E-mail: j.hill@aw.latrobe.edu.au

Paper presented at the 31st Annual Session and 61st Anniversary Celebrations of the Institute of Chemistry - Ceylon: Colombo, Sri Lanka : 19 - 22 June, 2002

SUMMARY

The major challenge for 'Chemical Education' in the new millennium is to restore 'chemistry' to its former pre- eminent position as the 'central science' and, simultaneously, as one of 4 'enabling sciences'. The rank and status of chemistry among the sciences has significantly declined over the last two decades to a level where, at least in Australia, it is commonly regarded as a 'service science' - 'service' in the context of 'serving' the biological sciences. Indeed, the Royal Australian Chemical Institute has recently issued a media release quantifying this decline in chemistry status in, not only Australian Universities, but also as a core subject within the science curriculum of our secondary colleges. This paper attempts to rationalise this alarming trend and suggests future challenges involved in restoring 'Chemistry in Australia' to its deserved pre-eminent status in (global) science education.

PREAMBLE

A major international chemical conference in Singapore in 2001 [1] had as its theme 'Marking the new millennium and recognising that 'science' and 'chemistry' in particular will have major significance in the 21st century'. Many of the 'so called' developed countries of the world are progressively attempting to achieve 'knowledge nation' status - realising that 'knowledge' is the driving force of national progression. Singapore is one such nation adopting this approach. Australia has also followed the lead of nations such as Singapore and focussed on 'knowledge' as the 'force of the new millennium', but has failed to support this with an appropriate level of resources. Singapore has also determined that 'knowledge' in this context means 'technological' knowledge and hence it is intuitively obvious that the sciences and 'chemistry' in particular will have a major impact on national development in the 21st century. However, unlike Singapore, it is apparent that in Australia, science education, and chemical education in particular, is not producing sufficient numbers of professionally trained scientists to promote and sustain the 'knowledge nation' ambition. Simultaneously, science education is not producing sufficient numbers of science school teachers to feed the higher education institutions with tertiary students dedicated to pursuing a science career. Hence, at the present time, it is apparent that Australia is in the midst of a dilemma - how to achieve 'knowledge nation' status when the mechanisms for achieving sufficient numbers of professionally trained scientists (chemists in particular) are in crisis. This paper attempts to rationalise this dilemma and provide some solutions to the immediate crisis. Simultaneously, an insight is provided into the stimuli which need to be infused into Chemical Education in Australia in the 21st century.

THE PROBLEM

The problem associated with 'chemical education' in Australia is well defined and has been well-known for at least the last 2 decades. We sounded the alarm in 2001 with an article in the 'Education Age' entitled 'Australian Chemistry in Crisis' [2]. Recently, a similar alarm bell has been sounded in the UK [3]. Both of these 'calls to action' highlighted the major elements of the overall problem: declining numbers of secondary school students electing to study chemistry at the school leaving certificate level (Year 12) [4]: declining numbers of tertiary science students electing to select 'chemistry' as a major in the (3 year) BSc course [5]: a declining chemical industry in terms of gross productivity both for the national and export markets: a pessimistic public image of 'chemistry' which has been systematically accentuated by the media and, most significantly, progressively declining government support for education generally and tertiary education in particular, coupled with declining financial support of scientific research, particularly 'fundamental' research.

The various 'calls to action' over at least the last decade have been largely ineffective, probably because the problem is too deeply entrenched in the soul of the very conservative Australian professional scientific community. It is therefore not surprising that only short-term 'solutions' have been suggested and only a few of these have been tested and applied. The most pungent of these calls to action was in the form of a media release by the Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI) in 2001 [6] with the theme 'Rebuilding the Enabling Sciences - Reclaiming the key to unlock the Nations' potential. This was a 'joint' statement by the professional institutes of the 'enabling sciences' in Australia - physics, chemistry, mathematics and engineering. Essentially, this statement defined 'the problem' thus: 'if the current rate of university (science) staff losses continues, there will be no chemistry, physics, mathematics and engineering (education) to support innovation (technological advance) beyond 2020' and 'If the current rate of secondary school participation in the enabling sciences continues, these sciences will disappear from the school curriculum by 2020'. Statistical data was provided to support these claims [7]. The RACI statement essentially defines 'the problem' and clearly indicates the depth of the present crisis in Australian chemical education. One very clear statistic is that the total number of students being taught chemistry in Australian Universities has remained substantially constant over the last decade but the total number of staff (academic and support staff) in Chemistry Departments has declined over the same time frame. This has led to a plethora of disturbing outcomes: declining staff/student ratios: declining chemistry department budgets, decrease in depth/breadth of university chemistry courses - especially with respect to laboratory sessions and tutorial support - leading to an overall 'quality decline' : staff have higher teaching loads and hence less time for research, which coupled with less access to research funding leads inexorably to fewer postgraduate research students. In short, the chemical education system in Australia is in crisis because chemistry in our Universities is progressively becoming 'self-eliminating'.

THE CHALLENGE

It is clear that 'the problem' is multi-facetedand therefore 'the challenge' in providing a solution is also multi-faceted. Perhaps the real challenge is to directly link 'knowledge nation' with 'scientific literacy'. Governments define 'knowledge nation' as 'one which is embracing the technological age' and thus it appears intuitively obvious that knowledge nation status can only be achieved by creating a scientifically literate nation simultaneously. This poses a direct challenge to the education system. As with numeracy and literacy skills, scientific literacy has to be instilled early in the educational process - at the primary level , subsequently developed through the secondary level and finally intensified and enriched at the tertiary level. Hence, the key challenge is to promote science education throughout these 3 sectors. Cross [8] has published widely on the teaching of primary science and has emphasised that 'science is an essential core experience for primary age children since it helps them make sense of their world'. Further, Cross believes that science should be viewed as one of the most important aspects of society which, coupled with technology, shapes the way we live. Further challenges associated with primary science teaching are the development of an enquiring mind, evaluation of facts and evidence and making decisions - in short - instilling an appreciation of 'the scientific method'. Additional challenges face the teaching of secondary science. Australian school science curricula have undergone constant review and restructuring over the last 2 decades. In Victoria, the latest such restructure was undertaken in 1995 [9] and has received both acclaim [10] and criticism [11]. A major criticism is that the current science curriculum ' allows students to access the technology but not to understand how it interacts and changes society'. Also, a high degree of 'rote learning' of scientific principles and facts is still involved without teaching the ability to apply such principles and facts to solve the problems of the modern world. The challenge in evidence here is to address these fundamental shortcomings within the constraints of the imposed curriculum. The RACI statement and government ministerial statements [12] have blamed school science curricula for the decline in science enrolments in niversities - but clearly this is not the main cause of the problem.

It is intuitively obvious that a review of the present levels and effectiveness of primary and secondary science education is needed but, in addition, such a review process is not complete without a comprehensive review of the Chemistry 1 course in Australian Universities. Hill and Cross [13,14] have undertaken such a review. We have recognised that the Chemistry 1 course is not only a crucial instrument for providing (all) science students with an essential knowledge of chemical principles but also, it has to provide the critical stimulus for retaining tertiary science students in a chemistry major to assure the future of chemistry research programs and provide foundation training of professional chemists. The present Chemistry 1 course falls short of these key objectives.

A further major challenge is to demystify 'chemistry' and to make it more 'user and environmentally friendly' - in short-to raise the 'public image' of chemistry. Herein lies a much broader challenge - to restore 'chemistry' to its former pre-eminent status as the 'central science' both on a national and international scale. New ways of 'teaching' and of 'presenting' chemistry need to be adopted which incorporate not only changes in pedagogy but also apply new paradigms of teaching which, in turn, lead to new paradigms of learning. The future of 'chemical education' depends not only on the design of new, more vibrant, more relevant and more challenging science curricula, but also, and perhaps more critically, on the adoption of new methodologies of teaching and learning and it is perhaps these critical changes which are providing wide-ranging challenges in science education.

THE SOLUTION?

It would be too dismissive to argue that initiatives are not being taken in Australia to address the decline of science emphasis in this country. Indeed a wide range of initiatives have been taken and continue to be taken - the apparent overall ineffectiveness of such initiatives is best explained in terms of a critical lack of willingness on the part of professional science educators to unilaterally apply them. It is slowly being recognised that 'turning students to science' (and Chemistry in particular) involves 'engaging them with science through discussion and collaboration' [15-18] . It is critically important to develop their professional skills [19] and to review the Vocational Education process [20]. There is a desperate need to review the Australian Chemical Industry in terms of its efficiency and effectiveness as a major contributor to the intrinsic wealth of this nation and to understand that if the Chemical Industry is not very substantially invigorated, employment opportunities for professional chemists will further decline. Also, the Chemical Industry needs to be more directly involved with the teaching of chemistry at all levels [21].

We have seen that the declining emphasis of chemistry is not a problem confined to Australia - however, we suggest that Australia has been less effective in solving the problem than has, for example, the UK. A very significant contributor to this hypothesis is that 'chemical education' in Australia is not seen as a crucial research area by academics and therefore there is a general lack of understanding or appreciation in Australia of international developments in science education in general and chemical education in particular [22, 23]. Further, the RACI does not incorporate a vigorous and active Chemical Education Division nor is there close interaction of the RACI with the secondary school network.

Naturally, a major part of the solution to the problem must be based on the chemistry curriculum - both at the secondary and tertiary levels. A plethora of initiatives have already been proposed in this arena : secondary school projects dealing with 'real' chemistry [24] : the introduction of new paradigms of teaching and learning [25] : the application of 'Problem Based Learning' [26] : teaching of 'modern' chemistry based on historical and philosophical principles [27] and teaching chemistry with a 'green' emphasis [28 - 29]. It is perhaps this latter initiative which will be a major force in changing the public image of chemistry in the new century.

As a major contribution to providing a solution to the demise of Chemistry in Australia, Hill and Cross [13,14] are currently undertaking a major review of the "Chemistry 1" course in Australian Universities with a view to framing a major reform of this course to meet defined needs of the present century and to redress in part the present crisis in Australian chemical education. We have researched in depth the present problems and difficulties associated with this course [14] as related to infrastructural constraints - departmental budgets, staff profiles, student numbers, retention rates, research strengths, technology support and faculty support. We believe that the present trends with respect to declining student interest in chemistry and chemistry-based degrees is likely to continue over at least the next decade. It appears that Chemistry Departments must continuously adapt and absorb the plethora of internal and external demands made on them and must continue to teach to the market and adapt to the demands of that market if these departments are to survive as traditional units. With these constraints in mind, we are in the process of developing a "Chemistry 1" course which embraces these identified challenges and is an attempt to promote chemical education to a new level of vibrancy in this country. It will not only incorporate the traditional 'building blocks of chemistry' but will also apply new paradigms of teaching and learning and new methodologies of teaching and learning so as to effectively engage students in the overall educational process.

We also believe that 'the solution' involves participation by the RACI in a variety of ways : providing professional Institute membership to secondary science teachers, reviewing the accreditation process as related to tertiary chemistry courses, greater interaction of the RACI with the schools network - promoting chemistry as a fundamental/central science, promoting chemistry in the public arena so as to enhance its image, lobbying governments to provide a much greater level of funding for school and University education and for basic and applied scientific research and providing links with the international chemistry fraternity via conferences, international societies and networks.

The 'solution' also involves the Australian chemistry profession continuously making our governments aware of the significance and achievements of our scientists [30] and of our chemists in particular, since it is the science fraternity which form the core of the 'knowledge nation' philosophy.

REFERENCES AND NOTES

[1] "Frontiers in Chemical Design and Synthesis", Singapore International Chemical Conference 11 (SICC2), Singapore, December, 2001.

[2] R. Cross and J. Hill , "Australian Chemistry in Crisis", Opinion/The Education Age, 28 Mar., 2001.

[3] J. Naismith, Chemistry in Britain, p. 3, May 2002.

[4] 'Foundation for the Future', National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Science and Technology Education, Government Printer, Canberra, 1994.

[5] 'Demand for Tertiary Studies in Science and Technology', Victorian Government proceedings, Melbourne, 1997.

[6] National Initiatives in Education - A joint statement by the Australian Institute of Physics (AIP), Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI), Australian Mathematical Sciences Council (AMSC) and the Institution of Engineers Australia (IEAust), 'Rebuilding the Enabling Sciences - Reclaiming the key to unlock the Nations potential'; J. O. Hill and R. T. Cross, Chemistry in Australia, p. 3, Jan./Feb. , 2002.
http://www.aip.org.au/initiative2001/

[7] D. J. Evans, 'RACI 2001 Survey of Chemistry', Chemistry in Australia, p. 17, Dec., 2001.

[8] R. T. Cross, 'Teaching Primary Science - Empowering Children for their World', Longmans, Melbourne, 1996.

[9] The Curriculum & Standards Framework-Science, Board of Studies, Victoria, 1995.

[10] R.T. Cross and P. J. Fensham, 'Is the 1996 Science for Victoria's Schools up with the World's 'best practice'?', Curriculum Perspectives, p. 3, Nov., 1996.

[11] R. T. Cross, 'Another way to the future! Towards enlightenment with a socially critical science curriculum framework', Lab. Talk, p. 17, Jun., 1995.

[12] 'Minister blames schools for science drop-off', The Age, 8 Feb., 1997.

[13] J. O. Hill and R. T. Cross, 'The Year 1 Chemistry Course in Australian Universities: A crisis of confidence', Chem. Education J., Vol. 4, No. 1 (2000).
http://chem.sci.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp/v4n1/indexE.html

[14] J. O. Hill and R. T. Cross, 'A report on a comprehensive review of the Year 1 Chemistry Course in Australian Universities', Arena Printing & Publishing, Fitzroy (Melbourne), p. 41, 2001.

[15] J. K. Borchardt, 'Turning students to Chemistry', Chemistry in Australia, p. 9, Feb., 2001.

[16] J. Dearn, 'Dull to Learn, Dull to Teach', Chemistry in Australia, p. 21, Apr., 1999.

[17] S.C. Barrie, M. A. Suntine, I. M. Jamie and S. H. Kable, 'APCELL: The Australian Physical Chemistry Enhanced Laboratory Learning Project', Aust. J. Ed. Chem., 57, 6 (2001).

[18] P. Savage, 'Marketing 'exciting' chemistry', Chemistry in Australia, p. 3, Sep., 2000.

[19] J. G. Dunn, R. I. Kagi and D. N. Phillips, 'Development of Professional Skills', Chemistry in Australia, p. 8, Apr., 2000.

[20] M. Haire, 'Vocational Chemical Education in Australia', Chemistry in Australia, p. 34, May, 2000.

[21] R. van Santen, 'Australia's Chemical Industry', Chemistry in Australia, p. 27, May, 2000.

[22] R. W. Hollingworth, 'Linking into Chemical Education in our Region', Chemistry in Australia, p. 32, Feb., 2001.

[23] K. Ghiggino, 'International Science Education - A University of Melbourne perspective', Chemistry in Australia, p. 35, Apr., 1999.

[24] N. J. Dickson, 'Introducing the real world of Chemistry', Chemistry in Australia, p. 20, Mar., 2002.

[25] G. T. Crisp, 'Towards a flexible Learning and Teaching environment', Chemistry in Australia, p. 6, Apr., 1999.

[26] D. Boud and G. Feletti, Eds., 'The challenge of Problem Based Learning', Kogan Page, London, 1997.

[27] I. Novak, 'Chemistry through the Looking Glass', Aust. J. Ed. Chem., 57, 32 (2001).

[28] M. Clarke, N. Barlow, A. Patti and J. L. Scott, 'Capturing the imagination with Green Chemistry --- and explosions, froth, colour, phase changes and lollies', Aust. J. Ed. Chem., 57, 25 (2001).

[29] C. L. Raston, 'Green Chemistry : Third Year Level Teaching : The Monash Experience', Chemeda, 16 pp. 54 - 56, (2000).

[30] 'Australian Scientists honoured in 2002 Legends Award stamp issue', Chemistry in Australia, p. 11, Mar., 2002.

TopAbstractCEJ Vol. 6, No. 2, Contents