Scribd
Upload
8 views

Assignment 1 u2103640

Uploaded by

Archanaa Thesha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views

Assignment 1 u2103640

Uploaded by

Archanaa Thesha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

NAME THESHA ARCHANAA A/P ARULARASU

MATRIX ID U2103640/1

COURSE SIP4004 TEACHING AND ASSESSMENTS OF


CHEMISTRY COMPONENTS IN SCIENCE

TITLE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES IN TEACHING AND LEARNING


OF CHEMISTRY COMPONENTS IN SCIENCE

LECTURER ENCIK MOHAMAD HISYAM BIN ISMAIL

SUBMISSION DATE 3 DECEMBER 2024


Chemistry is often described as the "central science," bridging biology and physics, yet
many students find it anything but approachable. The subject's abstract nature, unique language,
and the traditional way it’s taught can make it intimidating. Over time, this has led to declining
interest and performance among students. These challenges matter because chemistry is a
cornerstone of scientific understanding, impacting everything from healthcare to environmental
science. The question, then, is how we can make chemistry more engaging, relatable, and easier
to learn. Using a constructivist approach, which values students’ prior experiences and active
learning, is one promising way forward. Addressing these issues is crucial because chemistry not
only supports scientific literacy but also plays a central role in the development of careers in
STEM fields (Treagust et al., 2000). Constructivist theories emphasize the importance of
students' prior knowledge and experiences, which form the foundation for meaningful learning.
This report explores key challenges in teaching chemistry, including language and representation
barriers, the disconnection from everyday applications, and the need for innovative teaching
strategies to support student understanding.

The language of chemistry is one of the primary obstacles to student comprehension.


Unlike everyday language, chemistry involves a specialized vocabulary with terms that often
carry different meanings in common usage. For instance, words like “pure” and “mixture” have
technical definitions in chemistry that differ from their colloquial interpretations, which can
confuse learners (Treagust et al., 2000). Furthermore, symbolic representations, such as
molecular diagrams and chemical equations, add to the complexity. These symbols require
students to visualize phenomena that are not directly observable, such as the structure and
behavior of particles at the atomic level (Cardellini, 2012).

Even the visual side of chemistry which comprises diagrams, symbols, and equations can
feel overwhelming. Johnstone’s triangle breaks it down whereby chemistry operates at three
levels, the macroscopic which is what you can see, the symbolic which include formulas and
equations, and the molecular such as invisible atoms and molecules. While these levels make
perfect sense to experts, students often get stuck trying to comprehend them. For example, they
might see a chemical equation but struggle to imagine what’s happening at the atomic level
(Cardellini, 2012). To help students, teachers need to break down these connections more
explicitly, perhaps by using models, animations, or relatable analogies.

One of the biggest complaints students have about chemistry is that it feels irrelevant.
Why should they care about balancing chemical equations when they can’t see how it applies to
their world? This lack of connection is a huge missed opportunity because chemistry is
everywhere like in cooking, cleaning, and even the environment. When students see these
connections, the subject starts to come alive. Efforts to address this problem have included
innovative curricula such as the Salters Chemistry course, which emphasizes everyday contexts
and hands-on activities. For example, students may explore topics like the chemistry of cooking,
environmental issues, or household materials to see the practical value of chemistry in their lives.
Studies have shown that students who participate in such programs not only gain a deeper
understanding of chemistry but also develop a more positive attitude toward learning the subject
(Treagust et al., 2000). By building on students’ prior experiences and connecting abstract
concepts to familiar examples, educators can foster greater interest and engagement.

Traditional methods of teaching chemistry, such as lectures and textbook-driven


instruction, often fail to address the diverse needs of students. Lectures, while efficient for
delivering large amounts of information, do not promote active engagement or critical thinking.
Instead, they position students as passive recipients of knowledge, which can limit their ability to
internalize and apply what they have learned (Cardellini, 2012). This issue is compounded by the
fact that many students enter chemistry classes with preconceived notions or misconceptions that
conflict with scientific explanations. Without opportunities for dialogue or exploration, these
misconceptions continue to exist. Constructivist teaching approaches offer promising alternatives
by emphasizing active learning and inquiry. Strategies such as cognitive conflict and
incompatible events are particularly effective in helping students confront and revise their
misconceptions. For instance, presenting an experiment that contradicts students’ expectations
can stimulate curiosity and encourage them to re-evaluate their understanding (Treagust et al.,
2000). Additionally, collaborative learning environments, where students work together to solve
problems and explore concepts, have been shown to enhance understanding and retention.
Chemistry’s reputation as a difficult subject is rooted in the way it is traditionally taught,
which often emphasizes abstract concepts, technical language, and rigid teaching methods. These
challenges, while significant, present an opportunity to rethink and transform how the subject is
delivered. By connecting chemistry to real-life contexts, such as environmental issues, household
products, and even cooking, educators can make it more relevant and engaging. When students
see chemistry in action in their everyday lives, their motivation and curiosity naturally grow.
Equally important is the need to adopt teaching strategies that prioritize active participation and
inquiry. Moving away from passive lectures and rote memorization toward hands-on
experiments, collaborative learning, and discussions about the history and philosophy of science
can help students develop a deeper, more meaningful understanding of chemistry. These
approaches not only address misconceptions but also inspire students to see science as an
evolving, creative field.

Ultimately, the goal is to make chemistry more approachable, relatable, and exciting for
learners. When we bridge the gap between theory and application and support students in their
journey to understand complex ideas, we foster not just scientific literacy but also a lifelong
curiosity about the natural world. With thoughtful changes, chemistry can transform from a
feared subject into one that sparks discovery and innovation in classrooms and beyond.

References

Cardellini, L. (2012). Chemistry: Why the subject is difficult? Educación Química, 23(2),
305–310. https://doi.org/10.22201/fq.18708404e.2000.2.66458

Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., & Nieswandt, M. (2000). Sources of students’ difficulties in learning
chemistry. Educación Química, 11(2), 227–233.

You might also like