890
JOURNAL os CHEMICAL EDUCATION
JULY, 1927
HOW GRADE LABORATORY NOTEBOOKS? H. W. GOWLD, JAMES MILLIKINUNIVERSITY, DECATUR, ILLINOIS
This subject has to do with a part of the work of a teacher in chemistry that has in many cases proved to be a most irksome and ever-to-be-faced bore. Personally, I am free to admit that, a t times, I have found i t to he so. However, with the system which I am using a t present, most of the boredom has been eliminated. In this brief paper I shall simply describe my own methods concerning the grading of lahoratory notebooks. They are methods which I have found to be the most efficient in my own experience, and which I have followed consistently for four years. Briefly, here they are: The student has a bound notebook of sufficientsize to contain write-ups of all the experiments performed in the laboratory during the year. In it he records the data obtained from each experiment, together with equations and all necessary explanations, making the write-up as brief as possible, still including the essential points involved. Each experiment is written up a t some time during the same laboratory period in which it was performed. Each student in the section brings his notebook to the instructor once during the period for an O.K. The instructor goes over the exercise or exercises (in the student's presence), thoroughly quizzing him, if necessary, on points in which he is evidently weak, and calling his attention to any details which have been omitted. Any necessary minor corrections are made then and there. If erroneous or inaccurate results are presented, he is sent back to repeat the work and to report again later. Each completed exercise which has been passed upon favorably is rubber-stamped (date accepted) by the instructor. In brief, then, the notebook is looked over, not in the office a week or more later, hut right in the laboratory, a t elbows with the student, and during the same hour in which he has performed the exercises and written them up. No grade is placed on these exercises from period to period. To he sure, an estimate is placed on the notebook a t the end of the semester. But the student's ability to absorb ideas, to reason and to interpret, his general laboratory technic, and his personal attitude toward his work, all are factors which figure significantly in his laboratory grade. It is true that, in the above system, the student spends considerable lahoratory time in writing up experiments. However, he is expected to have his experiments well in mind before he comes to the laboratory. He is frequently quizzed and coached on them a t the beginning of the period. And he is expected, furthermore, to plan his work in such a way as to make most efficient disposal of his time. And since he makes brief and concise write-ups while the material is fresh in mind, i t is to he doubted
VOL.4, No. 7
How GRADELABORATORY NOTEBOOKS?
891
whether the extra experiments that might be done in this time would be more valuable to him. It is also true that the instructor spends considerable laboratory time in going over these notebooks. But this time practically coincides with the time that he, by a series of leading questions, gets the student to see where he made his mistakes, how to interpret his results, and see their significance. It is on these occasions that he can do his most intensive teaching and can be of greatest individual help to the student. It is then that he comes to know him most intimately, and can find out accurately just how much chemistry he knows; for he does not hesitate to quiz him unmercifully if it appears to be necessary. It has been my experience that, for a section of twenty students, the time spent in going over these exercises during the period does not materially interfere with general supervision of the laboratory work. I believe that i t is time well spent. ,* lhere are experiments of quantitative nature during the year which are longer and involve more theory and calculations than the average. Three or four such experiments are usually included during the year. For these, the student submits data to be O.K.'d in the usual manner. In addition, one week later, he turns in a full formal report including full description of apparatus used, the procedure, general theory involved, discussion of results and sources of error, and answers to collateral problems and questions. Here the student who likes to write up his experiments a t home and in an elaborate way gets his heart's desire. These reports are written up and graded outside of laboratory hours. It must be admitted that any given method concerning the treatment of laboratory notebooks has its talking points and also its objections. There is not sufficient time to discuss them here. For my own part, the most pertinent question to be asked is, "How does it actually work out?" And here the personality of the instructor enters in. No two have identical ideas, and no two can be expected to conduct a laboratory section in chemistry in exactly the same manner. Personally, I have found that grading laboratory exercises outside of laboratory hours, doing i t twice a week or once a month, thoroughly and painstakingly or hastily picking out mistakes a t random and slapping down a grade largely based on general impressions, was an endless drudgery. It was a part of the work of instruction that I would cheerfully shove off onto the shoulders of a budding assistant if one happened to be available. Whereas, by going over the exercises with the student immediately after he has performed and written them up, the task becomes not a bore, but an absorbing interest and pleasure in getting him to see his mistakes and to profit by them.
