Degree Project with Specialization in Chemistry
Education
15 Credits, First Cycle
Inquiry-Based Student Learning
Activities for Upper Secondary School
Chemistry.
Undersökande elevaktiviteter till
gymnasiekemiundervisning.
Jonathan Nielsen
KPU 90 credits, Upper Secondary School Chemistry Teacher
The date for the Opposition Seminar: 20180829
Examiner: Johan Nelson Supervisor: Birgitta Nordén
1
Preface
I want to thank my supervisor Birgitta Nordén and my group for rewarding discussions and guidance.
2
Abstract
The state prescribed curriculum for the two chemistry courses Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 for Swedish upper secondary school, advocates student planned laboratory exercises. But the current popular course literature book systems used for teaching Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 primarily describe student laboratory exercises with complete step-by-step instructions for the students to follow. This literature study lists and describes 15 inquiry-based learning activities for students attending Kemi 1 and Kemi 2, the descriptions focus on student activity, preconditions, and learning outcome. Each activity was found in a published peer-reviewed article. Combined these 15 student activities can be used for teaching 11 out of the 19 screened core contents listed in the state prescribed curriculum for Kemi 1 and Kemi 2.
Keywords: core content, chemistry, inquiry-based learning, state prescribed curriculum, Swedish upper secondary school, student learning outcome.
3
Table of Content
Preface... 1
Abstract ... 2
Introduction ... 4
Background of the Literature Study ... 4
Inquiry-Based learning Activities ... 4
State Prescribed Curriculum for Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 ... 7
Purpose and Problem Statement ... 9
Method ... 10
Results ... 13
Student learning activities for Kemi 1 ... 14
Materials and chemical-bonding ... 14
Reactions and changes ... 14
Stoichiometry ... 17
Analytical Chemistry ... 19
Student learning activities for Kemi 2 ... 21
Reaction speed and chemical equilibrium ... 21
Organic chemistry ... 22 Biochemistry ... 23 Analytical Chemistry ... 26 Discussion ... 28 References ... 32 Appendix ... 36 Appendix 1 ... 36 Appendix 2 ... 37
4
Introduction
Background of the Literature Study
In upper secondary school chemistry classes, students regularly perform laboratory work prepared for them by the teachers. Current course literature book systems used to teach Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 have descriptions of laboratory exercises for the students to perform (Andersson et al. 2012; Andersson aut 2013; Borén 2011; Borén 2012; Lindberg et al. 1997; Lindberg et al. 1999; Pilström 2007). These student exercises are most often so-called cookbook-type experiments, meaning the written instructions thoroughly explains each step of the experiment (Borén 2005; Borén 2011; Borén 2012; Henriksson 2011). Students end up performing and then writing a report about a laboratory exercise, where the method was dictated to them and the result given beforehand. But the state prescribed curriculum for upper secondary school chemistry advocates student planned laboratory exercises (Skolverket 2017). This systematic literature review lists and describes published learning activities for students, including prerequisite theoretical and practical student knowledge and student learning outcome. Each activity has one or more degrees of freedom, and each activity involves one or more of the core contents mentioned in the Swedish upper secondary school state prescribed curriculum for Kemi 1 and Kemi 2. They can be used in teaching Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 as a complement to the student learning activities described in the literature book system used for the courses, to better comply with the curriculum guidelines.
Inquiry-Based learning Activities
Inquiry-Based learning is broadly defined as a constructionist method of teaching, in which the teacher poses questions, problems or scenarios to the learner, in order for the learner to acquire new knowledge, as opposed to the traditional method where the teacher directly presents the new knowledge to the learner (Savery 2006). Ideally, all the information necessary for the learner to deduce the new knowledge is known or given to them (Kirschner et al. 2006). For example, a teacher requests an explanation for how the phases of the Moon come about. A prerequisite here is that the student already knows that the Moon revolves around the Earth and that the Earth, in
5
turn, revolves around the Sun. Inquiry-based learning methods are called by various names including the minimally guided approach, discovery learning, problem-based learning, experiential learning, open-ended activities and constructivist learning (Kirschner et al. 2006). The literature on student activities with one or two degrees of freedom, most often label these activities as inquiry-based learning. An initial study described three levels of openness or three degrees of freedom in laboratory instruction (Schwab & Brandwein 1962). This was elaborated to four degrees of freedom (Herron 1971). Each degree of freedom is defined by whether the following are pre-determined: the question to be answered (problem), ways and means (method) and the answers (results). In an activity with three degrees of freedom neither the problem, method, nor the results are determined. In an activity with two degrees of freedom, only the problem is pre-determined, the method and the results are open-ended. An activity with one degree of freedom is one in which the problem and the method are pre-determined with only the results being open-ended. An activity with 0 degrees of freedom is one in which the problem, method, and results are all pre-determined aka. a cookbook-type experiment (Ringnes & Hannisdal 2006; Yang & Li 2009).
Table 1. The four degrees of freedom for activities/practical laboratory work. Degrees of
freedom
Problem Method Result
0 Known Known Known
1 Known Known Unknown
2 Known Unknown Unknown
3 Unknown Unknown Unknown
The upper secondary school thesis conducted by students in their third year is an example of an assignment with three degrees of freedom. Ideally, a laboratory exercise with three degrees of freedom includes students performing the following sequence of tasks (Bowles et al. 2012): 1. Develop a model to explain an observation. 2. Design an experiment to test the model. 3. Collect the data from the experiment. 4. Analyze the data. 5. Adjust the model based on the findings. 6. Continue repeating steps 2-5 in a loop until satisfied with the model. The student laboratory
6
activities presented in this text only have one or two degrees of freedom, to not require too much time for preparation and execution.
There is research for and against using inquiry-based learning in science education (Kirschner et
al. 2006). Research has shown that a person’s mind can only consciously process four new objects at a time (Cowan 2001). Inquiry-based learning tasks, therefore, risk asking the impossible of the students, when they require that students process new information while searching for a feasible solution to a given task. During this time the mind can't also store new information in the long-term memory and students can end up not having learned anything after a long time trying to solve an inquiry-based learning task (Kirschner et al. 2006). In response, it has been shown that teachers attempting inquiry-based learning are more successful when they give instructions that allow the student higher degrees of cognitive freedom rather than behavioral freedom, instructional guidance rather than pure discovery, and curricular focus rather than unstructured exploration (Mayer 2004). Furthermore, the appropriate content material must have been covered in lectures prior to the students engaging in inquiry-based activities in the laboratory (Prilliman 2012). During the transition from traditional to inquiry-based activities, students must be supported and guided and given clear and reasonable expectations (Prilliman 2012). Cookbook-type laboratory exercises are easier to execute than inquiry-based laboratory exercises from both the instructor and the students’ perspective. Some studies suggest that students learn more and are more engaged in inquiry-based lab settings than in cookbook-type lab settings, but students also found the inquiry-based laboratories more frustrating and difficult (Dunlap & Martin 2012).
Courses that use inquiry-based learning activities, will tend to use more time on laboratory exercises, than the courses that only use cookbook-type lab exercises. Manual student activities may motivate theory-weary students. Studies have shown that students who have difficulty with the theoretical subjects (e.g. Swedish and Mathematics) could still be motivated to study when they ‘saw a concrete and immediate goal with what they did.’ They learned by doing something practical (Hugo 2011). Some students are difficult to motivate with an abstract subject content (Comenius & Kroksmark 1999). One of the strengths of chemistry as a school subject is that it naturally includes practical demonstrations and student laboratory exercises.
7
Generic barriers to higher degrees of freedom in chemistry laboratory exercises could include: Student knowledge-level is not uniform in each class. Certain students may have prerequisite knowledge while others at the same time may not have the prerequisite knowledge to plan a given exercise. Low motivation may cause students to take a long time when designing their own lab method. All the relevant theory must have been taught before students can begin to design their own exercise. Theory-weary students have time to lose interest before the practical work begins. The responsible teacher may find it more difficult to uphold safety during student laboratory exercises with higher degrees of freedom. It is harder to keep track of 20-30 students using several different methods in a laboratory, than students using the same method.
Possible solutions to the mentioned barriers could be: Having one version of the laboratory exercise tailored for strong students and another version for weaker students. In this case, weaker students will have fewer degrees of freedom. Have a clear deadline for the manuscript of a student planed method to be handed in, so that the actual laboratory work can begin on schedule. Inquiry-based learning activities within a given learning unit can be performed after the next learning unit has started, meaning the inquiry-based learning activities are delayed one learning unit relative to the theory. Have a limit to the number of students per instructor allowed in the laboratory during inquiry-based exercises.
State Prescribed Curriculum for Kemi 1 and Kemi 2
The state prescribed curriculum for the courses Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 instructs the teacher on the aim, core content and knowledge requirements of the two courses.
Under aim, the curriculum states, that the courses should help ‘students develop knowledge of the concepts, theories, models and methods of chemistry.’ The students should be able to apply this knowledge to their understanding of biology, chemical industry and public debates on the environment. Finally, to train the student in the scientific approach, including ‘formulating and searching for answers to questions, planning and carrying out experiments and processing, interpreting and critically assessing results and information’ (Skolverket 2017). Which can be
8
interpreted as advocating the inclusion of student activities with one or more degrees of freedom in the courses.
The core contents are the specific knowledge and skills the students should be taught in each course. The curriculum gives a list of core contents for Kemi1 and a list of core contents for Kemi 2 (see Appendix 1 and 2). Both lists have the same structure. They are divided into five learning units. Each has 16 core contents, in all 32. The first 4 learning units contain core contents each of which is a specific area of chemistry. The last learning unit in both lists is called ‘The nature of chemistry and its working methods’. This learning unit contains core contents that are general intentions and considerations the teacher should convey, such as the scientific method, ethics, and the learning process. One of these last core contents states that students should be involved in ‘Planning and carrying out experiments and formulating and testing hypotheses related to these’. The state prescribed curriculum here repeats the requirement that students perform laboratory exercises where the method is not already planned for them.
Knowledge requirements is a list of the knowledge and skills a student must show to qualify for the marks E, C or A respectively (Skolverket 2017). The specific knowledge and skill requirements can be sorted into the main categories: familiarity with the theory, communicative skills, and problem-solving skills. One of the specific knowledge requirements reads that ‘students plan and carry out, in consultation with the supervisor, experiments and observations in a satisfactory way’. This knowledge requirement can only be fostered and graded through inquiry-based learning activities. The same goes for, ‘Teaching should cover scientific working methods such as formulating and searching for answers to questions, planning and carrying out experiments and processing and critically assessing results and information’ (Skolverket2017).
In summation, the curriculum repeats several times that students should be involved in the planning and the carrying out of experiments. Yet most of the student laboratory exercises described in the popular literature systems for Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 do not require the students to plan the methods they use. This thesis is a literature search for student laboratory exercises for teaching each core content of Kemi 1 and Kemi 2, that have one or two degrees of freedom. Each found student laboratory exercise is described in the Result section.
9
Purpose and Problem Statement
This study concerns the two Swedish upper secondary school chemistry courses Kemi 1 and Kemi 2, their core content and how to teach/convey the core content using student activities, which allow the students one or more degrees of freedom in the planning, the execution and/or results. The problem statements to be addressed in this text:
Which of the Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 core content listed in the state prescribed curriculum are suitable for student-planned laboratory exercises according to the published research on the area? In each case, what does the research say about student learning associated with the exercise?
10
Method
The implementation of systematic literature review comprised: (i) Formulation of the criteria each article/study must meet, to be included in this review. (ii) Design and implementation of literature searches. (iii) Interpretation and evaluation of the identified literature (Gustafsson et al. 2010).
Search strategy
A systematic literature search for articles examining different types of inquiry-based learning in chemistry courses in upper secondary school level and first-year pre-graduate level. The search included: searching specific databases and internet searches using the search engines, Google and Google Scholar. Further studies were also found from citations. Most of the articles were found using literature searches in databases, namely ERIC via EBSCO and American Chemical Society.
Defining the searches
The first step of the literature search was to determine sets of key-words to search for, and the Boolean-logic to combine them. Thesaurus provided this function for EBSCO databases.
Literature searches
Through the library at Malmö University, the multiple databases Education Research Complete, American Chemical Society and EBSCO were searched. Education Research Complete and EBSCO cover research literature on education, psychology, sociology, management, social work and social psychology (Gustafsson et al. 2010). American Chemical Society covers research on chemistry and chemistry education. Examples of searches are described in Table 2. There are several labels used in the literature for student learning activities with one or more degrees of freedom. Some examples are inquiry-based learning, Problem-Based learning, and Open-ended activity. In order not to miss relevant articles on methods analogous to inquiry-based learning, searches were performed using all known synonyms.
11
Table 2. Examples of Literature Searches. The first search returned any article with at least one key-word that was a synonym for inquiry-based learning. Searches 2-8 return items with the specified area in chemistry as key-words.
Searches 11-19 return items that have both a key-word that is a synonym for inquiry-based learning and the given area of chemistry as a key-word.
ERIC via EBSCO 17 November 2017
Search terms Items found
1 (((DE "Constructivism (Learning)" OR DE "Problem Based Learning") OR (DE "Experiential Learning")) OR (DE "Inquiry")) OR (DE "Discovery Learning")
38,178
2 Chemical bonds OR Chemical bonding 551
3 Stoichiometry 254
4 Chemistry AND reaction 3087
5 Chemistry AND energy transformation 12
6 Chemistry AND formula 282
7 Reaction equations 61 8 Limiting reactant 9 9 Analytical chemistry 443 10 Redox 149 11 1 AND 2 12 12 1 AND 3 14 13 1 AND 4 137 14 1 AND 5 18 15 1 AND 6 10 16 1 AND 7 1 17 1 AND 8 1 18 1 AND 9 27 19 1 AND 10 1
Design
Studies included were empirical studies presenting an inquiry-based activity for students to perform for learning a specific area of upper secondary school level chemistry. Emphasis was put on studies that included a detailed description of the student activity.
Criteria for inclusion
The sturdies included have been peer-reviewed. Each article describes the preparation and execution of an inquiry-based student learning activity for upper secondary school (high school)
12
level chemistry, using equipment usually found in the labs of the schools that offer Kemi 1 and Kemi 2. No limitation for publication years was applied in the literature searches.
Screening
Most articles that have been screened, were first screened for relevance based on title and abstract. Several of the articles cited in the introduction have only been title and abstract-screened. Articles cited in the Results chapter have been full text screened.
Listing
Each student learning activity is presented by: An overall summary of the experiment. A description of the student activities during the exercise. A list of the prerequisites (student knowledge) for performing the exercise. Finally, the stated student learning outcome of the activity. If a given student exercise covers two or more core contents, it will be placed under the most relevant and the other core contents will just have a reference. The work focuses on the core contents of the first four learning units of Kemi 1 and Kemi 2, as these are each a specific area/component of chemistry (see Appendix 1 and 2). This text does not associate student learning activities with the core contents of the last learning unit of Kemi 1 and Kemi 2.
13
Results
Table 3. The core contents screened for matching inquiry-based student learning activities, and the number of activities found for each core content.
Kemi 1 Number
of student learning activities Learning unit Core content
Materials and chemical-bonding
Models and theories of the structure and classification of matter. 0 Chemical bonding and its impact on e.g. the occurrence, properties and application areas of organic and inorganic substances.
1 Reactions and
changes
Acid-base reactions, including the concept of pH and buffer effects. 1 Redox reactions, including electrochemistry. 2
Precipitation Reactions. 0
Energy transformations in phase transitions and chemical reactions. 0 Stoichiometry Understanding and writing formulae for chemical compounds and reactions. 0
Substance relationships, concentrations, limiting reactants, and exchanges in chemical reactions.
2 Analytical
chemistry
Qualitative and quantitative methods of chemical analysis, e.g. chromatography and titration.
2 Kemi 2 Reaction speed and chemical equilibrium
Reaction speed, e.g. the effect of catalysts and concentrations on how quickly chemical reactions take place.
0 Factors affecting equilibrium and equilibrium constants. 1 Calculations of and reasoning about equilibrium systems in different environments e.g. in oceans, in the human body and in industrial processes.
0 Organic
chemistry
Different categories of organic substances, their properties, structure, and reactivity.
2 Reaction mechanisms, including qualitative reasoning about how and why reactions take place, and about the rate of use of energy in different kinds of organic reactions.
0
Biochemistry The genetic flow of information, including the main elements of the replication of biochemical processes, transcription, and translation.
1 The main features of human metabolism at the molecular level. 1 Structure and function of proteins, with a special focus on enzymes. 1 Analytical
chemistry
Qualitative and quantitative methods of chemical analysis e.g. mass spectrometry and spectrophotometry.
1 Reasoning concerning sampling, level of detection, correctness and accuracy, and systematic and random sources of error.
14
Student learning activities for Kemi 1
Materials and chemical-bonding
Core content: Chemical bonding and its impact on e.g. the occurrence, properties and application areas of organic and inorganic substances
The relationships between chemical bonding and material properties are described in a student exercise involving alginate (Bowles et al. 2012). Students plan part of the method. Article files include printout instructions for students and instructors.
Activity: Students are provided with an aqueous solution containing a monovalent cation, another aqueous solution containing a divalent cation, and an aqueous solution containing alginate. In addition, they are provided with the generalized structure of alginate. The students are then asked to use the information and materials provided to plan and run an experiment to determine how the ions in the solutions associate with each other and in the end to develop a model to explain the observations.
Prerequisites: Student knowledge of the procedures and safety requirements when conducting the experiments. Student knowledge of the physical properties of substances that are determined by the type of chemical bonds they contain. Student learning: The students who completed these exercises showed an enhanced understanding of the relationship between chemical bonding and material properties, including their grasp of tissue engineering (Bowles et al. 2012).
Reactions and changes
Core content: Acid-base reactions, including the concept of pH and buffer effects
Hale-Hanes (2015) describes a student exercise on acid-base titration, where students perform four acid-base titrations. During the first two exercises, students follow instructions, last two are student planned. Article files contain instructions for the instructor and guiding questions for students. Student activity: In the first titration students add a strong acid to a weak acid, measuring the pH, calculating, and graphing the [H+]. In the second they add a strong base NaOH(aq) to a strong acid HCl(aq) of an unknown concentration measuring the pH and then calculate the concentration. The
15
titration is repeated virtually in an online titration-simulator. The students design the third titration themselves, to test an unknown weak acid with a known concentration, this is also repeated virtually in an online simulator. Students design the method for the last titration, here students are given an unknown weak acid to test to determine the pKa.
Prerequisites: Students must be familiar with acid-base theory and concepts, including pH, pKa, [OH-], [H+], and formulas for their correlations.
Student learning: Students showed improvement in understanding acid-base chemistry following the exercise as well as an improved mental model explaining acid-base chemistry. The students also reported an improved understanding of the chemistry due to the addition of the virtual laboratories (Hale-Hanes 2015).
Core content: Redox reactions, including electrochemistry
A student exercise on redox reaction with multiple lesson activity introduces the electrochemical cell (Sesen & Tarhan 2013). Includes student planned laboratory exercises. No printout
instructions for students or instructors found in article files.
Student Activity: Students insert different metal rods in pairs into different fruits and using a simple voltmeter, determine the Potential differences between the rods. Students are asked why the potential differences differ according to the type of fruits the metals are paired in, to discover that the half-cell potential difference depends on the electrolyte concentration. During the second lesson, students are presented with a model simulation of a cell system of a Zn and a Cu rod immersed in a 1 M HCl solution. Students are asked why the system produces an electric current. After the discussion, students are asked to construct the electrochemical cell. Necessary materials are made available to the students. After constructing a system where both metal rods are immersed in the same electrolyte solution, the students are asked to immerse the Zn and Cu rods into two different beaker-cells each containing electrolyte solution (1 M ZnSO4 or 1 M CuSO4,) and check for conductivity, no salt bridge. Students are asked why there is no electric current. After answering they connect the two beaker solvents to each other using the salt bridge and then comment on their observations. The third-day students are presented with a model simulating electron flow from anode to cathode and the “cell potential”. Students are then asked to plan an experiment to determine the effect of electrolyte concentration and temperature on cell potential. Students were
16
suggested to make four different electrochemical cells using Cu and Zn electrodes and a Na2SO4 salt bridge in different combinations of 0.05 M and 2 M CuSO4 solutions and 0.05 M and 2 M ZnSO4 solutions and measure the cell potentials via a voltmeter. Ice water and hot water are also available to students to test the cell potentials heat dependence. During the fourth-day students are asked to ponder if the reverse process is possible, if electrical energy could be transferred to chemical energy. After a discussion, a water electrolysis inquiry-based learning activity is made available to the students. Students secure two test tubes filled with water in the beaker, test tubes upside down over the beaker, mount the cupper and carbon electrodes and then connect a 12 V battery. 2–3 mL of 1 M Na2SO4 was added to the water and observations were recorded. Students were asked which gases were released in the anode and cathode and asked about the change of pH in the electrolyte solution and the reason for adding Na2SO4. The fifth and last day involves electroplating. Students are asked to plan and make an electrolysis system to plate an iron spoon with copper.
Prerequisite: Students must be familiar with: Periodic table, metals and non-metals, element activity, electronegativity, ionization energy, electron affinity, chemical reactions, acids and bases, and redox reactions.
Student learning: In a post-exercise test and questionnaire the students who did this exercise showed significantly better acquisition of scientific concepts related to electrochemistry and produced significantly higher positive attitudes towards chemistry and laboratory work, than students who had done an equivalent cookbook-type exercise (Sesen & Tarhan 2013).
DeMeo (1997) describes another student exercise on redox reactions, which can be used to discuss the electrochemical series and/or the solubility of gases in water, as well as to introduce the concept of corrosion. Students plan part of the laboratory exercise. No printout instructions for students or instructors found in article files.
Student activity: Students are asked to design an experiment to determine if copper metal reacts with acetic acid. They are guided to consider many chemical and physical variables, even the gases in the air. The methods proposed by the students are approved for carrying out when they consider the obvious: reproducibility, time, cost and safety, and the role of the gases in the air. The article gives an example of an approved plan: Pieces of copper metal placed in aqueous acetic acid in different sealed test tubes, each tube also containing one or more different gases, and a control test
17
tube containing pieces of copper metal water and air. After letting the test tubes sit for some time, the students find that only the copper Metal pieces in sealed test tubes that also contained oxygen gas had reacted (changed color), guiding them to the conclusion that oxygen gas plays an important role in the reaction between copper and acetic acid. Students are not asked to produce a complete reaction formula of the reaction/s that had taken place in the test tubes.
Prerequisites: Students must already be familiar with redox reactions and acid-base theory. Student learning: Promotes student analytical thinking and practical chemistry problem-solving skills. Students gain experience with scientific processes such as hypothesizing answers, controlling variables when designing an experiment, and making logical deductions based on what they know and observe (DeMeo 1997).
Stoichiometry
Core content: Substance relationships, concentrations, limiting reactants, and exchanges in chemical reactions
An exercise on substance relationships challenges students to completely fill a sealable plastic bag with the gaseous carbon dioxide produced by reacting baking soda with vinegar (Lanni 2014). Students plan part of the method. Printout instructions for students and instructors are available in the article files.
Student activities: Preparation lesson included a demonstration (by the instructor) of the reaction. In a guided discussion: Students identify reactants and products, write a balanced reaction equation NaHCO3(s) + CH3COOH(aq) → CH3COONa(aq) + H2O(l) + CO2(g) and calculate volume of carbon dioxide gas produced from a given amount of reactants at standard temperature and pressure (273.15 K and 1 atm). Students are then told they will perform an experiment, the following lesson, with a procedure of their own design, to completely fill a plastic bag with the carbon dioxide gas formed when letting baking soda and vinegar react. Students are then given the list of materials that will be available to them: Safety goggles, baking soda, vinegar, sealable plastic bags, graduated cylinders, spatulas, analytical balance, weighing paper, and paper towels. Students are then asked to plan and submit a written procedure to solve the task prior to starting the experiment the following lesson. As the students perform the actual experiment, they find they must determine the volume of the plastic bag, enter the vinegar and baking soda into the plastic
18
bag without the two reactants coming into contact with one and other before the bag was sealed. The authors' students had to try, fail and rewrite their experiment in average 4 times before they were successful.
Prerequisites: Students had to be familiar with basic stoichiometry, the ideal gas law, the reaction between baking soda and vinegar.
Student learning: Students performing the exercise move forward by trial and error, this, in turn, prompts student thinking about error analysis, ex. spill significance on the outcome of the experiment. Students train reexamination of procedure steps and learn the costs of keeping on repeating a process without careful consideration of the source(s) of error (Lanni 2014).
A second student exercise on substance relationships challenges students to determine the reaction stoichiometry of the reaction C6H8O7(aq) + 3NaOH(aq) → 3H2O(l) + Na3C6H5O7(aq) by a thermochemical approach (Tatsuoka et al. 2015). Students plan part of the method. Printout instructions for students and instructors are included in article files.
Student activity: During a Preparatory class discussion, the following tasks were given the students, in this order. (i). Students were to show that a simple acid-base reaction is exothermic. (ii). Deduce that the temperature increases in the solution made by mixing an aqueous acid solution with an aqueous base solution (all reactant solutions having the same fixed molar concentration), would be the highest when equivalent amounts of reactants were used. (iii). Deduce that the temperature increase would be proportionally lower the farther the amounts of reactants were from equivalent amounts. Students then propose an experimental design to determine the stoichiometric coefficients of the neutralization reaction. After approval of the plan, students execute the experiment, acquire data. Post-experiment tasks include Determination of the reaction stoichiometry. Qualitative prediction of the pH of the product solutions obtained by mixing the reactant solutions in different volume ratios.
Prerequisites: This exercise demands that the learning units on thermochemistry, acid-base reactions, the structure of materials and stoichiometry have already been covered.
Student learning: The exercise promotes students’ general motivation for conducting laboratory experiments and at the conclusion “the accomplishment of the inquiry gave them intense pleasure”. Guided group discussion and practical laboratory exercise lead students to deduce the Job’s
19
method themselves, promoting self-reliance. The exercise creates a basis for subsequent learning of acid-base reactions and neutralization titration (Tatsuoka et al. 2015).
Analytical chemistry
Core content: Qualitative and quantitative methods of chemical analysis, e.g. chromatography and titration
An exercise on chemical analysis challenges students to determine the chemical composition of an ingredient (sodium sesquicarbonate) in an alkaline detergent (Koga et al. 2011). Student plan part of the method. Includes printout instructions for students and instructors in article files. Sodium sesquicarbonate is a double salt of sodium carbonate and sodium hydrogen carbonate (Na2CO3 * 3 NaHCO3 *2H2O).
Student activity: Students are first introduced to some revealing properties of the double salt via demonstrations by the instructor. Demonstrations include a flame color test, coloration of an indicator, thermal decomposition and reaction with acid. The demonstrations are followed by a class discussion. Students propose the chemical composition of the double salt, this discussion ends when the conclusion is reached, that the double salt is made up of the following components with unknown coefficients: (x, y, z) in xNa2CO3 * yNaHCO3 * zH2O. This is followed by another class discussion on possible experimental methods the students can undertake to confirm the chemical composition. This discussion ends when the following methods have been proposed and discussed: neutralization titration, gravimetric analysis for the thermal decomposition and gravimetric analysis for the reaction with acid. Students then form groups and choose one of the three methods to perform. After the students have performed their chosen laboratory method, all teams share their results. Students obtain three different equations (based on each experiment) with unknown coefficients of x, y, and z in the hypothetical composition of the double salt, and in the end, calculate the coefficients.
Prerequisites: Student knowledge of the flame color test, coloration of an acid-base indicator, thermal decomposition. Chemical properties and reactions of sodium carbonate. Students should know the basics of neutralization titration and mass-loss measurements from decomposition.
20
Student learning: The topic comes from the daily lives of the students and the results of the learning activities are returned to their daily lives, the activity thereby teaches the students the possible direct connection between chemical lab methods and daily life. Students are trained in determining unknown coefficients (ratios) between several reactants and several products of a reaction by conducting an experiment, gathering data and calculating (Koga et al. 2011).
A second chemical analysis experiment challenges students to determine the composition of sodium percarbonate (Wada & Koga 2013). Includes student planned method and printout instructions for students and instructors in the article files.
Student Activity: Like the previous student exercise (same author). The general composition of sodium percarbonate is let known: xNa2CO3·yH2O2, and the coefficients (x and y) are to be deduced. Introductory demonstrations by the instructor include flame color test, decomposition of aqueous H2O2, sodium percarbonate reaction with aqueous HCl, coloration of indicator, thermal decomposition and test of product gas. Students discuss and propose the composition of sodium percarbonate, xNa2CO3·yH2O2 and propose experiments to affirm the chemical composition; the list of student proposed experiments is guided to the following: neutralization titration of the carbonate ion. Gravimetric analysis of deposited barium carbonate. Redox titration of H2O2 (iodometry). Measurement of the oxygen volume evolved from the catalytic decomposition of H2O2. Mass-loss measurement for the thermal decomposition to affirm the composition of sodium percarbonate. Students form groups and each group chooses an experiment and performs it. Post-lab the students collect data from other groups and calculate the coefficients.
Prerequisites: Knowledge of the chemical properties and reactions of sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide. Stoichiometry, neutralization titration, gravimetric analysis, redox titration, measurement of gas volume evolved from catalytic decomposition. Mass-loss measurement from decomposition.
Student learning: The students are guided to choose an analysis method from an undisclosed list of predetermined methods. Hereby gaining experience in making own decisions on a laboratory method to solve a given task. After the practical exercise students are asked to derive the mathematical formula that relates each experimental result to the unknown coefficients, x, and y, by using the reaction formula for each quantitative method. Hereby gaining experience in deducing
21
a mathematical correlation to explain results, gaining insight into theory development (Wada & Koga 2013).
Student learning activities for Kemi 2
Reaction speed and chemical equilibrium
Core content: Reaction speed, e.g. the effect of catalysts and concentrations on how quickly chemical reactions take place
See the Protein experiment, page 25 for an experiment including catalysis.
Core content: Factors affecting equilibrium and equilibrium constants
A student exercise on factors affecting chemical equilibrium has students explore vapor pressure and the concept of dynamic phase equilibrium in a closed system of only water liquid and vapor where volume and temperature can be varied (Cloonan et al. 2011). Article files include printout instructions for students and instructors. Students plan part of the method.
Student activity: Students are guided to make a closed system, Erlenmeyer flask purged of air, containing water liquid and vapor, sealed with a two-hole rubber stopper that in turn is fitted with a plastic syringe and a pressure sensor. Students are then encouraged to experiment/explore the impact of volume and/or temperature change on the pressure inside the system. Student handouts contain pre-activity questions, questions to solve during the activity and discussion questions for after the activity. The questions guide the students on what tests to perform and makes them think about the equilibrium model.
Prerequisites: Student knowledge of basic chemical equilibrium definitions, such as reaction and reverse reaction, reaction quotient and equilibrium constant.
Student learning: Exercise gives students familiarity with the molecular basis for the difference between the two systems and the grounds to conclude that the liquid-vapor system maintains constant pressure due to phase equilibrium. Students are guided to setup and observe pressure change with volume change in a system designed to challenge their misconceptions. Following
22
guided discussion helps students understand what was changing in the systems on a molecular level (Cloonan et al. 2011).
Organic chemistry
Core content: Different categories of organic substances, their properties, structure, and reactivity
The first exercise on organic substances introduces students to liquid-liquid extraction (Mistry et al. 2016). Students plan part of the method. Article files include a printout pre-lab test and lab instructions for students and instructors.
Student activity: Groups of students were each given one of several liquid-mixtures containing three organic compounds. Each compound containing a single acidic or basic functional group, with pKa values and characteristic infrared absorption bands familiar to the students. Students were informed on the content of the mixture and then tasked with designing a viable purification procedure using liquid-liquid separation methods to isolate at least two of the components (one at a time) from the mixture. The combinations of the compounds in each mixture was designed so that students were required to isolate at least one of the components by an acidic or basic extraction. Pre-lab quiz tests the students’ knowledge of pKa values and how a liquid-liquid extraction works. Students design/plan the laboratory procedure in the form of a flowchart. The teacher looks for any obvious errors in the procedure and highlight them for the student to amend or approves the planned procedure. Students execute their planned procedure. Purity was the most important criterion when assessing the quality of the samples. In the end, students write a laboratory report containing pre-experiment flowchart, the method written as a standard experimental procedure, analysis, and interpretation of infra-red spectra, and a discussion allowing students to assess and self-reflect.
Prerequisites: Theoretic Knowledge of basic acid-base definitions such as pKa - and pH-values, polarity, inter-molecular bonding, solubility, the molecular structure of organic molecules, functional groups (and the pKa-values, and infra-red absorption bands of these groups)
Practical experience with solvent extraction, drying with MgSO4, using a rotary evaporator, infra-red spectroscopy.
23
Student learning: Students apply their understanding of the chemical and physical properties of organic molecules and their problem-solving skills when the students themselves designing the method to isolate and purify mixtures at the end of an organic reaction. This experiment improved student problem-solving skills and understanding of chemical concepts related to liquid−liquid extraction (Mistry et al. 2016).
A second exercise on organic substances introduces students to carbohydrate analysis (Senkbeil 1999). Students plan part of the method. No printout instructions for students or instructors found in article files.
Student activities: Students are given unlabeled containers each containing a pure carbohydrate and asked to develop an appropriate sequence of tests for identifying the unknown carbohydrates. Students are presented with the names of the possible unknowns and asked to plan and make a flow chart of the protocol for identification of the unknowns by five possible tests/analyses. Students write and present a flowchart and protocol to instructors for approval. Then they perform the analyses following the protocol of their flow chart. Finally, they write a report on the whole activity.
Preconditions: Students must be familiar with the molecular structure and chemical properties of carbohydrates and be familiar with the five laboratory methods for classifying/identifying carbohydrates.
Student learning: Students use the theory presented to them on organic chemistry to analyze and correctly identify the unknown carbohydrate. Students design and follow their own flowchart. With minimal guidance, students learn through tedious and time-consuming ‘trial and error' the need to run blanks and standards for colorimetric or timed studies. Students often find their own new methods of analysis and this adds to their interest in laboratory work. Students find the experiment time-consuming, but also very rewarding (Senkbeil 1999).
Biochemistry
Core content: The genetic flow of information, including the main elements of the replication of biochemical processes, transcription, and translation
24
A student exercise on genetic information uses DNA evidence to investigate several organism’s evolutionary histories while providing practical modeling of the fundamental processes of gene transcription and translation (Parker et al. 2004). No student planned method. Article files include printout instructions for students and instructors.
Student activity: Students receive sample flies of different species stored in alcohol and ecological, reproductive trait data for each species. Using the data and own morphological observations students propose evolutionary relationships between the fly species and present their hypothesis as a tree. Students are then given the cytochrome b forward nucleotide base sequence from mitochondria from each species. To count the number of nucleotide mutations and amino acid mutations in the sequence between the species. After this student are given different formulae and assumptions to help draw a new evolutionary-tree using the unweighted pair-group method and arithmetic averages for the two datasets. In the end, students shared the trees with each other. Prerequisites: Students must be familiar with the central dogma of biology and the theory of the molecular basis of evolution.
Student learning: Students are presented with connections between scientific concepts with different levels of organization, from genes to organisms to ecosystems and how the information in DNA can be extracted and used by both the cell and by scientists. Building on the students’ basic knowledge of DNA structure and function, this hypothesis-driven laboratory exercise, promotes a more integrated understanding of the use of molecular genetics in evolutionary biology (Parker et al. 2004).
Core content: The main features of human metabolism at the molecular level
Figueira & Rocha (2014) describe a metabolism experiment for students on the foods we eat. Students plan the method. No printout instructions found in the article files.
Student activity: Students are provided with Benedict's solution (turns from blue to green to red with higher and higher concentrations of monosaccharides) and different food samples and asked, “What does Benedict's solution detect?” The students then had to decide the quantities of Benedict’s solution to use and quantities samples and whether to homogenize them before applying Benedict’s solution. After the open activity students were then asked to repeat the procedure, with samples of fructose, starch, sucrose, glucose, lactose, and maltose. After which, most students
25
realized that sugars (reducing sugars, sugars other than sucrose) produce a color change in Benedict's solution.
Prerequisites: Students must be familiar with saccharide molecular structure, resonance structures and reactivity of aldehydes.
Student learning: Exercise designed to engages students’ curiosity, to initiate learning about the method and to take ownership of the knowledge taught. Exercise enhances student power of observation. Left to guide themselves students are forced to break away from their passive learning habits. Students performing this exercise frequently obtain inconsistent results. This counteracts the impression students can get from guided exercises, that science experiments always lead to results confirming preexisting models (Figueira & Rocha 2014).
Core content: Structure and function of proteins, with a special focus on enzymes
Kimbrough (1997) describes a student exercise on protein function that investigates catalase activity. Students plan part of the method. No printout instructions for students or instructors found in the article files.
Student activity: Students prepare extracts with exposed catalase by puréeing plant or animal material with deionized water in a blender. Students are guided by a general procedure that uses potato extract. The students are provided with a gas collection apparatus, which can be made with an Erlenmeyer flask with a side arm connected by rubber tubing to a measuring cylinder that is filled with water and placed upside down touching the water of a filled beaker. Students mix the catalase extract (2–3 mL) with hydrogen peroxide (3–5 mL of a 3% solution) in the side-armed vessel, and the students then monitor the catalase activity by measuring the volume of oxygen generated by the reaction and collected in the upside down measuring cylinder as a function of time. After this, the students then design their own versions of the experiment to further explore some aspect of the reaction. The student-designed experiments are repeats of the described experiment incorporating some of the following variations: alternative sources for the enzyme (different fresh food products), different concentrations of hydrogen peroxide, different temperatures, different pH, different substrate or catalyst, and the addition of an inhibitor.
Prerequisites: Students must have knowledge of the catalase catalyzed reaction, general knowledge of enzyme-catalysis.
26
Student learning: Students individually investigate a large variety of reaction features, which produce data providing the students with insight into the sources and activity of the enzyme catalase and enzyme behavior in general. The exercise can be adjusted for students who understand kinetics at a quantitative level and for students who also understand kinetics at a qualitative level (Kimbrough et al. 1997).
Analytical chemistry
Core content: Qualitative and quantitative methods of chemical analysis e.g. mass spectrometry and spectrophotometry
Yang and Li (2009) describe a chemical analysis exercise where students investigate the contributions of Ca2+ and Mg2+ concentrations to water hardness. Students plan part of the method. No printout instructions for instructors of students found in the article files.
Student activities: Students were presented with the task of designing and performing their own experiments to determine Mg2+ and Ca2+ concentrations in water. Students were advised to use complexometry titration, metal ion indicators, triethanolamine to “mask” aluminum ions during Mg2+ concentration determination and provided with literature search strategies. Following the introduction, students are asked to search the literature for methods on determining Mg and Ca concentrations in water as homework. Second: Students findings are shared and discussed with the class and instructor. Students are grouped into teams and are helped to write a laboratory protocol using methods found in the literature. Each team is tasked with preparing and performing two independent experiments for individual Ca2+ and Mg2+ concentration determination. After the students' laboratory protocols have been approved by the instructor, the students carry out their planned lab experiment. Students then calculate error percentage in the obtained results and evaluate their experiments design. Finally, each team shares their methods, results, and evaluations with the rest of the class.
Prerequisites: Students must have experimental experience with titration, preferably even determining total water hardness by complexometric titration. Students must be familiar with the principles of complexometric titration, metal ion indicators, and the influence of masking agents and pH values on metal ion indicators.
27
Student learning: Exercise gives students experience in searching the scientific literature and discussing their findings, working in small groups, designing, testing, and evaluating trial procedures, developing and performing their own experiments. Understanding complexometry and effectively using complexometric titrants, masking agents, metal ion indicators, and buffer solutions. Students learn quantitative analysis relating to water quality, total water hardness, and determining individual calcium and magnesium concentration, complexometric titration tech-niques, designing independent protocols, and making accurate dependent calculations (Yang & Li 2009).
28
Discussion
For certain core contents, it was easy to find published inquiry-based student learning activities, for other core contents none were found. Some topics within the realm of chemistry do not lend themselves well to inquiry-based learning (Criswell 2006). Most of the found learning activities are associated with Kemi 1, which can be attributed to the easier learning material. With an intuitive understanding of a topic, it becomes easier for the students to devise laboratory investigations. The Kemi 1 core content on substance relationships and concentrations is assigned two published inquiry-based student learning activities. 'Substance relationships and concentration' falls under stoichiometry and this learning unit often contains many student exercises on the calculations of the amount of substance and substance mass (Andersson et al. 2012; Borén 2011). Many published student learning exercises on stoichiometry were found during the literature searches in this study that emphasize on these calculations. The exercise by Lanni (2014) encourages students to repeatedly attack the learning obstacles associated with the math of stoichiometry. This exercise on substance relationships was to fill a sealable plastic bag with gas. It is an exercise both stronger and weaker students can complete. While the second student exercise on substance relationships, that challenges students to determine the reaction stoichiometry of the reaction C6H8O7(aq) + 3NaOH(aq) → 3H2O(l) + Na3C6H5O7(aq) by a thermochemical approach (Tatsuoka et al. 2015) is mainly for stronger students. It was also easy to find student exercises for the Kemi 2 core content ‘Qualitative and quantitative methods of chemical analysis’. Thin Layer Chromatography falls under this core content and many student learning exercises using this method have been published. It is a straightforward method for students to learn and master (Pelter et al. 2008). Relatively many inquiry-based student activities for learning chemical bonds were found, though the models used to explain these bonds are not very intuitive. In general core contents with simple theory and laboratory methods were the easiest to find inquiry-based student learning exercises for.
No inquiry-based student learning exercises were assigned to core contents covering advanced theory and/or complicated lab-methods. An example is ‘Models and theories of the structure and classification of matter’. The models mentioned in the core content are particle physics. School
29
chemistry laboratories are not equipped for experiments in particle physics. No exercises were assigned to the theory-heavy Kemi 2 core content. An example is the core content on complex chemical systems ‘Calculations of and reasoning about equilibrium systems in different environments e.g. in oceans, in the human body and in industrial processes’ no inquiry-based student learning exercises were found for this core content. Another example is the core content covering organic reaction mechanisms ‘Reaction mechanisms, including qualitative reasoning about how and why reactions take place, and about the rate of use of energy in different kinds of organic reactions.’ Several published inquiry-based student activities for learning reaction mechanisms were found, but they were all university level. The Kemi 1 core contents precipitation reactions and titration cannot be taught using inquiry-based learning, as they themselves are basics lab-methods. But these lab-methods can be used by students in inquiry-based learning situations, for example, precipitation is used in the purification of soluble solids, and titration is used by students in the acid-base experiment (Hale-Hanes 2015).
At least 11 of the 19 core contents of Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 that are each a specific area of chemistry, can be taught using one or more inquiry-based student learning activities (Table 3 page 13). Inquiry-based learning activities are more time consuming than equivalent cookbook-type learning activities (Kirschner et al. 2006), and it will be hard if not impossible to perform 11 inquiry-based learning activities during a Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 course. A more realistic goal for instructors would be to include one inquiry-based learning activity per learning unit. This study shows that each of the 8 learning units that contain screened core contents can be assigned one or more inquiry-based activities. The author of this study plans to use a maximum of one of the student learning exercises presented in this study per learning unit, when teaching Kemi 1 and Kemi 2, as a complement to the student learning activities described in the literature book systems used for the courses. As mentioned in the introduction, teachers of Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 must present the students with the theory and help students foster their chemistry communication skills and problem-solving skills. This author first and foremost aims to be a chemical theory and language-oriented teacher. Studies have shown that a student’s vocabulary on a subject and knowledge of that subject tend to progress proportionately with each other (Hajer 2014). Students who are to perform a given inquiry-based learning activity must have the prerequisite theoretical and practical knowledge (Kirschner et al. 2006). The number of inquiry-based learning activities this author will give students during a Kemi
30
1 or Kemi 2 course depends on how fast the students obtain the theoretical knowledge. Classes with majority strong students will be able to perform more inquiry-based learning activities and activities at a higher level, than classes with majority weak students. The overall workload of a teacher also determines the amount of inquiry-based laboratory exercises the teacher will be able to include in the Kemi 1 and Kemi 2 courses. This author has been responsible for overseeing Kemi 1 student laboratory exercises during an internship at an upper secondary school. Student instructions and pre-experiment test questions that are already prepared and ready for the instructor to print out and give to the students save the instructor a lot of work. Therefore, information about their availability has been included in the exercise descriptions. All cited articles describing student learning activities are in English, and so are all the mentioned instructor and student printouts.
Only one of the articles (cited in the Results chapter) describing an inquiry-based student learning exercise, reports the student learning outcome by comparing an experimental group to a control group (Sesen & Tarhan 2013). The rest of the studies report student learning outcome without relating to a control group doing an equivalent cookbook-type experiment. Maybe the conclusions on student learning here are based on the respective authors teaching experience. The authors in these cases may have compared the perceived learning outcome from the described inquiry-based student learning activity with the perceived learning outcome from previously used equivalent cook-book type student exercises. Students performing inquiry-based learning exercises are sometimes forced to break away from their passive learning habits (Figueira & Rocha 2014). Less student guidance by instructors means more trial and error learning for the students in the laboratory (Senkbeil 1999). Which can be a frustrating and time-consuming obstacle to overcome both for the students and for the instructors. In the unguided exercises, students are more prone to get "wrong" results. But the process can leave the students more satisfied and interested in laboratory work (Senkbeil 1999). Inquiry-based student laboratory exercises take more time and energy from the instructor and the students than equivalent cookbook-type exercises. But they can provide a greater reward. When the students are motivated to invest a high amount of time and focus to solve a problem/perform a task, their growth, learning, and mastery of concepts are maximized.
31
Many of the inquiry-based student learning exercises included in this study are cookbook-type laboratory exercises that have been altered by leaving out strategically chosen steps of the method from the student laboratory instructions (Kirschner et al. 2006). Future studies could look at the student exercises in the popular book systems for teaching Kemi 1 and Kemi 2. Which of the cookbook-type student exercises described in these books could be changed into inquiry-based student learning exercises? Is this already practiced by teachers teaching Kemi 1 and Kemi 2? If so, how prevalent is the practice? Could there be made a teacher’s manual for converting well suited cookbook-type student laboratory exercises into inquiry-based student laboratory exercises?
32
References
Andersson, Stig, Jörnland, Lennart, Rosén, Birgitta, Rydén, Lars & Sonesson, Artur (2012). Gymnasiekemi 1. Stockholm, Sweden: Liber.
Andersson, Stig, aut (2013). Gymnasiekemi 2. Stockholm: Liber, 2013 (Kina); 6. uppl. Borén, Hans, aut (2012). Kemiboken 2. Stockholm: Liber, 2012 (Egypten); 5., omarb. uppl. Borén, Hans, aut (2011). Kemiboken 1. Stockholm: Liber, 2011 (Egypten); 4. uppl.
Borén, Hans, aut (2005). Kemiboken med laborationer och arbetsövningar. Stockholm: Liber, 2005 (Slovenien); 3. uppl.
Bowles, Robby D., Saroka, James M., Archer, Shivaun D. & Bonassar, Lawrence J. (2012). Novel Model-Based Inquiry of Ionic Bonding in Alginate Hydrogels Used in Tissue Engineering for High School Students. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 89 nr. 10 s. 1308-1311.
Cloonan, Carrie A., Andrew, Julie A., Nichol, Carolyn A. & Hutchinson, John S. (2011). A Simple System for Observing Dynamic Phase Equilibrium via an Inquiry-Based Laboratory or Demonstration. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 88 nr. 7 s. 975-978.
Comenius, Johann A. & Kroksmark, Tomas o. (1999). Didactica Magna. Stora
undervisningsläran Lund Studentlitteratur 1999 Lund Studentlitteratur; Ny utg.]. Cowan, Nelson (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of
mental storage capacity. [Digital version]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 24 nr. 1 s. 87-114. Tillgänglig: Cambridge Core. [2018/01/30]
Criswell, Brett (2006). A Diaper a Day and What's Going on with Gaviscon?: Two Lab
Activities Focusing on Chemical Bonding Concepts. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 83 nr. 4 s. 574.
DeMeo, Stephen (1997). Does Copper Metal React with Acetic Acid? [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 74 nr. 7 s. 844.
Dunlap, Norma & Martin, Leah J. (2012). Discovery-Based Labs for Organic Chemistry:
Overview and Effectiveness. Advances in Teaching Organic Chemistry. American Chemical Society. (s. 1-11)
33
Figueira, Angela C. M. & Rocha, Joao B. T. (2014). A proposal for teaching undergraduate chemistry students carbohydrate biochemistry by problem-based learning activities. [Digital version]. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, vol. 42 nr. 1 s. 81-87.
Gustafsson, Jan-Eric, Allodi Westling, Mara, Åkerman, Alin, Britta, Eriksson, Charli, Eriksson, Lilly, Fischbein, Siv et al (2010). School, Learning and Mental Health : A systematic review. Stockholm: Kungl. Vetenskapsakademien. Tillgänglig: DiVA.
Hajer. M, Meestringa. T (2014). Språkinriktad undervisning. Stockholm: Hallgren & Fallgren. Hale-Hanes, Cara (2015). Promoting Student Development of Models and Scientific Inquiry
Skills in Acid-Base Chemistry: An Important Skill Development in Preparation for AP Chemistry. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 92 nr. 8 s. 1320-1324. Henriksson, Anders (2011). Syntes: Kemi Malmö: Gleerup, 2011 (Slovenien); 2., rev.] uppl. Herron, Marshall D. (1971). The Nature of Scientific Enquiry. [Digital version]. The School
Review, vol. 79 nr. 2 s. 171-212.
Hugo, Martin (2011). Från motstånd till framgång: att motivera när ingen motivation finns Stockholm: Liber, 2011 (Egypten); 1. uppl.
Kimbrough, Doris R., Magoun, Mary A. & Langfur, Meg (1997). A Laboratory Experiment Investigating Different Aspects of Catalase Activity in an Inquiry-Based Approach. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 74 nr. 2 s. 210.
Kirschner, Paul A., Sweller, John & Clark, Richard E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. [Digital version]. Educational Psychologist, vol. 41 nr. 2 s. 75-86.
Koga, Nobuyoshi, Kimura, Tomoyasu & Kana (2011). Laboratory Inquiry for Determining the Chemical Composition of a Component in a Daily Use Detergent: Sodium Sesquicarbonate. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 88 nr. 9 s. 1309-1313.
Lanni, Laura M. (2014). Filling a Plastic Bag with Carbon Dioxide: A Student-Designed Guided-Inquiry Lab for Advanced Placement and College Chemistry Courses. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 91 nr. 9 s. 1390-1392.
Lindberg, Yngve, Pilström, Helen & Wahlström, Ebba (1997). Kemi för gymnasieskolan Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1997 ; (Falköping: Gummesson); 1. uppl.
Lindberg, Yngve, Pilström, Helen, Wahlström, Ebba & Aastrup, Lena o. (1999). Kemi för gymnasieskolan Stockholm Natur och kultur 1999 Eskilstuna Tuna tr; 1. uppl.
34
Mayer, Richard E. (2004). Should There Be a Three-Strikes Rule against Pure Discovery Learning? [Digital version]. American Psychologist, vol. 59 nr. 1 s. 14-19.
Mistry, Nimesh, Fitzpatrick, Christopher & Gorman, Stephen (2016). Design Your Own Workup: A Guided-Inquiry Experiment for Introductory Organic Laboratory Courses. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 93 nr. 6 s. 1091-1095.
Parker, Joel D., Ziemba, Robert E., Cahan, Sara H. & Rissing, Steven W. (2004). A hypothesis-driven, molecular phylogenetics exercise for college biology students. [Digital version]. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, vol. 32 nr. 2 s. 108-114.
Pelter, Libbie S. W., Amico, Andrea, Gordon, Natalie, Martin, Chylah, Sandifer, Dessalyn & Pelter, Michael W. (2008). Analysis of Peppermint Leaf and Spearmint Leaf Extracts by Thin-Layer Chromatography. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 85 nr. 1 s. 133.
Pilström, Helen, aut (2007). Modell och verklighet Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 2007 (Värnamo: Fälth & Hässler); 2. uppl.
Prilliman, Stephen G. (2012). An Inquiry-Based Density Laboratory for Teaching Experimental Error. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 89 nr. 10 s. 1305-1307. Ringnes, Vivi & Hannisdal, Merete (2006). Kjemi fagdidaktikk: kjemi i skolen Kristiansand:
Høyskoleforlaget, 2006; 2. utg.
Savery, John R. (2006). Overview of Problem-Based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions. [Digital version]. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, vol. 1 nr. 1 s. 9-20. Schwab, Joseph J. & Brandwein, Paul F. (1962). The teaching of science as inquiry. Ingår i
Joseph J. Schwab, Paul F. Br & Wein (red.), The teaching of science}Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press}. (s. 3-103)
Senkbeil, Edward G. (1999). Inquiry-Based Approach to a Carbohydrate Analysis Experiment. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 76 nr. 1 s. 80.
Sesen, Burcin A. & Tarhan, Leman (2013). Inquiry-Based Laboratory Activities in
Electrochemistry: High School Students' Achievements and Attitudes. [Digital version]. Research in Science Education, vol. 43 nr. 1 s. 413-435.
Skolverket (2017). Ämne - Kemi (Gymnasieskolan). Tillgänglig:
https://www.skolverket.se/laroplaner-amnen-och-kurser/gymnasieutbildning/gymnasieskola/kem [201712/18]
Tatsuoka, Tomoyuki, Shigedomi, Kana & Koga, Nobuyoshi (2015). Using a Laboratory Inquiry with High School Students To Determine the Reaction Stoichiometry of Neutralization by a
35
Thermochemical Approach. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 92 nr. 9 s. 1526-1530.
The University of Manchester (2010). What is Enquiry-Based Learning (EBL)? Tillgänglig: http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/ebl/ [201712/13]
Wada, Takeshi & Koga, Nobuyoshi (2013). Chemical Composition of Sodium Percarbonate: An Inquiry-Based Laboratory Exercise. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 90 nr. 8 s. 1048-1052.
Yang, Shui-Ping & Li, Chung-Chia (2009). Using Student-Developed, Inquiry-Based Experiments Investigate the Contributions of Ca and Mg to Water Hardness. [Digital version]. Journal of Chemical Education, vol. 86 nr. 4 s. 506.
