Clara Dziedziczak

18319297

Secondary Curriculum 2B
Chemistry

Assessment 2: Portfolio Artefacts –

Content Artefacts and Assessment
Task

Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

1
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Part A - Concept Map

Chemical Reactions
Inquiry question: What are the products of a chemical reaction?

2
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Completed Lecture Activities

Week 6 Lecture Activity

In chemistry a teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge is very important in order for students to
effectively learn and understand concepts. Particularly in the unit Organic Chemistry it is important
for teachers to be aware of and misconceptions that students may have about particular struggles
that student have in grasping concepts in order to effectively teach them. In Organic Chemistry there
are a lot of similar names and slight differences in formulas for completely different compounds as
well as slight differences in bonding and orientation that can change the molecule. Students may
have difficulty in understanding the impact that the differences in structure or spelling and what that
may have. It is important for teachers to have an in depth understanding and know the details of the
content they are teaching so that students are able to learn effectively. Care should be taken in
highlighting the differences between similar molecules.

Week 7 Lecture Activity

1) Describe one finding from the study that really resonated with you.

From the results of the study, on particular finding that particularly resonated with me was that
effective teachers utilised a wide range of teaching strategies to build student understanding,
problem solving and independence. Through teachers utilising multiple strategies to teach, they are
able to help students to become independent note takers. This was shown in the study by beginning
the class with a more teacher directed approach and then moving towards more independent
learning and application to allow students to think independently.

2) How can that finding inform the way you approach the teaching of your specific subject's HSC
course (biology, chemistry, physics)?

In teaching chemistry, this particular finding is able assist in planning effective lessons. Through
beginning a lesson that is mainly teacher directed and focused on building on previous lesson and
introducing new content, this is able to provide a context for the new knowledge and students are
able to develop links between concepts. In the second half of the lesson, by allowing students to
undertake independent learning they are able to problem solve and apply knowledge in a practical
way.

3
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Reply:
Clara Dziedziczak
RE: week 7 lecture activity
I totally agree Sheridan! I think it is definitely going to be a challenge planning lessons so that
students are able to develop a deep understanding of key concepts

Week 8 Lecture Activity

Last First Type of Name of URL Resource Description Lesson Description HSC Content Dot
Nam Name Resource Resource Chemistry Points
e Module:
Provide
Name and
Number
Dzie Clara Simulation Acid - https://phet.c This resource is a This resource can be Module 6: conduct an
dzicz Base olorado.edu/e simulation which allows used alongside a Acid/Base investigation to
ak Solutions n/simulation/a students to explore the practical to Reactions demonstrate the
cid-base- concentration of acids demonstrate the use of pH to
solutions and bases and how differences in pH indicate the
concentration and between different differences
strength affect pH strengths of acids and between the
bases. strength of acids
and bases
(ACSCH102)

4
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Part B - Guided Inquiry Assessment Task

1. Provide a brief description of how you will scaffold students’ learning up until providing the task to
students (1-2 paragraphs)

Prior to providing the assessment task to students the unit will be scaffolded in a way where
students of all abilities are catered for and can be included in the tasks. The unit will be programmed
so that there is a logical progression of the content and concepts are discussed in depth and
misconceptions are addressed. By ensuring that content is explained across the different levels of
representation, students are able to make connections and visualise what is happening to gain more
of an in-depth understanding.
Similar guided inquiry tasks with more teacher direction would be given throughout the unit, aiming
to build up students’ inquiry skills. As this task will be given at the end of the unit the students would
have already done a similar task, so during the task in class, students would be instructed to carefully
observe the reactions and note down what is occurring. Skills in writing and balancing equations
would also be practiced often throughout the unit.

Assessment task is adapted from:

Flinn Scientific Inc. (2016). Activity of Metals. Flinn Scientific Chem Fax! Retrieved from
https://www.flinnsci.com/activity-of-metals/dc10907/

Queensland Resources Council – Minerals and Energy Education (N.D.) Metal Reactivity. OResome
Resources. Retrieved from:
www.oresomeresources.com/library/utilities/download.php?id=59

5
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Preliminary Chemistry: Year 11 - Assessment Task 2

Guided Inquiry First Hand Investigation

Module 3: Reactive Chemistry

Teacher: Mr Snape Student Name:
Weighing: 20% Marks: /13
Date: 13 March 2017 Time Allowed: 50 Minutes (including 5 mins
reading time)

Outcomes Assessed
 designs and evaluates investigations in order to obtain primary and secondary data and
information CH11/12-2
 conducts investigations to collect valid and reliable primary data CH11/12-3
 explores the many different types of chemical reactions, in particular the reactivity of metals

Task Instructions
 Read the whole task outline before beginning the task – you have 5 minutes of reading
time
 Attempt all questions in the space provided
 Write all answers using black or blue pen only – a pencil may be used to draw diagrams
if appropriate

Task Outline
Reactivity of Metals – Determining Unknown Metals

After a practical last week, the leftover metals used in the demonstration were not returned
to their containers and left out. Unfortunately the labels for each metal have been mixed up
so it is not known what metal is in each dish.

A B C D E

You need to match up the 5 unknown strips of metal (A, B, C, D & E) with their labels so that
they can be stored correctly and the left over pieces will not be wasted.

The unknown pieces are any of the following:

 Iron strips
 Magnesium Ribbon
 Zinc strips
 Copper strips
 Aluminium

6
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

In order to determine which strip of metal goes into the correct container you are able to
utilise any of the materials from the “Materials List” below.

You will devise a method In order to test each of the unknown samples and match the label to
the correct unknown metal. Please construct a table to record your results.

On your bench you will be given 5 dishes labelled A, B, C, D & E containing a small amount of
the unknown metals.

You must collect the other materials you require from the front of the room before beginning
your experiment – they will be already measured and placed in small containers for you to
take to your desk.

Materials available
 Copper (II) Sulphate Solution 0.2 M  Forceps
(CuSO4)  Spotting trays/Reaction plates
 Iron (II) Sulphate Solution 0.2 M  Test Tubes
(FeSO4)  Test tube rack
 Magnesium Nitrate solution 0.2 M  Distilled water
(Mg(NO3)2)  Plastic Pipettes
 Silver Nitrate Solution 0.2 M (AgNO3)  Scissors
 Zinc Sulphate Solution 0.2 M (ZnSO4)  Marker
 Hydrochloric Acid 0.1 M (HCL)  Paper towel
 Steel wool
Please note that when using any of the solutions to only use a small amount – i.e. using one
drop at a time and ensure you take measures to prevent contamination between different
solutions.

Safety Considerations
 Ensure you are wearing personal safety equipment i.e. Splash proof safety goggles,
gloves and a lab coat.
 Please take care when handling chemicals to avoid spills and staining of clothing.
Avoid all contact of chemical with skin and eyes.
 The metal samples may also be sharp so ensure care is taken when handling the
samples – use forceps where possible.

Once you have completed the experiment and obtained your results. Please answer all
questions on the next page.

7
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Practical Questions

Reactivity of Metals – Determining Unknown Metals

1. Define reliability and identify how you increased the reliability of your experiment? (1mark)

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

2. Identify one risk and an appropriate safety consideration when using any of the solutions from
the materials list. (2 marks)

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

3. Write out two balanced ionic equations for two of the reactions you have observed. (2 marks)

__________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________

4. Draw up a results table identifying each of the 5 unknown metals i.e. (A, B, C, D & E). (3 marks)

8
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

5. Describe the method you used to determine the labels for the unknown metals by writing out a
step-by-step procedure. (5 marks)

__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

9
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Preliminary Chemistry: Year 11 - Assessment Task 2

Marking Criteria
Reactivity of Metals
Student Name: ___________________________

Mark:
Question 1:
Criteria Mark
Correct definition of reliability and identifies what was done to increase reliability of the 1
experiment.
Does not accurately define reliability and/or does not identify how reliability was increased. 0

Question 2:
Criteria Mark
Identifies a risk AND a safety consideration 2
Identifies a risk OR a safety consideration 1
No risk or safety consideration has been identified. 0

Question 3:
Criteria Mark
Both equations are written out correctly 2
One equation written out correct, second equation is incorrect or contains errors. 1
Both equations contain errors or are incorrect 0

Question 4:
Criteria Mark
All unknown metals have been correctly identified 3
Some of the unknown metals have been correctly identified with one or two errors 2
One of the unknown metals has been correctly identified 1
None of the unknown metals have been correctly identified 0

Question 5:
Criteria Mark
Procedure is clear and concise, all instructions are listed. Design of the experiment is 5
appropriate to determine unknowns. Evidence of a detailed understanding of controls and
variables.
Procedure is in order but lacks detail. Design is appropriate. Evidence of an understanding 4
of controls and variables.
Procedure is in order but is missing steps or information. Limited evidence of understanding 3
of controls and variables.
Most of the procedure is in order but is incomplete and missing information. Design of the 2
experiment could be improved to determine unknowns.
Not presented in a procedure format, any relevant information mentioned. 1
Procedure is absent. No evidence of experimental design 0

10
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Sample Answers
4. Explain an example of a student product that would result from participating in your assessment
task.

1. Define reliability and identify how you increased the reliability of your experiment? (1 Mark)

Reliability is the degree to which the experiment will produce stable and consistent results. To
increase the reliability of the experiment, the experiment was repeated.

2. Identify one risk and an appropriate safety consideration when using any of the solutions from
the materials list. (2 marks)

Silver Nitrate is toxic and corrosive to the skin. When using silver nitrate gloves, eye protection and a
lab coat should be worn.

3. Write out two balanced ionic equations for two of the reactions you have observed. (2 marks)

Iron and Copper Sulphate:

Fe(s) + CuSO4(aq)  FeSO4(aq) + Cu(s)

Zinc and Silver Nitrate:

Zn(s) + 2AgNO3(aq)  2Ag(s) + Zn(NO3)2(aq)

4. Draw up a results table identifying each of the 5 unknown metals i.e. (A, B, C, D & E). (3 marks)

Unknown Metal Sample Label

A Copper
B Iron
C Aluminium
D Zinc
E Magnesium

5. Describe the method you used to determine the labels for the unknown metals by writing out
a step-by-step procedure. (5 marks)
1. Each of the metal samples was cleaned with a small piece of steel wool.
2. A small amount of sample “A” was placed into 5 different wells on the spotting tray
along the top row.
3. Using a plastic pipette a small amount of each one of the 5 metal compound
solutions (copper sulphate, iron sulphate, magnesium nitrate, silver nitrate and zinc
sulphate) was added to the 5 wells containing sample A – one solution per well.
4. This was completed for each of the remaining 4 metal samples (B-E).
5. After the addition of the solution to the metal, the reaction (if any) was observed
and recorded in a table.
6. Steps 1-5 were repeated for reliability.

11
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

Part C - Justification
This justification will explore the reasoning behind some of the decisions made in creating a
concept map to connect links between ideas, how student learning will be scaffolded
through the unit as well as the design of the assessment task. Research from scientific
literature will be discussed to justify some of the decisions made about how certain
elements were created that best support student learning and understanding.

The concept map is utilised to represent the range of topics and concepts addressed in the
topic of Chemical Reactions contained within Module 3: Reactive Chemistry. Concept
mapping is a very useful tool when scaffolding and programming a unit in order to ensure
that relationships between topics are organised and taught in such a way where student’s
misconceptions about areas are addressed. It also enables teachers to be clear on the
particle topics that they need to cover in that unit and ensure that their pedagogical content
knowledge is developed to a quality standard. The use of a concept map makes thinking
visible and is able to communicate ideas in a visual way, making connections between ideas
clearer for students to see (Tanis Ozcelik, & McDonald, 2013). Students are also to utilise
concept mapping in either revision or at the beginning of a semester to make explicit links
between particular concepts and introduce links between old and new information.

In order for class time to be utilised effectively and for all students to participate in learning,
the unit must be scaffolded and structured in a way that facilitates participation for all levels
of ability. In order to achieve inclusivity for all students a number of different approaches
will be taken when exploring this unit. Open and well-structured tasks are able to allow
students to have an element of self-direction in their learning and encourage participation
by all students (Abels, & Klika, 2016). To develop a student’s cognitive and metacognitive
abilities, appropriate levels of support need to be provided to learners at different stages of
their learning, particularly around different topics or concepts that are difficult to grasp and
understand (van de Pol, Volman, & Beishuizen, 2010). This could be achieved by creating
inquiry based tasks that allow students to explore ideas for themselves and encouraging
reflective practice (Abels, & Klika, 2016). Inquiry based tasks allow students to appreciate
the problem and identity knowledge required as well as limitations in their knowledge that
would be required to solve the problem, helping to preparing them for instruction (Roll,
Holmes, Day, & Bonn, 2012). By exposing students to these kinds of activities they are able
to acquire a more robust knowledge and be able to transfer this knowledge to different
contexts and situations, rather than just rote learning (Roll, Holmes, Day, & Bonn, 2012).
During these tasks in class, students would be provided with feedback and the chance to
reflect and self-evaluate their learning and understanding. Small group work and class
discussions can be utilised as well as problem based tasks to help foster independent
thinking in students (Rushton, Lotter & Singer, 2011).

The guided inquiry task was created as the assessment task for Part B. This task requires
students to come up with an experiment that will allow them to determine what the five
unknown metals are by testing them with a number of different metals in solution. Students
would have done a similar experiment directed by the teacher earlier in the unit. The aim of
the task is to enable students to apply knowledge they have learnt in the unit to come up

12
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

with a solution to a problem. By assessing students in this way, they are challenged to apply
their inquiry and problem solving skills in a practical way (D'Souza, 2012).

As the assessment task is a summative assessment, it allows students to demonstrate and

consolidate knowledge learnt throughout the unit and is able to provide important feedback
to the learner to enable them to further their learning (Castleberry, Schneider, Carle, &
Stowe, 2016). Summative assessment further to assessing student learning is able to
determine if the teaching has been effective in achieving the overarching learning goal. The
assessment designed in Part B allows for the evaluation of student achievement in both
knowledge and skills outcomes.

13
 Clara Dziedziczak
18319297

References
Abels, S., & Klika, D. (2016). Scaffolding guided inquiry-based chemistry education at an
inclusive school. ResearchGate. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299861404_Scaffolding_guided_inquiry
-based_chemistry_education_at_an_inclusive_school

Castleberry, A., Schneider, E., Carle, M., & Stowe, C. (2016). Development of a Summative
Examination with Subject Matter Expert Validation. American Journal of
Pharmaceutical Education, 80(2), 29. http://dx.doi.org/10.5688/ajpe80229

D'Souza, L. (2012). Assessing Student Learning through Guided Inquiry: A Case Study of a
Beginning Teacher. Journal of Education, 192(2/3), 79-87.

NSW Education Standards Authority [NESA]. (2017). NSW Syllabus for the Australian
Curriculum: Chemistry Stage 6. Retrieved from:
http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/chemistry/chemistry-stage-6-syllabus-
2017.pdf

Roll, I., Holmes, N., Day, J., & Bonn, D. (2012). Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in
Guided Invention Activities. Instructional Science, 40(4), 691-710.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9208-7

Rushton, G. T., Lotter, C., & Singer, J. (2011). Chemistry teachers' emerging expertise in
inquiry teaching: The effect of a professional development model on beliefs and
practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(1), 23-52. DOI 10.1007/s10972-
010-9224-x

Tanis Ozcelik, A., & McDonald, S. (2013). Preservice Science Teachers’ Uses of Inscriptions in
Science Teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1103-1132.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9352-1

van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in Teacher–Student
Interaction: A Decade of Research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6

14