In the Classroom edited by
Chemistry for Kids
John T. Moore Stephen F. Austin State University Nacogdoches, TX 75962
Integrated Lecture and Laboratory Chemistry Components of Science Education Program for Early and Middle Childhood Education Majors
David Tolar R. C Fisher School Athens, TX 75751
S. K. Lunsford Department of Chemistry, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435;
[email protected] Early childhood (grades K–3) and middle childhood science education majors (grades 4–9) at Wright State University encounter courses that are most likely different from science courses taken in the past. Our early childhood program consists of five core science courses: Foundations in Problem Solving and Science Literacy, Concepts and Applications in Physics I, Concepts in Chemistry I, Concepts in Geology I, and Concepts in Biology I. The middle childhood science education program consists of the early childhood courses and the following courses: Concepts and Applications in Physics II, Concepts in Chemistry II, Concepts in Geology II, Concepts in Biology II, and Projects in Science. These courses have evolved over the years and are based on the National Science Education Standards and the National Science Teacher Association’s Standards for Science Teacher Preparation (1, 2). The author has the primary responsibility for the chemistry components of the science teachers educational program, consisting of two courses: Concepts in Chemistry I and Concepts in Chemistry II. The goals governing the development of the new chemistry courses are to prepare the preservice teacher by: • Developing skills and thought processes necessary to become a complex thinker. • Orienting students toward an inquiry-based learning environment. • Developing understanding of core chemistry concepts, such as physical versus chemical properties and changes to relation with periodic trends. • Familiarizing students with the National Science Education Standards. • Developing cooperative learning skills to become a collaborative worker. • Motivating students to become decision makers on realworld issues in science. • Developing students’ attitudes towards inquiry in science and learning to become better teachers. • Developing students’ ability to plan and implement inquirybased science programs. • Developing students’ ability to make a connection between science, math, history, the arts, and humanities as a relation between personal and global issues.
These newly designed courses reflect the national and state standards not only in the content, but also in the way the content is covered and assessed. Few teachers, particularly those at the elementary and middle level, experience any colwww.JCE.DivCHED.org
•
lege science teaching that stresses the skills of inquiry and investigation necessary to implement in their method of teaching (3–6). These newly developed science courses actively encourage students (preservice education majors) to learn not only science facts, but also the methods and processes of research, which scientists and researchers utilize. This training will help the students to make accurate assessments about technical problems and issues in the world today. The courses in the program have small class sizes of 24–28 students and are inquiry based with integrated class discussion and laboratory experiences. The courses are cooperative and constructivist learning environments in which students work in groups to obtain and analyze information from the investigations. The students are encouraged to communicate their results to their peers and the course instructors. In this way, students build their own knowledge and modify it as necessary through their investigations and discussions. These courses are “student centered” as opposed to “teacher centered”; the students are primarily responsible for acquiring, processing, and evaluating their understanding of the course concepts. Communication, reasoning, and applications of concepts are emphasized in these courses. Course activities are significantly different than the traditional lecture and laboratory format in that students first perform cooperative investigations to “discover” concepts, followed by cooperative group or whole class discussions that provide further elaboration of concepts (7–13). Concepts in Chemistry I After students have completed the Foundations in Problem Solving and Science Literacy course, they may enroll in the Concepts in Chemistry I. The structure of the course is similar to the Foundations course in that it is inquiry based and utilizes cooperative learning techniques, as well as integrating pedagogical content knowledge and math with chemistry content. The Concepts course focuses on topics such as heat and temperature, physical versus chemical properties, physical versus chemical changes, periodic table, atoms, states of matter, gas laws, chemical reactions, solutions, acids and bases, oxidation and reduction, and introduction to organic chemistry. Particular attention is given to overcoming student misconceptions in chemistry such as those involving heat and temperature. An example of a common misconception in the early childhood chemistry course is the perception that a metal object is colder than a plastic object when the two objects are at room temperature. The inquiry-based lesson on heat and temperature dispels many common misconceptions as the specific heat of metal versus the specific heat of water are discussed (14–16).
Vol. 81 No. 5 May 2004
•
Journal of Chemical Education
685
In the Classroom
Students are assessed through pre- and posttests of chemistry content, through student project activities, and through journal assignments. Pre- and posttests include short answer problems based on real-world issues such as the assessment that a pH from a calculation will help or hinder the growth of plants in the garden. The results from four quarters show an average pretest score of 28% and an average posttest score of 81% with a normalized gain of 0.74 (N = 100). These results indicate a significant gain in student conceptual understanding and a significant gain in the students’ abilities to apply this understanding in problem solving. The resulting gains are consistent with the trend and improved student understandings with increased active class interaction noted in the study by Gabel (14). Concepts in Chemistry II After completion of Concepts in Chemistry I, the middle childhood science education majors are required to take the newly developed Concepts in Chemistry II course. The structure of this course is also inquiry based and relates to everyday life of chemistry. This course includes the topics of periodic trends, chemical reactions related to the world today, kinetics (rate of chemical reactions), equilibrium, acids and bases with equilibrium, oxidation and reduction (galvanic and electrolytic cells), and organic chemistry (biochemistry to pharmaceutical aspects). The pre- and posttest involve either multiple choice answers or short answers to real-world issues, such as how to keep the patient alive (equilibria question). This course was developed as a result of Ohio’s transition to a performancebased model for professional licensure and has only one quarter of the results with an average pretest score of 47% and an average posttest score of 80% with a normalized gain of 0.62 (N = 100). These results are consistent with the noted trend of improved student understandings (14). Assessment Samples of questions from the pre- and posttest used to assess the effectiveness of the new courses are shown. The project is also discussed.
Question 1 A glass of ice water has been sitting by two students for a while. The following conversation occurs between the two students: Student 1: The ice is colder than the water. The water feels cold when I put my hand on it, but the ice feels much colder when I touch it, so the water must be warmer than the ice. Student 2: But the water and the ice should both be at the same temperature, since they have been in contact for a while.
Do you agree with student 1, student 2, both or neither? Explain your reasoning.
Question 2 You have an object that you think might be a metal. How would you test to see if it is a metal? Explain your reasoning. 686
Journal of Chemical Education
•
Question 3 Tom has a homogenous object with a mass of 45 g and a volume of 15 cm3. Tameka has a homogenous object with a mass of 12 g. If Tameka’s object is made of the same kind of material as Tom’s object, what is the volume of her object? Explain your reasoning and do not use equations. Question 4 400 grams of water at an initial temperature of 60 ⬚C are mixed with 200 grams of water at an initial temperature of 45 ⬚C in a thermally insulated container. What is the final temperature of the mixed water? Explain your reasoning using diagrams, but no equations! Question 5 State whether the following are chemical or physical changes. Briefly state your reasons. (a) A block of ice changes phases from solid to liquid as it melts. (b) Raspberry Kool-Aid is mixed with water and turns the water red. (c) A piece of wood burns. (d)
Two clear solutions are mixed and a white solid appears.
(e)
Alcohol is poured on a solid object; when the object is heated it smells like candy.
(f )
A chunk of aluminum is hammered flat.
(g)
A piece of aluminum foil is placed in a blue liquid. The foil instantly turns brown, the beaker warms up, and the liquid turns clear.
Question 6 You have 10 mL of three concentrations of the same chemical solutions labeled Ca, Cb, and Cc. The solutions are titrated with a known concentration of antacid solution. It takes 4 mL of the antacid solution to bring a color change to Ca, 6 mL of the antacid solution to bring about a color change to solution Cb, and 1 mL of antacid solution to bring about a color change in Cc. What can you determine about the unknown solutions from this information? Explain your reasoning. Question 7 In a heart operation, it is necessary to stop the flow of oxygen to the brain for a considerable quantity of time but this action could cause brain damage. At 98.6 ⬚F the brain cannot survive without oxygen for more than 5 minutes without permanent brain damage. Devise a mechanism to prevent the patient from suffering brain damage. Explain your plan in detail. Question 8 You are a member of a team of scientists in the research and development department of a large manufacturing company. The company makes travel mugs from the material that is in cup A; however, the company would like to make the travel mugs out of a material that is not likely to crack, as the material in cup A occasionally does. The company owns some mines in South America and has obtained the two samples in cup B from the mines. The company would like you to de-
Vol. 81 No. 5 May 2004
•
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
In the Classroom
termine whether either of the samples in cup B would be better materials to make travel cups from than the sample in cup A. Write the report that your team will present to the company executives discussing the pros and cons of utilizing the new materials for their travel mugs. To be a compelling report, you need to describe how you tested the samples, what you determined from your testing, and what your conclusions are based on (1, 2, 12, 17).
Project Students complete a course project in which they have the opportunity to design and facilitate their own chemistry inquiry activities for middle school grade levels. Cooperative groups of 3–4 students design a chemistry activity for a particular grade level and, as a group, facilitate this activity for the class. As a class, the effectiveness of the activity is analyzed and constructive criticism is given. It is interesting to note that the students try to model the teaching techniques of the course, particularly the Socratic questioning techniques utilized in facilitation during the course (16, 17). Conclusions One of the goals in developing the new chemistry courses was to foster positive student attitudes toward chemistry and to capitalize on both positive and negative experiences in helping students to see how teachers can influence students’ interests in science with inquiry-based and discovery learning. Overall, the chemistry components of the early childhood and middle childhood science education program have been successful in developing student conceptual understanding and ability to apply this understanding in problem solving. Additionally, the courses have been successful in helping students become better inquiry science learners, which in turn, will help them become better inquiry science teachers as called for in the National Science Education Standards. Other science educators at the University have noted in subsequent science courses of the program that students are better prepared with respect to content, approaches toward learning, and attitudes toward inquiry science teaching since the inception of the chemistry components of the program (1, 2, 12, 16, 17).
www.JCE.DivCHED.org
•
Finally, the science educators of the University are forming assessment plans to not only track student science content knowledge and attitudes, but also follow these students after graduation to assess the impact that this program has on science teaching in the classroom. Acknowledgment Special thanks to Beth Basista, Paul Serve, Jim Tomlin, Susann Matthews, Ann Farrell, Roderic Brame, and William Slattery. Literature Cited 1. National Research Council. National Science Education Standards; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 1996. 2. National Science Teachers Association. Standards for Science Teacher Preparation; National Acedemy Press: Washington, DC, 1992. 3. Shiland, T. W. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 107–109. 4. Bodner, G. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63, 873–878. 5. Herron, J. D. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 52, 146–150. 6. Domin, D. S. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 543–547. 7. Lloyd, B. W. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 866–869. 8. Lloyd, B. W.; Spencer, J. N. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 206– 209. 9. Gallet, C. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 72–77. 10. Nakhleh, M. B. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71, 201–205. 11. Stensvold, M.; Wilson, J. T. J. Chem. Educ. 1992, 69, 230– 232. 12. Lazarowitz, R.; Tamir, P. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning; Gabel, D., Ed.; Macmillan: New York, 1994; pp 94–128. 13. Herman, C. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 70–72. 14. Gabel, D. L. J. Chem. Educ. 1989, 65, 727–729. 15. Hake, R. R. Am. J. Phys. 1998, 66 (1), 64–74. 16. McDermott, L. Physics by Inquiry; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1996. 17. Burke, K. A.; Greenbowe, T.; Lewis, E.; Peace, E. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 699.
Vol. 81 No. 5 May 2004
•
Journal of Chemical Education
687
