Chemistry Week Five (or Ten, whichever way you look at it)

It was difficult to go back to uni this week (while even harder the next one!). After I seemed to just slip into a being over uni now. I guess I am getting to the end of my fifth year and want to experience something else. Yes I have been here five years due to taking a semester off then how I managed my subjects due to that.

As I mentioned in class my rounds where disappointing in many ways because they were not what I expected. But I really don't want to dwell on rounds here. I was glad that Deb did do the rounds debrief in this lesson. I know many others had already been through rounds debriefing, but this was my first class back at uni so I hadn't.

I found it interesting that while we had different experiences the things we learned on rounds where similar. Often someone would say 'oh I learnt this' and I would sit there and think 'oh yeah that happened to me too.' Listerning to others perspectives on this issues helped to clarify what I was thinking and begin to process some things I had not begun to deal with yet.

Curriculum.........
We spent the last part of the lesson looking at this. While we dealt with lots of parts, I found the idea of what is most important to chemistry being the most interesting. When we have been asked the question in the past I have always latched onto some content knowledge that I deamed to be necessary. (A fact or equation). So when Deb asked the question in class I wasn't surprised that the responses given where things like mole, and atomic theory.

What I was surprised about was my own thought process. Instead of content I began to think about skills I wanted. The facts where less important then getting students to learn skills behind science. Is it so important for students to learn atomic theory or mole or such???

Now before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying that they are not important to learn. I'm just wondering if they are necessary as part of chemistry at whatever year level. Sure you have to learn them sometime. But as Deb pointed out mole is just a unit of measurement. For me it is more important for students to understand why we need a unit of measurement and how measurement works, than being ace at using mole equations.

I'm not sure this is coming across entirelly clearly. Maybe if I explain it this way.... In science what is known as 'fact' or 'truth' changes. Be it the type of measurment we use or the shape of the atom. Our knowledge is evolving. But what it seems to me is the process of the discovery, the ideas behind this knowledge, stays the same. Perhaps instead of equiping students with the need to have complete understanding of this knowledge is wrong of us. Maybe we should focus our method on teaching the ideas and principals behind this knowledge. That's not to say ingor this knowledge exists, but to deal with they why instead of the what.

As I remember my second year uni lecturer saying. In the real world your not asked to memorise everything about chemistry (while you are for the exams). Its pointless because with books and the internet the knowledge is at your fingertips. What is necessary is having the skills and abilities to decode this information and deal with it in a logical way.

So maybe this is where chemistry curriculum needs to focus. Maybe it is the ability to process the information out there not the ability to memorise the perodic table (ect) that is most important.

(Sorry if this seems a rambling post. I suspect it is. I'm finding it difficult to put into words these ideas and questions that are floating around in my head. But I'd appreciate your thoughts on this. Even if they are that you think I've missed the point entirelly.)