Zubeyde Demet Kirbulut Gunes, Nurcan Turan-Oluk, Sinem Gencer, Hakkı Kadayıfçı, Burcu Işık, Halil Tümay, Funda Ekici, Sevinç Nihal Yeşiloğlu and Dilay Dincdemir
{"title":"Undergraduate chemistry students’ sensemaking in a laboratory setting: the interplay of knowledge gaps and epistemic emotions","authors":"Zubeyde Demet Kirbulut Gunes, Nurcan Turan-Oluk, Sinem Gencer, Hakkı Kadayıfçı, Burcu Işık, Halil Tümay, Funda Ekici, Sevinç Nihal Yeşiloğlu and Dilay Dincdemir","doi":"10.1039/D5RP00443H","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >This study investigates how undergraduate chemistry students engage in sensemaking during an inquiry-based Boyle's law laboratory activity, focusing on how different types of knowledge gaps and associated epistemic emotions guide their sensemaking trajectories. A holistic multiple-case study design was employed, with sensemaking episodes serving as the unit of analysis. Two student groups were purposefully selected to represent contrasting sensemaking trajectories. Group 1 exhibited a sustained sensemaking trajectory and completed the activity, whereas Group 2 exhibited a disengaging sensemaking trajectory and ultimately withdrew from the task without arriving at a coherent resolution. Data were collected through audio and video recordings, activity sheets, and epistemic emotion diaries, and were analyzed thematically. The results revealed clear differences between the groups. Group 1 primarily encountered procedural knowledge gaps. These gaps involved relatively low element interactivity and were resolved through collaborative reasoning. By contrast, Group 2 encountered conceptual and epistemic gaps that required the coordination of multiple abstract constructs, imposed high cognitive demands, and remained unresolved. Epistemic emotions also diverged markedly across the two groups. Both began the activity with curiosity and surprise, yet Group 1 sustained positive emotions that helped them manage confusion productively. Group 2 experienced increasing frustration and boredom, reflecting a trajectory of hopeless confusion that hindered sustained sensemaking. The interaction of unresolved gaps and negative epistemic emotions seemed to be associated with Group 2's disengagement. The findings suggest the instructional relevance of attending to both cognitive demands and epistemic emotions, particularly in moments when students encounter persistent knowledge gaps during laboratory sensemaking.</p>","PeriodicalId":69,"journal":{"name":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","volume":" 3","pages":" 1154-1171"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlepdf/2026/rp/d5rp00443h?page=search","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chemistry Education Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2026/rp/d5rp00443h","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigates how undergraduate chemistry students engage in sensemaking during an inquiry-based Boyle's law laboratory activity, focusing on how different types of knowledge gaps and associated epistemic emotions guide their sensemaking trajectories. A holistic multiple-case study design was employed, with sensemaking episodes serving as the unit of analysis. Two student groups were purposefully selected to represent contrasting sensemaking trajectories. Group 1 exhibited a sustained sensemaking trajectory and completed the activity, whereas Group 2 exhibited a disengaging sensemaking trajectory and ultimately withdrew from the task without arriving at a coherent resolution. Data were collected through audio and video recordings, activity sheets, and epistemic emotion diaries, and were analyzed thematically. The results revealed clear differences between the groups. Group 1 primarily encountered procedural knowledge gaps. These gaps involved relatively low element interactivity and were resolved through collaborative reasoning. By contrast, Group 2 encountered conceptual and epistemic gaps that required the coordination of multiple abstract constructs, imposed high cognitive demands, and remained unresolved. Epistemic emotions also diverged markedly across the two groups. Both began the activity with curiosity and surprise, yet Group 1 sustained positive emotions that helped them manage confusion productively. Group 2 experienced increasing frustration and boredom, reflecting a trajectory of hopeless confusion that hindered sustained sensemaking. The interaction of unresolved gaps and negative epistemic emotions seemed to be associated with Group 2's disengagement. The findings suggest the instructional relevance of attending to both cognitive demands and epistemic emotions, particularly in moments when students encounter persistent knowledge gaps during laboratory sensemaking.