THE EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT INSTRUCTORS FOR RECITATION AND LABORATORY IN FRESHMAN CHEMISTRY
Data on drops, term tests, final examinations, and $nu1 grades are presented for 23,868 enrolments of students who met a lecturer in chemistry. Of these students, 9098 met the same instructor in recitation and laboratory: and 14,770 met different instructors in recitation and laboratory. I n all particulars the records of the students who met the same instructor were better than the records of those who met different instructors. Those meeting different in, below passing, and structors showed 2% more dropped, a n additional 3 ~ 3more 3.35% fewer abme 90% than those who met the same instructor. I f all students who were dropped, or who failed, re-enrolled for the next quarter, assigning 1000 stwlents to the same instructor in recitation and laboratory would sane the time of a n instructor i n the succeeding guurter, bisides raising the standard of all of the other students.
. .
.
. . .
One of the many di5culties confronting a college freshman in chemistry is a system which gives the student a lecturer, a second instructor to direct his laboratory work, and a third to hear his recitation. In this system, which is used by many schools, the three teachers may use different nomenclature, and different methods of instruction, and may emphasize different portions of the subject matter. In the larger colleges and universities, the complexity of schedules makes it highly improbable that a student will have the same instructor in recitation and laboratory unless a special effort is put forth. For a number of years the professors a t Iowa State College have believed that a more intimate acquaintance and a better understanding between the teacher and the student were extremely desirable, and that a better attitude and a better quality of work could be obtained by decreasing the number of instructors for each student. In attempting to realize this goal considerable time and effortare spent in arranging the class and laboratory work so that as many students as possible meet the same instructor in recitation and laboratory. This is shown by the following data. Of the 11,273 students who registered prior to 1925, 3986 were so arranged that they met the same instructor in recitation and laboratory, while 7637 had different instructors. Of the 12,245 students who have since registered, 5112 met the same instructor in recitation and laboratory, while 7133 were assigned to different instructors. This was accomplished without any aid from the emfling officers. Beginning this year the enrolling o5cers are arranging students in groups so that providmg the same instructor in recitation and laboratory will be facilitated. In this paper the authors are following rather closely the general outline 1949
1950
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
NOVEMBER, 1932
and discussion of a previous paper.' The data of the previous paper together with those which have been obtained since are submitted in this article. During these years students have enrolled under one professor for approximately 26,000 quarter credits in freshman chemistry. Of these, more than 2000 have either failed to start their work or have been excused because of illness or other unavoidable causes. There were 23,868 who were assigned places in laboratory and met their laboratory instructors. Of these, 9098 were assigned to the same instructor in laboratory and recitation, and 14,770were assigned to different instructors in recitation and laboratory. An analysis of the data available from these two sources gives three measurable and interesting results: (1) the distribution between the two groups of students who dropped the course before the end of the quarter; (2) a comparison of the grades, made by the members of the two groups, in written work given by the lecturer; (3) a comparison of the final grades made by the members of the two groups. The tests and final examinations are given by the lecturer. The questions are as completely unknown to the instructor as to the students themselves. The answers are graded by squads of instructors. Each iustructor grades one answer in all books. The professor who wrote the questions discusses the grading of the answers with the squad and frequently acts as the squad leader and grades one question. The instructor affects the grades of his students in written work only by the quality of his teaching. There is only one seriotis objection to judging the effect of having the same instructor in recitatioa' and laboratory, or of having differentinstructors, solely by the written work. This is the fact that the professors frequently teach recitation sections and never laboratory sections. Several hundred of the students listed as having different instructors in recitation and laboratory were meeting in recitation the professor who prepared the questions in tests and final examinations for them. No student listed as having the same instructor in recitation and laboratory had this advantage. The final grade which a student receives for a quarter's work is given by the recitation instructor. That instructor has before him a card filled out by the freshman chemistry officefor each of his students, on which is recorded: (a) his own estimate of the student's work in recitation sent in a t intervals of two weeks, (b) a similar report from the laboratory instructor, (6) the grades for all lecture tests, (d) the final examination grade, and (e) a similar report of all previous quarters' work in freshman chemistry. However, the instructor is not bound to follow exact averages and might let a closer acquaintance, such as would be formed in laboratory, nncousciously affect the final grade. BROWN AND BIRD,J CHEM.EDUC., 2, 102-5 (Feb , 1925).
VOL.9, NO. 11
EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT INSTRUCTORS
1Y51
Of the !XI98 students having the same instructor in recitation and laboratory, 570 or 6.26% dropped before the end of the quarter. Of the 14,770 who met different instructors in recitation and laboratory 8.27% or 1222 dropped the course before i t was completed. There were 22,076 students who finished the course. Of these 8528 had the same instructor in recitation and laboratory and 13,548 bad different instructors in recitation and laboratory. In Tables I and I1 is given the distribution of grades for the 22,076 students: TABLE I General Effect of a C M g e of Instructors on Grades C;*odrM i n I'rr C m l .
Drops
Relaw 60
80-84 85-89 90-94
Tests
sxominations
Samc 6.26 Diff. 8.27 Same 12.31 Diff. 13.30 Same 25. 60 Diff. 26.67 Same 18.83 Diff. 12.96 Same 13.79 Diff. 13.96 Same 12.76 Diff. 11.25 Same 9.80 Diff.9.47 Same 5.65 Diff. 4.12
6.20 8.27 14.87 17.17 23.79 23.73 11.27 11.10 12.20 11.74 12.71 11.00 10.99 9.81 7.91 97.18
.
~ ~ o r t cr m r de
.
6.26 8.27 4.73 6.01 10.89 12.03 23.60 23.46 22.44 21.41 17.29 16.78 11.71 9.53 3.08 1.91
TABLE I1 Effect of Change of Instructor on Groups of Students in Different Grade Levels Greder in 1'8r cent.
Drops
Below passing
90-100
~csir
~mminorionr
Same 0.26 Diff. 8.27 Same 37.91 Diff. 39.97 Same 40.38 Diff. 38.15 Same 15.45 Diff. 13.59
1;. 26
8.27 38. fi6 40.90 36.18 33.84 18.90 16.99
~mrm ~;~:mdc
6.26 8.27 15.62 18.64 63.33 61.65 14.79 11.44
,
Each instructor receives from the registrar the following directions for reporting grades: "Grades from 75 to 100 are passing grades. Grades from 60 to 74 are condition grades. Grades below 60 are failing." The grades which are used in this paper are those given by the instructors on the scale prescribed by the registrar. Averages of data from the grades of 23,868 students should have some significance. If 1000 students began a course with the same instructor, 937
1952
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
N O Y E ~ B1932 R,
would attend classes until the close of the term and 781 would receive passing grades. If an equal number of students started with different instructors in recitation and laboratory, 917 would attend classes until the close of the term and 731 would receive passing grades. If 1000 students meet different instructors in recitation and laboratory 50 less of them will be given grades above passing than if they met the same instructor. If these 50 students should all enrol for chemistry during the next term, it would require the entire time of one instructor to conduct their classes. The beneficial effect is not confined to raising the lowest grade from below passing to above passing. Students of all degrees of ability are affected. The increase from 114 to 148 students per thousand receiving grades above 90% is a greater percentage increase (30%) than the decrease of failures and drops combined, 269 to 219 per thousand (19%). . In mastering chemistry, as in every other learning process, the greater responsibility is on the student, but a favorable environment encourages a more desirable attitude and the effects are more gratifying. Teaching is one of the influenceswhich tend to depress or enkindle, as the case may be, all the dormant forces within the student. It is an active contribution from one person to another, and the personalities of receiver and giver are very important factors in its effectiveness. The system of teaching which provides for the student the same instructor in recitation and laboratory gives the teacher greater opportunities for winning the cooperation, confidence, and good-will of the student, ,and the student may be led unconsciously into greater accomplishments, both intellectual and moral, and the development of his own latent powers. TIfe more completely these results are realized the better has been the quality of teaching.
