Inquiry-based learning in stereochemistry: Strengthening 3D visualization and conceptual understanding
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20450/mjcce.2026.3443Keywords:
stereochemistry, three-dimensional visualization, inquiry-based learning, cooperative learning, conceptual understandingAbstract
This study examined the impact of cooperative inquiry‑based learning (IBL) using hands‑on molecular models on the learning of organic stereochemistry in a high school setting. In this approach, teacher support is minimal, allowing students to independently construct new concepts while reviewing previously acquired knowledge. The research was conducted with two parallel groups: an experimental group, which participated in the IBL interactive activities, and a control group, which followed a traditional instructional approach. The experimental group engaged in a three‑phase learning cycle of exploration, concept formation, and application. Activities were conducted through cooperative small‑group work, encouraging students to discuss ideas and compare molecular structures. Students constructed and analyzed 3D models of organic stereoisomers, applying their observations to formulate rules for different types of stereoisomerism and to visualize molecular structures more effectively. After completing the activities, students completed a questionnaire regarding their attitudes and experiences, as well as a knowledge test. The questionnaire revealed that students found the activities motivating, useful, and accessible, highlighting increased engagement, improved conceptual understanding, and a preference for interactive model‑based approaches over traditional lectures. Both groups completed a knowledge test, and the results showed that the experimental group scored significantly higher. Statistical analysis confirmed that these differences were statistically significant. These findings indicate that cooperative IBL using hands‑on molecular models is an effective teaching strategy for improving conceptual understanding, mastery of stereochemical concepts, and the development of higher-order thinking. Moreover, students demonstrated an enhanced ability to apply learned concepts and terminology in new and more complex contexts, indicating a deeper and more lasting understanding of the material.
References
(1) McConathy, J.; Owens, M. J. Stereochemistry in drug action. Prim Care Companion J. Clin Psychiatry. 2003, 5 (2), 70–73. https://doi.org/10.4088/pcc.v05n0202
(2) Barton, L. M.; Smith, R. J.; Johnson, E. C.; Bukowski, E. J.; Sausa, E. C.; Byrd, E. F. C.; Orlicki, J. A.; Saba-tini, J. J.; Baran, Ph. S. Impact of stereo- and regio-chemistry on energetic materials. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019, 141 (32), 12531–12535.
https://doi.org/10.1021/jacs.9b06961
(3) Szweda, R. Sequence- and stereo-defined macromole-cules: properties and emerging functionalities. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2023, 145, 101737.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2023.101737
(4) Kumi, B. C.; Olimpo, J. T.; Bertlett, F.; Dixon, B. L. Evaluating the effectiveness of organic chemistry textbooks in promoting representational fluency and understanding of 2D-3D diagrammatic relationships. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2013, 14 (2), 177–187.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP20166J
(5) Olimpo, J. T.; Kumi, B. C.; Wroblewski, R.; Dixon B. L. Examining the relationship between 2D diagram-matic conventions and students’ success on represen-tational translations tasks in organic chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2015, 16 (1), 143–153.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00169A
(6) Koutalas, V. G.; Antonoglou, L. D.; Charistos, N. D.; Sigalas, M. P. Investigation of students' ability to trans-form and translate 2D molecular diagrammatic repre-sentations and its relationship to spatial ability and pri-or chemistry knowledge. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 152, 698–703.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.265
(7) Setyarini, M.; Liliasari, L.; Kadarohman, A.; Marto-prawiro, M. A. Profile of students’ comprehension of 3D molecule representation and its interconversion on chirality. AIP Conf. Proc. 2016, 1708 (1), 040007.
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4941157
(8) Durmaz, M. Determination of prospective chemistry teachers’ cognitive structures and misconceptions about stereochemistry. J. Educ. Train. Stud. 2018, 6 (9), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i9.3353
(9) Salame, I. I.; Khalil, A. Y. Examining some of the challenges students face in learning about rearrange-ment reactions in organic chemistry. Interdiscip. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2023, 19 (3), e2310.
https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/13203
(10) Salame, I. I.; Kabir, S. A. Examining students’ spatial ability and its impact on the learning of stereochemis-try. Interdiscip. J. Environ. Sci. Educ. 2022, 18 (4), e2288. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/12099.
(11) Schmidt, H. J. Conceptual difficulties with isomerism. J. Res. Sci. Teac. 1992, 29 (9), 995–1003.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290908
(12) Taagepera, M.; Noori, S. Mapping students' thinking patterns in learning Organic Chemistry by the use of Knowledge Space Theory. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77 (9), 1224–1229. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p1224
(13) Ogundiji, O. Identifying students' misconceptions in IUPAC nomenclature of organic compounds in public senior secondary schools in Ibadan. Nigeria. J. Gen. Educ. Humanit. 2025, 4 (3), 635–652.
https://doi.org/10.58421/gehu.v4i3.408
(14) Miu, B. Teaching the concept of isomerism in organic chemistry in high school education. Education facing contemporary world issues, Eur. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci. 2019, 67, 363–373.
https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.08.03.43
(15) Tuckey, H.; Selvaratnam, M.; Bradley, J. Identification and rectification of student difficulties concerning three-dimensional structures, rotation, and reflection. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68 (6), 460–464.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ed068p460
(16) Salah, B. M.; Alain, D. To what degree does handling concrete molecular model promote the ability to trans-late and coordinate between 2D and 3D molecular structure representations? A case study with Algerian students. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2016, 17 (4), 832–877. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00180C
(17) Fatemah, A.; Rasool, Sh.; Habib, U. Interactive 3D visualization of chemical structure diagrams embed-ded in text to aid spatial learning process of students. J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97 (4), 992–1000.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00690
(18) Mistry, N.; Singh, R.; Ridley, J. A web-based stereo-chemistry tool to improve students’ ability to draw Newman projections and chair conformations and as-sign R/S labels. J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97 (4), 1157–1161. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00688
(19) Seshadri, K.; Liu, P.; Koes, D. R. The 3Dmol.js learn-ing environment: A classroom response system for 3D chemical structures. J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97 (10), 3872–3876. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00579
(20) Kurbanoglu N.I.; Taskesenligil, Y.; Sozbilir, M. Pro-grammed instruction revisited: a study on teaching ste-reochemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2006, 7 (1), 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90012C
(21) Burrmann, N. J.; Moore, W. J. Development of a web-based, student-centered stereochemistry tutorial. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (12), 1622–1625.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300744s
(22) Iyamuremye, A.; Twagilimana, I.; Niyonzima, F. N. Examining the utilization of web-based discussion tools in teaching and learning organic chemistry in se-lected Rwandan secondary schools. Heliyon. 2024, 10 (20), e39356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39356
(23) Levy, J.; Chagunda, I. C.; Iosub, V.; Leitch, D. C.; McIndoe, J. S. MoleculAR: An augmented reality ap-plication for understanding 3D geometry. J. Chem. Educ. 2024, 101, 2533–2539.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c01045
(24) Ippoliti, F. M.; Nguyen, M. M.; Reilly A. J.; Gar, N. K. Gaming stereochemistry. Nat. Rev. Chem. 2022, 6, 373–374. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-022-00395-5
(25) Da Silva Junior, J. N.; De Andrade Uchoa, D. E.; Li-ma, M. A. S.; Monteiro, A. J. Stereochemistry game: creating and playing a fun board game to engage stu-dents in reviewing stereochemistry concepts. J. Chem. Educ. 2019, 96 (8), 1680–1685.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00897
(26) Da Silva Júnior, J. N.; Lima, M. A. S.; Moreira, J. V. X; Alexandre, F. S. O.; De Almeida, D. M.; De Oliveira, M. C. F.; Melo Leite Junior, A. J. Stereo-game: An interactive computer game that engages stu-dents in reviewing stereochemistry concepts. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (2), 248–250.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00475
(27) Milne, S. L.; Finkenstaedt-Quinn, S. A.; Garza, N. F.; Zimmerman, S. C.; Shultz, G. V. Capturing students’ identification of the relevance of organic chemistry in writing. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2024, 25, 403–416. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3RP00161J.
(28) Ping, R.; Parrill, F.; Church, R. B.; Meadow, S. G. Teaching stereoisomers throught gesture, action, and mental imagery. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac, 2022, 23 (3), 698–713. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RP00313E
(29) Kusumaningdyah, R.; Devetak, I.; Utomo, Y.; Ef-fendy, E.; Putri, D.; Habiddin, H. Teaching stereo-chemistry with multimedia and hands-on models: The relationship between students’ scientific reasoning skills and the effectiveness of model type. Cent. Educ. Policy Stud. J. 2024, 14 (1), 171–197.
https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1547
(30) Joshua, J.; Dauda, M. O.; Garba, A. Effect of ball-and-stick model instructional strategy on senior sec-ondary school II students’ interest and performance in stereochemistry in taraba state. Galaxy Int. Interdiscip. Res. J. 2022, 10 (1), 879–891.
(31) Johnstone, A. H. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 1991, 7 (2), 75–83.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x
(32) Talanquer, V. Macro, Submicro, and Symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2011, 33 (2), 179–195.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
(33) Taber, K. S.; Watts, M. Learners’ explanations for chemical phenomena. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2000, 1 (3), 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1039/B0RP90015J
(34) Orosz, G.; Németh, V.; Kovács, L.; Somogyi, Z.; Korom, E. Guided inquiry-based learning in second-ary-school chemistry classes: A case study. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2022, 23 (1), 50–70.
https://doi.org/10.1039/D2RP00110A
(35) Wu, M.Y. M.; Yezierski, E. Secondary chemistry teacher learning: Precursors for and mechanisms of pedagogical conceptual change. Chem. Educ. Res. Prac. 2022, 23 (2), 245–262. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2RP00160H
(36) Kožuchová, M.; Barnová, S.; Stebila, J., Krásna, S. H. Inquiry-based approach to education. Acta Educ. Gen. 2023, 13 (2), 50–62.
https://doi.org/10.2478/atd-2023-0013
(37) Lazonder, A. W.; Harmsen, R. Meta-analysis of in-quiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Rev. Educ. Res. 2016, 86 (3), 681–718.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366
(38) Furtak, E. M.; Seidel, T.; Iverson, H.; Briggs, D. C. Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of in-quiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 2012, 82 (3), 300–329.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206
(39) Avargil, S.; Piorko, R. High school students’ under-standing of molecular representations in a context-based multi-model chemistry learning approach. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 2022, 44 (11), 1738–1766.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2095679
(40) Abraham, M.; Varghese, V.; Tang, H. Using molecular representations to aid student understanding of stereo-chemical concepts. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87 (12), 1425–1429. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed100497f
(41) Buchner, J.; Kerres, M. Media comparison studies dominate comparative research on augmented reality in education. Comput. Educ. 2023, 195, 104711.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104711.
(42) Bullock, M.; Huwer, J. Using AR to enhance the learn-ing of chirality. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14 (11), 1214–1232. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111214.
(43) Gillies, R. M. Using cooperative learning to enhance students’ learning and engagement during inquiry-based science. Educ. Sci. 2023, 13 (12), 1242–1244.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121242
(44) Alcalá, D. H.; Garijo, A. H.; Pueyo, A. P.; Río, J. F. Cooperative learning and students’ motivation, social interactions and attitudes: Perspectives from two dif-ferent educational stages. Sustain. 2019, 11 (24), 7005–7016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11247005
(45) Abraham, M. R.; Renner, J. W. The sequence of learn-ing cycle activities in high school chemistry. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1986, 23 (2), 121–143.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660230205
(46) Wiggins, B. L.; Eddy, S. L.; Wener-Fligner, L.; Frei-sem, K.; Grunspan, D. Z.; Theobald, E. J.; Timbrook, J.; Crowe, A. J. A survey to assees student perspective of engagement in an active-learning classroom. CBE–Life Sci. Educ. 2017, 16 (2), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-08-0244
(47) Cronbach, L. J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951, 16 (3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
(48) Hoai, V. T. T.; Son, P. N.; Em, V. V. D.; Duc, N. M. Using 3D molecular structure simulation to develop chemistry competence for Vietnamese students. Eura-sia J. Math. Sci. Tech. Educ. 2023, 19 (7), em2300. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13345
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aleksandra Naumoska, Jane Bogdanov, Slobotka Aleksovska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
