Symposium: lecture and learning: Rre They Compatible?
Are Lecture and Learning Compatible? Maybe for LOCS: Unlikely for HOCS Uri Zoller Division of Chemical Studies, Department of Science Education, Haifa University-Oranim. Kiryat Tivon 3691 0, Israel Introduction: The Problem, Rational, Purpose In view of the overly high expectations of people in a world of conflictinglcompetingvalues and finite unevenly distributed resources, modern life has turned into a continuous process of problem-solving (PSI and decision-making (DM) or decision-selection from either available or as yet untreated options ( I ). However, although science and technology may be useful in establishing what we can do, neither of them (solely or jointly) can tell us what we should do. The latter requires the application of value judgements by socially responsible, rational citizens as an integral part of their critical system thinking capacity. Thus, a major purpose of chemical education is the development of
ology-which is compatible with low-order cognitive skills (LOCSI-should be amended and complemented by research-based HOCS-developing alternatives. The development of students'ability to thinkcritically in the context of the scientific content and processes of chemistry, in the discipline and in relation to societal issues, requires the "translation" of this purpose into appropriate, implementable teaching and examination stratehes. The switch in objectives concerning learning outcomes-from knowinglunderstanding (LOCS) to decision-makinglproblemsolvinglsystem critical thinking (HOCSI-requires a switch in teachinamethods in order to brine about the new expected learning outcomes.
the students' reasoning and critical thinking ability in the context of the specific content and processes of science in general and chemistly in particular, and their prohlem-solving/dsision-making capacity for so they can be effective citizens (2).
HOCS and Critical Thinking The acquisition of HOCS by our students is a major instructional goal in contemporary chemical (and science) teaching. The HOCS capabilities of critical thinking (CT) (71,problem solving (PSI, and decision making (DM) are considered by manyto be the most important learning outcomes that good teaching should aim for. While PS and DM are quite familiar concepts to the chemical education community, CT is regretably much less so. However, CT constitutes an essentid component in any meaningfil, rational process of PS-DM. Critical thinking includes the mental processes, strategies, and representations people use to solve ~roblems. make decisions and learn ieweoncepts. For our needs & this paper the following working.definition of critical thinking is proposed:
This is guided by the ultimate educational ideal of the educated person: one who has the ability to be engaged in higher-order skill-basedforms of inquiry (i.e. PS, DM, creative thinking) required both in the study of the disciplines and in dealing with characteristically interdisciplinaryeveryday life situations; the knowledge base relevant to these situations; the ability to select and apply the relevant information and skills guided by reflective, responsible attitudes, and t h e motivation and self-confidenceto act accordingly and ta take responsibility. In short, a person having the %DM " capability (3). Any progress towards the attainment of the above superordinate goal would require the application of new teaching methods that would mesh with these desired learning outcomes agreed upon by sciencelchemistry educators. Clearly, examinations as well as other assessment means must also be in resonance with this goal. The wmpliance of the above with the cnrrent reality of "mass-teaching" in heavily populated freshman (and sophomore) chemistry courses (4) is rather difficult. Furthermore, traditional chemistry teaching is very formal and lecture-oriented and is f m s e d on the presentation of a sequence of equations and facts to be memorized and on the teaching of algorithms to be reproduced by students (5).Chemistry knowledge is conceived by students as a rigid body of facts revealed by authority (professor or text) and their role is to return that knowledge,without processing, to the authority (6).The ultimate result is that students do not understand the concepts on which the problems presented are based and they are not called to apply their higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS), not to mention their value judgement. Consequently, both their chemistry problem-solving skills and PSIDM capacity for effective citizenry cannot be expected to develop in a meaningful manner. I n order to foster real learning in terms of HOCS, the current lecture-oriented, "teacher-proof"teaching method-
-
~
-
Ilational, lo&",lcd,and consequential e u o l u o l t ~t h ~ n k i n zin terms of what to accept (or rejevl~and what to believe I", followed by a decision (s.hat todoror not todot ahout it .followed by an accordingly responsible action. Clearly, CT is a multivariant complex process and this ability is not widespread among students. Yet, we want our students to have the latter so that they will be able to recognize assumptions and biases, appraise inferences, evaluate arguments, and select or generate alternative possible solutions. CT in chemistrv reauireli knowledee in --chemistry; it requires studentsto apply what they know and understand about the subiect matter as well as their common sense, experience, and value judgement in order to make correct inferences. Our ~roblemas teachers is that we do not know how to specificailyimprove the HOCS ability of our students through the use of different teachine strategies. Furthermore, there are several issues of concern in relation to HOCS-oriented chemistrv (and science) teaching: ~
~~
~
~
~
-
.The mismatch hetween HOCS-oriented teaching styles and traditional students'learning styles. The lacking of "proven" HOCS-oriented teaching strategies. .The resistance of the "system" to the implementation of HOCS-oriented teaching strategies. The lack of methods for evaluation,of HOCS. Volume 70 Number 3 March 1993
195
Our research, which provides a partial response to t h e questions of "what andhow to do it", that is, how to develop our students' HOGS capabilities, will constitute t h e essence of t h e following part of this paper. Selected successfully implemented teaching strategies (theories "translated" into practice) accompanied by illustrative examples will be presented.
Question II. The Florida Queen Butterfly produces a compound Ahaving the formula C8H9N0,which is essential for attracting the males for matme and renroduction. The NMR soectrum of eom~oundA and the five ~ o s s i d ~structural e isomers of A are given in the figure below.
HOCS-Oriented Teaching Strategies HOCS-oriented teaching strate@ that have been succesifullv field tested arcomoanied bv in-class active auantitativgand qualitative (i.e:, statistical and ethnographic) research and evaluation are: 1. Team work in class, lab and homework problem sets. 2. Active participation of students (undergraduates) in research and teaching. 3. Extensive class discussions and active student oarticinalion in the learnwi: prowxs. 4. Integration of "3TSmudules" in 1rcturt.snnd lab sesiuns. 5. The f~ratrnngof qawslion nsknng in the learning prorrss (8,.
6. The use ofESAQ-rypc exnmtnntionu; i e . the examinntion where the student asks the qucstlons 19 7 The Eclectic Exnmmnrion El.: $10,. 8. The Individualized Eclectic Examination (IEE)(Z). The last two s t r a t e..e e s will be brieflv. presented includ. ing selected specific examples. Descriprions and discussion of the prcwdinr SIX strawries r a n be found elsewherer 1 3 ,
The Eclectic Examination The E E is one possible model of a n H O C S a i e n t e d exam.
It consists of t h e following components (not all ofwhich are included in a given exam), assembled in various combinations with different proportions of each: questions to be answered and answers to be explained oroblems to be worked out and solutions to be rationalized questions to be generatedlformulated; tasks to be performed suggestions to be formulated; ideas to be developed, rationalized and defended experiments to be designed (in principle); alternatives to be chosen and supported simulations to respond to: decisions to be made and acted upon. The final form of each E E is tailored to the particular needs of the tareet audience a n d i n accordance with the course's predetermined goals. These goals must be explicitlv - from the " -presented to t h e course participants right start.
-
lllvo Sample EE ~ u e s t i o n s Question I. 1. T h e fallowing is an excerpt from a recent UNESCO publication:
...There is evidence that the ozone layer is being depleted by the chloroflourocarbons(CFC)released into the atmosphere... F t r ever" 1 percent depletion of the o n m p layer, greater penerrnuon of ultv;ivl~letheta-rsdmtion will incren3e the mcl. dence ~fnon-mrlnnomnskin cancer in humans by I perrrnt ... Do you think that fmm a chemical point of view C02 is a good substitute for the chlorofluaraearbons (Freons) in spite of the two carbon-axveen ." double bonds it contains? Emlain! 2. If you were assigned the task of finding a n appmpriate organic (or inorganic) substitute far freons, what would be your considerations and criteria concerning t h e properties and characteristics of the substitute to be proposed? 3. Based on the above, can you come up with any (one or two) specific candidat&)? Rationalize and explain.
196
Journal of Chemical Education
NMR spectra and possible structural isomers of mrnpound A
1. Which of these structural isomers best fits the given spectral data? Explain. 2. Suggest two simple chemical reactions, the results of which will enable you to confirm your conclusion in ( I ) . Provide the chemical reactions involved. 3. Which of the given isomers may, in principle, be optically active? 4. Draw qualitatively (crude approx. only), the IR spectrum you expect far one of the given isomers of your choice. 5. Is the use of UV for the identificationhharacterization of this isomer effective? Explain. 6 loptwndll What d~rerr~orl ofreseareh ifat all, would you recommend concernmg compound A" Be speclfic and mtionalize your answer.
The lndividuali~edEclectic Examination The IEE is a n EE-type exam which has been specifically designed for the particular needsof the individual student; that is, for each student in the class a different exam has heen designed and administered. The foiluwing two sumole IEE uueitions refer to the corres~ondlnetwo individuilly assigned student projects:
-
Project I. The Effects ofAcid Rain on Cars IEE La. Suppose the pH of rain is found to be in the range of 8-10. In your opinion, would the basic rain then be an envimnmental issue of concern? Explain. b. Suppose the bodies of our cars were made of plastics rather than metal. Would acid rain then constitute a problem in respect to cars? Explain. Project 2. Caffeine Consumption from Soft Drinks, Specifically the Placebo Effect of Caffeine in Cola Drinking. IEE2. In your project you stated: "It is safe to say that caffeine's effects may be more serious than the general public is willing to admit". Based on the analvsis of vour own data and fmdines. what would be your rreommendatwn~s cnnrcrnlng catreme ennaumptlon" Rvwde-hard rwdenren tojumfy your rwonmendatmnts Evidently, t h e implementation of t h e EE a n d IEE strategies within chemistry teaching is not a n easy task and i t i s time-consuming. So i s t h e development of students HOCS capability; there is no free:luuch.
Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Students Higher Level Coanitive Skills Performance and of Their ~raditionalHGme Assignments in HOCS-Oriented Courses
Final Course Entrya Traditional Home Assignments
IEE
S-1
79.8 (7.2) 79.0 (8.6)
S-2 G-1
71.7 67.2 (9.7) (11.1) 79.8 75.7 (7.6) (6.5) 77.0 81.1 (4.0) (6.2)
...'
Project Course Grade Final entry 78.0 72.6 + 6.3 (9.7) (7.8) 78.4 78.8 -0.8 (6.4) (5.8) 82.7' 84.7 + 5.7 (5.5) (3.2)
'Scores are based on the assessment of the students' firstassignment in each course, using HOCS and high-level thinking (Bloom's Taxonomvl as criteria for the evaluation. o~dlerencein mean scores between tne t nal prolect an0 the ftrst course assignment 'Tne fma projects in th s course were in fact a tane home' IEE. type assignment Relevant, Follow-up Research Each of the HOCS-oriented strategies applied (separately, or in combination with others) was accompanied by in-class, follow-up research and formative-type evaluation. w i m ~ l e m e n t e dand Rewrdless of the articular s t r a t e-" &died, the generai teaching style in the chemistry classes taught .. IJV . the author was HOCS-oriented 1 2 3 . 8-11). using the so-called the Integrated s u b j e c t - ~ a t t e r ~ e t h o d s avvroach Ill I. The research methodolorn ... aoolled in the si"dy that accompanied the implement;ltion of the I.:E and the IEE in two college undermaduate IS-1 and S-21 and one graduate (G-1) course consisted of: Quasi-quantitative (statistics)/qualitative (ethnographic) in-class case studies, the use of E E and IEE a s the major evaluation means of students' achievements/performancei n the course, complementing t h e above w i t h monitoring s t u d e n t s responsedbehavior in discussions and interviews, and the
.
..
use of Likert-type teaching evaluation questionnaires a t the end of the course. Selected results related to the three courses mentioned here are given i n the table (11). The most important results are the gains i n HOCS capacity, 71.7 + 78.0 and 77.0 + 82.7 i n undergraduate and graduate courses, respectively, a s a result of t h e implementation of HOCS-oriented teaching strategies. These results a r e in accord with previous studies, which indicated that HOCS can be learned by students when i t is a specific planned outcome of a science program (12). Summary I n response to the question: 'lecture and learning: are they compatible?" our work, experience, and research suggest that traditional lecturing and learning in chemistry may be compatible for some LOCS, but incompatible with most HOCS. The latter require the exposure of students to the appropriate class experiences, (i.e., teaching and learning strategies) which have been demonstrated by research to facilitate gains i n HOCS capacity. The design of instruction to improve students' critical thinking skills is crucial for science teaching (13).Therefore, t h e message is t h a t
there are ways to develop the HOCS capabilities of students within the existing constraints of large lecture sections of college chemistry wurses; and those who believe that the development of students'HOCS is a worthwhile and necessary goal of chemistry (and science) teaching, should and will go to the trouble ofworking harder in order to attain this goal. Literature Cited 1. Zoller, U. h Conwpfuol I w e s in Enuimnmenlol Education; Keiny, S., Zoller, U., Eds.; Perm Leng: NewYork. 1991:pp 71-87, 2. Zaller. U. J. CON.Sei. lhm. 1990,19,2SS291. 3. Zaller, U.H?4herEdue. i n E u i 1990,15,5-14. 4. Collins,T. J Call. Sci. Teach. 1990, 19,386389. 5. Bodner, G. M. Tpoching Critical Thinking Thmugh P d k m Salui~+-, paape senfed st the Annual Mdiw of the American Chemical Society (Chem. Edue. mv.1Atlanta, GA.April1991. 6. Carter. C. S C o n t d s ofCIassmorn Chernishy paper presented at theAnnualMeetinsaftheNat'l. Assoe. Res. Sci Teaeh. Lake of the Ozarks, MO.,Aptil 198s. 1. Stemberg,R. J. Phi Ddto K s p p 1987,(21,456459. 8. Zoller, U J. Chem Edur 1987,61,510612. 9. Zaller, U. submitted for publication in Sehool Sci. ond Moth. 10. Zoller U.Stud. Educ. Eml. 1989.9.353460. . . 11. Zoller;U.J.RRR.Sci. Teoch. 1991.28.593-EQ7. 12. Lh,M; Clement,C.; Dulm S.; Sullivan, P. J. Re*.Sci k h . . 1~89.26,171-187. 13. Allen, R., J. Coll Sei. Teach 1987,17, 139-140.
r.
Volume 70 Number 3 March 1993
197
