Bringing Research into
Your Classroom
Chris Kim
Schmid College of Science and
Techology
Chapman students presenting physical geology
research projects to AP Environmental Science
class, Orange High School
Why have your students do research in
the classroom?
Considerations:
 What types of projects lend themselves well to
classroom research?
 How much time will it take?
 How much time do you have?
 What are your students capable of doing?
 What resources do you need?
 What aspects of your own research can you bring into
the classroom?
 Can your students help you advance your research?
Tips for structuring a project
for effective learning
 Set well-defined goals – Make sure students see value
in the project
 Have students complete project in stages
 Provide regular/frequent feedback
 Anticipate setbacks
 Incorporate some aspect of peer review or
collaboration
Student-Initiated Research
Projects in the Classroom
What are some
characteristics/considerations of studentinitiated research projects?
Student-Initiated Research
Projects in the Classroom
 Can range from:
 Intro to advanced/capstone level
 Few weeks to full semester
 Individual to group to full-class projects
 Primarily student-initiated and designed
 Greatly benefit from:
 Multiple deadlines
 Peer, professor feedback
 Clear rubrics, templates and evaluation forms
Timeframes and Deadlines
 Include in syllabus (with % grade allocation)
 Clearly indicate timeframe of project
 Provide multiple deadlines (with point allocations):
 Project proposal/outline (suggesting >1 idea gives more






flexibility)
Detailed experimental method
Initial results
Full draft
Final report/presentation
Additional updates as necessary
TEMPLATES can help considerably!
Group Research Project
ENV 111: Physical Geology
Fall 2012
Objective: The goal of this assignment is to engage ENV 111 students in the scientific process
by designing a group research project, conducting the necessary experiments, processing the
data, and presenting the results. Students will work in groups of no more than 4 to develop and
conduct a geologically-relevant experiment using techniques and concepts covered in ENV 111.
Each group will present its work to its respective lab classmates and to the Orange High School
AP Environmental Science class at the end of the semester.
All groups will have group pages established on the ENV 111 Blackboard site (Go to
Communication > Group Pages) for the easy exchange and editing of files related to their
project. You can find template files on your ENV 111 Lecture Blackboard site. Submitted items
listed below in bold must be posted in each group’s space by 5 PM on the required deadlines.
Project Deadlines:
10/16-10/17: Form and name groups, begin brainstorming possible projects
10/23-10/24: Create and submit as a group 1-page outlines of two separate proposed projects
10/30-10/31: Group meetings during lab period to review experiment, get additional advice,
supplies. Submit a detailed Experimental Method for selected project
11/1-11/16
Collect samples/materials as needed, prepare for, conduct initial pilot experiment
11/6-11/7
Time in lab allocated to conduct pilot experiments. You must have made some
sort of progress on your project to show by this date in lab.
11/9
Submit Pilot Experiment Initial Results with explanation of your initial trials
and how you plan to adjust your method for your actual experimental trials
11/27-11/28
Layout of posters, Powerpoint presentations (during lab)
12/3
Print all posters, lay them out on posterboard
12/4-12/5
All posters and Powerpoint presentations presented for viewing at the
beginning of lab
12/7
Geoscience Research Poster Day, Orange High School (presentation of posters for
AP Environmental Science students, time TBA)
Grading: Your project grades will be based on:
· Submitting all required project components by the deadlines listed
· Feedback/review provided for other groups’ materials
· The scientific thoroughness/validity of the project
· The quality of the presentation
· The ability of all group members to explain the research conducted
· Participation (as judged by your group members)
Examples of past research topics:
-
Dissolution of calcite in water as a function of pH and temperature
Trends in particle size distribution of sediments from inland to coast
Effects of mineral saturation on hydroponic plant growth
Assessment of building material strength on simulated earthquake resistance
Volcanic slope and magma viscosity dependence on flow distance
Effects of height, density, and size of “asteroids” on impact craters
Effectiveness of water and wind at eroding/moving different sized particles/rocks
Earthquake simulation and shaking results on various soil types/structures
Material/equipment available:
- Shaking table, stir plates
- Ovens, fridges, freezers
- Sieve shaking stacks
- Beakers, graduated cylinders
- Balances, pH meters
- Meter sticks
- Buckets, shovels, spades, rock hammers
- Hand lens
- Hydrochloric acid
- Select minerals (calcite, hanksite)
- Sample splitter
The value (and effort) of
revisions
 Students’ experience with writing (reports)
≠
the real academic writing process
 Revisions:




Reflect the actual writing process
Provide a more sophisticated, higher quality result
Take proportionally much more time
Can leverage peer evaluations to lessen faculty time
Classroom research
examples
 Physical geology (General Education class):
 “Work in groups of no more than 4 to develop and
conduct a geologically-relevant experiment using
techniques and concepts covered in ENV 111.”
 Inorganic chemistry (majors course):
 “You will be sampling water sources around Chapman
University and analyzing them for dissolved metal content
as a function of selected variables.”
 Environmental science and policy capstone (senior
project): See CURQuarterly online, Summer 2014
 “The goal of this senior capstone course will involve the
design, research, analysis, presentation, and publication
of Chapman University's first campus environmental
audit.”
Presenting results: discussion
 Oral vs. poster vs. paper
 Peer evaluation vs. faculty
evaluation
 Internal presentations vs. to other
groups (student research day, local
high schools)
 Individually vs. as a group
Chapman students present physical geology
research projects to AP Environmental Science
class, Orange High School
Chapman students present physical geology
research projects to AP Environmental Science
class, Orange High School
Correlation between Building Date and Floor Level of Copper and Zinc levels in
Chapman University buildings in Orange, CA.
Crisand N. Anderson, Carina S. Minardi, and Lauren A. Pagel, Dept. of Chemistry, Chapman University, Orange, CA
! AAS analysis was also used to compare the
metal content of different floor levels (the
bottom-most and top-most floor) of three
buildings on Chapman University’s campus
100ppm stock solutions of copper and zinc were previously obtained by lab technicians
at Chapman University, Department of Chemistry. Serial dilutions with 0.1M Nitric acid
were performed in 100mL volumetric flasks to the concentrations of: 0.5, 1, 2, 2.5, and
5ppm.
Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) was performed on the standard solutions. A
Thermo Elemental Solaar S4 with an S&J Juniper & Co. Hollow Cathode Lamp was used.
From the absorbance data collected, standard curves were generated (Figure 1a and 1b)
and used to obtain the concentration values of copper and zinc in the samples.
Copper Standard Curve
y = 0.0766x + 0.0072
R² = 0.99876
0.4
0.3
Conclusions:
50mL water samples were obtained each from two sinks of each floor of Hashinger
Science Center and Leatherby Libraries. The samples were contained in sterile conical
vials in order for no oxidation or contamination to occur. All samples were acquired at
the same time of day (within 30 minutes of each other) in order to account for any
sample variance. Samples were then analyzed using AAS and through the correlating
standard curves generated in Figures 1a and 1b. Figures 3a and 3b, shows the
correlation between an older building (Hashinger) and a relatively new building
(Leatherby Libraries).
In the overall analysis of concentrations, Leatherby
Library sinks contained the highest amount of copper
on all the floors. The lowest concentration of copper
measured around 0.261 ppm occurring at the third floor
and the highest level of 0.458 ppm Cu at the fourth
floor. It is surprising that the concentrations of copper
increased as the floors increased for Argyros Forum
and Oliphant Hall, yet, decreased in the other buildings.
There is no obvious trend in the concentration changes
among floors. The age of the buildings doesn’t appear
to play a role in the amount of copper concentration
either. The oldest building, Hashinger Science Center,
was hypothesized to have the greatest amount of metal
in the water due to the older pipes. This, however, is
disproven in the analysis.
B
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.25
0.25
1
0.9
0.4
0.35
0.3
Age of Building (Zinc)
Age of Building (Copper)
0.5
y = 0.279x + 0.0058
R² = 0.99478
Zinc Standard Curve
A
0.45
Part IV: Conclusions & Summary
0.15
Concentration (ppm)
! AAS was used to compare the metal content of
water based on the age of two buildings on
campus: Hashinger Science Center and
Leatherby Libraries
Methods: Standard Preparation And AAS
Part II: Effect of Age of Building on Metal Content
Results: Hashinger v. Leatherby Libraries
0.3
Concentration (ppm)
! Standard curves were generated to compare
known concentrations of standards to unknown
samples through the use of Atomic Absorption
Spectroscopy (AAS)
Part I: Copper and Zinc Standards and Sample
Preparation
Absorbance
! The overall objective was to relate the
concentrations of copper and zinc metals in
water samples obtained at Chapman University
Absorbance
Overview:
Hashinger
0.2
Leatherby
0.6
0.5
Hashinger
0.4
Leatherby
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.1
0
1
2
3
4
0
0.05
0
0.05
Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS) is a commonly
used analytical technique because of its simplicity,
effectiveness, and cost efficiency. In AAS, the electrons
of the metal atoms are promoted to higher orbitals for a
short amount of time by absorbing a set quantity of
energy. The amount of energy is specific to the electron
transition in the particular element causing each
wavelength emitted by that electron transition to
correspond to a specific element. Since the quantity of
energy put into the flame is known and the quantity
remaining can be measured by the detector, the amount
of transitions can be calculated through the BeerLambert law. This results in a signal that is proportional
to the concentration of the metal in the sample or
standard solution. For this reason, it is necessary to
make a calibration curve with standards of known
concentrations of the metals in question in order to
determine the proportionality between signal and
concentration1.
0.1
0
0.1
-0.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
0.2
Concentration (ppm)
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Figures 1a and 1b: Copper (1a) and Zinc (1b)
3
4
The standard curves for zinc and copper were made through obtaining the absorbance
values of the known concentrations of standards. Unfortunately, the standard curve for
zinc reached saturation at 2ppm and so the linearity of the curve was only held until the
1ppm (R2= 0.9948).
Methods: Sample Obtainment and Preparation
50mL water samples were obtained each from two sinks of each floor of Hashinger
Science Center, Leatherby Libraries, Oliphant Hall, and Argyros Forum. The samples
were contained in sterile 50mL Conical Vials (Bioland Sci.) in order for no oxidation or
contamination to occur. All samples were acquired at the same time of day (within 30
minutes of each other) in order to account for any sample variance. Samples were then
analyzed using AAS and the standard curves (Figures 1a and 1b) to calculate the metal
concentrations in the samples.
Figures 3a and 3b: Hashinger and Leatherby Libraries
As seen in Figure 3a, the copper concentration in Leatherby Libraries is higher than that
of Hashinger Science Center, which is not in accordance with the hypothesis. With
reference to Figure 3b, the zinc concentration in both buildings varies with floor level.
Also, the standard deviations of the two buildings is so great that no real conclusions
can be drawn about zinc concentrations in the two buildings.
Part III: Effect of Floor Level on Metal Content
Results: Varying Concentrations of Floor Levels
The second portion of the study was to look at the metal concentrations at various floor
levels. The bottom-most and top-most levels of four buildings on Chapman University’s
campus (Orange, CA) were analyzed. This was used to examine the various levels of
metal concentrations based on the distance that the water traveled from the source to
the sink the samples were taken from.
Floor level Comparison (Copper)
Floor Level Comparison (Zinc)
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.4
Concentration (ppm)
0.5
0.3
Hashinger
0.2
Leatherby
Oliphant
0.4
Hashinger
Leatherby
0.3
Oliphant
0.2
0.1
0.1
Hypothesis:
0
lowest
highest
0
-0.1
It is also hypothesized that the top-most floor of any
and all buildings on campus will have a higher
concentration of metals. This is due to the water
travelling a farther distance in the metal pipes resulting
in more metals leaching into the water from the pipes.
2
Floor Level
1.2
Concentration (ppm)
In this experiment, AAS was used to quantify the amount
of dissolved metal ions (zinc and copper) in water
samples from woman’s restroom sinks on various floors
of buildings ranging in age on Chapman University’s
campus in Orange, California. The buildings that were
sampled from are: Hashinger (built circa. 1974), Argyros
(1992), Leatherby Libraries (2002), and the Oliphant Hall
(2002)1.
It is hypothesized that the dissolved metal content will
be greater in the older building (Hashinger), because the
metal from the pipes will leach into the water thus
leading to an increased concentration of copper and
zinc in Hashinger than Leatherby Libraries.
1
Floor Level
0
0
Concentration (ppm)
Introduction:
0.15
lowest
Floor Level
highest
Floor Level
Figure 4a and 4b. Metal Concentrations at Various Floor Levels
Figures 2: Samples & AAS
This figure shows a picture of the sample set. Samples were obtained by placing 50mL
of water from a woman’s restroom of each floor of the buildings in question. Water was
obtained in airtight conical tubes so that oxidation and/or contamination did not occur
to the samples. This is also a depiction of the Thermo Elemental Solaar S4 with an S&J
Juniper & Co. Hollow Cathode Lamp instrument used in this study.
It is visible in Figure 4a that copper concentrations in two of the three buildings
increase from the bottom-most floor to the top-most floor. No conclusions can be drawn
regarding Hashinger, because the top-most floor’s standard deviation is so high. The
same conclusions can be seen in the zinc concentrations of two of the three buildings.
Unlike Figure 4a, Leatherby Libraries’ zinc concentrations cannot be determined due to
standard deviations being so high in the sample. In the case of this data, the hypothesis
is held to be true in that the copper and zinc levels increase with increased floor levels.
When analyzing the zinc data, Leatherby Library also
contains the highest level of zinc at 0.778 ppm. This
only occurs at one of the sink locations. However, the
other buildings have varying zinc levels that are close
to this value. Again, the variations of zinc levels do not
appear to have trends among the floors or the age of
the building.
Analyzing the individual buildings, five sample floors
were analyzed from the Hashinger Science Center. The
second floor had the greatest concentration of zinc and
copper. The fourth floor decreased in concentration. It
was hypothesized that the higher the floor the more
metal content in the water due to the farther distance
that the water traveled. This assumes that the metal
was picked up from the pipes. However, the metals
have a low solubility which means that the farther they
travel in the pipes, they could potentially fall out of
solution as well. If the metal was obtained from the
water source and not the metal pipe then we could
assume that the higher floors would have lower levels
of metal. A medium of this theory could explain the
second and third floors having the greatest level of
metal content. This can also be seen in the Argyros
Forum data. The second floor has the highest value of
zinc and copper in sink 2 similar to Hashinger Science
Center. Leatherby Library didn’t have much variability
in the levels of copper or zinc.
Analyzing the overall effect of the data, the age of the
buildings doesn’t seem to have an effect of the copper
or zinc levels. Also, the middle floors in the buildings
seem to contain the highest levels of both metals that is
most likely due to the distance of pipe traveled as well
as the low solubility of the metals.
Future Research:
It would be interesting to repeat the experiment and
increase the amount of replicates in order to verify that
there is no effect of the age of the building on amount
of dissolved metals in the water. Also, since almost all
calculated values of the metals fell below the lowest
standard concentration on the standard curve, this
study could be repeated with standard curve values
starting at 0.1 ppm concentrations.
Bibliography:
1Skoog,
Douglas A, and James J. Leary.
Analysis. 4th Edition. 1992.
Principles of Instrumental
Inorganic Chemistry research poster
1st env. science senior capstone
course Spring 2013
Audit launch, Chapman Univ.,
May 2013
Audit presentation, CA
Higher Education
Sustainability
Conference, UCSB, June
2013