Mastery,insight, and the teaching of chemistry

The learning of chemistry is described as a process analogous to the process of making chemical discoveries. Historical examples are given to show how chemists have used their insight to break out of a conceptual loop in order to advance the science. Having the insight to make the intuitive leap necessary to break a conceptual loop is as important as having the mastery of the pertinent facts. As in making chemical discoveries, learning elementary chemistry requires developing insight as well as acquiring mastery of the facts. However, current general chemistry teaching tends to teach facts first and insight later. Suggestions for improving this situation so that insight and facts are learned together are given. Finally, the nature of insight is probed more deeply and presented as a two-step process where the first step is an evaluation of the perceptions about science which are held. Once the student, teacher, or researcher has a clear evaluation of the validity of the perceptions that he or she holds, further significant progress toward understanding or scientific discovery is possible.     

What about classroom Communicators?

Conclusion Note that the comparisons presented in this paper serve only as a springboard in pointing out some of the advantages and limitations of the Classroom Communicator. Like the bicycle and the automobile, each serving a useful purpose under certain conditions, different types of teaching aids and teaching machines will find their use. Not many individuals will want to argue whether the bicycle or the automobile is better. One would hope that an out-of-context decision on the Classroom Communicator versus this or that teaching machine is not made. It is thought, however, that some empirical or logical decision might be made with respect to the use of the Classroom Communicator in the near future. This article is adapted from a paper given by the author as part of a symposium on “Automated Instruction and Programed Learning,” Southeastern Psychological Association, Louisville, Kentucky. The opinions expressed are those of Herbert P. Froehlich, who from 1959 to 1962 was a research officer on the staff of the Chief of Naval Air Technical Training, Memphis, Tennessee, and are not necessarily shared by the Department of the Navy.     

In the bunkers of Binghamton

In addition to being editor ofAcademic Questions and chairman of the National Association of Scholars     

Exploring sex differences in science enrolment intentions: An application of the General Model of Academic Choice

In many countries there remain substantial sex differences in enrolments in elective science courses, despite concerted efforts in recent years to alleviate them. This paper explores the reasons for these differences by comparing models of male and female enrolment intentions in elective courses in biology, chemistry and physics. The models are based on responses from approximately 450 students from 5 Australian high schools. First, a theoretical model, the Science Enrolment Model, was derived from Eccles and colleagues’ General Model of Academic Choice. Students’ responses were then used to develop empirical models of enrolment intentions in the three elective courses. Analyses for the models were conducted using the LISREL “mean structures” extension. Sex differences in the dependent variables in the models were then attributed to the relevant sets of independent variables. Substantial sex differences were identified in measures of perceived career value, interest and performance expectations in all three models which explained between 70% and 82% of the sex differences in enrolment intentions.     

Analyzing the OECD Indicators Model

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has identified an elaborate set of indicators by which to judge aspects of education systems. This paper provides a comparative analysis of the education-related features of 28 high-income countries in terms of three blocks of indicators relating respectively to the contexts, processes and results of each system. Factor analyses showed that several aspects of the OECD model are more complicated than previously thought. For this reason, the OECD faces a choice of enriching the range of indicators or pruning some components to gain parsimony and greater country participation in data collection. The article demonstrates that to the extent that the OECD model holds, education context variables appear to influence costs, resources and school processes. In turn, processes appear to influence results including achievement though in some cases weakly and in other cases surprisingly. Although further changes in the OECD model deserve consideration the article also shows how it has grown substantially in scope, methodological rigor and country participation during the past decade.