Core Ideas and Topics: Building Up or Drilling Down?

Melanie M. Cooper · Lynmarie A. Posey · Sonia M. Underwood

117 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Chemical Education

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Science Education and Pedagogy Chemistry Education and Research Educational Theory and Curriculum Studies

Abstract

Abstract In this paper we discuss how and why core ideas can serve as the framework upon which chemistry curricula and assessment items are developed. While there are a number of projects that have specified “big ideas” or “anchoring concepts”, the ways that these ideas are subsequently developed may inadvertently lead to fragmentation of knowledge, rather than construction of a coherent, contextualized framework. We present four core ideas that emerged as a consequence of a transformation effort at our institution and discuss the relationships between core ideas and more recognizable topics in the context of a general chemistry course. We show how commonly taught topics can be supported and developed on the basis of the core ideas and discuss why this approach can lead to a more expert-like framework upon which students can build their future understanding.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 117 citations exist upstream.

References

2014Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics 2013Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States 2013Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment 1997A splintered vision : an investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education 2008Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL)2016Characterizing College Science Assessments: The Three-Dimensional Learning Assessment Protocol 1998Students' understandings of chemical bonds and the energetics of chemical reactions 2014Planning Instruction to Meet the Intent of the Next Generation Science Standards

Cited by

2017Practicing What We Preach: Assessing “Critical Thinking” in Organic Chemistry 2017Adapting Assessment Tasks To Support Three-Dimensional Learning 2017The ACS Exams Institute Undergraduate Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map IV: Physical Chemistry 2020The Tyranny of Content: “Content Coverage” as a Barrier to Evidence-Based Teaching Approaches and Ways to Overcome It 2020Arrows on the Page Are Not a Good Gauge: Evidence for the Importance of Causal Mechanistic Explanations about Nucleophilic Substitution in Organic Chemistry

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.