INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy o f a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality o f the material submitted. The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “ target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image of the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part o f the material being photographed, a definite method o f “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 8503230 Kim, Hyonam CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM COMPARISON IN SELECTED MICHIGAN HIGH SCHOOLS Michigan State University University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Ph.D. 1984 PLEASE NOTE: In all c ase s this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this docum ent have been identified here with a check mark V . 1. Glossy photographs or p a g e s______ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print_____ 3. Photographs with dark background 4. Illustrations are poor copy 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy 6. Print shows through a s there is text on both sides of page______ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirem ents_____ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine______ 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print______ 11. Page(s)___________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s)___________ seem to be missing in numbering only a s text follows. 13. Two pages num bered___________ . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled p a g es______ 15. Other_____________________________________________________________________ ^ S / S University Microfiims International C H E M IST R Y CURRICULUM C O M PA R ISO N IN SE L E C T E D M ICH IG A N H IG H SCHOOLS By Hyonam Kim A DISSERTATION Subm itted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for th e degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY D epartm ent of A dm inistration and Curriculum 1984 ABSTRACT CHEMISTRY CURRICULUM COMPARISON IN SELECTED MICHIGAN HIGH SCHOOLS By Hyonam Kim D ata were collected in two regular and one advanced placement chemistry classes in two Michigan suburban high schools in order to analyze four research objectives such as (1) a description of the educational environment of th e two high schools, (2) an analysis of educational objectives, (3) an analysis of topics and teaching methods, and (4) an analysis of student interest. A total of 40 class periods were observed, and 20 sets of student evaluation materials and three yearly teacher plannings were surveyed. Klopfer’s categories were used for the analysis of educational objectives and chemistry topics. The developed categories were used for the analysis of teaching methods and student interest. Most d a ta were analyzed by counting frequency, calculating percen­ tages, and tabulating the results. Educational objectives were instructed, which were knowledge and comprehension objectives, 46.3 percent to 68.2 percent; scientific inquiry I, 11.2 percent to 17.8 percent; application, 3.2 percent to 16.1 percent; and scientific inquiry II, III, and IV, 0.0 percent to 4.2 percent in the 40 classroom observations. In the student evaluation methods, edu­ cational objectives were emphasized, which were knowledge and comprehension, 39.5 percent to 48.0 percent; application, 43.7 percent to 45.4 percent; and scientific inquiry II, IV, and manual skills, 0.0 percent to .5 percent. Hyonam Kim In the analysis of chemistry topics, the tiro regular programs planned to emphasize mostly chemical laws, energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems, and atomic and molecular structure. The advanced placement program planned to emphasize mostly chemical materials (15.3 percent), chemical laws (15.3 percent), energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems (24.7 percent), and atomic and molecu­ lar structure (16.9 percent) in the total instruction hours. All three programs rarely taught general topic categories (0.0 percent to 7.4 percent). In the analysis of teaching methods, the two regular programs planned to use mostly lecture, student experiment, problem solving, and test. The advanced placement program planned to use more stu­ dent experiment methods (31.2 percent) than lecture method (29.2 percent) in the total instruction hours. In the analysis of student interest, lecture, problem solving, and socratic method classes received less interest than experiment classes or lecture classes. Manual skills (60.3 percent to 85.5 percent) captured greater student interest than knowledge and comprehension (41.3 percent to 53.2 percent). To m y families and teachers •• u ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author is most grateful to Professor Benjamin A. Bohnhorst, who was the chairman of the Dotoral Guidance Committee. His excellent guidance and constructive criticism in the preparation of this dissertation was invaluable. A special word of recognition is due to Professor Glenn D. Berkheimer, Professor Kenneth L. Neff, and Professor Andrew Timnick who, as members of the Dotoral Gui­ dance Committee, gave constructive criticism and encouragement. The author is indebted to the two chemistry teachers and students in the two Michigan high schools, who allowed their chemistry classes to be observed and took the time to talk with her. This dissertation was supported financially by the Korean Government Scholarship. The author is grateful to her parents, sisters and brothers for their concern and to her teachers for their teaching until this dissertation has been eomplished. The author must also give credit to her husband, Younggap You, for his sincere criticism and concern. ••• in TABLE 0 7 CONTENTS List of Tables ................................................................................................................... List of Figures ............................................................................................................. vui xi 1. Introduction (1) ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1. Background of the S tu d y .................................................................................. 1 1.1.1. Ancient and European Origins ofModern Science...................... 1 1.1.2. Development of Science Education in the U.S..................*.................. 4 1.1.3. Background of Science Education in Korea ........................................ 0 1.1.4. Objectives and Topics of Korean High School Chemistry Teaching .......................................................................................................... 15 1.2. Statement of the Problem ................................................................................ 20 1.3. Purposes of the S tu d y ....................................................................................... 23 2. Literature Review .................................................................................................... 24 2.1. Studies of Educational Objectives ............................................................ 24 2.2. Studies of Teaching M ethods........................................................................... 26 2.3. Studies of Curriculum Evaluation Methodology ............................................ 29 2.4. Summary ............................................................................................................ 34 iv 3. Methodology °f Data Collection and D ata Analysis Procedures...................... 35 3.1. Research Questions ............................................................................................ 35 3.2. Selection of Schools .......................................................................... 37 3.2.1. Criteria used in Selection of Schools ..................................................... 37 3.2.2. Negotiation with Principals, Chemistry Teachers, and School Dis­ tricts ........................................................................................................... 37 3.2.3. Selection of Appropriate Schools ........................................................... 39 3.3. Preparation of Categories and Data Collection Forms ................................. 39 3.3.1. Educational Objectives .......................................................................... 39 3.3.2. Topics and Teaching M ethods ................................................. 40 3.3.3. Student In terest'...................................................................................... 40 3.3.4. Preparation of D ata Collection Forms ................................................. 41 3.4. Data Collection Activities Perform ed.............................................................. 42 3.4.1. Selection of Chemistry Classes ............................................................. 42 3.4.2. Data Collection Period ......................................................................... 44 3.4.3. Observation of Chemistry C lasses....................................................... 44 3.4.4. Audio-Visual Recording of Chemistry Classes ................................... 46 3.4.5. Interviews of Personnel in the Two Schools....................................... 47 3.4.6. Survey of the W ritten Materials ......................................................... 48 3.5. Plan for Description of Educational Environment ........................................ 48 3.6. Data Analysis Procedures ................................................................................. 49 3.6.1. Educational Objectives .......................................................................... 50 3.6.2. Topics and Teaching M ethods............................................................... 52 v 3.6.3. Student In te re s t...................................................................................... 52 3.7. S um m ary........................................................................................................... 54 4. Educational Environment of Two Schools Studied ............................................ 56 4.1. Communities and Schools................................................................................. 56 4.2. Chemistry Teachers and S tu d en ts................................................................... 59 4.3. Science Courses .................................................................................................. 61 4.4. Financial Support and Facilities................ 65 4.5. Summary ............................................................................................................. 84 5. Data Analysis ............................................................................................................ 86 5.1. Educational Objectives ..................................................................................... 86 5.1.1. Representative Educational Objective Transcripts ............................. 86 5.1.2. Educational Objectives with respect to Different Teaching M ethods.................................................................................................... 91 5.1.3. Educational Objectives in the Evaluation Methods ............................ 109 5.2. High School Chemistry Topics and Teaching Methods ............................... 122 5.2.1. The Analysis of Topics ......................................................................... 123 5.2.2. The Analysis of Teaching Methods ..................................................... 125 5.2.3. Teaching Methods with respect to each Topic C ategory................. 127 5.3. Student Interest ................................................................................................. 138 5.3.1. Description of Student Interest P o in ts ................................................ 138 5.3.2. Student Interest with respect to Teaching M ethods........................ 140 5.3.3. Student Interest with respect to Educational Objectives ............... 143 5.4. Summary ............................................................................................................. 153 vi 6. Summary, Conclusions, and Further Research P la n s ........................................ 155 6.1. S um m ary............................................................................................................. 155 6.2. Conclusions ............................................................................................... 158 6.3. Further Research Plans .................................................................................... 160 6.4. Discussion............................................................................................................ 161 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................. 168 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 173 A. Educational Objective Categories ................................................................... 174 B. Chemistry and General Topic Categories ...................................................... 176 C. Teaching Method Categories............................................................................ 180 D. Contact L e tte r................................................................................................... 181 E. Class Information F o rm ....................................................... 184 F. Field Note Form ......... 185 G. Interview Q uestions........................................................................................... 186 H. Courses Offered in Schools S and D ............................................................... 187 I. Representative Educational Objective Transcript ......................................... 193 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Chemistry Course Units in Korean High School.......................................... 14 Table 2. Chemistry Class Periods in High Schools ..................................................... 21 Table 3. Chemistry Classroom Observation Schedule ............................................... 45 Table 4. Communities and Schools .............................................................................. 57 Table 5. Chemistry Teachers and S tu d e n ts................................................................ 60 Table 6-1. Science Courses in School S in the 1983-1984 School Y e a r ................... 62 Table 6-2. Science Courses in School D in the 1983-1984 School Year ................... 62 Table 7. Chemistry Courses Observed in Schools S and D ...................................... 63 Table 8. Financial Support of Schools S and D in the 1983-1984 School Year 68 Table 9. Chemistry Classroom Facilities of Schools S and D ................................... 70 Table 10. Observation Days According to Teaching M ethods.................................. 92 Table 11. Educational Objectives in Lecture, Problem Solving and Socratie Method ......................................................................................................... 94 Table 12. Educational Objectives in Lecture, Socratic Method Classes ................... 96 Table 13. Educational Objectives in Demonstration Classes ..................................... 98 viii Table 14. Educational Objectives in Experiment, Discussion, and Socratic Method ......................................................................................................... 101 Table 15. Educational Objectives in Film-Slide Showing Classes............................. 103 Table 10. Educational Objectives in Field Trip or Guest Speaker Classes ............. 100 Table 17. Educational Objectives in W orksheets........................................................ Ill Table 18. Educational Objectives in Textbook P roblem s.......................................... 114 Table 19. Educational Objectives in Laboratoiy Questions....................................... 110 Table 20. Educational Objectives in T e s ts ................................................................... 119 Table 21. Topics Categories in The Three Programs ................................................ 124 Table 22. Teaching Method Categories in The Three Program s.............................. 120 Table 23-1. Teaching Methods of Chemical M aterials............................................... 128 Table 23-2. Teaching Methods of Classification of Chemical E lem ent..................... 128 Table 23-3. Teaching Methods of Chemical C hange................................................... 130 Table 23-4. Teaching Methods of Chemical L aw s....................................................... 130 Table 23-5. Teaching methods of Energy and Chemical Equilibrium ...................... 131 Table 23-0. Teaching Methods of Electrochemistry.................................................... 131 Table 23-7. Teaching Methods of Atomic and Molecular S tru ctu re ......................... 132 Table 23-8. Teaching Methods of Introductory Organic C hem istry......................... 132 Table 23-9. Teaching Methods of Chemistry in Life Processes................................. 133 Table 23-10. Teaching Methods of Nuclear C hem istry.............................................. 133 Table 23-11. Teaching Methods of Historical Development....................................... 135 Table 23-12. Teaching Methods of Nature and Structure of Science ....................... 135 Table 23-13. Teaching Methods of Nature of Scientific Inquiry............................... 136 ix Table 23*14. Teaching Methods of Biographies of Scientists............................. 130 Table 23*15. Teaching Methods of M easurement........................................................ 137 Table 24. Student Interest with respect to Different Teaching Methods ................. 141 Table 25. Student Interest with respect to Different Educational Objectives 144 Table 26*1. Student Interest in Lecture, Problem Solving, and Socratic Method ............................................................................................................. 145 Table 20-2. Student Interest in Lecture and Socratic Method C lasses..................... 140 Table 20-3. Student Interest in Demonstration C lasses............................................. 148 Table 20-4. Student Interest in Experiment, Discussion, Socratic Method ............. 149 Table 20-5. Student Interest in Film-Slide Showing Classes...................................... 150 Table 20-0. Student Interest in Field Trip or Guest Speaker Classes ...................... 152 Table 27. Educational Objectives in the Three Programs ........................................ 102 Table 28. Proportions of the Educational Objectives ............................................... 105 Table 29. Differences from the NSTA Position Statement ....................................... 105 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Educational Administration System of the Republic of Korea .......... 11 Figure 2. School System of the Republic of Korea .................................................... 12 Figure 3. Lab Table in a Korean High School ........................................................... 10 Figure 4. Preparation Room in a Korean HighSchool .............................................. 10 Figure 5. An Example of a 00 Good Exhibition.......................................................... Figure 0. An Example of a Sloppy Exhibition ........................................................ 00 Figure 7. Science Fair as a Big Community Event .................................................... 67 Figure 8. A Chemistry-related Exhibition................................................................... 07 Figure 9. A Map of School S ........................................................................................ 72 Figure 10. A Map of School D ...................................................................................... 73 Figure 11. Chemistry Classrooms in School S .......................................................... 74 Figure 12. Chemistry Classrooms in School D.......................................................... 75 Figure 13. Chemistry Lecture Room in School.S ....... 70 Figure 14. Chemistry Teacher Room and Lab1 in School S ................................... 77 Figure 15. Chemistry Lab 2 in School S ..................................................................... 78 Figure 10. Chemistry Lecture-Lab Room in School D .............................................. 79 xi Figure 17. Chemistry Preparation Room and Storage Room in School S ........... 80 Figure 18. Chemistry Preparation-Storage Room in School D ................................ 81 Figure 19. A Regular Chemistry Lecture Class in School S ..................................... 82 Figure 20. A Regular Chemistry Lecture Class in School D ..................................... 82 Figure 21. A AP Chemistry Experiment Class in School S ..................................... 83 Figure 22. A Regular Chemistry Experiment Class in School D .............................. 83 Figure 23. Educational Objectives in the Classroom Observation ...................... 108 Figure 24. Educational Objectives in the Evaluation Methods ............................. 121 xn CHAPTER 1 Introduction This chapter describes a brief history of science curricula, the problems to be solved, and the purposes of this study. The history sketches ancient, modem, and U.S. science curricula development. Since the overall purpose includes developing a metho­ dology for comparing chemistry curricula, with a long range intention of using it and helping develop science education in Korea, a brief background on Korean education is also presented here. 1.1. Background o f th e Study This section includes background of origins of modern science, American science education, and Korean science education. 1.1.1. A ncient and European Origins o f M odern Science People study things which are presumed to be needed to live in this world. The contents of learning are inextricably interrelated to methods of learning, which for the purposes of this study, both will be embraced within the concept of curriculum. Curri­ cula have shifted and changed throughout the flow of history. Curriculum is usually for- 1 mutated in terms of perceived cultural need.1 European culture, which influences Ameri­ can culture, was affected by aneient Greek culture. From the ancient Greek and Roman periods, throughout the medieval, Byzantine, and Renaissance periods and from the six­ teenth through the eighteenth centuries, Europeans developed relatively more formal scientific curricula than those of other people in those time periods. In times previous to the aforementioned periods, people studied what were assumed to be needed knowledges, skills, and attitudes by interpreting their surroundings, analyz­ ing and classifying natural phenomenon, including animals, plants, the sky cosmic objects (such as moon, sun, and stars), and weather events. Greeks pursued the study of categories and topics such as happiness, truth, the atom, and so on. They used a dialectic method to discuss those topics. “Education was based on following the example of adults and the gods, and on learning the poems and myths passed down from generation to generation. Historical knowledge, whether inscribed in poetry, or preserved by oral traditions in family and clan, was part of this early curriculum."2 In the Greek period, primary schools taught the “three R’s" (reading, writing, arithmetic), music (vocal, instrument-lyres, flutes), gymnastics (individual, competitive exercises), and religion (through literature, and by participation in community religious events). Upper secondary schools offered further training in gymnastics and also in mili­ tary matters. *Y. Shima*u, “Social and Economic Influences in Curriculum Change in Japan: Case History of En­ vironmental Education,” Eneironmental Education and Information, vol. 1, no. 2, (April-June, 1081). ^ . K . Medlin, The Hiitory of Educational I i t at in the Weet, (The Center for Applied Research in Edu­ cation, Inc., 1064), pp. 11-12. In the Roman period, primary schools taught the three R’s and the Twelve Tables of Law; Secondary schools, Greek, Latin, literature, history, and some rhetoric; higher schools, rhetoric, law, and architecture. In the medieval period, cathedral schools taught grammar, rhetoric, logic, arith­ metic, geometry, astronomy, and music; universities, philosophy, law, and medicine. In the Byzantine culture, primary schools offered instruction in the basic skills and religion; secondary schools taught grammar, literature, and mathematics; institutions of higher education, rhetoric, logic, philosophy, science (astronomy), music, and mathematics. In t h e . Renaissance period, secondary schools provided Latin, Latin literature, Greek, Greek literature, grammar, rhetoric, logic, mathematics, astronomy, music, draw­ ing, ancient history, philosophy, nature studies, and physical military exercises. From the sixteenth through the seventeenth centuries in Europe, there emerged some new trends in curriculum, which were the results of some people’s efforts to experi­ ment and to develop general scientific rules. Copernicus (astronomy, heliocentrism), Vesalius (human anatomy), Galileo (telescopic magnifying lens, heliocentric theory), Kepler (planetary movements), Deeartes (analytical geometry), Newton (gravitation, laws of motion, calculus), and Boyle (chemistry, laws of gases) were among the creative per­ sons in th a t period, who greatly influenced curricula. And so a scientific academic community emerged and began and to accumulate the vast and astonishing scientific knowledge which is so predominant in our times. This knowledge was organized firmly, taught in the various schools, and became the funda­ mental bases of modern scientific knowledge. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centu­ ries, science and mathematics were emphasized. A modern curriculum formulated by John Milton offered instruction in mathematics, natural sciences, geography, anatomy, astronomy, navigation, and other practical and civic subjects. 1.1.2. D evelopm ent o f Science Education in th e UJS. Columbus was the first modern European to set foot in North America in 1492. Europeans began to immigrate to America in increasing numbers in the sixteenth through the seventeenth centuries and as they did so, they established European educa­ tional systems in their communities. On the basis of European traditions, and motivated by a pioneering frontier spirit, Americans have evolved their own educational system and curriculum, through the colonial period, and on into the twentieth century. The secondary school curriculum in English colonial America consisted of Latin, Greek, some English, writing, and arithmetic.3 By the end of the eighteenth century, academic secondary schools were established widely, where writing, drawing, arithmetic, accounting, geometry, astronomy, the English language, history, natural science, mechanics, commerce, and health were taught.4 Academic secondary schools where clas­ sical languages were not necessarily taught, were urged to do so by such people as Benja­ min Franklin. By the end of the nineteenth century, more than 20,000 high schools were in opera­ tion in the United States, where there were a variety of courses such as commercial sub­ jects, manual arts, agriculture, and home economics. In the period between 1920 and 1940, general mathematics, biology, general science, general business, social studies, and civics were included in the high school curricula. In the early years of the eighteenth century, chemistry was introduced into the American secondary schools and was taught formally at Franklin’s Philadelphia ®W. Bechner and J.D. Cornett, The Secondary School Curriculum-Content and Structure, (Intext Edu­ cational Publishers, 1072), p. 38. Ibid, p. 37 Academy, founded in 1751, along with other science subjects: astronomy, geography, zoology, and geology.5 During World W ar II, military trainers were surprised a t high school graduates’ low level of scientific knowledge. After World W ar II, some science educators began to plan the revision of science curricula. At the end of 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first earth-orbiting satellite. In those times of turmoil and competition with the Soviet Union, some United States educators began to urge Americans to develop more scientific discipline, and more mathematical and higher-level scientific knowledge. After 1957, many new science programs were developed. These programs, along with newly-published textbooks emphasized the processes of science: observing, measur­ ing, inferring, abstracting, and experiencing. Educators, school teachers, and psycholo­ gists worked together to develop the proposed new science curricula. The challenging programs were evaluated in real school situations and revised. As of 1983, the 1957-invented curricula and traditional curricula are used together in United States high school chemistry classes. Traditional curricula emphasized knowledge already established by previous scientists. Experiments in the traditional cur­ ricula were arranged in order to conform to already-established experimental procedures and results. There were a few inquiry types of experiments, but some traditional text­ books, such as Chemistry and You 5 included many life-related problems and principles. The authors tried to apply chemical knowledge to familiar life events. The 1957-invented textbooks included more updated knowledge. The CHEM Study (Chemical Educational Material Study) was organized with emphasis on scientific experi­ ■Ibid, p. 202 %.S. Hopkins et s i, Chemistry end Yen, (Lyons 3c Carnahan, 1930). ment and inference as the main structures. The CBA (Chemical Bonding Approach) program was based on emphasizing the chemical bond theory, which is the main theory of modern chemistry, especially of organic chemistry. Both programs tried to include basic concepts which had not yet been taught in high school classes. Those programs also used more mathematics than the older textbooks. These two programs were supported by the NSF (National Science Foundation). They were designed for college bound students, especially for science-oriented students. Because of their emphasis on scientific conceptual knowledges in the high school curri­ cula, universities and colleges had to enhance the level of their introductory science cur­ riculum. Some evaluations of the 1957-invented curricula indicated th at they were useful for enhancing students’ scientific attitudes but were not so useful for achieving scientific knowledge.7 The courses are difficult, but these students are more motivated in inquiry types of classes.8 A common educational goal continues to be to sustain present life and to enhance future life. We strive to teach accumulated knowledge, study skills, attitudes, and creativity. Beujamin S. Bloom and other psychologists met to discuss achievement test­ ing and to clarify educational objectives. As a result, they classified educational objec­ tives into three domains: the cognitive domain, the affective domain, and the psychomo­ tor domain. The cognitive domain included recall or recognition of knowledge and the TF. Lawrents and A. Gullickson, A Companion of CHEM Study Ctaaiti and Traditional Curriculum C lant! with Reipeet to Aehieuement and Attitndinal Meaiurei, Research Paper no. 4, (Minnesota Universi­ ty, College of Education). *J.M. Armstrong, A Comparatiot Eialuation of an Inicitijatiic and Traditional Biology Laboratory Curriculum at the Introductory College Leuel, (PhD. dissertation, University of Colorado, 1074). 7 development of higher intellectual abilities and skills.9 The affective* domain included changes in interest, attitudes, and values, and the development of appreciations and ade­ quate adjustment.10 The third domain was the manipulative or motor-skill area. Bloom thought the cognitive domain dominated in the greatest part of test development and curriculum development. But the actual curriculum occurs in classrooms and these include considerable activity in the affective domain, such as students’ interests and atti­ tudes. Klopfer specified science objectives into nine different categories and 48 subcategories11 (see Appendix A). These nine different categories are knowledge and comprehension, processes of scientific inquiry I, II, III, IV, application of scientific knowledge and methods, manual skills, attitudes and interests, and orientation. Bloom’s cognitive domain includes Klopfer’s knowledge and comprehension, and his four processes of scientific inquiry and application. Bloom’s psychomotor domain parallels Klopfer’s manual skills. These objectives are to be achieved by the curriculum. Curriculum is usually defined as the teaching contents and the teaching methods. It often also includes the objectives of teaching and the evaluation of learning. Teaching content, which is the core part of curriculum, usually is chosen from textbooks, and textbooks are written by people who have teaching experiences in the high schools or who are experts in those content areas. In the United States there are many different chemistry textbooks. Teaching methods vary: Some teachers use films, slides, pictures, models, and scientific •B.S. Bloom, ed, Taxonomy of Educational Obfeetiaea; Cognitive Domain, (Longman, 1981). “ D.R. Krathwohl, B.S. Bloom and B.B. Masia, Taxonomy of Educational Obfeetiaea; AJfeetiae Domain, (Longman, 1980). nL.E. Klopfer, “Evaluation of Learning in Science,” in B.S. Bloom et al. ede, Handbook on Formatiae and Summatiae Eaaluation of Student Learning, chapter 18, (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971) pp. 559042. 8 experimental equipment to give students better chances to understand and become motivated. Recently the teaching of inquiry skills, which the 1957-invented programs emphasized, has come to be regarded as an important objective in science education. W hat kinds of topics in chemistry should be taught in high schools? And how should new knowledge in chemistry be taught?12 b chemistry really a useful subject for . future adults?13 Do high school students feel satisfaction in their learning of chemistry through the various teaching methods? Many researchers have tried to answer these questions. Most research has been based on such tests as achievement tests,14 attitudes tests,15 and inquiry skill tests. It is probable th a t the educational budget in the United States is not sufficient at present to realize the goals of science education. The United States spends only .5 bil­ lion dollars on textbooks for grades kindergarten through 12, whereas 170 billion dollars are spent on 44 major weapons programs, 40 billion dollars are spent on federal paper work, and 20 billion dollars are spent on tobacco. Budgets in local school districts vary widely. In 1982, the Detroit Public School District spent $1,400 per year per student, but Midland, Michigan, spent $2,350 per stuu C.T. Bishop, '‘High school Chemistry, Relevance or Principles,” Journal of Chemical Education, voL 54, no. 3, (March 1077) pp. 160-170 ^G.C. Britton, "A Challenge Answeredf — 1,” Education in Chemittry, voL 14, no. 2, (March 1077), p. 37 l1S.A.P. Vanek, Comparative Study of Science Teaching Material* (ESS) and a Testbook Approach on Clanifieatory Skill*, Science Achievement, and Attitude*, (Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Rochester, 1074); H.W. Heikkinen, A Study of Factors Influencing Student Attitude* Toward the Study of High School Chemittry, (Ph.D. dissertation. University of Maryland, 1073); R E . Davies, A Companion of an Elective Mini-eoune science Curriculum and a Conventional Non-elective Science Curriculum at the Junior High School Level, (PhJ). dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, 1077). “ J.Y. Dempsey IQ, A Companion of Selected Loutiana High School* Having High Percentage Enroll­ ment* in Chemiitry with Thoie Having Low Percentage Enrollment* in Chemittry in terms of eertain Identi­ fied Initruetional Teacher, and Student* Characteriitici, (PhJ). dissertation, McNeese state University, 1975); M.F. Dobbins, IV, Me U*e of Chromatography to improve the Attitude* of High School Chemiitry Stu­ dent* Toward* Science, (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1080); E.A.J. Hall, The assessment of Parental Knowledge, Comprehcntion and Attitude* about the Science Curriculum in a Junior High Sehool, dent. The Detroit public school district is poorer than Midland’s school district, and therefore, the curricula in the two school districts may be different in terms of quality. They may have different quantities and kinds of laboratory equipments.16 Due to such a difference in funding, some schools may not be able to conduct enough experiments because of a lack of supplies or limited classroom space. There is no comprehensive examination in the United States for high school gradua­ tion as there is in the United Kingdom, but the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) scores, which test verbal and mathematical abilities, are used as criteria for college admissions, and the PSAT includes 15 subject areas including science subjects such as physics, chem­ istry, and biology. Some universities require some subject scores of the PSAT for college admission review. A given chemistry curriculum depends primarily on the chemistry teacher and the school. If a chemistry teacher likes organic chemistry, then organic chemistry will be stressed; teaching methods vary according to teachers' preferences. As a result, student learning varies. Some high school students can remember the names of elements, the periodic table, and the atomic numbers of elements; some can synthesize compounds such as soap or lotion. In this study, high school chemistry curricula will be studied in terms of educational environment, chemistry topics, teaching methods, and student interests. (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1977). 10F. Fornoff, Beginning an Advanced Placement Ckemietrg Cowee, Edition Y, (Educational testing Service, Princeton, N.J., Test Collection, 1976). 10 1.1.3. Background o f Science Education in K orea Korean science educational background of high schools was described, in the follow* ing aspects: educational system, and science courses. E ducational System The Korean educational system can be called as a semi-centralised system. The general structure is shown in Figure 1. In Korea, the educational headquarters come under the auspices of the Ministry of Education. Educational councils are established in each province. The educational councils act as administration bodies for the schools — the elementary through high school. All colleges in Korea are administrated directly by Ministry of Education. The basic educational system is 6-3-3-4, as shown in Figure 2: which is six years for an elementary school, three years for a middle school, three years for a high school, and four years for a college. For one school year, the school days number 240 days for elementary, middle and high schools, and 210 days for colleges. W ith the exception of the colleges, students attend school 5.5 days per week. The gen­ eral class size is 50-65 in grades kindergarten through twelve. There are differences in size and future plans for students between the vocational and academic high schools. In 1981 there were 748 Korean academic high schools and 614 vocational schools -- 56 agricultural schools, 100 industrial schools, 232 business schools, 37 vocational schools, 180 integrated vocational schools, and nine fishing and marine schools.17 There was a total of 1,006,313 academic high school students and 811,255 vocational high school students. Of the total of vocational high schools, 32.6 percent wished to attend college, but only 15.3 percent were able to do so. Graduates of 17Korean Educational Association and Saehan Newspaper, Yearbook oi Korean Education, 1081-1S8S, (Seoul, Korea), pp. 112-122 11 CENTRAL LEVEL MINI3TER OP EDUCATION VICE MINISTER Planning & Management School SupervisorsBUREAU i---------------------- 1--------Higher General Education Education College & University T-------------------- 1 Science Cultural & Education Physical Management 1 Junior Technical College Textbook Compilation Junior College PROVINCIAL LEVEL CITY AND PROVINCIAL BOARD OF EDUCATION ------------------------------------------------- j------------------------------------------------ SUPERINTENDENTS BUREAU I School Affairs Secondary Education LOCAL LEVEL Primary Education Cultural Physical Education Management Prihcipal secondary _ Principal Primary |” CITY AND KUN BOARD OP EDUCATION CHIEF OF OFFICE Principal School Affairs Primary School Figure 1. Management Finance Educational Administration System of the Republic of Korea High School Primary School Middle School Grades 1 - 6 1 -3 Kinder­ garten Special School Special School Grades 1 - 6 b Elementary 4 Secondary - Graduate School 1- 1 -3 Voca­ tional School Medical School 1-6 1 -3 Junior ollegi 1-2 1 -3 Eduoation College and University 1 -^ Education Figure 2. School System of the Republic of Korea Higher Education i 13 vocational high schools got jobs after high school graduation in the following portions: agricultural, 20.8 percent; industrial, 47.5 percent; business, 55.7 percent; fishing and marine, 38.3 percent; home economics, 85.0 percent; and academic tracks of vocational schools, eight percent. Of the total number of students in academic high schools, 70.0 percent wanted to go college, but only 51 percent of total academic high school students went to school beyond high school. Thirty-two percent of total academic high school students went to four-year colleges in 1081. Science curricula will be different in voca­ tional and academic high schools, for the vocationally oriented students and academi­ cally oriented students in each school. Science Courses Science is emphasized and treated as- an important subject in Korea. Science in high schools is divided into four subjects: physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science. Each subject is specialized into subject I and subject II. Subject I includes such basic knowledge as liberal art subjects. Subject II includes more advanced basic knowledge of modern sciences. Four to six units of all four subject Is are required for all academic high school students.18 Vocational high school students are required to take two out of four science I subjects. Four science II subjects are required for all science track stu­ dents and one or two of four science II subjects are required for vocational high school students. Chemistry classes are divided into two levels: one is Chemistry I and the other is chemistry II. As shown in Table 1, Chemistry I is taught to all academic high school students for four to six units, but in vocational high schools, it is offered as an elective “ Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea, Outline of new Curriculum: High School, 198S, pp. 88-91 and pp. 98-105 u Table 1. Chemistry Course Units in Korean High School1 Academic High School Schools Courses Chemistry I Chemistry n Total Vocational High School Social-Human Science track Science Track 4-6 units* (72-108 class period) compulsory 4-8 units (72-108 class period) compulsory 4-6 units (72-108 class period) elective 4 units (72 class period) compulsory 4 units (72 class period) elective 8-10 units (144-180 class period) 0-10 units (0-180 class period) 0 unit 4-6 units (72-108 class period) * One unit means one class period per week for one semester. One semester is about 18 weeks. Thus, one unit is 18 class periods. ‘Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea, Outline of Nev Carrie alarm High School, (1982) 15 course. One unit comprises one class period per week for one semester. Science track students in academic high schools are required to take Chemistry II for four units. All in all, in academic high schools, science track students take chemistry for eight to ten units, and social-human science track students, for four to six units. In vocational schools, students take Chemistry I and II as elective courses for zero to 10 units. In 1982, education comprised 17.10 percent of total government expenditure. This was the second largest expenditure following 34.32 percent for defense.10 However, there is great demand for additional money for the construction of laboratories, purchase of chemicals, glassware and equipment, and the hiring of laboratory assistants in high schools. Figure 3 and Figure 4 show the laboratory facilities of an common high school in Seoul, Korea. The laboratory has relatively sufficient glassware and chemicals, but facilities such as water supplies and comfortable space for experiments are needed. 1.1.4. Objectives and T opics o f K orean High School Chemistry Teaching Educational objectives and topics recommended by the Ministry of Education became effective in this 1984 school year. One school year starts on March 12 and ends on February 25. In this section, the recommended objectives and topics were analyzed using Klopfer’s categories. Objective analysis by classroom observation and topic analysis by studying teaching plans will be attempted in the future. O bjectives o f Chemistry Teaching The new chemistry curricula, revised in 1984, emphasize the relationship between attitudes and the human culture. Chemistry teaching objectives are specified according ‘international Monetary Fund, Government Finance Statiitici Yearbook, Vol. VI., (Washington D.C., U.SA , 1082), p. 25 16 WMJi • —> 'i Figure 3 . Lab T able in a Korean High School Figure 4. Preparation Room in a Korean High School 17 to Chemistry I and Chemistry II. In Chemistry I, five objectives are recommended: (1) systematic understanding of fundamental concepts of m atters and chemical phenomena, (2) developing inquiry ability, (3) recognizing improvement and changeability of chemical concepts, (4) developing scientific life attitudes, and (5) recognizing the relationship between chemistry and human culture. In Chemistry II, five objectives are also recommended: (1) obtaining fundamental knowledge needed for inquiry of regularity of nature, (2) improving inquiry ability, (3) recognizing improvement and changeability of chemical concepts, (4) developing scientific life attitude, and (5) developing attitudes for ongoing chemistry study. The objectives in Chemistry I have some of the same objectives to Chemistry II, such as recognizing improvement and changeability of chemical concepts and developing scientific life atti­ tudes. Chemistry II aims at more advanced objectives because it is taught to students who will study about work in chemistry-related areas. The advanced objectives are to obtain the fundamental knowledge needed for inquiry into the inherent natural order of the physical world and developing attitudes of continued chemistry study. As the five objectives are compared with Klopfer’s educational objective categories in science education,20 they include strongly Klopfer’s educational objective categories. Klopfer’s educational objectives are divided into nine major categories and 48 sub­ categories. The nine major categories are: (1) knowledge and comprehension, (2) scien­ tific inquiry I: observing and measuring, (3) scientific inquiry II: seeking a problem and ways to solve it, (4) scientific inquiry III: interpreting data and generalization, (5) scien­ tific inquiry IV: theoretical model, (0) application in science and outside of science, (7) manual skills in laboratory, (8) attitudes and interests in science and science-related ^Klopfer, “Evaluation of Learning in Science ” 18 careers, and (0) relationship to other areas of knowledge. The fundamental concepts objective in Chemistry I and II is similar to Klopfer’s knowledge and comprehension objectives. The inquiry ability objective in Chemistry I and II corresponds to Klopfer’s scientific inquiry I, II, III, and IV objectives. Changeabil­ ity of chemical concepts objectives in Chemistry I and II correspond to Klopfer’s orienta* tion objectives. Relationship with the human culture in Chemistry I also corresponds to Klopfer’s orientation objectives. Attitudes of the continuous chemistry study objective in Chemistry II also correspond to Klopfer’s attitudes and interests objectives. Among Klopfer’s major objective categories, the application and the manual skills objectives are not mentioned in Chemistry I and II in Korean high schools. The objectives of Chemis­ try I and II are specified in as much as detail in Klopfer’s objective categories. However, Chemistry I and II include most of Klopfer’s objective categories. Chemistry I includes two objectives, which correspond to Klopfer’s orientation objectives. They are the changeability of chemistry concepts and the relationship with the human culture objectives. Chemistry II includes two objectives, which are mapped to Klopfer’s attitudes and interest objectives, the scientific life attitude and the attitude of continuous study objectives. Chemistry I emphasizes the orientation objective and Chemistry II emphasizes the attitudes and interest objectives. The objectives of Chemis­ try I and II are recommended by the Korean Ministry of Education. The actual objec­ tives in the classroom may be different from the recommended objectives. Actual Korean chemistry teaching objectives will be studied in the future. Each school may have different educational background. Educational objectives may be pursued dif­ ferently in each chemistry classroom even though the same educational objectives are recommended by the Korean Ministry of Education. 19 High School Chem istry T opics The topics of Chemistry I and II, suggested by the Korean Ministry of Education, are analyzed by Klopfer’s chemistry topic categories. Klopfer’s chemistry topic categories are specified into the following ten categories: 2.11 chemical materials, 2.12 classification of chemical elements, 2.13 chemical change, 2.14 chemical laws, 2.15 energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems, 2.10 electrochemistry, 2,17 atomic and molecular structure, 2.18 introductory organic chemistry, 2.19 chemistry of life processes, and 2.10 nuclear chemistiy. Chemistry I has four parts: (1) chemistry-science of matter, (2) regularity of material world, (3) chemical bond and structure, and (4) chemical reaction. Chemistry I emphasizes the atomic and molecular structure, the energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems, and the chemical laws in Klopfer’s topic categories. It does not include introductory organic chemistry, chemistiy of life processes, or nuclear chemistry. Chemistry II has nine parts: (1) gas, liquid, and solid, (2) characteristics of solution, (3) modern models of atomic structure, (4) bonding and structure, (5) carbon compound and polymer, (6) thermochemistry, (7) reaction rate, (8) electrochemistry, and (9) transition elements and complex ions. Chemistry II emphasizes the energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems, electrochemistry, introductory organic chemistry topic categories, but it does not include classification of chemical elements, chemistry of life processes, and nuclear chemistry topic categories. Three evaluation areas are suggested by the Ministry of Education: understanding fundamental knowledge, improvement of scientific inquiry, and development of scientific attitudes. The Ministry of Education also suggests the various application of evaluation methods, such as pencil and paper examination, conversation, experiment, observation, 20 report, and opinion study. The Korean educational background was described in terms of educational system, science courses—especially chemistry, and financial supports and facilities. The Korean education system needs greater financial support to allow high school students to attend colleges and job training centers, and to gain employment. As shown in Table 2, in Korea, science track students in academic high schools take eight to 10 units of chemis­ try, which amounts to 144-180 class periods. Chemistry is compulsory course for all of academic high school students, so social-human science track students can learn chemis­ try at least 72 class periods of during the high school years. In Michigan, chemistry is an elective course, and some students take no chemistry courses in high school. Some Michigan high school students take one year of chemistry courses—180 hours, and some take two years of chemistry courses— 360 hours. In Korean high schools, science track students in academic high schools (144-180 class periods) have fewer classes than stu­ dents in some Michigan high schools (360 hours). 1.2. Statem ent o f the Problem The aim of this study is to develop and implement a curriculum comparison metho­ dology. The validity of comparison data depends on methods of collecting data. In this study, comparison data will be collected by field study in chemistry classroom, and from school personnel. Actual curricula may be different from the written curriculum materi­ als because of the differences in individual classroom background, such as teacher’s and student’s background and school environment.21 Spencer, “The Future of School Chemistiy," Education in Chemiatrg, vol. 5, no. 8, (November 1078) pp. 100*101; R.G. Barker and P.V. Gump, Big School, Small School-High School Site and Student Behavior, (Stanford University Press, 1072). 21 Table 2. Chemistry Class Periods in High Schools - Courses Schools Social-Human Science Track in Academic High Schools, Korea Science Track in Academic High schools, Korea Vocational High Schools, Korea Some High Sehools, in Michigan, U.S.A. Some High schools, in Michigan, U.SA Chemistrr I Compulsory Class oeriods or elective Chemistry II Class Compulsory periods or elective Total Class periods 72*108 compulsory 0 72*108 compulsory 72 eomplusory 144*180 72*108 elective 72 elective 0-180 180 elective 180 elective 0*380 180 elective 0 72*108 0*180 22 There are many chemistry topics, and there are many teaching methods, such as lecture, lecture-demonstration, student experiment, essay writing, field trips,33 discussions, and film-slide showing. Among the wide range of topics and teaching methods, chemistry teachers select those within their particular circumstances, and this process of selection is influenced by their preferences, by students’ future plans, and by the school’s financial support. For curriculum comparison, both the examination of teaching plans and classroom observation would most likely provide data which is closer to actual curri­ culum than would other sources of data. For purposes of curriculum comparison, educational objectives of chemistry teach­ ing, chemistiy topics, and teaching methods have been researched (objectives: Roadranka23 and Wood;24 and teaching method: Heikkinen25 and Vanek28). Most researchers used standardized or nonstandardized tests to evaluate students’ achieve­ ment, attitudes, and skills. Some researchers have studied just one aspect of curriculum, such as the textbook, or only the teaching methods, or a particular skill or attitude. Curriculum comparison should be performed taking many variables into account and through direct classroom observation. A curriculum comparison methodology based on field study and including teaching plans will be applied to chemistry curricula of two Michigan suburban high schools. "M. Binns, “Chemistry for Life: A Mode m Course," Education in Che mil try, vol. 15, no. 5, (Sep­ tember 1978) p. 143 and 145 *V. Roadranka, A Content Analyiii of Teaat and Thai High School Biology Textbooki, (Ph. D. disser­ tation, North Texas State University, 1981). "C.G. Wood, An Examination of the Interrelationihipi between Societal Faeton and the Development of the High School Chemiitry Curriculum Form 1850 to 1989, (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maine at Orono, 1976), pp. 78-90 "Heikkinen, Student Attitude! "Vanek, ESS and a Textbook Approach 23 1.3. Purposes o f the Study This study has four purposes: (1) to describe educational environment of two high schools in terms of communities, schools, teachers, students, and science courses, finan­ cial support, and facilities, (2) to analyze chemistry classes through observation and stu­ dent evaluation methods in terms of educational objectives such as knowledge and comprehension, scientific inquiry skills, application, manual skills, scientific attitude, and orientation in the two high schools, (3) to analyze chemistry topics and teaching methods shown in one-year teaching plans, and (4) analysis of student interest shown in chemistry classes. This study proposes developing a curriculum evaluation methodology, which may be used in Korea. This dissertation includes a literature review of objective research, teaching method research, and curriculum comparison methodology research in Chapter 2; methodology of the study in Chapter 3; description of educational environment of the two schools in Chapter 4; data analysis of educational objectives, chemistry topics, teaching methods, and student interest in Chapter 5; summary, conclusion, and further research plans in Chapter 0; Appendices; and References. CHAPTER 2 L iteratu re R eview A literature review concerns recent studies of educational objectives, teaching methods, and curriculum evaluation methodology. 2.1. Studies o f Educational Objectives Educational objectives are studied quantitatively by three researchers, Roadranka, Ogden, and Wood. Roadranka used Klopfer’s categories to analyze five Texas high school biology texts and one Thai high school biology text.1 In that study, the author analyzed the portions of knowledge and comprehension, application, scientific inquiry skills, orientation, scientific attitudes, and manual skills presented in the texts. She said that scientific attitudes could be analyzed by using student questionnaires. However, this study will use observation methods to locate a portion of scientific attitudes, as well as the other objectives, more realistically. The on-site observation is nearer to what happens in science instruction. Such results are expected to be more valid for the assess­ ment of chemistry instruction. *V. Roadranka, Content Anatgeie of Biology Testbooke. 24 25 Roadranka’s research showed 74 percent to 88 percent of contents of textbooks focns on cognitive objectives, 10 percent to 20 percent on inquiry skills objectives, two percent to five percent on manual skills objectives, and .5 percent to one percent on orientation objectives. She studied common topics covered in six texts for reference, such as structure of programs, and recorded the frequency of a certain objective shown in a topic. She found that cognitive objectives took high priority. However, these results will be different from the results of observation methods which will be used in this study. Roadranka chose just textbooks from among the various curriculum materi­ als. Even though textbooks have been the most basic curriculum materials for selecting the contents of courses until now, the same contents can be taught with emphases on different objectives. Ogden2 studied objectives of secondary school chemistry teaching by searching pro­ fessional periodicals of the 1918-1972 period. He categorized objective statements into four such as; knowledge, process, attitudes ft interest, or cultural awareness. The categories were further divided into 18 sublevels. He also historically divided the 19181972 period into 0 sublevels. In the sixth subperiod, 1903-1972, objectives of secondary school chemistry teaching were found such as; the knowledge category, 41.3 percent; the process category, 13.7 percent; the attitude and interest category, 24.1 percent; and the cultural awareness category, 20.6 pereent. Wood also analyzed objectives collected from various articles published from 1918 to 1933. Knowledge objectives comprised 40 percent; process objectives, 20 percent; atti­ tudes and interests objectives, 25 percent; cultural awareness objectives, 15 percent.3 “W.R. Ogden, “Secondary School Chemistry Teaching, 1018-1072: Objectives as Stated in Periodical Literature,” Journal of Rcoturek in Science Touching, voL 12, no. 3 (107S), pp. 235-248 *C.G. Wood, High School Chemietrg Curriculum, p. 00 26 Wood’s knowledge objectives included study skills and the application of chemistry to daily life, respectively, which belong to inquiry skills, and application objectives in Klopfer’s objective categories. Wood’s process objectives included the scientific method of thinking and the requisite skills needed to think analytically. His attitudes and interests objectives included an appreciation for science, an interest in scientific subjects, and career development in chemistry. Cultural awareness objectives dealt with esthetic, philosophical; and sociological aspects of chemistry. Klopfer analyzed objectives in more detail. The two researchers’ objectives are differently classified, so the portion of objec­ tives can not be compared each other, but Klopfer’s orientation objectives are similar to Wood’s cultural awareness objectives. In Roadranka’s study, orientation objectives are .5 percent to one percent, which is much smaller than that in Wood’s study, IS pereent. This study will use Klopfer’s objective categories for analysis of educational objectives shown in chemistry classrooms and in student evaluation methods. 2.2. Studies o f Teaching M ethods Certain teaching methods are believed to be more effective for some students than others. Student achievement and interest were studied with respect to different teaching methods. Student-centered classes seem to produce higher achievement and higher interest than CHEM Study or teacher-centered classes, but no significant difference in critical thinking ability has been observed (Heikkinen),4 and there are several studies on the effectiveness of gaining certain skills in different programs. Most of them used standardized tests or self-developed tests to assess these differences. Vanek studied the Elementary Science Study (ESS) as an activity-based curriculum and the Laidlaw Science Series as a textbook approach in the aspects of classificatory heikkinen, Student Attitude t 27 skills, science achievement, and attitude. In order to assess the results, he used the Sci­ ence Attitude Seale (Ralph), the Piagetian Classification Task, and the Science Test of the Stanford Achievement Primary Battery III for pre- and post-tests. He found that students in the ESS program liked science classes and scientists more than students using the textbook approach; teachers also liked the ESS program (activity-based curri­ culum) more than the textbook approach.5 Wood researched students’ preferences for different teaching methods. In his research of New York student ratings with regard to various methods, students rated methods where they “gained greatest understanding”. They were as follows: Iecturedemonstration (33 percent), textbook method (22.0 percent), individual lab (10.8 per­ cent), problem method (15.9 percent), and combination (11.7 percent).* One-third of the students indicated that the leeture-demonstration method was the best method for gain­ ing greatest understanding. Their ratings for “gained greatest enjoyment” were: indivi­ dual lab (44.4 percent), leeture-demonstration (20.2 percent), combination (15.2 percent), problem method (8.5 percent), and textbook method (5.7 percent).7 Almost half of the students answered that “individual lab” was the best method to use for gaining the greatest enjoyment. These results agree with other research. Vanek(1974) found that students and teachers liked more activity-based programs than a textbook approach. Heikkinen (1973) found that student-centered classes generated higher interest among students than teacher-centered classes. None of this research showed the reasons for students, preference for activity-based classes. In the present study, instruction will be analyzed ®Vanek, ESS end a Tcztbook Approach ®Wood, High School Chemiit ry Curriculum, p. 110 ’Ibid, p. 110 28 in terms of proportion of educational objectives and stndent interest. The student interest data will be collected by classroom observations and interviews with both stu­ dents and teachers Various teaching methods are classified. Slavison and Speer* classified teaching methods into 18 kinds, such as lecture method, socratic method, library, objeet-study, picture, observation, lecture- demonstration, individual lab,, problem, Dalton plan, unit, historical biographical, eoncentrie, heuristic, project, coordinated plan, integrative plan, club plan, trips and excursions, exhibits, and seareb-discovery. Wood divided teaching methods into leeture-demonstration, individual lab, text­ book method, problem method, and combination.* Downing classified teaching methods as lecture, question and answer, book method, text, assignment, recitation method, observation, experimental, leeture-demonstration, individual laboratory, problem method, project method, contract method, supervised study, and historical method. These three different kinds of classifications of teaching methods include leeturedemonstration, individual laboratory and problem method.10 Downing, Slavison, and Speer dealt differently with observation and individual lab work. Wood used a questionnaire method to study students' opinions of teaching methods. This study will apply different criteria to analyze student interest. The cri­ teria will be classified into negative, neutral, and positive. If students talk with others about nonsubject-related topics, and do not pay attention to their work, student interest will be judged to be negative. If students do their work eagerly and joyfully, then their attitudes will be judged to be positive. Intermediate judgments between negative and T bid ., p. 129 % id ., p. 119. “Ibid, pp. 128-189 29 positive will be judged to be neutral. 2.3. Studies o f Curriculum Evaluation M ethodology Many standardized tests are used for evaluation of student learning in cuiTieulum comparison studies. There are achievement tests, attitude tests, classification skill tests, and inquiry skill tests, among others. But the classroom observation method is also used frequently to evaluate curriculum. Achievement tests which have been used include the Science Test of the Stanford, the Achievement Primary Battery HI,11 the Test on Understanding Science, Form W (TOUS)12 the ACS-NSTA Cooperative Chemistry Exam, 1965, 1971 ,IS the Anderson* Fisk Chemistry Test, I960,14 the Testing of Science Knowledge, Part II,15 the Coopera­ tive Science Tests, Form A and B,1* and the BSCS processes of Science Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, and Analysis.17 Many attitude tests have been used, such as the Science Attitude Scale (Ralph),12 the Student Opinion Survey in Chemistry (SOSC),19 the Scientific Attitude Inventory (Davies and Dovinns), the Academic Interest Measure (Dempsey), the Learning Environment Inventory (Dempsey), and the Projective Tests of Attitudes (P.T.O.A.)-Lawrence, Lowery (Helenmarie). The Piagetian Classifica­ tion Tasks (Vanek), Comprehension (Hall), and a modification of Science Inquiry “ Vanek, ESS and a Teatbooh Approach. Dempsey, Enrollmenti in Ckemiitrg; Heikkinen, yteienr Attitudei. “J.S. Back Jr., A Companion of the Effeeto of on Inguiryinieitigatiie and a traditional Laboratory Program in High School Chemietrg on Studento' Attitudee, Cognitioo Abilitiea and Deoelopmcntal Lticlt, (Ph. D. dissertation, West Verginia University, 1970); RJL Cell, A Companion of Indieidualittd and Tradi­ tional Mctkoda for Teaching High School Ckemietrj, (PhJ>. dissertation, Arizona State University, 1974) '^R.L. Call, A-Comparioon of Individualized and Traditional Metkoda '•Davits, Elaetioe and Non-electiee Scianea Curricula “Ibid. “Bock, High School Ckemiatrg. “ Vanek, ESS and a Teatbooh Approach. “Heikkinen, Student Attitude a. 30 Assessment Instrument (Hartford) have also been used for evaluation. As a nonpaper-pencil type of evaluation, field study has been used often in educa­ tional research.30 When using frequency counting in the field study, it is easy to omit description of detaib. The field study method b useful for studying problems which are difficult to quantify for testing.31 Cusiek said that the individual teacher's personal field b an important element in the construction of curricula. For several examples of person­ alized curricula there were war games in social studies classes, computer programming in mathematics classes, and music opera in Englbh classes. Hollen developed observation modes23 in science instruction. Brophy developed a table assessing student-teaeher rela­ tions.23 Hollen developed classroom observation form, task description form, and lesson summary form. These consisted of coded and narrative records. These forms are very descriptive, and are analytically coded. These forms show materiab used, class format (12 kinds: demonstration by teacher, student presentation, and so on), student task description, noise level, teacher location, teacher activity, and student activity on coded forms. Science tasks are also coded.24 These forms are too detailed to be used appropri­ ately for comparison studies. The frequency of a certain code will become smaller because of the detail of the code, which makes it hard to compare one with another. ®H. Munsoa, “ An American Observations on Science Education in the Federal Republic of Germany," Science Education, voL 80, no. 2, ( April-June 1978) pp. 283-288; D. Smetherham, "Curriculum Innovation: Another View,* COREColtocUd Original Reiourctt in Education, voL 1, no. 3, (October 1977) pp. 31603198. **D.A. Payne, Tkt Assessment of Lteming-Cognitiet and Affeetiee, (D.CJBeath and Company, 1974). ®R. Hollen et aL, A Syetem for Obttrring and Analysing Elementary School Scitnet Teaching: A Ueer’e Manual, (Institute for Reeearch on Teaching, Michigan State University, 1980) Research Series no. 90. a J. Brophy et aL, Relationokipa betueen Teacher'e Presentations of Claeoroom Taokt and Studento' Engagement in Thoee Tatke, (Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, 1982) Research Series no. 116. P ollen, A Syetem for Obeereing and Analyzing, p. 34. 31 Anang and Lanier studied the influence of social organization in the classroom on teaching by using field study for one year. They visited ninth-grade classrooms once or twice a week. They observed mathematics and social studies classes taught by different teachers. The researchers used field notes and informal and formal interviews with stu­ dents and teachers. A mathematics teacher introduced new concepts and explained problems for 10 to 20 minutes, and let students work their worksheets or workbooks independently for the last 30 minutes. In almost every class during this independent period, the teacher talked about the problems with individual students. In the mean­ time, the social studies teacher tried to lead the class in every class event: questioning, answering, and writing. Researchers interviewed the teachers and students who partici­ pated in both of the classes. They found that students liked the mathematics class better, and felt they learned something in that class.25 Students remembered the social studies teacher’s scolding of other students for making noise, and many concepts and facts in the various social stu­ dies area were without connection to earlier learning. In the math class including indivi­ dual work period, students felt stable and could take close concern of the teacher. The research showed that social organizations in the classroom, such as the whole group reci­ tation or individual work groups, interacted with the teaching of subject matter. Close concern of the teacher can be interpreted differently in terms of educational objectives. The math teacher may explain problems with inquiry skills, orientation, or application educational objectives. He probably did not just give students factual knowledge. Teachers’ individual teaching needs to be analyzed in terms of educational objectives to determine effectiveness. 21A. Anang and P. Lanier, Whtrt ia the Subject matter t: Hart the Social Organization of the data■ room Affeeta Teaching, (Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, 1082) Research Series no. 114.” 32 Anang and Lanier found one of the math teacher’s class goals was application of math to the real world. When students learn applications of subject matter, they feel stable and interested. Klopfer’s specifications for science education include application of scientific knowledge and methods into application to new problems in the same field of science, to new problems in different fields of science, and to problems outside of sci­ ence (including technology). Application of subject matter to the real world involves application to problems outside of science. How much we should teach application, which is related to and useful in the real world, is a controversy.28 Before 19S7, science textbooks included many kinds of application to the real world (everyday life). Teaching applications can be achieved by mentioning examples of application27 and letting stu­ dents search subject matter- related magazine articles with corresponding discussion. Generally, students’ positive attitudes toward learning in school decreases as grade level increases. If students learn that which is interesting to them, they are motivated and do not become bored. Intrinsically, students try to be useful and want to receive praise from their teachers, parents and friends. Choosing topics28 is another crucial fac­ tor in the quest to teach interestingly; teaching methods and students' interest are closely related. Some comparative research on laboratory and recitation teaching showed that laboratory teaching was more effective in increasing students’ interest in chemistry. *W. Worthy, “Education: Applied Chemistry Getting Bigger Role," C h e m ic a l E n g in e e r in g N e v a , voL 80, no. 35, (August, 1082) pp. 25-27. ®P.J. Gaskeli, “Science Education for Citizens: for Perspectives and Issues, L Science, Technology and Society: Issues for Science Teachers,” Stndiee in Science Education, vol. 0, (1082) pp. 33*48; U. Zoiler, “Smoking and Cigarette Smoke: An Innovative, Interdisciplinary, Chemically-oriented Curriculum,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 58, no. 8, (August 1070) pp. 518-510 ®New York State Education Department, Albany, Bureau of Secondary Curriculum Department, Chemiotrg, A Syllahuc for Secondary Sekoolc, (1070). 33 Cusick researched the effects of professional staff networks on curriculum by using participant observation29 and interview in two comprehensive secondary schools. There were two kinds of network: support systems for teacher’s activity and informal interac­ tions for personal pleasure. One school had strong network, and another school, a weaker one, because there was no lunch hour and school closed early. Teachers working for the yearbook and the newspaper In the strong network school, established networks supporting their jobs. A science teacher who was a newcomer in the strong network school, liked to teach physical science, and organized four physical science classes and one chemistry class. The strong network school had had one chemistry class, one physi­ cal science class, and one ninth-grade science class. For a while he tried to persuade the principal and to make a new network, and created more physical science classes. This teacher thus changed the science curriculum of the school. Brophy studied relationships between teachers' statements in the process of presenting classroom tasks and students’ engagement in those tasks. They coded 18 categories of teachers’ presentation statements and counted the frequencies of each hap­ pening. Students’ engagements after these teachers’ presentation statements were coded as positive, neutral, and negative. Teachers’ extrinsic reward, recognition, self- actualization value, survival value, and personal reference statements received positive students’ engagement. Self-fulfilling prophecy effects occurred in accordance with teacher expectations. Similarly, giving obvious objectives to students may have effects on the achievement of those objectives. ® PA Cusick, A Study of Network* among profeitionol Staff* in Secondary Schooit, (Institute for research on Teaching, Michigan state University, 1082) Research Series no. 112. 34 2.4. Summary In Chapter 2, the recent studies of educational objectives, teaching methods, and curriculum evaluation methodology are reviewed. The educational objectives were stu­ died quantitatively by two researchers. Klopfer’s specification was used for the evalua­ tion of high school biology textbooks by Roadranka. Over 70 percent of contents of textbooks concentrate strongly on cognitive objectives. Student-centered classes, such as experiment classes, show higher student interest than teacher-centered classes, such as lecture classes. As curriculum evaluation methods, paper-peneil types of methods are used usually, but the classroom observation method is used frequently. Field study is also based on classroom observation method. CHAPTER 3 M eth o d o lo g y o f D a ta C ollection a n d D a ta A n a ly sis P ro ced u res Most of the data for this paper were collected via classroom observations in two Michigan high schools. In addition, this study used several other data collection methods: tape recording, photographing, interviewing, and surveying. The data col* i lected to answer several research questions have been analyzed using qualitative and quantitative methods. However, educational environment of selected schools is described primarily using qualitative methods. In this study, classroom indicates lecture room and/or laboratory for chemistry teaching. The term “program” refers to two chemistry courses in School S and one chemistry course in School D. This chapter includes: • • • • • Research questions Selection of schools Preparation of categories and data collection forms Data collection activities performed Data analysis procedures 3.1. Research Questions This study tried to develop a curriculum comparison methodology, and at the same time, to get a picture of Michigan high school chemistry curricula. Class observation 35 36 and surreys of teacher planning were most often used to collect data. Specifically, four research questions are proposed. The first question is concerned with the educational environment of the schools selected for study. The environment was described and analyzed, which was performed with respect to such aspects as school and community characteristics, student and chem­ istry teacher backgrounds, science courses, financial support, and facilities. The second research question is concerned with educational objectives. The actual curricula practices observed in Schools S and D were analyzed using Klopfer’s student behavior categories, which are shown in Appendix A, and which are considered as educa­ tional objectives in this study. Educational objectives were examined as they were mani­ fested in high school chemistry instruction and in student evaluation methods used in the selected schools. The third research question is concerned with topics and teaching methods. The topics selected for teaching and methods employed by Teacher S and Teacher D are analyzed using Klopfer’s content categories (shown in Appendix B), which are considered as topic categories, and teaching method categories (shown in Appendix C). The propor­ tion of teaching methods shown in one-year teaching plans was analyzed in each oneyear chemistry program. Topics shown in one-year teaching plans were analyzed quan­ titatively and qualitatively. The fourth research question is concerned with student interest as displayed in stu­ dent behavior and student comment in response to each educational objective and each teaching method. Analysis of student interest employed classroom observation data and student interview data. 37 3.2. Selection o f School* For the various reasons, the selection of school presented some difficulties. Two high schools in Michigan were selected for study, using particular criteria for selection. 3.2.1. C riteria used in Selection o f School* Some schools offered chemistry classes every other year, and did not offer chemistry classes in the 1083-1084 school year. Some schools had no well-qualified chemistry teachers, and some school districts were not willing to participate in this kind of research. Therefore, two schools were selected using the following criteria: • Willingness on the part of the schools participate in this research project and to allow access to chemistry classes • Comparable educational background of teachers and students, such th a t the teacher would both be (a) professionally well-qualified, (b) experienced in the classroom; and th a t the students would come from small, stable communities situated close to centers of communication, higher education, and scientific endeavor. 3.2.2. N egotiation with Principals, Chem istry T eachers, and School District* Permission to observe classes was granted by different authorities from one school to another. Six Michigan high schools were contacted; finally, two schools gave permis­ sion, and four schools refused to participate. Principals in Schools S and D, located in towns S and D, respectively, were contacted by telephone. The principal in School D gave permission to observe chemistry classes after consulting with the chemistry teacher. The principal in School S gave the researcher permission to talk with the chemistry teacher by telephone, saying th a t permission for classroom observation depended on the 38 approval of classroom teachers. The chemistry teacher in School S gave permission wil­ lingly. Two other city school districts were contacted by submitting application forms which indicated research goals and methodology, and attendance at a research review committee of one school district. Both schools, however, denied permission for this study to be performed in their school districts. The reason for one school district’s denial was th a t the school district planned to perform an overall academic achievement evaluation during the early spring semester and they did not want to generate further noncurricula disturbance to students and teachers. The reason the other school district gave denial was th a t this study asked too many research questions. These school dis­ tricts were located in university towns, and they regularly have visitors and observers, so they have research review committees to screen and to limit research in their school dis­ tricts. In yet another ease, a contact letter (Appendix D) was sent to a high school which sent back a denial letter. The reason for denial was th a t the school planned to have a substitute teacher for chemistry classes during the planned data collection period. One school principal was contacted by telephone and visited, but it did not offer chemistry classes in the 1083-1984 school year. The school offers chemistry classes and physics classes alternatively every year. The principal said th a t chemistry classes would be offered in the next school year and could then be observed for the research; however, this was not possible in view of this project’s time schedule. 39 3.2.3. Selection o f A ppropriate Schools Six schools in all were contacted before two schools (School S and School D) were found which would permit the study and met the criteria for selection. These schools satisfied all the criteria for selection. T hat is, both schools offered chemistry classes in the 1983*1984 school year. The chemistry curricula of the two schools were comparable with curricula of other schools in terms of subject m atter content, teacher qualification, and adequacy of facilities. Both schools agreed to allow this study, and teachers in both schools cooperated fully in the project. 3.3. Preparation o f C ategories and D a ta Collection Form s Klopfer’s educational objective categories and topic categories were used. Class information forms and field note forms were developed as well. 3.3.1. E ducational O bjectives Klopfer’s educational objectives (student behaviors) categories1 were used in this study; they are recognised as a comprehensive classification of educational objectives (Appendix A). The categories have nine major categories and 48 subcategories. The major categories include four categories of scientific inquiry skills which are defined as actual activities performed by students themselves. They also include 11 subcategories in knowledge and comprehension objectives. Historical and philosophical aspects are included in orientation objectives. Career concerns which are emphasized in the recent science teaching, are also included in attitudes and interests objectives. Klopfer’s categories have been used by other researchers.2 ^lopfer, “ Education of learning in Science.” *Ibid; Roadranka, Content Anaiyiio of Biology Tcitbooki; B.J. Fraoer, “Use of Content Analysis in Ex­ amining Changes in Science Education Aims over Time,” Seienee Education, vol. 62, no. 2, (1078), pp. 135141. 40 3.3.2. T opics and T eaching M ethods Klopfer’s content categories3 were also used in this study. Chemistry content categories and general content categories (Appendix B) were used specifically; the former categories have been coded as 2.11 through 2.110 and the latter categories, as 3.1 through 3.5. Topics shown in popular chemistry textbooks are included satisfactorily in Klopfer’s content categories. Teaching method categories were developed from Wood’s categories and Slavison’s and Speer’s categories.4 The categories used in this study included nine different teach* ing methods (Appendix C), which are numbered as 1 through 0. Teaching Method 2, demonstration, included teacher demonstration and student demonstration. Teaching Method 5, discussion, is defined as student-student conversation with chemistry prob­ lems in chemistry classes. Teacher-student conversation, including a question-answer process, is assigned to the Soeratic method, Teaching Method 8. 3.3.3. Student Interest Student interest is categorized by student interest phenomena, and data of student interest is collected by classroom observation. Student interest is graded positive, neu­ tral, and negative. Student interest points are assigned, positive, +1; neutral, 0; and negative, -1. Continuous variables such as interest are hard to categorize, so representa­ tive positive and negative interest phenomena are described. All other student interest classroom phenomena which could not clearly be scored as positive or negative are regarded as neutral interest. %lopfer, “Evaluation of Learning in Science." *Wood, High Sehooi Cktmittrg Carricafam. 41 Positive interest phenomena inelnde: • Students ask questions 'within a given five-minute observation period in leetureroom sessions • Over 00 percent of students watch, listen to teacher, write, and are quiet in lecture class period • Over 50 percent of students express their surprise at new information in experiment or lecture class periods Negative phenomena include: • Over 60 percent of students do not look at teacher, and do not write notes during lecture session • Over 60 percent of students talk about non-class-related topics 3.3.4. Preparation o f D a ta Collection Form s Three kinds of data collection forms were used in this study: class information form, field note form, and interview questionaires. Class information forms (Appendix E) were made for indication of general class information such as school, teacher, number of students, topics, and teaching methods. The forms were used to give information of educational background, and general information of a chemistry classroom such as topics and teaching methods. This information could be used for comparison of chemistry cur* ricula with curricula in different educational backgrounds. Field note forms (Appendix F) were developed including some variables such as time, educational objectives, student interest, student and teacher behavior, and instruc­ tional contents. The forms were used for analysis of educational objective and student 42 interest. Interview questionaires (Appendix G) were developed to get information of teachers’ and students’ opinion about student interest as related to different teaching methods. The interview questions are about students’ preference of experiment class to lecture class, preference of lecture class to demonstration class, and the reasons of the prefer­ ence. The questionaire includes a question about teachers’ opinion of financial support. 3.4. D a ta Collection A ctivities Perform ed Data were collected from 40 high school chemistry class periods, from December 1983 through March 1984, observing classes, taking photographs, drawing maps, tape recording, interviewing, and surveying. 3.4.1. Selection o f Chem istry Classes In this study, the two one-year chemistry programs were selected for observation in School S and only a one-year chemistry program in School D was observed. School S has two one-year chemistry programs and a one-semester chemistry program. The onesemester chemistry program is offered for twelfth-grade students who already have taken a one-year chemistry program. The semester chemistry program is organic chemistry. The teaching methods are the soeratie method and student experiment. Only a few stu­ dents take this and some of them work as lab assistants. This advanced class was not observed for this study. One of the one-year chemistry programs at School S is the reg­ ular chemistry program. The chemistry teacher at School S teaches four regular chemis­ try class periods a day. The first class meets from 8:00 a.m to 8:50 a.m. The second class meets from 11:40 a.m to 12:30 a.m. The third class meets from 12:40 a.m to 1:30 p.m and the fourth class, from 1:40 p.m to 2:30 p.m. All class periods have the same 43 teacher and the same chemistry curriculum. First class had 22 students and the other classes had 28-30 students. On the assumption th a t the four chemistry classes are simi­ lar, one of them was selected randomly on any given day for observation from December through March. Thus, fourteen regular chemistry class periods were selected in School S, the same number as in School D. Another one-year chemistry program is advanced placement chemistry, designed to expose students to college chemistry and to prepare them for the chemistry placement examination th a t some college-bound students take to satisfy college admission requirements. This program has been taught for only one class period a day, 10:05-10:55 a.m. This class was also observed from December through March. Twelve advanced placement chemistry class periods were selected for observa­ tion in School S. School D has only one regular one-year chemistry program. This program was observed in School D without selection. The chemistry teacher at School D teaches three classes a day. The first class is from 11:10 a.m to 12:00 a.m. The second class is from 12:10 a.m to 1:00 p.m. The third class is from 1:50 p.m to 2:40 p.m. All the classes have the same teacher and the same chemistry curriculum. Fourteen of these regular chemistry class periods were observed in School D. A random selection among the three classes a day was made for each of the fourteen days randomly selected from December through March. Hence, a total of 40 class sessions were used for observation in this study. Finally, two programs in School S and one program in School D were selected and observed. 44 3.4.2. D a ta Collection Period Data collection was done for 20 days (60 hours) in School S and 18 days (40 hours) in School D. The data collection period included 40 classroom observations, as shown in Table 3, a two-day science fair visit, and several visits without classroom observation. Data were mainly collected from December through March. There was classroom obser­ vation for five days in December, seven days in February, and three days in March at School S. on each day, three to four hours were spent at School S. Nine days in December, four days in February, and one day in March were spent a t School D. Two to three hours were spent in School D. Each day, the field notes were taken in all 40 class observations. Tape recordings were made in 22 class sessions. The visits corresponded to weather conditions. The data collection period was car­ ried on in the winter of 1984. During the data collection period, schools were closed occasionally for several days. School S closed more than School D. Although the two schools are located within 30 minutes driving distance of each other, the weather condi­ tions differed. School personnel were of differing opinions about the safety of road con­ dition for driving school buses, so the two schools did not close on the same snow days. 3.4.3. O bservation o f Chem istry Classes Both lecture room and laboratory classes were observed for a total of 40 class periods. In each class period three to four field note forms and a class information form were filled out. During classroom observation, recordings of educational objectives and of student interest were entered every five minutes. Students’ and teachers’ behaviors and teaching contents were also recorded. In the lecture room sessions, the observation locations were unchanged during observation. In School S, the observation location was in the middle of the farthest row 45 Table 3. Chemistry Classroom Observation Schedule School S, Regular Chemistry Field Tape Note Field Note Field Note Tape Tape Teaching Methode 12/2 7,8 12/S M 1.7.8 12/8 12/12 3.8 3.8 3.8 12/13 1.7.8 12/14 2.3.8 1.7.8 3,7,8 M 12/15 3.8 J21}9 3,8 12/20 3.8 2/13 1.2.8 2/14 1,7,8 2/15 2/18 3,8, 2/17 1.2.8 3,8 M 2/21 1,7,8 1.7.8 2/22 3.8 3,8 2/24 1.7.8 3.8 1,2,4,7 Total Daye *“AP chemistry” means “Advanced placement chemistry.” •* School D offered only a regular chemistry course. 3.8 46 from the teacher’s table. In the regular classes, students sat close beside the observer because of the large number of students. The observation locations were in the right corner and the middle of the back of the lecture room in School D. The chemistry teacher brought a table and a chair to th a t location for the observer. The location of observation made it easier to hear students’ words in the regular class of School S than in School D. In laboratory sessions the observation locations were changed during the classroom observation. The observer walked around the classroom to observe students’ behavior and words. 3.4.4. Audio-V isual R ecording o f Chemistry Classes Two kinds of recording were done such as audio tape recording and visual record­ ing. The visual recording was done by taking photographs and drawing maps. Eleven class photographs and 10 major facility photographs of chemistiyateaching were taken during the observation periods. Before taking photographs permission of the chemistry teachers was obtained. Some students did not care whether they were being photo­ graphed, but others indicated th a t they did not want to be photographed, and no pic­ tures were taken of these students. Maps of classrooms were drawn, including informa­ tion such as the location of facilities of classrooms. Over 1,000 minutes of chemistry class time were recorded by an audio tape recorder; twenty lecture class periods and two experiment class periods were recorded. Tape recording locations are indicated in the figures of Chapter 4. The tape recorder was located on the laboratory table, which was placed at the back of the chemistry classroom of School D. In the chemistry lecture room of School S, it was located at the center of the back row of chair-table-combinations. In the laboratory of School S, it was 47 located near a hood, which was placed at the back of the laboratory. 3.4.5. Interview s o f Personnel In th e T w o Schools The interviews were done with two chemistry teachers, six students in the three programs, a principal, and a counselor in the two schools. Both chemistry teachers were interviewed with questions abont student interest with respect to different teaching methods. The chemistry teacher of School 0 was asked several times about his educa­ tional background, science curriculum, chemistry curriculum, financial support, and facil­ ities. Before these informal interviews began, questions th a t would be asked were writ­ ten out and shown to the chemistry teacher; his answers were recorded. The chemistry teacher of School S preferred to answer questions in written form, so written questions about science curriculum and student interest with respect to different teaching methods were submitted and answered in written form a few days after asking. Information about the teacher’s educational background and about financial support for the school were asked and answered orally. Two students in the chemistry classes at School D, two students in the regular chemistry classes at School S, and two students in the advanced placement chemistry class at School S were selected randomly and interviewed with predeveloped interview questions. Each interview took five to 10 minutes and was scheduled before or after classes. The principal at School S, the secretary at School district D, and a counselor at School D were asked about student family jobs, student future plans, and financial sup­ port. The interviews gave useful information of educational background of teachers and students, and student interest in teaching methods. 48 3.4.6. Survey o f th e W ritten Material* The survey of written materials included the teaching plans of three programs and the evaluation materials used by teachers to evaluate students. Three sets of one-year teaching plans were copied from Schools S and D. They showed daily teaching topics and teaching methods during one school year. The 1083-1984 teaching plans at School D represented a complete set with the chemistry teacher's early planning of March through June, 1984. The 1982-1983 teaching plans for the regular and advanced placement chemistry programs of School S were obtained, but tbe March 28-May 13, 1983 plans were not available. The missing plans could nevertheless be compensated for by using the teacher’s estimated figures and students' notes. The teacher’s estimated figures con­ cerned number of periods of each teaching method that was supposed to have been spent for Chapters 18, 19 and 20 of the textbook, which were taught during the periods between March 16 through May 16. Students’ recorded lecture class notes and students’ notebooks, lab reports, textbook problems, and worksheets, all of which indicated the dates of instruction and completion. Over ten sets of tests, most of the worksheets used, and lab questions and textbook problems solved by students in each program were collected as evidence of evaluation methods in both schools. 3.5. P lan for Description o f Educational Background Educational background was described with regard to such aspects as community and school, teacher and student, science curricula, financial support, and facilities. The histories of schools, minimum credit requirements, and courses offered were described and tabulated for both schools. Populations of school districts, information concerning 49 schools, museums, science centers, and observatories in both communities were tabulated and described. The number of students in each grade, family jobs, and quantitative figures of college-bound students are described and tabulated in both communities. The two chemistry teachers’ backgrounds are described and tabulated in terms of sex, past teach­ ing experience, teaching experience in the present schools, educational background, teaching certification in chemistry, and preference for teaching jobs. Science curricula in both schools was tabulated in terms of course names, number of students in attendance, grade levels, and whether they were elective or compulsory courses. Chemistry curricula in both schools were described and tabulated in terms of course names, number of students in attendance, grade levels, whether they are elective or compulsory courses, names of textbook and laboratory manuals, and information for lab assistants and for science fairs. Financial support in both schools was analyzed in terms of annual support per stu­ dent for general and for chemistry teaching and revenue. Facilities in both schools were analyzed in terms of chemistry classroom size, equipment in lecture rooms and labora­ tories, exhibits on walls, and number of and sufficiency of chemicals and glasswares. Photographs and maps of classrooms were descriptively explained. Most analyses of facilities used descriptive methods. 3.6. D a ta A nalysis Procedures This section describes the procedures of analysis plan of educational objectives, topics, teaching methods, and student interests. 60 3.6.1. E ducational O bjectives Educational objectives were analyzed through classroom observation and the evaluation methods. From the audio tapes, two to three minute representative parts exemplifying various educational objectives were selected and transcripted. Some representative transcripts were analyzed in terms of their educational objectives. Forty class periods in both schools were analyzed in terms of educational objective subcategories. Among the various teaching methods, more than one teaching method was used in one class period. One class period is 50 minutes in School D and 55 minutes in School S. Nine to eleven five-minute periods were available for educational objectives and student interest assignment. During the class period, five to ten minutes were spent: (1) to move to another type of instruction, for example, from lecture class to stu­ dent experiment class; (2) to explain the tests; (3) to hand out and hand in worksheets or experimental reports; and (4) for chatting with other students or the teacher. However, in this study, if some part of the five minute-period, which included the above (1), (2), (3), or (4) was used for certain educational objectives, the period was con­ sidered to be spent on the certain educational objectives. The beginning of the class period was usually not assignable to any educational objective. At the end of some class periods, students in both schools who had already finished and whose tasks were given no more tasks to do, chatted with others. The regular chemistry class in School S had personal homework check cards for every student, which are sometimes checked at the beginning of class. Goodlad reported th at 76 percent of a class period is spent for instruction in the American high school.6 The last part of a class period is spent on behavioral disciplines, and so on. In this study, 82 percent to 90 percent of the class BJ.I. Goodlad, A Place eailed Sekaol, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1984. 51 period is considered to be spent for instruction. For educational objective analysis, the observed days were classified with respect to six groups of teaching methods, such as the lecture, problem solving and socratic method; the lecture and socratic method; the demonstration method; the student experi­ ment, discussion, socratic method; the film-slide showing method; and the field trip or guest speaker invitation method. The lecture, problem solving, and socratic method are grouped together because lec­ ture and problem solving methods are usually used in one class period. In one class period, the teacher of School S sometimes changed teaching method three or four times. The teacher in School S asked students to identify the procedural steps for solving prob­ lems by calling students’ names following their orders to sit down. Students asked ques­ tions frequently when they did not clearly understand and/or had specific questions. Sometimes when there were too many questions, the teacher of School S just ignored the questions and delivered the lecture. The teacher in School D gave lecture first and let students solve problems at the end of the period, but he did arrange some class periods just for problem solving. In the problem solving session, students solved problems, usually textbook problems, and the teacher walked around the classroom to answer questions, to give some clues to solu­ tions, and to encourage students in their work. Student experiment was grouped with discussion and socratic method because these methods appeared together in the class period. In experiment classes, students discussed matters frequently with the teacher and their laboratory partners or other groups of stu­ dents. Students asked questions about procedures or expected results. 62 Field trip and guest speaker classes were considered to be equal to class types. Field trip or guest speaker classes may bare the same affects on students because a guest speaker is invited from a specialised area, such as certain industrial areas or research areas. The frequency of educational objectives was counted and the percentages were tabulated and analyzed with respect to each teaching method in each program. Five sets of each evaluation method employed were randomly selected and the frequencies and percentages of educational objective subcategories were recorded. Evaluation methods used in both schools were tests, textbook problems, experiment questions, and worksheet questions. The percentage of educational objective subcategories was com­ pared in each evaluation method and in each program. 3.8.2. T opics and Teaching M ethods. Using Klopfer’s content categories, chemistry topics to be taught each day were classified. The percentage of each topic category was counted and described in each pro­ gram. The frequency and the percentage of each teaching method shown in yearly teacher p la n n ings were counted and tabulated in each program. And percentage for each method of teaching each topic category was tabulated with each program and analyzed. 3.6.3. Student Interest Student interest was analyzed with respect to different teaching methods and dif­ ferent educational objectives. The categories of teaching methods were the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method; the lecture and socratic method; the demonstra­ tion method; the student experiment, discussion and socratic method; the film-slide showing; and the field trip or guest speaker method. The analysis of educational 53 objectives was done in terms of Klopfer’s educational objective major categories. From the field notes, student interest points were counted by adding points, which were recorded for every five minutes of instruction during the classroom observation. First the point of student interest was counted from the field notes of each class period. Positive student interest was considered as 1 point; negative student interest, -1 point; and neutral student interest, 0 point. The points of student interest were classified with respect to six types of teaching methods. The points of student interest were added according to different types of teaching methods. The points of student interest were divided by the number of five-minute periods for each teaching method to obtain the percentage of student interest in each type of teaching method. The percentages of stu­ dent interest were tabulated, compared, and contrasted with respect to six types of teaching methods. The points of student interest were counted, according to each Klopfer’s educa­ tional objective major category. The percentages of student interest were calculated by dividing the student interest points by the number of five-minute periods. The percen­ tages of student interest were tabulated, compared, and contrasted with respect to edu­ cational objectives. The student interest points were classified according to teaching methods and educational objectives. The percentages of student interest were also cal­ culated by dividing student interest points by the number of five-minute periods. The percentages of student interest were tabulated according to nine major categories of edu­ cational objective in each type of teaching method. In each type of teaching method, stu­ dent interest was compared and contrasted with respect to educational objective major categories in the three programs. 54 The findings of interview with teachers and students regarding student interest were analyzed descriptively. Photographs of classes were described in terms of student interest. 3.7. Summary In Chapter 3, data collection methods and data analysis procedures are included. Two Michigan high schools were selected in order to analyze four research objectives: (1) a description of the educational background of the schools visited, (2) an analysis of the educational objectives, (3) an analysis of the topics and teaching and (4) an analysis of student interest. Two regular chemistry classes and one advanced placement chemistry class were observed for a total of 40 class periods and recorded for 20 class periods in order to analyze educational objectives and student interest. The one-year teaching plans were surveyed for the analysis of chemistry topics and teaching methods in the three programs. Data about the educational background of the two schools were col­ lected by interviews with school personnel and students, and surveys of written materials such as curriculum guides, which included information about communities, schools, teachers, students, and financial supports, and facilities. Educational objectives were analyzed by counting the frequency of each of Klopfer’s objective subeategories indicated in every five minute of classroom observation and shown in five sets of each evaluation method. The percentages of educational objec­ tives in classroom observation and the evaluation methods were tabulated with respect to six types of class periods. Chemistry topics and teaching methods were analyzed by counting the hours spent on each of Klopfer’s 15 topic categories and on each of his seven teaching methods. Student interest was analyzed by counting the student interest points (positive, +1; neutral, 0; and negative, -1) in each five minute period of classroom 55 observation 'with respect to the six types of class periods and each of Klopfer’s objective major categories. CHAPTER 4 E ducational E nvironm ent o f T w o Schools Studied This chapter includes a description of the educational environment in two Michigan high schools. The data concerning the educational environment of the two schools, including aspects of the background of the communities, schools, teachers, students, sci­ ence courses, financial support, and facilities, were described both qualitatively and quantitatively. 4.1. Com m unities and Schools The two schools studied were located in communities within 20 minutes driving dis­ tance from a big university city and within one hour driving distance from two big industrial cities. The big university had a well-known science museum. A town within 30 minutes driving, had a science observatory and Village D had its own museum. Near these two communities, various industries including automobile, vacuum cleaner, and pharmaceutical products are flourishing. The background of the two schools and com­ munities were tabulated in Table 4. Two high schools (Schools S and D) were located in small towns (City S and Village D), located near big cities and classified as rural subur­ ban towns. School S was established in 1874 as a result of people’s willingness to SB 57 Table 4. Communities and Schools Community S and School S Community D and School D School District population 17,000 (City S: 7,000) 10,000 (Village D: 1,400) Schools 3 elementary schools: K-4 grades, 652 students; K-4 grades, 508 students; S’S grades, 540 students 1 junior high school: 7>8grades, 540 students 1 high school: 0*12 grades, 1050 students 1 primary school: K-l grades, 278 students 1 elementary school: 2-4 grades, 447 students 1 middle school: 6-8grades, 871 students 1 high school: 0*12 grades, 750 students History of schools Established in 1874 Established in 1883 Minimum credits for graduation 21 English (3) Social Studies(3) Science (2) Math (1) Physical education (1) 22 Language arts (3) Social studies(3) Science (2) Math (1) Physical education (1) Consumer Economics (1/2) Transportation Less than 80 % of students are transported by school bus More than 80 % of students are transported by school bus 68 support a high school. School D was also established in 1883. Michigan had about 520 school districts1 serving Michigan’s eight million popula­ tion, of which 1.8 million were students in grades kindergarten through twelve.2 The two schools were administrated by the individual school districts. Both school districts included are near rural areas as well as the towns. The school district population of Vil­ lage D, which was 10,000, was less than th at of City S, which was 17,000. Both school districts included each of their elementary, junior high, and high schools. Both high schools required minimum credits for graduation in each subject: English (3), Social studies (3), Science (2), Math (1) and Physical education (1) in both schools, and Consumer economics (1/2) in School D. Total credits for graduation are 21 credits in School S and 22 credits in School D. In both schools, one credit was received by attending five days a week for one year. The two schools offered various courses in academic and vocational areas. School S offered the following courses: 28 courses in English Department, 10 courses in Math Department, 10 courses in Foreign Language Department, 27 courses in Science Department, 22 courses in Social Studies Department, 10 courses in Business Department, 17 courses in Art-physical Education Department, 0 courses in Music Department, 0 courses in Home Economics Department, 21 courses in Industrial Education Department, 10 courses in Special Programs, and 23 courses in Consortium classes. School D offered the following courses: 10 courses in English Department, 8 courses in Math Department, 0 courses in Foreign Language Department, 11 courses in Science Department, 11 courses in Social Studies Department, 9 courses in Business Department, 4 courses in Physical Education Department, 3 courses in Art ‘Michigan State Board of Education, Michigan K-1S Public School Diitricti Ranked 6$ Selected Finan­ cial Data, Bulletin 1014, 1080-1081 *Valena W. Plisko (Editor), The Condition of Education, 1988 Edition—A Statietieal Report, (National Center for Education Statistics) 60 Department, 4 courses in Music Department, 6 courses in Home Economics Department, 16 courses in Auto mechanics, Drafting, and Shared Vocational Programs, 7 Special classes. The individual course names are in Appendix E. School S offered more various courses than School D. 4.2. Chem istry Teachers and Students This section includes the backgrounds of both chemistry teachers and students. Backgrounds of students and teachers were tabulated in Table 5. Each chemistry teacher in Schools S and D had long teaching experience and high educational back­ grounds. The teacher in School S had 15 years of teaching experience; the teacher in School D, 23 years. The teacher of School S had BS in chemistry and MS in organic chemistry, and attended the special program for chemistry teaching certificate; the teacher in School D, BS in chemical engineering and MA in education. Both teachers had teaching certificates in chemistry. Students were mostly from families of managerial and professional employees in university and industrial company, and working in techni­ cal, sales and administration areas. School S had more students from families of the semiprofessional or professional job than in School D. Over 60 percent students of the two high schools had continued their education beyond high school. In the 1982-1983 school year, 75 percent of graduates from School S have gone to college more than 60 percent of graduates from School D. The teacher’s educational background influences curriculum orientation. The chemistry teacher in School D had background in chemical engineering. When he invited a guest speaker, he chose a researcher from a local pharmaceutical company, and let the guest lecture about the company product and spectrometer. The chemistry teacher in School S had MS degree in organic chemistry. She offered organic chemistry 80 Table 5. Chemistry Teachers and Students SchoolS Teachers . teaching experience . . periods at the present school . educational background . teaching certification in chemistry . preference in teaching job Number of students Family jobs of students . successful farms . managerial and professional employees in industry and university . others Education beyond high school of student (1983 graduates) . 4 years college . 2 years college . work and job training School D 15 years 23 yean 0 years BS in Chemistry, MS in Organic Chemistry, Program for teaching certification yes 23 yean BS in Chemieal Engineering, MA in Education yes very energetic in teaching and preparing of teaching materials very positive (He changed his job from engineering job 23 yean ago.) 9th grade (281), 10th (271) 11th (273), 12th (222) 9th (154), 10th (189) 11th (154), 12th (148) 5% 3% 45-50% 40-46% 28.5% technical and sales, 30.5%; laborers, 14%; crafts, 14.1%; service. 10% 55% 20% 45% 15% 25% 40% 61 course as a semester course. Both teachers liked teaching. The teacher in School S said th a t she worked at school all day long and at home too. She had two student assistants, who helped her in the preparation of classes, and in scoring and correcting worksheets and lab reports. The teacher in School D had also student assistants who helped one hour a day. School D and S offered student assistantship courses as semester courses. The two chemistry teachers were highly educated and experienced teachers. 4.3. Science Courses This section is about science courses including chemistry offered in two high schools. School S offered 27 science courses and School D offered 11 science courses. In the 1983*1984 school year, some of them were offered in both schools, which were shown in Table 6*1 and Table 6-2. Some are one-year courses and some are one-semester courses. Some of the courses were elective and offered to certain grade students. School S offered five chemistry courses (Appendix H), but two yearly chemistry courses and one semester course were taken by students in the 1983-1984 school year. In the second semester of the 1983-1984 school year, a few students took organic chemistry, which was one of three semester courses; IS students, the advanced placement chemis­ try; and 135 students, the regular chemistry in School S. School D had only one chemis­ try course, which was taken by 85 students. They used certain textbooks and lab manu­ als, which were tabulated in Table 7. The textbooks and lab manuals were purchased by schools about every five years. However, the two regular programs used 1975 edi­ tions of textbooks although 1983 editions of the textbooks were published and the teacher in School D had the 1983 edition. The teacher in School D said th at the 1983 edition was not much different from the 1975 edition, so they decided to use the 1975 edition. The advanced placement chemistry course in School S used the 1979 edition 62 Table 6-1. Science Courses in School S in the 1983-1084 School Year Semester or Year Grade Level Elective or Compulsory Year ll-12th Elective 15 Year 10-12th Elective 135 Physics Year 11-12th Elective 75 Biology Year Oth Compulsory 275 Physical Geology Year 10th Elective 58 Semester 10th Elective 27 Year 10th Elective 25 Names of Courses Chemistry Advanced placement Regular Space Scienee Physical Science Number of Students Table 6-2. Science Courses in School D in the 1983-1984 School Year Semester or Year Grade Levels Elective or Comnulsorv Chemistry, Regular Year ll-12th Elective 75 (11th); 10 (12th) Physics Year 11-12th Elective 51 Biology Year 10.12th Elective 122 Advanced Biology Year ll-12th Elective 21 Practical Biology Semester 10-12th Elective 27 ESS* Semester 9-12th Elective 98 IPS* Environment Semester Semester 9-12th 9-12th Elective Elective 98 14 Health Semester 9-12th Elective 30 ES* Semester 9-12th Elective 21 Name of courses Number of Students • In the 9th grade students must choose ESS/IPS or IIS/ES. In the 10th grade, elective courses should be taken for obtaining one more required credit. And in the 11th-12th grade, students may choose any elective courses. ESS: Earth Space Science, IIS: Ideas and Investigation in Science, IPS: Introduction to Physical Science, ES: Earth Science 63 Table 7. Chemistry Courses Observed in Schools S and D School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry School D, Regular Chemistry Schools and Programs School S, Regular Chemistry Number of Students 135 15 85 Elective or Compulsory Elective Elective Elective Grade levels 10-12th 11-12th 11-12th Textbooks Chemistry: A modern course1 Chemistry: A conceptual approach1 Chemistry: An experiments! foundation1 Lab manuals Laboratory chemistiy1 Experimental chemistry1 Lab Manual1 Lab Assistants Student Assistant Student Assistant Student Assistant Science Fair Participation Participation No lR-C. Smoot in d J. Pile*, C kim itry A M tiirn C n n t (C ttik i E* M n tI PabUshlac Co., 1078); lC 6 Nfcjtbmr, C km utry A Conctptual Approach, 4th Edittoa, (D. Vh> N oA iad Cb., 107S); *M. DM * R .L TalMboa, R.W. P»ny, and U K 9UtMT, Ckimislrp Eipirm tntal Fnniatw ni, 2nd Edition, (Prastkn-Hall, In*, 1076); *UN. C u n k h aal, D.P. H sian, aad R C Snoot, t it m li n i Ckimtitry, (Charts* & Msirlll PobUihkf Cb., 19SS); *MJL Saoko, HA. Plaoa, and S T . M u m , B xp th m n lil Cktmtilry, (K feO i»H U l Book Co., 1078); *RW, ManUl, Psnjr, RA. T ilk llm , aad HL Ehaoow, ttlw ito n i Mamit-Cktmutrf: Bipinmtnlal f n i M n t Sad Edition. (Piaatle»HaH, Inc., 1078) 84 textbook and lab manual in college general chemistry. Those textbooks were borrowed by students while taking the courses. School S participates in the Southeastern Michigan Science Fair every year. Before attending the Southeastern Michigan Science Fair, School S had a science fair in its cafeteria, where the students’ work during the winter break and special works of the stu­ dents were exhibited. The exhibitions were periodic tables, a comparison of D20 and H2O, a comparison of cold medicines, a changing role of too, and many others. School S exhibited a comparison of cold medicines, a changing role of too, and the other work in the Southeastern Michigan Science Fair of 1084. The Southeastern Michigan Science Fair was supported by a university, a community college, a local newspaper and indus­ trial companies including automobile companies. Judges of the fair were researchers in industrial companies, professors in universities, and military personnel. Special awards were given from: University of Michigan Women in Science Program, Air Pollution Con­ trol Association, Huron Hills Lapidary, Mineral Society, American Society for Microbiology, Washtenaw Council on Alcoholism, U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force, and U.S. Army. Over 300 students’ works were exhibited in the afternoon of March 31, 1984. Exhibi­ tions were classified by: (1) levels of school, and (2) the contents of the exhibitions. They were also separately exhibited in senior and junior high schools. In the senior division, the exhibitions were classified into biology, chemistry, and physics-mathematics. In the junior division, the exhibitions were classified into experiment category, and models and collections category. Good exhibition skill is based on three major points: (1) displaying information in organized and systematic ways, (2) properly emphasizing important points, and (3) pro­ viding sufficient evidence for each claims made. Based on these three criteria, students’ 05 works could be evaluated. An example of a good exhibition is in Figure 5, and an exam­ ple of a sloppy exhibition is in Figure 0. Well-arranged and clear exhibition can give more useful information to observers. The observers were from various age groups, ranging in age from one to 80. There were long lines to get into the fair in a community college. The science fair is a big event in the southeastern Michigan area as shown in Figure 7. Figure 8 showed a challenging idea th a t hydrogen gas was produced by a sim­ ple experiment and used as a fuel. Science curricula, including the science fair, showed the geographical characteristics of the two schools. 4.4. Financial Support and Facilities Financial support and facilities were described in this section. The financial sup­ port was described in terms of annual expenses per student, annual expenses per student for chemistry teaching, and revenue. The facilities of the two schools were described in terms of number of classrooms, size of classrooms, equipment in lecture room, exhibits, exhibition board, teaching materials, equipment in laboratories, chemicals, glassware, and other equipment. The two schools had similar revenue as shown in Table 8. Both schools were sup­ ported financially by local property tax. In School S, 82,980 is spent per student annu­ ally. For chemistry teaching, $4.40 is spent per student in the regular course, $28.50 in the advanced placement course, and $50-70 in the organic chemistry course. In revenue, 91 percent was supported by the local school district, which was actually from local pro­ perty taxes, three percent from the state, three percent from the federal government and three percent from other sources. Figure 5. An Example of a Good Exhibition Figure 6. An Example of a Sloppy Exhibition 67 Figure 7. Science Fair aa a Big Community Event HYDROGEN Figure 8. A Chemistry-related Exhibition 08 Table 8. Financial Support of Schools S and D in the 1983-1984 School Year School S School D Annual Expenses per Student $2,986 $2,790 Annual Expenses per student for chemistry teaching $4.40 (Regular program) $28.50 (Advanced placement program) $50-70 (Organic Chemistry) $0.60 (Regular program) local school district (property taxes) 91 (%) 94 state 3 1 federal 3 3 other sources 3 2 Revenue2 3 Michigan State Beard of Edncation, Michigan K - l t PuHie School Diatricta Ranked ijr Selected Financial Data, (Bulletin 1014, 1080-1081), p. 84. 69 In School D, $2,790 is spent per student annually. For chemistry teaching, $6.60 is spent annually. In revenue, 95 percent was supported by the local school district, one percent from the state, three percent from the federal government, and tiro percent from other sources. Annual expenses in the two schools were higher than other Michigan high schools.3 School S was supported better financially than School D. The two schools had different quality and quantity of facilities as shown in Table 9. The differences lay in room capacity, chemicals, and experiment equipments such as glassware. Figure 9 was a map of School S; Figure 10, of School D. School S had more room for chemistry teaching than School D as shown in Figure 11 and Figure 12. Chem­ istry lecture rooms and labs in both schools were described in Figure 13, Figure 14, Fig­ ure 15, and Figure 16. School S had one lecture room and two labs; School D had one lecture-lab room. Chemistry preparation room and storage in both schools were shown in Figure 17 and Figure 18. School S had one storage room and one preparation room; • School D had one preparation-storage room. School S had six rooms for chemistry teaching, where 150 students took chemistry courses, whereas School D had only two rooms, where 85 students took the chemistry course in the 1983-1984 school year. The total area for chemistry teaching was 319.8 m3 in School S; 147.6 m* in School D. The area per student was 2.1 m3 in School S; 1.7 m3 in School D. School S had a comfortable preparation room, as shown in Figure 17 but School D had a small space for preparation, as shown in Figure 18. However, actual classroom situation in School D does not seem to depend on this room area. Figure 19 showed the lecture room in School S and Figure 20 showed lecture class in the lecture-lab room in School D. The advanced placement chemistry class in School S, as shown in Figure 21, had an extra room for 15 students in 3Michigan State Board of Education, Michigan School Diotricto 70 Table 9. Chemistry Classroom Facilities of Schools S and D. School S Facilities SchoolD School Building Built in 1968: Figure 0 Built in 1968, Addition in 1974: Figure 10 Chemistry Classrooms lecture rooms Figure 11 1: Figure 13, Figure 19 Figure 12 1 lecture-lab room: Figure 16, Figure 20, Figure 22 preparation rooms 2: Figure 14, Figure 15 Figure21 1: Figure 17 storage rooms teacher rooms 1: Figure 17 1: Figure 14 laboratories Sise of Classrooms (m X m) lecture rooms lab 1 lab 2 preparation rooms storage rooms teacher room Equipments in Lecture room overhead projectors screens blackboards Desks and chairs Worksheet stand 57.4 76.7 76.7 61.1 35.9 12.0 1 preparation-storage room: Figure 17 0: in lecture-lab room 111.6 (lecture-lab room) 36 (preparationstorage room) Figure 13 1 1 1 Desk-ehair combination 1 Figure 16 1 1 3 Long desk and individual chair Periodic table (one in lecture room and one in Lab 1) Periodic Table; Sise of elements and ions; Names, formula, and ionic charges of common ions; Energy level of electrons 3 in lecture-room (2 for student work, and 1 for news) 1 in lecture room (for news) 1 in lab 1 (for worksheets) 1 in hallway (for news) Exhibits Exhibition Boards 1 in lab 2 (for safety' posters) 1 in hall way (for news) Teaching Materials textbook, lab manual, worksheets, diagrams: textbook, lab manual worksheets, diagrams 71 Table 9 (cont’d.). SchoolS Facilities Equipments in Laboratory School D 1 eye washing stand 1 fire blanket 2 eye and body washing stands (one in each lab), 2 fire blankets (one in each lab) 1 2 (for goggles) 2 (one in each laboratory) black coating (new) for individual student's apparatus 1 in lab I and 1 in lab 2 0 0 1 black coating (worn out) Chemicals Glassware (numbers) over 1,000 over 500 Erlenmeyer flasks round-bottomed flasks measuring flasks beakers washing bottles plastic bottles small medium large small glass bottles cylinders funnels medicine droppers Stoppers Spatulas Thermometers Thermostirs Hot plates PH paper Molecular model 22.4 1 box Other equipments 50 20 50 30 20 15 safety oven sterilisers hood tables drawers blackboards computers in other classrooms video projectors film projector 50 20 20 100 20 20 100 20 sixes 10 4 4 40 40 150 30 30 30 15 1 10 20 lattice models use them use it 1 1 use them use them S IU I Figure 9. A Map of School S Figure 10. A Map of School D 74 Lab 2 Storage Room Preparation Room Lab 1 Lecture Room Teacher's Room Figure 11. Chemistry Classrooms in School S Preparationstorage Room s Lecture-Lab Room for Chemistry and Physics Figure 12. Chemistry Classrooms in School D Cn Blackboard ana screen Teacher’s Table Exhibition Board— •*- O^jsink Overhead Projector Door to Lab 1 Exhibition Board Student Table Student Table Student Table Exhibition Board Student Table Figure 13. Chemistry Lecture Room in School S Location of an Audio Recorder 77 Book Self' Cabinet Teacher's Table Stand & ter iilzer Hood Oven Door to Lecture Room Gas Electricity Sink Window Water Lab Table Door to S Prepara­ tion Room*" Safety Shower Chemicals Blackboard Figure 14. Chemistry Teacher Room and Lab 1 in School S Door to Lab 2 78 Location of an Audio Recorder Stand Hood Sink— -|~*j Exhibition Board for Safety Posters Gas Electricity Water Window Lab Table Door to Preparation / Room Safety Shower Door to Lab 1 Blackboard Chemicals Figure 15. Chemistry Lab 2 in School S Y- Sink ^Exhibition j Board ■---------------- y* Blackboard' and Screen ------------------- j j Glassware Stand "for/ Physics Equipment .Teacher's Table / J Overhead Projector Student Table Black­ board Do ^ Student Table Energy L e v e ls ' of Electrons } Black­ board Periodic T a b l e d Student Table Location of an Audio Recorder iBook “ Electricity S elf Gas Water Sink. O o Lab Table1 — 4— X Diagram of size of Elements and Ions Figure 16. Chemistry Lceture-Lab Room in School D A Eye washing Stand Chemical! Stoppers Bottles Column Bottle Test Tube Ballance PH Paper Water Bath Glassware Bottles, Spoid, Spatura. and Others Sink Door to lab 1 Glassware Chemicals Magnetic Stirrer, Burner Door to Lab 2 Figure 17. Chemistry Preparation Room and Storage Room in School S Chemicals Alcohol Equipment for Physical AM meter, / Rheostat Hot Plate, Funnel Chemicals in Reagent ^ Bottles Chemicals Glasswarei Flask, Beaker, Bottle Sink Table for Bllance- Figure 18. Chemistry Preparation-Storage Room in School D Door to LectureLab Room 82 Figure 19. A Regular Chemistry Lecture Class in School S Figure 20. A Regular Chemistry Lecture Class in School D 83 Figure 21. A AP Chemistry Experiment Class in School S Figure 22. A Regular Chemistry Experiment Class in School D 84 their experiment class, whereas the regular chemistry class looked a little bit crowded with 30 students in their experiment class. Figure 22 showed the experiment class in the lecture-lab room in School D. School S had more glassware and chemicals than in School D. In School D, they did not use a lot of glassware and equipment in experiment classes. In this school, some small plastic bottles were used to distribute chemical solutions to students in the experiment. The similarities of both schools appear in utilities, audio-visual equipments, and class room facilities. Both schools had water, gas, and electricity supplies in lab tables. Both schools used overhead projectors in lecture classes as shown in Figure 19 and Fig­ ure 20. Using overhead projector gives more teaeher-student contact. The chemistry teacher in School D was satisfied with his chemicals and glassware even though he could not buy silver nitrate because of its high cost and, therefore, used other cheaper chemicals to do similar experiments.. The chemistry teacher in School S e said th at she needed a full time lab assistant even though student assistants were help­ ful. Both chemistry teachers wanted to have more financial supports to buy expensive equipments like pH meter, thermometer, fractional distillation equipment, and column chromatography equipment. All in all, School S had better facilities than School D in terms of laboratories and lecture rooms. 4.5. Summary In Chapter 4, the educational environment of the schools was described in the aspects of communities, schools, teachers, students, science curricula, financial support, and facilities. The two communities were located in suburban towns near university cities and business industrial cities. The two high schools,were well organized in the aspects of general curriculum. School S offered 27 science courses; School D, 11 science courses. The two chemistry teachers had master’s degrees, teaching certificates in chem­ istry, and over 15 years of teaching experience. Over 00 percent of students had contin­ ued their education beyond high school. School S offered one-year regular and one-year advanced placement chemistry programs as elective courses; School D, one-year regular chemistry program. Financially, the two schools were supported by the local school dis­ tricts —over 90 percent of the total revenue. T hat support was better than other high schools in Michigan.4 School S spent $2,986 per student per year; School D, $2,790. School S spent $4.40 in the regular chemistry program, $28.50 in the advanced place­ ment chemistry program, and $50-70 in the organic chemistry program per student per year; and School D, $6.60 in the regular chemistry program. School S had better facili­ ties than School D, such as, more chemicals (School S had 1,000 chemicals; School D, 500) and more room (School S had 2.1 m3 space in chemistry classrooms per student; School D, 1.7 m3 space.). Michigan State Board of Education, Michigan School Diitricto CHAPTER S D ata A nalysis This chapter includes an analysis of d ata collected a t tiro Michigan high schools. The data irere analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively in order to answer research topics such as: analysis of educational objectives, analysis of topics and teaching methods, and analysis of student interest. 5.1. E ducational O bjectives This section includes a description of the representative transcripts of the educa­ tional objectives, an analysis of educational objectives used in different teaching methods, and an analysis of educational objectives used in different evaluation methods. The analysis of educational objectives showed what was instructed in chemistry class­ room in terms of educational objectives. 5.1.1. R epresentative E ducational O bjective Transcripts Klopfer’s educational objective categories were used in this study to analyze chem­ istry educational objectives in schools S and D, which were a comprehensive instrument used to study educational objectives in science education. Klopfer’s objective categories had usually been used to analyze contents' of science textbooks. But this study 88 87 attempted to use Klopfer’s categories to find the proportions of educational objective by classroom observation. The following transcripts are from audio recordings of class instructions. Here, three representative transcripts were explained by showing why they were assigned to certain educational objectives. One transcript showed the interpretation of experimental d ata (D3) objective and the generalization (D6) objective in Klopfer’s categories, which was from the regular class in School S and was instructed on December 14, 1984. Topic was “Properties of periodic table”, and teaching methods were socratic method and lecture. Teacher: Atomic radii, going to the crossf (It means that atomic radii are going to increase or decrease as going to cross the periodic table.) (Teacher indicated Periodic Table.) Student: Um am. Teacher: What is it, going cross the chart? Student: Smaller. Teacher: Smaller? To what group? Student: Smaller. Teacher: I don’t think so. Keeps going down to get to? Student 1: Six, seven (Name of group of elements). Student 2: Seven. Student 3: Seven, eight. Teacher: To seven, eight. And then as approaching noble gases, they have completely filled shell. We gonna say, decreases to seven, eight (“seven” or “eight” means atomic number.). And then increase. So increases. Excuse me, decrease toward the nonmetals. And noble gases try to increase, some of them are larger than the begin­ ning of the period. Teacher tried to explain trends of atomic radii in elements of periodic chart. Before this class period, students made periodic charts themselves by cutting and gluing little pieces of paper, where alphabets were written. The purpose of which were to give infor­ mation about density, atomic radii and phases on a different sheet of paper. In the fol­ lowing class of the experiment class, the teacher led students to interpret the periodic chart which they made, and to generalize the trends. This instruction was for 88 interpretation of experimental data (D3) and generalization (DO) objectives in Klopfer’s categories. The other transcript showed the application in the same field of science (FI) in Klopfer’s categories, which was from the advanced placement class in School S, and was instructed on February 21, 1084. The topic was Nemst Equation. Teaching methods were: lecture, problem solving, and socratic method. Teacher: 10.5 (Problem number) is on page 360. (Teacher writes it on overhead projector roll with the following explanation E»E ° .05916/2 X Iog{l/.l» What is electropotential of a zinc, ions of zinc electrode, which concentration of zinc ion is zero point one molar. OK, you write the partial reaction first to see how elec­ trons move. So you look at the partial equation first. So in this case we can read, that is, n equals two. The symbol, the concentration of, you use the symbol inside the bracket, that’s always bracketing. Molarity, mole per liter. And that tells us the zinc ion, in this case, is zero point one molar. The ... oh, the first go back to the chart and the, look at the electropotential for this reaction would be zinc ion is going to zinc, rather than zinc is going to zinc ion. Teacher: OK, That's your easier standard conditions (indicating E°), minus zero point five nine or five nine two. Divide by n, which is two, times log, what? He always wants the product, here in the right hand side you have zinc, that’s solid, right? The activity of zinc is one. You got the log of the product, the activity of solid is one. You see what it is? Student: Um. Teacher: Concentration of the zinc, concentration of the zinc is point one. Let’s calculate, make sure your calculators still work. The teacher in School S showed how to find E value rif Zn+2 to Zn, using Nernst equation, which students had learned just before solving this problem. In this instruc­ tional process, students learned how to apply Nernst Equation. Application in the same field of science educational objective, F l was assigned in this period. 89 The third transcript showed the historical orientation objective (13) in Klopfer’s categories, which was from chemistry class in School D, and was instructed on December 2, 1983. Topic was “ Model of atom” and the teaching method was lecture. Teacher: .... Also all that time, came up with the idea that the matter was particular. And he came up with the name, "atom”. The matter was made of particle. Atom was supposed to be described, particle, very tiny particle. And it b indestructible, OK, atom was thought to be indestructible particle. And thb idea had lasted at least a couple of thousand years. And then, in the very late, eighteen hundred to nearly nineteen hundred, finally started, making a little bit of progress for under­ standing of the atom. The chemistry teacher in School D explained the change of idea about the atomic theories historically. This part was assigned to historical orientation educational objec­ tive, 13. The twelve transcripts including the above three transcripts are in Appendix I to show the procedures of entering Klopfer’s subcategories in each five minute period of instruction. The twelve transcripts are: 1. for the terminology (A2) objective and the conventional knowledge (A4) in Klopfer’s categories, and the topic was “measurement of pressure”. 2. for the conceptual knowledge (A3) and the principle knowledge (A8) objectives, and “net ionic equation” as a topic. 3. for the trend and sequence (AS), the interpretation of experimental knowledge (D3) and the generalization (DO) objectives, and “ properties of periodic table” as a topic. 4. for the technique and procedure (A7), the description of observation (B2) and common laboratoiy performance (G2) objectives, and “ activities of I A, II A, VII A elements” so as a topic. 5. for the principle knowledge (A8), the observing (Bl), the interpretation of experimen­ tal data (D3) objectives, and Le Chartelier’s principle as a topic. 0. for the theory knowledge (AS) objective and “kinetic theory” as a topic. 7. for the observing (Bl), the measurement (B3) and the common laboratory perfor­ mance (G2) objectives, and “diffusion of gases" as a topic. 8. for the application in the same field of science (FI) objective and “ Nernst equation" as a topic. 9. for the development of vocational interest (H8) objective and “ Women in chemistry" as a topic. 10. for the evolutionary character of science (13) objective and “model of atom” as a topic. 11. for the observing (Bl), the description of observation (B2) and the development skills in using equipment (G l) objectives, and “hydrogen peroxide" as a topic. 12. for the observing (Bl), the description of observation (B2) and the development skills in using equipment (G l) objectives, and “ion and precipitation" as a experiment topic. Forty classes observed were assigned in the same method by using Klopfer’s educa­ tional objective subcategories. Some five minute periods had been assigned with two to five objective categories. 91 6.1.2. E ducational O bjectives w ith respect to D ifferent T eaching M ethods. Educational objectives were analyzed with respect to different teaching methods. Among the various teaching methods, more than one teaching method was used. Teach* ing methods were classified into six categories: (1) the lecture, problem solving, and socratie method; (2) the lecture and soeratie method; (3) the demonstration method; (4) the student experiment, discussion, and socratie method; (5) the film-slide showing method; and (6) the field trips o r guest speaker method. As shown in Table 10, three class periods were observed in the regular program in School S for the lecture, problem solving, and socratie method; four class periods for the advanced placement class in School S; and four class periods in four days during the observation period for the regular program in School D. For the lecture and socratie method, the regular program in School S was observed three class periods; the advanced placement program in School S, one class period; and the regular program in School D, three class periods. For the demonstration method, the regular program in School S was observed for five minute in a class period; the advanced placement program in School S, five minutes in a class period; and the regular program in School D, 25 minutes of a class period. For the student experiment, discussion, and socratie method, the regular pro­ gram in School S was observed for six class periods; the advanced placement program in School S, three class periods; and the regular program in School D, four class periods. For the film-slide showing method, the regular program in School S was observed for five minutes in a class period; the advanced placement program in School S, 15 minutes in two class periods, which were five minutes in a period and 10 minutes in another class period; and the regular program in School D, 40 minutes in a class period. For the field trip or guest speaker method, two programs in School S did not have any class period of 92 Table 10. Observation Days According to Teaching Methods School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Periods Days School D, Regular Chemistry Periods Days 10 11 Q 12/8 12/13 2/15 2/21 10 10 10 0 12/2 12/14 12/15 3/1 10 10 10 0 12/8 2/24 3/8 0 0 0 2/14 10 12/12 12/13 2/27 0 0 0 3/7 1 12/14 1 2/27 5 12/12 12/13 2/15 2/18 2/22 3/1 0 0 0 10 10 10 2/16 2/17 2/22 10 10 10 12/8 12/10 12/20 2/24 10 8 0 8 3/7 1 3/6 3/7 1 2 12/5 8 2/13 10 14 124 Schools and Proicrams Teaching Methods School S, Regular Chemistry Periods Days Lecture, Problem Solving, and Socratie Method 12/14 2/14 2/21 Lecture and Soeratie Method Demonstration Student Experiment, Discussion, and Soeratie Method Film-Siide Showing Field Trip or Guest Speaker Total 14 116 12 • Periods means the number of five-minute periods 83 93 this type of teaching method bu t the regular program in School D was observed for one class period during the classroom observation period. All together, 40 class periods were observed during the observation period. An analysis of the educational objectives was tabulated in Tables 11, 12,13, 14, 15, and 10. In the lecture, problem solving, and socratie method classes, as shown in Table 11, knowledge and comprehension objectives were 62 percent to 88 percent, which was the largest portion of educational objectives in the three programs. Among the eleven knowledge and comprehension objectives, terminology, concepts, and principle objectives are mainly taught in the three programs. In the advanced placement class in School S, the application objectives were 34 percent. In the problem solving session, the advanced placement class spent a lot of time on application in the same field of science objective. But no application outside of science and in a different field of science appeared in any of the three programs. The classes using this method did not include any scientific inquiry skills II, III and IV, manual skills, or orientation objectives. In the lecture and socratie teaching method, as shown in Table 12, knowledge and comprehension objectives were 87 percent to 100 percent, which was emphasized more than in the lecture, problem solving, and soeratie method (01.9 percent to 88.3 percent). Most knowledge and comprehension subcategories were pursued except trend and sequence, and demonstration in a new context of objectives. Among other objectives, 3.7 percent of the interpreting data objective in the regular class in School S and 3.7 percent of orientation to evolutionary character of science objective in School D appeared in the regular classes in School D. In the demonstration classes, as shown in Table 13, scientific inquiry I objectives were found in a large portion of them. In School D, 32.7 percent of the knowledge and 94 Table 11. Educational Objectives in Lecture, Problem Solving, and Socratie Method Schools aad Programs Bdacational Objective KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: fact* % terminology 3: concept 4: coavtatioa 5: tread aad seqaeace S: daaiilicatioa. categories. criteria 7: Uchniaao. procsdoree 8: principle or taw 0; theory or eoaeeetaai schemes 10: demoaatratioa ia a aew context 11: translation to othor symbolic forms School S, Rofalar Chemistry fraaacacy 98 28.5 0.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.0 1.3 5.0 4.5 3.5 0.0 1.0 80.3 13.3 8.7 10.0 6.7 3.0 10.5 13.0 11.7 3.3 School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry freqaeacy 98 24.0 .8 .8 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 10.8 2.3 0.0 0.0 61.9 2.1 2.1 13.7 10.3 27.8 5.9 School D, Regnlar Chemistry fraaacacy 98 32.5 .3 6.3 11.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.3 4.6 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY 1: observing aad msasariag 1: observing Z dacriptioa of observatioa 3: measnrement 4: selecting instrnment S: calibratioa markings of instrnment 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .3 .3 0.0 O.Oi 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY It seeking a problem aad wavs to solve it. 1: recognition of problem Z formalatioa of hypothesis 3: choosing a stria of experiments 4: design of procedare 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY tit interpreting data aad ceaeraiifatioa 1: processing data 2: making faactioaal reiatieaship 3: iaterpretatioa of data 4: extrapolation and Interpolatioa S: evaination of a hypothesis by data 8: gensraiisatioa 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: recognition of the seed of a model Z formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.0 1.3 16.3 30.5 24.0 11.9 .8 .8 85 Table 11 (coat’d.)* ScfeaalS, l i f i i u C haaU T h a m m er % I 9 f Scfcoab »md P ro m o * 1 q o f a M at p k a * « t i a r e h i—d b r * m *dd e dadactias at maw hypetfceis Cm* > thaontical modal & ilM rp M a liM aad aaalaatiaa at tka raaait* at t x p w m .a u to U K a thoatadcal m add 8: n t m a aad o u a n a a at a t l M n l i a l modal 8.8 88 8.8 8.0 na 8.8 8.8 da 08 o.a M u 8.0 da OS MANUAL SKILLS I: da*dapm «at at ddUa ia « d a c aaaiam aat 2: comma* la b a n ta c r pmfocmaaca 300 183 4.0 1 10.3 0.0 1 40 M 0.8 0.0 da 08 08 08 8.8 0.0 1.8 03 .5 08 .5 08 08 08 1.7 ORIENTATTON I; raiatiauhipa a a a a g 1.7 u 1.4 08 08 08 08 08 1.8 4.8 04 1.3 5 1.8 0.0 8.0 1 08 8.0 1---------- 08 8.0 08 OO 88 oa oa 0.8 oa oo 0.0 80 08 0.0 avnaa ja ra d fie natam aaaa inilnases at jaa ac a o a ahiiaaoafcy to tk* rw rinuoiiarr cfeatactar rdaaioaaitip amaog adaadtie pragm a. taekaieai aciiatwjwa*. aad aeoaooae davdaam aat soejai aad moral innriieation* Total 34.3 0.0 I: favanta axtitad* toward jdaac* £ acem taaca of la m ftfic u w airr 3: adoatioa of jcn a d fie a td ta d a 4: aaiaam ast at sdaa*i& laaattaa i daaalapmaa* a t iot«m * ia adaaea 8: d rtd o o m o st at TacUiitaal ia H fa l* 3: 1X3 103 08 oo ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS £ 3: « % 08 is t: ia £ ia School 0 , R ofaiar C l ii a d tr r 88 tfea a a > fidd tfca ddTtnta* fidd at saamca 3: aatnd* at adaaea a p p l ic a t io n Srkaal 3, Adraacad fh e M d C b a ia tr * i 1 j i 08 08 si. a 08 08 38.3 ioaa 80 0.0 a i iqflo 06 Table 12. Educational Objectives in Lecture and Socratie Method Classes School S, Retolar Chemiatrr freqacacT % Schoola aad P rem nu Edacatioaai Obieetrre KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION t: facta % termiaoletrr 3: eoacest -4: coareatioa S: tread aad aeqaeace 6: elaaaificatioa. cateccriee. criteria 7: tecbsKia*. pracedarea 6: priaeiple or law 9: theory or eoaceataal ichemea 10: deaoaatrmtioa ia a aow context 11: traaalatioa to other anabolic forma 23.9 3.0 .5 6.3 3.3 0.0 4.3 1.3 2.0 1.0 0.0 4.0 90.3 11.2 1.9 23.4 13.0 16.0 4.0 7.4 3.7 14.6 School S, Adraaeed Piecemeal Chemiatrr freoaeacr % 10.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 10.0 10.0 60.0 School D, Re«alar Chemiatrr freqaeacr % 23.3 1.0 3.0 .3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 10.5 4.3 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: obeerriaa aad meaaariac 1: obaeariBK 2: deacriotioa of obaerratioa 3: meaaaremeat 4: leieetine iaatramoat 3: calibntioa markiara of iaatrameat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY n: eeeltiaa a problem aad ware to 1: reconitioa of problem 2: formalatioa of hrootheaia 3: ehooaia* a aeriea of exserimeata 4: dealkb of procedare 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 1 joIto it SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY III: iaterpretia* data aad reaeraliaatioa 1: procesaiaa data 2: makiaa faactioaai relatioaahip 3: iaterpretatioa of data 4: extraaelatioa aad iatervolatioa 5: eralaatioa of a hrootheaia br data S: ireaenJiaatioa 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: recoeaitioa of the aeed of a model 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 3.7 87.0 3.7 18.5 1.9 7.4 38.9 18.7 07 Table 12 (coat’d.). School* *ad Prorram* Edacatioaai Objective 3: specification of phenomena explained by a model 4: dtdnctioa of aew hypothesis from a theoretical model S: interpretation aad eralaatioa of tha result* of experiments to test a theoretical model 6: rerittoa aad extension of a theoretical model School S, Recalar Chemistrr frequency % School S, Adraactd Placement Chemistry % freaaeacr School D, Recalar Chemiatrr freaaeacr % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 APPLICATION 1: ia the same field 2; ia the differeat field of seieace 3: oataide of scieace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of skill* ia asinc equipment 2: eommoa laboratory oerformaace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.S .5 0.0 0.0 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 28.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 27.0 100.0 AND INTERESTS 1: favorite attitude toward scieace 2; aeeeotaace of seieatifie iaoairr 3: adootioa of seieatifie attitade 4: eaioymeat of seieatifie learaiax 5: dereioomeat of iatesest ia scieace 8: dereioomeat of rocatioaai iatensta a t t it u d e s ORIENTATION 1: relationships amoac ratio** seieatifie statemeata 2: iafloeaee of scieace oa ohiloooohy 3: to the erolatioaary character 4: rdatioaship amoac seieatifie proems, technical achieremeat, aad scoaomic derelopmeat 3: social aad moral implicatioa* Total 100.0 100.0 9.3 1.9 7.4 98 Table 13. Educational Obeetives in Demonstration Classes School* aad Pnm oi Edacatioaai Objective KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: fact* 2: termiaolocr 3: concept 4: convention 5: trend aad seaesac* S: claiaificatioa. catexorie*. criteria 7: techaiaa*. procedure* 8: principle or law 9: theory or conceptual schemes 10; deooaetntioa ia a new context 11: traaalatioa to other symbolic form* School 3, Recalar Chemistry freaaeacr % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry frequency % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 School D, Recalar Chemistry freaaeacr % 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 .3 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: observiac aad measuria* 1: obsemn* 2: description of obeerratioa 3: measurement 4: seiectiac iastrnment S: ealibntioa martinet of iaetrnmeat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .4 .2 .2 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II; seekine a prnblem aad erar* to sohre it 1: recognition of problem 2: formalatioa of hypothesis 3: ehoosiae a series of experiment* 4: desin of procedure 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY III: iateraretiac data aad ceneraliiation 1: proceeeiax data 2: makiae functional relationship 3; interpretation of data 4: extrapolation aad interpolation 5; evaiaatioa of a hypothesis by data 6: Keaeralisatioa .5 0.0 0.0 .3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: rececnitioa of the need of a model 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .s s so.o 50.0 so.o 50.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.7 20.5 0.1 28.5 28.5 20.4 20.4 09 Table 13 (cont’d.). School* aad Promm* Edacatioaai Objective 3: speeificatioi of pheaamcaa explained bv a model 4: dedoctioa of new hypothesis from a tbeorotical model S: iaterpretatioa aad eralaatioa of the nsalt* of orperimeet* to tett a theoretical model 6: reeieioa aad oneastoa of a theoretical model School S, Regalar Chemistry freqaeacy % School S, Advanced PIacemeat Chemistry freqaeacy % School D, Recalar Chemistry freqaeacy % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 APPLICATION 1: ia the same field 2: ia the different field of science 3: oatside of scieace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of skills ia asine aqaiomeat 2: common laboratory Deiformaac* 0.0 .2 20.0 1.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 .2 20.0 0.0 1.0 20.4 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: favorite attitade toisard science 2; acceptance of scientific inanity 3: adoption of scientific attitado 4: enjoyment of scientific learaiac S: devetoDmeat of iatoreet ia scieace 8: development of vocational interest* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .4 .2 .2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ORIENTATION 1: relationships amoac varioas scientific statements 2: inflaenc* of science on philosophy 3: to the cvolatioaaiy character 4: relationship among seieatifie progress, technical achievement, aad economic development 5: social aad moral implications Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1 4.0 1 100.0 100.0 40.0 20.0 20.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 comprehension objectives were due to the teacher’s demonstration in order to explain Le Chartelier’s Principles experimentally. Five minutes in the regular class in School S, five minutes in the advanced placement class in School S, and 25 minutes in School D were for the demonstration teaching method, which was a small part of the total instruction time. The reason for the small portion of time is th a t if there were good experiments to explain certain principles, Schools S and D let students do experiments. Accordingly stu­ dent experiments were performed most of the time. In the student experiment, discussion, and socratie method classes, as shown in Table 14, scientific inquiry I and manual skill objectives were together 57 percent to 96 percent in the three programs. In the scientific inquiry I: observing and describing, the observation objectives was mainly appeared, as did a little of the measurement, the selecting instrument, and the calibration marking objectives. A little of the seeking problems and ways to solve them (scientific inquity II), the interpreting data and gen­ eralization (scientific inquiry III), and the theoretical model objectives (scientific inquiry IV) appeared. Nine percent of scientific inquiry II,III, and IV were found in the regular chemistry class in School S; 5.6 percent, in the regular chemistry class in School D; and 0.0 percent, in the advanced placement chemistry class in School S. In the regular chem­ istry class in School S, students experienced various inquiry skills. Development of skills in using equipment objective (G l) was taught in the advanced placement class in School S, 10.4 percent of the time. Students in the advanced placement class in School S prac­ ticed basic skills in qualitative analysis such as cleaning test tubes and cleaning medicine droppers with boiling water. In the film-slide showing teaching method, as shown in Table 15, 5 minutes in the regular class in School S, 15 minutes in the advanced placement class in School S, and 40 101 Table 14. Educational Objectives in Experiment, Discussion, and Socratie Method School* aad P ro m a ! Edacatioaai Obtectiee KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: facta 2: tenniaolocy 3: coacept 4: eoareatioa 3: tread aad aeaaeaco 8: daaaiftcatioa. c u w n in . criteria 7: techaiaae. orocedano 8: priaciola or law 9: theory or coaceptaal achemee 10: demoaatratioa ia a aaw coatext 11: traaalatioa to othor rymbolie forma SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: obaerviax aad meaaariax 1: oboorriax 2: deacriotioa of obaorratioa 3: ooaaaroacat 4: aelectiac iaatromoat S: ealibratioa markiaca of iaatramaat School 3, Rofalar Chemiatrr freaaeacr % School S, Adraaced Placemeat Chemiatrr freaaeacr % 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.1 4.3 12.2 6.1 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 3S.1 17.3 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 7.3 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.7 14.6 7.1 6.3 26.7 12.3 11.1 1.4 .7 14.3 7.4 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .6 .4 0.0 10.6 12.0 3.3 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: aeekiac a problem aad ware to aolet it 1: recocaitioa of problem 2: formolatioa of hreotheaia 3: chooaiair a teriea of experimaata 4: dcain of oroccdore 1.6 .4 .4 .4 .4 2.8 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY lit iaterpretiax data aad Keaeralitatioa 1: proceaaiac data 2: tnakinc faactioaai raiatioaahip 3: iaterpretatioa of data 4: extrapelatioa aad iaterpolatioa S: evalaatioa of a hypothetic by data 8: Keaeralitatioa 3.4 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 3.0 3.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: reconitioa of the need of a model 2: formolatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 .7 .7 .7 .7 4.3 School D, Refalar Chemiatrr freqaeacy % 4.3 47.8 24.7 23.1 6.8 7.2 2.9 102 Table 14 coat’d.)- School* aad Proclaim Gdocatioaai Objective 3: sptdficatioa of pkoaomoaa explained be a model 4: dodactioa of b o w hypothesis from a theoretical modal S: interpretation aad evaluation of tho result* of experiments to toot a theoretical model 8: revision aad extoaaioa of a theoretical model APPLICATION 1: ia the earn* Held 2: ia the differeat field of adeace 3: ootaide of sdeaee MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of akilla io aaiac eaaiomeat 2: eommoa labontorr Derfonnaace Schools, Regular ChemiatrT % freaaeacr Schoul S, Advanced Placement ChemiatrT % freaaeacr School D, Regular Chemiatrr freaaeacr % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 8.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 IT.* 31.5 14.3 47.3 0.1 28.1 0.0 IT.* 31.5 3.1 11.2 10.4 37.5 0.0 0.1 28.1 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: favorite attitude toward scieace 2: acceptance of ideatifie iaaairv 3: adootioa of ideatifie attitude 4: eaiovmeat of scientific loamiac S'dereioomeat of iatereat ia science 8: dereioomeat of vocational iutereata 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ORIENTATION 1: relationahipa aaoac various scientific itatemeuta 2; influence of sdeace oa philosophy 3: to the evolutionary character 4: raiatioaahip amonf adeatifie profreaa, technical achievement, aad economic development S: social aad moral implications Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S8.8 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 34.0 100.0 1 00.0 4.5 3.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 10.1 2.0 100.0 103 Table 15. Educational Objectives in Filxn*Slide Showing Classes School* aad Pnwrram* Edacatioaai Objectire KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: facte 2; terminology 3: cooeeot 4: a i n i t i e i 5: tread and sequence 8: daiaificatioa. eategoriee, criteria 7: techaioae. procednree S: principle or law 9; theory or coaceotaai scheme* 10: demoaitralioa ia a aow coatext ll: traaalatioa to other symbolic form* SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: obaerriag aad meaaeriag 1: obaerriag 2: deecriptioa of obeerratioa 3: meaiarement 4: selecting iaitrameat S: calibratioa markian of iaitrameat School S. Refaiar Chemirtry freqaeacy % 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 School S, Advaactd PIactmeat Chemiatry freqaeacy % 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 School D, Recalar Chemiatry freaaeacr % 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 00 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: seeking a oroblem aad way* to solre it 1: recognition of oroblem 2: formalatioa of hvootheei* 3: choosing a aerie* of experiment* 4: desim of orocedore 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY lit interpreting data aad reeeraiiratioa 1: processing data 2: makiaa functional relationship 3: iaterontatioa of data 4: extrapolation aad interpolation 5: eraloatioa of a hrootheai* by data 8: generalisation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model t: recocaitioa of the aeed of a model 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 I 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 1 104 Table 15 (cont’d.)- School* sad Procrsms Edacatioaai Objective 3: rpaaficatiaa of pheaomeas axolaiaed by a model 4: dtdactioa of new hypotheeie from > theonticsi model 5: iaurpretstioa sad evaluation of tho raalU of esperimaats to tett a theoretical model 6: revision sad extension of a theoretical model School 3, Recalar ChemiatrT % freaaeacr School S, Advanced Placement ChemiatrT % freaaeacr School D, Recalar ChemiatrT freaaeacr % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 APPLICATION 1: ia the tame field 2: ia tho diffcreat field of idence 3: ootside of ecieace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of ikill* ia atinc eaaiomeat 2: commaa Isboratorr oeifonnaace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUOES AND INTERESTS t: favorite attitude toward ecieace 2: acceotaaee of ideatifie iaaainr 3: tdootioa of ideatifie attitude 4: euiovmeat of ideatifie learaiaa S: deveioomeat of iaterett ia icieace 8: deveioomeat of vocational iatereeta 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 ORIENTATION 1: relationships amonc vaiioaa ideatifie itatemeata 2: iaflaeace of Kieace oa ohiloeoohv 3: to the evolutionary character 4: reiatioaehip amoog ideatifie progreet, technical achievement, aad economic deveioomeat S: social aad moral impiicatiooe Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 a.o 100.0 ioo.o i 100.0 100.0 100.0 105 minutes in the regular class in School D were spent. In School S, procedure of centri­ fuge, cleaning precipitation and reaction rate1 were shown in two chemistry classes by the same chemistry teacher. The films were for procedural knowledge, which took two to three minutes showing time for each film. In School D, development of vocational interest objective was pursued by showing a 40 minutes of video-film, Women in Chemis­ try,2 which showed several women working in the chemistry-related areas. On the field trips or in guest speaker classes, as shown in Table 16, School S did not have this type of class during the observation periods of the study. However, School D did have one class period of this type. A guest speaker, invited from a local pharma­ ceutical company, talked about his company’s products, spectrometer used in his labora­ tory, and analytical chemistry. In School D, 58.6 percent of the procedure knowledge and comprehension objectives and 25.3 percent of the relationship with technical and economic development objective were counted. Educational objectives were analyzed with respect to the six types of teaching methods: (1) the lecture, problem solving, and socratie method (Teaching method, 1, 7, 8); (2) the lecture and socratie method (Teaching method, 1, 8); (3) the demonstration (Teaching method, 2); (4) the student experiment, discussion and socratie (Teaching method, 3, 5, 8); (5) the film-slide showing (Teaching method, 4); and (6) the field trips or guest speaker (Teaching method, 9). All in all, as shown in Figure 23 (The exact fig­ ures will be shown in Table 27 of Chapter 6), educational objectives in the chemistry classes of the three programs were emphasized in the following order knowledge and comprehension objectives (A), 46.3 percent to 60.2 percent; scientific inquiry I: observing and measuring (B), 11.2 percent to 17.8 percent; manual skills (G), 8.2 percent to 17.5 ’The films were produced by Ealing Film Loops. *The video tape was produced by The University of Michigan. 100 Table 10. Educational Objectives in Field Trip or Guest Speaker Classes School* aad Procram* Edacatioaai Obieetiw* School S, Recalar Chemistry freqaeacy % School S, Adwaacad Placemeat Chemistry freqaeacy % School D, Recalar Chemiatry freqaeacy % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 s 0.0 0.0 0.0 s.* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY L obeerriac aad a m t t i i u 1: obeerrin* T. detcriolioa of obwrratio* 3: m*a*ar*m«at 4: seiectinc iaitrameat S: ealibratioa markiact of iaitrameat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: setkinc a oroblem aad war* to loir* it 1: recocaitioa of problem 2: formalatioa of hreethem* 3: chooiioR a aeriei of exporimeats 4: deaiaa of orocedar* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY lit iaterpretioR data aad reaeralisatioa I: pmceisiac data 2: makinc fanctioaal relationship 3: interpretation of data 4: extrapolation aad iaterpolatioa S: era!nation of a hysothetti by data S: Reaeralisatioa 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: recocaitioa of th* need of a modal 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 o.o ! 0.0 0.0 0.0 KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION t: fact* 2: urm inoloRr 3: concept 4: coayoatioa S: trend aad leqaeaca 3: daaeificatioa. catecorie*. criteria 7: techaiqae. proc*dare* J: principle or law 9: theory or coacepteal schema* 10: demoait rat ioa ia a bow context 11 : traailatioa to other symbolic form* 0.0 1 83.8 3.1 38.8 107 Table 10 (cont’d.). School* aad Proarams Edacatioaai Objective 3: sperificaiioa of phenomena nplaiaed br a model 4: dedactioa of aow hypothesis from a theoretical modot S: interpretation aad evalnation of tho malt* of experiments to toot a theoretical modd 3: rrriaioa aad extension of a tbooretieal modd School S, Recalar Chemistrr % freoaoacy School S, Advaactd Placement Chemistry * freaaeacr School D, Rtfaiar Chemistry freonencv * 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 APPLICATION 1: ia the tamo field 2: ia the different fidd of science 3: oataide of scieace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of 3hi Its ia nein* eaaipmeat t. eoBunoa laboratoir performance 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: favorite attitado toward science 2: aceeotaaee of ideatifie iaoairv 3: adootioa of seieatifie attitado i: eaiovmeat of seieatifie leamia* S: daveloemeat of iaterest ia seieice 8: deveioomeat of voeatioaal iatoretts 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 t.l 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .< .3 11.1 ORIENTATION 1: rdaaioaships amoac varioaa scientific statemeats 2: iaflaeaeo of sdeaeo oa ahilosoehv 3: to the evolatioaasr character 4: relationship amoaf ideatifie prepress, technical achievement, aad economic devdoomeat 3: social aad moral implications Total 0.0 0.0 2.S 25.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 1 S.1 3.0 25.3 100.0 100 90 80 Regular Program In School S ?o 60 Advanoed Placement Program In School S 50 *10 ^ Regular Program in School D 108 30 20 10 I J- 0 B C D Educational E F Objectives Figure 23. Educational Objective* ia the Classroom Observation H 109 percent; application (F), 3.2 percent to 16.1 percent; attitudes and interests (H), .9 per­ cent to 14.6 percent; scientific inquiry II: seeking a problem and ways to solve it (C), 0.0 pereent to 4.2 percent; orientation (I), 0.0 percent to 2.8 percent; scientific inquiry III: interpreting data and generalization (D), 0.0 percent to 1.4 percent; and scientific inquiry IV: theoretical model (E), 0.0 percent. As shown in Figure 23, the regular program in School S emphasized objective A more than in other programs; the advanced placement program in School S emphasized objectives B, F, and G more than in the other programs; and the regular program in School D emphasized objectives H and I more than in the other programs. 5.1.3. E ducational O bjectives in th e E valuation M ethods. Evaluation methods used in the two schools were analyzed in terms of educational objectives. As evaluation methods, the two schools used worksheet questions, textbook problems, laboratory questions, and tests. The worksheet questions were prepared by teachers and distributed to students. Most worksheets were problems about certain topics intended to make students practice the application procedures of chemical, and mathematical principles. The worksheet questions included essay writing about chemistry-related articles in the advanced placement class in School S. For homework, students wrote five essays summarizing and commenting on articles published in science magazines or newspapers. The textbook problems were selected by teachers or sometimes by students in the textbooks used in each program. The textbook used in the regular program in School S, was “Chemistry: A Modern Course" by Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., the 1975 edi­ tion. The textbook used in the advanced placement program, was “Chemistry: A Con­ 110 ceptual Approach, D. Van Nostrand Co., the 1979 edition. The textbook used in the regular program in School D, was “Chemistry: Experimental foundations, Prentice-Hall, Inc., the 1975 edition. The laboratory questions were in the back of each laboratory topic in lab manuals used in each programs. The lab manual used in the regular program in School S, was “Laboratory Chemistry”, published by Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., the 1983 edi­ tion. The lab manual of the advanced placement program in School S was “Experimen­ tal chemistry”, published by McGraw-Hill Book Co., the 1976 edition, which was used for laboratory courses in general chemistry at college level. The lab manual used in School D was “Laboratory manual - Chemistry: Experimental Foundations” , PrenticeHall Inc., the 1975 edition. Teachers selected certain laboratory topics. Students did experiments, which were prepared by teachers and lab assistants. And students turned in lab reports, which included laboratory questions. The tests were selected among examinations after each chapter, examinations after each semester, and examinations after one school year. The tests were prepared by teachers with the long teaching experience (15 years teaching experience of the teacher in School S and 23 years teaching experience of the teacher in School D). The types of question in the various tests were both objective and subjective. Students solved the worksheet, textbook, and laboratory problems during the class period or a t home as homework. But the tests were taken during class periods. Tables 17-20 showed the educational objective analysis of the worksheet questions, textbook problems, laboratory questions, and tests. In the worksheets, as shown in Table 17, knowledge and comprehension and application objectives were 54.4 percent in the advanced placement class in School S, 82.0 percent in the regular class in School S, I ll Table 17. Educational Objectives in Worksheets Schoob tad Procraaa Edacatieaai Obieetrry School S, Rifalar Chomiatry fraoaaacy % 28.3 2.S 3.5 8.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 .5 0.0 0.0 1.0 52.5 5.0 7.0 13.0 8.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: obserriac aad meaaariac 1: obtorriaa 2: doocristioa of obserratioa 3: moaaaremeat 4: selactia* iastramaat S: ealibratioa markian of iaatrameat 4.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY 11: seelciaa a oroblam aad way* to lobe it 1: racocaitioa of oroblam 2: fonnolatioa of byaothaaia 3: eboeaiaa a aarita of eRMrimeata 4: deaica of orocedare 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY III: iatorDKtiar data aad reaeraliiatioa 1: orocaaaia* data 2: aakiac faactioaal reiatioaabio 3: iatarorttatioa of data 4: extraoolatioa aad iatanolatioa S: sraloatioa of a broothaaia by data 8: maeraliaatioa 3.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 8.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical modal 1: recomitioa of the aeed of a aodd 2: fonaolatioa of a tbaoreticai modal 1.0 0.0 1.0 KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: facta 2: ttrmiaolorr 3: coaeeot 4: caaaaatioa S: tm d aad aeqaaaca 6: daaaificatioa. categoric*. criteria 7: techaiaae. orocedarea 8: oriaeiole or law 9: thaoty or eoaceptaal schemas 10: demoastratioa ia a aow coatari 11: tnaolatioa to other symbolic fora* 18.8 1.0 2.0 8.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 School S, Adyaacad Placamaat Chamiatiy fraoaaacy % 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.8 0.0 0.0 School D, Racalar Chaabtry fraoaaacy % 18.0 0.0 1.0 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.5 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20 20 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.8 2.0 25.8 2.0 3.0 18.2 3.0 7.8 112 Table 17 (cont’d.). School* aad Proxrama Educational Objecthro 3: apeeificaiioa of phenomena ’ explained by a model 4: dednction of now hypothaaia from a theoretical modal S: interpretation aad e*aiaatioa of the raanlta of exparimoata to taat a theoretical modal 8: rrriaioa and axtanaioa of a theoretical modal APPLICATION 1: in the »m a field 2: in tha different field of aeiaaea 3: ootaide of aeiaaea School 3, Reciter Chemiatiy freoiency % School 3, Advanced Placement Chemiatiy freonency % Scheoi D, Reciter Chemiatiy fraaneacr % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 14.8 0.0 0.0 20.5 20.5 13.3 13.3 0.0 0.0 26.8 26.8 20.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 58.1 58.1 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of akiila in nainc eoatoment % common laboratory gerformaaee 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: favorite attitude toward aeiaaea 2: aeeaptaaea of aciantifie iaqniry 3: adoption of aciantifie attitnde 4: enjoyment of aciantifie leonine S: deveiooment of intareat in aeiaaea 8: deveioomant of vocational iatareata 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0. 5.7 3.3 20.0 13.4 8.6 0.0 ORIENTATION I: nUtionahipa amoac variona aciantifie atatementa 2: inflnanea of aeiaaea on philoaoohy 3: to tha evolutionary character 4: rtfaiioaahip amonc aciantifie pro(rota, technical achievement, aad economic deveiooment S: racial aad moral imnlicatioaa Total 0.0 12.8 25.6 2.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.1 4.0 12.2 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SO.l 8.7 0.0 50.0 100.1 13.4 100.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 100.0 113 and 92.0 percent in the regular class in School D. All of the scientific inquiry objectives were 18.1 percent in the regular class in School S. Twenty percent of the attitudes and interests objectives, and 25.0 percent orientation objectives were appeared in the advanced placement class in school S. All of the application objectives in the three pro­ grams were applications in the same field of science. In the textbook problems, as shown in Table 18, knowledge and comprehension objectives were 53.4 percent in the regular class in School S, 43.1 percent in the advanced placement class in School S, and 28.6 percent in School D. Application objec­ tives were 63.0 percent in School S, 50.9 percent in the advanced placement class in School S, and 46.6 percent in School D. The textbook in School D included more appli­ cation type of questions than ones in School S. The textbooks in School S included more recall type of questions than the one in School D. Information concerning convention and classification was asked in the regular class in School S. Factual, convention, and principle knowledges were used to solve textbook problems in the advanced placement class in School S. In the laboratory questions, as shown in Table 19, the regular program in School S asked more application skills than in the advanced placement program or in School D. The regular program in School S asked less knowledge and comprehension than in the advanced placement program or in School D. Interpreting d ata and generalization objec­ tives were 2.8 percent in the regular program in School S, 10.0 percent in the advanced placement program, and 28.2 percent in School D, which was larger than other evalua­ tion methods. However, the scientific inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model objectives did not appear in any program. There were no laboratory questions concern­ ing manual skills. When students do experiments, they need a lot of manual skills and 114 Table 18. Educational Objectives in Textbook Problems School* aad Preen mi EdacatioaaJ Obteetrre KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: fact* 2: termiaoloer 3: concert 4: csaTcatiaa 5: tread aad leoneact 4: ciueifieitioa. eateKoric*. criteria 7: technique. aroeadaiaa 8: orinciole ar lav 9: theory ar coacertual ichaaaa 10: demoait ratiaa is a a n r context 11: traailatiaa ta other symbolic forma School S, Ra|aiar Chetmitrr fraoaaacy % 28.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 S.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S3.4 43.4 10.0 School S, Ademoted Placement Chexaiitry freqneacy % 21.0 8.1 .0 .0 7.5 0.0 0.0 .4 5.1 1.7 0.0 0.0 43.1 10.2 1.3 1.3 15.0 .3 10.2 3.4 School D, Retaiar Chemiatry freqneacy % 14.3 4.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 4.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 10 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: abaarriac aad meaeariac 1: obeareinc 2: deecriatioa of obeerritioa 3: mtmiarement 4: seiectiac iaatTamaat 5: eaiibratioa marhian of iaitrameat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 t.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: seekiax a oroblam aad wvre to rolre it 1: recocaitioa of oroblam 2: formolatioa of hyoothaaii 3: eheaiiac a sariea of exoerimeate 4: desim of oreecdara 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY lit intentretiar data aad ceaeniiiatioa 1: oroceninx data 2: makiaa faaetiaaaJ reiatieaihio 3: intetvretatioa of data 4: extnoolation aad iataroolatiea S: eralaatioa of a hyoethafit by data 8: xeaermlisatioa 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical model 1: recenitioa of the seed of a model 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 2.0 115 Table 18 (coat’d.). School* aad Pmnam* Edaeatioaai Objective 3: ipocifkatioB of pkeaomoaa mlaiaod by a model 4: dodactioa of aew hypothoeio from a theoretical model S: iatorpntatioa aad oralaatioa of th* malt* of otperimeate to toot a theoretical model k review* aad extuiioa of a theoretical model APPLICATION 1: ia th* earn* Held 2: ia th* difToreat field of scioac* 3: oawid# of acioac* School S, Rofalar Chomiftry fnoaoacy % School S, Adraaced Pfacemeat Chemietry * freqaeacy School D, Rocalar Chomiitrr fnoaoacy 35 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.3 23.3 0.0 0.0 46.0 46.0 23.5 23.5 0.0 0.0 56.9 56.9 31.5 31.5 0.0 0.0 03.0 03.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: doroiopmoat of ikill* ia aeiaa eqaiomeet 2: coDuaoa laboratory ooeformaaco 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: faro rite attitad* toward eeioae* 2: acceotaace of scientific iaaairr 3: adootio* of scientific attitede 4: eniovmeat of scientific learaiac S: deveiooment of iatercet ia odeac* 0: doroloamoat of rocatioaal iatomt* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 .5 .3 0.0 2.0 ORIENTATION 1: relationship* among rarioa* ecieatific statemeaU 2: iaflaeace of eeieae* oa philoeoohy 3: to the trolatioaary character 4: rdatioaehip amoa( ecieatific progreee, technical achievemeat, aad ecoaomic doroiopmoat 5: social aad moral implicatioa* Total 0.0 0.0 1.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 50.1 .3 1.1 50.0 100.0 100.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.2 100.0 116 Table 19. Educational Objectives in Laboratory Questions Schooia tad Ptoimrae Edaeatioaai Obieetiye School S, RecaJar Chemiatiy fraoaaacy % 13.0 2.3 2.3 2.3 School S, Advaacad PIac*meat Chomiatry fnoaoacy % KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: facta % termiaolocy 3: coaceat 4: eoaaoatioa 5: tiaad aad n t i n c t 9: ctaaaiflcatioa. cateeonea. criteria 7: techaiaae. grocedarte S: priacioio or law 9: theonror coacegtaal achemea 10; demoaatntioa ia a bow coatect 11: traaalatioa to other symbolic forma 7.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY t obeerviac aad maaaerinc 1: obaerriac 2: deacriatioa of obacrratioa 3; aoaaaramoat 4; sdectiae iaetrameat S: caiibratioa markinn of iaatnmoat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.0 .7 Z1 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: eeokiac a oreblom aad wara to aohro it 1: recomitioa of oroblam 2: formolatioa of hyaotheaia 3: chooaiar a aoriaa of exDorimeata 4: detiiro of orocadaro 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY III: iateraretia* data aad neaaraliiatioa 1: groceraiar data 2: oulciaa fonctioaal relatioaahio 3: iatarpretatioa of data 4: extragolatioa aad iateroolatioa 3: eralaatioa of a hroothaaia by data S: reearalixatioa 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV: theoretical modal 1: reeoiraitioa of tha aeod of a modal 2: formolatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.3 2.3 2.3 23.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 ZS 0.0 4.2 12.5 2.8 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.3 3.0 8.4 23.0 5.8 2.8 11.8 8.0 1.4 4.2 10.0 10.0 School D, Rtfaiar Chemiatry fraaaeacr % 20.0 4.0 .6 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.7 3.0 0.0 1.5 40.3 8.1 1.2 3.7 3.1 .8 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 8.3 1.2 .8 0.0 .3 .3 0.0 1.2 14.0 3.0 2.3 4.4 .3 1.0 1.0 28.2 10.1 4.6 8.0 .6 2.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 13.3 6.0 3.0 .8 .8 117 Table 19 (cont’d.). Schools sad Proera mi Edacstiossi Objective 3: specification of phenomena explained by s model 4: dedoctios of sew hypothesii from s theoretical model 5: isteipretaiioa sad evaluation of th* m alts of experiments to test a theoretical model 8: reiitioa aad txtiniioa of a theoretical model APPLICATION 1: is th* tame field 2: is t he different field of tciesc* 3: ootsid* of teiesc* School S, Regular Chemistry fraoaescy % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry freaaeacy % School D, Regular Chemistry fraqaency % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.1 30.1 0.0 0.0 78.4 78.4 18.8 18.8 0.0 0.0 31.8 31.8 11.3 11.3 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: development of thill* is utinx eosipmest 2: commoa laboratory oeiformaac* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: faro rite attitade toward tcieac* 2: acceptaac* of tciestific iaqairr 3: adoption of tdeatific attitade 4: eaioyment of tcieatific learniae 5: deveiooment of isteieet ia science 8: deveiooment of vocational interest! 3.9 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ORIENTATION 1: relationships among varioat scientific statements 2: inflnence of science on philosophy 3: to th* evolutionary character 4: relationship among scientific progress, technical achievement, and economic development 5: social aad moral implications Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.9 3.8 3.8 100.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 149.8 33.8 33.8 100.0 •Daring th* frequency coasting. 1/3 (.3333...) n u coasted u .3. So .03333... i n deleted by the round-ofT rale and ia this c o m , .4 wu lotted. Therefore th* total it 49.8 iattesd o f 50.0. 118 learn a lot of manual skills. The manual skills can be evaluated. An evaluation of manual skills was attempted in a British nationwide examination for high school gradu­ ates who were planning to go college. In the tests, as shown in Table 20, more knowledge and comprehension in the regu­ lar class in School S was asked than in the advanced placement class or in School D. More application in the advanced class in School S was asked than in the regular class in School S or in School D. Two percent of the manual skills appeared in the regular class in School S. No scientific inquiries were asked in any of three programs. No attitudes and interests objectives were evaluated in any of the three programs. The large portion of convention knowledge and comprehension was asked in the regular in School S and in School D. In School D, 3.4 percent of the relationship of science, society, economics, and technology objectives were counted. Educational objectives of the evaluation methods were evaluated with the use of worksheets, textbook problems, laboratory questions, and tests. Knowledge and comprehension objectives (A) were also mostly emphasized as the analysis of 40 class observations. Ail in all, as shown in Figure 24 (The exact figures will be shown in Table 27 of Chapter 6), educational objectives in the evaluation methods of the three programs were emphasized in the following order: knowledge and comprehension objectives (A), 39.5 percent to 48.0 percent; application (F), 43.7 percent to 45.4 percent; scientific inquiry III: interpreting data and generalization (D), 2.2 percent to 7.0 percent; attitudes and interests (H), 1.2 percent to 5.0 pereent; orientation to other areas (I), 0.0 percent to 8.4 percent; scientific inquiry II: seeking a problem and ways to solve it (C), 0.0 percent to .5 percent; scientific inquiry IV: theoretical model (E), 0.0 percent to .5 percent; and manual skills (G), 0.0 percent to .5 percent. The objectives A and F were emphasized 119 Table 20. Educational Objectives in Tests School* aad Program* Edacatiouai Obioctir* KNOWLEDGE AND COMPREHENSION 1: fact* 2: termiaolocy 3: coaceet 4: coaeeatioa 5: tread u d leqaeace 6: daaeificatioa. caiecorie*. criteria 7: techaiaae. orocedaree 8; Driaciala or law 0; theory or ceaceotaai ichemee 10; demoait ratio* ia a aow coatoct 11: traaalatioa to other anabolic farm* School S, Refolar Chemiitry fieoneacy % 38.0 4.0 10 3.0 14.0 0.0 10 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 710 10 10.0 8.0 2S.0 12.0 10 School S, Adraactd Placemeat Chemistry fieoaeacy % 20.7 4.7 17 .8 3.4 0.0 0.0 11 3.3 2.0 0.0 0.0 School D, Regaiar Chemiitry fnqaeacy % 41.4 14 7.4 1.2 IS 20.4 3.1 1.1 .8 0.3 IS 3.2 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.2 8.8 3.1 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY I: obeerriac aad meantime 1; a Sterna* 2: deecriotioa of obiorraaioa 3: meaiareraeat 4: selecting iaatrnmeat 5: calibration markings of iaitrameat 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY II: seeking a oroblem aad wart to sole* it 1: raconitioa of problem 2: formalatioa of hroot hat* 3; chooaiac a aerie* of enerimeata 4: design of proccdar* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY III: interpreting data aad generalisation 1: processing data 2: making faactioaal relationship 3: iaterpretatioa of data 4: extrapolation aad iateroolatioa S: eralaatioa of a hrootheai* by data 8; generalisation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IV; theoretical model 1; recognition of the seed of a model 2: formalatioa of a theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 817 10.2 2.2 1.2 118 13.0 8.4 7.2 120 Table 20 (cont’d.). School* aad Edacatioaal Obioctir* 3: specification of phenomena exolniied b r a modd 4: deduction of arc hypothesis from a theoretical modd 5: interpretation aad rralmatioa of tha malt* of acpariaaeata to tett a thooreticai aodd 3: revision aad crtea*ioa of a thooreticai aodd APPLICATION 1: ia tha earn* field 2: ia tha different field of science 3: oataido of science Schod S, Regaiar Chemistry fieoaeacr % School S, Advanced Placement Chemietrr % freqnaacr School D, Ragalar CkemiftiT frmaaacv % 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 13.0 0.0 0.0 28.0 28.0 29.3 29.3 0.0 0.0 50.8 50.8 10.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 MANUAL SKILLS 1: dardopaaat of akilla ia asina eqaiomant 2: commoa labontorr perfonnaac* 1.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ATTITUDES AND INTERESTS 1: faro rite attitade toward aeiaaea 2t aceeotanc* of scientific inoairr 3: adootioa of sdeatific attitade 4: eaioyment of ecieatific learaiac 5: dareioomaat of iatantt ia science 8: dardopaaat of rocatioaal internet* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ORIENTATION 1: rdatiouhipa aaoac ratioa* ecieatific etatemaat* 2: iailnenee of eeieac* oa ohiloaoDhr 3: to th* erolatioaarr character 4: rdatioaahip among ecieatific progress, technical achieremeat. aad ecoaomic dereiopment 5: social aad moral implicaiioaa Total 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 S0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 100.0 100.0 37.9 37.9 3.4 .8 1.2 1.1 2.2 50.1 1 100.0 100 Regular Program in School Advanced Placement Program in School S Regular Program in School D 20 Educational Objectives Figure 24. Educational Objectives in the Evaluation Methods 122 mostly in all three programs. The objectives D, H, and I appeared quite a bit; however the objectives C, G, and G rarely appeared. As shown in Figure 24, the regular program in School S emphasized the objective A; the advanced placement program in School D emphasized the objectives H and I; and the regular program in School D emphasized the objective D more than the others. Educational objectives were emphasized differently in the instructions and evalua­ tion methods. (The differences will be shown in Table 27 of Chapter 0.) Instructions include lecture, problem solving, student experiment, and other classes; and evaluation methods include worksheets, textbook problems, laboratory questions, and tests. Knowledge and comprehension objectives (A) were more emphasized in instruction (46.3 percent to 60.2 percent) than in evaluation methods (40.4 percent to 48.0 percent). Scientific inquiry I objectives (B) and manual skill objectives (G) were 19.4 percent to 35.3 percent in instruction but 2.5 percent to 2.9 percent in evaluation methods. Objec­ tives B and G appeared together in student experiment classes. Objectives B and G were instructed but were not as extensively evaluated. Application objectives (F) were emphasized more in evaluation methods (43.7 percent to 45.4 percent) than in instruc­ tion (3.2 percent to 16.1 percent). In all three programs, there were discrepancies in instruction and evaluation in terms of emphasis of educational objectives. 5.2. H igh school C h em istry T opics an d T each in g M eth o d s. This section includes the analysis of topic and the analysis of teaching method, mainly in terms of teaching hours. For the analysis, data were collected from yearly teacher plannings. The total teaching hours in the 1983-1984 school year were 155.4 hours in the regular class in School S, 154 hours in the advanced placement class in School S, and 162.8 hours in School D. Tables 21, 22, and 23-1 to 23-15 are for the 123 analysis of topics and teaching methods. 5.2.1. T h e A nalysis o f T opics The analysis of topics used Klopfer’s content categories, which were ten chemistry content categories and five general content categories. Chemical materials topic category, as shown in Table 21, included density of liquid, qualitative analysis, hetero­ geneous system, and industrial process. Industrial process was not taught in any of the three programs. The advanced placement class in School S taught qualitative analysis for 23.5 hours. The regular class in School S also taught qualitative analysis. School D did not teach the chemical materials topic category itself. The classification of the chemical elements topic category included mainly periodic table, metal, and nonmetal. The advanced placement class in School S did not include this topic category because students in the advanced placement class had already learned it. Chemical law topic category was taught 20 percent in School D, 23.0 percent in the regular class in School S, and 15.3 percent in the advanced placement class. Energy relar tionships and equilibrium in chemical systems topic categories included thermodynamics, reaction rate, acid, and base, which were taught in a large portion in the three programs (24.7 percent to 31.0 percent). Electrochemistry included Faraday’s Law and potentials, which were taught in a small portion (3.0 percent to 4.8 percent). A1 three programs also included small portions of the nuclear chemistry topic category (.0 percent to 1.9 percent). All three programs did not teach these topics, such as the chemistry of life processes and the biographies of scientists. The introductory organic chemistry was taught just in the advanced placement program in School S. 124 Table 21. Topics Categories in The Three Programs Schools and Programs Tooie Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, AP Chemistry Hours % Chemical Materials: density of liquid, qualitative analysis heterogeneous system, industrial Diocese 8.0 5.1 23.5 Classification of Chemical Element: oeriodie table, metal and nonmetal O.S 8.2 0.0 Chemical change: chemical and ohrsieal chanre 5.S 3.5 12 Chemical Laws: basic chemical laws, concepts of mole, and molecular and emoirical formula 37.2 23.0 Energy Relationships and Equilibrium in Chemical Systems: acid and base thermodynamics, reaction rata 40.3 15.3 School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 0.0 8.8 4.0 7.8 2 1.2 23.8 15.3 42.4 20.0 25.8 38.0 24.7 51.5 31.8 7.0 4.5 7.4 4.8 5.8 3.8 Atomic and Molecular Structure: chemical bond, nomenclature 32.3 20.8 28.0 16.9 42.2 25.8 Introductory Organic Chemistry 0.0 12.4 8.1 0.0 Chemistry of Life Processes 0.0 0.0 Nuclear Chemistry 1.0 .8 3.0 1.9 2.8 1.7 Historical Development: theory of light, facts and value judgement 1.0 .8 1.1 .7 2.0 .7 Nature and Structure of Science 0.0 0.0 1.0 .8 Nature of Scientific Inquiry: develoo a emblem 2.0 0.0 8.5 4.0 Biograohies of Scientists 0.0 0.0 0.0 Electrochemistry: Faraday's law Measurement: scientific notation, significant figures, accuracy and oreeision Total 11.5 156.4 1.3 7.4 00.8 7.0 154.0 0.0 4.5 100.0 0.0 182.8 90.9 125 General topic categories were rarely taught in the three programs. Historical development topic category was taught in all of the three programs. Measurement topic category was emphasized in the regular and advanced pacement classes in School S but not taught in School D. 5.2.2. T h e A nalysis o f T each in g M eth o d s. Teaching methods shown in the teacher plannings were classified in the 7 categories: lecture, student experiment, film-slide showing, problem solving, field trips or guest speaker, test, and review. The analysis of teaching methods was done in terms of teaching hours and the percentage of the teaching hours of the total teaching hours. In each one-year program, as shown in Table 22, lecture method was used 44.0 per­ cent of the total instruction time in School D; 39.8 percent, in the regular program in School S; and 29.2 percent, in the advanced placement program in School S. Student experiments in the advanced placement program were performed individually. Students experiments in the regular class in School S were done individually or together with one or two laboratory partners —two to three students became one laboratory group. In School D, most students performed experiments with laboratory partners. Once again, laboratory groups consisted of two to three students. In the advanced placement pro­ gram, student experiment took up 31.2 percent of the total class time; in the regular program of School S, 20.9 percent; and in School D, 15.0 percent. Problem solving method was used in about 16 percent to 18 percent of the yearly teaching hours in the three programs. Film-slide showing, and field trips or guest speaker methods were used rarely in all of the three programs. About 21 percent of one-year teaching hours were spent for test and review sessions. Film-slide showing was used for half or one class period. Guest speakers were invited once a year in all of three 128 Table 22. Teaching Method Categories in The Three Programs Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistnr Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistnr Hours % School D, Regular Chemistnr Hours % Lecture 61.8 30.8 46.0 20.2 71.6 44.0 Student Experiment 32.5 20.0 48.0 31.2 24.5 15.0 .5 .3 .5 .3 1.0 .6 28.0 16.7 27.1 17.6 30.3 18.6 1.0 .6 1.0 .6 1.0 .6 Test 23.0 14.8 10.0 12.3 22.0 14.1 Review 10.6 6.8 13.4 8.7 11.5 7.1 165.4 08.0 154.0 00.0 102.8 100.0 Film-Slide Showing Problem Solving Field Trip or Guest Speaker Total 127 programs. The field trip method was not planned due to a lack of financial support. Generally both schools gave tests after finishing each chapter, and at the end of semes­ ters and school years. Tests took 12.3 percent to 22.0 percent of the whole teaching hours; review session for preparing the students for the examination took 0.8 percent to 8.7 percent of the total teaching hours. The lecture teaching method was a more popu­ lar method in the regular classes in Schools S and D than in the advanced placement class in School S. Student experiment teaching method was used in the advanced place­ ment program as much as 48.0 percent of the total class hours, which was a larger por­ tion than than any single method, including the student experiment method used in the two regular programs in Schools S and D. The analysis of teaching methods performed, which was extended further in the next section. 5.2.3. Teaching M ethods with respect to each T opic C ategory. Teaching methods were analyzed with respect to Klopfer’s 10 chemistry topic categories and five general topic categories, which were tabulated in Tables 23-1 to 2315. In the chemical material topic category, as shown in Table 23-1, qualitative analysis was taught in two programs in School S, where both film-slide showing and student experiment methods were used. In the advanced placement program in School S, 17 hours of student experiment method were used for the qualitative analysis. In the classification of chemical elements topic category, as shown in Table 23-2, the regular program in School S included experiments on making a periodic table. How­ ever, School D did not have any experiment class in this topic category, and the advanced placement program did not even include the category. 128 Table 23-1. Teaching Methods of Chemical Materials Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 2.0 25.0 1.0 4.3 0.0 Student Experiment 3.0 37.5 17.0 72.3 0.0 Film-Slide Showing .5 8.3 .5 2.1 0.0 8.5 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 2.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 Test 1.0 20.0 2.0 8.5 0.0 .9 11.3 1.0 4.3 0.0 8.0 100.1 23.5 100.0 0.0 Review Total 0.0 Table 23-2. Teaching Methods of Classification of Chemical Element Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 45.5 Lecture 5.3 55.8 0.0 3.0 Student Experiment 2.0 21.1 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 0.0 1.0 Field Trio or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 1.5 15.8 0.0 1.8 24.2 Review Total .7 9.5 7.4 100.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 6.8 15.2 100.1 15.2 129 In (he chemical change topic category, teaching methods were tabulated in Table 23*3. To teach the chemical law topic category, as shown in Table 23-4, the three pro­ grams mostly used lecture, student experiment, and problem solving methods. To teach energy relationships and equilibrium in the chemical system topic category, as shown in Table 23-5, the three programs used more lecture method than student experiment method. For teaching the electrochemistry topic category, as shown in Table 23-0, the advanced placement program in School S and in School D used the student experiment method: the regular program in School S did not. For teaching atomic and molecular structure, as shown in Table 23-7, the two regu­ lar programs used the lecture method 52.0 percent to 60.0 percent of the time. The two programs in School S included more experiment classes than in School D. The advanced placement program spent 17.3 percent of its time on the review method for this category. Students in the advanced placement program had learned this category before. However, due to its importance as a basic theory of modern chemistry, they reviewed this category for 4.5 hours. Introductory organic chemistry, as shown in Table 23-8, was taught only in the advanced placement program of School S. The two regular programs did not include this category. In the advanced placement program, five hours of experiments and 3.5 hours of lectures were included. The chemistry of life processes was not taught in any of the three programs as shown in Table 23-9, because the category was thought to overlap with with biology and the human body. To teach the nuclear chemistry topic category, as shown in Table 2310, School S invited a guest lecturer from a nuclear pollution research area. Two or three hours were spent on this category in the advanced placement program in School S 130 Table 23-3. Teaching Methods of Chemical Change Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistnr Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 1.0 18.5 2.0 15.7 0.0 Student Experiment 2.0 37.0 2.0 10.7 2.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 5.0 Field Trio or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 Test l.S 27.8 2.0 15.7 0.0 .0 15.7 100.0 0.0 12.0 100.1 0.0 2.0 Review Total 5.4 100.0 0.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 Table 23-4. Teaching Methods of Chemical Laws Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 13.0 34.5 8.5 33.2 18.5 38.9 Student Experiment 8.0 21.1 5.0 23.4 8.5 15.3 Film-Slide Showing .5 1.3 0.0 10.0 25.5 8.5 Lecture Problem Solving 0.0 25.4 8.5 20.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 Test 3.3 8.8 2.9 11.3 6.5 15.3 2.9 37.7 7.7 100.0 1.7 25.0 0.0 99.9 4.4 42.4 10.4 99.9 Review Total 0.0 0.0 131 Table 23-5. Teaching Methods of Energy and Chemical Equilibrium Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 17.0 30.7 17.0 44.7 17.5 34.0 Student Experiment 10.0 23.4 11.0 28.9 11.0 21.4 Film-Slide Showing ' 0.0 Problem Solving 0.5 Field Trip or Quest Speaker 0.0 Test 7.6 17.8 3.2 8.4 8.1 15.7 1.7 42.8 4.0 100.1 3.8 38.0 10.0 90.9 3.4 51.5 0.0 100.0 Review Total 0.0 0.0 15.2 3.0 7.9 0.0 11.5 22.3 0.0 Table 23-6. Teaching Methods in Electrochemistry Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistnr Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Houra % 2.0 27.0 4.0 69.0 0.0 3.0 40.5 1.0 17.2 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 2.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 Test 1.0 14.3 1.1 14.9 .4 0.9 Review Total 1.0 7.0 14.3 100.1 .3 7.4 4.1 100.0 .4 5.8 0.9 100.0 Lecture 3.0 Student Experiment 42.9 28.0 1.0 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 132 Table 23-7. Teaching Methods of Atomic and Molecular Structure Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistnr Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistnr Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 17.3 52.0 8.2 31.5 25.3 60.0 Student Experiment 5.5 10.5 4.0 15.4 2.0 4.7 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 Problem Solving 4.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 Test 4.9 14.7 4.5 1.6 33.3 4.8 100.0 4.5 26.0 Lecture Review Total 0.0 12.0 4.8 0.0 6.8 16.1 1.0 2.4 17.3 5.1 12.1 17.3 100.0 2.0 42.2 4.7 100.0 18.5 0.0 Table 23-8. Teaching Methods of Introductory Organic Chemistry Schools and Procrams Teaching Method Categories School St Regular Chemistnr Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistnr Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 0.0 3.5 28.2 0.0 Student Experiment 0.0 5.0 40.3 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 .5 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 2.1 16.9 0.0 Review Total 0.0 0.0 1.3 12.4 10.5 99.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 133 Table 23-9. Teaching Methods in Chemistry of Life Processes Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 0.0 0.0 0.0 Student Experiment 0.0 0.0 0.0 Film-Slid* Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 0.0 0.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 0.0 0.0 Review Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table 23-10. Teaching Methods of Nuclear Chemistry Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % 50.0 School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 1.3 Lecture 0.0 1.5 Student Experiment 0.0 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 .5 15.7 1.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 1.0 1.0 33.3 0.0 Test 0.0 Review Total 0.0 1.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 3.0 100.0 40.4 35.7 .5 17.9 0.0 2.8 100.0 134 and in School D. In order to teach the historical development category, as shown in Table 23-11, School S spent one hour in each chemistry program, which was accomplished by using the lecture and problem solving method. In School D, two hours were spent on this category, which was done with the aid of lecture and film-slide showing method. In order to teach nature and structure of science, as shown in Table 23-12, School S did not spend any time; but School D spent two hours, which were comprised of the lecture and problem solving method. In School D, 0.5 hours were spent to teach the nature of scientific inquiry (3.3), as shown in Table 23-13, which included two hours of student experiment, 2.5 hours of lec­ ture and one hour of problem solving. The contents were “Why we believe an atom,’1 “Construction of a logical model,” and “Precipitation reaction.” As shown in Table 2314, no program taught the biographies of scientists category (3.4). To teach Measure­ ment category, as shown in Table 23-15, the two programs in School S arranged 2.5 to 4.5 hours of lecture and 2.5 to 3.5 hours of problem solving periods. But School D did not teach any of the measurement category such as significant figures or scientific nota­ tion. The teaching method was analyzed in terms of teaching hours with respect to 10 chemistry and five general topic categories. The following methods were mostly used in the three programs: lecture, student experiment, and problem solving methods. The three methods were used over 77 percent of the time in the three programs: 77.4 percent in the regular class in School S, 78.0 percent in the advanced placement class in School S, and 77.6 percent in School D. 13S Table 23-11. Teaching Methods of Historical Development Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % 100.0 School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % .8 72.7 School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % 1.0 Lecture 1.0 Student Experiment 0.0 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 1.0 Problem Solving 0.0 .3 Field Trip or Quest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 0.0 0.0 Review Total 0.0 1.0 100.0 0.0 1.1 27.3 100.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 100.0 Table 23-12. Teaching Methods of Nature and Structure of Science Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 0.0 0.0 .5 Student Experiment 0.0 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 0.0 .5 Field Trio or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 0.0 0.0 Review Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 50.0 50.0 100.0 138 Table 23*13. Teaching Methods of N ature of Scientific Inquiry Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 1.0 50.0 0.0 2.5 38.5 Student Experiment 1.0 50.0 0.0 2.0 30.8 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 0.0 1.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 0.0 .7 10.8 Review Total 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 .3 6.5 4.6 100.1 100.0 15.4 Table 23-14. Teaching Methods of Biographies of Scientists Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistry Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 0.0 0.0 0.0 Student Experiment 0.0 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 0.0 0.0 0.0 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 0.0 0.0 Test 0.0 0.0 0.0 Review Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 137 Table 23-15. Teaching Methods of Measurement Schools and Programs Teaching Method Categories School S, Regular Chemistrr Hours % School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Hours % 35.7 School D, Regular Chemistry Hours % Lecture 4.5 30.1 2.5 Student Experiment 1.0 8.7 0.0 0.0 Film-Slide Showing 0.0 0.0 0.0 Problem Solving 3.5 Field Trip or Guest Speaker 0.0 Test 1.8 13.0 1.2 17.1 0.0 .0 7.8 .8 11.4 0.0 11.5 00.0 7.0 00.0 0.0 Review Total 30.4 2.5 35.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 138 5.3. Student Interest This section includes descriptions of positive and negative student interest phenomena, student interest with respect to teaching methods, and student interest with respect to educational objectives. Generally students liked student experiment class more than lecture, and problem solving class in all three programs. 5.3.1. Description o f S tudent Interest Points Description of student interest was included in Chapter 3 as a data collection category. During the data collection period, more phenomena about student interest had been found. The positive student interest was due to the following facts: (1) Students had tasks to do in a given time. In lecture classes, writing and listening were their tasks, whereas in student experiment class, their tasks were mixing chemi­ cals, observing the reactions, describing them and washing glasswares. • (2) Instruction was about the contents which students did not know and th a t were new to students. (3) Students participated in instruction by asking several questions to get an under­ standing of the teaching contents. (4) All students watched the teacher and listened carefully in lecture class. (5) The contents of instruction included the mentioning of the environmental materials used by the students themselves, such as gasoline, perfume, salt or pepper...... (6) All students prepared their experiments by carefully washing the test tubes. (7) If there were challenging things such as writing reports and turning in them at the 139 end of the class period or finishing experiments and finding specified results (color, dis­ tance, ...) in the given period, then students did their tasks and discussed the topics with each other. (8) Most students took.part in experiments. Secondly, the negative student interest conditions are: (1) Several students yawned. (2) The contents of instruction were already known by the students. (3) Some students finished their tasks faster than the allotted time, and then had noth­ ing to do for remainder of class. (4) Students chatted with the other students or teachers. Student interest phenomena were found during classroom observation as obvious behavior. So the obvious phenomena were assigned as positive or negative student interest. For example, a student in School D was dropping a solution on a piece of glass with a medicine dropper and her partner was going to write her description of observa­ tion, as shown in Figure 22 of Chapter 4 of this dissertation. They participated in the experiments eagerly. In this case, student interest is 100 percent. Student interest can also be studied in terms of the number of student questions, and aspects of their ques­ tions: such as who raised the question and to whom the question was raised. For exam­ ple, students ask questions to teachers or other students. Another direction of question­ ing is for teachers to ask questions of one or a group of students. 140 5.3.2. Student Interest with respeet to Teaching M ethods Student interest was indicated in a form of percentage of student interest, which was calculated by dividing student interest points by the number of five minute periods during which certain teaching methods were used. Student interest was studied with respect to six types of teaching methods, such as the lecture, problem solving and socratic method; the lecture and socratie method; the demonstration method; the stu­ dent experiment, discussion and socratic method; the film-slide showing method; the field trips or guest speaker method. Chemistry students in both schools showed over 50 percent student interest on the average. As shown in Table 24, the average student interest was 09.4 percent in the reg­ ular program in School S, 54.2 percent in the advanced placement program in School S and 65.3 percent in School D. However, the demonstration method received 100 percent of student interest in all of the three programs. The student experiment classes were more interesting to students than the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method classes. The demonstration, the film-slide showing, and the field trips or guest speaker teaching methods were used in short time period, just 10 minute to 115 minutes in the three programs. Most of the classes were instructed by three types of teaching methods, which were: the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method; the lecture and socratic method; and the student experiment, discussion, and socratie method. Counting only the three popular types of teaching method, the averages of student interest were 49.0 percent in the regular chemistry program in School S; 57.0 percent in the advanced placement chemistry program in School S; and 59.1 percent in the regular program in School D. The regular program in School D showed the highest student interest among the three popular types of teaching method. The regular chemistry class 141 Table 24. S tudent Interest with respect to Different Teaching Methods Schools and Programs Teaching methods School S, Regular Chemistry % or 5 min. SX* periods point S.I. School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry % of 5 min. SX period point S.I. School D, Regular Chemistry 5 min. SX % of period point S.I. Lecture, Problem Solving, and Socratic Method 30.0 10.0 33.3 30.0 16.0 41.0 30.0 20.0 51.3 Lecture, and Socratic Method 27.0 10.0 50.3 10.0 5.0 50.0 27.0 18.0 66.7 Demonstra­ tion 1.0 1.0 100.0 1.0 1.0 100.0 5.0 5.0 100.0 Student Experiment, Discussion, Socratic Method 57.0 31.0 54.4 30.0 24.0 80.0 35.0 10.0 50.3 1.0 1.0 100.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 5.0 62.5 0.0 116.0 0.0 83.0 46.0 10.0 124.0 5.0 72.0 50.0 50.0 Film-slide Showing Field Trip, Guest Speaker Total means "student interest." 142 in School D showed the highest student interest in the lecture, problem solving and socratic method, and the lecture and socratic method. The advanced placement chemistry class showed higher student interest than the regular class'in School S. Especially in student experiment teaching method, where the advanced placement chemistry students showed 80.0 percent student interest. The number of students in the class was IS and students in the class chose the course among various elective courses. Those students who attended in the advanced placement chem­ istry class were chemistry oriented students among 222 students in twelfth grade. During the class of film-slide showing, the advanced placement chemistry students showed normal (0.0 percent) student interest. The film showed in School S included qualitative analysis techniques such as washing precipitate, which had already been used in student experiment class periods. The film did not include new information. But if the film included some new information, then it got more attention from student. In the regular class in School S, student interest was 100 percent. In the regular class in School D, 62.5 percent student interest was shown. Students and teachers had different opinions about student interest with respect to teaching methods. As a result of teacher interviews on student interest, the teachers in both schools said th a t the combination of teaching methods was ideal. The teacher in School D gave an example of an ideal combination of teaching methods: two days of lec­ ture, one day of student experiment, one day of problem solving, and one day of test or review in each week. He also said th at he tried to follow the ideal combination of teach­ ing method. If five days of lecture or five days of student experiment was performed each week, he said students would be bored. It was found th a t students liked experi­ ment class more than lecture class, and they liked demonstration class more than lecture 143 class as a result of interviewing six students, two from each program. One student interviewed said th at she liked experiment class more than lecture class, but she also liked lecture class. The reasons for the students’ preference of experiment class were: (1) that a student could see the change of color or precipitation phenomena as evidences of chem­ ical reaction, and (2) th at a student could experience chemical reactions and chemistry, which helped a student learn more and remember better. In this section student interest was analyzed with respect to teaching methods, and student interest will be analyzed in the next section with respect to educational objectives. 5.3.3. Student Interest with respect to E ducational O bjective Average student interest is shown in Table 25 with respect to educational objective. Both scientific inquiry II objectives, and attitudes and interests objectives achieved 100 percent student interest in the regular program in School S. Scientific inquiry I objec­ tives, and manual skill objectives got high student interest in the advanced placement program: the former 79.6 percent, and the latter 85.5 percent. School D also got 76.8 percent student interest in both scientific inquiry I objectives. But the regular program in School S got relatively less student interest in scientific inquiry I objectives, and manual skill objectives. Student interest was analyzed further with respect to different groups of teaching methods. The results are tabulated in Tables 26-1 to 26-6. In the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method classes, student interest was less than average, as shown in Table 26-1, except observing and measuring objectives in School D, and attitudes and interest objectives in the two regular programs In the lecture and socratic method classes, as shown in Table 26-2, knowledge and comprehension objectives got higher student interest (50 percent to 61 percent) than 144 Table 25. Student Interest with respect to Different Educational Objectives School* aad Program* Edacatioaal objective* School S, Regular Chemistry SX* 55 of S mia. period point S.L School S. Advanced Placement Chemistry 5 mia. SX 55 of period p d at S.I. School 0 , Regalar Chemistry 5 mia. S X 55 of period poiat S.I. Knowledge aad Compnhouioa: all level* of kaowledm n .T 34.8 49.9 38.3 1S.8 41.3 70.9 37.7 53.2 Sdeatillc laqaiqr 1: obforriac. meaiariag aad lolactiaic eeaipmeata 1S.1 7.4 49.0 14.7 11.7 79.0 13.8 10.0 70.8 Sdeatific taqaiiy II: problem*, hypothed* aad wav* to lohro thorn t .s t .s 100.0 0.0 1.0 .2 20.0 Sdeatifie laqaiqr III: iatoiprttiac data aad ceaeralitatioa 4.9 t.s 2S.8 0.0 2.0 1.2 60.0 Sdeatific laqaiqr TV: baildiag aad reviiiBg thooiatical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Applicatioa: ia tho field of acioaco or oateide of odeae* s .s 9.3 41.8 13.3 8.0 45.1 4.0 •.5 •12.5 17.9 10.8 80.3 14.S 12.4 88.5 10.1 7.0 69.3 Attitado* aad (atorotto: enjoyment aad vocational interests ia ideaco t.O t.O 100.0 1.9 .4 21.1 18.0 13.2 73.3 Oritatatioa: to technology, economics, jodety aad morality 0.0 3.5 2.5 71.4 123.3 71.9 Maaaal aldlla: ekills ia odac oqaipmoat* aad laboratorr performance Total •“S.I.” m a n "student internet. “ 11S.7 0.0 59.4 89.7 40.3 145 Table 20-1. Student Interest in Lecture, Problem Solving, and Socratic Method Schoolsaad Programs Educational Object ires School S, Regular Chemistry 95 of 6 mia. S.I.* period point S.I. Knowledge and Comprehension: all levels of knowledge 38.5 8.0 30.2 School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry 5 mia. S.I. 96 of period point S.I. 34.0 10.0 41.7 School 0, Regular Chemistry 5 mia. S.I. 95 of period point S.I. 32.5 18.1 55.7 .3 100.0 •.5 -12.5 1.0 100.0 Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting instrument 0.0 0.0 .3 Scientific Inquiry II: problems, hypothesis, and ways to solve them 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Applicatioa: in the field of science or outside of science 2.5 Manual skills: skills in using equipment and laboratory performance 0.0 Attitudes and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests ia science 1.0 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 Total •“S.I.” means "student interest.” 30.0 1.0 40.0 13.3 6.0 45.1 0.0 0.0 1.0 100.0 1.5 0.0 38.8 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 4.0 16.0 38.7 10.8 146 Table 26-2. Student Interest in Lecture and Socratie Method Classes Schools and Programs Educational objectives Knowledge and Comprehension: all levels of knowledge School S, Regular Chemistry 5 mia. S.I.* % of period point SI. 25.0 15.0 57.0 School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry %ot 5 min. S.I. period point S.I. 10.0 5.0 50.0 School D, Regular Chemistry 5 min. S.I. %ot point S.I. period 25.5 14.5 61.7 Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting instrument 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry II: problems, hypothesis and ways to solve them 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 1.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Application: in the field of science or outside of science 0.0 0.0 0.0 Manual skills: skills ia using equipments and laboratory performance 0.0 0.0 0.0 Attitudes and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests in science 0.0 0.0 2.5 2.5 100.0 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 100.0 27.0 18.0 Total •“S.I. mews “student interest." 20.0 1.0 16.0 100.0 10.0 5.0 147 average student interest (41 percent to 53 percent) and student interest in the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method (30 percent to 55 percent) in all three programs. In the regular program in School S, interpreting data and generalization objectives got 100 percent student interest. In the regular program in School D, attitudes and interests, and orientation objectives also got 100 percent student interest. In the demonstration classes, as shown in Table 20-3, all educational objectives shown got 100 percent student interest. A teacher or a student demonstrated experiments and others watched them in demonstration classes. Students paid attention care­ fully in this type of instruction. In the student experiment, discussion, and socratic method classes, as shown in Table 26-4, knowledge and comprehension objectives in the regular program in School S got 63.2 percent student interest, which was higher than average student interest— 49.9 percent. Knowledge and comprehension objectives in advanced placement program and in School D got much less student interest than average. Interpreting data and generali­ zation objectives in the regular program in School S got 100 percent student interest. Interpreting data and generalization objectives, and theoretical model objectives in School O got 20 percent student interest, which was low student interest generally. Theoretical model objectives in the regular program in School S got normal student interest—0.0 percent. Manual skill objectives got high student interest, 60.3 percent to 85.3 percent in the three programs. In the film-slide showing classes, as shown in Table 26-5, knowledge and comprehension objectives got 100.0 percent student interest in the regular program in School S, but 0.0 percent in the advanced placement program in School S. Students in two programs in School S watched the same kind of film about qualitative analysis. But 148 Table 28*3. Student Interest in Demonstration Classes Schoolsand Programs EdnentienaJ objectives School S, Regular Chemistry %ot 5 mia. S.I.* period point S.I. Knowledge nod Comprehension: nil levels of knowledge Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting eqnioments Scientific Inquiry II: problems,hypothesis, and ways to solve them Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 0.0 0.0 .S .6 100.0 0.0 .5 School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry 38 of S mia. S.I. period point S.I. .5 100.0 .4 100.0 .4 School D, Regular Chemistry 5 mia. S.I. 38 of period point S.I. 1.6 1.6 100.0 1.3 1.3 100.0 1.0 100.0 1.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Application: in the field of science or outside of science 0.0 0.0 0.0 Manual skills: skills in using equipments and laboratory performance 0.0 .2 .2 100.0 1.0 Attitudes and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests in science 0.0 .4 .4 100.0 0.0 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 0.0 Total 1.0 •“S.I.” m n u “student interest.” • 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 4.0 4.0 149 Table 20-4. Student Interest in Experiment, Discussion, and Socratic Method School* and Programs Educational Object ire* School S, Regular Chemistry S6of 5 min. S.I.* period point S.I. School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry % of 5 mia. S.I. period point S.I. School D, Regular Chemistry 6 min. S.I. % of period pointed S.I. Knowledge and Comprehension: all levels of knowledge 18.3 10.3 83.2 1.3 .3 23.1 7.0 1.2 17.1 Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting equipments 14.8 8.9 47.3 14.3 11.3 79.0 12.2 0.0 73.8 Scientific Inquiry II: problems, hypothesis, and ways to solve them 1.8 1.6 100.0 0.0 1.0 .2 20.0 Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 3.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 .2 20.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Application: in the field of science, or outside of science 3.0 1.3 43.3 0.0 0.0 17.9 10.8 60.3 14.3 9.1 6.0 65.0 2.7 60.0 Manual skills: skills ia using equipments and laboratory performance 12.2 85.3 Attitudes and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests in science 0.0 0.0 4.5 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total •“S.I.” mean* “student interest.” 58.8 30.9 29.9 23.8 34.8 19.3 150 Table 20*5. Student Interest in Film-Slide Showing Classes Schools and ProKrams Educational Objectives School S, Regular Chemistry 6 min. S.I.* 95 of period point S.I. School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry 95 of 6 min. S.I. period point S.L School D, Regular Chemistry S mia. S.L 95 of period point S.I. Knowledge and Comprehension: all levels of knowledge 1.0 Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting equipments 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry II: problems, hypothesis and ways to solve them 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Application: in the field of science or outside of science 0.0 0.0 .0.0 Manual skills: skills in using equipments and laboratory performance 0.0 0.0 0.0 Attitudes and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests in science 0.0 0.0 8.0 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total 1.0 •“S.I.” means “student interest.” 1.0 1.0 100.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 5.0 82.5 5.0 82.5 151 the condition of student knowledge was different and the student interest points were different. Students in the advanced placement program already knew the content of the films so they were not interested in watching those films. Accordingly, it got 0.0 percent student interest, which was still normal. In School D, attitudes and interests objectives got 62.5 percent student interest, which was generally high student interest. In the Held trips or guest speaker classes, as shown in Table 26-6, attitudes and interests objectives, and orientation objectives got high student interest in School D. Knowledge and comprehension objectives got less than average student interest in knowledge and comprehension objectives. In this section, student interest analyzed in the three programs: the regular pro­ gram in School S, the advanced placement program in School S, and the regular program in School D. As previously stated, students showed 100 percent student interest in demonstration classes in all three programs. Students liked the student experiment, dis­ cussion, and socratic method more than the lecture, problem solving, and socratic method in all three programs; the former was 54.4 percent and the latter was 33.3 per­ cent in the regular program in School S; 80.0 percent, 41.0 percent in the advanced placement program in School S; and 59.3 percent, 51.3 percent in the regular program in School D. Students liked the lecture and socratic method more than the lecture, prob­ lem solving, and socratic method in all three programs; the former was 59.3 percent and the latter was 33.3 percent in the regular program in School S ; 50.0 percent, 41.0 per­ cent in the advanced placement program in School S; and 66.7 percent, 51.3 percent in the regular program in School D. Students liked knowledge and comprehension, scientific inquiry I, and manual skill objectives generally in all three programs. However, students showed different student 152 Table 26-6. Student Interest in Field T rip or Guest Speaker Classes Schools and Programs Educational Objective* School S, Regular Chemistry 5 min. S.I.* 96 of period point S.I. School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry 95 of S mia. S.I. S.I. period School 0 , Regular Chemistry S min. S.L 95 of period point S.I. Knowledge and Comprehension: all levels of knowledge 0.0 0.0 6.3 Scientific Inquiry I: observing, measuring and selecting equipments 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry II: problems, hypothesis and wars to solve them 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry III: interpreting data and generalisation 0.0 0.0 0.0 Scientific Inquiry IV: building and revising theoretical model 0.0 0.0 0.0 Applicatioa: in the field of science, or outside of science 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.3 36.5 • Manual skills: skills ia using equipment* and laboratory performance 0.0 0.0 0.0 Attitude* and Interests: enjoyment and vocational interests in science 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.1 100.0 Orientation: to technology, economics, society and morality 0.0 0.0 2.5 1.5 60.0 Total 0.0 0.0 10.0 4.0 •"S.I.'* means “student interest." 153 interests in three programs such as in scientific inquiry II, III, application, and attitudes and interests objectives. In the scientific inquiry II, student interest was 100 percent in the regular program in School S; 20 percent in the regular program in School D. In the application objective, student interest was 41.8 percent in the regular program in School S; 45.1 percent in the advanced placement program in School S; and -12.5 percent in the regular program in School D. 5.4. Summary In Chapter 5, data analyses were presented on educational objectives, chemistry topics, teaching methods, and student interest shown in the two high school chemistry programs. Educational objectives were instructed in the following order, knowledge and comprehension objectives (A), 46.3 percent to 68.2 percent; scientific inquiry I (B), 11.2 percent to 17.8 percent; manual skills (G), 8.2 percent to 17.5 percent; application (F), 3.2 percent to 16.1 percent; attitudes and interests (H), to 2.8 percent; and scientific inquiry II (C), III (D) and IV (E), 0.0 percent to 4.2 percent in the 40 classroom observa­ tions. In the student evaluation methods, educational objectives were emphasized in the following order: knowledge and comprehension (A), 39.5 percent to 48.0 percent; applica­ tion (F), 43.7 percent to 45.4 percent; scientific inquiry III (D), 2.2 percent to 7.0 percent; attitudes and interests (H), 1.2 percent to 5.0 percent; orientation (I), 0.0 percent to 6.4 percent; scientific inquiry II (C), IV (E), and manual skills (G) objectives, 0.0 percent to .5 percent. The advanced placement program in School S emphasized more scientific inquiry I, application, and manual skills in the class observations, and more attitudes and interests and orientation in the evaluation methods than the two regular programs did. 154 In the analysis of chemistry topics, the two regular programs planned to emphasize chemical laws (23.9 percent to 20.0 percent), energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems (25.9 percent to 31.0 percent), and atomic and molecular structure (20.8 percent to 25.8 percent). The advanced placement program in School S planned to emphasize chemical materials (15.3 percent), chemical laws (15.3 percent), energy rela­ tionships and equilibrium in chemical systems (24.7 percent), and atomic and molecular structure (10.9 percent). All of the three programs rarely taught general topic categories (0.0 percent to 7.4 percent). In the analysis of teaching methods, the two regular pro­ grams planned to use lecture (39.8 percent to 44.0 percent), student experiment (15.0 percent to 20.9 percent), problem solving (10.7 percent to 18.0 percent) and test (14.1 percent to 14.8 percent). The advanced placement program in School S planned to use more student experiment method (31.2 percent) than lecture method (29.2 percent). In the analysis of student interest, students showed 100 percent student interest in demonstration classes in the three programs. On the average, over 50 percent student interest was found throughout each program. Lecture, and problem solving classes (33.3 percent to 51.3 percent) received relatively less interest than experiment classes (54.4 percent to 80.0 percent) and lecture classes (50.0 percent to 60.7 percent). Manual skills received more student interest (60.3 percent to 85.5 percent) than knowledge and comprehension (41.3 percent to 53.2 percent). C H A PT E R 6 Sum m ary, Conclusions, and Further Research Plans In Chapter 6, the following sections are included: summary of chapters two through fire, which are literature review, the research methodology, the educational background of the schools, and the analysis of data, conclusions, further research plans and discus­ sion. 8.1. Summary This study included literature review, research methodology, and data analysis. In the literature review, it was found th at Klopfer’s educational objective categories are a comprehensive classification and include most specific science educational objectives, and th a t the classroom observation method gives close data on the actual curriculum. For this dissertation research, data were collected in two regular and one advanced place­ ment chemistry classes of two Michigan suburban high schools in order to reach four research objectives: (1) a description of the educational environment in the two high schools, (2) an analysis of the educational objectives, (3) an analysis of topics and teach­ ing methods, and (4) an analysis of student interest. A total of 40 class periods were observed; 20 of which were recorded with an audio tape recorder. Twenty sets of stu­ dent evaluation materials and three one-year teaching plans were surveyed. Klopfer’s 15S 158 categories were used for the analysis of educational objectives and chemistry topics. Categories were developed for use in the analysis of teaching methods and student interest. Most data were analyzed by counting frequency and calculating percentages, and then tabulated. The two schools were located in suburban towns near automobile factories and universities. Each of the two chemistry teachers had masters’ degrees and over 15 years of teaching experience. Over 60 percent of the students had continued their education beyond high school in the 1982*1983 school year. Both schools spent over $4 per chemis­ try student in the 1982-1983 school year. The two schools received over 90 percent of their financial support from the local school districts. School S had better facilities than School D, such as more chemicals (Sehool S had 1,000 kinds of chemicals; School D, 500), more room (School S had 2.1 m2 per student space in chemistry classroom; School D; 1.7 m2 per student), and more glassware (School S had 500 pieces of glassware; School D, 350.). Educational objectives were instructed in the following order: knowledge and comprehension objectives (A), 46.3 percent to 68.2 percent; scientific inquiry I (B), 11.2 percent to 17.8 percent; manual skills (G), 8.2 percent to 17.5 percent; application (P), 3.2 percent to 16.1 percent; attitudes and interests (H), and scientific inquiry II (C), III (D) and IV (E), 0.0 percent to 4.2 percent in the 40 classroom observations. In the stu­ dent evaluation methods, educational objectives were emphasized in the following order: knowledge and comprehension (A), 39.5 percent to 48.0 percent; application (F), 43.7 percent to 45.4 percent; scientific inquiry III (D), 2.2 percent to 7.0 percent; attitudes and interests (H), 1.2 percent to 5.0 percent; orientation (I), 0.0 percent to 6.4 percent; scientific inquiry II (C), IV (E), and manual skills (G), 0.0 percent to .5 percent. The 157 advanced placement program in School S emphasized more scientific inquiry I, applica­ tion, and manual skills objectives in the class observation, along with more attitudes and interests, and orientation objectives in the evaluation methods than those of the two reg­ ular programs. In the analysis of chemistry topics, the two regular programs planned to emphasize mostly chemical laws (23.9 percent to 20.0 percent), energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems (25.9 percent to 31.0 percent), and atomic and molecular structure (20.8 percent to 25.8 percent). The advanced placement program in School S planned to emphasize mostly chemical materials (15.3 percent), chemical laws (15.3 percent), energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems (24.7 percent), and atomic and molecu­ lar structure (10.9 percent). All three programs rarely taught general topic categories except measurement topic category. In the analysis of. teaching methods, the two regular programs planned to use lecture (39.8 percent to 44.0 percent), student experiment (15.0 percent to 20.9 percent), problem solving (10.7 percent to 18.0 percent), and tests (14.1 percent to 14.8 percent). They used the film-slide showing method for one or guest speaker method for zero to two class periods. The advanced placement program planned to use more student experiment methods (31.2 percent) than lecture methods (29.2 per­ cent). In the analysis of student interest, students showed 100 percent interest in the demonstration classes in the three programs. An average of over 50 percent student interest was found in each program. Lecture and problem solving classes (33.3 percent to 51.3 percent) received less interest than experiment classes (54.4 percent to 80.0 per­ cent and lecture classes (50.0 percent to 00.7 percent). Manual skills objectives captured greater student interest (00.3 percent to 85.5 percent) than knowledge and comprehen- 158 sion objectives (41.3 percent to 53.2 percent). 0.2. C onclusions This study found the following: 1. The two Michigan suburban high schools had highly qualified (master’s degrees and teaching certifications) and experienced (over 15 years teaching experience) chemis­ try teachers, and over 60 percent of total students who wanted to continue their education beyond high school. 2. The two Michigan high schools spent over $4 per chemistry student annually and were supported by the local school districts by over 90 percent. 3. School S had better facilities than School D, such as more room (School S had 2.1 m2 per student; School D, 1.7 m2), more chemicals (School S had 1,000 chemicals; School D, 500), and more glassware (School S had 500 glassware approximately; School D, 350.). 4. Knowledge and comprehension educational objectives were stressed strongly (46.3 per­ cent to 68.2 percent) in the classroom observation. 5. Scientific inquiry II, III, and IV objectives were rarely stressed (0.0 percent to 4.2 per­ cent) in the classroom observation. 6. Knowledge and comprehension (39.5 percent to 48.0 percent) and application educa­ tional objectives (43.7 percent to 45.4 percent) were primarily evaluated in the evaluation methods in the forms of tests, laboratory questions, worksheets, and text- 150 book problems. 7. Scientific inquiry II, IV, and manual skills objectives were rarely evaluated (0.0 per* cent to .5 percent) in the evaluation methods. 8. The two regular programs planned to stress the following topics (SchoolS,70.6per­ cent and School D, 83.4 percent) in detail: chemical lavs, 23.9 percent to 26.0 per­ cent; energy relationships and equilibrium in chemical systems, 25.9 percent to 31.6 percent; and atomic and molecular structure, 20.8 percent to 25.8 percent. 9. The advanced placement program planned to stress the following four topics (72.2 percent) in detail: chemical materials, 15.3 percent; chemical laws, 15.3 percent; energy relationships and equilibrium, 24.7 percent; atomic and molecular structure, 16.9 percent. 10. Two regular programs planned to stress the four teaching methods in detail: lecture, 39.8 percent to 44.0 percent; student experiment, 15.0 percent to 20.9 percent; prob­ lem solving, 16.7 percent to 18.6 percent; test, 14.1 percent to 14.8 percent. 11. The advanced placement program planned to use more student experiment (31.2 per­ cent) than lecture (29.2 percent). 12. Student experiment classes (54.4 percent to 80.0 percent) received more student interest than lecture and problem solving classes (33.3 percent to 51.3 percent) in the three programs. 13. Lecture classes (50.0 percent to 66.7 percent) received more student interest than lec­ ture and problem solving classes (33.3 percent to 51.3 percent) in the three pro- 160 grams. 14. Manual skills objectives received more student interest (60.3 percent to 8S.S percent) than knowledge and comprehension objectives 41.3 percent to 53.2 percent). 6.3. Further Research P lans What this study demonstrates is th a t the curriculum evaluation methods used here can be used effectively to make comparative studies from one system to another; and can be used also to show internally, within a system or curriculum, the degrees to which various categories of objectives are in fact being pursued and evaluated. The curriculum study for this dissertation was done in chemistry classes in two Michigan high schools. The following researches will be done: (1) The methodology used in this study can be applied to the Korean educational sys­ tem: analysis of educational objectives by classroom observation and in evaluation methods, analysis of topic and teaching method by study of teaching plans, and analysis of student interest by classroom observation and interviews. (2) The methodology used in this study can be applied to several schools in Michigan in order to investigate the average curriculum in Michigan high schools. The schools to be investigated are selected from various regions, such as rural, suburban, and urban areas, so that they can represent the local characteristics of the schools located. The curricula observed at the selected schools are summarized to show the average chemistry curriculum in terms of objectives, topics, or teaching methods. Then the curricula of School S and School D can be compared with the average curriculum to show the differences that exist and the influences on the chemistry curricula from the regional characteristics. 101 (3) The methodology used in this study will be used in several representative schools located in eastern, southern, mid-western, rocky mountain, and pacific states in order to compare the average chemistry curricula of the schools S and D or the Michigan schools with those of the U.S.. (4) The graduates who learned chemistry in high schools can be traced to rind out how they are successful in chemistry areas or how they use chemical knowledge, inquiry skills, manual skills, application ability, or scientific attitudes in their every day life. An evaluation method of the output side of chemistry curriculum must be developed, since this dissertation research is regarded as a development of a high school chemistry curriculum evaluation methodology from the input side of chemistry curriculum. 8.4. Discussion As shown in Table 27, there was difference between emphasis on educational objec­ tives in the instruction and in the evaluation methods. The educational objectives in the instruction were studied by classroom observation. Educational objectives in the evalua­ tion methods were studied by analyzing the four evaluation methods such as worksheets distributed by teachers, textbook problems, lab questions, and tests. In the instruction, the three programs mostly emphasized knowledge and comprehension objectives, but in the evaluation methods, they largely emphasized knowledge and comprehension, and application objectives. The application objectives in the evaluation methods were mostly the application of chemical knowledge in the same area of chemistry. Educational objectives differ according to different educational background. The educational background of students in community A was different from the educational 162 Table 27. Educational Objectives in the Three Programs School* and Procram* Educational objectives (%) School S. Retalar Chemiistrr Evalaatioa Classroom Observation Method School S, Advanced Placement Chemistry Classroom Eyalaatioa Observation Method School O, Rscalar Chemistry Classroom Evalaatioa Observation Method Know led(* and Comprehension: all lewd* of kaowledae <0.2 48.0 40.3 30.5 57.5 40.4 Scioatifie laqaity I: observing. measaring aad selecting eqnipmeats ts.t 2.0 17.8 2.0 11.2 2.0 Scioatifie laqaity H: problem*, hypothesis aad wav* to solve them 1.4 .5 0.0 0.0 .8 .3 Scientific Iaqairr III: iaterpretiac data aad generalisation 4.2 2.2 0.0 2.5 1.8 7.0 Scioatifie Iaqairr IV: baildiac aad revising theoretical model 0.0 .5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Applicatioa: ia the field of leieaee or oatside of science 4.8 44.8 1S.1 43.7 3.2 45.4 15.5 .5 17.5 0.0 8.2 0.0 .0 1.5 2.3 5.0 14.8 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.4 2.8 2.8 100.1 100.0 100.0 100.0 00.0 100.0 Maaaai skill*: skill* ia anac eqnipmeat* aad laboratory performaaee Attitadee aad Interests: eajoymeat aad vocational interest ia science Orientation: to technology, economics, society aad morality Total {%) 163 background of students in community B. The educational objectives of community A were different from the objectives of community B. The various objectives are indicated by Klopfer’s educational objective categories.1 Community A may emphasize knowledge and comprehension objectives more than attitudes and interests objectives. Community B may emphasize more application objectives over other objectives. Each community may have different educational backgrounds and different objectives. There is the assumption that ideal objectives existed in certain communities. The ideal objectives can be indicated by the percentage of each Klopfer’s major categoiy in terms of instruction time. For example, the knowledge and comprehension objectives, 50 percent; the scientific inquiiy I objectives, 10 percent; the scientific inquiry II objectives, five percent; the scientific inquiry III objectives, five percent; the scientific inquiry IV objectives, five percent; the application objectives, five percent; the manual skills objec­ tives, 10 percent; the attitudes and interests objectives, five percent; the orientation objectives, five percent. Ideal objectives are established differently from one community to another or from one country to another. It is possible to study how the educational objectives instructed in schools in a community differ from the ideal objectives. The discrepancy in the ideal objectives can be indicated as an ideality index. The index shows what the actual objec­ tives should strive for. This index can be counted according to historical evaluation of educational objectives. Educational objectives have been established as responses to social demand. Each chronological period has different social demands. The amount of which educational objectives of given periods respond to the social demands can be measured. ’Klopfer, "Evaluation of Learning in Science" 184 In 1982, the National Science Teachen Association of America emphasized sciencetechnology-society interactions and insisted that science-based societal issues should be taught for one-quarter of instruction time in high school.2 Table 28 showed percentages of educational objectives of the three programs and the NSTA position statement. The differences in objectives found in this study from those recommended in the NSTA posi­ tion statement were shown in Table 29. A simple method is used to show the overall differences from the standard objec­ tives in curricula. The simple method, a data abstraction method, is called “ You Ideal­ ity Index,”3 which is defined as a numeric value to show the efficiency of a curriculum in pursuing given educational objectives. The ideality index is calculated in two steps: (1) establishing a set of standard numeric values reflecting various desired educational objec­ tives, and (2) extracting numeric data from classroom observation and subtracting them from the standard numeric values. The resultant value is then the ideality index. The smaller the ideality index is, the closer the educational objective is to the ideal educa­ tional objective portion. These types of indices are very useful when the number of parameters considered are very large. To estimate the effectiveness of curriculum having a large number of parameters to be considered, the foregoing indices provide a clear way to demonstrate the reality of the classroom activities. A method to calculate You Ideality Index is discussed as follows. In this study, the standard or ideal educational objective portions were those recommended by the NSTA position statement. As shown in Table 28, the NSTA recommended the knowledge and comprehension objectives be taken in 51.2 percent of the total instruction National Science Teachers Association, “ Science-Teehnology-Soeiety: Science Education for the 1980s,” An NSTA Position Statement, 1982 T h e You Ideality Index was originally suggested by Younggap You. He is currently with Computing Research Laboratory, the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 106 Table 28. Proportions of th e Educational objectives School S Regular chemistry School S AP chemistry* School D Regular chemistry NSTA Knowledge and comprehension 71.9 57.7 74.6 51.2 Process skills 22.3 22.2 17.6 12.9 Application Science-based societal issues 5.7 20.1 4.2 10.6 0.0 0.0 3.6 25.3 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 Educational Objectives ( % ) T otal * “AP chem istry” means ‘‘Advanced placement chem istry.” Table 29. Differences from the NSTA Position Statement Educational Objectives School S Regular Chemistry School S AP Chemistry* School D Regular Chemistry + ** + + + + + 4.9 + 6.4 Science-based societal issues 25.3 25.3 21.7 You Ideality Index*** 30.2 25.3 28.1 Knowledge and comprehension Process skills Application * “AP chem istry” means “Advanced placem ent chemistry." •* " + ” means that the portion is more than the proportion o f NSTA. *** You Ideality Index is calculated by adding the differences from the standard proportions. In this case, the standard proportions are the proportions o f the NSTA Position Statem ent. 166 time in high school chemistry class; the process skills, 12.9 percent; application, 10.6 per* cent; science-based societal issues, 25.3 percent. The objective categories used in the NSTA Statement and the Klopfer’s used in this study are different, but these categories are adjusted by mapping in this way, such as the knowledge and comprehension objec­ tives in the Klopfer’s categories are mapping to the knowledge and comprehension objec­ tives in the NSTA Statement; the science inquiry objectives, to the process skills; appli­ cation objectives to the application; and the orientation objectives, to the science-based societal issues. And the attitudes and interests objectives and the manual skills objec­ tives in the Klopfer’s categories are not considered in the NSTA Statement. Thus the attitudes and interests objectives and the manual skills objectives were deleted in the mapping of two categories. The regular program in School S spent 71.9 percent of instruction time on the knowledge and comprehension objectives; 22.3 percent, process skills; 5.7 percent, appli­ cation; 0.0 percent, science-based societal issues. The regular program in School S (71.9 percent) spent more instruction time on the knowledge and comprehension objectives than th a t recommended by the NSTA (51.2 percent), which was expressed with “+ ” sign, as shown in Table 29. The process skills objectives (22.3 percent), which also took more instruction time than th at recommended by the NSTA (12.9 percent), which was also expressed with “+ ” sign. The application objectives (5.7 percent) took less instruc­ tion time than that recommended by the NSTA (10.6 percent), the case of which was indicated as 4.9 by subtracting 5.7 percent (value of the regular program in School S) from 10.6 percent (the standard value). The science-based societal issues (0.0 percent) were not considered in the regular program in School S, but they were recommended by the NSTA (25.3 percent), the case of which was indicated such as 25.3 by subtracting 0.0 percent from 25.3 percent. In the regular program in School S, the differences of 167 instruction time from the NSTA are indicated such as + , + , 4.9, and 25.3 respectively on each education objective. You Ideality Index, in the regular program in School S, was 30.2 by adding 4.9 and 25.3, and ignoring two + signs. By the same procedures, the advance placement program in School S showed 25.3 You Ideality Index; the regular pro­ gram in School D, 28.1 You Ideality Index. Table 29 showed th a t the advanced placement program in School S had educational objectives nearest to the educational objective portions recommended in the NSTA posi­ tion paper, where You Ideality Index was 25.3. The second nearest program was the reg­ ular program in School D, where You Ideality Index was 28.1. The program least near was the regular program in School S, where You Ideality Index was 30.2. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A. Anang and P. Lanier, What is the Subject M atterf : How the Social Organization of the Clattroom Affectt Teaching, Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, Research series No. 114, 1982. J.M. Armstrong, A Comparative Evaluation of an Investigative and Traditional Biology Laboratory Curriculum at the Introductory College Level, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Colorado, 1974. R.G. Barker and P.V. Gump, Big Schools, Small School• High School Size and Student Behavior, Stanford University Press, 1972. W. Bechner and J.D. Cornett, The Secondary School Curriculum*Content and Structure, Intext Educational Publishers, 1972. M. Binns, “Chemistry for Life: A Mode III Course,” Education in Chemistry, vol. 15, no. 5, September 1978, p. 143 and 145. C.T. Bishop, “High School Chemistry, relevance or Principles,” Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 54, no. 3, March 1977, pp. 169-170 B.S. Bloom, ed., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives; Cognitive Domain, Longman, 1981. J.S. Bock, Jr., Inquiry-Investigative and a Traditional Laboratory Program in High School chemistry on students’ Attitudes, Cognitive Abilities and Developmental Levels, Ph.D. dissertation, West Verginia University, 1979. G.C. Britton, “A Challenge Answered? —1,” Education in Chemistry, vol. 14, no. 2, March 1977, p. 37. J. Brophy et al., Relationships between Teachers’ Presentations of Classroom Tasks and Students’ Engagement in Those Tasks, Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, Research Series no. 116, 1982. W.C. Bungert, Effects of the chemical Education Material Study Curriculum on the 168 169 Teaching of High School Chemistry, Ph.D. dissertation, Western Reserve University, 1964. R.L. Call, A Comparison of Individualized and Traditional Methods for Teaching High School Chemistry, Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, 1974. L.N. Carmichael, D.F. Haines, and R.C. Smoot, Laboratory Chemistry, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., 1983. P.A. Cusick, A Study of Networks among Professional Staffs in Secondary Schools, Insti­ tute for Research on Teaching, Michigan state University, Research series no. 112, 1982. R.E.Davies, A Comparison of an Elective Mini-course Science Curriculum and a Conven­ tional Non-elective Science Curriculum at the Junior High School Level, Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania state University, 1977. J.Y. Dempsey III, A Comparison of Selected Lousiana High Schools Having High Percen­ tage Enrollments in Chemistry with Those Having Low Percentage Enrollments in Chemistry in terms of Certain Identified Instructional Teacher, and Students Characteristics, Ph.D. dissertation, McNeese state University, 1975. M. Dietz, R.L. Tellefson, R.W. Parry, and L.E. Steiner, Chemistry: Experimental Foun­ dations, 2nd Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975. F.G. Dillashow, The Effects of a Modified Mastery Learning Strategy on Achievement, Attitudes, and the Time on Task of High School Chemistry Students of Differing Aptitude and Locus of Control, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Georgia, 1980. M.F. Dobbins IV, The use of Chromatography to improve the attitudes of High School Chemistry Students towards Science, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsyl­ vania, 1980. F. Fornoff, Beginning an Advanced Placement Chemistry Course, Edition Y, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N.J., Test Collection. B.J. Fraser, “Use of Content Analysis in Examining Changes in Science Education Aims over Time,” Science Education, vol. 62, no. 2, 1978, pp. 135-141. S.P. Gannaway, Development of a High School Chemistry Textbook Evaluation Instru­ ment Using Survey and Content Analysis Techniques, Ph.D. dissertation, Auburn University, 1980. P.J. Gaskell, “Science Education for Citizens: Perspectives and Issues I. Science, Tech­ nology and Society: Issues for Science Teachers,” Studies in Science Education, vol. 9, 1982, pp. 33-46. J.I. Goodlad, A Place called School, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1984. 170 E.A.J. Hall, The Aaaeaament of Parental Knowledge, Comprehenaion and Attitudea about The Science Curriculum in a Junior High School, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1077. F.W. Hartford, Laboratory-Related Development of Reaearch Queationing Skills in Chem­ istry Students and Their Dependence upon Piagetian Intellectual Development, Ph.D. dissertation, The Florida State University, 1980. H.W. Heikkinen, A Study of factors Influencing student Attitudea Toward the Study of High School Chemistry, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Maryland, 1973. H.H.Helenmarie, A Study Conducted within selected Schools in Saint Paul, Minnesota, Designed to Assess Eight-year-old Children’s Attitudes Toward Science, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Minnesota, 1973. J.I. Hendricks Jr., The Comparative Effect of Twelve Weeks of the Science Curriculum Improvement Study and Textbook Approach on Achievement, Attitude toward Science, and Scientific Curiosity for Selected Rural Disadvantaged Fifth Grade Students, Ph.D. dissertation, Kansas State University, 1978. R. Hollon et al., A System for Observing and Analysing Elementary School Science Teaching: A User’s Mannual, Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, Research series no. 90, 1980. B.S. Hopkins et al., Chemistry and You, Lyons & Carnahan, 1939. International Monetary Fund, vol. VI, 1982, Washington D.C., p. 25. V.J. Janesick, An Ethnographic Study of a Teacher’s Classroom Perspective: Implications for Curriculum, Institute for Research on Teaching, Michigan State University, Research series no. 33, 1978. LE. Klopfer, “Evaluation of Learning in Science,” in Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning, B.S. Bloom et al. eds. , chapter 18, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1971, pp. 559-642. Korean Educational Association and Saehan Newspaper, Yearbook of Korean Education, 1981-198S, Seoul, Korea, pp. 112-122. D.R. Krathwohl, B.S. Bloom, and B.B. Masia, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives; Affective Domain, Longman, 1980. F. Lawrenz and A. Gullickson, A Comparison of CHEM Study Classes and Traditional Curriculum Classes with Respect to Achievement and Attitudinal Measures, Research paper no. 4, Minnesota University, College of Education. W.K. Medlin, The History of Educational Ideas in the West, The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1964. 171 R.W. Merrill, Parry, R.L. Tellefson, and H. Bassov, Laboratory Manual-Chemistry: Experimental Foundations, 2nd Edition, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1975. Michigan State Board of Education, Michigan K-12 Public School Districts Ranked by SeUected Financial Data, Bulletin 1014, 1980-1981, p. 34. Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea, Outline of New Curriculum: High School, 1982, pp. 89-91 and pp. 98-105. C.E. Mortimer, Chemistry: A conceptual Approach, 4th Edition, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1979. H. Munson, “An American Observations on Science Education in the Federal Republic of Germany,” Science Education, vol. 60, no. 2, April-June 1976, pp. 263-268. National Science Teachers Association, An NSTA Position Statement, “ScienceTechnology-Society: Science Education for the 1980s,” 1982 N ew York State Education Department, Albany, Bureau of Secondary Curriculum Development, Chemistry, A Syllabus for Secondary Schools, 1979. W.R. Ogden, “Secondary School Chemistry Teaching, 1918-1972: Objectives as Stated in Periodical Literature,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 235-246, 1975. D.A. Payne, The Assessment of Learning-Cognitive and Affective, D.C.Heath and Com­ pany, 1974. V.W. Plisko (Editor), The Condition of Education, 1983 Edition—A Statistical Report, National Center for Education Statistics V. Roadranka, A Comparative Content Analysis of Texas and Thai High School Biology Textbooks, Ph.D. dissertation, North Texas State University, 1981. N. Sapianchai, “Trends in the Selection of Content for Chemistry Curricula,” Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, vol. 11, no. 1, January 1979, pp. 21-27. M.A. Shampo, A Comparative study of two teaching Methods in High School General Chemistry, Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Wisconsin, 1960. Y. Shimazu, “Social and Economic Influences in Curriculum Change in Japan: Case His­ tory of Environmental Education,” Environmental Education and Information, vol. 1, no. 2, April-June 1981, pp. 135-141, M.J. Sienko, R.A. Plane, and S.T. Marcus, Experimental Chemistry, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976. D. Smetherham, “ Curriculum Innovation: Another View,” CORE: Collected Original 172 Rttovrcea in Education, vol. 1, so. 3, O ctoier 3977, pp. 31®D-3198. R.C. Smoot aad J. Price, Chrnuatrjp A O n io n i Cnane, Charles £ . M s i i Pm&Bsfcxng Co-, 1975. M. Spencer, 'uT3w Future