After class today I overheard a group of students talking about the chemical reactions practice we had just completed. One comment caught my attention.
They said the reaction type that was easiest and fastest for them to complete was the one they had presented on during the poster project. Some even said the other reaction types took two or three times longer.
My first thought was disappointment.
“I missed the mark with this project.”
Everything I ask students to do is meant to help them become competent and confident in all of the learning objectives—not just one. That’s actually one reason I’ve often been hesitant to use group projects or what educators sometimes call jigsawing the content, where each student becomes an expert on only one piece.
The goal of the project had been very clear:
Learn all three types of chemical reactions, but only present one.
Each group received the essential knowledge statements and guiding questions for all three reaction types. Students were also graded on their participation as audience members and the quality of the questions they asked during presentations. My expectation was simple: study each reaction type with the same rigor, even if you only presented one.
What I overheard suggested that hadn’t happened.
So I stepped into the conversation and asked a few questions, hoping to understand what went wrong so I could improve the project next time.
I walked away without a clear answer.
On the drive home this evening, though, something clicked.
The reason students felt comfortable with the reaction type they presented is simple.
They learned it.
Not because I taught it particularly well, but because of what they did while preparing to teach it themselves.
When I thought about it more carefully, I realized there were at least three things they did during that process.
1. Analysis
They explored the concept, breaking it into parts and examining how it worked.
2. Synthesis
From that exploration, they organized their understanding and created something—a poster, a structure, a representation of the idea.
3. Expression
Finally, they stood in front of their classmates and attempted to explain what they understood in their own words.
That realization changed the way I saw the entire project.
The lesson I taught was not about chemical reaction types.
It was a lesson about how learning actually happens.
While the project may not have satisfied the standard I set for myself as a teacher, it still gave students something powerful: a process they can use to master not only the other reaction types, but almost anything they want to learn.
And the reason I know this works is simple.
It’s exactly how I learned chemistry myself.
Over the years I built my own onlinr learning management system from scratch, a site I call the Science Portal. It contains notes, practice problems, worked solutions, and videos for every unit I teach. I also wrote an accompanying Chemistry Workbook. Neither existed before I needed to teach the material. I built them by doing exactly what my students did with their poster projects.
What do you think the Science Portal and the Chemistry Workbook are?
The Science Portal has been my poster project.
— Nicholas Sourvelis