On the Web
Use of Wikis in Chemistry Instruction for Problem-Based Learning Assignments: An Example in Instrumental Analysis Robert Clougherty Center for Graduate Programs, Empire State College, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 Mona Wells*,† Department of Chemistry, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505; *
[email protected] Instructional technology has exponentially expanded the scope of venues for the improvement of learning, exploitation of which is just beginning (1). One underutilized venue is the wiki, a type of Web site that facilitates collaborative endeavors, particularly the creative and iterative processes involved in authoring. At the outset of the exercise discussed here, the wiki venue was particularly attractive for its potential in development of problem-based learning (PBL) assignments for teaching instrumental analysis, that is, assignments wherein emphasis is placed not only on enhancing students’ conceptual knowledge, but simultaneously on developing the abilities of self-direction, problem-solving, and critical thinking, as well as teamwork and communication (2–4). A recent review of wikis (5) quotes Ward Cunningham (credited with invention of the wiki) as describing the wiki as “the simplest online database that could possibly work”. For educational purposes, this simplicity is desirable as it entails a short start-up time for students. Further, wiki software enables students to rapidly and freely create and edit Web-page content, in many cases with support of hyperlinks and graphics capability as well as simple text, all from the wiki interface so instructional time does not need to be dedicated to teaching students how to write html or how to use Web-authoring software. Additionally, wiki content can be arranged hierarchically as with any Web page and has been heralded as having an unique group communication mechanism (5) wherein the organization of content can be edited as well as the content itself. There are a number of important aspects of the communicational style thus enabled that promote PBL and are simultaneously close to standard mechanisms of communication in science, notably peer review, hence sharpening students’ skills in a multi-faceted manner. Trial Exercise in Instrumental Analysis For some years the fourth-year course in instrumental analysis at our institution has required students to complete a semester-long project; exact details vary, but the general scheme requires students to design their own laboratory exercise. Primary objectives are twofold: (i) student-designed exercises should seek to reinforce principles learned in lecture and (ii) should also seek to interest the student audience. That is, students are asked to design projects that they themselves would find interesting and in a context that should promote PBL via self-directed learning, teamwork, and real-world problem solving. The final format of the project is identical to the format of typical handouts given to students for instrumental analysis lab. In a fashion similar to typical labs, the project is introduced and explained †Current address: Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Science, Permoserstrasse 15, Leipzig, 04318, Germany.
1446
by each group to the class at large in a brief presentation, much as the instructor or lab TA normally gives a prelab presentation prior to each laboratory exercise. Although the project has always been assigned to groups, student feedback has indicated that the usual perils of such group work pertain: depending upon group dynamics, often one or two students complete most of the work and do so essentially in a vacuum with respect to their peers. Recently, we implemented a wiki-based version of this project with the hope that the format would encourage greater participation by all group members. All groups were asked to design a project illustrating the use of flame atomic absorption spectroscopy suitable for implementation at our institution. Given the open and instantaneously accessible editing provided by the wiki, all students had access to the group project at any particular point in time, serving to foster the imperative of individual responsibility within the group. For this project, we used seedwiki (6), but a number of other options are available (5), including a wiki tool in Blackboard. (Tutorials for seedwiki and the Blackboard wiki tool are provided in the online material; likewise, readers interested to see the full student project outcome may view a site map and associated archived wiki pages in the online material.) Assessment formed the final and key element of the wikibased project. To simultaneously promote interactive efforts and real-world conditions, this assessment was based entirely on a scheme of project review of the final results, according to (i) review by the technology lead,1 (ii) review by the chemistry lead,2 (iii) anonymous peer review by other student working groups in the class, (iv) anonymous peer review of each student’s contribution by other group members, and (v) technology and chemistry leads’ assessment of participation from individual activity in the project as reflected in peer-review content posted to the wiki site. To be counted, all peer-review comments were required to possess objective content (“your graphics are effective at illustrating the results”); subjective comments (“I like your graphics”) were not counted. This was carefully delineated to students at the outset. Outcomes of Trial Exercise Overall, the outcomes greatly exceeded both faculty and student expectations. At the end of the trial exercise semester, students were asked to evaluate the wiki component of the design lab exercise, the primary criterion being whether they would choose to do the project via the wiki medium if they had to repeat the experience. Likewise, the lead faculty members formed a joint assessment based on perception and evaluation of final project quality via grading metrics previously used for Web design and instrumental analysis classes. Student response was unanimously positive. Representative student impressions
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 85 No. 10 October 2008 • www.JCE.DivCHED.org • © Division of Chemical Education
On the Web Table 1. Student Perceptions of Trial Exercise Strengths
Weaknesses
• Maximized time efficiency for group work
• Student frustration with underperforming groups
• Continuous and seamless update
• Lack of intended anonymity for wiki-posted peer review
• Facilitation of intra- and intergroup interactions
• Student concern about faculty evaluation standards: chemistry or Web design?
• Iterative peer-review component enhanced quality of outcome • Facilitation of project organization with flexibility of page structure • Ease of use • Enhancement of computer skills in addition to technical component • Medium for reinforcement of ethics
of strengths and weaknesses of the trial exercise are listed in Table 1. Strengths of the exercise, as reported by students, all speak substantively to the original goals of the effort. Further, we anticipate that weaknesses can be largely addressed by future modifications; for example, students who were very engaged with the project were frustrated with underengaged groups, feeling that they were denied the opportunity to fully participate in the (required) peer-review component. This can be addressed by further reinforcement of the mechanism of rewarding participants in the grading scheme. Similarly, student confidence in faculty evaluation of projects, both as a communicational exercise via the medium of Web design and as a technical exercise in chemistry, can be enhanced by providing additional guidance on project goals, expectations, and the mechanism of faculty assessment. The only other student identified weakness, that in a class the size of instrumental analysis (enrollment never exceeding 20 students at the authors’ institution), Web-posted comments cannot remain truly anonymous (codes were given to students for the trial exercise to protect anonymity), is a valid point. Since we observed high quality and incisive student peer review in spite of having perceived a lack of anonymity, in the future anonymity will not be a component of the Web-posted comments. However, anonymity will be maintained for endof-project peer evaluation exercises, and these will be expanded somewhat in the scope of questions posed. Faculty perceptions of student outcomes for this exercise were also positive. The instantaneous and iterative nature of the wiki enable faculty at any particular instant to see whether students were active in their projects, the nature of developments, and to mediate as necessary. Although the trial exercise will have to be repeated to formulate a longitudinal assessment, the overall faculty impression is that the wiki medium enhanced the quality of efforts for engaged students and underscored the underperformance of others. For instance, at one juncture, students began to post complaints on one group’s Web site to the effect that a substantial quantity of material was taken verbatim from another source without proper attribution of such. Increasingly, surveying for and catching such inappropriate behavior is the bane of the instructor’s life, but now students have an opportunity to protect the academic integrity of their efforts to produce original work by pointing out failures of peers to act in kind. As well, the end-of-semester anonymous review component facilitated verification of instructor perceptions about each student’s contribution to their group (for example, when
one student wrote that they would prefer never again to work with a particular group partner, this provided active confirmation of the instructor’s prior impression that the group member in question had not been constructively engaged). Wiki and Peer Review Ronald Kostoff of the Office of Naval Research has written extensively on peer review in science and ranked applications of it in descending order as (i) journal manuscript submission review, (ii) proposal review, (iii) project and program review, (iv) faculty performance review, and (v) dissertation review; that is, peer review is so pervasive as to virtually rule science at the academic level (7, 8). However, through exercises in peer review at the graduate level at our institution, we find that our students are not well-equipped to appreciate or navigate the process. Ideally, we seek for students to understand and participate in the process earlier. The primary faculty-perceived benefit of the trial exercise is that it gradually, but inexorably, entrained students into the process. According to Chubin’s summary of the “taxonomy of the potential values added by peer review” (7, 9), we find that the use of wikis is an educational tool that addresses all elements; to wit, it is (i) an effective resource allocation mechanism (students themselves identifying this as a primary strength), (ii) an efficient resource allocator (in that all materials are stored in one location), (iii) a promoter of science accountability, as faculty have witnessed through student peer critique of academic conduct, (iv) a mechanism for faculty to direct student scientific effort, (v) a rational process, (vi) a valid and reliable measure of scientific performance, as agreed by students and faculty, and (vii) a fair process, also as unanimously agreed by students and faculty for the trial exercise. The last is of particular interest and note. Given the property of open editing, a central precept of wikis is trust among participants, trust in the process, and hence trust building. Checks and balances also exist as all participants control and check the content. This sort of scientific social contract is at the heart of peer review, even including the so-called assume-good-faith limitations of wikis, which in research science have been referred to as the problem of bias in peer review, with its associated impact on fairness (7). By use of wikis, inherently operating on trust but subject to assume-good-faith-limitations, students have the opportunity to observe firsthand the analogous functions of peer review in chemistry.
© Division of Chemical Education • www.JCE.DivCHED.org • Vol. 85 No. 10 October 2008 • Journal of Chemical Education
1447
On the Web
Conclusions
Literature Cited
In the deployment of a wiki, student performance skills, such as critical thinking and peer review, increased. The wiki, however, is essentially a communication tool, and the authors, based on their observation of this class, believe that the nature of this tool both allowed and facilitated student interaction and thus provided a vehicle and incentive to increase student performance in these areas. The process does need to be and will be repeated in the future, and we hope that publication of results from this trial exercise will promote readers’ parallel investigations in kind.
1. Reiser, R.; Dempsey, J. V. Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 2nd ed.; Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2006. 2. Boud, D.; Feletti, G. The Challenge of Problem-Based Learning, 2nd ed.; Kogan Page: London, 1999. 3. Cancilla, D. A. J. Chem. Educ. 2001, 78, 1652. 4. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 2004, 16, 235–266. 5. Tonkin, E. Ariadne 2005, 42. 6. Seed Wiki Home Page. http://www.seedwiki.com (accessed Jun
Acknowledgments We wish to thank Derek Pennycuff and Brandon Denton of the TTU Institute of Technological Scholarship for technical support and assistance, and we wish to thank Jacob Spradlin and the staff of the Computer Services Technology Support team at Sam Houston State University for kindly providing their Blackboard wiki tool guide.
Supporting JCE Online Material
http://www.jce.divched.org/Journal/Issues/2008/Oct/abs1446.html Abstract and keywords Full text (PDF) Links to cited JCE articles
Notes 1. In the trial exercise the technology leader was the director of the TTU Institute for Technological Scholarship. 2. The chemistry lead was the instrumental analysis instructor.
1448
2008).
7. Kostoff, R. N. Research Program Peer Review: Principles, Practices, Protocols; Defense Technical Information Center: Arlington, VA, 1997. 8. Kostoff, R. N. Science 1997, 277, 651–652. 9. Chubin, D. E. Evaluation Rev. 1994, 18, 20–30.
Supplement Tutorials for seedwiki and the Blackboard wiki tool
Example of a student project outcome
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 85 No. 10 October 2008 • www.JCE.DivCHED.org • © Division of Chemical Education
