GenChem

ABOR Learner-Centered Education

2009

General Chemistry Redesign

Department of ChemistryUniversity of Arizona

GenChemDevelopers

Chemical Education Committee

Steve BrownAndy Grall

Anne PadiasJohn Pollard

Vicente TalanquerWayne Wesolowski

Support

Graduate Teaching AssistantsTeaching Service Office

Prep Room

GenChem

In the summer of 2007, our team started working in the redesign of the two-semester General

Chemistry sequence for science and engineering majors to address the following problems:

The Problems

Weak correlation between the lecture and the laboratory courses. Lack of consistency among the different instructors. Limited contact between TAs and lecture instructors. Use of traditional lecture format to teach the courses. Very large discussion sections (~150 students). Lack of systematic, valid, and reliable assessment tools.

GenChem

1. Combine the lecture-lab courses into one.

Course(4 credits) ~288

Lab/Discussion

Instructor

TA

Better correlation (same students in lecture and labs;

clear association of TAs and instructors); More effective discussions; More efficient use of instructors’ and TAs’ time;

The Proposal

GenChem

2. Homogenize the curriculum and the assessment practices among all course sections.

Unit 1

Unit 2

Unit 3

Unit 4

Common Diagnostic

Exam

Common FinalExam

Common Partial Exams

Lecture

Lab

Common report structure, practicals, and rubrics.

The Proposal

Common on-line

homework system

Common Guiding

Notes

GenChem

3. As mandated by the ABOR-LCE initiative, create a more leaner-centered environment in which students take more ownership in their own learning (active participation).

The Proposal

Collaborative small group work;

Guided inquiry activities and experiments;

Whole class interactions.

GenChemTimeline

Pilot Test

Spring 2008 Off-sequence First Semester CHEM 151 (3 lecture sections).

Full Phase I

Fall 2008 On-sequence First Semester CHEM 151 (7 lecture sections).

Off-sequence Second Semester CHEM 152 (2 lecture sections).

Full Phase II

Spring 2009 CHEM 151/CHEM 152

GenChemProducts

Redesigned sequence; trimmed content; Common power point guides for first semester; On-line homework problem sets; Common diagnostic and four midterm exams;

Lecture

Revised/Adapted experiments; Common power point lab/discussion guides; Additional experiment notes; Revised lab manual; Common midterm and final practical exams;

Laboratory

GenChemImpact on Learning

CHEM 151

Total # of Students

Diagnostic Final Exam ACS

Traditional

2006-2007

3703 46.7% (SD = 17.7)

54.0%(SD = 16.3)

Reformed

Spring-Fall 08

2128 43.8%

(SD = 14.8)

59.3%(SD = 15.1)

CHEM 152

Total # of Students

Final Exam ACS

Traditional

2006-2007 (off-sequence)

540 45.2%(SD = 7.69)

Reformed-Pilot

Fall 2008 (off-sequence)

346 49.9%(SD = 11.6)

GenChemImpact on Performance

Average Grade: 67.1% to 70.7%

GenChemImpact on Performance

Average Grade: 64.4% to 68.1%

GenChemImproved Retention

From 11.4% to 6.5% in CHEM 151.From 14.4% to 4.8% in CHEM 152.

Failing Rates

Withdrawal Rates

From 6.49% to 4.96% in CHEM 151.From 8.86% to 6.31% in CHEM 152.

We have not been able to assess the impact of the transformation on drop rates in a reliable way given

the types of enrollment data collected by the UA.

GenChemImpact on Cost Savings

Major cost savings were associated with the reduction in the number of course planning and student contact hours for faculty and lecturers.

Planning and assessment time reduction: Common set of lecture notes, lab presentations, and multiple choice exams.

Contact hours reduction: Graduate teaching assistants are now responsible for teaching the discussion sessions for the General Chemistry courses (integrated into the laboratory time).

GenChemPedagogical Improvements

A variety of on-line interactive simulations were made available to instructors and students to

facilitate in-class activities and discussions. Laboratory activities were modified to create more opportunities for students to design experiments. In-classroom collaborative group activities were created/adapted and incorporated into the common weekly lecture and laboratory notes. Development and implementation of common midterm and final exams based on a common set of

learning objectives for the two courses.

GenChem

Team work highlighted the importance of having regular academic meetings to discuss different ideas and points of view about how to best teach the different topics.

The development team has faced challenges in how to train and better support the work of new instructors and graduate teaching assistants who were not involved in the development of the project. The team recognized the importance of assigning course leaders who could help support the work of everyone involved.

Implementation Issues

GenChem

One of the major lessons learned during the implementation of the project is the central role that

graduate teaching assistants play in the implementation and success of the new model.

Observations of student work in the laboratory suggest that the seamless integration of experimental work and discussion sessions is a challenge for most graduate teaching assistants. The development team

is currently discussing and exploring different options to solve this problem.

Implementation Issues

GenChemSustainability

The Department of Chemistry at the University of Arizona fully supports the changes that were implemented

and is committed to provide the resources needed to sustain the project. At this moment, all of the

General Chemistry courses offered by the Department are being taught

following the new format.