edited by: GRACEFISHERMCGUFFIE Northwestern High School Hyansville. Maryland 20782
curriculum report
Assumptions about High School Chemistry Topics Noojin Walker Pensacola Junior College, Pensacola, FL 32504 Coincidental to the report by Zimelis' in THIS JOURNAL, a variation of that study was concluded at Pensacola Junior College. The research question asked was twofold: What do high school teachers cover in the basic chemistry course? What do colleee teachers think that hieh school teachers cover in the has; chemistry course? Ausuhel has written that "If we had to reduce all of educational psychology to just one principle, we would say this: The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordinelv." .. . Thus, each time we begin a new class, or new lesson, or new concept, we base the prestmtation upon our nssumption of thestudent's knowledpe. \Vem.wme that thestudent knows K; therefore, we begin with L and proceed to M. What happens, however, if the student is a t G and we begin at K? What happens if the student is at R and we hegin HI K ? Thus, the study sought to test the accuracy of the college chemistry teachers' assumotions of what has been taurht in high schwl chemistry.
-
Method Chemistry teachers a t over 140 high schools and junior colleges, primarily east of the Mississippi, were surveyed. Each high school chemistry teacher was given a list of 50 lecture topics (Table 1) and asked to indicate those topics which were taught in hisfher typical high school chemistry course. Each junior college chemistry teacher was given the same list of topics and asked to indicate those topics which helshe assumed were taught in the typical high school chemistry course. The data were analyzed to answer the following three research questions:
' Zimelis, J., J. CMM.EDVC., 58, 488 (1981).
Ausubel. D. P., ''Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View." Holt Rinehart & Winston, New York. 1978.
1) Do high school teachers agree among themselves as to what
topics should be excluded from the high school chemistry course? 2) Do junior college teachers agree among themselves as to what lecture topics should be included and excluded from the high school chemistry course? 3) Do the junior college teachers' assumptions correspond with what is actually being taught? Each teacher was given a second list identical to the first; the second list was labeled "50 laboratory topics." The same instructions prevailed, and the same three research questions were asked. For purposes of the study, the criterion for "inclusion" was that 80 percent of the teachers agreed upon its inclusion. The criterion for "exclusion" was that no more than 20 percent of the teachers agreed upon its inclusion. Results In answer to the first question-"Do high school teachers agree among themselves on the lecture topics?"-the answer was "No." Eighty percent of them agreed on forty-four percent of the topics; they could not agree on over half of them. Only four laboratory topics were agreed upon. No agreement was evident on what lecture topics should be excluded. For the laboratory, however, agreement was more apparent. Thirtynine topics met the criterion for exclusion. No doubt several of the tonics did not lend themselves to exdoration in the hieh school laboratory, but a close examination shows that many topics could reasonablv fit iato the curriculum. ?he second questiot; focused on the accuracy of the junior colleee teachers'ossum~tionsof what is taunht. The answer was i h a t their assumptions were wrong. kgreement was This feature investigates aspects of the secondary schwl chemishy curriculum and related topics. New developmentswill be irlboduced and established techniques critiqued. Contributionsare welcome.
Volume 59
Number 6 June 1982
513
f$~ >-
'"".
reached on the inclusion of only 15 of the 50 lecture topics, and only 6 for exclusion. Not a sinde laboratory topic was agreed up'in as being an assumed pa& of the high schuol wurse, although 39 topics were assumed to he excluded from thr l a b oratory. This response was reflected in several written comments to the effect that, "I make no assumptions about the nast chemistrv exnerience of mv students. I teach the course a t a beginning level." The third auestion asked. "Do the iunior colleee teachers' assumptions correspond with what is actually being taught?" Agreement between iunior colleae assumptions and hiah school reality was foind for only15 ~ecturktopics. For the laboratory topics, agreement was found for 13 excluded topics but was not found for any included topics. If one compares the responses of the chemistry teachers in Zimelis' study with the ones in Table 1,some very striking similarities are apparent. The topics listed by Zimelis as havine no time soent on them corresoond well with the ones that uther high schuol tmrhers includttd lws frrqwntlynuclear, urgunic, ionic, colloid, and descriptive chtmistry. The university response to thew excluded topirs was very similar to the junior college teachers' response. 'l'he university faculty said theamount of time spent (none) wns'ahout right"twept that "more was needed" ior descriptive chemistry. A typical comment from the junior college teachers was, "My upiniun is that high school chemistry teachers short descriptive chemistry and basic stuichiwnetry while spvnding roo much time un theuretiral ~spects."The opinion was reinforced by n high school teacher whorommented."'rhe strrss i s m concepts and principles plus prohlem iolviny. Time does not oermit a study of the descriotive chemistw of famiiies."'l'hese comments are not new to us. Fifteen years ago in THIS JOURNAL, William Kieffer wrote, "Students can shape styrofoam atoms, but do not know that copper reacts with nitric acid." Another comment made by the university faculty in Zimelis' study was that they wanted to "make chemistry more fun." Perhaps this is another call for the inclusion of more descriptive chemistry. One is reminded of Haenisch's statement that "nothing can completely replace the intellectual experience and the esthetic satisfaction derived from colors, odors, precipitations, gas evolutions, the solution process, and chemical changes produced by one's own hands." He, and others, have suggested that the lecture be devoted to physical principles and that the laboratory be devoted to descriptive chemistry.
.
~~~
-
~
A
"
Conclusions
The data indicate that high school chemistry teachers do not agree on the topics to be included in the high school chemistry course and that junior college chemistry teachers are incorrect in their overall assum~tionsof what is taught in the high school chemistry course. If one expects the stidy of chemistry a t the college level to he meaningful, then one should consider Ausuhel's definition which states simply that meaningful learning occurs when the learning begins with what someone already knows and leads him to the discovery of something he did not know.3 The lack of coordination between high school and college chemistry is inefficient and ineffective. One would not propose a national curriculum. but certainlv one should e x ~ e cartict ulation a t the local-regional level.~~imelis has made an excellent beginning in his efforts to solve the problem; there are EDUC., 42, 347 (1965). Keiffer, W. T., J. CHEM. Haenisch, E. L., "The Content of Introductory College Chemistly," Advisory Council on College Chemistry. Washington. D.C.. 1964.
514
Journal of Chemical Education
Agreement Among Hlgh School Teachers (HST) About the lncluion ot Topics ~ihln-theHlgh School Chemistry Course, and Agreement Among Junior College Teachers (JCT) About Thelr ~ssimptions01 the Included Topics Lecture Topics Density Charles' Law Boyle's Law Molar Volume Atomic weight (metal) Atomic weight (gas) Empirical formula Solubility
Neutralization Types of reactions Redox reactions Chemical bonding Atomic structure Metric System ionization Measurements (wi, vol. lln) Freezing point depression Boiling point elevation Hydrates Equivalent weight (metal) Chemical equilibrium Heat of solution Hydrolysis Solubilily product Reaction rates Catalysis Common ion Ele~tromotiveseries Electrochemistry Radioactivity Heat of neutralization Colloids Graham's Law Complex ions Prep. and Prop. of Acids Bases
Salts Water Oxygen Halogens Alkali metals Alkali eanhs Transition metals Ammonia Nitrogen Sulfur
Organic acids Organic carbon Organic alcohols Organic esters
HST 95% 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 90 90 80 80 80 75 75 75 70 70 70 85 60 60 55 55 55 55 50 45 95 95 90 85 75 70 65 55 55 45 40 40 70 85 65 50
Laboratory JCT 100% 90 90 75 90 80 90 70 90 80 85 95 80 70 70 70 40 40 70 40 65 40 30 20
30 40 10 55 50
30 35 25 65 10 65 95 90 85 65 55 60 35 25 40 35 30 25 20 15
.
HST JCT -75% 40 40 50 25 25 50 85 70 80 55 35 5 70 35
SO 40 20 65 35 40 45 25 40 45 30 25 20 10 0 30 15 10 15 75 80 65 40 50 25 25 20 10 20 10 15 50 35 40
70% 30 25 20 5 15 10 40 70 20 10 0 0 60 30 70 20 10 35 20 15 20 0 0 10 10 0 10 10 5 20 0 0 0 35 30 20 20 20 0 to 0
0 5 0 5 10 10 10 0
other actions that can be taken. The faculty of a high school, a junior college, or a university could be the initiators of face-to-face dialoes amone the three. with hieh school and college chemistry ieing approached as a logicafwhole, rather than as seDarate considerations. Local sections of the American chemical Society could also be the unifying agents, bringing together the three educational systems. The body of knowledge within contemporary chemistry is too large to permit us the luxury of unnecessary duplication. I t is too important to permit us an indifference toward omissions. Articulation must he the concern of all of us.
