Linking Conceptual Understanding and Competency Mastery in Senior High School Chemistry: A Diagnostic Study

This study investigated the conceptual understanding and mastery of key chemistry competencies among Grade 11 STEM learners at Pangutaran National High School. Using a descriptive quantitative research design, a diagnostic assessment aligned with the Senior High School Most Essential Learning Competencies (MELCs) was administered to fifty purposively selected participants. The assessment evaluated learners’ proficiency across ten chemistry competencies, including stoichiometry, gas laws, chemical equilibrium, chemical reactions, and chemical representations. Results indicated that the majority of learners exhibited low conceptual understanding, with only one competency classified as mastered, two as nearly mastered, and two as not mastered, corresponding to the least mastered competencies. The highest-performing competency involved representing compounds using chemical formulas and structures (84%), whereas the lowest-performing competency was calculating empirical formulas from percent composition (38%). The overall mean score of 62.07% fell within the least mastered classification, highlighting widespread difficulties in integrating mathematical reasoning, conceptual interpretation, and symbolic representation. These findings are consistent with prior research indicating that learners tend to perform better in representational tasks while struggling with quantitative and abstract concepts. The study underscores the need for conceptually oriented instruction, targeted remediation strategies, and the integration of diagnostic assessment feedback to enhance chemistry learning outcomes and address persistent misconceptions.

assessment, chemistry, conceptual competencies

1. Adadan, E. (2017). Using multiple representations to promote grade 11 students’ scientific understanding of the particulate nature of matter. International Journal of Science Education, 39(5), 625–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1294783 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Al-Balushi, S. M., Al-Musawi, A. S., Ambusaidi, A. K., & Al-Hajri, H. S. (2017). The effectiveness of using multiple representations in developing students’ conceptual understanding in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 681–697. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00048F [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart & Winston. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Balita, C. E., & Padayogdog, E. A. (2020). Conceptual understanding and misconceptions of senior high school students in chemistry. International Journal of Science and Research, 9(6), 1234–1239. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bennett, R. E. (2018). Formative assessment: A critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1415281 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Birenbaum, M., Kimron, H., Shilton, H., & Dori, Y. J. (2015). Students’ learning outcomes from formative and summative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education, 22(2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2014.938171 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. GL Assessment. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Bretz, S. L. (2019). Evidence for the importance of conceptual understanding in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(2), 193–199. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00733 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Çalik, M., Ayas, A., & Coll, R. K. (2015). Investigating the effectiveness of conceptual change texts on students’ understanding of chemistry concepts. Research in Science Education, 45(5), 683–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9442-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2017). The development of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate students’ understanding of chemical reactions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 751–768. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00025C [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Chiu, M. H. (2012). Identification and assessment of students’ misconceptions in chemistry. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Cooper, M. M. (2015). Why ask why? Journal of Chemical Education, 92(8), 1273–1279. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00203 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Cooper, M. M., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2018). Chemistry, life, the universe, and everything: A new approach to general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(4), 596–605. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00400 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dahsah, C., & Coll, R. K. (2018). Thai grade 10 students’ conceptual understanding of stoichiometry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 797–816. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1449485 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. De Leon, J. A. (2021). Chemistry misconceptions among senior high school students: Implications for instruction. Philippine Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 45–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Gabel, D. L. (2016). Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00729 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701–705. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed070p701 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Identifying pre-service teachers’ misconceptions in physics and chemistry using diagnostic tests. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2799–2813. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. National Research Council. (2016). Developing assessments for the next generation science standards. National Academies Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p191 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2014). Educational assessment of students (7th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Nurrenbern, S. C., & Pickering, M. (1987). Concept learning versus problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(6), 508–510. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed064p508 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Orgill, M., & Bodner, G. (2020). What research tells us about using analogies to teach chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(2), 540–553. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9RP00134H [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Santiago, R. T., & Cruz, J. P. (2023). Analysis of chemistry achievement of senior high school students. Journal of Science Education Research, 18(1), 33–47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Silberberg, M. S. (2013). Chemistry: The molecular nature of matter and change (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Sirhan, G. (2017). Learning difficulties in chemistry: An overview. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 14(2), 20–33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Taber, K. S. (2013). Chemical misconceptions: Prevention, diagnosis and cure. Royal Society of Chemistry. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Taber, K. S. (2017). Student thinking and learning in science: Perspectives on the nature of learner ideas. Science Education, 101(4), 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21290 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Taber, K. S., Akpan, B., & Ukwungwu, J. O. (2019). Challenges in learning chemistry concepts. Education Sciences, 9(2), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020105 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Tan, K. C. D., & Subramaniam, R. (2020). Addressing chemistry misconceptions through diagnostic assessment. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 6(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1163/23641177-BJA10001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069880100204 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Treagust, D. F., & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2020). Diagnostic assessment in chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(3), 715–727. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00029J [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Villafañe, S. M., & Lewis, J. E. (2016). Diagnostic assessment of students’ understanding of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(2), 227–236. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00705 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Villanueva, A. R. (2022). Diagnostic assessment practices in Philippine science classrooms. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 10(3), 112–120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Xu, X., & Lewis, J. E. (2019). Investigating students’ reasoning in chemistry assessments. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(5), 871–879. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00740 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study