Computer-Based Inquiry Laboratory Activities

Computer-Based Inquiry Laboratory Activities Michael R. Abraham, The University of Oklahoma; John I. Gelder, Oklahoma State University; Thomas J. Greenbowe, Iowa State University Computer simulations are useful tools to bring into the classroom as a way to demonstrate the dynamic nature of chemistry. Such simulations can be used to depict dynamic, particulate level models of chemical phenomenon, or they can provide a macroscopic representation of the laboratory equipment used to gather data in an experiment. In the lecture environment the simulation is controlled by the instructor who can provide all the necessary background and describe the links between the dynamic changes that appear in the simulation with the chemical concepts under discussion. When students use the computer simulations independent of their instructor, however, some type of written activity is necessary to help students discover the concept under consideration. Research has shown that an effective pedagogical approach to helping students construct their own understanding of chemical concepts is the Learning Cycle (Lawson, Abraham, Renner, 1989). Using computer simulations as dynamic models in a guided, or open-inquiry activity has been demonstrated to be effective in a learner- centered environment (Williamson and Abraham, 1995; Abraham and Aldahmash, 1996). The Learning Cycle is an instructional strategy originally derived from the developmental theory of Jean Piaget and the constructivist view of the nature of science

(Lawson, 1995). This strategy divides instruction into three phases. In the first phase, called the exploration phase, students are given experience with the concept to be developed. Critical to this phase is the active participation of the learner in interacting with the chemical system. This is followed by the conceptual invention phase where the student and/or teacher derive the concept from the exploration observations. The final phase, called the application phase, gives the student the opportunity to explore the usefulness and application of the concept. The key to this instructional approach is the

4/29/18 1 Draft Version learner derives the concept from their observations of the behavior of a chemical system. In this sense a laboratory simulation can play a central role in instruction. Powerful, interactive, dynamic computer simulations have been developed by our projects (NSF EMD-CCLI 0127563 project website: http://genchem1.chem.okstate.edu/CCLI/Startup.html and NSF EMD-CCLI 0088709 project web site: http://www.chem.iastate.edu/group/Greenbowe/tg-research.html ) in the content areas: Gas Laws, Gas Phase Equilibrium, Kinetics, Atomic Structure and Periodicity, Acid-Base Chemistry, Electrochemistry, Stoichiometry, Thermochemistry, Isomerism, Polarity, and Molecular and Solid State Structure. Chemistry has many special instructional problems that should be taken into account when instructional materials are developed and implemented in classroom settings. A critical issue in instruction is the interrelationships of the three levels of representation of most chemistry concepts; the sensory, particulate, and symbolic levels (Gabel, Samuel et al. 1987). Sensory information derived from a chemical process (which can be investigated in a simulation) is explained by chemists in terms of atomic and molecular behavior, which is then translated into symbols or formulas. The particulate nature of matter (PNM) is the very essence of theoretical chemistry. Atomic and molecular behavior is an abstract construct that is used to explain most chemical concepts. We know that students have difficulty understanding concepts at the particulate level and with linking these three levels of understanding. This is a frequent source of student misconceptions (Novick and Nussbaum 1981; Osborne, Cosgrove et al. 1982; Shepherd and Renner 1982; Mitchell and Gunstone 1984; Griffiths and Preston 1989; Peterson, Treagust et al. 1989; Haidar and Abraham 1991; Abraham, Williamson et al. 1994). A major hurdle in developing instructional materials designed to assist students in developing connections between the three levels has been the ability to produce dynamic visuals depicting the phenomena of interest at the particulate level. We have developed

4/29/18 2 Draft Version simulations that depict real-time, dynamic simulations of particulate level models. Taken together, the simulations and their accompanying inquiry laboratory activities can help students link the macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic worlds of chemistry, and allow them to develop a deeper understanding of chemical phenomena. The guided and open-ended inquiry activities that use the simulations listed above are contained in Volumes I and II: During Class Inventions and Computer Lab Activities published by Hayden-McNeil Publishers. Volume I covers a first semester Introductory Chemistry course, and Volume II the second semester. Each Volume is composed of two sections; the first part of each volume contains activities designed for an active learning classroom; the second part contains guided and open-inquiry activities that use simulations as particulate level models for data collection. The second part also includes guide inquiry activities based on simulations of laboratory equipment that allow for data collection.

In summary we have developed a set of instructional materials consisting of computer-based visualizations that simulate chemical phenomena and that: 1) use a laboratory-based inquiry oriented instructional strategy at both the macroscopic and microscopic levels; 2) facilitate the linking of macroscopic, symbolic and molecular levels of chemical representations; 3) employ dynamic computer-generated representations of chemical systems that are accessible using Web browser software that is platform independent; 4) allow students to model a laboratory experiment at the macroscopic and molecular levels;

4/29/18 3 Draft Version 5) allow students to explore and manipulate chemical systems and to view, in real-time, the dynamic effect changing variables have on a physical or chemical system; and 6) can be used by students to address misconceptions.

We encourage interested chemistry instructors to obtain a desk copy of Volume I

(http://www.hmpublishing.com/featured-titles/chemistry/during-class-inventions-vol- i.html) and/or Volume II (http://www.hmpublishing.com/featured- titles/chemistry/during-class-inventions-vol-ii.html) from the Hayden-McNeil Website

(http://www.hmpublishing.com/featured-titles/chemistry.html). Users of these materials are encouraged to provide us with feedback that we can use to improve these materials.

References:

Abraham, M. R. & Aldahmash, A. (1996). The use of kinetic and static visuals in organic chemistry. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St Louis, MO.

Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., & Westbrook, S. L. (1994). A cross-age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165.

Gabel, D. L., Samuel, K. V., & Hunn, D. (1987). Understanding the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(8), 695-697.

Griffiths, A. K. & Preston, K. R. (1989, March). An investigation of grade 12 student's misconceptions relating to fundamental characteristics of molecules and atoms. . Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.

Haidar, A. H. & Abraham, M. R. (1991). A Comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919-938.

Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

4/29/18 4 Draft Version Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills [Monograph, Number One]. Kansas State University, Manhattan, Ks: National Association for Research in Science Teaching.

Mitchell, I. & Gunstone, R. (1984). Some student conceptions brought to the study of stoichiometry. Australian Research in Science Education, 14, 78-88.

Novick, S. & Nussbaum, J. (1981). Pupil's understanding of the particulate nature of matter: A cross-age study. Science Education, 65(2), 187-196.

Osborne, R., Cosgrove, M., & Schollum, B. (1982). Chemistry and the learning in science project. Chemistry in New Zealand, 46(5), 104-106.

Peterson, R. F., Treagust, D. F., & Garnett, P. (1989). Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and -12 student's concept of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(4), 301-314.

Shepherd, D. L. & Renner, J. W. (1982). Students' understandings and misunderstandings of the states of matter and density changes. School Science and Mathematics, 82(8), 650-665.

Williamson, V. M. & Abraham, M. R. (1995). The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 521-534.

4/29/18 5 Draft Version