Online Approaches to Chemical Education : Online Chemistry: The

Chapter 5

Online Approaches to Chemical Education Downloaded from pubs.acs.org by UNIV OF FLORIDA on 10/29/17. For personal use only.

Online Chemistry: The Development and Use of a Custom In-House Laboratory Kit Shayna Burchett* and Jack Lee Hayes Chemistry Department, State Fair Community College, 3201 W. 16th Street, Sedalia, Missouri 65301, United States *E-mail: [email protected].

Online laboratory courses can be a challenge to offer; maintaining rigor, incorporating appropriate instrumentation, and developing a sense of community are difficult to provide at an economical price point. A lab kit has been developed and produced in-house to provide an online chemistry with lab course that allows for online students to experience nearly the same labs as the on campus students. This chapter will focus on the development of the laboratory kit, activities that have been included in the online offering of the course, and lessons learned through the process.

Introduction This chapter communicates the journey of a community college chemistry department through the generation and refinement of a first semester online chemistry with lab course. The central component of the journey was the development and use of a custom in-house laboratory kit. Distance chemistry laboratory courses are a challenge to offer. Even though virtual laboratory activities are available and have some demonstrated success, the American Chemical Society does not recognize virtual laboratory activities as an appropriate replacement for tactile manipulation of reagents and equipment (1–4). Several solutions to this challenge have been previously proposed and piloted, all with their respective advantages and draw-backs. For example, kitchen chemistry, or using household supplies for laboratory activities, have been successfully implemented but can be a challenge due to the unique sets of materials available in each student’s environment (5–7). Also, at home laboratory practicals have been successfully incorporated into analytical chemistry courses © 2017 American Chemical Society


with minimal costs and computer usage capacity but these practicals still require visits to physical campuses (8). Further, remote laboratory activities have been successful at some institutions but require significant software capabilities and access to an appropriate physical lab facility (9). An interesting alternative to these options are commercial laboratory kits which offer a laboratory experience for online students without requiring complete design, construction, and handling of the kits by the instructor (10). However, even though multiple options exist for commercial laboratory kits, the bulk of those available require the course to be designed around the vendor curricula as the laboratory activities are limited to those offered by the kit vendor. In contrast, in-house laboratory kits allow instructors to design kits to match their learner outcomes. At State Fair Community College (SFCC) in Sedalia, Missouri, a laboratory kit has been designed to offer online chemistry students an equivalent course to the corresponding on campus course. This chapter will offer insight into the experiences and decision making process that led to the current edition of the online laboratory course and the current laboratory kit at SFCC.

Chemistry at State Fair Community College Since 2005 when current faculty began at SFCC, the chemistry department has focused on offering student centered, phenomenon first, activity based chemistry curricula. Beginning with the first class meeting, students investigate phenomena in order to guide discussions. The course learning outcomes are covered as the students encounter them based on their observations and claims. This direction was driven by the pedagogical curriculum described in the American Chemical Society Guidelines for Chemistry in Two-Year College Programs (11). Each chemistry activity is designed for open-ended investigations which strive to build science literate consumers. Through an interactive lab schedule filled with instrument intensive activities, learners are given control and responsibility over their own learning. In 2007, chemistry courses at SFCC migrated from a traditional lecture/lab schedule (physically meeting for all of the course contact hours) to a blended or hybrid schedule (physically meeting 27-90% of the course contact hours). This shift was made to accommodate commuter students who were sometimes driving over 100 miles each direction for class meetings. At this point, the department began sending lower-risk activities home with students in order to facilitate faceto-face discussions about the phenomena observed. The hybrid course offering provided the chemistry department with an opportunity to cultivate and improve distance activities with an eye towards a completely online chemistry laboratory course. As a part of this process, vendor supplied online learning activities were evaluated as hybrid take-home activities. The hybrid format facilitated the evaluation because it allowed the students to provide face-to-face feedback. Vendor activities were evaluated for their contribution to online community development, rigor, and appropriate reagents. During the evaluation, learner responses indicated that the online community development would require 58

modifications to vendor-provided instructions and that the rigor could be modified based on the reporting/interaction required of the students. The distinguishing positive characteristic among vendors was the suitability and packaging of reagents.

Online Chemistry at State Fair Community College


Vendor Kits In August of 2010, SFCC offered its first completely online chemistry laboratory course. The capacity was set at 20 students with a total of 18 students enrolling. The course utilized a commercial online laboratory kit shipped to the students’ homes with activities based on the supplies available from the vendor. Prior to receiving the laboratory kit, the students were required to construct a safety contract based on their specific home environment and participate in the building of a Safety Data Sheet (SDS) database for the reagents that were included in the laboratory kit (12). The instructor interacted with the students constantly throughout the course including during the safety portion to support student success. 17 of the 18 enrolled students were able successfully to complete the safety contract assignment and their lab kits were charged (approximately $350 including shipping costs) through the bookstore with other required course materials. The one student who did not successfully complete the safety portion of the course was not allowed to receive a laboratory kit according to the course policy. Without a laboratory kit, this student was unable successfully to complete the labs and was removed from the course. The course lab kits included supplies for the following 21 vendor experiments: Observations of Chemical Changes Laboratory Techniques and Measurements Separations of a Mixture of Solids Properties of Gases Liquids & Solids Physical & Chemical Properties Identification of Metallic Ions Ionic Reactions Stoichiometry of a Precipitation Reaction Caloric Content of Food Determination of Water Hardness Using a Titrator Colligative Properties & Osmotic Pressure LeChatelier’s Principle Beer’s Law & Colorimetry Chromatography of Food Dyes Titration for Acetic Acid in Vinegar Using Buffers Reaction Order and Rate Laws Oxidation-Reduction/Activity Series Electrochemical Cells and Cell Potentials Qualitative Cation Tests 59


The vendor lab instructions had been designed for individuals to complete the at home labs individually with minimal interaction beyond reporting; a stark contrast to the design of SFCC Chemistry laboratory activities. To improve on this, the activities were assigned with modifications designed to improve the rigor of the activities and interaction between students. This, however, did not have the intended effect. Instead, students would often conduct the activities as assigned in the vendor lab manual without the rigor and community that the chemistry department had intended to instill in the course. For example, students were told to compare and contrast their results in the Ionic Reactions activity with their classmates, but instead only compared their results with the provided solubility rules in the activity as directed by the vendor instructions. Also, the students were told to write a net ionic reaction equation for each reaction that formed a precipitate, but instead followed the vendor instructions only to write 10 net ionic reaction equations for precipitation reactions that they selected from their results. Further, the provided activity instructions included several post-lab questions that were answered even though the learners were informed that they did not need to complete them. Finally, an additional assignment had to be added after the activity for the students to name each of the precipitates formed because, again, the request was made outside of the provided lab instructions. Another challenge was that the disposal methods provided by the vendor did not match the desired outcomes of SFCC Chemistry. Vendor provided lab instructions indicated that the learners could dispose of reagents down the drain and/or in the trash due to the minute quantities, but also mentioned that any doubts or concerns should be voiced to the local area authorities. The vendor provided instructions also suggested that the students donate left over lab equipment to local high schools if they chose not to keep them. The disposal of lab reagents and equipment is a valuable teaching opportunity. The learners are tasked by the SFCC instructor with identifying the environmental hazards associated with reagents; students are encouraged not only to evaluate the contents of their lab kit but also the household products that they send down the drain found under their sinks. In addition to environmental impact, pH and quantity are each evaluated and discussed with the SFCC instructor and classmates prior to completing the activity where reagents are rendered non-hazardous. The SFCC disposal activity provides an additional opportunity for the instructors to evaluate the students as students are required to return all used lab material including filters containing precipitates upon completion of the course. Used as a laboratory final, the activity requires the students to follow instructions, measure pH, measure volume, measure mass, and demonstrate appropriate lab hygiene while rendering reagents non-hazardous. Further, even though the idea of donating the equipment to local schools sounds like a good idea, the frustration of mismatched lab equipment is typically reported as a burden by local secondary science educators. When such equipment is donated to an institution, it is rare that the donation is on a scale that allows for enough equipment to outfit all students. This results in each student having equipment that appears unique. The choice for learners to keep lab equipment after the conclusion of a chemistry course is something that SFCC strongly discourages; several of the items are considered drug paraphernalia in many 60


jurisdictions, including the electronic balance and lab ware. For these reasons, SFCC, with a desire to be environmentally and civically responsible, intentionally made the reuse of lab equipment a goal. Coupled with submitted images of the students conducting lab activities, including a unique name tag generated as one of the lab activities, the return and reuse of the laboratory kit equipment provides a way for SFCC to minimize student costs, physically evaluate student ability to follow instructions, and support environmental consciousness. The chemistry department pursued the return of laboratory kits by offering a refund of approximately $180 dependent upon the condition and completeness of the kit inventoried and evaluated by the course instructors. 7 of the 17 kits were returned for refunds. Refunds were handled through the bookstore as a textbook buyback. The maximum enrollment was increased from 20 to 24 during the Spring semester of 2011 with a total of 23 students enrolling. During this semester, 11 of the students were able successfully to complete the safety contract activity and purchase a laboratory kit with 10 kits returned for refunds. Purchasing the lab kits proved problematic because students were unable to use their financial aid until it went through the dispersement process as many students receiving student loans and/or grants had to wait for the institution to process the funds to allow for the purchase of bookstore materials. This issue caused some students to withdraw from the course. Transition from Vendor Kits to In-House Kits During the Spring semester of 2011, the vendor did not respond to communications from the Chemistry Department which then instigated construction of lab kits from existing supplies for the Summer semester of 2011. In-house packing allowed the Chemistry Department not only to select supplies based on the activities desired, but also allowed for an improvement in the instrumentation and equipment included in the kit. Kits were still shipped after the completion of a safety contract and continued to be distributed through the bookstore as course material at $400 to the students. Activities were selected to echo or complement the traditional on campus experience. For example, the online students completed the same Ionic Precipitation and pH activities as the on campus students, but also conducted a preparation for the return of their lab kit in place of a final lab practical. The lab practical and kit return had consistent requirements including measuring and adjusting pH, filtration, dilution, solution preparation, and evaluation of a product. In-house instructions were provided through the Learning Management System. Additional instrumentation and equipment, improved rigor, and enhanced online community were an intentional focus with the new course design. For example, the in-house lab instructions were designed to require sharing of data to complete activities assigned to mirror the experiences in the traditional classroom at SFCC. To this end, individual students were intentionally sent partial reagent series to force them to share results in order to generate complete data sets. The partial reagent series were repeated throughout the group of students in order to ensure that a complete data set would be generated. 61

62


Table 1. Laboratory Activities and ACS Topics Safe Practices

Keeping a Notebook

Use of Electronic Balances

Use of Volumetric Glassware

Preparation of Solutions

Measurements Using pH Electrodes

Measurements Using Spectrophotometers

Data Analysis

Report Writing

x

x

Safety Contract

x

SDS Database

x

Ternary Separation

x

x

x

x

Paper Chromatography

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Column Chromatography

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Beer’s Law

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Build a Spectroscope

x

x

x

x

Using a Spectroscope

x

x

x

x

Qualitative Eval. of Ions

x

x

x

x

x

Hard Water Evaluation

x

x

x

x

x

Macromolecule ID

x

x

x

x

x

Ester Synthesis

x

x

x

x

Micro Saponification

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Macro Saponification

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

pH Measurement Tools

x

x

x

x

x

pH of Household Solutions

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x x

x

x x x

63


Safe Practices

Keeping a Notebook

Use of Electronic Balances

Use of Volumetric Glassware

Preparation of Solutions

Measurements Using pH Electrodes

Antacid Titration

x

x

x

x

x

x

Redox Reactions

x

x

x

x

x

Internet Battery

x

x

x

x

x

Lab Kit Return

x

x

x

x

x

Measurements Using Spectrophotometers

Data Analysis

Report Writing

x

x x

x x

x x

64


Table 2. Laboratory Activities and Instrumentation Utilized Volumetric Labware

Electronic Balance

Ternary Separation

x

x

Paper Chromatography

x

x

Column Chromatography

x

x

Beer’s Law

x

x

Multi meter

pH Electrode

Temper ature Probe

Conductivity Probe

Color imeter

Micro pipette

Spectroscope

Digital Inter face

Resin Column

Safety Contract SDS Database x

x

x

Build a Spectroscope

x

Using a Spectroscope

x

Qualitative Eval. of Ions

x

x

x

Hard Water Evaluation

x

x

x

Macromolecule ID

x

x

x

Ester Synthesis

x

x

x

Micro Saponification

x

x

x

x

x

Macro Saponification

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

65


pH Measurement Tools

Volumetric Labware

Electronic Balance

x

x

Multi meter

pH of Household Solutions

Micro pipette

pH Electrode

Temper ature Probe

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Conductivity Probe

Antacid Titration

x

x

Redox Reactions

x

x

x

x

x

Internet Battery

x

x

x

x

x

Lab Kit Return

x

x

x

x

Color imeter

Spectroscope

Digital Inter face

x

x

x

x x x

Resin Column


One of the activities deployed with partial sets of reagents was the ionic precipitation activity. Students were provided with three quarters of the ionic solutions assigned and were required to share their data to generate the complete report of soluble and insoluble combinations. In order to minimize penalization for individual lack of participation, redundancies were provided across the group. Another activity that was used for the purpose of enhanced learning and online communication was the evaluation of pH for common household solutions. Each student was required to measure the pH of a unique beverage, personal hygiene product, and a harsh cleaner. The pH values for the harsh cleaners often range from below 2 to above 10 and are available to the public through most supermarket retailers. Learners then generated graphs for each of the three types of household solutions using their data and the data shared by their classmates. Some issues encountered included late shared data and students not following activity instructions. When students were not successful in completing activities with shared data on time, they experienced a reduced amount of peer data available for evaluation. Supplies for a total of 19 lab activities were included in the laboratory kit. The activities were selected to match the topics in the ACS Guidelines (13). Table 1 shows the activities included in the laboratory kit and their relationships with the ACS laboratory topics. Lab kits were returned to campus for a refund, evaluation of course activity completion, and recycling of supplies. Students were offered a refund up to $200 depending upon the condition and completeness of the kit. In Summer 2011, the maximum enrollment was increased to 25 to match the enrollment in other online courses; a total of 14 students enrolled with 12 receiving and returning their lab kits.

In-House Laboratory Kit By fall of 2011, laboratory supplies were purchased, packaged, and prepared by the Chemistry Department specifically for the online chemistry course as designed for that semester. Since then, prior to each semester, the course activities are evaluated, selected, and prepared for the upcoming semester. This allows for a constant revision of activities, instructions, and supplies. Instrumentation and equipment varies based on the activities selected for the individual semester but typically includes volumetric lab ware, electronic balances, multimeters, pH electrodes, electric temperature probes, conductivity probes, colorimeters, fixed volume micropipettes, hand-held spectroscopes, digital interfaces, and resin columns. Figure 1 is an image of some of the laboratory kit components and the toolbox that was used for shipment. The kit contents in the image are as follows beginning in the back of the image from left to right: back - toolbox used for storage and transportation; in front of toolbox -Hanna Checker hand-held colorimeter, electronic balance, plastic graduated cylinders, plastic test tube rack; in front of colorimeter - hand held spectroscope, Vernier voltage probe, Vernier temperature probes, lazer pointer, bungee cord, plastic ruler, test tube clamp, molecule kit; front of picture - syringe, well plate, weigh boats, specimen 66


cup. Table 2 shows the same list of available activities found in Table 1 and the potential equipment involved.

Figure 1. SFCC In-House Laboratory Kit and Selected Contents.

Figure 2 provides information for the number of students enrolled each semester, the number of kits sent to students after successful completion of their safety contracts and purchasing of their lab kit, and the number of lab kits returned by students for refunds. On average, 17 students enrolled in the online course each semester with 15 receiving kits and 12 kits returned for refunds. The trends of enrollment observed in Figure 2 are consistent with the enrollment trends experienced by the SFCC institution. The cost to the student was maintained at $400 with a maximum refund of $200 depending on the condition and completeness. Not including consumables ($60), the kit cost to the institution was about $450. Each lab kit had a life span of approximately 4 semesters with about a 15% loss each semester. The pricing and refund amount was determined to be conservative by the institution business office with a total cost over 4 semesters of about $725 and $800 in student fees. The costs did not include labor because the effort associated with the lab kits was considered “other duties” as assigned to existing faculty. 67


Figure 2. Student Enrollment and Kits Received/Returned by Semester, Fall 2010 through Spring 2016.

Leading up to the Summer 2012 semester, students expressed that they were unable to remain enrolled in the online course due to the high cost of course materials encumbered at the bookstore. To make this more manageable, students who enrolled in the Summer 2012 semester were charged $200 with no refund but the understanding that failure to return their kit would result in a financial hold on their account. Future semesters were conducted by charging the lab kit as a course fee up front rather than a course material expense through the campus bookstore. In Spring 2014, lab manuals were printed in house based on student requests to minimize printing costs at home; students were encouraged to avoid printing as much as possible, but their desire to have physical printed instruction materials in front of them outweighed instructor concerns that the printed materials not only had a negative environmental impact but also lacked value as a method to improve the pedagogical value of the activities. The printed lab manuals reinforced the instructors’ intuition that physical materials did not improve the student success in laboratory activities or content assessments and were quickly abandoned. Lab instructions were transitioned to live shared Google Documents with printing/downloading options disabled. The live documents not only provided up to date edits of instructions (for instance, to match supplies available or clarify expectations) but also offered an additional platform for student interaction through the chat feature within the document. 68


Vendor Reagents In Spring 2015, a vendor stepped forward who desired to prepare the consumable reagent portion of the laboratory kit as requested by SFCC. Consumable costs increased to $129 using the vendor, resulting in a severe reduction in labor required to construct and inventory kits each semester (from about 100 labor hours/semester to about 25 labor hours/semester). Costs of the reusable equipment were reduced to approximately $250 by changing to more economical instrumentation. With this shift in costs, the pricing and refund amounts were able to be maintained with an increase in consistency of the consumable supplies without an unreasonable increase in financial risk to the institution (about $766 cost/kit over 4 semesters with fees of about $800/kit over 4 semesters). In Fall 2015, the first round of online lab kits with vendor reagents were deployed.

Future Directions The instrumentation and equipment portion of the laboratory kit has been one of the most difficult to maintain. With over 30 separate pieces of instrumentation and reusable equipment to inventory, maintain, and package, the lab kit evaluation and preparation is cumbersome. In addition, reagent supplies could be reduced by transitioning to microscale activities. In order to improve the experience for online students and to expedite kit production, SFCC chemistry has been evaluating and pursuing the use of vendor maintained integrated lab interfaces and probes which allow for real time data analysis utilizing smaller reagent quantities. The new equipment may offer the opportunity for the students to experience gas sensors, electrophoresis, a magnetic stirrer, and a wider range UV-Vis spectroscopy. It is the hope of the authors that with improved instrumentation and smaller scale experiments, the online chemistry course at SFCC can increase in capacity and continue to provide an online chemistry laboratory experience with appropriate instrumentation that invites learners to explore chemical phenomena, improve their observation skills, and think critically.

References 1. 2.

3. 4.

Carnevale, D. The virtual lab experiment. Chron. Higher Ed. 2003, 49, A30. Dalgarno, B.; Bishop, A. G.; Adlong, W.; Bedgood, D. R. Effectiveness of a virtual laboratory as a preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students. Comput. Educ. 2009, 53, 853–865. Podolefsky, N. Learning science through computer games and simulations. Studies in Science Ed. 2012, 48, 237–240. ACS. Importance of Hands-On Laboratory Activities; 2014. Available at https://www.luther.edu/mertzecl/assets/140000_importance_of_hands_on_ laboratory_activities_ACS_american_chemical_society_2.pdf (accessed November 22, 2016). 69

5.

6. 7. 8.


9.

10. 11.

12.

13.

Jeschofnig, L.; Jeschofnig, P. Teaching lab science courses online: Resources for best practices, tools, and technology; John Wiley & Sons: San Francisco, CA, 2011; Vol. 29, pp 57−60. Kennepohl, D. Using home-laboratory kits to teach general chemistry. Chem. Ed. Res. Pract. 2007, 8, 337–346. Lyall, R.; Patti, A. T. F. Taking the Chemistry Experience Home—Home Experiments or “Kitchen Chemistry”. Accessible Elements 2010, 83–108. Hoole, D.; Sithamparesan, M. Chemistry Practical Home-kits with CD-based Instructions for Distance Undergraduates. Journal of Chem. Ed. 2003. Senese, F. A.; Bender, C.; Kile, J. The Internet chemistry set: web-based remote laboratories for distance education in chemistry. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning 2000, 2, 1696–1698. Carrigan, K. Review of LabPaq science lab kits for chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2012, 89, 314–315. American Chemical Society, S. C. o. E.. Guidelines for Chemistry Programs in Two-Year Colleges, 2nd ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington DC, 1997. Burchett, S.; Pfaff, A.; Hayes, J.; Woelk, K. Exploding misconceptions: Developing a culture of safety through learner driven activities. J. Chem. Health Saf. 2017, 24 (1), 36–42. SOCED. ACS Guidelines for Chemistry in Two-Year College Programs; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2009; p 13.

70

Online Approaches to Chemical Education : Online Chemistry: The

Recommend Documents