Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Introduction
Placed at William M. Davies Jr., Career & Technical High School in Lincoln, RI All students are in a 4-year academic program, as well as a 4-year technical program Taught the only 2 sections of 11th grade College Prep (CP) Chemistry
Introduction
Chemistry can be challenging, especially given what is covered in a traditional high school course (Deters 2006) One of the most abstract yet fundamental concepts covered in high school Chemistry is stoichiometry (BouJaoude 2003)
Introduction
Stoichiometry: the proportional relationships between two or more substances during a chemical reaction (Myers 2006) Stoichiometry: calculations that involve the amount of substances in a chemical reaction (Le 2013)
Introduction
Stoichiometry is difficult for various reasons (Haidar 2008) Students around the world have difficulty learning stoichiometryand teachers have trouble teaching it! (BouJaoude 2003, Dahsah 2007, Haidar 2008, Okanlawon 2010) If so challenging, why choose this topic?
Introduction
emphasizing units and dimensions promote understanding and problem-solving in Chemistry? 2) Can a graphic organizer enhance students understanding and problem-solving in Chemistry? and solve novel stoichiometry problems by focusing on the units and dimensions
2) adapt
Decided to use a combination of two researchbased methods for teaching stoichiometry (DeMeo 2008):
1) Dimensional
Conversion Factor (CF): a ratio that is derived from the equality of two different units and that can be used to convert from one unit to another (Myers 2006)
Various pieces of student work and class assignments were assessed While each assignment had a unique answer key, all of them were assessed based on the following two criteria:
1) Identification
Results
Assessment of Student Understanding of Stoichiometry
100
90 80
% of Total Students
70 60 50 40 30 20
10
0 Diagnostic Assessment
Understood CFs
Results
Results
Assessment of Student Understanding of Stoichiometry
100 90 80
% of Total Students
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Diagnostic Assessment Understood CFs Used correct CFs Formative Assessment 1 CFs in correct order Used the GO
Results
Results
Assessment of Student Understanding of Stoichiometry
100 90 80
% of Total Students
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Diagnostic Assessment Understood CFs Formative Assessment 1 Used correct CFs CFs in correct order Formative Assessment 2 Used the GO
Results
One of the summative assessments was a twoquestion survey designed to answer the 2 questions behind this project
Results
Results
Results
Results
Assessment of Student Understanding of Stoichiometry
100 90 80
% of Total Students
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Diagnostic Assessment Understood CFs Formative Assessment 1 Used correct CFs Formative Assessment 2 CFs in correct order Summative Assessment Used the GO
Discussion
Overall there was a small but not very significant improvement in students ability to solve stoichiometry problems Results seem to indicate two main reasons for the limited success:
DA relies heavily on CFs, but certain CFs are easier to understand than others Inconsistent use and reinforcement of GO led to students not taking advantage of this tool
Discussion
Results of summative assessment had direct implications for the two research questions: 1) Does emphasizing units and dimensions promote understanding and problem-solving in Chemistry?
Not necessarily authentic understanding, more likely to enable a plug and chug mentality in students
2)
Graphic organizers can help alleviate some of the plug and chug mentality, but not likely to enhance their skills
Conclusion
Two possibilities for future directions: 1) Revamp the DA/GO method
2) Consider
additional/alternative methods
Symbolic Algebra (DeToma 1994) Mole-Ratio Flow Chart (Wagner 2001) Reaction Tables (Watkins 2003) Cross-Proportions (Cook 2005)
References
Ault, A. (2001) How to say how much: Amounts and stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education, 78(10), 1347 1349. Ault, A. (2006). Mole city: A stoichiometric analogy. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(11), 1587. BouJaoude, S., & Barakat, H. (2003). Students problem solving strategies in stoichiometry and their relationships to conceptual understanding and learning approaches. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 7(3). Cook, E., & Cook, R. L. (2005). Cross-proportions: A conceptual method for developing quantitative problemsolving skills. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(8), 11871189. Dahsah, C., & Coll, R. K. (2008). Thai grade 10 and 11 students understanding of stoichiometry and related concepts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 573600. DeMeo, S. (2008). Multiple Solution Methods for Teaching Science in the Classroom: Improving Quantitative Problem Solving Using Dimensional Analysis and Proportional Reasoning. Boca Raton, FL: Universal Publishers. Deters, K. M. (2006). What are we teaching in high school chemistry? Journal of Chemical Education, 83(10), 14921498. DeToma, R. P. (1994). Symbolic algebra and stoichiometry. Journal of Chemical Education 71(7), 568570. Haidar, A. H., & Al Naqabi, A. K. (2008). Emiratii high school students understandings of stoichiometry and the influence of metacognition on their understanding. Research in Science & Technological Education, 26(2), 215237. Myers, R. T., Oldham, K. B., & Tocci S. (2004). Holt Chemistry. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Okanlawon, A. E. (2010). Teaching reaction stoichiometry: Exploring and acknowledging Nigerian chemistry teachers pedagogical content knowledge. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 5(2), 107129. Wagner, E. P. (2001). A study comparing the efficacy of a mole ratio flow chart to dimensional analysis for teaching reaction stoichiometry. School Science and Mathematics, 101(1), 1022. Watkins, S. F. (2003). Applying the reaction table method for chemical reaction problems (stoichiometry and equilibrium). Journal of Chemical Education, 80(6), 658661.
Acknowledgments
I would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance in my research: Janet Butler Ben Abrams Kerrie Medeiros and Tom Weaver Dan Bisaccio My students