Project TEACH Supplemented J. Edmund White Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville. Edwardsville, IL 62026 Each fall many new graduate students in chemistry find themselves committed to a iob for which most of them are ill-prepared. Most enter upon it with some trembling and trepidation; they have fears of being embarrassed or looking bad and feel that they do not really know what they are supoosed to be doine. Thev have had bestowed on them the title bf " ~ e a c h i n g~sGstant;"but most know little about teaching. Their concepts of what the job entails prohably come from vague memories of TAs in their own freshman courses, who probably were no better prepared than they are so do not provide a desirable role model. The sweaty-palms, thrown-to-the lions apprehension typical of manv beeinnine TAs can be alleviated bv a training .. program designed to make clear departmrntnl expectations. to orovide soecific details of the 1nl)orstorv routine. to offer suggestions bn conducting recitation and laboratory sections, and to reassure the neophyte teachers that all will turn out well. Since 1952, a "Handbook for Teaching Assistants" has EI)UCATION been available from the JotJRNAi. OF CHEMICAL for a minimal cost.' Providing a copy to a new TA is very desirable but is not enough. Activities which provide specific information.." eeneral euidance. and ooen discussion of concerns are effective in increasing the morale and confidence of the new TAs and. more important to the goals of the department, in raising the quality of the instruction they will give. Renfrew and Moeller also assumed that the effectiveness of instruction by TAs can be improvrd by training program^.^ Their survey of the training of TAs in 190 chemistry departments, however, showed h a t only about one-third had a training program in Fall 1975. The survey just mentioned revealed that "an increasing number of departments" are using the materials called Project TEACH. develooed a t the Universitv of Nebraska-Lincoln in 1975. The titles of the eight module; of Project TEACH are listed in Table 1. Readers not familiar with TEACH are referred to the description by the project s t a f f . V h e materials provided consist of color videotape cassettes and written materials designed to instruct and to stimulate discussion. At Southern Illinois Universitv-Edwardsville,we have used them as the base for our activiiies for introducing new graduate students to teaching and to the department, and we have added several features which might be considered by other departments with similar needs.
Table 1. Project TEACH Modules I. lnlroduction Performance Objectives Ill. (lue~tloningSkills IV. Reinforcement V. Testing I!.
VI. Tutoring
VIi. Microteaching VIII. Interaction Analvsls
-
Use of TEACH Materials
Our Droeram of trainine in teachine for new eraduate students has &olved over foukyears. The'jiw, neco;;d, and fourth offerines were ~ l a n n e dand conducted hv the author, the third by ~r2esessorMichael E. Landis. In the first year, 1976, presentations on firefighting and toxicology were added to the viewing and discussion of six of the TEACH modules: the total time allotted to the program was about ten hours, scheduled on four days of the &t week of the fall quarter. Changes were madeeach year, but the TEACH materials remainas thecore of the program. Only the latest presentation (Fall 1979) will Presented In a poster session. Midwest Regional Meeting. ACS. November 8. 1979. St. Louis. Missouri. Renfrew. M. M.. eta/.. "Handbook for Teaching Assistants." Divlsion of Chemical Education. Inc. of the A.C.S.. J. CnEM. Eouc.. Easton.
'
..
PA. 1974. ~
Renfrew. M. M.. and Moeller. 1..J. CHEM E m . . 55, 386 (1978). Project TEACH Staff.J. C ~ Eouc.. M 53. 209 (1976).
766
Journal of Chemical Education
Table 2. Schedule 1979 FIRST WEEK Mandav
Tuesday Wednesday Thwsday
Friday SECOND WEEK MlRD WEEK
Introdunions: Description of CMnse Videotape of Module I and Discussion Videotape of Module VII. Discursian, and Assignmems Introduction to Staff. Building. and Carnpvs Laboratory Safety I General: Protective Equipment Videotaw for Module Ill and Discussion Videotape far Module IV and Discussion Laboralw Safety11 Fires and Fire Extinguishers Other Emergency Equipment Emergency Procedures Module V and Discussion Exercises on Orading by TAs Preparations for Starting of Labs Next Week No Meeting: Videotaping of
Microtsachlng
Vidaotapa for Module VI and Discussion
Tutoring Techniques
Computer-Assisted Instruction FOURTH WEEK
Observe and Discuss Microteaching Videotapes FIFTH WEEK
Observe and Discuss Microteaching Vldeotapas SIXTH WEEK
Videotape for Module Vlll and Discussion
Discussim of Teaching Experiences SEVENTH WEEK
Discussion of Module ii Introduction to Piagel's Theory
E l m WEEK
Plaget. Continued: Gvsst Lectvrer NINTH WEEK
inlroductlm to BASIC Cawuter Language and Program
be described and discussed here. I t is outlined in Table 2 where the suoolements to TEACH can be seen clearlv. .. Before commenting on some of the supplementary adivities, we should note a few details. The program is offered during the fall quarter as a course, "Special Topics in Physical Science Teaching," which carries graduate credit. All new graduate students in chemistry are expected to take it. The reasons for including all are (1) a person who is not appointed a TA initially may become one later, (2) the experience in-
Table 3. Ranges of Points Given In Grading Exercise 1. Pre-Lab Assignment: Total Points = 16 (6 Answers at 2 Each) 1976 3 to 8 5 to 9.25 4.5 to 10.5 2. Lab Quiz:Total Points = 30 (as shown fw each question) 1976 111021 14.5 lo 23 1977 1979 9 lo 25 1977 1979
troduces the students to each other and to departmental oolicies and customs. and (3) safetv nractices are included. since our custom is to delay the s t i r i o f undergraduate labs until the second week. the TAs are free of teachine duties during the first week, and wescheduled most ofthe activities during that p e r i d After the first week, the clau meets for one hour ger week. In 1979,the first day had four parts: (I)gettingacquainted with each other, with departmental staff, with the science building, and with the campus in general, (2) explaining the course and Proiect TEACH.. 13) . . settine un the schedule for videotaping the microteaching sessions, and (4) viewing and discussing the videotape for the module on microteaching. The third and fifth days concentrated on the TEACH modules chosen as most helpful to the TAs in their immediate assignments: planning their microteaching presentation and conducting the first few meetings of the laboratory section. Other modules were fitted into the succeeding weeks as shown in Table 2. Mdules 11and VlII (see Table 1) were riven only cursory coverage, because they were deemed less important for our situation.
".
Additional Activities
The second and fourth dav of the first week were devoted to lahoratory safety. Some T A ~from other departments attended these sessions. T h e emphasis was on departmental policies, prntective and emergency equipment wk have, and the presentation to he made hv theTA at the first mcetine of each ~ lab~section. -~~~ - .~~~ ~ ~ One of the more successful supplements is the exercise on grading. Some reprints ofarticles-dealing with grading by TAs are distributed for advance reading; however, before discussion and with noguidance as to what to look for or how much to take off for specific errors, the graduate students are given a red Den and two samale student . oaners . to erade. Thev are provided a "key7'and the total points for each question. ~ k r o r s inserted in the supposed student responses included math mistakes, incorrecisignificant figures,mt showing work, and incomplete answers. The same papers were used for three years with similar results as shown in Table 3. The wide discrepancies elicit heated discussion in defense ofhdividual decisions, which can he guided into calmer exploration of what to look for, what weieht to assien to different tvnes of error. and what level of perftwmance is expected by the department. One goal is to avoid wide diff~rencesin the averare of the lnhoratorv .. .rrades . sections of different TAs. Somestudents will need more help than the TA reasonablv ran he expected to give. The modhe on tutoring (\'I) was expanded hv an introduction to the self-instructional lah and materials, the tutorial computer programs available through remote terminals, and where to go for "live" tutoring. To make the TAs aware of current educational concerns and toalert them to the pmsible problems ofstudents who are not a t the "formal" level. we added an introduction to Piaeet's theory of intellectualdevelopment through readings, typical testine orohlems. and a lecture bv Professor Ivan Russell. of the ~ r h o o lof Education. Most of the TAs and the author aereed that the topic is useful and should he retained but that there should he greater emphasis on the implications for ~~~~
".
laboratory instruction. Probably more time is needed than the two hours we allotted to the subiect. Near the end of the quarter, the use of remote computer terminals and the writing. of vroerams in the BASIC laneuaee . .. were introduced hy Dr. Henry Drew. T h e purpose was t o prepare the TAs to supervise a laboratory exercise in program writing which is carried out a t the beginning of the second quarter of our freshman lahoratory course. A feature of the training program not shown on the schedule was a mid-term evaluation of the performance of the TAs hy class visits bv the authnr and bv evaluation forms comoleted by thestudents in I he lal, cuurre. The results weredis&sed with each T A hv rheaulhor. On the whole. the students rated theTAs as good toexcellent. At theend of the quarter,asecand student evaluation was ohtained which cave similar results and showed that some impmvement hadoccurred since the first evaluation. Conclusion Reactions of the participating graduate students have been an extensive m e proohtoined hy usin: two que
