
Science • 30 • 21 students • Created with AI following Aligned with provincial curriculum standards
Free PDF · we'll email you a copy
I'm in the dalton law group, use this to guide you GAS LAWS CULMINATING PROJECT
You will be working in small groups (3-4 students) to research the prevailing Gas Laws and societal impacts that have shaped our current understanding of the behavior of gases and the relationship with pressure, temperature, and volume; along with our approach to the societal implications of these gas laws. INTRODUCTION TO GASES AND KMT BOYLE’S LAW CHARLES’ LAW GAY-LUSSAC’S LAW COMBINED GAS LAW AVOGADRO’S LAW IDEAL GAS LAW DALTON’S LAW REQUIREMENTS Your group will be responsible for completing 4 components to this project:
• a hands on experience for students to engage with the lesson
This lesson can take on any number of forms, from conventional “teacher-led” lesson, infomercial- style sales pitch trying to sell some fictitious product, television show, news report, etc.
28 MARKS 2) A proper, well-constructed, LESSON PLAN outlining the topics that you intend to discuss during the lesson. The lesson plan should specify the time allocation for all aspects of the lesson and who is responsible for each aspect, learning goals, success criteria, and the specific curriculum expectations you intend to cover. Be sure to address any learning styles and teaching strategies you are using. (You will want to research what an effective “Lesson Plan” looks like). NOTE: Any demonstrations you intend to perform should be outlined in detail in your lesson plan, including the reason for performing the demonstration and any equipment needed. Due Friday, June 5, 2025.
10 MARKS
10 MARKS
10 MARKS
ASSESSMENT / EVALUATION There will be several methods of assessment and evaluation that will be used to generate your grade throughout this project. i) One peer evaluation. • Each student in the class (excluding those in the presenting group) will conduct a digital peer evaluation, using a supplied assessment rubric (Google Form). • These peer evaluations will be averaged and count towards 50% of the group’s mark on the “lesson”. ii) One self-evaluation. • Each group member will conduct a digital self-evaluation of their own group (an evaluation of the other members in the group) using a supplied assessment rubric (Google Form). • These self-evaluations will be used to determine a multiplication factor for your individual mark, based on the group totals. o Groups will be allocated 100% per student in the group (i.e. If you have 3 people in your group, you will have 300 percentage points to allocate) ▪ NOTE: No 2 students can be allocated the same mark ▪ NOTE: Marks must differ by at least 2% ▪ NOTE: No mark can exceed 110%... similarly... No mark can go below 90%
iii) One teacher evaluation. • Your teacher will conduct an evaluation, also based on the same assessment rubric. • This evaluation will be worth the remaining 50% of the mark for each aspect of the project. SAMPLE MARK CALCULATION STUDENT #1
STUDENT #2
STUDENT #3 • Peer Evaluation of your LESSON: 23 /28 23 /28 23 /28 • Teacher Evaluation of your LESSON: 20 /28 20 /28 20 /28 AVERAGE: 21.5 /28 21.5 /28 21.5 /28 • Peer Evaluation of your HANDOUT: 8 /10 8 /10 8 /10 • Teacher Evaluation of your HANDOUT: 9 /10 9 /10 9 /10 AVERAGE: 8.5 /10 8.5 /10 8.5 /10 • Teacher Evaluation of your LESSON PLAN: 7 /10 7 /10 7 /10 • Teacher Evaluation of your PROBLEM SET: 10 /10 10 /10 10 /10 • Group Subtotal: 47 /58 47 /58 47 /58
• Multiplication Factor, from Group Self- Evaluation: 95% 100% 105%
• Your final mark: 44.7 /58 47 /58 49.4 /58 77 % 81 % 85 %
ASSESSMENT RUBRIC 0 UNACCEPTABLE
1 POOR QUALITY
2 AVERAGE QUALITY
3 GOOD QUALITY
4 EXCELLENT QUALITY
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Provided no history about the gas law and/or scientist involved with its discovery.
Provided the name of the scientist with no discussion of research conducted to derive the relationship.
Provided the name of the scientist with limited or unclear discussion of research conducted to derive the relationship.
Provided the name of the scientist with relevant discussion of research conducted to derive the relationship.
Provided the name of the scientist with detailed discussion of other research being conducted that led to the need for this relationship.
THEORY
Provided no theory relating to the development of the law and/or relationship investigated.
Introduced the law/relationship outlined by the theory with no explanations or applications. Includes unclear or no connections to the Kinetic Molecular Theory.
Introduced the law/relationship outlined by the theory with limited explanations. Includes limited connections to the Kinetic Molecular Theory.
Introduced the law/relationship outlined by the theory with clear explanations and some applications to daily life. Includes connections to the Kinetic Molecular Theory.
Introduced the law/relationship outlined by the theory detailed connections to real-world applications and the effects on daily life. Includes detailed connections to the Kinetic Molecular Theory.
REAL WORLD APPLICATIONS
Provided no applications of the law.
Provided only “school/lab” related examples of the law and nothing relating to the real world.
Provided real world applications of the law, with no connections to how it demonstrates the validity of the gas law.
Provided few real world applications of the law, with some implicit connections to how it demonstrates the validity of the gas law.
Provided several real world applications of the law, with direct, explicit, connections to how it demonstrates the validity of the gas law.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS
Provided no sample problems and/or were not able to solve the problems provided.
Showed few (i.e. one or two) examples with no explanation of how to solve and/or manipulate the all variables.
Showed few examples with limited explanations of how to solve and/or manipulate the all variables.
Showed some examples with limited explanations of how to solve and/or manipulate the all variables.
Showed variety of examples with detailed explanations of how to solve and manipulate relevant variables.
DEMOS, VISUALS AND/OR SIMULATIONS
Provided no demos, visuals, or simulations. Proper lab safety was NOT used throughout the demonstration.
Demos, visuals, or simulations used to support the law were inaccurate, unclear, and/or inappropriate. Proper lab safety was NOT used throughout the demonstration.
Demos, visuals, or simulations were used to support the law but were not helpful in better understanding the gas law. Proper lab safety was NOT used throughout the demonstration.
Demos, visuals, or simulations were used to support the law but were not clearly connected to the gas law. Proper lab safety was used throughout the demonstration.
Demos, visuals, or simulations used to support the law were relevant, clear, and made it easier to understand the gas law. Proper lab safety was used throughout the demonstration.
MARK 0 1 2 GROUP ORGANIZATION
Demonstrated uncertainty of order, material, and/or role. Presentation did not make good use of the time allotted and required teacher intervention.
Presentation appeared segmented, with clear breaks between presenters or uncertainty with roles and responsibilities. Presentation did not make good use of the time allotted.
Group demonstrated clearly defined, logical flow of information. Group worked well together with seamless transitions. Presentation maximized time allowance without exceeding.
CLARITY Concepts difficult to grasp. Voice unclear.
Presenters spoke too quickly, did not permit time to take appropriate notes, and/or required clarification of information on many occasions.
Presenters spoke slowly, ensured the information made sense and was understood by the class.
CREATIVITY Showed no creativity in presentation style and supporting materials.
Traditional style of presentation and supporting materials that do not go beyond what one would typically expect of a lesson.
Showed relevant and unique creativity in presentation style and supporting materials.
CLASS INVOLVEMENT No effort was made to ensure class participation, interaction, engagement.
Class involvement instigated by group members and/or appeared forced.
Class appeared engaged, interactive, and self-motivated to participate.
PRESENTATION DATES:
Students connect gas laws (Boyle’s, Charles’, Gay-Lussac’s, Combined, Avogadro’s, Ideal Gas, and Dalton’s) to Kinetic Molecular Theory (KMT) and evaluate how these ideas influence real-world technologies and public life in Canada. The class completes a short hands-on investigation and a structured mini “news segment” style activity to practise scientific communication.
Join thousands of teachers using Kuraplan AI to create personalized lesson plans that align with Aligned with provincial curriculum standards in minutes, not hours.
Created with Kuraplan AI
Generated using openai/gpt-5.4-nano
🌟 Trusted by 1000+ Schools
Join educators across Canada