---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 07:38:51 EDT From: Donald Rosenthal Subject: DR- Begin Discussion of Paper 3 CHEMCONF '96 New Initiatives in Chemical Education An On-Line Symposium, June 3 to July 19, 1996 Sponsored by the American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Education Organized by: Donald Rosenthal, Department of Chemistry, Clarkson University, and Tom O'Haver, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, The University of Maryland at College Park. It is Friday, June 14, 1996. I wish to thank George M. Bodner and Daniel S. Domin for submitting their paper, and both of them and many of you for the stimulating discussion. Discussion of Paper 2 is now over. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There will be additional time for General Discussion between July 15 and July 19. Also, no activities are planned on Saturday and Sunday, June 22 and June 23. Those wishing to engage in casual General Discussion of Symposium related topics may do so via CHEMCONF. >From 8 AM Eastern Daylight Saving Time (EDST) today until 8 AM EDST on Tuesday, June 18 you have an opportunity to discuss Paper 3: "The Role of Molecular Structure and Modeling in General Chemistry" by Loretta L. Jones Your discussion and questions should be sent to: CHEMCONF@UMDD.UMD.EDU or CHEMCONF@UMDD.BITNET In order to insure that this On-Line symposium functions smoothly PLEASE READ THESE BRIEF INSTRUCTIONS CAREFULLY. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The SUBJECT LINE can be useful in keeping track of various discussion threads. For example: P3 - GJ - D - JS - Molecular Modeling Software P3 indicates the message pertains to Paper 3. GJ are the initials of the sender - George Jones D - JS identifies discussion (or an answer) of a question from JS A brief (less than 40 character) description of the content or discussion thread. Please do not append or include a long quotation from the paper or a previous question or discussion message. Quote only a few lines and place a ">" at the beginning of each quoted line. CHEMCONF IS NOT TO BE USED FOR SENDING GENERAL MESSAGES OR EXTRANEOUS ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ QUESTIONS. ^^^^^^^^^ Be courteous to others in your responses and your e-mail practices. Please make your comments and questions carefully reasoned and succinct. Send one long message rather than several short messages. (Let's try to maximize Quality/Quantity.) If you wish to sign off, change your mail options, retrieve files, etc. remember to send such request to: LISTSERV@UMDD.UMD.EDU or LISTSERV@UMDD.BITNET and NOT CHEMCONF. (Listserv commands were provided when you signed on and are available on the World Wide Web.) Thomas O'Haver (University of Maryland, Phone: (301) 405-1831 e-mail: to2@umail.umd.edu), symposium co-chair, is managing the CHEMCONF Listserv and the World Wide Web site (The URL is http://www.wam.umd.edu/~toh/ChemConf96.html). Please contact Professor O'Haver about Internet problems. Donald Rosenthal Symposium Co-Chair and Chair, Committee on Computers in Chemical Education Clarkson University Phone: 315-265-9242 E-mail: ROSEN1@CLVM.CLARKSON.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:40:18 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-DR-Role of molecular modeling Questions from Don Rosenthal: 1. How are other courses at Northern Colorado making use of the expertise students have acquired in the freshmen course? ANSWER: The HyperChem software is used in physical chemistry courses to perform simulations. HyperChem is not used in organic chemistry because we have only six copies. This would not be enough to handle the large demand. Thus, hand-held models are used in organic chemistry courses, especially when stereochemical concepts are being taught. Students are allowed to bring molecular models to organic chemistry exams. They can create molecular structures to answer questions about stereochemistry and reaction mechanisms, and perhaps the kinds of questions described in the paper by Bodner and Domin. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 2. You state: > little is yet known about how giving students the opportunity to > explore and build structures in the molecular world affects learning. and > The challenge .. when introducing students to molecular modeling > software is how to provide the structured learning environment > that best leads to understang. Loretta, do you or do any of the other symposium participants have additional ideas you would like to share with us on these important matters? ----------------------------------------------------------------- ANSWER: The problem with most molecular modeling software is that it is created for bench chemists, who want an environment that will allow them to quickly construct complicated structures and obtain accurate information. The software is not designed to teach and can be very intimidating for beginners, unless some sort of structure is provided. Although time to explore can be beneficial, students usually need to be prompted to find value in modeling software, just as they do with molecular models. Of course, the relationships and properties we think are important are what we want students to find and learn. However, we do not know how important it is to allow students opportunities to explore microscopic worlds on their own. What do they learn when they do this? Cyril S. Smith once said that new technologies begin as toys. We play with them; then they become art forms, and eventually useful tools. If this same process can be imagined in microcosm for the individual, how important is it to allow opportunities for students to play with atoms and molecules, in order to learn their properties and become familiar with them; and how important is it for them to create structures of their own design (art forms)? Some students who have finished their assignments stay in lab to create bizarre compounds on HyperChem, and elaborate structures with the models. Are they wasting time or gradually altering their mental models in their own way? If we ask what they are doing, they say, "Just wanted to see what would happen." I don't have a firm answer to this question, only more questions. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:41:25 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-RL Question from Runhai Lu: BTW:Why don't use molecular models in the course? such as molecular vision ( general name: Darling Model), they are inexpensive and easy to use. Just an idea ANSWER: Great idea, actually. We use three types of molecular models, both in lab and in lecture. Gumdrop models are used in a discovery exercise, students build structures with Darling-type models in lab, and construct models of organic compounds with the Prentice-Hall kits in lecture classes. It seems to me that the study of chemistry is very different with and without models, whether the models are wooden, plastic, or computer-generated. We cannot see the molecular level world that is the basis of chemical principles. The models help us to become acquainted with its inhabitants. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:42:51 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-GL-Role of molecular modeling Questions from George Long: 1. What is the cost required to set up molecular modeling for a large group of students ? ANSWER: What you need depends on your purpose for introducing the technology. You could spend nothing and have excellent shareware, such as Rasmol. However, the free and inexpensive software can be excellent for organic structures, but poor for inorganic structures. Also, the programs usually do not allow you to calculate electrostatic potentials or bond angles and lengths, or to visualize molecular orbitals or electron density diagrams. The full-featured modeling programs vary in cost and the prices change with time. However, I once had a quote of $10,000 for a 25 user site license. 2. Do other faculty, in upper divisions courses use the same software ? ANSWER: Yes, in physical chemistry (See answer to Don Rosenthal). If we had been able to secure a site license, the biology department also wanted to use the software. 3. How do you think learning via modeling affects the non-chemistry majors, who are likely not going to see MM again. ANSWER: One of my goals in teaching general chemistry is to help students see the world in a new way. Modeling may help achieve this goal. We also teach students who will never see one again to use a buret, in hopes that this will help to build concepts of stoichiometry. Both of these goals can be questioned. 4. Even in simple molecules MM does not always give results that are exactly correct, particularly with inorganic compounds (i.e. in agreement, within error of experiments) Do you inform the students of these subtle errors or do you assume that the values are correct enough for freshmen. ANSWER: We tell students that the software is using theoretical models of molecular behavior to optimize the geometry. What they see on the screen is not the actual molecule, but the result of a calculation. Interested students are invited to try other algorithms to see if they get the same or different answers. Except for the few who believe that there are only right or wrong answers, students seem to have no difficulty with this and, in fact, I suspect that for some, it is the first time they begin to realize how decisions are made about chemistry. That is, they begin to realize that scientists work without answers in the back of the book. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:43:49 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-HP-Role of molecular modeling Comments from Harry Pence: 1. For years I've been saying that this is a generation of visual learners, and it may turn out that I'm more right that I realized. ANSWER: Yes, our students are accustomed to extracting information from pictures, both from television and from computers, probably much more so than we are. 2. One last comment: this past fall one of my former students came by for help. He was taking organic chemistry, and wanted help "visualizing the molecules." I pulled up a simple diagram of butane, showing that, contrary to way the molecule is sometimes represented, the carbon backbone is not linear but has the 109 deg bends that you would expect from simple bonding theory. He looked at it for a while, then said, "Thanks, that's what I thought it should look like." and left. I don't know if he's doing better or worse in organic than previous students, but I do think that there is a change in the way that he is viewing molecular structures. If you can have that much effect just showing pictures, I would expect that the results of having the students actually create their own molecules would be much greater. ANSWER: Sometimes a picture is worth more than 1,000 words. However, an unanswered question in chemistry is when is it helpful to have a model presented, and when is it better to create one's own mental model? There is some evidence that mental models generated by students are more powerful in learning than ones we show them. Even molecular modeling programs that allow free exploration and multiple representations have limited scope. However, they may be more accurate representations than those generated by students. A question I have is how can we inspire students to generate their own models, then help them refine and correct those models? I'll never forget reading about the student who was asked to describe acid dissociation in water in his own words. He said he imagined acids as fluffy yellow birds that lost feathers in water, the feathers corresponding to hydrogen ions. This vivid imagery should have great recall value. Now, how do we refine it? Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:45:05 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-RP-Role of molecular modeling Comment from Richard Pendarvis: I have used both molecular models and modeling software with my classes. I find that the physical molecular models are more effective teaching tools. My best guess is that the combined use of the various physical senses is somewhat more effective than the use of visual perception alone. Has anyone else had similar experiences? ANSWER: Yes, and we have found that incorporating that additional sense of touch has real value. Roy Tasker, of the University of Western Sydney, adds a third sense to his molecular animations: sound. Thus, colliding atoms crash and molecules patter against the walls of their containers. It seems to add another dimension. The paradox is that in each of our attempts to make the molecular world more real for students, we introduce more of ourselves and our interpretation of that world. Programs that simulate real molecular characteristics may be the closest to helping students generate the most accurate mental models. However, all models, from the odd shapes of ball and stick models, to the notion that atoms make noises when they collide (actually, they do, don't they? Just drop a book on the floor) compromise reality to some extent. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:47:21 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: P3-LJ-A-BR-Role of molecular modeling Question from Bert Ramsay: Are students' difficulties with (mathematical) problem solving fundamentally related to their ability to visualize molecules as distinguished from symbolic representations? ANSWER: According to the dual-coding theory we take in information through two separate channels: visual and auditory. Written text is processed through the auditory channel, while images and animations are processed through the visual channel. It is my belief that concepts are fundamentally visual in nature and are thus processed through the visual channel. This may explain why we have so much trouble teaching concepts using words. For example, imagine to yourself the concept of a chair. Do you think of a written definition of a chair, or do you imagine images of chairs to try to find their common characteristics, and only then come up with a description in words? Some years ago I studied how to analyze concepts and was delighted to find concept analysis resurfacing in Dudley Herron's new book, The Chemistry Classroom. When analyzing the concepts of chemistry, you begin to appreciate how visual they really are. If the concept is not clear, then no selection of representation will help understanding. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 09:40:49 -0400 From: JOHN WOOLCOCK Subject: P3-JW-D-LJ: Visual Approach to Concept Learning Loretta Jones (In response to a question from Bert Ramsey) >It is my belief that concepts are fundamentally visual in nature and are >thus processed through the visual channel. This may explain why >we have so much trouble teaching concepts using words. I have always believed that I am a visual learner and so Loretta's example of a concept of "chair" being a visual image hit home. I have always had trouble with theoretical topics until I could visualize them. This is why I am looking foreward to reading the study by Domin and Bodner concerning the use of multiple representations in FT-NMR mentioned in paper #2. I was not able to learn the basics of FT-NMR when I was in graduate school back in the early 1980's. Only when the pictoral descriptions of the concepts were used in articles in J. Chem. Ed. and which are now present in most texts, was I able to learn enough theory to teach it to my students. And I still have some difficulty visualizing the theory 2D NMR although Howard Bell's FT-NMR tutorials have helped a lot. However, I have seen in several sources that there are other dominant learning styles such as auditory, kinesthetic, etc. While most students do not exclusively use one style is there any evidence, other than anecdotal, that concept learning in chemistry is a fundamentally visual process? John Woolcock IUP Chemistry Dept. woolcock@grove.iup.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:24:17 -0400 From: "Jeff Davis (CHE)" Subject: P3 - Interfaces and Display One of the difficulties with students using modeling programs is that the more versatile they become the more complex the means by which selections are made for what is to be displayed, what parameters go into the computation, etc. I have taken the route of providing students some "standard settings" so they don't have a terrible number of manipulations to go through. This still leaves them with some options to fool around if they want to although often the end up with displays whose interpretation might elude them. I would be interested to know if there have been any attempts to put a "front-end" on such programs via an authoring system that would display for the student simple questions and selected information to be entered into appropriate spaces and which then drives the computational program to do its thing. For students at a a more introductory level this might help them see what they are doing more directly. At the same time, the same authoring program could then provide follow-up with explicit comments and directions about what to look for, etc. Another problem it seems to me is dealing with the more abstract quantities such as dipole moments and enrgies. Fortunately, students seem to respond to arrows as a useful representation of where the centers of electric charge are and whether polarities are large or small. (I'm putting aside how well they understand how these all arise and where the arrow and the numbers actually come from.) Energy is more remote. In many computational programs it is just a number. Even if one stretches or twists a molecule deliberately one still just sees a number. In these instances, what ways have users found to display these changes in a way that students can see such factors as which configuration has the minimum energy, what happends during the course of a reaction, etc. Jeff Davis Univ. of South Florida ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 13:41:55 -0500 From: mudlagiri B Goli Subject: Re: P3-LJ-A-RP-Role of molecular modeling I agree 100%. The real tragedy in organic chemistry teaching is students not using different kinds of models that can let students to make new compounds and break few bonds etc. For example in my organic chemistry class, I spend one hour on what I call "visiting families of organic compounds/covalent compounds" letting students build molecules like H2O, NH3, BF3, CH4, ethane, ethene,propene, ethyne, propyne, ether, alcohol,carboxyllic acid, aldehyde, ketone, haloalkane, ether, amine, ester, amide. You know what I was doing. Once they did it they have no problem at all in learning any compounds.Rest is piece of cake. Along with the building I ask them to answer few questions, like whether the atom involved is sp3, sp2 or sp etc. and also ask them to make sure that they write the lewis dot structure along with it. Ask them to find out lone pair of electrons in the model that they built. Sometime I go to the extent of asking them to use protractor to measure the bond angles in these various molecules. They come close to the real angles. So what is the impact: No problem at all for them to figure out sp3,sp2 and sp Molecules are no more funny names. But one with real identity. One more thing that I do in my organic chemistry class is to make chemistry lively, by giving a little life to the molecules. Example: Posively charged ion attracting negatively charged ion(opposite attracts etc. One can use ones imagination here. You can use real life equivalence almost on every topic. Example in hybridization:) I stop here and want to here from you. Have a good day. Goli ****************************************************** *** EMBY GOLI (goli@cypress.mcsr.olemiss.edu) *** *** Associate Professor of Chemistry *** *** Mississippi Valley State University, MS 38941 *** *** (601)254-3644 *** ******************************************************** On Thu, 13 Jun 1996, Loretta L. Jones wrote: > Comment from Richard Pendarvis: > > I have used both molecular models and modeling software with my classes. > I find that the physical molecular models are more effective teaching > tools. > > My best guess is that the combined use of the various physical senses is > somewhat more effective than the use of visual perception alone. > > Has anyone else had similar experiences? > > ANSWER: > Yes, and we have found that incorporating that additional sense of touch > has real value. Roy Tasker, of the University of Western Sydney, adds a > third sense to his molecular animations: sound. Thus, colliding atoms > crash and molecules patter against the walls of their containers. It > seems to add another dimension. > > The paradox is that in each of our attempts to make the molecular world > more real for students, we introduce more of ourselves and our > interpretation of that world. Programs that simulate real molecular > characteristics may be the closest to helping students generate the most > accurate mental models. However, all models, from the odd shapes of ball > and stick models, to the notion that atoms make noises when they collide > (actually, they do, don't they? Just drop a book on the floor) compromise > reality to some extent. > Loretta L. Jones > Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry > University of Northern Colorado > Greeley, CO 80639 > > lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 22:09:54 -0400 From: Runhai Lu Subject: Re: Models Last time, I answered one question about using computer modeling and phyiscal models in the chemistry course, I received a lot e-mail asking about the models I mentioned in my answer, Instead to answer each individual mail, I'd like to answer them here and share more information about the models. The models called " Molecular Visions"__ The flexible molecular model kit. It featurs an easy push/pull coupling system. You may contact the following address to get more information. Phone: 330-688-2080 fax: 330-688-5750 address: Darling Models P.O.Box 1818 Stow OH 44224 U.S.A---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 17:05:05 +1000 From: Rowan Hollingworth Subject: P3 - RH - Accuracy of representations Loretta Jones suggests that >There is some evidence that mental models generated by students are more >powerful in learning than ones we show them. Even molecular modeling >programs that allow free exploration and multiple representations have >limited scope. However, they may be more accurate representations than >those generated by students. A question I have is how can we inspire >students to generate their own models, then help them refine and correct >those models? I'll never forget reading about the student who was asked >to describe acid dissociation in water in his own words. He said he >imagined acids as fluffy yellow birds that lost feathers in water, the >feathers corresponding to hydrogen ions. This vivid imagery should have >great recall value. Now, how do we refine it? Where do we draw the line in the trade off between (vivid) imagery and accuracy of the image or model? There is a clear difference between the shapes of the orbitals shown in the Molecular Constructor and those plotted by Ramachandran and Kong J Chem Ed 72, 406 and 1082,(1995). Are these differences important to students' understanding of bonding in molecules? Are there any reasons why software as sophisticated as the Molecular Constructor should not illustrate as precise images as possible? What misconceptions may inadvertently arise from using imagery that is less than entirely accurate? I would also like to ask Loretta Jones another question. What do you explain to your students about the orbitals they are constructing with? How much do you think that they need to know about the mathematical basis of the orbitals to have a proper understanding of bonding? Can they successfully use this software as a black box? Dr Rowan W Hollingowrth Dept of Chemistry, University of New England, Armidale NSW, AUSTRALIA Email: rholling@metz.une.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 09:20:15 -0400 From: patricia mabrouk Subject: Re: your mail I am writing in response to your e-mail below. I feel quite strongly as apparently does your friend that 'familiarity breeds contempt' when it comes to quality teaching. My own experiences as an Assistant Prof I feel bear out this point quite well. Repeatedly I have found that I have done the best job of teaching the first and second times I have taught a course. Then I too have been a learner rather than a lecturer or a performer -often only one step ahead of my pledglings. I have found that while my teaching ratings improve thereafter I become less in touch with my students and with the learning process which my students are experiencing. I may be funnier. I may be more polished in my delivery. I may be more professional in terms of using modern technology in my delivery - powerpoint, www, etc. I find however I am a less effective instructor. Too often I have found that I have forgotten HOW I learned the material and at what personal cost. I believe that the reason our TA's are often more effective than we are in the classroom has more to do with the fact that they too are still learners and that it is this characteristic more than any other which we must capture if we are to effectively teach our charges. Pam Mabrouk Northeastern U. pmabrouk@lynx.neu.edu > > Don Rosenthal asks a series of questions that might be phrased as > follows. > > Is the course instructor in the best position to teach problem > solving to the students? > > What is the role of the recitation section taught by graduate > students? > > What is the role of cooperative (or collaborative) learning > in problem solving? > > Is it worthwhile presenting more than one way to solve a > problem? > > A close friend (who will not be named, to protect the "innocent") > once said: "Physical chemistry is too important to be taught by a > physical chemist." (Organic chemistry is too important to be > taught be an organic chemist, and so on.) Our work suggests that > the course instructor is not inherently in the best position to teach > problem solving. But, by carefully reflecting on what > they do when they face novel situations, and differentiating > between these practices and what they do when they work routine > exercises, they can become the best individual to teach problem > solving strategies because they are often the only individual at the > institution who has the insight to provide a broad picture of how > experts in that field attack problems they encounter. > > Graduate students can be a superb resource for improving the > problem-solving skills of their students because they are closer to > the students in terms of age and experience. But they often lack > the insight gained from several years of experience as the instructor > in charge of the course about the aspects of the course in which > their students need help. Thus, like some computer tutorial > programs, they can get the students to spend hours developing > skills that will earn them less than 1% of the points necessary to > pass a course. > > There is abundant evidence that individuals working together in > groups can solve problems -- and develop better problem-solving > skills -- than individuals working alone. All we have to do is look > at our practices when we "do" chemistry. All too often, we seem > to own two different hats. One we wear when we "do" chemistry, > and the other we put on to "teach" chemistry. I am convinced that > our students benefit when we approach the learning of chemistry > by students the same way we approach the learning of chemistry by > chemists. As an example of what I mean, let me note that a > number of years ago, the anarchistic model of problem solving in > the introduction to the Bodner and Pardue text was presented at a > seminar at Purdue. One of my colleagues argued: "You can't > possibly expect the students to follow this model when they work > problems in your course because this is what I do when I do > research." As you might expect, I disagree. > > I believe that it is important to periodically give the students more > than one solution to a problem, to clearly convey to them the > notion that there is no "best" way to work the problem. I also > believe that is important to make "mistakes" when solving > problems in class. (Fortunately, for me this is easy to achieve!) > This way, the students have to pay attention to what we are doing, > and, more importantly, recognize that problem solving is never > linear. It doesn't move directly from the start to the finish of a > task. Those of us who work problems for a living -- which is what > most chemists seem to do -- often start in the wrong direction, get > lost for a period of time in the path toward the solution, start over, > etc. The key to our performance is the fact that we are persistent; > we keep track of what we have accomplished; we try not to lose > sight of the goal; and we routinely ask ourselves: "Have I gotten > anywhere?" > ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 10:22:16 -0400 From: JBELL Subject: P2-RH- Teaching Students Problem Solving (Howald) Reed Howald's comments on the use of cooperative groups and peer learning processes are on the mark. In this regard, see the references to ConcepTests (Mazur and Ellis references) in Paper #1, where these techniques are used in a lecture setting. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:00:22 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: P3,TJZ,D,Accuracy of representations Rowan W Hollingowrth wrote: > How >much do you think that they need to know about the mathematical basis of >the orbitals to have a proper understanding of bonding? Can they >successfully use this software as a black box? I think this is similar to the problem of teaching very young children about reproduction. I personally wouldn't start with Gray's Anatomy. So with orbitals and other physical chemistry models that have a complex mathematical foundation we might start with where the students is and evolve our instruction as the students develops. Respectfully Theresa ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 11:00:25 -0500 From: Theresa Julia Zielinski Subject: P3,TJZ,D,Effect of experience on quality of teaching Dear Pam and other Participants Keeping the spark of the new learner in a course one has taught for 15 years or more let alone a year or two is a real challenge. Perhaps this is why teachers change textbooks so often. There is also the question of teaching evaluations. So much depends on the quality of presentation and showmanship of the teacher when these are filled out by younger students. Also there are the expectations that students bring to a class. If they expect one pedagogical style and get another then teacher ratings go down. I've talked to enough younger chemistry teachers at meetings to know that this is not a rare occurrence. One thing we must be painfully conscious of is that if we are not careful we may find ourselves in the edutainment business not the chemical education business in response to pressures from student expectations and pressures to use technology in the classroom and laboratory. The literature is clear, as this assembly of the choir will attest, that animations, videos, active learning strategies, molecular modeling, equation engines, WWW, etc do create more effective learning environments for students. There is evaluation out there and it should be convincing more of our colleagues of the power of these approaches. Perhaps they are still truly unconvinced or perhaps they, like many of our students, can not envision themselves as being able to do this stuff effectively and so they wait out retirement etc. Perhaps the answer may lie in the fact that we are burdened by the "tyranny of the curriculum" and the "tyranny of the right answer." Where does a teacher we squeeze in new methodologies and interesting pedagogical experiences for our students when we must "give them"/"cover" the material. Where is the money to come from? Furthermore where is the scientific method in all of this delivery emphasis? What chemical concepts do students discover? What intellectual critical thinking skills do they develop? Will they be able to learn on their own when they leave the nest? Or will they always be dependent on a mentor to guide them along until they manage to get tenure somewhere. Of course I like mentors as much as the next person but not as a steady diet. Without strong critical thinking skills and strong independent learning skills, and the caveat, with out a good mastery of content a student is not in the position to tell even a very good mentor that the suit was left at home. Problems that society must face that require responses have no "right" answers. There are answers that cost a lot. There are answers that favor one group over another. There are answers that are impossible to implement. There are lots of answers. Critical thinking means being able to face the options and make choices based on criteria. Where is this in our science classes? I don't see it in pchem. Maybe some of you have some to share. Respectfully Theresa At 08:51 AM 6/17/96, Pam Mabrouk wrote: > Repeatedly I have found that I >have done the best job of teaching the first and second times I have >taught a course. Then I too have been a learner rather than a lecturer >or a performer -often only one step ahead of my pledglings. I have >found that while my teaching ratings improve thereafter I become less in >touch with my students and with the learning process which my students >are experiencing. I may be funnier. I may be more polished in my >delivery. I may be more professional in terms of using modern >technology in my delivery - powerpoint, www, etc. I find however I am a >less effective instructor. Too often I have found that I have forgotten >HOW I learned the material and at what personal cost. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 09:59:32 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: P3 - Interfaces and Display >From Jeff Davis: >. I would be interested to know if there have been any > attempts to put a "front-end" on such programs via an authoring system > that would display for the student simple questions and selected > information to be entered into appropriate spaces and which then drives > the computational program to do its thing. For students at a a more > introductory level this might help them see what they are doing more > directly. At the same time, the same authoring program could then provide > follow-up with explicit comments and directions about what to look for, etc. Dave Whisnant and I once tried to secure funding to develop such a program, the "molecular control panel." Although we were not successful, Dave has developed a system that ties together HyperChem with a spreadsheet program and a Toolbook interface. This is the only such program I know of. Energy is > more remote. In many computational programs it is just a number. Even if > one stretches or twists a molecule deliberately one still just sees a > number. In these instances, what ways have users found to display these > changes in a way that students can see such factors as which > configuration has the minimum energy, what happends during the course of > a reaction, etc. The programs available seem to do a better job with electron density plots than with energy plots. This sounds like a fruitful area for development and leads to speculation about how one would show energy differences---have the molecule glow brighter as its energy increases? Loretta Jones Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 10:06:29 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: P3-LJ-A-RP-Role of molecular modeling >From Mudlagiri B. Goli: > For example in my organic chemistry class, I spend one hour on > what I call "visiting families of organic compounds/covalent compounds" > letting students build molecules like > H2O, NH3, BF3, CH4, ethane, ethene,propene, ethyne, propyne, ether, > alcohol,carboxyllic acid, aldehyde, ketone, haloalkane, ether, amine, > ester, amide. > So what is the impact: > > No problem at all for them to figure out sp3,sp2 and sp > > Molecules are no more funny names. But one with real identity. > > One more thing that I do in my organic chemistry class is to make > chemistry lively, by giving a little life to the molecules. Example: > Posively charged ion attracting negatively charged ion(opposite attracts > etc. One can use ones imagination here. You can use real life equivalence > almost on every topic. We have had similar experiences in general chemistry when introducing functional groups. Students are given the generic formula and an example. Then they must use the Prentice-Hall model kits to build a different example, draw its structure, and name it. We are thinking of getting another set of models, a type with non-spherical atoms, which are difficult to control in a tiered lecture hall. Your use of models to teach the dynamic nature of chemistry sounds interesting. I hope you can tell us more about it. Loretta Jones Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 12:36:33 -0400 From: AAHLGREN Subject: Re[2]: P3-LJ-A-RP-Role of molecular modeling Jones wrote: >...We are thinking of getting another set of models, a type with >non-spherical atoms, which are difficult to control in a tiered >lecture hall. Any chance to use the dropped atoms opportunistically for an analogy to tiered energy levels? Unless repeatedly pumped up, I suppose all the atoms would eventually end up in the ground state. (And here's another example of the patter of atomic impacts.) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:01:08 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: P3-JW-D-LJ: Visual Approach to Concept Learning >From John Woolcock: > I have always believed that I am a visual learner and so Loretta's example of a > concept of "chair" being a visual image hit home. I have always had trouble > with theoretical topics until I could visualize them. > However, I have seen in several sources that there are other dominant learning > styles such as auditory, kinesthetic, etc. While most students do not > exclusively use one style is there any evidence, other than anecdotal, that > concept learning in chemistry is a fundamentally visual process? Probably all the senses get involved in really deep learning of concepts. Also, it seems that the more varied the learning environments we can provide, the more we can reach all students, not just those who learn best by one mode or another. The statement about the visual nature of concept learning is supported by Haber: R. Haber, 1970, How we remember what we see, Scientific American, 222, 104-115 (also see Darrel L. Murray, 1978, A visual recall probe of cognitive structure, Science Education, 62, 39-46). Haber found that the manner by which images are recalled suggests a nonverbal storage and retrieval strategy for images, implying that, "...since the pictures are not stored in words they cannot be recalled in words either, at least not in much detail..." However, with some exceptions, such as the new ACS Conceptual Exam, tests of concept learning are almost invariably verbal, making it difficult to correlate concept acquisition with other variables. Note that the above research is old. About the time television was introduced there was a flurry of research in visual learning. Some of it is still highly pertinent. Another idea that has surfaced and has turned around in my mind for some time involved the analogy to language learning. If you don't learn a foreign language by a certain age, a rather young age, it becomes much more difficult. Is there a certain age by which something needs to be learned or developed in order that the learning of science can be accelerated, or at least smoothed? If so, what the heck is it? Is it being exposed to a rich visual environment as an infant? Having plenty of opportunities for kinesthetic learning and exploration, again, as a very young child? Or is the learning of science so complicated that this analogy is useless? Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 Voice 1-970-351-1443 FAX 1-970-351-1269 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:15:36 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: P3 - RH - Accuracy of representations >From Rowan Hollingworth: > Where do we draw the line in the trade off between (vivid) imagery and > accuracy of the image or model? There is a clear difference between the > shapes of the orbitals shown in the Molecular Constructor and those plotted > by Ramachandran and Kong J Chem Ed 72, 406 and 1082,(1995). Are these > differences important to students' understanding of bonding in molecules? > Are there any reasons why software as sophisticated as the Molecular > Constructor should not illustrate as precise images as possible? What > misconceptions may inadvertently arise from using imagery that is less than > entirely accurate? Every time we use a model to represent nature we introduce some kind of variation on nature. In general, I feel it is best to use a model that best represents what we want students to learn. Ideally, students will be exposed to all sorts of models. For atomic orbitals, these may be isosurfaces such as those generated by Ramachandran and Kong, which show some aspects of the spatial distribution of electron density, teardrop shapes such as those in the Molecular Constructor, which allow the student to see that the electron density of an atom includes contributions from various orbitals, 2-D topographical plots of electron density such as those used in HyperChem, or 3-D dot diagrams of probability distributions. Each type of model has its advantages and disadvantages. Probably the best approach is to use a variety of presentations and explain how they were obtained or why they are represented as they are. For example, ball-and-stick models are excellent for showing bond angles, while still allowing students to quickly identify specific atoms. Yet, they are not very good representations of molecular shapes. > I would also like to ask Loretta Jones another question. What do you > explain to your students about the orbitals they are constructing with? How > much do you think that they need to know about the mathematical basis of > the orbitals to have a proper understanding of bonding? Can they > successfully use this software as a black box? At the introductory level the mathematical basis can not be presented in an appropriate form. I present it qualitatively, but am interested in how others explain the shapes of orbitals. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 Voice 1-970-351-1443 FAX 1-970-351-1269 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 06:36:55 +0000 From: "Loretta L. Jones" Subject: Re: your mail Patricia Mabrouk wrote: > Repeatedly I have found that I > have done the best job of teaching the first and second times I have > taught a course. Then I too have been a learner rather than a lecturer > or a performer -often only one step ahead of my pledglings. The distancing experience you describe is common. An approach that has helped some of us is the use of cooperative learning groups, even in large lecture halls. Lynn Geiger, M. Lynn James, Clark Fields, and I, all in the same department, use learning groups to involve students more actively in their learning. I have students involved in classroom activities, using models, and sometimes doing simple experiments almost every day. It has been a completely different experience from lecturing. At first it was difficult, as I had little experience with the techniques, but now it is second nature. When students are working in groups, the instructor moves from group to group, gleaning information on how students are thinking and learning. At the same time, the relationship between teacher and students deepens and mutual understanding rises. In our studies of student acceptance, we have had very positive reception of cooperative groups. Students claim they learn more, learn more easily, and make friends and form study groups more easily. As a student once said, "This class is different from all my other classes. There I'm just a number. In this class I belong to a group. It's like being in a family; I'm missed if I don't show up." Of course, in group work many of the problems associated with families are present as well. However, the consistent use of these techniques has had a powerful effect not only on how students spend their time, but on the faculty as well. I feel I am a better teacher, because I have a better understanding of how my students learn. I am right there when they are struggling to build models, or working out a stoichiometry problem. For some topics, inspired by Theresa Zielinski's lecture-less classes, I have discarded lecture entirely. Student receive "guided reading" assignment sheets ahead of time, listing sections to read in the book and containing exercises related to the readings. A more difficult problem follows. When students come to class, they collaborate on the exercises, helping and correcting one another. They can ask questions of me or anyone in the room. Then they tackle the harder problem, which groups must work on their own. Selected homework assignments must be turned in with the completed assignment sheets, and students earn points for completion. This simple, but highly-structured technique has been very popular with students. Loretta L. Jones Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry University of Northern Colorado Greeley, CO 80639 Voice 1-970-351-1443 FAX 1-970-351-1269 lljones@bentley.univnorthco.edu ------------------------------ teachers even have their students sample acidic and nonacidic foods to help them make the distinction. We also use the sense of smell in organic chemistry, to help students distinguish amines, ketones, esters, carboxylic acids, etc. As for the smell of quantum mechanics, I think we have a largely unexplored area here, so will you permit me to be a little speculative? As apparently there are no inherent odors associated with abstract concepts such as orbitals, we could create odors as a distinguishing device to teach a concept not easily seen, such as energy. Imagine models of the s-orbitals that become larger as n becomes larger. If they were coated with a scratch-and sniff material, then one could detect energy differences by rubbing the hand across the sphere: a mild scent for 1s, a more pungent one for 2s, and on up. Like all models, this would induce some misconceptions, in the same sense as giving orbitals or atoms different colors or displaying structures as stick frameworks. Also, I expect that for abstract concepts it is not worth attempting to engage all of the senses. It may be better to give students information from which they can develop their own concepts, which may include their own constructions of the taste, smell, feel, and sounds of quantum mechanics. Loretta Jones ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 20:05:54 -0400 From: AAHLGREN Subject: Re[2]: P3-JW-D-LJ: Visual Approach to Concept Learning Smell is ideal for quantum theory. The point model and sharp-edged orbital drawings miss the chief characteristic of electrons -- namely, that they are spread out continuously; indeed, they are just a little bit everywhere. (Air-brush drawings do a better job, but can't really capture the single-molecule grain of an odor.) Overlap of orbitals is also suited to olfactory representation. I do hope, however, that classroom use of odoriferous analogy will we thought-experiments, not demonstrations. ------------------------------