TOPIC 1: Matter & Measurement
TOPIC 1 has hardly any specific relevance to the AP syllabus and much of the content is not even chemistry related. The content should be reasonably assumed to be scientific general knowledge by the time a student enters an AP chemistry course. I don't "teach" any of this material in a formal manner, I simply assign it on day 1 of the course and test it about a week later. Many AP chemistry teachers greatly over-emphasize the importance of significant figures and worry way too much about their students inability to get it right. The reality is that there may be the odd multiple-choice question here and there, and there are two calculations on the free-response part of the exam. Mistakes with significant figures in these questions can only be penalized one point on each question. Additionally there is usually leeway given, for example, an answer that should have been recorded to four significant figures will be not be penalized if it is recorded to three or to five. I tell my students that if they are in doubt that they should record answers to three significant figures. Usually this means they are close enough and lose no points. By the way, the exam is testing students chemistry knowledge, not their ability to handle numbers. Forget it and move on to more important matters. |
TOPIC 2: Atoms, Ions & Nomenclature
Chemical history, experiments leading to the discovery of sub-atomic particles and Dalton's atomic theory as an entity, are of virtually no importance at all to the AP exam. (Of course Dalton's theory is important to chemists, but we're talking the AP exam here, not what's important in other contexts). These areas may be the subject of a few multiple-choice questions, but they collectively deserve virtually no "teaching" time at all. I see no reason not teach what little radioactivity that is needed on the AP, here in this topic. It makes perfect sense as I am talking about proton and neutrons anyway, to go ahead and deal with nuclear reactions. Nomenclature is a strange beast. Superficially it appears to be unimportant in terms of the exam, but since so much else glibly refers to it and uses it, the subject is one that students need to grasp firmly. I don't suggest teaching it much though, just give them the tools and MAKE the students learn it by testing their knowledge of it in a way that will cost them points if they haven't. Hit them in the (grade) wallet, it's one of the few real points of leverage you have to make the students learn! |
TOPIC 3: Electronic Configuration
Avoid conversations that tangent into wave-particle duality, quantum physics and chemical history - they are largely irrelevant to the exam. All the quantitative chemistry can be handled by "plugging and chugging" into a few formulae, and the other chemistry is only likely to be the subject of a few multiple-choice questions. Learn s and p orbital shapes and the rules for filling and you're just about done. Obviously the rule exceptions do come up, and they should be learned. I’ve always thought that the use of the diagonal diagram method of working out electronic configuration to be very cumbersome, so I always teach the filling of sub-shells using the periodic table and the designation of period and block. |
TOPIC 4: Stoichiometry
In general, I don't teach dimensional analysis. I feel it is cumbersome and takes far too long to instill. Rather, I like to teach formulae that the kids learn. For example, for solids, moles = mass/molar mass. State symbols are largely unimportant except in two cases. One, if the question asks for them, and two if they can be used to illustrate a particular relevance in a reaction like a precipitation or the formation of a gas. Otherwise, students attempts to put them all over the place often only serve to illustrate their ignorance. |
TOPIC 5: Qualitative & Quantitative Chemistry
Solubility rules are important, but not really for this topic, it's really all about equation writing in TOPIC 12. This topic lays the groundwork for lots of other areas. TOPICS 12, 14 and 16 all benefit greatly from the work done here. |
TOPIC 6: Gases
The overwhelming majority of problems can be solved by either knowing the basics of kinetic theory and its relationship to ideal gases and the van der Waals equation, or simply "plugging and chugging" numbers into formulae. Not much here - a quick topic. |
TOPIC 7: Periodicity
Pretty easy stuff to understand, but students don't often explain these ideas very well. As long as it's in the multiple-choice part of the test that's not too much of a problem. I like graphs here to illustrate trends. Look out for exceptions as they are likely to be heavily examined. Be ultra-critical of written explanations of trends, students usually need lots of guidance. Way too often the kids "waffle" when they should be much more specific. Don't let them get away with it. |
TOPIC 8: Bonding
This is a very cumbersome topic that I find difficult to streamline and to categorize. That's why on the first page of my TOPIC 8 notes I try to summarize the collection of disparate ideas on the flowchart. I don't teach any FCC or BCC theory, nor MO theory. These are often misinterpreted by teachers as being important for the AP - they're not. Sigma & pi bonds and hybridization are all difficult theories that require a much simpler treatment at AP level than most teachers give them. For example, a single bond is sigma, double is a sigma and a pi, and a triple is a sigma and two pi. Pi bonds involve the overlap of UNHYBRIDIZED p orbitals. Done, period. |
TOPIC 9: Thermochemistry
The first of the BIG FIVE (large and profoundly important TOPICS). I used to teach this almost exclusively via Hess' cycles but I have increasingly favored the algebraic manipulation of equations. The definitions of enthalpy of combustion and formation are vital to recall. I think that the relevance of Born-Haber cycles is debatable for AP, but I like the neatness of the theory so I teach it. Entropy is a very difficult concept in general, and I highly doubt that many high school teachers (myself included) really understand it very well. No matter, think of disorder, think of state symbols and then plug and chug into some Delta S equations, watch out for common screw-ups in relation to units and you'll be set. |
TOPIC 10: Transition Metal Basics
PRIOR to the 2006-07 academic year, I said the following about TOPIC 10.
The first of two TOPICS (#11 is the other one) that I call bonus topics that I place in my syllabus for two reasons. Firstly it helps to open up some extra possibilities in equation writing, and secondly gives a little bit of chemical general knowledge that might be useful in other areas of the course. However, equation writing is the real motivation and the teaching of a little bit of this topic can open up options significantly in question #4 on the exam.
The comment about chemical general knowledge obviously remains true, but with the advent of the new Net Ionic Equation writing question in 2007 and beyond, my suspicion is that this topic will be (at least in the early years of the new question) less relevant. However, for now it stays. In the future it may be that it gets incorporated into the current TOPIC 12 and is restricted very tightly to equation writing relevance, since I doubt that Transition metals will feature very much in their own right.
|
TOPIC 11: Organic Basics
PRIOR to the 2006-07 academic year, I said the following about TOPIC 11.
The second of two TOPICS (#10 is the other one) that I call bonus topics that I place in my syllabus for two reasons. It helps to open up some extra possibilities in equation writing, and secondly gives a little bit of chemical general knowledge that might be useful in other areas of the course. However, equation writing is the real motivation and the teaching of a little bit of this topic can open up options in question #4 on the exam. I am still dismayed at the lack of organic knowledge needed for the AP, although lately we have seen a few odd parts of questions referring to it, for example some very simple isomerism. The continued minor expansion of some very simple organic nomenclature and isomerism on the exam would not surprise me.
The comment about chemical general knowledge obviously remains true, but with the advent of the new Net Ionic Equation writing question in 2007 and beyond, my suspicion is that this TOPIC will be (at least in the early years of the new question and with the possible exception of combustion) less relevant. However, for now it stays. In the future it may be that it gets incorporated into the current TOPIC 12 and is restricted very tightly to equation writing relevance, but this assumes that Organic chemistry will remain the exam oddity it currently is. If it becomes more popular in the future, then this TOPIC may need to be expanded rather than morphed into the current TOPIC 12.
|
TOPIC 12: Equation Writing
PRIOR to the 2006-07 academic year, I said the following about TOPIC 12.
The key to successful equation writing is simply practice. Practice, practice and more practice and you can get almost any student to regularly score 12+ out of 15. The national average on this question is pitifully low which I think is a reflection on the unwillingness or inability of teachers to teach to the test. This is a classic example of an area where one can make meaningful predictions about what will and won't be asked on the exam, and therefore one can coach students on how to score well regardless of their intellectual capacity. My kids do literally 1000+ of these during the year.
I think all of the above remains true as we look ahead to the new Net Ionic Equation format in 2007 and beyond, but until we have more data regarding the associated questions and the new level of difficulty it's difficult to make the comprehensive and definitive statments that I have been confident of in the past. In short, we'll just have to wait and see. |
TOPIC 13: Equilibrium
The second of the BIG FIVE. Still one of the most difficult concepts for students to grasp and for teachers to teach. Practice, practice and practice with old questions and some predictions about the most likely emphasis of question #1 each year can help a lot. Try to instill the idea of K not changing unless there is a change in temperature, and the idea that Le Chatelier "shifts" are ones where equilibrium is being re-established. Avoid explanations os "shifts" as simply being "becasue of Le Chatelier's Principle". Generally Ksp remains a very difficult area for many students. |
TOPIC 14: Acids & Bases
The third of the BIG FIVE. Even-handedness is important here. Try to give at least as much time to bases as acids, the temptation is to neglect them. Buffer calculations seem to be over complicated by many teachers, if students can recognize a buffer solution and apply the Henderson-Hasselbach formula, more often than not they can solve most problems. Also recognition of acid-base conjugate pairs and the subsequent application of Kw = Ka x Kb can be VERY useful part of a chemical problem solving toolbox. |
TOPIC 15: Kinetics
The fourth of the BIG FIVE. Be sure to stress the importance of expressing ideas properly in this topic. Frankly the concepts and the questions are not difficult for most students, but the mess they make of explaining themselves is often deep! Units of rate constants seem to be a persistent problem. Graphs can be learned, rather than understood, but an appreciation of y = mx + b is very, very helpful. Remember only 0, 1 and 2 order reactions come up on the AP exam. |
TOPIC 16: Electrochemistry
The fifth of the BIG FIVE. I like to think of SERP's this way; the more likely the forward (reduction) reaction, the more positive the value. I also teach line notation (cell diagrams) and work out Ecell from there. Most of the quantitative stuff is plug and chug, and with care this should be a high scoring area for students. Remember that the log (or ln) of a fraction will be a negative number, and that explanations after question #3 in the exam will not allow the help of a calculator. |
TOPIC 17: Colligative Properties
I like to deliver FPD, BPE and Osmotic pressure via the formulae that allow their calculation. Defining boiling point is important. I like to include work on positive and negative deviations from Raoult's Law since this re-introduces intermolecular bonding concepts. |
