Introduction to Research: A New Course for First-Year Undergraduate

Article Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Introduction to Research: A New Course for First-Year Undergraduate Students Wei Chen* Chemistry Department, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts 01075, United States

Downloaded via UNIV OF THE SUNSHINE COAST on June 26, 2018 at 17:08:01 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

S Supporting Information *

ABSTRACT: Introduction to Research is a 4-credit elective course designed for first-year undergraduate students who have a strong interest in the chemical sciences and scientific research. The rich yet accessible field of gold nanoparticles was the theme connecting a multifaceted teaching/learning experience. In the first unit, students were introduced to the various research topics through searching, reading, discussing, presenting, and writing about primary literature. In the second unit, students carried out synthesis and characterization of spherical gold nanoparticles using prescribed protocols to gain some general knowledge and hands-on skills. Writing a full laboratory report on the laboratory module helped students develop intellectual appreciation of the discipline and greatly enhanced their scientific writing skills. In the last unit, each student pair carried out one research-style project in order to gain a more comprehensive experience with the complex nature of scientific inquiry. Students gained competency and confidence through working with a teammate; coming up with a research idea; designing experiments; writing a proposal; conducting experimental work; learning laboratory safety; collecting, managing, and analyzing data; problemsolving; revising experimental design; and presenting research findings to the class. To jump-start their research career on campus, each student arranged meetings with the instructor and another chemistry faculty followed by a presentation on their research topics. This course has been offered twice, in the spring semesters of 2016 and 2017. Course evaluations and postcourse assessment indicated positive short- and intermediate-term student outcomes. KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, Curriculum, Undergraduate Research, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning, Nanotechnology

■

attention in the life and physical science communities.2−5 CURE has the potential to reach a large number of undergraduate students, and to support and retain undergraduates, especially women and underrepresented minority students, in STEM.2−4 CURE should have the following five dimensions: use of scientific practices, discovery, broadly relevant or important work, collaboration, and iteration.3 In CURE, students apply scientific practices to investigate collaboratively research topics that are of interest to the broader scientific community with outcomes that are unknown to the students and the instructor(s) alike.3,6 There are some excellent examples of CUREs in chemistry.7−11 In one of the reports, CURE projects were incorporated into the laboratory components of both Quantitative Analysis and Instrumental Analysis courses.8 For General Chemistry I, Winkelmann et al. described replacing 12 one-week “cookbook” experiments with four “research-inspired” modules for the laboratory component;9 Tomasik et al. reported the design, implementation, and evaluation of one research-based experiment.10 For General Chemistry II, implementing a research module in the areas of

INTRODUCTION Independent research is an essential component of undergraduate science education.1 Formalizing research-skill training in a course setting is beneficial to not only students, but also faculty,1 especially at primary undergraduate institutions where teaching and other responsibilities leave scant time for faculty to engage in one-on-one training of beginning undergraduate researchers. Mount Holyoke College has a culture of encouraging science students to start research early, typically at the end of their first year or during their sophomore year, which inevitably puts further demand on faculty time and resources to train younger students in their research laboratories. Offering a full course on introducing research methods to prospective first-year students is a logical and attractive solution. Furthermore, we have seen a recent decline in the number of chemistry majors. Another potential outcome of the course is to attract and recruit more chemistry majors early in their undergraduate career by making chemistry relevant and interesting and providing an engaging learning environment for cohort-building among a small group of firstyear students. The course that we were interested in implementing is an example of course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE), which has recently drawn a significant amount of © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Received: February 11, 2018 Revised: May 22, 2018

A

DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00102 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX

Journal of Chemical Education

Article

Table 1. Spring 2017 Course Calendar Week (Month/ Day) 1 (1/26) 2 (2/2) 3 (2/9) 4 (2/16) 5 (2/23) 6 (3/2) 7 (3/9)

Topics Introduction; Initial survey; Introduction to AuNPs; Library tour; How to conduct literature search Introduction to AuNPs (cont); Lab syllabus and lab notebook; Discussion of the review article Feedback on the first summary; Instruction for the second summary; Spherical AuNPs: procedure, synthesis, and discussion Share summary topics; Clarifying some basic concepts

8 (3/23)

Spherical AuNPs: characterization and discussion Share summary topics (cont); Final project: idea sharing Final project: topic selection; Guide to proposal; Faculty interview tips Final project: reality check (procedure, reagents, set up, etc.)

9 (3/30) 10 (4/6) 11 (4/13) 12 (4/20) 13 (4/27)

Final project (in lab) Final project (in lab); TEM sample prep: 3−4 Faculty research presentation Final project (data analysis) Final project presentation; Final survey; Course evaluation

Preclass Readings

Assignments

Tutorial AuNPs

Tutorial AuNPs

Guides to search (3); Guides to read (2); Review article General instructions; Article and its supplemental

Two-page summary on two aspects of the review Prelab

At least two references related to the summary

Two-page, single-spaced summary on a selected topic with two graphs and at least two new references Guide to writing report Lab report introduction Guide to constructing figures Lab report draft Independent Lab report Independent Independent Independent Independent Independent Independent

environmental or solid-state chemistry in the final weeks of the course was described by Clark et al.11 There are a number of other published articles on undergraduate courses that formally introduce students to research skills.12−19 Some described exposing first-year students to the chemical literature and research methodologies in their general chemistry courses.12,14 Most of the courses focused on chemical literature12 as well as writing and communication skills.15 Typically, they were standalone, one- or two-credit seminar courses offered to sophomores, juniors, and seniors prior to or during their undergraduate research.12,15−18 To the best of our knowledge, there is no existing report of a full course on introducing research methods to first-year undergraduate students. We believe that designing and teaching such a course will bring significant positive outcomes to undergraduate chemical education at Mount Holyoke College and other institutions. During the course design, we focused on developing student skills highlighted in the most recently published American Chemical Society (ACS) guidelines for bachelor’s degree programs: problem-solving skills, chemical literature and information management skills, laboratory safety skills, communication skills, and team building skills.20 Gold nanoparticles21 were chosen as the theme for the course since the field is contemporary, relevant, interdisciplinary, and most importantly accessible to first-year science students. The selection of the topic was also in consideration of the new ACS requirement for macromolecular and nanomaterials systems content to be included in bachelor’s degree programs.20

Proposal for final project; Project peer reviews (due 3/27) Independent Independent Independent Independent Independent

take the course. All interested students were asked to complete a questionnaire (Supporting Information). The course instructor evaluated each applicant and made admission decisions. Each time, 14−16 students applied, all were accepted, and 12 of them matriculated.

■

COURSE CONTENT AND TEACHING PEDAGOGIES The course was designed with the following learning goals in mind: performing literature searches, reading literature articles, reproducing literature procedures, practicing laboratory safety, carrying out an independent project, giving scientific presentations, and writing scientific reports, as specified in the course syllabus (Supporting Information). Classes met in a 3 h block each week due to the heavy laboratory component during parts of the semester. The content was broken down into three units: (1) learning about gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), (2) synthesizing and characterizing AuNPs following literature procedures, and (3) carrying out an independent project related to AuNPs. The course calendar is given in Table 1. Unit 1. Introduction to the Field: Literature Search and Reading, Basic Writing and Presentation Skills

This unit spanned the first 4 weeks with students learning how to conduct literature searches, how to read literature articles, how to carry out scientific discussions with peers and with the instructor, and how to write short scientific articles. This is the most challenging unit for students because it involves acquiring many new research skills and learning a new field that is exceptionally broad. Initial success hinges heavily on the guidance and support from the instructor. Many “how-to” guides (Supporting Information) were written or adapted from existing resources22,23 to support student learning. Implementing a “build-up” process for all the challenging skills (reading, writing, and presenting) was also helpful. For example, the first reading assignment was a tutorial on AuNPs,24 which was a feasible starting point for students at the beginning of the course. The knowledge gained from the tutorial served as a solid foundation for reading primary literature articles and

■

COURSE ENROLLMENT METHOD The course has been offered twice thus far, during the spring semesters of 2016 and 2017. To ensure initial success, the course was capped at 14 students and targeted first-year students who were motivated and had adequate preparation in chemistry and mathematics. Students were required to have taken General Chemistry I and Calculus I, and to be concurrently enrolled in General Chemistry II. General Chemistry I instructors identified and encouraged prospective students (15−20% or ∼30 students) in their class sections to B



Article

the instructor. It was helpful for the instructor to give examples of feasible topics during class discussions in Unit 1 and to build in an “idea sharing” session in Unit 2. Toward the end of Unit 2, all students settled on a project, and some of them had to abandon their own for their partner’s. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) was added to the characterization techniques for the final projects to provide visual confirmation of products and to enhance students’ research experience. It was a rewarding experience for first-year students to work with such a high-tech and sophisticated instrument and to be able to “see” the AuNPs that they synthesized. In this unit, students had the opportunity to learn how to document and manage a significant amount of information related to their project including that from literature articles, proposed and revised procedures, experimental results (data, spectra, images, videos, etc.), calculations, and analyses. To allow students more time for TEM work and to assist them with developing future independent research projects in faculty laboratories, a module of students interviewing faculty members about their research was built into the unit. Each student was asked to interview the instructor and another chemistry faculty member about their research and give a two-slide presentation to the class. This required a different set of skills and took them outside of their comfort zone. The instructor provided guidance on how to identify and set up an appointment with a faculty member of interest, how to prepare for an interview, and how to follow up postinterview. After the initial interview with the instructor, students received feedback prior to the second interview. This exercise was an important step to jump-start their undergraduate research career. This unit is the most challenging one for the instructor in terms of the time required for interviews by every student as well as the management of several teams working on different projects and progressing at different paces. During the second offering, two improvements were made to alleviate the demand on the instructor. First of all, starting the interview process 2 weeks earlier gave the instructor 3 weeks to meet the demand. Additionally, a “final project reality check” module (Table 1) was added during class time so that the student pairs and the instructor were in agreement. The instructor asked each student to independently provide detailed experimental procedures, a detailed list of needed apparati, supplies and reagents, and calculations in their proposal. Each student then reviewed their teammate’s proposal. Discrepancies in their experimental design and setup, including calculation errors, were identified by the instructor and the teammate during proposal reviews. Details for the final projects were then finalized during class time. This change not only improves efficiency and accuracy, but also promotes student−student and student−instructor collaborations. The increase in time demand is also offset somewhat by the fact that there is little lecture preparation for this unit. Overall, the instructor spent 2−3 more hours per week in this unit after the adjustments. The independent projects from both offerings are listed below. Spring 2016:

other tasks for the remainder of the semester. Last, it was important to have students direct their learning under the instructor’s guidance from the outset. During the first few weeks, class time consisted of group discussions based on preclass reading and writing assignments, individual students giving short, informal presentations of their findings to the class, and students compiling a list of difficult concepts for the instructor to clarify. Students persevered through Unit 1 because of their growing interests in gold nanoparticles through their own investigations and support from their peers and the instructor. No student withdrew from the course in either offering. Unit 2. A Prescribed Laboratory Module: Laboratory and Writing Skills

In this unit, students synthesized spherical AuNPs using the citrate-reduction method and conjugated them with bovine serum albumin (BSA) to enhance their stability following literature procedures.25 The experimental instruction for students and preparation information for instructor are provided in the Supporting Information. It is worth noting that safety was emphasized before and during laboratory sessions. For example, students were given safety training before starting laboratory work and were asked to construct an information table for all the reagents including their hazards as part of the prelaboratory assignment. Students worked in pairs for all laboratory exercises for both safety and team building purposes. In this unit, students learned how to transcribe literature procedures into step-by-step experimental protocols that they could follow in the laboratory. They also learned how to perform basic synthesis and characterization (UV−vis spectrophotometry and dynamic light scattering (DLS)) of gold nanoparticles. It was an exciting moment when they made AuNPs and observed the characteristic red color with the corresponding surface plasmon band at 520 nm after reading about them for weeks. This exercise also served as a foundation, from both intellectual and hands-on perspectives, for their independent projects, some of which derived from the prescribed exercise. The basic laboratory skills that students learned in this unit include complying with laboratory safety protocols, properly using laboratory notebook, following literature procedures, accurately using micropipettes, synthesizing AuNPs, operating UV−vis spectrophotometry in manual and automation modes, extracting and plotting spectra in Excel, applying Beer’s law, and operating a DLS instrument. Students also learned how to troubleshoot when their protocol did not generate the expected results and to find what went wrong in order to have a successful outcome. Another important component in this unit was writing a full laboratory report. It was a daunting task, but by dividing it into sections, providing feedback, and giving them the chance to make revisions, it became an achievable and productive experience. Unit 3. A Research-Style Project and Faculty Interviews: A Culminated Research Experience and Looking beyond the Course

For the final project, each student came up with a research idea from readings, discussions, and initial laboratory explorations. Students found a classmate with similar interests to team up with, consulted with the instructor for the project’s feasibility (cost, time, difficulty), wrote a proposal, carried out the project, and presented it to the class. Arriving on a research topic was a challenge, which many of them identified as one of their main concerns during their informal conversations with

• Silver Nitrate Induced Gold Nanostars via Green Tea Synthesis • Effect of pH on BSA-Conjugated Gold Nanoparticles • Ascorbic Acid Reduction Synthesis of Gold NanoparticlesExploring Effects of Concentration and Polyvinylpyrrolidone C



Article

• Detecting Low Concentrations of Acetone Using Citrate-Capped Gold Nanoparticles • Evaluating the Brust−Schiffrin Method for Gold Nanoparticle Synthesis • Gold NanoUrchins Spring 2017: • Synthesis of Gold Nanorods Using the Seed Growth Method • Stability of Gold Nanoparticles Conjugated with Lysozyme and Bovine Serum Albumin • Synthesis of Larger Gold Nanoparticles via Slow Addition of Additional Reagents • Effect of Impurities in Water on the Synthesis of Gold Nanoparticles • Effect of pH on Gold Nanoparticle Stability • Detection Using Immobilized Gold Nanoparticles in the Dry State Some of the projects were derivatives of the earlier module on citrate-reduction synthesis and conjugation with BSA, and others came from assigned and independent readings. The projects ranged from “research-inspired” to “research-based” except the synthesis of AuNPs using the Brust−Schiffrin method and the synthesis of gold nanorods. The instructor found them appropriate final projects for students to obtain hands-on experience after reading about them for a significant part of the semester and to add to the tool box of AuNPs synthesis methodologies. Since the instructor had no prior experience with them, the outcomes were unknown to the instructor, which fits the CURE criteria. “Effect of impurities in water on the synthesis of gold nanoparticles” is an example of a research-based project. This student pair became interested in investigating the effect of impurities in water on citratereduction synthesis of AuNPs after realizing the importance of keeping the system clean in the original synthesis. They compared the AuNPs synthesized in Nanopure, distilled, and tap water as shown in Figure 1. Their respective hydrodynamic

hydroquinone was explored as a weak reducing agent and a capping molecule after consulting relevant literature articles.26,27 Figure 2 shows TEM images of gold nanourchins

Figure 2. TEM images of gold nanourchins prepared using a seedgrowth method showing that particles grow in size and spikiness and become more uniform with increasing concentrations of hydroquinone (0.42, 1.4, and 2.8 mM, from left to right).

prepared with varying concentrations of hydroquinone. As the hydroquinone concentration increased, AuNPs became spikier and more uniform in size, which was confirmed by the DLS polydispersity index decreasing from 0.2 to 0.05, and the corresponding UV−vis spectra showed a red shift from 550 to 620 nm (not shown here). In guiding students through their independent project selections, the instructor focused heavily on project feasibility so that students were more likely to be rewarded with positive outcomes and increased confidence and interest in pursuing independent research. Eleven out of the 12 projects generated successful and meaningful outcomes. In the course evaluations (Supporting Information), the majority of the students singled out the independent project as their most rewarding part in the course.

■

COURSE ASSESSMENTS

Course Evaluations

Students particularly enjoyed learning about gold nanoparticles, learning useful skills for research and for high-level science courses, especially during the final independent project, and appreciated guidance from the instructor. From the 2016 class, some students felt overwhelmed at the beginning of the semester and wished they were given more extensive instructions. This was addressed when the course was offered the second time in 2017. Additional support was provided at the beginning of the semester to help alleviate students’ concerns and to boost their confidence. Overall, students were overwhelmingly positive about the course in their evaluations (Supporting Information).

Figure 1. AuNPs prepared using the citrate-reduction method in Nanopure, distilled, and tap water (from left to right): as synthesized (left image) and 1 week later (right image).

Student Outcomes

At Mount Holyoke, students declare their majors toward the middle of their fourth semester. Out of the 12 students enrolled in the inaugural class, five declared to pursue a chemistry major, five a biochemistry major, and two other STEM majors (mathematics and computer science). Out of the 10 (bio)chemistry majors, all have started independent research since taking the course. All indications point to similar positive outcomes with the second cohort of students (vide infra).

diameters were 34, 41, and 217 nm, as measured by DLS. Not surprisingly, impurities, likely salts, in tap water caused extensive aggregation and complete precipitation of AuNPs. The AuNPs prepared in distilled water were not as different from those made in Nanopure water. The increased particle size measured by DLS and some particle precipitation over time indicate that impurities in distilled water also cause aggregation of AuNPs although to a lesser extent. “Gold nanourchins” is an example of research-inspired project. This group of students were interested in making urchin-shaped AuNPs after learning about sea urchins in the Introductory Biology course. A seed-growth method was adopted, and

Postcourse Assessment

To quantify both short- and intermediate-term effects of the course on student intellectual growth in their undergraduate careers, a voluntary, anonymous assessment (Supporting Information) was sent to the 24 students who had taken the D



Article

indicating positive student experience and outcome. Even though the two sets of responses are statistically similar, the second group’s responses to learning goals are slightly more positive, likely due to the greater guidance that they received. Interestingly, the responses to the broader impact of the course are very similar between the two groups, independent of the extent of instructor support.

course in January 2018. This assessment was designed on the basis of the requirements that a CURE assessment should touch upon all five dimensions and report student learning gains and attitudes toward science.3 The existing chemistry assessment instruments28−31 were also consulted. This assessment focused on the course learning goals,32 immediate outcomes, such as course content knowledge, and longer-term outcomes, such as attitude toward research and chosen/ intended major.3 It consists of three sections: basic information including when the student took the course and what is the (intended) major, skills acquired in the course, and broader impact of the course. The responses are on a Likert scale with 1 strongly disagree, 2 disagree, 3 neutral, 4 agree, and 5 strongly agree. Students were given 3 weeks to complete the assessment. Sixteen students completed the assessment, 9 from the 2016 class who are currently juniors and 7 from the 2017 class who are sophomores. All indicated chemistry or biochemistry majors (an equal split) except two students choosing other STEM majors from the 2016 class. The average and standard deviation of all the responses to each question as well as the sectional and overall average and standard deviation by class are reported in Table 2.

■

a

FUTURE PLANS This course has received enthusiastic support from the Chemistry Department and the administration from the very beginning. Given the demonstrated initial success, it has become a permanent course offering at Mount Holyoke College each spring. On the basis of the experience from the initial offerings of “Introduction to Research”, improvements will be made on enrollment and assessment methods. One change to the enrollment criteria is to implement a minimum grade requirement for General Chemistry I. Since “B” is the average grade in most introductory science courses, it will be a reasonable minimum grade requirement. This will ensure that all enrolled students have a sufficiently rigorous background to succeed in the course. To increase transparency and diversity, the course will be advertised to all the General Chemistry I students, and to those who are placed out of General Chemistry I, through email (and in-class) announcements. This will increase the instructor’s workload in the screening process, but it is the only practical way to provide equal opportunity for every student. This will also likely increase the total enrollment; however, realistically, only the students who are placed out of at least one of the introductory science and mathematics courses will enroll in the course. It was certainly the case with the 24 students who have taken the course. It is important in the screening process to ensure that no admitted student takes more than three STEM courses in that semester. In the unlikely event when the total enrollment exceeds 20 students, two sections will have to be offered. Initial and final student surveys will be given during the first and last class, respectively. In the initial survey, students will be asked what they hope to accomplish in the course, what they are most excited about, what will be the biggest challenge, and what is their intended major. In the final survey, students will be asked a set of parallel questions: what they have accomplished in the course, what they were the most excited about, what was their biggest challenge, what is their intended major, and whether or not the course had any effect on that decision. Student responses from the initial survey will give the instructor a better appreciation of students’ goals, wishes, and anxieties, all of which will help tailoring the course accordingly. The correlation between the initial and final surveys will allow for student self-assessment and provide another means for course improvement.

The response rates were quite high, 75% (9 out of 12) and 58% (7 out of 12), considering that the assessment was given during the winter break when some students might not have had access to their school emails. Two students provided written comments. They are not included here since they are consistent with the comments in the course evaluations. Both sets of responses are overwhelmingly positive, 4.5/5 and 4.8/5,

Introduction to Research has been a successful new course as measured by student feedback as well as by training and recruiting first-year undergraduate students to (bio)chemistry majors and research laboratories. One key element to success was the choice of an appropriate research topic in consideration of both the instructor’s expertise and the disparities in student interests and backgrounds. An ideal topic should be interdisciplinary, of general interest, and feasible for beginning undergraduate students. Gold nano-

Table 2. Comparison of Postcourse Assessment Results Parameters by Survey Section

Spring 2016 (N = 9)a

Spring 2017 (N = 7)a

Section 1: (Intended) Major Biochemistry 4 3 Chemistry 3 4 Other STEM 2 0 Section 2: I Acquired the Following Skills in the Course Perform literature search 4.7 ± 0.4 4.6 Read literature articles 4.5 ± 0.5 4.9 Reproduce literature procedure 4.4 ± 0.7 4.7 Practice laboratory safety 4.8 ± 0.5 4.7 Carry out independent project 4.7 ± 0.5 4.9 Scientific presentation 4.1 ± 0.4 4.9 Scientific writing 4.5 ± 0.8 5.0 Average and standard deviation of the section 4.5 ± 0.6 4.8 Section 3: Broader Impact of the Course I have a good understanding of gold 4.3 ± 0.8 4.4 nanoparticles. I have a good understanding of research. 4.7 ± 0.4 4.7 I gained confidence in my intellectual abilities. 4.6 ± 0.8 4.7 My interest in research increased. 4.7 ± 0.5 4.9 My interest in (bio)chemistry increased. 4.5 ± 0.8 4.9 I would recommend the course to other 5.0 ± 0.0 4.9 STEM-inclined first-year students. Average and standard deviation of the section 4.6 ± 0.6 4.7 Overall average and standard deviation 4.5 ± 0.6 4.8

± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.4

± 0.5 ± ± ± ± ±

0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4

± 0.5 ± 0.4

■

Response scores use this scale: 1, strongly disagree; 2, disagree; 3, neutral; 4, agree; and 5, strongly agree. The reported values are average and standard deviation of the individual responses to each question.

E

CONCLUDING REMARKS



Article

Self-Efficacy Through Research-Inspired Modules in the General Chemistry Laboratory. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 247−255. (10) Tomasik, J. H.; Cottone, K. E.; Heethuis, M. T.; Mueller, A. Development and Preliminary Impacts of the Implementation of an Authentic Research-Based Experiment in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 1155−1161. (11) Clark, T. M.; Ricciardo, R.; Weaver, T. Transitioning From Expository Laboratory Experiments to Course-Based Undergraduate Research in General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 56−63. (12) Krakower, E. The Application of a Course in Chemical Literature to Undergraduate Research. J. Chem. Educ. 1969, 46, 395− 395. (13) Gawalt, E. S.; Adams, B. A Chemical Information Literacy Program for First-Year Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 402−407. (14) Martin, J. D. Beyond the Textbook: a First-Year Introduction to Research at a Research I University. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75, 325− 327. (15) Schmidt, M. H. Using “Household Chemistry Projects” to Develop Research Skills and to Teach Scientific Writing. J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 393−395. (16) Jones, R. M. Introducing Chemical Research to Undergraduates: a Survey Course for Sophomores and Juniors. ACS Symp. Ser. 2013, 1156, 81−90. (17) Schildcrout, S. M. Learning Chemistry Research Outside the Laboratory: New Graduate and Undergraduate Courses in Research Methodology. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79, 1340−1344. (18) Williams, E. T.; Bramwell, F. B. Introduction to Research: a New Course for Chemistry Majors. J. Chem. Educ. 1989, 66, 565− 567. (19) Kirk, L. L.; Hanne, L. F. An Alternate Approach to Teaching Undergraduate Research. J. Chem. Educ. 1991, 68, 839−841. (20) Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry. http:// www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/about/governance/committees/ training/2015-acs-guidelines-for-bachelors-degree-programs.pdf (accessed May 2018). (21) Daniel, M.-C.; Astruc, D. Gold Nanoparticles: Assembly, Supramolecular Chemistry, Quantum-Size-Related Properties, and Applications Toward Biology, Catalysis, and Nanotechnology. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 293−346. (22) Guidelines for Oral Presentations. https://student.unsw.edu. au/support-oral-presentations (accessed May 2018). (23) Kamat, P.; Hartland, G. V.; Schatz, G. C. Graphical Excellence. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2014, 5, 2118−2120. (24) Cademartiri, L.; Ozin, G. A. Concepts of Nanochemistry; WileyVCH: Weinhem, 2009; pp 85−111. (25) Lee, C.-F.; You, P.-Y.; Lin, Y.-C.; Hsu, T.-L.; Cheng, P.-Y.; Wu, Y.-X.; Tseng, C.-S.; Chen, S.-W.; Chang, H.-P.; Lin, Y.-W. Exploring the Stability of Gold Nanoparticles by Experimenting with Adsorption Interactions of Nanomaterials in an Undergraduate Lab. J. Chem. Educ. 2015, 92, 1066−1070. (26) Perrault, S. D.; Chan, W. C. W. Synthesis and Surface Modification of Highly Monodispersed, Spherical Gold Nanoparticles of 50−200 Nm. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, 131, 17042−17043. (27) Li, J.; Wu, J.; Zhang, X.; Liu, Y.; Zhou, D.; Sun, H.; Zhang, H.; Yang, B. Controllable Synthesis of Stable Urchin-Like Gold Nanoparticles Using Hydroquinone to Tune the Reactivity of Gold Chloride. J. Phys. Chem. C 2011, 115, 3630−3637. (28) Dalgety, J.; Coll, R. K.; Jones, A. Development of Chemistry Attitudes and Experiences Questionnaire (CAEQ). J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2003, 40, 649−668. (29) Grove, N.; Bretz, S. L. CHEMX: an Instrument to Assess Students’ Cognitive Expectations for Learning Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84, 1524−1529. (30) Barbera, J.; Adams, W. K.; Wieman, C. E.; Perkins, K. K. Modifying and Validating the Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey for Use in Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 1435− 1439.

particles is one such example. Environmental topics, such as water quality assessment involving detection of metal ions or/ and organics, and biochemistry topics, such as diseases related to protein structure and function, are some other examples.

■

ASSOCIATED CONTENT

S Supporting Information *

The Supporting Information is available on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00102. Questionnaire for student enrollment selection (PDF) Course syllabus (PDF) Course evaluations (PDF) How-to guides (PDF) Experimental description for spherical AuNP synthesis (PDF) Preparation instructions for spherical AuNP synthesis (PDF) Postcourse assessment (PDF)

■

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Corresponding Author

*E-mail: [email protected]. ORCID

Wei Chen: 0000-0002-6970-3455 Notes

The author declares no competing financial interest.

■

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author would like to thank Blanca Carbajal Gonzalez for assistance with TEM operation and chemistry colleagues for their generous support.

■

REFERENCES

(1) Creating Effective Undergraduate Research Programs in Science: The Transformation From Student to Scientist; Taraban, R., Blanton, R. L., Eds.; Teachers College Press: New York, 2008. (2) Elgin, S. C. R.; Bangera, G.; Decatur, S. M.; Dolan, E. L.; Guertin, L.; Newstetter, W. C.; San Juan, E. F.; Smith, M. A.; Weaver, G. C.; Wessler, S. R.; Brenner, K. A.; Labov, J. B. Insights From a Convocation: Integrating Discovery-Based Research Into the Undergraduate Curriculum. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2016, 15 (2), fe2. (3) Auchincloss, L. C.; Laursen, S. L.; Branchaw, J. L.; Eagan, K.; Graham, M.; Hanauer, D. I.; Lawrie, G.; McLinn, C. M.; Pelaez, N.; Rowland, S.; et al. Assessment of Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences: a Meeting Report. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014, 13, 29−40. (4) Bangera, G.; Brownell, S. E. Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Can Make Scientific Research More Inclusive. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2014, 13, 602−606. (5) Makarevitch, I.; Frechette, C.; Wiatros, N. Authentic Research Experience and “Big Data” Analysis in the Classroom: Maize Response to Abiotic Stress. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2015, 14, ar27−ar27. (6) Linn, M. C.; Palmer, E.; Baranger, A.; Gerard, E.; Stone, E. Undergraduate Research Experiences: Impacts and Opportunities. Science 2015, 347, 1261757−1261757. (7) Graham, K. J.; McIntee, E. J.; Raigoza, A. F.; Fazal, M. A.; Jakubowski, H. V. Activities in an S-STEM Program to Catalyze Early Entry Into Research. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94, 177−182. (8) Kerr, M. A.; Yan, F. Incorporating Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences Into Analytical Chemistry Laboratory Curricula. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93, 658−662. (9) Winkelmann, K.; Baloga, M.; Marcinkowski, T.; Giannoulis, C.; Anquandah, G.; Cohen, P. Improving Students’ Inquiry Skills and F



Article

(31) Bauer, C. F. Beyond “Student Attitudes”: Chemistry SelfConcept Inventory for Assessment of the Affective Component of Student Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2005, 82, 1864−1870. (32) Shortlidge, E. E.; Brownell, S. E. How to Assess Your CURE: a Practical Guide for Instructors of Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experiences. J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. 2016, 17, 399−408.

G


Introduction to Research: A New Course for First-Year Undergraduate

Recommend Documents