Abstract

To those of us who are sold on history, it may seem non-controversial to suggest that the learning and teaching of chemistry should give cognisance to the historical development of the subject. However, this suggestion is proving controversial amongst some in the chemistry profession. For example, in the October 2010 edition of Chemistry in Australia, Rami Ibo takes issue with the emphasis on the history of science in the HSC chemistry curriculum (Year 12) in New South Wales. He studied chemistry, physics and biology for his HSC in NSW and concluded that, because the primary focus of these three sciences was History of Science, ‘There was hardly any content that challenged our minds, and calculations barely involved plugging in numbers into an equation…. We were required to recall Antoine Lavoisier’s experiments that led to the theories of acids and bases… while my friends in Lebanon were studying ideal gas laws, chemical kinetics, acids and bases, organic chemistry, soaps and detergents, medicinal chemistry and new materials’ (Ibo, Chemistry in Australia 77(9): 5, 2010). What does the literature have to say in response to such arguments? Does the presence of the history of chemistry in a curriculum necessarily reduce important content and problem-solving skills?

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call