The Purpose of Laboratory Instruction in High School A Historical Survey B. P. Kapuscinski University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan. Canada In a recent article on the status of general chemistry today
--
Rrnnka atnted -. ..-1 l i, . .-..\.
(Ahong all aspects of the instruction conducted in chemistry departments, general chemistry lab must receive very low marks. What are the lab's objectives? One objective would be to initiate students to learn trails leading to careers as lsboratory scientists. Another would he to develop favorable attitudes among those who, as taxpayers, shall be asked to support Laboratory research. If one can reliably judge the status of labo ratory instruction by review of commercially available laboratory manuals and separates, it must be judged that neither objective is being accomplished. This type of criticism is not new in chemistry education. Laboratory instruction in introductory chemistry has been a component of science education in America since the midnineteenth century and has been challenged regularly since its incention. The . orouonents of lahoratorv instruction re. sponded to the challenge in diverse ways, their emphases reflecting the changing social and economic conditions of their times. It seems that each time the champions of lahoratory instruction were forced to defend their position, the education community henefitted from the challenge. The ohject of this paper is to review the purposes of lahoratory instruction as they were perceived in the literature from 1865 to the present and to suggest the benefits that accrued from each general encounter. The paper is divided into three sections based upon the main influences on chemistry instruction: the university community, economic conditions, and technological development. It concludes with reflections on future trends in science education. Influence of the University Community In the United States, the Boston Girls' High School and Normal School is credited with heing the first to begin lahoratory instruction in chemistry, in 1865. The principal of the school reoorted in 1871 ( 2 ) The present class (about 270) perform experiments. . . ,thereby gaining not only a knowledge of the elements and of their mast useful com~ounds. . . hut also by the success and failure of their experiments. . . they receive an education in patience, watchfulness, and exercise of forethought that will prove invaluable to them through life, in the discharge of domestic, social, and nrof~aaional allties .-... - . ~ - r ~
Laboratory investigations were viewed as means of gaining qualitative knowledge, as well as developihg habits useful in later life. In 1886 laboratory chemistry was added to the admission requirements of Harvard University. Professor Josiah Cooke prepared a description of the experiments that would be acceptable for admission. The resulting publication was thereafter referred to as "The Pamphlet." In it he stressed the importance of beginning the study of chemistry with ohservation and leading students to general principles by the use of their own inferences. But he also introduced an imuortant beriments. Tbe lahoratory manuals up to that kme appeared to contain "miscellaneous dahblings" in simple chemical re-
194
Journal of Chemical Education
actions and qualitative analysis. As a consequence of "The Pamnhlet." ~, hv 1899 most hieh school textbooks and laboratory manuals included quantitative measurement as a major part of the work done in the laboratory, stressing a maximal use of chemical and physical theory combined with exact quantitative measuring' At the turn of the century the number of high schools was increasing rapidly. Criticism against ',The Pamphlet" was mounting. Teachers decried the omission of descriptive and qualitative asoects of chemistrv, claiming that students were receiving an ikomplete program. ~ h e y d s oobjected to the medominance of mathematical arguments, which they felt were far too ahstract for the class ofminds to he reached. The revolt came to a head in 1898 when the New England Association of Chemistrv Teachers raised two maior ohiections: (1) . . there was not enough descriptive chemistry in "The Pamphlet" to give life to the great mass of laws and theories, and (2) pupils a t the high school level were too immature to understand ahstract orinci~les.Harvard acquiesced by havine "The Pamphlet" rewritten into a form mire in accord with the ideas of most high school teachers. Acceptance of the-laboratory program was rapid. Possible explanation for its popularity was its compatibility with the then widely held theory of faculty psychology or mental discipline. According to this theory, the mind could he exercised and trained much as a muscle of the body. Assignments were selected, not for their inherent worth or interest, but for the degree to which they "exercised" the mind. In the 100 experiments to he performed by the students, their understanding of the . nuruose . of an exueriment was not considered to he as important as its use for the development of their mental faculties. Notebooks were to he meticulouslv kept, with urooer grammar and spelling. Elaborate tables oidata and detailed drawings of eauipment were required. The underlying assumpti& was
