Use of Technology in General Chemistry Course Redesign

David V. DeardenBrigham Young University

1

General Chemistry Course Structure

Conceptual, “atoms first” approach

No concurrent lab

Mixed application for mixed clientele:

1-semester, stand-alone course for engineers

first of a 2-semester series in general chemistry for many others

2

General Chemistry Students

Pre-professional (30%), engineering (40%), science majors (15%), others (15%)

~85% have had high school chemistry, but course is taught with no prerequisites

Typical enrollment 2500 students/year

250 students/lecture (3x/week)

25 students/recitation section (2x/week)

Dropout/withdraw/fail typically < 10%

3

Challenges

Large sections

little personal interaction

inability to give adequate, personal feedback

diversity of student preparation/background

Course content (volume!)

4

Goals in Using Technology

Engage students during lecture

Give individual feedback

Do this without

sacrificing content

increasing instructor load

I use technology primarily for pedagogical reasons; assessment is a distant secondary purpose

this avoids potential concerns about security /cheating

“I love technology”

5

Redesign Strategies We Have Used

Use of recitation sections

Use of Blackboard / “Micro Exams”

Use of Chem Tutor

Use of iClicker quizzes

Use of online homework (Mastering Chemistry)

6

In-Class Interactive Quiz

SystemsKeep students engaged

Easy way to track attendance

Allow instructor to monitor learning and adapt teaching

Costs to students

Requires change in teaching methods

7

iClicker Adoption (all voluntary)

HITT at BYU was first used in Physics (adopted in Chemistry soon thereafter)

Requires IR receiver installation and line-of-sight; nice recording/grading package

Turning Point adopted university-wide

Requires PowerPoint; Windows-centric; relatively expensive; grading unwieldy

Transition to iClicker about 2 years ago

Good combination of low cost, small tech footprint, features; grading package weak

8

iClicker “Best Practices”

Spread questions through lecture

Mix “participation” questions with “right answer” questions

Get students to teach each other

Re-poll to assess learning

Adjust lecture based on student understanding

Allow ample “drops”

Transmitter registration9

iClicker Outcomes

Students generally liked using the system

Attendance improved markedly (from about 60% at end of term before using iClickers to ~90% after using them)

My teaching style has changed as a result of using the immediate feedback

10

Online HomeworkUse provided problems or write your own (or use a mixture)

Gives graded feedback

can be in form of “hints” or answer-based instruction

Instructor can monitor

Computer does the grading

Learning curve for students and instructor 1

1

MasteringChemistry Implementation

Faculty participation was voluntary in Fall ’07

By Winter ’08, all sections had adopted

Ranged from 1st time teachers to a retired faculty member who returned to teach

“Easier than I thought it would be”

Use has since spread to the follow-on course (Chem 106) and to 2 courses in the GOB series 1

2

MasteringChemistry “Best Practices”

Use the publisher-provided best practicesHave students do introductory exercisesAllow ample retries with small penalties for looking at hints

points are like candy!give most of the credit for completing

Allow ample “drops”Be flexible with due dates early onLeave problems available for reviewWork problems yourself before allowing student access

13

Student PerceptionsDearden General Chemistry, Fall 2007

"How helpful to you is each of the following in learning general chemistry"

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

1 2 3 4 5Effectiveness ranking (1=low, 5=high)

Perc

en

t an

sw

eri

ng

(of

~4

50

stu

den

ts)

lectures

recitation

end-of-chapter problems

MasteringChemistry

ChemTutor

Textbook

3.74 ± 0.90

3.97 ± 1.04

2.32 ± 1.23

4.35 ± 0.95

4.10 ± 1.09

3.38 ± 1.07

14

Exam ScoresBefore & After Mastering Chemistry

25.0

35.0

45.0

55.0

65.0

75.0

85.0

95.0

Macro1 Macro2 Macro3 Final

% M

ean s

core

on e

xam

s

W07 Mean (Before)

F07 Mean (After)

54.5 ± 24.5%54.5 ± 24.5%

60.6 ± 21.7%60.6 ± 21.7%

15

Acknowledgments

BYU Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry

Chem 105 instructors

BYU Physical Science 100 program and instructors

National Science Foundation

16