Small-Scale and Microscale Chemistry Experiments: a Critical Review of Evidence-Based, Inclusive, and Sustainable Laboratory Design
Özet
Small-scale and microscale chemistry experiments have the potential to reduce chemical consumption, potential exposure, waste generation, and costs while supporting repeated experimentation and individual participation. However, the assumption that scale reduction alone ensures improved learning, greater safety, or sustainability is not sufficiently supported by the available evidence. Using a critical integrative review approach, the literature is synthesised in terms of relationships among experimental scale, pedagogical design, measurement reliability, student roles, teacher competencies, inclusivity, and contextual conditions. The proposed Design-Mechanism-Context-Outcome (DMCO) Framework conceptualises scale reduction not as a factor that directly determines learning, safety, and sustainability outcomes, but as a design input capable of activating particular mechanisms. A conceptual distinction is also established between small-scale chemistry and green chemistry, emphasising that sustainability claims should be supported by evidence concerning hazard, waste, solvent selection, energy use, atom economy, and resource utilisation. From this perspective, small-scale chemistry is positioned as a component of evidence-based, inclusive, and sustainable laboratory design, with explicit attention to evidence quality and reporting standards.
Referanslar
Abdullah, M., Mohamed, N., & Ismail, Z. H. (2009). The effect of an individualized laboratory approach through microscale chemistry experimentation on students’ understanding of chemistry concepts, motivation and attitudes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10(1), 53-61. https://doi.org/10.1039/B901461F
Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945-1969. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305
Agustian, H. Y., & Seery, M. K. (2017). Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education: A proposed framework for their design. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 518-532. https://doi.org/10.1039/c7rp00140a
American Chemical Society. (n.d.). 12 principles of green chemistry. https://www.acs.org/greenchemistry/principles/12-principles-of-green-chemistry.html
Anastas, P. T., & Warner, J. C. (1998). Green chemistry: Theory and practice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198506980.001.0001
Andraos, J., & Dicks, A. P. (2012). Green chemistry teaching in higher education: A review of effective practices. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(2), 69-79. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1rp90065j
Azizah, N., & Laksono, E. W. (2025). A systematic review: Chemistry practicum problems in the Merdeka Curriculum. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia FKIP Universitas Halu Oleo, 10(3), 425-442. https://doi.org/10.36709/jpkim.v10i3.212
Bretz, S. L. (2019). Evidence for the importance of laboratory courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(2), 193-195. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00874
Burmeister, M., Rauch, F., & Eilks, I. (2012). Education for sustainable development and chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(2), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1039/c1rp90060a
Domin, D. S. (1999). A review of laboratory instruction styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 543-547. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p543
Eilks, I., & Hofstein, A. (2014). Combining the question of the relevance of science education with the idea of education for sustainable development. In I. Eilks, S. Markic, & B. Ralle (Eds.), Science education research and education for sustainable development (pp. 3-14). Shaker Verlag. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4641.8563
Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. F. (Eds.). (2009). Multiple representations in chemical education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8872-8
Ginting, A. M., & Budiasih, K. S. (2025). Systematic literature review: Implementation of green chemistry in science education. Jurnal Pendidikan Kimia Indonesia, 9(1), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpki.v9i1.100446
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00230.x
Khoirunnisa, F., Hendrawan, H., Kadarohman, A., & Anwar, S. (2024). Research trends on microscale experiment laboratory in chemistry learning: The bibliometric analysis of literature. SHS Web of Conferences, 205, Article 05003. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202420505003
Mardhiya, J., & Laila, F. N. (2022). Designing small-scale chemistry for general chemistry practical work course. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 8(6), 3102-3109. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v8i6.2440
Mayo, D. W., Pike, R. M., & Forbes, D. C. (1991). Microscale organic laboratory. John Wiley & Sons.
National Research Council. (2011). Prudent practices in the laboratory: Handling and management of chemical hazards (Updated ed.). National Academies Press.
Nugultham, K., Tamuang, S., Seebunrueng, K., & Supasorn, S. (2026). Enhancing Grade-10 students' conceptual understanding of ionic bonding through small-scale experiments in conjunction with particulate-level model kits. Chemistry Teacher International. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2026-0008
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., ... Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119-2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
Rajesh, S., & Kumawat, A. S. (2024). Integrating additive manufacturing approaches in electrochemistry for enhanced systems—A mini review. Ionics, 30, 677-687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-023-05325-z
Reid, N., & Shah, I. (2007). The role of laboratory work in university chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 172-185. https://doi.org/10.1039/B5RP90026C
Seery, M. K. (2020). Establishing the laboratory as the place to learn how to do chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(6), 1511-1514. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00764
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Singh, M. M., Szafran, Z., & Pike, R. M. (1999). Microscale chemistry and green chemistry: Complementary pedagogies. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(12), 1684-1686. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p1684
Stock, J. T. (1990). Microscale chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 67(11), 958-960.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Suiirbay, S. (2025). Green chemistry in secondary education: A systematic review of global trends, pedagogical approaches, and implementation challenges. Research in Science & Technological Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2025.2603292
Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: The many faces of the chemistry “triplet”. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903386435
Tantayanon, S., Faikhamta, C., Prasoplarb, T., & Panyanukit, P. (2025). Teachers' perceptions and design of small-scale chemistry driven STEM learning activities. Chemistry Teacher International, 7(2), 303-317. https://doi.org/10.1515/cti-2024-0091
Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356-367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404-428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO.
Waterman, E. L., & Thompson, S. (1995). Small-scale chemistry laboratory manual. Addison-Wesley.
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Young, J. A. (Ed.). (2013). Safety in academic chemistry laboratories (8th ed.). American Chemical Society.
Zuin, V. G., Eilks, I., Elschami, M., & Kümmerer, K. (2021). Education in green chemistry and in sustainable chemistry: Perspectives towards sustainability. Green Chemistry, 23(4), 1594-1608. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0gc03313h
