A Comparative Study of Leaving Certificate Chemistry in Ireland and Advanced Placement Chemistry in the United States

Abstract

This research aims to compare the senior second level programmes in Ireland and the United States, so that recommendations can be made to establish best practice for international chemical education. To do this, the project will exam the curriculum design, assessment and examination criteria for both programmes, with special consideration for the six objectives in Bloom’s Taxonomy. The methodology used in this study was aligned with the comparative education method, specifically the science (new) approach, used in other international studies of this kind. This enabled a comprehensive approach to be employed in investigating the parameters of both programmes and required the use of qualitative and quantitative resources to assess the curriculum and experimental content analysis. In addition, a specific sub-study of the chosen set of exam papers was conducted using Bloom’s Taxonomy. Each question was analysed for the presence of the six cognitive objectives reported in the taxonomy, and an average result across all five years of papers studied was produced. From these results, recommendations to the design and assessment style of both programmes were made. This research has shown that aspects from both programmes are favourable to a prospective second level chemistry course design. The Leaving Certificate Chemistry coursework is better aligned with corresponding international chemistry programmes, both in curriculum layout and subject content, and as a result, exposes students to real world applications. The Advanced Placement course has six key ideas and places a focus on delivering depth rather than breadth. The Advanced Placement subjects’ curriculum is not prescriptive and so allows both the teacher and student to use their learning through “it’s flexible” approach. This style is carried through to the final assessment where students are required to apply a higher degree of conceptual knowledge throughout the paper. This is also reflected in the course’s accompanying marking scheme, where students are given marks for answers which are additional to those proposed. This approach encourages creativity and conceptual learning, and allows the student to reach higher order objectives as a result. The negative outcomes of both programmes were also documented. Leaving Certificate Chemistry relies heavily on the lower order objectives, primarily knowledge and comprehension. This design leads to issues with rote-learning and memorization, neither of which are a true reflection of a student’s aptitude for the subject. Students are not uniformly awarded for questions phrased in a similar manner, and the marking scheme is rigid and prescriptive. There is also too much choice on each paper, and the same level of cognitive skill is not required to answer questions where choice exists. The Advanced Placement curriculum omits a crucial topic; organic chemistry. Although the quality of the students produced by the programme is unquestionable, the omission of such a fundamental topic is concerning. In terms of the assessment format, it is also evident that students are uniformly rewarded for answering all questions, regardless of the task. There is also no choice on the paper, all questions are mandatory. This does not give a student the ability to play to his or her strengths and must lead to unnecessary stress for each student on the examination day. Finally, both programmes are high stakes assessments, used for admission into third level courses, yet neither officially assess practical chemical techniques. This is both surprising and frustrating given the importance of science and science education in the current global climate.