The Efficacy of “POL: PLL & PLR” Method to Enhance Pre-University Students’ Understanding of Buffer Solution

  • Byron MC Michael Kadum Chemistry Unit, Department of Science, Labuan Matriculation College (LMC), OKK Daud Road, 87027 Federal Territory of Labuan, Malaysia.
Keywords: Pre-lesson learning, Post-lesson reflection, Pre-university chemistry, Buffer solution


The purpose of this classroom research was to see whether the method of Portfolio of Learning (POL): Pre-Lesson Learning & Post-Lesson Reflection (PLL & PLR) could enhance understanding of a chemistry concept, i.e., buffer solution, amongst pre-university students from a local institution located in the Federal Territory of Labuan, Malaysia. The sample was amongst the researcher’s tutorial group students; thirty-four (34) students in total. Initial observation showed that the students were struggling to grasp even the most basic chemistry concepts due to their poor learning strategies/skills. Therefore, this had served as the impetus for this research to be conducted. The group of students was equally divided into two (2) groups; the control group (CG) & the experimental group (EG). The T-Test analysis of the collected data showed a significant difference between the CG’s mean score and the EG’s mean score; t = 4.211, p =0.000216 (p < 0.001). Therefore, the study successfully validated the effectiveness of the proposed method of learning for enhancing the level of understanding of buffer solutions.


Download data is not yet available.


Baird, J. R., Fensham, P. J., Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1991). The importance of reflection in improving science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(2), 163-182.

Ihde, A. J. (1984). The development of modern chemistry. Courier Corporation.

Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of chemistry-logical or psychological?. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 1(1), 9-15.

King, T. (2002). Development of student skills in reflective writing. Spheres of Influence: Ventures and Visions in Educational Development. Proceedings of the 4th World Conference of the International Consortium for Educational Development, Perth: The University of Western Australia.

Kousa, P., Kavonius, R., & Aksela, M. (2018). Low-achieving students’ attitudes towards learning chemistry and chemistry teaching methods. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(2), 431-441.

Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191.

Nartey, E., & Hanson, R. (2021). The perceptions of senior high school students and teachers about organic chemistry: A Ghanaian perspective. Science Education International, 32(4), 331-342.

Papleontiou-Louca, E. (2003). The concept and instruction of metacognition. Teacher Development, 7(1), 9-30.

Piaget, J. (1963). Stages and their properties in the development of thinking. Social Research, 30(2), 283-299.

Spatz, C. (2008). Basic statistics: Tales of distributions. Thomson: Wadsworth.

White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modelling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.

Zubizarreta, J. (2009). The learning portfolio: Reflective practice for improving student learning. John Wiley & Sons.

How to Cite
Michael Kadum, B. (2022) “The Efficacy of ‘POL: PLL & PLR’ Method to Enhance Pre-University Students’ Understanding of Buffer Solution”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 7(2), p. e001311. doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v7i2.1311.