References
- Acar, B., & Tarhan, L. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning on students’ understanding of metallic bonding. Research in Science Education, 38(4), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9054-9
- Brown, D. E. (1993). Refocusing core intuitions: A concretizing role for analogy in conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1273–1290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660301009
- Brown, D. E., & Hammer, D. (2008). Conceptual change in physics. In International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 127–154).
- Chi, M. T. (2009). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 89–110). Routledge.
- Clark, D. B., D'Angelo, C. M., & Schleigh, S. P. (2011). Comparison of students’ knowledge structure coherence and understanding of force in the Philippines, Turkey, China, Mexico, and the United States. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 207–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2010.508028
- Cokelez, A. (2012). Junior high school students’ ideas about the shape and size of the atom. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9223-8
- Dangur, V., Avargil, S., Peskin, U., & Dori, Y. J. (2014). Learning quantum chemistry via a visual-conceptual approach: Students’ bidirectional textual and visual understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(3), 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00025K
- diSessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. B. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49–70). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2 & 3), 105–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
- diSessa, A. A. (2002). Why “conceptual ecology” is a good idea. In M. Limon & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 28–60). Springer.
- diSessa, A. A. (2014). The construction of causal schemes: Learning mechanisms at the knowledge level. Cognitive Science, 38(5), 795–850. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12131
- diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N., & Esterly, J. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28(6), 843–900. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2806_1
- diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1155–1191. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980201002
- Greek Pedagogical Institute. (2003). National program of study for primary and secondary education: Science. Greek Pedagogical Institute Publications.
- Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 68(S1), S52–S59. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19520
- Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5), 509–534. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199609)80:5<509::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-F
- Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352–381. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<352::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-J
- Ioannides, C., & Vosniadou, S. (2002). The changing meanings of force. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2(1), 5–62.
- Joki, J., & Aksela, M. (2018). The challenges of learning and teaching chemical bonding at different school levels using electrostatic interactions instead of the octet rule as a teaching model. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 932–953. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00110C
- Joki, J., Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., & Aksela, M. (2015). Coulombic interaction in Finnish middle school chemistry: A systemic perspective on students’ conceptual structure of chemical bonding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(4), 901–917. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00107B
- Ke, J. L., Monk, M., & Duschl, R. (2005). Learning introductory quantum physics: Sensori-motor experiences and mental models. International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1571–1594. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500186485
- Lemmer, M., & Morabe, O. N. (2017). Concept confusion and concept discernment in basic magnetism using analogical reasoning. Physics Education, 52(4), 045002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/aa6754
- Li, J., & Singh, C. (2016). Developing and validating a conceptual survey to assess introductory physics students’ understanding of magnetism. European Journal of Physics, 38(2), 025702. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/38/2/025702
- Maloney, D. P. (1985). Charged Poles? Physics Education, 20(6), 310. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/20/6/009
- Minstrell, J. (1992). Facets of student’s knowledge and relevant instruction. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 110–128). Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
- Muniz, M. N., Crickmore, C., Kirsch, J., & Beck, J. P. (2018). Upper-division chemistry students’ navigation and use of quantum chemical models. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 767–782. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00023A
- Nakiboglu, C. (2003). Instructional misconceptions of Turkish prospective chemistry teachers about orbitals and hybridization. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4(2), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1039/B2RP90043B
- Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates’ bonding misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 707–730. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690010025012
- Papageorgiou, G., Markos, A., & Zarkadis, N. (2016). Students’ representations of the atomic structure – the effect of some individual differences in particular task contexts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(1), 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00201J
- Papaphotis, G., & Tsaparlis, G. (2008). Conceptual versus algorithmic learning in high school chemistry: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts. Part 2. Students’ common errors, misconceptions and difficulties in understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(4), 332–340. https://doi.org/10.1039/B818470B
- Park, E. J., & Light, G. (2009). Identifying atomic structure as a threshold concept: Student mental models and troublesomeness. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 233–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701675880
- Petri, J., & Niedderer, H. (1998). A learning pathway in high-school level quantum atomic physics. International Journal of Science Education, 20(9), 1075–1088.
- Redfors, A., & Ryder, J. (2001). University physics students’ use of models in explanations of phenomena involving interaction between metals and electromagnetic radiation. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1283–1301. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110038620
- Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of Learning Science, 3(2), 115–163. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1
- Stamovlasis, D., Papageorgiou, G., & Tsitsipis, G. (2013). The coherent versus fragmented knowledge hypotheses for the structure of matter: An investigation with a robust statistical methodology. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 485–495. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00042G
- Stevens, S. Y., Delgado, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). Developing a hypothetical multi-dimensional learning progression for the nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 687–715. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20324
- Taber, K. S. (2000). Case studies and generalizability: Grounded theory and research in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 469–487. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900289732
- Taber, K. S. (2002). Conceptualizing quanta – illuminating the ground state of student understanding of atomic orbitals. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 3(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1039/B2RP90012B
- Taber, K. S. (2003). The atom in the chemistry curriculum: Fundamental concept, teaching model or epistemological obstacle? Foundations of Chemistry, 5(1), 43–84. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021995612705
- Taber, K. S. (2005). Learning quanta: Barriers to stimulating transitions in student understanding of orbital ideas. Science Education, 89(1), 94–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20038
- Taber, K. S. (2008). Conceptual resources for learning science: Issues of transcience and grain-size in cognition and cognitive structure. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1027–1053. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701485082
- Taber, K. S. (2013). Upper secondary students’ understanding of the basic physical interactions in analogous atomic and solar systems. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1377–1406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9312-3
- Taber, K. S. (2014). The significance of implicit knowledge for learning and teaching chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(4), 447–461. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00124A
- Taber, K. S. (2018). Lost and found in translation: guidelines for reporting research data in an ‘other’ language. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 646–652.
- Taber, K. S., & Tan, K. C. D. (2007). Exploring learners’ conceptual resources: Singapore A level students’ explanations in the topic of ionisation energy. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(3), 375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9044-9
- Talanquer, V. (2006). Commonsense chemistry: A model for understanding students’ alternative conceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(5), 811. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p811
- Talanquer, V. (2014). Threshold concepts in chemistry: The critical role of implicit schemas. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(1), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500679k
- Tsaparlis, G., & Papaphotis, G. (2009). High-school students’ conceptual difficulties and attempts at conceptual change: The case of basic quantum chemical concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 895–930. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801891908
- Vaiopoulou, J., & Papageorgiou, G. (2018). Primary students’ conceptions of the Earth: Re-examining a fundamental research hypothesis on mental models. Preschool and Primary Education, 6(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.12681/ppej.14210
- Vosniadou, S. (2002). On the nature of naive physics in reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. Springer.
- Vosniadou, S. (2012). Reframing the classical approach to conceptual change: Preconceptions, misconceptions and synthetic models. In B. Frazer, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 119–130). Springer.
- Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., & Skopeliti, I. (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3–34). Routledge.
- Wang, C. Y., & Barrow, L. H. (2013). Exploring conceptual frameworks of models of atomic structures and periodic variations, chemical bonding, and molecular shape and polarity: A comparison of undergraduate general chemistry students with high and low levels of content knowledge. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(1), 130–146. https://doi.org/10.1039/C2RP20116J
- Yayon, M., Mamlok-Naaman, R., & Fortus, D. (2012). Characterizing and representing student's conceptual knowledge of chemical bonding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(3), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1039/C0RP90019B
- Zarkadis, N., Papageorgiou, G., & Stamovlasis, D. (2017). Studying the consistency between and within the student mental models for atomic structure. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 893–902. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00135E