I hate to sound like a broken record but I used two activities from Grand Valley State Target Inquiry Program (link is external) that worked amazingly well and had a great "flow". Chad Bridle wrote two inquiry activities that dovetail together. The first is "Changes You Can Believe In". Students are presented first with nine cards that are particulate drawings of changes that occur in matter.
I just completed covering "ionic and covalent" bonding with my studenets. I wanted to bridge the gap to intermolecular forces. I found a great lab called "Sticky Water" from Target Inquiry - Grand Valley State.(link is external) Before I continue, I have to provide "full disclosure". I spent three years with the Target Inquiry Program at Miami University Ohio (Project TIMU(link is external)). There is a lab called "Sticky Water" that was written by a teacher in the Grand Valley State program. First, the activity focuses on just water, then ethane, then ethanol.
Last winter I watched a webinar put on by ACS and AACT called "NGSS in the Chemistry Classroom." As a result of watching that webinar, I took an activity that had NGSS Science & Engineering Practices (SEP) integrated into it and tried it out in class. In this activity, students are required to develop their own procedures and data tables.
There is a hydrate lab which is done by many teachers. Typically, students first use a known hydrate and are provided the formula. As an example, they might use CuSO4. 5H2O. On paper, they would work through the percent by mass of water in copper (II) sulfate pentahydrate. They then would be given a mass of the copper (II) sulfate pentahydrate, calculate how much water they should lose and then they would heat it and compare the data with the calculated value. Next, they are given an unknown hydrate. They are also given the molar mass of the unknown salt of the hydrate and they have to calculate the molar ratio of salt to water based on their data. Here is one possible way to “tweak” this lab.
We, as teachers, can see that life is sometimes like this and we care enough about our students that we want to try to prepare them for careers and problems that we can’t even imagine….because we believe that good education can empower people to go further and reach higher than they could ever dream….and maybe the journey we will start together begins with a simple question in which the answer may not seem immediately obvious...and that is O.K….
Teaching is so collaborative! That's why periodically I will interview a fellow instructor and post the questions and answers here. It benefits all of us when we discuss what works, what doesn't, and how we can improve. This month's feature is Sharon Geyer from Pomfret School in Connecticut.
What a mole-riffic time we are having here in Kennesaw, Georgia! Some highlights from my time here include:
~ The very appropriate cooling towels (Chill-its) we (ChemEd X) handed out to folks who stopped by our table, ran the Mole Run, or we saw between sessions. Several teachers have been diving in to research how they work. Chemistry in action!
During our recent chemistry summer camp, we used some electrochemistry activities. We had some logistical issues, but they were an overal success!
Historically, my students report significant figures as one of the most confusing concepts in honors chemistry. My recent blog post described the process of transforming my introduction into an inquiry activity. I’ve also re-worked my practice activities to be more directed to specific student needs, more focused on spending time with small groups, and more dedicated to active learning. This four step tiered plan works for me.
Wow! Night one of the semester we did the activity Change You Can Believe In. It was my second time facilitating, so I did a much better job of directing students when they asked questions and it went much faster than last semester. I did still, as expected, have students that were frustrated. One student asked me point blank what the difference between physical and chemical changes is.