References
- Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B., & Silberstein, J. (1986). Is an atom of copper malleable? Journal of Chemical Education, 63(1), 64-66 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed063p64
- Bodner, G. M. & Domin, D. S. (2000). Mental models: the role of representations in problem solving in chemistry. University Chemistry Education, 4(1), 24-30
- Chang, H. Y., Scott, L. A., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. (2004). Chemation: classroom impact of a handheld chemistry modeling and animation tool. Proceeding of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a community (p. 119 -120). Maryland, USA
- Chittleborough, G. & Treagust, D. F. (2007). The modelling ability of non major chemistry students and their understanding of the sub-microscopic level. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8 (3), 274-292 https://doi.org/10.1039/b6rp90035f
- ColI R.K. & Treagust D.F., (2001), Learners' mental models of chemical bonding, Research in Science Education, 31 (3), 357-382 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013159927352
- Copolo, C.F. & Hounshell, P.B. (1995). Using three dimensional models to teach molecular structures in high school chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(4), 295-305 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02211261
- Dori, Y.J. & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual and physical molecular modeling: Fostering model perception and spatial understanding. Educational Technology & Society, 4(1), 1-14
- Ferk, V. & Vrtacnik, M. (2003). Students' understanding of molecular structure representations. International Journal of Science Education. 25(10), 1227-1245 https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000038231
- Gilbert, J.K. & Boulter, C. (2001). Developing models in science education. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher
- Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J., & Rutherford, M. (2000). Explanations with models in science education. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 193-208). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher
- Gilbert, J.K., Jong, O. D., Justi, R. & Treagust, D. F. (2002). Chemical education: Towards research based practice. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. Amercian Anthropologist, 96, 606-633 https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100
- 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(6), 611-628 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290609
- Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E. & Smith, C.L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research In Science Teaching. 28(9). 799-822 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280907
- Hardwicke, A. J. (1995). Using molecular models to teach chemistry. School Science Review, 77(278), 47-56
- Habraken, C. (1996). Perceptions of chemistry: Why is the common perception of Chemistry, the most visual of sciences, so distorted? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(5), 193-201
- Han, J. & Roth, W.M. (2005). Chemical inscriptions in Korean textbooks: Semiotics of macro and microworld. Science Education, 90(2),173-201 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20091
- Harrison A.G., (2001). Textbooks for outcomes science: a review, The Queensland Science Teacher, 27, 20-22
- Harrison, A. G. & Treagust, D.F. (1996). Secondary students' mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509-534 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199609)80:5<509::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-F
- Head, J., Bucat, R., Mocerino, M., & Treagust, D. (2004). Exploring students' abilities to use two different styles of structural representation in organic chemistry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the national Association for research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada
- Ingham A.I. and Gilbert J.K., (1991), The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level, International Journal of Science Education, 13, 203-215 https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069910130207
- Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701 -704 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p701
- Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of chemistry: logical or psychological? Chemistry Education Research and Practice in Europe, 1(1), 9-15 https://doi.org/10.1039/a9rp90001b
- Jones, M. B. (2001). Molecular modelling in the undergraduate chemistry curriculum. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(7), 867-868 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed078p867
- Jones, L.L., Jordan, K.D., & Stillings, N.A. (2005). Molecular visualization in chemical education: The role of multidisciplinary collaboration. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 6(3), 136-149 https://doi.org/10.1039/b5rp90005k
- Jordan, B. & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2
- Khan, S. (2005). Constructing Visualizable Models in Chemistry. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Conference, Montreal, 11 th-15th, April
- Kozma, B. (2000). The use of multiple representations and the social construction of understanding in chemistry. In M. J. R. Kozma (Ed.), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advance designs for technologies of learning (pp. 11-24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
- Kozma, R. B., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marz, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry Learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-143 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0902_1
- Kozma R. B. & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of research in science teaching, 34(9), 949-968 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199711)34:9<949::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-U
- Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning: visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 87-113). London: Routledge
- Marquez, C., Izquierdo, M. & Spinet, M. (2006). Multimodal science teachers' discourse in modeling the water cycle. International Journal of Science Education, 90(2), 202-226
- McMurry, J. (1992). Organic chemistry: 3rd edition. Wadsworth: Cole Publishing Company
- Meislick, H., Nechamkin, H., & Sharfkin, J. (2000). Organic chemistry. New York: Hill McGraw
- Noh, T & Scharmann, L. C. (1997) Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students' conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 199-217 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199702)34:2<199::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-O
- Nyle, M. J. (1993). From chemical philosophy to theoretical chemistry. Berkeley: University of California Press
- Ochs, E., Gonzales, P., & Jacoby, S. (1996). 'When I come down I'm in the domain state': grammar and graphic representation in the interpretive activity of physicists. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & SA Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 328-369). New York: Cambridge University press
- Peterson, Q.R. (1970). Some reflections on the use and abuse of molecular models. Journal of Chemical Education, 47(1), 24-29 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed047p24
- Tasker, D. & Dalton, R. (2006). Research into practice: Visualization of the molecular world using animations. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(2), 141-159 https://doi.org/10.1039/b5rp90020d
- Treagust, D. F. & Harrison, A. G. (1999). The genesis of effective scientific explanations for the classroom. In lLoughran (ed.), researching teaching: Methodologies and practices for understanding pedagogy (pp. 28-43). London: Palmer Press
- Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. D., & and Mamiala, T. L. (2004). Students' understanding of the descriptive and predictive nature of teaching models in organic chemistry. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 1-20 https://doi.org/10.1023/B:RISE.0000020885.41497.ed
- 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 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10090
- Wu, H. K., Krajcik, l S., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 821-842 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1033
- Wu, H. K. & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465-492 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10126
- Zare, R. N. (2002). Visualizing Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 79(11), 1290-1291 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed079p1290
- Zieba, M.L. (2004). Teaching and learning about reaction mechanisms in organic chemistry. Unpublished thesis, University of Western Australia
- Zieba, M.L., Bucat, B., Mocerino, M.,& Treagust, D. (2002). Teaching, learning and reaction mechanism. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Townsville, Queensland