what college chemistry instructors and high school chemistry teachers perceive as important for...

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING VOL. 31, NO. 7, PP. 735-747 (1994)

What College Chemistry Instructors and High School Chemistry Teachers Perceive as Important for Incoming College Students

Sulaiman N. Razali

Department of Mathematics and Science Education, University of Malaysia, 591 00 Kuala Lampur, Malaysia

Robert E. Yager

Science Education Center The University of Iowa, 769 Van Allen Hall, Iowa City, IA

Abstract

Professors of college chemistry were asked to rank various examples of traditional chemistry knowledge and skills as to their importance for incoming students to possess. A pilot study revealed that the items-all selected from one edition of the American Chemical Society-National Science Teachers Asso- ciation (ACS-NSTA) Chemistry Achievement Examination-represented attributes viewed as relatively unimportant. The professors then identified 29 personal traits they considered more important for incoming students to possess. Subsequently, these items, knowledge, skill, and personal attributes, were included in a three-part assessment instrument. The instrument was administered to 69 college chemistry professors selected at random and to 37 high school chemistry teachers. The results reveal that the college professors universally identified student personal attributes as significantly more important for incoming students to possess over specific knowledge and skills included in the ACS-NSTA Achievement Examination. Chem- istry professors do not find items commonly used to assess success in high school chemistry as important attributes for incoming students to possess. Conversely, high school chemistry teachers regard the knowledge and skill items to be more important for college preparation than personal attributes.

A number of studies have attempted to measure the impact of high school learning in science o n achievement in college (e.g., Bettinger & Haight, 1977; Gallagher & Tamir, 1980; Tamir & Amir, 1981). However, studies relating to specific experiences with high school chemistry (and other specific science courses in high school), which are perceived to be important for students to have completed for college entrance, have not been reported by previous researchers. Previous research has focused on completion of high school courses and measures of student achievement in science as correlated with college success (Bolte, 1962; Naibert, 1964).

A survey by Ogden (1975) concerning the major objectives of high school chemistry that are perceived important by high school and college instructors provides some clues to some of the features perceived important for high school chemistry. Ogden categorized various kinds of objectives for high school chemistry as reflected by statements in articles from professional periodicals during the 1918-1972 period. He made a frequency count of statements of objec-

0 1994 by the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0022-4308/94/070735- 13

736 RAZALI AND YAGER

tives appearing in articles using the following categories: knowledge, process, attitude and interest, and cultural awareness.

With respect to knowledge objectives, Ogden found that statements advocating the understanding of “major facts, principles, concepts, or fundamentals” of chemistry were the most frequent descriptors of objectives for the knowledge citation across the years studied. He also found that secondary and higher education authors disagreed somewhat as to the relative importance of these objectives within the knowledge category. Secondary teachers were persis- tent in their support of the study of “specific topics” in chemistry (i.e., statements advocating the study of specific concepts such as ionization and atomic structure). College instructors more frequently supported the attainment of major facts, principles, concepts, or fundamentals as the primary objectives in the knowledge category. Objectives of this type were generaHy less detailed than those relating to the study of “specifics” and usually more than one example.

With respect to process objectives (those involving understanding and use of the methods and techniques of science such as classifying, inferring, predicting, or formulating hypotheses), Ogden found a high agreement between both groups. Specifically, statements involved with developing “scientific method of thinking” (those objectives dealing with development of critical thinking and problem-solving activities) and those concerned with providing training in the “processes, skills, and techniques of inquiry” were most frequently cited. Statements of this type are more functionally oriented than the former. They deal specifically with the techniques involved in employing the process and methods of scientific problem-solving.

With respect to attitude and interest objectives, Ogden found a general agreement among the writers as to the importance of objectives relating to the development of “scientific habits or attitudes” during the 1918-1946 period and understanding of “the nature of science and scientists” during the 1963-1972 period.

With respect to cultural awareness objectives (those dealing with the interworkings of science and society or the cultural implications of science for society), Ogden reported that they were least frequently cited in the literature during the 1918-1972 period.

Thus, it is seen that the most important features of high school chemistry (as indicated by the frequency of statements of objectives appearing in the literature during the 19 18- 1972 period) were those relating to skills in the development of the scientific method of thinking.

Two years later Stuart (1977) carried out a survey to compare the items used to assess success in high school chemistry courses ranked highest by college instructors and by high school instructors. The 10 highest ranked items by the teachers were:

I . Ability to balance chemical equations. 2 . Ability to use symbols and oxidation numbers to write formulas. 3. Ability to determine and use gram-molecular weight. 4. Understanding of the mole concept. 5. Ability to relate mathematical concepts to chemistry problem solving. 6. Ability to solve mass-volume and volume-volume problems. 7. Understanding of the basic types of chemical bonds and how they are formed. 8. Understanding of molar volume. 9. Ability to carry out accurate measurement in the metric system.

10. Ability to solve mass-mass problems.

The 10 highest ranked items by the college instructors were:

1. Ability to relate mathematical concepts to chemistry problem solving. 2. Ability to carry out accurate measurement in the metric system.

WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR INCOMING COLLEGE STUDENTS? 131

3 . Ability to balance chemical equations. 4. Ability to use and solve problems involving units of concentration. 5 . Understanding of the mole concept. 6 . Ability to communicate scientific ideas and concepts. 7 . Ability to determine and use gram-molecular weight. 8 . Ability to use the periodic table to predict chemical behavior. 9. An understanding of the gas laws.

10. Ability to solve gas law problems.

In relating the high school surveys to the college surveys, Stuart found disagreement. Items 2 , 4, and 6 ranked highest by the college instructors suggested a sharp argument for a well- rounded, active laboratory program. The high school teachers ranked highest those items related to basic chemistry knowledge.

Shifts in the perceived importance of objectives in science teaching are not uncommon in the United States. For example, with the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, the major objective of science teaching suddenly shifted to preinduction training for the students who would be entering the military service and for those training for the war industries (Tyler, 1977). Later, the announcement in 1957 that the Soviet Union had produced and launched an artificial satellite aroused the American people to further change. It was generally accepted that the United States had fallen behind the Soviet Union in terms of scientific knowledge and skills and this deficien- cy was blamed on school science programs. As a result, the emphasis in science teaching was shifted to one that required students to carry on scientific inquiries much like those undertaken by practicing scientists. The Chemical Education Material Study (1963) was a primary example.

Today, training students to become scientists and engineers is no longer seen as the most important objective in science teaching. A more important objective, according to a report issued by the Task Force on Education for Economic Growth of the Education Commission, is one of helping students to develop general scientific and mathematical literacy. But this claim was based on subjective judgment of the members of the Commission without the support of empirical evidence. Whether or not this objective is really the most important for high school students to master is not easy to determine. The goal must be considered appropriate not only by the students (some of whom will continue their study at the college level) but also by those who directly influence the student learning, that is, the teachers and the college professors.

Recent reports by Mitchell (1990) indicate disagreement among chemical educators as to the nature of college chemistry offerings. Based on a survey of college catalogs, Mitchell determined there were six basic types of introductory chemistry courses. Regardless of stated purposes and types of students enrolled, topics for the courses were similar and the instruction focused upon lecture, laboratory, and discussion. Mitchell reported that there is currently a lack of consensus about the introductory course. Most instructors ignore the high school experiences and the knowledge students bring to the college classroom/laboratory. And yet high school teachers frequently justify their chemistry courses because the colleges expect the typical course organization and content coverage (Stake & Easley, 1978; Weiss, 1978, 1987).

Krajcik and Yager (1987) have shown that high ability secondary students can succeed in college chemistry courses equally well when students who have completed high school chemistry are compared with those who have not. There is certainly reason to study the perceptions of the college chemistry faculty members in terms of what they do expect (and prefer) their students to possess as they enroll in college chemistry courses. It is interesting to compare these perceptions with those of high school teachers of chemistry.

The purpose of this investigation is to obtain the views of a sample of college chemistry


instructors and the views of high school chemistry teachers across the United States concerning their perceptions of the relative importance of specific knowledge, skills, and personal traits of students who enroll in a first college course in chemistry. The areas of knowledge investigated included knowledge of chemical facts, definitions, generalizations, comparative relationships, and interpretations related to all major content areas in typical high school courses. The skills investigated are the various process skills used by chemists, quantitative skills, and those required for investigations in the laboratory. All the items in these two parts of the research instrument in the area of concepts and process skills were drawn from the American Chemical Society-National Science Teachers Association (National Science Teachers Association and American Chemical Society, 1974) High School Chemistry Examination. The items in the knowledge area became Part A of the questionnaire; the items in the skill area became Part B of the questionnaire. Many have believed that the knowledge and skill items that were selected from the ACS-NSTA examination did not identify the important attributes needed for success in college chemistry. College chemistry instructors at the University of Iowa helped formulate a listing of these important personal traits that incoming students should possess. These personal traits were classified into general study skills, interest in chemistry, and certain personality features such as inquisitiveness, imagination, creativity, and ingeniousness. Hence, the three kinds of items came from the popular ACS-NSTA achievement test and direct feedback from college professors who questioned the importance of such knowledge and skill items when pilot studies were undertaken.

The survey instrument asked all respondents to rate various examples of need information, skills, and personal qualities. All items in the first two categories come from the ACS-NSTA Chemistry Achievement Examination. All items in the third category come as important factors suggested by college chemistry instructors who were asked to pilot the initial instrument that included the first two parts only. All respondents were asked to rate all items in each section as to its relative importance for college students to know, to be able to do, or to possess. Following is a list of items in the three categories.

Incoming college students need to know for college chemistry (Part A):

1. meaning of density; 2. features of ideal gas; 3. difference between endothermic and exothermic reactions; 4. mole concept; 5. identify oxidizing agents; 6 . number of electrons in given ion; 7 . nature of pyramidal molecules; 8 . definition and examples of isomers; 9. types of bonding;

10. meaning of structural formulae; 1 1 . molarity of solutions; 12. examples of neutralization reactions; 13. examples of chemical change; 14. relative sizes of atoms; 15. meaning of compound nomenclature; 16. the nature of electron configurations; 17. the best kind of chemical bonding for conducting electricity; 18. the number of neutrons in given isotopes; 19. meaning of atoms being attached to carbons tetrahedrally; 20. meaning of neutralization of a solution;

WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR INCOMING COLLEGE STUDENTS?

21. a conjugate acid-base pair; and 22. basic chemical symbols.

Incoming college students need to know how to (Part B):

1 . determine mass; 2 . balance chemical equations; 3. read a graph; 4. convert from one temperature scale to another; 5. determine equilibrium constants; 6. determine density; 7 . determine salt production; 8. compute percentage error; 9. interpret information from periodic table;

10. compute volume when pressure is known; 11. determine percent mass in a given chemical; 12. determine oxidation number; 13. determine activation energy; 14. recognize unsaturated compound; 15. determine number of atoms of a given kind found in a particular compound; 16. recognize nonpolar molecules; 17. determine concentration of solutions; 18. determine relative strength of acids; 19. determine solubility product expressions; 20. determine pH; 21. determine mass deposited during electroplating; and 2 2 . determine what happens during electrolysis of water.

Incoming college students should possess (Part C):

1. ability to take careful and complete notes; 2. ability to do college algebra; 3. proficiency with beginning calculus; 4. superior reading skill; 5. skill with use of typical laboratory equipment; 6. skill with standard safety procedures in the laboratory; 7 . high aptitude in science; 8. better than average interests/motivation for study of chemistry; 9. demonstrated study habits;

10. inquisitive mind; 1 I . personal trait of perseverance; 12. ability to pay attention; 13. ability to interpret tables and graphs; 14. skill with use of symbols; 15. interest in long-term experiment/project; 16. interest in advanced mathematics study; 17. high scores in science; 18. ability to write in exemplary manner; 19. superior skills in communication; 20. understanding of place of chemistry in society; 21. positive attitude about value of chemistry;

139


22. ability to differentiate between science and technology; 23. ability to read a contour map; 24. ability to visualize three dimensions; 25. ability to do thorough experiments; 26. ability to solve puzzles; 27. imagination; 28. creativity; and 29. ingenuity.

Method

A pilot study was conducted by science educators at the University of Iowa involving chemistry professors at the same university concerning their perception of the items as reflecting the importance of chemistry knowledge and skills for students aspiring to the study of college chemistry. Many professors expressed displeasure with the subject matter which was included in the questionnaire used in the pilot study (which in actuality was devised by using test items from the ACS-NSTA Chemistry Examination). Somewhat surprisingly, they gave much greater emphasis to specific personal attributes of students rather than their acquisition of knowledge of specific facts and formulae and their attainment of skills in applying the knowledge to familiar and unfamiliar situations.

Twenty-nine characteristics perceived important for high school students to possess were collected from the college chemistry faculty members. Such a list became Part C of the questionnaire with Part A being knowledge items and Part B skills items-both from the ACS- NSTA Chemistry Examination. (See above listing of specific items in each category.) This questionnaire was then used in a second pilot study where a sampling of chemistry faculty members from 20 Iowa colleges were asked to complete the questionnaire. This permitted the investigators to clarify language, to note difficulties with the use and interpretation of the instrument, and to determine the likely value of a more comprehensive study. This study is a report of the results of the perceived importance of various aspects of high school chemistry by college chemistry professors and high school chemistry teachers across the United States. Both groups of respondents (college and high school instructors) received the same survey instrument. The directions asked all respondents to rate the 73 items that were classified into three groups (knowledge, skill, and personal trait) as to their relative importance as preparation for success in a college chemistry course.

The distribution of questionnaires across the United States was accomplished with the help of former University of Iowa science education students who have graduated during the past three decades and are now serving in various colleges across the United States. Their addresses were obtained from the main office of the Science Education Center, University of Iowa. All graduating students for the 1956-1985 years were asked to help locate respondents for as many questionnaires as possible among college chemistry faculty members and local high school chemistry teachers. A total of 32 agreed to help identify college chemistry professors and high school chemistry teachers in their respective geographic regions who would complete the survey instrument. Only college professors who were teaching or had recently taught the introductory college course were included in the sample. Completed questionnaires were returned by 69 college chemistry instructors and 37 high school chemistry teachers. The location of both college and high school teachers represented diverse regions across the United States. None of the respondents came from the same state. A review of the nature of institutions, size, and

WHAT IS IMPORTANT FOR INCOMING COLLEGE STUDENTS? 74 1

location provided no reason to assume a nonrepresentative sample. Further, a telephone survey of faculty members from five colleges and universities in neighboring states was conducted to test the assumption that the institutions and faculty respondents were random. The telephone survey included questions concerning the relative importance of sample items from each part of the 73-item survey. No differences in sample responses by 15 college chemistry faculty members and 18 high school chemistry teachers were found. It is therefore assumed that college and high school faculty members comprising the sample in this study were indeed random selec- tions. Nonetheless, the results of this study should be interpreted with the possibility that a nonrandom sample was polled.

Results

College chemistry instructors perceived the attainment of items in the personal trait cluster as the most important for the high school chemistry students to possess (M = 3.13, SD = 0.78) whereas the attainment of items in the knowledge cluster was perceived as the least important (M = 2.05, SD = 0.60).

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) summarized in Table 1 reveals that differences among mean ratings of the clusters for college chemistry professors were statistically significant based on an alpha of .05 with F value of 5.65.

Pairwise comparisons between mean ratings for the items in each of the three clusters indicated that college chemistry professors rated the items included in the knowledge cluster as significantly less important than those in the other two clusters based on an alpha of .05 using Scheffe procedures. No significant difference was found between the items in the skill cluster and those in the personal trait cluster.

High school chemistry teachers perceived the attainment of the items in the knowledge cluster as the most important for the high school students to master (M = 3.68, SD = 0.46) whereas the items in the personal attribute cluster were perceived as the least important (M = 2.81, SD = 0.59).

Table 1 Analysis of Variance among Knowledge, Skill, and Personal Trait Clusters for College Chemistry Professors

Sum of df squares F ratio P

Treatment 2 9.75 5.65 .004 Subject 68 61.05 1.04 .4146

Significant mean difference

Cluster M SD Knowledge Skill

Knowledge 2.05 0.60 Skill 2.30 0.75 Personal trait 3.13 0.78


Table 2 Analysis of Variance among Knowledge, Skill, and Personal Trait Clusters for High School Chemistry Teachers

Sum of df squares F ratio P

Treatment 2 46.04 25.59 .OoOl Subject 36 37.75 1.17 .2864

Significant mean difference

Cluster M SD Knowledge Skill

Knowledge 3.68 0.46 Skill 3.59 0.72 Attribute 2.81 0.59

Table 3 M and SDs for Items in Each Cluster for High School Chemistry Teachers and College Chemistry Instructors

High school College teachers chemists

Number (n = 37) (n = 69) In favor of instructor

Item cluster of items M SD M SD t p from ~~

Knowledge (Part A) Knowledge of specific facts Knowledge of definitions Knowledge of generalizations Knowledge of relationships Knowledge of interpretations Mean rating for knowledge

cluster

Skill (Part B) Understanding Application Higher ability thinking Mean rating for skill clusters

Personal traits (Part C) General study skills Interest in chemistry Personality features Mean rating for personal trait

cluster

3 3.49 0.77 1.92 0.91 3.1 8 3.75 0.37 0.64 2.21 2.9 4 3.76 0.38 2.01 0.62 3.7 3 3.71 0.47 1.86 0.62 3.6 4 3.58 0.56 2.00 0.58 3.6

3.68 0.46 2.05 0.60 3.7

8 3.61 0.50 2.40 0.75 2.9 I 3.44 0.65 2.18 0.94 3.0 7 3.71 0.52 2.11 0.61 2.8

3.59 0.55 2.30 0.87 2.9

13 2.75 0.52 3.27 0.54 2.7 9 3.06 0.70 3.03 0.82 0.2 7 2.63 0.61 3.11 0.83 2.6

2.81 0.59 3.13 0.78 2.6

.01

.01

.001

.001

.001

.001

.01

.01

.001

.001

.01

.01

.01

h.s. h.s. h.s. h.s. h.s.

h.s.

h.s. h.s. h.s. h.S.

College h.s. College

College

Note. h.s. = high school


A one-way ANOVA summarized in Table 2 revealed that differences among mean ratings for items in the three clusters for high school chemistry teachers were statistically significant based on an alpha of .01 with an F value of 25.59.

Pairwise comparisons between mean ratings for the items in each of the three clusters indicated that high school chemistry teachers rated the attainment of items in the personal attribute cluster as significantly less important than the attainment of items in the other two clusters based on an alpha value of .05 using the Scheffe procedure. No significant difference was found between the items in the skill cluster and those in the knowledge cluster.

The relative importance of various areas of knowledge, skills, and personal traits having significant different mean ratings was explored. Table 3 presents a summary of areas of knowledge, skills, and personal traits having significantly different mean ratings as judged by college instructors and high school teachers.

The results in Table 3 show highly significant differences between high school chemistry teachers and college instructors regarding the importance of various areas of knowledge, skills, and personal traits. The pattern for high school chemistry teachers being more concerned for the items in the knowledge and skill clusters and chemistry instructors for the items in the personal trait was consistent. The corollary that high school chemistry teachers show greater concern in the areas included in the ACS-NSTA examination was also confirmed. The somewhat unex- pected absence of significant differences between college instructors and high school teachers in items concerning interest in chemistry is noted.

Discussion

High school chemistry teachers rated knowledge of chemistry (i.e., knowledge of chemical facts, definitions, generalizations) and skills in chemistry (i.e., processes, quantitative skills, and higher ability thinking) as significantly more important than the personal traits (i.e., general study skills and personality features such as creativity, ingenuity, and imagination). This can be interpreted as:

1 . The teachers are confident that the content they teach is important as preparation for college study;

2. The teachers were (and are) better prepared to teach chemistry concepts rather than promoting skills in using the knowledge and/or stimulating the development of skills for studying, promoting interest in chemistry, and encouraging the development of certain personal attributes;

3. The teachers think that college instructors expect incoming students to know many basic chemistry concepts;

4. The teachers know the nature of typical college chemistry courses and realize that success at that level is judged primarily upon mastery of concepts and special skills; andl or

5 . Because the knowledge items were extracted directly from the ACS-NTSA examination, the teachers consider examinations as appropriate measures of student successes and the attainment of their instructional objectives.

The first interpretation seems to support the findings of Stuart (1977) and Ogden (1975). Stuart surveyed the importance of high school chemistry and college chemistry as perceived by high school teachers and college instructors in New Mexico. In examining the 10 highest ranking items on the high school surveys, he found that most of the teachers favored the teaching of basic chemistry concepts to the teaching of skills and personal attributes. Likewise,


in a survey concerning the perceived importance of objectives for the teaching of high school chemistry as stated in professional periodicals of the 1918-1972 period, Ogden found that high school teachers favored knowledge objectives.

The second interpretation supports the views of Brooks ( 1983) concerning high school chemistry teachers. According to Brooks, when new chemistry curricula were introduced, many underqualified teachers were forced to use the materials with which they were uncomfortable. Such curricula emphasized “critical thinking” and “methods of science” to a much greater degree than had earlier curricula. These new curricula required extensive training programs for high school teachers. Such new science programs also required motivated and capable teachers for using materials flexibly, developing supplementary teaching materials, and allocating the additional time necessary to take full advantage of the “inquiry approach” recommended. As a result of inadequate preparation for using new approaches for teaching science, teachers based their teaching on prescribed materials; too often they adopt formal, didactic teaching methods that are contrary to recommendations offered by developers of the courses.

A third interpretation can be advanced. The results show that college chemistry instructors perceive the attainment of chemistry concepts as the least important preparation for entering college students. College chemistry faculty members prefer incoming students to possess certain study skills, to have an interest in chemistry, and to display certain personality features rather than students with specific conceptual knowledge and/or skills in chemistry. The difference in perceptions concerning the importance of chemistry knowledge as preparation for the study of chemistry in college as perceived by high school chemistry teachers and college chemistry instructors is the most striking result arising from this study. Teachers who are confident that the content they teach is important as preparation for college are, in fact, teaching something that college professors do not expect the incoming students to possess.

On one hand, it was anticipated that high school teachers perceived “concepts” of chemistry as the most important preparation for college study because the primary goal of education in science in secondary schools has traditionally been the preparation of students for examinations over a prescribed syllabus. At the high school level, in particular, high school examinations are prepared to examine student achievement based on high school courses. Such examinations are used to select and encourage the best students to study more chemistry (or other disciplines) at the university level. With such a syllabus-examination orientation, teaching has customarily focused on subject matter and the content of textbooks or teacher-dictated notes.

But, college professors who are dealing with more mature and academically inclined students and who normally give lectures to large groups of students would expect students to be more independent learners and less dependent on instructors. As independent learners the students should possess all the necessary attributes such as study skills, interest, creativity, imagination, and inquisitiveness that could help them to study independently. However, it must also be noted that college chemistry instructors are no different than their high school counter- parts in not wanting to change their own courses that closely match typical high school courses (Mitchell, 1990).

The final interpretation focuses on the contradictory views among high school chemistry teachers and college chemistry faculty concerning the use of examinations as tools for measuring student successes. The teachers believe that the use of standard examinations as measuring devices for selecting students to enter colleges is fine. However, college chemists feel that such examinations are unimportant because they test primarily for student knowledge of chemistry. The chemistry instructors were surprised to find that the knowledge and skill items actually come from the ACS-NSTA examination.

The existence of conflicting views among high school teachers and college chemistry


instructors concerning the importance of chemistry knowledge as preparation for the study of chemistry in college raises many controversial questions. Should knowledge of chemistry be the major outcome of high school chemistry teaching? Should a more important outcome be promoting student interest? Should it be promoting certain personal traits that are important in the pursuit of science? Should all courses at all levels focus more upon developing outcomes other than demonstration of an understanding of specific concepts and process skills?

One can approach such questions by considering the importance of a chemistry knowledge in a real classroom situation. As an illustration, consider the importance of knowledge of basic chemical symbols as used in the following chemical equation (Item 5 on Part A of the questionnaire): H, + 0, + 2H,O. This equation describes a chemical reaction. Students in writing this equation may already know a great number of chemical reactions. They remember how they are symbolized-first, symbols for reactants; than an arrow; and then symbols for the products. This knowledge usually omits any mention of the amount of energy released (or absorbed) as the reaction occurs. In this example, the formation of water from hydrogen and oxygen, the energy relationships are exceedingly important. Hydrogen and oxygen react explosively unless controls are used. The reaction between hydrogen and oxygen is not merely a source of water (other sources are a good deal less expensive). It is a source of power-power for missiles and rockets, power for electricity. This illustrates “knowledge” of chemistry individually has little meaning or significance in understanding chemistry. On the other hand, it has meaning when it is related to an important “skill” such as using power for water.

Although the above reasoning would seem to be an argument against the importance of teaching basic chemistry concepts directly, there is other evidence even more convincing. It has been found that up to 70% of the specific knowledge learned in a science course is forgotten within 1 year after the completion of the course (Barnard, 1956).

It is also important to remember that most high school students who complete courses in chemistry will not continue with chemistry at the college level. Perhaps it is appropriate for high school and college instructors to value different characteristics for students who enroll in college chemistry courses. For high school teachers it is but one next step for their students. For the college instructor it is important to have interested and willing students ready for instruction in the basic concepts and skills needed in the world of chemistry.

Perhaps the interface between high school and college chemistry is no different from that at any other level of education. Teachers universally want “good” students ready for the knowledge and skills they are prepared to offer. Teachers at every level want creative, imaginative, inquisitive, ingenious, interested students who also have good study skills. The question is how to get such students. Almost all instructors are guilty of concentrating on the knowledge and skills characterizing their course and assuming that such a focus will lead to the kind of student they wanted upon entrance and the same kind the instructor at the next level also wants. Unfortunately there is no information that “filling” students with the information and skills deemed important by teachers, course outlines, or school programs produces such persons. In fact, the affective items of the 1978, 1982, and 1987 science assessments of the National Assessment of Educational Programs (NAEP, 1978; Hueftel, Rakow & Welch, 1983; Educa- tional Testing Service, 1988) indicate that the results are just the opposite. Perhaps all instructors at all levels need to focus on developing further the traits for which they yearn for in incoming students.

The implication of this discussion is that the outcomes of high school chemistry instruction should be more than the acquisition of a body of chemistry knowledge and specific course- related skills that students have at the time of an examination. High school chemistry instruction should also cultivate traits and skills that have everyday utility. Of these, the ability to study and


think independently is one of major importance. Such would be equally fine for students at the end of the introductory college course prior to enrollment in the next college course in chemistry.

Conclusion

The results of the study suggest that college chemistry professors support certain new directions in the teaching of high school chemistry. They want high school chemistry instruction to focus on the development of certain personal traits and characteristics of the students. Such attributes include growth in student creativity, imagination, inquisitiveness, and ingeniousness; possession of study skills; development of greater interest in chemistry; and knowledge of the interaction of science, technology, and society (all from the personal trait part of the survey instrument).

The study also suggests that further development and improvement of ways to determine student successes in high school chemistry are highly desirable. Tests of many types should be designed to measure the various outcomes of high school chemistry learning. The ACS-NSTA examination includes primarily chemical information and mathematics skills. It does not deal with any personal traits of the students that college chemistry instructors report as most important. If chemistry teachers want to see their students develop equally in all three aspects (knowledge, skills, and personal traits), appropriate course materials, instructional strategies, and instruments for measuring student successes in all these areas should be developed. The items on the ACS-NSTA Achievement Test do not include the traits and characteristics that chemistry professors in college feel to be most important for incoming students to possess.

References

Barnard, J.D. (1956). Teaching high school science. Washington, DC: American Educa- tional Research Association: Department of Classroom Teachers.

Bettinger, D.J., & Haight, H.L. (1977). A pre-introductory college chemistry refresher course. Journal of Chemical Education, 54 3-4.

Bolte, J.B. (1962). A statistical analysis of the backgrounds of students taking the first course in physics at the State University of Iowa. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Brooks, D.W. (1983). The status of general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 60, 654-656.

Chemical Education Material Study. ( 1963). Chemistry: An experimental science. San Francisco: Freeman.

Educational Testing Service. (1988). The science report card: Trends and achievement based on the 1986 national assessment (Report No. 17-S-01). Princeton, NJ: National Assess- ment of Educational Progress.

Gallagher, J.J., & Tamir, P. (1980). High school preparation and study in college. Assess- ment in Higher Education, 5, 168-190.

Hueftle, S.J., Rakow, S.J., & Welch, W.W. (1983). Images of science: A summary of results from the 1981 -82 national assessment in science. Minneapolis: Minnesota Research and Evaluation Center, The University of Minnesota.

Krajcik, J.S., & Yager, R.E. (1987). High school chemistry as preparations for college chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 433-435,


Mitchell, A.L.G. (1990). Analysis of views of college faculty concerning introductory chemistry courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City.

Naibert, J.E. (1964). A statistical investigation offactors relating to success in a jrs t course in college chemistry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City.

National Assessment of Educational Progress (1978). The third assessment of science, 1976-77. Denver, CO: Author.

National Science Teachers Association and American Chemical Society. (1974). ACS/NSTA cooperative chemistry test. Washington, DC: Author.

Ogden, W.R. (1975). Secondary schooling chemistry teaching, 1918- 1972: Objectives as stated in periodical literature. Journal of Research in science Teaching, 12, 235-246.

Stake, R.E., & Easley, J . (1978). Case studies in science education, volumes I and 11. Urbana, IL: Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Stuart, T.C. (1977). A comparative of high school and college chemistry courses in New Mexico. Journal of Chemical Education, 53, xx-xx.

Tamir, P., & Amir, R. (1981). High school science as viewed by college students in Israel. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 7 , 21 1-225.

Tyler, R. W. (1977). Two new emphases in curriculum development. The Education Digest, 42(6), 11-14.

Weiss, I.R. (1978). Report of the 1977 national survey of science, mathematics, and social studies education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Weiss, I.R. (1987). Report of the 1985-86 national survey of science and mathematics education. Research Triangle Park, NC: Center for educational Research and Evaluation, Re- search Triangle Institute.

Manuscript accepted March 3 1, 1993.

what college chemistry instructors and high school chemistry teachers perceive as important for...

Documents