Profile of laboratory instruction in secondary school level chemistry and indication for reform.

摘要

This study is a profile of the laboratory component of instruction in secondary school level chemistry. As one of several companion studies, the purpose of the study is to investigate present practices related to instruction as a means of producing reform that improve cognitive and non-cognitive learning outcomes.;Five hundred-forty students, from 18 chemistry classes taught by 12 teachers in ten high schools were involved in this study. Three schools included public and private schools, urban school, suburban schools, and rural schools. Three levels or types of chemistry courses were offered in these schools: school regular chemistry for college bound students, Chemistry in the Community or "ChemCom" for non-college bound students, and a second year of chemistry or advanced placement chemistry.;Laboratory sessions in each of these three levels of courses were observed, videotaped, and later analyzed using the Modified Revised Science Teachers Behaviors Inventory (MR-STBI). The 12 chemistry teachers, eight science supervisors, and selected students were interviewed to determine their professional backgrounds and other factors that might influence how they teach, how they think, and how they learn.;The following conclusions developed from the research are: (1) The three levels of chemistry courses are offered across high schools of varying sizes and locations. (2) Teachers perceive that students come to chemistry classes poorly prepared to effectively carry out laboratory experiences and/or investigations. (3) While students indicated that they are able to effectively use math skills in analyzing the results of chemistry laboratory experiments, teachers, in general, are not satisfied with the level at which students are prepared to use these skills, or to use writing skills. (4) Students working in pairs, is the typical approach. Group cooperation is sometimes used in carrying out the laboratory component of chemistry instruction in the ChemCom and AP chemistry courses. (5) Computers and other technology were not observed in use commonly in laboratory component of instruction in any levels of chemistry courses. (6) The results of MR-STBI (Modified Revised Science Teachers Behavior Inventory) indicates that the rank order of use of the teaching behaviors in laboratory based instruction among the three types of chemistry courses are similar. (7) A summary of recommended practices for use in teaching each of the three levels of high school chemistry courses is presented in Chapter 5.