Editorial 23 (original) (raw)

Comments on a recent defence of constructivism in chemical education

In an article published in the Journal of Chemical Education in 2003 I made a number of criticisms concerning what I saw as confusions and problems within the constructivist approach to chemical education (Scerri, 2003). Recently a response was published by the chemical educator, Keith Taber (Taber, 2010). 1 I would now like to take this opportunity to begin to respond to his comments.

Whither constructivism?—A chemistry teachers’ perspective

Teaching and Teacher Education, 2008

Constructivism in science education has been the subject of considerable debate in the science education literature. The purpose of this study was to facilitate chemistry teachers' understanding that the tentative nature of scientific knowledge leads to the coexistence and rivalries among different forms of constructivism in science education. The study is based on 17 in-service teachers who had registered for a 11-week course on 'Epistemology of Science Teaching' as part of their Master's degree program. The course is based on 17 readings drawing on nature of science and a critical evaluation of constructivism. Course activities included written reports, classroom discussions based on participants' presentations and written exams. Based on the results obtained, it is plausible to suggest that participant teachers experienced the following transitions leading to greater understanding, as they acquired experience with respect to constructivism: (a) Active participation of students as a pre-requisite for change; (b) Different forms of constructivism represent competing and conflicting interpretations of progress in science; (c) Acceptance of the present state of constructivism as a Kuhnian paradigm; (d) Social constructivism as the preferred form of constructivism; (e) Critical appraisal of social constructivism; (f) Despite its popularity, social constructivism does not constitute a Kuhnian paradigm (due to controversies, there is no consensus in the science education community); (g) Contradictions faced by constructivism in science education provide the base for its advance and evolution towards more progressive forms, and hence the need to consider, whither constructivism? r

The semantics of chemical education: constructivism, externalism and the language of chemistry

Foundations of Chemistry, 2013

In this paper we present a semantic analysis of the application of didactic constructivism to chemical education. We show that the psychological basis of constructivism yield, when applied to chemistry, an internalist semantics for the chemical names. Since these names have been presented as typical examples of an externalism for kind terms, a fundamental incompatibility ensues. We study this situation, to conclude that it affects chemical education at every level. Finally, we present a preliminary analysis of this problem from the point of view of physics.

Yasar, M.D., et al. (2012, July). Teachers’ perceptions of constructivist principles in the renewed chemistry curriculum in Turkey. Paper presented at the 22nd International Conference on Chemical Education & 11th European Conference on Research in Chemical Education (ICCECRICE), Rome, Italy

The renewed secondary chemistry curriculum is in use since 2007 in Turkey. The new chemistry curriculum is based on constructivist approaches. The greatest responsibility in the implementation of the curriculum falls to teachers. If the curriculum has to be succeeded firstly teachers have to perceive and understand it as intended. The aim of this research is to analyze what has been intended by new chemistry curriculum and how chemistry teachers perceive these aims. The study investigated what meanings the current chemistry curriculum attached to constructivist approach and how teachers perceived them and implemented into the practice. In order to determine teachers’ perceptions, case study method was used. Data were collected from 23 chemistry teachers through semi-structured and focus group interviews. Semi-structured interviews have been done face to face with nineteen teachers, while a focus group interview done with four teachers. All interviewees were asked the same main questions and they were allowed to complement and expand the interview questions. The interviews were recorded and then transcribed by the researchers. The interview data were subjected to a content analysis so that each transcribed interview was read in detail to discover important topics, categories and codes. The result of the study indicated that the majority of the participants did not perceive sufficiently constructivist approach and its principle, how must be learning and teaching environment what methods-techniques must be used, what have to be pupils’ role and how assessment must be done in the new chemistry curriculum. Approximately half of the teachers partly perceived teachers’ role and which learning-teaching materials or tools must be used according to the new chemistry curriculum. The findings of the study may help academicians, curriculum developers and experts when they develop a new curriculum to consider teachers’ view and role in the curriculum develop process. And teachers should not be broken but must be involved in this process.

The Semantics of Chemical Education

In this paper we present a semantic analysis of the application of didactic constructivism to chemical education. We show that the psychological basis of constructivism yield, when applied to chemistry, an internalist semantics for the chemical names. Since these names have been presented as typical examples of an externalism for kind terms, a fundamental incompatibility ensues. We study this situation, to conclude that it affects chemical education at every level. Finally, we present a preliminary analysis of this problem from the point of view of physics.

Five ideas in chemical education that must die

Foundations of Chemistry, 2019

The article concerns five traditionally difficult issues that chemical educators encounter and how they should be resolved. In some cases I propose the examination of necessary and sufficient conditions in order to cast light on the relationships under discussion. The five educational issues are, the notion that a pH value of seven implies a neutral solution of water and vice versa, the use of Le Châtelier's Principle, the relative occupation and ionization of 4s and 3d orbitals, the explanation of anomalous electronic configurations and the elements that make up group 3 of the periodic table.

Some Comments Arising from a Recent Proposal Concerning Instrumentalism and Chemical Education

This paper is a response to the recent article in this Journal by Keith S. Taber in which he in turn responded to my critique of the use of constructivist approaches in chemical education. Taber now claims that constructivists should embrace what he terms instrumentalism. My response attempts to show that this is an outdated philosophical approach that has been replaced by antirealism. I also argue that there is much value in entertaining the opposite philosophical view, namely, realism in certain situations. Finally, I address what I regard as further confusions in Taber’s recent response concerning scientific models.

The new philosophy of chemistry and its relevance to chemical education

2001

ABSTRACT: This article tries to analyze briefly the reasons why philosophy of chemistry has only recently emerged, whereas the philosophical study of physics and biology are far better established fields of knowledge. Some key issues in contemporary philosophy of chemistry are reviewed and the ways in which this new branch of philosophy of science can be of potential benefit to chemical education are discussed.[Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

THE PRACTICE OF CHEMISTRY EDUCATION (INVITED CONTRIBUTION*) Chemical education in Europe: Curricula and policies TEACHING OF CHEMISTRY -LOGICAL OR PSYCHOLOGICAL

Chemistry is regarded as a difficult subject for students. The difficulties may lie in human learning as well as in the intrinsic nature of the subject. Concepts form from our senses by noticing common factors and regularities and by establishing examples and non-examples. This direct concept formation is possible in recognising, for instance, metals or flammable substances, but quite impossible for concepts like 'element' or 'compound', bonding types, internal crystal structures and family groupings such as alcohols, ketones or carbohydrates. The psychology for the formation of most of chemical concepts is quite different from that of the 'normal' world. We have the added complication of operating on and interrelating three levels of thought: the macro and tangible, the sub micro atomic and molecular, and the representational use of symbols and mathematics. It is psychological folly to introduce learners to ideas at all three levels simultaneously. Herein lies the origins of many misconceptions. The trained chemist can keep these three in balance, but not the learner. This paper explores the possibilities, for the curriculum, of a psychological approach in terms of curricular order, the gradual development of concepts, the function of laboratory work and the place of quantitative ideas. Chemical education research has advanced enough to offer pointers to the teacher, the administrator and the publisher of how our subject may be more effectively shared with our students. [Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. Eur.: 2000, 1, 9-15]