Computational Chemistry Software for Developing Deep Conceptual Understanding among Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15575/jtk.v11i1.51648Keywords:
chemistry learning, critical thinking, computational chemistry, conceptual understanding, educational softwareAbstract
Developing students’ deep conceptual understanding remains a persistent challenge in chemistry education because many chemical phenomena involve abstract molecular-level representations that are difficult to visualize through conventional instruction. Although computational chemistry software (CCS) has been widely used in scientific research, empirical evidence regarding its effectiveness in promoting meaningful conceptual understanding in undergraduate chemistry education remains limited. This study investigated the effectiveness of CCS in enhancing chemistry education students’ deep conceptual understanding. A quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design was employed involving undergraduate chemistry education students assigned to experimental and control groups. The experimental group learned with computational chemistry software (Gaussian, Avogadro, ChemDraw, and Spartan), whereas the control group received conventional instruction. Students’ deep conceptual understanding was assessed using a validated instrument measuring conceptual connectivity, scientific reasoning and concept application, and higher-order thinking skills. Data were analyzed using independent-samples t-tests, effect size analysis, and structural model evaluation with SmartPLS. The findings revealed that students who learned with CCS significantly outperformed those receiving conventional instruction across all dimensions of deep conceptual understanding (p < .001). Large effect sizes were observed for conceptual connectivity (0.89) and scientific reasoning and concept application (0.85), while a moderate-to-large effect was found for higher-order thinking skills (0.79). The measurement model also demonstrated satisfactory validity, reliability, and model fit. These findings indicate that CCS serves not only as a molecular visualization tool but also as an effective pedagogical resource for supporting scientific reasoning, conceptual integration, and higher-order thinking in chemistry learning. The study contributes empirical evidence supporting the integration of computational chemistry into undergraduate curricula to foster deeper conceptual understanding and digitally enriched chemistry instruction.
References
Abdo, S. N., Hsu, J. L., Kapetanakis, C., Newman, D. L., Wright, L. K., & Bailey, J. (2024). An exploration of spatial visualization skills: Investigating students’ use of 3D models in science problems during think-aloud interviews. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(9), 3624–3634. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c01355
Arsyad, M., & Syakhrani, A. W. (2024). The efficiency of using visual learning media in improving the understanding of science concepts in elementary school students. Indonesian Journal of Education (INJOE), 4(1), 775-787. Retrieved from https://felifa.net/index.php/INJOE/article/view/234
Azid, N., Ali, R. M., Khuluqo, I. Purwanto, S. E. & Susanti, E. N. (2022). Higher order thinking skills, school-based assessment and students’ mathematics achievement: Understanding teachers’ thoughts. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 11(1), 290-302. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i1.22030
Bílgín, A. K., Yürükel, F. N. D., & Yígít, N. (2017). The effect of a developed REACT strategy on the conceptual understanding of students: “Particulate nature of matter.” Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(2), 65–81. Retrieved from https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/155
Byusa, E., Kampire, E., & Mwesigye, A. R. (2022). Game-based learning approach on students’ motivation and understanding of chemistry concepts: A systematic review of literature. Heliyon, 8(5), e09541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09541
Corradi, D. M. J., Elen, J., Schraepen, B., & Clarebout, G. (2014). Understanding possibilities and limitations of abstract chemical representations for achieving conceptual understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 36(5), 715–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.824630
Dash, G. & Paul, J. (2021). CB-SEM vs PLS-SEM methods for research in social sciences and technology forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121092. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121092
Deringer, V. L., Bartók, A. P., Bernstein, N., Wilkins, D. M., Ceriotti, M., & Csányi, G. (2021). Gaussian process regression for materials and molecules. Chemical reviews, 121(16), 10073-10141. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00022.
Du, D., Baird, T. J., Bonella, S., & Pizzi, G. (2023). OSSCAR, an open platform for collaborative development of computational tools for education in science. Computer Physics Communications, 282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108546
Eitemüller, C., Trauten, F., Striewe, M., & Walpuski, M. (2023). Digitalization of multistep chemistry exercises with automated formative feedback. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(3), 453–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10043-2
Erümit, A. K., & Sarıalioğlu, R. Ö. (2025). Artificial intelligence in science and chemistry education: a systematic review. Discover Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00622-3
Fombona-Pascual, A., Fombona, J., & Vicente, R. (2022). Augmented reality, a review of a way to represent and manipulate 3D chemical structures. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 62(8), 1863–1872. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.1c01255
Gombert, S., Fink, A., Giorgashvili, T., Jivet, I., Di Mitri, D., Yau, J., Frey, A., & Drachsler, H. (2024). From the automated assessment of student essay content to highly informative feedback: a case study. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 34(4), 1378–1416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-023-00387-6
Hoai, V. T. T., Son, P. N., Em, V. V. D., & Duc, N. M. (2023). Using 3D molecular structure simulation to develop chemistry competence for Vietnamese students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13345
Honke, N., & Becker-Genschow, S. (2025). Adaptive learning in bionics: transforming science education. Frontiers in Education, 10(February), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1427083
Ipinnaiye, O., & Risquez, A. (2024). Exploring adaptive learning, learner-content interaction and student performance in undergraduate economics classes. Computers and Education, 215(March), 105047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105047
Kabudi, T., Pappas, I., & Olsen, D. H. (2021). AI-enabled adaptive learning systems: A systematic mapping of the literature. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2(December 2020), 100017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100017
Kuit, V. K., & Osman, K. (2021). Eficacia del módulo electrónico CHEMBOND3D para mejorar el conocimiento de los estudiantes sobre el concepto de enlace químico y las habilidades visoespaciales. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 252–264. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/11263
Lee, O. S., Gather, M. C. & Zysman-Colman, E. (2024). Digichem: computational chemistry for everyone. Digital Discovery, 3, 1695-1713. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4DD00147H
Lehtola, S., & Karttunen, A. J. (2022). Free and open-source software for computational chemistry education. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Science, 12(5), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcms.1610
Li, H., & Wei, X. (2024). A concise review of biomolecule visualization. Current Issues in Molecular Biology, 46(2), 1318-1334. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb46020084
Mayer, R. E. (2024). The Past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
Mishra, J. K. (2023). Inquiry based learning: issues and challenges. Echetana: International Journal of Education, 8(1), 157-163. Retrieved from https://echetana.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/738.-R-E-Hari-K.-Sharma.pdf
Muthmainnah, Ibna Seraj, P. M., & Oteir, I. (2022). Playing with AI to investigate human-computer interaction technology and improving critical thinking skills to pursue 21st century age. Education Research International, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6468995
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Nehring, A. & Schanze, S. (2025). Turning the Plurality of Chemistry into a Resource for Learning: A Core Competency of Chemistry Teachers. Science & Education, 34, 2051–2078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-025-00624-5
Panda, D. R. (2024). Human computer interaction strategies for effective digital learning experiences: From classroom to screen. International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, 08(008), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.55041/ijsrem37370
Pramesti, N. K. A. & Riastini, P. N. (2023). Professional status: teachers' difficulties in compiling questions based on higher order thinking skills. International Journal of Elementary Education, 7(3), 516-523. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijee.v7i3.61625
Pyatt, K. (2022). Use of chemistry software to teach and assess model-based reaction and equation knowledge. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 4(4), 215–227. http://www.jotse.org/index.php/jotse/article/view/110/142
Quan, W., Yue, D. W. & Bei Er, L. (2025). The application and challenges of virtual reality (VR) painting technology in art education in china: a case study of universities in mianyang, sichuan province. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education & Development, 14(4), 335-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v14-i4/26534
Rincon-Flores, E. G., Castano, L., Guerrero Solis, S. L., Olmos Lopez, O., Rodríguez Hernández, C. F., Castillo Lara, L. A., & Aldape Valdés, L. P. (2024). Improving the learning-teaching process through adaptive learning strategy. Smart Learning Environments, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00314-9
Serhan, M., Sprowls, M., Jackemeyer, D., Long, M., Perez, I. D., Maret, W., Tao, N., & Forzani, E. (2019). Total iron measurement in human serum with a smartphone. AIChE Annual Meeting, Conference Proceedings, 2019-Novem. https://doi.org/10.1109/JTEHM.2020.3005308
Talanquer, V. (2025). Exploring the Plurality of Chemical Modeling: Implications for Chemistry Teaching. J. Chem. Educ., 102 (8), 3090-3095. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5c00244
Üce, M., & Ceyhan, İ. (2019). Misconception in chemistry education and practices to eliminate them: Literature analysis. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 7(3), 202. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v7i3.3990
Vosniadou, S. (2019). The development of students’ understanding of science. Frontiers in Education, 4(April), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00032
Whatoni, A. S., & Sutrisno, H. (2022). Development of a learning module supported by augmented reality on chemical bonding material to improve interest and motivation of students learning for senior high school. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 8(4), 2210–2218. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i4.2057
Zendler, A., & Greiner, H. (2020). The effect of two instructional methods on learning outcome in chemistry education: The experiment method and computer simulation. Education for Chemical Engineers, 30, 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2019.09.001
Zhao, L., Wu, G., Shao, W. & Ma, X. (2024). Conceptual understanding and cognitive patterns construction for physical education teaching based on deep learning algorithms. Scientific Reports, 14(31409). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-83028-9
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Teguh Wibowo, Ariyatun Ariyatun, Annisa Adiwena Putri, Ervin Tri Suryandari, Azlan Bin Kamari, Jajang Muhariyansah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
