Can we make chemistry more meaningful and understandable to high school students by using visualization, technology, and authentic problem solving with cooperative learning?
Susan Camasta
(sfc1939@cs.com)
(not ready to use)
Coauthors
ASK
Partner Projects
| Math Science Technology Education |
Subject Areas
| Education, Educational Technology, Information Science, Mathematics, Science |
Grade Levels
Unit Keywords
|
chemistry, honors chemistry, authentic problem solving, gk-12, visualization, technology, inquiry, 350gk, 350 gk, lis350gk |
Open Directory Category
Rationale of the Unit
Chemistry is taught in American public high schools because generations of people (educators, parents, scientists, politicians, among others) have decided that some chemistry content is useful to the average citizen. We assumed these people also believe that the thinking, analysis and problem solving we do in Chemistry is useful for children to learn and practice. To expose them to the world of science and scientists is also a goal. We want young people to know something about how the universe works, how our society works, what we value, what careers are available to them. Based on our experience talking to students and reading/grading their papers, and talking with adults who took chemistry in years passed, many do not appear to be learning and understanding chemistry. We know we are exposing them to its concepts and ideas, yet we are not sure what we are really teaching them. What knowledge, skills and attitudes are they leaving our classes with? What do they remember years from now? Do they use any of the chemistry or its skills that we teach/expose them to? We assess kids with tests when they leave our classes at the end of the year. These tests answer few of those important questions.
Susan is a Chemistry teacher. Considering the above reality suggests some action be taken; some changes be made in our educational practices. She believes there must be a better way for students to learn chemistry and its related skills. She can return to her classroom tomorrow and do the same things she has been doing in the past. This is easy (relatively speaking; anyone who has taught knows teaching is not really easy) and nobody seems to be complaining (at least loudly). In fact, if she did make major changes, people might be more likely to complain because she is not doing it the old fashioned way...the way “we learned it”. Are we doing the best for our students? Given research results and that abound in the literature, it is only fair and ethical that we try some different things.
She has used “hands-on” activities for years, some of which were/are inquiry in nature, some “recipe” orientated. She has done some problem based learning with her classes. She has tried to stress the application of chemistry concepts to everyday situations and real-life visible phenomena. She has also used lecture (telling), discussion, demonstrations, worksheets and problem solving sessions. She has integrated technology. Variety is good. Students have different learning styles. Teachers can get bored.
She has done some action research in her classrooms over the years. .
In the 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 school years she tried “block scheduling”. She liked block scheduling. She thinks it promotes a more rational learning setting. The students surveyed liked it and parent comments were positive too. Student scores on tests were higher, however it was impossible to tell whether the improved scores were due to less time to forget the material, or a better understanding of the material presented. Furthermore, our assessments need to better test understanding of the concepts we teach if we are really to tell if this type of teaching makes a difference. In any case, we abandoned Block scheduling, for this year at my high school because of scheduling/space constraints.
In the 2000-2001 school year she was involved in the Math Science Visualization Project. We paired sophomore honors chemistry students with an honors Algebra II/Trigonometry class. The hope was that students would learn and understand both Chemistry and Algebra better if the teachers of the courses tried to integrate the material. The intent was positive, but the opportunities to integrate were limited. The math in Chemistry seems to be mostly 7th and 8th grade mathematics and basic algebra. The material being covered in their math class was at a higher level than the science class and we were rarely able to integrate. We could have more closely correlated the subject matters of the courses but it did not seem worth reorganizing a logical ordering of topics to do this. There were positive outcomes to this project, students enjoyed and benefited from working in a cohort, teachers benefited from working together closely, observing each other and talking about teaching. The chemistry teacher became more aware of the language of math and more sensitive to the use of math tools. Did the students learn and understand Chemistry and math better because of this arrangement? We do not think so. Their chemistry test scores were higher than those of other honors chemistry students, however the experimental group was highly selected (honors math and honors chemistry) and not directly comparable to the other students because they were more capable students, overall.
During the current school year, the Math Science Visualization Project continues. This year 24 freshmen are taking regular Chemistry and regular Algebra. Once again they travel as a cohort and the teachers observe each other and talk about integration. We had hoped we could connect the math more easily with this more basic math class. However, once again most of algebra is not easily related to first year chemistry topics. Yes, math needs to use science content to make it real for students, but all the sciences should be used for data and application, not just Chemistry. Further, the algebra should be integrated with economics and other social studies and whatever other content areas the math teacher has time to consider. Observing and talking with other subject matter teachers could aid in this task. The freshmen have consistently achieved lower on chemistry tests than their sophomore counterparts. I do not think this is related to their mathematical background, yet rather their lack of experience in a high school lab science course and their one less year of cognitive development.
The visualization portion of this project, both last year and currently, has been highly successful. She believes she always stressed visualization in her teaching, but the technology tools now avaialbe to my students and me, as well as my increased sensitivity to this aspect of their learning have made major changes in the methods and tools she uses for teaching.
Next year, we propose to continue our experimentation and implement a course that stresses inquiry using authentic problems designed around core topics of chemistry and using technology (the internet, visualization tools and computer based sensors for experiments.) In addition to learning chemistry we will stress learning technology skills and science process skills. That is what this Inquiry unit is all about!
|
Background and Resources
Activities and Open-ended problems
With an overhead computer projector, take the chemistry class to http://www.inquiry.uiuc.edu/php/units.php3
Have the class collaborate on some Chemistry related idea, and search the inquiry database for an authentic chemistry problem. If the problem is not on the database, try creating one, while using the Internet as a source of inormation.
|
Dialogues, Discussions, and Presentations
Assessment, Related Questions, and Story of the Unit
ASSESSMENT
RELATED QUESTIONS
STORY OF THE UNIT -- How did it go?
RESPONSES FROM OTHERS (teachers)
|
If you want to add your comments on this Unit, please login first.
|
