Integrating Big Ideas with a Traditional Topic Sequence in the AP

Chemistry Course: First Steps

Christopher Kennedy*
Science Department, Hiram High School, Hiram, Georgia 30141 United States
*S Supporting Information
ABSTRACT: Shifting focus from teaching traditional introductory chemistry topics in a
linear sequence to an emphasis on big ideas and enduring understandings in the
advanced placement (AP) chemistry course can be a challenging yet rewarding endeavor.
In this submission, a restructuring of the curricular sequence is proposed along with
potential learning experiences that align to it. This contribution is part of a special issue
on teaching introductory chemistry in the context of the advanced placement chemistry
course redesign.
KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, Curriculum, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning, Constructivism,
Professional Development

NEW EXPECTATIONS, NEW CHALLENGES

The College Board, with its recent emphasis on big ideas,
enduring understandings, and scientic practices, has chal-
lenged me to rethink how to teach the fundamental concepts
and nature of our science. The advanced placement (AP)
teachers that I know, like myself, have traditionally divided the
course into units in which our students are introduced to new
vocabulary, skills, and algorithms, often in the same sequence as
the textbooks on our approved lists. In the past, the textbook
was like the AP chemistry bible for the students. It clearly laid
out the contents, sequentially, and matched the course
frameworks. The way the topics were presented and the
methods of practice and assessment were also consistent with
the course frameworks. Now, however, we are asked to address
the big ideas in AP chemistry, which often include topics
from multiple chapters.
1
Although the big ideas of chemistry as
outlined in the redesigned AP framework could be woven
through this topical sequence, I have previously approached the
course as a sequential progression of ideas rather than the
interconnected one that might unify it into a cohesive whole.
1
We also had previously released multiple-choice and free-
response questions to help prepare our students. Yet, now I am
being asked to prepare my students for deeper, conceptual
questions with an emphasis on using particulate-level modeling
in my instruction and my assessments. Essentially, I have to
dump out my teacher toolbox, sort through it, and decide
what to keep, what to modify, and what to go nd or create.
Even after teaching chemistry for 20 years, this is a
tremendous challenge. Inquiry is not the problem; I embraced
the idea of inquiry learning and activities in my classroom many
years ago. I have written a number of activities and conducted
workshops on inquiry in the science classroom and believe a
constructivist approach tremendously enriches the chemistry
classroom. I am ne with asking the students to develop deeper
conceptual understanding of the content, including prompts to
take everything back to the particle level. I often ask my
students to draw or discuss what they think might be happening
on the submicroscopic level.
2
For two decades as a teacher and
most of a third decade as a student of chemistry, I have
attempted to relate the key topics to paint a bigger picture, like
connecting electron congurations to periodic trends and
solubility. I have tried to help students see the relationship
between electronegativity, polarity, bond strength, and the
ability to predict strengths of acids using this understanding. I
thought that I was weaving the seemingly disparate topics into a
tapestry. And yet this year, I feel inadequate, as I wrestle with
these questions:
(1) How do the traditional topics as have been presented to
me when I was learning them (and still in most
textbooks) t within this new framework emphasizing
teaching through the construct of big ideas that cut
across and through the entire introductory course
sequence?
(2) How do I sequence these big ideas in a way that will still
allow the students to build foundational understandings
before advancing to more complex relationships?
(3) What tools (laboratories, assessments, simulations,
discussions, etc.) should I retain from my past attempts
at presenting this material, and what do I need to
reinvent or discard altogether?
Question 1 has not been as dicult to deal with as I initially
thought. I have not been a textbook teacher, in my rst-year
(pre-AP) courses, for years. I have organized the topics in these
courses in terms of importance to the big picture. For
example, I teach moles and the dimensional analysis associated
with those conversions near the beginning of the course. The
new frameworks have forced me to do a similar analysis for AP
chemistry.
Special Issue: Advanced Placement (AP) Chemistry
Commentary
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
XXXX American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc. A dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed5000263 | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX
I gained a major insight this fall at one of my weekly
professional learning community meetings for chemistry.
Another chemistry teacher wanted to move a lab that we
traditionally use during our rst unit to another unit. I initially
argued against the change because we use that lab to illustrate
the concepts of chemical versus physical changes. As the
discussion progressed, it dawned on me that this same activity
also allowed students to experience phase changes, the idea of
solubility, the law of conservation of matter, the activity series
for metals, mole conversions/calculations, stoichiometry, and a
single-replacement reaction, all of which are traditionally taught
in dierent units. If I view these as separate units, how can I
help students see the big ideas behind them?
So I began resequencing my AP chemistry class. I tried
looking for relationships that might not, initially, be obvious. I
am now trying to think of the topics in AP chemistry as
spiraling rather than as linear, continuously reinforcing and
enriching each other. Topics that are traditionally considered
advanced (i.e., equilibrium, kinetics, thermodynamics) are
often found later in the text, once some of the foundational
concepts have been introduced and mastered. However, it is
also these topics that demonstrate the crosscutting relationships
seen in the big ideas. I am proposing that these topics be
introduced much more quickly in order to provide oppor-
tunities to spiral the curriculum. The sequencing that I have
initially settled upon is shown in Table 1.

REIMAGINING A UNIT ON KINETICS

This fall, I tried a new approach for kinetics. As a proponent of
experience-rst teaching, I decided to use a lab activity as the
focus. The unit, this iteration, was designed around a particular
lab experience: acidication of thiosulfate.
4
A white piece of
paper with a black X is placed under the reaction vessel. The
amount of sulfur produced is monitored visually and the
students record the time required until they can no longer see
the X under the reaction vessel. As the initial concentrations of
reactants are varied, the students collect times for the reaction
to produce a relatively constant amount of elemental sulfur.
The students then conduct several trials in which temperature
of the system is varied and the initial concentrations are held
constant. During the lab activity, the students are not able,
initially, to anticipate results. As the activity progresses, the
students begin to recognize patterns in the data collected and
begin to develop simple models of how the systems behave.
The data are then used to discuss the ideas of integrated rate
laws as well as providing data for a graphical analysis to
determine reaction order. The students were assessed via a
formal laboratory report, a short quiz at the midpoint of the
unit, and a formal test consisting of conceptual multiple-
choice questions and several free-response questions. Moving
forward, I am thinking about using a simulation as introduction.
I have a hands-on activity utilizing interlocking building blocks
in mind, which allows the students to experience the ideas of
reaction rates, dynamic equilibrium, catalysts, and competing
reactions.
5
Additionally, I may supplement this activity with
Reactions and Rates from PhET to both conceptually and
visually reinforce the particle nature of these interactions.
6
This
unit, though still discrete, followed on the heels of behavior of
gases. The two were tied together by the idea of reinforcing the
particle nature of matter, particle motion in chemical systems,
and the interactions of those particles, one of the critical tenets
of any chemistry class. This unit eectively introduces and
provides practice with the concepts from big idea 4 in the new
AP chemistry framework. In sequence, the unit would appear:
(1) Simulation (whether hands-on or PhET Reactions and
Rates
6
).
(2) Discussion: Requirements for successful reaction, equi-
librium.
(3) Prelab: Acidication of thiosulfate, introduce method of
initial rates concept.
(4) Data collection for acidication of thiosulfate.
(5) Data analysis: Integrated rate laws, graphical method,
temperature eects.
(6) Postlab: Determination of rate law, overall rate order,
calculation of rate constant, and error analysis.
(7) Formal or summative assessment.

THE BIG PICTURE

Most AP chemistry students have already completed a year of
introductory chemistry. During this time they will have been
introduced to some of the fundamental ideas and process skills
of chemistry: atomic theory, nomenclature, balancing chemical
equations, and stoichiometric calculations. Initial instruction,
often in the form of a summer assignment, should focus on
refreshing these ideas and skills. For my students, this means
that they walk into the AP chemistry course with solid
conceptual, algorithmic, and experimental foundations across
big ideas 1, 2, and 3. The sequencing and suggested activities I
outline here can be found, summarized, in a table in the
Supporting Information.
Particulate Nature of Matter
The rst full unit that I cover with my students looks at the
behavior of gases. Gas laws, which are often covered in rst-year
courses, are familiar territory to my students. Through this
unit, I use a familiar topic to introduce some less-familiar
skills: AP-style lab reports, AP free-response questions, and
Table 1. Proposed Sequence for AP Chemistry
Anchoring Concept
a
Traditional Topics
Fundamentals Atomic structure (including
electron congurations)
Review First-Year Chemistry, Including
Summer Assignment
Nomenclature
Periodicity
Valence shell electron pair
repulsion (VSEPR)
Basic chemical reactions
Stoichiometry
Particle Nature of Matter Gases
Intermolecular forces (related to
gases)
Kinetics
Energy and Equilibrium Chemical equilibrium
Thermochemistry
Spontaneity, entropy, free energy
Aqueous Systems Aqueous reactions (including net
ionic, redox)
Intermolecular forces (related to
solids and liquids)
Solubility (including K
SP
)
Properties of solutions
Acids and bases (including
equilibrium)
Electrochemistry
a
See ref 3.
Journal of Chemical Education Commentary
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed5000263 | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX B
challenging, concept-focused, multiple-choice questions. Addi-
tionally, I use gases to reiterate the importance of thinking
about chemistry in terms of particles. This allows me to address
several of the essential knowledge topics from big idea 2.
As noted previously, I followed gases with kinetics. Again, I
reinforce the idea of thinking about chemistry in terms of
particles. During our look at gases, we spend time discussing
particles for which there little to no interaction occurs, as
summarized by the kinetic molecular theory. Through kinetics,
we look at what can occur when the conditions are right for
interactions to occur. As discussed, I begin kinetics with a
laboratory experiment: the acidication of thiosulfate.
Intra- and intermolecular forces (IMFs) and electron
conguration are noted as being recurring ideas. I feel that
IMFs are best taught within the various contexts in which they
arise rather than as a discrete concept. For example, gas laws
provide an excellent background to talk about London
dispersion forces, whereas energy changes associated with
breaking and forming covalent bonds are addressed while
investigating thermodynamics. Polarity and hydrogen bonding
are revisited while exploring solution chemistry. Electron
congurations are likewise critical when talking about periodic
trends, the valence shell electron pair repulsion (VSEPR)
model, and the various acid models that exist.
Energy and Equilibrium
For years, I have struggled with where to place equilibrium in
the AP chemistry sequencing. In my mind, equilibrium is the
unifying topic for most of the curriculum; it can be related to
thermodynamics, acids and bases, kinetics, solubility, and
electrochemistry. I have, in the past, addressed equilibrium
right after gases. In the proposed sequence, I moved
equilibrium to study those concepts in conjunction with
thermodynamics. My students have, during rst-year honors
chemistry, been exposed to K
SP
, K
a
and K
b
, and K
eq
, both
conceptually and mathematically. As a result, we tend to spend
most of our time looking at the tricks associated with
equilibrium: addition of inert gases to a system, the 5% rule,
and so on. After our discussion of these two topics, most of my
students can eectively explain the driving force(s) for most
reactions. During equilibrium, my students perform a fairly
typical lab: equilibrium with Fe(SCN)
+2
.
7
This activity provides
an opportunity to explore Beers law and the concept of
spectrophotometry. Furthermore, the activity allows students to
explore how initial concentrations as well as temperature
impact the equilibrium position of a system. Alternatively, a
number of activities using cobalt complexes can be quickly
adapted for guided inquiry. I would also recommend allowing
students to explore a system in which changes in pressure
directly aect the equilibrium position. For thermodynamics, I
have students determine the thermodynamics of the dissolution
of urea.
8
This particular activity demonstrates the relationship
between equilibrium and thermodynamics, as well as illustrating
the dierence between thermochemistry and thermodynamics.
In the version that I use, the students are given helpful hints,
yet they must ultimately develop a procedure on their own.
After their data are collected, I provide the accepted values for
H, G, and S. The students then have a chance to
compare their experimental values to the accepted values. More
importantly, I ask the students to examine their procedures and
oer explanations for their inevitable sources of error. These
two topics account for most of big ideas 5 and 6.
Aqueous Systems
For the nal unit, I have grouped topics into aqueous
systems. This includes solution chemistry, redox, acids and
bases, and electrochemistry. I believe that these topics easily
ow from one to the other. By placing these toward the end of
my sequencing, I am able to easily tie the concepts from these
topics back to equilibrium and thermodynamics. For solutions,
I have traditionally had the students begin by nding the K
SP
of
calcium hydroxide.
9
I will most likely use this activity again,
primarily to expose students to the process of serial dilution. I
also perform an oxidationreduction titration at this point.
10
This is another instance in which the procedure used is one of
my main considerations for the lab choice. During rst-year
chemistry, my students perform only microscale titrations
during the acidbase unit. A redox titration allows the AP
chemistry students to practice using the burets, stir plates, and
watching for an end-point. The experiment focuses on only one
system, which allows the students to concentrate on the process
of titration. As a result, the stress and frustration levels for the
students are a bit lower than with the multitude of systems
possible with acidbase titrations.
For acids and bases, my students use pH probes and drop
counters from a popular probeware company. They collect
graphical data for each experiment and are allowed to overshoot
the equivalence points. With this setup, the students perform
1215 titrations over the course of a week. They rst make and
then standardize a sodium hydroxide solution. The stand-
ardized base is then used to look at a strong acidstrong base
system, a weak acidstrong base system, and a polyprotic acid.
The students also use their base to collect data that assist in the
identication of an unknown weak acid. I then create several
solutions to provide opportunities to explore strong acidweak
base and weakweak systems. My plan for this year is to gather
the data and the titration curves at the beginning of the unit.
The students will then be asked to identify the types of systems
by titration curve, calculate K
a
or K
b
where appropriate, and
attempt to identify the weak components. Additionally, this
data can provide a launching point to explore acidbase
equilibrium. For the nal activity of the unit, typically after the
unit assessment, I have students explore the properties of
goldenrod paper. My students are generally familiar with the
idea that the paper contains an indicator. In the AP chemistry
course I ask students to determine, experimentally, the K
a
of the
indicator in the paper. The students then spend several days,
working in groups, developing a procedure and conducting
their experiments.
With electrochemistry, I have several versions of galvanic cell
laboratories that I have used. In this version, I ask students to
rank a set of metals in terms of reduction potentials using data
they collect experimentally. In another version, I ask students to
determine the identities of several unknown metals based on
experimentally determined reduction potentials. In both cases,
students must rst discuss and determine a specic procedure.
It is also easy to vary the amount of background information
that I provide to the students.

CONCLUSION
I believe that the ideas and sequencing I have outlined touch
upon each of the enduring understandings outlined in the new
frameworks. In terms of pacing, I anticipate being able to nish
the rst three big units during rst semester AP chemistry. That
would leave aqueous systems for second semester. On this
Journal of Chemical Education Commentary
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed5000263 | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX C
schedule, I am trying to nish by the rst week in April. This
would provide 3 weeks, after spring break, for review prior to
the AP chemistry test in early May. I recognize that what I have
proposed is not what the authors of the new framework
intended. I know that my changes do not, yet, move far enough
toward the teaching of chemistry through big ideas. I hope,
however, that they represent a beginning, and a few steps in the
right direction. This article represents the beginning of my
journey.

ASSOCIATED CONTENT
*S Supporting Information
A master table showing the sequencing, suggested activities,
and big ideas associated with each of the units described in
the article. This material is available via the Internet at http://
pubs.acs.org.

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail: chkennedy@paulding.k12.ga.us.
Notes
The authors declare no competing nancial interest.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank Greg Rushton who encouraged, advised,
and pushed. Additionally, thanks to Lyric Portwood and Cheree
Vaughn for their support and input.

REFERENCES
(1) AP Chemistry Course and Exam Description, revised ed.; The
College Board: New York, 2013.
(2) Gabel, D. L. Use of the Particle Nature of Matter in Developing
Conceptual Understanding. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70 (3), 193.
(3) Holme, T.; Murphy, K. The ACS Exams Institute Undergraduate
Chemistry Anchoring Concepts Content Map I: General Chemistry. J.
Chem. Educ. 2012, 89 (6), 721723.
(4) Rate of Reaction of Sodium Thiosulfate and Hydrochloric Acid; Flinn
Scientic, Inc.: Batavia, IL, 2009; No. 91860.
(5) Cloonan, C. A.; Nichol, C. A.; Hutchinson, J. S. Understanding
Chemical Reaction Kinetics and Equilibrium with Interlocking
Building Blocks. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88 (10), 14001403.
(6) Koch, L.; LeMaster, R.; Loeblein, T.; Perkins, K.; Gratny, M.
Reactions and Rates. http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/
reactions-and-rates (accessed Jun 2014).
(7) Vonderbrink, S. Determination of the Equilibrium Constant for
the Formation of FeSCN
2+
. In Laboratory Experiments for Advanced
Placement Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Flinn Scientic, Inc.: Batavia, IL, 1995;
87.
(8) Pickering, M. The Entropy of Dissolution of Urea. J. Chem. Educ.
1987, 64 (8), 723.
(9) Vonderbrink, S. Determination of the Solubility Product of an
Ionic Compound. In Laboratory Experiments for Advanced Placement
Chemistry, 2nd ed.; Flinn Scientic, Inc.: Batavia, IL, 1995; 81.
(10) Sowa, S.; Kondo, A. E. Sailing on the C: A Vitamin Titration
with a Twist. J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80 (5), 550.
Journal of Chemical Education Commentary
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed5000263 | J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXXXXX D