An Evaluation of Senior Chemistry in New Zealand Secondary Schools

Abstract

In the initial phase of this study, a problem of declining proportions of students participating in chemistry study at secondary and tertiary levels was identified. The decline in participation in the form 6 year (the first year in which chemistry is studied as an individual subject), and apparent poor quality performance in this and the following year, directed attention to form 6 chemistry. A quantitative national survey of 1296 form 6 students' reasons for chemistry choice was conducted, which led to a comparison of form 6 chemistry students', their chemistry teachers' and tertiary chemistry teachers' perceptions of students' difficulty of understanding chemistry. This was followed by a qualitative interview study of 39 form 6 chemistry students' understanding of understanding, and understanding of the structure of matter. The study was phenomenological, at each stage information was obtained from the perspectives of those involved in school learning in chemistry: the students, chemistry teachers, school principals and a group of chemists and educationalists. Results showed that students who chose chemistry did so most often because they needed it for their career; interest in chemistry was less motivating. For those who rejected chemistry, a lack of interest and the difficulty of understanding chemistry were the principal reasons. Attitudes toward chemistry were generally poorer than toward biology or physics, except for girls' particular aversion to physics. Although school chemistry teachers realised that the form 6 course was difficult, they tackled the problem by teaching for recall and rule operation, which exacerbated the problem for the majority of students who wanted to achieve understanding in terms of the construction of personal meaning. Students tended to adopt techniques of recall and rule operation as a default option in order to meet the exigencies of assessment. The levels of understanding of the structure of matter which students achieved were very low, in spite of their high levels of past achievement. Low achievers were discouraged from taking chemistry because of feelings of high complexity, strangeness and difficulty, and of low interest or benefit.