In the Classroom
The Suggestion Box—An Old Idea Brings the “Real World” Back to Freshmen Chemistry Students (and Professors) Andreas Stein Department of Chemistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455 One important goal of many college and high school chemistry instructors is to remove some of the stigma associated with chemistry. This objective is often addressed by incorporating “real world” and “environmental” components in the curriculum. While this practice can be effective if the examples connecting life and theory are provided by the instructor, the effects may be longer lasting if the students make the connections themselves. This paper describes a method of incorporating a suggestion box into freshmen chemistry lectures that has been successful in bringing the subject matter closer to the students’ real-life experiences by inspiring them to look around and realize how chemistry affects their lives. At the same time the suggestion box has provided the instructor with fast lecture feedback and new curriculum ideas.
students were less afraid to ask questions in a large lecture auditorium by this semianonymous method. They perceived that they could say things or ask questions that they otherwise might not feel comfortable asking. Questions related to the lecture material were probably on the minds of many other students as well. One student commented that the questions gave her a feel for where she stood in the class (“I’m not the only one that didn’t understand that.”) Many students found the suggestion box concept “less intimidating” and “very student-focused”. They felt that it enabled them to be directly involved in the lecture. However, some students still did not contribute any questions or suggestions because they thought their questions were “less relevant than those of others”; they believed that they “could not think of good questions”; or they simply “did not take the time” to pose a question.
Implementation Types of Submissions and Responses The suggestion box method was used in an introductory chemistry course aimed primarily at college students majoring in science or engineering. This course was part of a general/organic/physical sequence. Nearly all students were non-chemistry majors. The principle was explained in the first class and stated on the syllabus as follows. Suggestion Box: A suggestion box will be available in the lecture room during each lecture. You are invited to submit comments or suggestions concerning the lecture or lecture material in the box. For example, if you think of a “real world” connection of the day’s subject material that is not presented in the text or by the lecturer, you can submit it as a brief note. Other examples include applications of the lecture material to your field of study, questions relating it to the household, etc. I will address many of these comments in the next lecture or another appropriate lecture. Please write your name and ID# on these notes, so that I can keep track of your submissions. If any student with four or more submissions throughout the year falls between two final grades, I will award him/her the higher grade.
Some specific examples of submissions from the previous year were given. Students were also encouraged to voice concerns about the lecture or any other aspect of the course via the suggestion box. A large box labeled “CHEM1052 Suggestions and Real World Ideas” was brought to class every day and prominently displayed on the lecture bench. Typically 2–3 notes were found in the box after each class. All notes were read after class, the submitters recorded on the class list (regardless of the quality of their comment or question), and a response was developed before the next lecture period. The lag time was convenient for the lecturer to research some of the answers. Most questions were addressed during the first 2–5 minutes of class, a time when some students were still entering the lecture theater. Sometimes the responses were more appropriate in the middle of the lecture when they could be used as an interlude between different lecture topics, or just as a brief break. The names of the submitters were never mentioned. Based on midquarter and end-of-term questionnaires, many
788
It is noteworthy that during two quarters of using a suggestion box, very few questions repeated themselves. The questions and comments fell into several categories (see Table 1). Examples of submissions are given in Table 2. While the average number of contributions per student did not change significantly from one year to the next, the fractions for each category did. The teaching-related comments were much more frequent in the first year, which was the instructor’s first time of teaching. The very first note, stating that the writing on the overhead transparency was too small, allowed the instructor to respond to this deficiency on the second day of classes, rather than after a midquarter evaluation. In similar ways, other deficiencies were caught early, thanks to the student comments. Changes in the number of responses for each of the technical subcategories Table 1. Categories of Submissions to the Suggestion Box Count Count Count 1994 1995 Total
Category
32
10
Questions about lecture material
12
16
28
Medicine/physiology/biology/nutrition
18
7
25
Household products
3
15
18
Environment/space
11
3
14
Materials/packaging
1
7
8
Home/automobiles
3
3
6
Comments/complaints/praise on lecture/exam/lab/lab manual/classroom, requests for specific problem review
42
Natural phenomena
1
4
5
Advertisements, movies
3
5
8
Material relating to other courses
6
1
7
Philosophical questions
1
4
5
Jokes, silly comments
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 74 No. 7 July 1997
Total
1
1
2
92
76
168
In the Classroom might be due, in part, to changing the textbook; in part, to relatively small number, it is interesting to note that a different student backgrounds. cross-section of all students participated, except for the very The submissions that were not directly related to weakest. The distribution of submissions for students with teaching had pedagogical benefits for the person who subdifferent grades is given in Table 3. The participation rate mitted the note, for the class audience, and even for the intended to increase slightly with higher grades. Of the stustructor. Many questions showed that the student had dents who made contributions to the “box”, about half thought about the lecture material and assessed the main handed in one suggestion, half more than one. concepts, even if sometimes the material was not yet fully The suggestion box can be used for extra credit. In the understood. The students asked themselves whether the present situation it was used to help students who were on new concepts related to their previous experiences in any the borderline between two grades. For example, in one way. Through this questioning they realized the importance class four borderline students had submitted multiple sugof (at least some of) the lecture material for themselves. A gestions to the “box”, and their final grades were improved few times students took the opportunity to contribute to the by these contributions. According to the syllabus at least lecture by bringing in interesting objects related to their four submissions were required for extra credit. This numquestions (a heat pack, a potato clock, advertisements of ber turned out to be too high, as the average number of subgimmick products, or excerpts of articles they found in missions for A, B, and C students who contributed to the popular scientific magazines). The audience profited not box was only 2.5. In the future the requirement will be reonly from the information given in the answer, but also from duced to three per student. This may appear more achievseeing examples of ways to analyze nontextbook problems. able, and induce more students to submit notes. If possible, the responses were expressed in such a way that they illustrated the process of research and reasoning. The Final Evaluation class might be asked “how would you go about analyzing this question? What tools do we already have?” Thus even Has the suggestion box been successful from the stuin cases where submissions were not directly related to the dents’ point of view? In questionnaires many students comcourse material, the students learned about chemistry and mented very favorably on the real-life examples that were analytical thought processes in general. Judging from stugiven in the lectures via the suggestion box. When asked dent feedback, it was highly satisfying for students to recwhether they “consider[ed] the suggestion box comments ognize how the theory learned from the book and in lecture useful or just a waste of time”, most students responded could be applied to practical situations. that they regarded them useful as an avenue of communiThe instructor benefited from expanding his own gencation, because they “made chemistry interesting”, and beeral knowledge and from receiving new ideas for future gencause they showed the impact of chemistry on everyday life. eral chemistry courses. This came at a cost: namely, the efThey also felt that this approach made the material easier fort and time spent on finding answers. References 1–3 to comprehend and retain. The few negative comments typiproved to be useful sources of information. Some answers cally remarked that the examples did not always relate showed that scientific interpretation is not always as clearclosely to the scheduled lecture topics, or that students subcut as it appears to many freshmen students. Recognition mitting questions were motivated only by the extra credit. of possible variations in interpretation is an important part The instructor’s experience with the performance of the of higher education and should be used to encourage criti“suggestion box” has been very positive. Its use has been cal thinking. stimulating even for a beginner-level course. It is clear that Many of the questions served to tie together several conthe goal of instilling a positive analytical attitude towards cepts covered earlier in the course. One question, for exscience in the minds of some freshmen students has been ample, proved to be a good lead into a lecture dealing with pH calculations for weak acids. In the Table 2. Examples of Student Submissions in Selected Categoriesa previous lecture the concept of pH Category Content of Submission had been introduced and illusM e d i c i n e / p h y s i o l o g y / I was looking at the acid–base chart and noticed that milk was trated by measuring the pH of beer biology/nutrition/food more of an acid and not a base. I always thought it was a base (pH 4.3 for the light American beer because of the way we use it to settle upset stomachs and when a tested). The following question person mistakenly swallows chemicals and medication. So I’ m was posed by a student: “Now if wondering what is the actual reaction or reason for the milk. Bud is acid, is a stronger or darker Household products I am wondering about body powder. It is able to seemingly absorb beer more acidic?” This question or control both body water and body oils. How is this possible? turned out to be a source for a wealth of concepts, including acid– Environment/space If the USA is one of the greatest CFC users, why isn’ t the hole in base chemistry, fermentation, the the ozone layer over us? And why is the hole over the south pole? CO2 /H 2CO 3/HCO 3{/CO 32{ equilibMaterials/packaging If glass is an amorphous solid, could you explain the structure of rium system, solubility, “ lead crystal” which is usually advertised as having 24–34% Pb? LeChâtelier’s principle, and alkaAdvertisements, movies Recently I have seen advertisements for laundry discs that linity of water. (For those intereliminate the need for soap. The ads say: “ the discs contain ested: the pH of an extra stout beer metallic elements (silver and copper) in “ activated ceramics” which was found to be 4.0.) release electrons, which, in turn produce ionized oxygen. It says this form of oxygen is a natural cleanser which breaks up dirt and organic compounds. The “ activated ceramics” also emit infrared electromagnetic waves which cause the water molecules to disassociate and penetrate deeper into fabrics, removing dirt and odors.” Could this possibly work, and would you pay $49 for three of these discs?
Who Participated? During two quarters of using the suggestion box, an average of one of every 6–7 students contributed at least once. While this is a
aNot
edited for grammar.
Vol. 74 No. 7 July 1997 • Journal of Chemical Education
789
In the Classroom Table 3. Distribution of Submissions as a Function of Student Grades Grade
Students Submitting/ Total Students
Suggestions Submitted Submissions/ (No.) Studenta (ave.) 1994 1995 Total
1994
1995
Total
A
11/41
8/37
19/78
25
22
47
2.5
B
9/63
13/58
22/121
22
38
60
2.7
C
11/99
8/75
19/174
28
14
42
2.2
D
3/16
2/16
5/32
3
2
5
W/F
0/21
0/ 6
0/27
0
0
0
0
Anonymous
n/a
n/ a
n/a
14
0
14
n/a
Total
34/240
92
76
168
n/a
31/192 65/432
1
a
Applies to students who submitted at least one note.
achieved when students write: “I find myself staring at boiling oatmeal and wondering about vapor pressure and evaporation rates—not to speak of boiling points! Chemistry is interesting to me because I can actually see it in everyday life.”
1. The Merck Index, 11th ed.; Budavari, S., Ed.; Merck & Co.: Rahway, NJ, 1989. 2. Selinger, B. Chemistry in the Marketplace, 4th ed.; Harcourt Brace: Sydney, 1994. 3. Meyers, R. A. Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, 2nd ed.; Academic: San Diego, 1992.
Literature Cited
790
Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 74 No. 7 July 1997
