In the Classroom
Introducing Second-Year Chemistry Students to Research Work through Mini-Projects Jeffrey G. Dunn and David N. Phillips School of Applied Chemistry, Curtin University of Technology, P. O. Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, Australia, 6845
Various authors have described innovative changes to experimental design in undergraduate chemistry courses that involve some form of project-type work. Merritt et al. (1) changed the emphasis in their general chemistry laboratory classes to involve students in the planning of exercises. In their approach, students are allocated specific projects and work in groups of 14 to 16; the primary emphases are on the interactive nature of laboratory research and an insight into the type of work undertaken by chemists. They found that this approach gave students both a sense of ownership of the project and improved mastery of the principles by talking to each other. Demczylo et al. (2) have used applied research projects in their analytical chemistry undergraduate course. Experiments such as EDTA titrations, carried out routinely in weekly large-group situations, are revisited by the students in smaller groups, where students derive a greater appreciation of the experiments when they are studied in far greater detail. Kirk and Hanna (3) have developed an interdisciplinary program in which student groups are introduced to research skills in a formalized classroom setting. The projects given to students are based directly on the experiences of the faculty staff. Each group of students studies one aspect of an overall project, and continuity is achieved by bringing the groups together at weekly research group meetings. More recently, Juhl (4) has described an applied and cooperative teaching methodology: students utilize group-project teaching ideas, and local industry is involved in the educational process. Students are also assigned oral presentations and written reports. The benefits gained from such group participation were the fresh ideas gained in a team environment; on the other hand, some students allowed their peers to carry out all the work. The Bachelor of Applied Chemistry degree course in the School of Applied Chemistry at Curtin University of Technology is a 3-year course that students enter from high school. The main prerequisites are Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics and English. The inorganic chemistry staff of the School have previously described units in the course to systematically help students develop a range of skills and techniques that will assist them in experimental program design and planning, an ability that they will use frequently when they gain employment or proceed into higher degree programs (5, 6 ). Over the past ten years we have introduced students to socalled “mini-projects” in the second semester of second year. Here they gain their first experience studying a chemistrybased problem before undertaking a major chemistry project in the third year (similar to that described by Chan and Lee [7 ] and Belliveau and O’Leary [8]). Student Program In the mini-projects students work in small groups for 5 hours per week over a period of 6 weeks. This represents a deliberate sacrifice of standard laboratory exercises in favor 866
of giving students an introductory experience of both the circumstances they will encounter with project work and group interactions when they gain employment. The class is divided into groups of 3 students, and each group is given a different project. Students are categorized by the marks they obtained in their first-semester Analytical Chemistry unit (5), and each group is deliberately structured to include students of a range of ability. The mini-project title and a brief summary of its aims is handed to each group in the first week of semester. The mini-projects consist of either industrially based problems, improving current experiments in the second-year Analytical Chemistry unit (5), or developing new experiments for future cohorts in Inorganic/Analytical Chemistry units. Typical examples of the topics issued to students, together with their aims, are shown in Table 1. Staff of the School have close research affiliations with local industry. The industrially based mini-projects are a result of dialogue between the staff and the chief chemists in local industry. Every attempt is made to introduce new miniprojects each year and, as a result, approximately 80% are in this category. Mini-projects used to develop new exercises might be pursued for two or three years until optimum experimental conditions are achieved. Some mini-projects such as The Fire Assay of Gold are retained each year; they are examples of experiments that are difficult to implement as larger class exercises. The “Student Outline” for this unit contains the statement that “The only techniques to be used during this work are those you have already met during your course, and no other more advanced techniques should be attempted.” Under special circumstances samples requiring techniques such as X-ray diffraction, thermogravimetry, and differential thermal analysis will be run for the students by a technician. The techniques already met to this point by students in Analytical Chemistry and Instrumental Analysis units of the course are listed below. Titrimetry, including acid–base, redox, and EDTA titrations Gravimetry Atomic absorption spectrophotometry using air/acetylene flame Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy UV-visible spectrophotometry Gas–liquid chromatography Preparative inorganic chemistry
Time is set aside in the first week for sufficient literature searching and group discussion so that the experimental program may satisfactorily commence in the second week. Each group reports back to the class supervisor at the end of the first week to ensure they have achieved this goal. Some advice may be given by the supervisor at this point if considered necessary. The next four weeks are spent on the experimental program. Students are taught professional practice by being ex-
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 75 No. 7 July 1998 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
In the Classroom
pected to enter their results directly in a duplicate book and submit the duplicate sheet on completion of each week. In standard weekly laboratory experiments, students are provided with the required reagents. In these mini-projects students are expected to prepare all their own reagents, including standardizing any appropriate solutions. This is good practice for what they will encounter in their future employment. The scientific content and degree of complexity of these mini-projects is illustrated by considering The Development of Zirconia-Based Pigments in some detail. An industrial company, Australian Fused Materials (AFM), produces zirconia at its plant near Perth, and the company was investigating the manufacture of zircon pigments from its zirconia. These pigments are prepared by heating a finely divided mixture of zirconia, silica, sodium chloride, and sodium fluoride with an appropriate coloring agent. Praseodymium(IV) oxide, vanadium(V) oxide, and iron(III) oxide produce yellow, blue, and pink pigments respectively. Excess sodium ion is then leached from the stain. In this mini-project the students prepared a series of pigments using a range of color additives and temperatures and investigated the effect of pH on the
leaching of sodium. Each student took responsibility for one color range. In the first week of the experimental program the various ground mixes were prepared. These were fired in the second week, and the leaching was carried out during the third week. The fourth week was devoted to the determination of sodium by atomic absorption spectrophotometry, for which the students prepared their own standard solutions. Samples of the leached pigments were sent to the company for a color evaluation using a method developed by the company. The results of the color evaluation were immediately forwarded to the students for incorporation in their report. The findings of the mini-project were of great value to the company. Each group then has two weeks in which to submit a written report, which is a joint effort from the group, further encouraging interactive participation. Guidelines are given for the structure of the report, including its categorization and correct format for the literature cited. Common faults found in project reports are outlined for the students. Reports on the industrially related projects are sent to the appropriate company.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 75 No. 7 July 1998 • Journal of Chemical Education
867
In the Classroom
In the final week each group makes an oral presentation to the whole class in the presence of the class supervisor. Stress is placed on professional presentations including the display of overhead transparencies, samples, etc. Three-quarters of the assessment is based on a self- and peer-assessment system by the students within each group. They are required not only to provide marks but also to give a written explanation of the reasons for those marks. Students hand in their marks and comments independently. The contribution of the class supervisor represents the other onequarter of the final assessment in the form of an equal mark for the report for each student.
“It was fun doing something different for a change. It prepared us well for our third year project. “The mini-project was very interesting. The oral presentation was excellent as it gave me much more confidence in my communication skills.”
Discussion
“I thought that everyone in the group contributed equally to the success of the project.” “She was fun to work with, showed responsibility and often thought of alternative ways to overcome problems.” “A good worker, well organised and open to any suggestions.” “I played my part well, but overall it was a team effort.”
These mini-projects are thoroughly enjoyed by the vast majority of students. In a typical class of 18, only one will either not enjoy or encounter difficulty with this approach. The mini-projects provide an alternative experience for students to complement the standard laboratory exercises encountered in other sections of the course. They introduce students to how to work in group situations while also providing insight into the type of work they will meet in their future employment (as also described by Merritt et al. [1]). Juhl (4) cites the downside of such project work as some students allowing their peers to carry out all the work. We have continued our policy of categorizing the groups as previously described. While the most able student often acts as a team leader, the moderate student tends to rise to the occasion. Our experiences have indicated that the self and peer assessment provides a driving force for all three students in the group to participate reasonably equitably in the project. Self and peer assessment allows the students to act in an adult and professional manner, and our experience indicates that they do show such a mature approach. There are safeguards in the system. In the event of one student being given particularly low marks, the other two students would be further interrogated to justify their reasons. The class supervisor is also very aware of the weekly input from all students. The assessment for the mini-project contributes 40% to the overall laboratory grade. The time and effort expected of staff is, on average, commensurate with that normally expected for standard laboratory exercises. Although there is no marking to be carried out while the experimental program is in progress, a heavy workload is associated with submission of the reports. The mini-projects provide an alternative experience for students to complement the standard laboratory exercises encountered in other sections of the course. Student Comments Typical comments made by the vast majority of students on their perception of the mini-project are: “A pleasant change from set laboratory work. It makes for a more interesting laboratory and gives an insight to investigative work.” “The mini-project allowed us to show free thinking ability, learn problem solving techniques and gain an insight to working in a team.” “Learning to work in a team is helpful preparation for when we commence in the workforce.” 868
Very occasionally we get a comment such as: “There needs to be more time for the background preparation and the option for students to determine their own project.” “A choice in the project allocated would have made it better.” Comments typical of their views on the self- and peer assessments system are:
Again, we get the occasional comment such as: “Although he did what was asked of him, his attitude and effort lacked a little.” “She was slightly lost at the beginning of the project in trying to understand what was required to fulfill the project.” The need for improved written and oral communication skills by chemistry students has been outlined by many authors (9–12). We agree with Juhl (4) that the project approach provides the students with an excellent opportunity to write a formal report. We include abstract, introduction, experimental, results and discussion, conclusions, references, and appendixes as basic necessities of this report. This will be the type of report required for their major final-year project, future employers, and for publication in professional journals. The inclusion of oral presentations in this unit some years ago arose directly from student requests. Each of our students gives a major oral presentation on a “consumer product” in a unit of the third year of the course. Their appreciation of this segment led to a virtual “demand” that more such presentations be allocated in the course. The mini-project seemed to be the ideal vehicle for meeting their wishes. Conclusions The mini-project concept provides an alternative teaching practice to routine weekly laboratory exercises, allowing students to experience a group working circumstance. It also helps prepare them for third-year and postgraduate projects and gives a taste of what chemists actually do in the workplace. The self and peer assessment gives them the opportunity to act in a professional and responsible manner and motivates the average students. Written and oral presentation skills are enhanced. Our students enjoy this activity, and it is highly commended by the School of Applied Chemistry’s Advisory Board, which primarily comprises industrial chemists. Literature Cited 1. Merritt, M. V.; Schneider, M. J.; Darlington, J. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1993, 70, 660–662. 2. Demczylo, V.; Martinez, J.; Rivero, A.; Scoseria, E.; Serra, J. L. J. Chem. Educ. 1990, 67, 948–950.
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 75 No. 7 July 1998 • JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu
In the Classroom 3. Kirk, L. L.; Hanna, L. F. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 839–841. 4. Juhl, L. J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 72–77. 5. Dunn, J. G.; Mullings, L. R.; Phillips, D. N. J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 220–221. 6. Dunn, J. G.; Phillips, D. N.; van Bronswijk, W. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 1186–1188.
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
Chan, W. H.; Lee, A. W. M. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 647–649. Belliveau, J. F.; O’Leary, G. P. J. Chem. Educ. 1983, 60, 670–671. Werner, T. C. J. Chem. Educ. 1986, 73, 140–141. Van Orden, N. J. Chem. Educ. 1987, 64, 506–507. Bailey, R. A.; Geisier, C. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 150–152. Beall, H. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 148–149.
JChemEd.chem.wisc.edu • Vol. 75 No. 7 July 1998 • Journal of Chemical Education
869
