Let's teach how we think instead of what we know

Chemistry Education Research and Practice

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 74-83

  Talanquer, Vicente ^a   Pollard, John ^a  

^a University of Arizona   (United States)

Author keywords

Curricular innovations; Curriculum design; Evidence based curriculum; First year undergraduate chemistry; General chemistry curriculum

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955802944     PISSN: None     EISSN: 11094028     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1039/c005349j     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. rd Edition, Dubuque, IA: McGraw Hill
2. th Edition, New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
3. American Chemical Society (ACS), (2005), Chemistry, New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
4. Anthony S., Mernitz H., Spencer B., Gutwill J., Kegley S., and Molinaro M., (1998), The ChemLinks and ModularCHEM consortia: using active and context-based learning to teach students how chemistry is actually done, J. Chem. Educ., 75, 322-324.
5. Barker V., (2000), Beyond appearances: students' misconceptions about basic chemical ideas, Royal Society of Chemistry: London.
6. Bennett J. and Lubben F., (2006), Context-based chemistry: the Salters approach, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28, 999-1015.
7. Bodner G. M., (1992), Why changing the curriculum may not be enough? J. Chem. Educ., 69, 186-190.
8. Bransford J. D., Brown A. L. and Cocking R. R., (eds.), (2000), How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
9. Burke K. A., Greenbowe T. J., Lewis E. and Peace E., (2002), The Multi-Initiative Dissemination Project: strategies for active student learning, J. Chem. Educ., 79, 699-?.
10. Burke K. A., Greenbowe T. J. and Gelder J. I., (2004), The Multi-Initiative Dissemination Project workshops: who attends them and how effective are they? J. Chem. Educ., 81, 897-902.
11. Burke K. A., Greenbowe T. J., and Hand B. M., (2006), Implementing the Science Writing Heuristic in the chemistry laboratory, J. Chem. Educ., 83, 1032-1038.
12. Chiu M. H., and Wu H.-K., (2009), Ways forward: eliciting students' mental models and exploring multimedia in science learning, in J. Gilbert and D. Treagust (eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education, New York: Springer.
13. Claesgens J., Scalise K., Wilson M. and Stacy A., (2009), Mapping student understanding in chemistry: the perspectives of chemists, Sci. Educ., 93, 56-85.
14. Eĝe S. N., Coppola B. P. and Lawton G., (1997), The University of Michigan undergraduate chemistry curriculum. 1. Philosophy, curriculum, and the nature of change, J. Chem. Educ., 74, 74-83.
15. Evans K. L., Leinhardt G., Karabinos M. and Yaron D., (2006), Chemistry in the field and chemistry in the classroom: a cognitive disconnect, J. Chem. Educ., 83, 655-661.
16. Gabel D. L. and Bunce D. M., (1994), Research on problem solving: chemistry, in D. L. Gabel (ed.), Handbook of research in science teaching and learning, New York: Macmillan and the National Science Teacher Association, pp. 301-326.
17. Gilbert J. K. and Treagust D. (eds.), (2009), Multiple representations in chemical education, The Netherlands: Springer.
18. Gillespie R. J., (1991), What is wrong with the general chemistry course? J. Chem. Educ., 68, 192-194.
19. Gillespie R. J., (1997), Reforming the general chemistry textbook, J. Chem. Educ., 74, 484-485.
20. Gutwill-Wise J. P., (2001), The impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses: an early evaluation of the modular approach, J. Chem. Educ., 78, 684-690.
21. Hawkes S. J., (2005), Introductory chemistry needs a revolution, J. Chem. Educ., 82, 1615-1616.
22. Hoffmann R., (1995), The same and not the same, New York: Columbia University Press.
23. Landis C. R., Peace G. E., Scharberg M. A., Branz S., Spencer J. N., Ricci R. W., Zumdahl S. A. and Shaw D., (1998), The New Traditions Consortium: shifting from a faculty-centered paradigm to a student-centered paradigm, J. Chem. Educ., 75, 741-744.
24. Lawson A. E., Abraham M. R. and Renner J. W., (1989), A theory of instruction: using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills [Monograph, Number One], Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas: NARST.
25. Lloyd B. W., (1992a), A review of curricular changes in the general chemistry course during the twentieth century, J. Chem. Educ., 69, 633-636.
26. th century general chemistry laboratory, J. Chem. Educ., 69, 866-869.
27. Lloyd B. W. and Spencer J. N., (1994), New directions for general chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 71, 206-209.
28. Mbajiorgu N., and Reid N., (2006), Factors influencing curriculum development in chemistry: a physical sciences practice guide, Hull, United Kingdom: Higher Education Academy of Physical Sciences Centre.
29. Moog R. S., and Spencer J. N., (2008), POGIL: Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, Oxford University Press: New York.
30. Nakhleh M. B., (1992), Why some students don't learn chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 69, 191-196.
31. National Research Council (NRC), (2001), Knowing what students know: the science and design of educational assessment, Washington DC: National Academy Press
32. National Research Council (NRC), (2003), Beyond the molecular frontier: challenges for chemistry and chemical engineering, Washington, DC: National Academy Press
33. Nowak-Thompson B., (2005), Introducing GC/MS into the first-year General Chemistry curriculum using pattern recognition and a verbal analogy, Chem. Educator, 10, 179-180.
34. Nurrenbern S. C. and Pickering M., (1987), Concept learning versus problem solving: is there a difference? J. Chem. Educ., 64, 508-511.
35. Pollard J. and Talanquer V., (2005), Interactive digital overheads: dynamic teaching tools for the chemistry classroom, Chem. Educator, 10, 36-40.
36. Reid N., (2000), The presentation of chemistry logically driven or applications-led, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 1, 381-392.
37. Schwartz A. T., Bunce D. M., Silberman R. G., Stanitski C. L., Stratton W. J. and Zipp A. P., (1994), Chemistry in context: weaving the web, J. Chem. Educ., 71, 1041-1044.
38. Schwartz A. T., (2006), Contextualized chemistry education: the American experience, Int. J. Sci. Educ., 28, 977-998.
39. Spector T. L., (1994), Using infrared spectroscopy for the curricular integration of general and organic chemistry, J. Chem. Educ., 71, 946-947.
40. Spencer J. N., (1992), General chemistry course content, J. Chem. Educ., 69, 182-186.
41. Taber K., (2002), Chemical misconceptions - prevention, diagnosis and cure. Vol I: theoretical background, Royal Society of Chemistry: London.
42. Talanquer V., (2006), Common sense chemistry: a model for understanding students' alternative conceptions, J. Chem. Educ., 83, 811-816.
43. Talanquer V., (2009), On cognitive constraints and learning progressions. The case of " structure of matter," Int. J. Sci. Educ., 31, 2123-2136.
44. Wiggins G., and McTighe J., (1998), Understanding by design, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
45. Wilson M., and Scalise K., (2006), Assessment to improve learning in higher education: the BEAR assessment system, High. Educ., 52, 635-663.
46. Wilson M., (2009), Measuring progression: assessment structures underlying a learning progression, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46, 716-730.