Reflection for 11/23

As I suspected from last class based on the introduction to BCA tables, I think that they

have an appropriate time where they are most helpful. I thought they worked very elegantly in

the lab activity to help tie together theoretical yield, limiting reactant, excess reactant, and

percent yield. It was a great way to summarize all information in one place. However, I did not

think that they worked as well for the worksheet problems. As I mentioned in Thursday’s

reflection, it became a bit tedious for every problem. Amy and I discussed how the BCA tables

were a little more confusing for these problems because the problem “did not care” about a lot of

the information that we were finding. Therefore, at first glance, we both were slightly confused

about how to fill in some parts of the table. Ultimately, I think that BCA tables are wonderful for

consolidating information from a lab, but a dimensional analysis approach may be more efficient

for problems outside of a lab. I think that I may teach my students how to use BCA tables in

addition to dimensional analysis, but it is not my favorite method.

Semi-unrelated to today’s class content, I learned in class today that my calculator has a

periodic table! Serena showed me and I was so surprised. To think that I am going to graduate

with my Biochemistry degree soon and I had no idea that I was essentially carrying a periodic

table with me all the time! Now I definitely know why a lot of chemistry teachers do not let their

students use a graphing calculator on exams.

Reflection for 11/18

I think that the BCA table method for approaching stoichiometry is interesting. I

recognize its value for helping identify what is being consumed and what is being produced,

giving a more holistic view of a reaction than the typical dimensional analysis approach. For this
reason, I think that it could be helpful for student learning. On the other hand, I think it may be a

bit tedious for every stoichiometry problem. It may not be as much of an issue in an on-

level/regular chemistry class, but in an AP chemistry class where students are required to be able

to solve problems correctly and quickly, the BCA table may take too long and give students

extraneous information that the question is not asking for. Now, I am not arguing that the

structure of an AP exam is the best way of measuring student learning (because it probably is

not), but I do think that with these systems in place, we should be giving our students strategies

to help them succeed. I think that maybe the BCA table is one strategy I could teach students, but

in addition to dimensional analysis. In summary, I think that the BCA table may be helpful

conceptually, but I am still in favor of dimensional analysis.

I enjoyed the copper-silver nitrate lab. Labs that involve both qualitative and quantitative

analysis are some of my favorites to promote student learning. I am excited to see the BCA table

in the context of a lab. Preliminarily, I think that the BCA table may function best with labs.

Reflection for 11/16

I think that the LOL/LOLOL charts have been my favorite “new” concept to take away

from this course. This method emphasizes conceptual understanding and I think that it is much

more accessible for students compared to the traditional models of teaching thermodynamics.

Thermodynamics has always been my least favorite unit, but I think that these charts and this

way of approaching problems has helped me to appreciate thermodynamics a little more.

Another important idea that we discussed in class was that the traditional way is not

always the best way, and that giving students as many strategies as possible can be beneficial for

their learning. This idea may be my main takeaway from the course thus far. While I still prefer a
lot of the methods that I was taught for solving problems (I love dimensional analysis), I also

recognize the efficacy of a lot of methods that we used in this class (LOL/LOLOL charts, gas

theory charts rather than gas law equations, etc.) I intend to incorporate some of these methods in

addition to the methods that I have learned and practiced over the years. I am a little worried

about overwhelming students with different strategies, but as discussed in class, I think that it is

more helpful to differentiate the learning process and give students some choice rather than only

teaching one way and expecting it to work for every student.

I love the chemical reactions lab that we discussed in class. I have done a very similar lab

in my own experience as a student, as well as in the lab that I TA for. I think that it is such a fun

lab for students to be able to see reactions happening and experience the different types of

reactions.

Reflection for 11/9

I wasn’t sure how I felt about using the bingo chips for balancing equations. I understand

how some students may find it helpful for visualizing how the atoms are conserved, but I think

that drawing the particle representations was just as, if not more, helpful for that same reason.

Additionally, I know that we have discussed how teaching students algorithmic approaches

doesn’t help them to understand WHY they are doing what they are doing, but balancing

equations is by nature kind of an algorithmic activity. The bingo chips may be helpful for the

first few reactions that students balance, but eventually they need to start practicing balancing in

a more practical way. Ultimately, I think that the bingo chips could be helpful but I’m not sure

that I would use them.

 I appreciated the whiteboard for the rearranging atoms worksheet because it gave the

opportunity to see higher level questioning. I loved how Michele asked me prior knowledge

questions to connect the new material to past units. I think that this type of questioning would be

helpful for students and is a great way to challenge those that have completed their whiteboard

correctly.

Moreover, I love labs like the nail lab! I think that it is helpful for students to be able to

actually see macroscopic changes in reactions such as the one in this lab. There are several labs

that enable you to see macroscopic changes, but this one is neat because of the color of the

copper product and the change in the color of the aqueous solution.

Reflection for 11/4

I liked how we reviewed what we learned from each activity in unit 6. I found this

conversation useful because it reminded me of prior learning and also helped to make

connections between the different activities that we did and talk about the “model so far”. I think

that this structure would be very useful with students at the end of the unit (or even throughout

the unit if done appropriately).

I love periodic table activities like the one in unit 6 worksheet 1. I think that having

students do activities like these increases their fluency with the periodic table because it requires

them to recognize the trends rather than memorize them. My mentor teacher this semester has

another periodic table activity that students fill in to help recognize different patterns based on

shared group properties and I think that both of these activities could be used together to help

emphasize the organization of the periodic table. There’s a reason that it is organized the way

that it is!
 I also think that the way that conductivity was explained in this class was the most useful

explanation I have heard. Again, this definition helps students to understand WHY metals tend to

lose electrons and WHY nonmetals tend to gain electrons, rather than having students memorize

them. It really promotes understanding over memorization!

The flowchart that we used to distinguish between ionic, molecular, and atomic

compounds was great! My educational courses always emphasize using graphic organizers to

help increase student organization and understanding, and I have been able to find some good

contexts for them, but this one seemed seamless. I definitely will use this!

Reflection for 11/2

I appreciate that we always talk about some of the history related to the topics that we are

discussing in class. Chemistry classes often mention the scientists’ work, but I have seen that

treated more as a memorization task than a deeper learning task. However, presenting the

material by talking more about the specific history and telling a story makes the information

more accessible for students. I also think that it renders knowing the scientists to be more

conceptual rather than memorization-based. There is still some memorization involved, but I

think that telling the history as part of a story lessens and therefore improves that aspect.

I enjoyed the lab activity where we determined the conductivity of different materials. I

thought that this was an interesting way to introduce students to the idea of conductivity, as well

as to metals versus nonmetals. I like how the activity helps to point out how metals have similar

properties (conductivity) and nonmetals have similar properties (nonconductivity). This activity

emphasizes learning about these properties and using evidence to drive understanding, rather

than having students memorize the properties of metals and nonmetals. I know that this
evidence-based strategy is (one of) the primary justification(s) for chemistry modeling

instruction, and I think that it was particularly powerful in this activity. I am curious as to how

nomenclature is taught in modeling because that does not seem to be something that you could

find evidence for, there are just rules that are followed. I am definitely interested to see where the

rest of this unit goes!

Reflection for 10/26

The lego activity was so cool! When we first started working with the legos I thought that

it would be valuable to do something hands-on and a little different from other activities that we

do. Legos are fun for students because they may feel more playful than typical labs, which may

help increase their engagement. When we were able to use the legos to model single, double, and

triple bonds based off the overlap, I was completely convinced of the value of this activity. I

have thought about using legos to model bonding but have never actually tried it so I was

surprised that the lego models were even more useful than I originally thought! This activity is

definitely one that I will want to use with my students.

I also enjoyed the sticky tape activity. If I did this activity when I was in high school, I

would have gone home, done it again, and showed my family. I like this type of activity where

students can actually redo the experiments on their own at home if they want to. I know that

most students will not want to do that, but it can be engaging and exciting for those that do.

Many activities that we do in a chemistry class are not ones that they can replicate themselves

(which is fine!), but I think that it is neat when we do something that is a little more tangible like

this activity. Even if one student is excited by the activity, that is more than enough for me.
 I am interested to see where we go from here after the sticky tape activity. I did a similar

activity when I took physics in high school, but I don’t recall doing such an activity in chemistry.

Obviously I know the general picture of where we go from here, but I am interested to see

further activities that we complete. The labs and activities have been my favorite part of this

class thus far and are what I see myself most likely to use in my future classroom.

Reflection for 10/21

I have never thought about the fact that chemists do not ever actually calculate the

number of atoms present! After that conversation, my immediate thought was that maybe AP

exams require students to calculate the number of atoms. I went through a few previous AP

exams and only saw questions asking for grams or moles, which makes sense based on the

conversation about the applicability (or lack thereof) of calculating atoms to a chemist. In my

internship last semester, my mentor teacher taught both on-level chemistry and honors chemistry.

The curriculum was the same, but she would give honors chemistry more difficult questions than

the on-level students. One difference that I recall was that she required the honors students to

calculate atoms more frequently than the on-level students. I agree that there does not seem to be

any value in being able to calculate the number of atoms (aside from maybe the first time to help

students understand the relative sizes of atoms), but it continues to be taught in all classrooms. I

want to prepare my students with the knowledge to succeed in future classes, so even if I do not

think that these calculations are the most meaningful, I think that I will still incorporate them

occasionally to familiarize students with them early on.

I also thought that the discussion about how students need to feel confident about

calculating molar masses and moles was so important! As was mentioned in class, after these
calculations are introduced, they never go away. Students need to have that solid foundation

before they are able to progress to more advanced concepts. I think that it was an important

conversation to have in this class because I think that teachers should be responsive to their

unique group of students so if one year the students really aren’t getting it, it is okay to spend

longer on these concepts to make sure that the students are solid before moving on.

Reflection for 10/19

I liked the empirical formula lab. It is another example of a lab where the evidence that

students draw from the lab can be used to explain an important concept before they’ve learned a

“definition” of the concept. I think that sometimes this inquiry-like structure can be more

confusing for students, but I think that it could be very helpful with this lab and this particular

concept. Additionally, I think that this lab lends itself to a very productive postlab discussion on

reasons why the ratios may be greater than or less than the expected values. These postlab

discussions wherein students must analyze the procedures and possible errors are very important

for students’ learning.

I found the brief conversation about the use of metaphors, analogies, and personification

to be interesting. I agreed with Serena that using these literary devices can be helpful for learning

because it may be more adjacent to students’ lives so they may be able to understand the general

concept before they are prepared to develop the chemistry idea. However, as was mentioned in

class, I also think that each of these strategies must be used carefully to avoid introducing

extraneous misconceptions. I think that the timing of introducing literary devices to help

facilitate chemistry understanding is key. It may be helpful to use a literary device when a topic

is first introduced so that students have a foundation for their learning. However, beyond the
introduction of a topic, as the topics are getting more complex, we should move beyond the

literary devices and focus more on chemical explanations. For example, when I am tutoring

students on energy and reactivity, I use an analogy of dating: if you are in an unstable

relationship, you are pretty stressed and therefore maybe more high energy, so you might be

more reactive when something goes wrong or maybe you’re ready to meet someone else.

Similarly, an unstable chemical will be higher in energy than a stable chemical and will want to

create a stronger, more low energy bond. I use the dating analogy when we first introduce the

topic, which makes the idea in the chemistry context more accessible so that the students can use

the chemistry context going forward.

Reflection for 10/14

I liked the way that we went over the relative mass activity on Thursday, wherein each

group was asked to explain their answer briefly, without a whiteboard. I think that whiteboarding

can be helpful when students need to draw particle diagrams or heating/cooling curves, but for

the purpose of this activity, simply talking through the answers was sufficient. Additionally, I

think that talking through the answers is much faster so it is more practical for frequent use in the

classroom.

I really enjoyed the relative mass activity and think that it has great instructional value.

When I first read over the “Extension” section, I was unsure about it, but after working through it

and talking about it as a class, I think that it would be very helpful for students as a prerequisite

to molar masses and the rest of the unit. Moreover, I liked unit 5 worksheet 1 because it connects

so many concepts in a student-friendly way. Particularly, I liked how percent composition was

used to determine molar masses, which were then compared to the accepted molar masses. I
appreciated that this worksheet gave some explanation for “how” we know things, rather than

just telling students to look at the periodic table and believe that it’s true.

As kind of a side note, I love that so many of these worksheets and videos have noted that

“mole” is Latin for “lump of stuff”. I think that teaching students Latin roots can be really

helpful for learning vocabulary, such as breaking “exothermic” into “exo”, “therm”, and “ic” and

using the roots to help clarify the definition of the word. Of course we want students to

understand the concept and not just memorize a definition, but I think that helping them learn the

vocabulary first can help them be more prepared for deeper conceptual understanding. I think

that it also sets students up for success if they go on to take higher biology and anatomy classes

as roots can be immensely helpful in those contexts. I have never been taught about the Latin

origin of “mole” so I was excited to learn that there is a Latin root there!

Reflection for 10/7

I thought that Thursday’s class had a lot of useful teacher advice. For example, I

appreciated going through the different worksheets for unit 4 and talking about the most

appropriate contexts to use them in. Working through worksheets is always a valuable

experience as it allows us to more easily identify possible student misconceptions and anticipate

where students may struggle. However, I also found that simply talking through an overview was

helpful. Particularly, I thought that the judgments about which worksheets were appropriate for

homework and which would be better geared for in-class work were very valuable.

I really liked unit 4 worksheet 2. Before this worksheet, I have always seen the concept of

diatomic molecules taught where students simply had to memorize which elements exist as

gaseous diatoms “just because they do”. I found that this worksheet was a good way to tie in the
previous unit about gas behavior with the idea of diatomic elements. By nature, the worksheet is

inquiry-based, requiring that students are asking questions and thinking critically about how we

know that these elements are diatomic and why we see that observed behavior. I think that this

structure is significantly more beneficial for learning than requiring them to memorize something

that they may not even fully understand the conceptual basis for as of yet. On a similar note, I

thought that parts of unit 4 worksheet 3 were very useful, but I was not a huge fan of the ratios in

problem 4. The ratios did not seem intuitive to me, like others mentioned in class. I could easily

see myself using some of this worksheet, but I would not approach problem #4 in the same

manner as it is written.

Reflection for 10/5

The round of questioning in Tuesday’s class was much smoother than Thursday’s class,

and I imagine it will continue to improve. I don’t feel entirely comfortable asking questions just

yet, but I think that having the opportunity to look at the boards before they are presented will be

a great help. After the whiteboarding discussion, my group members and I discussed that it took

us all awhile to notice the error in the board that we were questioning, so I think that being able

to look beforehand and pre-plan questions will be very helpful for me. On some level I can

anticipate what possible misconceptions could be, but it would be much easier and more time

effective to plan ahead. Additionally, this condition would be more similar to the actual

classroom experience, as I would be walking around and looking at students’ whiteboards and

thinking about questions, not making my own whiteboard as is necessary in this class.

I have never seen a Hofmann apparatus before! I think that it could be a very valuable

demonstration for physically representing stoichiometry and getting students to reason through
the stoichiometric relationships before they even know what those are. Are there any other

applications for a Hofmann apparatus?

I also liked the variance in the demonstrations: sand/salt, sugar/water/ethanol, and

iron/sulfur. Because each example was different from the rest, I think that it could be helpful for

students to think critically about what is happening at the particle level and how it is different

across different contexts. I look forward to seeing other demonstrations and labs that are done in

this unit because I really like this unit and want to learn new strategies and ways to present it.

Reflection for 9/30

Thursday’s class was my least favorite class thus far. Some of the negative attributes of

class - for example, Zach being questioned repeatedly - were highlighted in class and mentioned

as learning experiences so that we know not to question students in that way, which I completely

understood. I also think that there is value in having discussions rather than simply lecturing so

that students are engaged and are taking ownership of the material. However, discussing for two

hours straight (which, I know, would not be the reality in most secondary classrooms unless the

school was on block scheduling) was actually more disengaging for me than a lecture would

have been. Since the entirety of class time was occupied with presenting, I, as an anxious

student, was on high-alert for the full two hours and therefore was not retaining the information

well. I know that my experience does not represent most students’ experiences, but these are still

considerations that I will account for when I am designing discussions in my future classroom.

Ultimately, I think there should be a balance between lecturing to highlight key points and

having a class discussion so that students can put their thoughts out there and socially engage

with the material.

 For me, the most useful part of the class was the “lecture” presentation on the graph of

the number of particles versus the particle speed. I thought that the discussion about the

distribution and redistribution of particle speeds given the graph was a unique and useful way to

treat rates of vaporization. The graphical representation could be useful for students who are

more math-oriented, but also for those who learn well with visuals, so this concept was a great

way to differentiate the instruction to meet students’ needs. I found it useful for my learning and

think that it could be equally useful for students.

Reflection for 9/28

I found the strategy of allowing students time to compare their exams with each other to

be very interesting. I think that it is a great idea to give students the time to talk about their

exams because no matter what, they would probably compare with each other regardless of the

task at hand. In this way, they have the opportunity to “get it out of their systems” and it can be

used as a learning tool where students are receiving peer feedback while others have the

opportunity to “teach”/provide feedback based on what their answers were.

So far, I am really liking the method of using LOL charts to describe energy flow and

systems. This unit is one that I personally struggle with and the equations do little to help my

understanding. Therefore, I thought that the LOL charts were a unique way to get students to

capture the main idea of how energy is flowing - whether they are adding something to the

system or if the system is losing/releasing energy.

Similarly, I found the proportional reasoning approach for heat of fusion, heat of

vaporization, and specific heat capacity to be significantly more beneficial than any equations

that I have used before. In the last unit, I had no specific issue with proportional reasoning, but I
was still hesitant about adopting it. For this new unit, I am already recognizing how helpful

proportional reasoning can be. Since I, who struggles with this unit more than other units, found

this method to be helpful, I think that it is likely that students will follow the same pattern. I look

forward to seeing more examples of proportional reasoning used in different contexts!

Additionally, I found the particle diagrams for the thermal energy and phase changes to

be very beneficial for my understanding. I have learned the concepts several times and could

easily regurgitate facts, but drawing the particle diagrams led me to view the curve in a new way.

Reflection for 9/21

I found the discussion about “how straws work” to be interesting. Like mentioned in

class, it is something that everyone does almost everyday but no one stops to think about how it

works. I think that including discussions like these is valuable for students because it puts their

learning in the context of experiences that they already have. In this discussion, students have to

apply their science knowledge to their real-life experiences, which may help them to better

understand the topic. Additionally, they’ll learn a “cool” fact that they had never thought about

before, which may increase their engagement with the material! Therefore, I think that this

discussion was a very interesting one that students would enjoy and would help improve their

knowledge retention.

In regards to the discussion about lab reports, I thought that there were some important

points that were brought up. I completely agree that lab reports should be in a format comparable

to a journal article. I have always had chemistry lab reports assigned this way, so I am unsure

what the alternative would even be? With this being said, I think that lab reports are important

because they allow students to write in a scientific context, which is very different from how
they write in other classes. I think it goes beyond “preparing them for standardized tests” -

writing lab reports helps them to take ownership of the experiments that they have completed

and the knowledge that they have constructed so that they can “think like a scientist”, which will

enable them to fully grasp important concepts from the course and generalizable critical thinking

skills. More than helping them practice the concepts, lab reports are a way that students can

develop their literacy skills so that they are more prepared for life outside the classroom. As was

mentioned in class, there are journals for almost every field so even if students will not be

reading/writing in chemical journals in the future, the skills that they practice in writing a

chemistry lab report can still benefit them in other classes and in their future careers. I also agree

that teachers should not just throw their students into a lab report and it should be a gradual

process to prepare them to write an entire report. Lab reports can be overwhelming for students,

so they absolutely should be broken down into chunks to make them less intimidating as students

are first creating them. With the proper support, I think that lab reports can be a great way to

challenge students and to facilitate their development of essential scientific literacy skills.

Reflection for 9/16

I was very surprised by the methodology for solving gas law problems that was covered

in class today. Based on Tuesday’s class, I knew that we were going to approach gas laws in a

way unlike anything I had seen before, but this approach was more different than I had imagined.

I appreciate that the table method requires students to apply the conceptual relationships between

quantities (e.g. pressure and volume) and apply this knowledge to complete the problem. I like

this aspect of the approach. However, I still felt like students could easily get confused when

using this approach - my lab group and I were confused a few times and had to re-read the
questions a few times to determine the correct ratios to use. With the traditional method of gas

laws, it is easier to directly relate two quantities and identify what the problem is looking for.

With that being said however, I do think that this new approach favors conceptual understanding

over memorization of formulas, which is ultimately more important for student learning. I am

still not fully convinced about this method and worry that by not teaching gas laws in the

traditional way that I will not be fully preparing some students for future chemistry courses, but I

am interested to continue seeing this approach in action and acknowledge its values.

In addition, I found the particle diagrams that were drawn in Unit 2 Worksheet 3 to be the

most helpful particle diagrams we have seen thus far. Some of the particle diagrams for density

were useful, but they easily became confusing with discussions about “compactness”. These

particle diagrams for gas laws, however, were beneficial for macroscopically symbolizing what

is happening on a microscopic scale. I liked that there were so many different ways to “tell the

story” of what is happening by changing the box size for volume, changing the number of

particles, and drawing wooshies to indicate particle speed and thus temperature. I wish that there

was a way for pressure to be equally represented, but maybe the lack of representation

demonstrates that we do not manipulate pressure, it happens as a result of changing other

quantities.

Reflection for 9/14

I loved the lab that we did on Tuesday to learn about gas laws! I have never learned gas

laws this way and appreciated learning the concepts before we learned the math. The first time I

learned gas laws, I learned the math first and it took me quite awhile to understand the

relationships between the variables (pressure, volume, temperature, number of particles, etc.). I
was able to use the equations to figure out the relationships, but I know that that is not the best

way to learn and would not encourage my students to do the same.

Another thing that I valued about this lab was the creation of the graphs to show the

relationships between the quantities. For example, I did not realize that the relationship between

temperature (in Kelvin) and pressure is not directly proportional, but you have to change the

origin to be at 0 (aka temperature is now in Celsius) for a directly proportional relationship. I

have never thought about the pressure/temperature relationship in this way, or proportionality for

that matter!

I also very much enjoyed using the LabQuests for the experiment. I think that LabQuests

are good for student learning because they provide a lot of information options (measuring

pressure and temperature at the same time, for example) and they give students the opportunity

to work with technology in the lab. It is important for students to be practicing using technology

in different settings so that they can develop critical 21st century skills that they can use outside

of the classroom. Additionally, they may be more engaged with the content because they get to

use different tools than they usually do. I wonder though, how many schools have LabQuests

available to them?

Reflection for 9/9

My favorite part about Thursday’s class was the discussion about the first designs of

barometers. I had learned about barometers in previous classes, but the information never stuck

and I never retained what “mmHg” truly means as a unit. Hearing some of the history and

connections to literature (Alice in Wonderland and the Mad Hatter) helped me to retain the

information. I have probably learned about the design of barometers countless times, but the
connections made in Thursday’s class were more powerful for my learning than any previous

lessons. This exercise exemplifies the importance of including interesting background

information that students can use to make connections within their prior knowledge.

Additionally, I think that telling information in a story-like format, as was done in class, makes

the information more accessible and engaging for students.

Another part of Thursday’s class that I found interesting was the lab examining how food

coloring spreads in hot water versus in cold water. In the post-lab discussion, someone suggested

that in the future, the color of the food coloring should be a controlled variable. This suggestion

is important to note because it shows that students are thinking critically about what was done in

the lab and what else could be done to produce more results. In most lab reports, there is a

section on future experiments, so this type of discussion can also help prepare students to think

about the lab in this manner.

Finally, I enjoyed the part of class where the professor asked students to list different

variables that may affect the pressure. Asking students to list ideas gives them an opportunity to,

in a way, design their own experiment by taking them through the process of considering which

variables could be tested. Then, I think talking through why some options were not as practical in

the lab also helped students understand why they are studying the variables that are actually in

the lab.

Reflection for 9/7

I liked the discussion that opened class regarding the compactness misconception of the

particle diagrams. First of all, I appreciate hearing common misconceptions because while I can

identify them myself sometimes, other times there are misconceptions that I may never have
thought of. Therefore, I always enjoy hearing insight from others on common errors that they

see. Additionally, I liked the new diagram that the professor drew, with numbers representing

relative particle mass rather than particle size. I think that any way that we can make these

worksheets simpler without compromising the content is a good thing for student learning.

Another aspect of Tuesday’s class that I enjoyed was the “gallery walk” type activity that

we did with the whiteboards, rather than presenting them like we have done in previous classes.

Presenting is a valuable tool and I like that activity as well, but it was nice to do something a

little different. Additionally, as we were walking around, we were able to see the different boards

in greater detail which I think helps with understanding other groups’ perspectives even more.

In Tuesday’s class, we also talked about proportional reasoning versus dimensional

analysis. I thought that this method seemed interesting and like it could work well for students,

but I still feel attached to dimensional analysis. The professor mentioned that we will see soon

how proportional reasoning works elegantly, which I look forward to. I have always had teachers

mandate that students solve stoichiometry (and related) problems in a certain way, which I do not

completely agree with, but would it be too much to teach students both proportional reasoning

and dimensional analysis? I recognize that different students will have different preferences and I

want to account for this variability, but will multiple methods confuse them more than help

them?

Reflection for 9/2

In the beginning of class, there was a discussion about how most students that will be in

our future classrooms will not go any further with chemistry. I appreciated these comments

because they reminded me of a conversation that I had with my mentor teacher last semester. She
told me that a student came to her and said that he was not going into a science-related field and

asked how this material was relevant to his life. Instead of highlighting the numerous examples

of how chemistry could relate to his life, she instead told him that more important than the

content was the thinking skills that he was practicing by learning chemistry. This conversation

has stuck with me since then, and it reminded me of Thursday’s class discussion.

I also found the discussion about sig-figs to be very

interesting. I have always been someone who didn’t particularly care

for sig-figs, but would follow the rules in any classes I was taking.

My previous mentor teacher was very strict about sig-figs, which

made me think that I may want to be the same way. However, upon

hearing the professor’s statement that he accepts 土 1 sig-fig and

does not spend a lot of time going over the rules, I wondered if he had

a better approach. My initial reaction is that I prefer his method, but

also, I want to ensure that I am preparing my students for success

outside my classroom. Even if I elect not to be strict about sig-figs,

any students that take further science classes will come across them again, and I do not want to

do them a disservice.

Finally, my lab group and I struggled with the procedures for the lab. I appreciated that

the professor drew a diagram on the board of the apparatus and recognized that he verbally

explained all procedures. However, I felt that there were so many procedures being recounted at

once that I lost track and then found myself confused when trying to complete the lab. I think

that I will give my students written procedures, supplemented with diagrams and verbal

explanations.
 Reflection for 8/31

I enjoyed the overall structure of the mass versus volume lab. This lab was structured

similarly to the mass change lab, where students worked through the lab and then “discovered”

the main idea. I think that this structure was particularly useful for this lab due to the

mathematical nature of the density equation. While the equation may seem simple enough, I

think that it is important that students grasp the physical relationship between mass and volume

and apply that understanding to the equation. Having students “discover” the relationship by

performing the lab and then analyzing the graphs may help them to reach a deeper understanding

of the material, rather than being able to simply regurgitate the equation.

During class, we discussed the purpose of calculating volume using the ruler and the

displacement method to establish the relationship between grams and cubic centimeters. I think

that establishing this relationship in the lab is very important. While my lab group and I were

working on the worksheet, we came across several problems where we had to use this

relationship. When we encountered the first problem, Emily and I were both confused at first.

Then, I remembered from sharing data in the beginning of class that we used the grams to cubic

centimeters relationship for all metals and plastics in the previous lab. Therefore, I was able to

experience firsthand how concepts “discovered” in the lab can help students grasp concepts

when working through problems, which I think is a valuable connection. Rather than trying to

look something up to determine the solution, there should be readily available information from

the previous lab(s) that can help students find the solution, as I was able to do.

Another thing that I appreciated about Tuesday’s class (and many of these classes in

general) is some of the questions that are posed. For example, when asked whether the graphs
should go through the origin, at first it took me a moment before I could reason through an

answer. However, the question to Serena, “if I give you nothing, what is the volume? What is the

mass?” made the answer abundantly clear. Once I grasped that concept, I felt much more

confident in the material. At first I thought the origin question was odd, but after that interaction,

I recognized its importance. I think that these questions are powerful for pushing students to

continue approaching problems from different angles to ultimately reach deeper understanding.

Reflection for 8/26

One thing that I appreciated from Thursday’s class was the discussion of the comparative

length of class units. I look forward to learning more about how to divide the content into

different units and the time scale for each unit. My mentor teacher from last semester gave me

her previously used materials and unit schedules, but I appreciate hearing other teachers’

schedules so that I can figure out what will work best for my classroom. I am more nervous

about how I will structure the class than the actual teaching of material, so I look forward to

learning more about previously-established schedules that I can emulate.

I enjoyed the whiteboard activity and I recognize some of the positive benefits that were

discussed in class, but I also have some reservations. The professor mentioned that the

whiteboard activity was to encourage students to discuss the big picture and practice expressing

their thoughts, which I agree is a valuable exercise. Additionally, I acknowledge that the

professor said the activity is to practice sharing and not to get the perfect answer; I agree that

since this structure is a new way of learning, the teacher should not discourage students by

correcting every piece of incorrect information. However, as a student, I found myself wishing

that a correct answer was suggested. Will students reach the correct answer in future lessons after
more investigation? Is there a way that the teacher can encourage presenting information but also

clarify the correct answers? If possible, I would like to explore finding a balance between these

two ideas.

Another discussion from Thursday’s class that I found interesting was the discussion of

the decision whether to use a pie pan when performing the stretching steel wool experiment.

Ultimately, I agree with the class’s general consensus that it was more valuable for students to

perform the experiment without the pie pan and then have to think critically about how they

could alter the procedures to mitigate the loss of steel wool. This discussion made me wonder

about the possibility of giving students the opportunity to use different materials to design their

own procedure after they do the initial experiment. I have heard of teachers using this strategy

and had never considered the potential benefits of having students think critically about why they

are performing the procedures and reflecting on what makes an effective procedure.

Reflection for 8/24

I enjoyed Tuesday’s class activity quite a bit. So far, I have enjoyed experiencing how

starting with experiments and demonstrations prior to learning material can be beneficial for

student learning. In my experience specifically with labs, students are expected to learn the

material before the lab. However, even after watching lectures and taking notes, I often do not

feel comfortable with the material until after the lab has been completed. Providing context for

concepts via lab demonstrations could help students to make smoother connections between the

material and their lab experience, which may facilitate the learning process.

Furthermore, as I mentioned for the prior class, I enjoy this structure so far because

despite the teachers’ guidance and involvement, the learning still felt student-led. As someone
noted in class, the teacher is giving the students the seed of knowledge, which leads them to

reaching their conclusions. However, since students were making predictions and having

discussions about their observations, they drove the learning process while the teacher directed it

as needed. I think that this structure could help improve students’ engagement and therefore

improve their willingness/eagerness to learn.

As I reflect on the demonstrations and experiments that we have conducted in the first

two classes, I find that I am enjoying this structure more than I anticipated. I was always a

student who enjoyed taking notes in a lecture, which I know is not a beneficial strategy for many

students. Therefore, I find this lab-first structure intriguing and look forward to seeing further

examples of how modeling can lead students to deeper learning. With that being said, I am

curious to see how modeling will work with some of the later chapters that are more “math

heavy” like stoichiometry. I am also interested to see more examples of labs with the demo

strategy of giving procedures. I have seen other procedure alternatives that I personally enjoyed,

such as pictorial procedures, so I am curious to see how the strategies compare and what I

ultimately find to be the most effective with students.

Reflection for 8/19

During class, I appreciated that Professor Sweet was giving teaching advice as he was

opening the class and demonstrating the exercise. For example, his suggestion of three students

per group rather than four students is an interesting tip; I appreciate tips like these because they

arise from someone’s experience that they can impart on other future teachers. Since I do not

have that experience, I appreciate hearing from someone who does.

 Additionally, the discussion that the class held regarding the lab demonstration was well-

structured, in a manner that reflected instructional formats that I have learned about in other

classes. The progression from taking individual notes to sharing with a small group to presenting

to the entire class was useful for checking my own knowledge. I felt more comfortable bouncing

ideas off another student before presenting information to the entire class, so I also appreciated

the format for that reason. Moreover, the format of this progression led the discussion to be

student-centered based on our ideas. Professor Sweet facilitated the discussion, but knowledge

construction was ultimately in the hands of the students.

In addition, I found it difficult to act as a “16 year old” with little-to-no prior knowledge

regarding chemistry. As my partner and I were working together to create diagrams to present to

the class, we had to remind each other to serve in the student role for easier facilitation of the

assignment. I recognize the importance of putting on the student hat for the purpose of this class,

and hope to improve on that aspect so I can attain the full value of the lessons.

As a future chemistry teacher, I found class on 8/19 to be a useful introduction to how to

conduct lab demonstrations in an engaging and effective manner for student learning. I am

looking forward to hearing more “teaching tips” from Professor Sweet and experiencing

firsthand the student experience in a chemistry classroom like this one so that I can be more

prepared for supporting students in my future classroom.