DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.8345948.v1
title: Hands-on Complex Fluids Station III (J.F.K. Middle School)

description: Introduction<br>The overall aim of this visit to a local middle school was to show younger students interesting aspects of nontrivial liquid behavior, microfluidics, and systems chemistry. While many students at the middle school level understand different phases of matter, few know of the subtle behaviors of liquids. Few have seen complex spatio-temporal patterns generated by spatially distributed, nonlinear chemical reactions. In order to rectify this, myself and 2 coworkers presented 3, 15 minute long interactive stations on these topics to middle school students. The stations by my 2 coworkers focused on complex behavior of liquids. One focused on miscibility, and surfactants. The other on microfluidics, and flows at low reynolds number. These may follow as two separate reports depending on the time constraints of my coworkers. I will not summarize them here. The station I ran focused on complex patterns exhibited by chemical reactions. A few slides were presented, illustrating the complex waves of electrical activity in the brain. After this a video of a chemical reaction (the Belousov-Zhabotinsky, BZ, reaction) was shown exhibiting visually similar behavior. In line with the motivation of my work in the lab, I suggested to students that this provides a means for scientists to study complex brain dynamics without harming other beings, in a simple setting. I then prepared the BZ reaction in the class to illustrate the simplicity of these experiments, and give some reality to the videos I'd previously shown them. In the remaining 10 minutes students were left to play with a simulation of this chemical reaction, and explore the range of possible, rich patterns within these systems. <br><br>Methods<br>computer simulation, chemistry<br><br>Results<br>Students were engaged by the station I ran, and seemed to be quite stricken by the range of fascinating patterns possible within chemical, or biological systems. The vast majority of students were engaged in the exploration of the simulation, while only a minority elected to chat, or otherwise be distracted. Many asked questions about expressing curiosity about how such rich patterns are possible, and were given pause to know some of them are still poorly understood to this date. A minority of students were interested in the actual chemical reaction, and were interested to hear about some of the physical details of the process. Though engaged, I did notice that some students were left somewhat confused. <br><br>Discussion<br>Overall students were engaged, and interested in the matter, though there were elements which clearly could be improved upon. The activity engaged students, and provoked many questions. There was a lack of attention to the actual experiment. Also the use of computers, though useful in attracting attention to the simulation, could be distracting. It can be concluded the tutorial was a success, yet running the tutorial for longer, and with prepared computers would have contributed to added engagement, and integration of the material. As previously discussed in results, students were highly engaged. Within each class ~80% showed intense interest in the simulation during the 10 minutes they were allotted to play with it. This was rooted in the similarity between the simulation and common video/iphone games. As a result the tutorial required next to no explanation. Less then 5% of students needed to be shown how to operate the simulation. Students were often able to understand that under certain parameters, the simulation could reproduce the behavior of the chemical reaction in the front of the class. A major distraction within the tutorial was the failure of computers to be prepared in advance, and the many functions of computers. Only some students could access website hosting the game due to a web proxy, in spite of teachers having tested it successfully on a few ahead of time. Obviously some students, though a small percentage, chose to browse the internet during the tutorial. These could both be avoided by carefully preparing the computers involved ahead of time. Finally the 15 minute time span of the tutorial could be lengthened to leave time for discussion. Ultimately during the 15 minute time, there never ended up being a time for students to discuss what they'd seen with one another. A productive discussion about the range of patterns observed, be they stationary, changing in time periodically, or chaotically changing in time may have been helpful. I cannot say for sure this would be better, as I found students to be much more talkative when individually chatting with them, as compared to when I asked questions of the whole class. To summarize advanced preparation of computers, a lengthened period of the tutorial, could improve this otherwise quite functional exploration of chemical pattern formation. Computers were key to the engagement of this tutorial, but also served as the chief distraction. The vast majority of students who remained engaged witnessed very interesting, beautiful patterns formed by simple rules. Some began to grasp the idea that a simple toy computer model, such as the one they were playing with, could actually capture the complexities of a real chemical reaction. In a way this gave early students a sense for how modern theoretical physics is actually performed, and what such work involves. With a lengthened duration, added discussion of what was observed could aid the integration of the material. If you are interested in attempting the BZ demo, read the attached word doc very carefully. If you have a good grasp of chemistry, and chemical safety, it is a perfectly safe, standard procedure. If not, either read the handout carefully and do your own research, or do not attempt it at all. <br><br>