The research was further guided by the resources framework developed by Hammer 105 and Elby . Wittman, Parobek et al., and Rodriguez define a resource as "fine-grained knowledge" elements that are activated and contribute productively or unproductively in problem-solving. Modir et al. further extended the definition of resource to "a manifold of knowledge pieces." The manifold of knowledge pieces is context-dependent, with resources being activated to differing extents based on the prompt or other cues, and resources 110 activated will evolve with student experiences.The grain size of a resource varies widely based from fundamental phenomenological primitives (p-prims), which are accepted facts used in explanations to complex theories. Research question 1 compares the resources activated when constructing RCDs for reactions having differing mechanisms and kinetic and thermodynamic favorability. Research question 115 2 compares and contrasts the resources activated as students construct RCDs before and after a set of perceptual cues. These multidimensional research questions are key because researchers and practitioners can use the findings to develop scaffolds to better instruct students in constructing RCDs and rationalizing them to organic mechanisms, ultimately leading to a deeper understanding of the logic behind chemical reactions. The resources 120 framework aligns with scaffolding activities because the framework asserts that conceptual understanding is not stable but dynamic depending on the resources activated, which likewise depends on the context, such as the type of reaction. For organic chemistry, EPFs are used to explain the pathway reactions that follow, and RCDs are used to explain the energetics of these pathways. To successfully write EPFs 125 and construct RCDs, resources must be activated and productively applied to different representations. Specifically, the activation of the resource, "the reaction is stepwise" can only be applied productively if students have RC with RCDs.