Editorial Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 689−690
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Is Something New Happening with Textbooks? Norbert J. Pienta* Department of Chemistry, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2556, United States ABSTRACT: The traditional textbook model for general chemistry is discussed and reviewed in a historical context. KEYWORDS: Textbooks/Reference Books, General Public, First-Year Undergraduate/General
A
general chemistry using resources from OpenStax7 and Chemistry LibreTexts.8 The open-access licenses allow the users some flexibility in arranging or rearranging topics, again starting with traditional textbook content; the HTML format allows more flexibility but starts with the same framework and organization. Online educational resource (OER) initiatives are becoming more widespread and suggest that content may begin to appear through individual or collaborative efforts, an exciting possibility or perhaps the source of concern about the lack of a formal review process and quality control. To get to a different textbook, one must find it within a different or new pedagogy. The POGIL Project (ProcessOriented, Guided-Inquiry Learning)9 requires carefully crafted activities based on learning cycles; some compilations of activities have been published.10 Other curricula include the following: (i) CLUE (Chemistry, Life, the Universe, and Everything),11 which has been developed at Clemson and Michigan State Universities and is used at various universities (the developers find substantial improvement in student learning outcomes);12 (ii) “Chemical Thinking”,13 a curriculum developed at the University of Arizona, based on problembased learning that presents chemistry as a way of thinking;14 and (iii) a new curriculum that cuts across four semesters of general and organic chemistry, being developed at Emory University.15 My publishing friend retired not long after our conversation and died more than 15 years ago. For better or worse, he left me with the task of passing on the same question: Is the traditional textbook dead? Which new pedagogy, together with accompanying materials and evidence-based research, will be the progenitor of the next “modern” text? My hope is that it does not take another 25 years.
bout 25 years ago, a prominent (and perhaps infamous) editor/publisher of chemistry textbooks spoke with me about the imminent changes that would likely put an end to the print textbook. The CD in the front of the book and what were called multimedia tools, the state-of-the-art form of ancillary material at the time, were a sign to him that static pages soon would be replaced. He was not quite sure what form the corpus would manifest itself as, but the electronic book was coming. The topics to be covered in general chemistry and the textbooks used to accomplish that teaching have been timely topics for almost a century. Among the first articles published in this Journal in 1924 was one entitled “What We Teach Our Freshmen in Chemistry”, which included data from teacher surveys, contents of widely used texts, and content of final examination questions.1 More recent reports on the topics used in general chemistry include a series of papers initiated by the leadership of the ACS Examinations Institute.2−4 During the intervening years, texts mainly focused on descriptive chemistry but with some concerns about conceptual understanding. A text first published in the 1950s by Michell Sienko and Robert Plane, both young faculty at Cornell University, is often recognized as the first modern general chemistry textbook.5 The evolution from that book and Sienko and Plane’s philosophy to the current time has been accompanied by a massive reduction in the number of publishing houses (from 25+ down to 5+) and a proliferation of titles, many of which contain tables of contents that appear indistinguishable to some. Some efforts toward a substantive change appeared with the introduction of the “atoms-first” approach,6 a rearrangement of topics to push more conceptual ideas to the beginning of the first semester. The dire predictions about the future of the textbook, alluded to above, happened ∼40 years later. Finally, about 60 years after the appearance of Sienko and Plane, a new model may finally emerge. Modern technology and communication tools, together with a generation of students who espouse them, provide an opportunity for the next major step. For example, at the Editor’s institution over the past 5 years, the assigned book changed from a print text in its 11th edition, to another “classical” text which is now available in a hybrid form that has digital content (i.e., in the form of PDF files), and most recently to a true online book with a much richer set of tools and capabilities. But have the textbooks really changed? Certainly not, in going from the print to a PDF version. Even the “totally online” book has the same table of contents as the two stacks of books in my office. Open-access textbooks are available for © 2018 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Norbert J. Pienta: 0000-0002-1197-6151 Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS. Published: May 8, 2018 689
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00273 J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 689−690
Journal of Chemical Education
Editorial
Norbert J. Pienta is Professor and Director of General Chemistry at the University of Georgia, where he teaches and conducts research and scholarship about the teaching and learning of chemistry, devising methods, instruments, and analytics to characterize student learning and increase student success. He currently also serves as the editor-in-chief for the Journal of Chemical Education.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Cornog, J.; Colbert, J. C. What We Teach Our Freshman in Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1924, 1 (1), 5−17. (2) Murphy, K.; Holme, T.; Zenisky, A.; Caruthers, H.; Knaus, K. Building the ACS Exams Anchoring Concept Content Map for Undergraduate Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (6), 715−720. (3) Holme, T.; Murphy, K. The ACS Exams Institute Anchoring Concept Content Map I: General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (6), 721−723. (4) Holme, T.; Luxford, C.; Murphy, K. Updating the General Chemistry Anchoring Concept Map. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (6), 1115−1116. (5) For a historical perspective on the influence of the Sienko and Plane textbook, see Borman, S. A Tale of Two Textbooks. Chem. Eng. News 2005, 83 (41), 48−51; http://pubs.acs.org/cen/education/83/ 8341education1.html (accessed Apr 2018). (6) Esterling, K. M.; Bartels, L. Atoms-First Curriculum: A Comparison of Student Success in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (11), 1433−1436. (7) For a description of the OpenStax science textbooks, see https:// openstax.org/subjects/science (accessed Apr 2018). (8) For a description of the Chemistry LibreTexts, see https://chem. libretexts.org/ (accessed Apr 2018). (9) For a description of POGIL and access to some materials, see https://www.pogil.org/ (accessed Apr 2018). (10) Farrell, J. J.; Moog, R. S.; Spencer, J. N. A Guided-Inquiry General Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (4), 570−574. (11) For a description of CLUE, access to the book and course materials, and a complete bibliography of evidence-based studies, see http://virtuallaboratory.colorado.edu/CLUE-Chemistry/ (accessed Apr 2018). (12) Cooper, M.; Klymkowsky, M. Chemistry, Life, the Universe, and Everything: A New Approach to General Chemistry, and a Model for Curriculum Reform. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (9), 1116−1122. (13) For a description of Chemical Thinking, access to material, and links to evidence-based studies, see https://sites.google.com/site/ chemicalthinking/ (accessed Apr 2018). (14) Talanquer, V.; Pollard, J. Reforming a Large Foundational Course: Successes and Challenges. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (12), 1844−1851. (15) For an Inside Higher Ed piece that describes the Emory plan, see Roll, N. Chemistry, without the Dreaded Organic Chem Course. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/10/23/emory-revampschemistry-curriculum (accessed Apr 2018).
690
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00273 J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95, 689−690
