The problem with P. Chem.

Abstract

The physical chemistry course has long been known partially to "set the tone" of the chemistry major. It is, therefore, incumbent on the physical chemistry instructor to present this material in a manner that excites students, illustrates the usefulness of the material, and generates an understanding of the chemistry, rather than as a series of dull mathematical abstractions upon which the foundations of chemistry are laid. We believe that there are several indicators of whether this is being accomplished.

Faculty beliefs about the purposes for teaching undergraduate physical chemistry courses

“…The focus that faculty placed on helping students develop conceptual knowledge is not unprecedented. For over three decades, researchers and practitioners have been calling for a stronger focus on conceptual learning in the undergraduate physical chemistry education (e.g., Physical Chemistry Subcommittee, 1973; Society Committee on Education, 1984;Lippincott, 1988;Moore and Schwenz, 1992;Sözbilir, 2004;Zielinski and Schwenz, 2004;Ellison and Schoolcraft, 2008). These calls have spurred changes to the content and organization of the curriculum (Zielinski and Schwenz, 2004), instructional technologies used to teach the subject matter (Zielinski, 2008), and studentcentered instructional strategies for delivering content and practices (Spencer and Moog, 2008).…”

“…Although the curricula in upper-division physical chemistry courses are not mandated, there is a general belief about the topics that are traditionally included in the curriculum (Committee on Professional Training, 2008). Chemistry faculty members' subject matter knowledge is likely to inform their curricular selections, organizations, and critiques (e.g., Moore and Schwenz, 1992;Zielinski and Schwenz, 2004;Mortimer, 2008;Van Hecke, 2008).…”

“…A few years later Moore and Schwenz (1992) described their transcendental philosophy of physical chemistry in the undergraduate curriculum, which is described in the following text:…”

“…This opened the discussion to beliefs, goals, strategies, and practices, among other things, that faculty chose to introduce without explicit prompting. This prompt was generated based on our analysis of the practitioner literature related to teaching physical chemistry (e.g., Moore and Schwenz, 1992;Zielinski and Schwenz, 2004;Committee on Professional Training, 2008). During the interviews, faculty made specific references to a particular physical chemistry course, for example, an ACS-accredited course for chemistry majors that focused on quantum mechanics and spectroscopy.…”

“…It is the authors' understanding of the practitioner literature that faculty -as a grouphold varied philosophies about teaching physical chemistry (e.g., Moore and Schwenz, 1992;Schwenz and Moore, 1993;Zielinski and Schwenz, 2004;Ellison and Schoolcraft, 2008). On the one hand, practitioners of physical chemistry education have called for overhauls of the curriculum in pursuit of a better one (Moore and Schwenz, 1992). The tacit assumption supporting these calls for reform was the belief that students' difficulties could be overcome by finding more effective ways to select, organize, and present the subject matter.…”