pOGIL – A STuDENT-CENTRED INSTRuCTIONAL AppROACh

About the Author

Dr Aneeta Dogra is a science teacher and has a particular interest in student-centred pedagogies and how they affect students’ knowledge and skills. As part of her work, she conducted an action research study to explore POGIL’s adaptability within the Australian Curriculum for upper secondary chemistry and lower secondary science classrooms to address specific science inquiry skills and to demonstrate its crosscultural utility.

on a learning cycle model. During this process, the teacher serves as a facilitator rather than the source of the information.

Research basis

Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL) is a pedagogical approach that has grown in popularity in 21st century classrooms, as it offers an active and student-centred learning environment. Initially, POGIL was developed by Chemistry educators in the late 1990s. Since then, it has been successfully used in other disciplines as well. This article explores POGIL and its adaptability in the Australian curriculum for secondary classrooms to address science inquiry skills and its cross-cultural transferability. It is based on my research which was undertaken with Year 8 and Year 11 Chemistry classes.

POGIL can be defined as a hybrid of three learning theories: constructivism, active learning and inquirybased learning (Moog et al., 2009). In a POGIL learning environment, students work in small self-managed teams on specially designed POGIL activities based

Educational research provides educators with important information about new ways of teaching and learning. Research indicates that ‘teaching by telling’ does not work for many students. Every student learns differently, and educators should use a range of strategies to cater to the needs of diverse students. Social interaction plays an important role in students learning process and students learn best when they actively construct their own knowledge.

Many studies have found that POGIL serves as an effective active learning tool which enhances students conceptual understanding as well as develop essential process skills such as critical and analytical thinking, problem solving, teamwork, and communication. More importantly, POGIL process skills and Australian curriculum general capabilities align with one another.

Dual purpose of pOGIL and its place in the Australian curriculum

Content knowledge and process skills are two key elements of education. Both are equally important as they supplement each other. These process skills are essential in the 21st century and this is highlighted by the 2008 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. The new Australian curriculum has a much stronger focus on these skills. Keeping this in view, general capabilities were incorporated in the Australian curriculum to equip Australian students with the knowledge and skills which will enable them to live and work successfully. Teachers are expected to teach general capabilities to the extent that they are incorporated within each learning area. There are seven general capabilities namely, Literacy, Numeracy, Information and Communication Technology (ICT), Critical and Creative Thinking, Personal and Social, Ethical Understanding and Intercultural Understanding. be in the form of diagrams, graphs, data, or a small prose. Students use the model to answer a series of critical thinking questions to explore and develop an understanding of the concept or relationships. This is followed by some problems which involve application of the conceptual knowledge gained to new learning situations.

Similarly, POGIL also provides students an opportunity to master the content knowledge as well as develop essential process skills such as communication, teamwork, information processing, critical and analytical thinking, problem-solving and self-assessment.

Both the Australian curriculum (general capabilities) and POGIL process skills compliment each other and have some common skills. POGIL is an effective studentcentred strategy which can be easily incorporated into the lessons. Teachers can also teach both content and process skills simultaneously without compromising time.

An extract from a pOGIL workshet

Why? Solids, liquid and gases are made up of very small particles. To understand why solids, liquids and gases behave differently, scientists developed a theory called particle theory of matter. It is also called kinetic theory of matter. The word “kinetic” comes from Greek and means movement or motion.

Success criteria model 1-kinetic theory

Learning Cycle Model

Characteristics of pOGIL activities

The POGIL activities are modelled around a learning cycle approach which consist of three phases: exploration, concept introduction, and application. The POGIL worksheets begin with a model which can

• Comprehending diagrams and written information.

• Understand kinetic theory of matter.

• Understand more about states of matter.

• Applying theory to everyday situations.

Here are three pictures showing a microscopic view of a solid, liquid and gas.

Note: each circle represents a particle.

Key questions Look at the picture of a solid, liquid and gas in Model 1. What do you notice about the arrangement of particles in solids?

pOGIL in action

In a POGIL classroom, teachers are not the source of information, but they act as facilitators and guide students to invent concepts and reach conclusions. Students are grouped into heterogenous teams of three or four students, with each student given a role of either Manager, Presenter, Recorder, or a Reflector. Many researchers believe that allocating roles for students fosters a sense of positive interdependence and accountability in team settings, especially in the high school environment. Teachers can rotate team roles regularly so that every student gets an opportunity to develop a range of skills.

Students work collaboratively on POGIL worksheets which are modelled around a learning cycle approach consisting of three parts: the model (exploration phase), the critical thinking questions (concept introduction phase) and problems (application phase).

To implement POGIL effectively in their classrooms, the teacher must consider the social dynamics when forming groups to enhance positive interdependence. Teachers are encouraged to talk to students about the importance of group work and group norms. They should establish a clear set of rules and expectations for each group member to follow before starting POGIL sessions.

Conclusion

I had a positive experience implementing POGIL in my Year 8 and Year 11 Chemistry classes. It was an insightful experience as I could improve my teaching and learning style while enhancing my students’ learning experiences. Of course, like any other teaching strategy, you need to prepare your students for the new learning environment for successful implementation. My students held positive views about POGIL learning and considered POGIL to be a preferred learning environment compared to the traditional teachercentered pedagogy. It was found that POGIL not only increased their conceptual understanding, but also helped in the development of process skills such as collaboration, communication, problem solving and critical thinking. I would encourage teachers to trial this student-centered pedagogy in their classes, as they can easily incorporate POGIL into their courses to address their students’ curriculum needs.

References

1. ACARA. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians https://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum/ development-of-australian-curriculum

2. ACARA. (2016). Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority Retrieved 5th January, from https://www. australiancurriculum.edu.au/

3. Blake, B., & Pope, T. (2008). Developmental Psychology: Incorporating Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s Theories in Classroo0020ms. Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives in Education. 1. (Suppl. 1), S59-67.

4. Ghaith, G. M. (2002). The relationship between cooperative learning, perception of social support, and academic achievement. System, 30(3), 263-273. https://doi.org/http://doi. org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00014-3

5. Moog, R. S., Creegan, F. J., Hanson, D. M., Spencer, J. N., Straumanis, A., Bunce, D. M., & Wolfskill, T. (2009). POGIL-Process Oriented Guided Inquiry. In N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper, & T. J. Greenbowe (Eds.), Chemists’ Guide to Effective Teaching (Vol. II, pp. 90-99). Prentice Hall.

6. Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1986). Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science and children, 24, 31-32.

7. Piaget. (1972). Psychology and epistemology: towards a theory of knowledge. Harmondsworth : Penguin.

8. POGIL. (2012). POGIL Project. Retrieved 13/01/2019, from https://www.thesaurus.com/ browse/supported

9. Rillero, P. (1998). Process skills and content knowledge. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 35(3)

10. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.

INORGANIC ChEmISTRY IupAC RECOmmENDATIONS

Lyndon

Smith

The times are a changin’

The chemistry language is a changin’

It’s no longer what I learned at Uni.

It has come to my attention that over the last 25 years, IUPAC has made various changes to their recommendations which have not been incorporated into the West Australian syllabus, nor our textbooks.

In a previous time, this might not have been an issue, however, I find my students are seeking information on the Internet, and what we’re teaching and the information that Wikipedia, IUPAC and the Royal Chemical Society offers as answers, differs from our teaching.

I’ve collected the recent IUPAC recommendations (the most recent 25 years), and summarised them here. I would encourage teachers and examiners to consider that there could be alternative answers to questions, and the use of words like “hydron” instead of “proton” should be mutually acceptable until we can change the syllabus and update the textbooks to “hydron”.

I’m eager to avoid the conflict that a teacher faces when a student says, “I looked this up on Wikipedia, and you’re wrong.”

Syllabus references affected by these changes

Year 11 Chemistry 2023

Unit 1 – Chemical fundamentals: structure, properties, and reactions.

Chemical reactions: reactants, products, and energy change

Science Understanding:

• the mole is a precisely defined quantity of matter equal to Avogadro’s number of particles

• the mole concept relates mass, moles, and molar mass and, with the Law of Conservation of Mass; can be used to calculate the masses of reactants and products in a chemical reaction

Unit 2 – Molecular interactions and reactions

Intermolecular forces and gases

Science Understanding:

• the mole concept can be used to calculate the mass of substances and volume of gases (at standard temperature and pressure) involved in a chemical reaction

Year 12 Chemistry 2023

Unit 3 – Acids and bases

Science as a Human Endeavour

Subsequently, the Brønsted-Lowry model describes acid-base behaviour in terms of proton donors and proton acceptors. This approach includes a wider range of substances and can be more broadly applied.

IupAC Recommendations

The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) communicates its recommendations via the Blue Book, the Red Book, the Green Book, and the Gold Book with reference to their monthly journal. Most of the following changes are at least 25 years old.

IUPAC have issued updated versions of the Red Book (Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry) and the Blue Book (Organic Nomenclature) along with a version of the Gold Book (Compendium of Chemical Terminology) and the Green Book (Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry). There are significant changes that will affect chemistry teaching in secondary schools.

• Blue Book: https://iupac.org/what-we-do/ books/bluebook/

• Gold Book: https://goldbook.iupac.org/

• Green Book: https://iupac.org/what-we-do/ books/greenbook/

• Red Book: https://iupac.org/what-we-do/ books/redbook/ blue book: Nomenclature

PAC = “Pure and Applied Chemistry” is the official monthly journal of IUPAC.

New IupAC names to recognise and use Table 2.1 Systematic names of mononuclear parent hydrides of the elements in Groups 13,14,15,16, and 17 with normal bonding numbers.

(all systematic names, except for carbane, are preselected names; see P-12.2; for the retained name methane, see P-21.1.1.2)

Group 13 Group 14 Group 15 Group 16 Group 17

TℓH3 thallane PbH4 plumbane BiH3 bismuthane PoH2 polane AtH astane

* Note that methane is the preferred IUPAC name.

The Red book

Do not use proton in the context of “acids donate protons” – they donate hydrons.- 1988 IR-3.3.2 Isotopes of hydrogen

“Hydrogen is an exception to the rule in Section IR3.3.1 in that the three isotopes 1H, 2H and 3H can have the alternative names protium, deuterium and tritium, respectively. The symbols D and T may be used for deuterium and tritium but 2H and 3H are preferred because D and T can disturb the alphabetical ordering in formulae (see Section IR-4.5). These names give rise to the names, proton, deuteron, and triton for the cations 1H+, 2H+, and 3H+, respectively. Because the name proton is often used in contradictory senses, i.e., for isotopically pure 1H+ ions on the one hand, and for the naturally occurring undifferentiated isotope mixture on the other, it is recommended that the undifferentiated mixture be designated generally by the name hydron, derived from hydrogen.”

[Hydrogen ion is not suitable because that could be H–= “halide”. The proton theory of acids (1923) predated the discovery of deuterium (1930).]

The Red Book–Page 48 – paragraph IR-3.3.2

Hydron

General name for the ion H+ either in natural abundance or where it is not desired to distinguish between the isotopes, as opposed to proton for 1H+, deuteron for 2H+ and triton for 3H+

Sources:

• PAC, 1988, 60, 1115 (Names for hydrogen atoms, ions, and groups, and for reactions involving them (Recommendations 1988)) on page 1116

• PAC, 1994, 66, (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC

Recommendations 1994)) on page 1123

• Red Book, p. 103 – see below hydronation rather than protonation or protonated base – A new definition

Attachment of the ion H+ either in natural abundance or where it is not desired to distinguish between the isotopes.

A chemical species or molecular entity having an available pair of electrons capable of forming a covalent bond with a hydron (proton) (see Brønsted base) or with the vacant orbital of some other species.

Source:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 1994)) on page 1088 PAC, 1990, 62, 2167 (Glossary of atmospheric chemistry terms (Recommendations 1990)) on page 2176 brönsted Acid – A new definition

A molecular entity capable of donating a hydron (proton) to a base, (i.e. a ‘hydron donor’) or the corresponding chemical species. For example: H2O, H3O+, CH3CO2H, H2SO4, HSO4 , HCℓ, CH3OH, NH3

Sources:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC

• Recommendations 1994)) on page 1091

The Gold book language changes to accept Autoprotolysis

A term describing the acid base equivalent of disproportionation.

Autoprotolysis A term to use.

Proton transfer reaction (now hydron transfer reaction) between two identical amphoteric molecules (usually of a solvent), one acting as a Brönsted acid and the other as a Brönsted base.

Example: H2O + H2O H3O+ + OH–

Sources:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC

• Recommendations 1994)) on page 1087

Autoprotolysis Constant A term to use.

The product of the activities (or, more approximately, concentrations) of the species produced as the result of autoprotolysis. For solvents in which no other ionization processes are significant the term is synonymous with ‘ionic product’. The autoprotolysis constant for water, is equal to the product of activities:

Example: The autoprotolysis constant for water, Kw, is equal to the product of the relative activities of the hydronium and hydroxide ions at equilibrium in pure water.

K w = a(H3O+)a(OH–) = 1.0 × 10–14 at 25 °C and 1 standard atmosphere.

Note: Since the relative activity a(H2O) of water at equilibrium is imperceptibly different from unity (with mole fraction as the activity scale and pure un-ionized water as the standard state), the denominator in the expression for the thermodynamic equilibrium constant Kw° for autoprotolysis has a value very close to 1.

Sources:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC

• Recommendations 1994)) on page 1087

Clarification of aquation and hydration – 1994

Aquation not hydration

A term to use.

The incorporation of one or more integral molecules of water into another species with or without displacement of one or more other atoms or groups.

For example, the incorporation of water into the inner ligand sphere of an inorganic complex is an aquation reaction.

Example: The incorporation of water into the inner ligand sphere of an inorganic complex. Aℓ(H2O)63+(aq)

Sources:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC

• Recommendations 1994)) on page 1086 hydration Addition of water or of the elements of water (i.e., H and OH) to a molecular entity or to a chemical species.

Example: hydration of ethene: CH2=CH2 + H2O CH3CH2OH

Note: In contrast to aquation, hydration, as in the incorporation of waters of crystallisation into a protein or in the formation of a layer of water on a nonpolar surface, does not necessarily require bond formation.

Source:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077 (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 1994)) on page 1122

The Gold book Stop using “dispersion force” instead use “London force” – 1994

London forces

Previously were called “dispersion forces”. Attractive forces between molecules due to their mutual polarizability.

Note: London forces are the principal components of the forces between nonpolar molecules.

“London Force” has replaced the term “dispersion force” “ – named for Fritz Wolfgang London (March 7, 1900 – March 30, 1954) was a German physicist and professor at Duke University.

Source:

• PAC, 1994, 66, 1077. (Glossary of terms used in physical organic chemistry (IUPAC Recommendations 1994)) on page 1136

• Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry

• Third Edition Page 92

3.7 Non-SI units accepted for use with the SI

The following units are not part of the SI, but it is recognized by the General Conference on Weights and Measures that they will continue to be used in appropriate contexts. SI prefixes may be attached to some of these units, such as millilitre, mL; megaelectronvolt, MeV; kilotonne, kt. A more extensive list of non-SI units, with conversion factors to the corresponding SI units, is given in Chapter 7, p. 129.

The Green book

Continue to use litre (not dm3) and atomic & molecular masses use the unit dalton (Da) or amu (u)

We usually write “the molar mass of methane is 16.031” and we should say “16.031 Da” or “16.031 u”.

Sources:

• The Green Book – INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY

• Physical and Biophysical Chemistry Division

For example, an atom of helium-4 has a mass of 4.0026 Da. This is an intrinsic property of the isotope and all helium-4 atoms have the same mass. Acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin), C9H8O4, has an average mass of approximately 180.157 Da. However, there are no acetylsalicylic acid molecules with this mass. The two most common masses of individual acetylsalicylic acid molecules are 180.0423 Da, having the most common isotopes, and 181.0456 Da, in which one carbon is carbon-13.

The mole

The General Conference on Weights and Measures at the 2018 meeting, decided to set exact numerical values, when expressed in SI. They defined the mole as 6.02214076 × 1023 for the International System of Units (SI) effective from May 20, 2019. The kilogram, ampere, and kelvin were also redefined at this meeting.

The mole, symbol mol, is the SI unit of amount of substance. One mole contains exactly 6.022 140 76 × 1023 elementary entities. This number is the fixed numerical value of the Avogadro constant, NA, when expressed in the unit mol–1 and is called the Avogadro number.

The amount of substance, symbol n, of a system is a measure of the number of specified elementary entities. An elementary entity may be an atom, a molecule, an ion, an electron, any other particle, or specified group of particles. Its symbol is “mol”.

The mole is no longer defined as the amount of substance of a system which contains as many elementary entities as there are atoms in 0.012 kilogram of carbon 12; a definition of the mole in force since 1971.

The mole is a base unit of the Système International d’Unités.

Reference

1. Proceedings of the 26th CGPM (2018), 2019, p472