The Forum: New Directions for General Chemistry: Recommendations of the Task Force on the General Chemistry Curriculum

1994 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. 206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baird W. Lloyd ◽  
James N. Spencer
Keyword(s):  
General Chemistry ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Chemistry Curriculum ◽  
New Directions

scholarly journals Integrating Course Material and Application: A Progressive Writing Assignment Applied to an Astrochemistry Tutorial

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia H Wilkins ◽  
Camillus F Buzard
Keyword(s):  
General Chemistry ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Chemistry Curriculum ◽  
Chemistry Students ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Broader Impacts ◽  
Big Picture ◽  
Course Material ◽  
Writing Assignment ◽  
The Subject

A major challenge in teaching is helping students integrate course concepts to understand the big picture of a field and apply those concepts in new situations. To address this challenge in a tutorial course about astrochemistry (taught by graduate students to chemistry undergraduates), we implemented a progressive writing assignment that culminated in a final presentation. In the progressive writing assignment, students chose an astrochemistry topic they found interesting to be the subject of three sequential papers, which became the basis for their presentations. The purpose of this assignment was to gradually introduce chemistry students to research areas in astronomy, which is by nature outside the general chemistry curriculum, while also providing students with regular feedback. Over the course of the assignment, students applied key themes in the course—significance of astrochemistry research, research methods, and chemistry in astronomical environments—separately to their chosen topics before explaining in the final presentation how these different aspects of astrochemistry work together. By incorporating stories and anaologies, rather than just facts, students gave presentations that were accessible to a novice audience. As a result, students explained broader impacts of astrochemistry research, rather than just focusing on results, and they entertained questions with answers that went beyond clarification of the material discussed.

Investigating the impact of three-dimensional learning interventions on student understanding of structure–property relationships

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia M. Underwood ◽  
Alex T. Kararo ◽  
Gabriela Gadia
Keyword(s):  
General Chemistry ◽  
Active Learning ◽  
Boiling Point ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Intermolecular Forces ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Chemistry Curriculum ◽  
Structure Property ◽  
Structure Property Relationships ◽  
The Impact

The ability to predict macroscopic properties using a compound's chemical structure is an essential idea for chemistry as well as other disciplines such as biology. In this study we investigate how different levels of interventions impact the components of students’ explanations (claims, evidence, and reasoning) of structure–property relationships, particularly related to boiling point trends. These interventions, aligned with Three-Dimensional Learning (3DL), were investigated with four different cohorts of students: Cohort 1 – a control group of students enrolled in an active learning general chemistry course; Cohort 2 – students enrolled in the same active learning general chemistry course but given Intervention 1 (a 3DL worksheet administered during class time); Cohort 3 – students enrolled in the same active learning general chemistry course but given Intervention 1 and Intervention 2 (a 3DL course exam question administered after instruction); and Cohort 4 – a reference group of students enrolled in a transformed active learning general chemistry curriculum in which 3DL is an essential feature and includes Intervention 1 and Intervention 2 as part of the curriculum. We found that Cohort 2 students (with the 3DL worksheet intervention) were more likely than the control group (Cohort 1) to correctly predict the compound with a higher boiling point as well as incorporate ideas of strength of intermolecular forces into their explanations of boiling point differences. When a 3DL exam question was given as a follow up to the 3DL worksheet, students in Cohort 3 were more likely than Cohorts 1 and 2 to correctly identify the claim. Further comparison showed that Cohort 4 (transformed general chemistry curriculum) were more likely than Cohorts 1–3 to also include the ideas of energy needed to overcome stronger forces for a more sophisticated explanation (50% of Cohort 4 students compared to 17–33% for Cohorts 1–3). In addition, 80% of Cohort 4 students were able to construct a correct representation of hydrogen bonding as a non-covalent interaction compared to 13–57% for the other three cohorts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document