THE USE OF MODELS AND CASE STUDIES
IN TEACHING BONDING
By
Mark Joseph Erickson

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Physical Science - Interdepartmental
2011

ABSTRACT
THE USE OF MODELS AND CASE STUDIES IN TEACHING BONDING
By
Mark Joseph Erickson
The concepts of chemistry can often be more difficult to understand than the concepts of other
sciences due to the fact that much of what is happening occurs at the atomic and molecular level
and cannot be seen by the naked eye. When attempting to describe the properties of substances
using the interaction of invisible atoms and ions to form chemical bonds, the challenges increase.
An understanding of the differences and similarities between these structures and connecting
differences in these invisible structures to the resulting physical properties can be difficult
challenge for chemistry students. This study attempts to use case studies paired with labs and a
variety of models of atoms, ions, and compounds to increase student understanding of the
concepts and processes involved in chemical bonding. Based on the results of this unit the
author plans to continue his use of case studies. The author also plans to continue to use models
with more explicit discussion of modeling with the students.

DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my wife, Renee, and my two sons, Daniel and Caleb, who
made many sacrifices in encouraging me through this process. I would also like to dedicate this
thesis to my parents, Ron and Carla Erickson, who have continually encouraged and supported
my education, along with the many other ways that they have blessed my life.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge the help of my co-worker, Nancy Lefere for helping me collect my
assent forms. I would also like to acknowledge my wife for helping my with data entry on the
pre-test data and for her support during this process. I would like to especially acknowledge Dr.
Merle Heidemann for her help in proofreading and editing this thesis.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables

vi

List of Figures

vii

Introduction

1

Implementation

6

Results

19

Discussion

25

Appendices

27

Bibliography

69

v

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Description and Sequence of Activities

7

Table 2: List of Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Samples

16

Table 3: Focus of Assessment Questions

18

Table 4: Summary of Pre- and Post-Test Data

20

Table 5: Analysis of Retention of Student Learning on the Final Exam

21

Table 6: Analysis Correct Student Responses by Activity

21

Table 7: Analysis of Correct Student Responses on Lewis Structures

23

Table 8: Metal Element Properties (Metal vs. Non-Metal Activity)

42

Table 9: Non-Metal Element Properties (Metal vs. Non-Metal Activity)

42

Table 10: Unknown Elements (Metal vs. Non-Metal Activity)

43

Table 11: Hardness Scale (Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab)

53

Table 12: Volatility / Odor Scale (Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab)

53

Table 13: Melting Point Scale (Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab)

53

Table 14: Solubility Scale (Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab)

53

Table 15: Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Properties
(Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab)

54

Table 16: Table of Covalent Molecules (Molecular Modeling Lab)

59

Table 17: Table of Covalent Molecules (Honors) (Molecular Modeling Lab)

61-62

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Photo of Electrical Conductivity Tester

10

Figure 2: Photo of Re-Crystallized Samples

10

Figure 3: Photos of Binary Ionic Bonding Model

12

Figure 4: Photos of Polyatomic Ionic Boding Model

12

Figure 5: Photos of Covalent Bonding Models

13

Figure 6: Photos of Solution of Ionic Bond Models
in Covalent Water Molecules Models

13

Figure 7: Photo of Metallic Bonding Model

14

Figure 8: Photos of Samples of Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Substances

14

Figure 9: Wet Chemistry Lab (WCL) (Phoenix Lander Case Study)

45

Figure 10: Thermal Evolved Gas Analyzer (TEGA) (Phoenix Lander Case Study)

46

Figure 11: Corundum (Molecular Analysis Case Study)

64

Figure 12: Lye (Molecular Analysis Case Study)

64

Figure 13: Pewter (Molecular Analysis Case Study)

64

Figure 14: Trinitrotoluene (Molecular Analysis Case Study)

64

Figure 15: Lewis Structure of Aspirin (Molecular Analysis Case Study)

66

vii

Introduction
Chemical bonding, along with the rest of chemistry, attempts to explain observed events in the
macroscopic world using the interaction of unseen atoms in the molecular world. The existence
of atoms has been supported by evidence since John Dalton’s New System of Chemical
Philosophy, in 1808 (Dalton, 1808 and Coward, 1927). However, it was not until 100 years later
that the size of a molecule and the size of the nucleus could be estimated. Jean Perrin in 1908
used the formulas of Albert Einstein to calculate the size of an atom using Brownian motion, an
achievement that some claim finally proved the existence of atoms (Einstein, 1905; Perrin, 1908;
and Newburgh, 2006). Ernest Rutherford calculated the size of the nucleus using the scattering
of alpha particles by gold atoms in 1913 (Rutherford, 1913 and Bishop, 1990). When the efforts
of two Nobel laureates and 100 years are required to prove the existence of these particles, it
becomes obvious that atoms, ions, and molecules are not easily described.
A Review of Student Difficulties with Concepts in Chemical Bonding
“Confusions and difficulties over a number of chemical concepts require a
different perspective, since these are abstract and formal explanations of invisible
interactions between particles at a molecular level and are not likely to be arrived
at from confrontation with the world of experience.” (Carr, 1984)
Abstract reasoning is essential for chemistry students because unimaginably minute particles are
used to explain the changes and reactions that are studied (Harrison and Treagust, 1996). It has
been shown that the fundamental concept of the particulate nature of matter can be difficult for
students not just in chemistry, but in other sciences as well (de Vos and Verdonk, 1996).

1

Several studies have been done on the challenges and misconceptions students have with the
particulate nature of matter. It has been shown that many times students fail to use “atoms and
molecules” in their explanations of chemical changes, even when they have been emphasized in
class (Hesse, 1992). Students studying gas laws have been shown to have misunderstandings of
the particulate nature of matter (Novick and Nussbaum, 1981). These difficulties with the
particulate nature of matter can also be seen in students all the way up to the undergraduate
college level (Nakhleh, 1992). Students also have difficulty distinguishing between the
properties of matter, which is made up of multiple atoms, and the properties of the individual
atoms themselves (Ben-Zvi et. al., 1986).
Chemistry requires not only the concept that all matter is composed of particles, but also
distinguishes between the different types: atoms, molecules, or ions. In chemical bonding
students must have some understanding of how these different particles interact with each other
in different ways to form ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds. Studies have shown that students
have misconceptions and difficulty defining the characteristics of atoms and molecules (Griffiths
and Preston, 1992 and Tsaparlis, 1997). Students also have difficulty distinguishing between
bonding of molecules and ions (Butts and Smith, 1987). Some of these same misconceptions
between types of particles and in bonding have been seen even at the undergraduate college level
(Nicoll, 2001).
Misconceptions in the differences between atoms, molecules, and ions often start in grade school
and educators should be aware and help students begin to understand the differences between
atoms, molecules, and ions early on (Nakhleh, 1992). Several studies have also looked into the
use of visual aids and learning tools, because of the importance of visuispatial thinking in
chemistry (Wu and Shah, 2004). Others have suggested that teaching highly abstract models at
2

the introductory level is counter-productive (Coll and Treagust, 2001). Given the abstract nature
of chemical bonding and the difficulties that some students have been shown to have, this study
is investigating methods of increasing student understanding of chemical bonding. The focus
will be on the use of case studies and on the use of models in order to increase student
understanding.
A Journal Review of the Use of Case Studies in Science Education
Case studies “use realistic or true narratives to provide opportunities for students to integrate
multiple sources of information in an authentic context, often engaging students with ethical and
societal problems” (Yadav et. al., 2007). According to surveys of teachers who utilize case
studies, most teachers responded that they use case studies for promoting student engagement
(Herreid, 2011). Case studies may be used to stimulate interest by helping students see realworld applications to course activities (Hodges, 2005).
The use of problem based learning (PBL) has been studied in medical schools and found to be
generally enjoyed by most students and long-term student outcomes comparable to traditional
methods (Albanese and Mitchell, 1993). Similarly case studies have also been incorporated into
teaching science at the college level (Herreid, 1994). Studies have shown that case studies have
increased student-learning outcomes in biology program (Pai et. al., 2010), in teaching cellular
respiration concepts (Rybarczyk et. al., 2007), and an introductory chemistry course (Brink et.
al., 1995).
Some case studies designed for high school science classes have been published (Derriso, 2011),
but none were found to fit the chemical bonding labs for this study. Therefore two case studies
were designed by the author to be incorporated with the two labs.

3

A Journal Review of Modeling in Science Education
In order to explain and describe these atoms, ions, and molecules, chemists and chemistry
teachers use a variety of theoretical models or analogies which chemistry students often find both
challenging and confusing (Harrison and Treagust, 1996). Pedagogical analogical models are
“concrete” models that teachers often use to depict abstract or non-observeable entities like
atoms and molecules. One or more features dominate the analog’s concrete structure; e.g., balland-stick and space-filling molecular models (Harrison and Treagust, 1998). These models can
give concrete examples and allow for simplifications for clearness of understanding. These
oversimplifications and weaknesses should be identified with students as well (Harrison and
Treagust, 1998).
Molecular models are one of the more commonly used models in chemistry and it has been
shown that chemistry students who manipulate models are more successful in high school
chemistry than those who merely see the teacher manipulate models (Gabel and Sherwood,
1980). Standard molecular models represent covalent bonds, which is only one-third of chemical
bonding cases however. Furthermore to make the concept even more challenging, most
chemical bonds are somewhere between covalent and ionic or even metallic bonds. Therefore no
one model is sufficient and more than one type of model is necessary.
In using multiple models of a single concept, it becomes vitally important to indicate when a new
model is being used, how it is different, and why it works effectively (Carr, 1984). Realizing
that no model can be correct can be an important process. It has also been shown that chemistry
students who can process multiple models think about science as more about process than about
description of objects (Harrison and Treagust, 1998) and are more likely to build scientific
understanding of natural phenomena (Adadan et. al., 2010). Furthermore, students' conceptual
4

understanding might be enhanced by comparing models of covalent, ionic, and metallic bonds
and seeing them as part of similar processes (Thiele and Treagust, 1994 and Ardac and Akaygun,
2004).
In order to help students overcome some of the challenges of the concepts of chemical bonding
strategies need to be used to support the students. Case studies help make connections to the real
world and engage students. This should be helpful with the abstract concepts of chemical
bonding. Physical models of the covalent bonds are regularly used in bonding. Reinforcing
these with other types of models should be a natural method of helping student learning. This
study will investigate how case studies and models might increase student understanding of
chemical bonding.

5

Implementation
Description of Sample Population
The students selected for this study were from Lumen Christi Catholic High School located in
Jackson, Michigan. Lumen Christi is a private catholic high school under the Diocese of
Lansing. The 2009-2010 enrollment was 500 students and 37 faculty members. The student
population is primarily college prep with over 95% of students attending college after
graduation.
The participating students were selected from 132 juniors and seniors enrolled in one of four
Regular Chemistry, or one of two of Honors Chemistry courses, all of which are taught by the
author. Approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Michigan State
University for a project involving human subjects and from the Lumen Christi principal.
Students were made aware of this study, which occurred as part of the unit on chemical bonding
taught during the spring semester, and were given consent forms (see Appendix C). The consent
forms were signed by both by a parent or guardian and the student. The sample group consists of
28 students (23% participation), 14 students (15% participation) from four Regular Chemistry
classes and 14 students (44% participation) from two Honors Chemistry classes.
The unit took place over a period of six-weeks (Table 1) with a Pre- and Post-Test (Appendix C)
at the start and end. The unit was introduced with identifying the properties of metals and nonmetals in the Metals vs. Non-Metals Activity (Appendix D). This served the function of looking
at distinguishing substances by their properties and identifying metals and non-metals, since this
distinction is used in identifying the types of bonding. This was followed by relating the

6

Activity
Pre-Test

Metal versus NonMetal Survey

Phoenix Lander
Case Study

Ionic, Covalent,
and Metallic Lab

Models
Molecular Models
Activity
Molecular Analysis
Case Study

Review of Models
Post Test
Final Exam

Table 1: Description and Sequence of Activities
Description
This is a 27 question assessment designed using the Michigan MEAPS
to determine student’s prior knowledge of the objectives. This item was
designed specifically for this study.
In this group activity students are giving samples of metals and nonmetal elements and asked to identify and investigate some of the
physical properties that distinguish them. The students then use these
properties to classify some unknown samples as metals or non-metals.
This is a new activity designed during this study.
This case study uses the context of the NASA Mars Lander program to
investigate the make-up of the Martian surface among other things. The
students are given information about some Martian rock samples and
asked to classify them as ionic, covalent, or metallic. This is a new case
study designed during this study.
This lab has students observe some properties of ionic, covalent, and
metallic substances and identify some of the trends of these properties.
The students then use this information to classify some unknown
samples as ionic, covalent, or metallic. This was a previously designed
lab modified during this study.
Models of ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds are presented to the
students. Styrofoam models, graphic models, and animated models are
presented for each type of bond. These models were made and found
during this study.
This activity has students create molecular models of several covalent
compounds. The students then draw a picture of this model and classify
it as either polar or non-polar. This was a previously used activity.
This case study presents students with descriptions of common
substances without using the common name. Students are asked to
classify the substances as ionic, covalent, or metallic. Then students
answer questions about the bonding in another common substance from
it Lewis structure. This is a new case study designed during this study.
Models of ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds are presented to the
students as a review of the types of bonding. The use of these models
was not restricted to two specific times as they were used as examples
of bonding during the course of the unit as well.
The 27 question assessment is given to the students again as part of the
end of unit test to determine how student learning has changed.
The final exam included 5 questions from the Pre- / Post-Test
assessment to check for long-term retention of the concepts.

7

physical properties of substances to their structure using the Phoenix Lander Case Study
(Appendix E) with the Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab (Appendix F). As a part of this unit
models (Figures 3-7) of the different types of bonding were used with the instruction. This was
followed by a closer look at covalent molecules using the Molecular Modeling Lab (Appendix
G) and the Molecular Analysis Case Study (Appendix H).
Description of Case Studies and Lab Activities Incorporated into Instruction
The first case study, the Phoenix Lander Case Study (Appendix E), was used with the Ionic,
Covalent, and Metallic Lab (Appendix F). This was an interrupted case study in which
information was supplied to students in parts between which the students come to some
conclusion before being supplied the next piece of information (Herreid, 2005). The context of
the case was the two Phoenix Landers, which NASA sent to Mars in 2007. One of the five stated
mission goals was to determine the composition of the Martian soil. Students were shown
photos of Mars’ surface taken by previous orbiters (www.NASA.gov/phoenix) showing different
types of Martian geology. Students were then shown photos, graphics, and animations
describing the Phoenix mission and the Lander equipment (Appendix E).
The students then did the Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab (Appendix F) in which they were
given eighteen substances with the correct chemical formulas. Using the chemical formulas
students determined whether the substances were classified as ionic, covalent, or metallic. The
students recorded physical properties of the substances such as relative melting point, hardness,
solubility in water, conductivity of the solid, and conductivity in solution. The students then
completed a chart (Table 15) indicating the physical properties of ionic, covalent, and metallic
substances.

8

Eight electrical conductivity testers (Figure 1), enough for each lab group, where also built for
this study in order to enhance the lab and increase student involvement. The testers used 9-V
batteries and LEDs and were built using instructions found on the Internet (Reeves, 2010).
These replaced the single conductivity tester using 120-V and a 60-Watt light bulb that the
author had previously been using with this lab. The solid powders that were used in this lab
were first put in solution and then allowed to re-crystallize before being given to students. This
was an attempt to give the substances a more natural appearance (Figure 2) to fit the context of
the case study and help the students make connections to real life.
In the second portion of the Phoenix Lander case study, the students were given sample practice
questions giving some physical properties of different substances (Appendix I). They then
classified the substances as ionic, covalent, or metallic using the chart of properties from the lab.
The students were then given six unknown substances without the chemical formulas. By
finding the physical properties of these substances in the lab, the students classified these as
ionic, covalent, or metallic substances.
The next day, the students were given the correct classifications for the unknown substances to
check their hypotheses. The results of the Phoenix Lander mission were also given to the
students, including the fact that it is suspected that snowflakes were seen by the Lander
(www.NASA.gov/Phoenix).
The second case study, the Molecular Analysis Case Study (in Appendix H), is used following
the Molecular Models Lab (in Appendix G). Descriptions, photos, and a Lewis structure of
several common substances where used as a context for the students to apply their knowledge of
bonding.

9

Figure 1: Photo of Electrical Conductivity Tester

Photo of 9-V electrical conductivity tester used in Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab. This tester
can be used to test conductivity of a solid or of a solution. (For interpretation of the references
to color in this and all other figures, the reader is referred to the electronic version of this
thesis.)
Figure 2: Photo of Re-crystallized Substances

Photo of some substances used in Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab. The substances were recrystallized in an attempt to give them a more natural appearance.

10

In the Molecular Models Lab (Appendix G) the students used “ball and stick models” to show
the bonding in several covalent molecules. The molecules were chosen to include examples of
single, double, and triple bonding, examples of tetrahedral, trigonal pyramidal, bent, trigonal
planar, and linear geometries, and one formula which could be depicted in two forms. After
constructing the molecules, students drew them on the worksheet, and then classified them as
either polar or non-polar. They then answered some questions about covalent bonding.
In the Molecular Analysis Case Study (Appendix H), the students were given descriptions of
several common substances without using the common name. These descriptions included
information about the use of the material and some of the physical properties. Photos of a
sample of each substance were provided, except for clear liquids or gases. The photos and
descriptions of these substances were taken from the Internet (www.wikipedia.com). The
students then matched the descriptions to the correct chemical formula based on whether it had
ionic, covalent, or metallic properties. Finally, the students used a Lewis structure to answer
questions about the covalent bonds of another common substance.
Description of Models and Metal Non-Metal Activity Incorporated Into Instruction
Attempts were made in this study to use as many types of models as possible to depict ionic,
covalent, and metallic bonds. Concrete models made from painted Styrofoam balls were made
for ionic, covalent, and metallic bonds. Examples of ionic bonds (Figure 3) were developed and
used to illustrate the alternating pattern of anions and cations in the crystal lattice structure.
Polyatomic ions were also modeled (Figure 4) so that they could be switched in for the nonmetal anions to further illustrate the differences between types of bonds. Covalent models
(Figure 5) were made of all the molecules used in class illustrations, the Molecular Modeling lab,
and of the common VSEPR geometries. In addition, enough models of water molecules were
11

Figure 3: Photos of Binary Ionic Model

Photos of ionic bonding model a binary compound with non-metallic ions showing the
alternating pattern of the crystal lattice structure. The larger spheres represent the anions and
the smaller spheres represent the cations.
Figure 4: Photos of Polyatomic Ionic Model

Photos of polyatomic ionic model with polyatomic ions illustrating the interaction of two types of
chemical bonds. The larger spheres represent the metallic cations and the paired spheres
represent covalently bonded hydroxide anions.

12

Figure 5: Photos of Covalent Bonding Models

Photos of covalent bonding models including molecules of nitrogen, hydrogen chloride, water,
carbon dioxide, ammonia, methane, ethane, ethane, ethyne, acetone, benzene, and two forms of
sugar.
Figure 6: Photos of Solution of Ionic Bond Models in Covalent Water Molecules Models

Photo of a model of an un-dissolved ionic precipitate in a “beaker” of models of covalent water
molecules followed by the same solution after shaking or “dissociation” of the model ionic
compound resulting in its “disappearance” into solution.

13

Figure 7: Photos of Metallic Bonding Model

Photo of metallic bonding model showing the crystal pattern of metal atoms in delocalized
metallic bonds.
Figure 8: Photos of Samples of Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Substances

Photos of samples of ionic, covalent, and metallic substances for group and class use.

14

created to fill a large container representing a beaker of water (Figure 6). Models of ionic
compounds were then added to the bottom with model water molecules over them to show the
solution and dissociation of ionic compounds when the beaker is shaken. Metallic models
(Figure 7) showing delocalized bonding were more difficult to create and only one “concrete”
example was used.
Graphic models of each type of bond, borrowed from the Internet, were also selected to be
presented. The examples were all chosen from a single site in order that comparisons between
the three might be made more easily. The examples also showed the transition from the atomic
state to the bonded state in order to stress differences between atoms, ions, and molecules.
It has been demonstrated that technology may be used to enhance visual models by turning them
into animations (Williamson and Abraham, 1995). Therefore, animations of all three types of
bonding where found on the Internet and presented with the other models at least twice during
the study (Table 1).
In addition it was decided to use as many actual samples of the compounds formed by ionic,
covalent, and metallic bonds (Appendix I) as possible. This was an attempt to connect the
models to the real world experiences of sight, touch, and smell that they were representing. This
was also an attempt to make the instruction and activities more hands on. Samples were
collected of over thirty ionic, over fifteen covalent, and at least eight metals (Table 2 and Figure
8).

1

Samples were prepared in a method to avoid powdered forms to reflect a more natural state

1

A special thanks to following members of the MSU faculty and staff who provided some of
the materials for these collections. Tom Palazzolo, from the MSU physics machine shop,
provided several of the metal samples in these collections, Dr. Merle Heidemann who provided
several ionic rocks and some chemical samples from the DSME storeroom and to Dr. Ken
Nadler who provided a set of scintillation vials for this collection.
15

Table 2: List of Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Samples

Ionic

Compounds

Solids

Covalent

Element
Solids

Compound

Liquid

Compound
Element
Compound

dextrose, starch, methyl red sodium salt, methyl orange sodium
salt, analine yellow, ascorbic acid, malachite green, acid violet,
Trypan blue
water, methanol, acetone, isopropyl alcohol
nitrogen, oxygen
carbon dioxide, methane

Element

aluminum*, copper*, tin*, zinc*, lead*, molybdenum, tungsten

Alloy

brass*, mild steel*, stainless steel

Gas
Metallic

carbonates: calcium carbonate, ammonium bicarbonate
nitrates: aluminum nitrate, calcium nitrate, potassium nitrate,
cupric nitrate hydrate, ferric nitrate hydrate, silver nitrate,
ammonium nitrate
phosphates: potassium phosphate hydrate monobasic
hydroxides: sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide
sulfates: aluminum sulfate hydrate, calcium sulfate, potassium
sulfate, sodium sulfate, manganese sulfate hydrate, cupric
sulfate hydrate, ferric sulfate, ammonium sulfate
chlorides: barium chloride, cupric chloride hydrate, ferric chloride
hydrate, cobalt chloride hydrate, manganese chloride hydrate,
ammonium chloride, potassium chlorate
others: potassium ferricyanide, potassium permanganate,
potassium chromate, potassium dichromate hydrate,
ammonium dichromate, sodium acetate, lead acetate, silica gel,
slate*, mica*, quartz*
carbon*, sulfur*, iodine

Solid

16

than the prepared powders direct from the supply company.
A Metal vs. Non-Metal Activity (see Appendix D) was developed to help familiarize the students
with the properties of metals and non-metals. After first investigating several properties of metal
and non-substances, the students were given several unknown samples and asked to use their
properties to classify them as metals or non-metals.
Description of Assessment Tool
Students completed both a 17 question Pre- and a Post-test (Appendix C). This assessment was
designed to evaluate the effectiveness of each of the case studies as well as the models and metal
non-metal activity in context of the Michigan MEAPS for chemical bonding (Appendix B). The
test was composed of seven multiple-choice questions with four short response questions to give
some insight into student though processes (Table 3). Two matching sections with thirteen items
were also included for students to classify different substances and properties. Two questions
had students draw Lewis structures of a given molecule and a short answer question had students
explain the differences between a molecule and an ionic compound. Statistical analysis were
performed using a paired two sample student t-test using Excel. An alpha value of 0.05 was
selected as the level of significance for all t-tests.
In addition, five questions (5, 7a, 11d, 11g, and 11h) where used on the final exam. Student
performance on these questions was used to give an indication of students’ retention of the
material.

17

27 questions

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X

X

X
X

X
X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X

5

13

X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

15

6

17

X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
8

18

Multiple Choice
Multiple Choice
Short Answer
Multiple Choice
Multiple Choice
Short Answer
Multiple Choice
Multiple Choice
Short Answer
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Multiple Choice
Short Answer
Multiple Choice
Lewis Diagram
Lewis Diagram
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Matching
Short Answer

Point Value

Question Type

Models

Molecular
Modeling Activity

Molecular Analysis
Case Study

Phoenix Lander
Case Study

C4.3e
C2.1a
C2.1a
C4.3e
C4.3e
C4.3e
C4.3e
C4.3e
C4.3e
C4.9b
C4.9b
C4.9b
C4.9b
C4.9b
C5.5a
C5.5a
C5.5c
C5.5c
C5.5c
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5d
C5.5e

Ionic, Covalent,
and Metallic Lab

MEAP Objective

1
2
2b
3
4
4b
5
6
6b
7a
7b
7c
7d
7e
8
8b
9
10a
10b
11a
11b
11c
11d
11e
11f
11g
11h
12

Metal vs. NonMetal

Question #

Table 3: Focus of Assessment Questions

1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
35
points

Results
The results of the Pre- and Post-Test (Table 4) show that the students displayed an adequate
degree of understanding of the unit with overall scores of 60 for the Regular and 73 for the
Honors. In addition more than 70 percent of the students answered correctly for more than half
of the questions. There were a few questions for which the student scores did not improve. The
questions about properties of metals and non-metals account most of the questions that did not
show improvement, but the scores all showed mastery of the material. Question 11e (Appendix
C), which asked about the type of substances that conduct electricity in solution, showed poor
results. One possibility is that in the Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab (Appendix F) students reused the beakers when they tested solubility and conductivity causing some solutions to appear
conductive when they were not. The lab should be adjusted or the results discussed more
thoroughly. Conductivity of substances needs to be stressed more in the future based on the
results of question 11h (Appendix C) also.
Case Studies and Labs
In this study, the scores of assessment questions that were also used on the final exam, 6 weeks
later, seemed to remain fairly consistent or even increase (Table 5). The main exception was the
question asking about conduction of electricity in solution. As some materials are conductive as
solids, some in solution, and some non-conductive this is a fairly easily confused question. In
fact, the scores for the honors class the scores actually increased. One of the strengths of the
medical school PBLs is the long-term retention of learning as seen by test scores (Albanese and
Mitchell, 1993). This was a case study and not PBL, but this may show that other factors, such
as student interest, can be important factors in retention as well.

19

Table 4: Summary of Pre- and Post-Test Data
Percentage of Regular Students
with Correct Responses

Percentage of Honors Students
with Correct Responses

Pre-Test
1
2
2b
3
4
4b
5
6
6b
7a
7b
7c
7d
7ea
8
8b
9
10a
10b
11a
11b
11c
11d
11e
11f
11g
11h
12
Total

PostTest

p-value
(2 tailed)

Pre-Test

Post-Test

p-value
(2 tailed)

29
43
16
57
21
13
57
29
9
79
93
100
71
64
14
5
21
18
29
50
43
29
50
57
29
36
50
4

57
36
48
71
71
43
93
29
21
71
100
100
86
93
50
23
86
61
71
71
50
50
86
64
86
93
71
21

0.165
0.583
0.008
0.336
0.003
0.013
0.055
1.000
0.221
0.583
0.336
ns
0.435
0.040
0.019
0.003
0.002
0.000
0.000
0.189
0.612
0.272
0.019
0.752
0.001
0.001
0.272
0.086

64
50
34
57
50
38
50
21
14
93
100
100
100
100
71
43
79
34
79
64
21
29
93
86
57
50
64
16

100
100
43
93
86
59
93
64
38
93
93
100
100
93
93
48
100
59
73
71
57
71
100
50
86
50
93
71

0.496
0.096
0.901
0.269
0.543
0.508
0.029
0.083
0.073
0.163
0.083
0.083
0.163
0.041
0.718
0.887
1.000
0.086
0.214
1.000
0.041
0.020
0.579
0.004
0.269
0.496
0.269
0.001

34

60

0.000

55

73

0.351

20

Molecular
Analysis Case
Study

Pre-Test

Post-Test

Final
Exam

Pre-Test

Post-Test

Final
Exam

X

57

93

87

50

93

97

79

Phoenix
Lander Case
Study

Question #

Table 5: Analysis of Retention of Student Learning on the Final Exam
Percent of Regular Students
Percent of Honors Students
with Correct Answers
with Correct Answers

71

89

93

93

100

5
7a
11d
11g

X
X

X
X

50
36

86
93

100
62

50

50

not tested
77

11h

X

X

50

71

67

64

93

85

Table 6: Analysis of Correct Student Responses by Activity

Activity

# of
Questions

Metal versus
Non-Metal
Activity

5

Ionic,
Covalent, and
Metallic Lab

13

Phoenix
Lander Case
Study

8

Molecular
Analysis Case
Study

17

Molecular
Model
Activity

6

Models

15

Percent Students Answering
Correctly
Class

Pre-Test
Average

Post-Test
Average

Regular

81

87

Honors

99

96

Regular

39

67

Honors

58

77

Regular

43

71

Honors

58

72

Regular

36

66

Honors

55

77

Regular

22

54

Honors

49

74

Regular

24

52

Honors

47

75

21

The assessment questions showed that several of the questions for the case studies indicated
increases (see Table 6). The regular classes showed the greatest increases for these studies while
the honors classes show lower increases. This could be due to the fact that the increased
engagement helped the regular students greater than the honor students among other factors.
During the presentation of the Phoenix Lander Case Study (Appendix E), it was observed that
the classes appeared more silent and less engaged than normal. In questioning of several
students after class, the students responded that they did enjoy the presentation and doing
something in a different way. The author is therefore unsure of the students’ true reception of
this particular case study. Other studies have found that students can have divided responses of
they really liked it or they found it superfluous (Hodges, 2005) and this may be the case here.
Models, Molecular Model Activity, and Metal Non-Metal Activity
For the Modeling and the Molecular Modeling activity regular and honors classes showed
significant gains during the unit. In comparison to the greater gains on the case studies by the
regular classes, both groups seemed to benefit similarly for the Modeling and the Molecular
Modeling activities. This may support the idea that multiple forms of models help with
processing skills (Thiele and Treagust, 1994 and Ardac and Akaygun, 2004).
On the post assessment, it was noticed that several students attempted to use a Lewis diagram to
show an ionic molecule. It was also noted that the scores for the MEAP on Lewis structures
(Table 7) were higher than for the Modeling activities. This indicates that it is possible that not
enough time was spent distinguishing between diagrams for covalent bonds and diagrams for
ionic and metallic bonds.

22

Table 7: Analysis of Correct Student Responses on Lewis
Structure Questions
Percent of Students with Correct
Responses
Activity
Class
Pre-Test
Post-Test
Average
Average
Regular
23
73
C5.5c
3
Honors
64
77

23

Written diagrams are not as commonly seen for ionic bonds and almost never for metallic bonds.
The differences between concrete models and physical properties of the different bonds were
stressed several times, however drawings other than Lewis structures were not routinely used the
differences in drawings was not stressed. This was a fault of this unit. Next year, more attention
will be given to drawings of other types of bonding. This may give additional benefits as student
generated drawings have been shown to help in understanding of modeling (Van Meter et. al.,
2006).
The results for the activity comparing metals with non-metals showed both positive and negative
results. This was also the topic for which the students showed the greatest prior knowledge.
This activity may work better with the Periodic Table unit where this topic is first introduced.
There is no clear evidence to support the need for having more activities of this type in this unit.
Overall Results
The overall test results for the regular class seem to support that this unit was mostly successful
in improving student understanding. It also may indicate that the improvements were more
significant in the regular class than in the honors class. This is reasonable in more than one way.
The honors class showed more prior knowledge of the material meaning that the amount of new
material and room for improvement is greater for the regular classes. As mentioned earlier,
regular students are more likely to benefit from attempts to engage and use of multiple
illustrations than honors students who are more motivated and capable of learning in other ways.

24

Discussion
Case Studies and Labs
Based on the author’s experience with these case studies, I plan to continue using them and to
expand them to include more of a PBL component. I have tried incorporating some PBL labs at
the end of the semester and found the student response to be positive. I may attempt to use
“Avogadro Goes to Court” (Bieron, 1999) or adapt labs from other trainings. During the
research for this study, the author found other studies showing how PBL lab-based cases increase
students’ abilities to identify experimental variables that affect the outcome of an experiment
(Grunwald and Hartman, 2010). It would also need to be seen if lab-based case studies are best
used for introductory concepts early on or developed concepts at the end of units (Herreid,
2008).
Models, Molecular Model Activity and Metal Non-Metal Activity
The use of models appeared to be successful however improvement could be made. Using the
bonding models throughout the year and being more explicit in the use of analogical models in
other units should be beneficial. The benefit of manipulation of molecular models is seen in
studies occurring over the length of at least a semester (Gabel and Sherwood, 1980). The benefit
of the use of models to the honors classes also highlights the benefit of students recognizing the
use of multiple models (Harrison and Treagust, 1996).
Although the use of animations was rather limited, the author intends to make greater use of
animations in the future. They are more easily applied in other units and research has shown that
they have some benefits. The use of animations either in lecture or by students has been shown
to have the ability to increase student understanding of the particle nature of matter (Williamson

25

and Abraham, 1995) and the understanding of dissolution of sodium chloride (Kelly and Jones,
2007).

26

APPENDICES

27

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Student Consent Form (with a cover letter)

29

Appendix B: Chemical Bonding MEAP Objectives

33

Appendix C: Pre- / Post- Test (with rubric)

35

Appendix D: Metals vs. Non-Metals Activity

41

Appendix E: Phoenix Lander Case Study

44

Appendix F: Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab

51

Appendix G Molecular Models Lab

57

Appendix H: Molecular Analysis Case Study

63

Appendix I: List of Samples of Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Substances

67

28

Appendix A: Student Consent Form (with Cover Letter)

29

PARENTAL CONSENT AND STUDENT ASSENT FORM
Dear Students and Parents/Guardians:
I would like to take this opportunity to welcome you back to school and invite you to participate
in a research project, The Use of Models and Case Studies in Teaching Chemical Bonding,
that I will conduct as part of chemistry this semester. My name is Mark Erickson. I am your
science teacher this year and I am also a master’s degree student at Michigan State University.
Researchers are required to provide a consent form like this to inform you about the study, to
convey that participation is voluntary, to explain risks and benefits of participation, and to
empower you to make an informed decision. You should feel free to ask the researchers any
questions you may have.
What is the purpose of this research? I have been working on effective ways to teach chemical
bonding, and I plan to study the results of this teaching approach on student comprehension and
retention of the material. The results of this research will contribute to teachers’ understandings
about the best way to teach about science topics. Completion of this research project will also
help me to earn my master’s degree in Michigan State University’s Division of Math and
Science Education (DSME).
What will students do? You will participate in the instructional unit about chemical bonding.
You will complete the usual assignments, laboratory experiments and activities, computer
simulations, class demonstrations, and pretests/posttests just as you do for any other unit of
instruction. There are no unique research activities – participation in this study will not increase
or decrease the amount of work that students do. I will simply make copies of students’ work for
my research purposes. This project will continue from October to August 2011. I am asking for
permission from both students and parents/guardians (one parent/guardian is sufficient) to use
copies of student work for my research purposes. This project will continue from October to
August 2011.
What are the potential benefits? My reason for doing this research is to learn more about
improving the quality of science instruction. I won’t know about the effectiveness of my
teaching methods until I analyze my research results. If the results are positive, I can apply the
same teaching methods to other science topics taught in this course, and you will benefit by
better learning and remembering of course content. I will report the results in my master’s thesis
so that other teachers and their students can benefit from my research.
What are the potential risks? There are no foreseeable risks associated with completing course
assignments, laboratory experiments and activities, computer simulations, class demonstrations,
and pretests/posttests. In fact, completing course work should be very beneficial to students. One
risk that is very unlikely is that I might assign higher grades to students who agree to participate
in the research than to students who say “no”. I will minimize this risk by having another person
store the consent forms (where you say “yes” or “no”) in a locked file cabinet that will not be
opened until after I have assigned the grades for this unit of instruction. That way I will not know
who agrees to participate in the research until after grades are issued. In the meantime, I will

30

save all of your written work. Later I will analyze the written work only for students who have
agreed to participate in the study and whose parents/guardians have consented.
How will privacy and confidentiality be protected? Information about you will be protected to
the maximum extent allowable by law. Students’ names will not be reported in my master’s
thesis or in any other dissemination of the results of this research. Instead, the data will consist of
class averages and samples of student work that do not include names. After I analyze the data to
determine class averages and choose samples of student work for presentation in the thesis, I will
destroy the copies of student’s original assignments, tests, etc. The only people who will have
access to the data are me, my thesis committee at MSU, and the Institutional Review Board at
MSU. The data will be stored on password-protected computers (during the study) and in a
locked file cabinet in Dr. Heidemann’s locked office at MSU (after the study) for at least three
years after the completion of the study.
What are your rights to participate, say no, or withdraw? Participation in this research is
completely voluntary. You have the right to say “no”. You may change your mind at any time
and withdraw. If either the student or parent/guardian requests to withdraw, the student’s
information will not be used in this study. There are no penalties for saying “no” or choosing to
withdraw.
Who can you contact with questions and concerns? If you have concerns or questions about
this study, such as scientific issues, how to do any part of it, or to report an injury, please contact
the researcher.
Mark Erickson
3483 Spring Arbor Rd.
Jackson, MI 49203
merickson@jcslumenchristi.org
(517) 787-0630 x439
Dr. Merle Heidemann
118 North Kedzie Lab
Michigan State University
heidema2@msu.edu
(517) 432-2152 x107
If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, would like
to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint about this study, you
may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State University’s Human Research
Protection Program at 517-355-2180, Fax 517-432-4503, or e-mail irb@msu.edu or regular mail
at 207 Olds Hall, MSU, East Lansing, MI 48824.
How should I submit this consent form? If you agree to participate in this study, please
complete the attached form. Both the student and parent/guardian must sign the form. Return the
form to Mrs. Lefere, room 157, by January 31, 2010.

31

Name of science course: Chemistry
Teacher: Mr. Mark Erickson
School: Lumen Christi High School
Parents/guardians should complete this following consent information:
I voluntarily agree to have ____________________________________________ participate in
this study.
(print student name)
Please check all that apply:
Data:
___________ I give Mr. Erickson permission to use data generated from my child’s work in this
class for her thesis project. All data from my child shall remain confidential.
___________ I do not wish to have my child’s work used in this thesis project. I acknowledge
that my child’s work will be graded in the same manner regardless of their participation in this
research.
Photography, audiotaping, or videotaping:
___________ I give Mr. Erickson permission to use photos, audiotapes, or videotapes of my
child in the class room doing work related to this thesis project. I understand that my child will
not be identified.
___________ I do not wish to have my child’s images used at any time during this thesis project.

Signatures:
______________________________________________
(Parent/Guardian Signature)

________________________
(Date)

I voluntarily agree to participate in this thesis project.
______________________________________________
(Student Signature)
***Important***
Return this form to Mrs. Lefere.

32

________________________
(Date)

Appendix B: Chemical Bonding MEAP Objectives

33

Chemical Bonding MEAP Objectives
C2 Forms of Energy Chemistry students relate temperature to the average kinetic energy of the
molecules and use the kinetic molecular theory to describe and explain the behavior of gases and
the rates of chemical reactions. They understand nuclear stability in terms of reaching a state of
minimum potential energy.
C2.1x Chemical Potential Energy Potential energy is stored whenever work must be done
to change the distance between two objects. The attraction between the two objects may be
gravitational, electrostatic, magnetic, or strong force. Chemical potential energy is the result
of electrostatic attractions between atoms.
C2.1a Explain the changes in potential energy (due to electrostatic interactions) as a
chemical bond forms and use this to explain why bond breaking always requires energy.
C4 Properties of Matter Compounds, elements, and mixtures are categories used to organize
matter. Students organize materials into these categories based on their chemical and physical
behavior. Students understand the structure of the atom to make predictions about the physical
and chemical properties of various elements and the types of compounds those elements will
form. An understanding of the organization the Periodic Table in terms of the outer electron
configuration is one of the most important tools for the chemist and student to use in prediction
and explanation of the structure and behavior of atoms.
C4.3x Solids Solids can be classified as metallic, ionic, covalent, or network covalent.
These different types of solids have different properties that depend on the particles and
forces found in the solid.
C4.3e Predict whether the forces of attraction in a solid are primarily metallic, covalent,
network covalent, or ionic based upon the elements’ location on the periodic table.
C4.9x The rows in the periodic table represent the main electron energy levels of the atom.
Within each main energy level are sublevels that represent an orbital shape and orientation.
C4.9b Identify metals, non-metals, and metalloids using the periodic table.
C5 Changes in Matter Students will analyze a chemical change phenomenon from the point of
view of what is the same and what is not the same.
C5.5 Chemical Bonds -- Trends An atom’s electron configuration, particularly of the
outermost electrons, determines how the atom can interact with other atoms. The interactions
between atoms that hold them together in molecules or between oppositely charged ions are
called chemical bonds.
C5.5A Predict if the bonding between two atoms of different elements will be primarily
ionic or covalent.
C5.5x Chemical Bonds Chemical bonds can be classified as ionic, covalent, and metallic.
The properties of a compound depend on the types of bonds holding the atoms together.
C5.5c Draw Lewis structures for simple compounds.
C5.5d Compare the relative melting point, electrical and thermal conductivity and
hardness for ionic, metallic, and covalent compounds.
C5.5e Relate the melting point, hardness, and electrical and thermal conductivity of a
substance to its structure.

34

Appendix C: Chemical Bonding Pre- and Post-Test with Rubric

35

Chemical Bonding Pre-test
___ 1) What type of attractive force holds, or bonds, oxygen and magnesium together?
a) Ionic bond.
b) Covalent bond.
c) Metallic bond.
d) It does not react.
___ 2) What happens to oxygen when it forms a bond with magnesium?
a) It gains two electrons.
b) It loses two electrons.
c) It shares 2 electrons.
d) It does not react.
2b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
___ 3) What type of attractive force holds, or bonds, carbon and hydrogen together?
a) Ionic bond.
b) Covalent bond.
c) Metallic bond.
d) It does not react.
___ 4) What happens to carbon when it forms a bond with hydrogen?
a) It gains four electrons.
b) It loses four electrons.
c) It shares four electrons.
d) It does not react.
4b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
___ 5) What type of attractive force holds, or bonds, copper and zinc together?
a) Ionic bond.
b) Covalent bond.
c) Metallic bond.
d) It does not react.
___ 6) What happens to copper when it combines with zinc?
a) It gains two electrons.
b) It loses two electrons.
c) It shares 2 electrons.
d) It does not react.
6b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
7) Use the periodic table to identify the following elements as either metals or non-metals.
___ hydrogen
___ iodine
___ manganese ___ phosphorus ___ sodium
8) Which of the following elements will form an ionic bond with oxygen?
a) calcium
b) hydrogen
c) sulfur
d) nitrogen
8b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this element forms an ionic bond with oxygen.

36

___ 9) Which of the following is the correct Lewis diagram for ammonia (NH3)?
••

••

a) H : N : H

••

b) : H : N : H :

••

c) : N : H : H : H

••

H

••

••

H

••

••

d) : H : N : H :
••

••

••

:H:
••

10) Place the correct electron dots around the elements and then show the bonding for the
compound.
H
O

C

O

H

C

H

H
In the following matching question each choice may be used more than once and some questions
may have more than one answer.
11) Identify the following general characteristics as best describing either
a) ionic substances
b) covalent substances
c) metallic substances
___ solid form conducts electricity
___ high melting and boiling point
___ hard solid at room temperature
___ shiny and lustrous appearance

___ does not conduct electricity in solution
___ solid, liquid or gas at room temperature
___ conducts electricity in solution
___ low melting and boiling point

12) Explain why an ionic compound, such as NaCl, is not considered a molecule and a covalent
compound, such as H2O, is a molecule. You may use a drawing in your explanation if you
choose.

37

Chemical Bonding Pre-test Rubric
C4.3e Predict whether the forces of attraction in a solid are primarily metallic, covalent,
network covalent, or ionic based upon the elements’ location on the periodic table.
1) What type of attractive force holds or bonds oxygen and magnesium together?
a) Ionic bond. (+1)
b) Covalent bond.
c) Metallic bond.
d) It does not react.
C2.1a Explain the changes in potential energy (due to electrostatic interactions) as a chemical
bond forms and use this to explain why bond breaking always requires energy.
2) What happens to oxygen when it forms a bond with magnesium?
a) It gains two electrons. (+1)
b) It loses two electrons.
c) It shares 2 electrons.
d) It does not react.
2b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
When the oxygen gains two electrons it becomes negatively / anion (0.5) charged / ion
(0.5). When the magnesium loses two electrons it becomes positively / cation (0.5) charged
/ ion (0.5). The oppositely charged ions are now attracted (1.0) to each other. (+2)
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
negative
positive
attraction
anion
cation
electrostatic force
opposite
charges
force
loses/gains
electrons
more stable X
lower energy X
C4.3e Predict whether the forces of attraction in a solid are primarily metallic, covalent,
network covalent, or ionic based upon the elements’ location on the periodic table.
3) What type of attractive force holds or bonds carbon and hydrogen together?
a) Ionic bond.
b) Covalent bond. (+1)
c) Metallic bond.
d) It does not react.
4) What happens to carbon when it forms a bond with hydrogen?
a) It gains four electrons. (+1)
b) It loses four electrons.
c) It shares four electrons.
d) It does not react.
4b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
By sharing an electron with each of the four hydrogens, carbon has eight valence electrons
and each hydrogen has two valence electrons. This results in a more stable, or lower
energy, state that requires energy to break. (+2)
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
`eight e
sharing
electrons
two eX
chemical bond
octet rule
more stable
full valence level
lower energy

38

C4.3e Predict whether the forces of attraction in a solid are primarily metallic, covalent,
network covalent, or ionic based upon the elements’ location on the periodic table.
5) What type of attractive force holds or bonds copper and zinc together?
a) Ionic bond.
b) Covalent bond.
c) Metallic bond. (+1)
d) It does not react.
6) What happens to copper when it combines with zinc?
a) It gains two electrons.
b) It loses two electrons.
c) It shares 2 electrons. (+1)
d) It does not react.
6b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this results in an attractive force between the atoms.
The copper shares two electrons with other copper and zinc atoms. The delocalization of
these electron clouds results in a more stable, or lower energy, state that requires energy to
break. (+2)
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
(loosely) shared edelocalization
electron sea
more stable X
lower energy X
C4.9b Identify metals, non-metals, and metalloids using the periodic table.
7) Use the periodic table to identify the following elements as either metals or non-metals.
hydrogen
iodine
manganese
phosphorus
sodium
H – non-metal
I – non-metal
Mn – metal
P – nonmetal
Na - metal (+2.5)
C5.5A Predict if the bonding between two atoms of different elements will be primarily ionic or
covalent.
8) Which of the following elements will form an ionic bond with oxygen?
a) calcium (+1) b) hydrogen
c) sulfur
d) nitrogen
8b) Use one or two sentences to explain why this element forms an ionic bond with oxygen.
The oxygen requires an element with a low electronegativity, or metallic properties, in
order to remove its valence electrons and form an ionic bond. (+2)
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
low electronegativity
Ca loses elow attraction for ebecomes positively charged
metallic properties
large difference in electronegativity
O takes ebecomes negatively charged
C5.5c Draw Lewis structures for simple compounds.
9) Which of the following is the correct Lewis diagram for ammonia (NH3)?
••
••
••
•• •• ••
a) H : N : H (+1) b) : H : N : H :
c) : N : H : H : H
b) : H : N : H :
••
••
••
•• •• ••
H
H
:H:

39

••
10) Place the correct electron dots around the elements and then show the bonding for the
compound.
H
•• ••
••
:O:C:O:
H:C:H
•• ••
••
H
2 C-O bonds (+0.5)
4 C-H bonds (+1.0)
2 C-O pi bonds (+0.5)
2 x 2 lone pairs (+0.5)
0 lone pairs (+0.5)
C5.5d Compare the relative melting point, electrical and thermal conductivity and hardness for
ionic, metallic, and covalent compounds.
In the following matching question each choice may be used more than once and some questions
may have more than one answer.
11) Identify the following general characteristics as best describing either
I) ionic substances
C) covalent substances
M) metallic substances
_M_ solid form conducts electricity (+1)
_C_ does not conduct electricity in solution (+1)
_I,M high melting and boiling point (+2) _C_ solid, liquid or gas at room temperature (+1)
_I,M hard solid at room temperature (+2) _I__ conducts electricity in solution (+1)
_M_ shiny and lustrous appearance (+1)
_C_ low melting and boiling point (+1)
every incorrect answer is negative 0.5 points
(except for high BP and hard solid every incorrect answer is negative 1.0)
C5.5e Relate the melting point, hardness, and electrical and thermal conductivity of a substance
to its structure.
12) Explain why an ionic compound, such as NaCl, is not considered a molecule and a covalent
compound, such as H2O, is a molecule. You may use a drawing in your explanation if you
choose.
The NaCl is formed by attraction of any positve Na ion towards any negative Cl ion. The
H2O is formed by the forming of bonds between one specific O and two specific H. NaCl
isn’t a molecule because the bonds are not restricted to particular atoms but rather the entire
substance. (+3)
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
0.5
any Na
any Cl
one O
two H
any Na or Cl
specific H and O
repeating Na and Cl
units of H and O
+ Na Cl
X
H-O-H

40

Appendix D: Metals vs. Non-Metals Activity

41

name _____________________
date ______________________
group ____________________

Metals vs. Non-Metals
metal
aluminum
copper
iron
lead
magnesium
zinc

color

Table 8: Metal Element Properties
phase
malleability conductivity magnetism

volatility

Properties of metal elements:
1. color 2. phase 3. malleability 4. conductivity 5. magnetism 6. volatility -

nonmetal
carbon
nitrogen
sulfur

color

Table 9: Non-Metal Element Properties
phase
malleability conductivity magnetism

Properties of non - metal elements:
1. color 2. phase 3. malleability 4. conductivity 5. magnetism 6. volatility –

42

volatility

unknown
A
B
C
D
E
F

Color

Table 10: Unknown Elements
phase
malleability conductivity

magnetism

volatility

Identify the unknowns as metals or non-metals with a brief explanation. Then find the identity
of the unknowns from Mr. Erickson.
metal / non-metal

identity

A
B
C
D
E
F

43

Appendix E: Phoenix Lander Case Study

44

Soil Data from Mars Phoenix Lander
Set Up
The Mars Landers have special equipment that allows them to analyze the soil on Mars in order
to determine the composition of the surface, look for signs of water, and determine its suitability
for human colonization. Given certain physical properties for a surface sample, what type of
composition would you suspect?
Mission Overview
Mars is a cold desert planet with no liquid water on its surface. But in the Martian arctic, water
ice lurks just below ground level. Discoveries made by the Mars Odyssey Orbiter in 2002 show
large amounts of subsurface water ice in the northern arctic plain. The Phoenix Lander targets
this circumpolar region using a robotic arm to dig through the protective top soil layer to the
water ice below and ultimately, to bring both soil and water ice to the Lander platform for
sophisticated scientific analysis.
The complement of the Phoenix spacecraft and its scientific instruments are ideally suited to
uncover clues to the geologic history and biological potential of the Martian arctic. Phoenix will
be the first mission to return data from either polar region providing an important contribution to
the overall Mars science strategy "Follow the Water" and will be instrumental in achieving the
four science goals of NASA's long-term Mars Exploration Program.
--Determine whether Life ever arose on Mars
--Characterize the Climate of Mars
--Characterize the Geology of Mars
--Prepare for Human Exploration
The Phoenix Mission has two bold objectives to support these goals, which are to (1) study the
history of water in the Martian arctic and (2) search for evidence of a habitable zone and assess
the biological potential of the ice-soil boundary.
Equipment

Figure 9: Wet Chemistry Lab (WCL)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/images/press/WCL_delivery_2.html

45

Conductivity
The Thermal and Electrical Conductivity Probe (TECP) for NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander took
measurements in Martian soil and in the air. The needles on the end of the instrument were
inserted into the Martian soil, allowing TECP to measure the propagation of both thermal and
electrical energy. TECP also measured the humidity in the surrounding air. The needles on the
probe are 15 millimeters (0.6 inch) long.
Thermal Gas Evolver

Figure 10: Thermal Evolved Gas Analyzer (TEGA)
www.NASA.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/
TEGA is a combination high-temperature furnace and mass spectrometer instrument that
scientists will use to analyze Martian ice and soil samples. The robotic arm will deliver samples
to a hopper designed to feed a small amount of soil and ice into eight tiny ovens about the size of
an ink cartridge in a ballpoint pen. Each of these ovens will be used only once to analyze eight
unique ice and soil samples. Once a sample is successfully received and sealed in an oven, the
temperature is slowly increased at a constant rate, and the power required for heating is carefully
and continuously monitored. This process, called scanning calorimetry, shows the transitions
from solid to liquid to gas of the different materials in the sample: important information needed
by scientists to understand the chemical character of the soil and ice. As the temperature of the
furnace increases up to 1000°C (1800°F), the ice and other volatile materials in the sample are
vaporized into a stream of gases. These are called evolved gases and are transported via an inert
carrier to a mass spectrometer, a device used to measure the mass and concentrations of specific
molecules and atoms in a sample. The mass spectrometer is sensitive to detection levels down to
10 parts per billion, a level that may detect minute quantities of organic molecules potentially
existing in the ice and soil. With these precise measurement capabilities, scientists will be able
to determine ratios of various isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen, providing
clues to origin of the volatile molecules, and possibly, biological processes that occurred in the
past.
The TEGA is being built by a team at the University of Arizona, led by Dr. William Boynton and
at the University of Texas, Dallas by Dr. John Hoffman. This team has developed several
instruments for space flight, including a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) and Evolved
Gas Analyzer (EGA) that flew on the ill-fated Mars Polar Lander, and the Gamma-Ray
Spectrometer that is currently flying on the Mars Odyssey Orbiter. The latter instrument is
returning data on the elemental composition of Mars and has provided evidence for high
concentrations of subsurface ice in the Martian arctic.

46

Microscopy, Electrochemistry, and Conductivity Analyzer
The Microscopy, Electrochemistry, and Conductivity Analyzer (MECA) characterizes the soil of
Mars much like a gardener would test the soil in his or her yard. By dissolving small amounts of
soil in water, MECA determines the pH, the abundance of minerals such as magnesium and
sodium cations or chloride, bromide and sulfate anions, as well as dissolved oxygen and carbon
dioxide. Looking through a microscope, MECA examines the soil grains to help determine their
origin and mineralogy. Needles stuck into the soil determine the water and ice content, and the
ability of both heat and water vapor to penetrate the soil.
MECA's wet chemistry lab contains four single-use beakers, each of which can accept one
sample of Martian soil. Phoenix's Robotic Arm will initiate each experiment by delivering a
small soil sample to one beaker, which is ready and waiting with a pre-warmed and calibrated
soaking solution. Alternating soaking, stirring, and measuring, the experiment continues for the
entire day. It concludes with the addition of two chemical pellets. The first contains an acid to
tease out carbonates and other constituents that are only soluble in acidic solutions. The second
contains specific reagents to test for sulfates and soil oxidants.
The optical and atomic-force microscopes complement MECA's wet chemistry experiments.
With images from these microscopes, scientists will examine the fine detail structure of soil and
water ice samples. Detection of hydrous and clay minerals by these microscopes may indicate
past liquid water in the Martian arctic. The optical microscope will have a resolution of 4
microns per pixel, allowing detection of particles ranging from about 10 micrometers up to the
size of the field of view (about 1 millimeter by 2 millimeters). Red, green, blue, and ultraviolet
LEDs will illuminate samples in differing color combinations to enhance the soil and water-ice
structure and texture at these scales. The atomic force microscope will provide sample images
down to 10 nanometers - the smallest scale ever examined on Mars. Using its sensors, the AFM
creates a very small-scale "topographic" map showing the detailed structure of soil and ice
grains.
Prior to observation by each of the microscopes, samples are delivered by the Robotic Arm to a
wheel containing sixty-nine different substrates. The substrates are designed to distinguish
between different adhesion mechanisms and include magnets, sticky polymers, and "buckets" for
bulk sampling. The wheel is rotated allowing different substrate-sample interactions to be
examined by the microscopes.
MECA's final instrument, the thermal and electrical conductivity probe, will be attached at the
"knuckle" of the RA. The probe will probably consist of three small spikes that will be inserted
into the ends of an excavated trench. In addition to measuring temperature, the probe will
measure thermal properties of the soil that affect how heat is transferred, providing scientists
with better understanding of surface and atmospheric interactions. Using the same spikes, the
electrical conductivity will be measured to indicate any transient wetness that might result from
the excavation. Most likely, the thermal measurement will reflect ice content and the electrical,
unfrozen water content.

47

How could we determine the type of bonding of the Martian geology?
What physical and chemical properties would you expect for ionic, covalent, and metallic
compounds?

48

Practice Data
Sample 1:
conductive rock; high melting point,; does not dissolve into water
Type of rock: _______________
Sample 2:
non-conductive rock; high melting point; partially dissolves into water; electrolyte
Type of rock: _______________
Sample 3:
non-conductive rock; low melting point; dissolves into water; non-electrolyte
Type of rock: _______________
Sample 4:
non-conductive rock; high melting point; does not dissolve into water
Type of rock: _______________
Unknown Samples
Give a brief explanation of your reasoning.
Sample A:
Type of rock: _______________
Sample B:
Type of rock: _______________
Sample C:
Type of rock: _______________
Sample D:
Type of rock: _______________
Sample E:
Type of rock: _______________
Sample F:
Type of rock: _______________

49

Conclusion
Temperatures measured on Sol 151, the last day weather data were received, showed overnight
lows of minus 128 °Fahrenheit (minus 89 °Celsius) and day time highs in the minus 50 °F
(minus 46 °C) range. The last communication from the spacecraft came on Nov. 2, 2008.
Michael Hecht, the lead scientist for MECA.
Phoenix's preliminary science accomplishments advance the goal of studying whether the
Martian arctic environment has ever been favorable for microbes. Additional findings include
documenting a mildly alkaline soil environment unlike any found by earlier Mars missions;
finding small concentrations of salts that could be nutrients for life; discovering perchlorate salt,
which has implications for ice and soil properties; and finding calcium carbonate, a marker of
effects of liquid water. Chemicals such as sodium, magnesium, chloride and potassium were
also found.
"Not only did we find water ice, as expected, but the soil chemistry and minerals we observed
lead us to believe this site had a wetter and warmer climate in the recent past -- the last few
million years -- and could again in the future," said Phoenix Principal Investigator Peter Smith of
the University of Arizona, Tucson.
Another surprise from Phoenix was finding ice clouds and precipitation more Earth-like than
anticipated. The Lander's Canadian laser instrument for studying the atmosphere detected snow
falling from clouds. In one of this week's reports, Jim Whiteway of York University, Toronto,
and 22 coauthors say that, further into winter than Phoenix operated, this precipitation would
result in a seasonal buildup of water ice on and in the ground.

50

Appendix F: Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab

51

Name:
Group Members:

Date:

Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab
Purpose / Objective:
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The purpose of this lab is to recognize the physical characteristics of ionic, covalent, and
metallic substances. Then we will use the physical characteristics to classify several
substances as ionic, covalent, or metallic.
Background Information / Definitions / Formulas:
RESEARCH THE PROBLEM
1) How can ionic compounds be identified from the formula?
2) How can covalent compounds be identified from the formula?
3) How can metallic substances be identified from the formula?

Safety Precautions: Keep flammable substances (alcohol, etc.) away from open flames.
Wear safety glasses and follow standard safety procedures.
Objectives / Goals:
FORM AN HYPOTHESIS
Indicate whether you think the sample substances are ionic, covalent, or metallic.
Materials:
sample substances
penny
nail
glass plate

aluminum foil
Bunsen burner
ring stand
ring

Procedure:
Pre-Lab Procedures
Read through all lab procedures.

52

TEST THE HYPOTHESIS
wire gauze
scintillation vial
conductivity tester

Procedures
Hardness
Test the hardness of the solid samples. All liquid and gas
substances have a hardness of ‘0’. If your fingernail can scratch or
break the substance then the hardness is 1. If the substance will
scratch a penny then the hardness will be 2 or greater. If a nail can
scratch the substance then the hardness will be 3 or less. If the
substance will scratch glass then the hardness would be 4 or greater.
Some substances may not be able to be crushed. Record the
hardness.
Volatility / Odor
All gases are volatile. For the liquid and solid substances, use
proper wafting technique to test for a detectable odor from your
substance. Record how strong the odor was.

Melting Point and Boiling Point
Place a small amount (~1g) of your substance in an aluminum
tray. Place the tray on wire gauze over a Bunsen burner for a few
minutes to observe if the substance will melt or not. As soon as
the substance begins to melt or burn, remove the heat. Some
substances may not melt even when placed directly in the flame.
Record the relative melting point. Record also if the substance
burns or oxidizes in the air instead of melting.

Table 11: Hardness
Scale
0 liquid or gas
1 fingernail
2 penny or copper
3 nail or iron
4 glass
5 can’t be scratched
Table 12: Volatility /
Odor Scale
0 no detectable odor
1 slight odor
3 strong odor
5 gaseous substance
Table 13: Melting Point
Scale
0 gas
1 liquid
2 melts on tray
3 melts after min on tray
4 melts directly in flame
5 doesn’t melt

Solubility in Water
Mass out 0.1 g of powdered substance and place it in a
Table 14: Solubility Scale
graduated scintillation vial with 5 mL of distilled water.
0 does not noticeably dissolve
Cap the vial and shake it to see if the substance will
1 slightly soluble in 20 mL
completely dissolve. If it is not completely dissolved, then
3 soluble in 20 mL
add water to the 20 mL mark and observe the solubility. It
5 soluble in 5 mL
may be completely dissolved, slightly dissolved, or not
noticeably dissolved. Record the relative solubility of the substance and save the solution for the
next section.
Electrical Conductivity
Use the conductivity tester to determine the conductivity of the substance directly or of the
substance in solution. If the substance is not soluble in water indicate if it is conductive or not
conductive. If the substance is at least partially soluble in water indicate if the solution is
conductive or not conductive. Record the conductivity.
Post-Lab Clean-up
All solid substances should be returned to the materials area. All undissolved powders
may be placed in the trashcan. Any solutions may be washed down the sink with excess water.

53

Ionic, Covalent and Metallic Lab
Table 15: Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Properties
Hardness /
Volatility

(O2), & carbon
dioxide (CO2)
aluminum (Al)
ascorbic acid
(C6H8O6)
ammonium
carbonate
((NH4)2CO3)
brass (Cu and
Zn)
dextrose
(C6H12O6)
ethyl alcohol
(C2H6O)
ferric chloride
(FeCl2)
ferric nitrate
(Fe(NO3)3)
gypsum (CaSO4)
potassium
chloride
(KCl)
shale (SiO2 and
Al2O3)
starch
(C6H10O5)

V gaseous
5
H
V

Solubility
in Water

very low

air: nitrogen
(N2), oxygen

Melting
Point

very
soluble

0

5

H
V
H
V
H
V
H
V
V
H
V
H
V
H
V
H
V
H
V
H
V

water (H2O)

V

zinc (Zn)

low
1

H
V

54

Conductivity

Ionic,
Covalent,
or Metallic

Graphs and Charts:
1) Which substances were the hardest?

ANALYZE THE DATA

2) Which substances melted?
3) Which substances were electrolytes?
4) Which substances were conductive as solids?

Conclusion:
1) Which of the substances are ionic substances?

FORM A CONCLUSION

2) Which of the substances are covalent substances?
3) Which of the substances are metallic substances?

Evaluation of Goals / Objective
ACCEPT / REJECT HYPOTHESIS
1) Where your predictions about the type of substances correct?
2) What characteristics identify ionic bonds?
3) What characteristics identify covalent bonds?
4) What characteristics identify metallic bonds?

55

Appendix
Some ideas for the Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Lab were taken from the following material
found on-line at (Senese, 1999)
•

•

•

•

•

Electrical conductivity of the compound in aqueous solution. Ionic compounds
conduct electricity when dissolved in water, because the dissociated ions can carry charge
through the solution. Molecular compounds don't dissociate into ions and so don't
conduct electricity in solution.
Electrical conductivity of the compound in liquid form. Ionic compounds conduct
electricity well when melted; metallic solids do as well. Covalent molecular compounds
do not, because they usually don't transfer electrons unless they react.
Hardness. Molecular solids are usually much softer than ionic materials. Ionic crystals
are harder but often quite brittle. Squeezing an ionic crystal can force ions of like charge
in the lattice to slide into alignment; the resulting electrostatic repulsion splits the crystal.
Melting points and boiling points. In an ionic compound, the forces of attraction
between positive and negative ions are strong and high temperatures are required to
overcome them. The melting and boiling points of ionic compounds are usually very
high. A smaller amount of energy is required to overcome the weak attractions between
covalent molecules, so these compounds melt and boil at much lower temperatures than
metallic and ionic compounds do. In fact, many compounds in this class are liquids or
gases at room temperature.
Enthalpies of fusion and vaporization The enthalpy of fusion is the amount of heat
required to melt one mole of the compound in solid form, under constant pressure. The
enthalpy of vaporization is the amount of heat required to vaporize one mole of the
compound in liquid form, under constant pressure. These properties are typically 10 to
100 times smaller for molecular compounds than they are for ionic compounds.

Author: Fred Senese senese@antoine.frostburg.edu

56

Appendix G: Molecular Models Lab

57

Name:
Group Members:

Date:

Molecular Model Lab
Purpose / Objective:
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The purpose of this lab is to use ball and stick models to represent several examples of
covalent compounds and correctly predict the structure and polarity of the molecule.
Background Information / Definitions / Formulas:

RESEARCH THE PROBLEM

Group IV elements are black spheres with 4 holes for bonding.
Group V elements are blue spheres with 3 holes for bonding. (Some of the spheres may have
4 or 5 holes instead. These are extra for a different activity and only 3 holes should be used.)
Group VI elements are red spheres with 2 holes for bonding.
Group VII elements are purple, orange, green spheres with 1 hole for bonding.
Hydrogen atoms are the yellow spheres with 1 hole for bonding.
Wooden sticks are for bonds. You may use them interchangeably or the shorter ones for
bonds with hydrogen. Metal springs are for double bonds and should be used in pairs
Safety Precautions: No special safety precautions are required.
Objectives / Goals:
I predict that the sample molecule is _________.

FORM AN HYPOTHESIS

Materials:
1 box of molecular models.

TEST THE HYPOTHESIS

Procedure:
Pre-Lab Procedures
Remember the arrangement of the stored balls and sticks.
Procedures
For each of the given formulas build a model of the molecule. After having completed the
model molecule, make a sketch of the molecule in the given box on the data sheet. The sketch
should show the arrangement of the bonds and shape of the molecule. Be sure to designate
single or double bonds and label the name of the element for each atom. You may be asked to
have a certain number of completed models checked off during class.
Post-Lab Clean-up
Replace the balls and sticks to their correct places in the boxes. Return the complete molecule
kits where they belong.

58

Data Table for Regular Classes
Data Tables:

COLLECT THE DATA

Table 16: Table of Covalent Molecules
HF

polar / non-polar

H2O

polar / non-polar

NH3

polar / non-polar

CH4

polar / non-polar

BrF

polar / non-polar

O2

polar / non-polar

N2

polar / non-polar

C4H8

polar / non-polar

C2H4Cl2

polar / non-polar

polar / non-polar

59

Data Table for Regular Classes

Graphs and Charts:

ANALYZE THE DATA

1) Which molecules have double bonds?
2) Which molecules are polar?

Conclusion:

FORM A CONCLUSION

1) What is an example of a molecule with polar bonds that is non-polar?
2) What is a possible formula for the example molecule?

Evaluation of Goals / Objective

ACCEPT / REJECT HYPOTHESIS

1) What is the formula of the example molecule and was your hypothesis correct?

60

Data Table for Honors Classes
Data Tables:

COLLECT THE DATA

Table 17: Table of Covalent Molecules (Honors)
N2

polar / non-polar

O2

polar / non-polar

S8

polar / non-polar

ICl

polar / non-polar

CO2

polar / non-polar

SF2

polar / non-polar

PH3

polar / non-polar

C2H2

polar / non-polar

N2F2

polar / non-polar

C2H4

polar / non-polar

61

Data Table for Honors Classes

Table 17: Table of Covalent Molecules (cont.)
CH2CCH2

polar / non-polar

HNO2

polar / non-polar

CH2O

polar / non-polar

CHCl3

polar / non-polar

C6H12O6

polar / non-polar

polar / non-polar

Graphs and Charts:
1) Which molecules have double bonds?

ANALYZE THE DATA

2) Which molecules are polar?

Conclusion:
FORM A CONCLUSION
1) What is an example of a molecule with polar bonds that is non-polar?
2) What is a possible formula for the example molecule?

Evaluation of Goals / Objective
ACCEPT / REJECT HYPOTHESIS
1) What is the formula of the example molecule and was your hypothesis correct?

62

Appendix H: Molecular Analysis Case Study

63

Analysis of Commonly Known Compounds
Pictures of Unknown Substances
Figure 11: Corundum

Figure 12: Lye

Figure 13: Pewter

Figure 14: Triinitrotoluene

64

Analysis of Commonly Known Compounds
Below is a list of the formulas of some commonly known compounds. Each compound also has a
matching description of the properties of that compound. For some of these substances an
uncommon name has been used to make the identification a little more challenging.
A. CH3COCH3
D. C3H8

B. Al2O3
E. NaOH

C. 93% Ag, 6% Sb, and 1% Cu
F. C7H5N3O6

Give the matching formula for each of the following descriptions. With the formula identify the
substance as ionic, covalent, or metallic. For the covalent substances, identify if the substance is
polar or non-polar as well. Give at least one reason for your identification (i.e. high melting
point, conductive, etc.)
1. Corundum is an electrical insulator but has a relatively high thermal conductivity for a
ceramic material. Its hardness makes it suitable for use as an abrasive and as a component in
cutting tools.

2. Ethane is a colorless and odorless gas. It is isolated from natural gas and is a byproduct of
petroleum refining. It has a melting point of -182°C and a boiling point of -89°C.

3. Lye is available as a coarse powder or as flakes. It is also available as a solution dissolved in
water and is used in soaps and detergents. Lye also contains a polyatomic ion.

4. Pewter is a malleable alloy with a melting point around 200°C. It is a relatively easy material
to cast and has been used in the production of various objects.

5. Propanone is a colorless flammable liquid that mixes with water. It is an important solvent
and often used for cleaning in some industrial settings.

6. Triinitrotoluene, or TNT, is a yellow-colored solid best known as a useful explosive material
with convenient handling properties. It melts at 80°C allowing it to be poured as well as safely
combined with other explosives. It neither absorbs nor dissolves in water.

65

Aspirin is an analgesic used to relieve minor aches and pains and an antipyretic used to reduce
fever, and as an anti-inflammatory. It is a white, crystalline substance with a melting point of
135°C. It is somewhat soluble in water. Answer the following questions using the structural
formula of aspirin given below.
Figure 15: Lewis Structure of Aspirin

7. Give the formula for this substance and use the ball and stick models to create this compound.
8. Is this a polar or non-polar compound?
9. How many pi bonds does this compound contain?
10. What is the hybridization of the carbon atoms in this compound?
11. What is the hybridization of the oxygen atoms in this compound?

66

Appendix I: List of Sample Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Substances

67

List of Sample Ionic, Covalent, and Metallic Substances
IONIC COMPOUNDS
Samples
carbonates: calcium carbonate, ammonium bicarbonate
nitrates: aluminum nitrate, calcium nitrate, potassium nitrate, cupric nitrate hydrate, ferric
nitrate hydrate, silver nitrate, ammonium nitrate
phosphates: potassium phosphate hydrate monobasic
hydroxides: sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide
sulfates: aluminum sulfate hydrate, calcium sulfate, potassium sulfate, sodium sulfate,
manganese sulfate hydrate, cupric sulfate hydrate, ferric sulfate, ammonium sulfate
chlorides: barium chloride, cupric chloride hydrate, ferric chloride hydrate, cobalt chloride
hydrate, manganese chloride hydrate, ammonium chloride, potassium chlorate
others: potassium ferricyanide, potassium permanganate, potassium chromate, potassium
dichromate hydrate, ammonium dichromate, sodium acetate, lead acetate, silica gel, slate,
mica, quartz
COVALENT COMPOUNDS
Sample Solids
Elements: carbon, sulfur, iodine
Compounds: dextrose, starch, methyl red sodium salt, methyl orange sodium salt, analine
yellow, ascorbic acid, malachite green, acid violet, Trypan blue
Sample Liquids
Compounds: water, methanol, acetone, isopropyl alcohol
Sample Gases
Elements: nitrogen, oxygen
Compounds: carbon dioxide, methane
METALLIC COMPOUNDS
Samples
Elements: aluminum, copper, tin, zinc, lead, molybdenum, tungsten
Alloys: brass, mild steel, stainless steel

68

BIBLIOGRAPHY

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adadan, E., Trundle, K.C., and Irving, K.E. (2010). Exploring grade 11 students’ conceptual
pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multirepresentational instruction.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8) 1004-1035.
Albanese, M.A. and Mitchell, S. (January 1993). Problem-based learning: A review of the
literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1) 52-81.
Ardac, D. and Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that
emphasizes molecular representations on students’ understanding of chemical change. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 41(4) 317-337.
Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B., and Silberstein, J. (1986). Is an atom of copper malleable? Journal of
Chemical Education, 63(1) 64-66.
Bishop, C. B. (1990). Simulation of Rutherford’s experiment. Journal of Chemistry Education
67(10) 889-891.
Brink, C.P., Goodney, D.E., Hudak, N.J., and Silverstein, T.P. (1995). A novel spiral approach to
introductory chemistry using case studies from the real world. Journal of Chemical Education,
72(6) 530-532.
Butts, B. and Smith, R. (1987). HSC chemistry students’ understanding of the structure and
properties of molecular and ionic compounds. Research in Science Education, 17(1) 192-201.
Carr, M. (1984). Model confusion in chemistry. Research in Science Education, 14(1), 97-103.
Coll, R.K. and Treagust, D.F. (2001). Learners’ mental models of chemical bonding. Research in
Science Education, 31(3) 357-382.
de Vos, W. and Verdonk, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and
in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6) 657-664.
Dalton, J. (1808). A new system of chemical philosophy. London.
Derriso, A. (2011). Teaching Forward. The Science Teacher, 78(2) 48-51.

70

Dunbar, B. (2007). Pheonix Mars Lander, NASA, 2007. Web. June 2010.
National Aeronautics and Space Agency (2007). Phoenix Mars Lander. Retrieved from
www.NASA.gov/Phoenix
Einstein, A. (1905). On the movement of small particles suspended in stationary liquids required
by the molecular-kinetic theory of heat. Annalen der Physik, 17 549-560.
Gabel, D.L. and Sherwood, R. (1980). The effect of student manipulation of molecular models
on chemistry achievement according to Piagetian level. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 17(1) 75-81.
Griffiths, A. K. and Preston, K. R. (1992). Grade-12 students’ misconceptions relating to
fundamental characteristics of atoms and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
29(6) 611-628.
Grunwald, S. and Hartman, A. (2010). A case-based approach improves science students’
experimental variable identification skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(3) 28-33.
Harrison, A. G. and Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students’ mental models of atoms and
molecules: Implications for teaching chemistry. Science Education, 80(5) 509-534.
Harrison, A. G. and Treagust, D.F. (1998). Modeling in science lessons: Are there better ways to
learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 420-429.
Herreid, C.F. (1994). Case studies in science: A novel method of science education. Journal of
College Science Teaching 23(4) 221-229.
Herreid, C.F. (2005). The Interrupted Case Method. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(2)
4-5.
Herreid, C.F., Schiller, N., Herreid, K. F., and Wright, C. (2011). In case you are interested:
Results of a survey of case study teachers. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(4) 76-80.
Hesse, J. J., III (1992). Students’ conception of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 29(3) 277-299.

71

Hodges, L.C. (2005). From problem-based learning to interrupted lecture. Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education, 33(2) 101-104.
Kelly, R. M. and Jones, L. L. (2007). Exploring how different features of animations of sodium
chloride dissolution affect students explanations. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
16(5) 413-429.
Michigan Department of Education (2006, October). Chemistry High School Content
Expectations Retrieved from http://www.michigan.gov/documents/
CHEM_HSCE_168205_7.pdf
Nakhleh, M. B. (1992). Why some students don’t learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions.
Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3) 191-196
Newburgh, R., Peidle, J., and Rueckner, W. (2006). Einstein, Perrin, and the reality of atoms:
1905 revisited. American Journal of Physics, 74(6) 478-481.
Nicoll, G. (2001). A report of undergraduates’ bonding misconceptions. International Journal of
Science Education, 23(7) 707-730.
Novick, S., and Nussbaum, J. (1981). Pupils’ understanding of the particulate nature of matter: A
cross-age study. Science Education, 65(3) 187-196.
Ozmen, H. (2006). Some student misconceptions in chemistry: A literature review of chemical
bonding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2) 147-159.
Pai, A., Benning, T., Woods, N., McGinnis, G., Chu, J., Netherton, J., and Bauerle, C. (2010).
The effectiveness of a case study-based first-year biology class at a black women’s college.
Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(2) 32-39.
Reeves, J. (2010). “Make a conductivity tester” Anywhere anytime chemistry: UNC at
Wimington, n.d., Web, June 2010.
Rutherford, E. (1913). “The scattering of α and β particles by matter and the structure of the
atom.” Philosophical Magazine, 6(21) 669-688.

72

Rybarczyk, B. J., Baines, A. T., and McVey, M. (2007). A case-based approach increases student
learning outcomes and comprehension of cellular respiration concepts. Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education, 35(3) 181.
Salmon, R., Robbins, C., and Forinash, K. (2002). Brownian motion using video capture.
European Journal of Physics, 23(3) 249-253.
Senese, Fred (1999, May 31). What properties distinguish ionic compounds from covalent
compounds? posted to http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/compounds/faq/
properties-ionic-vs-covalent.shtml.
Thiele, R.B., and Treagust, D.F. (1994). An interpretive examination of high school chemistry
teachers’ analogical explanations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3) 227-242.
Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Atomic and molecular structure in chemical education. Journal of
Chemical Education, 74(8) 922-925.
Van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., and Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a
strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(2). 142166.
Williamson, V.M. and Abraham, M.R. (1995). The effects of computer animation on the
particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 32, 521-534.
Wu, H.K., and Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science
Education, 88(3) 465-492.
Yadav, A., Lundeberg, M., DeSchryver, M., Dirkin, K., Schiller, N. A., Maier, K., and Herreid,
C. F. (2007). Teaching science with case studies: A national survey of faculty perceptions of the
benefits and challenges of using case studies. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(1) 34-38.

73