Chemical Education Today edited by
From Past Issues
Kathryn R. Williams
Pioneering Pedagogic Publications: Algorithms, Student Understanding, and Chemical Knowledge
University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-7200
by Jerry P. Suits
During the first ten years of the Journal (1924 to 1934), several pioneering chemical educators perceived certain student needs: to understand chemical knowledge rather than memorize factual material and to link solving quantitative problems to underlying chemical principles instead of relying on formulas or algorithms. Some authors conducted surveys of the nature and content of course examinations; others sought to find out which students succeeded in learning the different types of chemical knowledge on these exams. Many articles written by these pioneering educators reveal a focus upon the fundamental pedagogic ideas in chemical education. Awareness of these ideas from the past may help us sift through the more enriched (some might say cluttered) educational notions currently being promoted so that we can better distinguish between trivial and relevant issues. Algorithms and Quantitative Problem-Solving Several articles from the 1920s describe the value and limitations of algorithms in solving quantitative problems, although the pedagogic term “algorithm” did not appear in a JCE title until it was the topic of a symposium reported in 1987 (1). In 1926, Rich called this approach “mechanized habits of response” (2), and the following year Brinkley referred to it as “the substitution of numbers in a prescribed scheme” (3). Both descriptions capture the essence of how students can use algorithms without thinking about the chemical context of the “math problem”. In 1929, Sherrill clearly expressed the limitation of this approach, stating that problem solving should “require logical thinking in the application of the principles under consideration” (4). Thus these pioneering educators were painfully aware of the pedagogic obstacles imposed by the use of algorithms. Furthermore, they proposed a solution that linked quantitative problem-solving strategies to an understanding of the underlying chemical principles. Examinations and Chemical Knowledge Several authors investigated the nature and content of examinations used in chemistry courses because, as articulated by Cornog and Colbert, “…it seems probable that the content of final examination questions express[es] more certainly than information from any other source just what ideas constitute the irreducible minimum of chemical knowledge a student must possess to pass the course, [and] consequently they would appear to set out the ideas which teachers deem most basic” (5). In 1926, Rich found that most of the questions (82.5%) on two sets of high school chemistry exams required memory processes (2). Likewise, at the college level,
Cornog and Colbert (5) found that memory items dominated the examinations they studied. These and other educators considered the extent to which idealized notions of chemical theory and its problem-solving applications were matched with the actual practice of classroom teaching. They found that memory processes dominated the curriculum owing to overemphasis on descriptive chemistry and its apJacob Cornog. plications to industrial processes. This trend, found in both textbooks and examinations, reduces chemistry to “essentially a mass of information” (6). Brinkley proposed a shift from “covering content” to “giv[ing] our students the consciousness of their own mastery of that portion of the subject which we do cover” and “to make progress very slowly and to deal with simple scientific concepts, starting whenever possible with familiar facts and working out from these to broader and more complete knowledge” (7 ) (emphasis added). This timeless strategy could be used to organize modern chemistry courses under the theme of “less is more”. Student Characteristics and Academic Achievement Most early educators tended to ignore the role of student characteristics in the teaching/learning process. However, a statement by Cornog and Colbert illustrates some awareness of this factor: “While care and skill in formulation and administration of courses will help, it is doubtful if satisfactory thoroughness can generally be obtained so long as students of high intelligence do not wish to learn and so many of low intelligence cannot” (5). Today’s readers may interpret this as blaming the student for the learning/teaching difficulties, especially since modern educators face a much more diverse population of students. However, we must strive to maintain a delicate balance between two needs: determining which factors affect the learning process and avoiding abdicating our teaching responsibilities. In a 1929 study, Reed and colleagues (8) found a correlation between exam scores of college chemistry students and their “index of brightness” (IB or IQ) as measured by the Otis test (9). Specifically, they found that students, even the ones in the brightest quartile, had difficulty performing “numerical ratio calculations”. Unfortunately, the authors did not cite these findings as evidence that questioned the effectiveness of the ratio approach as advocated by McKinney (10).
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 78 No. 8 August 2001 • Journal of Chemical Education
1015
Chemical Education Today
From Past Issues Chemical Knowledge and Transfer of Learning One of the goals of chemistry instruction should be to help students transfer their knowledge to other disciplines and to selected real-world problems. In 1925, both Powers (11) and Rich (6) suggested that this goal is worthwhile, but they recognized that it is very difficult to implement. Modern chemical educators have rediscovered the value of real-world applications in the teaching of chemical concepts (12). Thus it would be interesting to determine the extent to which these applications facilitate or promote the transfer process. Further Implications for Modern Chemical Educators The modern reader should be impressed with the extent to which pioneering chemical educators were able to focus on the fundamental pedagogic ideas in the discipline. “Nothing is new under the sun.” On the one hand, each of these concepts could become the subject of a carefully designed educational research study. On the other hand, researchers now have measuring and teaching tools that were unavailable to early JCE authors, tools that can transcend the dichotomies of the past (13), such as lecture-vs-laboratory or quantitative-vs-qualitative. For example, we recently developed, implemented, and evaluated a multimedia module on the gas laws for use in a first-semester general chemistry course (14). In the module students solve both qualitative and quantitative problems within a real-world context. On the quantitative portion of the gas-law examination, the students in the test group scored significantly higher than those in the control group. This occurred despite the fact that the control students had worked numerous gas-law problems on homework assignments. Simultaneous presentation of both the qualitative and the quantitative aspects enables students to actively explore the relationships between the two ends of this dichotomy. This example illustrates that chemical edu-
1016
cators now have the opportunity to refocus upon instructional ideas from the past and then apply modern methods to help build bridges connecting these pedagogic issues. Literature Cited 1. Papers presented at the Symposium on Algorithms and Problem Solving, 190th National Meeting of the ACS, Chicago, Sep 1985. See Bodner, G. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 513–514. 2. Rich, S. G. J. Chem. Educ. 1926, 3, 445–449. 3. Brinkley, S. R. J. Chem. Educ. 1927, 4, 1283–1288. 4. Sherrill, M. S. J. Chem. Educ. 1929, 6, 260–262. 5. Cornog, J.; Colbert, J. C. J. Chem. Educ. 1924, 1, 5–12. 6. Rich, S. G. J. Chem. Educ. 1925, 2, 142–145. 7. Brinkley J. Chem. Educ. 1930, 7, 1869. 8. Reed, R. D.; Salter, C.; Kluckholm, C. J.; Gies, T. P. J. Chem. Educ. 1929, 6, 327–331. 9. The Otis test was a commercially available intelligence test: Otis, A. S. Otis Group Intelligence Scale; World Book: Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY, 1925. It was used to predict success (grades) in elementary school: Dickson, V.; Norton, J. K. J. Educ. Res. 1921, 3, 106. It was also used to predict success at the high school level: West, R. L. J. Educ. Res. 1921, 3, 261. 10. McKinney, P. V. J. Chem. Educ. 1928, 5, 858–860. 11. Powers, S. R. J. Chem. Educ. 1925, 2, 174-180. 12. For example, the 31 papers presented at the Symposium on Using Real-World Questions to Promote Active Learning, 219th National Meeting of the ACS, San Francisco, Mar 26– 30, 2000. 13. Alexander, P. A. Educ. Res. 2000, 29 (2), 28–34. 14. Suits, J. P.; Courville, A. A. Math. Sci. Educ. Technol. 1999, 531–53.
Jerry P. Suits is in the Department of Chemistry, McNeese State University, Lake Charles, LA 70609-0455;
[email protected].
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 78 No. 8 August 2001 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
