Milano O. Torres, Rebecca C.N. España, Antriman V. Orleans


The study was intended to facilitate learning chemistry through the integration of graphic organizers (GOs). This study specifically determined the attitude toward chemistry and achievement of two groups of students under study. The study indicated that there is a significant difference between attitude toward chemistry of students in the experimental group before and after the experiment. The result of students’ perception about GO, as teaching strategy and approach to teaching chemistry, indicated the rationale in this undertaking. All presentations used by the teacher in the class incorporating graphic organizers in identified formats such web diagram, flowchart-concept map, Venn diagram and pictorial graphics obtained a good and very good perception. Performance, on the other hand, indicated ultimate measure of GO’s effectiveness in facilitating learning. This analysis implied that the experimental group performed significantly better than their counterparts in the control group with adjusted means scores of 47.45 and 39.11, respectively. Facilitating learning chemistry can be made through integrating graphic organizers. GO-based presentation solicited and indicated positive attitude from the students. Hence, the use of graphic organizers effect changes in behavioral dimensions of learning content for the better. GOs as conditioners can make students perform well and may seem to improve their attitude toward learning. GO is apparently indicating success as critical index of learning. It is recommended that GO be used by teachers to improve attitude and achievement of students. 


Facilitating learning, graphic organizers, visual learning, attitude toward chemistry, student performance

Full Text:



Ausubel, D.P. (1969). School learning: An introduction to educational psychology. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Dye, G. A. (2000). Graphic organizers to the rescue! Helping students link and remember information. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 72-76.

Guastello, E. F., Beasley, T. M., & Sinatra, R. C. (2000). Concept mapping effects on science content comprehension of low-achieving inner-city seventh graders. Remedial and Special Education, 21(6), 356-264.

Hall T., & Strangman N. (2002). Graphic Organizers. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved March 20, 2009 from

Horton, S. V., Lovitt, T. C., & Bergerud, D. (1995). The effectiveness of graphic organizers for three classifications of secondary students in content area classess. Journal of Learning Disabilities.Houston, M. J. (1993), “Goal-Oriented Experiences and the Development of Knowledge,” Journal of Educational Research, 20 (September), 190-207.

Johnson, E. (1997). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Jonassen, D. (1998). Designing constructivist learning environments in C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories and models, 2ND edition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved April 2, 2009 from

Lovitt, S. (1994). Strategies for adapting science textbooks for youth with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 105-116.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works. Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps(R) as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Novak, Joseph D. & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ritchie, D., & Volkl, C. (2000). Effectiveness of two generative learning strategies in the science classroom. School Science & Mathematics, 100(2), 83-90.

Robinson, D.H., & Katayama, A.D. (1998). Interactive effects of graphic organizers and delayed review on concept application. Journal of Experimental Education, 67(1), 17-32.

Sivin-Kachala, J., & Schneiderman, M. (2003). Scientifically based research: A guide for education publishers and developers. Washington, DC: The Software & Information Industry Association.

Willerman, M., & MacHarg, R. (1991). The Concept Map as an Advance Organizer. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 705-711.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2014 International Journal of Educational Studies

International Journal of Educational Studies
ISSN: 2312-458X (Online), 2312-4598 (Print)
© EScience Press. All Rights Reserved.