Article pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Using Undergraduate Facilitators for Active Learning in Organic Chemistry: A Preparation Course and Outcomes of the Experience Hannah E. Jardine† and Lee A. Friedman*,‡ †
Department of Teaching, Learning, Policy, and Leadership and ‡Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742, United States S Supporting Information *
ABSTRACT: In this study, we describe a course to educate and prepare undergraduate “facilitators” for small group problem solving sessions in a large, first semester, introductory undergraduate organic chemistry course. We then explore the outcomes of the facilitator experience for one cohort of facilitators through qualitative analysis of written reflections, surveys, and field notes. Our findings suggest that the course achieved its goals of providing facilitators with effective teaching techniques and reinforcing content knowledge, and it created a forum for the facilitators to provide feedback to each other and to the course instructor. Furthermore, the course catalyzed the development of professional skills, enhanced metacognitive abilities, reinforced the benefits of active learning, and exposed facilitators to educational literature. These findings are noteworthy because they demonstrate the various potential benefits for undergraduates that facilitate active learning in large chemistry courses. KEYWORDS: Second-Year Undergraduate, Upper-Division Undergraduate, Organic Chemistry, Collaborative/Cooperative Learning, TA Training/Orientation
I
peers that have recently taken the course, an opportunity that might not be possible through interactions with the instructor or even graduate teaching assistants. In addition to benefits for students in courses supported by ULAs, the ULA experience also provides cognitive, personal, and instrumental benefits to the ULAs themselves.10 ULAs may develop leadership and professional skills such as communication and self-confidence.10 ULAs may also form a supportive community as they discuss their experiences throughout a course.7 Additionally, teaching course content to other students may help ULAs develop a deeper understanding of the material,11 which may lead to performance gains for ULAs in subsequent coursework.8 The ULA experience may include organized training in pedagogy and content to both prepare ULAs to work effectively with students and to support their professional development.12,13 Although the literature includes several models for ULA training in different undergraduate science contexts,12,13 there is not much in the literature about ULA preparation specifically designed for ULAs in organic chemistry courses. Therefore, we describe our course, Pedagogy and Instruction in Chemistry, developed to educate and prepare ULAs, whom we refer to as “facilitators,” for problem solving sessions in a large
ntroductory organic chemistry requires students to learn a great deal of difficult content in a short amount of time; it also requires a different set of mental and study skills, such as qualitative problem solving, that prove challenging for undergraduates to master.1 For these reasons, many students are affected by anxiety and negative perceptions of organic chemistry,2 which may discourage students, especially women and students from underrepresented minority groups, from continuing in science studies.3 Introducing active learning into the organic chemistry course may help to improve student success and attitudes.4 Cooperative learning and problem solving approaches to teaching organic chemistry have been successfully incorporated into large classes to help students develop the critical and complex thinking skills required for success.5,6 Organic chemistry students who experience student centered instruction and work in small groups may demonstrate significant improvements in performance, retention, and attitudes about the course.5,7 Successful implementation of active learning into large lecture organic chemistry courses requires more resources, especially human resources, than traditional lecturing. In some cases, undergraduate learning assistants (ULAs) have been used to facilitate small group problem solving in large lecture chemistry courses.5,8,9 The students enrolled in these courses benefit from the increased interaction that the ULAs provide. Students in the large course are able to gain valuable insight about course content and learning strategies by interacting with © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
Received: August 22, 2016 Revised: March 22, 2017
A
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
introductory undergraduate organic chemistry course. To expand upon the literature that describes the various opportunities for development for ULAs,7,8,10,11 we explored the outcomes of the facilitator experience for one cohort of facilitators. This study addresses the following research question: What are the potential benefits for undergraduate facilitators for active learning in introductory organic chemistry that are enrolled in a Pedagogy and Instruction in Chemistry course?
(2) Pedagogy: To share and practice strategies for productively working with students; to read and discuss relevant educational literature in regards to both general learning and how students learn organic chemistry. (3) Reflection: To discuss and reflect on how problemsolving sessions are going (with attention to student thinking, progress, and challenges) as well as the impact of the experience on the facilitators themselves. The main goal of PIC was to equip the facilitators with teaching skills and strategies to help them productively interact with students during problem solving sessions. PIC focused on teaching strategies for problem solving sessions, discussed how and why learning organic chemistry can be challenging, and highlighted the importance of using guiding questions rather than solely providing students with explanations and answers. During the weekly PIC class, which was led by the lecture course instructor, facilitators prepared for upcoming problem solving sessions by reviewing applicable organic chemistry content, reviewing the problems to be covered and their solutions, reflecting on the previous problem solving sessions, practicing the facilitation of group problem solving, and investigating and discussing relevant educational literature. More detailed information can be found in the course syllabus in the Supporting Information. Compared to other ULA training models,12,13 this structure is unique in that the lecture course instructor covered both content and pedagogy concurrently in the same course. During many of the PIC class sessions, the facilitators were exposed to ideas about teaching and learning by discussing relevant educational literature, including literature specific to teaching and learning organic chemistry. The facilitators read six different education research papers over the semester: one on the general benefits of active learning in undergraduate STEM courses,16 one psychology paper,17 and four papers related to student learning in organic chemistry.5,18−20 The paper on the general benefits of active learning was used to introduce the facilitators to current reform ideas in education research. The psychology paper was included to discuss how to recognize and interact with students that may be unaware of their level of understanding. The papers specific to organic chemistry provided the facilitators with pedagogical content knowledge and ways of approaching challenging organic chemistry topics. For each paper, the facilitators were required to submit a short, open-ended reflection before coming to class. The PIC class sessions also dedicated a significant amount of time to reviewing organic chemistry material and problems to be covered as well as reflecting on previous problem solving sessions. Assignments included writing their own problems and presenting problems to other facilitators while noting potential student mistakes and questions they could ask of students. Mock facilitation sessions were sometimes employed when reviewing problems so that facilitators would get practice both from the perspective of a student and the perspective of a facilitator. After each set of related problem solving sessions, facilitators submitted an open-ended reflection on a discussion board through the online course platform. Facilitators were asked to comment on specific experiences with students, provide a general sense of how the sessions went, and/or describe any commonalities across students that they found noteworthy. At the end of the semester, facilitators completed a final open-ended reflection questionnaire.
■
USE OF FACILITATORS FOR ACTIVE LEARNING IN ORGANIC CHEMISTRY To help students to develop their problem solving skills in organic chemistry as well as combat negative perceptions of organic chemistry, active learning in the form of guided problem solving sessions14 was introduced into a large, introductory, nonmajors, organic chemistry course at a MidAtlantic public university. During problem solving sessions, problems were posted on the screen in the lecture hall, and students were allowed to work with their choice of other students around them on the problem. The course instructor and facilitators then roamed the room and worked with students on an individual and small group basis to effectively guide them through the problems and encourage productive collaboration.5 Facilitator interactions with students included, but were not limited to, facilitators asking questions to guide students, facilitators asking students to explain their thinking, and facilitators demonstrating various methods for solving problems. When the instructor felt that the majority of students had worked through the problem, he went over the problem with the class and covered not only the solution, but also the strategies and thought processes involved. The instructor then posted a new problem, and the cycle continued. The findings presented in this study come from the Spring 2016 semester. In Spring 2016, there were approximately 190 students enrolled in the organic chemistry lecture course, the majority of who were life science majors. This three-credit course met for three 50 min classes per week, and problemsolving sessions occurred during approximately one out of every three classes. With 17 facilitators, one graduate teaching assistant, and one instructor present during each problemsolving session, there was approximately a 1:10 “expert” to student ratio, which typically allowed for interaction with every small group at least once during a problem-solving session.
■
FACILITATOR PREPARATION COURSE: PEDAGOGY AND INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY The undergraduate organic chemistry facilitator experience is composed of two separate but interrelated components: facilitation during problem solving sessions in the lecture class and participation in a weekly course titled Pedagogy and Instruction in Chemistry (PIC). PIC was designed to prepare facilitators to be effective during problem solving sessions. Effective science teaching requires an array of knowledge including content and conceptual knowledge, reflective practice, and knowledge of teaching and learning.15 PIC incorporates all four of these components and draws from the content and pedagogy aspects of the “learning assistant experience triad for developing pedagogical content knowledge”.12 The course objectives included: (1) Content and Concepts: To review organic chemistry with a focus on conceptual aspects and how to teach it. B
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
skills, informed ideas about science education, enjoyment, and an interest in teaching.
In the Spring 2016 semester, there were 14 facilitators enrolled in PIC. The instructor recruited all of the facilitators from previous semesters of the same organic chemistry course. There were nine male and five female facilitators. Two facilitators were freshmen, nine were sophomores, one was a junior, and two were nontraditional undergraduates. Facilitator ages ranged from 18 to 28 with the average age of 21. They had all received an A− or higher in the course, and the average cumulative GPA was 3.68, ranging from 3.45 to 4.0 (excluding the nontraditional undergraduates). The facilitators’ majors included biological sciences, physics, engineering, and food science; the majority of the facilitators were biological sciences majors.
Cognitive Benefits
Deeper Engagement with Organic Chemistry Content. The experience provided facilitators with an in depth review of organic chemistry both through reviewing problems with the instructor in PIC and preparing for problem solving sessions individually. Thirteen of 14 facilitators agreed or strongly agreed on a Likert scale that they gained a better understanding of the material than they had before the experience. In preparation for facilitation, they thought more deeply about the concepts than they might have when taking organic chemistry for the first time: “When I reviewed [the problems], I could understand what broader principle was being tested. I also made sure that I understood why answers other than the ones given on the solution sheet weren’t correct.” Throughout the semester, facilitators thought deeply about the foundations and nuances of organic chemistry, and their approach to helping students became more productive. For example, “When I am helping students with NMR problems, I will ask them to point out and write down any fact that they can pull from the table, and try to think of what piece of information that peak alone gives you.” “There are multiple factors that go into deciding how to go about a reaction, such as nucleophilicity, pKa, resonance, etc. Curved-arrow mechanisms are more than just some tedious drawing you have to do every time you practice a reaction. They are one of the first fundamental concepts taught in the course, and it is carried throughout the entirety of the course. If this concept is not mastered, organic chemistry becomes misconceived as something that can be memorized.” “For a student to do well in an organic chemistry course, [they] must know where electrons are and how they move, and this will involve the use of arrows. Only thinking about what the product might be just makes organic chemistry more of memorization rather than practice.” Metacognition and Awareness of Learning Strategies. Many of the facilitators left the experience with a greater awareness and appreciation of different learning strategies. We did not explicitly teach learning strategies in PIC; however, literature reading assignments and subsequent conversations, along with the experience of being a facilitator, helped the facilitators to develop metacognitive skills, recognize the value of different learning strategies, and to evaluate their own learning. Ten of the 14 facilitators enrolled in PIC agreed or strongly agreed that the experience provided them with insight into their own learning. We learned that even our A-student facilitators often study for exams by memorizing material when the exam format encourages this, in spite of a desire to learn concepts. This is illustrated in the following statements from facilitator reflections throughout the semester: “I consider myself a “good” student, and I work hard and get good grades. But this paper made me re-evaluate my own abilities in my classes, and made me ask myself how much am I really learning, and how much am I just memorizing patterns.” “The concepts we’ve learned and discussed have made me aware of where my performance may be lacking in my own schoolwork any why. It is brought to my attention common mistakes that many students make that I also make as well.” The facilitators also recognized the cognitive benefits associated with peer teaching and cooperative learning. In a
■
METHODOLOGY All of the written assignments for PIC, which included literature reflections, reflections on problem solving sessions, and the final reflection, were collected and compiled for qualitative analysis. All 14 facilitators enrolled in PIC completed a midsemester survey, included in the Supporting Information, which contained Likert scale statements and open-ended response options aimed to gauge facilitators’ perceptions of the experience and collect suggestions for improvements. Students in the organic chemistry lecture course were given a separate midsemester survey, which included Likert scale statements and the option for open-ended responses. The response rate for this survey was 72%. For the purpose of this study, from the student survey, only responses to the statement “The facilitators have been helpful during problem solving sessions” were evaluated, as it was the only question on the student survey that asked about the facilitators explicitly. Openended responses for both of these surveys were collected and compiled for qualitative analysis. Throughout the semester, field notes were collected by one of the authors during all problem solving sessions in lecture as well as all PIC class sessions. To address our research question, we used a general inductive approach for qualitative data analysis.21 Throughout the duration of PIC, we read and reviewed all of the written data several times and developed a preliminary list of codes made up of general themes and categories related to the research question. After PIC was over, both authors read through a matching subsample of the data and coded any statements related to the research question using HyperRESEARCH computer software. Individually, we started with the preliminary list of codes, developed more specific codes, and added any missing and noteworthy themes and categories. We met and compared codes, discussed similarities and differences, and developed a final agreed upon list of categories, specific codes, and rules for coding to ensure intercoder reliability. Lastly, we divided the remainder of the data evenly and coded it using the final agreed upon coding scheme.
■
OUTCOMES OF THE EXPERIENCE FOR UNDERGRADUATE FACILITATORS Here, we summarize the results of our qualitative analysis and provide specific examples of how the facilitators described benefits of their experience. We found that facilitators experience cognitive benefits, including deeper engagement with organic chemistry, awareness of learning strategies and metacognition, as well as personal, and professional benefits, including communication and interpersonal skills, teaching C
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
reading response, one facilitator commented “students who have to teach their peers not only obtain the knowledge necessary but also gain a deeper understanding of it by ensuring that they are able to take the concepts and describe them in their own words.” Another facilitator said, “The entire course reinforced the concept that you can only truly gauge how well you know the material once you try to teach it to someone else.” The facilitators also recognized the value of cooperative learning and believed it to be more effective and more engaging than traditional lecturing. “This experience has made me realize the value in working with others to learn. It’s more than working together, but discussing ideas and things you are not understanding with people who are at the same place in their learning is so beneficial.” Overall, the experience helped facilitators develop metacognitive skills, learning strategies, and self-awareness, which have a positive impact on student learning.22
The facilitators explicitly described their use of questions in their reflections throughout the course, and they also demonstrated an understanding of why this is an effective strategy for working with students, and how it improves future learning. For example, “As a facilitator, I feel that I can help the students by constantly asking them questions that help relate the finite and specific arrow pushing back to the big picture principles to help guide their thinking. I feel like this is really important, especially for Organic II, because the volume of material is too much to memorize, and understanding principles and trends becomes important for solving problems.” “After I asked some leading questions, the students would figure out the next step. I think the thing they most need to learn right now is how to ask these questions to themselves and transfer concepts from problem to problem.” The facilitators were aware or became aware that students will try to memorize the course content. During observations of the facilitators in action, we saw even that when a student got a question right, a facilitator would often ask them to explain their reasoning and their answer: “My other plan is to ask the students who are doing very well to explain their problemsolving strategies to check if they’re using important concepts or if they’re relying on rote memorization.” The facilitators demonstrated close attention to student understanding of course material in terms of both student growth and struggles students were having. In their discussion posts about the problem solving sessions, they made general comments such as “Now a lot of the students explain their mechanisms well, and they generally seem to understand the principles behind the reactions they’re studying.” They also made specific comments about student understanding such as, “[A student] seemed to have a very good knowledge of the reagents that were going to be used for synthesis. [They] knew exactly what the reagents were, but [their] grasp was still limited. [They] could fire off the name of a reagent when given a pointed question like ‘What reagent can be used to do antiMarkovnikov addition of water?’...However, [they were] unable to independently put reagents together to get from a starting [molecule] to a final product.” When students in the lecture course were asked about the facilitators, they made many positive comments about the facilitators’ abilities, dedication, and assistance with problemsolving strategies. Of the students that completed a midsemester survey administered to the large lecture course, 84.4% agreed or strongly agreed “the facilitators have been helpful during problem solving sessions.” Students wrote, “they allow us to think before they guide us” and “whenever I come across a question, the facilitators don’t hesitate to help. But rather than give me the answer, they ask me helpful questions that lead me to the answer.” The students noted the facilitators’ use of questioning and focus on mechanistic reasoning, as demonstrated in the following responses: “The facilitators are very good at leading me to the answer rather than telling me outright. They help me along the way, but ultimately I’m the one who comes up with the mechanism. I appreciate that.” “The facilitators are helpful because they do not just tell you the answer or give you a hint, they make you explain your thinking and reasoning behind the problem. They make sure you know why the reaction mechanism works the way it does.”
Personal and Professional Benefits
On a Likert scale, all of the facilitators agreed or strongly agreed that the experience was valuable for their personal and professional development. They were considered authority figures in the classroom, which boosted their confidence and helped them to develop a sense of leadership. They described feeling that the lecture students expected a lot of them, and this sense of responsibility encouraged them to come to problem solving sessions well prepared. Communication and Interpersonal Skills. Working with each other and with students in the lecture during problem solving sessions improved facilitators’ interpersonal skills throughout the semester: “This [experience] has definitely taught me how to better interact with and lead my peers.” Consistent practice talking through material with students at different levels of understanding improved their communication skills: “I think that my communication skills definitely have gotten better because at the beginning of the semester I was nervous and I tripped over my words a lot and found that I couldn’t figure out the right way to put what I was trying to say. I realized that at the end of the semester I was talking more freely and didn’t really have to think so much about what I was trying to say, I just said it.” They saw this skill development as valuable for their future careers: “[The experience] has improved my communication as a whole, which is very important to me since I want to enter medicine and communication is vital for success as a doctor.” They also described having developed more meaningful relationships with the instructor and with each other. Teaching Skills. On a Likert scale, all of the facilitators agreed or strongly agreed that PIC was valuable for their training as a facilitator for organic chemistry. Facilitators related information from the readings to strategies that they could apply during problem solving sessions. Activities such as mock facilitation sessions, writing problems, solving problems, and writing questions to ask students helped the facilitators to practice and refine their teaching approaches while receiving valuable feedback from the instructor and other facilitators. Discussions among facilitators provided opportunities to compare student progress and concerns, ask questions, and share suggestions for working with students productively. A facilitator comment demonstrates the value of in-class discussions: “I think listening to others’ experiences gave me tips on what to look out for or what kinds of questions I could consider asking when interacting with students.” D
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
Figure 1. Visual representation of the feedback system created by the Pedagogy course and the use of facilitators for problem solving sessions.
Ferguson and Bodner,8 “This paper has given me two strategies that I’m going to try applying tomorrow during problem solving.” A few facilitators even mentioned the value in reading literature in terms of preparing for standardized tests such as the MCAT. In their reflections, the facilitators demonstrated a new appreciation and understanding of teaching at the undergraduate level. “[The experience] helped me to view teaching under a different lens. I look at teaching as a more in-depth science and skill and I realize that it takes a lot of effort, trial and error, and patience to become a great teacher.” They were also able to articulate the difference between “knowing content” and “teaching.” “After facilitating I have realized that being able to master the material doesn’t necessarily allow for someone to be a good teacher.” Some comments displayed an appreciation for and a sensitivity to how difficult teaching can be, particularly when courses are large. They recognized the challenges that come along with incorporating active learning into a large undergraduate course. One facilitator commented they “definitely have a heightened respect for [their] professors now. Being able to see what you guys are feeling and thinking makes me realize that you all are trying to teach us in the most effective ways possible and make sure that we know course material, not just trying to make a course extremely hard.” Understanding the perspective of a course instructor may “[cause a student] not to be so quick to judge how a professor teaches.” The facilitators repeatedly mentioned how the experience has reinforced their personal ideas about the value of active learning approaches. “I believe more courses should take an active learning approach, in which a portion of the semester’s lectures are solely dedicated to problem solving that opens up opportunities to work with your peers.” One student even suggested the instructor share the benefits of active learning with the larger class: “...students may or may not see better grades, but they will leave the class with a better understanding of organic chemistry, and that will help them in future classes.”
The following statements from facilitator reflections demonstrate they perceived growth in their teaching abilities throughout the experience. “I did learn how to better follow students’ thought processes when they’re working on problems. This was most helpful when students had incorrect answers that incorporated some correct ideas. In these cases, I asked them to explain why the correct parts were correct, and then asked questions to help them figure out why the incorrect parts were incorrect.” “This course made me see a lot of ways I could improve in instructing students rather than just telling them the answer. It is a hard thing to really guide a student and say the right things at the right time. It is even harder when the groups get larger. I think I’ve seen a lot of self-improvement in my facilitating over the course of this semester.” Informed Ideas About Science Education. PIC exposed the facilitators to a variety of education literature and discussions around education research. Many of the facilitators did not expect to read literature in preparation for facilitation, but they appreciated the opportunity and learned from it. Thirteen of the 14 facilitators in PIC agreed or strongly agreed that they better understand research and theories related to teaching and learning. As science majors, it is unlikely they would have been exposed to this literature otherwise, and for most of them, this was their first introduction to education research. One facilitator wrote in the final reflection, “I didn’t realize there was research about how to teach others before I took this class, so this has helped me to understand how people approach education research.” Throughout the course, their reflections on the readings demonstrated an ability to summarize key themes, pull out relevant data, analyze methodology, critique findings, and incorporate education research jargon such as “pedagogy,” “meta-analysis,” and “phenomenography” into their vocabulary. Some readings provided them with specific strategies to approach problem solving that they applied when working with students. One facilitator said explicitly in his reflection on the paper by E
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
■
Enjoyment and Interest in Teaching. Finally, every facilitator mentioned in some way they enjoyed the experience. They “had a great time during our discussions,” “enjoyed helping other students,” and after the experience, they “enjoy [organic chemistry] even more.” These positive experiences with organic chemistry will help with retention and cultivate a sense of belonging in STEM. Additionally, the positive experience created a heightened interest in teaching for several of the facilitators. “ [The experience] validated my interest of wanting to become a TA for a class.” Nine of the 14 facilitators enrolled in PIC in Spring 2016 volunteered to facilitate again in the following semester. One facilitator wrote, “I feel that [the course] will have a more lasting impact on me than any other class I’ve taken at [this University].”
■
Article
CONCLUSION We have described a course, Pedagogy and Instruction in Chemistry (PIC), to prepare undergraduate facilitators for problem solving sessions in organic chemistry, as well as highlighted outcomes of the facilitator experience. PIC provided facilitators with teaching skills, reinforced content knowledge, developed professional skills, enhanced metacognitive abilities, reinforced the benefits of active learning, and exposed facilitators to educational literature. Furthermore, it created a forum for the facilitators to give feedback to each other and to the course instructor about the students in the large lecture organic chemistry course. The facilitators’ positive experiences might potentially help with retention and cultivate a sense of belonging in STEM, which we see as especially important for our female facilitators. These findings are of value to those interested in using undergraduates to facilitate active learning in chemistry courses, developing courses to prepare these facilitators, and evaluating the outcomes of this experience.
DISCUSSION
Our first and foremost goal for Pedagogy and Instruction in Chemistry was to equip facilitators with content knowledge and teaching skills to help them productively work with students during problem solving sessions in introductory organic chemistry. To do this effectively, we felt it was important to imbue in them an appreciation and an understanding of how and why students struggle in organic chemistry. On the basis of previous literature, we expected to see evidence that the facilitator experience improved professional skills, created a supportive community, and provided opportunities for deeper understanding of the course material.7,8,10,11 Our data support all of these claims and reveals additional benefits of the experience. Comments from the facilitators and lecture students in surveys and the course assignments, as well as observations of the facilitators in action, demonstrate that we achieved our goal of providing the facilitators with the skills and content knowledge to work with undergraduates during problem solving sessions. Beyond these goals, the facilitators also developed metacognitive skills through discussions as well as reflecting on literature and working with students. The facilitators began to evaluate how they learn in their other courses and how they may most effectively learn course content. We see the facilitators forming the nexus of a feedback system (Figure 1). In a typical large lecture course, interactions between instructor and students are limited. However, using facilitators allows for more interactions with students and therefore more feedback for both instructor and students. The facilitators were able to provide valuable input to the course instructor about where students were struggling and offer suggestions on what the course instructor could do to become more effective in the classroom. The increase in interactions and connections also likely plays a role in fostering sense of belonging and combatting the negative perceptions that are common for students in introductory organic chemistry courses. The Fall 2016 version of the course was run in the same manner as the described course, as we were happy with the overall results from the prior Spring semester. While the data analysis and coding described above were not done, qualitative observations suggest that the enrolled students did gain professional skills, a better learning of organic chemistry, and many of them developed the metacognitive skills described above.
■
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
S Supporting Information *
The Supporting Information is available on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636. Facilitator midsemester survey (PDF) Course syllabus including assignments and literature references (PDF)
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
Lee A. Friedman: 0000-0003-1906-3960 Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to acknowledge financial support from an Elevate Fellowship from the Teaching and Learning Transformation Center at the University of Maryland, College Park. We would also like to thank Gili Marbach-Ad and Patty Shields for helpful discussions.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Anderson, T. L.; Bodner, G. M. What can we do about ‘Parker?’ A case study of a good student who didn’t ‘get’ organic chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2008, 9 (2), 93−101. (2) Steiner, R.; Sullivan, J. (1984). Variables correlating with student success in organic chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 1984, 61 (12), 1072− 1074. (3) Barr, D. A.; Matsui, J.; Wanat, S. F.; Gonzalez, M. E. Chemistry courses as the turning point for premedical students. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 2010, 15 (1), 45−54. (4) Paulson, D. R. Active learning and cooperative learning in the organic chemistry lecture class. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (8), 1136− 1140. (5) Bradley, A. Z.; Ulrich, S. M.; Jones, M., Jr.; Jones, S. M. Teaching the Sophomore Organic Course without a Lecture. Are you crazy? J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 514−519. (6) Browne, L. M.; Blackburn, E. V. Teaching introductory organic chemistry: a problem-solving and collaborative-learning approach. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (8), 1104−1107.
F
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
(7) Tien, L. T.; Roth, V.; Kampmeier, J. A. Implementation of a peerled team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39 (7), 606−632. (8) Amaral, K. E.; Vala, M. What teaching teaches: Mentoring and the performance gains of mentors. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86 (5), 630− 633. (9) Robert, J.; Lewis, S. E.; Oueini, R.; Mapugay, A. Coordinated Implementation and Evaluation of Flipped Classes and Peer-Led Team Learning in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 1993− 1998. (10) Micari, M.; Streitwieser, B.; Light, G. Undergraduates Leading Undergraduates: Peer Facilitation in a Science Workshop Program. Innovative Higher Educ. 2005, 30 (4), 269−288. (11) Ramaswamy, S.; Harris, I.; Tschirner, U. Student Peer Teaching: An Innovative Approach to Instruction in Science and Engineering Education. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2001, 10 (2), 165−171. (12) Otero, V.; Pollock, S.; Finkelstein, N. A physics department’s role in preparing physics teachers: The Colorado learning assistant model. Am. J. Phys. 2010, 78 (11), 1218−1224. (13) Tien, L. T.; Roth, V.; Kampmeier, J. A. A Course to Prepare Peer Leaders to Implement a Student-Assisted Learning Method. J. Chem. Educ. 2004, 81 (9), 1313−1321. (14) Jones-Wilson, T. M. Teaching Problem-Solving Skills without Sacrificing Course Content: Marrying Traditional Lecture and Active Learning in an Organic Chemistry Class. J. Col. Sci. Teach. 2005, 35 (1), 42−46. (15) Luft, J. A.; Kurdziel, J. P.; Roehrig, G. H.; Turner, J. Growing a garden without water: Graduate teaching assistants in an introductory science laboratories at a doctoral/research university. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2004, 41, 211−233. (16) Freeman, S.; Eddy, S. L.; McDonough, M.; Smith, M. K.; Okoroafor, N.; Jordt, H.; Wenderoth, M. P. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2014, 111 (23), 8410−8415. (17) Kruger, J.; Dunning, D. Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments. J. Personal. Soc. Psych. 1999, 77, 1121−1134. (18) Angawi, R. F. Using a Problem Solving-Cooperative Learning Approach To Improve Students' Skills for Interpreting 1H NMR Spectra of Unknown Compounds in an Organic Spectroscopy Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2014, 91 (6), 823−829. (19) Bhattacharyya, G.; Bodner, G. M. It Gets Me to the Product: How Students Propose Organic Mechanisms. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 1402−1407. (20) Ferguson, R.; Bodner, G. M. Making sense of the arrow-pushing formalism among chemistry majors enrolled in organic chemistry. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2008, 9, 102−113. (21) Thomas, D. R. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. Am. J. Eval. 2006, 27 (2), 237−246. (22) Cook, E.; Kennedy, E.; McGuire, S. Y. Effect of teaching metacognitive learning strategies on performance in general chemistry courses. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (8), 961−967.
G
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00636 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
