Citation map · Study

SZodixStudyAcademic Library

Shelves Open access

Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated

Student Understanding of Ionic Bonding: Molecular versus Electrostatic Framework?.

0 references·16 citing·49 second hopsampled

FromToDepth

this work references cited by second hop· second hop is a sample of the most-cited connections

References

No references inside the corpus for this window.

Cited by

2001Alternative Conceptions of Chemical Bonding Held by Upper Secondary and Tertiary Students116 cited
2003Learners' mental models of metallic bonding: A cross‐age study111 cited
2001The Mismatch between Assumed Prior Knowledge and the Learner's Conceptions: A typology of learning impediments108 cited
2003Mediating mental models of metals: Acknowledging the priority of the learner's prior learning107 cited
2001Progression in high school students’ (aged 16–18) conceptualizations about chemical reactions in solution100 cited
2006A review of chemical bonding studies: needs, aims, methods of exploring students’ conceptions, general knowledge claims and students’ alternative conceptions100 cited
2009The effects of conceptual change texts accompanied with animations on overcoming 11th grade students’ alternative conceptions of chemical bonding98 cited
2002MENTAL MODELS IN CHEMISTRY: SENIOR CHEMISTRY STUDENTS MENTAL MODELS OF CHEMICAL BONDING88 cited
2000LEARNERS’ EXPLANATIONS FOR CHEMICAL PHENOMENA88 cited
2004Chemistry: A matter of understanding representations80 cited
2003The Atom in the Chemistry Curriculum: Fundamental Concept, Teaching Model or Epistemological Obstacle?80 cited
2013Representations of chemical bonding models in school textbooks – help or hindrance for understanding?79 cited
2011

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

Representational Classroom Practices that Contribute to Students’ Conceptual and Representational Understanding of Chemical Bonding

77 cited

2012Student misinterpretations and misconceptions based on their explanations of two computer animations of varying complexity depicting the same oxidation–reduction reaction71 cited

1998The sharing‐out of nuclear attraction: or ‘I can't think about physics in chemistry’67 cited

2017The influence of textbooks on teachers’ knowledge of chemical bonding representations relative to students’ difficulties understanding65 cited