Chemistry 431: Guided Study in Teaching Chemistry Instructor: John C. Deming, PA 336, [email protected]Office Hours: Monday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday 8:00 – 10:00 AM, Tuesday 2:30 – 4:30 PM, and by appointment. I am frequently available outside office hours. Please come in any time the door is open. Prerequisite: Acceptance into the education program at Winona State University, junior or senior standing. Course Purpose: An opportunity for the qualified teaching candidate to obtain practical knowledge and experience in techniques of planning and safely conducting inquiry-based chemistry activities, including laboratories, discussions/cooperative learning opportunities, etc. Not only will candidates learn of new ways of teaching traditional content, but they will also learn the historical, cultural, and societal context in which key discoveries were made throughout the history of chemistry. Teaching candidates will learn to teach with the learning cycle curriculum strategy, a research-based inquiry method for teaching science that has been shown to improve students’ knowledge of scientific principles and their ability to think. At the conclusion of the project, candidates will have collaboratively developed curriculum materials that will have an immediate impact in their classrooms. Course may be repeated to a total of 2 credits. Credits may not be applied toward “electives” category of other programs in chemistry. Meetings: To be arranged. Textbooks: National Science Education Standards (ISBN: 078814281X). REQUIRED. Marek, E.A. & Cavallo, A. M. L. (1997). The learning cycle: Elementary school science and beyond (revised ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (ISBN: 0435071335) REQUIRED. In addition to these texts, we will utilize readings from the literature in chemical education, science education, psychology, and brain science. A readings list is below, although each student in the course will customize his or her readings to his or her curriculum project. Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1994). Really raising standards: Cognitive intervention and academic achievement. London: Routledge. Cracolice, M.S., & Deming, J.C. (2001). Peer-led team learning. The Science Teacher, 68(1), 20– 24. Deming, J.C., & Cracolice, M.S. (2004). Learning to think. The Science Teacher 71(3), 42-47. Deming, J.C., Ehlert, B.E., & Cracolice, M.S. (2003, September). Algorithmic and Conceputal Understanding Differences in General Chemistry: A Link to Reasoning Ability. Paper presented at the 226th ACS National Meeting, New York, NY.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
4:30 PM, and by appointment. I am frequently available outside office hours.
Please come in any time the door is open.
Prerequisite: Acceptance into the education program at Winona State University, junior or
senior standing.
Course Purpose:
An opportunity for the qualified teaching candidate to obtain practical knowledge
and experience in techniques of planning and safely conducting inquiry-based
chemistry activities, including laboratories, discussions/cooperative learning
opportunities, etc. Not only will candidates learn of new ways of teaching
traditional content, but they will also learn the historical, cultural, and societal
context in which key discoveries were made throughout the history of chemistry.
Teaching candidates will learn to teach with the learning cycle curriculum
strategy, a research-based inquiry method for teaching science that has been
shown to improve students’ knowledge of scientific principles and their ability to
think. At the conclusion of the project, candidates will have collaboratively
developed curriculum materials that will have an immediate impact in their
classrooms. Course may be repeated to a total of 2 credits. Credits may not be
applied toward “electives” category of other programs in chemistry.
Meetings: To be arranged.
Textbooks: National Science Education Standards (ISBN: 078814281X). REQUIRED.
Marek, E.A. & Cavallo, A. M. L. (1997). The learning cycle: Elementary school
science and beyond (revised ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (ISBN:
0435071335) REQUIRED.
In addition to these texts, we will utilize readings from the literature in chemical
education, science education, psychology, and brain science. A readings list is
below, although each student in the course will customize his or her readings to
his or her curriculum project.
Adey, P., & Shayer, M. (1994). Really raising standards: Cognitive intervention and academic
achievement. London: Routledge. Cracolice, M.S., & Deming, J.C. (2001). Peer-led team learning. The Science Teacher, 68(1), 20–
24. Deming, J.C., & Cracolice, M.S. (2004). Learning to think. The Science Teacher 71(3), 42-47. Deming, J.C., Ehlert, B.E., & Cracolice, M.S. (2003, September). Algorithmic and Conceputal
Understanding Differences in General Chemistry: A Link to Reasoning Ability. Paper presented at the 226th ACS National Meeting, New York, NY.
Furio, C., Calatayud, M.L., Barcenas, S.L., & Padilla, O.M. (2000). Functional fixedness and functional reduction as common sense reasonings in chemical equilibrium and in geometry and polarity of molecules. Science Education, 84(5), 545–565.
Gabel, D., Sherwood, R., & Enochs, L. (1984). Problem solving skills of high school chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 221–233.
Haidar, A.H., & Abraham, M.R. (1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919–938.
Heyworth, R.M. (1999). Procedural and conceptual knowledge of expert and novice students for the solving of a basic problem in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 21(2), 195–211.
Lawson, A.E. (2003). The neurological basis of learning, development and discovery: Implications for science and mathematics instruction. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lawson, A.E., Abraham, M.R., & Renner, J.W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. Cincinnati, OH: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
Monteyne, K., & Cracolice, M. S. (2004). Development and validation of a web-based assessment of higher-order thinking skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, BC.
Nakhleh, M. (1993). Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Journal of Chemical Education, 70(1), 52–55.
Nicoll, G.; Francisco, J.; Nakhleh, M. (2001). A three-tier system for assessing concept map links: A methodological study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 863-875.
Nurrenbern, S., & Pickering, M. (1987). Concept learning versus problem solving: Is there a difference? Journal of Chemical Education, 64(6), 508–510.
Schneider, L.S., & Renner, J.W. (1980). Concrete and formal teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(6), 503–517.
Shayer, M., & Adey, P. (Eds.) (2002). Learning intelligence: Cognitive acceleration across the curriculum from 5 to 15 years. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Grading: Your course grade will be based on midterm assessments, a formal presentation
on inquiry, and the evaluation of the quality of your final curriculum project. This
curriculum project is the development of a complete learning cycle curriculum
package covering one major topic in high school chemistry, constituting about 1.5
weeks of student activities. Ongoing feedback will be given about progress toward
the final project by requiring you to hand in your final project for evaluation at
random times during the semester.
Additional deductions may be made for cases beyond the scope of these criteria at
the discretion of the instructor.
A 90% – 100%
B 80% – 89.9%
C 70% – 79.9%
D 60% – 69.9%
Other: Any student in this course who has a disability that may prevent him or her from
fully demonstrating his or her abilities should contact me personally as soon as
possible so we can discuss accommodations necessary to ensure full participation
and facilitate your educational opportunities.
This course syllabus is not a contract; it is a tentative outline of course policies.
Changes may be made before, during, or after the semester at my discretion.
Course Objectives:
(articulated in MN BOT Teachers of Science Subpart E of rule 8710.4750,
same numbering scheme applied here)
A teacher of science must have a broad-based knowledge of teaching science that
integrates knowledge of science with knowledge of pedagogy, students, learning
environments, and professional development. A teacher of science must
understand:
1) Curriculum and instruction in science as evidence by the ability to:
a) Select, using local, state, and national science standards,
appropriate science learning goals and content;
b) plan a coordinated sequence of lessons and instructional strategies
that support the development of students' understanding and
nurture a community of science learners including appropriate
inquiry into authentic questions generated from students'
experiences; strategies for eliciting students' alternative ideas;
strategies to help students' understanding of scientific concepts and
theories; and strategies to help students use their scientific
knowledge to describe real-world objects, systems, or events;
c) plan assessments to monitor and evaluate learning of science
concepts and methods of scientific inquiry; and
d) justify and defend, using knowledge of student learning, research
in science education, and national science education standards, a
given instructional model or curriculum;
2) safe environments for learning science as evidenced by the ability to:
a) use required safety equipment correctly in classroom, field, and
laboratory settings;
b) describe, using knowledge of ethics and state and national safety
guidelines and restrictions, how to make and maintain a given
collection of scientific specimens and data;
d) describe, using state and national guidelines, how to acquire, care
for, store, use, and dispose of given chemicals and equipment used
to teach science;
e) implement safe procedures during supervised science learning
experiences in the public schools; and
3) how to apply educational principles relevant to the physical, social,
emotional, moral, and cognitive development of preadolescents and
adolescents;
4) how to apply the research base for and the best practices of middle level
and high school education;
5) how to develop curriculum goals and purposes based on the central
concepts of science and how to apply instructional strategies and materials
for achieving student understanding of the discipline;
7) the need for and how to connect students' schooling experiences with
everyday life, the workplace, and further educational opportunities;
Course Outline of Topics:
The Nature of Science and Science Teaching – Best Practices
Traditional Instructional Cycles in Science Inquiry instruction The learning cycle and its applications
Developing Learning Cycles Adapting Existing Laboratories to Follow an Inquiry Format Converting Traditional Teaching Materials into Inquiry Materials
Learning Cycles for Secondary Science – Teachers Design Their Own Inquiry Units
The Nature of the Learner Piaget’s Theories of Intelligence and Intellectual Development Brain Physiology and Growth from Childhood to Adult
The Goals of Science Education Minnesota Standards for Science National Science Education Standards Understanding of Appropriate Science Learning Goals and Content
The Theory Base of Secondary School Science Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development
The Research and Theories of Shayer and Adey The Role of the Teacher During Inquiry Instruction
Linking the Language of Science with the Concepts in Science Vygotsky’s Theories of Intellectual Development – Labeling a Concept Facilitating Students' Understanding of Scientific Concepts and Theories
Applying Concepts to New Settings Vygotsky’s Theories of Intellectual Development – Concept Generalization Phenomenon
Measuring Students’ Progress in a Learning Cycle Program – Content Knowledge Misconceptions in Chemistry Constructing Exam Questions to Evaluate Student Learning
Assessing Procedural Knowledge Using Piagetian Tasks The Development of Higher-Order Thinking Skills Description of Piagetian Tasks of Formal Operations
Action Research in the Classroom Teachers as Researchers Gathering Data on Teaching Effectiveness Protecting the Learner from Trivial Measurements The Rights and Privacy of the Learner
Safe Storage and Use of Chemicals Introduction to Online Chemical Ordering Tools Searching and Use of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) Safe Chemical Use and Storage
Laboratory Safety
Learning Objective Learning Opportunity Assessment & Evaluation B. A teacher of chemistry