Science Activities

Projects and Curriculum Ideas in STEM Classrooms

ISSN: 0036-8121 (Print) 1940-1302 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsca20

Attacking a Dense Problem: A Learner-centered

Approach to Teaching Density

Austin M Hitt

To cite this article: Austin M Hitt (2005) Attacking a Dense Problem: A Learner-centered Approach
to Teaching Density, Science Activities, 42:1, 25-29, DOI: 10.3200/SATS.42.1.25-29

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.3200/SATS.42.1.25-29

Published online: 07 Aug 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 128

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vsca20
 AUSTIN M. HITT
Abstract. Density is a difficult concept for students to learn
because it is abstract and because it is derived from the concepts
of mass and volume. The solution is to address density at each of
the three levels of scientific understanding: macroscopic, particle/
modeling, and symbolic. This article demonstrates how to help
students gain a conceptual understanding of density by
combining the three levels of scientific understanding and the 5E
Learning Cycle.
Key words: density, learning cycle, modeling, models
tudents find density “too deep” to understand and
S “too theoretical” to have any meaning for their
lives. Density is confusing because it is abstract and
because it is derived from two other concepts: mass and vol-
ume. Despite having some understanding of mass and vol-
ume, students do not develop a conceptual understanding of
density. For example, a review of the science education
research reveals that students ages 14–22 relate density to
the arrangement, concentration, and mass of matter particles
AUSTIN M. HITT is an assistant professor of science education
at Coastal Carolina University in Conway, South Carolina. He is
a former high school science teacher and currently teaches sec-
ondary science methods at Coastal Carolina University. The focus
of his research is teaching science through models and model con-
struction in grades K–12.
25
but they do not connect volume with density (Driver,
Squires, Rushworth, and Wood-Robinson 1994).
Density is an important concept for students to learn
because it has many applications in the physical and bio-
logical sciences. The significance of density is underscored
by its inclusion in the National Science Education Stan-
dards (NSES). In grades 5–8, density is listed under the
strand Properties and Changes of Properties of Matter,
which indicates that students should understand density,
boiling point, and solubility as intrinsic properties of matter
(NRC 1996).
In order for students to understand density and other
scientific concepts, they need to learn these concepts at
three different conceptual levels: macroscopic, particle or
modeling, and symbolic (Gabel 1999; Johnstone 1991).
The three conceptual levels of scientific understanding are
interconnected, and each level is necessary for concept
mastery (see Figure 1).
The macroscopic level is the easiest level for students to
understand because it involves the five senses. An example
of conceptual understanding at this level that relates to den-
sity is comparing two objects of the same mass but with dif-
ferent volumes. The particle or modeling level refers to phe-
nomena that are not observed. To visualize these
phenomena, students need to build models that they can see
and manipulate. In the case of density, students can create
26 SCIENCE ACTIVITIES Vol. 42, No. 1

graphs displaying the relationship between the mass and vol-
ume of a metal. The symbolic level is the most abstract level
and consists of the formulas, equations, and definitions that
represent phenomena. An example of the symbolic level is
the formula for density, which is equal to the mass divided
by the volume (D = M/V).
accurately describe density in response to open-ended ques-
tions. The problem was that the students memorized the mate-
rial but did not have a conceptual understanding of density.
This paper presents an instructional approach that com-
bines the 5E Learning Cycle and the three levels of concep-
tual understanding. I discuss the implication of this
approach for teaching density and other scientific topics.

Macroscopic
Symbolic Model/Particle
FIGURE 1. Conceptual levels of scientific understanding.
Generally, students are not taught density using all of the
conceptual levels of scientific understanding. For example,
when I taught ninth-grade physical science I omitted instruc-
tion at the modeling level. I introduced density by having stu-
dents weigh an object and determine its volume using water
displacement. Next, I presented the density formula, and as a
class, the students solved density problems. Finally, I assigned
the students additional practice problems for homework.
This approach appeared to be effective, but my students’
responses on tests revealed that they had only a superficial
understanding of density. My students could solve for the
missing variable in the density formula, but they could not
PROCEDURES
Macroscopic Level – Activity 1: Sinking and Floating
Students observe what happens when sodas are placed in
three aqueous solutions and measure the mass and volume
of the sodas and the aqueous solutions.
Engage
1. Divide the class into groups of 3–4 students and give
each group a diet and a regular soda (for materials, see
figure 2).
2. Have students make predictions for the sinking and
floating behaviors of the sodas in tap water, salt water,
and rubbing alcohol.
3. Tell the students to record their predictions in their note-
books and in a class data table.
Explore
1. Use the three 2-liter soda bottles with the tops removed
as the containers for the tap water, salt water, and rub-
bing alcohol (see Figure 3). The sodas are placed in
each of the containers.
2. Lead a discussion on the experimental results and explana-
tions for the behavior of the sodas in the different solutions.
3. Most students believe the sodas sink or float because
they are heavier or lighter than the solutions in the con-

Activity 2:
Determining
Activity 1: the density of an Activity 3:
Sinking and floating unknown metal Layering liquids

Balance Balance Balance

Can of regular sodaa 100 ml graduated cylinder Plastic straw
Can of diet sodaa Metal pellets Cooking oil
10 ml graduated Plastic cup Corn syrup
cylinder (diluted to 50%)
3 plastic 2 liter soda bottles Tap water Food coloring
Rubbing alcohol Pipette
Saturated saltwater Potato slice
Tap water Saturated saltwater
Tap water

a
The sodas should be a regular and diet of the same brand.

FIGURE 2. List of materials for the density experiment.

Spring 2005
FIGURE 3. Sinking and floating of a regular soda. The
solutions from left to right are tap water, saltwater, and
rubbing alcohol.
tainers. To address this misconception, the students
need to find and compare the densities of the sodas, tap
water, saltwater, and rubbing alcohol. Students measure
10ml of each liquid using a graduated cylinder, deter-
mine the mass of the liquids using the balance, and
record the results in a data table (see Table 1).
4. After comparing the densities of all the liquids, the stu-
dents uncover the pattern for sinking and floating and
connect it to density. At this phase of the lesson the stu-
dents understand density at the macroscopic level, but
they do not have a conceptual understanding. To truly
understand density, they need to visualize it by building
graphical models that demonstrate the relationship
between mass and volume.
Table 1. Example Data Table for Mass and Volume
Measurements of Sodas, Tap Water, Saltwater,
and Rubbing Alcohol
Type of liquid Mass (g) / 10mL Mass / mL
Diet soda 9.65 .965
Regular soda 10.21 1.021
Tap water 10.00 1.00
Saltwater 10.60 1.06
Rubbing alcohol 8.75 .875
Modeling Level and Symbolic Level – Activity 2:
Determining the Density of a Metal
Students create a graphical model for the relationship
between mass and volume and determine the density of the
metal using the y-intercept and density formulas.
Explain
5. Have students fill a 100 mL graduated cylinder with tap
water up to the 75 mL mark and weigh the graduated
cylinder. (The weight of the cylinder and the water is
then subtracted from all measurements for the mass of
the metal pellets).
SCIENCE ACTIVITIES 27
6. Tell them to add metal pellets to the graduated cylinder
until the volume of water inside the cylinder rises 5 mL.
7. Using the balance, ask them to re-weigh the graduated
cylinder and record the mass of the pellets inside of the
graduated cylinder (see Table 2).
8. Let them repeat steps 6 through 8 until the volume of
water in the graduated cylinder reaches the 100 mL mark.
9. Students plot the data on graph paper and draw a line-
of-best-fit (see Figure 4). Because mass and volume are
directly proportional, the data points approximate a
straight line that extends through the origin. The stu-
dents can observe this pattern and realize that density is
a constant. However, to scientifically explain the trend
they need to describe density at the symbolic level.
Elaborate (Determining the density of a metal,
continued)
10. The students determine the density of the metal pellets
by applying the slope-intercept formula, y=mx + b
(symbolic level). By having students interpolate and
extrapolate from the graph, they can see that density is
not affected by changes in overall mass. When students
solve for the unknown masses or volumes, they prove to
themselves that density is a constant.
Combining the Three Conceptual Levels
Symbolic Level – Activity 3: Layering Liquids
Students measure the mass and volume of unknown liquids,
create graphical models to represent mass and volume, and
use mathematical formulas to determine density.
Evaluate
11. Evaluate the students individually and in groups using
the layering liquids activity. The activity consists of
determining the density of unknown liquids and of
devising a plan for placing the liquids in a straw without
mixing the layers. The unknown liquids are tap water,
salt water, alcohol, 50% corn syrup, and cooking oil.
The identities of the liquids are disguised using food
coloring.
12. Using the balance, the students determine the masses of
the five different volumes of each of the unknown liquids
(macroscopic level).
13. Each student graphs the mass and volume data (modeling
level), draws a line-of-best-fit, and determines the density
(slope) of each liquid using the y-intercept formula (sym-
bolic level).
14. The students check the accuracy of their density calcu-
lations by layering the liquids in a straw (see Figure 5).
They push a plastic straw into a potato slice that serves
as a base. Then they use a pipette to drizzle the liquids
down the sides of the straw. The liquids should be
28 SCIENCE ACTIVITIES Vol. 42, No. 1

Table 2. Example of Mass, Volume, and Density Table

Starting mass
of the graduated
cylinder and New mass Starting mass– Volume Massa / Volume
75ml of water (g) (g) New mass (mL) (g/mL)

115.4 154.8 39.4 5 7.88

192.3 76.9 10 7.69
225.7 110.3 15 7.35
270.2 154.8 20 7.74
309.3 193.9 25 7.76

a
Use the difference between the starting mass and the new mass.

detail. Within groups, the students are evaluated based on

Mass vs. Volume the success of their liquid-layering experiment.

CONCLUSIONS
200
The conceptual levels of scientific understanding are
easy to insert within the framework of the 5E Learning
150
Mass (g)

Cycle (see Figure 6). At the initial stages of the learning

100
cycle, the students engage and explore phenomena at the
macroscopic level through experiments and demonstra-
50 tions. In the explanation stage of the 5E Learning Cycle, the
students explain a phenomenon by building a model (mod-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
eling and particle level). At the elaboration stage, students
Volume (mL) represent a phenomenon in the context of scientific sym-
bols, such as mathematical formulas or scientific terms.
FIGURE 4. Example graph of the relationship between Finally, during the evaluation phase of the learning cycle
mass and volume. students are assessed at all three conceptual levels of scien-
tific understanding.

Evaluate

Macroscopic
Engage

Elaborate Explore

Symbolic Modeling

FIGURE 5. Series of liquids layered in the straw.

placed in order of their densities, most dense to least

dense. The students will know if their density calcula-
tions are correct if the colored layers do not mix.
15. The students are assessed individually and in groups on
different parts of the assignment. Individually, the content
of the students’ notebooks are evaluated for accuracy and
Explain
FIGURE 6. Model demonstrating the integration of the
5E Learning Cycle and the three conceptual levels of
scientific understanding.
Spring 2005
This combination of the 5E Learning Cycle and the three
conceptual levels of scientific understanding are advanta-
geous for two reasons. First, this approach is conducive to the
way students learn science. Students make observations at the
macroscopic level, construct personal understandings by
building models, and apply the appropriate scientific symbols.
Second, the combination of the three conceptual levels of
scientific understanding and the 5E Learning Cycle creates
lessons that gradually evolve from simple science process
skills, such as observing and predicting, to more complex
ones needed for experimenting and testing. Therefore, stu-
dents are challenged to think at increasingly higher cogni-
tive levels as the lesson progresses.
National and state science standards focus on the need for
inquiry and the need for critical thinking skills. This article
presents a method that can meet both objectives, and it can
be applied to diverse science topics. The conceptual levels
SCIENCE ACTIVITIES 29
of scientific understanding and the 5E Learning Cycle can
be easily combined to create authentic inquiry-based
instruction. Students are challenged to think and approach
problems scientifically, which results in more engaging and
realistic science instruction. This approach can make many
science subjects “less dense” for students.
References
Driver, R., A. Squires, and V. Wood-Robinson. 1994. Making
sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas.
London: Routledge.
Gabel, D. 1999. Improving teaching and learning through chem-
istry education research: A look to the future. Journal of Chem-
ical Education, 76(4): 548–554.
Johnstone, A. H. 1991. Why is science so difficult to learn? Things
are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted
Learning 7(7): 7583.
National Research Council (NRC). 1996. National Science Edu-
cation Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.