I would suggest D, but it would be only for students who have taken the at Least Gen Chem I and II, Organic I and II, and P Chem I and II. This is because before you are able to understand the technology, one must first understand the theory behind the technology. What good does it do to use a machine if you do not understand the output from your input? By the time you finish these 6 semesters of chemistry, you have the sufficient knowledge to understand how IR, 13C and 1H NMR, UV-VIS, GC, and even how MS work. From knowing these techniques, you have the knowledge to discern the data given by the machines. Using the machine should be a privilege since they are very expensive pieces of equipment. -Ricardo Rodriguez
I vote for option c. Rather than explain to each student how to operate each instrument, perhaps it would be best to run the analysis with the students present so that he/she can see the process of analysis and get immediate feedback on their results.---Peter Nani
I think option b works best because although the students are not actually involved in running the machine, the students still get an idea of how the spectroscopic analysis works and it minimizes waiting time during lab. It would be hard to run an analysis when there is a class of over 10 students. If students want to lean how to run the analysis, they can set up an individual time with the professor.--Marie-France Likanje
I, too, think option c is a good way to go about this. This way the students can see the instruments used and learn a little about them. By seeing the procedures taken to use the instruments, they learn something outside of the lab assignment and can also ask questions about it if they are curious. --Melanie Bonifacio
Page Information
|
Wiki Information |
Recent PBwiki Blog Posts |