Like other STEM disciplines, chemistry education increasingly focuses on teaching the way that its discipline thinks. Instructors can find discipline-specific research on teaching chemistry, which continues in its discovery of the methods that are most effective for student learning. Particular foci include active learning and techniques such as Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL).
The American Chemical Society (ACS) plays a central role in publishing guidelines for undergraduate chemistry courses. Particular emphasis has been placed on the importance of permanent faculty teaching in courses that involve certification and laboratory research experiences for students, as well as the availability of proper equipment for use by undergraduates (e.g. optical molecular spectroscopy, optical atomic spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, chromatography and separations, and electrochemistry). The organization endorses pedagogies that are based on learning theory and have led to measurable student achievement, including “problem- or inquiry- based learning, peer-led instruction, learning communities, and technology-aided instruction such as the use of personal response systems and flipped or hybrid classes. Laboratory work provides a particularly attractive opportunity for inquiry-driven and open-ended investigations that promote independent thinking, critical thinking and reasoning, and a perspective of chemistry as a scientific process of discovery” (ACS 2008 Guidelines).
Journals
Articles and Papers
Abstract: “In this paper we discuss how and why core ideas can serve as the framework upon which chemistry curricula and assessment items are developed. While there are a number of projects that have specified “big ideas” or “anchoring concepts”, the ways that these ideas are subsequently developed may inadvertently lead to fragmentation of knowledge, rather than construction of a coherent, contextualized framework. We present four core ideas that emerged as a consequence of a transformation effort at our institution and discuss the relationships between core ideas and more recognizable topics in the context of a general chemistry course. We show how commonly taught topics can be supported and developed on the basis of the core ideas and discuss why this approach can lead to a more expert-like framework upon which students can build their future understanding.”
Presents major guidelines for chemistry program approval and student certification.
Abstract: “To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under traditional lecturing versus active learning. The effect sizes indicate that on average, student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies), and that the odds ratio for failing was 1.95 under traditional lecturing (n = 67 studies). These results indicate that average examination scores improved by about 6% in active learning sections, and that students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. Heterogeneity analyses indicated that both results hold across the STEM disciplines, that active learning increases scores on concept inventories more than on course examinations, and that active learning appears effective across all class sizes—although the greatest effects are in small (n ≤ 50) classes. Trim and fill analyses and fail-safe n calculations suggest that the results are not due to publication bias. The results also appear robust to variation in the methodological rigor of the included studies, based on the quality of controls over student quality and instructor identity. This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. The results raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and support active learning as the preferred, empirically validated teaching practice in regular classrooms.”
Abstract: “Despite multiple calls for reform, the curriculum for first-year college chemistry at many universities across the world is still mostly fact-based and encyclopedic, built upon a collection of isolated topics, oriented too much towards the perceived needs of chemistry majors, focused too much on abstract concepts and algorithmic problem solving, and detached from the practices, ways of thinking, and applications of both chemistry research and chemistry education research in the 21st century. This paper describes an alternative way of conceptualizing the introductory chemistry curriculum for science and engineering majors by shifting the focus from learning chemistry as a body of knowledge to understanding chemistry as a way of thinking. Starting in 2007, we have worked on the development and implementation of a new curriculum intended to: promote deeper conceptual understanding of a minimum core of fundamental ideas instead of superficial coverage of multiple topics; connect core ideas between the course units by following well-defined learning progressions; introduce students to modern ways of thinking and problem-solving in chemistry; and involve students in realistic decision-making and problem-solving activities.”
Excerpt (page 1): “POGIL (Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning) is a student-centered, research-based pedagogic strategy that has been used effectively in chemistry classrooms at all levels in colleges and high schools throughout the country. This approach is built on the foundational work of many others in the areas of cognitive development, cooperative learning, and instructional design. In addition, the reform efforts in science curriculum and pedagogy of the late twentieth century, particularly those in chemistry, were instrumental in laying the groundwork for POGIL and the POGIL Project, a national faculty development effort.”
This book describes peer-led team learning, a method in which undergraduate students serve as peer leaders to facilitate learning amongst students. This book describes not only how to effectively implement the strategy in the classroom, and also the research support for method.
Abstract: “The ChemLinks Coalition and the Modular Chemistry Consortium, based at Beloit College and the University of California-Berkeley, respectively, are now in their third year of collaboration to develop and test topical modules for the first two years of the college chemistry curriculum. This report describes our implementation of a modular approach and some of the active learning strategies it employs, plans for evaluating the effectiveness of this approach, and plans for disseminating it broadly within the undergraduate chemistry community.”
Abstract: “For more than a century, laboratory experiences have been purported to promote central science education goals including the enhancement of students’ understanding of concepts in science and its applications; scientific practical skills and problem solving abilities; scientific ‘habits of mind’; understanding of how science and scientists work; interest and motivation. Now at the beginning of the 21st century it looks as if the issue regarding learning in and from the science laboratory and the laboratory in the context of teaching and learning chemistry is still relevant regarding research issues as well as developmental and implementation issues. This special CERP issue is an attempt to provide up-to-date reports from several countries around the world.”
Abstract: “Since the 1970s’, the author was involved in researching the laboratory work. The research focused on the various issues concerning the laboratory as a unique learning environment. Most of these studies are included in this review. They were mainly conducted at the Department of Science Teaching, The Weizmann Institute of Science, in the context of chemistry curriculum development, implementation and evaluation. The review of the research studies and its related publication is organized under the following key issues: (1) The chemistry laboratory: A unique mode of learning, instruction, and assessment. (2). Assessing students’ performance and achievement using different modes of presentation in the chemistry laboratory. (3) Students’ attitude towards and interest in school chemistry laboratory work. (4) Students’ perceptions of the laboratory classroom learning environment.”
Abstract: “Chemistry is regarded as a difficult subject for students. The difficulties may lie in human learning as well as in the intrinsic nature of the subject. Concepts form from our senses by noticing common factors and regularities and by establishing examples and non-examples. This direct concept formation is possible in recognising, for instance, metals or flammable substances, but quite impossible for concepts like ‘element’ or ‘compound’, bonding types, internal crystal structures and family groupings such as alcohols, ketones or carbohydrates. The psychology for the formation of most of chemical concepts is quite different from that of the ‘normal’ world. We have the added complication of operating on and interrelating three levels of thought: the macro and tangible, the sub micro atomic and molecular, and the representational use of symbols and mathematics. It is psychological folly to introduce learners to ideas at all three levels simultaneously. Herein lies the origins of many misconceptions. The trained chemist can keep these three in balance, but not the learner. This paper explores the possibilities, for the curriculum, of a psychological approach in terms of curricular order, the gradual development of concepts, the function of laboratory work and the place of quantitative ideas. Chemical education research has advanced enough to offer pointers to the teacher, the administrator and the publisher of how our subject may be more effectively shared with our students.”
In this article Ronald Gillespie advocates for six major concepts to be integrated into undergraduate and high school chemistry courses. Also discusses is the depth in which the material is suggested to be covered. The major ideas proposed include: (1) atoms, molecules and ions, (2) the chemical bond, (3) molecular shape and geometry: three-dimensional chemistry, (4) kinetic theory, (5) the chemical reaction, and (6) energy and entropy.
