Accommodating Diverse Learning Styles in Undergraduate Chemistry: A Mixed-Methods Study on Differentiated Interactive Learning Materials
), Sumiati Side(2), Nurul Ilmi(3)
| 
Country:
(1) Department of Chemistry, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
(2) Department of Chemistry, Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
(3) Material Science Division, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Japan
Corresponding Author
This study investigates chemistry students’ perceptions of Interactive Learning Materials (ILMs) developed using a differentiated instruction approach. The research employed a mixed-methods design involving 62 undergraduate students in the Chemistry Education Program, Universitas Negeri Makasar, Indonesia, who completed a perception questionnaire and a validated online learning-style assessment. Descriptive analysis revealed that students’ overall perceptions of the ILMs were highly positive across six dimensions: preliminary experience, relevance, conceptual comprehension, differentiation, motivation, and effectiveness. In addition, a Kruskal–Wallis inferential test was conducted on a subset of 46 valid respondents to examine whether perception scores differed significantly across learning-style groups. The results indicated no statistically significant differences among the seven learning-style categories (H (6, 46) = 4.72, p = .58), suggesting that the ILMs were perceived positively and consistently across all groups. Qualitative responses further supported these findings, highlighting that kinesthetic learners valued interactive features but desired richer hands-on engagement. Overall, the study confirms that ILMs with differentiated pathways can effectively support diverse learners in mastering abstract chemistry concepts, while emphasizing the need for future development to integrate more kinesthetic and exploratory elements.
Keywords: interactive learning materials, differentiated instruction, learning styles, chemistry education, student perceptions.
Ang, W. (2020). Scaffolded inverse blended learning: an approach to teach an online general chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00436
Aslam, R. (2021). Impact of learning motivation on students’ academic achievement: mediating role of constructive feedback. Pakistan Social Sciences Review, 5(3), 438–449. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2021(5-iii)35
Asriadi, M., Hadi, S., & Istiyono, E. (2023). Trend research mapping of differentiated instruction: a bibliometric analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(2), 273–288. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpr.202320544
Ayub, S., Karim, A., & Laraib, A. (2023). Learning styles of medical students. The Professional Medical Journal, 30(9), 1475–1478. https://doi.org/10.29309/tpmj/2023.30.09.7650
Banks, G., Clinchot, M., Cullipher, S., Huie, R., Lambertz, J., Lewis, R. M., Ngai, C., Sevian, H., Szteinberg, G., Talanquer, V., & Weinrich, M. (2015). Uncovering chemical thinking in students’ decision making: a fuel-choice scenario. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(10), 1622–1630. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00119
Boelens, R., Voet, M., & Wever, B. De. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: instructors’ views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education, 120, 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009
Bondie, R., Dahnke, C., & Zusho, A. (2019). How does changing “one-size-fits-all” to differentiated instruction affect teaching?. Review of Research in Education, 43(1), 318–343. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732x18821130
Bush, A. A., Amechi, M. H., & Persky, A. M. (2020). An exploration of pharmacy education researchers’ perceptions and experiences conducting qualitative research. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(6), 7129. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7129
Cade, A., Sherson, M. W., Holt, K., Dobson, G., Pritchard, K., & Haavik, H. (2018). Differences in learning retention when teaching a manual motor skill with a visual vs written instructional aide. Journal of Chiropractic Education, 32(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.7899/jce-17-19
Cohen, A., & Singh, D. S. R. (2020). Effective student feedback as a marker for student success. South African Journal of Higher Education, 34(5), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.20853/34-5-4259
Cullipher, S., Sevian, H., & Talanquer, V. (2015). Reasoning about benefits, costs, and risks of chemical substances: mapping different levels of sophistication. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(3), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5rp00025d
Curley, L. E., Wu, Z., & Svirskis, D. (2018). Using technology in pharmacy education: pharmacy student performance and perspectives when visual aids are integrated into learning. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2018.01062
da Silva, D. C., Freitas Júnior, F. R., Ribeiro Silvia, T. M., & Carvalho Nunes, J. B. (2022). The characteristics of qualitative research: a study with theses from a postgraduate program in education. Educação Em Revista, 38. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-469826895t
Davenport, J. L., Rafferty, A. N., & Yaron, D. (2018). Whether and how authentic contexts using a virtual chemistry lab support learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 5(8), 1251–1259. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00048
DeVore, S., Marshman, E., & Singh, C. (2017). Challenge of engaging all students via self-paced interactive electronic learning tutorials for introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010127. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.13.010127
Ewim, D. R. E., & Opateye, J. (2021). Assessment for learning and feedback in chemistry: a case for employing information and communication technology tools. International Journal on Research in Stem Education, 3(2), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.31098/ijrse.v3i2.660
Hatmanto, E. D., & Rahmawati, F. (2023). Unleashing the potential: exploring attitudes and overcoming challenges in implementing differentiated instruction in the philippines’ english language classrooms. E3s Web of Conferences, 425, 02001. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202342502001
Hernandez, J., Vasan, N., Huff, S., & Melovitz‐Vasan, C. (2020). Learning styles/preferences among medical students: kinesthetic learners’ multimodal approach to learning anatomy. Medical Science Educator, 30(4), 1639–1643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01049-1
Hibbard, L., Sung, S., & Wells, B. (2015). Examining the effectiveness of a semi-self-paced flipped learning format in a college general chemistry sequence. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(12), 2038–2046. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00592
Hooda, M., Rana, C., Dahiya, O., Rizwan, A., & Hossain, M. S. (2022). Artificial intelligence for assessment and feedback to enhance student success in higher education. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5215722
Iterbeke, K., Witte, K. De, Declercq, K., & Schelfhout, W. (2020). The effect of ability matching and differentiated instruction in financial literacy education. evidence from two randomised control trials. Economics of Education Review, 74, 101949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2019.101949
Jain, R., & Sharma, R. (2023). Learners’ perception towards audio visual (AV) resources used in lecture classes. Shodhkosh Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 4(2), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v4.i2.2023.648
Karaman, P. (2021). The effect of formative assessment practices on student learning: a meta-analysis study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(1), 143–155. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.870300
Koć‐Januchta, M., Höffler, T. N., Prechtl, H., & Leutner, D. (2020). Is too much help an obstacle? effects of interactivity and cognitive style on learning with dynamic versus non-dynamic visualizations with narrative explanations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 1777–1799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09822-0
Kozleski, E. B. (2017). The uses of qualitative research. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 42(4), 211–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916683710
Min Swe, K. M., & Wh, K. (2020). Does learning style make a difference on student’s academic performance? learning style preferences of medical students from university tunku abdul rahman. Asian Journal of Medicine and Health, 18(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajmah/2020/v18i230183
Mngomezulu, H., Mkhize, T. F., & Nhlumayo, B. S. (2024). The role of formative feedback in teaching and learning: grade 10 physical sciences teachers’ perspectives. Interdisciplinary Journal of Education Research, 6(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.38140/ijer-2024.vol6.10
Palupi, A. D., Suwartono, T., & Sukawati, D. (2024). Can different learning styles impact efl learners’ toefl achievement? Premise Journal of English Education, 13(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v13i1.8751
Ruffing, S., Wach, F.-S., Spinath, F. M., Brünken, R., & Karbach, J. (2015). Learning strategies and general cognitive ability as predictors of gender- specific academic achievement. Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01238
Samsudi, S., Supraptono, E., Utanto, Y., Rohman, S., & Djafar, T. (2024). Unraveling the merdeka curriculum: exploring differentiated instruction’s impact on student learning. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 12(2), 701–720. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v12i2.1131
Schweiker, S., & Levonis, S. (2023). Enhancing chemistry education through technology-enhanced learning: Impact on student outcomes. ASCILITE Publications. https://doi.org/10.14742/apubs.2023.463
Sinaga, M., Situmorang, M., & Hutabarat, W. (2019). Implementation of innovative learning material to improve students competence on chemistry. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, 53(1), 28–41. https://doi.org/10.5530/ijper.53.1.5
Singh, A., & Ko Min, A. K. (2017). Digital lectures for learning gross anatomy: a study of their efficacy. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 29(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2017.50
Taş, H., & Minaz, M. B. (2024). The effects of learning style-based differentiated instructional activities on academic achievement and learning retention in the social studies course. Sage Open, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241249290
Valiandes, S. (2015). Evaluating the impact of differentiated instruction on literacy and reading in mixed-ability classrooms: quality and equity dimensions of education effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 45, 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.02.005
Westbroek, H., Rens, L. van, den Berg, E. van, & Janssen, F. (2020). A practical approach to assessment for learning and differentiated instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 1144–1166. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1744044
Winkelmann, K., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Fowler, D., & Macik, M. (2017). Development, implementation, and assessment of general chemistry lab experiments performed in the virtual world of second life. Journal of Chemical Education, 94(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00733
Wong, C. H., Tsang, K. C. K., & Chiu, W.-K. (2021). Using augmented reality as a powerful and innovative technology to increase enthusiasm and enhance student learning in higher education chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(1), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01029
Wu, M., & Yezierski, E. J. (2023). Investigating teacher–teacher feedback: uncovering useful socio-pedagogical norms for reform-based chemistry instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(11), 4272–4283. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00409
Yarris, L. M., Juvé, A. M., Coates, W. C., Fisher, J., Heitz, C., Shayne, P., & Farrell, S. (2015). Critical appraisal of emergency medicine education research: the best publications of 2014. Academic Emergency Medicine, 22(5), 629–637. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12801
Zowada, C., Gulacar, O., & Eilks, I. (2018). Innovating undergraduate general chemistry by integrating sustainability-related socio-scientific issues. Action Research and Innovation in Science Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.51724/arise.9
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.