How the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum Engages Students in Seven

Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

How the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum Engages Students in Seven Science Practices Outlined by the College Board Erica Posthuma-Adams* University High School of Indiana, Carmel, Indiana 46032 United States ABSTRACT: As advanced placement (AP) teachers strive to implement the changes outlined in the AP chemistry redesign, they will have the opportunity to reflect on and evaluate their current practices. For many AP teachers, the new focus on conceptual understanding, reasoning, inquiry, and critical thinking over memorization and algorithmic problem solving will require new and effective curricular materials. The Chemistry Modeling Curriculum offers a robust, research-based set of materials designed to cultivate the science practices outlined in the AP chemistry course description, and foster deeper conceptual understanding. Through this curriculum, students learn how to develop, evaluate, and modify models based on data and observations they collect from simple experiments. They practice communicating their ideas through class discussions and informal whiteboard presentations. Students of the Modeling Curriculum are expected to represent their ideas in a variety of ways including graphically, mathematically, and diagrammatically. For these reasons, the use of the Modeling Curriculum in a pre-AP chemistry course can help students begin to develop these skills and better prepare them for the rigors of the AP curriculum. This paper will provide a brief background of the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum, illustrate how Modeling is different from traditional instruction, and provide resources for teachers who want to learn more about implementing the curriculum. This contribution is part of a special issue on teaching introductory chemistry in the context of the advanced placement chemistry course redesign. KEYWORDS: High School/Introductory Chemistry, First-Year Undergraduate/General, Student-Centered Learning, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning, Curriculum

B

1. The student can use representations and models to communicate scientific phenomena and solve scientific problems. 2. The student can use mathematics appropriately. 3. The student can engage in scientific questions to extend thinking or guide investigations within the context of the AP course. 4. The student can plan and implement data collection strategies in relation to a particular scientific question. 5. The student can perform data analysis and evaluation of evidence. 6. The student can work with scientific explanations and theories. 7. The student is able to connect and relate knowledge across various scales, concepts, and representations in and across domains. Traditional instructional methods are generally characterized by teachers delivering content through lectures or textbook

ased on recommendations from the National Research Council and the National Science Foundation,1 the College Board’s revisions to the Advanced Placement (AP) Chemistry curriculum focus on conceptual understanding, outline six big ideas, and stress seven science practices.2 The resulting changes call for a reduction in the amount of content and less focus on memorization and algorithmic problem solving. The big ideas are centered on the structure and properties of matter, bonding and attractions, how matter undergoes change in a chemical reaction, as well as chemical kinetics, thermodynamics, and equilibrium.3 There is also an emphasis on providing opportunities for the student to act as a scientist by designing experiments, evaluating data, and effectively communicating scientific ideas. While the content topics are not new to the AP Chemistry classroom, the increased concentration on reasoning, inquiry, and critical thinking skills are. The AP Chemistry Course and Exam Description outlines the seven science practices in which AP students should be engaged:2 © 2014 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Special Issue: Advanced Placement (AP) Chemistry Published: July 18, 2014 1284

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400911a | J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91, 1284−1290

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

framework provides a unique structure to how content is delivered, which makes the curriculum especially useful for the pre-AP and AP classroom. The intent behind the framework design is to produce students who think like scientists: students who can engage in scientific debate, analyze information, and communicate support for their beliefs.14 In order to achieve this desired result, Modeling Instruction requires students to connect previous knowledge, collaborate in planning experiments, present and justify their conclusions, and develop and employ models (especially models of the particulate nature of matter).14 Each unit in a Modeling Curriculum follows a constructivist learning cycle and begins with an investigation or demonstration.15 This investigation, called a paradigm lab, establishes the course of study for the unit by helping students define the question to be investigated and considering what they already know about the topic.14 Students devise a plan to implement in order to collect the necessary evidence to answer the proposed question. Once data has been collected, students analyze and present their conclusion to the class. The class then works to synthesize the new evidence into an improved model, which answers the question being investigated.14 After the model is established, students deploy the model; they work in small groups to solve problems applying the newly devised model. Frequently, the problem sets are whiteboarded, a process where students solve problems on whiteboards at their desks and then present to their peers to facilitate class discussion16 (see Figures 1 and 2).

readings and students independently completing problem sets and worksheets.4 Most chemistry teachers agree that it is important to help students develop skills such as the ones outlined by the College Board,5 but traditional science instruction does little to teach students how to think or act like scientists. Rather, it lends itself to fact memorization and completing procedural tasks while requiring little critical analysis, interpretation of data, or creative problem solving.6,7 According to the American Chemical Society, a strong laboratory experience is necessary in order for students to effectively learn chemistry,8 yet chemistry classes are less likely than other science classes to include laboratory activities.5 Furthermore, laboratory activities are commonly used to confirm and verify what is taught in lecture, and do not provide an authentic investigative experience for the learner.9 Experts agree that it is important for learners to not know the expected outcome prior to conducting an investigation.8−10 Traditional lab manuals have historically provided detailed, step-by-step instructions for students to follow in order to arrive at a pre-established conclusion.9,11 Students are rarely tasked with the challenge of developing a procedure for an investigation. They gain little experience in evaluating errors in their experimental results.11 Students are simply not given the opportunity to “do” science. In addition to the lack of experiential learning, many classes still use an algorithmic approach to problem solving.6 Gas law equations, mole maps, and pneumonic devices are all strategies that can help students arrive at correct answers but do little to foster a conceptual understanding of matter.6,12 Studies have shown the ability to employ algorithms and arrive at correct answers can be developed independently from the ability to apply conceptual knowledge.13 In other words, students can robotically substitute values for variables and calculate answers without being able to judge whether their resulting answers are reasonable. I witnessed this disconnect in my own classroom. I repeatedly found my students more concerned with arriving at the correct quantitative answer than with understanding why it was the right answer. Additionally, I was frustrated with my students’ inability to connect laboratory activities to concepts in lecture. After acknowledging traditional lecture, algorithmic problem solving methods, and “cookbook” style laboratory activities were not effective in engaging learners in authentic science practices, I began to research alternative pedagogies. My goal was to find classroom practices and methods to help cultivate these skills in students before they entered the AP level. By building a strong foundation in my pre-AP course, I felt I could better prepare incoming AP students by providing them with the experiences necessary to develop the vital skills they were lacking. Since adopting the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum, I have seen great improvements in my students’ ability to solve complex problems, evaluate data, and communicate and defend their ideas.

Figure 1. This board depicts the data collected in an investigation between pressure and temperature on the Celsius scale. The tails on particles indicate how quickly the particles are moving. The angled lines indicated pressure events, or collisions, between the particles and the container wall.

Modeling units include short quizzes to serve as progress checks and culminate in an exam that may include a lab practicum.14 According to the AP Chemistry course homepage, “The AP Chemistry revised course stresses mastering the conceptual and quantitative aspects of chemistry, by enhancing students’ qualitative understanding and visualization of the particulate nature of matter through the development of students’ inquiry, analytical, and reasoning skills.”17 These skills lie at the core of the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum (see Table 1), which is why Chemistry Modeling can help to prepare students for AP Chemistry.

■

MODELING INSTRUCTION The Chemistry Modeling Curriculum can achieve these improved outcomes by addressing many of the weaknesses of traditional instruction including “the fragmentation of knowledge, student passivity, and the persistence of naı̈ve beliefs about the physical world.”14 In an effort to correct these shortcomings Modeling Instruction was developed at Arizona State University in the mid-1990s as a pedagogical framework for physics but has since expanded to include the entire middle and high school physical science curriculum.14,15 This Modeling 1285



Article

discovery and the development of the atomic model. Consider the sequence in a popular first year high school chemistry text, Modern Chemistry.21 Chapter three in this text presents the ideas of the atomic model, atomic mass, and isotopes, whereas the physical properties of gases are not discussed until the tenth chapter.21 In contrast, the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum does not rely on any specific textbook; rather students build their reference material from evidence collected in laboratory experiments. Models of the atom evolve from simple to more complex as more evidence becomes available to aid in model construction. The simplest model of the atom, the featureless, indivisible sphere, is introduced in the first unit, but isotopes are not discussed until nuclear chemistry is addressed in unit ten.15 Being that the simplest model of the atom can account for the behavior of gases, the empirical study of the gas laws is included in unit two.15 Comparing traditional instruction and Chemistry Modeling Instruction treatment of a gas laws highlights the differences in classroom pedagogies. In a traditional classroom, gas laws are frequently taught early in the second semester when students would have already completed units on atomic structure, nomenclature, the mole concept, chemical reactions, and stoichiometry. In a Modeling classroom, students experiment with gases to collect more evidence in order to improve the existing model of matter previously established in the class. The comparison is illustrated in Table 2 below. As illustrated in Table 2, Modeling Instruction incorporates several strategies to help students develop strong conceptual understandings before asking them to solve quantitative problems. Where traditional instruction provides students an equation and algorithms to use in order to arrive at an answer, Modeling Instruction emphasizes connecting observed behavior to graphical and diagrammatical representations. This allows students to solve quantitative problems involving changes in pressure, volume, temperature, and moles using proportional reasoning rather than by using an algorithmic approach.22 Students must identify the relationship between the dependent and independent variables and predict how the specified change would affect the original conditions. The problems are solved without equations, which requires students to reflect on their answers. Diagramming the gases at the particle level allows students to use models in order to communicate their

Figure 2. This board demonstrates the relationship between pressure and volume. Each board shows particle diagrams at three different points on the graph. The particle diagrams are used to explain macroscopic observations at the particulate level.

■

COMPARING TRADITIONAL AND MODELING INSTRUCTION Modeling Instruction is a student-centered method of content delivery where the teachers’ role shifts from the provider of information to the facilitator of learning. This shift allows for students to become active participants in their knowledge construction and provides for more meaningful learning.7,18 In contrast to many traditional classrooms where teachers make most of the decisions surrounding what content to include and how it is presented, Modeling Instruction allows students to plan and investigate questions presented in class. Teachers act as guides, redirecting and focusing discussion and addressing misconceptions as they are revealed. To aid in this approach, content is organized around the evolution of the particle theory of matter, not a disconnected series of topics. This sequence emphasizes the relations between concepts and provides students with a logical story to follow.18−20 As a result, modeling classrooms progress through a first year chemistry curriculum chronologically - following the timeline of scientific

Table 1. Seven Science Practices Identified by the College Board and the Tenets of Modeling Instruction Science Practices Outlined by College Board2 The student can use representations and models to communicate scientific phenomena and solve scientific problems. The student can use mathematics appropriately. The student can engage in scientific questions to extend thinking or guide investigations within the context of the AP course. The student can plan and implement data collection strategies in relation to a particular scientific question. The student can perform data analysis and evaluation of evidence.

The student can work with scientific explanations and theories. The student is able to connect and relate knowledge across various scales, concepts, and representations in and across domains.

The Modeling Method Objectives and Principles of Instructional Design15 The student will be engaged in understanding the physical world by constructing and using scientific models to describe, explain, predict, and control physical phenomena The student will acquire basic conceptual tools for modeling physical objects and processes, especially mathematical, graphical, and diagrammatical representations. The student engages in Socratic dialogue, discussion, and inquiry. The student will collaborate with peers to plan and conduct experiments in order to clarify or answer a question. The student will show how engaging in evaluating a scientific model through comparison with empirical data validates scientific knowledge. The student will present and justify conclusions in oral and/or written form including the formulation of models for the phenomena in question and evaluation of the models by comparison with data. The student will develop insight into the structure of scientific knowledge by examining how models fit into theories. The student will develop skill in all aspects of modeling as the procedural core of scientific knowledge.

1286


Homework

Class activities

Laboratory activities

Introduction to topic

Timing in curricular sequence Prerequisite knowledge

1287

Students assigned to complete problem sets over the gas laws as homework.

Once students could solve the basic gas law relationships, the ideal gas law and Dalton’s law of partial pressure would be introduced.

The instructor provides students with lab sheets outlining step-by-step actions to take in order to collect the necessary data to solve the gas law equations the students had written in their notes. The instructor provides students step-by-step instruction on how to use a eudiometer to collect hydrogen gas over water. The data collected would be used to practice using Dalton’s Law and verify the molar volume of a gas. The instructor performs demonstrations to illustrate the gas laws, which would culminate with the presentation of the mathematical relationships between pressure, volume, temperature, and moles of gas. The instructor demonstrates how to solve example problems of Charles’s, Boyle’s, and Gay-Lussac’s laws in front of the class.

Students create storyboards of the particle level to explain the macroscopic observations of each of the introductory demonstrations. Through group discussion and being challenged to defend their explanations, students start to piece together the idea that energy is transferred between particles through collisions between those particles. By this point in the unit students have started to derive the big ideas of the kinetic molecular theory. Students are asked to explain how a straw works (see Figure 3). This activity leads to a rich discussion on the concept of pressure and the barometer. Lab groups present on their findings; including pictures of the graphs and particle diagrams. The final component of unit two is to provide students an opportunity to apply what they have learned in the laboratory to solving gas law problems. Modelers use something called IFE (Initial, Final, Effect) tables to solve problems involving these variables (see Figure 4). Students are asked to create graphs to illustrate the relationships uncovered in the investigations. Students are asked to connect the behavior of the particles to the observed relationships between the variables and discuss any anomalous data points to reveal any potential sources of error. Students complete problems sets using IFE tables. The problems are whiteboarded and discussed in class the following class period.

Through collaboration and class discussion students start to adjust their mental model to include the fact that particles must be moving and that the movement is related to the temperature of the substance.

As students perform these experiments they construct particle diagrams to illustrate how the two variables are related at the microscopic level (see Figures 1 and 2).

The students are asked to explain macroscopically observed phenomena regarding the states of matter using their model. They are led to realize that their model must be modified in order to account for the existence of different states for the same substance. The first activities in the unit sequence are two demonstrations: one demonstration of the diffusion of a gas and the other of dye in a liquid at two different temperatures. Students investigate, through guided inquiry, the relationships between pressure, volume, and number of particles (students do not use the term mole yet). Lab groups collaborate to come up with a procedure to collect relationship data using Vernier Probeware.23

The student’s model entering this unit consists of matter made of discrete particles, mass conservation, and density differences in different materials

Students would have previously studied unit conversions, dimensional analysis, properties of matter, nomenclature, writing and balancing chemical equations, and the mole concept. A typical introduction consists of a lecture on the nature of gases, the units used for measuring pressure, and a demonstration on how to convert between various units.

Modeling Instruction Early in curricular sequence16

Middle of curricular sequence15

Traditional Instruction

Table 2. A Comparison between a Traditional and Modeling Study on Gases

Journal of Chemical Education Article



Article

conclusions drawn from the laboratory activity. Class time is devoted to students presenting their work on whiteboards so that their peers can question the choices made in solving the problem. Whiteboard presentation sessions are an important aspect to any modeling classroom. Through these discussions, students learn how to communicate their ideas and defend their conclusions with data and observations collected in the laboratory. As shown on Table 2, the traditional approach admittedly packs more material into the unit. The concepts of Dalton’s law of partial pressure and the ideal gas law are not included in this early unit but are studied in a later unit on stoichiometry. Where the Modeling Unit lacks in quantity of content, it makes up in quality of science practice (see Table 3) Although the content in the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum was not designed for an AP course, pieces of the pedagogy may be modified and implemented into an advanced class in order to strengthen students’ science skills. These strategies are especially applicable now, as the AP curriculum shifts to focus on the analysis and evaluation of data and communication of scientific ideas. Specifically, an AP instructor adopting the Modeling framework for the role of laboratory in instruction would follow a guided-inquiry approach and allow students to learn about a topic through investigation instead of using an experiment to verify something they had been told. The College Board requires AP Chemistry classes to include at least 16 laboratories and, of the 16, a minimum of six need to be conducted in guided-inquiry format.17 Additionally, integrating whiteboard presentation sessions where students present and justify ideas in front of their peers can help AP students strengthen their science skills by requiring them to decide how to present their data and how the evidence supports their conclusions. Incorporating models more heavily in instruction and asking students to create particle-level diagrammatic representations to explain an observed phenomenon can help to anchor the connections between conceptual ideas and concrete evidence.

Figure 3. A student describes how a straw works using text and a diagram. Using the diagram to illustrate their explanation, the student writes, “The air molecules in the air exert pressure on the water molecules. This causes the water molecules to go into the straw a little bit. The air molecules in the straw push down on the water molecules. This prevents the water from going up the straw more. When a person sucks on the straw, the air molecules in the straw are moved up into the person’s mouth since the air molecules in the straw are gone, there is nothing to push down on the water to keep it out of the straw. The water molecules rises [sic] in the straw and into the persons mouth.”

■

GETTING STARTED WITH MODELING

Teachers wanting to learn more about the Modeling Instruction pedagogy and the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum can find additional information at the American Modeling Teachers Association (AMTA) Web site.15 All teachers have the option of joining AMTA, which will grant them access to the entire Chemistry Modeling Curriculum as well as the Physics Modeling Curriculum and beta version of the Biology Modeling Curriculum. Some teachers choose to fully adopt the modeling curriculum, while others only incorporate pieces. Each educator’s situation is unique and certain restraints, such as state mandated course exams, can influence how and to what extent the Modeling paradigm can be implemented. AMTA supports a variety of workshops where teachers can acquire training on best practices and experience how to most effectively use the curricular materials. Depending on funding, some workshops require a registration fee, but some provide stipends to participating teachers.24 Additional and supplemental information can be accessed through the strong online support network Modelers have created on twitter (#modchem, #modsci, #modphys, #modbio, @AMTAteachers), and Facebook (American Modeling Teacher’s Association fan page).25

Figure 4. On this whiteboard, the students have constructed a table to represent a system with an original volume of 2.0 L at 0.0 °C and 740 mmHg; this is the “Initial (I)” line of the table. The system undergoes a change, which results in a final temperature of −10.0 °C and pressure of 760 mmHg; this is the “Final (F)” line of the table. The students then indicate the direction of change in the Temperature and Pressure columns but must predict the effect that given change will have on the volume of the gas - this goes in the “Effect (E)” line of the table. Once the effect has been established, the student must arrange the data to create a factor less than one in each case since each change should cause a decrease in volume.

1288


■

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: [email protected]. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author thanks Lisabeth Posthuma, Greg Rushton, Deborah Herrington, Deanna Cullen, Larry Dukerich, and Jon Nowicki for their suggestions on the manuscript and Luke Crawley for supplying the photos of student work.

■

REFERENCES

(1) National Science Foundation. http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_ summ.jsp?cntn_id=106929 (accessed Jun 2014). (2) AP Chemistry Course and Exam Description Effective Fall 2013. http://media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/ap-chemistrycourse-and-exam-description.pdf (accessed July 17, 2014). (3) Kemsley, J. Renewing Advanced Placement. Chem. Eng. News. 2011, 89 (37), 54−55. (4) Banilower, E., Cohen, K., Pasley, J., Weiss, I. Effective Science Instruction: What Does Research Tell Us? 2nd ed. http://www. centeroninstruction.org (accessed Jun 2014). (5) Banilower, E. R.; Smith, P. S.; Weiss, I. R.; Malzahn, K. A.; Campbell, K. M.; Weiss, A. M. 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education: Status of High School Chemistry. http://files. eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541798.pdf (accessed Jun 2014). (6) Cracolice, M. S.; Deming, J. C.; Ehlert, B. Concept Learning Versus Problem Solving: A Cognitive Difference. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85 (6), 873−878. (7) Spencer, J. N. New Directions in Teaching Chemistry: A Philosophical and Pedagogical Basis. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (4), 566−569. (8) ACS Guidelines and Recommendations for the Teaching of High School Chemistry. http://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/ education/policies/recommendations-for-the-teaching-of-high-schoolchemistry.pdf (accessed Jun 2014). (9) Monteyne, K.; Cracolice, M. S. What’s Wrong with Cookbooks? A Reply to Ault. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81 (11), 1559−1560. (10) Schwartz, D. L.; Chase, C. C.; Oppezzo, M. A.; Chin, D. B. Practicing Versus Inventing with Contrasting Cases: The Effects of Telling First on Learning and Transfer. J. Educ. Psychol. 2011, 103 (4), 759−775.

The student is able to connect and relate knowledge across various scales, concepts, and representations in and across domains.

The student can work with scientific explanations and theories.

Article

SUMMARY As outlined throughout this paper, the goals of Modeling Instruction and those of the revised AP Chemistry curriculum are both aligned with providing students with authentic science experiences and developing the seven science skills outlined by the College Board. The benefits of this type of instruction at the pre-AP level have been evident in my class. For example, in teaching gas laws as described previously, I find I have to do very little review of these concepts in AP. Students come into the second year course as better problem solvers and are more comfortable evaluating errors in their lab work. They are more adept at communicating and using different types of representations to express their thoughts. By adopting some aspects of the Modeling pedagogy at the AP level, teachers can continue to cultivate and improve upon the science skills established in the pre-AP course. As AP instructors start to seek out ways to help them meet the new requirements for their courses, the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum and Modeling community can provide resources, strategies, and support to help them achieve their goals.

Students investigate, through guided inquiry, the relationships between pressure, volume, and number of particles (we do not use the term mole yet). Lab groups collaborate to come up with a procedure to collect relationship data using Vernier Probeware.23 Lab groups present their findings, including pictures of the graphs and particle diagrams. They connect the behavior of the particles to the observed relationships between the variables and discuss any anomalous data points to reveal any potential sources of error. Through collaboration and class discussion students start to adjust their mental model to include the fact that particles must be moving and that the movement is related to the temperature of the substance. Students piece together the idea that energy is transferred between particles through collisions between those particles. By this point in the unit, students have started to derive the big ideas of the kinetic molecular theory. Students are asked to represent concepts graphically, mathematically, and with pictures. They must be able to communicate the relationships between the particle diagrams and graphs.

The student can engage in scientific questions to extend thinking or guide investigations within the context of the AP course. The student can plan and implement data collection strategies in relation to a particular scientific question. The student can perform data analysis and evaluation of evidence.

The students are asked to explain macroscopically observed phenomena regarding the states of matter using their model. They are led to realize that their model must be modified in order to account for the existence of different states for the same substance. Students solve quantitative problems involving changes in pressure, volume, temperature, and moles using proportional reasoning rather than by using an algorithmic approach. Students must identify the relationship between the dependent and independent variables and predict how the specified change would affect the original conditions. The problems are solved without equations Students are asked to explain how a straw works. This activity leads to a rich discussion on the concept of pressure and the barometer. The student can use representations and models to communicate scientific phenomena and solve scientific problems. The student can use mathematics appropriately

How Unit Two in the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum Aligns with College Boards Science Practices11 College Board’s Science Practices2

Table 3. College Board’s Science Practices Aligned with Activities from the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum Unit 2


1289



Article

(11) AP Chemistry Teacher Lab Manual Chapter 2. http://media. collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/IN120085064_Chemistry_ TeacherLabManual_2013_Ch2.pdf (accessed Jun 2014). (12) Herron, J. D. Piaget for Chemists. J. Chem. Educ. 1975, 52 (3), 146−150. (13) Samovlasis, D.; Tsaparlis, G.; Kamilatos, C.; Papaoikonomou, D.; Zarotiadou, E. Conceptual Understanding Versus Algorithmic Problem Solving: Further Evidence from a National Chemistry Examination. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2005, 6 (2), 104−118. (14) Jackson, J.; Dukerich, L.; Hestenes, D. Modeling Instruction: An Effective Model for Science Education. Sci. Educ. 2008, 17 (1), 10−17. (15) American Modeling Teachers Association. http:// modelinginstruction.org (accessed Dec 2013). (16) Posthuma-Adams, E. Whiteboarding Strategies. http://www.jce. divched.org/article/whiteboarding-strategies (accessed Jun 2014). (17) AP Chemistry Course Homepage. http://apcentral. collegeboard.com/apc/public/courses/teachers_corner/2119.html (accessed Jun 2014). (18) Bodner, G. M. Constructivism: A Theory of Knowledge. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 63 (10), 873−878. (19) The Modeling Method: A Synopsis. http://modeling.asu.edu/ modeling/synopsis.html (accessed Jun 2014). (20) de Vos, W.; van Berkel, B.; Verdonk, A. H. A Coherent Conceptual Structure of the Chemistry Curriculum. J. Chem. Educ. 1994, 71 (9), 743−746. (21) Davis, R.; Frey, R.; Sarquis, M.; Sarquis, J. Modern Chemistry, 6th ed.; Holt, Rinehart, and Winston: Austin, TX, 2005. (22) Sample of Chemistry Unit 2: Energy & States of Matter − Part I. www.modelinginstruction.org (accessed Jun 2014). (23) Vernier Software & Technology. http://www.vernier.com/ (accessed Jun 2014). (24) Modeling Workshops for Summer 2014. http:// modelinginstruction.org/teachers/workshops-2014/ (accessed Jun 2014). (25) American Modeling Teachers Association Fan Page. www. facebook.com/Modelinginstruction (accessed Jun 2014).

1290


How the Chemistry Modeling Curriculum Engages Students in Seven

Recommend Documents