THE IMPACT OF PHET INTERACTIVE SIMULATIONS AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATION SLIDE SHOW VISUALISATION ON LEARNING BALANCING OF CHEMICAL EQUATIONS AMONG GRADE 10 PUPILS

Main Article Content

NICHOLAS SIBINDA
OVERSON SHUMBA

Abstract

This study investigated the impact of PhET interactive simulation and PowerPoint presentation slide show visualisation on learning the balancing of chemical equations to grade 10 learners. A pre-test post-test quasi-experimental research design was used. Students in the experimental group were instructed using simulation games while PowerPoint presentation slides with visualisation were used in the comparison group. The post-test results revealed that the PhET Interactive Simulation was more effective compared to the PowerPoint Presentation Slide Show Visualisation. The PhET interactive simulation software application appeared to work better because of the equations that are embedded in it. The group taught using the PhET interactive simulation had attained better attitudes and high achievement scores towards learning of balancing of chemical equations as compared to the group which was taught using PowerPoint presentation slide show visualisation.

Keywords:
PhET interactive simulation, powerpoint presentation slide show visualisation, learner attitude, learner academic achievement

Article Details

How to Cite
SIBINDA, N., & SHUMBA, O. (2022). THE IMPACT OF PHET INTERACTIVE SIMULATIONS AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATION SLIDE SHOW VISUALISATION ON LEARNING BALANCING OF CHEMICAL EQUATIONS AMONG GRADE 10 PUPILS. Journal of Applied Chemical Science International, 13(1), 1-5. Retrieved from https://ikprress.org/index.php/JACSI/article/view/7300
Section
Original Research Article

References

Adams WK. Students engagement and learning with PhET interactive simulations. Online First; 2010.

Almala(2005) constructivist learning model: science teacher 58(6)

Loretta(2013). Pedagogic roles of animations and simulations in chemistry courses. ACS symposium series 1142:127-159

Roschelle (2000). Science Teacher’s views on the use and effectiveness of interactive simulation in teaching and learning. International journal of instruction vol 15, number 1: 277-292

Clark M (2009). Use of PhET interactive Simulation in general chemistry laboratory: Models of Hydrogen atom. Journal of chemical education

Perkins KK, Loeblein PJ, Dessau KL. SIMS for science: Powerful tools to support inquiry based teaching. The Science Teacher. 2010;77(7):46-71.

ECZ. 2015 Examinations Performance Report. Lusaka: ECZ; 2017.

Mason R & Hlynka D. 1998. PowerPoint in the classroom: where is the power? Education technology, 38(5), 42-45

Harrison( 1999). Slides for students. University of North Georgia

Basaraba KR. What are the effects of computer simulations on students' conceptual understanding on balancing of chemical equations?; 2012.

Bozkurta E, Ilika A. The effect of computer simulations over students’ beliefs on physics. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. 2010;2(2010):4587–4591.

Alrsa'i MS, Aldhamit YA. The effect of computer simulation on Al-Hussein Bin Talal University student's understanding of chemistry concepts and their attitude towards chemistry learning. International Journal of Educational Research and Technology. 2014;5(1):54-60.

Blake C, Scanlon E. Reconsidering simulations in science education at a distance: Features of effective use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2007;23(6):491-502.

Bindu C. Impact of ICT on teaching and learning: A literature review. International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations. 2016;4(1):24-31.

Brunsell E, Horejsi M. Science 2.0. The Science Teacher. 2012;79(4):10.

Dori YJ, Belcher J. How does technology enabled active learning affect undergraduate students' understanding of organometallic? The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2005;14(2):243-279.

Eckhardt M, Urhahne D, Conrad O, Harms U. How effective is instructional support for learning with computer simulations? Instructional Science. 2013;41(1):105- 124.

ECZ. 2005 Examinations Performance Report. Lusaka: ECZ; 2007.

ECZ. 2009 Examinations Performance Report. Lusaka: ECZ; 2010.

ECZ. 2013 Examinations Performance Report. Lusaka: ECZ; 2013.

ECZ. 2014 Examinations Performance Report. Lusaka: ECZ; 2015.

ECZ.2017. Examination Performance report. Lusaka. 2018

Jimoyiannis A, Komis V. Computer simulations in chemistry teaching and learning: A case study on students' understanding of preparing soluble salts. Computer & Education. 2001;36(2):183- 204.

Jia Q. A brief study on the implications of constructivism teaching theory on classroom teaching reform in basic education. International Education Studies. 2010;2(2).

Mansor R, Halim L, Osman K. Teachers’ knowledge that promotes students’ conceptual understanding. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences. 2010;9:1835-1839.

Moore WS. Student and faculty epistemology in the college classroom: the perry schemata of intellectual and ethical development. In K.W Prichard & R.M Sawyer(Eds), Handbook of college teaching: theory and applications: Greenwood Press; 1994.

Newcombe NS. Thinking spatially in the science classroom. Current Opinion in Behavioural Sciences. 2016;10:1-6.

Sweller J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science. 1988;12:257-285.

Vygotsky LS. Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1978.

Wise KC, McKenzie DL. Simulations in the science classroom. JSTOR. 1986;9(4):14- 15.

Weiman CE, Adams WK, Perkins KK. PhET: Simulations that enhance learning. Education Forum. 2008;322.