Knowledge and perception of eponyms in chemistry by university students in Belarus and the United States

Abstract

Introduction. The didactic principle of education-in-studies is one of the most important instruments of quality education at all levels. Compliance with this principle enhances the results of methodological means educators choose. A positive example is considered a widely recognised and effective method of education and upbringing. As such examples, in education it is recommended to use personal and scientific biographies of scholars whose names became a part of scientific eponyms - terms meaning phenomena, laws, theories, inventions, etc. derived from the names of their originators. Eponyms are researched from the prospective of many sciences, including pedagogy. According to the principles of humanisation and historicism declared in governmental documents on education, eponyms can be utilised as means of upbringing while studying natural and other disciplines. However, the research data about this role of eponyms are scarce. In particular, it is unknown how students perceive this component of language and if there is a difference in perception between school and university students. This gap in methodology and teaching technique applies to a number of disciplines including chemistry. The aims of this research publication were to study attitudes of university students in two countries - Belarus and the USA - to chemical eponyms, and to identify correlations between their reflective cognition and solid knowledge of the future professionals. Methodology and research methods. A 27-item questionnaire with different types of answers was developed by the author of the present research. The questionnaire was administered via the Internet for the survey of students at University of Oregon and Belarusian State University. Analysis of the data collected was done in IBM® SPSS® package using descriptive (mean, standard deviation, variance) and inferential (Mann-Whitney and Pearson tests) statistics. Results and scientific novelty. The survey showed that students in both countries recognise chemical eponyms by association better than by their content. Belarusian respondents exhibited a bit higher level of eponym knowledge than American respondents, which is explained by populations (the former one had more chemistry majors), timing and duration of chemistry courses. Recognition of chemical eponyms differs; it is promoted by their repeatability, uniqueness, and phoneticity. The majority of students in both countries perceive eponyms non-reflexively, and the students' attitude towards eponyms is mostly uncertain. It was found that the determinant factor for good knowledge and reflective positive attitude towards eponyms is the student's motivation for learning. This motivation, in turn, is determined by the chosen major. Naturally, the profile majors “Chemistry” and “Chemistry Teaching” motivate students the most. It has been concluded that on the one hand, for implementation of the humanisation and historicism principles, one should not rely exclusively on eponyms. To avoid mistakes, one should keep a systemic approach that implies a set of pedagogical means and methods. On the other hand, systematic, regular work with chemical eponyms helps to get an in-depth understanding of chemical phenomena and to get the chemical theory-and-practice synthesis quick and balanced. Unfortunately, less and less attention is paid in educational literature to both eponyms and scholar personalities as their sources, and that is fundamentally wrong. Practical significance. The research materials and the results obtained in this research will be useful for teachers and instructors of chemistry in the development of lessons, lectures, seminars and laboratory classes as well as in writing tutorials and textbooks.