Molecular visualization has become increasingly accessible in chemistry education, yet less is known about how students use visualization experiences to interpret, revise, and coordinate molecular representations. This study examined representational reasoning in introductory organic chemistry through the analysis of student-generated artifacts produced during molecular visualization activities. The analyzed artifacts were generated during regular course instruction by 120 first-year undergraduate Allied Health students enrolled in an introductory organic chemistry course. Working in pairs, the students completed molecular visualization activities involving five molecular systems (butane, cyclohexane, 2-butanol, cis/trans-2-butene, and acetic acid) using the freely accessible platforms MolView and ChemTube3D. Artifacts, including written explanations, sketches, annotations, and representational comparisons, were examined to investigate how learners interpreted, revised, and coordinated symbolic, intermediate, and spatial representations. Findings indicate that students initially relied on symbolic representations as primary interpretive anchors, often demonstrating uncertainty regarding the spatial molecular organization. Molecular visualization supported revision of molecular interpretations and coordination of multiple representations across stereochemistry, conformational change, geometric isomerism, and molecular polarity. Analysis of the artifacts further informed a proposed representational reasoning cycle describing how learners moved from initial interpretation toward comparison, revision, and coordination of molecular representations. The findings suggest that molecular visualization may be valuable not only as a visualization resource but also as a representational environment that supports molecular reasoning and representational coordination in introductory organic chemistry.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reyes et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: