396
T. C. Johnstone
among the 70% whose answers were categorized as “yes,” included: “Yes. I feel like
it tied together multiple concepts nicely.”; “It was very interesting and useful.”; “I
did find it helped me better understand the concepts.”; “Yes, absolutely!” Responses
from those whose answers were classified as “somewhat” included: “I think so, but
am not 100% sure”; “I thought so. But looks like I was wrong.”; “It helped a bit. …
It has always been a challenging subject for me.”
11.4 Discussion
The present-day maturity of FLP chemistry signals that it is ready to be incorporated into mainstream undergraduate education. Although FLP chemistry can be
easily included as an “additional topic” or an example of a research application of
main-group chemistry, recent developments in FLP research, which have highlighted
the explicit thermodynamic connections between the chemistry of FLPs and classical Lewis adducts, suggest that alternative presentations are possible. With regard
to course design and instruction, the incorporation of FLP chemistry as a natural
progression from Lewis acid–base chemistry was facile. The links between FLP
chemistry and conventional Lewis acid–base chemistry also facilitate the development of assessments that target higher level cognitive domain objectives. Effective
chemical learning requires that student learning be assessed across the entire landscape of the cognitive domain [30]. Questions like those provided as examples in the
Results section allow the student to understand, apply, analyze, and evaluate as they
explore the extrapolation of classical Lewis acid–base chemistry to FLP chemistry.
The response of this initial cohort of UC Santa Cruz students to the material has
been positive, a reception that is reflected in the narrative responses collected in the
postquestionnaire.
The data collected from the questionnaire also provide preliminary insight into
whether teaching the FLP concept can help to cement an understanding of fundamental thermodynamic concepts. Figure 11.2 shows that for all questions the proportion of correct answers was greater after the coverage of the FLP material, but
the sample size is too small to meaningfully quantify the statistical significance of
this difference. A comparison of the responses from the pre and postquestionnaires
reveals that certain simple concepts were well established even before the start of the
course. For example, 100% of students responded correctly on both questionnaires to
questions about the relationship between equilibrium constants and concentrations
(Question 2) and the use of equilibrium constant to represent the extent of a reaction
(Question 3). Although a few students gave incorrect answers for the definition of an
equilibrium constant (Question 1) on the prequestionnaire, all respondents gave the
correct answer in the postquestionnaire. Given the semantic nature of the knowledge
probed with Question 1, the improvement likely stems from student re-exposure to
topics that they have not used recently. Indeed, one of the narrative responses on the
postquestionnaire included the following statement: “Although it had been a while
since I took thermodynamics so I thought it helped jog my memory a little bit.” The
T. C. Johnstone
among the 70% whose answers were categorized as “yes,” included: “Yes. I feel like
it tied together multiple concepts nicely.”; “It was very interesting and useful.”; “I
did find it helped me better understand the concepts.”; “Yes, absolutely!” Responses
from those whose answers were classified as “somewhat” included: “I think so, but
am not 100% sure”; “I thought so. But looks like I was wrong.”; “It helped a bit. …
It has always been a challenging subject for me.”
11.4 Discussion
The present-day maturity of FLP chemistry signals that it is ready to be incorporated into mainstream undergraduate education. Although FLP chemistry can be
easily included as an “additional topic” or an example of a research application of
main-group chemistry, recent developments in FLP research, which have highlighted
the explicit thermodynamic connections between the chemistry of FLPs and classical Lewis adducts, suggest that alternative presentations are possible. With regard
to course design and instruction, the incorporation of FLP chemistry as a natural
progression from Lewis acid–base chemistry was facile. The links between FLP
chemistry and conventional Lewis acid–base chemistry also facilitate the development of assessments that target higher level cognitive domain objectives. Effective
chemical learning requires that student learning be assessed across the entire landscape of the cognitive domain [30]. Questions like those provided as examples in the
Results section allow the student to understand, apply, analyze, and evaluate as they
explore the extrapolation of classical Lewis acid–base chemistry to FLP chemistry.
The response of this initial cohort of UC Santa Cruz students to the material has
been positive, a reception that is reflected in the narrative responses collected in the
postquestionnaire.
The data collected from the questionnaire also provide preliminary insight into
whether teaching the FLP concept can help to cement an understanding of fundamental thermodynamic concepts. Figure 11.2 shows that for all questions the proportion of correct answers was greater after the coverage of the FLP material, but
the sample size is too small to meaningfully quantify the statistical significance of
this difference. A comparison of the responses from the pre and postquestionnaires
reveals that certain simple concepts were well established even before the start of the
course. For example, 100% of students responded correctly on both questionnaires to
questions about the relationship between equilibrium constants and concentrations
(Question 2) and the use of equilibrium constant to represent the extent of a reaction
(Question 3). Although a few students gave incorrect answers for the definition of an
equilibrium constant (Question 1) on the prequestionnaire, all respondents gave the
correct answer in the postquestionnaire. Given the semantic nature of the knowledge
probed with Question 1, the improvement likely stems from student re-exposure to
topics that they have not used recently. Indeed, one of the narrative responses on the
postquestionnaire included the following statement: “Although it had been a while
since I took thermodynamics so I thought it helped jog my memory a little bit.” The