Skip to content

4. Field Activity 02

This week I worked on co-teaching a PBL with our Chemistry teacher called the “Chemical Bonding Game”

Process

This is the second year I have collaborated with the STEM School Chemistry teacher on this Chemical Bonding Game PBL. Driving Question: How can we, as game designers, create a playable board or computer (Chromebook) game that teaches players the properties, behavior, and structure of ionic and covalent compounds?

Student Comments: (Final Game Day and Interviews scheduled for 12/13/24) * Challenges students face * Successes * Questions students ask

The lesson plan can be found here on ScopesDF.

Learning Targets

LT4 – I can use criteria to write and name chemical formulas, identify and model the types of bonds in compounds, and prove how intermolecular forces impact bonding and properties of compounds.

LT5 – I can justify predictions of molecular polarity and geometry using electronegativity and Lewis electron-dot representations.

Reflection

1.Student Engagement: How did your students respond to the use of digital fabrication technology? Did it increase their engagement or motivation? Why or why not?

As 10th grade students, they have been engaged in digital fabrication PBLs for at least one full year. Students are familiar with digital fabrication, however, with each project they are becoming more fluent in the various technologies as well as more confident. These students were eager to make their games and were more willing to do the hard work of chemisrty so they could have a fun game. I know digital fabrication increases their motivation, in fact, I think at this point they would be disappointed if at least on project per class was not dig fab.

2.Student Learning Outcomes: How effectively did the digital fabrication component help students achieve the learning objectives? Were there any unexpected learning outcomes?

They have yet to take their final test for these Learning Targets, so I don’t have quantitative data on how they did. However, unexpected learning outcomes include communication, collaboration, and critical thinking. Students had to do a lot of problem solving when their first prototypes needed iteration. They had to work as a group to acheive their goals and communicate effectively both when writing the instructions to the game and within the group.

3.Instructional Challenges: What challenges did you face while teaching this lesson, and how did you address them? Were there any specific points where students struggled with the technology or content?

Students did well with the technology. They mostly used the laser cutter and 3D printer and they had all done projects with these tools in the past year. So the technology was a bit of a review. I did notice that students were more willing to try more with the laser during this project, so that make me happy that they are gaining confidence. Since some of the classes are large, some groups had to wait a bit, so another challenge was how do we keep kids engaged when waiting on a machine? Luckily they were asked to write instructions for the game and they could work on that while waiting.

4.Teacher Growth: How has this experience changed your perspective on incorporating technology like digital fabrication into your teaching? What skills or strategies have you developed as a result?

I wouldn’t say my perspectives have changed. However, skills include creating resources that students can use to remind them how to use the machines. We have QR codes for tutorials strudents can use on their phones. This helps me not have to say the same thing (click here, click here) for every student.

![

Finished game pictures on the way…