Advertisement

Introduction

  • Gwendolyn A. LawrieEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The biennial IUPAC International Conference on Chemistry Education (ICCE) provides participants with an opportunity to share their research and/or their practices or to simply survey the landscape in this rich field and exchange ideas with peers. Participants typically represent multiple academic and teaching roles at all career stages. The international roots of this forum provide us with a snapshot of chemistry education research and practice originating across all five continents—we are able to map a landscape that informs alignment with the current understanding and the directions in growth in our field.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The editorial team is very grateful to the many reviewers who reviewed chapters for this book. We also thank all chapter authors for their contributions.

References

  1. Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18, 57–75.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does (4th ed.). Maidenhead: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, G. A., Bull, J., & Pendlebury, M. (2013). Assessing student learning in higher education. Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, M. M., & Stowe, R. L. (2018). Chemistry education research—from personal empiricism to evidence, theory and informed practice. Chemical Reviews, 118(12), 6053–6087.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 485–492.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK Summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science education, 88(1), 28–54.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kane, R., Sandretto, S., & Heath, C. (2004). An investigation into excellent tertiary teaching: Emphasising reflective practice. Higher Education, 47, 283–310.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HIGH.0000016442.55338.24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. NRC. (2013). Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards. Washington, DC: The National Research Council, National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  11. Taber, K. S. (2016). Learning generic skills through chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 17, 225–228.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c6rp90003h.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of QueenslandSt. LuciaAustralia

Personalised recommendations