1. Share the Wealth: A Catalytic Activity
Kate Walsh, MCEP Cohort- 6
EDUC: 536 – The Teaching and Learning of Chemistry
Dr. Kate Scantlebury
Fall ‘05/Spring ‘06

2. Project
The presentation which follows was presented at the Annual Meeting of the Metro-Washington DC Chemistry Teachers
The focus was on the results of my research on the implementation of POGIL in my AP Chemistry Course

3. Meeting Format 2 other presentations were made.
Dr. Diane Bunce, Catholic University – presented “Different Strokes for Different Folks: Using a variety of teaching styles to reach more of our students
Dr. Angel de Dios, Georgetown University – presented on the freshman chemistry cirriculum at Georgetown University.

4. Meeting Format
Each presentation was followed by questions and answers and a chance to share best practices
We also toured Georgetown Visitation’s science facilities

5. Feedback Meeting organizer, Sharon Hillery’s, follow-up email:
Dear fellow chemistry teachers, Thank you to all who attended yesterday’s meeting at Visitation. I found Kate Walsh’s presentation to be very enlightening about POGIIL (Inquiry learning) and Dr. Diane Bunce – as always- gives a great lecture and provided much for us to think about as we examine our teaching styles and methods. Dr. de Dios’ web page for the schools in the Philippines seems like a good resource for us as well. I hope those who attended had a good day. I would appreciate any feedback – positive or not – and also suggestions for a future day – maybe in the autumn.
Sharon
Georgetown Visitation Preparatory School
th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C
  voice mail ext. 4417

6. Fighting the Good Fight
Implementing POGIL in an AP Chemistry Course
Kate Walsh
Georgetown Preparatory School
April 6, 2006

7. Background POGIL P- Process O-Oriented G-Guided I - Inquiry
L – Learning
Developed by Spencer & Moog at Franklin & Marshall College

8. Background Key Components: 1. Small groups of Students 2. Information
3. Leading questions which allow students to formulate knowledge
4. Group discussions of conclusions and/or simultaneous reporting
5. Hands-off position for instructor

9. Background
Reflecting on my first year ( ) of teaching AP Chemistry – poor ability to explain answers
Reflecting on my own experience with POGIL- as an undergrad I took 2 semesters of “rigorous organic chemistry” and did quite well yet 2-3 years later retained little to none of it and never really understood much of it.

10. Basic Hypothesis
Use of the POGIL Method will improve students ability to explain/conceptualize their understanding of chemical concepts.
Since this is a vital component of the AP Test I felt my AP Students were a perfect test group.

11. Test Group 12 boys 3 juniors, 9 seniors
All take a minimum of 2 AP courses, some as many as 5
This is a second year of Chemistry for all of the boys.
All of the boys are enrolled in AB Calculus at a minimum, most are enrolled in BC Calculus.

12. The Test
Testing was implemented by teaching the Kinetics unit using a traditional “chalk and talk” style and then teaching the Equilibrium unit using exclusively POGILs.
The POGILs were obtained from the POGIL website or from the text “Chemistry: A Guided Inquiry”
Students were tested after each unit using tests compiled from the JCEd website’s conceptual question bank and from the ConcepTest question bank compiled at the Univ. of Wisconsin – Madison.

13. Challenges
This group of students was much more comfortable with the “chalk and talk” presentation.
They were generally uncomfortable with the idea of interdependence and had a tendency to want to work only with those with whom they were most comfortable.
I had to very carefully moderate the discussions between groups.

14. Challenges
After about the 3rd POGIL students began to warm up to the idea.
One major break through occurred when I had the groups simultaneously report their results to the question, “define what is meant by the term at equilibrium”
I think the students finally saw why there was value in the group effort

15. Outcomes Chalk & Talk POGIL Mean 66.7 77.8 Median 69.5 78.7 Std. Dev.
15.5
10.0

16. Challenges Small sample The 2nd exam was the last of the quarter
All male and high achieving test group

17. QUESTIONS ?
References:
Contact info: