Students Construct Understanding of Heavy Concepts Using iPads

How do we acquire knowledge?

I used to think that teaching was essentially teacher centered.  The teacher would convey knowledge in the form of lecture and the students would absorb it.  Of course the students had to study in order to commit this knowledge to memory and deepen understanding, but this lecture model was the best way to teach in my mind.  In short, this is teaching by telling.

It didn't work so well.  I distinctly remember when I realized this many years ago.  It was gas laws.  Yes those gas laws get 'em every time! I thought I did it so well.  I lectured with enthusiasm.  I showed the "wow" kind of demos like the collapsing can.  I lectured.  I had them do the lab where the students calculate the molar volume of  a gas.  I lectured on the gas laws.  I showed cool video demonstrations. I modeled the way to do calculations. I gave a quiz.  The students all failed the quiz. Do you see the pattern here?  I,I, I,I...I failed!  But with failure comes learning.

The need for meaningful experience in the process of learning

It started to hit me when I  asked my students.  "You know when you are washing dishes and put a cup full of air upside down...what happens?"

"We have dish washers teacher!"

I realized my students did not have many of the experiences that I had had growing up that implicitly taught me about gases.  So I decided to give them more experiences.  Perhaps the reason they did not do well on the abstract calculations was because they did not understand the concepts behind the calculations!

The next year I ordered a set of Boyle's Law Apparatus.  This is basically a syringe with a block on top and a block on the bottom so that you can stand it up freely.  It also allows one to stack weights, like books, on top.   It is very simple.

If you push on the blocks, you feel the invisible gas push back!

Finding Misconceptions

I then had the students draw diagrams, I called them "Black Box Diagrams", by which the student would have to draw what they imagined was what was going on inside the syringe at the molecular level.  What they drew astounded me.  I made them draw two diagrams, one with very little weight on the top block and one with lots of weight on the top block.  The students were all over the map.  Several drew the molecules as if they were balloons.  With little external pressure on the apparatus the ballon-like molecules were large and with much pressure the balloon-like molecules shrunk!  I had no idea they thought this way!  They did not grasp the fundamental concept that the molecules are not changing at all.  The molecules simply bump into each other more with increased pressure.  Then I asked the students, "What is in between these molecules you drew."  Almost unanimously I heard them answer, "Air!"  I would always get one or two students in a class that would say, "Nothing, it's empty space."  But again the majority proved that they had so many misconceptions about gases.  (Sort of like I too had misconceptions about teaching and learning.)

But I realized that I intuitively had an understanding of gases that I had built up over years of experience and guidance from my teachers and through struggle.  This made Charles' Law and it's algorithms in my mind  just a natural and direct consequence of that intuition.  My students did not have the same experiences.  So either they came to an understanding of gases that had some misconceptions or they simply made up their theories.  I suspect it was a little of both.  Nevertheless they had ideas of gases that stood as a roadblock to understanding the abstract concepts of Boyle's, Charles' and Gay-Lussac's laws and the uses of them in calculations.

Our current understanding of the brain backs this up.  We are constantly forming chemical connections between the proteins which make up our brain cells.  Although I think learning is more than just brain chemistry, connections between brain cells are necessary.  But what if a brain connection is made that represents a false idea?  Would that pose a problem to developing a correct understanding?  Is it possible that a misconception, "bad brain connection" must be disconnected and then reconnected in a new "good brain connection"?

If this is the case and much of brain research seems to say it is, then I need to have my students confront their misunderstandings about science (disconnect past connections in the brain) and form new connections that represent a more correct understanding of the science concepts.

Constructivist learning theory

This theory of learning is called in the academic world Constructivism.  Now some will go so far as to say that students construct reality or students construct knowledge.  I don't go that far.  Knowledge of reality is something outside of me that is correct whether I say so or not.  For example I don't construct knowledge of sulfuric acid.  The knowledge of the reality about sulfuric acid is what it is no matter what I think. I certainly can have misconceptions of acid.  That would have serious consequences.  But I do think we construct our understanding of of this knowledge about such things as molecules and sulfuric acid.

Teacher as facilitator

And so my students construct their own understanding of of the world.  I play a part in that by providing experiences for them, sharing my own experiences, giving lectures, asking them questions that make them think, etc.  But I believe one thing for sure: My students don't come to me with blank slates for minds that I just fill in for them with my words.  They have much prior understanding that I as a teacher must probe and understand so that I can help them understand abstract chemistry concepts. Often that probing reveals an incorrect understanding by one of my students.  I think my job at that point is to create a learning experience for them in which they come face to face with that misconception and help them struggle to gain a better understanding.  More and more I see my role as a facilitator of learning.  This takes the focus off of me.  The students' needs for forming good conceptions come to play a bigger role in what drive my teaching.

iPads help students construct knowledge

I think the iPads are a wonderful tool for students to develop their deeper understanding of scientific concepts.  You can almost see the connections forming in their brains as they plan their presentation and begin to develop an explanation for the chemistry behind the experiment.  This especially was visible to me when I had them produce a presentation in groups. Their wheels are really turning.  They want to get it right!  I have one student who produces high quality written lab reports that are very organized and the student gets good lab results, but sometimes this student does not quite explain the chemistry correctly.  I have witnessed this student get better at it as time has gone on.

The current assignment was to create a digital lab report for simple and fractional distillation.  In the presentation they had to explain the difference between the two types of distillation.  These concepts are pretty high level.  When writing a lab report, the discussion is pretty one-dimensional.  But with a screen cast, there is verbal explanation but also diagrams, pictures, and graphs that the student must use to explain the chemistry.    I think this is heavy construction!  Can anyone say "physical chemistry" without flinching?

Students own their learning

In Organic Chemistry I have wanted my students to create digital lab reports that demonstrate this deep understanding.  The biggest challenge for most has not been the chemistry, it has been learning how to use the iPads and the apps.  The term "digital native" might not be as good a description as I once expected.  But by the middle of the semester I think my students have arrived at the point where they are producing some high quality screencasts.  Usually we spend two days on distillation, one for simple and one day for fractional.  But this time I thought I would try to do both in one day and give the students the other three hour lab period for working on their screen cast.  The students made a good start on their screencasts in three hours but most needed more time.  I told them that they could come in any time I am on campus and check out an iPad.  I also gave them a week to complete the assignment.  Most of them either used their own iPads, I think six students either had their own at the beginning of the semester or convinced their mom and dad to get them one, or they borrowed one from a friend.  Of fifteen students only one was unable to complete turn in the screen cast URL on the due date.   I let this student have the extra time needed to get it done.  I could see the student was getting stressed out and taking it very seriously so I had no problem giving extra time.  Here are some of the best screencasts using the app Explain Everything.

You can see that each student took a different approach to explaining the difference between simple and fractional distillation.

Where to go from here

We are now well over half way through the semester.  I still think it is very important that the students write.  I want them to write well.  I tell them that they will probably forget much of the chemistry they learn in my class.  But there are two more important things I want them to learn.  The first is how to learn.  If I can equip them to be learners of difficult concepts on their own, what more could I want.  Well I also want them to be good communicators.  This involves both speaking, clearly articulating heavy concepts in a way that is understandable, and it involves writing, making a claim and backing it up with solid evidence.

I plan to have the students create their own lab reports for the caffeine extraction lab.  And I think I want to have them create one more report after that, perhaps a synthesis that involves explaining the mechanism.  I also want to give them at least one more "digital quiz" before the semester ends.  Now that they have spent so much effort learning the technology, I want them to feel like they can create  a good presentation of heavy chemistry easily.  Stay tuned.

iPads Get a Serious Workout!

Students create some fantastic screencasts!

Just before I first started out as a high school chemistry teacher I really thought I knew my material.  After all I had four years of college level chemistry behind me.  How could teaching high school  be that hard.  But I soon realized that passing a written test on some content, even with a good grade, is not anything close to explaining that concept at an understandable level to 35 energetic high school students in the period right after lunch.  I remember after a few days of my first teaching job saying to myself, "I really need to know this stuff a lot better!"  Some days I would be what we call "just 10 minutes ahead of the students."  On top of that I would get a question from a good student that would just stump me.  And then there was this one student that everyday kept saying, "Mr. Bradbury, I just don't understand!"  I must confess that I let that student exasperate me at times.  I would try one explanation and then another and then an example.  And the student just kept saying, "But I don't understand!"

Teaching a concept  requires a whole deeper level of understanding.  I have often wished I could give my students and oral exam where each one has to get up in front of the class and explain a concept to everyone else.  But then again that can be terrifying!  I remember when my Algebra 1 teacher made me get up in front of my whole class one late September school day during a typical late summer Southern California heat wave.  There was no air conditioning in classrooms back then.  I remember wilting under the pressure!  The only thing that saved me was that I could face the chalkboard and not my classmates.  But I could still feel the arrows of their stares on my back.  I wanted to climb under my desk.  I learned that I clearly did not understand Algebra!

Or was it that I was so full of fear in front of the class that I could not have performed even if I had all the necessary knowledge.

Nevertheless I think the best proof of deep understanding of a concept is being able to clearly articulate that concept in a very relaxed  conversational manner.  Screencasting allows just this.  One of the most difficult concepts in chemistry is Molecular Orbital Theory.  Understanding MO theory requires an accumulated knowledge, the ability to think abstractly, and the ability to see and draw three dimensional objects in two dimensions.

Screencasting can be an "equalizer"

The other thing that screencasting allows is a bit of privacy.  The students can really wrestle with concepts on their own.  Then they get to prepare their presentation, explain it and edit their explanation.   (Hey, as a teacher I take lots of time to prepare myself!)  The pressure is low.  What my colleagues and I are finding is that some of the best screencasts are produced by some of the "forgotten" students that sit quietly in the back of class hoping the teacher will never call on them.  Screencasting lets everybody have a chance to shine.

The Assignment

I decided to have my students create a screencast of their explanation of how to draw the hybridization box diagram and molecular orbital diagrams of a particular molecule or ion.  This is no easy task!  I must say it is a challenge for me to do it.  Even more it is a huge challenge to draw intricate diagrams on the iPad.  Here is the specific assignment.

1. Draw the box diagrams showing the ground state, excited state and  hybridized state for your assigned molecule or ion as shown in class.  Show the VSEPR structure.  Label all orbitals and show the relative energy of each.  State the type of hybridization (sp² etc.)  

2. Draw the contour diagram for the assigned molecule. Label angles and label orbitals.  No credit will be given if drawn incorrectly.  Show orbital overlap correctly and show electrons.  Make all drawings large.  State the shape of the molecule.  http://tinyurl.com/luw

Teacher Expectations Exceeded (Big Time!)

I had a three hour block of lab time.  Secretly I hoped that they would take about an hour and then we could continue working on our chemistry experiment.  But I was so surprised, yet again, by how seriously they took this assignment.  Some of them spent over an hour just planning and preparing how they were going to present their explanation.  Most of them had already completed the assignment on paper.  Some of the students went over the three hours and a few asked if they could keep the iPads during the 1 1/2 hour lunch break.  

They really put me to shame.  When I do a screencast that is say five minutes long I will spend no more than ten minutes on  the whole process.  Yes I am more experienced and so I take less planning, but when I saw what some of these students had done I must say I was overwhelmed.  When I compare their work to some of my screencasts I just want to crawl under a rock!  Here are a few that were created on Educreations.  (The Educreations posts are not as easy to embed in a blog as are ShowMe screencasts)  

Even if you have no idea what a molecular orbital is I think you will be very impressed by the work of these students.  They do a fantastic job of presenting. And this isn't just two plus two equals for this is very high level stuff.  What level on Blooms Taxonomy do you think this hits?

Link to 1st student created screencast on Educreations

Link to 2nd student created screencast on Educreations

Link to 3rd student created screencast on Educreations

These students really took pride in their work.  Some of them were very interested in my response to their work.  I think they felt like they really accomplished something intellectually significant.  I think they did!

iPad workout part 2:  Working on a digital lab report in Organic Chemistry

Last semester I told my students to create a digital lab report for my Organic Chemistry class.  At that time I had no class set of iPads and only one or two students had their own.  Most of the lab reports were created with a desktop or laptop.  But now with the iPads I think this could be a lot easier.  So for the distillation lab I told my students that they would be doing a digital lab report.  Everything that is covered in a regular written lab report must be presented in a screencast.  I recommended the app Explain Everything.  The big hurdle is that the students are not allowed to take home the iPads, although 4 or 5 have their own.  Usually we do two distillations, simple and fractional.  We do these distillations over two days.  But simple distillation often goes so fast, and the real hold up is setting up the apparatus.  This time I decided to do both distillations in one day.  They would have to work quickly, but they would only have to add the fractional column for the second distillation.  By doing this in one day it opened up a whole three hour lab period for working on the digital lab report.

Again, these students spent a good deal of time just prepping for their screen cast.  They uploaded text and pictures and diagrams.  I was impressed with their hard work.  In the end the three hours was not enough time for them to complete the lab report.  This was good for me to learn.  Normally they have to spend significant time outside of class working on the report anyway.  But many of them do not have iPads of their own.  (Although they seem to be appearing more and more as the semester goes on.  Way to go parents!)

Several students asked if they could come in the following week to work on the report.  So what I chose to do was give them one week to complete the digital report and send me the link.  I think some or many of them will come and borrow an iPad while I am on campus in another class or in my office hour.  So part 2 is to be continued...

Apps: Deeper into Molecular Modeling

Seeking and Finding: Two very good apps 

Molecular Orbital Modeling with Mols Editor

There are so many apps out there for modeling molecules.  For my General Chemistry class I want to build simple molecules and be able to look at them three-dimensionally.  I also want to be able to look at the molecular orbital contour diagrams.  So far the best app for this has been Mols Editor.  In previous posts I have shown the basic 3-D structure.  Now I want my students to draw those crazy contour diagrams.  These are hard to visualize and draw because they are so abstract and 3-D on top of that.  Mols editor lets you build the molecule and then there is an button to display the molecular orbitals.  Here is a picture of methane CH4.

You can see result of the SP3 hybridization of carbon and the overlap with the hydrogen 1s orbitals.  My students found this very helpful.  Of course even harder to draw and visualize are the double and triple bonded molecules.  Here is an example of ethene C2H6.

Because the app lets you rotate the molecule it is very easy to see and then attempt to draw. Why didn't they have this stuff when I was suffering through Gen Chem!!!  And I had to walk barefoot in the snow to school...  Well it makes it easier to teach anyway.

Bond Angles and R/S configuration and Spectra with iSpartan

I also want to show my students the bond angles.  Unfortunately Mols editor does not yet display bond angles.  At least I have not seen that yet.  But another app called iSpartan lets you draw the molecule and then it renders the molecule in 3-D.  It also allows you to analyze bond angles, R and S configuration and it shows the NMR and Infrared spectra.  Here is an example of finding the bond angle.

When you highlight three connected atoms (circled in above photo)  the app automatically calculates the bond angle.  As you can see in the picture of CBr4, which is tetrahedral, the bond angle is 109.5 which is correct.  I figured this app out a little too late for my current General Chemistry students, but maybe I will use it next semester.

If a particular atom is chiral the app tells if the arrangement is the R or S.  This is of particular interest to my Organic Chemistry students.  Here is a screenshot of bromo-chloro-fluro-iodomethane.  And you can see it is the S-configuration of it.

The last thing I want to point out about iSpartan is that you can also obtain the spectra of various molecules if they are in the available database.  Next week we are doing the steam distillation lab of cloves.  We will extracting Eugenol.  I am happy to say that this molecule is in the data base.  So my students can run the IR on their extracted sample and then compare it to the one on the app.

As you can see in the upper left corner, H-NMR and C-NMR also are available.

So for me, Mols Editor and iSpartan are two of the best apps for molecular modeling.  There are others that I will "review" later.  The one downside of iSpartan is the cost.  Currently it runs around $20.  Mols Editor has three versions.  One is free.  The one I am currently using is $1.99.  I find it to be quite adequate.  The third version has self-testing.  It costs $4.99.  I have not been able to find that as useful as I had hoped to yet. But these two apps really, to me anyway, really enhance my job of teaching a science that is 3-dimensional.  Chemistry teaching will never be the same once this type of tool catches on!

What Happens When Students' Hard Work on a Screencast is Lost!

Near iPad "Meltdown!" (But Everything Turned out ok)

I wanted to continue what I started with my General Chemistry Students last week when we created ShowMe screencasts of Lewis dot structures.  (See previous post)  This time I wanted the students to create  a screencast of Valence Shell Electron Pair Repulsion (VSEPR) diagrams.  I needed to lecture for about an hour and then I figured it would take about one and a half hours for the students to create their screencast.  I have the luxury of teaching the same students for lecture and lab.  I had some extra lab time that I could "steal" from in order to do the productions. I also continued to use the app Mols Editor to have the students draw in 3-D what they were drawing on paper.  The assignment I gave the students was to create a 5-7 minute screencast of a specific VSEPR structure and include a "screen capture photo" of their model made on Mols Editor. (I showed them how if you hold the two buttons on the iPad down at the same time and then release them it takes a picture of whatever is on the screen and sends it to the photos.) They were to work alone.  Students need lots of practice drawing these structures (you will soon see that turns out to be a prophetic statement).  There are specific rules and ways to draw in 2-D on paper what are in reality 3-D molecules. So I had them draw a quick sketch of their structure using the iPad and stylus and then come up and compare it with my answer key.  If they received approval they could go on with their screencast.  I suggested they use ShowMe like they did the previous week.  They seemed eager to do this assignment and off they went in the hallways, adjacent rooms and one student even set up her "studio" under her desk.  I gave them a little critique on their previous work.  One of the big problems is that the students just did not talk loudly enough.  Again this is a problem when you have a room full of students recording at the same time.  But they are figuring it all out.  This time I also gave them a rubric and told them that they would get up to ten points for their effort.  Here is the rubric:

Rubric for student created screen cast 10 points

Content
Accuracy	3 points
Depth and quality of explanation	2 points
Presentation
Clarity of voice  Appropriate volume, natural sounding, not scripted	2 points
Clarity of drawing	2 points
Use of color and effects (text, photos, arrows etc. where assigned or appropriate)	1 points

Before I talk about the near disaster of a morning that it was I need to reflect on my rubric and grading in general.  Previously I wrote about assessment and evaluation.  Sometimes I wonder if we overgrade students.  What I mean is this.  Does every last piece of student work need to be graded?  What does it communicate to the students if we have to give points for everything?  What does it communicate to the students if often times or some times we don't give them any points at all for their work?  In this current situation I  was forced to wonder why I decided to give points.  Was it because I felt like I needed to motivate them?  Is telling students, "This assignment is worth 100 points or worth 10 points"  a good way to motivate students?  The reason why I am questioning my motives is because I think they would have given this project just as much effort had I not said anything about points.  I wonder if it would have taken pressure off of the students and give them more freedom to create. I wonder if I spoiled a sense in their mind that started the previous week when I just said "Here is the tool, go create!"  I wonder if I popped a bubble that I did not even know had been filled, and we all came back to the ground with, "Oh, that's right I am going to be judged on the quality of my work."  Had they for just a moment found the perfect joy of simply learning for its own sake?  I don't really know the answer to that.  On the other hand they may have needed a rubric to give them a set of standards to aim for.  I think I might need to ask them.

Nevertheless my students set off with much vigor.  

And then it started to happen.

I had a student come up and tell me that they were unable to log into ShowMe and that there screencast was not saved.  Then another student came up and said they could not upload to ShowMe and their work was lost.  Then another and then another.  As this was happening many of the students just went ahead and made another one and then another and another. When I finally decided to go onto the ShowMe website, it would not load  onto my browser.  It seemed as though there was a problem with the website and my students' work was repeatedly lost.  I felt pretty bad.  And the minutes ticked on.  We burned through the entire three hour lab period. None of the students would not give up.  I had to kick them out of class to go get lunch.  I had originally intended to do lab during the shorter lecture period.  But I decided I wanted to give the students a chance at success.  

I was not sure how they would respond.  I could tell some were getting pretty frustrated.  So it was time for some silly humor!

Earlier in the week I met with my son Sam's 6th grade teacher for the quarterly parent teacher conference.  She told me about an app called Tellagami:

What an app!  You type in text and an instant animation is created.  You get to choose things like gender, hair color and voice but the animated person speaks whatever was typed.  There is a typed character limit of around 500.   Here is the quick, goofy Tellagami I created to tell my students what I had decided to do:

You can also go to this URL to see it.  It is worth it, I assure you.  But I warn you, you will want to download the app and start making these animations yourself!

https://tellagami.com/gami/ZJN1H8/

My wife Lisa thinks it sort of looks like me.  I even chose a downcast emotion. Can you tell?

So we burned up the hour and 45 minute lecture period.   After about three and a half hours, much longer than expected, all but two students sent me a link to their screencast.  The last two spent about another 45 minutes trying to upload.  In all some students performed their work up to 5 or 6 times!  I guess they got lots of practice.  I was impressed with their persistence for sure.  Seventeen students stayed with ShowMe and nine decided to use the similar app Educreations. As before I sent them a URL of a Google form in which to put the link to their screencast.  I also ask them questions like "Rate the experience" or "Rate the use of the app." Even after a stressful day for me the students still seemed quite positive.  There was only a small number of students, about two,  that were very frustrated or negative. One said, "I used to like iPads, now I hate them."  But she had a wry smile.  So after a day in which I felt like I as a teacher did very little "teaching of chemistry" I was quite worn out.

Here is an example of the day's work creating VSEPR Diagrams

Assessment and iPads: Questions, Questions, Questions!

How do we know what students know?

That is the million dollar question isn't it.  How much money is spent trying to figure out what our students have learned?  How much political wrestling between states and districts go into trying to see what is in the heads of the students?  How do we measure knowledge?  What do we measure?  Should we use multiple choice tests?  She we make students write essays?  Should we make students perform?  Do we try to find out how much a student has memorized?  Or do we want students to utilize knowledge and demonstrate their reasoning?  Those are the big questions that drive educational discussion.

I was told by my own high school chemistry teacher, Mr. Rice,  when I went back to teach at my own high school in Downey California, "The pendulum always swings from one extreme to the other.  When you get hit by the pendulum three times, it's time to retire!"

Being born in 1965 makes me not quite a baby boomer and not quite a generation x'er.  I am often stuck in the middle of extremes, so I will go with balance between different approaches to things.  I like to use multiple measures in multiple situations.  Here at Cerritos a few years ago we used the term "visible knowledge".  I like that term, knowledge I can see.  We began a conversation  ten years or so ago about learning outcomes which at the time it seemed related to visible knowledge.  Our learning outcomes for students were things that they would create, that would demonstrate their knowledge.  It was a product we could look at that maybe collected different types of work that we could look at from different angles.  This work would show knowledge but also present it in a larger, more whole way.  When I taught high school we used portfolios as a way to evaluate student growth and knowledge.  Portfolios were collections of "best work" that were diverse enough to give us a big picture view of the student.  It showed how well the student could integrate knowledge from different areas and present it in different ways.  A good analogy would be an artist's portfolio.  A good portfolio would demonstrate that the artist has multiple skills and maybe even could tie different works together with a common theme.  Portfolios also gave students a sense of accomplishment.  It was not just some score on a multiple choice exam.  It was tangible.  It was visible knowledge.

It seems as though the outcomes discussion has taken us away from integrated tangible demonstration of knowledge and brought us to discrete learning objectives that are just like those I used when I first started teaching high school 25 years ago. Duck, the pendulum is coming!

But maybe with innovative technology we have began to find our way back to balance.

iPads will not solve every problem.  Ha! Indeed, hey will create new ones.  Nevertheless the technology will allow us to jump ahead, and by trying new means of assessment and evaluation we might be able to bypass some of the arguments that have been blocking our progress.  Innovation often does that.  I would like to take a minute to define some terms.

Authentic

I like structures assessment that have two characteristics.  1) The form of assessment should not be that different from the actual learning experience.  For example, we don't normally teach in a multiple choice setting.  In many of my educational experiences I was "taught" by a lecture and then I was evaluated by a multiple choice exam.  Many times the questions were not even related to what was covered by the lecture.  Here is an example an authentic form of evaluation.  Students in a lab may perform several lab techniques to solve different practical problems.  In an evaluation or exam or test a student would be given a similar assignment that may involve needing to show mastery of one or more of the techniques learned over the semester and one or more of the algorithmic problems.  The test may even integrate several techniques and require utilization of several types of the reasoning skills learned and use these to solve a new problem.  2) It should be difficult to tell the difference between "normal" everyday learning and when the process of evaluation is happening. In real authentic evaluation, the method of measuring knowledge is so close to the method of instruction that an outsider cannot even tell the difference?  Even more the students' knowledge may increase during the authentic evaluation.  Learning never stops.  I don't think multiple choice testing, although there is a place for this, is very authentic.  I think it is quite different from the teaching and learning experience and I don't remember learning much during a traditional exam.  Imagine learning just as much during a test as you did at any other time during the class.  Please bear with me for a couple more definitions.

Evaluation vs. Assessment

So far I have not distinguished between assessment and evaluation.  So let me do that now.  I will just give you the way I use these terms and hopefully you will thoughtfully consider how you use them.  I think that although evaluation and assessment overlap, they are different.  For me evaluation is a test or exam or assignment that gets graded.  I am evaluating the student's progress or knowledge at a particular point or over a particular period of time.  Assessment to me goes on constantly.  Assessment tells me how well I, the teacher, am doing.  Do they seem to "get it".  Is my method of teaching working? Do the students understand?  So assessment could be looking at the level of performance on an exam and saying, "Too many performed poorly on that question, I better reteach it or find some  other way to help them do what I want them to do."  Perhaps I am assessing an assignment and how well they learned what I wanted them to learn or maybe I am assessing a book to see if they learned from what they read.  Often I ask questions in the middle of a lecture or lab to see if the students are understanding.  I read their body language, I walk around the room to see what they have on their paper, or iPad.  If I am not satisfied I make the change.  To me that is assessment.  Evaluation is for the grade.  Assessment is a gauge to see how my current students are learning in the current environment and situation. Assessment and evaluation overlap.  But that is how I distinguish between the two.  Assessment is not a euphemism for the dreaded examination,  a euphemism we will just have to replace in five years.

Formative vs. Summative

What I am describing as the day to day minute by minute checking on my students is what I think many people call formative assessment.  I am assessing how my students are "forming their knowledge" and figuring out what I can do to improve that learning process.  For me, formative assessment demonstrates that teaching is all about the relationship between the student and the teacher.  It is a both/and process.  And it is balance.  As a teacher I must know my students and care about them.  I am so profoundly grateful that at the place where I teach the previous sentence describes what drives the vast majority of my colleagues!  Teaching and learning is a relational experience.  So let me say loudly technology is not a substitute for the relationship between the student and the teacher!  For me summative evaluation is that test or assignment that gives me the big picture view of a student's knowledge and output over a broader period of time.  The summative evaluation could be an exam at the end of a few weeks or it could be a project we have been working on for some time.

Good people disagree on all of this.  I am just sharing my own experiences.

Finally, to the iPads!

Today was another big day for me because I gave my first "digital quiz" in my Organic Chemistry lab.  At the end of each lab experiment every professor in our chemistry department gives a lab quiz on the previous week's experiment.  Today I "cracked the mold" a bit.  I have stated in this journal before that I think it is good if students not just write their responses to questions but also get to explain audibly what they have learned.  I think it uses a different part of the mind and requires different kinds of thinking and different skills.  It seems to me that the students think that when they talk with their voice, they better know what they are talking about.  So in today's quiz I asked my students some of the same questions I might ask them on a common paper quiz but this time they had to create a screencast using their voice, photos, drawings and text.  They were told to use the Explain Everything app to make the presentation and them upload it to Youtube.  I knew this might be stressful for some.  So, for the first quiz like this I let them choose if they wanted to work alone or in pairs.  I also let them use their lab notebook but not the lab textbook.  I gave them 60 minutes to make a 5-7 minute presentation.  Here is a copy of the quiz: (If you click on the image of the quiz you can get a larger readable version.)

As you can see I included a rubric.  I will talk about rubrics in a minute. But when I handed out the quiz I tried to use a little humor to keep the students from getting too stressed out.  I want them to keep thinking that they have a good chance to succeed.  If that is the case then the stress level will be lower.  I also think trust is important here.  When doing something new like this I think the students have to trust that I am not going to destroy their grade.

As soon as the students got the quiz and understood the expectation they really got serious and started having an intense discussion.  I was quite surprised by this.  They took this very seriously and their discussions went to a very deep level.  That does not frequently happen in the lab setting.  I could tell they wanted to get it right.  And since they both had to talk on the video, they both had to understand and agree on what they were saying.  I think the team approach went much further than I had expected.  They also planned out their presentation.  They made a rough outline and tried to be organized. I was very impressed by this effort.  They really dug in and invested 100%. Not only did this exercise allow me to have an end product that I could assess and evaluate but being able to watch the process the students went through was a huge added bonus! Visible knowledge.

Rubrics

So what is good work?  What is an A or a C?  For me that might be the hardest question I as a teacher have to answer.  Most teachers I know take that very seriously.  But it kind of boils down to another question:  "What do I expect of my students?" Do I really know what I expect of my students?  Do my students know what I expect of them?  Those last two questions really get at the heart of the matter.  I want to have realistic expectations and I want my students to know very clearly what those expectations are.  Now, I have to make a huge confession.  This is a hard one.  I have to say that when I try something new, I don't always know what I really expect and I don't always know how to tell my students very clearly what my expectations are.  Usually the first time I have tried some innovation in my teaching I did not do a very good job of telling my students what I expect.  I must say that over the last 25 years I have had the priveledge of working with some of the finest young students!  So being purposely vague with my expectations has often worked.  I have gotten some very good work.  Some of that work I have displayed in this blog.  But once I have seen what top students can do I think it is my responsibility to communicate what good work is to the students that might not have performed as well.  So I usually make a rubric from the best student work the previous time I assigned it.  Sometimes I am purposely vague so the students have to reach high and use their creativity.  Today with so many new forms of technology and new types of skill that my students have I want to see what they come up with.  Maybe they will think way outside of my box.  They might come up with something way better than I ever imagined. Most of the time I am real clear on what I want so that every student has a clear understanding of my expectations.  Often I will show students an example of quality work.  I especially do this when it comes to writing lab reports.  I think one of the keys to life is having realistic expectations and communicating those expectations very clearly. So for a quiz like the one I gave today I tried to very clearly express my expectations.  Here are two examples of the students' work. There are some errors.  But remember they only had 60 minutes.  I am quite impressed with what they accomplished.  (Ok some of them took a little longer than an hour.)  But for the first time at this I thought they did a good job.








When it comes to learning and measuring learning iPads are just tools.  But sometimes tools can help us get much farther with them than we otherwise could have without them.  Technology is not the answer to all my questions.  But I think I see evidence of student learning and not only is this a good tool to evaluate their knowledge the very process itself of creating these screencasts was a wonderful thing to see.  I could witness the students learning as they were "tested".  So for me this was a form of authentic assessment even as it overlapped with evaluation.

Molecules!

Using an app to draw molecular models

My original plan was to use screen casting apps to have my Organic Chemistry Lab Students create "electronic" lab reports.  At the end of this post I will show you an example of one of the first efforts to do just that.  But I have found more success in my General Chemistry class using the apps to help the students learn content, specifically molecular shapes.  Today we used the app "Mols Editor"

to draw the VSEPR or "Valence shell electron pair repulsion" model of molecular structure.  The properties and function of a substance is determined by its molecular structure.  The shape is a significant contributor to both structure and function.  So it is critical that students develop the ability to look at the formula of a molecule and determine its three dimensional shape.  There are several apps available that allow one to build molecules and also see its shape in three dimensions.  Many of these apps are not easy to use when constructing molecules.  Others have big molecules and beautiful pictures of them that can be rotate but no building function.  I just wanted a simple app that allows us to build small molecules to look for specific shapes predicted by VSEPR theory such as linear, trigonal planer, tetrahedral etc.  After much searching I found it in Mols Editor.  With just a few taps on the screen one can build a structure and it is in the correct orientation.  Here is an example of building CF₄ :

As a chemist knows carbon can only have four bonds in a molecule like the one above. So each time an atom is "tapped" another atom is bonded to it.  However, the app will not let the student create more bonds for an atom than is chemically possible. So in the picture above we see the tetrahedral structure of many carbon compounds.  If the central carbon atom is tapped again the student gets a message box that tells the student that no more bonds can be made with that atom.  What is really good about this app is it lets students rotate the molecule with their finger and they can see the molecule from different angles.  I sent my students a quick survey on google forms asking them to rate the app for me.  They were all very positive in that it helped them see the structure.  The one downside is that the app does not provide the bond angles.  I really think this experience helped my students get a good foundation in VSEPR structures and I plan to use it again.

Small steps towards a digital lab report

As I mentioned, I wanted to have my Organic Chemistry students create lab reports that are digital using multimedia presentations.  The screencasting apps seemed like a very good tool to do this.  I gave my students the option of doing the traditional hand-written lab report or going electronic.  Only two students took me up on the offer to go digital.  I was surprised by this.  I think the hand written form is much harder.  I expect them to write a 1 1/2 to 2 page discussion with much deep analysis of the chemical concepts applied to the practical aspect of the experiment.  Nevertheless, 13 out of 15 chose to write.  I need to figure this out!  Maybe they are just fearful of the unknown. Maybe they are not sure of my expectations.  Maybe they are worried about their grade.  I need to have an honest talk with them.

I must first say that these are top-notch students.  I have had many of them in previous classes.  And I know their writing quite well.  This group is a selection of very good technical writers.  I have no problem if they write a few less lab reports in order to try to verbally explain their analysis in a screencast.  I just have to figure out how to get them over the threshold.

Here is one of the two "digital lab reports" I received today: