edited by
J. DUDLEY HERRON Purdue University West Lafayene, Indiana 47907
Table 1.
Student Attitude and Achievement in IAC and CHEM Study Robert D. Sherwoodl
Department of Science and Environmental Education Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana When a teacher switches from one curriculum program to another qurstions often arise about whether the rorrrct decision was made inchanging programs. An attempt was madr to answer somr of thesequestions by comparing meajureiof attirudeand achievement hetwcrnCHFM study and the IAC (Interdisciplinary Approach to Chemistry) programs in a school setting. The IAC and the CHEM study materials have some basic differences in philosophy and style. IAC is less mathematical than CHEM study and does not go into detail on more abstract concepts such as energy levels and wave mechanics. The actual books are very dissimilar. All CHEM study versions are hardback texts while the IAC material is a series of seven paperbound modules covering the basic areas of chemistry. The modules include an Introductory module plus modules on Physical, Inorganic, Organic, Environmental, Nuclear, and Biochemistry.' Earlier work by several authors had indicated that perhaps there were some measurable differences between IAC and other programs (2-5). Subjects in the Study
The students taking Chemistry I in the 197.%76 school year and the 1976-77 school year a t New Palestine High School, New Palestine, Indiana were the subjects for the study. New Palestine is a small (700 students 9-12) high school in the Indianapolis area with a mixture of rural and suburban students. In 1975-76 there were 4 seniors, 19 juniors, and 50 sophomores enrolled in Chemistry I. The fdlowing year there were 5 seniors, 23 juniors, and 67 sophomores enrolled in the course. The course was taught by the author both years. Tests Given
The Student Opinion Suruey in Chemistry (SOSC) (6) developed by Heikkinen (7) was used as a measure of student attitude towards chemistry. The 20 items on the instrument are equally divided into favorable and unfavorable items. The scorine varies from 20 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable). i n undertded student would have a score of 60. Part I of the ACS-XSTA C'oupr,rati~.eExaminarionForm 1975 ( 8 )was used as a measure of chemistry achievement. The ACS-NSTA exam is of two parts of equal difficulty containing 40 multiple choice items each. Only Part I of the exam was administered in this study. Intelligence test scores (LorgeTborndike or Otis-Lennon) were also obtained for most students. Description of the Courses
In 197576 school year the Chemistry I course consisted of approximately 30 weeks of instruction covering about 16 The author was Chemistry Instructor/Science Department Chairman, New Palestine High Sehwl, New Palestine, Indiana at the time of this studv
School Year
Descrlptlon of Treatments
Instruction
Approximate Time Period
1975-76
CHEM study
First 30 weeks
1975-76 1976-77
Environmental iAC Mcdule Introductory. Physical and inorganic IAC Environmental LAC Maduie
Lest 6 weeks First 30 weeks
1976-77
Table 2.
Last 6 weeks
Instrument(s) Used after Completion SOSC. A C S NSTA SOSC SOSC. ACSNSTA None
Means and Standard Devlatlon for Tests Given N
Mean
Standard Deviation
1975-76-Lor@-Thorndike or Otis 1975-76-SOSC Pretest 1975-76-sosc posttest
69 73 73
112.82 73.00 77.33
9.60 13.25 13.58
1976-77-Lorge-Thorndike w Otis 1976-77-SOSC 1976-77-ACSNSTA
87 95 89
113.62 71.12 15.35
9.73 15.16 4.45
Instrument
chapters of the Parry version of CHEM study (9) and approximately six weeks of one of the IAC modules, The Delicate Balance: An Environmental Chemistry Module. The SOSC and ACS-NSTA instruments were administered after the CHEM study text material had been covered hut before the IAC module was started. The SOSC was readministered alter rompletion of the lAC material. During the 19Xfi-7: srhool vear four of the IAC modules became h e hasic texts for the ?:hemistry I course. The modules taught were the Introductory Chemistry module, the Physical Chemistry module, thr Inorganic Chemistry module. and the Environmental Chemistry module. The SOSC and thr ACS-NSTA instr~~ments were administered after the tirst three modules were taught hut before the Environmental module. The students were not told thev would be takine the ACS-NSTA exam until one day beforeuit was administered. Thev were informed that the test would not chanee " their made in the course but might he made part of their permanent record. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the treatments and the data. Results
Several analyses of the data shown in Table 2 were made. First, to see how switching from CHEM study to IAC might affect attitudes. the mean on the SOSC administered after 30 weeks of CHEM study in 1975-76 (SOSC pretest) was comnared to the mean on the SOSC after studvine an IAC module ior the following 6 weeks (SOSC post-test). ?he comparison was made by means of the t-test, producing a value for t corresponding t o p = 0.053 ( t = 1.95, df = 144). Thus, the ohserved difference in means would occur by chance alone about one time in twenty, suggesting that the change in curriculum resulted in an imorovement in attitude. Taken at face ialue, this result umould appear to mean that students liked IAC hetter thun (:HEM stu~lybut things aren't Volume 55, Number 11, November 1978 / 733
that simple. It is possihle that the individualized format used d h the IAC module was what produced the morr favorable attitude. Indeed, the shift may represent nothing more than reaction to a change in pace or a more enjoyable topic of study. Whatever the cause, it would appear that i t is not simply a preference for IAC over CHEM study. When the mean SOSC score for the 1976-77 group (f = 71.12) which studied IAC for the first 30 weeks was compared to the mean SOSC score for the 197E-76 group ( E = 73.00) which studied CHEM study for the first 30 weeks, there was no evidence of difference (t = 0.84, df = 166. P = 0.40). Since the students in the two groups were not randomly assigned to treatment, this result can only he taken as suggestive. Still, it seems fair to say that if studen& react more fawrahly to one of these courses of study than to the other, the preterenc~is not strong enough to overcome the effect of other factors which vary from class to class and from year to year. Although student attitudes are clearly important, most teachers worry more about what has been learned. This is difficult to judge because any test represents a narrow selection from a larger pool of possible test questions. A given test may come closer to measuring what was taught in one course than in another, even though the total amount learned was the same in both courses. In spite of this problem and the obvious difficulty resulting from non-random assignment of students to treatment groups, it was judged that a comparison of scores on the ACS-NSTA chemistry exam would be of some value. However, since IQ is known to correlate well with achievement tests of this t .. w e ,. the mean IQ for the groups was first compared. This com~ a r i s o neave no evidence that the two moups differed in basic ~ n t r l l i g e k (et = 0.50, d/ = 147, p = 0621,knd it wasdecided to proceed with the rompuriwn of the ACS-NS'I'A scores.
734 1 Jouml of Chemical Education
Once again, no differences between the two groups were detected ( t = 1.40, df = 156, p = 0.163), and we are forced to conclude that if one of these programs is more effective in teaching chemical concepts of the type tested by the ACSNSTA exam, that difference in effectiveness was not sufficiently potent to show up under the condition of this study. Discussion
This study is not a true experiment so i t cannot show whether IAC or CHEM study is better. Under the conditions of this study, there does not appear to he a great deal of difference in either attitude or scores on the ACS-NSTA exam. I t is sometimes su~zestedthat IAC increases student interest in chemistry. ~ h 6 . kdata cast wmc d w h t on that suggestion. I t is, however, equallv doul~tfulthat the use of IAC will rrsult in substantially~lowerachievement as others predict. I t appears that both programs have something t o offer. Teachers might be well advised to at least try one of the IAC modules to see if there is a place for it in their program. Literature Cited (11 Chemistry Assacis% of Maryland. Inc.. "Interdisciplinary Approache. t o Chemirtry." Hsrpersnd Row, NewYork, 1973. (21 C d n e r , M.,"Tho InterdisciplinaryApproach to Chemistry ( I A C ~ P r w m and I Related Research." in Tisher, R. (Editor) "Science Education: Research. 1973." Australian Science Education Repparch A ~ a m i a t i ~ 1973. n . pp. 17-21. (31 Forgy,E.L..andBakken, M. E.. J. CHEM.EDUC.53.309 (19761. (41 Hearts, R. J . , ' T h e Identification and Mearurament of Hieh Sehml Chemistry Laboratory Skills." Dissrrlolion Abstrocb. 34-2.7MlA. (19741. (51 Shsnvood, R., and Herron, J. D., Sci. Educ.. 60111.471 (19761. (61 Chemistry Aswriales of Maryland. he.. "Student (binion Survey in Chemistry? Hamer (71 ~ ~ i k t i H., " ~"A~ study . ~~~t~~ ~ ~ student ~nt t i t ~ ~~~~~d d *~ the study ~ of High Schml Chemistry? Dlrsertalion Abalrods, 31-2,7076A 11974). (81 Examinations Committee ACS, "ACS-NSTA Cooperative Examination, Farm 1975." University of Southern Fiorida. Tampa. Florida. 1975. (91 Parry, Steiner, Tellefsen, and Diefz, "Chemistry Experimental Foundations." ~ r e n tice-Hall. Englewuud Cliffs, New Jersey. 1970.
~
~
