The Significance of the Origin of Physical Chemistry for Physical Chemistry Education: The Case of Electrolyte Solution Chemistry
Publication Date
Authors
Avondale Authors
Publisher
Original
Rights
© 2014 The Royal Society of Chemistry.
The article available for download is a post-peer-review, pre-copy edit version of an article published in Chemistry Education Research and Practice. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C4RP00010B
Version
Review Status
Field of Education
Field of Research
Degree
Department
Faculty
Supervisor
Awarding Institution
Degree
Department
Faculty
Supervisor
Awarding Institution
Abstract
Physical Chemistry's birth was fraught with controversy, a controversy about electrolyte solution chemistry which has much to say about how scientific knowledge originates, matures, and responds to challenges. This has direct implications for the way our students are educated in physical chemistry in particular and science in general. The incursion of physical measurement and mathematics into a discipline which had been largely defined within a laboratory of smells, bangs, and colours was equivalent to the admission into chemistry of the worship of false gods according to one chemist. The controversy can be classified as a battle between dissociationists on the one hand and associationists on the other; between the Europeans on the one hand and the British on the other; between the ionists on the one hand and the hydrationists on the other. Such strong contrasts set the ideal atmosphere for the development of argumentation skills. The fact that a compromise position, first elaborated in the late 19th century, has recently enhanced the explanatory capacity for electrolyte solution chemistry is challenging but one in which students can participate to their benefit.
Description
Research Statement
Keywords
Citation
de Berg, K. C. (2014). The significance of the origin of physical chemistry for physical chemistry education: the case of electrolyte solution chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 15(3), 266-275. doi:10.1039/C4RP00010B