Chimica nella Scuola

Non solo calcoli stechiometrici

Vol. 3 No. 3 (2026): Chimica nella Scuola n. 3 2026

La verifica del risultato per migliorare le abilità nel problem solving

  • Liberato Cardellini
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1473/4jzqr874
Submitted
26 August 2026
Published
26 August 2026

Abstract

Some educational experiments were conducted to identify the difficulties students encounter in using familiar concepts such as density or in solving simple stoichiometric calculation problems and verifying the result. This article demonstrates how the systematic use of verification improves students’ self-esteem and problem-solving skills.

References

  1. [1] D. R. Krathwohl, A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview, Theory Into Practice, 2002, 41, 212-218.
  2. [2] G. Tsaparlis, U. Zoller, M. Fastow, A. Lubezky, Students’ Self-Assessment in Chemistry Examinations Requiring Higher- and Lower-Order Cognitive Skills, Journal of Chemical Education, 1999, 76, 112-113.
  3. [3] R. S. Nickerson, D. N. Perkins, E. E. Smith, The teaching of thinking, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1985, p. 323.
  4. [4] J. R. Anderson, Cognitive psychology and its implications, Fourth Ed., W. H. Freeman, New York, 1995, p. 237.
  5. [5] D. H. Jonassen, Learning to solve problems: a handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments, Routledge, New York, 2011, p. xvii-xviii.
  6. [6] H. Buff, Stöchiometrie. Ein leitfaden zur kenntniss und anwendung der lehre von den bestimmten chemischen proportionen. Campeschen Officin, Nürnberg, 1829.
  7. [7] H. Kramers-Pals, J. Lambrechts, P. J. Wolff, Recurrent difficulties: Solving quantitative problems. Journal of Chemical Education, 1982, 59, 509-513.
  8. [8] M. Frazer, R. Sleet, A study of students’ attempts to solve chemical problems, European Journal of Science Education, 1984, 6, 141-152.
  9. [9] D. Gabel, K. Samuel, High school students’ ability to solve molarity problems and their analogue counterparts, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1986, 23, 165-176.
  10. [10] J. D. Herron, T. J. Greenbowe, What can we do about Sue: A case study of competence, Journal of Chemical Education, 1986, 63, 528-531.
  11. [11] M. Niaz, The relationship between M-demand, algorithms, and problem solving: A neo-piagetian analysis, Journal of Chemical Education, 1989, 66, 422-424.
  12. [12] G. M. Bodner, I have found you an argument: The conceptual knowledge of beginning chemistry graduate students, Journal of Chemical Education, 1991, 68, 385-388.
  13. [13] J. Cohen, M. Kennedy-Justice, et al., Encouraging meaningful quantitative problem solving, Journal of Chemical Education, 2000, 77, 1166-1173.
  14. [14] A. H. Johnstone, Can problem solving be taught? University Chemistry Education, 2001, 5, 69-73.
  15. [15] G. M. Bodner, J. D. Herron, Problem-solving in chemistry. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, J. H. Van Driel (a cura di), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp 235-266). Kluwer, New York, 2003.
  16. [16] M. S. Cracolice, J. C. Deming, B. Ehlert, Concept learning versus problem solving: A cognitive difference, Journal of Chemical Education, 2008, 85, 873-878.
  17. [17] A. L. Chandrasegaran, D. F. Treagust, et al., Students’ dilemmas in reaction stoichiometry problem solving: Deducing the limiting reagent in chemical reactions, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2009, 10, 14-23.
  18. [18] M. C. Sostarecz, A. G. Sostarecz, A conceptual approach to limiting-reagent problems, Journal of Chemical Education, 2012, 89, 1148-1151.
  19. [19] O. Gulacar, T. L. Overton, et al., A novel code system for revealing sources of students’ difficulties with stoichiometry, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2013, 14, 507-515.
  20. [20] E. Yuriev, S. Naidu, et al., Scaffolding the development of problem-solving skills in chemistry: Guiding novice students out of dead ends and false starts, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2017, 18, 486-504.
  21. [21] M. Shadreck, O. C. Enunuwe, Recurrent difficulties: Stoichiometry problem-solving, African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 2018, 14, 25-31.
  22. [22] K. Vo, M. Sarkar, et al., Problem solving in chemistry supported by metacognitive scaffolding: teaching associates’ perspectives and practices, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2022, 23, 436-451.
  23. [23] G. Polya, How to Solve it. A New Aspect of Mathematical Method, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1973, p. xvii.
  24. [24] A. H. Schoenfeld, Mathematical problem solving, Academic Press, New York, 1985.
  25. [25] P. Liljedahl, M. Santos-Trigo (a cura di), Mathematical Problem Solving. Current Themes, Trends, and Research, Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 2019.
  26. [26] D. J. Herron, The chemistry classroom: Formulas for successful teaching, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1996, pp. 73-75.
  27. [27] D. Frank, Implementing instruction to improve the problem-solving abilities of general chemistry students (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1985). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1986, 47(1), 141-A.
  28. [28] C. S. Dweck, Motivational processes affecting learning, American Psychologist, 1986, 41, 1040-1048.
  29. [29] K. Amrai, S. E. Motlagh, et al., The relationship between academic motivation and academic achievement students, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011, 15, 399-402.
  30. [30] C. Romero, A. Master, et al., Academic and emotional functioning in middle school: The role of implicit theories, Emotion, 2014, 14, 227-234.
  31. [31] K. A. Renninger, S. E. Hidi, The power of interest for motivation and engagement. Routledge, New York, 2016.
  32. [32] R. M. Ryan, E. L. Deci, Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2020, 61, 101860.
  33. [33] R. Pekrun, H. W. Marsh, et al., School grades and students’ emotions: Longitudinal models of within-person reciprocal effects, Learning and Instruction, 2023, 83, 101626.
  34. [34] E. Santana-Monagas, F. Núñez-Regueiro, J. L. Núñez, Does motivation lead to academic success, or conversely? Reciprocal relations between autonomous and controlled motivation, and mathematics achievement, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2025, 95, 513-529.
  35. [35] Rif. 23, pp. 14-15.
  36. [36] L. Cardellini, Strategie per il Problem Solving in Chimica, Libreria Scientifica Ragni, Ancona, 2014, pp. 109-110.
  37. [37] V. Roadrangka, R. H. Yeany, M. J. Padilla, The construction and validation of group assessment of logical thinking (GALT). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX, 1983.
  38. [38] D. M. Bunce, K. D. Hutchinson, The use of the GALT (Group Assessment of Logical Thinking) as a predictor of academic success in College Chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education, 1993, 70, 183-187.
  39. [39] L. Bird, Logical reasoning ability and student performance in general chemistry, Journal of Chemical Education, 2010, 87, 541-546.
  40. [40] Rif. 36, pp. 13-14.
  41. [41] M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, Overview, in M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, M. J. Farr (a cura di), The Nature of Expertise (pp. xv-xxviii). Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988.
  42. [42] L. Cardellini, Moli di reazione che avvengono: un concetto utile nella stechiometria, La Chimica nella Scuola, 1995, 17, 19-21.
  43. [43] Rif. 36, pp. 26-27.
  44. [44] D. H. Schunk, F. Pajares, The Development of Academic Self-Efficacy. In A. Wigfield, J. S. Eccles (a cura di), Development of Achievement Motivation (pp. 15-31). Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 2002.
  45. [45] L. Cardellini, Ragionamenti fondamentali nel calcolo stechiometrico. Superare le difficoltà con la densità, La Chimica nella Scuola, 2019, 41, 25-83.
  46. [46] G. A. Miller, The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information, Psychological Review, 1956, 63, 81-97.
  47. [47] A. H. Johnstone, New stars for the teacher to steer by? Journal of Chemical Education, 1984, 61, 847-849.
  48. [48] J. Sweller, P. Ayres, S. Kalyuga, Cognitive Load Theory, Springer, New York, 2011.
  49. [49] L. Cardellini, Fattori di conversione e rapporti stechiometrici: strumenti logici per la risoluzione dei problemi, La Chimica nella Scuola, 1996, 18, 148-151.
  50. [50] L. Cardellini, Come risolvere i problemi sugli equilibri ionici, La Chimica nella Scuola, 2001, 23, 84-90.
  51. [51] T. L. Brown, H. E. LeMay, et al., Chemistry: The Central Science, 14e, Pearson, Harlow (UK), 2018, pp. 732-733.
  52. [52] R. H. Petrucci, F. G. Herring, et al., General Chemistry: Principles and modern applications, 11th Ed., Pearson Canada, Ontario (Canada), 2017, Ch. 17.
  53. [53] Rif. 51, p. 727.
  54. [54] Rif. 52, p. 755.
  55. [55] J. N. Butler, Ionic Equilibrium. A Mathematical Approach, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1964, p. vi.
  56. [56] J.-L. Burgot, Ionic Equilibria in Analytical Chemistry, Springer, New York, 2012, p. 88.
  57. [57] M. J. Sienko, Equilibrium, W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York, 1964, p. 404.
  58. [58] P. Nylén, N. Wigren, Stechiometria, CEDAM, Padova, 1971, pp. 174-175.
  59. [59] M. Kapur, Productive failure. Unlocking deeper learning through the science of failing, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2025.
  60. [60] M. Kapur, K. Bielaczyc, Classroom-based experiments in productive failure. In L. Carlson, C. Hölscher, T. Shipley (a cura di), Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2812-2817), Cognitive Science Society, Austin, 2011.
  61. [61] L. Cardellini, J. Pascual-Leone, On mentors, cognitive development, education, and constructivism: An interview with Juan Pascual-Leone, Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 2004, 4, 199-219.
  62. [62] L. Cardellini, The foundations of radical constructivism: An interview with Ernst von Glasersfeld, Foundations of Chemistry, 2006, 8, 177-187.

Most read articles by the same author(s)