J o m a OB Cmmc~lrEDUCATION
514
MARCH, 1929
HIGH-SCHOOL CHEMISTRY AND THE STUDENT'S RECORD IN COLLEGE CHEMISTRY Inn D. GARARD m~ 'I'HALIA B. GATES, NEWJERSEY COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, RUTGERS NEW BUUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY UNIVERSITY,
The question of the value of high-school chemistry to those students who subsequently take college chemistry has never been settled. Much verbal comment has been made, often to the effect that the advantage of a highschool course is valueless to the college student of chemistry. Some papers containing statistical evidence have been published and it is to this list that the authors wish to add.182 In this college the students taking first-year college chemistry are all women; most of them are freshmen, but some are sophomores, and two or three each year are upper-class students. All of these are included in the averages given below. Some calculations were made to determine whether sophomores did any better than freshmen in the same work, and it was found that 615 examination grades from 88 sophomores (and upper classmen) averaged 60.9 per cent while 883 grades from 118 freshmen averaged 58.3 per cent. This difference of 2.6 per cent is small and probably of slight significance. However, the sophomores were almost invariably higher in the first examination of the year and also in the mid-year and June finals which are the times of maximum effort; but more of these freshmen than sophomores left college before graduation which could account in part for the difference in grades since the poorer students drop out in greater numbers.
Examination Grades The grades given below are for the written tests given about the same time each year and for the final examinations given a t the end of each semester. No class recitations or other incidental grades are included because they contain a greater personal element. For the first two years there was one lecturer and one laboratory assistant. For the last three years there were two lecturers and a total of seven diierent laboratory instructors. Jan. 20 May 22 Date Oct. 14 Oct. 28 Nov. 23 Dee. 12 Final Feb. 23 Mar. 27 Apr. 27 Final Number of students 174 104 202 143 216 198 139 180 197 Gradesf 69.4 68.6 56.2 62.4 67.8 60.2 56.7 58.4 66.3 Grades58.5 59.5 43.2 55.5 58.8 52.7 49.7 49.1 59.3 Number of students 113 69 123 93 133 118 84 109 113 + Students who have had high-school chemistry. - Students who have not had high-school chemistry. 1 Fry, Tms JOURNAL, 2 , 2 6 0 4 (April, 1925). Everhwt and Ebaugh, Ibid., 2, 7 7 0 4 (Sept., 1925).
+
The foregoing table shows the composite, weighted averages for the five-year period, 1919-23 inclusive. The grades of all students who took each examination are included in the average for that date. Absences account for the irregular number of students a t the different dates as well as the fact that in a few cases the examination for that date was not given. The weighted averages of all the above grades show that 1553 examination grades made in general chemistry by 216 different college students who have had high-school chemistry average 62.8 per cent; while 955 grades made by 133 different students in the same classes, who have not had high-school chemistry, average 53.8 per cent. Not only was the general average 9 per cent higher but the former were also 82 from 7 to 11 per cent higher I in each examination. This e 76 LAB J----- consistency in difference _--. between the grades of the 70 two groups is shown more 2 64 clearly by the following curves.
--
,
--
--
$58
Laboratory Grades
52
The laboratory grades were compiled a t the end of each semester only, and so I I I I I I I I only two values were availl4 31 able. It was found that Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Mar. Apr. May 214 students with high-represents the grades of students who have school training in chemistry had high-school chemistry averaged 74.9 per cent in - - - - those who have not our classes a t the midyear, while 129 students without high-school training averaged 69.6 per cent. At the end of the year, 204 students of the former class averaged 78.8 per cent and 126 of the latter group averaged 74.0 per cent. These values are also given on the above curve chart. '
46
'' ' '
'' ''
Discussion of Results The grades used in this paper were given without prejudice as our rolls contained no information as t o who had offered credit in high-school chemistry, and no effort was made t o get the information, for it was thought a t the time that the previous training made little difference. By 1924 it was found possible to maintain separate sections for students of diierent ability and then the compilation of the above data from our records and those of the registrar began.
Most of the students were from the high schools of New Jersey which rank well up the list in their equipment for teaching chemi~try,~ the exact rank depending on the relative weight allowed for the various factors (equipment, library, teacher's training, and so on). Some indication of the results of the teaching in these high-schools is given by the records of the men students of Rutgers who have been trained in much the same high schools as the women whose grades are given above.' These men ranked second in the list of records from fourteen widely distributed colleges, in the Iowa Chemistry Training Test. It would seem, then, that the high-school training is somewhat better than that of the country as a whole. No dogmatic interpretation of these results should be made, but they seemed to us to show sufficient diierence to warrant separate sections, and so, since 1924, separate sections of liberal arts students have been maintained in general chemistry. Subsequent experience has justified the separation in the opinion of the teaching staff, although a change in the system of grading has been made and so statistical comparison is of little value. If students are arranged in the familiar groups denoted variously as, A, B, C, D, or as excellent, good, average, poor, and failed and the like, then the differencesshown are almost sufficient to place the average student who has had high-school chemistry one group higher than the average student who has not had such a course. It is, of course, impossible to say definitely what the reason for this differenceis. The authors feel that it is not the facts that are remembered, but rather the student's familiarity with the language and nature of the subject and also the fact that some of the work is repetition. To the beginner everything is new and unfamiliar and so much time and energy must be spent in mastering the most elementary and mechanical phases of the subject. Possibly some of the difference is due to the tendency of the better students to elect high-school chemistry and the poorer to avoid i t because of its difficulty. One factor brought out by the curves deserves emphasis; namely, the position of the maxima. These points represent the student's maximum effort. They lie farthest apart for the two groups a t thebeginningof the term and closest a t the end of the year. For both classes the curves show the ambitious start, the well-known slump, and the desperate recovery. This attitude of students toward their work is one of the greatest difficultiesin predicting their performance and also in designing the courses. That the difference in the laboratory grades of the two groups was less than that of the examination grades and that i t was maintained throughout the year were both unexpected. However, the individual aid given by a
Tnrs JOURNAL, 4,9113 (July, 1927). Cornog and Stoddard, Ibid., 3, 1408-15 (Dec., 1926).
VOL. 6,No. 3 HIGH-SCHOOL CHEMISTRY AND COLLEGE PERFORMANCE
517
laboratory instructors and the less exact method of grading experimental work may account for these features of the differences. While the final combined grades which we record with the registrar are not included in this paper, they have been averaged and while the differences are somewhat less than those of the examination grades, they are of the same order.
