Atomic Structure and Periodicity

8 Jun 2019

VIPEr Fellows 2019 Workshop Favorites

Submitted by Barbara Reisner, James Madison University

During our first fellows workshop, the first cohort of VIPEr fellows pulled together learning objects that they've used and liked or want to try the next time they teach their inorganic courses.

6 Jun 2019

VSEPR: Flash Review

Submitted by Christopher Durr, Amherst College
Description: 

This presentation is meant to be a review of applying VSEPRup to steric number 6. It's designed to be viewed as a powerpoint and printed out to keep for the student's notebook.

It can be used at multiple levels: as a review immediately after learning VSEPR in general chemistry, or as a refresher before starting upper level inorganic chemistry. The instructor could add text or voice over the slides to add more detail or leave the presentation as is for students.

If you'd like .psd or .pdf files of the drawings in these presentation, please contact me directly.

Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

After reviewing this material students should be able to:

Draw the correct VSEPR predicted structure of a molecule based on steric number and lone pair count.

Name VSEPR structures with their appropriate geometry.

Avoid common VSEPR mistakes, particularly those with steric number 5 and 6.

Recognize how lone pairs distort bond angles from ideal geometry in molecules like ClF3

 

Implementation Notes: 

I plan on uploading this flash review (along with others) to my class site before students arrive to my upper level inorganic course. I will voice over the slides, explaining the concepts, so they're ready to apply molecular orbital theory on the first day of class.

Time Required: 
10 - 15 Minutes
Evaluation
Evaluation Methods: 

I will compare student preparedness between this class and a previous one that did not receive a review.

Evaluation Results: 

This will be updated in the future.

6 Jun 2019

Molecular Orbital Theory: Flash Review

Submitted by Christopher Durr, Amherst College
Description: 

This presentation is meant to be a review of constructing and utilizing an MO diagram, in this case O2. It's designed to be viewed as a powerpoint and printed out to keep for the student's notebook.

It can be used at multiple levels: as a review immediately after learning MO theory in general chemistry, or as a refresher before starting upper level inorganic chemistry. The instructure could add text or voice over the slides to add more detail or leave the presentation as is for students.

If you'd like .psd or .pdf files of the drawings in these presentation, please contact me directly.

 

 

Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

After reviewing this material students should be able to:

Recall the shape, size and appropriate nodes of atomic orbitals.

Note the appropriate electron configuration of a given atom.

Draw molecular orbitals with the appropriate sign and node position.

Apply the Aufbau Principle to molecular orbitals to determine the ultimate spin state of a molecule.

Determine the bond order of a molecule from a completed MO diagram.

Manipulate the bond order of a molecule with Reduction/Oxidation.

 

Implementation Notes: 

I plan on uploading this flash review (along with others) to my class site before students arrive to my upper level inorganic course. I will voice over the slides, explaining the concepts, so they're ready to apply molecular orbital theory on the first day of class.

Time Required: 
10 - 15 Minutes
Evaluation
Evaluation Methods: 

I will compare student preparedness between this class and a previous one that did not receive a review.

Evaluation Results: 

This will be updated in the future.

12 Dec 2018

Foundations Inorganic Chemistry for New Faculty

Submitted by Chip Nataro, Lafayette College

What is a foundations inorganic course? Here is a great description

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ed500624t

 

Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Course Level: 
17 Nov 2018

Quantum Numbers and Nodes: A General Chemistry Flipped Classroom Module

Submitted by Jack F Eichler, University of California, Riverside
Evaluation Methods: 
1) Performance on the pre-lecture online quiz

2) Performance on the in-class activity (clicker scores or hand-graded worksheet)

 

 

 

Evaluation Results: 

Students generally score on average 70% or higher on the pre-lecdure quiz, and on average 70% or more of students correctly answer the in-class clicker questions. 

Description: 

This is a flipped classroom module that covers the concepts of quantum numbers, and radial and angular nodes. This activity is designed to be done at the beginning of the typical first quarter/first semester general chemistry course (for an atoms first approach; if instructors use a traditional course structure this unit is likely done towards the middle/end of the first quarter/semester). Students will be expected to have learned the following concepts prior to completing this activity:

a) quantization of energy in the atom and the Bohr model of the atom;

b) how the wave/particle duality of electrons was described by de Broglie;

c) how the wave/particle duality of electrons was used by Schrodinger to develop the quantum mechanical model of the atom;

d) how radial probability distribution was used to generate the idea of atomic orbitals, and orbital probability surfaces.

Acknowledgement: This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1504989. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

 

 

 

Learning Goals: 

a) describe the meaning of the quantum numbers n, l, and ml;

b) determine the values of the quantum numbers n, l, and ml;

c) describe the meaning of radial and angular nodes;

d) determine the number of radial and angular nodes on different types of atomic orbitals;

e) begin to understand the correlation between the quantum numbers and the total number of atomic orbitals for a given atom, and how the periodic table can be used to build up the overall orbital structure for an atom.

 

Equipment needs: 

Suggested technology:

1) online test/quiz function in course management system

2) in-class response system (clickers)

Course Level: 
Corequisites: 
Prerequisites: 
Topics Covered: 
Implementation Notes: 

Attached as separate file. 

Time Required: 
50-80 minutes
7 Aug 2018
Description: 

Rules for quantum numbers are confusing but not arbitrary.  They are based on wave mathmatics, and once laid out properly are symmetric and beautiful.  Within four animation-clicks of the first slide of this PowerPoint Presentation, this beauty will unfold.  I do not exaggerate to say, faculty members will be agape and students will say, "Why didn't you show us this before."  No other presentation shows in as elegant a way the relationship between 1)  n, l and ml, 2) the ordering of orbitals in hydrogen-like atoms, and 3) the ordering of orbitals in the periodic table (along with the difficulty of assigning orbital filling in transition and f-block elements).  

Beauty is in every atom.  Let it loose.

Topics Covered: 
Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Course Level: 
Learning Goals: 

A student will be able to relate the quantum numbers n, l and ml to each other.

A student will be able to correctly describe the number of subshells and number of orbitals in a shell.

A student will be able to describe the orbital energies in a hydrogen-like atom.

A student will be able to order subshells in a multi-electron system and relate this to the periodic table.

A student will realize the symmetry and beauty of quantum chemistry without ever seeing the shape of one orbtal.  

Implementation Notes: 

In the first two slides, often use the phrase "because it's a square."

This is useful for Inorganic Chemistry students as well because it will cement in their mind long lost rules of quantum numbers.

 

Evaluation
Evaluation Methods: 

1) Short answer quiz questions

2) Multiple choice questions on hour and final exams.

3) Awe.

Evaluation Results: 

1) From a quiz killer to a typical A, B, C student gets it right, the D student is still a bit confused and the F student still misses the idea.

2)  On a question asking, "how many orbitals in the n=3 shell", the results increased from the 40's to 80's %.  

3) As jaws dropped, quarters could be slipped into their mouths.  Faculty pulled out phones to take pictures of a white-board version before I told them I had a PowerPoint version.

1 Jun 2018
Evaluation Methods: 

This LO has not been implemented; however, we recommend a few options for evaluating student learning:

  • implement as in-class group work, collect and grade all questions

  • have students complete the literature discussion questions before lecture, then ask them to modify their answers in another pen color as the in-class discussion goes through each questions

  • hold a discussion lecture for the literature questions; then for the following lecture period begin class with a quiz that uses a slightly modified problem.

Evaluation Results: 

This LO has not been implemented yet.

Description: 

In honor of Professor Richard Andersen’s 75th birthday, a small group of IONiC leaders submitted a paper to a special issue of Dalton Transactions about Andersen’s love of teaching with the chemical literature. To accompany the paper, this literature discussion learning object, based on one of Andersen’s recent publications in Dalton, was created. The paper examines an ytterbium-catalyzed isomerization reaction. It uses experimental and computational evidence to support a proton-transfer to a cyclopentadienyl ring mechanism versus an electron-transfer mechanism, which might have seemed more likely.

 

The paper is quite complex, but this learning object focuses on simpler ideas like electron counting and reaction coordinate diagrams. To aid beginning students, we have found it helpful to highlight the parts of the paper that relate to the reading questions. For copyright reasons, we cannot provide the highlighted paper here, but we have included instructions on which sections to highlight if you wish to do that.

 

Corequisites: 
Course Level: 
Learning Goals: 

After completing this literature discussion, students should be able to

  • Count the valence electrons in a lanthanide complex

  • Explain the difference between a stoichiometric and catalytic reaction

  • Predict common alkaline earth and lanthanide oxidation states based on ground state electron configurations  

  • Describe how negative evidence can be used to support or contradict a hypothesis   

  • Describe the energy changes involved in making and breaking bonds

  • On a reaction coordinate diagram, explain the difference between an intermediate and a transition state

  • Explain how calculated reaction coordinate energy diagrams can be used to make mechanistic arguments

Implementation Notes: 

This is a paper that is rich in detail and material. As such, an undergraduate might find it intimidating to pick up and read. We have provided a suggested reading guide that presents certain sections of the paper for the students to read. We suggest the instructor highlight the following sections before providing the paper to the students. While students are certainly encouraged to read the entire paper, this LO will focus on the highlighted sections.  

 

Introduction

            Paragraph 1

            Paragraph 2

            Paragraph 3

            Paragraph 4

First 5 lines ending at the word high (you may encourage students to look up exergonic if that is not a term commonly used in your department)

Line 14 starting with “In that sense,” through the end of the paragraph

            Paragraph 6

From the start through the word “endoergic” in line 22

Line 31 from “oxidation of” to the word “described” in line 33

Line 40 from “These” to the word “dimethylacetylene” in line 45

Paragraph 7

            From the start to the word “appears” in line 4

            The words “to involve” in line 4

            Starting in line 4 with “a Cp*” to “transfer” in line 5

Results and Discussion

            Paragraph 1

            Paragraph 2

            Paragraph 3 from the start through “six hours” in line 10

            Paragraph 4

            Paragraph 5

                        From the start to “solution” in line 3

                        From “This exchange” in line 10 to “allene” in line 11

                        From “Hence” in line 19 through the end of the paragraph

            Paragraph 6 from the start through “infrared spectra” in line 19

            Paragraph 7 from “Hence” in line 4 through the end of the paragraph

Mechanistic aspects for the catalytic isomerisation reaction of buta-1,2-diene to but-2-yne using (Me5C5)2Yb p 2579.

            Paragraph 1

            Paragraph 2

            Paragraph 3

            Paragraph 4

Experimental Section

            Synthesis of (Me5C5)2Yb(η2-MeC≡CMe).

            Synthesis of (Me5C5)2Ca(η2-MeC≡CMe).

Reaction of (Me5C5)2Yb with buta-1,2-diene

 

 

 

Time Required: 
One class period.
3 Jun 2017

Literature Discussion of "A stable compound of helium and sodium at high pressure"

Submitted by Katherine Nicole Crowder, University of Mary Washington
Evaluation Methods: 

Students could be evaluated based on their participation in the in-class discussion or on their submitted written answers to assigned questions.

Evaluation Results: 

This LO has not been used in a class at this point. Evaluation results will be uploaded as it is used (by Spring 2018 at the latest).

Description: 

This paper describes the synthesis of a stable compound of sodium and helium at very high pressures. The paper uses computational methods to predict likely compounds with helium, then describe a synthetic protocol to make the thermodynamically favored Na2He compound. The compound has a fluorite structure and is an electride with the delocalization of 2e- into the structure.

This paper would be appropriate after discussion of solid state structures and band theory.

The questions are divided into categories and have a wide range of levels.

Dong, X.; Oganov, A. R.; Goncharov, A. F.; Stavrou, E.; Lobanov, S.; Saleh, G.; Qian, G.-R.; Zhu, Q.; Gatti, C.; Deringer, V. L.; et al. A stable compound of helium and sodium at high pressure. Nature Chemistry 2017, 9 (5), 440–445 DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2716.

Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

After reading and discussing this paper, students will be able to

  • Describe the solid state structure of a novel compound using their knowledge of unit cells and ionic crystals
  • Apply band theory to a specific material
  • Describe how XRD is used to determine solid state structure
  • Describe the bonding in an electride structure
  • Apply periodic trends to compare/explain reactivity
Implementation Notes: 

The questions are divided into categories (comprehensive questions, atomic and molecular properties, solid state structure, electronic structure and other topics) that may or may not be appropriate for your class. To cover all of the questions, you will probably need at least two class periods. Adapt the assignment as you see fit.

CrystalMaker software can be used to visualize the compound. ICE model kits can also be used to build the compound using the template for a Heusler alloy.

Time Required: 
2 class periods
3 Jun 2017
Evaluation Methods: 

This LO was craeted at the pre-MARM 2017 ViPER workshop and has not been used in the classroom.  The authors will update the evaluation methods after it is used.

Description: 

This module offers students in an introductory chemistry or foundational inorganic course exposure to recent literature work. Students will apply their knowledge of VSEPR, acid-base theory, and thermodynamics to understand the effects of addition of ligands on the stabilities of resulting SiO2-containing complexes. Students will reference results of DFT calculations and gain a basic understanding of how DFT can be used to calculate stabilities of molecules.

 
Prerequisites: 
Corequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

Students should be able to:

  1. Apply VSEPR to determine donor and acceptor orbitals of the ligands

  2. Identify lewis acids and lewis bases

  3. Elucidate energy relationships

  4. Explain how computational chemistry is beneficial to experimentalists

  5. Characterize bond strengths based on ligand donors

Course Level: 
Implementation Notes: 

Students should have access to the paper and have read the first and second paragraphs of the paper. Students should also refer to scheme 2 and table 2.

 

This module could be either used as a homework assignment or in-class activity. This was created during the IONiC VIPEr workshop 2017 and has not yet been implemented.

 
Time Required: 
50 min
3 Mar 2017

In-class peer review

Submitted by S. Chantal E. Stieber, Cal Poly Pomona
Evaluation Methods: 

Student participation was evaluated during the in-class portion based on the questions students asked. 

The formal peer review homework was evaluated based on completion, level of thought and thoroughness.

Evaluation Results: 

Overall, students were very interested in this topic and had not formally learned about the process before. There was a very lively discussion and a lot of questions were asked. All students received full credit for participation. 

Similarly, once students received their classmate's paper for peer review, they took the process very seriously and carefully went through the paper and answered the worksheet questions. 

I was very impressed by the high quality of the formal peer reviews that were turned in as homework. Students clearly spent a lot of time to carefully think about the paper and craft a reasonable response. Most students received full-credit. 

Description: 

This activity includes questions for students to answer to help guide them through the process of peer review. It was designed to assist students in writing peer reviews for research reports written by their classmates, but could be applied to literature articles as well.

Corequisites: 
Prerequisites: 
Learning Goals: 

A student will be able to:

-Explain how the peer-review process works

-Critically read through a research article

-Carefully review a research article

-Write a professional peer review

Implementation Notes: 

An overview of peer review was given with three powerpoint slides. Students then worked through a modified Q&A of the peer review module "Peer Review - How does it work?" posted by Michael Norris on VIPEr. This provided students with an example of real reviews, along with the resulting article revisions. 

The current worksheet was then passed out to students along with a research report written by one of their classmates (I assigned these and removed names). In class, students answered the questions on the worksheet and were able to ask questions of the editor (the instructor in this case). Following the in-class peer review, students had to write a formal peer review, which was turned in as homework. 

The peer review was a final component of a research report that students had been working on throughout the course. The final report was turned in after students had received the review comments back from their peers. The grade of the final report took into consideration whether or not students had made modifications based on comments by their peer reviewer.

 
Time Required: 
60 min

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Atomic Structure and Periodicity