SINTA

0.0

Impact

Scholar

6

H-Index

Journal of Chemical Learning Innovation

an Open Access Journal

Guided Discovery Learning for Acid-Base Chemistry: Effects on Student Achievement and Conceptual Mastery

Heti Nurhayati
Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University
Indonesia
heti12@gmail.com
Majid Shabani Mahalli
University of Mazandaran ROR
Iran, Islamic Republic of
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to analyze the effect of guided discovery learning on students’ chemistry learning outcomes and conceptual understanding in acid-base topics, addressing challenges in mastering abstract chemical concepts through structured experimental activities.

    Methodology: A quasi-experimental design with a non-equivalent control group was employed. The experimental group received guided discovery learning integrated with laboratory activities, while the control group followed conventional instruction. Data were collected through pre-tests, post-tests, and observation sheets, and analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent sample t-tests, N-gain, and effect size (Cohen’s d) with SPSS software.

    Main Findings: Results show that the experimental group achieved higher post-test scores (Mean = 82.15, N-gain = 0.67) compared to the control group (Mean = 70.21, N-gain = 0.45), with a statistically significant difference (p = 0.001) and a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.82). Guided discovery learning effectively improves students’ conceptual understanding and overall chemistry learning outcomes.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study integrates guided discovery learning with systematically designed laboratory activities in acid-base instruction, providing a holistic evaluation of learning improvement. The approach connects theoretical concepts with practical experiences, offering a more effective instructional model and contributing new knowledge for enhancing chemistry education practices in secondary schools.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    H. Nurhayati and M. S. . Mahalli, “Guided Discovery Learning for Acid-Base Chemistry: Effects on Student Achievement and Conceptual Mastery”, Jor. Chem. Lea. Inn, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 25–31, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.37251/jocli.v3i1.2967.

    More Citation Formats

  • 86
    Abstract views
    57
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. N. Waight, X. Liu, and M. Whitford, “‘Like They Are Everyday Substances, You Like See Them, Hold Them, Use Them Every Day’: Students’ Understanding of Big Ideas and Macro and Submicro Chemistry Phenomena in the Context of Computer-Based Models,” Res. Sci. Educ., vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 935–960, 2023, doi: 10.1007/s11165-023-10114-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10114-9
    2. S. D. Luviani, S. Mulyani, and T. Widhiyanti, “A review of three levels of chemical representation until 2020,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1806, no. 1, p. 12206, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012206
    3. D. Sarıtaş, H. Özcan, and A. Adúriz-Bravo, “Observation and Inference in Chemistry Teaching: a Model-Based Approach to the Integration of the Macro and Submicro Levels,” Sci. Educ., vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 1289–1314, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11191-021-00216-z. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00216-z
    4. H. A. El-Sabagh, E. du Plooy, D. Casteleijn, D. Franzsen, C. C. Y. Yang, and H. Ogata, “Personalized learning analytics intervention approach for enhancing student learning achievement and behavioral engagement in blended learning,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 2509–2528, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11291-2
    5. S. E. and A. E. W. Benjamin, “Studying the student’s perceptions of engagement and problem-solving skills for academic achievement in chemistry at the higher secondary level,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 8347–8368, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12165-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12165-x
    6. I. García-Martínez, J. M. Fernández-Batanero, J. Fernández-Cerero, and S. P. León, “Analysing the Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Computational Sciences on Student Performance: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis,” J. New Approaches Educ. Res., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 171–197, 2023, doi: 10.7821/naer.2023.1.1240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.1.1240
    7. P. J. Woods and Y. Copur-Gencturk, “Examining the role of student-centered versus teacher-centered pedagogical approaches to self-directed learning through teaching,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 138, p. 104415, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2023.104415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104415
    8. J. Busa and S.-J. Chung, “The Effects of Teacher-Centered and Student-Centered Approaches in TOEIC Reading Instruction,” 2024. doi: 10.3390/educsci14020181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020181
    9. P. Bergström, M. Rönnlund, and Å. Tieva, “Making the Transition from Teacher-Centered Teaching to Students’ Active Learning: Developing Transformative Agency BT - Creating Dynamic Places for Learning: An Evidence Based Design Approach,” P. C. Lippman and E. A. Matthews, Eds., Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2023, pp. 99–115. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-8749-6_6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-8749-6_6
    10. G. Tsaparlis and H. Sevian, Concepts of Matter in Science Education, vol. 19. in Innovations in Science Education and Technology, vol. 19. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2013. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-5914-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5914-5
    11. A. Li et al., “Discovery and mechanism-guided engineering of BHET hydrolases for improved PET recycling and upcycling,” Nat. Commun., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 4169, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-39929-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39929-w
    12. C. Fazio, “Active Learning Methods and Strategies to Improve Student Conceptual Understanding: Some Considerations from Physics Education Research BT - Research and Innovation in Physics Education: Two Sides of the Same Coin,” J. Guisasola and K. Zuza, Eds., Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020, pp. 15–35. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-51182-1_2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51182-1_2
    13. Sumartiningsih, Dafik, and Suparti, “The analysis of the implementation of discovery-based learning to improve students’ creative thinking skills in solving the number multiplication problems,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1563, no. 1, p. 012070, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1563/1/012070. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1563/1/012070
    14. E. Fitriani and F. Festiyed, “Effect of STEM integrated physics e-modules to improve critical thinking ability of class XI students of SMAN 2 Lubuk Sikaping,” Phys. Learn. Educ., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 124–129, 2023, doi: 10.24036/ple.v1i2.57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24036/ple.v1i2.57
    15. I. Aldalur and A. Perez, “Gamification and discovery learning: Motivating and involving students in the learning process,” Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 1, p. e13135, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13135
    16. E. Nsabayezu, A. Iyamuremye, J. P. Nahimana, J. Mukiza, E. Kampire, and T. Nsengimana, “The progress in the application of rubric materials in chemistry teaching and students’ learning enhancement during 21st century: a systematic review,” Discov. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 5, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s44217-022-00005-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-022-00005-y
    17. A. Bandura, D. Ross, and S. A. Ross, “Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models.,” J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 575–582, Nov. 1961, doi: 10.1037/h0045925. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045925
    18. M. Zaheer and S. Munir, “Research supervision in distance learning: issues and challenges,” Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 131–143, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1108/AAOUJ-01-2020-0003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/AAOUJ-01-2020-0003
    19. L. Barua and B. B. Lockee, “A review of strategies to incorporate flexibility in higher education course designs,” Discov. Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 127, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44217-024-00213-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00213-8
    20. S. Maksić and S. Jošić, “Scaffolding the development of creativity from the students’ perspective,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 41, p. 100835, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100835
    21. S. Hong, J. Moon, T. Eom, I. D. Awoyemi, and J. Hwang, “Generative AI-enhanced virtual reality simulation for pre-service teacher education: a mixed-methods analysis of usability and instructional utility for course integration,” 2025. doi: 10.3390/educsci15080997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15080997
    22. P. A. Kirschner, J. Sweller, and R. E. Clark, “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching,” Educ. Psychol., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 75–86, Jun. 2006, doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
    23. J. D. Johnson, L. Smail, D. Corey, and A. M. Jarrah, “Using Bayesian Networks to Provide Educational Implications: Mobile Learning and Ethnomathematics to Improve Sustainability in Mathematics Education,” 2022. doi: 10.3390/su14105897. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su14105897
    24. K. C. Culver and N. A. Bowman, “Is What Glitters Really Gold? A Quasi-Experimental Study of First-Year Seminars and College Student Success,” Res. High. Educ., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 167–196, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11162-019-09558-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-019-09558-8
    25. C. J. Asarta and J. R. Schmidt, “The effects of online and blended experience on outcomes in a blended learning environment,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 44, p. 100708, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100708
    26. L. Alfieri, P. J. Brooks, N. J. Aldrich, and H. R. Tenenbaum, “Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?,” J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 1–18, Feb. 2011, doi: 10.1037/a0021017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017
    27. K. Altmeyer, S. Kapp, M. Thees, S. Malone, J. Kuhn, and R. Brünken, “The use of augmented reality to foster conceptual knowledge acquisition in STEM laboratory courses—Theoretical background and empirical results,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 611–628, May 2020, doi: 10.1111/bjet.12900. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12900
    28. F. Baier, C. Maurer, C. Dignath, and M. Kunter, “Fostering pre-service teachers’ theoretical knowledge application: studying with and without text-based cases,” Instr. Sci., vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 855–876, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s11251-021-09560-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-021-09560-7
    29. A. F. Di Natale, C. Repetto, G. Riva, and D. Villani, “Immersive virtual reality in K-12 and higher education: A 10-year systematic review of empirical research,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 2006–2033, Nov. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13030. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13030
    30. C. Brierley, L. Ellis, and E. R. Reid, “Peer-assisted learning in medical education: A systematic review and meta-analysis,” Med. Educ., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 365–373, Apr. 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14672. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14672
    31. E. C. Zabor, A. M. Kaizer, and B. P. Hobbs, “Randomized Controlled Trials,” Chest, vol. 158, no. 1, Supplement, pp. S79–S87, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.013
    32. F. Wadood, F. Akbar, and I. Ullah, “The importance and essential steps of pilot testing in management studies: a quantitative survey results,” J. Contemp. Issues Bus. Gov., vol. 27, no. 5, p. 2021, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://cibg.org.au/
    33. S. M. Inggit, W. Liliawati, and I. Suryana, “Identifikasi Miskonsepsi dan Penyebabnya Menggunakan Instrumen Five-Tier Fluid Static Test (5TFST) pada Peserta Didik Kelas XI Sekolah Menengah Atas,” J. Teach. Learn. Phys., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 49–68, 2021, doi: 10.15575/jotalp.v6i1.11016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15575/jotalp.v6i1.11016
    34. L. I. Nashoihah and T. Nurita, “Improvement of students critical thinking skills through structured inquiry learning models on substance pressure topics,” J. Pijar Mipa, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 462–468, 2022, doi: 10.29303/jpm.v17i4.3661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v17i4.3661
    35. I. Wayan Distrik, Z. A. Imam Supardi, B. Jatmiko, and Yuberti, “The effects of multiple representations-based learning in improving concept understanding and problem-solving ability,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1796, no. 1, p. 012044, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012044. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1796/1/012044
    36. H. Barjestesh, P. Vijayaratnam, M. Sabzevari, N. Fatehi Rad, K. Rabani, and M. Manoochehrzadeh, “Digital Literacy of Iranian English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Teachers: Teaching Experience in Focus,” Forum Linguist. Stud., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 163–171, Jan. 2025, doi: 10.30564/fls.v7i1.7244. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7244
    37. R. Fernande, V. Sridharan, and W. Kuandee, “Innovation Learning with POE: Improve Understanding Student to Equality Square,” J. Educ. Technol. Learn. Creat., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 20–28, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jetlc.v2i1.977. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jetlc.v2i1.977
    38. V. H. Nguyen, R. Halpin, and A. R. Joy-Thomas, “Guided inquiry-based learning to enhance student engagement, confidence, and learning,” J. Dent. Educ., vol. 88, no. 8, pp. 1040–1047, Aug. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13531. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jdd.13531
    39. K. M. Jegstad, “Inquiry-based chemistry education: a systematic review,” Stud. Sci. Educ., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 251–313, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1080/03057267.2023.2248436. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2023.2248436
    40. J. Sweller, “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning,” Cogn. Sci., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 257–285, 1988. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
    41. A. A. Alanazi, K. Osman, and L. Halim, “Effect of scaffolding strategies and guided discovery on higher-order thinking skills in physics education,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 20, no. 9, p. em2496, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/14980. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14980