Comparison of learning in two context-based university chemistry classes

Abstract

ABSTRACTContext-based learning (CBL) is advocated as beneficial to learners, but more needs to be understood about how different contexts used in courses influence student outcomes. Gilbert defined several models of context that appear to be used in chemistry. In one model that achieves many criteria of student meaning-making, the context is provided by ‘personal mental activity’, meaning that students engage in a role to solve a problem. The model’s predicted outcomes are that students develop and use the specialised language of chemistry, translate what they learn in the immediate context to other contexts, and empathise with the community of practice that is created. The first two of these outcomes were investigated in two large-enrolment university chemistry courses, both organised as this CBL model, in which students were introduced to kinetic molecular theory (KMT). Sample 1 students (N1 = 105) learned KMT through whole-class kinaesthetic activity as a human model of a gas while focusing on a problem identifying substances in balloons filled with different gases. Sample 2 students (N2 = 110) manipulated molecular dynamics simulations while focusing on the problem of reducing atmospheric CO2. Exam answers and pre-/post-test responses, involving a new KMT context, were analysed. Students in Sample 1 demonstrated a stronger understanding of particle trajectories, while Sample 2 students developed more sophisticated mechanistic reasoning and greater fluidity of translation between contexts through increased use of chemists’ specialised language. The relationships of these outcomes to the contexts were examined in consideration of the different curriculum emphases inherent in the contexts.