The actual curly arrow mechanisms are in a way themselves cartoons, how they map to the reality in the way that a Micky Mouse might map to real life.
Expert Insights
|
|
I was thinking about Le Chatelier’s principle and how that’s quite cumbersome in its wording, and so when I teach it, and how I always break that down into language that’s probably easier for students to understand, and Bob tells me that’s called repackaging, and I sort of thought that through all my teaching I do a fair bit of repackaging, a lot of the time, so I guess that was just a trait that I use and has been pretty successful for me, I think. |
|
The culture in the chemistry department was always lots and lots of content. And that’s changed now because you don’t need it, because they can find it another way, but you’ve got to give them the framework to understand the content. |
When you think of things in terms of energy you can represent energy … energy can be modelled as a particle, as matter. It can be modelled using waves and then trying to talk about how we would use each model as it's appropriate for a particular situation. It's the sort of things we observe might dictate which model we use to explain it, by recognising that in each case there is another model but perhaps just not as useful. So maybe it goes back to just trying to show that everything that we do is a model, every model has its upside and its downside and that we usually only use a model that’s as detailed as it needs to be for the particular concept that you're trying to get across. If you want to get across a concept of a car to someone who has never seen a car you don't probably show them a Ferrari or a drag racing car. Maybe you show them a Lego style block and we do the same thing with our scientific models as well. I guess trying to get across that idea that this is the model that we're going to use but it can be a lot more complicated. I don't want you to think it's as simple as this but it's appropriate under the circumstance. So I guess I spend a lot of time talking about things as models when I'm talking about quantum mechanics. Our treatment in the first year, which is where I cover it, a little bit of second year but I don't take a mathematical detail treatment of quantum mechanics. Someone else does that, so I really bow to them. So most of mine is non-mathematical, just simple mathematics and mainly conceptual type of stuff. I guess some of the things I try and do to illustrate the differences between the models and the way that we use them is to ask questions in class that might be postulated in such a way that you can't answer it if you're thinking about both models at the same time. So the one I like is where I show say a 2s orbital and the probability distribution of that node in between. I talk about things that … there's one briefly, this plum pudding model which they all laugh about. When you look at this 2s model there is a probability and a high probability, relatively so, that the electron can be inside the nucleus, if you think about it in particle terms. Then talk about the nodes and so on and how they arise in quantum mechanics and so on and then ask questions like if the electron can be here and here but it can never be here how does it get there? ... I try and get across maybe the bigger picture, everything we're going to do from this point on (because we do this fairly early in first year) - everything is going to be a model. Nothing is going to be right. Nothing is going to be wrong. Nothing is going to be exactly the way it is. Everything will be just a model. You'll hear us saying things like ‘this is how it is’ or ‘this is what's happening’. But really you need to interpret that as ‘this is a model and this is how this model is used to explain this particular phenomenon. |
|
In the lab it comes out in a variety of ways. It comes out most commonly when the student gets to actually start doing their calculations and you ask them to relate that back to what they’ve actually physically measured. And when they start doing those sorts of things you realise there’s a bit of a misplaced idea here or a misconception that you can deal with there. |
The big picture is that in any topic there’re key principles, and if you as a lecturer can get across the key principles, that then sets them up to solve problems and to think about the other principles and how they connect. But if they don’t, if they’re not prepared to accept the fact that there are these key principles you need to understand then it’s not going to work. |
|
Ions and ionic chemistry are essential to life and just about everything they will run across. |
But if you’re honest, they’ll be honest right. And I think that’s really important. If you b*gger something up and you really do make a blue or even a little blue, tell them. Say ‘oh look this was wrong, you know this is what it should be’. So that’s important - to be honest, to be upfront. Recognise that we’re dealing, in 2015 or 2014, we’re dealing with OP1 to maybe 14. Recognise the breadth of that class. Don’t teach the top, don’t teach the bottom, teach somewhere in the middle, but try to make sure that you don’t lose the top ones and lose the bottom ones, which is very difficult to do and you only do it with experience. |
|
I think we’ve all sat in lectures and gone, that was dreadful, so we learned quite a lot from understanding how not to do it as well as how actually to do it. And of course the key is preparation and organisation..... whenever I go into a class knowing that I am beautifully organised, that gives you that extra confidence to project and to present, and you come away with that feeling that you know that the class has gone well and you’ve got the information across to the students in the way that you wanted. |
So the strategy is to reflect, to change things, to be flexible, to talk to them but not talk down to them, and certainly I would say to any young lecturer don’t be writing the lecture the night before. Know what your course is because then you can jump back and forth as you talk about something. You can say yeah we talked about this a week ago or something like that, you know. Know what you’re going to talk about, the whole thing, because then you can put it all together as a package. |




Unless otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License