Chemical Bonding 1: Basic Concepts

Chemical Bonding I: Basic Concepts examines general ideas of chemical bonding between atoms and ions and how this bonding affects the chemical properties of the elements. An overview of Lewis symbols, Lewis structures and the octet rule is presented including the role of valence electrons in ionic and covalent bonding. The energy changes that accompany ionic bond formation are also discussed with emphasis on lattice energy. The chapter covers guidelines and general procedures for writing Lewis structures or electron dot formulas for molecular compounds and polyatomic ions. The concepts and applications of resonance, formal charge and exceptions to the octet rules are presented, along with coverage of the relationship between bond polarity and electronegativity.

Chemical Bonding 2: Modern Theories of Chemical Bonding

Chemical Bonding II: Modern Theories of Chemical Bonding explains four bonding theories related to molecular geometry and bonding. Lewis structures and the Valence-Shell Electron-Pair Repulsion (VSEPR) model are used to describe and predict the electron group geometry, molecular geometry and shapes of molecules. The VSEPR model is then used to predict molecular polarity as a function of shape. This leads to Valence Bond Theory, which uses the principles of orbital overlap and hybridization of atomic orbitals to describe chemical bonding. Finally the Molecular Orbital Theory (MOT) based on electron delocalization is discussed in terms of bonding and anti-bonding molecular orbitals.

Real space electron delocalization, resonance, and aromaticity in chemistry

Chemists explaining a molecule’s stability and reactivity often refer to the concepts of delocalization, resonance, and aromaticity. Resonance is commonly discussed within valence bond theory as the stabilizing effect of mixing different Lewis structures. Yet, most computational chemists work with delocalized molecular orbitals, which are also usually employed to explain the concept of aromaticity, a ring delocalization in cyclic planar systems which abide certain number rules. However, all three concepts lack a real space definition, that is not reliant on orbitals or specific wave function expansions. Here, we outline a redefinition from first principles: delocalization means that likely electron arrangements are connected via paths of high probability density in the many-electron real space. In this picture, resonance is the consideration of additional electron arrangements, which offer alternative paths. Most notably, the famous 4n + 2 Hückel rule is generalized and derived from nothing but the antisymmetry of fermionic wave functions.

Heuristics Hindering the Development of Understanding of Molecular Structures in University Level Chemistry Education: The Lewis Structure as an Example

Understanding chemical models can be challenging for many university students studying chemistry. This study analysed students’ understanding of molecular structures using the Lewis structure as a model, and examined what hinders their understanding. We conducted pre- and post-tests to analyse students’ conceptions and changes in them. The measures contained multiple-choice questions and drawing tasks testing their understanding of concepts, such as polarity, geometry, charge or formal charge and expanded octet. The pre-test revealed a lack of knowledge and several misconceptions in students’ prior knowledge. For example, the concept of polarity was well-known, but the combination of polarity and geometry appeared to be difficult. For some students, the representation of molecules was intuitive and lacking a systematic approach. Certain students used mnemonics and draw ball-and-stick models connected to surficial representations. After the chemistry courses, the conceptions and drawings had generally changed, and the level of the students’ knowledge increased markedly. Although, fewer ball-and-stick models were drawn in the post-test, some students still used them. The main result was that students who drew ball-and-stick models in the pre-test were less capable of drawing the correct Lewis structures with electrons in the post-test. In addition, heuristics seem to hinder learning and some concepts, such as resonance, remained difficult. This is probably due to the fact that understanding molecular structures requires systemic understanding, where several matters must be understood at the same time. Our study highlights that the understanding of molecular structures requires conceptual change related to several sub-concepts.

Covalent d-Block Organometallics: Teaching Lewis Structures and sd/sd2 Hybridization Gives Students Additional Explanations and Powerful Predictive Tools

Despite tremendous efforts by instructors and textbook authors, students find it difficult to develop useful chemical intuitions about preferred structures, structural trends, and properties of even the most common d-block element organometallic species, that is d6, d8, and d10 systems. A full molecular orbital analysis of a transition metal species is not always feasible or desirable, and crystal field theory, while generally useful, is often too simplistic and limited. It would be helpful to give students of organometallic chemistry an additional toolkit that helps them to understand d-block compounds, in particular highly covalent ones. It is well known in the research literature in organometallic chemistry that hybridization arguments involving s and d orbitals (such as sd and sd2 hybridization for d8 and d6 systems, respectively) provides useful insight. However, this knowledge is much underused in undergraduate teaching and not taught in undergraduate textbooks. The purpose of this article is to make descriptions of bonding that are based on s,d-hybridized orbitals more accessible in a way that is directly useful for undergraduate teaching. Geometries of unusual low-coordinate structures can be successfully predicted. An in-depth physical explanation for the trans-influence, the weakening of a bond due to a strong bond trans to it, is provided. A clear explanation is given for why the cis isomer normally more stable than the trans isomer in square-planar d8 complexes of the type MR2L2 (R = alkyl/aryl, L = relatively weakly bonded neutral ligand). Similarly, the relative stability of fac versus mer isomers in octahedral d6 complexes of the type MR3L3 is explained. Relevant to catalysis, the method explains why strongly donating ligands do not always facilitate oxidative addition and why 12-electron and 14-electron Pd(0) species are thermodynamically much more accessible than one might expect. The method capitalizes on 1st year knowledge such as the ability to write Lewis structures and to use hybridization arguments. It also ties into the upper-year experience, including graduate school, where covalent d-block complexes may be encountered in research and where the hybridization schemes described here naturally emerge from using the NBO formalism. It is discussed where the method might fit into the inorganic curriculum.<br>

Covalent d-Block Organometallics: Teaching Lewis Structures and sd/sd2 Hybridization Gives Students Additional Explanations and Powerful Predictive Tools

Despite tremendous efforts by instructors and textbook authors, students find it difficult to develop useful chemical intuitions about preferred structures, structural trends, and properties of even the most common d-block element organometallic species, that is d6, d8, and d10 systems. A full molecular orbital analysis of a transition metal species is not always feasible or desirable, and crystal field theory, while generally useful, is often too simplistic and limited. It would be helpful to give students of organometallic chemistry an additional toolkit that helps them to understand d-block compounds, in particular highly covalent ones. It is well known in the research literature in organometallic chemistry that hybridization arguments involving s and d orbitals (such as sd and sd2 hybridization for d8 and d6 systems, respectively) provides useful insight. However, this knowledge is much underused in undergraduate teaching and not taught in undergraduate textbooks. The purpose of this article is to make descriptions of bonding that are based on s,d-hybridized orbitals more accessible in a way that is directly useful for undergraduate teaching. Geometries of unusual low-coordinate structures can be successfully predicted. An in-depth physical explanation for the trans-influence, the weakening of a bond due to a strong bond trans to it, is provided. A clear explanation is given for why the cis isomer normally more stable than the trans isomer in square-planar d8 complexes of the type MR2L2 (R = alkyl/aryl, L = relatively weakly bonded neutral ligand). Similarly, the relative stability of fac versus mer isomers in octahedral d6 complexes of the type MR3L3 is explained. Relevant to catalysis, the method explains why strongly donating ligands do not always facilitate oxidative addition and why 12-electron and 14-electron Pd(0) species are thermodynamically much more accessible than one might expect. The method capitalizes on 1st year knowledge such as the ability to write Lewis structures and to use hybridization arguments. It also ties into the upper-year experience, including graduate school, where covalent d-block complexes may be encountered in research and where the hybridization schemes described here naturally emerge from using the NBO formalism. It is discussed where the method might fit into the inorganic curriculum.<br>

Dealing with Lewis structures in chemistry lessons

Chemical formulas are represented with the help of Lewis structures. To illustrate reaction mechanisms, these structures are provided with arrows and the new structural formula is recorded. This procedure presents blind pupils with several hurdles: - How do these structures come about? - How can students spontaneously create tactile formulas in class? - How can the movements shown by arrows be traced? For the representation of atomic symbols, for which the element symbols from the periodic table are normally used, magnets were developed that differ in shape, color, and size. Since only a handful of symbols occur regularly and in large numbers in school, only a few symbols have been permanently assigned, some are variable and can be used appropriately defined for the respective teaching situation. With this symbol set, it is possible to quickly and individually manufacture almost all molecules relevant in school. These magnets allow the independent determination of reaction mechanisms in the further course of the lesson. Due to the mobility of the elements on the magnetic base, electrons and atoms can be moved and thus result in a new bonding situation that is reinterpreted by the students. The advantage of this procedure is that the pupils do not just paint arrows, but consciously think about all processes and can also make mistakes. When analyzing intermediate products, you can determine that your actions were either not compliant or compliant but not effective. This enables individual active learning in the classroom.