Core Ideas and Topics: Building Up or Drilling Down?

Journal of Chemical Education

Volumn 94, Issue 5, 2017, Pages 541-548

  Cooper, Melanie M ^a   Posey, Lynmarie A ^a   Underwood, Sonia M ^b  

^a MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chemical Education Research; Curriculum; First Year Undergraduate General; Learning Theories; Second Year Undergraduate; Student Centered Learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 85019062686     PISSN: 00219584     EISSN: 19381328     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00900     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. National Research Council. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 1999.
2. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., and Raizen, S. A Splintered Vision: An Investigation of US Science and Mathematics Education; Springer Science & Business Media: New York, 2002.
3. Anthony, S.; Mernitz, H.; Spencer, B.; Gutwill, J.; Kegley, S. E.; Molinaro, M. The ChemLinks and ModularCHEM Consortia: Using Active and Context-Based Learning to Teach Students How Chemistry Is Actually Done J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75 ( 3 ) 322-324 10.1021/ed075p322
4. American Chemical Society. Chemistry, A General Chemistry Project of the American Chemical Society; WH Freeman: New York, 2004.
5. Talanquer, V.; Pollard, J. Let’s Teach How We Think Instead of What We Know Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2010, 11 ( 2 ) 74-83 10.1039/C005349J
6. Ellis, A. B.; Gerselbracht, M. J.; Johnson, B. J.; Lisensky, G. C.; Robinson, W. R. Teaching General Chemistry: A Materials Science Companion; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1993.
7. Gillespie, R. J. The Great Ideas of Chemistry J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74 ( 7 ) 862-864 10.1021/ed074p862
8. Atkins, P. Chemistry: The Great Ideas Pure Appl. Chem. 1999, 71 ( 6 ) 927-929 10.1351/pac199971060927
9. Freeman, S.; Eddy, S. L.; McDonough, M.; Smith, M. K.; Okoroafor, N.; Jordt, H.; Wenderoth, M. P. Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2014, 111, 8410-8415 10.1073/pnas.1319030111
10. Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL); Moog, R. S.; Spencer, J. N., Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008.
11. Gafney, L.; Varma-Nelson, P. Peer-Led Team Learning: Evaluation, Dissemination, and Institutionalization of a College Level Initiative; Cohen, K., Ed.; Innovations in Science Education and Technology; Springer: Weston, MA, 2008.
12. Hamilton, T. M. Textbook Inflation: Thirty-Five Years of Brown’s General Chemistry Textbook Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2006, 7 ( 1 ) 46-48 10.1039/B5RP90015H
13. Schwartz, M. S.; Sadler, P. M.; Sonnert, G.; Tai, R. H. Depth versus Breadth: How Content Coverage in High School Science Courses Relates to Later Success in College Science Coursework Sci. Educ. 2009, 93 ( 5 ) 798-826 10.1002/sce.20328
14. National Research Council. Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in Undergraduate Science and Engineering; Singer, S. R; Nielson, N. R.; Schweingruber, H. A., Eds.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
15. Barker, V. Beyond Appearances: Students’ Misconceptions about Basic Chemical Ideas; Royal Society of Chemistry: London, 2000; p 78.
16. Taber, K. S. Chemical Misconceptions: Prevention, Diagnosis and Cure; Royal Society of Chemistry: London, 2002; Vol. 1.
17. Boo, H. K. Students’ Understandings of Chemical Bonds and the Energetics of Chemical Reactions J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1998, 35, 569-581 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199805)35:5<569::AID-TEA6>3.3.CO;2-Z
18. Teichert, M. A.; Stacy, A. M. Promoting Understanding of Chemical Bonding and Spontaneity through Student Explanation and Integration of Ideas J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39, 464-496 10.1002/tea.10033
19. Cooper, M. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W. The Trouble with Chemical Energy: Why Understanding Bond Energies Requires an Interdisciplinary Systems Approach CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2013, 12, 306-312 10.1187/cbe.12-10-0170
20. National Research Council. A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
21. National Research Council. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2013.
22. College Board. Advances in AP: AP Chemistry. https://advancesinap.collegeboard.org/stem/chemistry (accessed Feb 2017).
23. Holme, T.; Luxford, C.; Murphy, K. Updating the General Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1115-1116 10.1021/ed500712k
24. Holme, T.; Murphy, K. The ACS Exams Institute Undergraduate Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map I: General Chemistry J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 721-723 10.1021/ed300050q
25. College Board. College Board Standards for College Success: Science. http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/cbscs-science-standards-2009.pdf (accessed Feb 2017).
26. Laverty, J. T.; Underwood, S. M.; Matz, R. L.; Posey, L. A.; Carmel, J. H.; Caballero, M. D.; Fata-Hartley, C. L.; Ebert-May, D.; Jardeleza, S. E.; Cooper, M. M. Characterizing College Science Assessments: The Three-Dimensional Learning Assessment Protocol PLoS One 2016, 11, e0162333 10.1371/journal.pone.0162333
27. Rushton, G. T. Introducing the Journal of Chemical Education’s “Special Issue: Advanced Placement (AP) Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 ( 9 ) 1273-1275 10.1021/ed500476r
28. Murphy, K.; Holme, T.; Zenisky, A.; Caruthers, H.; Knaus, K. Building the ACS Exams Anchoring Concept Content Map for Undergraduate Chemistry J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 ( 6 ) 715-720 10.1021/ed300049w
29. Talanquer, V. Central Ideas in Chemistry: An Alternative Perspective J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 ( 1 ) 3-8 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00434
30. Cooper, M. M.; Caballero, M. D.; Ebert-May, D.; Fata-Hartley, C. L.; Jardeleza, S. E.; Krajcik, J. S.; Laverty, J. T.; Matz, R. L.; Posey, L. A.; Underwood, S. M. Challenge Faculty to Transform STEM Learning Science 2015, 350 ( 6258 ) 281-282 10.1126/science.aab0933
31. Cooper, M. M.; Underwood, S. M.; Hilley, C. Z. Development and Validation of the Implicit Information from Lewis Structures Instrument (IILSI): Do Students Connect Structures with Properties? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2012, 13, 195-200 10.1039/C2RP00010E
32. Cooper, M. M.; Corley, L. M.; Underwood, S. M. An Investigation of College Chemistry Students’ Understanding of Structure-property Relationships J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2013, 50, 699-721 10.1002/tea.21093
33. Johnson, P. Children’s Understanding of Changes of State Involving the Gas State, Part 1: Boiling Water and the Particle Theory Int. J. Sci. Educ. 1998, 20, 567-583 10.1080/0950069980200505
34. Bodner, G. M. I Have Found You an Argument: The Conceptual Knowledge of Beginning Chemistry Graduate Students J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68 ( 5 ) 385-388 10.1021/ed068p385
35. Cooper, M. M.; Williams, L. C.; Underwood, S. M. Student Understanding of Intermolecular Forces: A Multimodal Study J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 ( 8 ) 1288-1298 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00169
36. Williams, L. C.; Underwood, S. M.; Klymkowsky, M. W.; Cooper, M. M. Are Noncovalent Interactions an Achilles Heel in Chemistry Education? A Comparison of Instructional Approaches J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1979-1987 10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00619
37. National Research Council. Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment; Pellegrino, J. W.; Chudowsky, N.; Glaser, R., Eds.; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2001.
38. Krajcik, J.; Codere, S.; Dahsah, C.; Bayer, R.; Mun, K. Planning Instruction to Meet the Intent of the Next Generation Science Standards J. Sci. Teach. Educ. 2014, 25 ( 2 ) 157-175 10.1007/s10972-014-9383-2
39. Evidence Statements | Next Generation Science Standards. http://www.nextgenscience.org/evidence-statements (accessed Jan 14, 2017).