Programmed learning in chemistry education: a critical review of theory, application, and effectiveness

Pavlo P. Nechypurenko; Tetiana V. Tashtan; Serhiy O. Semerikov

doi:10.55056/seq.962

Authors

Pavlo P. Nechypurenko Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5397-6523
Tetiana V. Tashtan Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2635-1055
Serhiy O. Semerikov Kryvyi Rih State Pedagogical University Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0789-0272

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55056/seq.962

Keywords:

programmed learning, chemistry education, adaptive learning systems, scoping review, higher-order thinking skills, educational technology

Abstract

This scoping review examines the historical trajectory, theoretical underpinnings, and efficacy of programmed learning in chemistry education from its behaviourist origins to contemporary adaptive learning systems. Through a systematic analysis of the literature following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we mapped the field's evolution across secondary and tertiary education levels. Our findings reveal that programmed learning, when applied to specific chemistry domains such as stereochemistry and chemical bonding, shows moderate effectiveness in enhancing conceptual understanding and student achievement. The contemporary manifestations of programmed learning principles in technology-enhanced, adaptive learning environments demonstrate particular promise for personalising instruction and addressing diverse student needs. However, challenges persist in fostering higher-order thinking skills and in implementation contexts with limited resources. This review highlights the importance of balancing structured guidance with constructivist approaches, identifying a theoretical convergence that maintains programmed learning's systematic design while incorporating student-centred pedagogies. Critical gaps include limited longitudinal studies examining knowledge retention and insufficient research on teacher experiences and implementation fidelity. We present an integrative framework for future programmed learning applications in chemistry education that emphasises adaptive scaffolding, contextualised learning, and metacognitive development.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Abstract views: 457 / PDF views: 294

References

Batamuliza, J., Habinshuti, G. and Nkurunziza, J.B., 2024. Exploring lower secondary school teachers’ perceptions of integrating simulations into chemistry instruction. Frontiers in Education, 9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1484495. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1484495

Bekaulova, Z., Duzbayev, N., Mamatova, G., Bersugir, M. and Bekaulov, N., 2023. Adaptive Learning Model and Analysis of Existing Systems. In: A. Khikmetov, K. Kolesnikova and M.T. Ipalakova, eds. Workshops and Short Paper Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Digital Technologies in Education, Science and Industry 2023, Almaty, Kazakhstan, December 6-7, 2023. CEUR-WS.org, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 3680. Available from: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3680/S2Paper1.pdf.

Blaser, M., 2019. Combining Pre-class Preparation with Collaborative In-Class Activities to Improve Student Engagement and Success in General Chemistry. In: M. Blaser, T. Clark, L. Lamont and J.J. Stewart, eds. Active Learning in General Chemistry: Whole-Class Solutions. Washington, DC: ACS Publications, ACS Symposium Series, vol. 1322, chap. 2, pp.21–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2019-1322.ch002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2019-1322.ch002

Broman, K., Bernholt, S. and Christensson, C., 2022. Relevant or interesting according to upper secondary students? Affective aspects of context-based chemistry problems. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(4), pp.478–498. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1824177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1824177

Cinque, A., Miller, J., Legron-Rodriguez, T., Paradiso, J.R. and Lapeyrouse, N., 2024. Student Perceptions of Adaptive Learning Modules for General Chemistry. In: R.A. Sottilare and J. Schwarz, eds. Adaptive Instructional Systems. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 14727, pp.105–115. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60609-0_8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60609-0_8

Crippen, K.J. and Brooks, D.W., 2009. Applying cognitive theory to chemistry instruction: The case for worked examples. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10(1), pp.35–41. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/b901458f. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/B901458F

García-Martínez, J. and Serrano-Torregrosa, E., eds, 2015. Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Opportunities and Trends. Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527679300. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527679300

Graulich, N., Bernholt, S., Rodemer, M., Borchert, C., Giese, M., Göttlich, R., Habig, S., Hermanns, J., Ho, F., Hütgens, S., Lieber, L., Lützen, A., Pölloth, B., Schüßler, K. and Schwedler, S., 2024. Bringing Researchers and Practitioners Together: On the Aims of a Research Network in Organic Chemistry Education. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(9), pp.4011–4017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00587

Hein, S.M., 2012. Positive Impacts Using POGIL in Organic Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(7), pp.860–864. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed100217v. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/ed100217v

Hendrickson, H.P., Lenn, K.M., Vazquez, F.X., Williams, K.L., Winograd, B.A., Mulvihill, E.A. and Geva, E., 2021. The Compute-to-Learn Pedagogy and Its Implementation in the Chemistry Curriculum. In: A.R. McDonald and J.A. Nash, eds. Teaching Programming across the Chemistry Curriculum. Washington, DC: ACS Publications, ACS Symposium Series, vol. 1387, chap. 6, pp.69–87. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2021-1387.ch006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2021-1387.ch006

Holme, T.A., 2019. Can Today’s Chemistry Curriculum Actually Produce Tomorrow’s Adaptable Chemist? Journal of Chemical Education, 96(4), pp.611–612. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00112

Hougen, D.F. and Shah, S.N.H., 2019. The Evolution of Reinforcement Learning. 2019 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence, SSCI 2019. pp.1457–1464. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9003146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/SSCI44817.2019.9003146

Izzet Kurbanoglu, N., Taskesenligil, Y. and Sozbilir, M., 2006. Programmed instruction revisited: A study on teaching stereochemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(1), pp.13–21. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/b5rp90012c. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90012C

Karamouzis, S.T., 2006. The Use of Psychophysiological Measures for Designing Adaptive Learning Systems. In: I. Maglogiannis, K. Karpouzis and M. Bramer, eds. Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations. Boston, MA: Springer US, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, vol. 204, pp.417–424. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34224-9_48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-34224-9_48

Lamba, R.S., 2008. Information Overload, Rote Memory, and Recipe Following in Chemistry. In: R.S. Moog and J.N. Spencer, eds. Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL). Washington, DC: ACS Publications, ACS Symposium Series, vol. 994, chap. 3, pp.26–39. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2008-0994.ch003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2008-0994.ch003

Lapitan Jr, L.D.S., Chan, A.L.A., Sabarillo, N.S., Sumalinog, D.A.G. and Diaz, J.M.S., 2023. Design, implementation, and evaluation of an online flipped classroom with collaborative learning model in an undergraduate chemical engineering course. Education for Chemical Engineers, 43, pp.58–72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.01.007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.01.007

Liu, Z., Yin, S.X., Lee, C. and Chen, N.F., 2024. Scaffolding Language Learning via Multi-modal Tutoring Systems with Pedagogical Instructions. Proceedings - 2024 IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence, CAI 2024. pp.1258–1265. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1109/CAI59869.2024.00223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CAI59869.2024.00223

Löffler, P., Pozas, M. and Kauertz, A., 2018. How do students coordinate context-based information and elements of their own knowledge? An analysis of students’ context-based problem-solving in thermodynamics. International Journal of Science Education, 40(16), pp.1935–1956. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1514673. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1514673

Mitarlis, Ibnu, S., Rahayu, S. and Sutrisno, 2020. The effectiveness of new inquiry-based learning (NIBL) for improving multiple higher-order thinking skills (M-HOTS) of prospective chemistry teachers. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), pp.1309–1325. Available from: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.3.1309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.3.1309

Munn, Z., Peters, M.D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A. and Aromataris, E., 2018. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), p.143. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Nigon, N., Tucker, J.D., Ekstedt, T.W., Jeong, B.C., Simionescu, D.C. and Koretsky, M.D., 2024. Adaptivity or agency? Educational technology design for conceptual learning of materials science. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32(6). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22790. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22790

Osadcha, K., Osadchyi, V., Semerikov, S., Chemerys, H. and Chorna, A.V., 2020. The Review of the Adaptive Learning Systems for the Formation of Individual Educational Trajectory. In: O. Sokolov, G. Zholtkevych, V. Yakovyna, Y. Tarasich, V. Kharchenko, V. Kobets, O. Burov, S. Semerikov and H. Kravtsov, eds. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on ICT in Education, Research and Industrial Applications. Integration, Harmonization and Knowledge Transfer. Volume II: Workshops, Kharkiv, Ukraine, October 06-10, 2020. CEUR-WS.org, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 2732, pp.547–558. Available from: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2732/20200547.pdf.

Overman, M., Vermunt, J.D., Meijer, P.C., Bulte, A.M. and Brekelmans, M., 2014. Students’ Perceptions of Teaching in Context-based and Traditional Chemistry Classrooms: Comparing content, learning activities, and interpersonal perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 36(11), pp.1871–1901. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.880004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.880004

Pellas, N., 2025. The Impact of AI-Generated Instructional Videos on Problem-Based Learning in Science Teacher Education. Education Sciences, 15(1), p.102. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010102

Peters, M.D.J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A.C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C.M. and Khalil, H., 2020. Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), pp.2119–2126. Available from: https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167

Pribush, R.A., 2015. Impact of Technology on Chemistry Instruction. In: M.V. Orna, ed. Sputnik to Smartphones: A Half-Century of Chemistry Education. Washington, DC: ACS Publications, ACS Symposium Series, vol. 1208, chap. 10, pp.155–194. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2015-1208.ch010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2015-1208.ch010

Qi, Y., An, C., Huang, C., Lv, H. and Zhang, H., 2024. Enhancing Critical Thinking in Vocational Chemistry Education: Active Learning Strategies in Vocational Training. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(11), pp.4892–4903. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00887. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00887

Reyes, R.L., Isleta, K.P., Regala, J.D. and Bialba, D.M.R., 2024. Enhancing experiential science learning with virtual labs: A narrative account of merits, challenges, and implementation strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(6), pp.3167–3186. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13061. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13061

Risi, S., Vanderbleek, S.D., Hughes, C.E. and Stanley, K.O., 2009. How novelty search escapes the deceptive trap of learning to learn. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, GECCO ’09, p.153–160. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/1569901.1569923. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1569901.1569923

Sadykov, T., Kokibasova, G., Minayeva, Y., Ospanova, A. and Kasymova, M., 2023. A systematic review of programmed learning approach in science education. Cogent Education, 10(1), p.2189889. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2189889. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2189889

Sagimbayeva, A., Samikova, M., Zhaxibayeva, Z., Berdalieva, A. and Bekbenova, A., 2024. Models for establishing subject-specific competencies for chemistry teachers. Scientific Herald of Uzhhorod University. Series Physics, (55), pp.317–325. Available from: https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/55.2024.31mt7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/55.2024.31mt7

Skinner, B.F., 1954. The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 24, pp.86–97.

Suaalii, F. and Bhattacharya, M., 2007. Conceptual Model of Learning to Improve Understanding of High School Chemistry. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 18(1), pp.101–110. Available from: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/21911.

Sweeder, R.D., Herrington, D.G. and Crandell, O.M., 2023. Chemistry Education Research at a Crossroads: Where Do We Need to Go Now? Journal of Chemical Education, 100(5), pp.1710–1715. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00091. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00091

Treagust, D.F., Qureshi, S.S., Vishnumolakala, V.R., Ojeil, J., Mocerino, M. and Southam, D.C., 2020. Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) as a Culturally Relevant Pedagogy (CRP) in Qatar: a Perspective from Grade 10 Chemistry Classes. Research in Science Education, 50(3), pp.813–831. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9712-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9712-0

Tricco, A.C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K.K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M.D., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E.A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M.G., Garritty, C., Lewin, S., Godfrey, C.M., MacDonald, M.T., Langlois, E.V., Soares-Weiser, K., Moriarty, J., Clifford, T., Tunçalp, Ö. and Straus, S.E., 2018. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), pp.467–473. Available from: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850

Utami, D.D., Setyosari, P., Kamdi, W., Ulfa, S. and Kuswandi, D., 2020. The effect of smart-pbl learning strategy and academic-self regulated learning on metacognitive & problem-solving skills in learning chemistry. Periodico Tche Quimica, 17(35), pp.960–976. Available from: https://doi.org/10.52571/PTQ.v17.n35.2020.79_UTAMI_pgs_960_976.pdf. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52571/PTQ.v17.n35.2020.79_UTAMI_pgs_960_976.pdf

Velázquez-García, L., Cedillo-Hernández, A., Colón-Vallejo, A., Del Pilar Longar-Blanco, M. and Cedillo-Hernández, M., 2025. AI-Based Applications Enhancing Computer Science Teaching in Higher Education. Journal of Information Systems Engineering and Management, 10(2.0), pp.14–32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i2.920. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52783/jisem.v10i2.920

Vincent-Ruz, P. and Boase, N.R.B., 2022. Activating discipline specific thinking with adaptive learning: A digital tool to enhance learning in chemistry. PLoS ONE, 17(11), p.e0276086. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276086

Witherby, A.E. and Tauber, S.K., 2017. The Influence of Judgments of Learning on Long-Term Learning and Short-Term Performance. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), pp.496–503. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.08.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.08.004

Wu, S.H. and Lai, C.L., 2020. The Role of Technology in Chemistry Experiment Learning: A Review of Academic Publications from 1993 to 2018. In: J. Shen, Y.C. Chang, Y.S. Su and H. Ogata, eds. Cognitive Cities. Singapore: Springer Singapore, Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 1227, pp.642–651. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6113-9_74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6113-9_74

Wu, S.H., Lai, C.L., Hwang, G.J. and Tsai, C.C., 2021. Research Trends in Technology-Enhanced Chemistry Learning: A Review of Comparative Research from 2010 to 2019. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(4), pp.496–510. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09894-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09894-w

Young, J.D., Demirdöğen, B., Bauer, C.F. and Lewis, S.E., 2024. A lack of impact of pedagogy (peer-led team learning compared with didactic instruction) on long-term student knowledge of chemical equilibrium. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 26(1), pp.183–196. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1039/d3rp00148b. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/D3RP00148B