Development and Implementation of a First ... - ACS Publications

Jan 28, 2013 - The students met face-to-face for one class each week (50 minutes) and the lectures were accessible online via Adobe Connect. Quizzes w...
3 downloads 8 Views 252KB Size
Download PDF
Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Development and Implementation of a First-Semester Hybrid Organic Chemistry Course: Yielding Advantages for Educators and Students Julie B. Ealy* Department of Chemistry, Penn State University Lehigh Valley, Center Valley, Pennsylvania 18034, United States ABSTRACT: A first-semester organic chemistry course was developed as a hybrid course. The students met face-to-face for one class each week (50 minutes) and the lectures were accessible online via Adobe Connect. Quizzes were scheduled for almost every lecture with access online through ANGEL. In addition, the students had three in-class tests and one final exam. There were 29 students total, from three different semesters, enrolled in the hybrid class. A description of and suggestions for hybrid course development are described.

KEYWORDS: Second-Year Undergraduate, Curriculum, Organic Chemistry, Computer-Based Learning, Distance Learning/Self Instruction, Multimedia-Based Learning, Internet/Web Based Learning, Nonmajor Courses, Student-Centered Learning

A

lifestyles, especially for the adult learner who may be employed full time, for students who do not live on campus, and for those students whose college education is at a nonresidential campus. A hybrid course also provides time flexibility for students and opportunities to use technologies that are available at home, and the students have the freedom to listen to online lectures at any time, day or night.1,5,10−12 If instructors choose to redesign a traditional classroom course to a hybrid course where their lectures are online, many hours may be required to write the lectures and syllabus with clearly defined course requirements. The instructors will need technology support, professional development in the use of online course management tools, and to make decisions about how their lectures will be taped.5,8,9,11−13 Questions should be considered such as “What is the appropriate technology for the course?” and “Do I know how to use the technology?” It is especially necessary to integrate classroom pedagogy with the online work and not have two separate courses and especially not to develop one and one-half courses where the students are unable to complete the course expectations.3 Prompt feedback by instructors in a hybrid course is critical and supports a learner-centered environment that allows students to incorporate feedback into current assignments.15 The face-to-face contact permits instructors to emphasize the demands and challenges of a hybrid course.15 Instructors need to explain to students many times, and in different ways, the structure of a hybrid course because the students do not perceive time online as work but more as homework even “if it

hybrid, or blended learning, course is a course where students meet face-to-face with the instructor for some portion of the course and the remaining portion is online.1,2 There are not specific guidelines in hybrid course development and the ratio of online time to face-to-face classroom contact varies.3 Many different courses, both undergraduate and graduate, have been designed or redesigned as hybrid such as engineering technology,4 educational technology,5 undergraduate marketing,6 textile sciences,7 ecology,8 exercise physiology,9 and graduate education.10 A hybrid course1,2,7,8,11−13 combines the best characteristics of in-class teaching and online learning with a redesign of some lectures into activities such as tutorials, simulations, audio, video, quizzes, group discussions, and group projects where the final project is posted online for the class to see. Authors of hybrid courses11,12 suggest that it is important to carefully consider the activities that are better suited for face-to-face contact and the ones that will work well online. In a hybrid course, students have increased opportunities to become active and interactive learners in their classroom contact as they participate in group discussions. Through the activities of the online learning, the students gain technology expertise as they listen to online lectures and submit their responses to questions posted to the class.2 Students today have increased opportunities for informal learning through online information, social networking sites such as Facebook, and digital media that contribute increased possibilities for them to learn outside the classroom.14 They are visually more literate than previous generations and have expectations for increased communication with faculty via email at nearly any hour.14 A hybrid model matches better with their © 2013 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Published: January 28, 2013 303

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed200858p | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

is time they would have previously spent in class in a traditional course”.15 A hybrid course poses challenges to students. Students encounter problems with time management in a hybrid course.6,16 They may experience technology issues, a lack of readiness to master the content in a less-structured environment, an unwillingness to seek academic help, and not knowing when to ask for help.5,6,8,11,16 Instructors need to be ready to help students with technology difficulties, or have support personnel to do this, and be available to answer students’ questions in a timely manner. Instructors will often find an increased workload in regards to communication with students and will need to spend time coaching their students how to best succeed in a hybrid course.

■

■

DESCRIPTION OF THE ORGANIC CHEMISTRY HYBRID COURSE The hybrid organic chemistry course described here is the first semester of a two-semester sequence. The students in the course met on campus one class per week with the course lectures online. The students are only required to have completed one semester of general chemistry to take the course. Therefore, some of the students will not have covered topics such as thermochemistry, equilibrium, kinetics, and acid−base chemistry. Other students, however, will have completed two semesters of general chemistry. This presents a challenge to ensure topics are covered in a logical order and thoroughly. The topics above are introduced as needed, but taught with an understanding that this is the first exposure to these topics for many of the students.

■

■

• learn how to record and present the lecture notes using Adobe Connect combined with a PC tablet or a document camera with the ability to record as the lecture notes are delivered, • provide the students with an outline of the lecture using PowerPoint slides they could print before they listened to the lecture and could use to take notes on while listening to the lecture, • decide how to structure the one scheduled on-campus class to make the most productive use of the time, and • make sure the students kept up with the material, something important in any science course, but especially organic chemistry.

PRESENTATION OF THE LECTURE AND LECTURE NOTES It was necessary to learn how to use Adobe Connect to record the lectures. Adobe Connect was freely available at the author’s institution and was recommended for the hybrid course lectures. Adobe Connect can have a steep learning curve, but in the case of the author, instructional technology staff were available as guides through just about every step and also available whenever help was needed. The steep learning curve involved a coordination of recording the lecture making sure to turn on the record option; handwriting the notes on a PC tablet; and, if wanted, changing the color, font style, and use of bold, all of which require a change in the writing tool while recording. With Adobe Connect, the lectures became immediately available to the students through signing into a password-protected Web site. An alternative method to deliver the lectures is to use a document camera. This method was used after offering the course three times because of a software update with Adobe Connect; all the lectures had to be recorded again. The notes were written on the same PowerPoint slides to which the students had access. Unlike Adobe Connect, it was easier to change the writing style with markers and highlighters and physical models could be shown and manipulated while explaining concepts. The downside of using a document camera at the author’s institution was that each lecture had to be uploaded to a server because of the lecture size and could only be done by an instructional technology person. Other instructors have used the Olympus DS-330 Digital Voice Recorder,13 provided students with a CD-rom,12 used Articulate Studio,9 and two-way interactive video5 to record lectures. The choice depends on what is available at your campus combined with any needed technology help. PowerPoint lecture slides were developed to be used in the online lectures. In the design of the slides, it was necessary to keep in mind that the students would not be with the instructor when they listened to the lectures. Because of this, development of the PowerPoint slides can be a time-consuming process, as the authors of other hybrid courses have indicated.9,12,13 Once the PowerPoint slides were designed, the lectures needed to be prepared. Only by doing this ahead of time will the instructor learn what does and does not work. After the lectures were ready, each lecture was recorded, with the instructor hand writing notes on blank slides as the lecture was presented. If it is necessary to record a lecture a second or third time because of mistakes, this can add significantly to the time required to record a lecture. Preparation ahead of time is strongly encouraged.

WHAT TYPES OF QUESTIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BEFORE HYBRID COURSE DEVELOPMENT? • If the lectures are online primarily, do you want (i) your students to sit and read or do you want to talk to your students, (ii) to be seen by your students, or (iii) to talk to your students in real time so they can ask questions or respond to your questions? • How much time do you want to spend preparing to teach the course: limited or a great deal? • Have you taught the course before? • Do you already have notes or PowerPoint slides that you like and work well with your style of teaching and the course? • If you decide to talk to your students in a “lecture-type” format, do you understand students’ difficulties and challenges in that particular course? If so, how will you present the material to address the conceptual challenges students will encounter? • Where will you go for help, especially if using new technology with which you are not familiar?

WHAT DID THIS AUTHOR WANT TO ACCOMPLISH? The author wanted to: • talk to students for the lecture aspect of the course, but not in real time, • present the lecture notes in such a way the students could hear the lecture notes and “see” the author write the notes, 304

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed200858p | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

time management; that is, 36 min in the example shown. Students took notes on the PowerPoint slides when they listened to each lecture. The next layer of organization for the chapter-lecture folder contained the PowerPoint slides; example slides are shown in Figure 4. All the slides for the course were designed to ensure the concepts were covered in such a way as to enhance students’ learning. The greatest challenge was to think about the conceptual difficulties students experience in organic chemistry,17−22 to build upon those concepts, and to use models in a consistent and connected manner to ensure better understanding. Because of a strong interest in molecular modeling and visualization, different models were used such as skeletal, twodimensional, structural, or electron density surfaces. Organic chemistry textbooks use many different models of molecules23−25 and articles have been published that address the use of visualization and images to help explain concepts.21,22,26−30 As organic textbooks used these models extensively, it was important to take the time to explain their purpose to students, to incorporate them into an organic chemistry course, and to use different models on quizzes and tests.

Depending on the course management system at the institution, the course must be organized to accommodate all aspects of the course in a logical arrangement for both the instructor and for the students. Though ANGEL was the course management system at the author’s institution, WebCT,7,9,12 Blackboard,5,10,13 and MOODLE8 can be used for hybrid courses.

■

ORGANIZATION WITHIN ANGEL On the first face-to-face class, which was the first day of the semester, students were introduced to the organization within ANGEL. This was to ensure that the students know where the class materials were located, how class materials were organized, and to make sure they know what was expected of them in the course. When the students opened ANGEL, they saw the information shown in Figures 1 and 2. This is called the first

■

QUIZ ASSESSMENT The dates for each quiz were recorded on the calendar provided in ANGEL; however, to highlight the quiz dates, an e-mail was sent to the entire class at the beginning of each week. Because the students were seen face-to-face on the first day of the week, they were reminded about the quizzes for the next seven days. Organization in a hybrid course and keeping students informed were extremely important. Quizzes followed almost every lecture; example quiz questions are shown in Figure 5. The questions were mainly multiple choice, but there were also some fill-in-the-blank. The majority of questions came from four different test banks and the author also wrote some of the quiz questions. Access to the quizzes was on a “timer”. Each quiz was available for 24 h, 60min time limit, one question at a time, no backtrack, random order of questions and answer choices, and no review of questions. The parameters for each quiz were designed to encourage honesty and to make it difficult to “copy” answers. Students can work together on quizzes. If the students had questions about an incorrect answer on a quiz, they typically emailed the instructor. If several students had similar questions, the instructor might email the entire class, something that was easy to do through ANGEL. It was especially important to communicate with the entire class if a misunderstood concept interfered with students’ further understanding before the class met again face-to-face. In addition to email communication, with ANGEL as the course management system, a response to a question could be posted there for all students to view and discuss such as through a Discussion Forum or under Course News and Events. The quizzes were set to start within two days of when the students should have listened to and taken notes on a lecture. Because many students do not read the textbook and do not prepare for tests until very close to when a test is scheduled, it was important to have many quizzes and for them to correspond to the lectures. The quizzes were one way to help ensure that students kept up with the material. This was especially critical in organic chemistry where the course builds strongly on previous concepts.

Figure 1. Chapter and lecture folders within ANGEL.

Figure 2. Chapter and lecture quiz organization.

layer of organization. There was a chapter-lecture folder, for example, Chapter 1 Lecture 1 (Figure1). The contents of these folders were always accessible. There were also quiz titles such as Quiz Chapter 1 Lecture 1 (Figure 2). The questions for each quiz that correspond to a particular lecture were found there. It is important that students know to which specific lecture the quiz pertains so they can study that material before they take the quiz. In the next layer of organization, there were, within each chapter-lecture folder, the PowerPoint notes and access to the online lecture (Figure 3). For each online lecture, the amount of time the lecture takes was given to help the students with

Figure 3. Chapter and lecture PowerPoint notes and online lecture. 305

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed200858p | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Figure 4. Example PowerPoint slides for the online lecture aspect of the course.

Students also came prepared to class with questions. Their active participation was useful to other members of the class, especially those students who were too shy and believed their question was a “stupid” question. Students also corresponded via e-mail to ask about questions they believed they missed on a quiz. Again, the contact via email was very important with a quick response time from the instructor. Though the students did not have the opportunity to review a quiz after it was given, they often kept track of questions they found difficult. Not being able to review quizzes was something that a few students commented on, “Perhaps with the small class size, printing out the online quizzes would be nice because one problem we had was that if I got things wrong on an online quiz we couldn’t see what it was we got wrong, which meant we couldn’t learn from our mistakes.”

■

WHY TEACH A HYBRID COURSE AND WHAT DO STUDENTS HAVE TO SAY? When a decision was made to develop the first semester of organic chemistry as a hybrid course with only one on-campus class per week, the author’s commuting campus was in need of classroom space and alternative ways of offering courses were being considered. Other instructors have also developed their hybrid courses because of space issues on their campus.9,12 In hindsight, teaching the course as hybrid has worked well and has provided students with an opportunity to “take” the course during their available time and to listen to the lectures any hour of the day and as often as needed as student comments indicate: I was able to sit down and do it on my own time. The lectures online were fantastic. I was able to learn the material at whatever pace I wanted to, and review it as necessary. Comments from the students indicated that with only one required on-campus class per week they could save time commuting to campus and gas money: “Did not have to drive the 38+ minutes four times a week.” With the students’ availability of two additional hours during the week when the class does not meet, they could also schedule face-to-face time for extra help, if needed. As one student commented: “It’s appreciated that you always have time (or take the time) to help students. It’s really good that students do know you’re available. Thank you.” A review session was often offered before each test and a few students took advantage of this extra class. Students also had 24-h access to e-mail and often communicated this way. The

Figure 5. Example quiz questions.

■

FACE-TO-FACE CLASS TIME WITH STUDENTS Because there was only one scheduled face-to-face meeting per week with the students, it had to be productive and useful to them. At the beginning of the class, students’ class notes were checked to ensure they have completed the required lectures for that week. They know which lectures were required based on the syllabus. In addition to the quizzes, checking the notes was another way to ensure students kept up with the material. With only 9−10 students per class, this only took about 5−10 min of class time, if the students had their notes available as soon as they come to class. The students flipped through each page of the lecture notes, the notes were glanced at, and a check or minus was recorded. In a large class, a trustworthy student could be designated to help check students’ notes. Information was then shared with the class from their previous week’s quizzes and concepts were discussed that were associated with questions the majority of students missed. ANGEL has a feature called Item Analysis that presents specific information about each quiz that includes the questions on that quiz and the percent of students who chose each response. A student commented: “I think the face-to-face classes covered the right material and helped review just fine.” 306

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed200858p | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

(8) Rodriguez, M. A.; Anicete, R. C. R. J. Online Learn. Teach. 2010, 6 (4), 1−5. (9) McFarlin, B. K. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2008, 32, 86−91. (10) Rovai, A. P.; Jordan, H. M. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2004, 5 (2), 1−13. (11) Sitter, V.; Carter, C.; Mahan, R.; Massello, C.; Carter, T. 2009 ASCUE Proceedings. Online access: http://www.ascue.org/files/ proceedings/2009/p40.pdf (accessed Jan 2013). (12) Hensley, G. J. Online Learn. Teach. 2005, 1 (2), 1−7. (13) Daffron, S. R.;Webster, E. The Adult Higher Education Alliance. Online access: http://ahea.org/files/pro2005daffron.pdf (accessed Jan 2013). (14) Hartman, J. L.; Dziuban, C.; Brophy-Ellison, J. Faculty 2.0. Educause Rev., 2007, 42, 62−77. Online access: http://www.educause. edu/ero/article/faculty-20 (accessed Jan 2013). (15) Martyn, M. Educause Quarterly, 2003 (November 1), 18−23. (16) Stodel, E. J.; Thompson, T. L.; MacDonald, C. J. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2006, 7 (3), 1−24. (17) Ealy, J. B.; Hermanson, J. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2006, 15 (1), 61− 69. (18) Mullins, J. J. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 83−87. (19) Nash, J. G.; Liotta, L. J.; Bravaco, R. J. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 333−337. (20) Pungente, M. D.; Badger, R. A J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80, 779− 784. (21) Taagepera, M.; Noori, S. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1224−1229. (22) Zoller, U. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 1990, 27, 1053−1065. (23) Bruice, P. Organic Chemistry, 6th ed.; Prentice Hall: Boston, MA, 2011. (24) Carey, F.; Giuliano, R. Organic Chemistry, 8th ed; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, 2010. (25) McMurry, J. E. Organic Chemistry, 7th ed.; Thomson Brooks/ Cole: Belmont, CA, 2008. (26) Appling, J. R; Peake, L. C. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 13, 361−365. (27) Ealy, J. B. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2004, 13 (4), 461−471. (28) Shusterman, G. P.; Shusterman, A. J. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 771−776. (29) Abraham, M.; Varghese, V.; Tang, H. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87, 1425−1429. (30) Taagepera, M.; Noori, S. J. Chem. Educ. 2000, 77, 1224−1229.

author always tried to answer their questions within 24 h because the students appreciated a prompt reply. On the downside, students made comments such as the following: “You couldn’t ask questions right as you had them; you had to email or wait until the next class.” This was a disappointing comment, but even with immediate response via e-mail, there can be a time delay. When students were asked if they would recommend the course to others the comments fell into two categories, such as I would but only if the student(s) were committed to the course and needed it for their major. Yes, the online lectures were very helpful and the professor spent a lot of time to make sure the students understood the material.

■

CONCLUSION Development of a hybrid course was not without its challenges. It was a time-consuming process to develop a course where it was necessary to create the material from scratch. If an instructor had previously developed PowerPoint slides, then the online lecture aspect of a hybrid course is not such a daunting task. It was necessary to make a decision as to how the PowerPoint slides would be recorded for online use by students, and this was strongly tied to the technology help on the campus and the available tools. The course management tool, such as ANGEL, WebCT, or Blackboard was invaluable. This was the location for the course organization such as the course syllabus, topics for online discussion, correspondence with the class, and where students could deposit group projects that become available for each member of the class to view. Whether a hybrid course is developed because of space limitations or for some other reason, a hybrid course can provide an alternative to a completely face-to-face course. It offers flexibility to students in regards to scheduling with fewer trips to campus and is especially helpful to adults with a family and job. The initial time investment will provide benefits both for the instructor and students.

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: [email protected]. Notes

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Kaleta, R.; Garnham, G. 17th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, 2001. Online access: http://www.uwex.edu/ disted/conference/Resource_library/proceedings/01_41.pdf (accessed Jan 2013). (2) Dziuban, C. D.; Hartman, J. L.; Moskal, P. D. Educause Center for Applied Research, 2004 (March 30), 1−12. Online access: www. educause.edu/ecar/ (accessed Jan 2013). (3) Aycock, A.; Garnham, C.; Kaleta, R. Teaching with Technology Today, 2002 (8), 8, 1−5. Online access: http://www.wisconsin.edu/ ttt/articles/garnham2.htm (accessed Jan 2013). (4) Tang, M.; Byrne, R. Int. J. E-Learn. 2007, 6 (2), 257−266. (5) Senn, G. J. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. 2008, 7, 267−283. (6) Lynch, R.; Dembo, M. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 2004, 5 (2), 1−16. (7) Marcketti, S. B.; Yurchisin, J. Academic Exchange, 2005, Fall, 317−320. 307

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed200858p | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 303−307