This is just one example of where departing from a traditional or specification-determined order can mean that students attain a more sophisticated and holistic comprehension of fundamental chemistry than otherwise.Free Online Drawing Software Tools 2021: Diagrams are effective communication elements that can visualize and make others understand our concepts faster than anything else. You can then return to them and refine their answers at a later stage. Or get them to draw an atom of helium and explain why it does not need to form ions.ĭespite not having studied group 0, once students have studied outer shells and ions, they should be able to answer questions like this – albeit not to an exam-ready standard. You can also foreshadow later topics by asking students to draw an atom of neon and explain why it does not need to gain or lose electrons, for example. For example, ask students what the charge on a nucleus is, what the total charge on the nucleus of Na/P/Br … is and to explain why nucleuses and electrons are attracted to each other. As such, you will want to make sure you ask questions earlier on in the sequence. When it comes to the final section, students will need a strong understanding of outer shell completion, and fluency in the charges of subatomic particles and their electrostatic behaviour. To mitigate this problem, some textbooks go so far as to add the formation of ions into the sequence earlier on: Mastery of a few basic principles can unlock a vast range of applications Similarly, for group 0, explaining that the elements need to neither gain nor lose electrons is far easier once students have fully internalised outer shell behaviour. These explanations only make sense to students once they have studied the formation of ions and the behaviour of outer shell electrons. When we teach reactivity at 14-16, we say that group 1 elements become more reactive down the group due to the ease of losing the outer shell electron, and group 7 less reactive down the group due to the difficulty of gaining an outer shell electron. The problem arises from the trends in reactivity in groups 1 and 7 and the inert nature of group 0. I find this sequence problematic, due to the aforementioned risks of knowledge fragmentation. Popular textbooks often follow suit, resulting in this order:Ītomic structure > periodic table > groups 1, 7 and 0 > structure and bonding Several exam specifications do the same, discussing groups 1, 7 and 0, before doing structure and bonding. The key stage 4 national curriculum begins with embedding knowledge of atomic structure and the periodic table (including trends in groups), before moving on to knowledge of structure and bonding. Get it right, and students will appreciate the interconnectedness of chemical concepts and how mastery of a few basic principles can unlock a vast range of applications. Get it wrong, and students’ knowledge becomes fragmented and disjointed, untethered from a unifying narrative. When the substance of our lessons is so deeply interrelated, it’s crucial we do it in the right order, so sequencing is everything. A simplification, to be sure, but a simplification which explains the elegance of the modern periodic table, Mendeleev’s foresight, how atoms interact and bond with each other, how simple and giant structures come to be, the trends in reactivity in groups 1 and 7 and the nobility of group 0.
Chem draw make a flowchart free#
Having conceived of atoms as billiard balls for the first few years of secondary school, we are finally free to start teaching students about the power of the electron shell model of the atom. The start of 14–16 chemistry is a beautiful thing. Stepping away from traditional or specification-determined sequencing may help your chemistry students better master basic principles and unlock a vast range of applications