10.2478 - Asn 2022 0012

ASN, Vol.
9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
Acta Scientifica Naturalis
Former Annual of Konstantin Preslavsky University of Shumen: Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Geography
Journal homepage: https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/asn/asn-overview.xml
Didactic model of the “Chemistry training process” system when applying semiotic approaches
Radostina Strahilova Vasileva-Tcankova
University of Shumen Bishop Konstantin Preslavski, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Chemistry,
115 Universitetska Str., 9700 Shumen, Bulgaria
Abstract: The present development uses the modeling method described in the literature and proposed a new
didactic, functional model of the "chemistry training" system in the application of semiotic approaches:
semantic, pragmatic, and syntactic. The main objective of creating such a model is to demonstrate the specific
activities of the subjects "teacher" and "pupil" when familiarizing themselves with chemical symbols and their
study by students. The added new components in the model "Technology of chemistry training", "Semiotic
information" and the clarified links between them, lead to a complete change in the way the described system
works. The developed didactic model makes it easy to guess the relationship between a new learning situation
and a result, that is, to predict an unknown process or phenomenon. This model makes it possible to formulate
a reasoned hypothesis of the study.
Keywords: model, modeling method, Chemistry training process system, Chemistry training technology and
semiotic information components, semiotic approaches, semantic approach, pragmatic approach, syntactic
approach
1. Staging the problem
The study of a number of literary sources and the practice of training show that chemical symbolism is
the most difficult component to absorb and understand in the "Learning Chemical Language" system [1, 2, 3,
5, 8]. It includes knowledge of chemical signs, formulas and equations, as well as the rules for their
compilation and use in training.
25
Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

DOI: 10.2478/asn-2022-0012 ©2022 Radostina Vasileva-Tcankova, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Public License
ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
Learning the chemical symbols and operating skills with them is one of the most complex and
important tasks of chemistry and environmental training in the seventh and eighth grades. Observations on
the results of the study of chemical indications indicate that they are not high.
In the practice of training in Chemistry and Environmental Protection, a relatively low level of
absorption of chemical symbols is established, which is confirmed by the ineedement of students to use them
in studied or similar situations. Insufficient awareness and continuity of knowledge was found, which led to
the mechanical learning of the symbols and was one of the reasons for the decrease in the interest and success
of the students in the subject [1, 2, 3, 5, 5, 8].
Problems, related to the more successful introduction and study of chemical language components, can
be overcome by applying new ideas in creating an optimal methodology for teaching the main chemical
symbols. The specificity of the chemical language as a sign system allows the transfer of ideas from semiotics
science and opens up the possibility of using new approaches and means in the study of chemical indications.
Clarifying the specifics of semiotic approaches: semantic, pragmatic, and syntactic allows the
following reference points for methodological and research work to be formulated:
1. Theoretically justified, the possibility of differentiating the common semiotic approach into three
more specific training approaches is theoretically justified – semantic, pragmatic and syntactic. We are
talking about private methodic approaches, because they stem from the specifics of science chemistry and the
subject "Chemistry and environmental protection" [4, 5, 7, 8, 10].
2. The most important signs of the three semiotic approaches have been sought and revealed.
3. The development and detection of the essence of semiotic approaches shall indicate that they can be
applied in the study of the types of substances and the types of chemical reactions in the process of their
marking.
4. Selected fragments of the learning content are shown, in which individual chemical symbols are
introduced with the way the three new approaches are applied. It has been experimentally established that the
methodology described leads to an improvement in the results of chemistry training.
The revealed nature and possibilities for using the three semiotic approaches in chemistry and
environmental training lead to the idea of building a model of the chemistry training process system in the
application of these research and training approaches.
2. Development of a functional, didactic model of the Chemistry training system in the application of
semiotic approaches
Modeling is a research procedure related to the redirection of scientific research from the studied real
objects and phenomena from reality to so-called models. From the different meanings of the concept of
26

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
“model” for scientific research, the following is appropriate: “The model is an image used under certain
conditions as a substitute or representative of the original.” [6, 13]. The image is usually formed by a scheme
or drawing, which explains the studied objects and phenomena [13]. Modelling is therefore a visual
representation of objects and phenomena from reality and the use of images to study the originals replaced by
them. Substitution is possible because of the existence of some similarity (similarity, analogy, conformity)
between them. There may be no external physical likeness between the image and the actual object, i.e. the
model is a substitute sign. The modeling procedure is suitable for both material objects and ideal (thought)
images, for example, for concepts with their characteristic signs. Therefore, models are used in different
nature sciences, and modeling is a general scientific and universal method. The models not only explain the
phenomena studied, but serve to predict them by the researcher, which is a manifestation of their heuristic
functions [6, 13].
In the system of pedagogical sciences, so-called didactic models are created and used. They may serve
research purposes or be applied as a means of training [6, 11, 12].
For the current work, research-oriented didactic models are of interest. They illustrate the researched
changes in training, from which changes in the results obtained such as knowledge, skills and relationships
are expected. The model allows to guess the relationship between a new learning situation and a result, that
is, to predict an unknown phenomenon. Didactic models make it possible to formulate a reasoned hypothesis
of the study.
The wide variety of definitions for the method "modeling" and the proposed classifications of the types
of models in pedagogical and methodological literature [5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17] enable three main stages
to be outlined in the process of developing a model of chemistry training using semiotic approaches:
1. Study of the classic model of the "Learning Process" system, which includes the collection,
complementarity, analysis and aggregation of information about this system.
2. Creation (construction) of an activity model of the system "Chemistry Training Process" for the case
when semiotic approaches are used, combined with analysis of the built model and clarification of the
meaning of the system-forming connections in it.
3. Establishment of a working hypothesis on the outcome of the operation of the system under the
conditions of altered training technology.
To analyze the “Chemistry training process system”, clarify its structure by arranging and
supplementing information on the meaning of the links between the components. When predicting the
performance of the system in a changed situation in the work, a Classic, generally accepted model of the
training process presented in Figure 1 is initially used.
27

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
The main components of the system are: teacher and the terms naming his activity, student and the
terms corresponding to his activity and learning content defining the two types of activities. The 1-to-6 digit
model marks the traditional connections between the components that are a manifestation of the interactions
between them.
Link 1 - straight link or rights of information;

Link 2 - feedback;
Link 3 - dependence of the student's activity on the learning content;
Link 4 - adaptation of the educational content to the age characteristics of the trainees;
Link 5 - dependence of the learning content on the way it is interpreted by the teacher;
Link 6 - dependence of the teacher's activity on the regulated learning content.
Figure 1. Classic model of the "Learning Process" system
The clarified characteristics of the three new semiotic approaches – semantic, pragmatic and syntactic,
compared with the used baseline model of the "Learning Process" system, make it possible to proceed with
the construction of a modified didactic model. The new model is adequate to the changed didactic situation,
i.e. it identifies new moments arising from the application of the studied approaches.
The conversion of the model scheme implies a first change of the "Learning Content" component. It
includes a new component, conditionally called "Semiotic Information". For its meaning, it is very important
28

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
to clarify that it is not about incorporating knowledge about semiotic ideas, but about semiotic reading of
chemical symbols.
The component "Semiotic information" is not additional, but is a way of introducing chemical
symbolism. Therefore, the purpose of semiotic reading of the topics of chemical symbolism is related to the
easing of the processes of understanding and meaningful use of symbols by students. In order to avoid clutter
of the new model scheme, an abstraction of the analysis of changes in all connections has been adopted.
Emphasis shall be placed on the analysis of the links showing the interaction between the teacher and the
students when considering semiotic information. The model adapted to the objectives of the study is shown in
Figure 2 [6, 9].
The model is marked with numbers 1′, 1′′, 4′, and 5′ the new connections between the components.
Additionally displayed without numbering are the links between the teacher and the students, which are
realized in the processes of checking and evaluating knowledge and skills with simultaneous fixation of
results. These connections are derivatives of Connection 2 of the baseline model and are very important in
experimental methodological studies. It should be specified that in the new model (Figure 2) the links with
designations 1 to 6 are traditional in nature, that is, they are realized in the training of all subjects. These links
are described and their meaning can be found in pedagogical and methodical literature [5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 15,
16, 17].
Links 1′ and 1′′ are variants of Connection 1 - Straight Information. They connect the activity of the
teacher and the students through a component named after the general term "Chemistry Learning
Technology".
The content of the term includes the methodological toolkit developed in the study, which includes the
following pedagogical categories: approaches (here refer to two groups - classical and new semiotic
approaches), training methods (verbal, visual and practical), forms of organization (class and extracurricular),
priyomas (for mental and learning activities) and means of training. With all their variety of species, they are
used by the teacher during the experimental work for understanding and absorbing chemical symbolism by
the students, and through it the entire curriculum in Chemistry and Environmental Protection. The aim of the
implementation of the new technological component as a link between the two main structural components
"teacher" and "student" with their activities (teaching and learning) is to trace its impact on the links that exist
between the different components of the Chemistry learning process system. In the framework of the
chemistry curriculum, another new element called "Semiotic Information" is present in the specified model.
The meaning of the term naming this element consists in the use of additional, extended information to clarify
the relationship between the chemical objects studied and their symbolic substitutes, as well as a
29

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
multidirectional disclosure of the meaning of the main chemical symbols, chemical signs, chemical formulae
and chemical equations.
Figure 2. Functional and adapted model of the system "Chemistry training process" in applying semiotic
approaches
Connection 4′ is derived from Connection 4 and reflects the impact of additional information on
chemical symbolism used by the teacher in the learning process (i.e. semiotic information) on the student's
activity. Since this information is not present in the textbooks, it is fixed in class notebooks so that it can be
used in the self-preparation of students.
Connection 5′ is a modification of Connection 5 and reveals how additional semiotic information
influences the teacher's activity. This information is developed by the experimenter and provided to the
teacher for preparation.
The teacher's activity relates to the following possible actions:
- familiarisation with chemical symbolism as a component of the "chemical language" sign system and
its composition;
30

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
- recasting the learning content in a form where chemical indications are subject to advanced study
with the application of semiotic approaches;
- organization and management of the cognitive activity of students in the processes of learning and
forming skills for working with the main chemical symbols - chemical signs, formulas and equations;
- providing feedback on the learning outcomes achieved by the modified impact. In the learning
process, the feedback received by the teacher through the actions of the students (in the model is marked as
Link 2) can be carried out using the methods for checking and evaluating knowledge and skills.
The two subjects "teacher" and "student" who participate in the system under discussion have a
complex composition, a certain structure of the activity and are considered to be essential components in the
learning process. The additional structural units included in the model "Technology of chemistry training"
and "Semiotic information" performs the role of varying factors, determining the actions of the teacher and
the student, as well as the way the system works. In the case of successive implementation of these actions,
the absorption of chemical symbols is achieved in the context of changes in the two factors mentioned, in
case of amended learning content and the associated change in training technology.
The modified model of training as a system aims to show the specifics in the activities of the subjects
"teacher" and "student" in the introduction and study of chemical indications using the new links.
Complementing the model by bringing in new components and clarifying the interactions between them lead
to appropriate changes in the functioning of the whole system. The simplified model presentation of the
Chemistry learning process system makes it possible to find appropriate ways (pathways) to adapt new
semiotic information to students' activities (according to their specificities) and its gradual introduction and
use in the learning process.
The new structural components in the model (Semiotic Information and Chemistry Training
Technology) as well as emerging links are the reason for a complete change in the way the system studied
works. The model allows illustrating the varying factors in the planned and carried out pedagogical
experiment. The creation and study of the model make it possible to suggest the changes in the real object
studied – a process of chemistry training.
Clarification of the purpose of inclusion of the new components and the meaning of the links between
them in the described system makes it possible to formulate the working hypothesis of the study:
If the training in Chemistry and Environmental Protection in the seventh and eighth grades
purposefully implements the three semiotic approaches - semantic, pragmatic and syntactic, there is a
likelihood of an increase in the results of the study work, expressed in acquiring knowledge and forming
skills for operating the main chemical symbols and in general improvement of the success of chemistry
students.
31

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
Conclusions
The study of literary sources on the topic and the analysis of the educational content on Chemistry and
Environmental Protection, according to the purpose and tasks of the study, lead to the following conclusions:
1. The possibilities for developing accessible Chemistry and environmental learning content and an
improved methodological system for teaching and mastering it can be sought and revealed by using the ideas
of semiotics in the process of introducing students to chemical symbolism.
2. The complexity and abstract nature of the component "chemical symbolism" allow the study of its
elements to be based on the described semiotic strands - semantics, pragmatism and syntactics and
corresponding character ratios - "sign ~ object", "sign ~ person" and "sign ~ sign". It can be assumed that the
use of semiotic approaches will facilitate the understanding of the complex meaning of chemical symbols.
3. The subject "Chemistry and environmental protection" shall be required to acquaint students with
the basic chemical indications by incorporating an improved system of lessons, exercises and summary
lessons. Such uonic units are present in the current curriculum for the seventh and eighth grades, but the
volume of information on the chemical symbols in them is insufficient, there are also gaps and inaccuracies.
4. The development of an effective system of learning fragments and summaries aimed at better
understanding and mastering the main chemical symbols of students (from the positions of semiotic
approaches) is possible only after a thorough study of semiotic and methodological literature related to the
topic of this development, after analysis and change of the learning content and by appropriately including
the semiotic reading of chemical symbolism in the training process.
Acknowledgement
The work was supported by the Shumen University Research Program, Project No. RD-08-
160/04.03.2022.
References
[1]. Antonova, L.; Galcheva, P. About the composition of the chemical language in training. Chemistry, 1992,
4, 44-50.
[2]. Antonova, L.; Filipova, R. Use of semiotic approach in the study of chemical symbolism. Yearbook of
Konstantin Preslavski University of Shumen, 1997, XIV D, 118-123.
[3]. Antonova, L.; Galcheva, P.; Vasileva, R. Use of semantic approach in the introduction of chemical
equations. Chemistry, 2001, 5, 309-316.
32

ASN, Vol. 9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022
[4]. Antonova, L.; Vasileva-Tcankova, R. Syntactic relations between the signs in chemical symbolism and
their relationship with the mean systems "substance" and "chemical reaction". Yearbook of University of
Shumen Konstantin Preslavski. Natural Sciences, 2006, XVI B3, 53-62.
[5]. Antonova, L.; Vasileva-Tcankova, R. Semiotic approaches to the study of chemical symbols. Chemistry,
2008, XVII, 181-191.
[6]. Antonova, L.; Vasileva-Tcankova, R. Modeling of the "Learning Process" system using semiotic
approaches. Yearbook of Konstantin Preslavski University of Shumen –Natural Sciences – Methodology,
item XIX B 5, 2009, 23-32.
[7]. Vasileva-Tcankova R., Antonova L. Use a pragmatic approach to study chemical reactions and how to
mean them. Yearbook of University of Shumen Konstantin Preslavski. Natural Sciences – Methodology,
2006, XVI B3, 63-75.
[8]. Vasileva-Tcankova R. Essence of semiotic approaches in the study of chemical symbols. Yearbook of
University of Shumen Konstantin Preslavski. Natural Sciences – Methodology, 2007, XVII B5, 24-33.
[9]. Vasileva-Tcankova, R. Use of semiotic approaches in the study of chemical symbols. Dissertation on the
award of educational and scientific degree Doctor, Sofia, 2009.
[10]. Vasileva-Tcankova, R.; Zhelyazkova, V. Opportunities of science semiotics to develop research and
training approaches. Compendium of reports from the 19th century. National Conference with
International Participation "Natural Sciences 2021, University of Shumen Konstantin Preslavski,
Shumen, 2021.
[11]. Ganchev, G. Modeling in chemistry training, IPCU „A. Tosheva“, Stara Zagora, 1993.
[12]. Malcheva, Z.; Genkova, L.; Angelova, V. Methods of chemistry training, University Publishing House
St. Kliment Ohridski, Sofia, 1999.
[13]. Milev, A.; Nikolov, B.; Bratkov, J. Dictionary of Foreign Words in Bulgarian Language, Science and
Art, Sofia, 2003.
[14]. Milkov, L.; Kolev, G. General pedagogy. Didactics, Polygraph LTD, Shumen, 1994.
[15].Nikolova, R. Theoretical modeling as a method of scientific knowledge in chemistry training. The
Intensification of the Educational Process, Section 4, IPCU A. Tosheva, Stara Zagora, 1984.
[16].Fridman, L. Modeling in educational activity. The Formation of Educational Activity of Schoolchildren,
Pedagogy, M., 1982.
[17]. Fridman, L. Visibility and modeling in training. Knowledge, Pedagogy and Psychology, Moscow, 1984.
33


10.2478 - Asn 2022 0012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10.2478 - Asn 2022 0012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASN, Vol.

9, No 2, Pages 25–33, 2022

Acta Scientifica Naturalis

Radostina Strahilova Vasileva-Tcankova

1. Staging the problem

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Link 1 - straight link or rights of information;

Figure 1. Classic model of the "Learning Process" system

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

Corresponding author: r.tcankova@shu.bg Full Paper

You might also like