pubs.acs.

org/jchemeduc Activity

Go Fischer: An Introductory Organic Chemistry Card Game

Georgia L. Battersby, Corey Beeley, Danielle A. Baguley, Harrison D. Barker, Harvey D. Broad,
Niamh C. Carey, Edward S. Chambers, Daria Chodaczek, Richard A. R. Blackburn,*
and Dylan P. Williams*
Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230 Read Online

ACCESS Metrics & More Article Recommendations *

sı Supporting Information
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

ABSTRACT: The use of games in chemistry education is well-established and is

known to have numerous benefits to participants. This contribution describes the
student-led development of an introductory organic chemistry card game based on the
Downloaded via UNIV OF SURREY on October 24, 2023 at 11:50:31 (UTC).

classic party game Go Fish. The game has been designed to help students practice
applying the rules of organic nomenclature, to recognize key functional groups, and to
familiarize themselves with simple examples of reactivity of molecules containing these
functional groups. The game was used as an organic chemistry revision activity at the
end of a freshman introductory general chemistry module (that included a significant
amount of introductory organic chemistry). Evaluation of the activity shows that
students enjoyed playing the game, found it easy to play, and that they found it a useful
learning experience.

KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, Organic Chemistry, Humor/Puzzles/Games, Alcohols, Aldehydes/Ketones,

Alkanes/Cycloalkanes, Alkenes, Amides, Amines/Ammonium Compounds, Aromatic Compounds, Carboxylic Acids, Esters, Ethers,
Nomenclature/Units/Symbols

■ INTRODUCTION
Educational games play an important role in formal and
informal learning settings as shown by the diversity of games
designed to support learning of topics that span chemistry.1−3
A variety of different formats have been adopted by creators of
chemistry games including escape rooms,4 board games,5
games hosted on digital platforms,6 and card games.7,8
Previous implementations of games-based approaches in
chemistry have demonstrated positive impacts on student
engagement, motivation, achievement, and participation in
active learning.9,10
Introductory organic chemistry courses often require
students to familiarize themselves with a number of key facts
and rules that must be mastered by students before they
commence studies of organic structure and reactivity.11,12
Examples of topics taught in these early stages of introductory
organic chemistry courses include chemical nomenclature,
structures of functional groups, and simple examples of
reactivity. A variety of different types of games have been
used to support student learning of these essential foundation
concepts in organic chemistry. O’Halloran described an
adaptation of a common party game that can be used in
introductory organic chemistry courses: The Organic Chem-
istry Name Game.13 The Organic Chemistry Name Game
requires players to determine the class of molecule drawn on a
sticky note attached to their forehead by asking other students
a series of yes/no questions about their unknown molecule.
© 2020 American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
2226
The game provides a fun, social learning experience that allows
students to develop their familiarity of the structures of
different functional groups and allows them to gain a deeper
appreciation of the subtle structural differences between similar
functional groups (e.g., the differences between carboxylic acid
derivatives). An adaptation of this approach was described by
Fishovitz et al. This approach requires students to give clues to
the player with the structure on their forehead in a specific
order to promote higher-order thinking.14 A card-game
designed to support student learning of functional groups
was described by Knudston.15 ChemKarta is a customizable
matching-game that students play in small teams. The
evaluation of this activity revealed that students found this a
very engaging activity. Since the publication of ChemKarta,
additional modules have been created to cover topics of
structure and bonding and named reactions.16 Sousa Lima et
al. described a game-based mobile application in 2019 for
Android and iOS named Chemical Nomenclature.17 The
Chemical Nomenclature game allows students to apply and
Received: May 21, 2020
Revised: June 18, 2020
Published: July 21, 2020
https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230
Journal of Chemical Education
develop the application of chemical naming rules to a large
number of examples. The Chemical Nomenclature game was
demonstrated to have a positive impact on the ability of
students to determine the correct names of chemical
structures. An organic nomenclature focused computer game
called Say My Name was created by Nunes da Silva Junior et
al. in 2018.18 Say My Name is a digital board game that gives
students the opportunity to practice applying the principles of
organic nomenclature on up to 600 examples. The use of
games in organic chemistry education is not limited to
introductory topics. In 2015 Carney described an adaptation of
the classic card-game Rummy to support student learning of
retrosynthesis.19 The author explained that this activity
supported student engagement in the topic and facilitated
social learning. It is also worth noting that Carney designed the
card deck to be adaptable enough to be used as the basis of
other game formats including poker and “Go Fish”.
This study describes the student-led development and
evaluation of an educational card-game based on a familiar
format. A “Go Fish” inspired game titled “Go Fischer” was
designed to provide freshman students with opportunities to
apply their learning of organic nomenclature, methods of
structure representation, and simple functional group chem-
istry in a fun social-learning setting. The student authors
created the name of the game by combining the name of the
original party game with the names of one of the mechanisms
from the reactivity cards (i.e., the Fischer esterification). The
format was inspired by the mainstream version of the game and
(in-part) the published work described above.15,17−19 The
game was designed to allow students to make associations
between the principles of organic nomenclature, visual
representation of molecular structures, and some key aspects
of organic reactivity. The game can be played in-class or be run
as an informal learning activity outside of scheduled class time
provided enough sets of cards can be produced and
distributed. The following sections describe the rules of the
game, plus its use and evaluation as an in-class, end of module
revision activity.
■ DEVELOPMENT AND BACKGROUND
The game was originally designed by a group of six freshman
students (coauthors of this contribution) as part of a team-
based induction activity (named Learn on the Move) in 2017.20
The induction activity requires small groups of students to
design, develop, and evaluate learning resources suitable for
use as part of a freshman course. Learn on the Move is a useful
way of generating student-authored content.
The prototype of Go Fischer was further developed for
integration into the University of Leicester’s standard under-
graduate programs and evaluated as part of a student-staff
partnership one year later. The game has been designed to be
played by groups of students participating in an introductory
general chemistry course. Details of this course (intended
learning outcomes, structure, delivery, and assessment) have
been included as part of the Supporting Information but it
should be noted that this course includes more introductory
organic chemistry than a typical U.S. General Chemistry
course. It is anticipated the game could be played in a variety
of different types of courses that include introductory organic
chemistry. The game is flexible enough to be played by groups
of different sizes (the number of cards dealt out in a hand can
be adapted based on the size of the group). On the basis of our
experiences, we suggest a minimum of two players is required
2227
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Activity
(i.e., one against the other) and a maximum of six players
(either playing as two teams of three or three teams of two).
The game is based on a familiar card game which usually
means some players in each group will have played the original
version of “Go Fish” and will be able to help the rest of the
players learn the rules. It is recommended that the game is
used after students have studied the following basic topics:
• organic nomenclature
• functional group names and structures
• representations of organic molecules
The game can be used to reinforce student learning after the
relevant classroom sessions or it can be used as a revision
activity ahead of a summative coursework assignment or
examination (facilitator notes have been included in the
Supporting Information). We encourage instructors to give
students enough time to refer to their books and notes while
playing as it can help them play the game (this may be
particularly useful when students consider the “reaction” cards
described below).
■
RULES AND GAMEPLAY
The game is played with a 52 card deck that is divided into
four, color-coded suits:
• names of the example molecules (yellow)
• characteristic reactions to produce example molecules
(red)
• functional group names (blue)
• structures of the example molecules (green)
The deck features 13 functional group sets, meaning there
are 13 cards present in each suit. Each functional group is
represented once within each suit and players should link these
together to create completed “sets”. The complete ether
functional group set is shown in Figure 1. The full deck of
cards along with an answer key has been included in the
Supporting Information.
Figure 1. An example of a full functional group “set” of cards.
The aim of the game is to collect as many full “sets” of four
suits for given functional groups. The game can be played by
individual players, or students can team-up together to play
against other teams in their group. When played at the
University of Leicester, students played in teams of two (i.e., so
a group of six had three teams of two playing against each
https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230
Journal of Chemical Education
other). This approach allowed students to discuss answers with
the other member of their team.
1. Players must sit around a table that allows them to face
each other. At the start of the game one team of players
(chosen at random) is given the responsibility to deal
out the cards. This team must cut the cards and deal
them out (cards face down) clockwise one at a time to
each of the teams around the table. If there are three
teams playing the game, each team is dealt six cards. Any
remaining cards are placed face-down in the middle of
the table.
2. Each team must now review the cards they have been
dealt and make mental notes of the functional groups to
which their cards belong.
3. The team immediately to the left of the dealers (team 1)
then begin the game by asking one of the opposing
teams to give them all of their cards that belong to one
particular functional group “set” (this must be a
functional group from which team 1 already has at
least one card in the original hand they were dealt).
4. If the asked opposing team has any cards belonging to
that functional group “set”, they must hand them over to
team 1. Team 1 can then ask the same team or another
opposing team to hand over any cards the chosen
opposing team have belonging to a different functional
group set. This continues until team 1 makes an
unsuccessful request for cards.
5. If the asked team does not have any cards from the
requested set they must call out “Go Fish” and team 1
must take the top card from the deck in the middle of
the table. Play now moves to team 2 (move clockwise
around the table) and proceeds as described above.
6. When a team collects a full functional group set they
must tell the other players and display the cards from
this set face up in front of them on the table. The
opposing teams must then check the claimed set is
validif it is, a point is awarded to the team with the set
and the cards in the set are no longer in play. If not the
team takes the cards back and the cards remain in play.
7. If a team runs out of cards they must take a complete
hand (i.e., six cards if there are six players) from the
stack in the middle of the table in order to continue their
participation. The team with the highest score after a
fixed period of time (40 min is used at the University of
Leicester) is declared the winner.
■
IMPLEMENTATION
Our in-class implementations of the game took place in 50 min
contact sessions (the standard length of a single contact
session at the University of Leicester). It was first piloted with
the foundation year cohort to verify that the written rules
could be followed in vivo and to establish the best way to
implement the game with larger groups. The foundation year is
a preparatory course for students who lack the entry
qualifications for entry into year one of the chemistry degree.
Having piloted the game, it became an integrated part of the
end of our first year general chemistry module. This six-week
introductory module is a level 1 module taken by all Chemistry
students (ca. 105) in which students cover the fundamentals of
inorganic, organic, and physical chemistry. The three topics the
game supports (see above) are the main teachings of the
organic component of this module. For reference, a summary
2228
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Activity
of the General Chemistry module is included in the Supporting
Information.
The game was played in a revision session once the module’s
lectures, workshops, and tutorials had all been completed. The
instructors prepared for the session by placing one pack of
cards on each table along with a printed copy of the rules (a
handout showing the rules and an example of one round of the
game is included in the Supporting Information). The students
had been preallocated into groups of six, and if fellow
instructors choose to run the game in a contact session, this is
recommended in order to make most effective use of the time
available in the contact session. Each group was told to divide
itself into three teams of two in order to play the game. The
first 10 min took the form of a short briefing from the
instructor lead which focused on a description of the rules. The
remaining 40 min of the contact session was used for the game
play. Students were told that the winning team in each group
would be the one with the greatest number of complete sets at
the end of the 40 min period. When teams achieved a full “set”,
they needed to present these to the rest of their group. The
other two teams were encouraged to carefully verify any claims
of complete sets and to challenge the claim if they thought the
claim was wrong. If they thought the claim was incorrect, they
needed to provide a scientific explanation to support their
challenge.
■
EVALUATION
The game was played in class by 69 students of the first year
chemistry undergraduate cohort in a scheduled revision
session. After playing, students were asked to answer a
Likert-style questionnaire, with 55 students opting to
participate in this evaluation. This evaluation was carried out
in accordance with the University of Leicester’s Code of
Practice for Research Ethics and was approved by the School’s
Learning and Teaching committee. The survey was conducted
as an anonymous paper exercise, with students required to
strongly agree, agree, neither/neutral, disagree or strongly
disagree with a series of statements.
Part one of the survey probed if the game was enjoyable and
easy to play. The results of this part of the survey are displayed
Table 1, where the percentage strongly agree and agree
responses have been combined as percentage agree (% Agree).
The full Likert data is presented in the Supporting
Information.
Table 1. Percentage of Students Positively Evaluating Go
Fischer
Statement % Agree
I enjoyed playing the game 82
The rules were easy to understand and follow 67
The game was difficult to play 26
I understand the objective of the game 82
I enjoyed the interactions between other players and teammates 89
The data collected show that the majority of students
enjoyed playing Go Fischer, with the team-based element of
the game-play clearly being a contributing factor to this. When
asked about the instructions provided to play the game, 67% of
the respondents felt the rules were easy to understand and
follow. A closer look at the data reveals that only 18% of the
students disagreed (strongly disagree or disagree) that the rules
were easy to understand, with the remaining 17% being neutral
https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230
Journal of Chemical Education
on the matter. The instructors commented that the students
progressed well with the game and that groups required very
little support from instructors which is reinforced by the fact
that only 26% of the students agreed or strongly agreed that
the game was difficult to play. After 40 min of game play the
instructors observed that each group had declared a winner,
something that is reinforced by the fact that 89% of the
respondents understood the game’s objective.
The survey given to students also aimed to ascertain the
game’s educational benefits, the results of which are displayed
in Table 2.
Table 2. Evaluation of the Educational Benefits of Go
Fischer
Statement
Playing the game was a useful learning activity
The game helped me apply chemistry I already knew in a useful
way
I would play a similar style game for different subject areas
I would like games to be made for different topic areas for revision
The majority of respondents were positive about the
educational benefits of the game with 72% of the respondents
agreeing that the game was a useful learning activity. More
specifically, 75% of the students agreed (or strongly agreed)
that Go Fischer had helped them apply the module’s chemistry
in a useful way. Having just played a fun and useful game the
majority of respondents agreed that they would play a variant
of the game in different subject areas and 72% wanting this to
become a reality through creation of games for other revision
topics. These findings support the high levels of student
engagement and interaction observed by instructors.
In summary a chemistry nomenclature game based on the
familiar Go Fish card game has been developed and deployed
as a revision type activity and reported to be a useful learning
activity for freshmen students. These students found the game
easy-to-play, understood its rules, and the mechanism by which
to score points. They enjoyed playing it and suggest that they
would play more games for other topics within their course.
The process by which the game was created also demonstrates
that high quality student-generated content can be produced
by teams working on the Learn on the Move team-based
induction.20
■ ASSOCIATED CONTENT
* Supporting Information
sı
The Supporting Information is available at https://pubs.ac-
s.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504.
Cards ready for printing (PDF)
General chemistry module details (PDF, DOCX)
Answer key (PDF, DOCX)
Facilitator notes (PDF, DOCX)
Full Likert data (PDF)
Rules and example round (PDF)
■ AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Authors
Richard A. R. Blackburn − Leicester Learning Enhancement
and Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Activity
Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom; orcid.org/
0000-0003-4074-9318; Email: r.blackburn@leicester.ac.uk
Dylan P. Williams − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom; orcid.org/0000-
0002-1260-5926; Email: dylan.williams@leicester.ac.uk
Authors
Georgia L. Battersby − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Corey Beeley − Leicester Learning Enhancement and Pedagogy
Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester, Leicester
LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Danielle A. Baguley − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
% Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Agree
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
72 Harrison D. Barker − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
75 Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
75
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
72
Harvey D. Broad − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Niamh C. Carey − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Edward S. Chambers − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Daria Chodaczek − Leicester Learning Enhancement and
Pedagogy Group, School of Chemistry,, University of Leicester,
Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
Complete contact information is available at:
https://pubs.acs.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge the feedback provided by all
students and facilitators since the game was introduced in
2018.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Granath, P. L.; Russell, J. V. Using Games to Teach Chemistry.
1. The Old Prof Card Game. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (4), 485.
(2) Russell, J. V. Using Games To Teach Chemistry: An Annotated
Bibliography. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (4), 481.
(3) Cooper, M. M.; Stowe, R. L. Chemistry Education Research
From Personal Empiricism to Evidence, Theory, and Informed
Practice. Chem. Rev. 2018, 118 (12), 6053−6087.
(4) Dietrich, N. Escape Classroom: The Leblanc ProcessAn
Educational “Escape Game. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (6), 996−999.
(5) Triboni, E.; Weber, G. MOL: Developing a European-Style
Board Game To Teach Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95
(5), 791−803.
(6) Jones, O. A. H.; Spichkova, M.; Spencer, M. J. S. Chirality-2:
Development of a Multilevel Mobile Gaming App To Support the
Teaching of Introductory Undergraduate-Level Organic Chemistry. J.
Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (7), 1216−1220.
(7) Erlina; Cane, C.; Williams, D. P. Prediction! The VSEPR Game:
Using Cards and Molecular Model Building To Actively Enhance
Students’ Understanding of Molecular Geometry. J. Chem. Educ.
2018, 95 (6), 991−995.
2229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230
Journal of Chemical Education pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Activity

(8) Miller, J. L.; Wentzel, M. T.; Clark, J. H.; Hurst, G. A. Green

Machine: A Card Game Introducing Students to Systems Thinking in
Green Chemistry by Strategizing the Creation of a Recycling Plant. J.
Chem. Educ. 2019, 96 (12), 3006−3013.
(9) Stringfield, T. W.; Kramer, E. F. Benefits of a Game-Based
Review Module in Chemistry Courses for Nonmajors. J. Chem. Educ.
2014, 91 (1), 56−58.
(10) Daubenfeld, T.; Zenker, D. A Game-Based Approach to an
Entire Physical Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (2), 269−
277.
(11) Flynn, A. B.; Ogilvie, W. W. Mechanisms before Reactions: A
Mechanistic Approach to the Organic Chemistry Curriculum Based
on Patterns of Electron Flow. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (5), 803−810.
(12) Anderson, T. L.; Bodner, G. M. What can we do about ‘Parker’?
A case study of a good student who didn’t ‘get’ organic chemistry.
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2008, 9 (2), 93−101.
(13) O’Halloran, K. P. Teaching Classes of Organic Compounds
with a Sticky Note on Forehead Game. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (12),
1929−1932.
(14) Fishovitz, J.; Crawford, G. L.; Kloepper, K. D. Guided Heads-
Up: A Collaborative Game that Promotes Metacognition and
Synthesis of Material While Emphasizing Higher-Order Thinking. J.
Chem. Educ. 2020, 97 (3), 681−688.
(15) Knudtson, C. A. ChemKarta: A Card Game for Teaching
Functional Groups in Undergraduate Organic Chemistry. J. Chem.
Educ. 2015, 92 (9), 1514−1517.
(16) Knudston, C. A. https://caknudtson.weebly.com/chemkarta.
html (accessed 2020−06).
(17) Sousa Lima, M. A.; Monteiro, A. C.; Melo Leite Junior, A. J.; de
Andrade Matos, I. S.; Alexandre, F. S. O.; Nobre, D. J.; Monteiro, A.
J.; da Silva Junior, J. N. Game-Based Application for Helping Students
Review Chemical Nomenclature in a Fun Way. J. Chem. Educ. 2019,
96 (4), 801−805.
(18) da Silva Júnior, J. N.; Nobre, D. J.; do Nascimento, R. S.;
Torres, G. S.; Leite, A. J. M.; Monteiro, A. J.; Alexandre, F. S. O.;
Rodríguez, M. T.; Rojo, M. J. Interactive Computer Game That
Engages Students in Reviewing Organic Compound Nomenclature. J.
Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (5), 899−902.
(19) Carney, J. M. Retrosynthetic Rummy: A Synthetic Organic
Chemistry Card Game. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92 (2), 328−331.
(20) Williams, D. P. Learn on the Move: A Problem-Based
Induction Activity for New University Chemistry Students. J. Chem.
Educ. 2017, 94 (12), 1925−1928.

2230 https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00504
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 2226−2230