaller number
of academically stronger students (as revealed from the S4 mid-term chemistry
examination result) in the group.

Table 7.12(a) Mean score of Question 7 in the pretest, posttest and the
corresponding gain score for different groups

Group 1
(strength)
Group 2
(basicity)
Group 3
(concentration)
Group 4
(volume)
Group 5
(same moles)
Group 6
(different moles)

No. of
No. of
Mean score
students high
of Q7 (all
achievers factors) in
pretest
11
4
17.55

Mean score
of Q7 (all
factors) in
posttest
28.55

Mean gain S.D.

score of
Q7 (all
factors)
11.00
7.457

11

16.09

31.82

15.73

13.267

11

20.91

31.36

10.45

7.299

10

21.00

33.90

12.90

9.960

11

21.00

32.91

11.91

13.766

11

17.64

32.64

15.00

11.498

222

Table 7.12(b) Mean score of the whole paper in the pretest, posttest and the
corresponding gain score for different groups

Group 1
(strength)
Group 2
(basicity)
Group 3
(concentration)
Group 4
(volume)
Group 5
(same moles)
Group 6
(different moles)

7.3

No. of
No. of
Mean score
students high
(whole
achievers paper) in
pretest
11
4
33.27

Mean score
(whole
paper) in
posttest
49.18

Mean gain S.D.

score of
the whole
paper
15.91
8.142

11

30.45

52.36

21.91

15.235

11

37.82

52.82

15.00

8.922

10

34.80

56.80

22.00

11.185

11

35.73

52.73

17.00

13.646

11

33.00

53.64

20.64

11.818

Implications of the Study

In most of the chemistry textbooks in Hong Kong at Secondary 4 level,

concentration of reactants is described as one of the factors affecting the reaction

rate of a chemical process. When the notion is introduced, the reaction between a
metal and an acid is usually chosen as an illustration. By carrying out suitable
experiments, data of measurable physical parameters like the mass of the reaction
mixture, the volume of the gas produced or the pressure of the closed system could
be obtained and used to plot rate curves. When the rate curves are analysed,
usually both the initial rate and the amount of products formed at the end of the
reaction would be determined. The first problem that arises is: as some of the
factors that affect the initial rate and the amount of products respectively are
common, whereas some are not, students often found it confusing in distinguishing
these factors in relation to the initial rate and the amount of products. The second
problem is, when different factors affecting the reaction rate are described in most

223

of the textbooks, different reactions are chosen or different experimental set-ups

for following the reaction progress are used. Students might not be able to discern
the critical features of the experimental set-ups in relation to the characteristics of
the reactions involved for choosing the most appropriate one for investigation. This
issue deserves more and more attention from teachers and researchers when our
chemistry curricula in recent decades place a much stronger emphasis on scientific
inquiry. Students nowadays are expected to be able to carry out scientific
investigations by designing their own experiments in their school curricula.
Investigative Study, a group-based scientific investigation, has been added in the
New Senior Secondary chemistry curriculum in Hong Kong as a key component in
the School-Based Assessment (CDC & HKEAA, 2007).

Exploring ways to tackle the two problems addressed above are the aims of
the present study to develop appropriate pedagogies based on the variation theory
to help students attain the direct object of learning (discerning factors affecting the
reaction rate and amount of products as well as interpreting/sketching rate curves)
and the indirect object of learning (designing experiments for a scientific
investigation) through experimentation. Without the careful use of variation
consciously structured by the teacher in the practical lessons, say by keeping the
unfocused factors invariant and varying one single factor, students may perceive
the factors as a number of unrelated entities and could not discern clearly the
relationship between the factors and their effects. To tackle this, the newly
designed experiment documented in the present study could afford experiences for
students to improve their understanding with respect to the OLs. In the experiment,
students were asked to measure the change in mass of the reaction mixture (which

224

denoted the amount of products formed during the reaction) by keeping the type of
reaction and the laboratory set-up invariant whilst varying one factor of the acid at
a time. The experimentation together with the thoughtful debriefing thus might
serve as a basis for students to build up a good foundation and a clear concept for
later learning of the topic kinetics at the A-level stage, in which the reaction rate
would be related to concentration in quantitative terms in the form of a rate
equation. It is envisaged that if students could develop a more precise conception
of the reaction rate phenomenon at Secondary 4 level, they would probably be able
to understand the phenomenon kinetics in a more sophisticated way in their Alevel or undergraduate chemistry course. Also, through helping students to discern
the critical features of designing an experiment and providing them hands-on
experience, students might be able to develop their generic skills in conducting
scientific inquiry via this valuable learning experience.

Chemistry is a conceptual subject. In order to explain scientific phenomena,

experimentation is often used to illustrate and explain the microscopic world and
relate it to macroscopic properties of matter. Apart from conducting a scientific
investigation, computer simulation might allow a new dimension of variation and a
greater variety of patterns of variation to be introduced to enhance students
understanding of the notion of reaction rate. In line with this thinking, I.T. or
computer software such as Flash can be considered as an effective tool in teaching
chemistry concepts because computer simulation or animations of moving particles
at molecular level (particles presented at the microscopic level) can be used to
illustrate the simple collision theory which is often used to explain the effect of
different factors on the reaction rate in a chemical reaction. Computer animations

225

can represent chemical species in a pseudo three-dimensional and dynamic way as

no other media does (Whitnell, Fernandes, Almassizadeh, Love, Dugan, Sawrey &
Wilson, 1994), and help students to imagine chemical phenomena at submicroscopic level (Allessi & Trollip, 1991; Kelly & Jones, 2007). They make
abstract concepts or phenomena concrete by providing opportunities for students
to focus on probable variations, and to develop scientifically acceptable key
features in students representations of chemical phenomena (Tasker & Dalton,
2006). Therefore by juxtaposing the animation how particles collide between a
solution of low concentration and one with high concentration, the contrast that
was brought into the students focal awareness - higher concentration results in
higher collision frequency and hence higher reaction rate - could possibly help
with the constitution of the patterns of variation in a more efficient and effective
manner. When simultaneously focusing the object/event world and the
theory/model world with I.T. as a tool, students could be provided with
opportunities to make the vital link between the macroscopic level and the
microscopic level.

Creating the necessary conditions for students to understand scientific

phenomena and to develop powerful ways of acting is one of the most important
educational goals in science teaching. This study sheds light on how variations can
bring forth the critical features of the object of learning into students focal
awareness in the research lessons. Suitable variations can be used in laboratory
experiments to provide an effective learning environment and experiences that
bring out the critical aspects of the phenomenon in order for certain scientific
concepts to be understood. The findings of this study suggest that the use of

226

variation theory as a theoretical framework for pedagogical design through

conducting scientific investigations is efficient in bringing about student learning
of both the scientific concepts and generic skills. Specifically, the researcher
remarks that if several aspects of a phenomenon (e.g. initial rate/amount of
products of a chemical reaction) that in turn depended on various factors tested in
the experimental conditions (e.g. concentration/volume of an acid) were
investigated, separating the two reaction aspects whilst varying the factors, and
finally fusing all the factors at the end could be more conducive to student learning
than fusing the aspects for each factor at the beginning. The positive learning
outcomes of the present study lends support to the argument made by Marton and
Tsui (2004) that separating the aspects followed by fusing the aspects could be
seen as a powerful tool in bringing out the critical aspects of the object of learning,
more efficient than never taking the critical aspects apart.

A thoughtful teaching-learning sequence used in practical science lessons

might considerably enhance the students understanding of the scientific
phenomenon, especially in scientific investigations which involve different taskpool results. If the result of each group (each part) consists of two or more
aspects, it seems to be better using a debriefing sequence which focuses on a single
aspect of all the parts first instead of focusing on all the aspects from one part at
the same time. By experiencing variation of the same aspect across different parts
(while the variation pattern in the experimentation is just the opposite same part,
different aspects), the parts are allowed to be discerned from another dimension
in a simultaneous manner, generating a more complete whole.

227

Students equipped with clear conceptions of aspects as their prior knowledge

may benefit more from an appropriate pattern of variation than the vague
counterparts if the object of learning is too difficult. Adjusting the object of
learning from time to time, and from class to class thus is considered as crucial to
constituting the space for effective learning. Finally, if the sequence of data
analysis in the experimentation and that used in the debriefing forms a contrasting
pattern, it might help highlighting the part-whole relationship clearer than a similar
pattern used in the two sessions for certain interaction effect might have existed
between experimentation and debriefing leading to positive learning outcomes. It is
hoped that the above findings provide insights for teachers to reflect and be aware
of their own ways of teaching, so that appropriate pedagogical instructions could
be formulated and deployed to help students develop the capability of seeing and
acting in powerful ways. It is also hoped that teachers would find the teaching
approach adopted in this study helpful, especially when similar object of learning
is to be dealt with in their career.

7.4

Limitations of the Study

The present study had its limitations. First, there was no control group to

which gain scores could be compared in the data analysis due to ethical
considerations. If there was a control group, the research lesson might take longer
time than the conventional lesson, i.e. the variable teaching time might not be
easily controlled.

Second, to compare the effects of different debriefing sequences on student

learning, variables other than instruction such as the participants should be kept

228

invariant as far as possible. The academic ability of the 2 classes under

investigation, whether in the pilot study or in the main study, were not exactly the
same, thus individual differences in students learning ability were unavoidable.
Owing to the different number of students involved when comparison was made,
class size effects were also possible.

Third, rapport had not been established between the teacher and the 2 classes
(4C and 4D) in the main study as they were not originally taught by the teacher
(the researcher) in the academic year 07-08 (except for the research lessons). The
teacher-student relationship could affect the classroom interactions. The
availability of learning opportunities which was seen as a cooperative effort
between teachers and students during classroom interaction (Tsui, 1995) could be
hindered.

Fourth, class 4A was the first class in which the lesson plan was implemented
in the pilot study. Technical problems were found affecting the enacted object of
learning. The I.T. technician at first was not familiarized with the laboratory setting
such that about 5 minutes were wasted in arranging the position of the video
camera and the lighting system. As the lesson plan and the experiment were newly
designed, it also took some time for the researcher to be familiarized with the time
schedule and equipment setting. This might affect the effectiveness of the teaching
towards class 4A. Validity of data collected from class 4A could be reduced, as the
class might not have reflected their entire and true potential. These technical
problems were solved and thus were not observed in the main study.

229

Fifth, all the lessons in the experimentation and debriefing sessions were
video-recorded. The teacher and the students were no doubt intermittently aware of
the camera and perhaps, therefore, not entirely relaxed. This might not reveal the
real context of the lessons.

A sample of only 15% in the pilot and 20% in the main study of the total
respondents was selected for interview. Though this percentage is common for
descriptive research, the appropriate sample size in reality depends on various
factors such as the specific type of descriptive research involved, the size of the
population, and whether data will be analysed for given subgroups. In other words,
the sample size might not be big enough. More data should be examined to
obtain a more in-depth finding. Furthermore, the selected interviews were
conducted in mixed-code, Cantonese and English, to facilitate effective
communication between the researcher and the respondents.

However,

transcriptions had to be translated into English to present them as evidence, and

hence reducing accuracy.

Last but not least, this research involved only the high school female students
and thus the generalizability of the results is constrained by the sample of the study.
Gender difference in achievement was not taken into account.

7.5

Areas for Further Research

The teacher in the present study demonstrated how to use suitable variations in

experiments to design an effective learning environment for students to develop a

powerful way of understanding a scientific phenomenon. Applying variation

230

theory in practical components provides a new dimension of variations and opens

up the space of learning to improve students understanding of scientific concepts.
This could be a challenging and potential area for further research in science
education in the field of phenomenography.

Teaching sequence allowed a new dimension of variation of the patterns of

variation to be displayed to students in this study. Its effectiveness to bring forth
the critical aspects of the phenomenon in question in other chemistry topics such as
chemical bonding or electrochemistry could be another interesting area for
investigation.

In A-level chemistry courses, comprehensive quantitative treatment of

reaction rate (e.g. rate equation expressed in terms of concentration of reactants
and order of reaction) would be much more complicated than the CE-level.
Presenting students with this new quantitative treatment might confuse them and
interfere with their conceptions of reaction rate. A longitudinal study is thus
recommended.

With regard to some unsatisfactory performance of the students in

distinguishing the critical aspects affecting the initial rate and the amount of
products, terminology confusion could be a possible factor. Students might not
have a thorough understanding of the conceptual terms like strength, basicity
and number of moles. Whether this confusion would appear in the schools using
Chinese as the medium of instruction would be of interest to be illuminated.

231

Furthermore, the present study was conducted in a girls school and hence
gender effect was unavoidably neglected. As gender difference in achievement has
long been an important issue in science education, it would be worthwhile to
explore whether gender difference has an effect on students understanding of
scientific phenomena through the use of variations in classrooms.

7.6

Concluding Remarks
In this thesis, a research lesson which based on the variation theory as a

framework aiming at improving students understanding of reaction rate at

Secondary 4 level chemistry course in Hong Kong was presented. According to
Marton and Booth (1997),
A way of experiencing something is a way of discerning something from, and
relating it to, a context. The meaning of something for someone at a particular point in
time corresponds to the pattern of parts or aspects that are discerned and are
simultaneously objects of focal awareness. (p. 112)

However, only when a particular aspect varies whilst all other aspects of the
phenomenon are kept invariant allow the learner to experience variation in the
varying aspect and hence discern that aspect (Bowden & Marton, 1998). When
students do not learn, it might not be due to their innate incompetence; instead it
might be because they have not discerned what they need to discern (Marton,
2002), or they have not focused simultaneously on all the critical aspects and their
relationships with respect to the object of learning (Lo, Pong & Chik, 2005, pp. 1920).

232

The researcher attempted to structure the learning situation and create

conditions to make it easier for students to learn. Different patterns of variation
that correspond to the critical features of the objects of learning (OL1 and OL2 in
this study) were used in the introduction, the hands-on experimentation and the
debriefing session. In order to investigate whether a special debriefing sequence
might lead to better student learning, in the debriefing of the pilot study, different
sequences of aspects were used. Having that experience, revised patterns of
variation in the debriefing sequences were employed in the main study. The
substantial improvement in student learning outcomes appears to indicate that there
is an association between student learning and the pattern of variation constituted
in the research lessons. It lends support to the current literature that the difference
in the pattern of variation being created in the teaching enactment seems to be a
crucial factor in determining what was made possible to for the students to learn
(e.g. Lo, Chik, & Pang, 2006; Lo, Hung, & Chik, 2007; Lo et al., 2008; Pang & Lo,
2012). When appropriate patterns of variation were purposely brought out to help
the students see the critical aspects of the object of learning, students learning
could be enhanced. Therefore, intentional structuring of lessons by the teacher in
accordance with a framework grounded in variation theory with certain patterns of
variation and invariance introduced in the experimentation and the debriefing
provides new insight for teachers in planning and constructing the science learning
environment.

Designing appropriate teaching-learning sequences in a science lesson is

important for student learning (Leach & Scott, 2002; Andersson & Wallin, 2006;
Viiri & Savinainen, 2008). In the present study, two debriefing sequences were

233

used to compare the effect on student attaining scientific conceptions. In the pilot
study, it was found that the discussion on the effect of closely-related factors (i.e.
volume, concentration and mole) simultaneously on the 2 aspects of a reaction, the
reaction rate and amount of products, seemed to be more effective in enhancing
student learning than the traditional order (i.e. concentration, strength and basicity).
In the main study, results showed that separation of aspects, separation followed
by fusion of factors appeared to be more conducive to student learning than the
fusion of aspects counterparts. That is, discussing all the factors affecting one
aspect (initial rate) before going through the factors affecting the other aspect
(amount of products) could possibly create a better learning condition than
discussing the separate factors affecting the 2 reaction aspects simultaneously.
Besides, if the sequence of data interpretation in the experimentation and that used
in the debriefing forms a contrasting pattern, it might help highlighting the partwhole relationship clearer than a similar pattern used in the two sessions for
certain interaction effect might have existed between experimentation and
debriefing leading to positive learning outcomes. The above findings not only
support the results of a number of empirical studies that students following the
experimental teaching sequence had a greater gains compared with the control
sequence (e.g. Brown & Clement, 1991; Viennot & Rainson, 1999), but also offer
convincing evidence that it is possible to design and implement research-based
teaching-learning sequence with patterns of variation inherited that can be more
effective in promoting student learning of scientific concepts and helps
strengthening science education research. This area would possibly contribute
further knowledge to the field of phenomenography and seems to be valuable for
further research.

234

To conclude, creating the necessary conditions for students to understand

scientific phenomena is one of the aims of chemistry education. Teachers ways of
shaping the space of learning is essential to result in the convergence between the
intended, the enacted and the lived object of learning because it seems highly
probable that people need help thinking about their experiences and organising
them into some coherent view of the world (Bransford & Schwartz, 1999, p. 85).
It is by no means an easy task for teachers to derive an ideal teaching method from
some basic theories (Fok & Ki, 2005). Analysing research lessons based on
variation theory seems to be a way out. The present study provides empirical data
to support the power of variation theory as guiding principles for teachers to plan
their lessons in order to help students develop scientific conceptions and inquiry
skills through conducting scientific investigations. Additionally, this study reveals
that using certain patterns of variation (separation of aspects followed by fusion)
may be more conducive to student learning. Specifically, the findings of the
present study inform science teachers in planning investigations which involve
different task-pool results. If the result of each group (each part) consists of two
or more aspects, it seems to be better using a debriefing sequence which focuses on
a single aspect of all the parts first instead of focusing on all the aspects from one
part at the same time. Marton and Booth (1997) see learning as a process that goes
from the whole to the parts, and is based on discernment, and in turn experience
variation. With the experience of variation, parts are discerned from the whole, and
at the same time in relation to the whole (Tse et al., 2007). By experiencing
variation of the same aspect across different parts in the debriefing (while the
variation pattern in the experimentation is just the opposite same part different

235

aspect), in this way, the parts can be discerned from another dimension,
generating a more differentiated and more integrated whole.

Though the findings in the present study are quite subject-specific, the
methodology of the variation theory is applicable to various science subject
domains. Furthermore, the appropriate pattern of variation depends not only on the
choice and the level of difficulties of the object of learning, but also on the prior
knowledge of the students on scientific terms. The ability to interpret a scientific
concept is clearly an essential prerequisite for using the concept to make complex
inferences or to do any scientific work with it (Reif, 1995, p.18). Knowing well
the students ability in interpreting scientific concepts, adjusting the object of
learning and the patterns of variation constituted in the lessons is not an easy task.
Teachers therefore need to review the object of learning and their pedagogical
designs from time to time so that a more effective learning condition could be
created to help students develop the capabilities of seeing and acting in powerful
ways so as to rise to the challenges of the global society.

236

Reference
Abimbola, I. O. (1988). The problem of terminology in the study of student
conceptions in science. Science Education, 72(2), 175-184.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1979). Science: a way of knowing. The Science Teacher, 46(6),
23-25.
Allessi, S. M. & Trollip, S. R. (1991). Computer-based instruction: Methods and
development (2nd Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Alters, B. J. (1997). Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 34(1), 39-55.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1998). Blueprints
for reform: Science, mathematics and technology education. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Ametller, J., Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2007). Using perspectives on subject learning to
inform the design of subject teaching: an example from science education.
Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 479-492.
Andersson, B. (1990). Pupils conceptions of matter and its transformations (age
1216). Studies in Science Education, 18, 5385.
Andersson, B. & Bach, F. (2005). On designing and evaluating teaching sequences
taking geometrical optics as an example. Science Education, 89(2), 196-218.
Andersson, B., Bach, F., Hagman, M., Olander, C. & Wallin, A. (2003). Discussing
a rationale for the design of teaching sequences: geometrical optics as an
example. Paper presented at the Meeting of the European Science Education
Research Association, August 2003, Noordwijkerhout, NL, as part of the
symposium Improving Science Teaching Through Research.
Andersson, B. & Wallin, A. (2006). On developing content-oriented theories
taking biological evolution as an example. International Journal of Science
Education, 28(6), 673 695.
Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) (1984). Science in school at age 15, report
no. 2. London: Department of Education and Science.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt,
Reinhart and Winston.
Barab, S. & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: putting a stake in the
ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 114.

237

Barke, H. D., Hazari, A. & Yitbarek, S. (2009). Misconceptions in chemistry:

Addressing perceptions in chemical education. Berlin Heidelberg: SpringerVerlag.
Barker, V. (1995). A longitudinal study of 16-18 year olds understanding of basic
chemical ideas. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis. Department of Educational Studies,
University of York.
Barker, V. (2000). Beyond appearances: Students misconceptions about basic
chemical ideas. A report prepared for the Royal Society of Chemistry.
Available at http://www.chemsoc.org/networks/learnnet/miscon.htm (accessed
July 2004).
Bell, B. & Brook, A. (1984). Aspects of secondary students understanding of plant
nutrition: Full report. Leeds: Childrens learning in science project, Centre for
Studies in Science & Mathematics Education. University of Leeds.
Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B. & Silberstein, J. (1987). Students visualization of a
chemical reaction. Education in Chemistry, 24, 117-120.
Ben-Zvi, R. & Hofstein, A. (1996). Strategies for remediating learning difficulties
in chemistry. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving
teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 109-119). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Ben-Zvi, R., Hofstein, A., Samuel, D. & Kempa, R. F. (1977). Modes of
instruction in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
14, 433-439.
Ben-Zvi, R., Silberstein, J. & Mamlok, R. (1993). A model of thermal equilibrium:
a tool for the introduction of thermodynamics. Journal of Chemical Education,
70(1), 31-34.
Birk, J. P. & Kurtz, M. J. (1999). Effect of experience on retention and elimination
of misconceptions about molecular structure and bonding. Journal of Chemical
Education, 76(1), 124-128.
Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: a theory of knowledge. Journal of
Chemical Education, 63, 221-252.
Bodner, G. M. (1991). I have found you an argument. Journal of Chemical
Education, 68, 385-388.
Booth, G. (2001). Is inquiry the answer? The Science Teacher, 68(7), 5759.
Booth, S. (1997). On phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education
Research and Development, 16(2), 135-158.

238

Bowden, J., DallAlba, G., Martin, E., Masters, G., Laurillard, D., Marton, F.,
Ramsden, P. & Stephanou, A. (1992). Displacement, velocity, and frames of
reference: phenomenographic studies of students understanding and some
implications for teaching and assessment. American Journal of Physics, 60,
262-268.
Bowden, J. & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning: Beyond quality and
competence in higher education. London: Kogan Page.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain,
mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., Vye, N. J. & Sherwood, R. D. (1999). New
approaches to instruction: because wisdom cant be told. In S. Vosniadou & A.
Ortong (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 470-497). NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Bransford, J. D. & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: a simple proposal
with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education: a Publication of
the American Educational Research Association, 24, 61100.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: theoretical and methodological
challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal
of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141178.
Brown, D. & Clement, J. (1991). Classroom teaching experiments in mechanics. In
R. Duit, F. Goldberg & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning:
Theoretical and empirical studies (pp. 380-397). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
Cachapuz, A. F. C. & Maskill, R. (1987). Detecting changes with learning in the
organisation of knowledge: use of word association tests to follow the learning
of collision theory. International Journal of Science Education, 9(4), 491-504.
akmaki, G. (2005). A cross-sectional study of the understanding of chemical
kinetics among Turkish secondary and undergraduate students. Unpublished Ph.
D. thesis. The University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.
akmaki, G. (2010). Identifying alternative conceptions of chemical kinetics
among secondary school and undergraduate students in Turkey. Journal of
Chemical Education, 87(4), 449-455.
akmaki, G., Donnelly, J. & Leach, J. (2003). A cross-sectional study of the
understanding of the relationships between concentration and reaction rate
among Turkish secondary and undergraduate students. Paper presented at the
European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) conference,
August 2003, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands.
akmaki, G., Leach, J. & Donnelly, J. (2006). Students ideas about reaction rate
and its relationship with concentration or pressure. International Journal of
Science Education, 28(15), 1795-1815.

239

alik, M., Kolomu, A. & Karaglge, Z. (2010). The effect of conceptual change
pedagogy on students conceptions of rate of reaction. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 19(5), 422-433.
Caramazza, A., McCloskey, M. & Green, B. (1981). Naive beliefs in
sophisticated subjects: misconceptions about the trajectories of objects.
Cognition, 9(2), 117-123.
Carlgren, I. & Marton, F. (2001). Lrare av imorgon [Teachers of tomorrow].
Stockholm: Lrarfrbundets Frlag.
Carstensen, A.-K. & Bernhard, J. (2007). Critical aspects for learning in an electric
circuit theory course an example of applying learning theory and designbased educational research in developing engineering education. Paper
accepted for publication in the proceedings of the first International Conference
on Research in Engineering Education (ICREE), June 2007, Honolulu.
Chik, P. M. P. (2006). Differences in learning as a function of differences between
hierarchical and sequential organisation of the content taught. Unpublished Ph.
D. thesis. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Chik, P. M. P. & Lo, M. L. (2004). Simultaneity and the enacted object of learning.
In F. Marton & A. B. M. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of
learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton & Co.
Clark, R. L., Clough, M. P. & Berg, C. A. (2000). Modifying cookbook labs. The
Science Teacher, 67(7), 40-43.
Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with
students preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
30, 1241-1257.
Clement, J., Brown, D. E. & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are
misconceptions: finding anchoring conceptions for grounding instruction on
students intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 554-565.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., DiSessa, A., Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2003). Design
experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). The Jasper series as an
example of anchored instruction: theory, program description, and assessment
data. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 773-798.
Coll, R. K. & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding
amongst senior secondary and tertiary students: nature and origins. Teaching
and Learning, 22(1), 48-60.

240

Collins, A. (1999). The changing infrastructure of education research. In E. C.

Lagemann & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems
and possibilities (pp. 289298). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Costa, A. L. (1984). Mediating the metacognitive. Educational Leadership, 42(3),
57-62.
Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experiences of learning.
London. New York: Routledge.
Crowell, S. (1989). A new way of thinking: the challenge of the future.
Educational Leadership, 47(1), 60-63.
Curriculum Corporation (1994). Science A curriculum profile for Australian
schools. Carlton: Curriculum Corporation.
Curriculum Development Council (2001). Learning to learn: Life-long learning
and whole-person development. Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Council.
Curriculum Development Council (2002a). Science education - Key learning area
chemistry curriculum guide (Secondary 4-5). Hong Kong: Curriculum
Development Council.
Curriculum Development Council (2002b). Science education - Key learning area
curriculum guide (Primary 1 - Secondary 3). Hong Kong: Curriculum
Development Council.
Curriculum Development Council (2007). Syllabuses for secondary schools
Chemistry (Advanced Level). Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Council.
Available
at
http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_2855/07alchem-e.pdf (accessed September 2007).
Curriculum Development Council & Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment
Authority (2004). Proposed biology, chemistry, physics and science subject
frameworks for the New Senior Secondary curriculum - 1st draft (for
consultation). Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Council.
Curriculum Development Council & Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment
Authority (2007). Chemistry curriculum and assessment guide (Secondary 4-6).
Hong Kong: Curriculum Development Council.
Dahlgren, L. O. (1975). Qualitative differences in learning as a function of
content-oriented guidance (Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 15).
Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Dahlgren, L. O. (1984). Outcomes of learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell & N.
Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 19-35). Edinburgh: Scottish
Academic Press.

241

Dahlgren, L. O. & Marton, F. (1978). Students conceptions of subject matter: an

aspect of learning and teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher
Education, 3, 25-35.
Davies, P. & Dunnill, R. (2008). Learning study as a model of collaborative
practice in initial teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 34(1),
316.
De Vos, W. & Verdonk, A. H. (1986). A new road to reactions: Part III. Teaching
the heat effect of reactions. Journal of Chemical Education, 63(11), 972-974.
DeMeo, S. (2001). Beyond density: an inquiry-based activity involving students
searching for relationships. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(2), 201-203.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological methods: A sourcebook (2nd Edition). New
York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: an emerging
paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
Deters, K. M. (2005). Student opinions regarding inquiry-based labs. Journal of
Chemical Education, 82(8), 1178-1180.
Driver, R. (1981). Pupils alternative frameworks in science. European Journal of
Science Education, 3(1), 93101.
Driver, R. & Bell, B. (1986). Students thinking and the learning of science: a
constructivist view. School Sciences Review, 67, 443-456.
Driver, R. & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms. A review of the literature
related to concept development in adolescent science students: a constructivist
view. Studies in Science Education, 5(2), 61-84.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young peoples images of
science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P. & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making
sense of secondary science: Research into childrens ideas. London: Routledge.
Duit, R. (1999). Conceptual change approaches in science education. In W.
Schnotz, S. Vosniadou & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual
change (pp. 263-282). Amsterdam: Pergamon. An imprint of Elsevier Science.
Duit, R. & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: a powerful framework for
improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science
Education, 25(6), 671-688.
Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography STCSE, students and teachers conceptions and
science
education.
Available
at
http://www.ipn.unikiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html (accessed December 2010)

242

Ebenezer, J. (2001). A hypermedia environment to explore and negotiate students

conceptions: animation of the solution process of table salt. Journal of Science
Education and Technology, 10(1), 7392.
Ebenezer, J. V. & Fraser, D. M. (2001). First year chemical engineering students
conceptions of energy in solution processes: phenomenographic categories for
common knowledge construction. Science Education, 85, 509-535.
Edgeworth, R. L. & Edgeworth, M. (1811). Essays on practical education (3rd
Edition). London: Johnson.
Education Commission (2000). Review of education system: Reform proposals:
Consultation document. Hong Kong: The Commission.
Enger, S. K. & Yager, R. E. (2001). Assessing student understanding in science: a
standards-based K-12 handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Entwistle, N. (1997). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D.
Hounsell & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning - Implications for
teaching and studying in higher education (2nd Edition) (pp. 3-22). Edinburgh:
Scottish Academic Press.
Fazey, J. & Marton, F. (2002). Understanding the space of experiential variation.
Active Learning in Higher Education, 3, 234-250.
Fensham, P. J. (1992). Science and technology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook
of research on curriculum (pp. 789829). New York: Macmillan.
Firestone, W. (1987). Meaning in method: the rhetoric of quantitative and
qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 16(7), 16-21.
Fishman, B., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J. & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating
a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. Journal of the
Learning Science, 13, 43-76.
Fok, A. K. & Ki, W. W. (2005). Learning teaching in teaching and learning (
). In W. W. Ki, S. K. Tse & M. S. K. Shum (Eds.), Variation
theory and the space of learning () (pp. 141-158). Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Fraser, D. M., Linder, C., Allison, S., Coombes, H. & Case, J. (2006). Using
variation to enhance learning in engineering. The International Journal of
Engineering Education, 22(1), 102-108.
Friedler, Y. (1984). Problems and processes in learning and teaching in the biology
laboratory in Israeli high schools. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, Hebrew
University, Jerusalem (in Hebrew with English summary).
Friedler, Y. & Tamir, P. (1986). Teaching basic concepts of scientific research to
high school students. Journal of Biological Education, 20(4), 263-269.

243

Fuhrman, M., Novick, S., Lunetta, V. & Tamir, P. (1978). The Laboratory
structure and task Analysis Inventory (LAI). (Technical Report 14). Iowa City,
IA: Science Education Center, University of Iowa.
Furio, C. & Calatayud, M. L. (1996). Difficulties with the geometry and polarity of
molecules. Journal of Chemical Education, 73, 36-41.
Gabel, D. L. (1992). Modeling with magnets - a unified approach to chemistry
problem solving. The Science Teacher, March, 5863.
Gabel, D. L. (1993). ChemSource, Vol. 1 (pp. 1-28). Washington, DC: American
Chemical Society.
Garnett, P. J., Garnett, P. J. & Hackling, M. W. (1995). Students alternative
conceptions in chemistry: a review of research and implications for teaching
and learning. Studies in Science Education, 25, 69-95.
Gay, L. R. & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research: Competencies for analysis
and application (6th Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Gibbings, P. D. (2008). Experience of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in virtual
space: A phenomenographical study. Queensland university of Technology,
Brisbane.
Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. & Fensham, P. (1982). Childrens science and its
consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633.
Gilbert, J. K. & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative
conceptions: changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science
Education, 10, 6198.
Gilbert, J. K. & Zylbersztajn, A. (1985). A conceptual framework for science
education: the case study of force and movement. European Journal of Science
Education, 7(2), 107-120.
Griffiths, A. K. & Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade 12 students misconceptions
relating to fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 29, 611-628.
Goldsworthy, A., Watson, R. & Wood-Robinson, V. (2000). Developing
understanding in scientific enquiry / investigations. London: Kings College.
Good, R. (1991). Editorial. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(5), 387.
Gowin, D. B. (1983). Misconceptions, metaphors, and conceptual change: once
more with feeling. In H. Helm & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Proceedings of the
international seminar on misconceptions in science and mathematics (pp. 3941). Ithaca, NY: Department of Education, Cornell University.

244

Grobman, H. (1970). Developmental curriculum projects: Decision points and

processes. Itasca, Illinois: Peacock Publishers, Inc.
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newburry
Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Gurtwistch, A. (1964). The field of consciousness. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University
Press.
Guo, J. P. (2010). On the dilemma of similar or different: The use of variation
theory in designing multiple examples for mathematics learning. Unpublished
Ph. D. thesis. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. (1999). Construing experience through
meaning - A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell.
Halloun, I. A. (2004). Modeling theory in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Hand, B. M. & Treagust, D. F. (1988). Application of a conceptual conflict
strategy to enhance student learning of acids and bases. Research in Science
Education, 18, 53-63.
Harlen, W. (1985). Helping children to plan investigations. In W. Harlen (Ed.),
Primary science: Taking the plunge (pp. 58-74). London: Heinemann.
Hashweh, M. (1988). Descriptive studies of students conceptions in science.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 121-134.
Hegarty-Hazel, E. (1990). Overview. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student
laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 3-26). London: Rutledge.
Henry, N. W. (1975). Objectives for laboratory work. In P. L. Gardner (Ed.), The
structure of science education (pp. 61-75). Hawthorn, Victoria: Longman.
Herron, J. D. (1996). The chemistry classroom: Formulas for successful teaching.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Herron, J. D. & Nurrenbern, S. C. (1999). Chemical education research: improving
chemistry learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(10), 1353-1361.
Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. School Review, 79, 171-212.
Hodson, D. (1985). Philosophy of science, science and science education. Studies
in Science Education, 12, 25-57.
Hodson, D. (1991). Practical work in science: time for a reappraisal. Studies in
Science Education, 19, 175-184.

245

Hofstein, A. & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science

teaching: neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2),
201-217.
Holmqvist, M. (2011). Teachers learning in a learning study. Instructional Science,
39(4), 497511.
Holmqvist, M., Gustavsson, L. & Wernberg, A. (2007). Generative learning:
learning beyond the learning situation. Educational Action Research, 15(2),
181-208.
Huber, R. A. & Moore, C. J. (2001). A model for extending hands-on science to be
inquiry based. School Science and Mathematics, 101(1), 32-42.
Hurd, P. D. (1969). New directions in teaching secondary school science. Chicago,
Rand McNally.
Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: new minds for a changing world. Science
Education, 82, 407-416.
Hwang, B. T. & Liu, Y. S. (1994). A study of proportional reasoning and selfregulation instruction on students conceptual change in conceptions of
solution. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association
for Research in Science Teaching, March 1994, Anaheim, CA.
Johansson, B., Marton, F. & Svensson, L. (1985). An approach to describing
learning as a change between qualitatively different conceptions. In A. L. Pines
& T. H. West (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 233-257).
New York: Academic Press.
Johnston, A. T. & Southerland, S. A. (2001). The multiple meanings of tentative
science. Paper presented at the 6th meeting of the International History,
Philosophy, and Science Teaching Organization, November 2001, Denver, CO,
United State.
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what
they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 7583.
Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: a changing
response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701-705.
Johnstone, A. H. & Wham A. J. B. (1982). Demands of practical work. Education
in Chemistry, 19(3), 71-73.
Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L. & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A
constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jones, V. G. (1981). A study of certain aspects of curriculum innovation in the
physical sciences in the light of the Popper-Kuhn debate on the nature of
science. Unpublished M.Ed. dissertation, Kings College, University of London.

246

Jones, M. G., Carter, G. & Rua, M. J. (2000). Exploring the development of

conceptual ecologies: communities of concepts related to convection and heat.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 139-159.
Justi, R. (2002). Teaching and learning chemical kinetics. In J. K. Gilbert, O. de
Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust & J. H. van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education:
Towards research-based practice (pp. 293-315). Kluwer Academic Publishers:
Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Kellogg, R. T. (1995). Cognitive psychology. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
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.
Kempa, R. F. & Hodgson, G. H. (1976). Levels of concept acquisition, and concept
motivation in students chemistry. British Journal of Educational Psychology,
46, 253-260.
Ki, W. W. (2007). The enigma of Cantonese tones: how intonation language
speakers can be assisted to discern them. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis. Hong
Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Ki, W. W., Lam, H. C., Chung, A. L. S., Tse, S. K., Ko, P. Y., Lau, E. C. C., Chou,
P. W. Y., Lai, A. C. Y. & Lai, S. M. S. (2003). Structural awareness, variation
theory and ICT support. L1: Educational studies in language and literature,
special issue: ICT and the transformation of the L1 curriculum: Implications
for teacher educators, 3(1-2), 5378.
Ki, W. W., Tse, S. K., Shum, M. S. K. & Lam, H. C. (2005). Variation theory and
the space of learning (). In W. W. Ki, S. K. Tse & M. S.
K. Shum (Eds.), Variation theory and the space of learning (
) (pp. 1-19). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Kinchin, I. M. & Alias, M. (2005). Exploiting variations in concept map
morphology as a lesson-planning tool for trainee teachers in higher education.
Journal of In-Service Education, 31(3), 569592.
Kirik, . T. & Boz, Y. (2012). Cooperative learning instruction for conceptual
change in the concepts of chemical kinetics. Chemistry Education: Research
and Practice, 13, 221-236.
Kirschner, P. & Meester, M. (1988). Laboratory approaches. Higher Education,
17(1), 81-98.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, C. M. & Fredricks, J. (1998).
Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: initial attempts by middle school
students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313-350.
Kurz, J. S. (2001). Open-ended inquiry. The Science Teacher, 68(1), 62-66.
247

Kwok, L. Y. P. (2010). A phenomenographic analysis of variations in secondary

five students conceptions of web authoring techniques and applications. Hong
Kong Teachers Centre Journal, 9, 107-118.
Laudan, L. (1990). Science and relativism: Some key controversies in the
philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lam, S. Y. (2004). The use of variation theory to improve student understanding of
acids and bases. Unpublished M. Ed. dissertation. Hong Kong: The University
of Hong Kong.
Lambert, F. L. (2002). Disorder - a cracked crutch for supporting entropy
discussions. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(2), 187192.
Laws, P. M. (1996). Undergraduate science education: a review of research.
Studies in Science Education, 28, 1-85.
Lawson, A. E. (1975). Developing formal thought through biology teaching.
American Biology Teacher, 37, 411-419, 429.
Lawson, A. E. & Renner, J. W. (1975). Piagetian theory and biology teaching.
American Biology Teacher, 37, 336-343.
Layton, D. (1990). Students laboratory practice and the history and philosophy of
science. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science
curriculum (pp. 37-59). London: Routledge.
Lazarowitz, R. & Tamir, P. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in
science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and
learning (pp. 94-128). New York: Macmillan.
Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2000). The concept of learning demand as a tool for
designing teaching sequences. Paper presented at the meeting Research-based
teaching sequences, November 2000, Universit Paris VII, France.
Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences:
an approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social
constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38(1),
115-142.
Leach, J., Scott, P., Ametller, J., Hind, A. & Lewis, J. (2006). Implementing and
evaluating teaching interventions: towards research evidence-based practice? In
R. Millar, J. Leach, J. Osborne & M. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Improving subject
teaching: Lessons from research in science education. Oxon: Routledge.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students and teachers conceptions of the nature of
science: a review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29,
331-359.

248

Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning, and values. Norwood,

New Jersey: Ablex.
Lijnse, P. (2000). Didactics of science: the forgotten dimension in science
education research? In R. Millar, J. Leach & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving
science education The contribution of research (pp. 308326). Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Lijnse, P. & Klaassen, K. (2004). Didactical structures as an outcome of research
on teaching-learning sequences? International Journal of Science Education
26(5), 537-554.
Linder, C. & Erickson, G. L. (1989). A study of tertiary physics students
conceptualizations of sound. International Journal of Science Education, 11
(special issue), 491-501.
Linder, C., Fraser, D. & Pang, M. F. (2006). Using a variation approach to enhance
physics learning in a college classroom. The Physics Teacher, 44(9), 589-592.
Linn, M. C. (1997). Learning and instruction in science education: taking
advantage of technology. In D. Tobin & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), International
handbook of science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Lo, M. L. (2006). Variation for the improvement of teaching and learning. Keynote
presentation presented at the EARLI Special Interest Group 9
Phenomenography and Variation Theory Biennial Workshop 2006, December
2006, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Lo, M. L. (2009). The development of the learning study approach in classroom
research in Hong Kong. Educational Research Journal ,
Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, CUHK, 24(1), Summer 2009.
Lo, M. L., Chik, P. M. P. & Pang, M. F. (2006). Patterns of variation in teaching
the colour of light to primary 3 students. Instructional Science, 34(1), 1-19.
Lo, M. L., Hung, H. H. Y. & Chik, P. M. P. (2007). Improving teaching and
learning through a learning study Using patterns of variation to teach electrochemical series in Hong Kong. Curriculum Perspectives, 27(3), 4962.
Lo, M. L., Kwok, W. Y., Pong, W. Y., Ko, P. Y. & Wong, C. Y. (2008). The
variation for the improvement of teaching and learning (VITAL) project: Final
report. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Lo, M. L., Marton, F., Pang, M. F. & Pong W. Y. (2004). Toward a pedagogy of
learning. In F. Marton & A. B. M. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the
space of learning (pp. 189-225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

249

Lo, M. L. & Pong, W. Y. (2005). Catering for individual differences: building on

variation. In M. L. Lo, W. Y. Pong & P. M. P. Chik (Eds.), For each and
everyone: Catering for individual differences through learning studies (pp. 926). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Lo, M. L., Pong, W. Y. & Chik, P. M. P. (Eds.) (2005). For each and everyone:
Catering for individual differences through learning studies. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong University Press.
Lowery, L. F. (1985). The everyday science sourcebook. Palo Alto, CA: Dale
Seymour.
Lucas, U. (2000). Skimming the surface or diving deep: Students approaches to
learning within introductory accounting. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual
Congress of the European Accounting Association, March 2000, Munich,
Germany.
Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: historical perspectives and
contexts for contemporary teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.),
International Handbook of Science Education vol. 1 (pp. 249-264). Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Lybeck, L. (1981). Arkimedes i klassen. En mnespedagogisk berttelse.
[Archimedes in the classroom]. Gteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothogurgensis.
Lybeck, L., Marton, F., Strhmdahl, H. & Tullberg, A. (1988). The
phenomenography of the mole concept in chemistry. In P. Ramsden (Ed.),
Improving learning: New perspectives (pp. 81-108). London: Kogan Page.
Marton, F. (1974). Inlrning och studiefrdighet [Study skills and learning].
Rapporter frn Pedagogiska institutionen. Gteborgs Universitet.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around
us. Instructional Science, 10, 177-200.
Marton, F. (1988). Describing and improving learning. In R. R. Schmeck (Ed.),
Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 53-82). New York: Plenum Press.
Marton, F. (1992). Phenomenography and the art of teaching all things to all
men. Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 5, 253-267.
Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.),
The international encyclopedia of education vol. 8 (2nd Edition) (pp. 44244429). Oxford: Pergamon.
Marton, F. (2002). Afterword. In M. L. Lo, W. Y. Pong, F. Marton, A. Leung, P. Y.
Ko, F. P. Ng, M. F. Pang, P. M. P. Chik, F. S. F. Chan & A. N. C. Tang (Eds.),
Catering for individual differencesbuilding on variation (the first findings),
INSTEP, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong: Hong Kong.

250

Marton, F., Beaty, E. & DallAlba, G. (1993). Conceptions of learning.

International Journal of Educational Research, 19, 277-300.
Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Marton, F., Fensham, P. & Chaiklin, S. (1994). A Nobels eye view of scientific
intuition: discussions with the Nobel prize-winners in Physics, Chemistry, and
Medicine (1970-1986). International Journal of Science Education, 16, 457473.
Marton, F. & Pang, M. F. (1999). Two faces of variation. Paper presented at 8th
European Conference for Learning and Instruction, August 1999, Gteborg
University, Gteborg, Sweden.
Marton, F. & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 193-220.
Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2008). The idea of phenomenography and the
pedagogy of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook
of research on conceptual change (pp. 533559). London: Routledge.
Marton, F. & Tsui, A. B. M. (Eds.) (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of
learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Matthews, M. R. (1997). Editorial. Science and Education, 6(4), 323-329.
Maturana, H. R. & Varela, F. J. (1988). The tree of knowledge. Boston: New
Science Library.
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interpretive approach.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
McNally, D. W. (1974). Piaget education and teaching. Sydney: Argus &
Robertson.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in
education (2nd Edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Messick, S. (1992). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation
of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 1323.
Millar, R. (1989). Constructive criticisms. International Journal of Science
Education, 1, 587-596.
Millar, R. & Osborne, J. (Eds.) (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the
future. The report of a seminar series funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
London: Kings College London, School of Education. Available at
http://www.kcl.ac.uk.education (accessed March 2006).

251

Millar, R., Tiberghien, A. & Le Marchal, J. (2002). Varieties of labwork: a way of

profiling labwork tasks. In D. Psillos & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and
learning in the science laboratory (pp. 9-20). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Minstrell, J. A. (1984). Teaching for the development of understanding of ideas:
forces on moving objects. In Anderson, C. W. (Ed.), Observing science
classrooms: Observing science perspectives from research and practice. ERIC
Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio.
Minstrell, J. A. (1989). Teaching science for understanding. In Resnick, L. &
Klopfer, L. (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research
(pp. 129-149). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Minstrell, J. A. (1992). Facets of students knowledge and relevant instruction. In
R. Duit, F. Goldberg & H. Neidderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning:
Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 110-127). Kiel, Germany: IPN.
Minstrell, J. A. & Van Zee, E. H. (2000). Inquiry into inquiry learning and
teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the
Advancement of Science Press.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students dont learn chemistry. Journal of
Chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196.
Nakhleh, M. B. (1994). Students models of matter in the context of acid-base
chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 71, 495-499.
National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2003). Standards for science
teacher
preparation.
Available
at
http://www.nsta.org/main/pdfs/NSTAstandards2003.pdf (accessed April 2006).
Neuman, D. (1987). The origin of arithmetic skills: A phenomenographic approach.
(Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 62). Gteborg, Sweden: Acta
Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Niaz, M. (1995). Cognitive conflict as a teaching strategy in solving chemistry
problems: a dialectic-constructivist perspective. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32, 959970.
Ng, D. F. P., Tsui, A. B. M. & Marton, F. (2001). Two faces of the reed relay:
exploring the effects of the medium of instruction. In D. A. Watkins & J. B.
Biggs (Eds.), Teaching the Chinese learner: Psychological and pedagogical
perspectives (pp.135-159). Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.

252

Novak, J. D. (1987). Proceedings of the second international seminar on

misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics, July
1987, Vol. II. Ithaca, NY: Department of Education, Cornell University.
Novick, S. & Nussbaum, J. (1978). Junior high school pupils understanding of the
particulate nature of matter: an interview study. Science Education, 62, 273281.
Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1982). Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict
and accommodation: toward a principled teaching strategy. Instructional
Science, 11, 183-200.
Olson, D. R. (1973). What is worth knowing and what can be taught. School
Review, 82, 27-43.
Osborne, R. J. & Cosgrove, M. M. (1983). Childrens conceptions of the changes
of state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(9), 825-838.
Osborne, R. J. & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). The use of models in science teaching.
School Science Review, 62, 57-67.
Osborne, R. J. & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: a generative process.
Science Education, 67, 489-508.
Padilla, M. J. (1990). Science process skills. National Association of Research in
Science Teaching Publication: Research Matters - to the Science Teacher No.
9004.
Pang, M. F. (2002). Making learning possible: the use of variation in the teaching
of school economics. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis. Hong Kong: The University
of Hong Kong.
Pang, M. F. (2003). Two faces of variation: on continuity in the phenomenographic
movement [1]. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(2), 145-156.
Pang, M. F. (2010). Boosting student financial literacy: benefits of learning study.
Instructional Science, 38(6), 659677.
Pang, M. F. & Lo, M. L. (2012). Learning study: helping teachers to use theory,
develop professionally, and produce new knowledge to be shared. Instructional
Science, 40(3), 589-606.
Pang, M. F. & Marton, F. (2003). Beyond lesson study: comparing two ways of
facilitating the grasp of some economic concepts. Instructional Science, 31(3),
175-194.
Pang, M. F. & Marton, F. (2005). Learning theory as teaching resource: enhancing
students understanding of economic concepts. Instructional Science, 33, 159191.

253

Pang, M. F. & Marton, F. (2007). On the paradox of pedagogy: the relative

contribution of teachers and learners to learning. Iskolakultra Online, 1, 1-29.
Patrick, K. (1998). Teaching and learning: the construction of an object of study.
Unpublished Ph. D. thesis. Australia: University of Melbourne.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage Publications.
Peterson, R. F., Treagust, D. F. & Garnett, P. (1989). Development and application
of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and grade-12 students
concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301-314.
Pfundt, H. (1982). Untersuchungen zu den Vorstellungen, die Schler vom Aufbau
der Stoffe entwickeln [Investigations of the concepts students develop about
the structure of matter]. Der Physikunterricht, 26, 51-65.
Pfundt, H. & Duit, R. (2000). Bibliography: Students alternative frameworks and
science education (5th Edition). Kiel, Germany: Institt fr die Pdagogik der
Naturwissenschaften (IPN).
Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought: Equilibration of cognitive structures.
New York: Viking Penguin.
Pong, W. Y. (1999). The dynamics of awareness. Paper presented at the 8th
European Conference for Learning and Instruction, August 1999, Gteborg
University, Gteborg, Sweden.
Pong, W. Y. & Marton, F. (2001). Conceptions as ways of being aware of
something - accounting for inter- and intra-contextual shifts in the meaning of
two economic phenomena. Unpublished manuscript.
Pong, W. Y. & Morris, P. (2002). Accounting for differences in achievement. In F.
Marton & P. Morris (Eds.), What matters? Discovering critical conditions of
classroom learning (pp. 9-18). Gteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982).
Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual
change. Science Education, 66(22), 211-227.
Preece, P. F. W. (1984). Intuitive science: learned or triggered? European Journal
of Science Education, 6, 710.
Ragsdale, R. O. & Vanderhooft, J. C. (1998). Small-scale kinetic study of the
catalyzed decomposition of hydrogen peroxide. Journal of Chemical Education,
75(2), 215-216.

254

Ratcliffe, M., Osborne, J., Collins, S., Millar, R. & Duschl, R. (2001). Evidencebased practice in Science Education (EPSE). Teaching pupils ideas-aboutscience: clarifying learning goals and improving pupil performance. Paper
presented at the Third Conference of the European Science Education Research
Association (ESERA), August 2001, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Reif, F. (1995). Millikan lecture 1994: Understanding and teaching important
scientific thought processes. American Journal of Physics, 63(1), 1732.
Renstrm, L. (1988). Conceptions of matter: A phenomenographic approach.
(Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 69). Gteborg, Sweden: Acta
Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Renstrm, L., Andersson, B. & Marton, F. (1990). Students conceptions of matter.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 555-569.
Roberts, D. A. (1982). Developing the concept of curriculum emphases in
science education. Science Education, 66, 243-260.
Robinson, W. R. (2000). Hidden insights in the science education research
literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(5), 556-557.
Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer.
Rovio-Johansson, A. (1999). Constituting different meanings of the content of
teaching and learning in higher education. Paper presented at 8th European
Conference for Learning and Instruction, August 1999, Gteborg University,
Gteborg, Sweden.
Rovio-Johansson, A. & Lumsden, M. (2007). To enhance students learning
outcomes in accounting by a new teaching methodology. Paper presented at the
19th Nordic Academy of Management Conference, August 2007, Bergen,
Norway.
Rudd, II, J. A., Greenbowe, T. J., Hand, B. M. & Legg, M. J. (2001). Using the
science writing heuristic to move toward an inquiry-based laboratory
curriculum: an example from physical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical
Education, 78(12), 1680-1686.
Runesson, U. & Marton, F. (2002). The object of learning and the space of
variation. In F. Marton & P. Morris (Eds.), What matters? Discovering critical
conditions of classroom learning. Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis
Gothoburgensis.
Slj, R. (1975). Qualitative differences in learning as a function of the learners
conception of the task. (Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 14.)
Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

255

Slj, R. (1982). Learning and understanding: A study of differences in

constructing meaning from a text. Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis
Gothoburgensis.
Slj, R. (1988). Learning in education settings: methods of inquiry. In P.
Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning: New perspectives. London: Kogan Page.
Slj, R. (1997). Talk as data and practice - a critical look at phenomenographic
inquiry and the appeal to experience. Higher Education Research and
Development, 16(2), 173-190.
Sanderson, B. A. & Kratochvil, D. W. (1971). Science - A process approach,
product development report No. 8. American Institutes for Research in the
Behavioral Sciences, Palo Alto, C.A.
Saunders, G. L., Cavallo, A. L. & Abraham, M. R. (1999). Relationship among
epistemological beliefs, gender, approaches to learning, and implementation of
instruction in chemistry laboratory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of
the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, March 1999,
Boston, MA.
Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science inquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F.
Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Schwartz, D. & Bransford, J. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction,
16(4), 475522.
Science Education Section, Education and Manpower Bureau (2005). NSS
Understanding and interpreting the chemistry curriculum - Draft of NSS
chemistry curriculum (as at 24 November 2005). Hong Kong: Government
Logistics Department.
Selmes, C., Ashton, B. G., Meredith, H. M. & Newal, A. (1969). Attitudes to
science and scientists. School Science Review, 51, 7-22.
Shavelson, R., Baxter, G. & Pine, J. (1992). Performance assessment: political
rhetoric and measurement reality. Educational Researcher, 21(4), 22-27.
Shulman, L. S. & Tamir, P. (1973). Research on teaching in the natural sciences. In
R. M. W. Travers (Ed.), Second handbook of research on teaching (pp. 10981140). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Songer, N. B. (1996). Exploring learning opportunities in coordinated networkenhanced classrooms: a case of kids as global scientists. The Journal of the
Learning Sciences, 5, 297-328.

256

Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In

R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive
psychology and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: State University
of New York Press.
Strmdahl, H. (1996). On mole and amount of substance. A study of the dynamics
of concept formation and concept attainment. (Gteborg Studies in Educational
Sciences, 106). Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Strmdahl, H. (2012). On discerning critical elements, relationships and shifts in
attaining scientific terms: the challenge of polysemy/homonymy and reference.
Science & Education, 21, 5585.
Strmdahl, H., Tullberg, A. & Lybeck, L. (1994). The qualitatively different
conceptions of 1 mol. International Journal of Science Education, 16(1), 17-26.
Svensson, L. (1976). Study skill and learning. (Gteborg Studies in Educational
Sciences, 19). Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications.
Taber, K. S. (2002). Chemical misconceptions - prevention, diagnosis and cure.
Volume I: theoretical background. Royal Society of Chemistry.
Taber, K. S. (2003). Responding to alternative conceptions in the classroom.
School Science Review, 84(308), 99-108.
Taber, K. S. (2009). Progressing science education: Constructing the scientific
research programme into the contingent nature of learning science. Dordrecht:
Springer.
Talanquer, V. (2006). Commonsense chemistry: A model for understanding
students alternative conceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(5), 811816.
Tamir, P. (1977). How are the laboratories used? Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 14, 311-316.
Tamir, P. (1990). Evaluation of student work and its role in developing policy. In E.
Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp.
242-266). London: Rutledge.
Tamir, P. & Lunetta, V. N. (1981). Inquiry-related tasks in high school science
laboratory handbooks. Science Education, 65(5), 477-484.
Tasker, R. & Dalton, R. (2006). Research into practice: visualisation of the
molecular world using animations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
7(2), 141159.

257

Taylor, C. (1996). Defining science: A rhetoric of demarcation. Madison, WI: The

University of Wisconsin Press.
Teichert, M. A. & Stacy, A. M. (2002). Promoting understanding of chemical
bonding and spontaneity through student explanation and integration of ideas.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 464-496.
Thelen, L. J. (1983). Values and valuing in science. Science Education, 67, 185192.
Theman, J. (1983). Uppfattningar av politisk makt [Conceptions of political power].
Gteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Thiele, R. B. & Treagust, D. F. (1994). An interpretive examination of high school
chemistry teachers analogical explanations. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 31, 227-242.
Treagust, D. F., Duit, R. & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Overview: research on students
preinstructional conceptions - the driving force for improving teaching and
learning in science and mathematics. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & B. J. Fraser
(Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 1-16).
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Tretter, T. R. & Jones, M. G. (2003). Relationships between inquiry-based
teaching and physical science standardized test scores. School Science and
Mathematics, 103(7), 345-350.
Tse, S. K., Marton, F., Ki, W. W. & Loh, E. K. Y. (2007). An integrative
perceptual approach for teaching Chinese characters. Instructional Science,
35(5), 375-406(32).
Tsui, A. B. M. (1995). Introducing classroom interaction. London: Penguin.
Tullberg, A. (1997). Teaching the mole. A phenomenographic inquiry into the
didactics of chemistry. (Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 118).
Gteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
Uzzell, P. S. (1978). The changing aims of science education. School Science
Review, 60, 7-20.
Van Driel, J. H. (2002). Students corpuscular conceptions in the context of
chemical equilibrium and chemical kinetics. Chemistry Education: Research
and Practice in Europe, 3, 201213.
Viennot, L. & Rainson, S. (1999). Design and evaluation of a research-based
teaching sequence: the superposition of electrics fields. International Journal
of Science Education, Conceptual Development in Science Education, 21(1), 116.

258

Viiri, J. & Savinainen, A. (2008). Teaching-learning sequences: a comparison of

learning demand analysis and educational reconstruction. Latin-American
Journal of Physics Education, 2(2), 80-86.
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, 37(2), 160176.
Vosniadou, S. (1999). Conceptual change research: state of the art and future
directions. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou & M. Carretero (Eds.), New
perspectives on conceptual change. Pergamon. An imprint of Elsevier Science.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, F. & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technologyenhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 53(4), 5-23.
Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J. & Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternative
conceptions in science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science
teaching and learning: A project of the National Science Teachers Association
(pp. 177-210). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Watts, D. M. & Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some childrens ideas about
force. Physics Education, 16(6), 360-365.
Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International
Journal of Education Research, 13, 21-39.
Wellman, B. (2001). Making science learning more science-like. In A. L. Costa
(Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (3rd Edition)
(pp. 159-163). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Wenestam, C. G. (1982). Childrens reactions to the word death. Paper presented
at the American Educational association Annual Meeting, New York.
Whitnell, R. M., Fernandes, E. A., Almassizadeh, F., Love, J. J. C., Dugan, B. M.,
Sawrey, B. A. & Wilson, K. R. (1994). Multimedia chemistry lectures. Journal
of Chemical Education, 71, 721-725.
Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction (7th
Edition). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Wood, D. A. (1975). A bibliography of chemical kinetics and equilibrium
instructional models. School Science and Mathematics, 75, 627-633.
Wood, R. (1991). Assessment and testing: A review of research. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

259

Woolnough, B. & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. Cambridge Science

Education Series. Cambridge University Press.
Wu, H. K. (2003). Linking the microscopic view of chemistry to real-life
experiences: Intertextuality in a high-school science classroom. Science
Education, 87(6), 868-891.
Wu, H. K., Krajcik, J. S. & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting conceptual
understanding of chemical representations: students use of a visualization tool
in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842.
Zoller, U. (1990). Students misunderstandings and misconceptions in college
freshman chemistry (general and organic). Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 27(10), 1053-1065.

260

APPENDIX 1
Timeline of Pilot Study (2007) and Main Study (2008)
Date
mid Apr 07

Pilot study

03-07 May 07
09 May 07

14, 16 May 07
(4A)
15, 17 May 07
(4B)

late May 07

Mid Jun 07
late Jun 07

11-12 Jul 07
early Apr 08

Main study

21-25 Apr 08
28 Apr 08

6, 9 May 08
(4C)
7, 8 May 08
(4D)

mid May 08
July 08

Work schedule

Construction and Validation of Pretest

Designing Lesson Plans

Distribution and Collection of Parent Consent Form

Administration of Pretest
The pencil-and-paper test was administered to the 2
classes of F.4 students

Brief study of responses of Pretest

Implementation of Design Lesson

(Chp 22 Rate of reaction) a double period (for
experimentation) and a single period (for debriefing)

Administration of Posttest
The pencil-and-paper test was administered to the 2
classes of students right after the design lesson

Chemistry Lesson
Summarize factors that affect rate of reactions with the
help of teaching notes

Final examination

Administration of Delayed Posttest

The pencil-and-paper test was administered to the 2
classes of students right after the final examination

Selected Interview

Data Analysis

Construction and Validation of Pretest

Designing Lesson Plans

Distribution and Collection of Parent Consent Form

Administration of Pretest
The pencil-and-paper test was administered to the 2
classes of F.4 students

Brief study of responses of Pretest

Implementation of Design Lesson

a single period (introducing rate of reaction) and a double
period (experimentation)

Administration of Posttest
The pencil-and-paper test was administered to the 2
classes of students right after the design lesson

Preliminary Data Analysis

Selected Interview

Data Analysis

261

APPENDIX 2
Pre-Posttest of Pilot Study (2007)
Name:___________________ Class: F.4___ (

Date: ___________

F.4 Chemistry: Conceptions of Rate of a Chemical Reaction

1.

In order to investigate the relative strength of hydrochloric acid and ethanoic acid,
a student measures the pH of a 50 cm3 of 1M hydrochloric acid and a 50 cm3 of
2M ethanoic acid by means of a pH meter. Is it a fair test? Explain your answer.

2.

What are factors that affect the rate of a chemical reaction?

3.

Draw an experimental set-up that would enable you to measure the rate of the
reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid in a school laboratory.

4.

For the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid, sketch a graph to show the
relationship between
(a) mass of the reactants against time, and
(b) volume of hydrogen gas
produced against time.
Volume
of H2(g)
produced

Mass of
reactants

time

262

time

5.

Excess magnesium is added to 15 cm3 of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid. After 5 minutes,

a total of 20 cm3 of hydrogen gas has been collected, which denotes the end of the
reaction. Sketch the graph of the volume of hydrogen gas evolved against time
using the axes below.
40

Volume of
H2(g) evolved
/ cm3

30

20

10

time / minute
0

6.

10

The above experiment is repeated with same amount of magnesium (in excess),
but with acid solution of different situations:
A.
7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid
D.
15 cm3 of 0.1 M ethanoic acid
B.
15 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid
E.
15 cm3 of 0.1 M sulphuric acid
3
C.
30 cm of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid
F.
7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M sulphuric acid
Sketch, on the same graph above, the results that would be obtained in repeated
experiments A to F. Label the curves clearly.

7.

Which of the followings below would affect the rate of the above reaction and the
amount of product formed, assuming that Mg is in excess? Put a in the
appropriate boxes. Explain your choice.
Rate of reaction

not certain

263

No

Volume of the
acid
Concentration of
the acid
Strength of the
acid
Basicity of the
acid
Number of moles
of the acid

Yes

not certain

No

Yes

Reason

Amount of product
Reason

APPENDIX 3
Pre-Posttest of Main Study (2008)

264

265

266

APPENDIX 4
Laboratory Worksheet of Main Study (2008)
Objective:

To determine factors affecting rate of reaction between zinc

carbonate and a dilute acid.

Introduction:
Zinc carbonate reacts with a dilute acid according to the equation:
ZnCO3(s) + 2H+(aq) Zn2+(aq) + H2O(l) + CO2(g)
While the reaction is going on, carbon dioxide gas is released and the mass of the
reaction mixture decreases. By measuring the decrease in mass of the mixture
(which corresponds to mass of the CO2 formed), how the reaction rate changes
during the course of the reaction can be studied.
Part A To follow the progress of the action of acid on zinc carbonate
Procedure:
1. Weigh out 1.5 g of ZnCO3(s) powder (which is in excess) in a plastic bottle,
using an electronic balance.
2. Transfer 15 cm3 of 0.5 M HCl(aq) from a measuring cylinder into a 100 cm3 beaker.
3. Put the beaker and plastic bottle on the balance and record the initial total mass (Fig. 1).
plastic
bottle

empty
bottle

ZnCO3
HCl

reaction
mixture

electronic
balance

stopwatch

Fig. 1

4.
5.
6.

Fig. 2

Tip the ZnCO3(s) powder into the acid and start the stopwatch at the same time.
Leave the beaker with its contents and the empty bottle on the balance (Fig. 2).
Record the total mass every 15 seconds for the first two minutes and every
half-/one-minute for another eight minutes.
Calculate the decrease in mass in the following table. Plot a graph of decrease
in mass against time on p.3. Label it curve A.

Result:
Time / min
Mass of
mixture / g
Decrease in
mass / g
Time / min
Mass of
mixture / g
Decrease in
mass / g

000

015

030

045

100

115

130

145

200

230

300

10

267

Part B An investigation of factors affecting the reaction rate

You are provided with the following chemicals:
0.5 M hydrochloric acid,
0.5 M ethanoic acid,

1.0 M hydrochloric acid,

0.5 M sulphuric acid,

0.25 M hydrochloric acid,

zinc carbonate powder

For each group of students, make use of the result obtained in Part A to design an
experiment that enable you to determine whether the following aspect(s) assigned
would affect the rate of reaction between zinc carbonate (in excess) and a dilute
acid.
Group no.

Aspect investigated

Group no.

Aspect(s) investigated

Strength of the acid

Volume of the acid

Basicity of the acid

Volume & conc. , keeping

same no. of moles of the acid

Concentration of the acid

Volume & conc. , varying no.

of moles of the acid

Procedure:
Repeat the experiment in Part A, but this time using
________________ g of ZnCO3(s) and
_____________ cm3 of _______ M _________________ acid.
Calculate the decrease in mass in the following table. Plot a graph of decrease in
mass against time on p.3. Label it curve B.
Result:
Time / min
Mass of
mixture / g
Decrease in
mass / g
Time / min
Mass of
mixture / g
Decrease in
mass / g

000

015

030

045

100

115

130

145

200

230

300

10

268

Group no. _______ Aspect(s) investigated: _____________________________

Chemicals used:
Mass of ZnCO3
Part A
Part B

1.5 g

Volume of
acid
15 cm3

Molarity of
acid
0.5 M

Acid used
HCl(aq)

Results of Part A and B

For the curves A and B, do they have approximately

(i) same initial rate?
(ii) same decrease in mass at the end of the reaction?

269

Yes / No
Yes / No

Summary
Sketch the curves for the results of Part A and B from different groups on the same
axes below and complete the table on the right.

Changes

Amount
Initial
of
rate
products

strength
basicity
Decrease in mass /g

concentration
volume
Same no. conc vol
of moles conc vol
Different conc vol
no. of
conc vol
moles
Key: - increase
- decrease
- no change

Time / minute

Conclusion:
For the reaction between ZnCO3 and a dilute acid in which acid is the limiting
reactant,
Factors affecting initial rate:
_________________________________________________________________
Factors affecting no. of moles of product:
_________________________________________________________________

270

APPENDIX 5
Protocol for Selected Interview
Interview Protocol
Time of interview:
Date:
Venue: Chemistry Laboratory
Interviewer:

Questions
1.

Can you interpret orally your written responses in the pretest and the
posttest?

2.

With regard to your responses in the pretest and posttest, are there any
differences between them? Could you compare them and describe the
differences, if any, for each of the questions?

3.

For each of the question, which answer do you think is more accurate?
The one given in the pretest or that of the posttest? Why?

4.

With respect to each of the questions, is there any change in your

conception now? Do you have any new answers that you would like to
give? Why and why not?

271

APPENDIX 6
Notes of Pilot Study (2007)

272

273

APPENDIX 7
Laboratory Preparation List and Video-recording
Schedule in Main Study (2008)
4C and 4D Chemistry practical lessons
Date: 8/5 (Thu) 4D and 9/5 (Fri) 4C
Time: 10:40 12:00 p.m. (Period 4 and 5)
4C and 4D Lesson Plan
F.4 Chemistry Expt.: To determine factors affecting rate of a reaction
Time

Teacher Activities

Student Activities

(4C & 4D)

10:40 10:50

10:50 11:45
11:45 - 12:00

Introduce the experiment

(Notebook computer PowerPoint)
Demonstrate the experiment
(Teachers bench)
Walk around and assist students
to perform experiments
Pool the experimental results
from 6 groups together

Students bench (each group) 6

Apparatus
electronic balance 1
25 cm3 measuring cylinder 1
50 cm3 measuring cylinder 1
100 cm3 beaker 2
plastic dropper 2
stopwatch 1
spatula 1

Sit around the teacher bench and

listen to the teacher.

Perform experiments (6 groups of

students 6 benches)
Each group of students sends a
representative to report their
experimental results in front of the
whole class (Visualizer)

Chemicals
0.5 M hydrochloric acid
1.0 M hydrochloric acid
0.25 M hydrochloric acid
0.5 M ethanoic acid
0.5 M sulphuric acid
1.5 g zinc carbonate powder (in plastic bottle) 4

Teachers bench for demonstration

Apparatus
Chemicals
0.5 M hydrochloric acid
electronic balance 1
3
25 cm measuring cylinder 1
1.5 g zinc carbonate powder (in plastic bottle) 6
3
100 cm beaker 1
plastic dropper 1
Stopwatch 1
spatula 1

274

APPENDIX 8
Sample Responses of Written Tests and the
Corresponding Scores Awarded in Main Study (2008)
Question 1:

In order to investigate the relative strength of hydrochloric acid

and ethanoic acid, a student measures the pH of a 50 cm3 of 1M
hydrochloric acid and a 50 cm3 of 2M ethanoic acid by means of
a pH meter. Is it a fair test? Explain your answer.

Type of answer Sample response(s)

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

Yes, this is a fair test. Since the volume of the two acid(s) are
the same. Secondly, although ethanoic acid is a weak acid
and only partially ionize(s), the experiment doubled the
amount of the molarity of the experiment and make(s) it the
same as hydrochloric acid. (4C0207)

Level 2

Strength of an acid (is) determined by its rate of reaction.

The more H+(aq) ion, the more it reacts. A fair test should
require the same no. of mole of acid under the same
environment. (4D0110)

Level 3

It is not a fair test. The molarity of hydrochloric acid is 1 M

but that of ethanoic acid is 2 M. Since the two acids have
different molarity, it is unfair to compare the strength.
(4C0210)

Question 2:

What are factors that affect the rate of a chemical reaction?

Type of answer Sample response(s)

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

No response / wrong answers.

Level 2

Heat, reducing agents. (4D0105)

Level 3

Temperature, molarity, volume, mass would affect the rate of

a chemical reaction. (4D0101)

Level 4

The reactivity of metal. Temperature. Volume of the acid.

Strength of the acid. (4D0121)

Level 5

Concentration of the acid. Basicity of the acid. Strength of

the acid. Number of moles of the acid. Other environmental
factors such as temperature. (4C0219)

Level 6

Temperature, the chemicals (acids) basicity, concentration,

strength, the chemicals size (for a solid). (4C0229)

275

Question 3:

Draw an experimental set-up that would enable you to measure the

rate of the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid in a school
laboratory.

Type of answer Sample response(s)

Score
awarded
0

Level 1

(4D0106)
Level 2

(4C0108)
Level 3

(4C0102)
Level 4

(4D0212)

(4D0225)

276

Question 4:

For the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid, sketch a

graph to show the relationship between (a) mass of reactants against
time (b) volume of hydrogen (H2) gas produced against time.

Type of answer Sample response(s)

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Score
awarded
0

No response / wrong graphs.

(4C0104)
Show the correct trend of one of the measured variables (e.g.
decreasing trend for mass of reactants / increasing trend for
volume of hydrogen gas) with minor mistakes (e.g. use
straight lines rather curves of correct curvature)

(4C0115)
Show the correct trend of one of the measured variables with
correct curvature.

(4D0117)
OR
Show correct trend of both measured variables with minor
mistakes in each curve.

Level 4

Level 5

(4C0105)
Show the correct trend of both measured variables, but with
minor mistakes in one of the curves.

(4C0102)
Show the correct trend and curvature in both curves.

(4D0110)

277

Question 5:

Excess magnesium is added to 15 cm3 of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid.

After 5 minutes, a total of 20 cm3 of hydrogen gas has been
collected, which denotes the end of the reaction as shown in Fig.1.

40

Volume of
H2(g)
evolved / 30
cm3

II

III

20

15 cm3 of 0.1 M HCl

IV

10

9
10
time / minute

Choose the curve (I, II, III or IV) that matches with the followings if the experiment is
repeated by using
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

III

II

IV

15 cm of 0.2 M hydrochloric acid

30 cm of 0.1 M hydrochloric acid
15 cm of 0.1 M ethanoic acid

The following response gained 2 marks:

(4D0123)

278

Question 6:

Sketch, in Fig.2, the results that would be obtained if the

experiment in question 5 is repeated with
(a)
(b)
(c)

15 cm3 of 0.1 M sulphuric acid - label your curve X

7.5 cm3 of 0.2 M sulphuric acid - label your curve Y
7.5 cm3 of 0.05 M sulphuric acid - label your curve Z

Type of answer Features of responses

for each curve
Level 1
No response / wrong gradient and wrong maximum
volume of gas

Score
awarded
0

(4D0107) 0 mark for curve X because the initial rate

and volume of hydrogen evolved indicated are wrong.
Level 2

Understands the effects on either reaction rate or

amount of products due to different changes; but the
curve drawn is not precise with respect to gradient or
volume.

(4C0201) 1 mark for curve Z because the initial rate

indicated is wrong, whereas the amount of product is not
precisely indicated.

279

Type of answer Features of responses

for each curve
Level 3
Understands the effects on either reaction rate or
amount of products due to different changes; and the
curve drawn is precise with respect to gradient or
volume.

(4D0118) 2 marks for curve Y because the initial rate

indicated is correct, but the amount of product is wrong.
OR
Understands the effects on both reaction rate and
amount of products due to different changes; but the
curve drawn is not precise with respect to gradient and
volume.

(4C0212) 2 marks for curve Y because curve Y shows

an increment of both the reaction rate and the amount of
product compared with the given curve, but both aspects
are not presented precisely.

280

Score
awarded
2

Type of answer Features of responses

for each curve
Level 4
Understands the effects on both reaction rate and
amount of products due to different changes; but the
curve drawn is not precise with respect to gradient or
volume.

Score
awarded
3

(4D0113) 3 marks for curve X because the initial rate

is correctly indicated, but the amount of product is not
precisely presented.
Level 5

Understands the effects on both reaction rate and

amount of products due to different changes; and the
curve drawn is precise with respect to gradient and
volume.

(4C0216) 4 marks for curve Z because both the initial

rate and amount of products are presented precisely.

281

Question 7:

For the reaction between magnesium and a dilute acid, which of

the followings are factors affecting the rate of reaction and the
amount of product formed, if (a) Mg is in excess? (b) Mg is
the limiting reactant?
Put a in the appropriate boxes. Explain your choice.
Rate of reaction

not certain

No

Yes

not certain

No

Yes

Reason

Amount of product
Reason

Concentration of (a)
the acid
(b)
Volume of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Basicity of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Strength of the
(a)
acid
(b)
Number of
(a)
moles of the acid (b)

Type of answer Sample response(s)

for explanation
for each aspect
Level 1
No response /
wrong choice in the given aspect (with/without explanation)
/ correct choice with wrong explanation

(4C0215)

282

Score
awarded
0

Type of answer Sample response(s)

for explanation
for each aspect
Level 2
Correct choice in the aspect + explanation with minor
mistakes or the explanation is not clear enough
For example:
higher concentration leads to higher reaction rate because
there are more hydrogen ions [higher concentration]

(4C0218)
the amount of product is not affected by the concentration
of acid because magnesium is limited [limited in amount
/ no. of moles]

(4C0221)
strong acid ionizes completely [to give higher
concentration of hydrogen ions], resulting in higher
reaction rate

(4C0217)

283

Score
awarded
1

Type of answer Sample response(s)

for explanation
for each aspect
Level 3
Correct choice in the aspect + correct explanation

(4D0207)

(4C0242)

(4C0212)

(4D0218)

284

Score
awarded
2

APPENDIX 9
Lesson Transcription in Debriefing Session
Classes 4C and 4D of Main Study (2008)
[Debriefing class 4C]
Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Would you please take out the laboratory worksheet? And turn to page
4. Well, now we will discuss the experimental results. Here are the
theoretical results. So, lets check. Maybe your results match with the
theoretical one.
The first aspect that we will investigate is the strength. Suppose we use
hydrochloric acid, as in Part A. In Part B, if we change the strong acid
hydrochloric acid into ethanoic acid, which is a weak acid, the curve
will look like this. [The teacher pointed to the graphs shown on the
screen.] So that means if you compare the initial rate, well, what
happens? This is the initial rate for the hydrochloric acid reaction. This
is the initial rate for the ethanoic acid.

The teacher
compared the
initial rate of a
strong acid
reaction with a
weak acid
reaction.

Theoretically we find that ethanoic acid should have a lower

concentration of hydrogen ion and hence a lower initial rate. Why?
[Pause] As we have mentioned, ethanoic acid is a weak acid, it cannot
ionize completely. If the given molarity is 0.5 M, this stands for the
molarity of the acid molecules. But not all the molecules can be
changed to hydrogen ions, some will remain as molecules. When it is
added to water, some of the molecules can be changed to [hydrogen]
ions. Suppose the percentage of ionization, say, is 30 percent. That
means only 30 percent of the molecules can be changed to the
hydrogen ions.

The teacher
illustrated the
meaning of
strength in
terms of
concentration of
hydrogen ion
(linking up
macroscopic level
and microscopic
level).

Of course, it is not necessary to calculate the exact concentration of

hydrogen ion. What you should know is that the concentration of
hydrogen ion that can be formed from the acid molecules should be
less than the total amount of the acid molecules [in 1 dm3]. So the
concentration of hydrogen ion is less than 0.5 molar. This is the
concentration of H+ in the weak acid - less than the given molarity.

285

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

But how about strong acid? Since hydrochloric acid is a strong acid,
that means it ionizes completely. All the molecules can be changed to
the ions. If we have initially 100 molecules, if it is a strong acid, all the
100 molecules will be changed to the ions. 100 hydrogen ions can be
obtained. So the concentration of hydrogen ion in the 0.5 molar strong
acid HCl should also be 0.5 M.
Lets compare the two concentration of hydrogen ion. For those in the
weak acid, the molarity of H+ is less than the given molarity, because
the given one is the molarity of the acid molecules, not the hydrogen
ions. But for hydrochloric acid, which is strong acid, the molarity of
the H+ is exactly the same as the given molarity. All the molecules can
be changed to the [hydrogen] ions. So which one has a lower
concentration of hydrogen ion? [Pause] It is the ethanoic acid. With
lower concentration of hydrogen ion, the initial rate will be lower.

The teacher
elucidated the
effect of
strength on the
initial rate.

How about the amount of products? If you want to determine the

amount of products formed, we have to consider the equation
involved. Theoretically, they should give the same amount of products
at the end of the reaction. Why? Lets look at the 2 reactions, the 2
equations involved. [The teacher pointed to the equations shown on
the screen.] If you consider the mole ratio, 1 mole of zinc carbonate
reacts with 2 moles of ethanoic acid, and gives out 1 mole of carbon
dioxide. By comparing the mole ratio in the chemical equation, if we
have 2 moles of ethanoic acid, it will give 1 mole of carbon dioxide.
Lets look at another equation. Its about the hydrochloric acid. In this
case, we found that the same mole ratio is observed. 2 moles of
hydrochloric acid will give 1 mole of carbon dioxide. As in the
experiment, zinc carbonate is in excess, number of moles of products
depends on the number of moles of the limiting reactant. This time the
acid is the limiting reactant. Just determine the number of moles of the
acid. If we use the same volume, same molarity, just like this case,
same numbers of moles of acids are used, so same number of moles of
products can be obtained theoretically.

The teacher
explained the
effect of
strength on the
amount of
products by
making use the
chemical
equations
involved (linking
up macroscopic
level with
symbolic level).

286

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Lets look at the second case. Its the basicity. Well, of course
sulphuric acid is a dibasic acid. If you compare the initial rate, there
should be a difference. [The teacher showed the 2 different tangents at
time zero.] Why? To explain the initial rate, we have to consider the
concentration of hydrogen ions. Since sulphuric acid is a dibasic acid,
one molecule of acid will give 2 hydrogen ions. Suppose the molarity
of the acid molecule is 0.5 molar. The molarity of hydrogen ions will
be twice that of the acid molecules. That means, it is 1 molar. How
about hydrochloric acid? Since it is a monobasic acid, 1 molecule will
give 1 hydrogen ion. The molarity of acid is 0.5, so the concentration
of hydrogen ion is also 0.5. Lets compare the 2 concentration of
hydrogen ion, one is 1 M, the other is 0.5 M. Of course the one which
has a higher molarity of hydrogen ion, that is, the sulphuric acid, has a
higher initial rate.

The teacher
illustrated how
basicity
affected the
concentration of
hydrogen ion and
hence the initial
rate.

How about the amount of products? [Showing the different levels

reached by the 2 curves.] If you consider the amount of products, we
found that sulphuric acid should give a greater amount of products at
the end of the reaction. This time, we have to consider the chemical
equations involved. [Pointing to the chemical equations.] Of course
you should know how to write the chemical equations involved. 1
mole of sulphuric acid gives 1 mole of carbon dioxide. 2 moles of HCl
give 1 mole of carbon dioxide.

The effect of
basicity on the
amount of
products was
discussed in terms
of the chemical
equations and the
mole ratio.

According to the given information, if the molarities of the two acids

are the same, the volumes are the same, the number of moles involved
in the acid should be the same. But, the mole ratio is different. In the
first reaction, the mole ratio is 1:1. In the second reaction, the mole
ratio between the acid and carbon dioxide is 2:1. Therefore, if you
determine the number of moles of carbon dioxide formed in sulphuric
acid and compare that with the hydrochloric acid, the two numbers are
different. Thats why they will give different amount of products at the
end of the reaction. Higher basicity, greater number of moles of the
products.
Lets look at case number 3, concentration. If we use the same acid
HCl and change [molarity] from 0.5 to 1, we find that the initial rate
should be different. [Pointing to the 2 different tangents at time zero.]
Lets look at the concentration of the hydrogen ion. In 1 molar
hydrochloric acid, the concentration of hydrogen ion is 1 molar. In 0.5
molar hydrochloric acid, the concentration of H+ is 0.5 M. So having
the higher concentration of hydrogen ion will give a higher initial rate.

287

The teacher
explained the
effect of
concentration
on the initial rate.

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

If you want to consider the amount of products, lets look at the

equation. [Pointing to the chemical equation.] Same reaction involved,
same mole ratio. Since the number of moles can be calculated by using
the molarity and the volume, if you change the concentration, the
number of moles [of acid] will be changed, and therefore, the number
of moles of the products will be changed. Using a higher concentration
of the acid will give a greater number of moles of carbon dioxide, if
the reaction can get to the end.

The teacher
elucidated the
effect of
concentration
on the amount of
products.

And the next part is about the volume. This time we find that the
volume would not affect the initial rate. [The teacher showed that the
tangent of the 2 curves at time zero overlapped with each other.]
Why? Again lets look at the concentration of hydrogen ion. If we only
change the volume without changing the molarity of the acid, we find
that in both cases, the concentration of hydrogen ion in 0.5 molar
hydrochloric acid is 0.5 M. So they have the same concentration of
hydrogen ion. Therefore, the initial rate should be the same. You can
see that these two curves nearly coincide with each other at the initial
part.

The effect of
volume on the
initial rate was
brought out by
the teacher.

Of course, there should be a difference in the amount of product

formed. [The teacher pointed to the different levels reached by the 2
curves.] Why? Lets look at the end of the reaction, the level of the
two curves. Suppose you do it by calculation. For example, if we
double the volume, the number of moles [of acid] will be doubled.
And the number of moles of carbon dioxide formed will also be
doubled, because the amount of products depends on the amount of the
limiting reactant.

The effect of
volume on the
amount of
products was
explained in
terms of moles of
acid.

And the next case is about the number of moles. If we split it into two
parts, suppose I in the first case, we reduce the concentration,
increase the volume, but keep the same number of moles of the acid
used. This is the initial rate. There should be a difference if we reduce
the concentration. [Showing the 2 different tangents at time zero.]
Suppose I change it to 0.25 molar instead of 0.5. We reduce the
molarity, increase the volume, and keep the same number of moles of
the acid used. Since the molarity is lower, the concentration of H+ is
lowered. The initial rate will be reduced.

The teacher
explained the
effect of same
moles, different
concentration and
volume on the
initial rate.

288

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

But keeping the same number of moles [of acid] means that same
number of moles of the products should be obtained. [The teacher
showed the chemical equation and the corresponding calculation.] If
you do the calculation, same number of moles [of acid] in the two
reactions, same number of moles of the products should be obtained.

The teacher
explained the
effect of same
moles, different
concentration and
volume on the
amount of
products.

The other case. If we change the concentration to a higher value, but

reduce the volume, this time suppose I use 1 molar hydrochloric acid
instead of 0.5. The concentration is increased, the initial rate will be
increased. [Showing the steeper curve obtained by a more
concentrated acid.] But the number of moles of the products should
remain unchanged. [Pointing to the same level reached by the 2 curves
at the end.] The number of moles the products depends on the number
of moles of the given acid.

Another scenario
was used as an
illustration.

The last case. Well, similarly, if we use a lower concentration of the

acid, say, 0.25 M, the curvature or the steepness of the curve will be
reduced. [Indicating the less steep curve obtained by a less
concentrated acid.] And it is due to the concentration of H+ again.
Suppose we use a smaller volume and a lower concentration. This time
obviously the number of moles will be reduced and hence affecting the
amount of the products formed. [Indicating the lower level of the curve
obtained by a dilute acid of a smaller volume.]

The teacher
explained the
effect of
different moles,
different
concentration and
volume on the
initial rate and the
amount of
products.

289

[Debriefing class 4D]

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Take out the laboratory worksheet and please turn to page 4. Well, this
morning you have performed the experiments. Some of you got very
good experimental result, but for some of you, the result may not
match the theoretical value. In that case, it doesnt matter because
today we will focus on the theoretical value of the result. Id like you
to turn to page 4 and we will discuss the result case by case.
First of all, its about the first aspect, the strength. If you want to
perform the experiment to investigate whether strength is a factor
which affects the reaction rate, we should choose a weak acid to
compare with the strong acid in Part A. If you choose a weaker acid
like ethanoic acid, well, what happens to the initial rate? [The teacher
pointed to the graphs shown on the screen.] Lets look at the curve.
The one which is steeper will have a faster reaction rate. The one
which is less steep has a lower initial rate. By looking at just the rate,
first, by comparing the slope of these two straight lines, we find that
the blue line, the ethanoic acid has a lower initial rate. So, the rate
should be reduced compared with the strong acid.

The teacher
compared the
initial rate of a
strong acid
reaction with a
weak acid
reaction.

Of course you may ask the reason behind. Because ethanoic acid is a
weak acid, not all the molecules are ionized. Some of them remain as
the molecular form, while some of them ionize. The initial molarity
given to you represents the total number of molecules [in 1 dm3]
before water is added. The initial molarity of the acid molecule is 0.5
molar. As some of them cannot be ionized because it is only a weak
acid, the molarity of the H+ ion that can be formed when it is added to
water should be less than 0.5 molar.

The teacher
illustrated the
meaning of
strength in
terms of
concentration of
hydrogen ion
(linking up
macroscopic level
and microscopic
level).

But how about hydrochloric acid? [Pause] Hydrochloric acid is a

strong acid. All the molecules will be changed to the hydrogen ions
once it is added to water. So this is the molarity of the given acid. All
the molecules will be changed to the hydrogen ions. Therefore the
concentration of hydrogen ion of the hydrochloric acid is 0.5 molar.
So, lets compare the 2 concentration of hydrogen ion. If the one
which is the weaker acid has the lower concentration of hydrogen ion,
less than 0.5 M, the initial rate should be lower than the strong acid.
[Pointing to the ethanoic acid curve.] Because this one has a lower
concentration of hydrogen ion, the initial rate should be lower.

290

The teacher
elucidated the
effect of
strength on the
initial rate.

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Lets look at case number 2, the basicity. If you choose an acid with a
higher basicity like sulphuric acid, one acid molecule can give 2
hydrogen ions. Lets work out the concentration of hydrogen ion in
each case. Well, the first one is a dibasic acid. If the given molarity is
0.5 [M], the molarity of hydrogen ion in sulphuric acid is 0.5 times 2
because each molecule can give 2 hydrogen ions. That means it should
be 1 molar.

The effect of
basicity on the
initial rate was
discussed and
explained in
terms of
concentration of
hydrogen ions.

How about hydrochloric acid? Of course, hydrochloric acid is a

monobasic acid. One molecule will give only one hydrogen ion. The
concentration of hydrogen ion will be exactly the same as the
concentration of the original acid molecule, and therefore 0.5 [M]. So
compare the two data, one is 1 M, the other one is 0.5 M. [Pointing to
the steeper sulphuric acid curve.] Sulphuric acid has a higher
concentration of hydrogen ion, it will give a higher initial rate. We can
compare the curvature, compare the steepness of the curve.
Well, case number 3, concentration. Suppose we change the
concentration from 0.5 molar to 1 molar, in that case, the concentration
of acid is doubled. And of course, the concentration of hydrogen ion
will also be doubled. One is 1 molar, the other one is 0.5 molar.
[Pointing to the 1 M hydrochloric acid curve which had a steeper
tangent at time zero.] The one which has a higher concentration of
hydrogen ion, that means 1 M in this case, will have a higher initial
rate.

The effect of
concentration
on the initial rate
was explained.

How about case number 4? Well, according to the experimental result,

you have obtained the correct result. If you just simply change the
volume without changing the molarity and basicity of the acid, we find
that the first few parts of the curve, that means the initial rate, is the
same in both cases. [The teacher showed that the 2 curves had the
same steepness.]

The effect of
volume on the
initial rate was
discussed.

Why? [Pause] The concentration of hydrogen ion in the 0.5 molar

hydrochloric acid is 0.5 molar. If you simply change the volume
without changing the molarity, the concentration of H+ remained 0.5
molar. As the 2 cases have the same molarity of hydrogen ion, they
have the same initial rate.

291

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Well, the other case is about changing the concentration and volume
but keeping the same number of moles. Suppose you use a lower
concentration of hydrochloric acid and you have to change the volume
correspondingly in order to keep the same number of moles of the acid
molecule. If you compare the reaction rate, we simply look at the
concentration. [Pointing to the less concentrated acid curve.] When
you compare these curves, the initial rate will be lowered because of
the lower molarity of the acid. So just based on the molarity of the
acid, since the red case has a lower molarity of the acid, lower
molarity of the hydrogen ion, they will have a lower initial rate.

The teacher
explained the
effect of same
moles, different
concentration and
volume on the
initial rate.

Or, alternatively, if you use a higher concentration but a smaller

volume, this time since the molarity of the acid is higher [pointing to
the more concentrated acid curve], higher than the black one, the
concentration of H+ will be increased, and therefore the rate will be
increased. And of course you can compare the steepness and compare
the slope of the tangent.

Another scenario
was used as an
illustration.

The last case, different concentration different volume without keeping

the same number of moles. We can simply focus on the concentration
part without looking at the volume. [The teacher pointed to the steeper
curve.] If we use a higher concentration, say 1 M instead of 0.5 M, just
like this picture, theoretically the initial rate should be higher because
of the higher concentration of the acid. And how about the last one?
[The teacher pointed to the less steep curve.] Of course, if we use a
lower concentration of the acid, the concentration of the hydrogen ion
and hence the rate will be lowered.

The teacher
explained the
effect of
different moles,
different
concentration and
volume on the
initial rate.

Well, suppose we change it to 0.25 M, the concentration of H+ is

smaller, and therefore the initial rate will be smaller. [Comparing a
pair of rate curves.] If you look at this part, actually the initial rate
does not depend on the volume, we just focus on the concentration of
the acid. If it has a lower concentration, it will have a lower initial rate.
If we use the higher concentration, we would get the higher initial rate.
So thats all about the initial rate.

Another scenario
was used as an
illustration.

292

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

Lets look at the other column, about the amount of products. Well,
back to the first case, strength. Suppose we use a weaker acid, the
strength actually would not affect the total amount of products. Why?
[Pause] If you want to determine the amount of products, we have to
consider the number of moles involved and the mole ratio of the
chemical equation. [The teacher pointed to the equations shown on the
screen.] This is the reaction between zinc carbonate and ethanoic acid.
First of all, work out the complete equation and of course, you have to
balance the equation. The mole ratio between zinc carbonate and
ethanoic acid is 1:2.

The teacher
mentioned the
relationship
between chemical
equation, mole
ratio and the
amount of
products.

Now lets look at the number of moles of ethanoic acid. Since you are
given the molarity, 0.5 M, volume 15 cm3, you can calculate the
number of moles of the acid used. So simply 0.5 times 0.015, you can
get the number of moles. Just make use of the molarity and the
volume, calculate the number of moles. If you consider the products in
the form of carbon dioxide, 2 moles of ethanoic acid will give 1 mole
of carbon dioxide. The mole ratio between the acid molecule and
carbon dioxide is 2:1. Therefore the amount of the product, CO2,
should be half that of the ethanoic acid. You can calculate the number
of moles of carbon dioxide.

The teacher
explained the
effect of
strength on the
amount of
products.

And how about the other one? If you use hydrochloric acid, we find
that the mole ratios of the chemical species in the 2 separate equations
are exactly the same. 2 moles to 1 mole ratio and the other case, 2
moles of acid give 1 mole of carbon dioxide. The mole ratio is exactly
the same in the 2 separate equations. You can work out the number of
moles of carbon dioxide evolved. Well the two numbers of moles are
exactly the same. Therefore you should get the same amount of
products. Although ethanoic acid is a weaker acid, it will give the
same amount of products depending on the volume and concentration
of the acid used.
Lets look at case number 2, sulphuric acid against hydrochloric acid.
If you want to determine the amount of products formed, lets look at
the end of the reaction. [The teacher pointed to the final level of the
curves shown on the screen.] This one obviously has a higher level
than the other. Again we can work out the chemical equation and lets
look at the mole ratio.

293

The teacher
explained the
effect of
basicity on the
amount of
products.

Teachers explanation

Data analysis

The first one - zinc carbonate reacting with sulphuric acid. [The
teacher showed the equations.] 1 mole of zinc carbonate reacts with 1
mole of sulphuric acid, gives out 1 mole of carbon dioxide. So the
mole ratio between the acid and carbon dioxide is 1:1. In this
experiment, zinc carbonate is in excess. The limiting reactant is the
acid. The amount of products depends on the limiting reactant sulphuric acid. This number of moles of the acid will give this
number of moles of carbon dioxide.

The teacher
explained the effect
of basicity on the
amount of products.

How about hydrochloric acid? The mole ratio between HCl and
carbon dioxide is 2:1. If you have this number of moles of
hydrochloric acid, the number of moles of carbon dioxide formed will
be half of the number of moles of hydrochloric acid. Comparing the 2
values, you find that this case has a greater number of moles of
carbon dioxide gas formed. [Addressing the higher level of the
sulphuric acid curve.] So the basicity will change, will affect the
amount of products if the acid is the limiting reactant.
Case number 3. [Pointing to another pair of rate curves.] If you look
at the level of the curve, we find that this one has a higher level than
the other one. Of course, the reaction involved has exactly the same
mole ratio. If you double the concentration, the number of moles [of
acid] will be doubled. The amount of products will be doubled.

The teacher
explained the effect
of concentration
of acid on the
amount of products.

And the next one is about the volume. [Showing the curves of
hydrochloric acid of different volumes.] Since volume will also affect
the number of moles, if you double the volume, change from 15 to 30
cm3, a larger volume will have a greater number of moles of the acid,
a greater number of moles of carbon dioxide will be obtained.

The teacher
elucidated the
effect of volume
on the amount of
products.

And the other case is about changing the concentration and volume. If
you can manage to give the same number of moles of the acid, same
number of moles of products will be obtained. So in these 2 cases,
same number of moles of carbon dioxide will be given out
theoretically. [Pointing to the same level reached by the 2 curves.]

The effect of same

moles, different
concentration and
volume on the
amount of products
was discussed.

And the last case - different number of moles with different

concentration and different volume. Since the amount of products
depends on the number of moles which in turn depends on the
concentration and volume, if we change the concentration and volume
in such a way that the number of moles [of acid] is changed, the
amount of products will be changed, just like this one. [Pointing to
the different levels reached by the 2 curves.] Different numbers of
moles of reactants give different number of moles of products, no
matter you use a higher or lower concentration.

The effect of
different moles,
different
concentration and
volume on the
amount of products
was illuminated.

294