Creation of an American Association of Chemistry Teachers
View Author Information
Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907, United States
* E-mail: [email protected]
Copyright © 2013 The American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
This publication is free to access through this site. Learn More
Abstract
This commentary briefly describes the creation and organizational structure of a new American Association of Chemistry Teachers, as well as the member benefits.
This publication is licensed for personal use by The American Chemical Society.
Introduction
ARTICLE SECTIONS
For many years, both American Chemical Society (ACS) staff and elected leaders of the Society have recognized that high-quality instruction in the sciences at the K–12 level is a crucial element in the preparation of students for careers in chemistry and related STEM disciplines (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics). Good news about the state of K–12 instruction in chemistry can easily be found. The National Science Foundation (NSF), for example, has noted an increase of 10% in the number of students enrolled in high school chemistry courses in the past decade. (1) There has also been an ever-increasing number of K–12 teachers who have been implementing inquiry-based approaches in teaching chemistry. (2) And, as noted elsewhere, (3) there have been significant developments that will shape the future of K–12 chemistry courses as a result of the NRC report A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, (4) which provided the basis upon which a set of Next Generation Science Standards have been developed. (5)
But, problems associated with K–12 chemistry can also be found. First, and perhaps foremost, only 35% of high school chemistry teachers have both a bachelor’s degree and certification to teach chemistry. (6) Chemistry has also been identified as a discipline in which there is a significant staffing shortage. (7) Whereas chemists have historically focused their thinking about K–12 education on the high school course, recent reports have suggested that preparing primary and middle school teachers is critical to solving the shortage of STEM professionals in the United States. (8) Others have argued that there are simply not enough qualified STEM teachers to meet student needs. (9) The ACS has responded by becoming a member of the recent presidential initiative “100Kin10” to recruit 100 000 highly qualified STEM teachers over the next 10 years (10) as a step toward the goal of one million additional STEM graduates over the next decade. (11)
Discussions of the state of K–12 instruction in chemistry often fail to take into account the results of research on the unique problems teachers face in their first few years on the job, (12) or the work on factors that contribute to exemplary practice in teaching. (13) This work has shown that it is not enough to simply recruit individuals who have the potential to become exemplary teachers into high-quality teacher preparation programs. In the absence of an active mechanism for supporting beginning teachers, all too many who could become exemplary teachers leave teaching within the first few years.
The American Association of Chemistry Teachers
ARTICLE SECTIONS
The author is pleased to be able to announce the result of an action taken by the ACS Board of Directors to provide the necessary funding to create an American Association of Chemistry Teachers (AACT) that will focus on supporting an underserved, yet critically important, sector of the global scientific community: K–12 teachers of chemistry.
What can the ACS provide? The Society can provide the infrastructure upon which the new organization can be built. It can also provide a rich tradition of excellence and a commitment to education that can be traced back to the defining documents and charter of the ACS adopted more than 125 years ago.
What can the AACT become? The AACT will be an organization for teachers and by teachers that can and will provide K–12 chemistry teachers with more of what teachers want rather than what the ACS might think they want. The AACT represents a new direction for the Society, in which ACS no longer does things “to” or “for” teachers, but “with” teachers. The AACT will provide the basis for a true dialogue between K–12 chemistry teachers and subject-matter experts the ACS can provide.
The AACT provides the opportunity to inspire teachers who then inspire students to pursue STEM careers, as well as producing a scientifically literate community of citizens and consumers who are able to make decisions based on sound scientific understanding. It can also provide the opportunity for teachers to share the vitally important pedagogical content knowledge (PCK)—the “tools” or “tricks of the trade” (14-16)—teachers develop on the basis of their experience to help students understand the content knowledge that defines the broad spectrum of activities in the chemical enterprise.
As a metaphor for the sharing of PCK, let us consider the problems beginning chemistry teachers face through the perspective provided by one of the students who came through the chemical education graduate program at Purdue. While reflecting on her experiences as a high school chemistry teacher, she noted that her roommate as an undergraduate had been a preservice elementary education major, and that the two of them shared an apartment after they graduated and took their first teaching positions. Our chemed graduate student noted that there was a fundamental difference between the experiences these two teachers encountered in the first few years in the classroom. When a problem came up in her roommate’s elementary school classroom, she was able to reach into “a bag of tricks” she had developed during her preservice teaching program. Our chemed graduate student noted that she had a great deal of content knowledge as a result of the preservice teacher education program from which she graduated, but that her own “bag of tricks” for solving the routine problems that arose as a beginning teacher was virtually empty.
AACT Member Benefits
ARTICLE SECTIONS
One of the primary goals of the new organization is to create an inclusive K–12 chemistry education community. One of the most important benefits of participating in the new American Association of Chemistry Teachers will therefore be the opportunity for networking with other K–12 chemistry teachers. We believe the AACT will help retain the best teachers of chemistry and enable them to help new teachers overcome the challenges they encounter. In essence, the AACT should help teachers of chemistry combat the feeling of isolation that results from being the only chemistry (or science) teacher in their school, or just one of a small group of chemistry or science teachers.
Proposed member benefits for the AACT include an online periodical that will contain articles written by teachers for teachers, as well as a subscription to the ACS publication ChemMatters. Other online resources will include multimedia presentations (animations, videos, simulations) that help teach chemistry concepts, as well as a platform for sharing lesson plans, and a blog about chemistry education written by selected AACT members. Online resources will also include a network of members; questions and answers on chemistry pedagogy, classroom techniques, and content questions; message boards for posting ideas for teaching, chemistry in the news, and so on.
As an organization devoted to the development of exemplary teachers of chemistry, the AACT will also take an active role in the professional development of K–12 chemistry teachers. This could involve local, regional, or national conferences; Webinars with continuing education units (CEUs); workshops with CEUs; expert “technical support” by phone or e-mail; and mentoring from experienced classroom teachers.
AACT Organizational Structure
ARTICLE SECTIONS
The AACT will have its own governing board, reporting to the ACS Board of Directors, but it will also work with staff in the ACS Education Division. The assistant director for the AACT will report to the director of the ACS Education Division. Other ACS entities, such as the Society Committee on Education (SOCED) and the Division of Chemical Education, will help with the challenge of creating, growing, and evaluating the AACT.
The AACT will serve an important coordinating function that makes resources developed by disparate ACS entities accessible to K–12 teachers of chemistry. The AACT will be the means by which ACS can develop resources, build community, and advocate with K–12 teachers of chemistry rather than for them.
The ACS Strategic Plan is organized around four goals, one of which is focused on improving education. This goal calls on the ACS to: “Foster the development of the most innovative, relevant, and effective chemistry education in the world.” In its recent action, the ACS Board of Directors recognized that the only way to achieve this goal at the K–12 level is to bring teachers of chemistry together, to work with each other to create a classroom environment throughout the United States that is responsive to, and respectful of, the unique needs of this community of professionals, dedicated to the effective teaching and learning of chemistry.
Acknowledgment
ARTICLE SECTIONS
It is both a pleasure and an honor to recognize the work of staff members in the ACS Education Division who were dedicated to the task of preparing the new program funding request submitted to the ACS Board of Directors that resulted in funding the creation of the AACT. We also owe a debt of gratitude to the members of the ACS Division of Chemical Education and the Society Committee on Education who served on the ad hoc taskforce to consider the creation of an association of chemistry teachers, and the members of the Chemistry Teachers Association Advisory Board who provided guidance in the development of this proposal. We also gratefully acknowledge the members of the ACS Board of Directors for their continual support for education as a priority of the Society, and for the faith and trust they exhibited in funding the AACT program.
References
ARTICLE SECTIONS
This article references 16 other publications.
- 1National Science Foundation, National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, Volume 1. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/pdf/front.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 2See, for example: Gallagher-Bolos, J. A. and Smithenry, D. W. Teaching Inquiry-Based Chemistry; Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH, 2008.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 3Bodner, G. M. Preparing Chemistry Teachers for the Next Generation Science Standards Chem. Eng. News 2011, 89 (50) 32Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 4National Research Council, Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K–12 Science Education Standards. A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; Quinn, H.; Schweingruber, H.; Keller, T., Eds; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 5National Research Council. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2013.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 6Hill, J. G.; Gruber, K. J. Education and Certification Qualifications of Departmentalized Public High School-Level Teachers of Core Subjects: Evidence From the 2007–08 Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES 2011–317); U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics: Washington, DC, 2011; http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011317.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 7American Association for Employment in Education, Inc. Educator Supply and Demand in the United States; AAEE: Columbus, OH, 2010; p 4, 7. http://www.usu.edu/career/files/uploads/PDF/2010%20Educational%20Supply%20and%20Demand.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 8Epstein, D.; Miller, R.; Center for American Progress. Slow Off the Mark: Elementary School Teachers and the Crisis in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED536070 (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 9Levine, A. How To Fix the STEM Deficit. The Washington Post (Posted May 19, 2011.) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/how-to-fix-the-stem-deficit/2011/05/18/AFN0El6G_blog.html (accessed Dec 2013).Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 10President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Prepare and Inspire: K–12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) for America’s Future. (Public release September 2010.) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stem-ed-final.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 11President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Engage To Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. (Public release February 2012.) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 12Simmons, P. E.; Emory, A.; Carter, T.; Coker, T.; Finnegan, B.; Crockett, D.; Richardson, L.; Yager, R.; Craven, J.; Tillotson, J.; Brunkhorst, H.; Twiest, M.; Hossain, K.; Gallagher, J.; Duggan-Haas, D.; Parker, J.; Cajas, F.; Alshanna, Q.; McGlamery, S.; Krockover, J.; Adams, P.; Spector, B.; LaPorta, T.; James, B.; Rearden, K.; Labuda, K. Beginning Teachers: Beliefs and Classroom Actions J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1999, 36 (8) 930– 954Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 13Tobin, K.; Fraser, B. What Does It Mean To Be an Exemplary Science Teacher? J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27 (1) 3– 25Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 14Shulman, L. S. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching Educ. Res. 1986, 15 (2) 4– 14Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 15Shulman, L. S. Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform Harvard Educ. Rev. 1987, 57 (1) 1– 23Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 16Miller, M. L. Pedagogical Content Knowledge. In Theoretical Frameworks for Research in Chemistry/Science Education; Bodner, G. M.; Orgill, M., Eds.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2007; pp 83– 102.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
Cited By
ARTICLE SECTIONS
This article is cited by 5 publications.
- Marci Zane and Valerie Karvey Tucci . Exploring the Information Literacy Needs and Values of High School Chemistry Teachers. Journal of Chemical Education 2016, 93
(3)
, 406-412. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00450
- Adam M. Boyd . American Association of Chemistry Teachers: A New Layer of Support for Teachers of Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education 2015, 92
(2)
, 201-202. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00035
- Deanna M. Cullen . Welcome Home. Journal of Chemical Education 2014, 91
(1)
, 6-7. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed400743f
- Norbert J. Pienta . The Role of Elementary and Secondary Schools and Their Teachers of Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education 2014, 91
(1)
, 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed4008777
- Hestenes David. A role for physicists in STEM education reform. American Journal of Physics 2015, 83
(2)
, 101-103. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4904763
- This publication has no figures.
References
ARTICLE SECTIONSThis article references 16 other publications.
- 1National Science Foundation, National Science Board. Science and Engineering Indicators 2008, Volume 1. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind08/pdf/front.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 2See, for example: Gallagher-Bolos, J. A. and Smithenry, D. W. Teaching Inquiry-Based Chemistry; Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH, 2008.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 3Bodner, G. M. Preparing Chemistry Teachers for the Next Generation Science Standards Chem. Eng. News 2011, 89 (50) 32Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 4National Research Council, Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K–12 Science Education Standards. A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas; Quinn, H.; Schweingruber, H.; Keller, T., Eds; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2012.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 5National Research Council. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2013.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 6Hill, J. G.; Gruber, K. J. Education and Certification Qualifications of Departmentalized Public High School-Level Teachers of Core Subjects: Evidence From the 2007–08 Schools and Staffing Survey (NCES 2011–317); U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics: Washington, DC, 2011; http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011317.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 7American Association for Employment in Education, Inc. Educator Supply and Demand in the United States; AAEE: Columbus, OH, 2010; p 4, 7. http://www.usu.edu/career/files/uploads/PDF/2010%20Educational%20Supply%20and%20Demand.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 8Epstein, D.; Miller, R.; Center for American Progress. Slow Off the Mark: Elementary School Teachers and the Crisis in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED536070 (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 9Levine, A. How To Fix the STEM Deficit. The Washington Post (Posted May 19, 2011.) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/how-to-fix-the-stem-deficit/2011/05/18/AFN0El6G_blog.html (accessed Dec 2013).Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 10President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Prepare and Inspire: K–12 Education in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) for America’s Future. (Public release September 2010.) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-stem-ed-final.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 11President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology. Engage To Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. (Public release February 2012.) http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-engage-to-excel-final_2-25-12.pdf (accessed Dec 2013) .Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 12Simmons, P. E.; Emory, A.; Carter, T.; Coker, T.; Finnegan, B.; Crockett, D.; Richardson, L.; Yager, R.; Craven, J.; Tillotson, J.; Brunkhorst, H.; Twiest, M.; Hossain, K.; Gallagher, J.; Duggan-Haas, D.; Parker, J.; Cajas, F.; Alshanna, Q.; McGlamery, S.; Krockover, J.; Adams, P.; Spector, B.; LaPorta, T.; James, B.; Rearden, K.; Labuda, K. Beginning Teachers: Beliefs and Classroom Actions J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1999, 36 (8) 930– 954Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 13Tobin, K.; Fraser, B. What Does It Mean To Be an Exemplary Science Teacher? J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27 (1) 3– 25Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 14Shulman, L. S. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching Educ. Res. 1986, 15 (2) 4– 14Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 15Shulman, L. S. Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform Harvard Educ. Rev. 1987, 57 (1) 1– 23Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.
- 16Miller, M. L. Pedagogical Content Knowledge. In Theoretical Frameworks for Research in Chemistry/Science Education; Bodner, G. M.; Orgill, M., Eds.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2007; pp 83– 102.Google ScholarThere is no corresponding record for this reference.