Goals and Education Materials The project began by considering ways in which technology could improve learning in introductory chemistry courses. Chemistry concepts are abstract and initially are difficult to attach to real-world experience. For this reason, high school and college chemistry courses have evolved a standard set of paper-and-pencil manipulations (dimensional analysis, balancing equations, stoichiometry, Lewis dot structure, etc.) that are canonized in textbooks and standard exams. Traditional chemistry courses emphasize development of these notational tools as a basis from which the “real stuff” can be approached. However, these tools are taught in the absence of activities that show their underlying utility. While these tools might be considered the underlying procedural knowledge base, they become inert bits of knowledge that are difficult for students to access. The difficulty in applying these procedures occurs at two levels. One is within the formal chemical domain, where it is often difficult to connect a paper-and-pencil procedure to an actual chemical process (use in chemistry). The other level is the application of a procedure to complex real settings (transfer to the real world). More fundamentally, the traditional educational approach strips out the very essence of science and leaves behind a confusing bag of tricks. Our goal is to use technology to complement traditional instruction with manipulatives that allow student problemsolving to be more authentic, i.e., more similar to that engaged in by practicing chemists (Bodner and Heron, 2002). The following two sections discuss the interventions we are developing.
[1]
David Yaron,et al.
Using Simulations to Transform the Nature of Chemistry Homework
,
2000
.
[2]
D. Pushkin.
Introductory students, conceptual understanding, and algorithmic success
,
1998
.
[3]
Gaea Leinhardt,et al.
Chemistry in the Field and Chemistry in the Classroom: A Cognitive Disconnect?
,
2006
.
[4]
Peter S. Shaffer,et al.
TEACHING PHYSICS: Preparing teachers to teach physics and physical science by inquiry
,
2000
.
[5]
David J. Yaron,et al.
Linked Active Content for Digital Libraries for Education
,
2002,
J. Digit. Inf..
[6]
Susan C. Nurrenbern,et al.
Concept Learning versus Problem Solving: Is There a Difference?.
,
1987
.
[7]
Andrew Gavrin,et al.
Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology
,
1999
.
[8]
J. Gilbert.
Chemical education: towards research-based practice
,
2003
.
[9]
C. Lebiere,et al.
The Atomic Components of Thought
,
1998
.
[10]
D. Hestenes,et al.
A mechanics baseline test
,
1992
.
[11]
J. Spencer,et al.
New Directions in Teaching Chemistry: A Philosophical and Pedagogical Basis
,
1999
.