The Effect of Multiple Representation-Based Learning (MRL) to Increase Students’ Understanding of Chemical Bonding Concepts

S. Sunyono, A. Meristin


This study was conducted to determine the effectiveness of multiple representation-based learning (MRL) model compared to discovery learning (DL) model and problem based learning (PBL) model in terms of students’ initial abilities. The factorial design was used in this study. The selection of samples in this study was done through a random sampling technique. Three X classes of the same school was chosen. The three classes applied different learning model. The first class employed the MRL, the second class used the DL model, and the last class adopted the PBL model. Overall, the number of samples involved in the study was 117 students. The results of the study showed that the conceptual understanding of students learning using MRL was significantly different from students learning to use problem-based learning with significant differences in N-gain was 0.0004, but not significantly different from students using discovery learning. This finding showed that MRL is the most effective model for increasing the conceptual understanding of students with “low” and “moderate” initial ability compared to PBL and DL.


multiple representations, conceptual understanding, chemical bonding, initial ability, effectiveness

Full Text:



Abubakar, A. B., & Arshad, M. Y. (2015). Self-Directed Learning and Skills of Problem-Based Learning: A Case of Nigerian Secondary Schools Chemistry Students. International Education Studies, 8(12), 70.

Bodner, G. M., & Herron, J. D. (2002). Problem-Solving in Chemistry. In Chemical Education: Towards Research-Based Practice (pp. 235-266). Springer, Dordrecht.

Carin, A. A., & Sund, R. B. (1993). Teaching Modern Science. Merrill.

Chang, R., & Overby, J. (2011). General Chemistry, 6th ed. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Coll, R. K. (2008). Chemistry Learners’ Preferred Mental Models for Chemical Bonding. Journal of Turkish Science Education (TUSED), 5(1).

Davidowitz, B., Chittleborough, G., & Murray, E. (2010). Student-Generated Submicro Diagrams: A Useful Tool for Teaching and Learning Chemical Equations and Stoichiometry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(3), 154-164.

De Cock, M. (2012). Representation Use and Strategy Choice in Physics Problem Solving. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 8(2), 020117.

Devetak, I., Lorber, E. D., Juriševič, M., & Glažar, S. A. (2009). Comparing Slovenian Year 8 and Year 9 Elementary School Pupils’ Knowledge of Electrolyte Chemistry and their Intrinsic Motivation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10(4), 281-290.

Fuad, N. M., Zubaidah, S., Mahanal, S., & Suarsini, E. (2017). Improving Junior High Schools’ Critical Thinking Skills Based on Test Three Different Models of Learning. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 101-116.

Gkitzia, V., Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2011). Development and Application of Suitable Criteria for the Evaluation of Chemical Representations in School Textbooks. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 12(1), 5-14.

Hake, R. R. (2002, August). Relationship of Individual Student Normalized Learning Gains in Mechanics with Gender, High-School Physics, and Pretest Scores on Mathematics and Spatial Visualization. In Physics Education Research Conference (No. 2, pp. 30-45).

Huddle, P. A., & 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: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 65-77.

In’am, A., & Hajar, S. (2017). Learning Geometry through Discovery Learning Using a Scientific Approach. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 55-70.

Jaber, L. Z., & BouJaoude, S. (2012). A Macro–Micro–Symbolic Teaching to Promote Relational Understanding of Chemical Reactions. International Journal of Science Education, 34(7), 973-998.

Jacobsen, D. A., Eggen, P. D., & Kauchak, D. P. (2006). Methods for Teaching: Promoting Student Learning in K-12 Classrooms. Merrill.

Jones, B. D., Epler, C. M., Mokri, P., Bryant, L. H., & Paretti, M. C. (2013). The Effects of a Collaborative Problem-Based Learning Experience on Students’ Motivation in Engineering Capstone Courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 2.

Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2003). Models of Teaching.

Kelly, O. C., & Finlayson, O. E. (2007). Providing Solutions through Problem-Based Learning for the Undergraduate 1st Year Chemistry Laboratory. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 347-361.

Kingir, S., Geban, O., & Gunel, M. (2012). How Does the Science Writing Heuristic Approach Affect Students’ Performances of Different Academic Achievement Levels? A Case for High School Chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 428-436.

Kim, Y. L. (2013). The use of Mobile Technologies to Promote Scientific Discovery Learning in Elementary School. Stanisław Juszczyk, 264.

Janssen, F. J., Westbroek, H. B., & van Driel, J. H. (2014). How to Make Guided Discovery Learning Practical for Student Teachers. Instructional Science, 42(1), 67-90.

Prasad, K. S. (2011). Learning Mathematics by Discovery. Academic Voices: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 1, 31-33.

Rodríguez, C. A., & Fernández Batanero, J. M. (2017). Aplicación de un Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas en Estudiantes Universitarios de Ingeniería Del Riego. Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 90-96.

Savoie, J. M., & Hughes, A. S. (1994). Problem-Based Learning as Classroom Solution. Educational leadership, 52(3), 54-57.

Slavin, R. E., & Davis, N. (2006). Educational Psychology: Theory and Practice.

Sunyono, S., & Sudjarwo, S. (2018, June). Mental Models of Atomic Structure Concepts of 11th Grade Chemistry Students. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching (Vol. 19, No. 1).

Yuanita, L., & Ibrahim, M. (2015). Supporting Students in Learning with Multiple Representation to Improve Student Mental Models on Atomic Structure Concepts. Science Education International, 26(2).

Vitošević, B., Janković, A., & Vitošević, Z. (2014). Piloting of Blended Learning: Implementation and Benefits. Stanisław Juszczyk, 104.

Yakmaci-Guzel, B., & Adadan, E. (2013). Use of Multiple Representations in Developing Preservice Chemistry Teachers’ Understanding of the Structure of Matter. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 8(1), 109-130.


  • There are currently no refbacks.