Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Education (Higher)
Description
Chemistry as a subject is difficult to learn and understand, due in part to the specific language used by practitioners in their professional and scientific communications. The language and ways of representing chemical interactions have been grouped into three modes of representation used by chemistry instructors, and ultimately by students in understanding the discipline. The first of these three modes of representation is the symbolic mode, which uses a standard set of rules for chemical nomenclature set out by the IUPAC. The second mode of representation is that of microscopic, which depicts chemical compounds as discrete units made up of atoms and molecules, with a particular ratio of atoms to a molecule or formula unit. The third mode of representation is macroscopic, what can be seen, experienced, or measured directly, like ice melting or a color change during a chemical reaction. Recent evidence suggests that chemistry instructors can assist their students in making the connections between the modes of representation by incorporating all three modes into their teaching and discussions, and overtly connecting the modes during instruction. In this research, chemistry teachers at the community college level were observed over the course of an entire semester, to evaluate their instructional use of mode of representation. The students of these teachers were tested prior to and after a semester's worth of instruction, and changes in the basic chemistry conceptual knowledge of these students were compared. Additionally, a subset of the overall population that was pre- and post-tested was interviewed at length using demonstrations of chemical phenomenon that students were asked to translate using all three modes of representation. Analysis of the instruction of three community college teachers shows there were significant differences among these teachers in their instructional use of mode of representation. Additionally, the students of these three teachers had differential and statistically significant achievement over the course of the semester. This research supports results of other similar studies, as well as providing some unexpected results from the students involved.
ContributorsWood, Lorelei (Author) / Baker, Dale (Thesis advisor) / Ganesh, Tirupalavanam G. (Committee member) / Colleen, Megowan (Committee member) / Sujatha, Krishnaswamy (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
To address the need of scientists and engineers in the United States workforce and ensure that students in higher education become scientifically literate, research and policy has called for improvements in undergraduate education in the sciences. One particular pathway for improving undergraduate education in the science fields is to reform undergraduate teaching. Only a limited number of studies have explored the pedagogical content knowledge of postsecondary level teachers. This study was conducted to characterize the PCK of biology faculty and explore the factors influencing their PCK. Data included semi-structured interviews, classroom observations, documents, and instructional artifacts. A qualitative inquiry was designed to conduct an in-depth investigation focusing on the PCK of six biology instructors, particularly the types of knowledge they used for teaching biology, their perceptions of teaching, and the social interactions and experiences that influenced their PCK. The findings of this study reveal that the PCK of the biology faculty included eight domains of knowledge: (1) content, (2) context, (3) learners and learning, (4) curriculum, (5) instructional strategies, (6) representations of biology, (7) assessment, and (8) building rapport with students. Three categories of faculty PCK emerged: (1) PCK as an expert explainer, (2) PCK as an instructional architect, and (3) a transitional PCK, which fell between the two prior categories. Based on the interpretations of the data, four social interactions and experiences were found to influence biology faculty PCK: (1) teaching experience, (2) models and mentors, (3) collaborations about teaching, and (4) science education research. The varying teaching perspectives of the faculty also influenced their PCK. This study shows that the PCK of biology faculty for teaching large introductory courses at large research institutions is heavily influenced by factors beyond simply years of teaching experience and expert content knowledge. Social interactions and experiences created by the institution play a significant role in developing the PCK of biology faculty.
ContributorsHill, Kathleen M. (Author) / Luft, Julie A. (Thesis advisor) / Baker, Dale (Committee member) / Orchinik, Miles (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013