Book and Media Review pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Review of Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning Sarah B. Boesdorfer* Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614, United States Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning, edited by Diane M.Bunce. American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011. 231 pp. ISBN: 9780-8412-2715-6 (paperback). $80.00. Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning is appropriately an ACS Symposium Series book, because similar to any symposia it had a great deal of variety along with some ups and downs. As the title suggests, the theme of this symposium (book) was using research techniques to investigate some of those ideas that we all “know” to be true about teaching and learning but do not actually have evidence to support. Some of the myths explored in the book include students’ retention of knowledge after an exam, the time constraints of activity-based learning strategies, the use of visualizations in the classroom, and student learning in accelerated summer courses. Some of the chapters do not approach the research from a specific myth but rather from a description of a methodology that can be used to examine questions. These chapters offer examples of the methodologies by providing data for a research question, but do not as clearly or specifically address a myth about teaching or learning as some of the other chapters. Methodology chapters, for example, describe test and survey development and analysis, along with the development of a study from the beginning through publication. Similar to any edited book or symposia with a variety of authors, some chapters are stronger than others. Williamson’s chapter, “Teaching Chemistry with Visualizations”, is probably the strongest; she discusses myths about visualizations and provides a review of the research surrounding the myth. Oliver-Hoyo’s chapter on activity-based instruction is also strong, and while not addressing a specific myth, Schurmeier, Shepler, Lautenschalger, and Atwood’s chapter is interesting both in terms of the discussion of their methodologies and the findings of their research as it relates to general chemistry. Overall, though, the chapters do not fit well together as a collection. The problem is the theme or focus of the book. According to the first chapter, the book’s purpose is to “provide examples of research that address a wide array of cultural beliefs about teaching and learning manifested as easy answers (myths) to common problems” (p 3). It attempts to: (i) “challenge some commonly held myths about teaching and learning”; (ii) provide “examples of chemical education research”; and (iii) “showcase a range of research questions and methodologies used to investigate them” (pp 3−4). It is too much for one book, especially one in which the stated purpose is to address cultural beliefs about teaching and learning, even if it is a wide array of them. In many of the chapters, a myth, classroom specific or global, is not mentioned or is only briefly discussed in the introduction or conclusion of the chapter. After reading these chapters, I was left asking, what © 2014 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Reprinted with permission from Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning; Bunce, D. M., Ed.; ACS Symposium Series 1074; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2011. Copyright 2011 American Chemical Society.
was the myth? For example, the purpose of Chapter 5 is to “provide the reader with a more realistic view of how one of our published manuscripts progressed from initial idea to published article” (p 51). While this is valuable to many, the idea of cultural beliefs or myths is not the emphasis or even a significant part of the discussion. This focus away from the myth is true of about half the chapters in the book. The introduction suggests that this book provides examples of research as a follow-up to Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research.1 While it does provide more examples of chemical education research, the audience for the follow-up is different from the original. In his review of Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research, Kovac2 listed four different audiences that would find the book useful; unfortunately, I have difficulty identifying the same number of audiences for this book. Certainly, anyone looking for more examples of different kinds of educational research would find it helpful, but without the consistent themes of myths throughout Investigating Classroom Myths through Research on Teaching and Learning or another theme to tie the chapters together better, it is likely singular chapters that people will find useful rather than a majority of the book. Considering the list price of the book, I do not recommend it as a whole; however, I do recommend reviewing the table of contents because individual chapters can be purchased through the ACS publications Web site.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. Published: February 21, 2014 470
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed500038h | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 470−471
Journal of Chemical Education
Book and Media Review
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Bunce, D. M., Cole, R. S., Eds. Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research; ACS Symposium Series 976; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008. (2) Kovac, J. Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research (Diane M. Bunce and Renée S. Cole, eds.). J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86, 171.
471
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed500038h | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 470−471
