POGIL - American Chemical Society

Chapter 5

Phasing into POGIL

Downloaded by EAST CAROLINA UNIV on June 5, 2014 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: September 29, 2008 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2008-0994.ch005

R. Daniel Libby Department of Chemistry, Moravian College, 1200 Main Street, Bethlehem, PA 18018

Excellent teachers are always assessing their students' success in learning and searching for new creative approaches that will provide their students with the best possible learning opportunities. This chapter suggests a process for helping instructors consider whether or not to change their approaches to teaching, and then presents various options for phasing in POGIL. POGIL can be thought of as divided into three structural elements: learning cycle based activities, use of self– managed class groups, and use of specific roles for group members. The last part of this chapter presents options for partial POGIL implementations that use only one of the structural elements alone or any combination of two of the elements together.

Although we may be continually exploring alternative ideas about teaching, how do we go about deciding if or when we should adopt something new and, if so, how do we implement the adoption? There are two major factors that should bear on the first decision: our level of satisfaction with the current situation in our classes and our knowledge of a new approach that we believe might improve our students' learning. This chapter first deals with whether a change should be © 2008 American Chemical Society In Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL); Moog, R., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008.

49

50 considered. Then, assuming that the answer is yes and POGIL is the innovation of choice, a variety of ways to phase POGIL into classes are considered.


Should I Adopt POGIL and What Are my Options? I have been using POGIL-related approaches in my teaching for 28 years and have been a POGIL workshop facilitator for several years. I am frequently asked questions about why or how one might adopt the POGIL approach to teaching. These questions usually focus on whether to use commercially available activities or write personal ones and how often and in what context should POGIL group activities be used. I believe that my experience with phasing in my current POGIL implementation over many years provides additional options to those considering the POGIL approach.

The Decision Process Before exploring approaches to POGIL implementations, one should revisit the question, "Why should I consider changing the way I teach?" This question can be considered through a series of steps. 1. Am I absolutely satisfied with my current student outcomes? If the answer is yes, go no further. 2. Have I seen alternative teaching models that I believe might improve my student outcomes? If not, begin to explore alternatives that are currently being used. 3. What is my comfort level with potential changes I have considered? Separate aspects that present little discomfort from those perceived as more problematic, major barriers to implementation. 4. What changes are reasonable right now to begin moving toward a new teaching model? It is not necessary to change everything at once. 5. What support is available to assist me with my change? Take advantage of all available practitioners and programs.

For the purpose of this chapter, let us assume that your answer to step one is NO and in answering step two you have discovered the POGIL approach and have done some background reading or attended a workshop. You also believe that POGIL may improve your students' learning experience in one or more of your courses. So, you can see potential advantages in using POGIL, but are unsure whether it will work with your students and whether you can effectively facilitate group activities in your course.

In Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL); Moog, R., et al.; ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2008.


51 Currently, there is great diversity in POGIL implementations in terms of the sources of course materials and how often group activities are used. There are commercially available activities for several college courses (7- 7), but several implementers write their own activities even for courses that have available materials. The other primary variables in these implementations are how often and in what context group activities are used. POGIL activities may be used with in-class groups for essentially all class meetings, they may be used in varying frequencies in class as part of a predominantly lecture course, in recitation sections that support a standard lecture course or in special discussion sections replacing one lecture per week. Each of these approaches is being used in classes varying from about 10-250. The fourth implementation, Peer-led Guided Inquiry (PLGI), employs upper-level undergraduates as facilitators in a large course (8). With the above models available, the doubts of a potential new implementer usually relate to lack of confidence in facilitating group activities and unfavorable classroom design. These concerns often seem insurmountable. However, the current models outlined above for adoption are more limited than they need to be. Below, a broader analysis of the aspects of POGIL is presented along with a number of alternative ways of moving toward POGIL.

Structural Elements of POGIL One way to deal with step three, is to analyze the POGIL approach in terms of the structural elements of its implementation. POGIL is based on research indicating that teaching by telling does not work for most students (P), that students who are part of an interactive learning community are more likely to be successful (70), and that knowledge is personal; students enjoy themselves more and develop greater ownership over the material when they are given an opportunity to construct their own understanding (

POGIL - American Chemical Society

Recommend Documents