PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 8, 2010International Journal of Science Education583 citations

Macro, Submicro, and Symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”

View Full Paper
VTVicente Talanquer

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

The idea that chemical knowledge can be represented in three main ways: macro, submicro, and symbolic (chemistry triplet) has become paradigmatic in chemistry and science education. It has served both as the base of theoretical frameworks that guide research in chemical education and as a central idea in various curriculum projects. However, this triplet relationship has been the subject of different adaptations and reinterpretations that sometimes lead to confusion and misunderstanding, which complicates the analysis of the triplet’s nature and scope. Thus, the central goal of this paper is to describe some of the existing views of the triplet relationship in chemistry and science education and critically analyse their underlying assumptions. We also propose a general structure of our chemistry knowledge intended to better situate the chemistry triplet in relationship with the different types, scales, dimensions, and approaches that seem to characterise such knowledge. Our proposed model may be useful in the analysis, evaluation, and reflection of educational research results and teaching practices centred on the triplet relationship.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Vicente Talanquer (2010) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fe2d1764de1d9f19e9636fhttps://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper