David W. Emerson
University of Mich~gan-Dearborn Dearborn, 48128
Teaching Organic Chemistry a Modified Keller Plan
Until 1971, when the first freshman class was admitted, The University of Michigan-Dearhorn (UM-D) operated solely as an upper division institution populated by students transferring in as juniors. The students taking organic chemistry until 1972 came from a variety of twoand four-year institutions and had considerably varied hackerounds. Most of the chemistrv. maiors took organic chemUistry before transferring; thus, the majority 3 the class consisted of biology majors, many of whom were premedical and predentai-students. By 1973 the course enrollment was augmented by students from the first freshman class, so it was clear that this was the last opportunity to experiment with a reasonably small class. The breakdown of the class is given in Table 1. Other constraints which helped design the course included the lack of a pool of tutors and the lack of funds to pay tutors, had any been available. The basic assumptions behind the course design were 1) It is probably better for a student to learn some material
thoroughly than to "learn" a much larger body of material sketchily. 2 ) Students learn at different rates and probably few of the students in a class are precisely attuned to the pace of regular lectures. Furthermore, the learning pace of a student is influenced by factors such as the demands of other courses, personal life, and so an; thus a given student may he inclined to move ahead rapidly at one period and to lag hack at other periods. Within limits, the course should accommodate these personal differences. 3) Examinations should he a constructive and, insofar as passihle, a non-threatening part of the learning process. What is really gained by the conventional system in which a law score in one hour exam continues to drag dawn a student's average fur the whule *mesterg 1 1 Kxarnuwtiuna r a n p r u d e m p o n a n r rniorrnarinn f u r tenrhrr and srudmt whwh he." r u rdrntily and to correct weaknesses in a student's background. 5) Tangible rewards can be seenasresultingfrom extra effort. How the Course was Conducted
The textbook used was Morrison and Boyd ( I ) and the material was drawn from the last two thirds of the hook. Twelve chapters were selected as the minimum core needed to earn a grade of "C," 15 to earn a "B," and 18 to earn an "A," A chapter was considered learned when the student could pass an examination on it with a grade of at least 90 points (out of a possible 120). No penalty resulted from failing an examination; it could he repeated whenever the student wished. The exams were scheduled in advance to be given during class periods. A student could take any examination he wished by signing u p in advance for it. The agreement was that he would get whatever grade he had earned by the last day of classes and, if he wished, he could attempt to raise his grade by taking a final examination on whichever he wanted of the assigned chapters he had not yet passed. I£ he passed enough examinations during the three hour final period to raise himself to the next higher grade level, he would get the higher grade. Each student who presented himself for the final was thus given an individualized packet of examinations on chapters which he had specified in advance. The 228
/
Journal of Chemical Education
Table 1. Students" by Class and Field of Concentration Chemistry Major8
Biology Major8
Other8
4
10 7
1 1
Junior Senior
0
Nine students dropped the course. ' Includes premedical and predental shldenta not majoring in chemistry.
Table 2. Grade Distribution, Percent at Letter Grade This MethodR
,"
.-
Traditional Method
--
persons
" B a d on nvmber of students initially enrolled in &as. 6 Based on number of students initially in class. Average of seven yeara. 1963-69.
instructor had some misgivings about not giving a general, comprehensive final examination hut then decided that organic chemistry at the first year level is sufficiently cumulative that, in effect, a built-in necessity for reviewing had been operating all semester. The result was that 43.5% of the students elected to take a final examination. The class time not devoted to examinations was given over to group discussions, answering specific questions, and lecturing on special topics. Results
Keller (2) and Leo (3) reported a substantially altered grade distribution when courses taught by the Keller Plan were comnared to courses offered in the traditional manner. A hiiher proportion of higher grades and drops and a lower ~rouortionof lower mades resulted. That.. too.. was our experience (Table 2). The larger proportion of drops may have indicated a certain amount of panic over a teaching method not previously tried, a t least in chemistry, a t this institution. I t is noteworthy that a high proportion of drops persisted in 1973 and 1974 with the course taught in the traditional manner. This may reflect also the lower proportion of upperclasspersons in the more recent classes. Student reaction to the course was varied. A slump in morale occurred about five weeks into the course when a number of students were discouraged about not passing the proficiency exams on the first attempt. When asked if they had been "A" students in chemistry previously, many admitted they were not, and then relaxed a hit. The first few weeks was also a time in which many students discovered that they should have learned some topics in the first semester more thoroughly and were spending much of their time making up deficiencies in their background. Once this "patching up" process was compete a number of these students then proceeded a t a faster rate. One of the strong points of this method is that it enables the instructor to diagnose a student's deficiencies in hack-
ground very early in the semester and permits the instmctor to recommend remedial action. This point deserves emphasis; the need for personal, one-to-one tutorial assistance for the student appears to he minimal if the instructor takes pains to refer the student to specific passages in the text which inform the student on matters about which his test answers indicate he is ignorant. After a few weeks the need for such detailed referencing decreases as the student mends his deficiencies and learns that the text really does have the answer to many of his questions. Several authors (4-7) have expressed reservations about innovations such as self-paced instruction. Indeed the students miss exposure to the live performance and perhaps the values of the instmctor and may be getting' more training than education. It seems clear, however, that the student assimilates more readily the kind of factual material on which tests are based by this force feeding method than by the traditional method. More subtle evaluation than that which course grades afford is needed to elucidate these matters. A final word of caution: No instructor should embark on this method of teaching with the idea that it will be easier
than conventional methods. It is, frankly, greatly time consuming. Many examinations have to be made up, graded, and records kept on them. There are indications, however, that the method may have some pedagogical benefits. Students are encouraged to take more responsibility for their learning while a t the same time having their work evaluated frequently in a non-punitive manner. Beyond a certain minimum students can set their own pace and many appear to be strongly motivated in the process. Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to the members of the class for good-naturedly participating in a reciprocal learning experience. Literature Cited 11) Morrison. R. T., and Boyd, R. N., "Organic Chemistry." Bacon, Inc., Bmfon. 1966. 1.79-89 11968). 12) Keller, F.S.. J olAppliedBehauiorAm1y~ii~ (3) L q M . W.~M.. J. CHEMEDUC., 50.49(19731. I41 Brasted,R.C.. J. CHEMEDUC.,50. j90i1973). (51 Mellon, E. K., J.CHEM.EDUC.. SO. 530(19731. (6)Wolke. R.L., J.CHEM.EDUC.,50.99(1973). 17) Lippineotf. W. T., 3. CHEM. EDUC.. 49.721 11972).
Ed. , AIlyn and
Voiurne 52. Number 4. April 1975
/
229
