Reflection on Student Work

Description of Task This falls in the middle of an activity sequence on the atomic model of the atom, specifically in a stretch where we move from the Thompson Model, through Rutherford. This activity was intended to simulate the Rutherford scattering experiment that was done, without a description of what Rutherford found first. Using marbles being shot out and following the path of the marble in and out students were supposed to be able to find the shape and proper size of the object hidden from view. On the paper that they used there were supposed to trace the lines in the way they saw most fitting, and draw the final shape on the paper as well with the proper dimensions. Ideal Response

Patterns in Students Responses Below are copies of the work the students did in groups. Most of the groups got the shapes correct, however most groups struggled with the correct size, and a good way to organize the data. Additionally from observations made during the activity most students really seemed to struggle to predict the path that the marble took while under the cardboard.

Implications for prior lessons and for assessment task Overall the background that something was shot at atoms, and that we could predict what the structure might look like based on that went pretty well. Students were able to make predictions before we started the activity as to what would be expected under Thompsons model which is what was covered before. The problems that arose in the activity and assessment mostly were centered around the students struggling to develop a good way to analyze their data. No groups did anything to try to track their marbles outside of entry and exit point and no groups did anything to systematically attempt to determine shape and size. When looking back this was the first time that students had attempted an activity of this nature. Most of the previous activities that were done with students had a heavier emphasis on graphing and finding a mathematical relationship, as opposed to this activity which focused much more on trying to visualize data. I tried to mention the importance of organizing the data that they collected, but no students seemed to do anything along those lines. Instead the groups took a random approach to shooting the marbles, and tried to guess where to put their lines. Implications for following lessons In the next lesson, we will be using a Phet Chemistry simulation to observe what Rutherfords actual data presented. We will discuss how this compares to the activity they did, and how they think they could have improved their data and analysis. While there were some issues in the way students approached the issue they got enough of what I wanted them to get out of the activity to be able to move on as originally planned, the only difference will be adding a brief discussion on data organization and interpretation which is something we will continue to focus on throughout the year. What I learned about how students learn Implications for teaching in general While this is fairly early in the unit I am noticing that students have a difficult time trying to develop models for things that they cannot see. It is difficult for them to interpret that data that surrounds things that cant be seen, and to express some sort of mental picture as well. Most of the class up to this

point has been focused on the macroscopic, only briefly touching on the particulate nature of matter, so these issues hadnt come out much prior to this activity and some of the days immediately preceding this lesson. Additionally I am finding that students have a very difficult time developing data collection almost from scratch. Many of the previous activities throughout the year have had them analyzing data that they collected, but the collection of that data was fairly well structured for the students. In order to get to an activity like this one, one has to be very careful to try to build students abilities up to this level. While the activity got to the base level that I hoped for I believe if the students were more accustomed to developing their own experiments they likely would have gotten a lot better results and likely would be better able of understanding more complicated experiments and data.