A systematic review of green and sustainable chemistry training research with pedagogical content knowledge framework: current trends and future directions

IF 2.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Chemistry Education Research and Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI:10.1039/D4RP00166D
Sevgi Aydin Gunbatar, Betul Ekiz Kiran, Yezdan Boz and Elif Selcan Oztay
{"title":"A systematic review of green and sustainable chemistry training research with pedagogical content knowledge framework: current trends and future directions","authors":"Sevgi Aydin Gunbatar, Betul Ekiz Kiran, Yezdan Boz and Elif Selcan Oztay","doi":"10.1039/D4RP00166D","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >This study reviewed the green and sustainable chemistry education (GSCE) research that provided training at the tertiary level from 2000 to 2024. The Web of Science and ERIC databases were screened using title and abstract review. In total, 49 studies were analysed. The analysis instrument has two main parts, namely, general characteristics of the training, which was formed in light of the GSCE literature (<em>i.e.</em>, chemistry sub-disciplines, type of implementation, and context), and analysis of the training through the lens of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) construct that is the commonly-used framework for the analysis of training regarding orientation to teaching GSCE, learner, curriculum, assessment, and instructional strategies utilised. Results showed that organic chemistry (<em>n</em> = 15) is the most emphasised branch of chemistry in the articles. Regarding the learner component, the studies were inadequate, and very few studies provided information about the misconceptions and difficulties that students may encounter while learning GSC. Regarding the curriculum component, among the green chemistry principles, ‘use of renewable feedstocks’ was the most emphasised, while the least emphasised ones were ‘reduce derivatives’ and ‘real-time pollution prevention’. Fourteen studies used subject-specific teaching strategies (<em>e.g.</em>, cooperative teaching and project-based strategies). Although representations are not used in GSCE, most of the studies included laboratory studies (<em>n</em> = 31). Finally, regarding the assessment, very few studies focused on measuring students' skills (laboratory skills, discussion skills, <em>etc.</em>) and affective variables. In light of the findings, GSCE training should get more benefit from the literature on science/chemistry teaching strategies. Moreover, alternative assessment tools (<em>e.g.</em>, rubrics and concept maps) should be utilized regarding the instruments utilized to assess the participants' GSC knowledge.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":" 1","pages":" 34-52"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2025/rp/d4rp00166d","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study reviewed the green and sustainable chemistry education (GSCE) research that provided training at the tertiary level from 2000 to 2024. The Web of Science and ERIC databases were screened using title and abstract review. In total, 49 studies were analysed. The analysis instrument has two main parts, namely, general characteristics of the training, which was formed in light of the GSCE literature (i.e., chemistry sub-disciplines, type of implementation, and context), and analysis of the training through the lens of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) construct that is the commonly-used framework for the analysis of training regarding orientation to teaching GSCE, learner, curriculum, assessment, and instructional strategies utilised. Results showed that organic chemistry (n = 15) is the most emphasised branch of chemistry in the articles. Regarding the learner component, the studies were inadequate, and very few studies provided information about the misconceptions and difficulties that students may encounter while learning GSC. Regarding the curriculum component, among the green chemistry principles, ‘use of renewable feedstocks’ was the most emphasised, while the least emphasised ones were ‘reduce derivatives’ and ‘real-time pollution prevention’. Fourteen studies used subject-specific teaching strategies (e.g., cooperative teaching and project-based strategies). Although representations are not used in GSCE, most of the studies included laboratory studies (n = 31). Finally, regarding the assessment, very few studies focused on measuring students' skills (laboratory skills, discussion skills, etc.) and affective variables. In light of the findings, GSCE training should get more benefit from the literature on science/chemistry teaching strategies. Moreover, alternative assessment tools (e.g., rubrics and concept maps) should be utilized regarding the instruments utilized to assess the participants' GSC knowledge.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于教学内容知识框架的绿色与可持续化学训练研究:当前趋势与未来方向
本文回顾了2000年至2024年绿色与可持续化学教育(GSCE)在高等教育培训中的研究。Web of Science和ERIC数据库采用标题和摘要综述的方法进行筛选。总共分析了49项研究。分析工具有两个主要部分,即培训的一般特征,这是根据GSCE文献(即化学子学科,实施类型和背景)形成的,以及通过教学内容知识(PCK)结构的视角对培训进行分析,PCK是分析GSCE教学方向,学习者,课程,评估和使用的教学策略的常用框架。结果表明,有机化学(n = 15)是文章中最强调的化学分支。关于学习者部分,研究是不充分的,很少有研究提供关于学生在学习GSC时可能遇到的误解和困难的信息。就课程内容而言,在绿色化学原则中,“使用可再生原料”被强调最多,而“减少衍生物”和“实时污染预防”被强调最少。14项研究使用了特定学科的教学策略(例如,合作教学和基于项目的策略)。虽然在GSCE中没有使用陈述,但大多数研究都包括实验室研究(n = 31)。最后,在评估方面,很少有研究关注于测量学生的技能(实验技能、讨论技能等)和情感变量。根据研究结果,GSCE培训应该更多地受益于科学/化学教学策略方面的文献。此外,对于用于评估参与者的GSC知识的工具,应该使用替代评估工具(例如,规则和概念图)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
26.70%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal for teachers, researchers and other practitioners in chemistry education.
期刊最新文献
Back cover Student conceptualizations and predictions of substitution and elimination reactions: what are they seeing on the page?† Self-regulated learning strategies for success in an online first-year chemistry course ‘Seeing’ chemistry: investigating the contribution of mental imagery strength on students’ thinking in relation to visuospatial problem solving in chemistry† Student's study behaviors as a predictor of performance in general chemistry I
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1