Article Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc
Project-Based Integrated Lecture and Laboratory Quantitative Analysis Course Drew Budner* and Brett Simpson Department of Chemistry and Physics, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, South Carolina 29528, United States
Downloaded via DURHAM UNIV on July 18, 2018 at 18:10:57 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
S Supporting Information *
ABSTRACT: Students entering into a quantitative analysis course often struggle with connecting theoretical aspects of concepts from lecture to hands-on applications in the laboratory setting. A one-semester quantitative analysis course was redesigned to integrate active learning with a project-based curriculum that incorporated structured review of fundamental concepts as needed. This approach includes moving away from a traditional separate lecture/lab format, into an integrated lecture/lab course model incorporating problem-based learning. In an effort to help students draw relationships between the theoretical concepts and the physical world, the course was designed around laboratory activities first and exploration of underlying chemical concepts second. Each project is centered around a specific laboratory experiment and provided opportunities for review of fundamental concepts, continued use of methods and skills from previous experiments, and hands-on application of new concepts. In addition, the projects were designed to give increasing responsibility and freedom to the students to develop robust experimental design skills. KEYWORDS: Upper-Division Undergraduate, Analytical Chemistry, Collaborative/Cooperative Learning, Inquiry-Based/Discovery Learning
■
INTRODUCTION New curriculum approaches to analytical chemistry incorporate problem-based learning (PBL),1−3 project-based learning (PJBL),4−7 or authentic research experiences into the student laboratory curriculum (CURE).8−11 These methods are student-centered, active learning approaches that ask students to address complicated problems while expanding on existing knowledge to find the solutions. A comparison of these three active learning methods is shown in Table 1. Students build content knowledge and skills in complex problem solving while working in groups. The combination of increased content knowledge and acquisition of practical skills makes these approaches more enjoyable for the students.12,13 Problem-based learning is an approach which engages students in a challenging task. In working to solve this problem, students apply existing knowledge and learn new information in order to come to a solution. Students work in a group to share resources, build interpersonal skills, and address the challenging problems assigned. For PBL to be most effective, problems are designed that involve choosing authentic, real-world problems that students view as genuine. Good problems are designed under a framework that (1) includes a basis in interesting real-world situations, (2) provides multiple hypotheses, (3) requires creative thinking and problem solving skills, (4) requires the addition and application of knowledge and skills that are linked to specific student learning outcomes, and (5) requires an integration of a range of knowledge needed to solve. PBL has been implemented in several different quantitative analysis courses in a wide range of institutions.2,3 In these cases the students have shown greater engagement, greater perception of learning, and higher course satisfaction. Students who have participated © XXXX American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
in PBL courses also show equivalent or greater understanding of associated course learning objectives.2,3 Project-based learning is similar to PBL in structure and design, but the scale of the problems is different. In projectbased learning the questions that are being answered are larger in scope, and require more time and engagement to complete.4−6 These large projects are usually broken into smaller problems that are addressed using PBL. In contrast to PBL, PJBL typically includes more elements of higher order thinking according to Bloom’s taxonomy. Students are required to spend more time synthesizing and evaluating, and then addressing these larger scale problems.13 While these projects can be designed to model research projects, the instructor knows the outcome and therefore can offer suggestions and solve problems quickly. More so than PBL, PJBL projects are designed specifically to provide students with both content and problem solving skills. Course-based undergraduate research experiences are longer, more involved projects which have an outcome unknown to the instructor and the students. Here students are expected to design, initiate, and perform a complete research project and prepare the appropriate report in a short period of time. The typical time frame for a CURE is 4−5 weeks. In these experiences, the instructor acts as more of a mentor and provides suggestions and opportunities to discuss and solve actual problems. CUREs have also been shown to improve student engagement and development of research skills.9,10 The challenge for the instructor is to provide students with, or guide students to, selected projects that are true Received: February 26, 2018 Revised: June 27, 2018
A
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00146 J. Chem. Educ. XXXX, XXX, XXX−XXX
Journal of Chemical Education
Article
Table 1. Comparison of the Active Learning Modalities: Problem-Based Learning, Project-Based Learning, and CurriculumBased Undergraduate Research Experiences Criteria Example problem Time span Complexity of problem Level of student support Level of scaffolding Highest Bloom’s taxonomy level
PBL
PJBL
CURE
A 250 mL solution is prepared with initial concentrations of 0.030 M Ca2+ and 0.10 M EDTA4−; calculate the concentration of free Ca2+ in the solution.
