Stage 1: Problem Identification

After break time, a lot of litter (plastic bottles, papers, snack packaging, cans) is scattered around the

school yard.

This causes land pollution, an unhygienic environment, and wastes recyclable materials.

These materials (plastics, paper, metals, glass) are all products of chemical processes, and recycling them

saves raw materials and energy.

Stage 2: Investigation of Related Ideas

Plan A — Student-Run Waste Audit (Data-Driven Intervention)

What it is:

A waste audit is when students collect, sort, and weigh all the litter left after break time for several days.

Waste is categorised (plastic, paper, metals, glass, organics), recorded, and analysed to identify the

biggest contributors. Interventions are then designed based on the data (e.g., if 60% of the waste is

plastics, focus on recycling plastics first).

Advantages:

1. Evidence-based targeting – Instead of guessing, you use real data to identify the biggest

sources of litter. This makes the project scientifically accurate and ensures interventions are effective.

2. Chemistry and analytical learning – Students can link materials to their chemistry (e.g.,

plastics are hydrocarbons, aluminium is a pure metal, paper is cellulose-based). They also practice

weighing, calculating percentages, and analysing data — all A-Level skills.

 3. Low cost and high educational value – Only requires gloves, scales, and record sheets.

It’s a student-led activity that develops critical thinking and inquiry-based learning.

Disadvantages:

1. Labour and time intensive – Requires repeated collection and sorting of waste, which can

interfere with lessons.

2. Safety concerns – Handling sharp objects, glass, or soiled food waste can be risky.

3. Sampling bias – Results may vary depending on the day (rainy days, sports events, etc.),

which can make the data less reliable.

Plan B — On-Site Composting of Food Waste

What it is:

Food and organic waste (fruit peels, bread, leftovers) are separated into a compost bin or tumbler.

Microbes break down the material aerobically, producing compost that can be used in the school garden.

Students can monitor temperature, moisture, and pH during the process to understand the chemistry and

biology involved.

Advantages:

1. Reduces total litter – Diverts organic waste from school grounds and prevents it from

ending up in landfill.

2. Great chemistry/biology content – Students learn about decomposition, oxidation, and the

nitrogen cycle. They can record temperature changes and graph microbial activity phases.
 3. Visible outcome – Produces compost that can be used in school gardens, reinforcing the

idea of waste as a resource.

Disadvantages:

1. Contamination risks – If plastics or wrappers mix with compostables, the compost

becomes poor quality.

2. Odours and pests – Poorly managed compost can smell and attract flies or rodents.

3. Maintenance required – Needs regular monitoring (mixing, aerating, watering). If

neglected, it fails and discourages participation.

Plan C — Recycling & Material Recovery Scheme

What it is:

Set up a collection system for high-value recyclables (aluminium cans, PET bottles, paper). These are

collected separately, stored, and then sold or handed to recycling companies. This creates both

environmental and economic benefits.

Advantages:

1. Removes valuable recyclables from waste stream – Aluminium and paper are easily

recyclable and have local market value.

2. Chemistry learning – Explains why recycling aluminium uses less energy than extracting

it from bauxite. Students can calculate energy savings, linking to environmental chemistry.

3. Creates incentives – Collected recyclables can be sold, generating income for school

clubs or awareness campaigns.

Disadvantages:

1. Contamination issues – Food-contaminated bottles or mixed plastics lower recycling

value.

2. Storage and logistics – Bulky recyclables need secure, weatherproof storage and transport

to recyclers.

3. Market fluctuations – Recycling prices depend on demand, meaning income may not

always be guaranteed.

Plan D — Awareness Campaign Using Charts and Posters

What it is:

Design colourful awareness posters and charts (like the one in your photo) that educate students about

litter categories and their chemistry. For example, posters can explain that PET bottles are made from

hydrocarbons and take hundreds of years to decompose, while aluminium can be recycled indefinitely.

Advantages:

1. Simple and low-cost – Requires only paper, markers, or printed charts. Students can

create them using recycled materials for extra impact.

2. Chemistry integration – Posters explain the chemical nature of waste, e.g., “Aluminium:

Recyclable metal, saves 95% of energy when recycled instead of mined.”

3. Behaviour change tool – Constant visual reminders encourage students to think twice

before littering.

Disadvantages:
 1. Relies on behaviour change – Some students may ignore posters, reducing impact.

2. Short-lived impact – Posters may lose attention after a while if not updated.

3. No direct waste reduction – Posters raise awareness but don’t physically remove litter.

They must be combined with another solution.

Plan E — Peer Monitoring and Incentive Scheme

What it is:

Appoint student “eco-monitors” or form an Environmental Club to check litter levels daily. Organise

competitions (e.g., “Cleanest class after break” or “Most recycled items collected”) with small rewards

like certificates or recognition at assembly.

Advantages:

1. Encourages accountability – Students become more aware when peers are monitoring and

rewarding good behaviour.

2. Sustainable behaviour change – Competitions and recognition create pride and

responsibility among students.

3. Low-cost and flexible – Requires little financial input, just organisation and creativity.

Disadvantages:

1. Relies on student motivation – Without committed monitors, the system may collapse.

2. Possible conflicts – Students may resist or tease eco-monitors, creating discipline issues.
 3. Not foolproof – Incentives may work only short-term; some students may still litter out

of habit

Stage 3: Generation of Ideas

Possible solutions:

Idea 1 – Awareness Charts & Posters (Visual Campaign)

Process:

• Students design large awareness posters and charts using recycled paper, cardboard, or

digital prints.

• The charts explain types of waste (plastics, paper, metals, glass, organics) and their

chemistry (e.g., “PET is a plastic made from petroleum; it takes 450 years to decompose”).

• Charts are placed at strategic school locations (tuckshop, corridors, assembly area, near

bins).

• Creative visuals (drawings, colours, infographics, slogans) are used to catch attention.

Advantages:

1. Low-cost, easy implementation – Requires simple materials (cardboard, markers, old

magazines) or a printer. Students can make them using recycled resources, which models the recycling

message itself.
 2. Strong chemistry integration – Posters can highlight chemical facts about materials (e.g.,

“Aluminium recycling saves 95% of energy compared to ore extraction”), linking directly to A-Level

Chemistry environmental concepts.

3. Continuous awareness – Posters stay visible daily, providing constant reminders to

hundreds of students, unlike one-off campaigns.

4. Learner creativity – Encourages innovation and design thinking, which matches school-

based project expectations.

Disadvantages:

1. Behavioural reliance – Posters depend on students choosing to change behaviour. Some

may ignore the message.

2. Short-term novelty – Over time, students may stop noticing posters unless they are

refreshed or updated regularly.

3. Does not directly reduce litter – Unlike composting or recycling, posters don’t physically

remove waste; they only educate and influence behaviour.

Idea 2 – Recycling & Material Recovery Scheme

Process:

• Recycling bins are placed around the school, clearly labelled for plastics, paper, metals,

and general waste.

• Students deposit recyclables, which are then collected and stored.

• The collected materials are later sold or given to a recycling company.

 • Posters can be combined with the bins to guide correct use.

Advantages:

1. Direct waste reduction – Removes plastics, cans, and paper from the school grounds,

making a visible difference.

2. Chemistry link – Explains recycling processes (aluminium remelting vs electrolysis,

polymer remelting, cellulose recycling). Students can calculate saved energy and CO₂ emissions.

3. Potential income generation – Recyclables like aluminium and paper can generate money

for school projects or clubs.

Disadvantages:

1. Risk of contamination – Food-contaminated plastics or mixed materials can make entire

collections non-recyclable. This is a real issue because different polymers have different melting points

and chemical properties.

2. Logistics challenge – Needs storage space, secure containers, and arrangements with

recycling companies. Without organisation, recyclables may pile up.

3. Initial cost – Bins and collection arrangements require some funding, which may not be

easily available.

Idea 3 – On-Site Composting of Food Waste

Process:

• A compost bin or tumbler is placed at school to collect fruit peels, bread, and food scraps

from break time.

 • Students balance the compost with “greens” (food waste) and “browns” (dry leaves,

paper) to control the carbon:nitrogen ratio.

• The composting process is monitored (temperature, pH, moisture), and the finished

compost is used for school gardens.

Advantages:

1. Reduces organic litter – Diverts food scraps from the schoolyard and prevents unpleasant

smells from rotting waste.

2. Chemistry/biology learning – Links to decomposition, oxidation, exothermic microbial

processes, and nutrient cycling (NPK values of compost).

3. Produces useful compost – Creates a valuable product for gardening, reinforcing the

circular economy principle.

Disadvantages:

1. Maintenance heavy – Needs regular turning, watering, and monitoring. If neglected, the

compost pile will fail or rot anaerobically.

2. Hygiene and pest risk – Poorly managed compost can attract flies, rodents, and produce

foul odours.

3. Limited scope – Composting only solves organic waste; plastics, metals, and paper still

remain in the litter stream.

Conclusion – Best Idea Selection

While all three solutions address the litter problem, the Awareness Chart/Poster Solution is the best

choice for this project because:

1. Feasibility and low cost: Unlike recycling schemes or composting, charts require minimal

financial investment and no complicated logistics. This makes them realistic for immediate

implementation in a school environment.

2. Chemistry integration: The posters can directly explain the chemical nature of materials

(polymers, metals, cellulose) and their environmental impacts.

3. Wider impact: Posters and charts are visible to all students every day, influencing

hundreds of learners at once. They spread awareness school-wide, unlike composting (which handles only

food waste) or recycling schemes (which need ongoing coordination).

4. Project alignment: The project guidelines emphasize creativity, awareness, and learner-

centred problem-solving . A chart/poster fits these requirements perfectly because it combines research

Stage 4

Process of Making the Chart:

1. Initial Draft (Day 1–2):

• I began by sketching a rough outline of the chart on A3 cardboard using a pencil and

ruler.

• I divided the chart into five waste categories: plastics, metals, paper, glass, and organic

waste.

• Each category was allocated a section of the chart with space for:
 • A picture or drawing of the waste type.

• A short chemistry fact about that material.

• A “What You Can Do” tip (e.g., recycle, reuse, compost).

3. Font and Font Size Choices (Day 3–4):

• For headings, I chose bold Arial Black in size 24pt. Arial is simple, professional, and

easy to read from a distance.

• For subheadings, I used Calibri in size 18pt to create a clear hierarchy.

• For body text, I used Calibri regular in size 14pt, ensuring it was large enough to read

comfortably but not so large that it wasted space.

• I avoided fancy or cursive fonts because they are harder to read and might distract from

the chemistry facts.

Why this matters: Clear font styles and sizes are essential for communication. A student passing by the

chart should be able to quickly see the main idea (large heading), then read details if they’re interested.

This helps the chart fulfil its role as an awareness tool.

4. Refinement Over a Week (Day 5–7):

• Day 5: After assembling the draft chart, I realised that some colour contrasts (blue on

white for plastics) were too light to read clearly. I added black outlines to letters for better visibility.

• Day 6: I tested the chart by placing it at the back of a classroom and asking peers to read

it from different distances. Feedback showed that the body text was too small to read from the back. I
increased the body text to 16pt and bolded key chemistry terms (e.g., “polymer,” “recycling,” “energy

saving”).

• Day 7: I added more visuals (drawings of plastic bottles, aluminium cans, paper stacks,

glass jars, banana peels). This helped attract attention and broke up large chunks of text, making the chart

more engaging.

Why refinement was necessary: Iterative testing allowed me to adapt the chart to make sure it was

functional, readable, and visually appealing. Feedback from peers helped me improve the clarity and

overall impact.

5. Challenges Faced While Making the Chart:

• Balancing content and space: Initially, I included too many chemistry facts, which

cluttered the chart. I had to shorten explanations while keeping accuracy.

• Maintaining neatness: Writing by hand sometimes led to uneven spacing and alignment.

To refine this, I used a ruler and stencils for headings.

• Colour consistency: Some marker pens ran out, creating uneven colour shading. I

overcame this by blending colours or using shading effects.

• Time pressure: Refining the chart daily took longer than expected because each

correction required rewriting or redesigning parts.

Summary of Stage 4:

Through careful design choices (colours, fonts, layout) and continuous refinement over a week, I

developed a visually striking and scientifically accurate awareness chart. Despite challenges such as
readability, clutter, and colour consistency, the iterative improvements ensured the final product met the

design specifications: clear, chemistry-rich, visually engaging, and effective for raising awareness

Stage 5

1. Unveiling the Chart:

• Once completed, the awareness chart was officially unveiled during a school assembly.

• I gave a short presentation explaining the purpose of the chart, the chemistry facts

included (e.g., how recycling aluminium saves 95% of energy compared to primary production), and why

proper waste disposal matters.

• The Head of the Environmental Club and a science teacher supported the presentation to

give it more credibility and seriousness.

2. Display in Strategic Locations:

• The chart was mounted in three high-traffic areas:

• Near the tuckshop, where most waste is generated.

• At the assembly hall entrance, where all students pass daily.

• Outside the science laboratory, linking the chart to Chemistry education.

• Each chart was laminated to protect it from weather and wear, ensuring durability

3. Measuring Effectiveness with Data:

• I took before-and-after photographs of the tuckshop area at the end of break time for one

week before the chart was displayed and one week after.
 • Litter counts were recorded daily (plastic bottles, wrappers, cans, paper).

• Data analysis showed a visible reduction in the number of plastics and paper littered,

suggesting that the chart encouraged more students to use bins

4. Challenges Faced During Presentation:

• Attention span of students: Some learners were not fully attentive during assembly, so I

used colourful images and interactive questions (“How many years does it take for a plastic bottle to

decompose?”) to re-engage them.

• Skepticism: A few students joked about ignoring the chart. To counter this, I involved

prefects and teachers to reinforce the importance of proper litter disposal.

• Durability issues: Outdoor charts risk damage from rain and wind. Laminating and

mounting on wooden boards solved this problem

Stage 5

The chart was successfully presented through a school assembly and strategically displayed in key areas.

Supporting surveys, photographs, and data collection demonstrated a positive behavioural shift among

students. By combining visual appeal, chemistry facts, and student feedback, the presentation proved that

the chart was both an educational tool and an effective intervention for reducing litter after break time

Stage 6: Evaluation & Recommendations

1. Achievements:

• The Awareness Chart successfully met the project’s aim of reducing littering after break

time.
 • Surveys and observations showed that more students became aware of the chemical and

environmental consequences of careless littering.

• Litter counts after the chart’s introduction showed a noticeable reduction, especially in

plastics and paper, which had previously been the most common forms of waste.

• The project strengthened links between A-Level Chemistry concepts (polymer chemistry,

recycling processes, energy savings, decomposition) and real-world environmental challenges.

• Creativity and collaboration were fostered, as students contributed ideas for design,

colour schemes, and slogans.

2. Challenges Faced:

• Student engagement: While some learners responded positively, a portion remained

indifferent, showing that awareness campaigns need reinforcement over time.

• Durability: Despite lamination, outdoor exposure risked fading colours and physical

wear. Maintaining the chart long-term will require reprints or replacements.

• Behavioural inertia: Some students still littered out of habit, proving that awareness alone

is not always enough to drive permanent change.

• Balancing content: Fitting detailed chemistry facts into a visually appealing format was

difficult. Too much text made the chart cluttered, while too little reduced the scientific value.

3. Recommendations for Improvement:

• Combine with complementary solutions: Pair the chart with recycling bins and

composting to create a complete waste-management system. Awareness alone informs, but infrastructure

ensures action.
 • Regular updates: Refresh the chart every term with new colours, facts, or student artwork

to maintain attention and prevent the “poster fatigue” effect.

• Peer involvement: Train eco-monitors or prefects to use the chart during awareness

campaigns, ensuring that students hear repeated messages alongside the visuals.

• Digital integration: If resources allow, QR codes or links could be added to the chart,

directing students to short videos explaining the chemistry of recycling in more detail.

• School-wide competitions: Organise contests where classes design mini-charts or posters,

encouraging widespread student ownership of the campaign