Professor |
Dr. Susan E. Groh |
| 208 Brown Laboratory | |
| Phone: 831-2915 | |
| E-mail: sgroh@udel.edu |
| Grade Weighting Scheme | Point Recapture | Lab Grading Scheme |
Final grades will be based on the following
weighting scheme:
| Hour Exams (3) | 45% |
| Comprehensive Final Exam | 15% |
| Problem Sets & Assignments | 15% |
| Laboratory Reports | 20% |
| Participation/Group Evaluations | 5% |
All three sections will meet together for common hour exams. This will require meeting outside of class three times during the semester (from 7:00 - 10:00 P.M on the three Thursdays indicated in the class schedule). Individual arrangements for examination will be made for students who have a legitimate academic or religious conflict with the scheduled exam time. There may be a take-home group component in some exams.
Educational research suggests that learning is enhanced in situations where
students can cooperate, rather than compete, with one another. To encourage
this, bell-curve grading is not used in this course; for you to succeed
does not mean that someone else must fail. Rather, the absolute "mastery"
grading standard indicated below will be used:
45 49 54 58 62 67 71 75 80 84 88 100
F | D- | D | D+ | C- | C | C+ | B- | B | B+ | A- | A |
Each laboratory session is overseen by a teaching assistant ("TA"); typically graduate students in chemistry, TA's are responsible for maintaining a safe lab environment and for providing assistance and advice as you carry out the experiments. They also grade the lab reports, following the common grading schemes prepared and furnished by the course instructor (SEG); the course instructor, however, has ultimate responsibility for the lab and assigns the final lab grade. Questions about an experiment may be directed to the instructor and/or the TA's.
More information about the lab, including a discussion of what's expected in a lab report, may be found in the Appendix to the lab manual.
Lab Grading System. One of the goals of the laboratory program is to expose you to the process of doing science. There is a myth about the scientific method (observation, hypothesis, experiment, analysis, and conclusion) that often is present in students' minds - namely, that these steps always proceed linearly and in sequence. In actuality real scientists stumble, collect data inaccurately, misinterpret or overinterpret results, miss significant aberrations, and so on. Science isn't a one-shot deal; one isn't always right or blessed with understanding at each and every stage. Chances are good that this will be your experience too, at times.
In order to minimize this problem, real-world science relies on the peer review system. When a scientist writes a paper describing some results, the paper is first submitted to other workers in that field for review. These reviewers look for problems in experimental design and execution, in data interpretation, and in analysis and extrapolation of results; if problems are found, the author is given the chance to correct them before the material is communicated to the rest of the scientific community.
We will utilize a similar system of evaluation in this course (based on an approach described by Miles Pickering in "Making Grading Less Painful", with D. Hershbach, in the Journal of College Science Teaching, vol 21, pp.377-379 (1991) ), with your lab teaching assistant serving as your initial peer reviewer. Lab reports will be graded according to the general guidelines below:
Each lab is nominally worth 100 points; of these, 5 points are reserved as "discretionary" points, to be awarded (in whole or part) by the lab TA as a measure of adequate completion of the prelab questions (before lab!) and of competent lab performance. Another 5 points will be assigned as a measure of accuracy in experimental results. The remainder of each lab report, then, may earn a maximum possible score of 90 points.
In conjunction with these 90 points, each lab report will receive one of the following ratings:
"Accepted": the report is exemplary as it stands. A report that is "Accepted" will address all the areas mentioned in the lab manual guidelines completely and competently. Data are presented in accepted formats, both accurately and clearly; the reader should have no difficulty in making sense of the information gathered. The procedure should be clear enough that someone else could repeat the experiment. Calculations are presented logically and correctly. Both Before and After Lab Questions are answered clearly, in complete sentences, in such a way as to demonstrate the writer's understanding of the concepts involved. The error analysis presents a discriminating look at sources of errors, rather than offering sweeping statements about "human error". The results and conclusions are summarized concisely. Labs with this rating will be awarded the maximum 90 points for this section.
"Accepted with minor revision". A report that is "Accepted with minor revisions" will typically have technical flaws, rather than conceptual errors. A technical mistake is one that does not reflect a misinterpretation of the concepts being addressed by the experiment; rather, it is more of an error in the "process" of doing or reporting the experiment (versus the "content" of the report). Mistakes such as inadequate procedures, simple math errors, sloppy or unclear presentation of graphical or tabular data, weak error analyses, missing summaries, etc. are considered technical errors. Included in the "minor revision" category are reports that contain a single conceptual error, with or without a few technical flaws. If left uncorrected, labs with this rating will be awarded 75 (out of 90) points (for this section.
"Accepted with major revision". A report that is "Accepted with major revisions" will typically contain two or more conceptual errors - i.e., mistakes in Before or After Lab questions that address the major ideas or concepts of the lab itself. Errors in presenting data or in calculation set-ups that lead to a flawed interpretation of the results require major revision, as do vague or ambiguous answers to questions. Reports with many technical errors may be downgraded to the "major revision" category. Either the lab TA or the professor should be consulted before revision is attempted. If left uncorrected, labs with this rating will be awarded 65 (out of 90) points for this section.
"Rejected": reserved for a report with multiple, substantial flaws. If left uncorrected, labs with this rating will receive nocredit for this section.
It is your decision as to whether or not to revise and resubmit a report. Any revised reports that become "Accepted" will be awarded 85 (out of 90) points. (The 5-point cost of revision is to discourage the initial submission of "rough draft" lab reports.) Revised reports that are still not completely acceptable will receive a grade no lower than the original. In this system, if you make mistakes in your first lab report, you still have the chance to learn from those mistakes and to regain almost full credit. The final lab grade will be an average over all the experiments, using the points indicated above.
Lab reports will generally be due one week after completion of the experimental work; revisions are due at the next lab session after receiving the graded lab. Makeup labs, due to tight scheduling of Drake 006, are not possible. If you can't make your usual lab section for a legitimate reason, you may be able to get into another CHEM 103H section that week, depending on the availability of space: see me as soon as you recognize the conflict.
"At times I felt the professor's notes became my notes without passing through either of our minds."
The traditional lecture approach to teaching is an excellent way to transfer information from one notebook to another; unfortunately, it's not necessarily an excellent way to develop a real understanding of chemistry. You don't learn how to ride a bike or speak French by listening to someone explain how to do it - you've got to try it yourself. To learn any subject well, including chemistry, you have to become actively involved in the learning process. The format of this course is designed to encourage that involvement by combining a problem-based, group-centered introduction to concepts with whole class discussions and lectures. Participation is encouraged and expected in all these activities, as befits an Honors course (please note the 5% "participation" component of the course grade!). To repeat an old but nonetheless accurate adage, " the only stupid question is the one not asked" - if you have doubts about something, I can assure you that there will be others with the same question!
In problem-based learning, real or potential problems and situations are used to introduce various ideas or topics and to serve as focal points for learning new material. You may find this a bit unusual, if you're accustomed to only working on problems after all the pertinent material has already been thoroughly discussed in class. The rationale here is to have the problem provide a context and reason for learning the material: you're not expected to be able to come up with a solution instantly - in fact, if you can, then I've written a poor problem! The problems are meant to encourage a discussion within small groups of students about what knowledge or insights each person can bring to the situation, what information you collectively still lack, and where to find that information. Students in this course have a wide range of backgrounds and experiences in chemistry, but each can make a valuable contribution to the efforts of the group. Some students may have more "content" knowledge than others and will be able to test just how deep that knowledge is, by trying to explain an idea to someone else. Others, by virtue of being unfamiliar with a particular area, can often help their group see a situation from different perspectives and, through their questions, make certain that all in the group end up really understanding the material.
In this course, at least in the early stages, the course text will generally be an adequate resource for the information or ideas you'll need to deal with problems; I will provide a collection of general chem texts for use in class, but you may prefer to have one person in your group bring along a copy of the course text, as well. You should be accustomed to viewing the whole text, not just the most pertinent chapter, as a source of information; in addition, the Chemistry library (located on the second floor of Brown Lab) has a wealth of reference materials, including several additional general chemistry texts that are placed on reserve for this course. The Internet is a good source as well, particularly for more topical information, provided that you take care to evaluate the reliability of any sites you consult. See the UD Library site for helpful guidelines.
You are encouraged to work together in this course - not just on formal group assignments, but on other problem sets and lab reports as well. If you've collaborated with others in any way in preparing an individual assignment, you are responsible for (1) preparing your own answers in your own words, and (2) acknowledging your discussions with others by citing your collaborators' names in your assignment. Work that appears simply to have been copied from another's paper will not be accepted from either student involved.
During an assignment each person in the group is expected to participate fully; to ensure that, each member will be assigned a role to fulfill. These roles will rotate with each assignment or activity. The descriptions of responsibility for each of these roles follows:
Late penalties Lab reports, problem sets, and other assignments that are turned in late will be subject to a grade penalty, unless the situation has first been discusses with the course instructor or laboratory TA.
Safety. Delaware state law requires that you wear safety goggles AT ALL TIMES when working in a chemical laboratory - from the moment you enter until the time you leave, unless the TA explicitly states that goggles are not needed that day. Any student not wearing goggles when required will be asked to leave the lab, and will receive a nonnegotiable grade of zero for that experiment. Safety rules also forbid the wearing of shorts, short skirts, or sandals in the lab; long or unruly hair must be restrained. You'll receive additional instructions concerning laboratory safety at your first lab meeting.
Academic dishonesty has no place in this or any other course. Cheating in any form (plagiarism, copying, sharing data or text files, altering information, storing information in calculators, using cribs on exams, etc.) will result in judicial proceedings in accordance with the University's policy on academic dishonesty. For a discussion of what constitutes academic dishonesty, please see the Code of Conduct .
Here are some other recommendations, from former students:
| Exam Schedule | Problem Set Schedule |
Schedule of Topics and Readings
| Dates (approx.) | Topics | Text Readings |
| 9/3 | Introduction | Ch. 1 |
| I. THE ATOMIC MODEL | ||
| 9/5-9/12 | Historical background and Dalton's atomic theory | Ch. 2 |
| Atomic structure | ||
| Molecules: structures and nomenclature | ||
| 9/15-9/24 | Masses and moles
Determining chemical formulas Stoichiometry |
Ch. 3 |
| II. THE NATURE OF CHEMICAL CHANGE: AN OVERVIEW | ||
| 9/24-10/3 | Chemical reactions | Ch. 4 |
| 10/6-15 | Thermochemistry | Ch. 6 |
| III. ELECTRONIC STRUCTURE AND PERIODICITY | ||
| 10/17-31 | Quantum theory and the atom | Ch.7 |
| 11/3-10 | Electronic structure and periodicity | Ch. 8 Interchapter, Ch. 14 |
| IV. CHEMICAL BONDING | ||
| 11/12-21 | Models of chemical bonding | Ch. 9 |
| Molecular geometry | Ch. 10 | |
| Bonding theory |
Ch. 11 |
|
| V. STATES OF MATTER | ||
| 11/24-26 | Gases | Ch. 5 |
| 12/1-10 | Liquids and solids | Ch. 12 |
Common hour exams for all three sections are scheduled for the following
days and times:
| Oct. 2 | EXAM 1 | 004 Kirkbride | 5:00 - 7:00 P.M. |
| Oct. 30 | EXAM 2 | 004 Kirkbride | 5:00 - 7:00 P.M. |
| Dec. 4 | EXAM 3 | 004 Kirkbride | 5:00 - 7:00 P.M. |
Arrangements will be made for alternate testing times for students with legitimate academic and religious conflicts with this schedule. Please see me as soon as you are aware of a conflict. If room restrictions allow, the exam period will be extended until 8 pm to allow ample time for work. Students who have a class scheduled after the 5-7 exam slot and who wish to take advantage of the opportunity for extra time should see me about resolving the conflict.
Anticipated schedule for problem set assignments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| T 9/16 | End of free drop/add period |
| T 10/17 | First year students' midterm marking period ends |
| M 10/27 |
Fall Break Day: no classes or labs |
| T 10/28 | Last day to change registration or withdraw from courses w/o academic penalty |
| R 11/20 | Spring registration begins |
| R-F 11/27-28 | Thanksgiving: no classes |
| W 12/10 | Last day of classes |
| 12/11-19 | Final exam period |
| Date | Experiment | Lab Report Due For |
| 9/8-9 | Check-in, Safety | |
| Chemical Stoichiometry: Job's Method | ||
| 9/15-16 | Chemical Analysis by Thermal Decomposition | Chemical Stoichiometry |
| 9/22-23 | Thermal Decomposition (cont'd.) | |
| 9/29-30 | Water Analysis: I. Hardness | Thermal Decomposition |
| 10/6-7 | Water Analysis: II. Dissolved Oxygen | Hardness |
| 10/13-14 | (TBA) | Dissolved Oxygen lab |
| 10/20-21 | Enthalpy of Formation of NH4Cl | (TBA) |
| 10/27-28 | No labs | |
| 11/3-4 | Atomic Emission Spectroscopy |
Enthalpy |
| 11/10-11 | Characterization of Industrial Inorganic Compounds by Chemical Interactions (Note: you will need to look up and have certain data available at the start of this lab: please plan accordingly!) | Atomic Emission |
| 11/17-18 | Characterization cont'd | |
| 11/24-25 | (TBA) | Characterization |
| 12/1-2 | Solid State Structures | (TBA) |
| 12/8-9 | Solid State Structures (cont'd.) | |
| 12/12 | Structures |
|
|
"http://www.udel.edu/~sgroh/chem103syll.html"
Last updated August 14, 2003. Copyright University of Delaware, 1997. |