Editorial pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Online Courses in Chemistry: Salvation or Downfall? Norbert J. Pienta* Department of Chemistry, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-2556, United States ABSTRACT: Online versions of lecture courses in chemistry are discussed. KEYWORDS: General Public, Public Understanding, Outreach, Curriculum, Computer-Based Learning, Distance Learning, Self Instruction, Internet, Web-Based Learning
I
Internet- or computer-based activities. An example of the development and implementation of a hybrid organic course is reported by Ealy8 in this issue. The flipped classroom is a form of blended learning in which some or all lectures are available as videos for viewing outside of the meeting time, thereby freeing the instructor to apply the didactic knowledge, work with the students on solving problems, and engage students in additional learning activities. Associate Editor Deanna Cullen spoke about finding potential resources for the flipped classroom on the JCE Chemical Education Xchange in a recent editorial.9 Thus, it appears that chemical educators are beginning to explore the landscape, although scientists and chemists are a conservative lot who generally love lectures. From the scientific research perspective, we have all been trained to write up our work in papers and talk about it in lectures. It is not surprising that the lecture model has permeated undergraduate instruction and that it persists there. I hope that chemical educators are not afraid to develop online or blended courses because they see them as a threat to the beloved and familiar lecture. In his book, What’s the Use of Lectures?, author Donald Bligh suggests that lectures can be somewhat effective in transmitting information but only in limited amounts and rates; however, lectures are not an optimal method for promoting thought, teaching behavior, or changing attitudes.10 Many of our chemical education research colleagues are providing the data to substantiate other activities and approaches that are just as good or better than traditional lecture. On a personal note, plans for our new preparatory chemistry course have it being primarily online, technology-driven, and without the opportunity for traditional lectures. This instructor will have to find new venues in which to tell stories.
t started as an innocent enough activity, a visit to the Office of the Provost by a new faculty member who has responsibility for the general chemistry program. The new faculty member was this Journal’s editor, so the word “new” refers to the venue and not the stage of his career. One topic of discussion during that visit involved student success in general chemistry, particularly through the use of a preparatory or triage course. Based on successful use of diagnostic exams in chemistry1 and mathematics and such a prep chem course at another institution,2 a decline in the number of student withdrawals is a reasonable expectation. The Provost almost immediately asked if that course could be offered online, not an unexpected response since his office had just issued a call for proposals for online courses. An online prep chem course with a somewhat different purpose has been described in this Journal previously,3 but the reported outcomes support this author’s expectations. This is not the only encounter with online courses that a general chemistry coordinator at a large public institution is likely to encounter and an often-contentious issue has to do with the laboratory experience. The New York Times declared 2012 the “year of MOOC”.4 A MOOC, or massive open online course, is an alternative both to traditional university offerings on campuses and to traditional online courses that resemble the former group by limiting enrollment, charging tuition, and carrying credit. For example, the nonprofit startup edX5 from a consortium of prestigious universities (i.e., Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of California−Berkeley, Wellesley, Georgetown, and the University of Texas System) and forprofit Coursera6 already boast millions of enrollees. The New York Times article describes some of the meteoric growth but quickly points out some of the challenges: enormous enrollments, issues related to scale-up, grading, cheating, preparation and persistence of enrollees, and student engagement. In spite of the prospective shortcomings, the potential to provide instruction to large numbers of students without many of the infrastructure needs is a tempting alternative. Furthermore, university administrators are likely drawn to the publicity, the competition (i.e., being on the cutting edge of progressive ideas) and the promise of cost savings. Additional issues, particularly what he calls the “human element”, appear in a CNN commentary by Douglas Rushkoff.7 How are chemistry educators responding to requests and opportunities for online instruction? Blended learning refers to instruction in which classroom methods are combined with © 2013 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail:
[email protected]. Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Pienta, N. J. A Placement Examination and Mathematics Tutorial for General Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2003, 80 (11), 1244−1246.
Published: March 12, 2013 271
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400097s | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 271−272
Journal of Chemical Education
Editorial
(2) Pienta, N. J. From Course Redesign to Curricular Review: Assessment in Chemistry at the University of Iowa. In Assessment in Chemistry Programs: Evolving Best Practices; Ryan, J., Muffo, J., Eds.; Assessment in the Disciplines Series, Association for Institutional Research: Tallahassee, FL, 2010. (3) Botch, B.; Day, R.; Vining, W.; Stewart, B.; Hart, D.; Rath, K.; Peterfreund, A. Effects on Student Achievement in General Chemistry Following Participation in an Online Preparatory Course. ChemPrep, a Voluntary, Self-Paced, Online Introduction to Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2007, 84 (3), 547−553. (4) Pappano, L. The Year of MOOC. The New York Times, Nov 2, 2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/ massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapid-pace. html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 (accessed Feb 2013). (5) To examine edX offerings, see https://www.edx.org/ (accessed Feb 2013). (6) To examine Coursera offerings, see https://www.coursera.org/ (accessed Feb 2013). (7) Rushkoff, D. Online Courses Need Human Element To Educate. CNN, Jan 15, 2013. http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/15/opinion/ rushkoff-moocs/?hpt=hp_t4 (accessed Feb 2013). (8) Ealy, J. Development and Implementation of a First-Semester Hybrid Organic Chemistry Course: Yielding Advantages for Educators and Students. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (3); DOI: 10.1021/ed200858p. (9) Cullen, D. M. JCE Chemical Education Xchange: X Marks the Spot for Finding Quality Chemistry Education Resources. J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90 (1), 3−4. (10) Bligh, D. A. What’s the Use of Lectures?; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, 2000.
272
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed400097s | J. Chem. Educ. 2013, 90, 271−272
