Advancing chemistry education as a field

Academia grows and develops organically so that it is not always easy to know exactly when a field or discipline begins, or divides, or where it has a boundary with some related area of activity. We might consider such questions as when chemistry really became recognised as a distinct science (or when alchemy transitioned into chemistry) or indeed how we decide where chemistry ‘ends’ and chemical physics or biochemistry or geology ‘begin’. Such questions are unlikely to offer simple unambiguous answers (Hudson, 1992). Where chemistry investigates natural phenomena that are reproducible and oblivious to cultural shifts, social phenomena such as academic fields are ontologically less definitive.

Indeed there is something rather tautological about the whole notion of a field, as in effect the field is defined by those people who are recognised (by the field) as having authority in that field. To refer to some idea as being canonical in a field (that matter is composed of submicroscopic particles; that students often bring alternative conceptions about chemical phenomena to class) is to make a claim about what is generally agreed upon by those who are considered to be active within that field – where those best placed to judge who should be considered active within a field…are those who are themselves active in the field! So deciding what counts as public knowledge in say chemistry, or in chemistry education, may not be as clear-cut and easily determined as the term ‘public knowledge’ may imply (Taber, 2013). There is then something of a self-referential process – or to put a more positive spin upon it, a dialectical process – from which fields, and their contents, emerge.

Chemistry education as a scholarly field

Chemistry is certainly now long established, and although chemistry today looks very different from how it did, say, 100 years ago, there is a clear continuity which leads us to consider it the ‘same’ discipline. Chemistry education is a younger and rather different entity. Of course, there has been chemistry education in one form or another as long as there has been chemistry – but as an activity rather than as the scholarly field of chemistry education research (CER). This is a distinction which is not always clear in the minds of some of those who submit articles to a journal such as Chemistry Education Research and Practice.

Many of those teaching chemistry in universities around the world consider themselves (quite rightly) as practitioners of chemistry education. However, contributing to the research field requires an engagement with the current state of knowledge, shared concepts and accepted methodologies in the field. Unfortunately the journal regularly receives submissions that report (what authors suggest is) a good idea for teaching some topic, or moot some new approach for conceptualising some aspect of chemistry, or suggest innovative laboratory work, but which make minimal engagement with previous related research and scholarship in the field. Chemistry Education Research and Practice is a journal which explicitly seeks to support the development of chemistry education practice: but through publishing articles that engage with current knowledge in the field and look to build upon what has already been established in order to move understanding forward. Some submissions which remain disconnected from the wider field may indeed reflect good practice: but unless the accounts of such work are clearly positioned within the existing field, and evaluated according to accepted standards, this cannot be demonstrated. This is unfortunate as well-meaning authors who are keen to share their ideas, and who have spent time and effort writing up their work, will find their submission declined for publication.

What makes CER a field?

So although chemistry education is certainly intimately linked to the science of chemistry, it is a specialist field which has its own distinct features: shared commitments, accepted methodologies, norms for communicating ideas, and so forth – what the philosopher/historian of science Thomas Kuhn (1974/1977) referred to as a disciplinary matrix. In the case of chemistry education, the field – although being especially and particularly concerned with the teaching and learning of chemistry – has been informed by the research traditions in education more widely (Bodner and Orgill, 2007), and the established conceptual apparatus that has attained wider currency within the broader field of science education (Fensham, 2004). Chemistry education as a research field is therefore something of a hybrid, taking its conceptual and methodological tools from outside chemistry but having its focus very much within the teaching and learning of the scientific discipline of chemistry.

Indicators of an active field include research publications and conferences that are focussed specifically on that field, as well as specified academic appointments and designated research groups identifying with the specialism. CER certainly meets these criteria. Chemistry education now has a number of specific research journals (such as Chemistry Education Research and Practice) as well as well-established conferences which take place in diverse parts of the world.

A productive research field encompasses ‘progressive’ research programmes. In a progressive (or scientific) research programme individual studies build upon each other so that over time there is a development of the empirical base and theoretical content of the programme: empirical studies test and motivate new theory, and theoretical developments both explain existing findings and predict the outcomes of future enquiries (Lakatos, 1970; Taber, 2009). Readers of Chemistry Education Research and Practice will recognise how the CER field encompasses various lines of work where researchers in different parts of the world are building upon each other's research in this way.

Scholarly books in Chemistry Education

An active research field also tends to spawn scholarly books positioned within the specialised field. The appearance of such books within chemistry education was quite infrequent before the present century. One book published a little over a decade ago (Gilbert et al., 2002) could be seen as somewhat trailblazing in this regard, being offered in the spirit of encouraging chemistry education to stake its place as an organised research field (Gilbert et al., 2004). Since then two books have been published by the American Chemical Society to support those new to the research field in developing the research expertise needed to undertake their own studies in chemistry education (Bunce and Cole, 2008, 2014).

Perhaps more significantly, in the past few years we have begun to see an increasing number of scholarly books concerned with specific aspects of chemistry education. Some of these are primarily concerned with drawing upon research to inform teachers (Eilks and Hofstein, 2013; Taber, 2012), but others are primarily aimed at developing dialogue in the field itself – as a means of communication between researchers. As a few notable examples: in recent years Gilbert and Treagust (2009) offered an edited work on the role of multiple representations in teaching and learning chemistry; Anastas et al. (2009) edited a volume on green chemistry education; Tsaparlis and Sevian (2013) edited a volume on the key issue of teaching about the nature of matter; and Devetak and Glažar (2014) have edited a volume on teaching for understanding in chemistry. Other announced volumes due for publication in the coming months include one on the affective dimensions of chemistry education (Kahveci and Orgill, 2015) and a volume that according to its publisher will provide “a thorough review of the vibrant field of chemistry education” (Garcia-Martinez and Serrano-Torregrosa, 2015).†

The RSC Advances in Chemistry Education book series

It is in this context that the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC, the publisher of Chemistry Education Research and Practice) has decided to launch a specialist book series for scholarly work in chemistry education. The RSC Advances in Chemistry Education book series will publish both edited volumes and monographs (single authored books on a particular research topic), with a view to providing the field with the authoritative and up-to-date accounts of research topics in chemistry education.‡

The RSC has a long history of publishing in many areas of chemistry, and has established a tradition of supporting book series in major areas of scholarship and research in chemistry. The establishment of a dedicated book series on Chemistry Education, by a major learned society and academic publisher, is another indicator of the increasing maturity of CER as a research field.

It is intended that the RSC Advances in Chemistry Education book series will publish volumes that explore current knowledge and understanding and report cutting edge research in major topics in chemistry education. The scope of the series has been set wide, to reflect the range of work published in CER journals such as Chemistry Education Research and Practice. Volumes in the new series will have to have a direct relevance to the teaching and learning of chemistry, but will be inclusive of level of education (e.g. school, undergraduate, teacher education, vocational education, etc.), and may focus on issues in teaching and learning relating to certain topics of chemistry, or address wider pedagogic themes related to chemistry education – such as assessment, enquiry teaching, problem-solving etc. – as long as the focus is on what is particular to the teaching and learning of chemistry. The public understanding of chemistry and research related to chemistry outreach will be included, as well as such themes as (chemistry) teacher thinking and the nature of the chemistry curriculum.

The relationship between journals and scholarly books

Indeed the scope of the Advances in Chemistry Education books series is very similar to that of Chemistry Education Research and Practice. This raises the question of how the book series will relate to (and complement) the journal. In part this links to the programmatic nature of research in a field referred to above. Individual research studies contribute to our knowledge incrementally within research programmes. Scientific research programmes are based around specific hard core commitments and are heuristically guided (Lakatos, 1970). Traditionally research reports contextualise a particular study within a research programme by setting out the conceptual framework informing the work, and showing both how the study builds upon (and responds to) previous work and how it raises questions and hypotheses for further related work.

A journal, such as Chemistry Education Research and Practice responds to the latest developments in a field by publishing work as and when submitted, as long as it meets the quality criteria for inclusion in a research journal. With the exception of special themed issues of journals, then, journals do not ‘manage’ content by either selecting papers according to topic or indeed seeking a balance of topics in an issue or across a volume: but rather offer the community the latest, peer-reviewed, quality work as soon as it can be published.

The role of scholarly books is somewhat different, as a particular volume can review progress in a particular subfield, or focus on the state of a specific research programme within a wider field. Where journal articles tend to be limited in length, a research monograph gives an author space to set out a more detailed account of work within a personal research programme, and so to show how a series of studies can collectively build up knowledge and understanding in a topic. An edited book allows the editors to bring together the key scholars working on a topic to write a set of related accounts of how their collective scholarship and research reflects the current state of our knowledge in some especially important or currently active area of a field. Often, then what makes a contribution to a scholarly book different from an article in a journal is the wider context in which the book chapter is situated: a context that is managed by the editors of the book so that the book as a whole offers more than just a compilation of scholarly articles.

Advancing chemistry education

The RSC Advances in Chemistry Education book series is just being announced, and it is expected that the first volumes for the series will be commissioned over the coming months.§ Over time, the volumes that are published will themselves act as indicators of areas of work within the CER field that are especially active and so worthy of summarising in the form of a book. Those books will likely then become seen as seminal works in those areas, and so contribute to the further development of those research programmes. In that way the Advances in Chemistry Education volumes will not simply be a record of existing advances, but also part of the apparatus by which chemistry education will be further advanced.

References

1. Anastas P. T., Levy I. J. and Parent K. E. (ed.), (2009), Green Chemistry Education: Changing the Course of Chemistry, Washinghton, D.C.: American Chemical Society.
2. Bodner G. M. and Orgill M. (ed.), (2007), Theoretical Frameworks for Research in Chemistry/Science Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
3. Bunce D. M. and Cole R. S. (ed.), (2008), Nuts and Bolts of Chemical Education Research, American Chemical Society.
4. Bunce D. M. and Cole R. S. (ed.), (2014), Tools of Chemical Education Research, Washington, D.C.: American Chemical Society.
5. Devetak I. and Glažar S. A. (ed.), (2014), Learning with Understanding in the Chemistry Classroom, Dordrecht: Springer.
6. Eilks I. and Hofstein A. (ed.), (2013), Teaching Chemistry – A Studybook: A Practical Guide and Textbook for Student Teachers, Teacher Trainees and Teachers, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
7. Fensham P. J., (2004), Defining an Identity: The Evolution of Science Education as a Field of Research, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
8. Garcia-Martinez J. and Serrano-Torregrosa E. (ed.), (2015), Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Opportunities and Trends, Wiley.
9. Gilbert J. K. and Treagust D. F. (ed.), (2009), Multiple Representations in Chemical Education, Dordrecht: Springer.
10. Gilbert J. K., de Jong O., Justi R., Treagust D. F. and Van Driel J. H. (ed.), (2002), Chemical Education: Research-based Practice, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers BV.
11. Gilbert J. K., Justi R., Van Driel J. H., de Jong O. and Treagust D. F., (2004), Securing a future for chemical education, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 5(1), 5–14.
12. Hudson J., (1992), The History of Chemistry, London: Macmillan.
13. Kahveci M. and Orgill M. (ed.), (2015), Affective Dimensions in Chemistry Education, Dordrecht: Springer.
14. Kuhn T. S., (1974/1977), Second thoughts on paradigms, in Kuhn T. S. (ed.), The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 293–319.
15. Lakatos I., (1970), Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes, in Lakatos I. and Musgrove A. (ed.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–196.
16. Taber K. S., (2009), Progressing Science Education: Constructing the Scientific Research Programme into the Contingent Nature of Learning Science, Dordrecht: Springer.
17. Taber K. S. (ed.), (2012), Teaching Secondary Chemistry, 2nd edn, London: Hodder Education.
18. Taber K. S., (2013), Modelling Learners and Learning in Science Education: Developing Representations of Concepts, Conceptual Structure and Conceptual Change to Inform Teaching and Research, Dordrecht: Springer.
19. Tsaparlis G. and Sevian H. (ed.), (2013), Concepts of Matter in Science Education, Dordrecht: Springer.

---

Footnotes

† http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-3527336052.html.

‡ Announced at http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/people/staff/taber/rscaice.html.

§ Colleagues who wish to informally explore ideas for volumes in the series are invited to contact the author of this editorial, or one of the other editorial board members: Avi Holstein, Vicente Talanquer or David Treagust.

---