Data-Driven Chemistry and Molecular Origami:
Selected anecdotal comments from students
-
While it was disturbing to have so little
reliance on the textbook, I feel I probably
learned more from not using it. Instead of
reading information we figured it out for
ourselves.
-
I really liked [the] data sheets and the hands
on approach both with molecules...
Overall I really enjoyed the class
and learned a lot.
-
It would have been nice to have
had a book that coincided with what we were
learning. I definitely would have paid $20 for
a book of models and questions.
-
The course provided me with a much better
picture of atoms and molecules and how they
bond than I would have gotten in 125 in a very
organized way which built on other models to
explain them better.
-
It was confusing to go into groups first and
then discuss later because we were told
different things sometimes in the groups and
then learn the right answer later. It might be
better to discuss the material first and then
break into groups.
-
The format of the course was extremely helpful.
A short intro to the material, then small group
discussion and hands-on work, with a large
group summary was excellent! I feel I
understand this better than I would have just
through lecture, and it was more interesting
this way, too.
-
Especially within the sciences, two clear-cut
ways to learn exist. For so long science has
been stuck in a mathematical mode i.e., we
tell you facts, you memorize facts, you
reguritate facts on tests. This works well for
many students and is a good method. However,
this class was almost perfectly suited to the
other kind of student (myself). The class was
theoretical and visual and provoked intense
thought. It is of paramount importance to
continue and broaden this style of teaching in
science. This was the best class I have had at
St. Olaf and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Also
Chemistry 121 was far too much like Chemistry
125 and not enough like 123 the classes should
be divided distinctly not one taught one way
and the other half and half. I have more to
say...signed...
Chemistry 123 interim course evaluation supplemental
questions. January, 1995, Professor R. Hanson 03-1230-025
(1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) disagree
somewhat (4) agree somewhat (5) agree (6) strongly
agree
median/mean indicated in italics
Atoms: First two weeks
- Analyzing "data" was effective in helping me learn
about atoms. (5.50/5.21)
- The essays were effective in helping me learn about
atoms. (5.61/5.38)
- It was disturbing to have so little reliance on the
textbook. (3.96/3.81)
- I feel that I learned what I needed to know about
atoms. (5.23/5.17)
- I wish I had learned about atoms this way in my
high school chemistry course. (Leave blank if not
applicable.) (4.89/4.51)
Molecules: Second two weeks
- The 300,000,000:1 scale models were effective in
helping me learn about the structure of molecules.
(4.85/4.77)
- Analyzing the slight variations in molecular
structures presented by the models helped me learn
about bonding. (4.79/4.71)
- I would have been willing to spend $20 to buy a
book of models with associated questions and
discussion relating to bonding. (4.00/3.94)
- I wish I had learned about molecules this way in my
high school chemistry course. (Leave blank if not
applicable.) (4.91/4.64)