A Course for the Underprepared Chemistry Student
Frank Walmsley University of Toledo Toledo. Ohio 43606
.
Students who enter colleee with minimum . oreoaration in . one or more areas have rec2ved considerable attention with the advent of open or relaxed admission oolicies. In the area of rhemistry, aitempts have heen made to identify the characteristics of the underprepared student ( 1 , 2 ) so that areas of difficulty could he anticipated and plans made to deal with thosr areas. Although the results of the survev (2)are lareelv opinions expressedby instructors the sample-is large enough and the results are uniform enough to demand attention. Courses for the underprepared chemistry student have previously been described (3-6). A course for large numbers of these students a t a large metropolitan univ&ity and an evaluation of the course based on student performance in succeeding courses are described here. For over 16 years the Department of Chemistry of The Universitv of Toledo has identified the undernrenared chemistr$student who has professional goals in thesciknces or engineering, using the Toledo Chemistry Placement Examination (7).Previous to our current course our program for the underprepared student was similar to those at Columbia and Behrend (4,5).Due to the large number of students enrolled in the course (268 in the Fall 1974 term) we are not able to devote as much of our teaching resources to the course which the type of course at Ohio State-Newark requires (3). .. A one-quarter course, entitled Elementary Chemistrv, was planned t,, precede the general chemistry c&es required of all engineering, pharmacy, physical science, and biology studrnts. To heln students who lack motivation or have =oonr --study hahits,'the course was offered on a two lecture-two discussion per week basis. Since these students are presum- ' ably being prepared for additional chemistry courses that are tauaht in a fairlv rieorous manner the elementarv course should he taught& :similar manner. The course was graded solely on a PASSIN0 CREDIT basis where, by universitywide definition, a PASS is equivalent t o a C or better, and a NO CREDIT does not affect the grade point average. Thus it is possible to insist on a t least the equivalent of a C for passing and a t the same time does not brine the unreasonable pressure associated with working for an unreasonable for 98% of these students). A t t e m ~ t at s self-paced instrurtion and non-traditional methods of ir&ructionhave met with mixed success as described by Kotnik (2). T o overcome these prohems, the computer assisted instruction (CAI) material was written so as to require the student t o do some studvine and work some problems before going to a computer terminal. When wrong answers are encountered the student is given some real on-the-soot assistance. This anoroach has been used (8,9)in other cotkes with excellent acceptance by the students. In addition. eieht audiovisual nroerams were ourchased in multiple copy kd'edited before beingmade avaiGble to the student in the university library.' This undertaking involved several major changes in the ~
~
~
~~
~~~~
~
'Additional information regarding the CAI material may be obtained from the author. 2The t-test calculations were done using the Statistical Package for the Soeial Sciences.SPSS. version 6. Based on calculated F values. the separate variance results are reported. The Mail pobabilities were obtained from the SPSS dculation or from J. Amer Statistical Assoc., 54,683 (1959). 314 1 Journal of Chemical Education
.
instruction of these students and an attemot was made to evaluatethe success/failure of the undertaking. I t was not possible to evaluate the various aspects of the course but two questionnaires were given to the students in order to determine the actual make-up of the class and to measure their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with various aspects of the course. The first survey was taken on the first day of class; the second survey was administered during the last class. From the first survey it appears that the students in general have a good attitude toward chemistry. There were 57% of the students who gave positive responses with regard to their feelings about chemistry. In the second survey this percentage had increased to 75%. The responses to the questions regarding math courses were surprising in the light of comments by instructors in the course. Every instructor in the course has deplored the general mathematical ability of the students. Yet the survey showed that 63% of the students were taking college mathematics above the level eauivalent to three vears of high schud college preparatory mathematics. It should he noted that 1% of the students were not taking any college mathernatia and informal conversations revealed that most of these did not have a working- knowledge of three vears of hieh school mathematics. In order to evaluate the overall success or failure of Elementary Chemistry the student's grades in the next course, General Chernistrv I. were compared with the rermlar student5 in the course. ~ h e r & u l t shown s in Table 1 2 inzicate that the two groups are essentially identical. Our previous program for the underprepared student Table 1. Compariron of Elementary Chemistry Studentr in General Chemistry I and Regular General Chemirtrv I Studentr
Group
Meana
Standard Deviation
Studentr from Elementary Chemirtry
2.02
0.780
General Chemi~tryI Studentr
2.12
1.093
r
of Freedorn
0.62
83
~robability
p = 0.537
a C a I ~ ~ l a t eard a grade Daint on a 4-point scale.
Table 2. Compariron of Elementary and General Chemirtry Students With General Chemistry I Studentr and of the Same Two Groups in General Chemirtrv I1
Grow
Elementary and General
Chemirtry General Chemirtry I Elern. & Gem Chem. in Gen. Chern. I1 General Chemistry I1
Standard M B B ~ Deviation
f
Degrees of Freedom
Probabilitv
combined the review work with the first general chemistry course in a course called Elementary and General Chemistry. Offered as three lectures, two recitations per week or two lectures, three recitations per week compared with two lectures. two recitations per week for the regular course this is sirnil& to other programs ( 4 , 5 ) . In our case this course was judged to be unsuccessful and this is shown by the t-test results in Table 2 where the students in Elementary and General Chemistry are compared with the regular General Chemistry I students and where these same twogroups of students continue on to General Chemistry 11. This program was particularly unsuccessful for students who had not taken high school chemistry with 74% of these not receiving a passing grade. With the present program this has been reduced to 33% which is still high but it should be realized that these students have orofessed eoals in science or eneineerine..and vet . thev have not even arrrmptrd to prepare themselves for those goals while in hieh school. This indicates the lack of seriousn~!ssin their inteitions which is corroborated by conversations with these students.
I t might he hoped that a very large fraction of the underorepared students could be heloed to be successful in chemistry. Such hopes need to he moderated because many students are attracted ta science, health, and engineering careers by the "glamor" of those professions without being aware of the academic requirements or of their own abilities. The course described here appears to be successful in preparing those students who have the ability to pursue such careers. The development of this course was supported by a grant from The University of Toledo Development Fund. Literature Cited (11 K0tnik.L. J., J . CHEMEDUC.,50,467 (19731. I21 K0tnik.L. J.. J . CHEM.EDUC.,SI. 165!1974). 131 Mecksfroth. W. K.. J . CHEM.EDUC.,51,3W (1974). (4) Pickering. M.. J. CHEM. EDUC.,52,512 (19751. ( 5 ) Leaver8.D. R.,and Bslmer. L. W..J. CHEM. EDUC.53.292 (19761. 161 Hunter.N. W..J. CHEM.EDUC.,53.801 (1976). (71 Howy, N. H..and Kmhn,A.. J.CHEM. EDUC., 10,370 (19681. 181 Wdrnsley, J. A. and Walrnsloy, F ,"Betmen Alchemyand Techndoc-TheChemical Lahoraturv:' . Prentice-Hall. Ine... Enelewoud Cliffs. N.J.. 1975 and accornosnvin~ .. InslrueturkGuide. (91 Reeder. R. R., IUPAC Conference on Labratory lnsVvnion in Chemistry. Rensselsei, N.Y.. Psper IV-4,197b
.
~
~
Volume 54, Number 5, May 1977 / 315
