DIFFERENTIATED LEARNING LESSON PLAN TEACHER: Natalie Hudok CLASS: Honors ChemistryAbingdon High School Periods 1 & 5 DATE:

February 13, 2013 TIME: 50 minutes each LESSON AIM: Learning ways to express and calculate solution concentration using the solver-listener paired problem solving method. RATIONALE FOR DIFFERENTIATED LEARNING: After getting to know my students over the first couple weeks, I noticed indications that they may benefit from structured pair work. Especially when dealing with chemistry math problems, the students were at different achievement levels, with some that succeeded independently on most assignments and others who struggled and needed my help often, more than I was able to give as one person in the short time allotted for class. Unfortunately, when students were allowed to work together freestyle, the work sessions turned out to be more like chat sessions with work done on the side, not even together. In order to differentiate instruction to meet students needs more efficiently, I decided to try a structured collaborative approach called the solver-listener paired problem solving method when working with chemistry math problems. In it, students work in pairs, with members switching between two rolessolver and listenerwith specific tasks. While solving a problem, the solver vocalizes the steps to the listener, who records the solvers instructions verbatim and only interjects with questions to remove confusion or to correct the solvers mistakes. In this way, I figured that the weaker students would benefit from the guidance of stronger students, while all students would strengthen their communication, collaboration, and logical thinking skills. I decided to use this lesson to introduce the method, which I could then utilize on other assignments throughout the semester. STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES: VA Standards of Learning: CH.4 The student will investigate and understand that chemical quantities are based on molar relationships. Key concepts include c) solution concentrations Specific Objectives: 1) Students will be able to write the formulas for molality, mass percent, and mole fraction, and be able to calculate using the formulas. 2) Students will be able to use the solver-listener paired problem solving method. REVIEW (10 min): Have displayed on the board the solution to last nights homework Preparing Diluted Solutions. Check answers to see how the students did. Review of making a solution from solid concentrated stock solution diluted solution. If necessary, use Dilutions Worksheet to practice labeling M1, V1, M2, and V2.

TEACH THE LESSON: Materials: Worksheet: Dilutions Worksheet Worksheet Packet: Molality Practice Problems, % by Mass Problems and Mole Fraction Problems Bottle of Vinegar Procedure: (5 min) Lesson on Expressions of Solute Concentration

Write on board: Expressing Solute Concentration 1) Molarity (M) = moles of solute/ L of solution 2) Molality (m) = moles of solute/ kg solvent 3) Mass Percent = mass of solute/ mass of solution x 100% 4) Mole Fraction = moles of solute/ moles of solute + moles of solvent (total moles) Say that these are all ways of expressing solute concentrationhow much solute is dissolved in some solvent to create a solution. The solvent that is used most often and that is implied unless otherwise stated is water. Such solutions in which the solvent is water are called aqueous solutions. We have already learned about molarity, which is the most common way to express solute concentration, but there are three other ways we may see concentration. As an example of mass percent, show students the vinegar bottle and have them describe what the 5% acidity label means. (15 min) Teach and model paired problem solving. o Assign students to pairs. Instruct them that they will be working problems together through paired problem solving. Pairs: (one stronger student with one weaker student) Period 1: [Names omitted for privacy.] Period 5: [Names omitted for privacy.]

Describe the roles of the problem solver and the listener. Role of the Problem Solver: The problem solver solves the problem (or attempts to solve the problem), all the while vocalizing exactly the steps and thought processes going through his/her head. It is important that the problem solver not leave out any steps, even the most trivial. Verbal mention of all the steps involved is crucial to the understanding of the process. Role of the Listener: The listener verifies the steps of the problem solver, ensures that the problem solver mentions ALL the steps, and asks for clarification of any steps that were not understood. The listener must not solve the problem on his/her own, but must instead follow the problem solver's process. If the listener notes any errors, he/she should remain silent at first, to see if the problem solver catches the error and corrects it. If the problem solver does not notice or realize the error, the listener must point it out, but must allow the problem solver to correct the error alone. Demonstrate paired problem solving by asking a volunteer to come to the board and act as the listener while I am the solver. Pass out Worksheet Packet: Molality Practice Problems, % by Mass Problems and Mole Fraction Problems. Tell students that today we will be using molality, and then we will move on to mass % and mole fraction tomorrow. Work Molality #5 on the board, with me as the solver and the volunteer as the listener. Make at least one deliberate mistake to show students how to respond as listeners to incorrect instructions.

(20 min) Allow students to work in pairs on Molality #6-8. Monitor pairs to make sure they are following the solver-listener method correctly.

CLOSURE: If students seem ready, tell them they will have a quiz tomorrow on the definitions of each form of concentration.

SELF-EVALUATION:

As I introduced the solver-listener approach, I said that we would be getting into pairs regularly. When the time came, I would tell students whether it would be freestyle or solver-listener. In the case of freestyle, they could solve the problem any way they liked as long as both students showed the work and both had the answer circled. Other times I would tell them wed use the solver-listener approach and that I would show them how to do it today. I got willing volunteers in each class. The demo went fairly well, although it would have gone better if I had done it with a problem they were already familiar with. Or I should have shown them myself how to do the first molality problem before doing the pair demo on the second problem. Instead, I chose the first problem on the Molality worksheet. I instructed all students to act as listeners like their classmate and write down on their sheets everything he/she did on the board.

In Period 5, I let the students go to lab tables to work together because they asked. It ended up getting a little rowdy, though, so in the future, I will make them stay at their desks and start class with them paired up so that they dont have to move when we start pair work. I also had a hard time getting everyones attention to go over a problem. Maybe I will try a bell or something to get their attention before going over problems. Most students were reluctant to follow the solver-listener method. They had never done it before and rebelled, as I had expected. I had to monitor pairs closely and prod them to make sure they followed the procedure exactly. Some brighter students thought the idea ridiculous and cumbersome, and I explained that until they could explain their solution process to someone else, they had not yet mastered the problems. Others were slow to get started either because they were quiet by nature or because neither knew how to work the problem, some worked independently instead of together, and some tried the procedure but only spottily. A few worked together fairly well. I knew that setting this new procedure in motion would take a lot of effort initially. I even told Period 5 that they would hate it at first but that they would get used to it. I was fairly certain that if I put enough effort into it at the beginning, the procedure would start to pay dividends in the long run if used often enough. At least, that is what the research says about solver-listener. The research also shows that most teachers who try to implement it never implement it fully, so they lose the benefits of it and eventually give it up as ineffective. I didnt want to be one of those teachers, so no matter how cumbersome it seemed at the time, I resolved to persevere until it started to flow smoothly. I considered this an experiment and a challenge. The next day, I reinforced the method by having the students try it again on some more problems. This time, however, I learned that if I allowed each group only one worksheet, they were more likely to work together as intended instead of trickle off into independent work. After trying this method about three times, I unfortunately let it fall to the wayside because students were so resentful of it. I believe, though, that if I instituted this method at the beginning of the year before any other expectations had been made by the students, it would have been much more successful. Thus, I plan to try this method again once I have a classroom of my own.

Molality Practice Problems

5. What is the molality of a solution containing 75.2 g of silver perchlorate (AgClO4) dissolved in 885 g of benzene?

6. What is the molality of a solid solution containing 0.125 g of chromium and 81.3 g of iron?

7. If 18.6 g of methanol is used to dissolve 2.68 g of Hg(CN)2, what is the molality of the solution?

8. What is the molality of solid solder wire if it is made from 68.7 g of lead dissolved in 117 g of tin?