In the Classroom
A Treasure Hunt for Chemistry Adam J. Bridgeman, Peter J. Rutledge, and Matthew H. Todd* School of Chemistry, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia *
[email protected] Ricky Connor Sydney eLearning, Institute for Teaching and Learning, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Engaging students in their chemistry studies is an ongoing issue across the globe, especially as classes become increasingly large and diverse. In addition to the need for students to acquire subject-specific, chemical knowledge and procedural attributes (1), faculty teaching first-year students have a responsibility to facilitate students' socialization and the development of learning skills. The first-year experience plays an important role in students' success in later years at university, as well as in retention (2-4). Although there is some debate about the effectiveness of traditional “orientation week” socialization and learning-skills events on academic achievement (5), there is evidence that embedding the desired outcomes of these sessions within a discipline-specific learning environment is more valuable (6). For example, attendance at orientation-week events introducing learning management systems (LMSs) is generally poor (perhaps because staff and students overestimate prior computer-literacy skills) (7), necessitating remedial sessions in class time. In seeking to develop meaningful activities within our first-year chemistry courses that address these collegiate objectives, we are also mindful of the pedagogical benefits of con-
currently encouraging early student-faculty contact, cooperation among students, and active learning (8, 9). In particular, we sought an activity that would foster collaborative and social interaction among groups of laboratory students while also encouraging an appreciation of the role of human activity in chemistry and the influence of chemistry in shaping our university and society (10). A new kind of activity for undergraduate chemistry classes, which we call a “treasure hunt”, is described. The activity has been designed to (i) encourage students to work actively together outside the classroom, (ii) provide an orientation to the physical geography and important locations on the campus, (iii) introduce students to important features of the LMS such as the discussion board, blog, and assignment upload features, (iv) challenge students with questions beyond the formal syllabus, and (v) provide an interesting and engaging coursework assignment that could be used in both large and small units of study, providing interaction with faculty and delivering rapid feedback. The treasure hunt satisfies these objectives and has been run successfully with a number of undergraduate classes, ranging in size from 40 to over 500 students.
Figure 1. How the Treasure Hunt Works. Two questions generate grid coordinates, and a third question identifies an object in that location. The locations, when connected, generate the structure of a molecule: the “treasure”.
_
_
r 2011 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc. pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc Vol. 88 No. 4 April 2011 10.1021/ed100867m Published on Web 02/14/2011
_
Journal of Chemical Education
437
In the Classroom
How the Game Works A series of questions are posed that define physical locations around the university campus. When presented on a map, these locations generate the line structure of a molecule, which is the overall “treasure”. The winning team is the first to provide the name of this molecule having successfully identified and photographed all the individual locations throughout the treasure hunt. Students are provided with a link to a publicly available map of the campus on which an A-Z and 1-30 grid is superimposed, so that each square is specified by a letter and a number (Figure 1). Students are sorted into groups of four or five according to their laboratory schedule to build connections within existing collaborative groups, although the allocation could be random. We have found that the treasure hunt works well with student groups of four and five, but this number can be varied as required. We have used the game to support an introductory organic course (the example shown in Figure 1); however, the clues only require a letter and a number as answers, and the game is easily adaptable to other university and preuniversity courses. For example, atomic symbols and numbers could be utilized to provide clues in a general chemistry course. Each week, students are provided with three questions. The answer to the first question is a letter and the answer to the second is a number. Together these specify the grid square of interest for that week. These two questions are chemical in nature and tie in with material being covered in lectures at the time, but are more challenging than those encountered in lectures or tutorials. Students are encouraged to work through the questions with the other members of their group using a private blog or discussion group on the LMS. The third question refers to a physical object located in that week's grid square on the map, and this question is as chemically relevant as the campus geography allows. (Examples from The University of Sydney campus include the small painted icons of organic molecules over an arched door, an architrave embossed with the name of Becquerel, and statues of Gilgamesh and Confucius.) Successfully locating the desired object indicates to the students that they are in the correct grid square and that their answers to the other two questions were correct. Students are asked to take a picture of this object and upload the image through the LMS as the answer to the week's question. Academic staff are alerted by e-mail to the submission and can mark this as correct or return the assignment as incorrect with suggestions for righting it, in which case the assignment remains open and the team members are allowed to submit another answer. Staff have the opportunity to provide feedback on incorrect answers (e.g., “Close, but your letter is wrong; you need to check the stereochemistry again.”) or positive encouragement for correct answers. To avoid plagiarism and ensure the whole team is involved, for several objects, students are required to submit a photograph that includes a team member in the field of view. The clues, locations, and the order in which they are released, together with the final treasure, are altered from one year to the next to remove the chance of previous participants assisting their junior colleagues. New questions are released each week automatically, eight questions over eight weeks as the eight “pieces of eight”. The final clue is released at midnight on a Friday night, and we have seen teams waiting for the last clue in real time in order to race to the final treasure. This level of interest means that staff 438
Journal of Chemical Education
_
Vol. 88 No. 4 April 2011
_
must closely monitor submissions, in order to correct and return any erroneous submissions quickly, given the time factor. The treasure hunt generates a series of points on a map. To help the students identify the treasure molecule's structure, the order of the clues can be made so that the vertices of the molecule appear in sequence, but this is not necessary. In one treasure hunt, the clues were not sequential and the treasure was the chair form of cyclohexane. In others, the clues have been released sequentially to reveal treasure of octane, 1-methylcyclohexane, or cyclohexene (pictured in Figure 1). Repetition of grid squares using different questions to provide the required letter and number allowed the use of a double bond. (The default is that each vertex represents an sp3-hybridized carbon, but notes for a given week can specify a particular vertex as a heteroatom, differently hybridized center, or other variation.) In a nonorganic course, any relevant structural or molecular entity could be adopted as the treasure. Examples might include VSEPR molecular shapes or even Lewis structures. Members of the winning team are presented with prizes in class, and the treasure hunt contributes to assessment for those who complete it successfully. We employ a scoring function of one mark per correct weekly clue (piece of eight) plus two marks for correct identification of the treasure, giving a possible total of ten. (Students may substitute this mark for their worst tutorial mark in the semester, giving a reason for students to complete the exercise even if not a member of the winning team.) Summary Students who participate in this hunt engage with their peers and the campus and must develop and demonstrate competent use of the LMS, including its assignment submission and blog or discussion board facilities. The nature of the activity means that these competencies are developed “hands-on” through peer support and with minimal staff input required. The treasure hunt was conceived and works well as an undergraduate chemistry exercise, with a molecule as the treasure, but the basic format is readily adapted and could be applied to almost any subject, at any level from high school to postgraduate. The location is not limited to a university campus and could instead span other urban areas or even a whole city: anywhere with a readily accessible grid map and interesting items to seek (11). Acknowledgment We thank The University of Sydney for its support of this activity via the funding on an eLearning Strategic Learning and Teaching Project. Literature Cited 1. Jones, A. High. Educ. 2009, 58, 175–191. 2. Tinto, V. Rev. Educ. Res. 1975, 45, 89–125. 3. Tinto, V. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition; University of Chicago Press: South Ellis, IL, 1987. 4. Tinto, V. Plan. High. Educ. 1996, 25, 1–6. 5. McKenzie, K.; Schweitzer, R. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 2001, 20, 21–33.
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
_
r 2011 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
In the Classroom 6. Peat, M.; Dalziel, J.; Grant, A. M. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2000, 37, 293–303. 7. Reid, I. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australian Society for Computers in Learning and Tertiary Education, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Dec 8-10, 1997; p 486-491. 8. Chickering, A.; Gamson, Z. F. Am. Assoc. High. Educ. Bull. 1987, 39, 3–7.
r 2011 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
_
9. Chickering, A.; Ehrmann, S. C. Am. Assoc. High. Educ. Bull. 1996, 49, 3–6. 10. Mahaffy, P. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 49–55. 11. We would be delighted to hear if other faculty run the treasure hunt, so that an online resource can be assembled to share these experiences. Please feel free to e-mail the corresponding author.
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
_
Vol. 88 No. 4 April 2011
_
Journal of Chemical Education
439
