“Essential” Vs “Advanced” Knowledge: A New Way to Teach and Assess Foundational Chemistry Courses

Chemistry is a foundational discipline for many science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs, making first-year chemistry courses a common requirement in many degrees. Designing courses that accommodate differences in disciplinary needs and prior knowledge remains challenging. This paper describes the iterative design of a first-year chemistry course at a large Australian university for chemistry majors (∼20%) and service degrees, including other sciences (∼30%), medical science (∼28%), and engineering (∼16%). The redesign used an “essential” and “advanced” syllabus structure. Mastery learning and competency-based assessment were integrated to support self-paced learning, while ensuring attainment of essential knowledge and skills for degree progression and workplace readiness. Evaluation of the student experience and learning gains drew on longitudinal academic performance, grade and student feedback analysis (2015–2024), and pre/post quantitative questionnaires covering attitudes, experiences, self-assessed learning gains, basic needs fulfilment, and chemistry concept inventories. The course was redesigned from a traditional format to a partially flipped, learner-centered model. Longitudinal data indicated improved student satisfaction and perceptions of assessment appropriateness. Pre/post analyses (2018–2019) identified small but statistically significant positive changes in enthusiasm about chemistry, interest in discussing chemistry, and perceptions of chemistry’s relevance. Students showed improved knowledge in isolated contexts for bond polarity and Le Châtelier’s principle while greater self-perceived confidence was reported for pH calculations. However, observed effects were small, and these gains did not extend to a broader pattern across the syllabus, indicating the need for longer-term evaluation to confirm positive improvement in student experience indicators.