Education
Cooperative Group Learning in Undergraduate Analytical Chemistry With problem-based learning, students are more fully engaged in the learning process, and their understanding of the process of chemical analysis is increased.
lems is vital throughout one's career. The report also stresses how important it is for students to work in teams and develop communication skills, traits valued by employers (1,2). Unfortunately, significant barriers inhibit the incorporation of problem-based learning into undergraduate analytical chemistry courses. One barrier is the lack of materials such as textbooks, lab manuals, and other educational aids that support problem-based learning. The second is the inexperience of most instructors with such methods. Most instructors feel comfortable teaching the way they were taught it worked for them, and they have achieved through such a system. But workshop participants reported that traditional methods of teaching analytical chemistry not working for many undergraduates Third as pointed out by workshop participants from large public universities large class «;ize Na+ > Li+. Groups save eever ro their
Analytical Chemistry News & Features, December 1, 1998
In-class problem solving can also be done in a style other than typed problem sets. One example focuses on instrumental features in atomic absorption (AA) spectroscopy, such as the use of a chopper to account for emission of radiation by the flame and the use of a continuous source to account for spectral interferences such as absorption by molecular species and scatter by particulates. In this case the groups are told that they represent analytical chemists and design engineers at an instrument companv that manufactures AA spectrophotometers Customers have purchased the product but now begin to report that they observe problems based on the emission any method for flame emission Each company is to devise a means to eliminate the problem. As companies secretly present to me their thoughts, I indicate whether they are on the right track and perhaps help them understand why an idea that has been proposed will not work. Because the class has already learned
about choppers earlier in the term, developing a way to account for flame emission is rather straightforward for them. Use of a continuous source to account for molecular absorption and particulate scatter is, however, more elusive and generally takes more time. Because we have already discussed hollow-cathode lamps rather than continuous sources, the concept needed to solve the problem is known to them in a different context. The good-natured competitive aspect of these problems fits in well with a class that has been learning in a cooperative throughout the term Some practitioners of cooperative learning incorporate an element of group assessment, either giving some graded exams or assignments to be completed by the group or grading a group on how well they worked together on in-class problems. I have assessed student performance through individual in-class or take-home exams. Out-of-class assignments are not graded, but students are given credit for completing them. Also, group learning demands that students attend class and credit is awarded for attendance and active participation Even in my general chemistry class of 55 students it was easy to take attendance once the students formed their grouDS Group learning aids the instructor in getting to know the students and attendance by students esnprially in trpneral chemistrv improved markedlv Recap Group-learning methods can be readily implemented in undergraduate analytical chemistry courses if problems that are currently used in lectures are adapted to in-class problem sets. Through proper design, problem-based learning can be incorporated into undergraduate analytical chemistry courses without sacrificing substantial amounts of content. Group-learning methods engage the students more fully than a lecture and provide the instructor with insights into what students know how they solve a problem and what confuses them This knowledge facilitates more useful intervention on die part of the instructor As with a lecture format students must still assume responsibility for learning and refining their understanding of material outside class G leamincr
(8) Cooper, M.J. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72,16264. (9) Cottell, P. G.; Millis, B. J. Complex Cooperative Learning Structures for College and University Courses sn To omprovv the Academy: Resources for Studentt Faculty, and Institutional Development; Wadsworth, E.C., Ed.; New Forums Press: Stillwater, OK, 1994. (10) Davis, B. G. Tools for Teaching, JosseyBass Publishers: San Francisco, 1993. (11) Dougherty, R. C.J. Chem. Educ. 1997, 74, 722-26. (12) Dougherty, R. C; Bowen, C. W.; Berger, T; Rees, W.; Mellon, E. K.; Pulliam, E. J. /. Chem. Educ. 1995, 72, 793-97. (13) Duch, B.J./ Coll. Scii Teaching 1996, March/April, 326-29. (14) Felder, R. M.; Forrest, K. D.; Baker-Ward, L.; Dietz, E. J.; Mohr, H. P./ Eng. Educ. 1993,82,15-21. (15) Grasha, A F. Teaching with Style: A Practical Guide to Enhancing Learning by Understanding Teaching and Learning Styles; Alliance Publishers: Pittsburgh, PA 1996. (16) Hake, R. R. Amer. J. Physs 1998, 66, 64-74. evaluations which completed (17) Herron, J. D. The Chemistry Classroom: Forusing a college-wide instrument have been mulas for Successful Teaching, American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1996. much better since project labs and group (18) Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T; Smith, Ipprnincr were instituted Women in my K. A. Cooperative Learning: Increasing Colrnnrses have responHpH esnprially well fn lege Faculty Instructional Productivity, the coonprative learninp- methods ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4.; George Washington University, School attention is hping of Education and DevelopmentWashingtVto ton, DC, 1991. rpepntpH grnnne in the erienrpe- learn (19) Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R. T; Smith, K. A. Active Learning: Cooperatton in the Colit. i i' iU lege Classroom; Interaction Booo Company: ing that encourages cooperation, rather Edina, MN, 1991. than competition, provides a more support(20) Johnson, D. W.; Johnson, R T Learning Toive environment for those traditionally disgether and Alone: Cooperattve, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning, 4th ed.. Allyn & enfranchised from science. Bacon: Needham Heights, MA 1994. References (21) Lazarowitz, R.; Hertz-Lazarowitz, R.; Baird, J. E.J. Res. Sci. Teaching 1994,31,1121(1) The report "Curricular Developments in 31. the Analytical Sciences" can be obtained (22) Meyers, C; Jones, T. B. Promoting Active from Ted Kuwana, Dept of Chemistry, Learning: Strategies for the College ClassUniversity of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045 room; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Fran(http://www.chem. ukans.edu/analyt_ cisco, 1993. curricular_dev). (2) Thorpe, T. M.; Ullman, A. H. Anal. Chem. (23) Nelson, C. E. Critical Thinking and Collaborative Learning In New Directions for 1996,68,477A-80 A Teaching and Learning, No. 59; Jossey(3) Wenzel, T. J. A«a/. Chem. 1995,67,470 Bass Publishers: San Francisco, 1994. A-75A. (4) Pollio, H. Teaching Learning Issues; Learn- (24) Slavin, R. E. Cooperative Learning: Student Teams, 2nd Ed.; National Education Associing Research Center, University of Tennesation: Washington, DC, 1987. see: Knoxville, 1984; pp. 3-18. (25) Starr, E. M.J. Geol. Educ. 1995, ,3,391— (5) Allen, D. E.; Duch, B. J.; Groh, S. E. New 94. Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 68; Jossey-Bass Publishers: San Francisco, (26) Wright, J. C.J. Chem. Educ. 1996, 73, 827-32. 1996; pp. 43-52. (6) Blosser, P. E. Using Cooperattve Learning in Science Education in The Science Out- Thomas J. Wenzel is a professor at Bates look, ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, College. His research interests include chiral Mathematics and Environmental Science: NMR shift reagents, lanthanide luminesColumbus, OH, 1993. (7) Bonwell, C. C; Eison, J. A Active Learning: cence detection in LC, and selective sorbents Creating Excitement in the Classroom, for GC. Address correspondence about this ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. article to Wenzel at Department of Chemis1; George Washington University, School try, Bates College, Lewiston, ME 04240 of Education and Human Development: (twenzel@bates. edu). Washington, DC, 1991. among students working on the same problems and facilitates out-of-class learning, thereby increasing the time students spend working on course material and improving the quality of their understanding. I have not done any formalized assessment to compare group learning to lecturing, but prior studies serve to document the advantages of cooperative learning methods. I have observed that students, especially the weaker ones, do significantly better now on homework assignments and exams than they did in the past. It was typical when using a lecture format to have one or more students not understand how to begin a complex solubility problem that had conditions of pH and other soluble ligands whereas all students now make progress on such questions Student
Analytical Chemistry News & Features, December 1, 1998 795 A
