Context-based and conventional approaches to teaching chemistry: Comparing teachers’ views

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 27, Issue 13, 2005, Pages 1521-1547

  Bennett, Judith ^a   Gräsel, Cornelia ^b   Parchmann, Ilka ^c   Waddington, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WUPPERTAL   (Germany)

^c LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27844496552     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690500153808     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ahmed, A., & Pollitt, A. (2000). Observing context in action. Paper presented at the IAEA Conference, Jerusalem, May [University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicates website available online at: www.ucles.org.uk].
2. Altricher, H. (2002). Curriculum implementation—limiting and facilitating factors. Paper presented at the Second University of York–IPN Conference on Science Education.
3. American Chemical Society. (1988). ChemCom: Chemistry in the Community. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
4. American Chemical Society. (1994). Chemistry in context. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
5. Banks, P. (1997). Students’ understanding of chemical equilibrium. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of York.
6. Barber, M. (2000). A comparison of NEAB and Salters A Level Chemistry: student views and achievements. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of York.
7. Barker, V., & Millar, R. (2000). Students’ reasoning about basic chemical thermodynamics and chemical bonding: what changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1171–1200.
8. Bennett, J., & Holman, J. (2002). Context-based approaches to the teaching of chemistry: what are they and what are their effects? In J. Gilbert (Ed.), Chemical Education Research-based Practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
9. Bennett, J., & Otter, C. (2003). Context-based chemistry: the Salters approach. Paper presented at the European Science Education Research Association Conference, Noordwijk, 19–23 August.
10. Burton, W., Holman, J., Pilling, G., & Waddington, D. (1994). Salters Advanced Chemistry. Oxford: Heinemann.
11. Burton, W.G., Holman, J.S., Pilling, G.M., & Waddington, D.J. (1995). Salters advanced chemistry: a revolution in pre-college chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(3), 227.
12. Burton, W., Holman, J., Lazonby, J., Pilling, G., & Waddington, D. (2000). Salters Advanced Chemistry, 2nd edn. Oxford: Heinemann.
13. Dutch Physics Curriculum Development Project. (1988). Projekt Leerpakketontwikkeling Natuurkunde. Utrecht: Rijksuniversteit Utrecht, Vagroep Natuurkunde-Didactiek.
14. Fishman, B.J., Marx, R.W., Best, S., & Tal, R.T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643–658.
15. Fullan, M. (1983). Implementation und Evaluation von Curricula: USA und Kanada. In: U. Hameyer, K. Frey and H. Haft (eds.). Handbuch der Curriculumforschung. Weinheim: Beltz 489–499.
16. Fullan, M. (2001). The New Meaning of Educational Change, 3rd edn. London: Cassell.
17. Gräsel, C., & Parchmann, I. (2004). Implementationsforschung—oder: der steinige Weg, Unterricht zu verändern [Research on implementation: the problem of changing teaching and learning]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 32, 196–214.
18. Gutwill-Wise, J.P. (2001). The impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses: an early evaluation of the modular approach. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(5), 684–690.
19. Harland, J., & Kinder, K. (1997). Teachers’ continuing professional development: framing a model of outcomes. British Journal of In-service Education, 23, 71–84.
20. Hoffman, L., Häußler, P., & Lehrke, M. (1998). Die IPN-Interessenstudie Physik [The IPN study on interest in physics]. Kiel: Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
21. Holman, J. (1991). A new look at A-level chemistry. Chemistry in Britain, 27(9), 813–814.
22. Holman, J., & Waddington, D. (1994). Salters advanced chemistry on course. Education in Chemistry, 31(5), 130–132.
23. Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1995). Student Achievement through Staff Development. White Plains, NY: Longman.
24. Kyriacou, C. (1998). Essential Teaching Skills, 2nd edn. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.
25. Lewis, J. (1981). Science in Society. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
26. Lloyd, G. (1992). Experiencing Salters advanced chemistry. Education in Science, 147, 27.
27. Lubben, F., & Bennett, J. (1998). Assessing pre-university students through extended individual investigations: teachers and examiners views. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 833–848.
28. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science Education for the Future. London: School of Education, King’s College, London.
29. Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441–467.
30. Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations. (2003). AS/A Level GCE Chemistry Specifications and sample papers. Retrieved July 9 2005 from www.ocr.org.uk.
31. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2000). Managing Curriculum 2000 for 16–19 students. Retrieved August 31 2004 from www.qca.org.uk/nq/framework/managing.
32. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2004) A level chemistry results 1992–2001. Retrieved July 9 2005 from www.qca.org.uk/5570.html.
33. Parchmann, I., Ralle, B., & Demuth, R. (2000). Chemie im Kontext — eine Konzeption zum Aufbau und zur Aktivierung fachsystematischer Strukturen in lebensweltlichen Kontexten [Chemistry in context — a concept of aqcuiring and activating conceptual chemical knowledge in contexts]. MNU, 53(3), 132–136.
34. Ramsden, J. (1997). How does a context-based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 697–710.
35. Royal Society of Chemistry. (2000). Summaries of Specifications for Advanced level Qualifications in the UK. Retrieved July 9 2005 from www.chemsoc.org/networks/learnnet/Qualspec.htm.
36. Sanger, M.J., & Greenbowe, T.J. (1996). Science–Technology–Society (STS) and ChemCom courses versus college chemistry courses: is there a mismatch? Journal of Chemical Education, 73(6), 532–536.
37. Supported Learning in Physics Project. (1997). Eight units For Advanced Level. Buckingham: Open University Press.
38. Tal, R.T., Dori, Y.J., Keiny, S., & Zoller, U. (2001). Assessing conceptual change of teachers involved in STES education and curriculum development—the STEMS project approach. International Journal of Science Education, 23(3), 247–262.
39. 21st Century Project Team (2003). 21st Century Science—a new flexible model for GCSE science. School Science Review, 85(310), 27–34.
40. University of York Science Education Group. (1990–1992). Science: The Salters Approach: 22 Unit Guides for Key Stage 4. York/Oxford: UYSEG/Heinemann Educational.
41. Whitelegg, E., & Parry, M. (1999). Real-life contexts for learning physics: meanings, issues and practice. Physics Education, 34(2), 68–72.