One of the labs I do with my Chemistry I class is to measure the temperature and volume of a gas under two sets of conditions, and, based on Charles’s Law, extrapolate the graph to estimate the temperature of absolute zero. Every year, I get students who have had calculators and computers plot their graphs for so long that they can’t plot one by hand. Some of the mistakes they make include:
- having a break in one or both axes, despite having data points on both sides of the break
- uneven scales on one or both axes
- failing to extrapolate the graph to the point of interest, such as not continuing the graph all the way to the x-axis, even when the number they needed was the x-intercept.
- not using a straightedge for the axes and/or the best fit line
After several years of frustration, it finally dawned on me that this is because the students see the graph as only a visual representation of their data—not as a tool that can be used to generate a numerical answer. If the graph is the shape it’s supposed to be, it must be right. Anything beyond that is chalked up to the teacher being picky, instead of seen as necessary to make the graph useful.
Unfortunately, the more technology we throw at this problem, the worse it becomes.
The idea that students need to be well versed in current technology in order to be successful in the workplace is a fallacy. If they have good high-level thinking skills, they will always be able to learn the technology. However, if they’re used to the technology but they don’t have good high-level thinking skills, they’re doomed.
Originally posted to the ChemEd-L discussion list.
