|
From some textbook publishers, I get a stack of supplementary material
about a foot high. There are solutions to even-numbered problems,
odd-numbered problems, instructor’s guide, instructor’s
resource manual, student’s guide, math review toolkit, media
companion, transparency pack, and finally the instructor’s
annotated edition of the textbook. I come from the old school, I
suppose—all I want is the same textbook that the students buy.
Having no solutions manual forces me to do the problems myself (though
it is nice to be able to check that I didn’t make any stupid
mistakes). So I must confess that I have never examined the CDs that
come with seemingly every textbook. With these obvious prejudices, I
have reviewed the CD1 by Laidler, Meiser,
and Sanctuary. Since I did not have the textbook that I assume
accompanies the CD, I cannot comment on how well the CD follows the
text. To run the CD, you must install it on your computer. I
didn’t like that. If the school has not updated my computer in a
while, I am usually cramped for space on the hard drive. In the
computer labs on campus, students are not allowed to install software.
I installed the CD on a 266 MHz K6 computer with 64 MB of RAM and a 6
GB hard drive running Windows 2000. The installation was
straightforward. (The README file on the CD indicates that it also
installs on Macintosh computer, which was verified on an iMac with OS
9.1 and a Power Macintosh G3 with OS 8.1.) The K6 computer was only
capable of 800 × 600 pixel screen size on the monitor. The CD
presentation was made for video with a greater number of pixels because
the entire presentation could not be viewed on my monitor and I was not
able to pan to the regions off the screen. I must say that I
enjoyed the CD. Some sections would ask you to do a calculation and
type in the result. I think that this is one of the strengths of
computers, that they provide the student with immediate feedback. I
instantly knew that I forgot to divide by 2 when I calculated the
kinetic energy. Another positive aspect of computers is that they
don’t mind going over the same concept over and over again. I
usually get frustrated after explaining something for the third time. I
also enjoyed viewing the atomic orbitals. This is another big plus for
computers, that they can provide images far superior to what I can draw
on the board. The students can manipulate the 3D images such as
rotating the orbitals for a different view. Other sections plot certain
equations, such as the radial functions, and provide immediate
visualization of an equation that may not make much sense to the
student. I actually found myself “playing” with a few
things, so the CD managed to hold my interest. Before students
can attack a problem, they need some picture in their head of where
they are going and what they need to do. Dick Zare’s
“Commentary” in this Journal2 caused me to rethink some of my prejudices about
the value of computer use and visualization. Chemistry is a field where
visualization is an important part of understanding; most people are
visual learners. So perhaps I have been unfair in ignoring a lot of the
supplementary material. Prior to reviewing this CD, I already knew how
to calculate kinetic energy and I knew what atomic orbitals looked
like. What is really important is the impact this CD has on a student.
So I enlisted the students in my first-semester physical chemistry
class. This can hardly be considered a statistical analysis, but I will
present just a few numbers and the general impressions of the
students. There were 16 students in my class and 15 decided to
take up my extra credit assignment to provide their impressions of the
CD3. There were two biology majors, two
forensic science majors, and the remaining students were chemistry
majors. There was a pretty wide range of abilities, interest, and work
ethic, so I believe this class provided a diverse population. I asked
the students to review the first three chapters dealing with classical
thermodynamics (since that was all we were covering that semester), but
they were free to review the rest of the CD if they wished. Most
students really liked the CD, some even commented that they wished they
had had the CD at the beginning of the semester. I pointed out that
their own physical chemistry textbook came with a CD, but some of them
remarked that it wasn’t very good. One student commented that
this CD was much better than CDs with his general, organic, and
analytical texts. He even suggested that the CD might be used in place
of the text. Others enjoyed the CD so much they went on to view the
chapters on kinetics and quantum chemistry. Some students felt
that Chapter 1 was a simple review of introductory physics and was not
appropriate as students should have had two semesters of physics prior
to physical chemistry. Others felt that the treatment of topics was a
bit spotty. I, too, felt that some topics were covered well and others
were completely ignored. As one student fairly pointed out, this CD was
intended as supplementary material. A number of students would have
liked more questions, problems, answers, and solutions. Students
pointed out that they had trouble figuring out which equation to use
and how to put the equation in a form appropriate for solving their
problem. These students would like to have problem-solving tutorials. A
few students felt that most of the material was too simple and would
actually be more appropriate in first-year general chemistry.
Most students liked the general “look and feel” and
found navigating pretty intuitive. Everyone said that it was not at all
obvious how to activate the sound and a number of students (and I)
weren’t even aware that there was a sound component. A number of
students said that they would have liked a “Play” button
rather than an “Options” button for animating the graphics.
A lot of them said that they enjoyed “rolling dice” and
watching the histogram take on the shape of a normal distribution.
This CD opened my eyes, and I would encourage my students to use it.
It would be nice if it ran off the CD rather than a hard drive,
although that might slow it down to the point of being a bit jerky.
Some mention should be made about the requirements for running the CD.
For example, it should not be run on a computer with a screen
resolution of less than 1024 × 768. It is a bit spotty in the
topics that it treats, which is appropriate for supplementary material.
In light of the observation that some physical chemistry texts are
getting too complex, maybe this CD is moving in the right
direction4. I don’t believe that
this CD would be useful in the classroom because I think that the
students would get a lot more out of it playing with it on their own.
The best praise is the observation that most of the students and I
found ourselves running some of the animated graphics over and over out
of sheer enjoyment. How often can that be said in physical
chemistry? Notes - An advance copy
of Physical Chemistry CD was the version reviewed.
- Zare, Richard N. J. Chem. Educ.
2002, 79,
1290–1291.
- The students who
participated in the review were Scott Aust, Cody Craig, Jonathan Downs,
Lura Eakin, David Guzman, Chastidy Hammond, Neeta Kongara, Paula
McCall, Courtney Poe, Sarah Sarabia, Toni Sellers, Jerry W. Swearingen
Jr., Amanda Toman, Michael Towler, and Angel Waddy.
- Bernal, Pedro J. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79,
1075–1076.
|