More than ‘pour-and-mix’ – Extending Content Knowledge at the college level through an analysis of coumarin in cinnamon
Author:
Emden Markus1ORCID, Scholz Matthias2
Affiliation:
1. Zurich University of Teacher Education , Zurich , Switzerland 2. Chemistry , University of Education Schwaebisch Gmuend , Schwaebisch Gmuend , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
The article introduces the layout of a college course on analytical chemistry for pre-service teachers. The course aims at fostering teacher students’ professional knowledge by recapitulating Core Content Knowledge, introducing Specialized Content Knowledge, and complementing it with discipline-overarching Linked Content Knowledge. Synthesizing these types of knowledge is expected to support students in their processes of meaning making. As they realize an every-day relevance of analytical chemistry they will see opportunities to relate chemical knowledge to their later school students. Regarding Linked Content Knowledge, suggestions are given to address aspects related to the Nature of Science. An exemplary lab activity to analyze the coumarin content in cinnamon is provided. Coumarin has shown adverse health effects in a non-neglectable proportion of humans. Regarding cinnamon there are two varieties of cinnamon with significantly different coumarin content: cassia is very rich in coumarin while Ceylon cinnamon is nearly void of it. The more popular cassia has been shown to be so high in coumarin that a potential risk for light weight consumers cannot be ruled out. Regarding school science, the lab activity can raise an awareness with students for the tentative, creative and socio-cultural Natures of Science – right from the students’ kitchen cabinets.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Education,Chemistry (miscellaneous)
Reference49 articles.
1. Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In Abell, S. K., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105–1149). Mahwah, London: Erlbaum. 2. Abernethy, J. L. (1969). The historical and current interest in coumarin. Journal of Chemical Education, 46(9), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed046p561. 3. Abraham, K., Wöhrlin, F., Lindtner, O., Heinemeyer, G., & Lampen, A. (2010). Toxicology and risk assessment of coumarin: Focus on human data. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, 54(2), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.200900281. 4. Anton, R., Barlow, S., Boskou, D., Castle, L., Crebelli, R., Dekant, W., Engel, K.-H., Forsythe, S., Grunow, W., Heinonen, M., Larsen, J. C., Leclerq, C., Mennes, W., Milana, M. R., Pratt, I., Rietjens, I., Svensson, K., Tobback, P., & Toldrá, F. (2004). Opinion of the scientific panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contacts with food (AFC) on a request from the commission related to coumarin: Question number EFSA-Q-2003-118. The EFSA Journal, 12(2), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2004.104. 5. Ballin, N. Z., & Sørensen, A. T. (2014). Coumarin content in cinnamon containing food products on the Danish market. Food Control, 38, 198–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.10.014.
|
|