In the Classroom edited by
View from My Classroom
David L. Byrum Flowing Wells High School Tuscon, AZ 85716
Let’s Talk about It! Using a Graded Discussion Procedure to Make Chemistry Real Amy Roediger Mentor High School, 6477 Center St., Mentor, OH 44060-4193;
[email protected] When The Plain Dealer ran the headline “Chemistry key to Mars discovery” (1), I certainly wanted to introduce this article to my classes. Because students so rarely recognize chemistry as the key to any topic outside the classroom, much has been written about making chemistry relevant. Efforts range from providing students with answers to applicationbased questions (2) to using literature in the science classroom to pique interest (3). Some educators invoke more extensive measures to bridge the application gap, such as the creation of a mock jury trial that examines a chemistryrelated crime (4) or the adoption of a laboratory program that uses only “real-world” chemicals (5). The news of the now famous Antarctic meteorite ALH84001 broke in August 1996, leaving me little time to overhaul my September lesson plans to include a fascinating study of Mars. On the other hand, merely giving the students a copy of the article seemed like a waste of time. Would they bother to read it or understand why the chemistry of this meteorite was important? Drawing on a National Science Education Standard that emphasizes the importance of discourse between students (6 ) and an article about the promise of productive classroom discussions (7 ), I developed a plan that combined discussion and assessment in an effort to connect chemistry to real life. Description Students read an assigned set of articles, which explore an application of the current classroom topic. Articles reflect several viewpoints on an issue. The following day approximately 25 minutes is reserved for the graded discussion of these articles. Desks are arranged in a circle to encourage discourse. A discussion question, written on the board, stimulates ideas. Students use the articles to support their opinions as they answer the question. However, unlike the situation in typical classroom discussions, students are graded on the basis of their responses and their participation. The teacher, sitting outside the circle, says nothing and does not interfere in any way with the discussion process. Instead, she listens to the responses and grades them. All students begin the exercise with 8 out of 15 points. They accrue additional points by responding to the question or by encouraging others to participate. The number of points for student responses ranges from 1 to 3, depending on the quality of the response. The teacher records the points as a “checkplus” (three points), a “check” (two points), or a “checkminus” (one point). Additionally, students can gain a maximum of three positive participation points (one point per act) for encouraging others to speak, complimenting ideas, or asking for clarification. Students lose points (one point per act) for
interrupting another speaker, engaging in one-on-one debate, monopolizing the discussion, holding side conversations, or other inappropriate behaviors. Participation points are recorded simply as pluses or minuses. Table 1 shows a rubric for response and participation. Students lose all points if they sleep or do not have the article or their notes in plain sight. Table 2 demonstrates a sample for a graded discussion. Upon completion of the discussion, the teacher engages the students in a critique of the process, pointing out particularly good responses or how everyone might improve the next time. With the Mars articles, I posed the question “Is there life on Mars?” The initial responses quickly concluded “yes”, citing evidence of four compounds found in the meteorite and quoting scientists from the article. Several minutes into the discussion students began to disagree. Just because there may have been life on Mars at one time, life might not exist at present. Students scrambled to find evidence in the article that might affirm or refute this claim and the discussion was off and running. Some students, desperate for points, methodically responded “That’s a good point”, but eventually, as they were drawn into the topic, those compliments were offered genuinely as they learned a different point of view from their peers. As the process became self-sustaining, I was equally amazed by the quality of responses and the level of participation. When I gave them the “time’s up” signal, they were disappointed that the process had ended, but motivated to learn more about chemistry.
Table 1. Response and Participation Rubric Mark
No. of Points Response
✓+
3
Response is a new idea, supported by article, linked to course content
✓
2
Response lacks link to course or is not new, but is well supported
✓᎑
1
Response is merely a restatement or an unsupported opinion
+
1
Positive participation
᎑
᎑1
Negative participation
Table 2. Sample Tally Sheet for Grading the Discussion Responses
✓ ✓+
✓᎑ ✓
✓+
✓᎑ ✓᎑
✓✓
Participation
+++
+
++᎑᎑
++
Student Name
Adam
Betty
Cindi
Diego
+ + + ᎑ +++ ᎑ ᎑
Total Score
15/15 12/15 11/15 12/15 10/15 13/15
Ed
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 77 No. 10 October 2000 • Journal of Chemical Education
Fran
1305
In the Classroom
Topics and Questions Since most high school textbooks now include applications in all chapters, a chemistry textbook offers excellent ideas for graded discussions. My students have considered the FDA approval of olestra, the dangers of radon gas, the lingering problem of acid rain, the efficacy of the Clean Air Act and subsequent amendments, and the possibility of a petroleum shortage. I try to restrict my use of articles to newspapers and common magazines because these are the sources of news on which a student will rely beyond high school. Articles that present multiple viewpoints ultimately enrich the discussion. It is critical that articles include current scientific information and a pertinent link to chemistry class, and come from a reputable source. Finally, questions must be phrased carefully to allow students to fully investigate the topic. “Is there life on Mars?” obviously offers more possible answers than “Why do scientists think life may have existed on Mars?”
of ideas. Students learn social skills valuable for college or the workplace. Consistent with the findings of Berka and Berka (11), the “best” students in the class are not always best at discussing material. Students who struggle with stoichiometry, for instance, may coherently advocate a tougher Clean Air Act, while students who excel at equilibrium might stammer through a summary of the risks of radon. Perhaps most importantly, students read science news stories and connect their chemistry content with the environment in which they live. The process generates enthusiasm for learning science. Students happily recount for me that they watched television specials about Mars, talked with their parents about our dependence on petroleum, or explained to fellow grocery store patrons about the “wow” in Frito Lay WOW chips. At the end of the year, the discussions remain embedded in their minds, defining the impact of chemistry on their lives!
Discussion
Conclusion
A study in which nontraditional teaching methods were introduced in college chemistry classes showed that discussion helped students organize ideas in meaningful ways and increase interest in chemistry (8). Following graded discussions, my students responded more actively during lectures, asking questions about the chemistry of neon lights or batteries. And, while they learned, they began extending their knowledge. Sorenson suggests that encouraging student-focused discussion heightens the ability to analyze literature (9). Indeed, as students function at the analysis and evaluation levels of Bloom’s taxonomy, their ability to think critically is strengthened. Articles often contain conflicting information, which students contemplate. Furthermore, because this discussion is graded, students offer their most sophisticated responses in hopes of obtaining the greatest possible number of points. By choosing articles of varied levels of difficulty, a teacher can successfully utilize the graded discussion with any age or ability group. In fact, Freeman and Horowitz concluded that when very young children discuss science stories, they are more likely to enjoy text that at first appears too technical (10). Students of all ages can benefit from this rare discussion within the science classroom. Because discussion relies on verbal skills rather than mathematical ones, this activity provides teachers with an opportunity to assess skills in a different context. Offering points for participation creates a climate conducive to exchange
The obstacles to reforming science education include lack of time, money, and training. Using a process as simple as the graded discussion helps students find relevance and appreciation for science while encouraging the high degree of student interaction that results in the creation of meaning. Because the graded discussion requires no money or specific training and takes very little time, teachers and students reap benefits without sacrificing important curriculum.
1306
Literature Cited 1. Maugh, T. H.; Torassa, U. Chemistry Key to Mars Discovery. The Plain Dealer (Cleveland); Aug 8, 1996; pp 1A, 15A. 2. White, M. A. J. Chem Educ. 1995, 72, 1064. 3. Hollis, W. G. Jr. J. Chem Educ. 1996, 73, 61–62. 4. Jones, M. J. Chem Educ. 1997, 74, 537. 5. Kerber, R. C.; Akhtar, M. J. J. Chem Educ. 1996, 73, 1023–1025. 6. National Research Council. National Science Education Standards; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 1996; pp 32–33, 36. 7. Barton, J. Educ. Dig. 1995, 60 (5), 48–52. 8. Francisco, J. S.; Nicoll, G.; Trautman, M. J. Chem Educ. 1998, 75, 210–213. 9. Sorenson, M. Eng. J. 1993, 82 (1), 42–47. 10. Horowitz, R.; Freeman, S. Read. Teach. 1995, 49 (1), 30–35. 11. Berka, K.; Berka, L. J. Chem Educ. 1996, 73, 931–933.
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 77 No. 10 October 2000 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
