University of South Florida Scholar Commons Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2006 Teaching philosophy and practices among chemistry faculty attending the MID project workshops: Implications for reform in chemistry Beverly Dee Barker University of South Florida Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd Part of the American Studies Commons Scholar Commons Citation Barker, Beverly Dee, "Teaching philosophy and practices among chemistry faculty attending the MID project workshops: Implications for reform in chemistry" (2006). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/2452 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Teaching Philosophy and Practices Among Chemistry Faculty Attending MID Project Workshops : Implications for Reform in Chemistry by Beverly Dee Barker A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Chemistry College of Arts and Sciences University of South Florida Major Professor: Jennifer Lewis, Ph.D. Kirpal Bisht, Ph.D. Donilene Loseke, Ph.D. Maralee Mayberry, Ph.D. Mike Zaworotko, Ph.D. Dana Zeidler, Ph.D. Date of Approval: April 19, 2006 Keywords: faculty development, undergraduate chemistry reform, teaching conceptions, pedoagogical content knowledge, teaching practices, faculty demography © Copyright 2006, Beverly Dee Barker Dedication This work is dedicated to Bruce David Hougan, my husband, who helped to carry this load over the long haul. Acknowledgements As happens in a project that has an interdisciplinary outlook and approach, the inspiration and completion of this work has come about through enormous assistance and advice from others. Dr. Jennifer Lewis, my advisor in Chemistry and creator of the Chemical Education program at USF, inspired her group and me by her example to think carefully about relationships of practice and thinking as they pertain to the world of chemists and chemistry. Dr. Dana Zeidler, my mentor and director of the Science Education Program in the College of Education at USF, taught me to value pedagogical content knowledge, maintain a sense of humor in the face of failure, and to value my undergraduate degree in philosophy. Dr. Jeff Kromrey, in the Educational Measurement Program in the College of Education at USF who taught me the finer points of statistical applications in education and who continued to be very open to provide much needed advice, long after I left his classroom. My gratitude to Leila Amiri, who helped organize the paperwork needed to complete my dissertation at USF when I was away in Alaska and to Dr. Mary Snyder, Dean of the College of Education at the University of Alaska, for her careful reading of the text and critique. And last but far from least, the rest of the committee who took the time to offer their perspectives and critique of this work: Dr. Mike Zaworotko, chairman of the Chemistry Department, Dr. Donileen Loseke and Dr. Maralee Mayberry, both teachers and mentors in Sociology and Dr. Kirpal Bisht, natural product chemist at USF and a willing deliberator of Chemical Education research. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. iv LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... vi ABSTRACT...................................................................................................................... vii I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1 An Invitation to Academic Chemists...........................................................................1 THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT .....................................................................................3 THE PROBLEM: SCIENCE LITERACY ..........................................................................4 REFLECTIONS IN CHEMISTRY ....................................................................................7 (1) The problem of science literacy in chemistry ................................................8 (2) The role of chemical education for the science and society: policy tensions and faculty perceptions..................................................................10 (3) Promoting the process of learning: The problem of content transmission and its inherent philosophy ....................................................16 SUMMARY...............................................................................................................27 THE SOLUTION: PROPAGATING REFORM.................................................................30 (1) The MID Project...........................................................................................30 (2) The MID Project in a larger context: The Model of Reform Dissemination..............................................................................................37 SUMMARY...............................................................................................................44 i II. THE STUDY RATIONALE........................................................................................46 PRIOR MIDP EVALUATION AND RELEVANCE OF THIS WORK ..................46 RATIONALE FOR THE METHODOLGY USED IN THE CASE STUDY...........49 The effects of the institutional level on teaching conceptions...........................50 The effects of the discipline on teaching conceptions .......................................52 The effects of personal teaching conceptions on practice .................................54 III. RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEIR JUSTIFICATION....................................59 Justification for the Research questions.....................................................................59 Justification 1.....................................................................................................59 Justification 2.....................................................................................................62 IV. METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................................65 Trustworthiness..........................................................................................................66 QUANTITATIVE METHODS .....................................................................................69 Instruments of Assessment and Analysis Methodology ............................................69 Pre-Workshop Survey........................................................................................69 Post-Workshop Survey ......................................................................................71 Inventory Survey................................................................................................72 QUALITATIVE METHODS ........................................................................................74 Sample selection ........................................................................................................74 Sampling Population Criteria and Population Matrix........................................76 Interviews...................................................................................................................81 Field observations ......................................................................................................84 ii V. RESULTS AND FINDINGS.......................................................................................87 RESEARCH QUESTION 1 ..........................................................................................87 RESEARCH QUESTION 2 ........................................................................................108 RESEARCH QUESTION 3 ........................................................................................121 RESEARCH QUESTION 4 ........................................................................................139 SUMMARY.............................................................................................................149 VI. SYNTHESIS.............................................................................................................151 A Model of Reform..................................................................................................151 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................158 APPENDIXES .................................................................................................................175 APPENDIX A: CHEMICAL THINKING ACTIVITY ..................................................176 APPENDIX B: SURVEYS..............................................................................................184 APPENDIX C: RUBRIC OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONS – SEMI-STRUCTURED...........................................................................214 APPENDIX D: CODING RUBRIC ................................................................................215 APPENDIX E: CLASSROOM RUBRIC FOR LEARNING PROCESSES AND TEACHING PRACTICES ....................................250 APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPTS AND QUOTES ....................................260