This summer, our team used the Molecules of Life Modeling Kit© and Water Kit© in three different educator courses, and we noticed two distinct but complementary ways instructors worked with the models. In each course, facilitators experimented with both a structured sequence—using slide decks and teacher notes to build and name molecules—and a more open approach where participants simply explored the pieces and talked about how they might behave in water.
Both approaches worked well in a workshop setting. Taken together, they suggested something we want to carry into the school year: you don’t have to choose between formal structure and organic exploration when you introduce teachers to the molecules of life. You can model both in professional learning, then invite teachers to adapt those moves with their students, using water as a comparison partner and hydrophobic vs hydrophilic behavior as a yearlong backbone.
When we designed the Molecules of Life Modeling Kit©, the starting point was straightforward: give learners a way to physically build amino acids, nucleotides, carbohydrates, and phospholipids so they can see what these monomers look like and how they connect. In our summer workshops, instructors first experienced that design through a structured, slide-supported sequence from the Digital Modeling Hub. Participants built each type of molecule, connected the models to diagrams, and used prompts to link structure to function.
In that more formal route, educators appreciated having a guided progression—“first we
In other weeks, educators tried a second path as workshop participants. We handed them all the Molecules of Life pieces at once, either preassembled or grouped by function, and resisted the urge to explain right away. Instead, facilitators asked them to sort, cluster, and play—then layered in prompts like, “Which of these pieces do you think would be happiest surrounded by water?” or “Which ones look like they’d cluster away from water?” This pattern-first entry point kept the focus on behavior and interaction rather than labels, giving teachers a chance to experience what that might feel like for their students.
In our workshops, water did not appear as a stand-alone topic; it served as a comparison partner for everything else. Educators engaged with magnetic water molecules, explored hydrogen bonds, and built simple ice structures to visualize how water molecules arrange themselves. Once participants had a feel for “how water behaves,” facilitators introduced Molecules of Life pieces and shifted the conversation to interactions:
In these workshop activities, none of the molecules needed names at first. Educators reasoned in terms of hydrophobic and hydrophilic tendencies, often using their own everyday language. Only after they had wrestled with these patterns did facilitators circle back to formal terms and categories. Our intent was to give teachers an experience they could adapt: start with interaction-based reasoning, then add the naming and formalism once students have something to attach it to.
Because these experiments happened in professional learning settings, we were careful to discuss them as ideas for classroom practice, not as finished prescriptions. Still, a clear pattern emerged: when educators used Molecules of Life and the Water Kit together, they started imagining yearlong habits of prediction they could bring back to their students.
In our debriefs, teachers and facilitators sketched out sequences they might try in their own courses. Some planned to start their “molecules of life” unit with a dump-and-notice activity: spread out the Molecules of Life pieces, invite students to record what they notice and wonder, and then use the Water Kit to prompt initial guesses about which pieces would be hydrophilic or hydrophobic. Others envisioned returning to the models before major macromolecule units:
In other words, the workshop gave educators a chance to practice these moves in a low-stakes setting. Our role was to help them see how Molecules of Life and water could become recurring touchpoints, if and when they choose to carry these ideas into their classrooms.
As we look ahead to the school year, we’re not claiming that every sequence we tried in a workshop has already run in classrooms. Instead, we’re sharing a few moves that educators told us they want to try, and that align with what we’ve seen work in modeling-rich environments.
We’ll keep paying attention to how these ideas show up in actual classrooms and plan to share more concrete teacher stories as they emerge. For now, our summer experience with educators has sharpened our sense that Molecules of Life and the Water Kit together can support both formal and organic modeling approaches—and that giving teachers space to explore both in workshops is an important first step.
In your own courses this year, would you rather pilot one of these workshop-tested sequences with a single class first, or build smaller Molecules of Life & Water Kit moments into several units from the start?