the science teachers bulletinfiles.ctctcdn.com/b3e457cc001/83ca086a-0b10-41ed-a9f0-0... · 2015. 8....
TRANSCRIPT
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Fall 2013 1
The Science Teachers Bulletin
Volume 77, Number 2 Spring 2014
PROMOTING EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE EDUCATION
STANYS EXECUTIVE BOARD 2014-2015
President
Jason Horowitz Nassau STANYS Section
President Elect Gene Gordon
Central Western STANYS Section [email protected]
Vice President Glen Cochrane
Suffolk STANYS Section [email protected]
Secretary
Donna Banek Nassau STANYS Section
Past-President Frances Scelsi Hess, Ed.D.
Catskill STANYS Section [email protected]
ii STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
The Science Teachers Bulletin
Volume 77, Number 2 Spring 2014
Official Publication of the
Science Teachers Association of New York State, Inc.
PO Box 2121 Liverpool, NY 13089
(516) 783-5432 www.stanys.org
A State Chapter of the National Science Teachers Association and a member of the New York State Council of Education Associations
Editor: Michael J. Hanophy, Ph.D. St. Joseph’s College 245 Clinton Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11205 [email protected]
Assistant Editors: Aaron D. Isabelle, Ph.D. [email protected] Helen Pashley, Ph.D. [email protected] Vivian Pokrzyk, Ph.D. [email protected]
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 iii
The Science Teachers Bulletin
2014 STANYS
Published twice a year (Fall and Spring)
All rights reserved.
Permission to duplicate any part of this journal may be requested in writing from the editor.
Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and may not reflect STANYS policy.
Guidelines for submission of manuscripts are
found on the last page.
Don’t forget to submit YOUR article for the next issue of
The Science Teachers Bulletin
Deadline for the FALL issue is October 15, 2014
See guidelines for submission on Page 32
iv STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
Table of Contents
Letter to the Editor Josephine Salvador, Ed.D. Director, NYS Master Teacher Program Pages 1-2 Protein Crystallography Dan Williams Pages 3-6 The Wonder of Lightsticks in Regents Chemistry Candace Schneggenburger Pages 7-23 The Role of Metaphorical Thinking
and Models in the STEM Classroom John Styles Pages 24-31
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 1
Letter to the Editor
*Editor’s Note: In the Fall 2013 edition of the Bulletin, Dr. Bruce Tulloch’s article, “Master
Teachers Need a Master Plan,” discussed the many benefits of New York State’s
Master Teacher Program. In this issue, Dr. Josephine Salvador, Director of the
program, clarifies some aspects of the application process.
7 March 2014
Dr. Hanophy,
I am writing in response to the article, Master Teachers Need a Master Plan,
in the Fall 2013 issue of Science Teachers Bulletin. It’s wonderful to see
this excellent new opportunity for STEM teachers highlighted by STANYS
but I need to make a few corrections to the information about the
application process.
Dr. Tulloch proposes that the application would do well to include
“recommendations of academic supervisors, peers, and students as well as a
thorough review of credentials and prior professional activities” and indeed,
the application includes such documentation.
The application components are quite detailed. In addition to a resume,
personal statement, college transcripts and a PRAXIS II exam, the
application requires the most recent teacher observation report and two
letters of recommendation—one from the principal or building
administrator and one from a colleague. Candidates also have the option of
including a recommendation from a current or prior student. The complete
application portfolio allows for the candidate to present the fullest portrait
2 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
of their professional work. The complete application information is
accessible via the New York State Master Teacher Program webpage at
http://www.suny.edu/masterteacher/
Governor Cuomo created the NYS Master Teacher Program to “reward
those teachers who work harder to make the difference and whose students
perform better as a result.” Master Teachers possess a growth mindset and
are committed to deepening the breadth and depth of their content area,
pedagogical craft and knowledge of student communities. A number of
NYS Master Teachers are active members of STANYS and I am very glad
for this professional connection.
The students in NYS deserve the best STEM teachers in their classrooms
and, collaborating as a network, we can be sure that can happen.
Sincerely,
Josephine Salvador, Ed.D. Director, New York State Master Teacher Program The State University of New York 33 W. 42nd Street - New York, New York 10036 Be a part of Generation SUNY: Facebook - Twitter - YouTube
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 3
Protein Crystallography
Dan Williams
Shelter Island High School
Shelter Island, NY
Protein crystallography is a powerful tool in biology today, helping scientists to know the
shapes of molecules and interpret their function. This tool is not reserved for hard core
scientists with access to synchrotron technology; this tool can be used in high schools,
empowering students with knowledge and insight into the “shape equals function” world of
proteins. Simple programs like WinCoot open up tremendous possibilities for all of our
labs.
Protein crystallography has typically been covered in the classroom either through a J-mol
exploration of a structure or a “Protein Challenge” modeling exercise. While these are
excellent teaching tools, neither provides inquiry, real world experience, or research in
crystallography. However, open ended inquiry and research in protein crystallography is
not only possible in the high school classroom; with the use of this technology it is free and
easily accessible. Maybe even more valuable, the use of this technology in the classroom
can illustrate residue shapes, active site pockets, and steric hindrance within polypeptides
making the chemistry of proteins real for the students.
While students at my school on Shelter Island are attempting to crystallize a protein in our
lab and resolve its structure at the synchrotron (NSLS at Brookhaven National Lab through
the InSync Program) not every lab program will be able to do this. However, every lab that
has a computer with internet access will be able to perform original research or complete
inquiry based lessons on open access crystallographic data. The software required is called
4 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
WinCoot (http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~lohkamp/coot/wincoot.html) is free and relatively
easy to learn, and crystallographic data comes from servers such as the “Electron Density
Server” at Uppsala University, Sweden (Kleywegt et al. 2004).
Students can download data directly
into WinCoot for analysis. Much of the
published data in the protein data bank
is incomplete; scientists often are only
interested in a particular active site or
ligand binding site, so less attention is
paid to other regions of the polypeptide.
Huge uncharted regions of electron
density data are available that have not
been examined. Therefore, students
can explore looking for novel ligand
binding sites, new conformations,
mutations, or other areas of interest.
WinCoot is also a great tool to teach the
use of electron density data; students
will see the characteristic three dimensional shape of residues like tyrosine and will easily
understand how its size and shape prohibits certain conformations (Figure 1). You can
actually see covalent bonding in WinCoot, find a cysteine–cysteine interaction, and students
will observe the electron density cloud tightened within the disulfide bond as the electrons
are being shared between the sulfurs. We teach conformation and the sharing of electrons
between atoms but often students do not grasp these concepts because they cannot
visualize the electrons that are in clouds around each atom. With WinCoot students do see
how the electrons clouds look and behave (Figure 2).
I have been exploring using WinCoot as a teaching tool in a comprehensive molecular story.
Students read the journal article “Design of a novel globular protein fold with atomic-level
accuracy” (Kuhlman et al. 2003) and discuss why designing novel proteins is important.
Figure 1. The structural formula of tyrosine in green and the electron density cloud of the amino acid.
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 5
Students then use an amino acid map of the Top7 protein to predict its secondary structure.
They also use Toobers® (foam-covered wire that will hold its shape once folded) to build
models based on their predictions (Martz 2005). Students then examine the actual electron
density cloud of Top 7, resolving their secondary structure with the data. Finally, students
check their work by importing the known secondary structure of Top7. In this exercise,
students read primary literature, apply knowledge of chemistry to make predictions,
compare their predictions to actual data, and check their work on accepted scientific values,
a very powerful exercise.
Protein crystallography is a
powerful tool in biology
today. It is not reserved for
hard core scientists; it is very
accessible for high schools
students. Programs like
WinCoot empower students
and teachers with the ability
to gain knowledge and insight
into the “shape equals
function” world of proteins.
There are tremendous
possibilities available for our
classrooms and research
programs.
To learn more about programs like this, feel free to contact me or the Brookhaven National
Laboratory Office of Educational Programs (http://www.bnl.gov/education/).
Figure 2. The pinched-off area in the blue electron cloud represents the middle of the cysteine–cysteine disulfide bond where electrons are being shared between two sulfur atoms.
6 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
References
Kleywegt GJ, Harris MR, Zou JY, Taylor TC, Wählby A, Jones TA. 2004. The Uppsala Electron-
Density Server. Acta Cryst. D60: 2240-2249. The website for the Electron Density
Server at Uppsala University can be accessed at http://eds.bmc.uu.se/eds/.
Kuhlman B, Dantas G, Ireton GC, Varani G, Stoddard BL, Baker D. 2003. Design of a novel
globular protein fold with atomic-level accuracy. Science 302(5649), 1364-1368.
Martz E. 2005. Toobers® in science education. http://www.umass.edu/molvis/toobers/
About the Author: Dan Williams is a science teacher at Shelter Island High School, Shelter Island, NY. He has been involved for several years with the educational programs at Brookhaven National Laboratory including InSynC, a program designed to train both teachers and students and introduce synchrotron science into the high school curriculum.
Shelter Island High School 33 North Ferry Road Shelter Island, NY 11964 (631) 749-0302 [email protected]
Make plans to attend the
119th
Annual STANYS Conference
November 1-4, 2014 Rochester, NY
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 7
The Wonder of Lightsticks in Regents
Chemistry
Candace Schneggenburger
Palmyra-Macedon High School
Palmyra, NY
Each year during May, the barrage of
distractions – AP exams, last minute
field trips, fire drills, the prom, and
nice weather – seem to remove any
remaining vestige of motivation my
students have for the final push of the
school year. I wanted to try
something different, but what?
What’s cool, chemistry-related, and
not hazardous? My answer to this
question came from my “go to”
resource for chemistry-related ideas –
the Journal of Chemical Education
published by the American Chemical Society. As I skimmed old issues of the journal, I re-
discovered the article, “The Chemistry of Lightsticks: Demonstrations to Illustrate Chemical
Processes” (Kuntzleman et al. 2012). LIGHTSTICKS! THIS IS IT! They’re cool (not
chemically, but they are definitely “cool” in student parlance). They are definitely
Figure 1. Image of Lightstick during Reaction Rates and Reaction Coordinate Lab
8 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
chemistry-related, they weren’t overly hazardous, and I had most of the needed supplies on
hand.
Lightsticks can be used to demonstrate so many chemical concepts that I decided to make
them the theme for our Regents Chemistry exam review over the course of several weeks.
That meant I needed about 400 4” lightsticks and, thanks to the STANYS Foundation Award,
I was able to purchase them. An added bonus was that my supplier, GlowMania
(http://www.glowmania.com/), gives its customers 50 lightstick bracelets for every $50 of
product purchased so I had some extra lightsticks to use as incentives for my students!
I used the lightsticks each Friday in May to review the following chemistry topics: Reaction
Rates and Reaction Coordinates (Figure 1 & 2, Appendix 1), Stoichiometry (Appendix 2),
Redox (Appendix 3), and Acids and Bases (Appenidx 4). For each of the four topics,
students completed a short (25-30 minute) lab activity, created posters to encapsulate
their learning about the topic (Figure 3), did gallery walks to view other students’ posters
and took pictures of them with their phones, and then completed review questions
(previous Regents exam questions) about the topic. I will be sharing the details of the lab
activities and some student posters at the annual STANYS convention in Rochester this
November.
Each of my students got to keep a
bracelet after he or she finished with
it in the first review lab on Reaction
Rates and Reaction Coordinates. My
students were excited both by the
concept of using lightsticks to review
chemistry and by the fact that they got
to keep a bracelet. I will also put a
lightstick bracelet on each of their
desks as they sit down to take the
Regents exam in June – partly because
they’ll think it’s neat and partly
Figure 2. Data from Reaction Rates & Reaction Coordinate lab showing the lightstick reaction to be exothermic.
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 9
because I am hoping it will trigger their memories of what we reviewed when we used the
lightsticks.
At the writing of this article, I still have one
more Friday of lightstick reviews to do,
however I am declaring the project a
success – at least as it relates to engaging
my students. I have not heard one word
about AP exams, the prom, or the weather.
What I have heard is – “Mrs. S, you always
have the best labs! At my other school we
never did cool things!” and “When’s our
next lightstick lab?” and “Are we using the
lightsticks again today?” The students
enjoyed getting to take home the lightstick
bracelets, either wearing them on their wrists or belt loops. They were intrigued by the
actual design of the lightsticks: dye and phthalate ester in the glass vial surrounded by
hydrogen peroxide in the outer plastic casing. They realized that the sound you hear when
you activate a lightstick is the breaking of the glass vial. An unplanned connection between
chemistry and lightsticks has also arisen in our organic chemistry unit as the students have
noticed that one of the reactants in the lightstick is an “ester with some benzene rings”.
I am hopeful that this experience will translate to improved test scores on June 24, but
more importantly, I am hopeful that this experience will enhance my students’ recognition
and appreciation of the wonders of chemistry in their daily lives.
References
Kuntzleman TS, Rohrer K, Schultz E. 2012. The chemistry of lightsticks: demonstrations to
illustrate chemical processes. Journal of Chemical Education 89(7): 910-916.
Figure 3. Students creating their Chemical Reactions poster.
10 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
Appendix 1. Using lightsticks to review Reaction Coordinates and Reaction Rates
Name: Lab Partners:
Friday Lightstick Lab & Review #1
Introduction
Over the next four Fridays, we will be using lightsticks to help us review chemistry topics. Today’s
topic is Reaction Coordinates and Reaction Rates – the unit we just finished in class. We will conduct
a lab experiment using lightsticks and then create a poster size review sheet for the topic. During a
gallery walk of everyone’s posters, you will take pictures of everyone’s poster using your cell phone.
We will use the posters to complete Regents exam review questions about reaction rates and reaction
coordinates.
Everyone loves lightsticks! I’m entirely sure that’s because lightsticks are ALL ABOUT CHEMISTRY!!!
Lightsticks consist of an outer plastic casing that contains a phenyl oxalate ester (a carbon containing
compound – we’ll learn about this in a few short weeks! I can’t wait!) and sodium salicylate. The
sodium salicylate catalyzes the reaction and is related to the “oil of wintergreen” that we used in the
Chemical Bonds Lab and the Evaporation & IMF lab. That plastic casing has a small glass tube inside
that contains hydrogen peroxide. When the lightstick is bent, the glass vial breaks. This releases the
hydrogen peroxide allowing the reaction to occur. The reaction can’t happen until the hydrogen
peroxide is released because, according to collision theory, substances must have effective collisions
in order to react. A collision is only effective if the particles have the correct orientation and
speed/energy when they collide. There are several factors which will influence how effective
collisions are. They are: concentration, temperature, addition of a catalyst, and surface area. In
general, an increase in either the temperature or the concentration of the reactants will increase
number of effective collisions and speed up a chemical reaction. Increasing surface area (making the
particles smaller) will increase the rate as well.
Materials
Lightsticks netbook sodium salicylate scissors test tubes test tube racks 3 beakers ice temperature probe
Procedure, Part I – Effect of Temperature on Reaction Rate
1. Obtain and wear goggles.
2. Obtain 3 beakers. Fill them 2/3 full – one with room-temperature tap water, one with ice water,
one with hot water from Mrs. S’s sink.
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 11
3. Use the temperature probe to determine the temperature of the water in each beaker. Record
the information in the Data Table.
4. Simultaneously snap 3 lightsticks.
5. Insert one lightstick into each beaker. Watch what happens for three minutes and record your
observations in the Data Table.
6. After three minutes remove all three lightsticks from the beakers and allow them to come to
room temperature for three minutes. Record your observations in the Data Table.
7. You may keep your lightstick bracelet! See Mrs. S for the bracelet closures.
Data Table
Hot Water
Room Temperature Water
Ice Water
Temperature
Observations of Lightsticks after two
minutes in beaker
Observations of Lightsticks two minutes after
removing them from the beaker
Procedure, Part II – Exo or Endo?
8. On the Experiment tab, select Data Collection. Set the Mode to Time Based and the Length to 60
seconds. Leave the Sampling Rate at 2 samples/second. Click Done.
9. Obtain and activate a 4” lightstick. Record the color of your light stick
here.___________________
10. Use scissors to cut the top off the lightstick.
11. Transfer the contents of the lightstick into a test.
12. Insert the temperature probe into the test tube.
12 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
13. Mass out 0.5 g of sodium salicylate.
14. Click the “collect” button. After 10 seconds, add the sodium salicylate to the test tube and use
the temperature probe to mix it into solution.
15. Record the starting temperature and the highest temperature reached in the Data Table.
16. Complete the Data Table by finding groups with other color lightsticks and recording their data.
Data Table
Lightstick Color Initial Temperature Highest Temperature Change in Temperature
pink/red
yellow
green
purple/blue
orange
Analysis
1. Which temperature of water made the lightsticks glow the most brightly in Part I? In terms of
collision theory, explain why this makes sense.
2. Is the lightstick reaction exothermic or endothermic? How do you know?
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 13
3. Sketch a potential energy diagram to show the changes in potential energy that occurring in a
lightstick.
4. Given the following information about the heat content of the reactants and products AND the
balanced equation also shown below, calculate the heat of reaction (H) for a lightstick.
Remember that H = Hproducts – Hreactants.
You must take the balanced equation into account. For example, according to the equation 2 moles of CO2 are produced in the lightstick reaction, but the table only tells
you the heat per ONE mole.
Compound Heat Content
(kJ/mole)
C14H4O4Cl6 OR C26H24O8Cl6 -540
H2O2 -188
C6H3OCl3 OR C12H13O3Cl3 -394
CO2 -165
The overall reaction in a lightstick is usually one of the two following reactions. You may choose either one for your calculations. They both give the same result.
C14H4O4Cl6 + H2O2 2C6H3OCl3 + 2CO2
OR
C22H24O8Cl6 + H2O2 2C12H13O3Cl3 + 2CO2
14 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
Conclusions
1. Create a review poster that summarizes all of your “Kinetics & Equilibrium” Chemquips.
2. Use your phone to take pictures of every group’s review poster.
3. Complete the attached Kinetics & Equilibrium questions.
4. In doing this lab I learned:
a.
b.
c.
Printed Name Date
Signature
Part I adapted from J. of Chem. Educ. editorial staff, The Effects of Temperature on Lightsticks, J.
Chem. Educ., 1999, 76 (1), p 40A]
Part II adapted from Kuntzleman, Rohrer, and Schultz, The Chemistry of Lightsticks:
Demonstrations To Illustrate Chemical Processes, J. Chem. Educ., 2012, 89, p 910-916
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 15
Appendix 2. Using lightsticks to review Stoichiometry and Moles
Name: Lab Partners:
Friday Lightstick Lab & Review #2
Introduction
Today’s lightstick review topic is Stoichiometry & Moles– your “totes fave” topic. We will conduct a
lab experiment using lightsticks and then create a poster size review sheet for the topic. During a
gallery walk of everyone’s posters, you will take pictures of everyone’s poster using your cell phone.
We will use the posters to complete Regents exam review questions about stoichiometry and moles.
The overall reaction in a lightstick is usually one of the two following reactions. This most common
reaction is the second one. We will assume the second reaction is occurring in our lightsticks and will
use the equation to help us determine how many grams of C22H24O8Cl6 were originally in the
lightstick.
C14H4O4Cl6 + H2O2 2C6H3OCl3 + 2CO2
OR
C22H24O8Cl6 + H2O2 2C12H13O3Cl3 + 2CO2
Materials
lightstick netbook sodium salicylate scissors gas pressure sensor Erlenmeyer flask thermometer
Procedure
1. Obtain and wear goggles.
2. Using a regular thermometer, record the current room temperature in the Data Table.
3. COMPLETELY fill the Erlenmeyer flask to the tippy-top with tap water. Transfer the water to a
graduated cylinder to determine the volume of the Erlenmeyer flask. Be CAREFUL. The flask
holds at least 125 mL of volume and the graduated cylinder only holds 100 mL. You’ll need to fill
the graduated cylinder to the 100 mL mark, empty it, then add the rest of the contents of the
Erlenmeyer flask to the graduated cylinder. Record the volume in the Data Table.
16 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
4. Insert the stir bar into an Erlenmeyer flask, put a special, white rubber cork into the opening of
the Erlenmeyer flask and set the flask on a stir plate.
5. Set up the netbook. Open LoggerPro and attach the gas pressure sensor. On the Experiment tab, select Data Collection. Set the Mode to Time Based and the Length to 10 minutes. Change the Sampling Rate to 2 samples/minute. Click Done. Be sure to get the pressure unit set to “kPa”.
6. Obtain and activate a 4” lightstick. Record the color of your light stick
here.___________________
7. Use scissors to cut the top off the lightstick and transfer the contents into the Erlenmeyer flask.
8. Begin data collection by clicking on the “collect” button. Record the initial pressure in the Data
Table.
9. Mass out 1.00 g of sodium salicylate and quickly add it to the flask. Remember to re-cork the
flask so the system is closed.
10. Once data collection has stopped, record the highest pressure in the Data Table.
Data Table
Flask Volume in
mL
Flask Volume in L
Room Temperature
in oC
Room Temperature
in K
Initial Pressure
Highest Pressure
Analysis
1. What is the change in pressure over the course of data collection?
2. We’d like to use the “1mole of gas = 22.4L” conversion factor, but that is only true at standard temperature and pressure (STP). What are the values for standard temperature and standard pressure? Are we at those temperatures and pressures inside the Erlenmeyer flask?
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 17
3. We can’t use the “1 mole of gas = 22.4L” conversion factor because that is only true at standard temperature and pressure (STP) and we are NOT at STP. Oh, darn, guess we can’t do the lab.
WRONG!!!! Mathematical relationships to the rescue!!!!
We can use the ideal gas law to determine how many moles of gas we have. The ideal gas law is:
PV = nRT where P = pressure in kPa, V = volume in L, T = temperature in K, and R
= the universal gas constant (8.31 L.kPa/K.mole) Solve for the number of moles of CO2 generated using the answer to question 1 for the
pressure.
4. Use stoichiometry to determine the number of grams of C22H24O8Cl6 that were originally in the lightstick.
18 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
5. Complete the chart below.
Mass of C22H24O8Cl6 in YOUR
lightstick
Mass of C22H24O8Cl6 in a second
group’s lightstick
Mass of C22H24O8Cl6 in a third
group’s lightstick
Average Mass of C22H24O8Cl6 in a
lightstick
Conclusions
1. Create a review poster that summarizes all of your “Chemical Rxns” Chemquips.
2. Use your phone to take pictures of every group’s review poster.
3. Complete the attached Moles & Stoichiometry questions.
4. In doing this lab I learned:
a.
b.
c.
Printed Name Date
Signature
Adapted from Kuntzleman, Rohrer, and Schultz, The Chemistry of Lightsticks: Demonstrations To
Illustrate Chemical Processes, J. Chem. Educ., 2012, 89, p 910-916
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 19
Appendix 3. Using lightsticks to review Redox Rreaction
Name: Lab Partners:
Friday Lightstick Lab & Review #3
Introduction
In this installment of Lightstick Review, we will investigate Redox Reactions. During the lightstick
reaction, the phenyl oxalate ester (a carbon containing compound) is broken apart and carbon dioxide
is released. The carbon from the ester is oxidized to form the carbon dioxide and oxygen is produced
in the reduction of oxygen in H2O2 to O2.
In this lab we will confirm the creation of O2 in the lightstick by using an oxygen gas probe during the
reaction.
Materials
netbook 50 mL beaker 125 mL Erlenmeyer flask scissors netbook O2 gas probe LabQuest mini
Procedure
1. Obtain and wear goggles.
2. Set up the LabQuest mini, the O2 probe, and the netbook. Open LoggerPro. Under the
Experiment tab, select Data Collection. Set the Mode to Time Based. Set the Length of Time to 5
MINUTES and the sampling rate to 2 samples/second. Click Done.
3. Obtain and activate a 4” lightstick. Record the color of your light stick
here.___________________
4. Use scissors to cut the top off the lightstick and transfer the contents into the Erlenmeyer flask.
5. Begin data collection by clicking on the “collect” button. Record the initial and final O2
concentrations in the Data Table.
6. Find one other group that used the same color lightstick as you did. Record their O2
concentrations in the Data Table.
20 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
Data Table
Our Data Another Group’s Data
Initial O2
Concentration
Average Initial O2
Concentration
Final O2
Concentration
Average Final O2
Concentration
Average Change in O2 Concentration
Conclusions
1. Create a review poster that summarizes all of your “Redox” Chemquips.
2. Use your phone to take pictures of every group’s review poster.
3. Complete the attached Redox questions.
4. In doing this lab I learned:
a.
b.
c.
Printed Name Date
Signature
Adapted from Kuntzleman, Rohrer, and Schultz, The Chemistry of Lightsticks: Demonstrations To
Illustrate Chemical Processes, J. Chem. Educ., 2012, 89, p 910-916
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 21
Appendix 4. Using lightsticks to review Acids, Bases, and Neutralization
Name: Lab Partners:
Friday Lightstick Lab & Review #4
Introduction
In this last Lightstick Review lab we will review Acids, Bases, and Neutralization. You will experiment
with various basic salts (i.e. sodium carbonate, sodium hydrogen carbonate, sodium nitrite, sodium
phosphate, sodium acetate) to see which one increases light emission to the greatest extent.
The reaction that occurs in a lightstick is catalyzed by the addition of weak base and inhibited by the
addition of a weak acid. The relevant chemistry for this part is contained in equations 1 and 2:
(1) HC7H5O3 + OH- C7H5O3- + H2O
(OOOH!!! LOOK: An acid plus a base makes salt & water!)
(2) C7H5O3- + H3O+ HC7H5O3 + H2O
Materials
netbook spectrophotometer laser cable lightsticks Na2CO3 NaHCO3 NaNO2 K3PO4
NaC2H3O2 scissors test tube ring stand
clamp
Procedure
1. Turn on the computer and start LoggerPro.
2. Attach the Spectrovis spectrophotometer DIRECTLY to the computer! No need for the LabQuest
Mini. Insert the fiber optic cable into the opening on the spectrophotometer. Be sure to line up
the triangles!
3. Under the Experiment tab, scroll down to Calibrate and then over to the word
“Spectrophotometer”. Left click on the word “Spectrophotometer” a dialog box will pop up.
Click to check the box before the words “Disable Calibration (Use raw values) then click OK.
4. Also under the Experiment tab, select Data Collection and change the Collection Mode to Time
Based. Then click Done.
5. Click on the icon in the tool bar that looks like a little rainbow ( ). Change the Collection
Mode to Absorbance vs. Wavelength. Click Done
22 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
6. Activate a glowstick. Cut it open and pour the contents into a test tube.
7. Clamp the test tube into the holder.
8. Position the fiber optic so that the opening near the yellow end of the cable is in contact with the
glass tube. Click “Collect”. When data collection stops, go the Experiment tab and select “Store
Latest Run”.
9. Choose one of the four following substances to add to the lightstick mixture. Indicate
your choice by circling the formula of the substance.
Na2CO3 NaHCO3 NaNO2 K3PO4 NaC2H3O2
10. Measure out 0.5 g of the substance and add it to the test tube.
11. Wait about 15-20 seconds and then hold the fiber optic cable directly up against the glass
of the test tube (like you did in Step 8). Click “Collect”.
12. Save the graph to Mrs. S’s FreeAgent Hard Drive in the 1Lightsticks Review Lab4 folder. Save it
as each of your first names followed by your class period.
Conclusions
1. Create a review poster that summarizes all of your “Acids & Bases” Chemquips.
2. Use your phone to take pictures of every group’s review poster.
3. Complete the attached Acid/Base questions.
4. Compare your graph to another group’s graph to see which (if either) substance had a greater
effect on light intensity. Write a sentence that compares the two graphs.
5. In doing this lab I learned:
a.
b.
c.
Printed Name Date
Signature
Adapted from Kuntzleman, Rohrer, and Schultz, The Chemistry of Lightsticks: Demonstrations To
Illustrate Chemical Processes, J. Chem. Educ., 2012, 89, p 910-916
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 23
About the Author: Candace Schneggenburger is the District Lead Science Teacher for Palmyra-Macedon High School. She teaches Regents Chemistry to about 80 students each year. She was the recipient of a STANYS Foundation Award (http://www.stanys.org/about/awards/9-about-stanys/stanys-award-recipients/199-foundation-award.html) which helped to fund her work with lightsticks.
Palmyra-Macedon High School 151 Hyde Parkway Palmyra, NY 14522 (315)597-3420 [email protected]
Calling all authors! Contribute to
The Bulletin editors are looking for articles on science content,
pedagogy, lab exercises, science travel, and book reviews.
The deadline for the Fall 2014 Issue has been extended to
October 15, 2014.
(See submission guidelines on the back page)
24 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
The Role of Metaphorical Thinking and
Models in the STEM Classroom
John Styles
Schoharie Jr-Sr High School
Schoharie, NY
I.
When we hear the word metaphor, no doubt we are taken back to junior high English class.
I can recall being assigned various poems and other works of literature and being asked to
identify the metaphors employed by the authors. If your experience is anything like mine,
then you probably learned that a metaphor is a literary device used to make implicit
comparisons between two objects –that is, comparisons that do not use the words like or as.
Again, if your junior high English experience was like mine, then metaphors were always
contrasted with similes, another literary device for making comparisons, though this time
the comparison was explicit –that is, they make use of the words like or as. This typical
junior high English lesson has a long history that goes back at least as far as Aristotle who
wrote about metaphor in both the Rhetoric and the Poetics. The picture of metaphor that
emerges from those works is one of an elliptical simile. As such, a literal description can
always be substituted for a metaphorical expression without any loss of meaning. This had
the effect of denying any special cognitive content to a metaphor, thereby reducing it to
mere rhetorical flourish.
This attitude toward metaphor prevails into the modern era and is readily found among
17th century Enlightenment thinkers. During this period, when science was in ascendancy
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 25
and a scientific world view had come
to dominate the European continent,
the writings of influential thinkers
such as Thomas Hobbes and John
Locke left no room for the use of
metaphor in the still nascent
sciences. For instance, in the
following passage from Essay
Concerning Human Understanding,
Locke condemns all uses of
figurative language in matters pertaining to securing knowledge and establishing truth
(Johnson 1981, p 13):
But yet if we would speak of things as they are, we must allow that all the art of
rhetoric, besides order and clearness; all the artificial and figurative application
of words eloquence hath invented, are for nothing else but to insinuate wrong
ideas, move the passions, and thereby mislead the judgment; and so indeed are
perfect cheats: and therefore, however laudable or allowable oratory may render
them in harangues and popular addresses, they are certainly, in all discourses
that pretend to inform or instruct, wholly to be avoided; and where truth and
knowledge are concerned, cannot but be thought a great fault, either of the
language or the person that makes use of them.
It is clear from this passage that Locke acknowledges a very limited role for figurative
language generally and for metaphor in particular. In rhetorical addresses, for example, it
may serve as ornamentation of sorts to dress up a speech by using words in a fanciful
manner, but beyond that has no substantive function. If our interest is in gaining or
conveying knowledge and acquiring or establishing truth, as it would be in scientific
endeavors, then, according to Locke, there is no room for figurative language and its use
must be avoided.
This attitude prevailed for another three hundred years. However, in the mid-20th century
philosopher Max Black published a paper that proposed a revolutionary way of thinking
about what a metaphor is and how it functions. One immediate impact of his work was that
26 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
it caught the attention of philosophers of science who saw in his theory a new model of
scientific explanation.
II.
In his paper, Metaphor, Black (1955) proposes what he calls the” interaction theory of
metaphor,” metaphors to be understood as an interaction between two conceptual systems
that he designates the primary and secondary subjects of the metaphor. A rather simple
example he uses is, “Man is a wolf.” According to Black, we understand this metaphor
because our thoughts associated with humans and wolves interact with one another and
the result of this interaction is various shifts in meaning of the terms involved, such that
our concepts human and wolf are altered. If Black is correct, then no literal substitution for
the metaphor will suffice to capture the insights generated by the metaphor.
In a follow-up paper, Black introduces the notion of metaphorical thought (Black 1979, p
31). He insists that when we make a metaphorical assertion, we are not merely
entertaining the metaphor, but are actively engaged in thinking of one thing as though it
were another, and in so doing, explore all of the implications of such thinking. At the heart
of metaphorical thought is the ability “to think of something (A) as something else (B)”
(Black 1979, p 31), and this process is characterized by conceptual innovation. He likens
the conceptual innovation prompted by metaphorical thought to thinking of a triangle that
is composed of three curved segments. To see the triangle in this way requires alterations
to the concept of a triangle, insofar as curved segments are not part of our conceptual
understanding of a triangle. While this exercise in non-Euclidean geometry is not an
example of metaphorical understanding, it does capture the essence of metaphorical
thought, viz., that when we think of some A as metaphorically B the result is a change in the
relevant concepts (Black, 1979 p.33):
The imaginative effort demanded in such exercises (familiar to any student of
mathematics) is not a bad model for what is needed in producing, handling, and
understanding all but the most trivial metaphors. That the use of relevant
concepts employed should change…seems essential to the operation.
Subsequent to Black’s work, philosophers of science took notice, and began applying his
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 27
ideas to various areas in science including developing models of explanation and using
models in the development of theory.
III.
Mary Hesse had already been studying the relationship between analogies and theoretical
models when Black’s work on metaphor was published. Hesse (1966) argues that Black’s
interaction theory of metaphor provides for us a new way to understand the relationship
between the explanadum of a scientific theory and the explanans. She describes this as a
“metaphoric re-description of the domain of the explandum” (Hesse 1966, p 132). In this
analysis, the domain of the explanadum corresponds to the primary system in Black’s
account; the explanans function similarly to the secondary system. A favorite example of
Hesse’s is the explanation of gas behavior through an understanding of massive,
mechanical particles, such as billiard balls. Much in the same way that Black’s secondary
system of an interaction metaphor will inform and change the way we understand the
primary system, our understanding of the
mechanics of billiard balls will inform and
shape our thinking about and understanding of
the behavior of gas particles. One consequence
is that by using the metaphor, we move from
thinking about gas particles as volume-less
points to thinking of them as finite particles,
and therefore as possessing volume. Interaction
metaphors supply a model that can be used to
construct a theory, and in so doing attempt to
offer an explanation of the theory in terms of a
more familiar system.
This manner of generating scientific explanation abandons the deductive-nomological
model of explanation (D-N) by taking the emphasis off the deductive relationship that is
supposed to have existed between the explanadum and explanans. Instead, it focuses on
the relationship between the primary system and the secondary system given by and
28 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
mediated through the metaphor. If metaphors are the driving force behind theoretical
explanations, then this would go a long way towards accounting for the observation that
the deductive relationships said to exist between explanadum and explanans on the D-N
account can rarely be demonstrated in practice. Rather, as Hesse points out, what we do
see are relationships of approximate fit, and these relationships are quite consistent with a
metaphor-based theory of explanation. It is precisely this relationship of approximate fit
that will help guide research, insofar as scientists continually strive to find a tighter fit or
ever-closer approximations. At the close of the paper, Hesse characterizes rationality as:
“the continuous adaptation of our language to our continually expanding world and
metaphor is one of the chief means by which this is accomplished” (Hesse 1966, p 139).
Following Hesse’s application of interaction metaphors to offer an alternative account of
scientific explanation, many other philosophers of science sought to expand the use of
Black’s theory to other areas of science. One such approach focused on what Richard Boyd
(1979) termed “theory-constitutive metaphors.” As the name suggests, theory-constitutive
metaphors, constitute the theory. They are the scaffolding around which the theory is
structured; as such, they cannot be replaced by any adequate literal expression(s). The
theory is, at least for a time, built around the metaphor; to remove the metaphor would be
to, in effect, discard the theory. Theory-constitutive metaphors are the vehicle by which the
theory is introduced and articulated. According to Boyd, the essential feature of theory-
constitutive metaphors is that they display “inductive open-endedness.” This feature allows
us to explore the relationship that exists between a primary and secondary system (Boyd
1979, p 489):
They [theory-constitutive metaphors] display what might be called inductive
open-endedness…. The reader is invited to explore the similarities and analogies
between features of the primary and secondary subjects, including features not
yet discovered, or not yet fully understood…. Theory-constitutive metaphors are
introduced when there is (or seems to be) good reason to believe that there are
theoretically important respects of similarity or analogy between the literal
subjects of the metaphors and their secondary subjects. The function of such
metaphors is to put us on track of these respects of similarity or analogy.
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 29
Boyd argues that this exploration of the two systems will serve to orient research as
scientists continue to explore the features of the two systems in order to determine the
extent of similarity. Finally, he argues that theory-constitutive metaphors encourage the
scientist to always look for new discoveries between the two systems and bring about
greater understanding of the aspects of similarity and analogy that are most relevant to the
theory being developed.
Examples of theory-constitutive metaphors can be found throughout various sciences. One
of area of interest is in the various models of the atom. For example, Rutherford’s nuclear
model of the atom includes electrons moving in circular paths around the nucleus. This
strongly suggests a planetary model of the atom. With this model in hand, scientists
endeavored to uncover the precise ways in which the atom behaves like a miniature solar
system and in which ways it does not. As Boyd notes, the model generated a research
program as scientists tried to work out the exact nature of the similarity. The Rutherford
model was eventually deemed inadequate because in exploring the implications of the
atom-as-solar system, it was recognized that the laws of electrodynamics predict electrons
radiating energy and spiraling into the nucleus. But it was precisely this deficiency that
would ultimately lead to the Bohr model of the hydrogen atom. This model preserves the
underlying planetary metaphor, but adds the orbitals and quantization of angular
momentum. This little sliver of the history of the development of the atomic model
underscores the virtue of the open-endedness of theory-constitutive metaphors.
IV.
Our understanding of what a metaphor is and how it functions has changed dramatically
since Aristotle nearly two and half millennia ago. Through the work of Max Black and those
he influenced, metaphor no longer need be confined to English classrooms. If Black is
correct that metaphor is a vehicle for prompting creative thought and conceptual
innovation, then they deserve to be emphasized and utilized in the STEM classroom.
Thinking through the implications of a metaphor often involves higher-order thinking skills
such as analysis and synthesis, skills that should be stressed in all areas of education, but
especially in STEM areas. In my own classroom, I try to emphasize the role of the
30 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
metaphors that underlie various atomic models. Most of my students have no idea what
plum-pudding is, so when I tell them Thomson described the atom as being plum-pudding
it means nothing to them. I give them a very general description of the dessert, and we talk
about how Thompson pictured the atom as negative particles scattered throughout a
positively charged medium, and ask them to create their own model to describe the atom. I
have had some interesting responses over the years, but one of the better ones is chocolate
chip cookie dough. This is a much more effective model for students today who are vastly
more familiar with chocolate chip cookie dough than with plum pudding. As we transition
to Rutherford’s model, I like to give them the results of his experiments and ask them to
develop a model of the atom and an underlying metaphor to accompany it. When we finally
get to the discussion of the planetary model, the model provides a context for asking
essential questions: In what ways can an atom be said to be like a solar system? And just as
importantly, we can identify the features of an atom that are not like a solar system. In
thinking about and answering both questions, students are engaging with subject matter at
a deeper level. This type of exercise need not be confined to chemistry. One could easily
imagine presenting a lesson based on Darwin’s use of artificial selection as a model for
natural selection. Indeed, in a rural school district, such as the one I teach in, many students
are very familiar with artificial selection and could readily relate to it and use it as a vehicle
to extend their knowledge of natural selection.
Regardless of the content area, the emphasis on models and the metaphors that underlie
them always prompt students to think of something that is unfamiliar and largely unknown
to them in terms of something this is more familiar and better understood. Ideally, the
result is an enhanced understanding of both.
References
Black M. 1955. “Metaphor”. In Models and Metaphors. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press,
25-47.
Black M. 1979. “More About Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. A. Ortony
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed, 1993, 356-408.
STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014 31
Boyd R. 1979. “Metaphor and Theory Change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for?” In
Metaphor and Thought, ed. A. Ortony. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2nd
edn, 1993, 481-532.
Hesse M. 1966. “The Explanatory Function of Metaphor.” In Introduction to the Philosophy
of Science, ed. Arthur Zucker. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 132-139.
Johnson M (editor). 1981. Philosophical Perspectives on Metaphor. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press.
About the Author: John Styles has primarily taught NYS Regents chemistry and AP chemistry at Schoharie Jr-Sr High School since 1996. In 2008 he took a two-year leave to take a position teaching chemistry at SHAPE International High School located at NATO headquarters in Casteau, Belgium. In addition to teaching chemistry, John regularly teaches classes in philosophy and logic at various local colleges.
Schoharie Jr-Sr High School 436 Academy Drive Schoharie, NY 12157 (518) 295-6601 [email protected]
Photographic images in this issue are attributed to
• Images of glowstick and glow bracelets (cover & p 23) courtesy of glowmania.com
• Protein crystallography images courtesy of the author (Dan Williams)
• Classroom images (glowsticks) courtesy of the author (Candace Schneggenberger)
• Mind Technologies (p 25) © Agsandrew | Dreamstime.com
• Smiling thinking woman with two web bubbles (p 27) © Nastia1983 | Dreamstime.com
32 STANYS The Science Teachers Bulletin Spring 2014
Submission Guidelines
The Science Teachers Bulletin welcomes articles about science and science education. If you wish to submit an article for publication, please prepare the following: 1) Double-spaced manuscript (in Microsoft Word format) with figure, tables,
photos or other images separated from the main body of the text. Permission for image/photo use may be required.
2) References (if used) at the end of the text using an appropriate reference
format.
3) An autobiographical sketch including your background, email, telephone
number and address.
For additional information or if you have any questions, please contact:
Michael J. Hanophy, Ph.D. The Science Teachers Bulletin, Editor
St. Joseph's College 245 Clinton Avenue Brooklyn, NY 11205
Email: [email protected] The Science Teachers Bulletin is published twice a year (Fall and Spring). Submissions must be received no later than October 15 to be considered for the Fall issue and by March 15 for the Spring issue. Submitted manuscripts should not have been previously published or under consideration for publication elsewhere. Opinions expressed in The Science Teacher Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect STANYS policy.