Learning about stoichiometry: From students' preconceptions to the concept of limiting reactant

Chemistry Education Research and Practice

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 362-375

  Gauchon, Laure ^a   Méheut, Martine ^b  

^a Lycée Ferdinand Buisson   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ PARIS DESCARTES   (France)

Author keywords

Chemical change; Chemical reaction; Limiting reactant; Stoichiometry; Students' conceptions; Teaching effects

Indexed keywords

EID: 37549035462     PISSN: None     EISSN: 11094028     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1039/B7RP90012K     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Andersson B.R., (1990), Pupils' conceptions of matter and its transformations (age 12-16) Studies in Science Education, 18, 53-85.
2. Arasasingham R.D., Taagepera M., Potter F. and Lonjers S., (2004), Using knowledge space theory to access student understanding of stoichiometry, Journal of Chemical Education, 81, 1517-1523.
3. Artigue M., (1988), Ingénierie didactique, Recherches en didactique des Mathématiques, 9, 281-308.
4. Boujaoude S. and Barakat H., (2000), Secondary school students' difficulties with stoichiometry, School Science Review, 81 (296), 91-98.
5. Brosnan T., (1990), Categorising macro and micro explanations of material change, in P.-L. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. de Vos and A.-J. Waarlo (Eds), Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles, CDβ Press, Utrecht, 198-212.
6. Davous D., Feore M.C., Fort L., Lévêque T., Mauhourat M.B., Perchard J.P. and Jullien L., (1999), Transformation chimique d'un système, le modèle de la réaction chimique, Bulletin de l'Union des Physiciens, 93, 1-35.
7. Duit R., Gropengießer H. and Kattmann U., (2005), Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: the model of educational reconstruction. In H.E. Fischer (Ed.) Developing standards in research on science education, pp. 1-10, Taylor and Francis, Leiden.
8. Durandeau J.P., Duruphty A., Bramand P., Duruphty O., Fanguet M., Fanguet R., Faye P., Giacino M., Jaubert A., Martegoutes R., Sahun R. and Thomassier G., (2000), Physique-Chimie 2nde, Hachette, Paris.
9. Frazer M.J. and Servant D., (1986), Aspects of stoichiometry titration calculations, Education in Chemistry, 23, 54-56.
10. Frazer M.J. and Servant D., (1987), Aspects of stoichiometry, where do students go wrong? Education in Chemistry, 24, 73-75.
11. Gauchon L., (2002), Etude des conceptions d'élèves à propos de la notion de réactif limitant, unpublished Master Dissertation, Université Paris 7.
12. Grisard E., (2006), Conceptions des transformations chimiques, unpublished Master Dissertation, Université Paris 7.
13. Huddle P.A. and Pillay A.E., (1996), An in-depth study of misconceptions in stoichiometry and chemical equilibrium at a South African university, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 65-77.
14. Kermen I., (2005), Investigating students' and teachers' reactions to a curriculum on the evolution of a chemical system, In H.E. Fischer (Ed.) Developing standards in research on science education, pp. 131-137,. Taylor and Francis, Leiden.
15. Laugier A. and Dumon A., (2000), Travaux pratiques en chimie et représentation de la réaction chimique par l'équation-bilan dans les registres macroscopique et microscopique: une étude en classe de seconde (15-16ans), Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 1, 61-75.
16. Méheut M., Saltiel E. and Tiberghien A., (1985), Pupils' (11-12 year olds) conceptions of combustion, European Journal of Science Education, 7, 83-93.
17. Ministère de l'Education Nationale, (2000), Accompagnement de programme, Chimie, Classe de seconde, CNDP, Paris.
18. Piaget J., (1975), L'équilibration des structures cognitives, PUF, Paris.
19. Schmidt H.-J., (1990), Secondary school students' strategies in stoichiometry, International Journal of Science Education, 12, 457-471.
20. Stamovlasis D., Tsaparlis G., Kamilatos C., Papaoikonomou D. and Zarotiadou E., (2004), Conceptual understanding versus algorithmic problem solving: a principal component analysis of a national examination, The Chemical Educator, 9, 398-405.
21. Stamovlasis D., Tsaparlis G., Kamilatos C., Papaoikonomou D. and Zarotiadou E., (2005), Conceptual understanding versus algorithmic problem solving: further evidence from a national chemistry examination, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6, 104-118.
22. Stavridou H. and Solomonidou C., (1989), Physical phenomena - chemical phenomena: do pupils make the distinction? International Journal of Science Education, 11, 83-92.
23. Tiberghien A., Psillos D. and Koumaras P., (1995), Physics instruction from epistemological and didactical basis, Instructional Science, 22, 423-444.
24. Tsaparlis G., (2003), Chemical phenomena versus chemical reactions: do students make the connection? Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 31-43.