Authors : Arkoful Sam

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 10 - October

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4zsax8ad

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26Oct857

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study investigated chemistry students’ misconceptions about common salt in seawater and their implications for the chemistry education curriculum. Using a phenomenological design within the Model of Educational Reconstruction framework, the research engaged forty-five (45) first-year chemistry students at the University of Education, Winneba (UEW), Ghana. Participants were organized into nine groups of five students each and observed over a six-week period. Findings revealed that students frequently expressed misconceptions, inconsistent reasoning, and unscientific ideas about oceanic chemical processes. These misconceptions highlighted significant conceptual gaps in their understanding of solutions and seawater chemistry. The study underscores the need to reconceptualize curriculum content to address these misconceptions, offering valuable insights into achieving conceptual balance and strengthening the teaching of solution chemistry and marine science education.

Keywords : Misconceptions, Common Salt, Educational Reconstruction, Seawater, Marine Science.

References :

1. N. Seçken, “Identifying student’s misconceptions about salt,” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 234–245, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.004
2. S. Izzati and N. Rochmah, “Analysis of students’ comprehension and misconception towards the topic              of            salt solubility,” Jurnal Penelitian dan Pembelajaran IPA, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 152-165, 2020. https://doi.org/10.30870/jppi.v6i1.7324
3. B. M, Naah and M. J. Sanger, “Student misconceptions in writing balanced equations for dissolving ionic compounds in water,” Chemistry Education Research and Practice, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 186-194,     2012. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2rp00015f
4. [4] I. I. Salame and D. Nikolic, “Examining some of the challenges students face in learning about    solubility and the dissolution process,” Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science           Education, vol. 17, no. 3, e2237, 2021. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9333
5. I. Kibirige, J. Osodo and K. M. Tlala. “The effect of Predict-Observe-Explain strategy on learners’    misconceptions about dissolved salts,” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 300-310, 2014. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n4p300
6. C. A. Stedmon and A. W. Visser, “Why is the sea salty and does it matter?” Frontiers for Young Minds,             11, 1097831, 2023.  https://doi.org/10.3389/frym.2023.1097831
7. J. I. Drever, “The geochemistry of natural waters: Surface and groundwater environments” (3^rd ed.),Prentice Hall, 1997.
8. M. Chaplin, “Do we underestimate the importance of water in cell biology?” Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 861-866, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2022
9. K. Niebert, and H. Gropengiesser, “Understanding and communicating climate change in metaphors,” Environmental Education Research, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 282-302. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.690855
10. J. Ankrah, “Climate change impacts and coastal livelihoods; an analysis of fishers of coastal Winneba,              Ghana,” Ocean & Coastal Management, vol. 161, pp. 141-146. 2018.     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.04.029
11. J. Amoako, F. Osei, and P. Mensah, “Coastal dynamics and environmental challenges along Ghana’s                Gulf of Guinea shoreline,” Journal of Coastal Research, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 350-360. 2022.  https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-21-
12. J. W. Creswell and V. L. Plano-Clark, “Designing and conducting mixed methods research,” Sage Publications, 2018.
13. I. Steinke, “Quality criteria in qualitative research,” In U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research, pp. 184–190, Sage Publications, 2004.
14. J. Hall, R. Smith and A. Patel, “Enhancing student understanding of ion movement with visual models,” Advances in Physiology Education, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 145-152, 2025.
15. D. Torres, A. Xu, and B. Abrams, “Disentangling the dissolution of ionic and molecular compounds: alternative conceptions and teaching considerations in chemistry,” Journal of Chemical Education,               vol. 102, no. 7, pp. 2661-2672, 2025.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5c00307
16. M. Rahman and S. Hasan, “Experimental modeling of saltwater intrusion in coastal aquifers,” Journal          of Hydrology, vol. 624, 130456, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2025.130456
17. [17] W. Cai, Y. Wang and J. Li, “Salinity variability in estuarine systems: Implications for freshwater–seawater interactions,” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, vol. 290, 108512, 2025.     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2025.108512
18. A. N. Muniru, “Ocean Harmony: Blending tradition and conservation in Winneba,” ArcGIS Story    Maps, 2025.
19. D. Pauly and R. Froese, “Periodic closures and fish biomass recovery,” Marine Policy, vol. 132, 104654, 2021.
20. University of Education, Winneba, “DISE-UEW explores chemistry at the Ayensu Estuary,” UEW News, 2024.
21. N. Y. Boanu, I. Y. Dadson, K. Adu-Boahen, and E. O. Yeboah, “Assessment of the physico-chemical properties in the muni-pomadze ramsar site and its catchment in Winneba, Ghana,” Environmental  Protection Research, pp. 95-111, 2022. https://doi.org/10.37256/epr.222022786