Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Making Connections: Learning and Teaching Chemistry in Context

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Even though several studies have reported positive attitudinal outcomes from context-based chemistry programs, methodological obstacles have prevented researchers from comparing satisfactorily the chemistry-learning outcomes between students who experience a context-based program with those who experience a content-driven program. In this narrative inquiry we are able to address the question: how do the recalled experiences of a student and her teacher in context-based and concept-based chemistry programs compare? From the student’s unique perspective of experiencing both programs with the same teacher, we have constructed our collective account around four themes; namely, the extent to which the student makes connections between chemistry concepts and real-world contexts, developing research independence through engaging in extended experimental investigations related to contexts, learning chemistry concepts through contexts, and conceptual sequencing in a context-based program. The student reported real-world connections between chemistry concepts and contexts, found her engagement in the context-driven tasks interesting and productive, and identified connected sequences of concepts across the contexts studied. Despite difficulties for teachers who are required to shift pedagogies, the student’s lived experiences and outcomes from a context-based program provide some encouragement in working through these issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While there are different ways of defining context-based learning, the trial pilot chemistry syllabus in Queensland defines context as “a group of learning experiences that encourages students to transfer their understanding of key concepts to situations that mirror real life” (Queensland Studies Authority 2004, p. 11). Generally, a context-based approach and related science-technology-society (STS) curricula adopt an alternative rationale for learning experiences for students than traditional or conceptually focused programs. The focus in a context-based approach is on the application of science as a means of developing scientific understanding in such a way as to develop students’ capacities to function as responsible participants in their everyday lives (Aikenhead 2006; Bennett 2005).

  2. We group context-based and STS approaches because Bennett (2005) found it too difficult to distinguish between implemented programs aligned with each approach. Both approaches adopt an alternative rationale to more conventional programs. The focus in context-based and STS programs is on the application of science to develop students’ capacities to function as responsible participants in their everyday lives (Aikenhead 2006; Bennett 2005).

References

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Chemical Society [ACS] (2001). Chemistry in context (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, P. (1997). Students’ understanding of chemical equilibrium. MA thesis, University of York, York, UK.

  • Barber, M. (2000). A comparison of NEAB and Salters A-level chemistry: Student views and achievements. MA thesis, University of York, York, UK.

  • Barker, V., & Millar, R. (2000). Students’ reasoning about basic chemical thermodynamics and chemical bonding: What changes occur during a context-based post-16 chemistry course? International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1171–1200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton, A. C., & Darkside, (2005). Greater objectivity through local knowledge. In W.-M. Roth (Ed.) Auto/biography and auto/ethnography: Praxis of research method (pp. 23–47). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beasley, W., & Butler, J. (2002). Implementation of context-based science within the freedoms offered by Queensland Schooling. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Australian Science and Education Research Association Conference, Townsville, Queensland, July.

  • Bennett, J. (2005). Bringing science to life: The research evidence on teaching science in context. York, UK: Department of Educational Studies, The University of York Retrieved September 4, 2007 from http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ/ResearchPaperSeries/Contexts%20booklet.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., Campbell, B., Hogarth, S., & Lubben, F. (2007). A systematic review of the effects on high school students of context-based and science-technology (STS) approaches to the teaching of science. York, UK: Department of Educational Studies The University of York. Retrieved June 12, 2007 from http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/educ/projs/EPPI/bennettsaarmste.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., & Holman, J. (2002). Context-based approaches to the teaching of chemistry: What are they and what are their effects? In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.) Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 165–184). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based chemistry: The Salters approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 999–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockmeier, J., & Harré, R. (1997). Narrative: Problems and promises of an alternative paradigm. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 30(4), 263–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalcante, P. S., Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (1997). The effect of various kinds of lesson on conceptual understanding in science. Research in Science and Technology Education, 15(2), 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry. Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eijkelhof, H. M. C., & Lijnse, P. L. (1998). The role of research and development to improve STS education: Experiences form the PLON-project. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 464–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elbaz-Luwisch, F. (1997). Narrative research: Political issues and implications. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(1), 75–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedler, Y., & Tamir, P. (1990). Life in science laboratory classrooms at secondary level. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.) The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 337–356). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, H., & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86, 693–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The status and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gutwill-Wise, J. (2001). The Impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses: An early evaluation of the modular approach. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(5), 684–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70(256), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A. (2004). The laboratory in chemistry education: Thirty years of experience with developments, implementation, and research. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5(3), 247–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Kesner, M. (2006). Industrial chemistry and school chemistry: Making chemistry studies more relevant. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1017–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88, 28–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Key, M. E. (1998). Student perceptions of chemical industry: Influences of course syllabi, teachers, first hand experience: Doctoral thesis, University of York, York, UK.

  • King, D. (2007). Teacher beliefs and constraints in implementing a context-based approach in chemistry. Teaching Science, 53(1), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D., & Ritchie, S. M. (2007, April). Implementing a context-based approach in a chemistry class: Successes and dilemmas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.

  • Kortland, J. (2005). Physics in personal, social and scientific contexts: A retrospective view on the Dutch Physics Curriculum Development Project PLON. In P. Nentwig, & D. Waddington (Eds.) Making it relevant. Context-based learning of science (pp. 67–89). Munchen, Germany: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 781–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lye, H., Fry, M., & Hart, C. (2001). What does it mean to teach physics in ‘context’? A first case study. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 48(3), 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okebukola, P. A. O. (1986). An investigation of some factors affecting students’ attitudes toward laboratory chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 86, 531–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1991). Teaching for transfer. In A. L. Costa (Ed.) Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (Revised Edition, Volume 1) (pp. 215–223). Alexandria, VI: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Personal Narratives Group (1989). Interpreting women’s lives: Feminist theory and personal narratives. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy. A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Studies Authority (2004). Chemistry: Extended trial pilot syllabus. Brisbane, Queensland: Queensland Studies Authority.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, J. M. (1997). How does a context-based approach influence understanding of key chemical ideas at 16+? International Journal of Science Education, 19(6), 697–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riessman, C. K. (2002). Narrative analysis. In A. M. Huberman, & M. B. Miles (Eds.) The qualitative researcher’s companion (pp. 217–270). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigano, D. L., & Ritchie, S. M. (1994). Students’ thinking in a chemistry laboratory. Research in Science Education, 24, 270–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie, S. M., & Rigano, D. L. (1996). Laboratory apprenticeship through a student research project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 799–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, S. (1993). The role and effect of context in learning form six oxidation and reduction concepts by female students. Doctoral thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.

  • Roth, W.-M. (2005). Auto/biography and auto/ethnography: Finding the generalized other in the self. In W.-M. Roth (Ed.) Auto/biography and auto/ethnography: Praxis of research method (pp. 3–16). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, A. T. (2006). Contextualised chemistry education: The American experience. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 977–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherin, B., Edelson, D., & Brown, M. (2004). On the content of task-structured science curricula. In L. B. Flick, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.) Scientific inquiry and the nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (pp. 221–248). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, R. (1994). Creative technology projects in science: The CREST model. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 40(4), 26–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L. A., & Bitner, B. L. (1993). Comparisons of formal operations: Students enrolled in ChemCom versus a traditional chemistry course. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Science Teachers Association, April 1993, Kansas City, MO.

  • Smith, M., & Matthews, P. (2000). Science, technology and society in transition year: A pilot study. Irish Educational Studies, 19, 107–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutman, F., & Bruce, M. (1992). Chemistry in the community – ChemCom: A five year evaluation. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(7), 564–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, K. (2000). Becoming an urban science educator. Research in Science Education, 30(1), 89–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-C. (2000). The effects of STS-oriented instructions on female tenth graders’ cognitive structure outcomes and the role of student scientific epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1099–1115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tytler, R. (2007). Re-imagining science education: Engaging students in science for Australia’s future. (Australian Education Review, 51). Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Council of Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of York Science Education Group [UYSEG] (2000). Salters advanced chemistry, chemical storylines, chemical ideas, activities and assessment and teachers’ guide (2nd ed.). York/Oxford, UK: UYSEG/Heinemann Educational.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vignouli, V., Hart, C., & Fry, M. (2002). What does it mean to teach physics ‘in context’? A second case study. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 48(3), 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wierstra, R. F. A. (1984). A study on classroom environment and on cognitive and affective outcomes of the PLON-curriculum. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 10, 273–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, J. W. (1999). Teachers’ perceptions of the contextual approach to teaching VCE physics. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 45(2), 58–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winther, A. A., & Volk, T. L. (1994). Comparing achievement of inner-city high school students in traditional versus STS-based chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 71, 501–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager, R. E., & Weld, J. D. (1999). Scope, sequence and coordination: The Iowa Project, a national reform effort in the USA. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 169–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., Donn, S., Wild, R., & Beckett, P. (1991). Students’ versus their teachers’ beliefs and positions on science/technology/society-oriented issues. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 25–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., Ebenezer, J. V., Morley, K., Paras, S., Sandberg, V., West, C., et al. (1990). Goal attainment in science-technology (S/T/S) education and reality: The case of British Columbia. Science Education, 74, 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Emeritus Professor Peter Fensham for his helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 4059, Australia

    Donna King, Alberto Bellocchi & Stephen M. Ritchie

Authors
  1. Donna King
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alberto Bellocchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen M. Ritchie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donna King.

Appendix

Appendix

Sample Questions from Interview One

  1. 1.

    Tell me what you did in chemistry last year.

  2. 2.

    Tell me if there were any similarities or differences between what you did last year and this year?

  3. 3.

    How did the pracs compare across each year?

  4. 4.

    What do you think of the two different approaches there are for doing experiments?

  5. 5.

    In what ways was the content linked to real life in both years?

  6. 6.

    What were the similarities and differences between the way content was taught between last year and this year?

  7. 7.

    What do you think of the two different approaches you have seen between last year and this year?

  8. 8.

    Imagine you were starting year 11 again and you actually had the choice of one of the two approaches, which one would you choose and why?

Sample Questions from Interview Two

  1. 1.

    Compared with last year, in what ways were the writing requirements similar and different this year?

  2. 2.

    How do you think the writing that you had to do for last year’s tasks and this year’s tasks compares in terms of understanding the concepts behind it?

  3. 3.

    How do you think that affects your understanding of the concepts that you’re doing in those two different tasks?

  4. 4.

    I just remind you that in the last interview you said that you learnt things in more depth. Can you explain to me what you meant by you learnt it in more depth?

  5. 5.

    So when you say you have learnt things in more depth can you give me an example of differences between this year and last year? How did you learn something in more depth this year?

  6. 6.

    And also in the last interview you made a comment about how you personally like to see how the chemistry is applied to real situations. You said you like to see the purpose of the chemistry. Can you explain what you meant by this?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

King, D., Bellocchi, A. & Ritchie, S.M. Making Connections: Learning and Teaching Chemistry in Context. Res Sci Educ 38, 365–384 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9070-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9070-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation