Innovative technologies and methods for teaching chemistry within the STEM
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Main Article Content
Abstract
High-school chemistry faces persistent challenges: limited access to laboratories, costly consumables, and strict safety regulations that restrict experimentation. At the same time, STEM education demands methods that foster analytical thinking, creativity, and interdisciplinary problem-solving. This article examines innovative approaches that integrate digital technologies—virtual laboratories, VR/AR environments, gamified learning, and authentic instrumentation projects—into secondary chemistry curricula. Evidence from ChemVLab+ simulations in the United States, gamification trials in Europe, VR/AR implementations in Germany, and teacher-preparation initiatives in Kuwait demonstrates consistent gains in conceptual understanding, engagement, and motivation. Studies conducted in Kazakhstan further highlight the transformative potential of inquiry-based and digitally supported approaches in stimulating STEM career aspirations among secondary-school students. Comparative analysis of these interventions identifies core strengths—enhanced visualisation, immediate feedback, and increased student agency—alongside challenges related to infrastructure, teacher training, and curricular integration. Building on this evidence, the article introduces a novel integrated digital ecosystem that combines gamified concept modules, browser-based simulations, immersive molecular exploration, and authentic hands-on experiments. The model emphasises instructional coherence, scalability, and long-term knowledge retention, offering a roadmap for chemistry education that bridges classroom practice with authentic scientific inquiry. This framework offers a coherent, scalable, and future-oriented roadmap for advancing chemistry education within STEM.
Article Details
References
Davenport, J. L., Rafferty, A., Timms, M. J., Yaron, D., Karabinos, M. ChemVLab+: Evaluating a virtual lab tutor for high school chemistry // Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. 2012. https://cocosci.princeton.edu/anna/papers/ChemVLabICLS2012.pdf
Bazie, H., Lemma, B., Workneh, A., Estifanos, A. The effect of virtual laboratories on the academic achievement of undergraduate chemistry students: Quasi-experimental study // JMIR Formative Research. 2024. Vol. 8. e64476. https://formative.jmir.org/2024/1/e64476 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/64476
Hu-Au, E., Okita, S. Student experiences from virtual reality-based chemistry laboratory and real-life lab: Comparative analysis // Journal of Chemical Education. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00937
Wohlfart, O., Wagner, A. L., Wagner, I. Digital tools in secondary chemistry education – added value or modern gimmicks? // Frontiers in Education. 2023. Vol. 8. 1197296. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023-.1197296/full DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1197296
Alhashem, F. N., Alfailakawi, H. M. Technology-enhanced virtual labs for pre-service teachers // Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2023. Vol. 39. P. 567–583. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12789 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12789
Japashov, N., Naushabekov, Z., Ongarbayev, S., Postiglione, A., Balta, N. STEM career interest of Kazakhstani middle and high school students // Education Sciences. 2022. Vol. 12, No. 6. 397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060397
https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/12/6/397
Balta, N., Ongarbayev, S., Japashov, N., Naushabekov, Z., Postiglione, A. Middle- and secondary-school girls’ attitudes to STEM careers in Kazakhstan // Frontiers in Education. 2023. Vol. 8. 1158041. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1158041/full
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R. (eds.) How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2000. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/9853/how-people-learn-brain-mind-experience-and-school-expanded-edition
Davis, F. D. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology // MIS Quarterly. 1989. Vol. 13, No. 3. P. 319–340. https://www.jstor.org/stable/249008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Pashler, H., Rohrer, D., Cepeda, N. J., Carpenter, S. K. Enhancing learning and retarding forgetting: Choices and consequences // Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2007. Vol. 14, No. 2. P. 187–193. https://uweb.cas.usf.edu/~drohrer/pdfs/Pashler_et_al_2007PB%26R.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194050
Black, P., Wiliam, D. Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment // Phi Delta Kappan. 1998. Vol. 80, No. 2. P. 139–148. https://www.michigan.gov//media/Project/Websites/mde/2017/09/18/Inside_The_Black_Box_-_Black_and_William.pdf
Bodner, G. M., Herron, J. D. Problem solving in chemistry // In: Gilbert J. K. et al. (eds.) Chemical Education: Towards Research-based Practice. Dordrecht: Springer, 2002. P. 235–266. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-306-47977-X_11 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47977-X_11
Nakhleh, M. B., Mitchell, R. C. Concept learning versus problem solving: There is a difference // Journal of Chemical Education. 1993. Vol. 70, No. 3. P. 190–192. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p190 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p190
Evans, C., Leinhardt, G., Karabinos, M., Yaron, D. Learning stoichiometry with virtual lab activities: The role of constructive simulations in conceptual understanding // Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 2006. Vol. 17, No. 2. P. 131–152. https://oli.cmu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2012/05/Evans_2007-_Learning_Stoichiometry.pdf
Smith, J. K., Metz, P. A. Evaluating student understanding of acid/base chemistry // Journal of Chemical Education. 1996. Vol. 73, No. 11. P. 1076–1078. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed073p1076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed073p233
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. L. Effects of frequent classroom testing // Journal of Educational Research. 1991. Vol. 85, No. 2. P. 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1991.10702818 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1991.10702818
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence // Educational Technology Research and Development. 2012. Vol. 60, No. 4. P. 909–930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9203-3
Lockton, M., Fargason, S. Teachers as gatekeepers of educational technology: Realising the potential of digital tools in schools // British Journal of Educational Technology. 2019. Vol. 50, No. 2. P. 757–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12779 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12779
Brunner, C., Corn, J., Klebba, J. M. Learning in virtual environments: Measuring student interaction with sequential mixed media // Educational Technology Research and Development. 2005. Vol. 53, No. 3. P. 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504672 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504672