Chemical reasoning, and in particular structure–property reasoning, is an important goal of chemistry education. Johnstone’s triangle (1982, 1991) is often used to explicate this type of reasoning. This triangle describes the multilevel thought chemical reasoning requires and shows why students find chemistry so difficult. However, this model gives little guidance for teachers and students on how to teach and learn structure–property reasoning. In this theoretical article, we propose an alternative model for structure–property reasoning which has three advantages compared with previous models, namely, more coherence between chemical concepts and the skill of reasoning, more horizontal coherence (coherence between the concepts), and more vertical coherence (coherence throughout the school years). In four cases selected from the Dutch secondary school chemistry curriculum, the model was used to show how it can guide teachers and students in teaching and learning structure–property reasoning, and to demonstrate these above-named three advantages. The presented model has various educational applications as a scaffold for students’ reasoning, and as an instruction, design, and curriculum tool for teachers.

This paper describes the design of an instrument to assess secondary school students' proficiency in structure-property reasoning (SPR). Design criteria for the instrument required that it should be based on a comprehensive model for structure-property reasoning, assess both reproductive and productive use of structure-property reasoning, be cost-effective, and be easy for teachers to adapt to their situation. An unframed and framed sorting task and an unframed and framed mapping task were included in the instrument. It was used to determine the proficiency in structure-property reasoning of two populations: 60 Dutch secondary school students on the preuniversity track and 108 Dutch first-year university chemistry students. Results were analyzed using established statistical techniques, and they confirmed that the SPR-instrument clearly discriminates between preuniversity and first-year chemistry students. The paper concludes by outlining the possibilities offered by the instrument and suggestions for further research.

Structure–property reasoning (SPR) is one of the most important aims of chemistry education but is seldom explicitly taught, and students find structure–property reasoning difficult. This study assessed two design principles for the development of structure–property reasoning in the context of demonstrations: (1) use of a POE task (predict–observe–explain) and (2) use of the domain-specific particle perspective, both to increase student engagement and to scaffold micro-level modeling. The aim of the demonstration series was to teach structure–property reasoning more explicitly to pre-university students (aged 15–16). Demonstrations pertained to the properties of metals, salts and molecular compounds. The SPR instrument was used as a pretest and posttest in order to gain insight into the effects on structure–property reasoning. In addition, one student (Sally) was followed closely to see how her structure–property reasoning evolved throughout the demonstrations. Results show that after the demonstrations students were more aware of the structure models at the micro-level. The students also knew and understood more chemical concepts needed for structure–property reasoning. Sally’s qualitative data additionally showed how she made interesting progress in modeling micro-level chemical structures. As we used conventional demonstrations as a starting point for design, this could well serve as a practical tool for teachers to redesign their existing demonstrations.