A Service-Learning Project in Chemistry: Environmental Monitoring of

Sep 4, 2012 - Student benefits include improved course-related skills, increased self-confidence, and a broadening sense of community engagement. Inst...
0 downloads 8 Views 2MB Size
Download PDF
Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

A Service-Learning Project in Chemistry: Environmental Monitoring of a Nature Preserve David C. Kammler,† Triet M. Truong,‡ Garrett VanNess,‡ and Audrey E. McGowin*,‡ †

Department of Chemistry, Antioch College, Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387, United States Department of Chemistry, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio 45435, United States

‡

S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: A collaborative environmental service-learning project was implemented between upper-level undergraduate science majors and graduate chemistry students at a large state school and first-year students at a small private liberal arts college. Students analyzed the water quality in a nature preserve by determining the quantities of 12 trace metals, seven anions including nitrate and phosphate, and Escherichia coli and coliform bacteria. Dissolved oxygen, temperature, and pH were recorded in the field as well. Students publicly communicated their results by creating deliverables such as a standard operating procedures manual, a PowerPoint presentation, and a professional-quality poster. The project was successful and student learning and interest in environmental chemistry were enhanced. The community response was particularly positive. KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, Upper-Division Undergraduate, Curriculum, Environmental Chemistry, Public Understanding/Outreach, Collaborative/Cooperative Learning, Hands-On Learning/Manipulatives, Toxicology, Water/Water Chemistry

S

two institutions to cover individual deficiencies and integrating two distinctly different categories of students. This article describes a service-learning project performed jointly by a large state university and a small private liberal-arts college using upper-level undergraduate science majors, chemistry master’s students, and first-year nonscience majors. A nearby nature preserve, the public, and the first-year students were recipients of the project’s services.

ervice-learning is an effective approach to enhancing student learning and is becoming more prevalent in science curricula.1−11 Ongoing research has shown students, instructors, and the community benefit from this approach. Student benefits include improved course-related skills, increased self-confidence, and a broadening sense of community engagement. Instructor benefits include better content delivery and collaboration opportunities with colleagues and the community.8,12−18 The increased engagement with learning institutions and the receipt of needed and valued services also benefit the community. Chemistry classes in particular face significant challenges when attempting to use service-learning because of the difficulty in finding a good community partner, curricular and logistical challenges, and organizational and transportation difficulties.5 Although environmental topics are common in service-learning, chemistry-oriented projects particularly in environmental chemistry are less prevalent5,19−22 especially at the advanced level.23−25 There are few examples of (a) multiple higher-learning institutions collaborating on the same servicelearning project,20 (b) combining higher-level college science students with nonscience-major students in the same project, or (c) one set of students providing the service and also receiving a service from another set of collaborating students. Flexibility and creativity are keys to integrating servicelearning into a curriculum.5 In this case, flexibility revolved around loosening stringent course content to allow for deeper learning, while creativity resulted in pooling the resources of © 2012 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

■

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT This project was a collaboration between an advanced environmental chemistry class at Wright State University (WSU; Dayton, OH) and an interdisciplinary first-year seminar on water at Antioch College (Yellow Springs, OH, 11 miles from WSU). The advanced environmental chemistry class is intended for upper-level undergraduate students and graduate chemistry majors but is also open to other upper-level science majors and graduate students with the appropriate chemistry background. The global seminar course about water is a mandatory class for all first-year students and approaches the subject from a variety of disciplines, including the sciences. It has a mandatory small-group project, of which the project below was one possible choice for students. The Glen Helen Nature Preserve (“Glen Helen”) is a 1000acre nature preserve in Yellow Springs, OH managed by the Glen Helen Ecology Institute and owned by Antioch College. Published: September 4, 2012 1384

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Glen Helen is an ecologically diverse biome containing several small rivers, forests, hills, ravines, and other natural landmarks that provide recreational space for approximately 100,000 visitors per year. Glen Helen includes “The Yellow Spring”, from which the village takes its name: a natural artesian spring that was once the center of a booming tourist trade in the 1800s. Unfortunately, Glen Helen faces numerous ecological challenges such as water contamination from stormwater runoff, treated sewage effluent from the local wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), runoff from nearby industrial sites, and thousands of annual visitors and their pets. This potential contamination directly threatens the Yellow Spring, which remains a popular site for tourists and for drinking by visitors. Wright State University is a research university with analytical resources that were used to assess the water quality. The two institutions created a joint service-learning project monitoring water quality in Glen Helen that would be innovative and highly relevant. The project had six goals: (1) to give the advanced environmental chemistry students an opportunity to develop their skills in real field-testing situations, (2) to allow the advanced students to mentor younger students interested in environmental issues and science, (3) to provide the younger global seminar students the opportunity to explore water from a scientific aspect and to be mentored and trained by more experienced science students, (4) to have students perform a valuable service for the community, (5) to provide the local community with a valued and needed service, and (6) to communicate scientific information effectively to the general public using a poster format.

■

DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY The methodology of the service-learning project was developed primarily in accordance with the learning objectives of the advanced environmental chemistry course and less so those of the water seminar (Table 1). After an initial meeting of the Table 1. Learning Objectives Figure 1. Schematic of Glen Helen Nature Preserve showing the seven sampling locations. WWTP is a wastewater treatment plant.

Advanced Environmental Chemistry Learn about the chemical nature of air, water, and soil Gain practical experience in environmental sampling and analysis Communicate scientific information to the general public effectively Understand how some chemicals degrade and move in environmental systems Develop the ability to assess the overall impact of a chemical on the environment Work effectively and cooperatively in a small group Global Seminar: Water

same, whereas the younger students rotated. Each group consistently sampled only the north (N1, N2, N3), middle (M1, M2, M3), or south (S1) Glen Helen sites using the established methodologies. Each group sampled three times over the course of the term, made qualitative observations, took quantitative measurements, and brought samples back to the lab for further analysis. The course instructors and graduate teaching assistant occasionally accompanied the student groups, initially to familiarize students with the test sites, and later to observe sampling and analysis. The core of the project was the student-driven development of standard operating procedures (SOPs), which were primarily based on standard EPA methods, and will be used by future classes of both institutions to continue monitoring Glen Helen. Good laboratory practice (GLP) was emphasized by teaching proper note taking and reporting techniques and by instructorsupervised notebook and data-sheet preparation. The SOPs went through many iterations and revisions, which stimulated classroom discussions (Table 2). The SOPs were later bound in an SOP manual that included material safety data sheets (MSDS) and an appendix with references. After the upper-level advanced environmental chemistry students drafted the initial SOPs and studied the analytical

Develop basic scientific knowledge of water use and treatment Improve ability to think critically about water issues

instructors with the director of the nature preserve, several locations within Glen Helen were listed as places where contamination might be found. This list was presented to the advanced students who selected those locations that would be sampled by the class. The locations were further subdivided into multiple sampling sites and then categorized into three general groups of north, middle, and south, referring to the geography of Glen Helen (Figure 1). Seven advanced environmental chemistry students (undergraduate and graduate) and five global seminar students participated in this project and were divided into three smaller groups of variable composition and size as determined by the students. Advanced students in each group were always the 1385

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

planning their next trip. The types of data gathered and the analyses performed are listed in Table 3.26

Table 2. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) Developed by Students SOP

Reference Method

1

EPA Method 200.7

2 3 4

EPA Method 300.1 Variousa EPA Method 300.1

5

EPA Method 200.7

6

3M Petrifilm E. coli/ Coliform Count Plate Interpretation Guide

Title

Table 3. Data and Analyses for the Comprehensive Testing

Cleaning Sample Containers for Trace Metal Analysis Cleaning Sample Containers for Anion Analysis Sampling at Glen Helenb Analysis of Fluoride, Chloride, Bromide, NitriteN, Nitrate-N, Phosphate, and Sulfate in Fresh Waters by Ion Chromatography Inductively Coupled Plasma-Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) Analysis of Water Samples E. coli and Coliform Enumeration of Water Samples

Type of Data Qualitative On-Site measurements Laboratory analyses

Observation or Measurement Date, time, GPS location, weather conditions, wildlife and human activities, water color, clarity, and odor Temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen Anions: F−, Cl−, Br−, NO2−, NO3−, PO43−, SO42− Metals: Al, As, Ca, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mg, Na, Ni, Pb, Zn BOD7 E. coli and coliform bacteria

After the monitoring project was finished for the term, the students analyzed all of the data and produced products for private as well as public consumption (Table 4). The upper-

a

EPA Methods 200.7, 300.1, QA/G-6; instructions provided with equipment. bA copy of SOP 3 is contained in the Supporting Information.

Table 4. Products Produced

methods to gain proficiency, they planned their first field trip to Glen Helen. The chemistry students accustomed to independent work predesigned by instructors now had to collaborate and plan every aspect of the trip. The instructors took a “hands-off” approach, providing only minimal guidance to avoid catastrophic failure. Students were allowed to self-select into three groups (two to three students each) to sample the three chosen areas of Glen Helen. Each group was issued a small cooler with cold packs to transport samples back to the Wright State chemistry laboratory. Each group was also given a bag to hold the Hach test kit for dissolved oxygen, a pH meter with a temperature probe, precleaned sample bottles, waste containers, markers, paper towels, eye protection, gloves, and a copy of the sampling protocol (SOP 3) with the data form included (see the Supporting Information). The students were given the responsibility of ensuring their kits were complete and ready for each sampling trip. The three groups visited the same sites throughout the project, thereby becoming experts at sampling those locations. After the first sampling field trip, the upper-level students in each group trained the first-year students how to take samples and perform the on-site tests during the second and third sampling events. In this way, two services were rendered: Glen Helen received the desired environmental monitoring and the first-year students received training and mentorship. The upper-level environmental chemistry class met twice a week and the global seminar once a week, presenting logistical challenges. Ultimately, the first-year students participated in the project outside of their normal class time, as part of their chosen final projects. Sampling and analysis required two days over a rolling two- or three-week cycle, with each cycle beginning with sample collection on the first day and analysis on the second day of the first week. After on-site sampling, students returned to the lab where they placed the samples collected for anion analysis in a refrigerator (holding time 48 h), filtered and acidified the samples collected for metals analysis, and inoculated the Petri plates (in duplicate) for counting coliform bacteria (37 °C, 48 h). The bulk of analysis was done on the second day. Because the standard BOD5 (biochemical oxygen demand on day 5) would have required analysis on the weekend, a BOD7 was calculated during the second week, a logistical issue that may have materially affected the results. Students analyzed their data over two days of the second week and finished the cycle by revising SOPs and

Product SOP Manual PowerPoint presentation Poster Research dataa

Audience

Purpose

Future students Director of Glen Helen General public Scientific community

Instructions on how and where to take and analyze environmental samples Discussion of results and services provided Inform public of water quality of Glen Helen Create knowledge database for Glen Helen

a

A fuller account of the research will be reported in a forthcoming publication.

level students presented their results via PowerPoint to the director of the Glen Helen Ecology Institute as their final exam. Together, all students created a professional-quality scientific poster aimed at the general public.27 This poster presented the project results in the context of the safety and potability of the tested waters of Glen Helen and was presented by the first-year students to the general public in an open poster session. The poster was also put on public display in Glen Helen and a short synopsis was submitted to the Glen Helen newsletter. These products demonstrated that the learning objectives were met. Students gained practical field experience, a rarity in the chemical sciences. The technical writing to create the SOP manual proved to be a complex task for students at all levels. During group discussions, students were required to evaluate the interrelatedness of water quality parameters to interpret the results and determine the source of pollutants. Students were motivated to work effectively in groups because complete and equal participation was required to complete the project on time. Students were also challenged to critically evaluate the quality and clarity of their results when preparing an appropriate presentation for the Glen Helen director and the public-oriented poster.

■

PROJECT TIMELINE AND STRUCTURE The students in the upper-level class started the project before the first-year students. This provided time to learn the material, develop the initial SOPs, sample for the first time, and build confidence before the first-year students became involved. All students worked together for six weeks. Then, the first-year students continued and had further time to reflect upon their 1386

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

work before their final presentation to the community (Table 5).

Table 6. Average Advanced Student Responses to Course Evaluations

Table 5. Project Structure Statement

Students Step

Activity

1 2 3

Meet with Glen Helen partners Identify possible sampling sites Discuss proposed project with upperlevel students Learn and practice analytical methods Draft SOPs, including sampling SOP Take first field trip Analyze first set of samples Evaluate results Revise SOPs First-year students self-select to participate Take second field trip, train first-year students Analyze second set of samples Evaluate results Revise SOPs Take third field trip, first-year students participate Analyze third set of samples Evaluate results Prepare poster and PowerPoint presentation Present and discuss results with Glen Helen Director Discuss progress of final project Present poster at open forum Archive poster in WSU’s CORE database Display poster publicly in Glen Helen

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Upper-level (WSU)

First-year (AC)

Xa  X

 Xa 

X X X X X X 

      X

X

X

X X X X

 X  X

X X X

 X X

X

X

  X

X X 



X

Materials contributed to my learning I was challenged in this course Student responsibilities were well-defined a

Fall 2010: Not Service-Learninga

Fall 2011: ServiceLearninga

Change

3.67

4.57

+0.90

4.00

5.00

+1.00

4.83

4.00

−0.83

Scale was 1−5, with 5 being the most favorable value.

focused on the term-long service-learning project, involved extensive natural sampling and quantitative instrumental analysis, and had problem sets instead of exams. The quantitative evaluation results clearly show students were significantly more challenged and learned more from the course materials. They also reflect student anxiety regarding making their own decisions on how to perform testing activities and their difficulty transitioning from receiving step-by-step instructions for a process with a known outcome to an uncertain, student-driven environmental sampling project. The specifically designed project evaluations focused on the novel service-project approach to the course and included freeresponse questions such as “Do you think the unconventional style of the course increased or decreased your learning?”, “How do you feel about the ‘products’ we produced?”, “How do you feel about making a contribution to society as a part of this course?”, and “What was the most satisfying and frustrating part of the course for you personally?”. Responses to these questions were overwhelmingly positive and clearly showed the benefits of the experiential and community-based learning in the course. Students clearly appreciated the applied and experiential nature of the course: “The most satisfying was the real world applications of what we were doing. Being able to get the sample and analyze it was probably the best training I have ever had in a classroom. I was also personally satisfied with the work we were doing for the community and addressing issues that are often ignored.” and “I liked getting out of the classroom to learn.” The community outreach aspects also clearly resonated with the students: “The course allows the students the opportunity to educate the public on what they learn. All other chemistry courses cover materials useful only to chemists or scientists.” and “I think this class gave me a rewarding feeling for helping the local community.” The unconventional and service approach also appealed to students: “Increased my motivation in the course dramatically which led to me being more encouraged to read and learn on my own.” Students greatly valued the tangible products they produced: “The products make this class exceptional. No other course offered in the chemistry department has such ambitious goals.” and “I think the products were well done and a very necessary deliverable that demonstrated the amount and quality of work we did. Simplifying and presenting our data was very important.” There were very few negative comments; short complaints regarding “too much work”, “cleaning laboratory equipment”, and “the weather”.

a

These were actions of the instructors at both institutions and the staff at Glen Helen. This information was included to indicate advanceplanning activities.

■

PROJECT ASSESSMENT Two sets of postcourse evaluations were administered at the end of each course: the standard evaluation form for each institution that was given to all students in the course and a separate form designed specifically for and given only to students who participated in the project. Both of these forms at both institutions were administered in the typical anonymous format. The standard form used the Likert scale28 and limited free response, whereas the other form was exclusively free response to specific course- and project-related questions. Of the two classes, only the advanced environmental and analysis course had been taught in the past and had a focus specifically on the project, so only quantitative data for standard evaluations for that course are presented (Table 6). The student sample size was small (0.10) between prior and current offerings are discussed. Prior to the service-learning approach (fall 2010 and before), the advanced environmental and analysis course had a lecture and exam format, a small group project including literature review, and only one natural sampling event using qualitative test kits. In the fall of 2011, the course was predominantly 1387

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

designed to use available equipment unless a significant source of funding is available. The value of the analytical services provided by the students in this course was about $3,000 (not including the cost of sampling services). Glen Helen is financially autonomous and receives little to no (0−5%) funding from Antioch College. Additionally, if one moves beyond accounting and includes nontraditional metrics such as improved community relations, student education, and instructor growth, it is evident the benefits outweighed the costs. Thus, it is clear this project had substantial economic value. The students and instructors both agreed the method for determining dissolved oxygen (DO) in the field is cumbersome (Hach test kits), and better equipment for the measurement of dissolved oxygen would benefit the course in the future, such as digital DO meters or combined pH−T−DO meters. Curiously, the discharge permit of the Yellow Springs Wastewater Treatment Plant (NPEDS number 1PC00013) does not specify nitrate, only ammonia, and so it was not possible to make a conclusion regarding whether the plant was in violation of its permit to discharge.30 In the future, planning should include review of relevant discharge permits in the sampling area to ensure violations of permits can be detected with the methods selected. Also, reporting should indicate the results are preliminary and were not obtained under true GLP conditions. Altogether, the environmental chemistry course and the subsection of the water seminar course met all of their learning objectives with students having greater enthusiasm for the course material and reported enhanced interest and learning.

Community reaction to the project was also highly positive. Dozens of community members viewed the final poster, discussed the project with students, and gave positive feedback. Glen Helen staff members were pleased by the quality of the work and asked for the results to be made more widely available to the public, including posting an additional copy of the poster in Glen Helen and inclusion of a summary in the spring 2012 Glen Helen newsletter.29

■

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The unconventional partnership of two different institutions and sets of students was fruitful and positive, even if frequently logistically challenging. Both institutions benefitted from access to resources they did not have, natural or scientific. Both sets of students benefitted from interacting with each other and the community in several ways. First, the advanced students had the opportunity to train and mentor beginning students, thereby increasing their own understanding of the material. Second, the novice students had access to trained peers who could help them experience and explore environmental chemistry. Third, the science majors learned how to better communicate scientific results to nonscientists, an unfamiliar challenge conquered successfully. Fourth, the nonsciencemajors witnessed firsthand the difficulty in communicating science to the public and came to a greater understanding of how this is a continuing problem in today’s world. Fifth, the science majors and instructors gained valuable field experience. Sixth, and most importantly, the students clearly benefitted from performing a project of real-world significance and community value. The first-year students fully participated in the project, made many insightful comments during group discussions, and had significant and substantial input into the final poster. These students were in the perfect position to help the advanced students communicate scientific information to the public. They had general knowledge of the project but not the scientific background and, therefore, significantly aided the advanced students. The advanced students were excited and enthusiastic about mentoring younger students and took on this role with equal measures of seriousness, dignity, and humor. In hindsight, it is clear the advanced students needed additional time to learn more course content before the monitoring project began. Students were learning new material and methods as they were taking samples and finishing the project. Also, there was not enough time for student mentoring. Additional weeks are needed at the front end for the advanced students to learn course material before going into the field and to allow greater contact time between the two classes. A laboratory technician and a graduate teaching assistant were essential for training students in the requisite instrumental analysis methods and for supervising equipment use as the course proceeded. Workload was also an issue for the advanced students. The students started from scratch. They drafted the first SOPs and methods at the beginning of the class with guidance from EPA methods and instructors. Future students will begin with the SOP manual created by the inaugural class and will continue to revise these methods, as well as add new ones with additional tests. In this way, the future workload of the course will be decreased. About $1,500 was spent on consumables. This did not include the cost of capital equipment. The projects should be

■

SUMMARY The service-learning approach was successful. The two institutions creatively pooled their resources to cover their own deficiencies and strengthened the ties between them. The advanced and introductory students worked well together and successfully completed an ambitious comprehensive water quality monitoring project. Students in both courses and the community benefitted from this approach and produced useful products of which they were proud.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

SOP 3: Sampling at the Glen Helen Nature Preserve. This material is available via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: [email protected]. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors gratefully acknowledge Nick Boutis, Director of the Glen Helen Ecology Institute, for his help with and support of this project and the students of Antioch College (Perri Freeman, Nargees Jumahan, Ryann Patrus, Zeb Reichert, Sam Senzek) and Wright State University (Richard Cooke, Jessica Dagher, Felicia Gooden, Richard Grimes, Kayla Lilly, Jeremy Lear, Morgan Russell) for their hard work, dedication, and willing participation. 1388

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389

Journal of Chemical Education

■

Article

(30) Nitrate levels suggested possible violation of ammonia discharge limits. This observation has not been corroborated by an independent testing agency under strict GLP conditions.

REFERENCES

(1) Saitta, E. K. H.; Bowdon, M. A.; Geiger, C. L. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2011, 20, 790−795. (2) Cartwright, A. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 1009−1010. (3) Science Education and Civic Engagement: The SENCER Approach; Sheardy, R. D., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2010. (4) Kalivas, J. H. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 1410−1415. (5) Sutheimer, S. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 231. (6) LaRiviere, F. J.; Miller, L. M.; Millard, J. T. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 1636−1639. (7) Fitch, A. Chapter 8. In Active Learning: Models from the Analytical Sciences; Mabrouk, P. A., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2007; pp 100−108. (8) Esson, J. M.; Stevens-Truss, R.; Thomas, A. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 1168. (9) Hatcher-Skeers, M.; Aragon, E. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 462. (10) Nix, M. Sci. Teach. 2001, 68, 12. (11) Wiegand, D.; Strait, M. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1538−1539. (12) Butin, D. W. Service-Learning in Theory and Practice: The Future of Community Engagement in Higher Education; Palgrave MacMillan: New York, 2010; pp 3−43. (13) Bringle, R. G.; Hatcher, J. A. New Dir. Higher Educ. 2009, 147, 37−46. (14) Vogelgesang, L. J.; Ikeda, E. K.; Gilmartin, S. K.; Keup, J. R. Service-Learning and the First-Year Experience: Outcomes Related to Learning and Persistence. In Service-Learning and the First-Year Experience: Preparing Students for Personal Success and Civic Responsibility (Monograph 34), Zlotkowski, E.; Ed.; University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition: Columbia, SC, 2002; pp 15−26. (15) Life, Learning, and Community: Concepts and Models for ServiceLearning in Biology; Brubaker, D. C., Ostroff, J. H., Eds.; American Association for Higher Education: Washington, DC, 2000; pp 1−30. (16) Ward, H. Introduction. In Acting Locally: Concepts and Models for Service-Learning in Environmental Studies; Ward, H., Ed.; American Association for Higher Education: Washington, DC, 1999; pp 4−7. (17) Caroline, M. S.; Ward, K. Chem. Educator 1998, 3, S1430− 4171−(98)03213−2. (18) Markus, G. B.; Howard, J. P. F.; King, D. C. Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 1993, 15, 410−419. (19) Maguire, C. da Rosa, J. Chapter 4. In Science Education and Civic Engagement: The SENCER Approach; Sheardy, R. D., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2010; pp 45−61. (20) O’Hara, P. B.; Sanborn, J. A.; Howard, M. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 1673−1677. (21) Kesner, L.; Eyring, E. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76, 920. (22) Fitch, A.; Reppmann, A.; Schmidt, J. The Ethics of Community/ Undergraduate Collaborative Research in Chemistry. In Acting Locally: Concepts and Models for Service-Learning in Environmental Studies; Ward, H., Ed.; American Association for Higher Education: Washington, DC, 1999; pp 53−63. (23) Hosten, C. M.; Talanova, G.; Lipkowitz, K. B. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2011, 12, 388−395. (24) Cavinato, A. G. Chapter 9. In Active Learning: Models from the Analytical Sciences; Mabrouk, P. A., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2007. pp 109−122. (25) Draper, A. J. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81, 221. (26) More details on the methods will be reported in an upcoming publication. (27) The poster presentation containing the results of the analyses can be obtained at the following Web site: http://hdl.handle.net/2374. WSU/5720 (accessed Aug 2012). (28) Likert, R. Arch. Psychol. 1932, 22, 1−55. (29) Current and back issues of the Glen Helen Newsletter are available at http://antiochcollege.org/glen_helen/about_glen/news_ and_publications/newsletters.html (accessed Aug 2012). 1389

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed300109k | J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 1384−1389