Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton

Edited by

Michael K. Seery and Claire Mc Donnell

 Published by Creathach Press

Copyright 2019 © Contributing Authors

Cover image by Christopher Armstrong

Back cover image (Courtesy of Tina Overton/University of Leeds)

All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be copied, reproduced, or transmitted in any form
or by any means, without the prior permission of the publishers.

ISBN: 978-0-9928233-1-3

overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com

To access Supplementary Information, use the code: overtonfs3

when prompted on the website
Contributor Details v

Foreword from Prof Tina Overton 1

1. Introduction to the Festschrift 5

Michael K. Seery and Claire McDonnell

2. A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry 9

Kristy L. Turner

3. Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students 23

David Read, Stephen M. Barnes, Julie Hyde and James S. Wright

4. Integration of technology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory 39

Barry J. Ryan

5. Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry 55

Elizabeth Yuriev, Sabrina Basal, and Kimberly Vo

6. A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry 77

Dudley E. Shallcross

7. Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education 89

Simon J. Lancaster, Dennis F. Cook and William J. Massingberd-Mundy

8. Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry 105

Gwendolyn Lawrie, Kelly E. Matthews and Lawrence Gahan

9. Context- and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education 123

Dylan P. Williams

10. Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry 137

Christine M. O’Connor

11. Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry 151

Natalie M. Rowley

12. Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learn stereochemistry 165
Nimesh Mistry

13. Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education 181

Suzanne Fergus

14. Student-led interviews to develop employability skills 195

James W. Gaynor

15. Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates 209

Claire McDonnell and Vanessa L. Murphy

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | iii

16. Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education 225
Jane Essex

17. A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates 237
Gita Sedghi

18. Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists 249
Christopher M. Pask and Samantha L. Pugh

19. Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment 265
Katherine J. Haxton

20. Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum 283

Daniel C. Southam and Brenda M. Rohl

21. Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects 301
Jenny L. Slaughter and Lynne Bianchi

22. Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry

undergraduate laboratories 315
Dino Spagnoli, Cara Rummey, Nikki Y.T. Man, Siobhán S. Wills, and Tristan D. Clemons

23. Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students 333
Natalie J. Capel, Laura M. Hancock, Katherine J. Haxton, Martin J. Hollamby, Richard H. Jones,
Daniela Plana and David J. McGarvey

24. Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory 349
Michael K. Seery, Hendra Y. Agustian and Thomas O. Lambert

25. Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills 363

Angela Ziebell, Stephen R. George-Williams, Stephen M. Danczak, Jared C. Ogunde, Michelle
A. Hill, Katherine Fernandez, Mahbub Sarkar, Christopher D. Thompson and Tina L. Overton

26. Introducing elements of inquiry into undergraduate chemistry laboratories 377

Patrick I.T.Thomson, Lauren McShannon and Samantha Owens

27. Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry 391

Jennifer A. J. Burnham

28. Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery 405
Julie Hyde

29. Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance

chemistry laboratory teaching 421
Aishling Flaherty, Tina L. Overton, Anne O’Dwyer, Patricia Mannix-McNamara and J. J. Leahy

30. Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants 435

Christopher A. Randles

iv | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

Contributor Details

Tina Overton, University of Leeds

Professor Tina Overton is the Director of the Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence at the University of
Leeds. She was previously Professor of Chemistry Education at Monash University, Australia, where she
still holds a Distinguished Professorship, and at the University of Hull, UK. She was also the Director of
the Higher Education Academy UK Physical Sciences Centre which supported teaching and learning in
chemistry, physics, astronomy and forensic science. Before entering academia Tina worked as an analyst
in industry and in nuclear medicine in the National Health Service. These experiences and the fact that she
studied part-time as an undergraduate have shaped how she supports students and teaches chemistry.
She has taught inorganic, industrial, and environmental chemistry and designed and delivered online
distance-taught MOOCs and work-based programmes. Her research interests are in critical thinking,
context- and problem-based learning, the development of problem-solving skills, work-based learning,
and employability. She has published widely in chemistry education research and authored textbooks
in inorganic chemistry and skills development. She has been awarded the Royal Society of Chemistry’s
Higher Education Teaching Award, Tertiary Education Award, and Nyholm Prize, the Royal Australian
Chemical Institute’s Fensham Medal, and is a National Teaching Fellow and Senior Fellow of the Higher
Education Academy.

Michael Seery, University of Edinburgh

Michael is Professor of Chemistry Education and the Director of Teaching in the School of Chemistry
at University of Edinburgh. His research explores learning in laboratories and supporting students’
independent learning. He is the Editor of the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) journal Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, and past Chair of the Editorial Board of Education in Chemistry. He is currently a
member of the RSC Education Division and was Secretary of the Chemical Education Research Group
during its period of revitalisation, leading to an RSCInspirational Committee Award. His teaching activities
have been recognised by the RSC Higher Education Teaching Award and the Irish Learning Technology
Association Jennifer Burke Award, and he was a member of the team that won a National Academy for
Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (NAIRTL) Teaching Excellence Award. He has also been
awarded the RSC Inspirational Member Award. He currently manages a research group of five PhD
students.

Claire Mc Donnell, Technological University Dublin

Claire is Assistant Head at the School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences in TU Dublin, where
she teaches organic and medicinal chemistry. Her interests in chemistry education include facilitating
learner transition to higher education and the application of technology to support student learning and
collaboration. She has implemented several approaches to embed professional skills in the curriculum,
including context and problem based learning and community engaged learning. She was the recipient
of the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) Higher Education Teaching Award in 2009 and was one of a four
person team from TU Dublin to receive a Teaching Excellence Award from the Irish National Academy
for Integration of Research, Teaching and Learning in the same year. She spent a three year secondment
with the TU Dublin Learning, Teaching and Technology Centre from 2013–16 where she was programme
coordinator for their MA in Higher Education. Claire is Treasurer of the RSC Higher Education Group and
was previously a member of the RSC Education Division and Chair of the Education Division Ireland Region
Committee. She is a founding member of the Chemistry Education Research Team at TU Dublin which
won a DELTA award from the Irish National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in 2018.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |v

Hendra Agustian, University of Edinburgh
Hendra has degrees in both chemistry and education, from universities in Indonesia, UK, the Netherlands,
and Czech Republic. He has been working in education sector for well over ten years, as a teacher,
curriculum coordinator, and researcher. He was an Erasmus Mundus awardee in 2009 and a research grant
from Stichting Gedachtegoed, the Netherlands, in 2011. He is finishing his PhD in chemistry education at
the University of Edinburgh, funded by Engineering and Physical Science Research Council, UK, focussing
on pedagogical and philosophical validation of undergraduate chemistry laboratory through the lens of
students’ learning and views of science.

Christopher Armstrong, University of Hull (cover art)

Chris is a Teaching Fellow and the current chemistry Programme Director at the University of Hull. He has
been integrating art and design into the curriculum with the use of posters, infographics, and animation
for both teaching and assessment.

Stephen Barnes, University of Southampton

Stephen is a Ph.D student in chemical education at the University of Southampton. Stephen completed
his BSc studies at Southampton in 2012, winning numerous awards for his academic performance. As
a postgraduate teaching assistant on the Science Foundation Year programme, Stephen has created
teaching resources to support active learning in classroom settings and has made videos which have
been used by thousands of school pupils as well as Southampton students. Stephen won the student
nominated faculty award for Best PG Demonstrator from the University of Southampton Students’ Union
in 2018 in recognition of his work on the Science Foundation Year.

Sabrina Basal, Monash University

Sabrina is a pharmaceutical science/engineering student with a great interest in science education
research. Sabrina has been awarded a 2018 Monash University Winter Scholarship to carry out research
on problem-solving skills in chemistry.

Lynne Bianchi, University of Manchester

Lynne specialises in science education curriculum development, innovation and research and is Director
of the Science & Engineering Education Research and Innovation Hub at the University of Manchester. She
has a well-established profile in the areas of teaching, learning and assessment of school science, child
led learning, thinking skills and professional learning. She is a Senior Fellow of the HEA, and author of
professional and children’s books, such as Science Beyond the Classroom Boundaries and Smart Pickings. Her
current research focuses on the Trajectory of Professional Development as a framework for professional
learning, and the award winning Great Science Share for Schools campaign.

Jennifer Burnham, University of Sheffield

Jenny did a BSc, PhD and postdoctoral research in chemistry before becoming a teaching assistant at the
University of Sheffield in 2005. She is now a Senior University Teacher, with responsibilities for laboratory
teaching leading the departmental approach to programme-led teaching. She completed an MEd in
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in 2012, is a University of Sheffield Senate Award winner for
Excellence in Learning and Teaching (2012/13), and a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. She
has wide-ranging scholarship interests in the learning and teaching of chemistry, and fosters the interests
and careers of teaching-focussed staff institutionally as well as nationally through work with the Royal
Society of Chemistry.

vi | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

Natalie Capel, Keele University
Natalie is a Teaching Fellow in Chemistry, specialising in organic chemistry. She was appointed at Keele
in 2016, and since then has utilised a variety of different teaching methods, in particular Team-Based
Learning. She has disseminated her experiences as part of the Keele TBL group at a number of national
higher education conferences, focussing on how introducing active learning to Foundation Year courses
has led to increased student satisfaction and attainment.

Tristan Clemons, University of Western Australia

Tristan is a National Health and Medical Research Council research fellow at the University of Western
Australia (UWA) interested in the teaching and learning of chemistry at the undergraduate level, especially
in the roles of laboratories and laboratory preparation of students. Through his work, Tristan has been
recognised for a number of awards including a WA Young Tall Poppy Award in 2014 a UWA Award for
Exceptional Contribution to Education Futures in 2016 and recently in 2018 recognised as a 40 under 40
winner as an influencer in the WA Business Community under 40 years of age.

Dennis Cook, University of East Anglia

Dennis completed his undergraduate dissertation in Natural Sciences under the instruction of Professor
Lancaster at UEA. He has since completed a postgraduate certificate in educational theory and placement
work in schools as part of a secondary science PGCE. He is currently persuing a Masters by research in
computational chemistry at UEA.

Stephen Danczak, Monash University

Stephen has recently completed his PhD in chemistry education under the supervision of Associate
Professor Chris Thompson and Professor Tina Overton. He investigated how chemistry students, teaching
staff and employers defined critical thinking and developed an instrument to measure critical thinking
development. Even before commencing his PhD Stephen has been involved in teaching chemistry
laboratories at several institutions for many years. More recently he has been involved in chemistry
tutorials and assisting lecturers to implement active learning pedagogies, and science communication
tutorials.

Jane Essex, University of Strathclyde

Jane taught chemistry and science in schools in England for 16 years before making the transition into
university-based teacher education. She has been working in this area for 16 years and her work has
included the piloting of subject knowledge enhancement courses. Through her chairing of the Chemical
Education Research Group, she has promoted teacher research activities to enhance chemistry education.
She has been recognised for the impact of her teaching by being shortlisted as national STEM Outreach
Ambassador of the Year in 2016, the Herald Global GameChangers award for Innovation in STEM Education,
and was the winner of the RSC Inclusion and Diversity Award 2019.

Suzanne Fergus, University of Hertfordshire

Suzanne is an Associate Professor in Learning and Teaching at the University of Hertfordshire. In 2016,
she was awarded the prestigious Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) Higher Education Teaching Award
for her sustained innovation in the teaching and assessment of chemistry across a diverse portfolio
of undergraduate and postgraduate degree programmes and in 2017, received a National Teaching
Fellowship. Suzanne is currently the Learning and Teaching strategic lead within the Department of
Clinical and Pharmaceutical Sciences where she promotes, develops and leads on technology enhanced
learning, assessment and feedback design and effective learning approaches.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | vii

Katherine Fernandez, Monash University
Katherine is a PhD candidate in the School of Chemistry and a teaching associate for the Indigenous
Academic Engagement Program (IAEP) at Monash University, Australia. Before coming to Australia, she
worked in the Philippines as a food analyst for six years and as senior lecturer in the chemistry department
at Trinity University of Asia for fifteen years. She holds a bachelors degree in chemistry and a masters
degree in chemistry education. She has published on the topic of contextualising chemistry for nursing
and co-authored a chemistry book for senior high school’s STEM strand.

Aishling Flaherty, University of Limerick

Aishling is completing a position as post-doctoral chemistry education research associate at Michigan State
University. She has a B.Sc in Science Education and a Ph.D. in Chemistry Education from the University of
Limerick. She has taught chemistry, education, and chemistry pedagogy at graduate and undergraduate
levels of education. Her current research interests include examining how empowerment theory,
leadership theory, and transformative learning theory can promote teaching and learning throughout
tertiary chemistry education. She is currently relocating to Limerick to take up a faculty position there in
the Department of Education.

Lawrence Gahan, University of Queensland

Lawrence is an Emeritus Professor at the University of Queensland in Australia. His research was in the area
of bioinorganic chemistry and, since retirement, in computational chemistry. Throughout his academic
career he was involved in the development of teaching resources with the goal of expanding the learning
experiences of undergraduate students. His teaching efforts were recognised with a number of awards,
including: Deans Award for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (2008), Faculty of Science Teaching
Excellence Award (2009), University of Queensland Teaching Excellence Award (2009), and an Australian
Teaching and Learning Council (ALTC) Citation (2010).

James Gaynor, University of Liverpool

James is a chemistry lecturer with a focus on education. His interests are organic chemistry, synthetic
laboratory chemistry, organic spectroscopy, molecular biology for chemists, and general employability skill
development. He is a Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy and is currently the departmental
Year 1 coordinator and employability champion. James has won numerous teaching awards/bursaries
including an RSC Chemistry Education Activating Research bursary (2012), Faculty of Science and
Engineering Teaching and Learning awards (2015 for employability curriculum development and 2017
for health and safety curriculum development), and a University of Liverpool Learning and Teaching
Fellowship (2017).

Stephen George-Williams, University of Sydney

Stephen has completed two PhDs (one in chemistry and the other in chemistry education) and has a
number of publications in both fields. He has been teaching in laboratories since 2009, which ignited
his passion for education. His research interests range from contextualised and inquiry-based teaching
laboratories, assessment (particularly using more problem-based criteria), training of sessional teaching
staff and communication between teaching staff. He has been highly involved in the Transforming
Laboratory Learning program and will implement his work on large scale interventions in the tertiary
education space at the University of Sydney.

Laura Hancock, Keele University

Laura teaches across a wide range of organic and inorganic chemistry topics. She is particularly interested
in developing authentic assessment and student engagement (both in class and with assessment), and

viii | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

is passionate about the use of Team Based Learning to promote active learning. In 2016, she jointly won
a Keele teaching excellence award for improving the learning experience and outcomes for 1st and 2nd
year organic chemistry students.

Katherine Haxton, Keele University

Katherine is a senior lecturer in chemistry at Keele University. She was awarded a Keele Teaching
Excellence Award in 2012, and elected to the Royal Society of Chemistry Education Division Council in
2014. She was programme director for Keele’s chemistry degrees between 2012 and 2016 which included
establishing single honours BSc and MChem chemistry as well as a trans-national degree programme with
a Chinese university and programmes including an international year. She teaches inorganic, industrial
and sustainable chemistry and is particularly interested in alternative modes of assessment that allow the
development of skills alongside subject knowledge, and the development of conceptual understanding
throughout degree programmes.

Michelle Hill, Monash University

After completing a BSc(Hons) in Chemistry, Michelle worked in R&D in the chemical industry for 11 years,
researching improved polymers for a range of applications, and training and supporting manufacturing
and technical teams in the Pacific region. She then worked as Head of Research and Insights at an
international strategy consulting firm for 10 years, before undertaking doctoral chemistry education
research which reflects her passion to help prepare undergraduates for a diverse employment future.
She currently teaches “Career Skills for Scientists” to undergraduates at Monash University. She is a RACI
member and past recipient of the Masson Memorial Medal.

Julie Hyde, University of Sheffield

Julie is a Senior University Teacher and Director of the MChem Industry programme at the University
of Sheffield. She is a Chartered Chemist and Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, and a SFHEA. She
has extensive experience in developing and delivering a three year laboratory programme in China
for Sheffield’s integrated [3+1] degree. In addition, she supports and guides students for their annual
placements in the UK and abroad, as well as developing a dedicated employability module for the MChem
Industry programme. She received an RSC Award for Service for her outstanding service in the promotion
of chemistry locally, nationally and internationally and a University Senate Award in Learning and Teaching
in the category Sustained Excellence.

Martin Hollamby, Keele University

Martin has been a lecturer at Keele University since May 2013. Prior to this he was a postdoctoral researcher
in Germany and Japan and studied for both an MSciand a PhD at the University of Bristol, UK. His research
focuses on molecular self-assembly, and the application of scattering techniques, including SANS, for
characterizing the structure and formation mechanisms of soft and condensed matter. He teaches a
range of topics within the broad categories of physical and colloidal chemistry, and oversees the first year
laboratory module Practical and Professional Chemistry Skills. He has developed, organised and created a
range of assessment and feedback exercises within these roles.

Richard Jones, Keele University

Richard obtained a degree in chemistry from Oxford and a PhD from Birmingham. He was appointed a
lecturer in inorganic chemistry at Keele in 1992. His research interests are focussed on structural inorganic
chemistry, in particular with regard to catalysis and halogen bonding. Whilst at Keele he has introduced
several innovations, which have been widely adopted within the school. These have widened the forms of
assessment they encounter; in which they develop skill sets which are applicable to the workplace. These

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |ix

have focussed on improving student experience in particular improving effective feedback.

Thomas Lambert, University of Edinburgh

Thomas is currently undertaking a PhD in hydrogen deuterium exchange-mass spectrometry in the Clarke
lab at the University of Edinburgh. He is the post-graduate representative for Chemunity, a EUSA funded
student focused mental health based organization. Thomas is also an Associate Fellow of the Higher
Education Academy.

Simon Lancaster, University of East Anglia

Always an enthusiastic lecturer in inorganic chemistry with a fascination for technology, Simon frequently
combined the two, gaining the appreciation of his students. In 2010 he was recognised by the Sir Geoffrey
and Lady Allen Excellence in Teaching Award at UEA. The integration of peer instruction into his flipped
teaching provided a proven pedagogy for advancement of his view of chemistry as a concept over
knowledge based discipline. Advocacy for a flexible model of active learning in partnership with students
has been rewarded by a National Teaching Fellowship (2013) and the Royal Society of Chemistry Higher
Education Award (2013). He was promoted to a Chair in Chemistry Education in 2014. He is currently
president of the Education Division of the Royal Society of Chemistry.

Gwendolyn Lawrie, University of Queensland

Gwen is Associate Professor in the School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences (SCMB) at the University
of Queensland (UQ). Her research is situated at the nexus between education research and teaching
practice and explores the role of student-generated explanations and representations in deeper learning
as well as scaffolding of online collaborative and self-regulated inquiry in large classes. Gwen’s work has
been recognised through many awards: the 2017 Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI) Chemistry
Education Division Medal; 2013 Pearson RACI Educator of the Year Award; a 2013 OLT Australian Award
for University Teaching; and a 2012 UQ Award for Teaching Excellence. She is a Senior Fellow of the Higher
Education Academy (SFHEA) and Fellow of RACI (FRACI).

J.J. Leahy, University of Limerick

J.J. has been teaching analytical chemistry analytical chemistry which is highly laboratory skill oriented
to undergraduate and post-graduate students since 1987 at the University of Limerick. The students
taking these modules come from a variety of scientific backgrounds including chemistry biochemistry,
environmental science, and food science so the knowledge of chemistry can differ. He has a strong interest
in structuring laboratory classes to meet the needs of all learners; chemists and non-chemists; with the
aim of balancing the need to understand principles while constructing applications led curricula. He has
frequently been nominated as teacher of the year for large class teaching.

Nikki Man, University of Western Australia

Nikki completed a PhD in organic chemistry and microbiology at the University of Western Australia
(UWA). Having taught instrumental music since 2007, she added chemistry laboratories to her belt from
2013; in the same year, she became part of the UWA Travelling Scientist program, delivering science talks
in the remote Kimberley region. She was a finalist in the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Chemistry World
Science Communication Competition in 2016. In 2017, she was a visiting lecturer in organic chemistry and
academic skills at Southwest University China for the Australian Education Management Group. Nikki is
currently a postdoctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, working in the
outreach-specialised research group, “Kitchen Lab”.

x|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

Patricia Mannix-McNamara, University of Limerick
Patricia is a teacher educator and is Professor and Head of the School of Education at the University of
Limerick. She has won several excellence in teaching awards at the University of Limerick. She has been
highly commended for her teaching excellence in the Shannon Regional Consortium and had been
nominated for a national teaching excellence award. Empowerment and student centered pedagogy are
core to her practice and her focus as an educator is driven by the promotion of critical thinking and the
development of educative agency.

William Massingberd-Mundy, University of East Anglia

William joined Professor Lancaster for his final research project while embarking on an undergraduate
degree in chemistry at the UEA having been inspired by the diverse range of teaching that he had been
exposed to throughout his undergraduate studies. His research provided a fascinating insight into the
variety of pedagogies in place.

Kelly Matthews, University of Queensland

Kelly Matthews is an Associate Professor (Higher Education) at the University of Queensland in Australia.
Her research explores students’ experiences of learning and engaging students as partners in learning
and teaching. She co-develops, and teaches into, teaching preparation programs for new tutors and
academics, and teaches undergraduate subjects in education. Kelly has collaborated on 24 funded
teaching and learning projects worth $2.5 million and publishes extensively. In 2015 she was awarded an
Australian Learning and Teaching Fellowship focused on Students as Partners. She is a Vice-President for
the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and a co-editor for the International
Journal for Students as Partners.

David McGarvey, Keele University

David is a Reader in Physical Chemistry with a background in the use of time-resolved spectroscopies to
elucidate the kinetics and mechanisms of exited state and free-radical processes of commercial, biological
and medical relevance. He has been teaching in Higher Education in the UK for over twenty five years
and has interests in the design of teaching, assessment and feedback methods to develop students’
professional chemistry skills. He has extensive experience of the design of varied learning scenarios that
often draw upon authentic contexts and the use of educational technologies. In 2011 he was the winner of
the RSC Higher Education Teaching Award and in 2013 he was shortlisted for the Times Higher Education
(THE) Most Innovative Lecturer Award.

Lauren McShannon, University of Strathclyde

Lauren was a student chemistry teacher at the University of Strathclyde, graduating in 2017. She then
successfully completed her Probation Year 2017-18 and has since secured a permanent teaching post with
Aberdeen City Council.

Nimesh Mistry, University of Leeds

Nimesh is a Senior Teaching Fellow in the School of Chemistry at the University of Leeds. He is currently
a holder of a University Student Education Fellowship and a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy.
After quickly realising that his students may not learn in the same way he did, Nimesh decided to gain a
better understanding of how students learn and use this to inform his own teaching practice. His interests
include the use inquiry-style experiments into laboratory education and addressing issues students face
when learning organic chemistry.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |xi

Vanessa Murphy, Technological University Dublin
Vanessa is a lecturer in the School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Technological University
Dublin. Since joining the school in 2013, she has worked on expanding community based learning
activities for undergraduate students as a means of developing their personal and professional skills.
Vanessa lectures at both undergraduate and postgraduate level, where she is committed to developing
authenticlearning strategies, and is passionate about bringing chemistry to the wider community. Vanessa
is a member of the Chemistry Education Research Team (CERT) that was awarded with a Disciplinary
Excellence in Learning Teaching and Assessment (DELTA) award in 2018 from the National Forum for the
Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education.

Christine O’Connor, Technological University Dublin

Christine is Assistant Head of the School of Food Science and Environmental Health, TU Dublin. She has a
PhD from Dublin City University and has completed a part-time MSc in Pharmaceutical Quality Assurance,
PG Cert and Diploma in Third Level Learning and Teaching, as well as an MSc in Applied eLearning. She
was a member of the European Thematic Chemistry Network (ECTN) and one of the founding members of
the DIT chemistry education research team (CERT). She was awarded the DIT Presidents commendation
and has won two national teaching awards for third level chemistry education (NAIRTL, 2009 and DELTA,
2018). More recently she has been involved in developing international curriculum design programmes
in developing countries. Her teaching interests are in the area of spectroscopy and drug delivery which is
underpinned by her research interests. Her pedagogical research is in the areas of context based teaching,
curriculum design, and blended learning.

Anne O’Dwyer, Mary Immaculate College

Anne was awarded a scholarship from the Irish Research Council to complete her doctoral studies. This
work focused on developing an understanding and developing of teachers’ and students’ attitudes and
approaches to teaching and learning organic chemistry. Anne has developed and taught chemistry
pedagogy to pre-service second-level science teachers. Anne is currently a member of the Department
of STEM Education in Mary Immaculate College, where she teaches science pedagogy to undergraduate
primary teachers. She continues to contribute to the development, teaching,421 and supervision in the
postgraduate M.A. in STEM Education.

Jared Ogunde, Monash University

Jared holds an MA in science education from the University of York. Currently, he is a chemistry education
PhD student at Monash University. He has experience in education and public outreach and was recently
a chemistry teaching associate at Monash University.

Samantha Owens, University of Strathclyde

Samantha was a student chemistry teacher at the University of Strathclyde, graduating in 2018 with a
Masters in Chemistry with Teaching.

Christopher Pask, University of Leeds

Chris is currently a Senior Teaching Fellow in the School of Chemistry at the University of Leeds. He has
a keen interest in developing students’ employability skills. He is the Industrial Placements Tutor for the
School and has been involved in the development and now leads the delivery of modules designed to
improve the commercial and business skills of undergraduate chemists.

xii | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

Daniela Plana, Keele University
Daniela studied Chemistry at Universidad Simon Bolivar in Venezuela, moving to the UK for her PhD in
Physical Chemistry at the University of Manchester. Since 2015 Daniela has been a Teaching Fellow at
Keele University, becoming a Fellow of the HEA in 2018. As her focus at Keele has been working with
international students, Daniela is School Internationalisation Director and a member of the UK-China
Universities & RSCTransnational Degrees Network. She is currently involved in a KeeleTeaching Innovation
Project to develop inclusive learning resources for large diverse cohorts of students.

Samantha Pugh, University of Leeds

Samantha is an Associate Professor in STEM Education and Faculty Lead for Teaching Enhancement at
the University of Leeds. She is known for developing context-based learning and working in partnership
with students in the Physical Sciences. Her contribution to the sector was recognised with the award of
University Student Education Fellowships in 2012 and 2014 and she was a finalist for the NCEE Enterprise
Educator in HE in 2014. She was made a National Teaching Fellow in 2017.

Christopher Randles, Purdue University

A graduate of Professor Tina Overton’s PhD program at the University of Hull where he conducted
research into the approaches used by STEM students to solve open-ended problems and their links
to cognitive functionality, Christopher currently works at Purdue University as a postdoctoral research
fellow for Professor George Bodner. At Purdue his tasks include training graduate teaching assistants and
supporting undergraduate and graduate research programs in chemistry and physics education. Currently
he focuses research into online collaborative learning environments (Web2.0 systems such as PeerWise
and Edmodo), problem-solving (approaches to solving open-ended and multiple-choice questions), and
graduate teaching assistant training (reflective practice to improve professional development).

David Read, University of Southampton

David is Professorial Fellow in Chemical Education at the University of Southampton. He has led on the
development of innovative teaching methods and the use of learning technology in chemistry and more
widely at Southampton. Notable projects include the adoption of clickers in 2007 and the promotion
of their use across the community, the piloting of lecture capture in 2009, and the development and
dissemination of flipped classroom approaches over recent years. David won both the RSC HE teaching
award and ALT award for most effective use of video in 2010, and was awarded a National Teaching
Fellowship in 2017.

Brenda Rohl, Curtin University

Brenda completed her DPhil at Oxford University in 1996 in analytical chemistry applied to archeology.
Since then she has worked in many roles in the vocational and tertiary education sectors, including as
a lecturer and Associate Dean of Students. Throughout her career she has had a particular interest in
teaching chemistry and the first-year student experience. She has supported hundreds oftertiary students
in their career pathways.

Natalie Rowley, University of Birmingham

Natalie is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Chemistry at the University of Birmingham. She is a Fellow of
the Royal Society of Chemistry, a National Teaching Fellow (awarded 2016), a member of the International
Federation of National Teaching Fellows and a Fellow of the Higher Education Futures institute (HEFi) at
the University of Birmingham.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |xiii

Cara Rummey, University of Western Australia
Cara is currently a masters student at the University of Western Australia. Her research project is focused
on developing pre-laboratory activities for a first year chemistry unit. She is the recipient of the Raoul
Robellaz Kahan Scholarship and a Government Research Training Stipend.

Barry Ryan, Technological University Dublin

Barry is an award winning and research active applied biochemist with a proven expertise in practitioner
use of, and leadership in, alternative research-based pedagogies in a modern higher education setting. His
approach to teaching has always been at the transformative edge and is underpinned by his integration
of pedagogical research as a way to inform and shape his practice. This approach is embodied by his early
adoption and continued research-led development of the “student as producer (and co-creator)”paradigm.
Barry was awarded the Royal Society of Chemistry Higher Education Award in 2019 in recognition of his
development and dissemination of this philosophy. Concurrently, his lab-based research aligns with his
educational research, resulting in a multi-faceted research profile incorporating community, laboratory,
and pedagogical research to support and nurture biochemists at all levels of higher education. He
seamlessly weaves these research strands together, promoting a student centred, research informed
approach to chemistry and biochemistry education that is both original and innovative.

Mahbub Sarkar, Monash University

Mahbub is a lecturer of educational research at the Monash Centre for Scholarship in Health Education.
Prior to that, he pursued his post-doctoral research under the supervision of Professor Tina Overton with
the Chemistry Education Research Group (CERG) at Monash. He has over 12 years experience in researching
a range of STEM education issues from early years to undergraduate levels, including aspects such as
improving the quality of science curricula and teaching to increase student engagement, understanding
the development of scientific and environmental literacy with students, and promoting undergraduate
science students’ employability skills.

Gita Sedghi, University of Liverpool

Gita is a senior lecturer (Teaching and Scholarship) in the Chemistry Department at the University of
Liverpool. She is also a Senior Fellow of the HEA and engaged in pedagogical research and exploring
innovative teaching methodologies for undergraduate programmes. Gita’s teaching philosophy is based
on inspiring and engaging a diverse community of students with chemistry through partnership. Her
research is focused on peer assisted learning; inclusive teaching and learning for home and international
students; as well as pre-laboratory activities, online assessment, and formative feedback to enhance
students’ performance and experience. Evidence of Gita’s success in improving the student experience is
provided by her two Faculty Teaching and Learning awards and a Liverpool Teaching Fellow Award.

Dudley Shallcross, University of Bristol

Dudley was the first national teaching fellow in Chemistry in higher education in the U.K. He was co
director of the Bristol ChemLabS Centre for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in Chemistry and has co
developed the Dynamic Laboratory Manual to support practical chemistry. He has led many innovations
in chemistry education at tertiary and secondary levels including; school teacher fellows, better use of
labs and smart worksheets. He has also led successful outreach programmes to all ages and science
teaching at primary school level. He has won many awards for science education including; the Royal
Society of Chemistry’s Higher Education Teaching Award (2004), Tertiary Education Award (2008) and the
Nyholm Prize (2017), the Society of Chemical Indusries’ Inaugural Science Education Award (2006), the
Royal Meteorological Society Hunt Award (2009), and the Merrill Lynch Science Education Award (2010).

xiv | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

Jenny Slaughter, University of Manchester
As a lecturer in the School of Chemistry at the University of Manchester, Jenny enjoys the student-facing
role, whether it’s the challenges of interpreting chemistry in 3D during tutorials and lectures, enabling
Graduate Teacher Assistants to deliver excellent inquiry-based learning environments in the teaching
laboratory or supporting students to become collaborative partners in education-focused research
projects. She coordinates all teaching laboratory activities in her department, is a member of the
Curriculum Review team and leads the Faculty Graduate Teacher Assistant training scheme. She is a Senior
Fellow of the HEA and holds a PGCE in Higher Education.

Daniel Southam, Curtin University

Daniel is a Senior Lecturer in Chemistry at Curtin University. He has been awarded the RACI Chemistry
Educator of the Year award in 2014 and an Australia Award for University Teaching Citation for
Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning. Daniel is a passionate advocate of active learning, where
he crafts engaging social environments blended with effective use of technology that support student
development of skills necessary for lifelong learning. His broad aim is to improve students’perceptions of
their ability to learn science, and to develop capacity for real change in the depth of their understanding
and enjoyment of science.

Dino Spagnoli, University of Western Australia

Dino is the coordinator of first year studies in chemistry and biochemistry at the University of Western
Australia, which involves coordinating all activities related to online quizzes and laboratories for first year
chemistry units. He lectures and coordinates large first year units with cohort sizes between 100 and
450 students. Along with Tristan Clemons and Shannan Maisey, he won the UWA Award for Exceptional
Contributions to Education Futures for his work on developing online pre-laboratory videos in 2016. He
was the recipient of the 2016 UWA Faculty of Science Excellence in Coursework Teaching (Level 1) award.

Christopher Thompson, Monash University

Chris is an Associate Professor in Chemistry Education with a background in physical chemistry. He has
published over 50 papers in the fields of both science education and his native discipline of spectroscopy.
At the Faculty of Science he has focused on curriculum and assessment reform across all year levels, and
paid particular attention to the employability of Science Graduates from all disciplines. He currently serves
as Associate Dean (Education).

Patrick Thomson, University of Strathclyde

Patrick is an early-career teaching & scholarship fellow with an interest in practical chemistry education for
entry-level undergraduate students. He runs first year teaching laboratories at Strathclyde, and delivers
introductory organic chemistry lectures. He also believe passionately in sharing innovative practice, and
give institution-wide learning enhancement training.

Kristy Turner, Bolton School Boys’ Division & University of Manchester

Kristy has a unique role combining teaching chemistry part-time in both a school and university. A
secondary school teacher since 2006, She was a Royal Society of Chemistry School Teacher Fellow
in 2011/12 and has had a combined role since 2015 working both in Bolton School Boys’ Division and
University of Manchester. Kristy won the RSC Schools Education Award in 2017 for her work in engaging
school teachers with education research, and she is currently Chair of the Editorial Board for the RSC
periodical, Education in Chemistry.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |xv

Kimberly Vo, Monash University
Kimberly is a pharmaceutical science student with a keen interest in chemistry education research and
a particular focus on process skills. Kimberly has been awarded a 2017 Monash University Summer
Scholarship to carry out research on problem-solving skills in chemistry.
Dylan Williams, University of Leicester
Dylan is the Director of Learning and Teaching in chemistry at the University of Leicester. Dylan has led
the development and evaluation of context- and problem-based learning approaches in chemistry at
Leicester for over a decade. In 2017 Dylan was awarded the HEA National Teaching Fellowship and was a
member of the Collaborative Award for Teaching Excellence winning Leicester Natural Sciences team. In
2018 Dylan received the RSC Higher Education Teaching Award.

Siobhán Wills, University of Western Australia

Siobhán completed a PhD in carbohydrate chemistry at the University of Western Australia (UWA). During
her PhD, she volunteered in the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)
STEM Professionals in Schools program, delivering science outreach education in primary schools, as well
as demonstrating undergraduate chemistry laboratories. It was through demonstrating that Siobhán had
the opportunity to delve into chemical education research, helping to design pre-laboratory exercises
and videos to mitigate stress and anxiety associated with laboratories for first year students. Siobhán
currently works as a postdoctoral researcher for Bayer AG CropScience in Germany.

James Wright, University of Sheffield

James graduated PhD from the University of Sheffield as a graduate teaching assistant and obtained FHEA
as a student. He then worked as a teaching associate for the Sheffield-Nanjing Tech University joint degree
in inorganic, organic, and practical chemistry. He is now an Assistant Teaching Fellow in chemistry at GTIIT,
a Sino-foreign joint institute, where his current teaching focus is practical chemistry, and his particular
interest is in improving the scientific communication and writing of Chinese students in English.

Elizabeth Yuriev, Monash University

Elizabeth is an education-focused Senior Lecturer. She has produced 98 papers, five book chapters,
and two edited books. Her education research outputs include 11 papers, 16 conference talks, and 12
seminars, workshops, and invited presentations. Her work focuses on innovations to improve learning and
teaching of employability skills, with an emphasis on skill development in problem solving, collaboration,
and study skills. Her achievements in education innovation have been recognised with numerous awards:
Lecturer of the Year, Faculty and Vice-Chancellor Teaching Excellence, Monash Teacher Accelerator, and
the Australian Learning and Teaching Council Citation for Outstanding Contribution to Student Learning.

Angela Ziebell, Monash University

Since joining Monash three years ago Angela has lead the Transforming Laboratory Learning project. With
a strong non-academic research background in biological chemistry Angela is an experienced mentor
with an interest in transformational projects. With a strong record in hosting interns, Angela brings an
interest in student development together with a big picture understanding of how to maximise impact
when working with diverse stakeholders and in complex teams.

xvi| Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Foreword from Prof Tina Overton

Many of the authors of the chapters in this book will have experienced a lightbulb moment, the moment
when they saw chemistry education differently or decided they wanted to teach chemistry differently to
how they themselves had been taught. My lightbulb moment came many years ago when I was observing
a colleague give a seminar in sociology. I'd observed many such seminars or tutorials in science and
engineering and they were all predictably similar, involving students tackling problem sheets and tutors
going through the answers. This seminar, however, was entirely different. Students were expected to form
and defend arguments, to present ideas, and to grapple with problems and ideas to which there were
no single correct answers. They were animated and engaged, and I wanted to join in the discussion with
them. From that day I wanted to provide my own students with the opportunity to answer challenging
problems to which the answer could be “it depends”, to use judgement, to formulate arguments, to have
to defend them, and to critique arguments put forward by others. This desire, or the desire to present
students with meaningful, complex and open questions and problems, has driven my practice ever since.
One early manifestation of this was the publication of a collection of problems designed explicitly to get
students to think critically, read critically, evaluate and construct arguments and deal with uncertainty
(Garratt et al., 1999).

Another turning point for me was the realization that students who spent a year in industry, or who studied
part-time whilst working in industry, had massive advantages over regular full-time, on-campus students.
These advantages manifest themselves as possession of a range of communication and interpersonal
skills and a way of thinking more broadly about a chemical problem, not just looking at the chemistry but
considering issues such as economics, safety, regulatory issues, environmental issues, and availability of
manpower and equipment. In order to meet the needs of full-time on-campus students in terms of these
skills and attitudes, I became increasingly interested in the use of context and problem-based learning,
using industrial contexts and open-ended problem scenarios to drive skills development and expose
students to the ways of thinking like a chemist (Overton et al., 2009).

So, engagement with complex, open-ended problems has become, for me, a key way of supporting
students to develop transferable and higher order intellectual skills. Most of the problems that our
undergraduates experience are algorithmic and closed in nature, and are better considered as exercises
rather than as problems. As academics we use the term problem-solving to cover the whole gamut of

To cite: Overton, T. L. (2019),“Foreword from Prof Tina Overton”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in
Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 1-4.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 1

activities ranging from simple exercises to open-ended, complex activities, such as those found in problem
based learning. Johnstone (1993) articulated the different types of problems perfectly by manipulating
three variables: whether data was given, whether the method was known, and where there was a single
solution. This produced eight types of problems as shown in Table 1, with type 1 being algorithmic and
type 8 perhaps being encountered in problem-based learning. These different types of problems require
Table 1: Different types of problems (Johnstone, 1993)

Type Data Methods Outcomes Skills

1 Given Familiar Given Recall of algorithms
2 Given Unfamiliar Given Looking for parallels to unknown method
3 Incomplete Familiar Given Analysis of problem to decide what further data are
required
up
4 Incomplete Unfamiliar Given Weighing possible methods and deciding on
data required
5 Given Familiar Open Decision making about appropriate goals.
Exploration of knowledge networks
6 Given Unfamiliar Open Decisions about goals and choices of appropriate
methods.
Exploration of knowledge and technique networks
Once goals have been specified, the data are seen
7 Incomplete Familiar Open to be incomplete

Open Suggestion of goals, methods, consequent need

8 Incomplete Unfamiliar for additional data. All of the above skills

different types of intellectual skills, with the more open-ended type requiring higher order cognitive skills
whilst algorithmic require only lower order cognitive skills (St Clair-Thompson et al., 2012; Randles and
Overton, 2015). Algorithmic problem solving is heavily favoured in assessment schemes with open-ended
problems seldom featuring in meaningful assessed tasks (Overton et al., 2015).
As soon as we consider using complex problems with students then we have to consider cognitive load.
Cognitive load has an enormous impact on students’ ability to think and function (Sweller, 1988; St Clair
Thompson et al., 2010). Johnstone and El-Banna (1986) demonstrated that performance in problem solving
tasks plummets as cognitive load rises. Sirhan et al. (1999) demonstrated that students’ performance in
assessment improves if some content is removed from lectures and studied prior to the lecture, thus
reducing cognitive load. Johnstone et al. (1994) also demonstrated that cognitive load in laboratory
learning is high and can be reduced through the use of pre-laboratory exercises. Such exercises are now
almost universally adopted in university chemistry education.

Solving problems is an easy way to implement active learning into chemistry teaching. The benefits of
active learning are now widely known and there really is no excuse for any university teacher to be using
didactic lectures without any form of activity. There are many compelling examples of its effectiveness
in chemistry (Bonwell and Eison, 1991) and beyond (Freeman et al., 2014). The jury is no longer out. If we
bring together Sirhan’s work on pre-lectures with active learning in classrooms, we have the blueprint
for flipped learning which has grown so rapidly in popularity, largely because technology makes it easier
for academics to implement it and support students through it (Weaver and Sturtevant, 2015). So the
concept of flipped learning has been around for a long time, but the terminology is perhaps relatively
recent.

2|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Foreword

Figure 1: A model for chemistry education that equips graduates to be effective and successful

My engagement with the research literature, interaction with students and employers and carrying out
chemistry education research has led me to develop a simple model for chemistry education shown in
Figure 1. The model reduces chemistry education to three elements in order to develop graduates who
can make the most of opportunities that are available to them and be successful in their career.

These three elements are a sound knowledge of chemistry, development of a range of transferable
skills, and some awareness and appreciation of broader professional and real-world issues. Of course,
subject knowledge is crucial and that is the element in this model that is relatively straightforward for
most academics to grapple with as we are all subject experts. But on its own, it isn't enough. All students
need to develop a range of transferable skills that are desired by employers and identified as lacking in
chemistry graduates (Sarkar et al., 2016). Many academics find it very challenging to engage with these
skills, let alone help students to develop them and then assess them in a meaningful way. In addition,
many universities now commit to developing a number of graduate attributes in their graduates, such
as entrepreneurship, global citizenship, intercultural competence, etc. These attributes can provide real
challenges for academics who are aiming to incorporate them seamlessly into a chemistry programme.
However, I believe that these three elements can be embedded within a chemistry degree to the benefit
of students and their future careers and lives.

Sound subject knowledge comes from the curriculum as defined by individual academics, the wider
chemistry community, or guided by professional bodies. Transferable skills can be developed through
adopting the appropriate pedagogy. Any pedagogy that allows students to develop transferable skills
is inevitably some form of active learning, including the flipped classroom, problem-based or inquiry
based learning, complex problem-solving, research, or industrial experiences. Those additional real-world
attributes can be embedded through the context within which we teach chemistry. By choosing real
world or professional, work-related contexts for chemistry we can expose students to a range of broader
issues, to help them to think like a chemist in the real world and equip them with an awareness of issues
that extend across many non-chemistry sectors.

So, my model is simple; define the curriculum, select an appropriate pedagogy, and set the learning
within a realistic context. All else will follow. As we have discussed, curriculum content is relatively easy.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |3

Developing appropriate pedagogies and relevant real-world contexts is more challenging and more
interesting. The authors of the chapters of this book all tackle these challenging issues with creativity,
innovation, and scholarship. They have contributed to a most excellent volume which should be of value
to anyone teaching chemistry at the university level.

Tina Overton
Leeds, 2019

References
Bonwell, C.C., and Eison, J.A. (1991), Active Learning: Creating excitement in the classroom, ASHEERIC Higher
Education Report No. 1, George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. and Wenderoth, M.P. (2014), “Active
learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics”, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 111 No. 23, pp. 8410-8415.
Garratt, J., Overton, T. and Threlfall, T. (1999), A question of chemistry: Creative problems for curious chemists,
Longman, Harlow, UK.
Johnstone, A.H. and El-Banna, H. (1986), “Capacities, demands, and processes—a predictive model for science
education”, Education in Chemistry, Vol. 23, pp. 80-84.
Johnstone, A.H. (1993), “Introduction”, in Wood, C. and Sleet, R. (Eds.), in Creative Problem Solving in Chemistry,
Royal Society of Chemistry, London, pp. iv-vi.
Johnstone A.H., Sleet R.J. and Vianna J.F. (1994), “An information processing model of learning: its application to
an undergraduate laboratory course in chemistry”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19, pp. 77-88.
Overton, T.L., Byers, B. and Seery, M.K. (2009), “Context and Problem-based Learning”, in Eilks, I. (Ed.), Innovative
Methods of Teaching and Learning Chemistry in Higher Education, Royal Society of Chemistry, London, pp.
45-61.
Overton, T., Potter, N. and Leng, C. (2013), “A study of approaches to solving open-ended problems in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 468 – 475.
Randles, C.A and Overton, T.L. (2015), “Expert vs. novice: approaches used by chemists when solving open-ended
problems”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 811-823.
Sarkar, M., Overton, T., Thompson, C. and Rayner, G. (2016), “Graduate employability: Views of recent science
graduates and employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3, pp. 31-48.
Sirhan G., Gray C., Johnstone A.H. and Reid N. (1999), “Preparing the mind of the learner”, University Chemistry
Education, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 43-46.
St Clair-Thompson, H, Overton, T. and Botton, C. (2010), “Information processing: A review of implications of
Johnstone’s model for science education”, Research in Science and Technology Education, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp.
131-148.
St Clair-Thompson, H., Overton, T. and Bugler, M. (2012), “Mental capacity and working memory in chemistry:
algorithmic versus open-ended problem solving”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 13 No.
4, pp. 484 – 489.
Sweller, J. (1988), “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning", Cognitive Science, Vol. 12 No. 2,
pp. 257–285.
Weaver, G.C. and Sturtevant, H.G. (2015), “Design, implementation, and evaluation of a flipped format general
chemistry course”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 9, pp.1437-1448.

4|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 1 Introduction to the Festschrift

Michael K. Seery† and Claire McDonnell‡

†School of Chemistry, University of Edinburgh and ‡School of Chemical

and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Technological University Dublin

michael.seery@ed.ac.uk, claire.mcdonnell@dit.ie

The F-word

A Festschrift is a collection of writings published in honour of a scholar. It comes from the German words
for writing and celebration.They are typically found in the less-well surveyed bookshelves of the university
library; serious tomes of scholarly writing whose pages probably don’t see much daylight. But Tina is no
ordinary scholar and this is not a typical Festschrift. Instead of academic pseudo-papers compiled in book
form, the task was to make something useful, helpful, inspiring, and pragmatic. True to its etymological
roots, it would be a real celebration of the work of a scholar and her impact on several generations of
academic educators.

Parrot talk

In 1997, University Chemistry Education (the forerunner to Chemistry Education Research and Practice)
published proceedings of the symposium Using chemistry to create opportunities for learning. One
proceeding was entitled Creating critical chemists (Overton, 1997) and described activities designed to
teach chemistry students how to construct an argument, read critically, make judgements, and use logic
in deductions. This work was a harbinger of much of the focus of Tina’s intellectual activity over the next
two decades—thinking about the embedding of professional and transferable skills within the chemistry
curriculum, and thinking about how students (and indeed experts) approach problem solving. This work
evolved into extending the links deeper into the curriculum, and subsequently in her article Teaching

To cite: Seery, M.K. and McDonnell, C. (2019), “Introduction to the Festschrift”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching
Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 5-8.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |5

chemists to think: from parrots to professionals, Tina argued strongly for the inclusion of open-ended and
creative problem-solving activities (Overton, 2000). The article introduced the activity Tales of the River
Bank, one which would become a model for many problem-based activities in chemistry, including many
in this book. Tina introduced readers to the subject specific skills emerging from these activities, but also
more broadly to the key transferable skills, such as communication, information retrieval, problem solving,
and team work. The strength of this work and the reason it has become a blueprint for many others is in
its relatability. It is clear how these kinds of activities can be embedded into a chemistry curriculum, and
what can be achieved as a result of it. Indeed it is clear also how it runs practically, with details of what
it looks like to implement. While implementation was in Tina’s own university, others looking to develop
their curriculum could gain a real sense of how it might fit in to their setting. This is another recurring
strength of Tina’s work. Indeed, while our focus here is on chemistry, the types of exercises mentioned in
those first proceedings were subsequently presented to a broader audience; with the important message
that while the activities need to be within students’ discipline, we can be clever and learn from other
disciplines (Garratt et al., 2000). The message of transferability extended beyond just different university
chemistry departments, but also to different disciplines entirely.

Where’s the evidence?

Tina then proceeded to empower those who were introducing educational enhancement activities to
evaluate them effectively and to explore their impact. She co-edited Getting Started in Pedagogic Research
within the STEM Disciplines (Overton and Grove, 2013). This valuable open access publication has provided
many science educators with the confidence and the skills to engage in education research. The need to
develop new research skills to do so because of the requirement to apply qualitative methods as well as
the more familiar quantitative ones is clearly presented as is practical guidance to achieve this. Within the
chapters of this Festschrift, the evidence gathered to support the use of each approach demonstrates the
application of these pedagogic research skills. This illustrates the development of dual professionals, as
identified by Wisdom (2009, pxii):
The historian, the chemist, the land surveyor, the nurse — each devoted to their subject, each committed
heart and soul to their students.

Fostering a culture of innovation

The extent of Tina’s influence in both considering transferable skills within the curriculum as well as her
particular interest in developing problem solving skills is impressive. A cursory glance through chapters
in this book will yield many examples of others looking to introduce similar concepts into their curricula,
in what is still considered innovative practice. A crucial consideration for our community of educators
interested in embedding innovative approaches in our curricula is how to encourage more widespread
adoption of such approaches. How can we move beyond these approaches being innovative to being just
normal practice?

A report on discipline-based education research published by the US National Research Council (2012),
commonly called the DBER report, outlines how innovative ideas are embedded in practice, based on the
work of Rogers (2003):
• Stage 1: Knowledge:The individual learns about the innovation and seeks information about
it.
• Stage 2: Persuasion:The individual evaluates the innovation and begins to develop a positive
or negative attitude. Close peers’evaluations of the innovation have the most credibility.

6|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introduction to the Festschrift

• Stage 3: Decision:The individual decides to adopt or reject the innovation.

• Stage 4: Implementation: The individual puts the innovation into practice, possibly with
some modifications, yet some uncertainty remains.
• Stage 5: Confirmation: The individual looks for support for his or her decision. At this stage,
the individual may decide to discontinue the innovation, either by replacement (adopting
a better innovation) or by disenchantment, because the innovation does not meet the
individual’s needs.

While there is general awareness among many chemistry educators of many innovative approaches, there
is a lot of evidence to show that approaches are not adopted, or are adopted and then not continued. The
DBER report states:
the high levelofdiscontinuance (even after modification) indicates that faculty either lacked the knowledge
needed to customize a research-based practice to their local situation or underestimated the factors that
tend to work against the use of innovative instructional practices.

The research of Henderson in physics education arguesthat, to address this, the conversation needs to shift
from what works (and evidence of that) to how it works (Henderson and Dancy, 2009). The implementation
phase needs much more support and evidence.

The focus of the Festschrift

In this Festschrift, therefore, we invited leading chemistry educators in three countries where Tina has had
immediate influence — the UK, Ireland, and Australia — to contribute their knowledge on a particular
aspect of their own innovative work in the teaching of chemistry. Conscious of the implementation barrier
to adopting innovation, authors were tasked with reporting less of what they did and how it went, and
instead sharing more of the how to do it. They were asked to be generous in implementation guidance,
looking beyond their own implementation to consider how others might adopt it in their context.

In doing so, the intention is that the book mirrors Tina’s own good practice in sharing innovation with
useful guidance, showcased more than 20 years ago, and becomes a useful source of information for
those looking to introduce innovative practice in their own chemistry teaching settings, wherever in the
world they may be.

Michael Seery Claire Mc Donnell

University of Edinburgh Technological University Dublin

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |7

References
Garratt, J., Overton, T., Tomlinson, J. and Clow, D. (2000), “Critical thinking exercises for chemists: Are they subject
specific?”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 1, pp. 152-167.
Grove, M. and Overton, T. L. (2013), Getting Started in Pedagogic Research within the STEM Disciplines, University of
Birmingham: STEM Education Centre, available at; https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/university/colleges/
eps/STEM/activities/pedagogic/getting-started.aspx
Henderson, C., and Dancy, M.H. (2009), “Impact of physics education research on the teaching of introductory
quantitative physics in the United States”, Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, Vol.
5 No. 2, pp. 020107-1–020107-9.
National Research Council 2012, Discipline-Based Education Research: Understanding and Improving Learning in
Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Overton, T. L. (1997), “Creating critical chemists”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 1, pp. 28-30.
Overton, T. L. (2000), “Teaching Chemists to Think: From Parrots to Professionals”, University Chemistry Education,
Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 62-68.
Rogers, E.M. (2003), Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Wisdom, J. (2009), “Foreword” in Cousin, G., Researching Learning in Higher Education, Routledge, New York.

8|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 2 A framework to evaluate the transition
to undergraduate studies in chemistry

Kristy L. Turner
Bolton School Boys’ Division, Bolton and School of Chemistry, University
of Manchester
kristy.turner@manchester.ac.uk

Every year around half a million students in the UK enter higher education. Around 95,000
enter courses in the physical sciences (HESA, 2018) and around 5,000 of these begin degree
courses in the chemical sciences. Similar proportions of students make this same transition
in other developed countries. The vast majority of these students will be beginning
undergraduate study immediately following their secondary education. The transition
between secondary and higher education is a challenging time for students (Smith, 2013).
Poorly managed transition can have serious consequences for students potentially leading
to underachievement or even non-continuation.

In this chapter, I outline the major differences between chemistry education at a secondary
level and in higher education in a framework that can be used by educators in chemistry in
both sectors to evaluate how they can smooth this crucial transition using practical steps.
Although this chapter is deeply rooted in my experience in chemistry education in England,
it has widespread utility beyond the discipline and in education systems in other countries.
The differences outlined are applicable to many courses in higher education and particularly
to those with an element of laboratory or clinical work. This contribution is developed from
my experience as a secondary school teacher for more than 12 years and more recent work
as a school teacher fellow, a role where I teach chemistry in both a secondary school and a
university.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

I would not be a chemistry education researcher were it not for Tina’s encouragement when I
started out in 2011. Entering the chemistry education community from a school teaching
background was initially intimidating. Kind words of encouragement from Tina in person,
through social media, and by email gave me the confidence to persevere. The examples she
set as someone fighting for parity of esteem against the traditional research landscape have
provided me with inspiration.

To cite:Turner, K. L. (2019), “A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 9-22.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |9

Introduction

Educational transition points

Transition points between educational phases are challenging for students. There are usually three main
transition points in a student’s educational career.The start of primary school marksthetransition between
informal education in a home or nursery setting and formal, compulsory education. Most students will
then make another transition from the smaller primary school setting to larger secondary school settings
at some point in their pre-teen years. The final transition occurs when the student leaves compulsory
education, either to pursue higher or further education, or enter employment. Each transition point has its
own unique challenges and there is evidence that each transition point has a temporary effect on student
progress as they adjust to their new educational environment (Galton et al., 1999).

Transition to higher education

Transition between secondary school and higher education is one of the least regulated transition
points. At the earlier transition phases, there is some communication between nurseries and schools,
and between primary schools and secondary schools. This may be face to face transition meetings or
written reports and, in many school systems, student progress is monitored from school entry to school
leaving age. A national curriculum may be in place that regulates the content delivered in each phase. In
contrast, students leave their secondary education and enter higher education as independent adults.
The information that comes with them may be limited to only their exam scores and personal information.
In the UK, statistics are gathered each year by the Higher Education Statistics Agency and, of particular
interest to the transition process, are those titled non-continuation following year of entry. Across higher
education, this drop out rate for students in their first year of study has remained stubbornly static. The
percentage of the 2016/17 student cohort in the UK not continuing in higher education following their
first year varies widely across institutions; from <1% to nearly 20% and these statistics are similar in other
developed countries. For most students who drop out, leaving has little to do with the inability to meet
formal academic requirements (Tinto, 1993). Outside of the non-continuation statistics, it is highly likely
that even those students who appear to have made a successful transition and continued in their higher
education course will have encountered some difficulties in the transition process.

The field of student transition is under-conceptualised and research in the area is mainly small scale
(Briggs et al., 2012). Research tends to be focused on broad themes, neglecting the specific contexts that
may cause transition in particular individual subject areas to be especially challenging. The development
of a framework to scaffold discussion and intervention around transition to higher education in physical
sciences may help alleviate some of the barriers to successful transition for students. Additionally, use of
this framework will allow teachers and managers on both sides to ensure good coverage of the issues to
be addressed in this important and diverse area.

Design

Secondary and higher education settings for framework development

I have been a secondary school teacher since 2006 working in both community comprehensive schools
and a selective fee-paying boys’ school. I have taught students in their pre-university years throughout
my career. Since 2015 I have split my teaching week between a fee-paying boys’ school and the School
of Chemistry at the University of Manchester where I work primarily with students in the Foundation
Year and Years 1 and 2. The University of Manchester is a traditional university with a long tradition in the
chemical sciences. Three and four year programmes are offered leading to BSc and MChem degrees in

10|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

chemistry and medicinal chemistry and can be taken with an industrial placement, international study
or an integrated foundation year. The typical Year 1 cohort is about 240 students with a mixed cohort of
international and home students who mostly enter directly from secondary school.

Personal observations from a dual perspective of working in both higher and secondary education
supplemented by a review of the relevant literature informed the identification of framework themes and
of measures that can be implemented to smooth transition. Under this framework, transition between
secondary and higher education can be considered to fall into four broad themes:
• background factors
• curriculum and assessment
• class and cohort connectedness
• factors related to teaching, learning and feedback

Each of these broad themes can be further broken down as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: A framework for consideration of the transition to undergraduate study in chemical sciences

Background factors
Eachindividualstudententering higher education hasasetofdefinablecharacteristicswhich may influence
how easily they make the transition to higher education. Some may be easily recordable or measurable
such as age, ethnicity, gender, and prior achievement profile. Others, such as family circumstances and
caring responsibilities may be less defined or not disclosed by students.

Higher education represents a significant personal financial investment for students, especially in systems
where tuition fees are payable. In contrast, most students don’t have to pay for their secondary level

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 11

education. For those students who have attended fee paying schools, the cost of this is generally met
by parental finances, or by bursaries and scholarships. There is no financial implication for the student
themselves if they fail or need to repeat a part of their education. Higher education usually requires
financial investment by the student directly in the form of tuition fees (where these exist), accommodation
and other associated living costs, and books or resources needed for study. Should the student fail, then
this financial investment may be lost and a financial penalty is incurred if a student has to repeat a part of
their education for any reason. This creates a psychological burden on students (Minsky, 2016).

Most secondary students will live at home with family support for day to day living, such as washing,
preparation of meals, and shopping for food. In higher education, students’ living circumstances will vary
significantly within a cohort, with some living independently for the first time and increasing numbers
choosing to commute from home (Caulton, 2018). Both circumstances present challenges for instructors
and students. Newly independent students may have challenges organising their academic commitments
alongside the demands of running their own household affairs. Commuting students may find the
structures of academic life don’t take account of their commutes by public transport or become isolated
as they have additional barriers to integration with students living on campus (Jacoby, 2000; Thomas and
Jones, 2017).

Engagement in part-time employment is very varied for students in both stages of education. Some
students will workaround their secondary school studies, limiting this employment to evenings, weekends
and holidays. Many schools and colleges actively discourage part-time employment stating concerns over
its impact on attainment. However, employment alongside higher education can be extremely beneficial
for future employability and professionalism and go some way to decreasing financial pressures for
students. For both groups of students, part-time employment may have a significant impact on their
ability to engage with their full-time studies.

Curriculum and assessment

The structures surrounding study in secondary and higher education are very different. In the school
environment, students will study relatively few subjects. For English students, it is typical to study 3–4
subjects at advanced level (A Level) but there are significant variations across Europe with 5–7 subjects
being common. These subjects will be taught by one or two teachers to a regular timetable with the same
pattern each week or fortnight. Attendance at school is formally monitored and intervention carried out
if it slips below a level that supports progress. This intervention may take a number of forms, eventually
resulting in contact with parents/guardians. Classes in schools take place in a small number of rooms on
(mostly) one site, reducing the organisational burden on students.

The submission of assignments (homework) generally occurs regularly and informally with students
handing in their work directly to their teachers, often during a class. Failure to submit assignments by
the deadline incurs no significant penalty unless the assignment forms a component of the final grade.
In the UK these assignments are called coursework and are typically marked by the teacher and the
marks moderated by the exam board. Coursework has increasingly fallen out of favour in recent years
in England due to concerns regarding the validity and reliability of teacher assessment (Johnson, 2013)
and the impact of easy sharing of assessment items and responses via the internet leading to concerns
regarding plagiarism (Stewart, 2013). It is likely that the students will be given second chances to submit
assignments, including deadlines being set deliberately early in order to allow time to intervene before
final deadlines are reached.

In higher education, at the degree title level, students may be studying a single subject. However, even

12|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

for students studying the single subject of chemistry, the way the course is split into modular structures
may make it appear to be a combination of numerous disciplines, some of which may seem disparate. For
example, a module in quantum mechanics will be a very different experience to one in organic chemistry,
or one in practical chemistry. Added to this, within many undergraduate programmes, a number of
course credits are taken in option courses. Option courses are not considered core to the programme
and choices may be very closely related to core chemistry — for example biochemistry; or may extend
outside of traditional course boundaries, such as a course in a foreign language. It is likely there will be
many instructors per module with contributions to teaching made by lecturers, tutors, graduate teaching
assistants (demonstrators), and peer tutors. Formal monitoring of attendance may only be in place for a
small proportion of the timetabled classes, most commonly laboratory classes and tutorials. There may
be some intervention strategies in place for low attendance, but they are likely to only be triggered after
many weeks which may mean a significant impact on student achievement will have already occurred.

Undergraduate teaching takes place in several different rooms on different sites across campus, and these
may change several times during the timetable for a module. Assignments are handed in through formal
structures and rarely handed directly to the instructor. This submission may be electronically through a
virtual learning environment or physically to a teaching office, or perhaps even to a postbox at the office
rather than submission to a member of staff. Failure to submit assignments by the deadline is likely to
incur a significant penalty which ranges from deduction of marks to refusal to mark and a fail or zero
grade. Second chances are rarer in higher education.

Syllabus, support resources, and assessment

In secondary education the syllabus is fixed, usually by an external body such as an exam board with
influence from national government and various stakeholders such as representatives from higher
education and employers. These are publicly available and accessible to a range of audiences from the
learners themselves to their teachers and parents, the general public and employers. This is in complete
contrast to the situation in higher education where flexible syllabuses are designed within the institution.
Whilst there may be some degree of regulation of content, often linked to degree accreditation by a
learned society or professional body such as the Royal Society of Chemistry, syllabuses will vary from
institution to institution. A syllabus document with learning objectives and outcomes is usually publicly
available, perhaps on the institution’s website or internal systems but they may seem opaque to novice
readers.

Secondary students are spoilt for choice with support resources. National syllabuses are well resourced
with both commercially published resources such as revision guides and also web-based content from
educators in the field on sites such as YouTube. In higher education there are fewer resources available
and resources such as textbooks are likely to be written for a general audience and not tailored for the
syllabus. Web based resources may be difficult to find at the correct level.

Assessment in sciences in secondary education is primarily through terminal examinations. The English
GCSE and A Level examinations are each planned to assess two years of work. Assessment models in
higher education are incredibly varied including aspects of in course assessment, laboratory assessments,
and examinations. Many past papers are available to secondary students and these are widely used for
examination preparation. These past papers are published alongside their mark schemes. Relatively few
past papers are available to undergraduates and, when they are available, mark schemes may not be
provided, or indeed may not exist in any formal way (Turner, 2012).

Large differences are evident in the design of assessments. Public examinations taken at the end of

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 13

secondary education are highly regulated with rules dictating many aspects of assessment design from
the overall length of examinations to the proportions of different assessment objectives such as recall,
application, and analysis in the papers. Examination papers in sciences are designed with accessibility
factors in mind including accessible font, plenty of white space to improve readability, no repetition
within questions, and standard question types and layouts. Command-led questions form the greatest
proportion of question types with those command words clearly defined for candidates in syllabus
information. There are agreed command words for particular question types. For example the standard
command for drawing a curly arrow mechanism for A Level students chemistry is outline. Secondary
school examination papers in England are designed with the question section followed immediately by
the space for the answer, giving candidates vital clues about the expected length of the answer and its
format—for example, a written answer or a drawing. Answer line prompts may be present to further guide
the candidate. The examination rubric is simple as all questions in an examination are to be answered,
meaning there is no question choice. The difficulty of the questions in a paper is considered and an overall
ramping effect is generally seen with earlier questions designed to be easier to build the candidates’
confidence. Mark schemes are standardised and revisited following the examination taking account of
candidates’ responses. Once complete, the examinations are marked by specially trained examiners who
are regularly monitored to check their accuracy in applying the mark scheme. Increasingly this marking is
done on screen, reducing errors in addition of marks.

As previously discussed, while assessments that bear credit in higher education are varied, examinations
remain a significant feature of the assessment landscape at this level, particularly for large first year cohorts.
Examination papers set in higher education are subject to quite different regulation to those in schools.
At an institution level, assessment is heavily regulated. However this regulation is at a surface level and
doesn’t delve deeply into the details of the papers. Papers are set by academics themselves with various
checking procedures in place. These checking procedures vary through a hierarchy from informal systems
such as colleagues checking a paper through to internal committees and eventually, external examiners.
External examiners are experienced higher education teachers who offer an independent assessment of
academic standards and the quality of assessment to the appointing institution (HEA, 2015).

The typical examination format for undergraduate assessment is a booklet of questions with instructions
to answer the questions in one or more separate answer books. The front of the examination paper
usually shows the rubric for answers. This may be complex, with compulsory and optional questions with
associated instructions. As a result, each year a minority of candidates are likely to fail to follow the rubric,
answering too many or too few questions or in the wrong number of answer booklets. The design of
examination papers may not take into account other accessibility factors as the font is likely to be chosen
by the institution or just be the one historically used rather than chosen specifically for readability. Sans
serif type face such as Verdana, Calibri, or Arial are considered the most accessible, and 11pt Arial font
is used by the major English exam board AQA. Ramping of difficulty may be apparent within questions
with earlier parts of questions being set for confidence building. It may not be apparent across the whole
paper. Questions may be direct, or command-led (Figure 2) with little standardisation of command words.

Cohort and class connectedness

Fostering a positive climate and sense of community for students in educational settings has been linked
with retention and academic success (Dwyer et al., 2004). There are many factors that influence how
connected students feel to their cohort and class including group dynamics, peer-student relationships
and student-instructor relationships and pastoral support.

14|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

Figure 2: illustration of direct and command led questions

Group dynamics
A class of students is a temporary group of individuals which “consists of friendships, peer interactions,
relationships, tensions, and overall dynamics that can be positive, negative or even neutral” (Mamas, 2018).
These groupings may stay together for significant periods of time, perhaps whole school years; or for
much shorter time periods including one off groupings for a specific learning session. Tuckman (1965)
observed that groups go through five stages of development: forming, storming, norming, performing,
and adjourning. These stages may be cyclical and there is no recognised usual time for each stage. Some
groups may be stuck in one stage for a significant period of time.

In schools, teaching groups are relatively static in terms of numbers and make up (Turner, 2017). Students
are likely to sit in the same place in the classroom with the same peers in each teaching session. Classes are
usually small enough for students to quickly gain an understanding of the others in the group and their
own role and contribution to the group. Typically, a secondary school advanced chemistry class contains
between 10 and 35 students. Some school teaching groups also have historical connectedness when a
group of students go through their whole secondary school together. All these factors mean students
may feel a sense of community at school relatively quickly.

In undergraduate teaching, groups vary significantly both in size and construction. Small group teaching
may mean as few as two students with a tutor such as in supervisions at Oxford and Cambridge colleges
although groups of 4–8 are more common. For example, at the University of Manchester, a typical first
year student in chemistry will have tutorials with six students, workshops with 20-40 students, peer
assisted study sessions with 15 students, whole cohort lectures with >200 students and optional unit
lectures taken in other departments with >400 students. That is a lot of different groups for a student who
has been used to just one to adjust to. Additionally, group dynamics may also impact upon assessment as
universities increasingly use group projects and assessments in their programmes (Gibbs and Laga, 2009).

Instructor-student relationships and pastoral support

The relationship between instructors and students is a key component of student success in education
and can be crucial in developing students’ academic self-concept and enhancing their achievement
(Konarraju et al., 2010).

In secondary education, teachers tend to develop significant relationships with students during the
teaching period. This is a consequence of regular, frequent contact with relatively small classes over a
significant period, sometimes up to five years. In contrast, in higher education the strength of relationships
formed with students can be highly variable. Some instructors such as personal guidance tutors may

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 15

develop significant relationships with students. However, it is likely that others will not know the names or
faces of their students due to large cohorts in groups in lectures, and the nature and duration of teaching at
this level. Academics leading teaching activities may have little understanding of students’ prior learning
experiences and curriculum (Turner, 2013).

A key feature of secondary education is the pastoral care and guidance that forms part of the organisation
of schools. There is frequent contact (daily, several times a week) with a pastoral tutor. At its highest
frequency, a tutor may see students several times a day for registration periods meaning they are able to
form strong relationships and informally monitor students. Tutors in schools have regular training in areas
like child protection, protecting students from radicalisation (Home Office, 2015) and adolescent mental
health. Pastoral tutors are also likely to be available for a significant proportion of the teaching week as
they are employed full or part-time and teach on the same site as students.

In higher education, there is significant variation in pastoral care. Pastoral care may be carried out by a
number of staff in the institution including student support professionals, peer mentors, and academic
staff. It is good practiceforevery student to have a personal tutor—a member of academic staff who takes
an overview of a small group of students’ progress and experience. Contact with a pastoral or personal
tutor is likely to be infrequent, perhaps as little as once a semester. Additionally, pastoral tutors may have
little or no training for this aspect of their wider academic role, with their efficacy often depending on
their own innate interpersonal skills and desire to do the job well. It is likely that pastoral tutors will be only
intermittently available due to teaching, meeting, and conference commitments. Some pastoral work will
be high quality and higher education institutes have a wide range of support services available however
the lack of a strong relationship with a tutor may mean a student may not feel comfortable in making a
disclosure to a staff member and thus accessing support services.

Factors related to teaching, learning and feedback

Teaching in higher education has the potential to be more varied than that in schools. Across any given
year at the University of Manchester, chemistry students will encounter lectures, workshops, tutorials,
facilitated group work, flipped teaching, laboratory instruction, and peer facilitated study. Despite this
available variety, the main mode of delivering chemistry content is through large group lectures with
direct instruction. Whatever the type of class scheduled, the mode of delivery is likely to be the same for
the whole session as there is little variety within sessions. Learning in higher education is increasingly
supported by virtual learning environments, providing everything from a repository for educational
resources and flipped content to discussion forums and group learning spaces.

In schools, teaching the smaller class size means that the mode of delivery can be very varied although
individual teachers may have fixed styles which limit the experience of their students. In a secondary
school class, lessons may include aspects of direct instruction, active learning and enquiry. A key feature
of this stage of education is regular homework exercises. These are set to engage students in regular
practice of key concepts and provide formative assessment of students’ understanding of concepts
covered in class. Past paper questions feature heavily in the homework exercises set by teachers at this
level (Husband, 2016; Ofsted, 2011). Homework is set regularly, completed and handed in to teachers
who then mark it and deliver feedback. The feedback given on the work is personal, delivered in context
of a personal relationship between teacher and student. It may also be given alongside a grade or score
or comment only based marking may be used. Secondary students may be encouraged to engage with
feedback, redoing pieces of work or taking retests until a particular score is achieved. Secondary students
receive a large volume offeedback, even within individual lessons and this feedback is multimodal; verbal,
audio, and written feedback may all feature.

16|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

In higher education, there may not be any regular homework type exercises which provide formative
assessment opportunities. Most exercises form part of a coursework element of a module and therefore
feedback received is often accompanied by a grade. Formative pieces, such as tutorial exercises may or
may not be marked or returned to students. Where feedback is given it is usually written and as such,
engagement with any feedback given may be limited.

One of the most striking differences between chemistry courses in secondary and higher education is in
the environment for practical work. School students will carry out practical work relatively infrequently
depending on a number of factors associated with their school or college and their teachers. Practical
work could be as infrequent as 12 tasks across a two year programme of study or more regularly, perhaps
once a fortnight (Cadwalader, 2018). Experiments are carried out in the same school laboratories that are
used for regular theory teaching. This practical work is often done in pairs to reduce the costs associated
with consumables and waste disposal. In higher education, practical work is carried out in a specialist
laboratory designed specifically for that purpose and is frequent — usually at least weekly — and often
carried out individually.

For secondary students, some of the equipment used in practical work will be unfamiliar but most will
have been used in their prior education. This equipment is likely to be specifically provided by teachers
or technicians for each practical session. New undergraduates encounter far more new equipment and
instrumentation more regularly in their laboratory work. The equipment used is likely to be part of a
larger stock of equipment in the laboratory and students have the additional responsibility of finding the
appropriate equipment prior to starting work.

Approaches to health and safety are very different. In schools, responsibility for health and safety in
practical work lies with the teacher and the institution’s management. The student carries little or no
personal liability. Risk assessments for each practical session are done by teaching and technical staff and
not routinely shared with students beyond highlighting the main risks. Where risk assessments are done
by students, this is usually to fulfil an academic requirement rather than to genuinely assess the risks of a
procedure. This contrasts with laboratory workin higher education where responsibility for the health and
safety in practical work lies with the student following training from an instructor and with support from
technicians. Students routinely carry out riskassessments relating to the experiments they are carrying out,
initially with support but later independently, and this is often a requirement of beginning work on each
experiment in the laboratory. At the end of a laboratory session, students are expected to decontaminate
and clean their own equipment, returning it to the appropriate place. In schools, decontamination and
washing of equipment is carried out by teaching staff or technicians.

A Framework to Evaluate Transition

The themesidentified highlight the differences between secondary and higher education and these were
used to formulate a framework (Table 1). The framework is presented in a format showing the steps that
can be taken by educators in both sectors to ease the transition. It is intended that this can be used in
both schools and HEIs to promote discussion to evaluate what measures are in place and what areas may
need some attention. Of course every detail within the broad themes identified will not be applicable to
all of the students entering our undergraduate chemistry courses. Within any large cohort there will be
a large variation in prior experience. As mentioned earlier, this framework is based on my experience as
a chemistry educator in England. Although some practices may be specific to this system, many of these
differences should be quite minor and the framework should be applicable in other countries.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 17

 Table 1: Framework devised to evaluate transition to undergraduate study for students in chemical sciences

School actions Transition Higher Education Institution actions

themes
Develop anthat
curriculum enrichment/pastoral
includes sessions on Background
factors Identify variety in cohorts of students (for example,
students with family responsibilities, with part
independent living, study-life balance, time jobs) and track to check progression is in line
and financial education. with the overall cohort. Projects such as Jisc (2019)
learning analytics provide tools to facilitate this and
many universities have their own systems.
Curriculum and assessment
deadlinessome
assignment
Evaluate learning
aspects
Consider institutional
and
consequencessubmission.
second
for of centralised
attitude
chances and the
behaviour.
towards Curriculum
structures Sample a number of student timetables to
evaluate the impact of timetabling of internal and
external modules on workload and organisation
requirements.

kinds
using
particular
published
Encourage
of
learning
questions
concept.
syllabus,
students to interact
that
objectives
with activities
cantobe with
predictsuch
asked the
onas
the a Syllabus Evaluate the transparency of learning outcomes for
each module including clarity of language used to
communicate them.
Consider working with students to develop syllabus
materials. This could be through formal students-as
partners (for example University of Reading, 2019)
or team projects, or informally through staff-student
committees.
that
one alignstextbook.
education,
chemistry
Encourage
Signposting
source with
toexample,
for athose
support
students
when toused
use
working general
on
in ahigher
a resource
more than
topic. resources
Support Provide support in the use of general texts, such as
guided reading lists.
Evaluate multimedia resources by external providers
that may enhance independent learning of topic
areas. A collection of resources is collated by the
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC Learn Chemistry).
Plan assignments to expose students Assessment Evaluate the balance of formative (non-credit
to a range of questions and paper bearing) and summative assessment across
styles including those where answers programmes.
are written on paper separate to the Consider the use of exemplar materials to increase
questions. assessment literacy.
Teaching, learning and feedback
Consider how timetabling could be used Teaching styles Allow time initially for students to get it wrong and
creatively to provide opportunities for learn from their mistakes.
students to experience different teaching Introduce students to the organisation of sessions
styles, such as large group lectures and shown in an online timetable and encourage staff to
1:1 sessions, alongside their regular class use online calendar tools to schedule sessions with
style. students.
Encourage participation in large group teaching
sessions, such as through the use of electronic voting
systems (Gibbons and Laga, 2017; Lancaster and
Arico, 2018; Wijtmans et al., 2014).
Consider incorporating starter activities at the start
of lectures to make good use of the available time
when students are arriving into the teaching session
(Smith, 2013).

18|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

Table 1 (continued): Framework devised to evaluate transition to undergraduate study for students in chemical sciences

School actions Transition Higher Education Institution actions

themes
Teaching, learning and feedback (continued)
to
Provide
andreceive
construct
opportunities
wholetheir
group
ownfor
feedback
next
students
steps. Feedback Signpost feedback opportunities for students and
evaluate the clarity of the feedback for language
used and applicability for novice chemists.
with
Evaluate the practical
pre-university students
work done
for Laboratory
work Evaluate introductory practical chemistry courses for
purpose.
both frequency and purpose. Consider the balance of skill acquisition, problem
Consider a cycle of skill acquisition solving, and alignment with taught chemistry
followed by application of the skill courses.
to a problem-based task. Consider a cycle of skill acquisition followed by
application of the skill to a problem-based task or
a competency-based curriculum in the initial years
(Goedhart, 2015).
Cohort/class connectedness
example
outside
to mix
providing
for
Provide
some by
workplaces.
cohortsacademically
to
their
opportunities
activities
opportunities
visit
merging
class
universities
grouping
inwith
school
classes
forfor
students
students
or
whole
or
for dynamics
Group Consider how groupings can be organised to find
a balance between supportive peer groups and
challenging students to move beyond their comfort
zone.
Monitor and evaluate the composition of groups
in order to provide some stability of individuals for
some classes.

plans
to or opportunities
Consider planned
interact
students.
Provide
their implementing
with peers
immediate friendship
groupings
outside ofof
forseating
students
group. Student-peer
interactions Consider crossover of some groupings including
those in laboratory groups and tutorial groups to
allow groups to gain stability.
Provide opportunities for students to interact outside
of formal academic sessions, such as by facilitating
social interactions such as cohort meals and trips and
supporting student societies.
or external
or
universities
teachers
lectures
concepts.
Invite guest
from
Thesethe
classes
speakers,
or
speakers
learned
couldto
school
onsuch or
bepresent
ascollege
particular
societies.
other
from interactions
instructor
Student- Identify opportunities for instructors to develop their
skills in communicating with novice learners. This
could include both online and face-to-face training
sessions, or visits to schools (Turner, 2014).
Consider allocating the most student-focused
members of staff to Year 1 courses (Westlake, 2008).
student
Encourage
support
students to research
mechanisms in Pastoral
support Develop opportunities for personal tutors to share
expertise and experience.
their general research prior to Signpost training opportunities for academic
choosing HEIs for their applications. advisors.
Implement peer assisted study schemes and where
schemes already exist, evaluate their effectiveness.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |19

Implications and Adaptability

The framework proposed is based on my experience of teaching chemistry in both secondary and higher
education over several years and an overview of the chemistry education landscape. This experience
spans different types of schools and a large university setting which draws its intake from a range of
school and college settings. The framework should therefore be readily adaptable to other schools and
higher education institutions.

Your context
The prompts below outline key aspects to be considered by those exploring the use of this framework
to evaluate what they are already doing to address the school to university transition and what else they
might implement.

For educators in schools

• What role do you think schools and colleges play in the transition to higher education?
• How can you make small and sustainable changes that will smooth the transition between
secondary school and higher education for students who leave your school to pursue higher
education in the sciences?

For educators in universities

• What do you know about the composition of your own typical student cohort and their
educational background at secondary level?
• What measures are already in place to ease transition to undergraduate study?
• How can you make small and sustainable changes that will smooth the transition between
secondary school and higher education for your typical cohort and for identifiable groups
(such as those students with caring responsibilities, those with non-standard entry
qualifications) within the wider cohort?

Conclusions

Transition between school and university in chemical sciences is a complex issue and one where there
is no quick fix. The proposed framework provides guidance for both schools and higher education
institutions to evaluate their contribution to the transition between school and undergraduate study in
chemical sciences and other subject areas with common features such as experimental or clinical work.
It is intended to provide a stimulus for discussion with educators at all levels together with examples of
practical actions that could be implemented.

This work is being followed up with various studies trialling and evaluating activities that schools can
implement to ease transition to undergraduate study as well as pedagogical studies around the mastery
of key skills in chemistry, most notably the balancing of chemical equations.

References
Arico, F.R. and Lancaster, S. (2018), Facilitating active learning and enhancing student self-assessment skills.
International Review of Economics Education, Vol. 29, pp. 6-13.
Briggs, A.R.J., Clark, J. and Hall, I. (2012), Building bridges: understanding student transition to university. Quality
in Higher Education, Vol. 18, pp. 3-21.

20|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A framework to evaluate the transition to undergraduate studies in chemistry

Cadwalader, S. (2018), “Assessing science practical skills at A Level. The Ofqual Blog”, available at: https://ofqual.
blog.gov.uk/2018/05/10/assessing-science-practical-skills-at-a-level/ (accessed 10 May 2018).
Caulton, G. (2018), “Forgotten, isolated and ignored: the rise of the commuter student” Times Higher Education,
available at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/student/blogs/forgotten-isolated-and-ignored
rise-commuter-student (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Galton, M., Gray, J. and Ruddock, J. (1999), The Impact of School Transitions and Transfers on Pupil Progress and
Attainment. DfEE, London, available at: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130404090100/
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/RR131.pdf (accessed 22nd February
2019).
Gibbons, R. E. and Laga, E.E., (2017), Chasm Crossed? Clicker Use in Postsecondary Chemistry Education, Journal
of Chemical Education, Vol. 94, pp. 549-557.
Gibbs, G. (2009), The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford,
available
pdf (accessed
at: http://owww.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/group_work/brookes_groupwork_gibbs_dec09.
22nd February 2019).

Goedhart, M.J. (2015), “Changing Perspectives on the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum”, in Garcia-Martinez,
J. and Serrano-Torregrosa, E. (Eds), Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Innovative Strategies and New
Technologies, Wiley-VCH, 2015
HEA (2015), A handbook for external examining, Higher Education Academy, York.
HEFCE (2017), “Students by subject area - STEM”, available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/analysis/HEinEngland/
subjects/stem/ (accessed 22nd February 2019).
HEFCE (2018), “Non-continuation: UK Performance Indicators 2016/17”, available at https://www.hesa.ac.uk/
news/08-03-2018/non-continuation-tables (accessed 22nd February 2019).
HESA (2018), “What do HE students study? (2016-17)”, available at: https://www.hesa.ac.uk/data-and-analysis/
students/what-study (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Home Office (The) (2015), “Statutory guidance: Prevent duty guidance”, available from: https://www.gov.uk/
government/publications/prevent-duty-guidance (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Husband, T. (2016), “I’m going to stop assigning past paper questions”, Education in Chemistry, available from:
https://eic.rsc.org/opinion/im-going-to-stop-assigning-past-paper-questions/2010043.article (accessed
22nd February 2019).
Jacoby, B. (2000), “Why involve commuter students in learning?” New Directions in Higher Education, Vol. 109, pp.
3-12.
JISC (2019), “Learning Analytics”, available from: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/learning-analytics (accessed 22nd
February 2019).
Johnson, D. (2013), “Students stripped of A-level grades at ‘outstanding’ college after teachers accused of ‘leading’
pupils through exams”, The Telegraph, 24th July, available from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/
educationnews/10198906/Students-stripped-of-A-level-grades-at-oustanding-college-after-teachers
accused-of-leading-pupils-through-exams.html (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Kangas Dwyer, K., Bingham, S.G., Carlson, R.E., Marshall P., Cruz, A.M., and Fus, D.A., (2004), “Communication
and connectedness in the classroom: Development of the connected classroom climate inventory”,
Communication Research Reports, Vol. 21, pp. 264-272.
Konarraju, M., Musulkin, S. and Bhattacharya, G. (2010), “Role of Student–Faculty Interactions in Developing
College Students’ Academic Self-Concept, Motivation, and Achievement”, Journal of College Student
Development, Vol. 51, pp. 332-342.
Maikel Wijtmans, Van Rens, L. and Van Muijlwijk-Koezen, J.E. (2014), “Activating Students’Interestand Participation
in Lectures and Practical Courses Using Their Electronic Devices”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91,
pp. 1830-1837.
Mamas, C. (2018), “Exploring peer relationships, friendships and group work dynamics in higher education:
applying social network analysis”, Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 42, pp. 662-677.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |21

Minsky, C. (2016), ” UK students’ mental health affected by financial worries”, available at: https://www.
timeshighereducation.com/student/news/uk-students-mental-health-affected-financial-worries Times
Higher Education, (accessed 22nd February 2019).
OFSTED (2011), Improving science in colleges: a survey of good practice, available from: https://www.gov.uk/
government/publications/improving-science-in-further-education-and-sixth-form-colleges (accessed
22nd February 2019).
RSC (n.d), Learn Chemistry, http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Smith, C. (2013), “There’s teaching, and there’s teaching”, Education in Chemistry, available at: https://eic.rsc.org/
feature/theres-teaching-and-theres-teaching/2020262.article (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Stewart, W. (2013), Practical science to be removed from A Levels due to fears of cheating and over-marking.
Times Education Supplement, 25th October, available at: https://www.tes.com/news/practical-science-be
removed-levels-due-fears-cheating-and-over-marking (accessed 22nd February 2019).
University of Reading (2019), Partnerships in learning and teaching projects funding scheme, Academic development
and enhancement team, University of Reading, available at http://www.reading.ac.uk/reading-cqsd/
Developing-and-enhancing/project-funding/cqsd-plantscheme.aspx (accessed 27/02/2019).
Thomas, L. and Jones, R. (2017), “Student engagement in the context of commuter students”, The Student
Engagement Partnership, available at: https://www.lizthomasassociates.co.uk/projects/2018/
Commuter%20student%20engagement.pdf (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Tinto, V. (1993), Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, University of Chicago Press,
Chicago.
Tuckman, B.W. (1965)“Developmental sequence in small groups”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol.65 No. 6, pp. 384-99.
Turner, K. L. (2012), “Mark schemes, model answers and assessment for learning”, Variety in Chemistry Education/
Physics Higher Education Conference, Edinburgh, 30-31 August.
Turner, K. L. (2013), “Recession proof outreach”, Variety in Chemistry Education/Physics Higher Education
Conference, Liverpool, 29-30 August.
Turner, K. L. (2017), “UoM Chemistry blog. Chemistry at UoM compared to chemistry at school”, available
from: http://www.mub.eps.manchester.ac.uk/uomchemistryblog/2017/09/chemistry-uom-compared
chemistry-school/ (accessed 12th September 2017).
Turner, K. L. (2014), How the other side learn, Education in Chemistry, available at: https://eic.rsc.org/endpoint/
how-the-other-side-learn/2000407.article (accessed 22nd February 2019).
Westlake, C. (2008), “Predicting student withdrawal: examining the reasons through a preliminary literature
review”, Newport CELTJournal, Vol. 1, pp. 29–33.

22|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 3 Nurturing reflection in science foundation
year undergraduate students

David Read,†,‡ Stephen M. Barnes,† Julie Hyde¥ and James S. Wright¥,¶

†School of Chemistry and ‡Centre for Higher Education Practice, University
of Southampton, ¥Department of Chemistry, University of Sheffield,
¶Guangdong Technion Israel Institute of Technology.

D.Read@soton.ac.uk

This chapter describes how to develop skills of reflection in Science FoundationYear students
that will support them in evaluating their progress and consolidating their learning as they
progress through the year and onto their degree. Two case studies outlining reflective
activities undertaken by students are presented alongside data providing insight into the
student-perceived benefits of these approaches. The first activity focuses on practical skills
development and has already been adopted by colleagues at the University of Sheffield
with Chinese students in the first year of a [3+1] programme at Nanjing Tech University,
generating additional data included in this chapter. The second is a self-assessment activity
in organic chemistry. It was adapted from an activity used in chemistry degree programmes
at Southampton that has also been used by teachers in schools and colleges locally and
nationally to support A Level students. The implementation of the approaches outlined in
the case studies is described in moderate detail, and all resources are available for download
for those wishing to explore them in more depth. The case studies, informed by literature
on reflection, metacognition and meaningful learning, are presented as novel activities with
the flexibility to be adapted to other contexts in chemistry and other disciplines.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (David Read)

When I first arrived in HE, Tina was the undisputed leader of the chemistry education community
in the UK, and was an inspirational champion for evidence-based teaching innovation and
effective scholarship of teaching and learning. Tina has set a very high standard for myself and
my peers to aim for in developing, evaluating, and disseminating our teaching practice. Even
when we fail to reach that standard, we have at least made significant progress as a result of
aiming high in the first place. In terms of the work outlined in the chapter, reading Tina’s seminal
Study and Communication Skills for the Chemical Sciences made me realise the importance of
reflection in the process of consolidation of vital skills and prompted me to devise and implement
approaches which support its development.

To cite: Read, D., Barnes, S. M., Hyde, J., and Wright, J. S. (2019), “Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate
students”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina
Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 23-38.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |23

Introduction

This introduction will discuss the rationale for the development of students’ reflective skills during
undergraduate studies with reference to their prior experiences and preparation for subsequent years of
study. This work, which has primarily been carried out with Science Foundation Year students, is framed
in the context of a short review of key literature in the field that has influenced the creation of a suite of
reflective activities undertaken throughout an academic year.

The context of the Science Foundation Year (SFY) at the University of Southampton
The SFY is designed to provide students who do not have the prerequisite qualifications with sufficient
background to progress onto a science degree at the University. Students study modules in chemistry
and biology (equivalent to UK A Level) that together account for half of the academic credits for the
year, along with a smaller module in mathematics (12.5% of the overall credits). Additionally, there is a
Laboratories and Coursework module (25%) and a Routes to Success (12.5%) module, which focuses on
skills development and incorporates assessed reflective activities. Enrolment typically ranges from 40–60
students per year.

With only 24 weeks of teaching time, it isn’t possible to equip students with the same level of knowledge
and skills as can be achieved within a school setting over two years. A key difference is the fact that
teachers at 16–18 level spend far more time with students in smaller classes, allowing them to provide
targeted feedback, support and encouragement on a frequent basis. Although staff on the SFY provide
considerably more feedback than might be experienced on many degree programmes, this cannot fully
compensate for the deficit in contact time with teachers compared to school.

To overcome the difficulties posed by this situation, wetake the opportunity to engender skills of reflection
in our students, providing them with the capability to evaluate their own progress, and essentially give
themselves feedback. The approaches used are described in this chapter along with evidence of impact on
students and plans for future developments to capitalise on the benefits we have identified. In addition,
recommendations are provided for adaptation of these activities to other institutions.

Reflection and its potential role in the Science Foundation Year

Despite the apparent ubiquity of the term, a clear definition for reflection still remains elusive. Rogers
(2001) examined a range of theoretical approaches to the concept of reflection, identifying commonalities
and differences in the frameworks proposed. A common theme was that reflection, being a cognitive
process, requires proactive engagement by the individual as exemplified by Dewey (1933), who described
reflective thinking as the application of “active, persistent and careful consideration” to the task at hand.
Reflection in an educational context requires the individual to “explore their experiences in order to lead to
new understandings and appreciation” (Boud et al., 1985) and to critically assess the activity which is the
subject of the reflective process (Mezirow, 1990). As summarised by Rogers (2001, p41):
the intent of reflection is to integrate the understanding gained into one’s experience in order to enable
better choices or actions in the future, as well as to enhance one’s overall effectiveness.

This aspect of reflection is critical for SFY students in compensating for the feedback deficit outlined in the
previous section.

The process of reflection

Most models of reflection break the process into a number of stages, which typically commence with the

24|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

identification of a problem and a decision on behalf of the individual to seek a solution. A commonly cited
model is Gibbs’ reflective cycle (Gibbs, 1988), which provides a six-stage framework for reflection (Figure
1).

The process may be triggered by some sort of new experience, which may be problematic or perplexing
to the learner, providing a focus for reflection, which begins with a description of the experience. Gibbs’
approach encourages iterative cycles of reflection that help a learner to move forward over time, and this
presents a good overarching model for the SFY. In the case of our students, the experiences that prompt
reflection include in-class tests and examinations, laboratory activities, and self-assessed exercises. The
evaluation and analysis stages typically involve consideration of additional information, sometimes
referred to as data collection (Rogers, 2001), which later informs planning and a decision to act. This
represents an essential feature of reflection, paving the way to new experiences and skills development
(Boud et al., 1985) and changes in thinking which lead to new understanding (Seibert and Daudelin,
1999). The use of structured reflective activities with SFY students provides a framework for their thinking
to develop in this way, although students are free to draw on additional information if they so wish. The
final stage then typically involves the individual taking action (and implementing their learning) based on
ActionPlan
the previous steps. Again, this is supported in SFY students through prompts which ask them to express
their learning from the process.

Description

Feeling

Conclusion Evaluation

Analysis

Figure 1: Schematic of Gibbs' reflective cycle

Barriers to reflection
The learner must be willing to engage, which can be difficult in cases where reflection is not perceived
to be of value, presenting a barrier which inhibits the reflective process and the learning that may be
derived from it. Boud and Walker (1993) classified such barriers as internal, arising from “previous negative
experiences, accepted presuppositions about what the learner can do… [and] the emotional state of the
learner” and other issues commonly identified in today’s students. Roberts and Yoell (2009) classified
students into three groups based on their engagement with a reflective journal activity and the benefit
they derived from it:
1. Natural students were predisposed towards reflection and found it beneficial;
2. Converts were initially sceptical but became more positive as they started to engage with
reflection;
3. Disengaged students evidently had misconceptions about the purpose of reflection and did

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |25

 not find it to be beneficial.

Paterson (1995) suggested that the clarity of expectations and the quantity and quality offeedback were
key factors in the development of reflective skills, as exhibited by converts in Roberts and Yoell’s study. A
lack of familiarity with the process can also impede reflection, which Loughran (1996) suggests may be
overcome through the use of demonstrative processes, where the teacher explicitly models the process
of reflection on their own practice. These points are taken into account in the design of reflective activities
on the SFY, with the goal of encouraging all students to engage effectively with the tasks. In this case, the
staff member delivering this strand of teaching explains the role of reflective practice in the development
of his teaching, with some exemplification of the thought processes employed. The continued provision
of constructive feedback on reflective assignments helps students to develop the skills required.

Reflection and metacognition

Students may also benefit from reflection in developing their subject-specific knowledge and
understanding. In this case, it is important to consider the relationship between reflection and
metacognition, the latter of which was described by Rickey and Stacy (2000) as involving examples where
“the object of reflection is always one’s personal knowledge orthinking”. These authors noted the importance
of metacognition in chemistry education, citing evidence of its value in developing the understanding of
ideas and also in positively impacting on problem-solving success. With this in mind, we also endeavour
to encourage students to reflect specifically on aspects of the chemistry they are studying, again with the
aim of ensuring that they consolidate their learning effectively.

Reflection on general performance during the Science Foundation Year

The main focus of this chapter is on two case studies described in subsequent sections, one in which
students reflect on the development of practical skills and one in which they undertake a synoptic self
assessed exercise in organic chemistry. In order to foster skills of reflection more generally, students are
prompted to reflect on their progressregularly throughout the year aspart of the Routes to Success module,
as illustrated in Table 1. The reflective templates used in Activities 2, 3 and 5 are available for download
(http://edshare.soton.ac.uk/19410/) for those interested in exploring this aspect of the work further. At
different stages in the year, students are prompted to reflect on their ambitions and motivations, their
academic performance and how they are adapting to university life. By providing prompts, feedback and
opportunities for discussion with staff, this structured approach helps students to overcome the barriers
to reflection described in the previous section. Students are required to evaluate their study approaches
in the light of in-class test and exam results, identifying strengths and weaknesses and refining their
approach as a result. It is intended that this should become a continuous process that students will then
implement proactively in their subsequent studies and beyond into their working life.
Table 1: Schedule of general reflective activities taking place during the SFY
Activity Week Reflection activity Assessment
1 4 Progress interview with staff member Verbal feedback only
2 5 Written reflection in response to prompts Written feedback only
3 9 Reflection on performance in in-class tests Graded with written feedback
4 20 Progress interview (post exam) Verbal feedback only
5 23 Reflection on performance in Sem 1 exams Graded with written feedback
6 28 Assessed reflective interview Graded with verbal feedback

26|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

Methods

This section will outline the context in which two reflective activities were developed within the SFY
programme as well as discussing how they can be implemented and evaluated. Case Study 1 concerns a
series of activities to support learning from practical work, while Case Study 2 is a one-off synoptic self
assessed task to consolidate learning of reaction mechanisms.

Case study 1: Reflection on practical skills development

The key aims of the practical component of the SFY are to:
1. provide students with experience of a range of practical techniques that they might
encounter in their future studies;
2. develop students’ confidence in working in a laboratory environment;
3. develop students’ abilities to monitor their experimental activity and improve their
performance in the light of their experiences.

Over the course of the year, there are ten three-hour chemistry practical sessions, meaning there are
limited opportunities to repeat techniques to increase familiarity. During the first year of implementing
the programme (2012/13), it became clear that many students were not assimilating even simple
practical techniques. For example, the incorrect use of measuring cylinders led to spillages during the
second practical despite teaching of the correct technique in the previous session. This prompted the
development of a new approach to practical assessment the following year, namely the Practical Skills
Portfolio (PSP). It should be noted that in 2012/13, students were required to write full laboratory reports
for two of the ten practicals they completed, with nothing beyond answering several questions at the end
of the session required for the rest. In subsequent years, students have completed nine PSP documents
and one full report. The practical scripts and PSP templates used in the chemistry component of the SFY
are available for download (see Supplementary Information).

The PSP was designed to minimize the effort for staff while maximising the benefit to students. An
investment of time was required to create the templates, although this was straightforward once the
first one had been generated. Students are familiarised with each practical through pre-laboratory
activities, which include videos outlining the process of many of the techniques employed. Students
are briefed about the requirements of the PSP, with positive comments from students in previous years
used to exemplify the benefits. Students are made aware that the bulk of the marks are awarded for the
demonstration of learning through reflection. An indicative time plan for the implementation of PSPs is
shown in Table 2.

The PSP — which was subsequently adopted by colleagues at the University of Sheffield for use with
students in China (see Chapter 28) — is described more fully elsewhere (Wright et al., 2018). Students
collect photographic evidence of their completion of practical techniques, with photographs being taken
in collaboration with a laboratory partner. After the session, students add the photographs to the PSP.
Students are then required to reflect on the technique by writing a response to the prompt “What was
difficult about the technique? What advice would you give another student to complete it correctly?” The
PSP also includes other tasks for students to complete, which may include writing a component of a full
report such as a method or evaluation. An example of a PSP entry, including a photograph and a reflective
statement, rated good but not excellent, is given in Figure 2.

It is envisaged that the PSP should take 30–40 minutes to complete, representing a light-touch assessment

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |27

 Table 2: Indicative timeplan for implementation of Practical Skills Portfolios

Week Activity Notes

The skills and techniques should be brought to the attention
Prior Identify practical skills and of
students and prompts should be added to practical
techniques covered in
steps where they are required to obtain a photograph (see
practicals
Supplementary Information).
These are set out in a tabular format, with reflective
Create PSP templates (in
Prior Word) prompts and space for students to add reflections (see
Supplementary Information).
Wk 1 Students are advised that an excellent response will identify
Outline
the startthe
expectations of content
the
of the andat three aspects of a practical technique on which they will
PSP
session
reflect and provide advice to other students, with discussion
of issues which should be considered when performing the
skill/technique.
Wk 2 The rubric and quickmark comment features of Turnitin (see
Supplementary Information) are used to promote rapid
Mark add
students’
feedbackPSPs and marking and
consistency. Demonstrators are provided
with initial training by staff, and moderation continues
throughout the year.
Students alternate between biology and chemistry
Students receive marks practicals, providing a one week window after submission
Wk 3 for marking and feedback to support students in improving
and feedback
subsequent work.
focussing on skill development. PSPs are graded online, either by staff or postgraduate demonstrators,
using Turnitin (see Supplementary Information), supporting the return offeedback to students in advance
of the next practical so it can be utilised effectively. Ensuring that an appropriate level of reflection is
displayed in all students’ responses to the prompts is a focus for the feedback provided.

Case study 2: Synoptic self-assessed exercise in organic chemistry

The approach to teaching of organic reaction mechanisms on the SFY, delivered through lectures, was
designed to foster an appreciation of meaningful approaches. This involved a stepwise approach, similar
to that outlined by Pungente and Badger (2003):
• Step 1:Identification and labelling of lone pairs, dipoles and pi-bonds in the reactants.
• Step 2: Prediction of the first step in mechanism based on the features identified in Step 1.
• Step 3: Completion of subsequent steps leading to the reaction product(s).

Students were given opportunities to practise each mechanism in lectures, with feedback provided
throughout. Students also had the opportunity to attempt mechanistic problems during weekly workshop
sessions, where students were given problem sets based on the content of the week’s lectures. During the
sessions, they could ask questions and receive feedback from 2–3 staff and postgraduate demonstrators.
Despite this framework, observations of student behaviour in 2012/13 and 2013/14 indicated that many
were adopting a rote-learning approach to mechanisms, which has previously been identified as a source
of misconceptions (Henderleiter et al., 2001). Although it is unclear why this was the case, it is possible
that the pace of teaching on the SFY programme meant that students lacked opportunities to reflect on
their thinking and develop the confidence to work out a mechanism; students in such a position may be
inclined to resort to rote-memorisation.

28|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

Figure 2: An example of an entry from a PSP including feedback provided via Turnitin (used with permission)

Grove and Bretz (2012) placed students on a spectrum from rote-memorisation to meaningful learning
according to the approach they adopted when studying organic chemistry. Students who adopted rote
memorisation due to a lack of awareness of more meaningful techniques were classified as unaware
learners, whereasindifferent learners were those who were aware of meaningful approaches but chose not
to adopt them.Those in the latter category expressed that they were unwilling to spend the time applying
more meaningful techniques in the belief that it would be easier to adopt a rote-learning strategy. It
was felt that a significant proportion of SFY students had the characteristics of unaware and indifferent
learners because they weren’t assimilating the more meaningful aspects of the taught approach, and it
was desirable to induce a shift in their behaviour.

In order to move students away from rote-memorisation, it was felt that they should be prompted to
analyse their approach to reaction mechanisms and to identify where more meaningful thinking could be
incorporated in future. Since limited time was available in timetabled teaching sessions, it was proposed
that a self-assessed exercise be set for completion over the Easter vacation break.

Description of the synoptic self-assessed exercise in organic chemistry

The use of videos of experts talking through answers to problems (talking mark schemes) to support Year
2 students in self-assessing their performance on organic chemistry problem sets at Southampton has
been described previously (Brown et al., 2012). A key feature of a talking mark scheme — as opposed to

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |29

a static written document — is the fact that the expert describes their thought process and the rationale
behind it as they outline an approach to answering the problem. This allows students to compare their
own thought process with that of the expert and reflect on any differences, potentially facilitating the
incorporation of more meaningful strategies into their approach to mechanisms.

This approach to self-assessment involves three steps: students complete problem sets; the teacher
checks the work is complete and returns it for marking; and then students carry out self-assessment and
record their reflections in a survey. This approach has also been adapted as a summer vacation homework
exercise encompassing inorganic, organic and physical chemistry for students transitioning between Year
1 and Year 2 in chemistry at Southampton (Read and Duckmanton, 2012), resulting in favourable feedback
from students. The completion of surveys by students at the end of the process, in which they report their
marks for the exercises as well as their responses to reflective prompts, has facilitated the monitoring of
student engagement as well as providing insights into the benefits in terms of student confidence and
their approach to learning.

The process of self-assessment with reference to talking mark schemes is aligned with Sadler’s model of
formative assessment (1989). Sadler referred to three conditions for effective self-monitoring, which are
listed as stages in Table 3, mapped against steps in the self-assessment process outlined by Brown et al.,
(2012) and used in this case study.
Table 3: Mapping of stages in self-assessment activity onto Sadler’s (1989) model of
formative assessment and self-monitoring
Stage Sadler’s description Self-assessment activity by student
Viewing the model answer and
Students should understand the goal and
1 underpinning thought process outlined by
standard for which they are aiming. the expert during the talking mark scheme.
performance withcompare
Students should their
the standard. Marking their answer and comparing their
2 thought process with the expert’s.
3 and
gapthe
Students
between their
standard
should identify
for current
which they
steps
performance
toare
close the Responding to reflective prompts in the
aiming.
survey, asking them to explain how they will
improve their future performance.

An indicative timeline for the implementation of this approach is outlined in Table 4. It should be
emphasised that the creation of talking mark schemes, discussed later on, can be time consuming and
it is important that perfectionism is avoided. The other steps in the creation of the activity are relatively
straightforward, although an investment of time is required to create the resources in the first instance.

Since the SFY chemistry programme is based on the UK A Level specification, the problem set in this
case was based on a set of activities adapted from previous A Level examination questions, and this was
created and issued to students before the Easter vacation break. A set of talking mark schemes, based
around PowerPoint slides and on-screen annotations, were created and uploaded as unlisted videos to
YouTube (see, for example https://youtu.be/zelMnTeCsQ4). These videos were created using Camtasia
Studio on a laptop in a private office, but similar videos could also be recorded using institutional lecture
capture software in a lecture theatre. A screenshot from a talking mark scheme is shown in Figure 3. In
our case, the videos were then embedded in a survey which asked students to enter their own marks
for each question answered (see Supplementary Information for details). When the resources were
later repurposed for use with school students, the survey was replaced by a pro forma (see example in

30|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

Table 4: Example timeline for implementation of this approach

Time Activity Notes

Prior Create problem set Ideally, questions should prompt a multi-step thought process
that can then be modelled in the talking mark scheme (see
http://edshare.soton.ac.uk/18073 for an example).
Prior Best approached with limited preparationand
in order to model
Wk 1 Issue
Create talking set
problem
students
schemes markto Advise students to
thought
do some preparation then complete the
process of an expert when tackling an unseen problem
(see https://youtu.be/zelMnTeCsQ4 for an example).

problems without reference to notes.

Wk 1 marking
paper
Create and
survey
reflection It is particularly important that this prompts students to identify
pro forma OR
for
strengths and weaknesses, and strategies for improvement (see
Supplementary Information).
Wk 2 Issue students with a link to the survey or the marking pro
Wk 3 or
Check
Download
students
work,
collect
for
thensurvey
for marking.
completion
analysis
pro
return of forma.
formas
data
to Generate Whichever for students
feedbackformat is used,based on their
it should include links toto
responses the
talking mark scheme videos. The marking process is intuitive for
students, the main guidance being to expand on their responses
to reflective prompts.

reflective prompts, and identify any common issues arising from

performance on the activity itself to inform generic feedback.
Wk 3 Mark students A light touch marking process can be used to award a mark, as
outlined in the supplementary information (see Supplementary
reflections (optional)
Information).

Figure 3: A screenshot from a talking mark scheme

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |31

Supplementary Information) for ease of use. This is completed on paper by students as they view the
videos and can then be collected in for analysis by the teacher.

Reflective prompts were included in the survey (and the proforma), along with some evaluative questions,
to which students were required to respond. Students were instructed to complete the problem set and
then self-assessment via the survey before they returned to university four weeks later. This meant that
the work was not checked for completion prior to marking. Students were told in advance that the activity
and the self-assessment process would each take 1–1.5 hours to complete.This exercise was credit bearing
(~10% of the module mark), with students being graded on the quality of reflection in their responses. It
is likely that this influenced the completion rate (typically about 75% over the three years this activity has
been in operation), although it should be noted that implementations with undergraduate chemists saw
completion rates > 80%, despite not being credit bearing.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

This section will consider the evidence of impact of each case study in turn, based on students’responses
to survey questions. Some qualitative data extracted from students’ comments is discussed briefly in
the chapter with more detailed information available in the Supplementary Information, including the
themes identified through thematic analysis.

Data relating to Case Study 1 was collected as part of a process to evaluate the effectiveness of the SFY
in preparing students for practical work in later years. This was achieved through a survey of students
who had participated in the SFY in previous academic years before progressing to later years of study. In
total, 27 complete responses were received from a population of 88 students (31%). Students voluntarily
completed the survey and consented to the data being used in scholarly publications and presentations.

The data presented in relation to Case Study 2 is collected through the normal operation of the activity.
Students whose comments have been used in this chapter provided consent for the data to be used for
research purposes. Note that students did have the option not to respond to evaluative questions during
the activity, and these were not themselves subject to assessment.

Evidence of impact on students for reflective Case Study 1

Some of the evidence collected has been reported previously (Wright et al., 2018), although the aspects
relating to the reflective components of the PSP are discussed exclusively herein. Students responded
to two reflective prompts on a Likert scale and were asked to add a comment. Likert response data is
presented in Figure 4, with qualitative data extracted from comments available in the Supplementary
Information. Note that the shading in the charts indicates the breakdown of responses between students
who are currently studying on degree programmes in years 1–4 at Southampton (having completed the
SFY) and in Years 2 and 3 on the Sheffield/Nanjing [3+1] programme. None of the students surveyed
encountered PSPs in subsequent studies.

Our evaluation shows that students generally place great value on the processes of self-assessing and
reflecting on their practical performance. Analysis of qualitative data (Supplementary Information)
provided evidence that students perceived the reflective process to be to be valuable in developing their
understanding and ability to recall different techniques and how to perform them. Bearing in mind that
this is data collected from students who used PSPs one or more years previously, it is noteworthy that
some of them commented on the value of this approach in preparing them for their studies that followed.

32|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

Prompt 2: To what extent did self-assessing your performance and reflecting on it impact on your
ability to remember how to perform techniques at a later date?

ItIthad
hadaastrong
small positive impact.
It had negative
It had a small no impact at all.
impact. It had a strong positive impact.

It had a small positive impact.

It had no impact at all.

It had a small negative impact.

It had a strong negative impact. It had a strong negative impact.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Number of responses in Agreement (n=95)
Number of responses in Agreement (n=95)
0 10 Soton UG
20 Sheff30
Y2 40 Y3
Sheff 50 Soton SFY Sheff Y2 Sheff Y3

Figure 4: Student perceptions of the impact of self-assessment and reflection on their understanding of practical
techniques (left) and on their ability to remember how to perform practical techniques (right)

However, it should be acknowledged that this is self-reported data based on students’ perceptions of the
impact of PSPs, and we have not attempted to measure students’ ability to perform techniques. Thus it
cannot be inferred that the self-assessment and reflection described has led to enhanced understanding
and recall of practical techniques. Nonetheless, staff and demonstrators in the teaching laboratory report
seeing fewer errors since the introduction of PSPs, and it was noted by the laboratory demonstrator in
2013/14 that most students were observed to be correctly viewing the meniscus in their measuring
cylinder at eye-level during the second practical in contrast with the previous year.

Evidence of impact on students for reflective Case Study 2

As noted previously, students entered their marks for the exercise into a self-assessment survey, which
included evaluative and reflective Likert items and open text response questions (see Supplementary
Information). Completion of the survey was part of the assessment, with 117 students out of a cohort of
154 responding to questions over the three academic years. Figure 5 illustrates responses from students
to Likert survey items relating specifically to their perceptions of the impact of the activity on them. This
data indicates that an overwhelming majority of students felt that their understanding and confidence
improved as a result of the activity. Students were asked to comment on what had caused their confidence
to change, with thematic analysis of their responses presented in the Supplementary Information. Key
themes identified included clarification of thought processes, changing perceptions of difficulty, and the
development of a more holistic approach to mechanisms, among others.

Students were asked about the role of the activity in helping them to identify where they needed to do
more work/revision, as illustrated in Figure 6. Again, quotes listed in the Supplementary Information give
some indication why students were largely in agreement with the statement in the prompt. Students
understanding of organic reaction mechanisms. Prompt2:I am now more confident abouttackling some questions thatImay meet inmyexams.

Strongly agree Strongly agree

Agree Agree

Neither agree or disagree Neither agree or disagree

Disagree Disagree

Strongly disagree Strongly disagree

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Number of responses in agreement (n=117)
Number of responses in agreement (n=117)
2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

Figure 7: Student Figure

5: Student responses
responses relatingtounderstanding mechanismsto understanding of reaction mechanisms (left) and
ofreactionrelating
relating to confidence in tackling exam questions (right)

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |33

were asked to suggest actions they would take to improve their performance in organic chemistry, with
the most common response being that they would be practising more problems. In many cases, the
students cited specific actions identified, such as the creation of flash cards to consolidate understanding
of the stepwise nature of a mechanism.

It is evident that students see the value of this activity for their learning. Thematic analysis of qualitative
data (Supplementary Information) identified a number of common themes, which included clarification of
thought processes, changing perceptions of difficulty, and understanding the approaches to mechanisms,
among others. Further analysis of this and other qualitative data collected is underway, but the themes
identified illustrate the range of benefits that students have recognised through their engagement with
the task. Although impact on attainment has not been measured, staff and postgraduate laboratory
demonstrators have reported an improvement in many students’ confidence as well as a more structured
approach when drawing mechanisms after completion of the task.

Data presented is based on student perceptions, and no attempt has been made to measure impact on
student attainment in organic chemistry as part of this study. However, there is strong evidence that
students place great value on the process of self-assessing these exercises with reference to talking mark
schemes. The qualitative data provides fascinating insight into the minds of students as they reflect
on their performance and their learning in relation to reaction mechanisms. Many student comments
indicate increased awareness of meaningful approaches, as defined by Grove and Bretz (2012), as a result
of their reflection on the thoughtidentify processesIneedtodomoreemployedwork/revision. in successfully approaching mechanistic problems.
where

Neither agree
Strongly Agree
or Disagree
disagree
agree

Strongly disagree

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Number of responses in agreement (n=117)

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

Figure 6: StudentFigure9:responsesStudentresponses
relatingrelatingtotofuture
futureworkandworkrevisionand revision

Implications and Adaptability

Reflective Case Study 1 — applicability of the approach

The PSP approach has already been adopted successfully by the University of Sheffield team with
students on their [3+1] programme with Nanjing University of Technology, and has been shared with
teachers in schools and colleges. In the cases described, the PSP is used in the assessment of fundamental
practical activity and the format is probably better suited to work of this nature, rather than the more
advanced practicals encountered in later years of degree programmes. However, the reflective element
could potentially be incorporated into any practical procedure either in the laboratory or as part of a post
laboratory write up.

The keypoints outlined below should be considered by those exploring the adoption of a similar approach:
• PSPs streamline the process of recording practical activity on the part of the student, and
also the assessment process for staff, supporting rapid feedback provision.

34|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

• Feedback to students is essential, as the level of reflection can be limited in early examples.
• Students have indicated that the awarding of marks acts as an incentive, with the combined
marks being worth 14% of the module mark on the SFY from 2012/13–2017/18.
• Consistency of assessment and feedback on PSPs across different markers at Southampton
is supported through the use of Turnitin rubrics and Quickmark comments.
• A risk assessment should be carried out regarding the use of phones as cameras in the
teaching laboratory. Note that phones can be placed in re-sealable plastic bags without
losing their touchscreen functionality.

Reflective Case Study 2 — applicability of the approach

As discussed, this approach has already been used with students in Years 1 and 2 of the chemistry degree
programme across all areas of the discipline, showing its versatility. Additionally, the SFY resources
described herein have been adapted for use with A Level students. Over 1500 students at 23 schools and
colleges took part in the initial project, and the resources are now freely available for download (http://
edshare.soton.ac.uk/18073). At the time of writing, there have been > 2600 file downloads from this page
since January 2017.

The points below outline key considerations for those exploring the adoption of a similar approach:
• Explore the downloadable examples at http://edshare.soton.ac.uk/18073 for ideas about
how to create appropriate exercises and talking mark schemes and run this type of self
assessment activity.
• If setting up a survey for the self-assessment is problematic, students can still be prompted
to record their marks and reflections using a paper pro forma instead.
• Shorter reflective exercises based on this approach can be embedded in any teaching
activity, including a lecture. For example, students could attempt an exercise and then mark
it with guidance from the lecturer, before reflecting either through peer discussion or via a
classroom response system.
• Awarding credit for the activity is likely to incentivise students to engage, although a
non-credit bearing version employed with Southampton undergraduates achieves high
completion rates.

Conclusions and Future Work

Activities which prompt students to engage in reflection on their learning have been implemented on
the SFY programme, two of which are the focus of this chapter — reflection on development of practical
skills (PSPs) and reflection on self assessment of organic mechanisms using talking mark schemes. The
resulting data provides evidence of the impact of the activities on students’ learning and their confidence
in their capabilities. Such activities help to prepare students for their future studies and for life beyond in
the workplace. This sentiment is captured in the quote below from a student now in the 3rd year of their
pharmacology degree:
[The SFY] helped with my organisation skills and really understanding what’s expected of me at university
level. It taught me the importance of independent work and also becoming a reflecting student who
understands what works and doesn't work in terms of learning content.

We are currently exploring methods to facilitate and monitor continuous reflection on progress more
generally during the SFY, potentially using an online system to capture students thoughts each week
regarding their grasp of content and what they need to concentrate on going forwards. Data collected via
such an approach would support staff in pastoral activity, helping to identify students who are at risk of

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |35

underachieving due to ineffective study approaches or lack of engagement.

There is great scope for future work in this area, which could progress towards more rigorous pedagogical
research. The impact of the reflective component of PSPs on students’ abilities to replicate techniques
correctly could be investigated. Photographs in PSPs could be also replaced by videos, supporting
peer review as outlined by Seery et al. (2017), with the reflective component being incorporated in the
commentary added to the video.

Along-term goal of the work with talking markschemes is to investigate their impact on students’abilities
to successfully tackle mechanistic problems in organic chemistry.This could be done by usingathinkaloud
protocol, where students verbalise their thought process while working through a problem, as previously
reported in organic chemistry by Ferguson and Bodner (2008) and Kraft et al. (2010). By working with
students pre- and post-activity, it would be possible to probe the effect of the self-assessment task on
students’ assimilation of the meaningful learning approaches conveyed in the talking mark schemes into
their own problem-solving toolkit.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Boud, D., Keogh, R. and Walker, D. (1985), “Promoting reflection in learning: A model”, in Boud, D., Keogh, R. and
Walker, D. (Eds), Reflection: Turning experience into learning, Kogan Page, London, pp. 18-40.
Boud, D. and Walker, D. (1993), Barriers to reflection on experience. Using experience for learning, Routledge Falmer,
London, pp. 73-86.
Brown, R. C. D., Hinks, J. D. and Read, D. (2012), A blended-learning approach to supporting students in organic
chemistry: methodology and outcomes, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, pp. 33-37.
Dewey, J. (1933), How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process Vol. 8,
D.C. Heath Company, Boston, MA.
Ferguson, R. and Bodner, G. M. (2008), Making sense of the arrow-pushing formalism among chemistry majors
enrolled in organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 102-113.
Gibbs, G. (1988), Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods, Oxford Polytechnic Further
Education Unit, Oxford.
Grove, N. P. and Bretz, S. L. (2012), “A continuum of learning: from rote memorization to meaningful learning in
organic chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vo. 13 No. 3, pp. 201-208.
Henderleiter, J., Smart, R., Anderson, J. and Elian, O. (2001), “How do organic chemistry students understand and
apply hydrogen bonding?”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 78 No. 8, pp. 1126-1130.
Kraft, A., Strickland, A. M. and Bhattacharyya, G. (2010), “Reasonable reasoning: multi-variate problem-solving in
organic chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 11 No.4, pp. 281-292.
Loughran, J. (1996), Developing reflective practice. Learning about Teaching and Learning through Modelling,
Falmer Press, London.
Mezirow, J. (1990), “How critical reflection triggers transformative learning”, in Fostering Critical Reflection: A
Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, pp. 1-20.
Paterson, B. L. (1995), Developing and maintaining reflection in clinical journals, Nurse Education Today, Vol. 15
No. 3, pp. 211-220.
Pungente, M.D. and Badger, R. A. (2003), “Teaching introductory organic chemistry: 'Blooming' beyond a simple

36|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Nurturing reflection in science foundation year undergraduate students

taxonomy”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 80 No. 7, pp. 779-784.

Read, D. and Duckmanton, P. (2012), “Students writing their own feedback; self-assessment mediated by video
mark schemes”, HEA STEM Conference Proceedings, available at: https://tinyurl.com/ycz8ojpy (accessed
10th February 2019).
Rickey, D. and Stacy, A.M. (2000),“The role of metacognition in learning chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 77 No. 7, pp. 915-920.
Roberts, A. and Yoell, H. (2009), “Reflectors, converts and the disengaged: A study of undergraduate architecture
students’ perceptions of undertaking learning journals”, Journal for Education in the Built Environment, Vol.
4 No. 2, pp. 74-93.
Rogers, R. R. (2001), “Reflection in higher education: A concept analysis”, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 26 No.
1, pp. 37-57.
Sadler, D. R. (1989), “Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems”, Instructional Science, Vol. 18
No. 2, pp. 119-144.
Seery, M. K., Agustian, H. Y., Doidge, E. D., Kucharski, M. M., O’Connor, H. M. and Price, A. (2017), Developing
laboratory skills by incorporating peer-review and digital badges. Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 403-419.
Seibert, K. W. and Daudelin, M. W. (1999), The role of reflection in managerial learning: Theory, research, and
practice, Quorum Books, Westport, CA.
Wright, J. S., Read, D., Hughes, O. and Hyde, J. (2018), “Tracking and assessing practical chemistry skills
development: practical skills portfolios”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 13 No.
1, available at: https://journals.le.ac.uk/ojs1/index.php/new-directions/article/view/2905 (accessed
February 11th 2019).

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |37

38|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 4 Integration of technology in the
chemistry classroom and laboratory

Barry J. Ryan
School of Food Science and Environmental Health, Technological
University Dublin
barry.ryan@dit.ie

The role of technology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory continues to evolve, with
mainstream applications such as pre-lecture/laboratory resources being supplemented by
technological innovations such as immersive reality. Although the range is vast, care must
be taken to select appropriate and pedagogically aligned technologies to enable learning.

In this chapter a model for the appropriate selection and application of technology enabled
learning in chemistry is developed and explored in the context of two case-studies. This
model, LEAPTech, is based on ten years of personal experience, informed by evidence and
underpinned by the scholarly literature. This model will serve as a starting point for new
educators and a useful checkpoint for more experienced educators.

Although the chapter is written from a chemistry education stance; the technologies, case
studies and model examined are applicable to all practical STEM subjects. The LEAPTech
model is central to the two case-studies detailed and provides context and capacity for
readers to adopt a tried and tested framework and set of technologies from two chemistry
education settings:

1. The use of augmented reality learning supports in the lab.

2. Collaborative online peer instruction in lectures.

Technology is ubiquitous; however, support is needed for educators around how to select
appropriate technologies for their students. The LEAPTech Framework provides a sensible
tool to map learning activity to an aligned and supportive technology, and to measure the
impact of technology integration in a chemistry/science classroom or laboratory. An easy
adoption of the LEAPTech Framework is enabled by the noted recommendations.

To cite: Ryan, B.J. (2019), “Integration of technology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C.
(Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp.39-54.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |39

Introduction

Technology has been used the classroom since the nineteenth century. Initially devices such as the
overhead projector (1930) were considered significant advances on more traditional technologies such as
the chalkboard (1890), the pencil (1900) and the ball point pen (1940; Anon, 2018). More recently, rapid
advances in computing have revolutionised how technology is implemented to enable learning. With the
advent of the Internet and smart devices, access to information is now easier than ever before (Siwawetkul
and Koraneekij, 2018). For example, mobile phone technology has a 70% penetration and the majority
of worldwide internet traffic is funnelled through smartphones (Boxer, 2018). The ever-present nature of
technology in our daily lives facilitates rapid information access and permits alternative approaches to
technology enhanced teaching to be adopted during (synchronous) and outside (asynchronous) class
contact time (Pricahyo et al., 2018).

Technology integration has been rapid and continues to expand in all aspects of education (Maya et al.,
2017). Science, and chemistry education specifically, is no different (Table 1). However, selection of the
appropriate technology and the level to pitch it at for a given student cohort can be challenging. The
LEAPTech (Learning through Engaged and Active Pedagogies with Technology) Framework (see Figure
1) was developed in order to provide a pragmatic approach to technology selection and integration. It
evolved based on ten years experience and is informed by the scholarly literature. The underlying concept
of LEAPTech is that technology integration should enhance the learning experience.

Figure 1: An overview of the LEAPTech framework. Learning is student centred and is driven by technology-enhanced
pedagogy that engages and activates the students and itself is evaluated for appropriateness

Two concepts underpin the development of LEAPTech. Watson coined the mantra pedagogy before
technology (2001, p251), and this informed the key first step in LEAPTech; a synergistic underpinning
pedagogy that supports technology integration and use in both the lecture and laboratory environment.
For LEAPTech, Beauchamp and Kennewells’ (2009) interactive teaching with technology paradigm
provided an adaptable approach to modify, map, and quantify the level oftechnology enabled interactivity
(See Table 2 for examples). The use of a framework provides structure for both the academic and student
cohort. The final step in LEAPTech is a detailed and rigorous evaluation of the technologies that complete
this framework, as applied to the cases at hand. This ensures the appropriateness of the technology and
the validity of the impact on the student learning experience.This approach chimes with Taber’s (adapted
by author) recommendation of pedagogy before novelty (2017, p398), using research to inform practice
and offer evidence as to effectiveness.

40|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

Table 1: Some technologies used in chemistry education, both theoretical and practical, showing type of technology, the
setting in which it was used and a primary reference

Type of Use of Technology Reference

Technology
Augmented reality Detailed organic chemistry reaction mechanisms and Plunkett (2018)
the use of laboratory equipment through trigger
induced augmented reality.
Animations structure though
Developed students
student generatedof
understanding animations.
atomic Akaygun (2016)

Electronic ELNs were used in a biochemistry laboratory Van Dyke and Smith
laboratory leading to enhanced peer-to-peer collaboration and Carpenter (2017)
notebooks communication with instructors.

Immersive virtual Aided students to visualise chemical concepts, such Lancaster (2018)
reality as symmetry, chirality and solid-state structures, in
three dimensions.
Modelling 3-D models were used to promote a deeper Barak and Hussein
understanding of biomolecule function from a Farraj (2013)
chemical perspective.
Online tutorials Assisted students to develop problem solving skills O’Sullivan and
based on automated responses in an online setting. Hargaden (2014)
Pre-laboratory Provision of pre laboratory question sets and Teo et al., (2014)
resources instructional videos resulted in students displaying
a better theoretical understanding and a higher
confidence in their technique.
Pre-lecture Online lectures were provided in advance of class, Mooring et al., (2016)
resources and class time used for problem-solving resulted in
a statistically significant increase in both emotional
satisfaction and intellectual accessibility.
Simulations Assisted students problem solving capacity by Avramiotis and
introducing simulations to the learning environment Tsaparlis (2013)
Student response Promotes active learning through interactive Shea (2016)
systems questions that foster in-class discussion and
can allow the instructor to identify student
misconceptions quickly in a large class setting.
Video Point of view demonstration of practical laboratory Fung (2015)
techniques that resulted in enhanced student
laboratory performance.
Virtual laboraties A virtual laboratory was used to assist students in Herga, Čagran and
their conceptual understanding of sub-microscopic Dinevski (2016)
chemistry.
Wiki Documenting collaborative learning and aligning Kristian (2015)
theoretical knowledge with soft and technical skills.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |41

In this chapter, two aligned case studies (one in a laboratory setting, the other as part of a lecture course)
are presented to contextualise and highlight the appropriateness of the LEAPTech framework. Abridged
mixed method evaluation findings are also briefly presented to complete the stages of the LEAPTech
framework. Overtime, and through an iterative process informed by the LEAPTech framework, a deliberate
transition towards dialogic and synergistic modes of technology use to enable teaching and learning
can be achieved. This evolution is also unpacked and explored through recommendations for practice.
Table 2: Classification, and comparison, of the different levels of teaching enabled by technology with relevant
technologies and example technologies provided. The technologies that underpin the case studies in this chapter are in
bold. Adapted from Beauchamp and Kennewell (2010)

Classification Characteristics Technology

Sample Example Technology

Authoritative The primary opinion

understanding is thatsupporting
of the academic;
student presentation
Slideshow PowerPoint notes

there is little or no student discussion or

contribution.
Dialectic on
is
Student
however,
academic
resolving
contribution
student is encouraged;
thefacilitated.
interactions
misconception and
are focussed Response
Personal
System Clicker technology
(such as Socrative)

Dialogic academic and

Sustained resulting
interactions betweenin students
in-depth use of discursive
purposeful
and Communication
software Nearpod, Augmented
Reality Scenario
Based Learning
outputs, from different perspectives,
that develop student understanding.
Synergistic act as
and triggers
Contextualised,
the that
academic open
ofallow
develop
ended
students
problems
new Content
software
creation PeerWise, Video

knowledge.
Rationale, Methods, and Case Study Design

Rationale
The case studies presented here are divided into two topics; laboratory and lecture associated technology
enhanced learning. The rationale for integrating technology in these settings, informed by the LEAPTech
framework, differs depending on the setting. In the laboratory, the adaption and adoption of augmented
reality, combined with scenario based learning, assisted students in developing good pre-laboratory
preparation habits and enabled a more student centred, research-orientated approach to laboratory
teaching. In the lecture associated use of technology, students were empowered to curate significant
user generated learning resources that were used to construct a student centred, peer instructed active
learning environment (Santoso et al., 2018).

Implementation — Laboratory case study

In the laboratory case study, and as part of a final year dissertation research project, a final year student
developed a pre-laboratory resource for a single problem-based laboratory session based on the
extensive use of augmented reality for first year introductory chemistry students. Augmented reality
overlays “virtual information on top of the real world, with continuous and implicit user control of the point

42|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

of view and interactivity” (Kesim and Ozarslan, 2012, p297). To enhance student preparation before — and
independence during — a thin layer chromatography (TLC) laboratory, an augmented reality smartphone
application, HP Reveal, was used to make simple augmented reality based scenarios.

Chemistry behind the augmented reality implementation

A simple TLC laboratory was used as a test bed for the feasibility of augmented reality in the chemistry
laboratory. A contextualised problem-based approach was implemented to allow the students to work
their way through the laboratory-based problem, using augmented reality to support their laboratory
technique development in a structured way. The context of the TLC laboratory was a crime scene,
whereby clues were distributed around the laboratory, accompanied by augmented reality triggers. These
triggers initiated an augmented reality experience for the students once they were viewed through the
smartphone app. These augmented reality experiences focussed on supporting students in executing
accurate and safe laboratory techniques in a just-in-time approach. The scenario the students were
immersed in asked them to solve a crime based on the TLC analysis of the pen ink used during the crime
(Mc Donnell et al., 2007). The students were not provided with a manual for the lab; instead they were
given access to the laboratory technique videos before the laboratory, through the institutional virtual
learning environment. The students were prompted, if needed, during the scenario by the augmented
reality experiences, additional clues and by the author. Each student group used their own smart device,
with the augmented reality application HP Reveal pre-installed. This permitted the students to engage
with the augmented reality content through previously created triggers.

Setting up the HP Reveal augmented reality

HP Reveal was used as a mobile device application that allowed the students to experience augmented
reality through their smartphone in the laboratory. HP Reveal recognises images from the physical world
as triggers to initiate the augmented reality, over the trigger image, on the smartphone. This layered
media can include audio, video, animatronics, or a webpage and gives the user an augmented reality
experience. The augmented reality experience was created before the laboratory and comprised six steps:
1. Register with HP Reveal Studio (www.studio.hpreveal.com) and create a free account.
2. Upload your desired trigger image (see Figure 2 for examples) that the mobile device will
recognise. This image can be uploaded as either a PNG or JPEG file type.
3. Upload your chosen overlay. This overlay can be an audio file, a picture, a video, or a 3D
image or scene. HP Reveal Studio compatible file types include; JPEG, PNG, FLV, MP4, or TAR
(for 3D overlays).
4. The trigger and the overlay are combined to create an aura (an augmented reality
experience) and you can chose what will happen when the trigger is recognised. At this
point you also have the option to add extra commands including pausing the overlay upon
a user command, moving to additional content after user engagement with the overlay,
making the overlay full screen, and initiating the camera on the smart device.
5. Save your aura to the My Auras space. At this point you can assign searchable hashtags to
allow your aura to be easily found or you can share via hyperlink. The aura can be made
public or private and a cover image, that is visible when the aura is displayed, can also be
inserted.
6. Experiencing the augmented reality requires students to download the free HP Reveal
application to their smartphone, search for the relevant aura and use the applications
viewfinder to locate the trigger image to initiate the aura.

Implementation — Lecture-based case study

In the second case study, technology enabled peer instruction was used to allow students to co-construct

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |43

 Figure 2: Sample augmented reality triggers and a collection of clues and ink samples from
the contextualised problem scenario

knowledge and understanding in an enabling online environment. Peer instruction is “an interactive
teaching technique that promotes classroom interaction to engage students and address difficult aspects of
the material” (Mazur and Watkins, 2010, p39). In this case study, PeerWise (www.peerwise.cs.auckland.
ac.nz) enabled peer instruction to move beyond traditional face-to-face peer interactions and permitted
peer instruction to take place anonymously, and asynchronously, through a secure online space.

Chemistry behind PeerWise implementation

In this case study, students in three collaborating institutions were encouraged to engage in an online
peer instruction space, PeerWise, with the aim of developing their chemistry understanding through
question writing and answering. The focus of the question writing was topics covered in their Year 1
general chemistry modules, with a specific emphasis on introductory organic chemistry. The curricula
in the three institutions converged on nomenclature, functional group applications and basic organic
reactions informed by electron pushing/curly arrows. Students were asked, at a minimum, to:
1. Generate four questions over the course of a 12-week semester.
2. Ensure they completed the relevant study to confirm the answers were accurate and the
feedback they provided was supportive.
3. Answer four questions and leave four positive and meaningful comments.

Student authored questions were categorised based on academic selected, pre-defined tags so as to
allow the students to search the question database effectively. There was no academic moderation of
the question/answer/feedback standard, and a small credit (4% of the module grade) was awarded on a
sliding scale for student engagement, in line with the minimum expected participation.

Setting up PeerWise
PeerWise is a free, online space where students create multiple-choice questions, with accompanying
feedback, that are shared with their peers. Peers then answer these questions, receive feedback and are
awarded engagement badges and points that accumulate over time. Academic preparation is key to
enabling students to peer instruct through PeerWise, and primarily involves creating the PeerWise space
and subsequently providing training for students on appropriate question/feedback/comment authoring.

A PeerWise space is created by following these five steps:

1. Register for free, and request an instructor account (https://peerwise.cs.auckland.
ac.nz/#join).

44|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

2. Once registration is complete, enter the your institutional PeerWise space with your
username and password.
3. Create a new course (the secure online space where your students will peer instruct each
other) and give the course an appropriate name; for example the module code and year.
4. The course will be assigned a unique course ID and you can upload the students to this
course manually or via a spreadsheet, using a unique identifier (such as student number).
5. Students can be invited to enter the PeerWise space once they know the course ID number
and their unique identifier. They complete a separate registration process, defining their
own password etc.

Participants
In both case studies, appropriate technology was woven into an introductoryYear 1 chemistry module and
underpinned by an aligned social constructivist pedagogy. A social constructivist approach to teaching
centralises individual student learning through social, group-based learning activities. It focuses on
building individual understanding from existing knowledge within the group. The students in both case
studies were non-chemistry majors, from multidisciplinary degree courses focussing on two core areas
(Food and Pharmaceutical), across two levels, aligned with the Irish National Framework of Qualifications,
where Level 8 is an undergraduate honours degree (see www.qqi.ie for details). These courses were at
Level 6, a two-year certificate course, and Level 8, a four year honours degree course. The majority (> 75%)
of students did not have prior chemistry background from secondary school. In the lecture-based case
study, the population comprised students from three different higher education institutions in Ireland
with a specific emphasis on fundamental organic chemistry theory.

Evaluation
The effect of introducing technology into the learning environment, based on the LEAPTech framework,
was evaluated. Those who participated in the evaluation were protected following typical ethical
guidelines that included; voluntarily participation, fully informed consent, ability to withdraw, anonymity,
ensuring no harm to the participant or researcher, privacy, confidentiality and data storage. A case study
methodology, combined with simple additional steps (for example the researcher did not conduct the
interviews, surveys were completed anonymously and after the assessment for the module was complete),
minimized bias and enhanced data conformity as part of a coordinated approach to data validity, reliability
and research rigour. The data collected took several forms over the two case studies, but converged on
three types:
• an anonymous evaluation form (either an online multiple choice questionnaire or a standard
institute module review)
• an independent academic facilitated discussion forum
• a personal reflective researcher diary

All data were collected once the students had completed their modules, with the exception of the reflective
diary, which was recorded by the researcher on an on-going basis. The reflective diary documented
informal discussions with students, personal researcher observations, and comments. Students were
asked for consent to allow the researcher to record any interesting or relevant points raised during an
informal discussion. Data triangulation was utilised to ensure only valid themes were investigated and
that the examples and findings are based on feedback from as broad a student base as possible (Jick,
1979). Quantitative data were examined using basic mathematical functions in Microsoft Excel to produce
graphical representations of data. Qualitative data were coded onto several key themes informed by data
saturation and based on researcher interpretation influenced by Strauss and Corbins’ (1990) Method of
Constant Comparison and Braun and Clarkes’(2006) Six Step Approach to Data Analysis.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |45

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Case study 1: Augmented reality laboratories

The research question that underpinned this case study was:
Can an augmented reality smartphone based application assiststudents in developing scientific laboratory
skills and enhance their self-reported laboratory confidence in a problem-based learning environment?

After completing the augmented reality enhanced laboratory, participants were surveyed to gauge their
perceived enhanced understanding and skill development. A discussion forum provided rich data that
was analysed and thematically coded (Braun and Clarke, 2006) and with further sources of data included
a researcher reflective diary and undergraduate project supervisory meeting logbook. Iterative coding
and thematic analysis were carried out until data saturation was achieved and convergence on three key
themes emerged; (i) student laboratory preparation, (ii) visual aids to learning, and (iii) student confidence.

Theme 1: Student laboratory preparation

Many (75%, n = 13) students noted that they typically reviewed, at a shallow level, the laboratory manual
before a laboratory. A low percentage (< 15%, n = 2) of students commented that they routinely carried
out in-depth preparation before laboratories. Barriers to preparation included time pressure (these
students had four laboratory sessions per week), poor self-regulation and responsibility for learning as
a hangover from their learning experience at second level and the laboratory manual was considered
too detailed and dense; all common barriers noted to pre-laboratory preparation (Pogacnik and Cigic,
2006). In this case study, the inclusion of the augmented reality triggers within the online preparative
space significantly altered the student preparation. Approximately 95% (n = 16) of students noted they
prepared for longer, took more notes and engaged the augmented content a number of times. Repeat
engagement with augmented content included students repeat playing, as well as playing with pausing,
the augmented content. Enhanced engagement with pre-laboratory activities, when they are technology
based, echoes past studies by O’Brien and Cameron (2012) and Chaytor and colleagues (2017); although
engagement does not always result in improved laboratory performance (Jolley et al., 2016).

Theme 2: Visual aids for learning

The use of visual aids to support pre-laboratory and in-laboratory practical work was considered very
important by the student cohort. Students commented on how they liked to see the technique in action,
carried out by someone skilled in the technique, before they then attempted the technique. All the
respondents to the online survey (n = 17) cited that would seek out visual aids to help them prepare for
all their laboratories, not just chemistry. In this study, the provision of the visual aids as preparatory guides
allows the students to pause, consider, rewind and replay; thereby allowing the students to self-pace
their learning and to connect the laboratory to corresponding lecture content (Schmidt-McCormacket
al., 2017). The use of an expert in the video (shot in point of view, over the shoulder, or head on) allows for
the inclusion of tips appropriate for novices as well as important and timely health and safety reminders
(Agustian and Seery, 2017). The key element of just-in-time learning allows the students to prepare
efficiently for the laboratory, but also re-use the resources in the laboratory at key points in the laboratory
(for example setting up an instrument) through embedded augmented reality triggers.

Theme 3: Confidence
Undergraduate students, particularly Year 1 students, can lack confidence in their laboratory skills —
mainly due to the lack of laboratory time in second level schools. In this study, students reported self
confidence in relation to their laboratory technique increased by 50% with the use of augmented reality,

46|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

with past research indicating that increased confidence leads to enhanced learning (Chesser-Smyth, 2013
and Rasul et al., 2011). When probed, the students that participated in the discussion group cited making
mistakes as their biggest fear in the laboratory, often resulting in procrastination in the laboratory. The
provision of both pre-/post- and in-laboratory support and guidance, via augmented reality, was seen
to help the students on multiple levels; including, reducing the in-laboratory cognitive load and making
optimal use of face-to-face laboratory time (Supasornet al., 2008).

Considerations for using augmented reality

Augmented reality experiences can be easily and inexpensively incorporated into the chemistry
laboratory, using the LEAPTech Framework as a guide for appropriate integration. Providing access
to the augmented reality experiences before, during and after the laboratory allows time for dialogic
conversations to naturally take place. The augmented reality experiences replace the need for the
academic to repeat procedural instruction; it empowers students through confidence in their technique
and promotes meaningful discursive interactions in the laboratory. However, caution is required so that
the augmented reality experiences do not distract the students in the laboratory. This can be achieved
by enhancing just the key techniques through augmented reality. Additionally, actively engaging the
students in purposeful dialogue at the key points of the laboratory procedure will further support student
practical and theoretical knowledge development.

Case Study 2: Inter-institutional PeerWise implementation

The research question that structured this pilot case study was:
How does a shared, anonymous online learning space affect student perceived learning achievement?

Three emergent themes, following thematic analysis, were noted and chime with recent research in this
area (Kay et al., 2018); (i) student generated question quality, (ii) student motivation, and (iii) a shared
online community.

Theme 1: Quality control

Of those that responded to the pilot survey, a quarter of the students (n = 3) struggled with the lack of
question (and answer) quality control within PeerWise and resulted in PeerWise having a negative effect
on their perceived learning. An example comment was “I was unsure if material was correct”.

The quality of the student-produced question can be problematic when introducing PeerWise to a cohort.
Indeed, this lack of question standard regulation by the academic has previously been observed as a
barrier to use (Seery, 2014); however, research by Galloway and Burns (2015) suggests that with the correct
support, guidance and facilitation, chemistry students can create higher order questions, with matched
correct answers and learn in the process. Alternatively, this negative perceived effect on learning could be
reversed if the roles are switched within PeerWise with each student taking on board the role of question
quality controller. Utilising this flipped approach, the standard of learning deepens further for both the
student reviewer and also those engaging with the questions.
There was some bad information as question answers were not always right. So [you had to do] your own
research [to check if the] wrong answer is correct.

This peer-reviewer role could be formalised within the comments section of each PeerWise question
(Fergus, 2014), with a scaffold provided to assist students in both constructing and reviewing questions
(Bates and Galloway, 2013).

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |47

Theme 2: Empowerment and motivation
All those that responded (n = 12) to the survey noted that they felt empowered by PeerWise and were
encouraged to take responsibility for their learning within PeerWise. PeerWise was used in this pilot case
study as a mechanism to support student transition from a typically teacher centric second level system
to a student centred higher education (Purchase et al., 2010); this was noted in student responses to the
effect of PeerWise on their perceived learning:
[We] had to do independent research and study to create valid questions.
[PeerWise] helps you take charge of your own learning and revision.

Additional motivators existin PeerWise and these includebadges and a leaderboard and these can be used
to induce engagement initially and sustain motivation throughout the semester. In this pilot case study
students that engaged more than the suggested minimum (write four questions, answer four questions
and comment on four questions over a 12-weeksemester) cited they did so to gain more PeerWise badges
and to enhance their position on the PeerWise leader board.This chimes with previous positive correlation
between the gamification of PeerWise and perceived learning gains (Howe et al., 2018).

Theme 3: Community of practice

Over 90% (n = 11) of the survey participant responses noted that being part of a larger community (the
three higher education institutions in one online space) was beneficial to their learning. Being able to
connect and engage with peers within PeerWise has been shown to have benefits for those that engage
(for example Duret et al., 2018); however, in this pilot case study the benefit of engagement with peers in
other institutes undertaking similar courses of study was explored. The benefits of an inter-institutional
collaborative PeerWise space included students sharing alternative perspectives on common theory,
based on they way they were taught at their host institution:
It allowed me to learn how [the peers from the other institutions] approached certain topics and give me a
greater understating.

This concept was also evidenced throughout the analysis of the student generated questions and
subsequent discussion within the comments sections (Figure 3). Furthermore, from a logistical perspective,
combining three student groups increased the database of questions significantly. Once the questions
were tagged appropriately within PeerWise, students could use the question database as a revision
mechanism throughout the academic year.
The questions created were also relevant to our physical chemistry module; the volume of questions
available would probably not be as large if it was just [one institute].

Figure 3: An example of peer-to-peer learning through the comments section in a typical PeerWise question. All three
student higher education institutions are noted; either in question generation or the commentary. The comments are
accurate, constructive and helpful to both the question author and also other students that attempt the question

48|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

The use of PeerWise in higher education is increasing, including the sciences in general (Hancock et al.,
2018 and Kay et al., 2018) and chemistry specifically (Hudson et al., 2018). In this pilot case study the
benefits of inter-institutional peer-to-peer learning were explored and found to be a positive influence
on perceived learning. However, concerns regarding the quality of the students contributions remain;
flipping the role of the student to one of critical reviewer as well as question producer may assist in
addressing this shortfall in perceived learning.

Considerations for using PeerWise

Students authoring and answering peer-authored questions is an exercise that can be easily carried
out using printed worksheets, following a social constructivist paradigm; however, the use of PeerWise
enhances this approach. Within PeerWise all students have access to all questions, comments and
feedback and can engage whenever they want. Additional motivators such as badges and a leader
board are integrated in to PeerWise with minimal academic input required. As the online space is not
viewed as academic controlled, students can develop a community of practice whereby the questions
are generated, answered and commented on by the students, for the students. PeerWise, therefore, aligns
to the LEAPTech framework, social constructivism supports learning and multiple studies have reported
positive outcomes from its integration. It also pushes students to the highest level of Beauchamp and
Kennewell (2010) classification matrix; synergistic learning through technology integration and allows
students to develop new knowledge.

Implications and Adaptability

The LEAPTech framework provides a sensible tool to measure the impact of technology integration into
a chemistry/science classroom or laboratory. Keeping the key tenets (pedagogy before technology and
novelty) of the framework in mind during technology integration into a course will allow the framework
to guide appropriate technology selection. Pitching the selected technologies at the right level of the
framework will provide the greatest range of adaptability for your students. Additionally, from a practical
viewpoint it is also important to consider the following in your context.

Accessibility
Will students be encouraged to use their own devices in class/laboratory and if so what is the bring
your own device (BYOD) policy within your institution? If you plan on using devices within a laboratory
environment, will your BYOD policy cover such use? Are your students willing to use their personal
devices for learning; what about their personal data plans (see Connectivity below)? Will a BYOD policy
place additional pressure on students who may not have smartphones/tablets/laptops, and if so, can a
rental scheme be but in place so as not to disadvantage these students?

Inclusiveness
How will students with learning difficulties be enabled in a technology-enhanced classroom/laboratory?
Adoption of universaldesign principles into yourtechnology-enhanced environment can ensure inclusivity
is central for all learners (Dinmore, 2014). Inclusive learning technologies can also be considered; for
example, text to speech software integration for PeerWise questions/answers/feedback or closed caption
annotations for augmented reality video-based resources.

Connectivity
Technology enhanced learning is synonymous with cloud computing and connection to the internet.
Consider the teaching environment that you wish to enhance throughtechnology integration; is this space

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |49

suitably connected, via WiFi, so as to remove the need for students to use their own personal data plans?
Does the wireless server have the capacity to deal with several hundred (in the case of large classes) near
simultaneous log-ons? Consider liaising with the local IT support to assess the capacity of the teaching
space as additional requirements may be needed to support your classes connectivity.

To blend
How is the topic/module that you are considering for integrating technology currently delivered? What
would be the perceived benefits of integrating technology into your class/laboratory? What are the
disadvantages? Perhaps a blend, or hybrid, approach may achieve the best of both technology enabled
and traditional approaches to teaching and learning (Pimmeret al., 2016). Start by integrating a technology
in a small way into a class; for example, when you ask a question to the class, collect student responses
through an appropriate technology such as Nearpod and marry it to an online homework task within
PeerWise. Consult with your student group to evaluate their experience of this technology integration; if
it is positive you can build further technology based enhancements into your teaching and assessment.

Assessment
Will you use technology as part of your assessment strategy? If so, it is worth considering familiarising the
students with the technology in non-assessed settings. For example, if you plan to use PeerWise as part of
your assessment strategy, you may allow students non-assessed practicetime. Furthermore, the approach
to teaching and assessment can be constructively aligned embracing technology. Constructive alignment
is the process of configuring teaching and learning methods, assessment, and the learning outcomes so
that they are aligned and symbiotic. An example would be the use of student response systems to capture
student answers, and therefore evidence on learning outcome attainment, to multiple choice questions
(MCQ) in class.Thus the teaching and learning method would involve answering MCQs. PeerWise could be
used to promote this teaching and learning method outside class contact time by encouraging students
to design and answer MCQs. The corresponding assessment could use the institutional VLE to assess more
formally student attainment of the learning outcomes via MCQs (Ryan, 2013).

Evaluation
If you adapt the LEAPTech framework to select and map technology integration into your class or
laboratory, you should also consider evaluating the impact of the innovation. In the augmented reality
case study, the inclusion of augmented reality had a positive impact on students developing their self
reported laboratory skills. However, caution is needed here as this key finding suggests the students
prepared more and felt more confident in their technique, but the accuracy of their technique was not
explored as part of this study. A drift in perceived ability, whereby the novelty factor of the inclusion of
augmented reality may have clouded the students personal judgment on their own technical abilities and
this needs further exploration.

Conclusions

In this chapter the LEAPTech framework was introduced and used as a lens to showcase two case studies
focussing on the adoption, integration and evaluation of technology into both the chemistry classroom
and laboratory. In both examples it was found that, with judicious technology selection and integration, the
learning experience of students in both the lecture and laboratory setting could be enhanced. However,
the use of technology needs to be integrated, seamless and justified; technology needs to be built in, not
bolted on. Common themes of student empowerment, responsibility for learning, and confidence are
noted in the case studies explored in this chapter. Nevertheless, care must be taken when evaluating new

50|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

technologies in any learning environment. Student positivity does not always correlate with enhanced
student learning; careful consideration of research bias and data validation, through triangulation for
example, can assist in the credibility and transferability of an investigation into the benefit, or otherwise,
of a technology enabled learning environment.

Looking to the future, the annual reports from New Media Consortium (Becker et al., 2017) and The Open
University (Sharples et al., 2016) are excellent, timely sources for those seeking to keep their finger on
the pulse of emerging technologies and innovating pedagogies. For the case studies in this chapter, new
avenues can be explored to further integrate technology and evaluate its impact on student learning.
For example, augmented reality could be used to create interactive journal articles. In this example the
interactive element (for example an audio summary) could be created by each student in a class, thus
creating a suite of digitally enabled resources for their peers. This concept of student content creation,
enabled through suitable technology, could be expanded to visual standard operating procedures for
laboratory instruments and augmented poster presentations; the possibilities abound and are only limited
by your creativity with the technology! Whatever direction taken with technology in the classroom/
laboratory, the guiding principles of a suitable framework (for example LEAPTech) will help ensure the
learning experience, for staff and student, is a positive one.

Acknowledgements

The contributions of Ms. Alice Lynskey (augmented reality) and Drs. Eileen O’Leary, Elaine O’Keefe, Gary
Stack and Laura Crowe (PeerWise) are gratefully acknowledged.

References
Agustian, H. Y. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education:
a proposed framework for their design”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 518-532.
Akaygun, S. (2016), “Is the oxygen atom static or dynamic? The effect of generating animations on students'
mental models of atomic structure”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 17, pp. 788-807.
Anon (2018), “The evolution of technology in the classroom”, available at https://online.purdue.edu/ldt/learning
design-technology/resources/evolution-technology-classroom (accessed 16th August 2018).
Avramiotis, S. and Tsaparlis, G. (2013), “Using computer simulations in chemistry problem solving”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14, pp. 297–311.
Barak, M. and Hussein-Farraj, R. (2013), “Integrating model-based learning and animations for enhancing
students’ understanding of proteins structure and function”, Research in Science Education, Vol.43, pp.
619-636.
Bates, S. and Galloway, R. (2013), “Student generated assessment”, Education in Chemistry, Vol. 50, pp.18-21.
Beauchamp, G. and Kennewell, S. (2010), “Interactivity in the classroom and its impact on learning”, Computers
and Education, Vol. 54, pp. 759-766.
Becker, S.A. Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Glesinger Hall, C. and Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017), NMC Horizon
Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition, The New Media Consortium, Austin, Texas, available at https://
www.learntechlib.org/p/174879/(accessed 2nd April 2019).
Boxer, A. (2018), “Digital 2018”, available at https://wearesocial.com/blog/2018/01/global-digital-report-2018
(accessed 11th June 2018).
Braun, V. and Clarke V. (2006), Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology, Vol. 3,
pp. 77-101.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |51

Chaytor, J. L., Al Mughalaq, M. and Butler, H. (2017), “Development and Use of Online Prelaboratory Activities in
Organic Chemistry To Improve Students’ Laboratory Experience”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94
No. 7, pp. 859-866.
Chesser-Smyth, P. (2013), “Student life - How to build self-confidence”, Nursing Standard, Vol. 27, pp. 64-64.
Dinmore, S. P. (2014), “The Case for Universal Design for Learning in Technology Enhanced Environments”,
International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education, Vol. 3, pp. 29-38.
Duret, D., Christley, R., Denny, P. and Senior, A. (2018), “Collaborative Learning with PeerWise”, Research in
Learning Technology, Vol. 25, pp. 1979-1992.
Galloway, K. W. and Burns, S. (2015), “Doing it for themselves: students creating a high quality peer-learning
environment”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 82-92.
Fergus, S. (2014), “Student-generated content: using PeerWise to help support chemistry understanding and
increase student engagement with course content in a first year module”, Ninth Irish Variety In Chemistry
Education, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland.
Fung, F. M. (2015), “Using first-person perspective filming techniques for a chemistry laboratory demonstration
to facilitate a flipped pre-laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92, pp. 1518-1521.
Hancock, D., Hare, N., Denny, P. and Denyer, G. (2018), “Improving large class performance and engagement
through student‐generated question banks”, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 46 No. 4,
pp. 306-217.
Herga, N. R., Čagran, B. and Dinevski, D. (2016), “Virtual Laboratory in the Role of Dynamic Visualisation for Better
Understanding of Chemistry in Primary School”, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology
Education, Vol. 12, pp. 593-608.
Howe, P. D., McKague, M., Lodge, J. M., Blunden, A. G. and Saw, G. (2018), “PeerWise: Evaluating the Effectiveness
of a Web-Based Learning Aid in a Second-Year Psychology Subject”, Psychology Learning & Teaching, Vol.
17, pp. 166-176.
Hudson, S. L., Jarstfer, M. B. and Persky, A. M. (2018), “Student Learning with Generated and Answered Peer
written Questions”, American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 82 No. 2, pp. 96-99.
Jick, T.D. (1979), “Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action”, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp. 602-611.
Jolley, D. F., Wilson, S. R., Kelso, C., O’Brien, G., & Mason, C. E. (2016), “Analytical thinking, analytical action: using
prelaboratory video demonstrations and e-quizzes to improve undergraduate preparedness for analytical
chemistry practical classes”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 11, pp. 1855-1862.
Kay, A. E., Hardy, J. and Galloway, R. K. (2018), “Learning from peer feedback on student-generated multiple
choice questions: Views of introductory physics students”, Physical Review Physics Education Research, Vol.
14, pp. 0101191-17.
Kesim, M. and Ozarslan, Y. (2012), “Augmented reality in education: current technologies and the potential for
education”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 47, pp. 297-302.
Kristian, K. E. (2015), “A Wiki-Based Group Project in an Inorganic Chemistry Foundation Course”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 92, pp. 2074-2079.
Lancaster, S.J. (2018), “Immersed in virtual molecules”, Nature Reviews Chemistry, Vol. 2, pp. 253-254.
Maya, E., Quan, V., Nickow, A.J. and Oreopoulos, P. (2017), “Education technology: an evidence-based review”,
National Bureau of Economic Research, pp. 1-102.
Mazur, E. and Watkins, J. (2010), “Just in time teaching and peer instruction”, in Scott, S. and Mark, M. (Eds), Just in
time teaching: Across the disciplines, and across the academy, Sterling, VA: Stylus, pp. 33-62.
McCoy, Bernard R. (2016), Digital Distractions in the Classroom Phase II: Student Classroom Use of Digital Devices for
Non-Class Related Purposes. University of Nebraska Faculty Publications, p. 90.
Mc Donnell, C., O’Connor, C. and Seery, M. K. (2007), “Developing practical chemistry skills by means of student
driven problem-based learning mini-projects”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8, pp. 130
139.

52|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Integration oftechnology in the chemistry classroom and laboratory

Mooring, S.R., Mitchell, C.E. and Burrows, N. L. (2016), “Evaluation of a flipped, large-enrollment organic chemistry
course on student attitude and achievement”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93, pp. 1972-1983.
O’Brien, G., and Melanie C. (2012), “Prelaboratory activities to enhance the laboratory learning experience”,
Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education, pp. 80-85.
O’Sullivan, T. P. and Hargaden, G. C. (2014), “Using structure-based organic chemistry online tutorials with
automated correction for student practice and review”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91, pp. 1851-
1854.
Pimmer, C., Mateescu, M. and Gröhbiel, U. (2016), “Mobile and ubiquitous learning in higher education settings.
A systematic review of empirical studies”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 63, pp. 490-501.
Plunkett, Kyle (2018), “A Simple and Practical Method for Incorporating Augmented Reality into the Classroom
and Laboratory”, ChemRxiv, https://doi.org/10.26434/chemrxiv.7137827.v1.
Pogacnik, L. and Cigic, B. (2006), “How to motivate students to study before they enter the laboratory”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 83, pp. 1094-8.
Pricahyo, E. W., Akhyar, M. and Suharno S. (2018), “Modern technology: Has it been Utilized in Learning?”, Journal
of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, Vol. 3, pp. 3-11.
Purchase, H., Hamer, J., Denny, P. and Luxton-Reilly, A. (2010), “The quality of a PeerWise MCQ repository”,
Proceedings of the Twelfth Australasian Conference on Computing Education, Vol. 103, pp. 137-146.
Rasul, S., Bukhsh, Q. and Batool, S. (2011), “A study to analyze the effectiveness of audio visual aids in teaching
learning process at university level”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 28, pp. 78-81.
Ryan, B.J. (2013), “Line up, line up: using technology to align and enhance peer learning and assessment in a
student centred foundation organic chemistry module”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
14, pp. 229-238.
Santoso, H. B., Batuparan, A. K., Isal, R. Y. K. and Goodridge, W. H. (2018), “The Development of a Learning
Dashboard for Lecturers: A Case Study on a Student-Centered E-Learning Environment”, The Journal of
Educators Online, 1.
Seery, M. (2014), “Warming to PeerWise”, Education in Chemistry, available at: https://eic.rsc.org/opinion/
warming-to-peerwise/2010160.article (accessed 6th February 2019).
Schmidt-McCormack, J.A., Muniz, M.N., Keuter, E. C., Shaw, S.K. and Cole, R.S. (2017),“Design and implementation
of instructional videos for upper-division undergraduate laboratory courses”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 749-762.
Sharples, M., de Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi, C-K.,
McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M. and Wong, L. H. (2016), Innovating Pedagogy 2016, Open University
Innovation Report 5. Milton Keynes.
Shea, K. M. (2016), “Beyond clickers, next generation classroom response systems for organic chemistry”, Journal
of Chemical Education, Vol. 93, pp. 971-974.
Siwawetkul, W. and Koraneekij, P. (2018), “Effect of 5E instructional model on mobile technology to enhance
reasoning ability of lower primary school students”, Kasetsart Journal of Social Science, in press, DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.02.005.
Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded
theory. (2nd Ed). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
Supasorn, S., Suits, J. P., Jones, L. L. and Vibuljan, S. (2008), “Impact of a pre-laboratory organic-extraction
simulation on comprehension and attitudes of undergraduate chemistry students”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 9, pp. 169-181.
Watson, D.M. (2001), “Pedagogy before technology: Re-thinking the relationship between ICT and teaching”,
Education and Information Technologies, Vol.6, pp. 251-266.
Taber, K.S. (2017), “The role of new educational technology in teaching and learning: A constructivist perspective
on digital learning”, in Handbook on digital learning for K-12 schools, Springer, Cham, pp. 397-412.
TeoT.W., Tan K. C. D., Yan Y. K., Teo Y.C. and Yeo L.W. (2014), “How flip teaching supports undergraduate chemistry

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |53

 laboratory learning”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 15, pp. 550–567.
Van Dyke, A. R. and Smith-Carpenter, J. (2017), “Bring Your Own Device: A Digital Notebook for Undergraduate
Biochemistry Laboratory Using a Free, Cross-Platform Application”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94,
pp. 656-661.

54|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 5 Developing problem-solving skills
in physical chemistry

Elizabeth Yuriev, Sabrina Basal and Kimberly Vo

Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University
elizabeth.yuriev@monash.edu

Developing problem-solving skills by chemistry students and teaching of these skills by

instructors are two of the recognised challenges of chemistry education (Herron, 1996b).
There is extensive chemical education literature dealing with the nature of associated
difficulties and instructional approaches to address these difficulties. One of the main
difficulties experienced by students when solving chemistry problems stems from the lack
of process skills. To tackle this challenge, we have developed and evaluated the problem
solving workflow called Goldilocks Help. It provides specific scaffolding for students faced
with procedural difficulties when solving chemistry problems. We have implemented
it into the teaching of physical chemistry in a holistic manner where teaching, practice,
and assessment are constructively aligned. The evaluation of the workflow showed that
it was associated with the shift in students’ beliefs in their abilities to use productive self
regulation strategies in problem solving: planning, information management, monitoring,
debugging, and evaluation. In fact, many students could effectively regulate their problem
solving though planning and analysis. Analysis of student work showed that students who
demonstrated more expertise by engaging in structured problem solving and explicit
reasoning were more successful in their problem-solving attempts. However, contrary to
their stated values, they were not as effective in employing monitoring, debugging, and
evaluation. We propose that it is important to constructively align teaching and learning
activities with assessment that explicitly encourages students to engage in demonstrating
their reasoning during problem-solving, as well as other reflective and evaluative practices.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Our education research and teaching practice are influenced by Tina Overton’s research into
problem solving and numerous insightful discussions with Tina over the term of her tenure in
Monash University, Australia. Specifically, the workon expert vs. novice problemsolving (Overton
et al., 2013; Randles and Overton, 2015) provided theoretical foundation for the student-tailored
implementation of the Goldilocks Help problem-solving workflow, and the work on open-ended
problems (Overton et al., 2013; Overton and Potter, 2008; Overton and Potter, 2011; Randles and
Overton, 2015; St Clair-Thompson et al., 2012) inspired the development of several learning and
teaching activities described below.
To cite:Yuriev, E., Basal, S. and Vo, K. (2019), “Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp.55-76.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |55

Introduction
Student difficulties in solving chemistry problems
We have previously reviewed student difficulties manifested when solving chemistry problems (Yuriev
et al., 2017). Poor problem-solving approaches and strategies, together with the lack of knowledge of
subject matter (Gulacar et al., 2013; Herron and Greenbowe, 1986) and misconceptions or alternative
conceptions (Taber, 2002), are among the main causes of such difficulties. Also, when students fail to
operationalise appropriate problem-solving processes, they resort to memorising algorithms. This usually
occurs when students are not motivated to tackle problems conceptually or when they are cognitively
overloaded and thus cannot afford the mental capacity required for conceptual problem solving (Gulacar
et al., 2014; Overton and Potter, 2008).

The following issues may further confound problem-solving attempts: an inability to extract relevant
information from a problem (Bodner and McMillen, 1986; Cohen et al., 2000; Gulacar et al., 2014) or
recognise a need for additional information that may be required (Van Ausdal, 1988), being unable
to handle conceptual complexity (Gulacar et al., 2014), and poor reasoning skills (Cohen et al., 2000).
When one or more of these issues arise, students tend to dash into the solution without first clarifying
the problem (Drummond and Selvaratnam, 2008; Harper, 2005; Selvaratnam, 2011), guess (Gulacar et
al., 2014), not know where to start (Gulacar et al., 2014; Van Ausdal, 1988), or give up (Drummond and
Selvaratnam, 2008; Harper, 2005). Finally, students may arrive at an incorrect, or incomplete, answer and
not recognise it because they are not used to habitually reflecting on or evaluating the outcome (Herron
and Greenbowe, 1986; Van Ausdal, 1988).

Academic value conflicts in teaching problem solving

Students are not the only contributors to the difficulties summarised above. Several teaching and
assessment practices contribute to students developing flawed approaches to problem solving. Teachers
often claim that they value reasoning in problem solving. However they frequently assess in a manner
that discourages, or at least does not reward, explicit reasoning demonstrated in students’ work, instead
assigning all or most marks for the correctness of the answer (Petcovic et al., 2013). A similar value conflict
arises when teaching is focused on conceptual learning, while assessment deals primarily with algorithmic
problems (Overton and Potter, 2011).

Other instructor-driven causes of poor problem-solving skills include instruction which focuses on
application of procedures at the expense of reasoning (Bodner and McMillen, 1986; Cohen et al., 2000;
Harper, 2005; Nyachwayaetal., 2014; Pushkin, 1998; Zoller, 2000), and insufficient training of metacognitive
strategies (Cohen et al., 2000; Drummond and Selvaratnam, 2008; Selvaratnam, 2011; Yu et al., 2015).

Analysing problem-solving processes

There are several classifications of students based on their approaches to chemical problem solving (Table
1). While the novice vs. expert paradigm is widely known, the additional classifications go beyond such
simple distinction. They further empower the instructors by demonstrating the features of higher-order
problem solving and providing guidance in terms of type of practice required.

Think-aloud protocol is the most common data collection method for analysing problem-solving
practices. Using think-aloud interviews, Overton and co-workers (Gulacar et al., 2013) developed a coding
scheme to categorise problem solving of stoichiometry problems as successful, neutral, and unsuccessful,
with additional detailed codes for the neutral and unsuccessful categories. When they investigated

56|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

open-ended problems, a marking scheme was used to assess student work based on how they dealt
with the data, method, and goals (Overton and Potter, 2011). In consequent studies, this scheme was
elaborated based on the themes emerging from the interviews and included codes for problem framing,
strategising, logic and scientific approach, information management, approximations and estimations,
algorithms, evaluation, ability to focus, and confidence (Overton et al., 2013; Randles et al., 2018; Randles
and Overton, 2015). Rodriguez et al. (2018) focused on characterising the productive and unproductive
features of problem-solving pathways used by students when solving chemical kinetics problems. Mason
et al. (1997) used a graphical method (incident identification graphs) to measure time spent by students
during specific“episodes” of problem solving: read, define, setup, solve, and check.

Think-aloud interviews have the advantage that students can verbalise their thought processes, may be
more comprehensive than if they just had to write down their solution, and could be probed with clarifying
questions. On the other hand, having to talk while solving a problem may influence the student’s problem
solving process and behaviour. Also, this data collection method is inevitably limited to a relatively small
number of participants. Conversely, students’ written work, which is admittedly usually limited to what is
produced on the page, is free from the stress of talking while thinking and could be generated in large
numbers, for example through collecting exam solutions. A scheme to analyse written solutions was
developed to code for reasoning: fully shown and correct, partially shown and incorrect, partially shown
and ambiguous, and fully shown and incorrect (Henderson et al., 2004; Petcovicet al., 2013). Stoichiometry
problems were used in this analysis, albeit the solutions were not the real student work, instead they were
simulated to include common mistakes and approaches. In another study, a computer-based assessment
was developed where students’work (for example answers to MCQ questions, concept maps, log files) was
used to map their problem solving to four dimensions: understanding and characterising the problem,
representing the problem, solving the problem, and reflecting and communicating the solution (Scherer
et al., 2014).

Problem-solving rubrics developed as part of the ELIPSS project (Cole et al., 2017; Cole et al., 2018) are
available for analysing both students’ written work (product) or observed problem-solving behaviours
(interaction). The rubrics categorise problem solving in terms of: evidence of thought process (work),
ability to identify necessary information and use information correctly, choosing problem-solving strategy,
completeness, logic of the solution, and judgement of reasonableness of the solution.

Theoretical framework
Our teaching standpoint is underpinned by the concepts of scaffolding and prompting. Scaffolding
enables learners to accomplish a task that could not be completed without assistance (Belland, 2011;
Pea, 2004; Vygotsky, 1978; Wood et al., 1976). With respect to problem solving, scaffolding comprises the
structuring of the process and metacognitive and procedural prompting (Reiser, 2004). It emphasises
problem-solving processes (Wood et al., 1976), focuses students’attention on important process elements
(Reiser, 2004), and promotes reflection (Davis, 2000). Prompts point students to important, possibly
overlooked, information and potential knowledge gaps, help in organising thought processes, make their
thinking visible, and emphasise the need to evaluate the validity of their solutions (Ge and Land, 2003).
Guiding-through-questions, or Socratic questioning, essentially promotes logical reasoning, structured
problem-solving processes, and reflection (Ge and Land, 2003; Rhee, 2007). Question prompts convey
transcendent messages about what is important in problem solving.

Our perspective on learning is based on the theory of metacognitive self-regulation. Metacognition is

the ability to monitor and critically evaluate one’s understanding and problem-solving processes (Flavell,
1979). Self-regulated learning comprises proactive processes, which learners use to set goals, choose

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |57

and implement strategies, and monitor their effectiveness (Pintrich et al., 1991; Zimmerman, 2008). Thus,
metacognitive self-regulation involves planning, monitoring, and regulating (Pintrich et al., 1991).
Table 1: Problem-solving approaches and associated literature references

Problem-
solver Description Reference

classification
Novices and
experts Novices take an
experts use
unstructured or scientific,
a structured,approach to problem
approach
solving; Bodner and Domin,
1991
Novices,
experts, and
transitional As above, with the recognition of a developmental stage Overton et al., 2013

and
Instrumental
relational Instrumental problem solvers recognise algorithms; relational
Skemp, 1979
problem solvers use conceptual schema
Successful
unsuccessful
and Successful problem solver is able to extract relevant
information from the problem statement, often uses drawing
to represent a problem, is willing to try something when Bodner, 2003; 2015
stuck, keeps track of the problem-solving process, and checks
answer to see if it makes sense
Productive and
unproductive Based on specific strategies used by problem solvers Rodriguez et al., 2018

Design of the Problem-Solving Workflow

While there is an extensive range of problem-solving processes (reviewed by usin (Yuriev et al., 2017)),
they usually involve several common steps: understanding and representing the problem, planning a
solution, implementing it, and evaluating an outcome (Polya, 1945). We have designed the Goldilocks
Help workflow (Table 2) to achieve the following:
1. scaffolding of a systematic problem-solving process with an explicit designation of phases;
2. introducing students to the types of prompts that could guide them through the process;
3. encouraging explicit reasoning necessary for successful conceptual problem solving; and
4. fostering the development of metacognitive self-regulation by the inclusion of monitoring,
evaluation, and reflection prompts.

The workflow is designed for quantitative problems, mostly with a specific correct answer. Whereas it is
presented in a sequential fashion, it contains multiple feedback loops to expose a non-linear nature of
problem solving (Figure 1).

The design of the workflow was informed by common student difficulties in solving chemistry problems
and prior research on problem-solving processes (Yuriev et al., 2017). Specific strategies were included
to help students avoid, or be able to deal with, points where they commonly get stuck while solving
problems: dead ends and false starts. Dead ends are points on unproductive problem-solving pathways
that prevent reaching a correct solution. False starts are a consequence of lacking required knowledge,
but being unaware of it.

At the extremes of problem-solving instruction, students are either given a generic advice, for example
to analyse or to plan, or are provided with an algorithm. When designing the workflow, we aimed for the

58|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

GOLDILOCKS HELP v.3

the problem: clear? of

meaning Consult the
•Define/deconstruct
Terms principle(s)
Relevant Is the
resources
the
Consult Yes No resources
(textbook,
all terms
personal notes,
online, etc.)

1. the
What
Analyse known? (data: numerically and dimensionally)
isproblem:

2. What is required to be determined? (unknowns)

3. What additional information may you need?

Establish the relationships

between the data and the
Consult unknown(s)
No
the Are
clear?
all the
relationships
resources
Is all information,
Yes required to
determine the
unknown(s),
available?
No
Yes

Implement planned steps: calculate, check units

Yes Are the units Yes Is the answer

correct? sensible?

No No

is solved
The
problem Troubleshooting:
• Are there arithmetical errors?
• Are the correct units being used (e.g., K vs C)?
• Is the correct order of magnitude being used (e.g., kJ vs. J)?
• Are the correct properties being used: system or specific (e.g., J vs. J/mol)?

Figure 1: Problem-solving workflow

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |59

 Table 2: Problem-solving workflow
solving
phase
Problem- Main action(s) Prompts/questions Additional actions (if stuck, or
negative answers to prompts)

Understand deconstruct
problem
Define/ the Is the meaning of all
clear? terms Consult the resources (textbook,
personal notes, online, etc.)

What is known? (data:

numerically and dimensionally)
Analyse the What is required to be
Analyse problem determined? (unknowns) Consult the resources
What additional information
may you need?
Plan and
between the
relationships
Establish
unknown(s)
data Are all the relationships clear?
Is all information, Consult the resources
determine required to
the unknown(s), Return to the Analysis phase

available?
Implement Implement
planned steps:
calculate, check
units
Evaluate Troubleshoot: Are there
arithmetical errors? Are the
correct units being used? Is the
Troubleshoot, if Is the
Are the
answer
units correct?
sensible? correct order of magnitude being
necessary used? Are the correct properties
being used: system or specific?
Return to the Analysis phase
Return to the Implement phase

balance between these two approaches. In Socratic questioning fashion, the prompts mean to increase
students’ awareness of what they do not understand and to trigger the use of additional information
where necessary.

Understanding
Problem representation, or cognitive restructuring, is the critical step of problem solving (Bodner and
McMillen, 1986). Following the review of known student difficulties in solving chemistry problems,
we decided to split the representation step into two separate processes: understanding the problem
statement (comprehending) and analysing the problem (exploring it).

Students often do not recognise that they do not know something.This lack of knowledge, combined with
a lack of awareness, leads to false starts in problem solving. Furthermore, misconceptions and alternative
conceptions (Taber, 2002) can lead to dead ends of wrong answers. An example solution pathway is shown
in Figure 2 (common error (i)). In the workflow, students are prompted to first examine all the terms and
concepts they encounter in the problem with the question:“is the meaning of all terms clear?”

60|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

Figure 2: Heat capacity problem – illustration of student difficulties (specific errors are shown in bold). This problem is
presented to students in the context of reversible processes with no non-expansion work occurring

Previously, we have shown that deep understanding of terminology promotes successful problem solving
(Yuriev et al., 2016).

Analysis
A commonly known pitfall of student problem solving is to look for an equation as a strategy (Harper,
2005). In such an algorithmic approach, if students cannot locate a correct equation, they are stuck,
another false start. If however, they pick an inappropriate equation and fail to realise its unsuitability, they
embark on an unproductive pathway leading to another dead end (Nyachwaya et al., 2014). A productive
alternative is to prompt:
What is known (data)? What is required to be determined (unknowns)? What additional information may
be needed?

At this stage, it is also important to state explicitly any relevant assumptions, particularly to avoid

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |61

incorporating non-normative ideas in reasoning. An example of such incorporation in chemical kinetics
problems is applying first-order rate laws to zero-order processes, without accounting for differences
between these processes (Rodriguez et al., 2018).

Planning
Skipping the planning step is frequently recognised as the feature of student problem solving (Herron,
1996a). While this skipping may be another instance of not knowing what one does not know, it is
commonly manifested in the superficial manipulation of mathematical formulas (Cohen et al., 2000;
Drummond and Selvaratnam, 2008; Gulacar et al., 2014; Selvaratnam, 2011; Van Ausdal, 1988) and/or in
the failure to account for the dimensional nature (units) of physicochemical properties. (Gulacar et al.,
2014; Van Ausdal, 1988). As a result, students may arrive at the dead end of a wrong answer, exemplified
by Figure 2 (common error (ii)).

The workflow encourages students to set up relevant equations meticulously and to use symbols and
units ahead of numbers when substituting properties into equations:
Establish the relationships between the data and the unknown(s). Are all the relationships clear? Is all
information, required to determine the unknown(s), available?

Implementation
For quantitative problems, implementation is simply doing maths. Given good mathematical background,
this phase of problem solving is not challenging to most students. What is challenging though is not to
jump into implementation, without first doing analysis and planning. As stated above, many students skip
these important steps, and thus jeopardise the success of implementation.

The workflow makes it explicitly clear that implementation cannot come before these crucial steps. This
order should emphasise to students the importance of analysis and planning. Furthermore, this step
is presented as a prompt to calculate and check units. This description is intended as a reminder that
physicochemical properties are not dimensionless and the execution of implementation involves unit
checking as well as mathematical calculation.

Evaluation
Our review of literature on chemical problem solving revealed a general frustration with students’
resistance to engage in reflective practice while solving problems. “Teachers know that admonitions to do
so fall on deafears”(p. 73) (Herron, 1996a). It has been suggested that students recognise answer checking
as valuable, but still do not engage in it simply because they do not know how (Frank, 1986).

An example of a non-sensible answer is a numerically correct answer with a wrong sign — shown in Figure
2 (common error (iii)) — a solution dead end. To scaffold evaluation, the workflow prompts students to
consider the question: Is the answer sensible? Are the units correct?

If a student realises that one or both answers are No, they need strategies to go back through the
solution process to identify where they went wrong. The workflow contains a (non-comprehensive) list of
troubleshooting prompts as well as feedback loops to earlier solution stages.

Implementation of the Problem-Solving Workflow

Many students demonstrate a value conflict between what they know are successful learning and
problem-solving strategies and actual strategies they use to do well in the course (Elby, 1999; White et

62|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

Figure 3: The workflow is used in teaching when problem solving is modeled by instructors. Students are encouraged
to use the workflow when practicing problem solving. During assessment, students’ solutions are marked both for
correctness and explicit demonstration of the problem-solving process

al., 2015). Therefore, it is critical that assessment is constructively aligned with desired learning outcomes
and, in the case of problem solving, rewards explicit reasoning and reflection. Providing students with
explicit cues that they are expected to evaluate, check, reflect, and/or comment on the outcome should
be standard practice in chemistry teaching, at least for novice problem solvers.

These principles underpinned the implementation of the problem-solving workflow into the teaching
of physical chemistry in a holistic manner where teaching, practice, and assessment are constructively
aligned (Figure 3).

Setting and scope

The workflow was used in physical chemistry units undertaken by Year 1 students enrolled in the Bachelor
of Pharmaceutical Science degree in a research-intensive Australian university. The contents of the units
include: thermodynamics, acids and bases, phase equilibria, and chemical kinetics in Semester 1; and
solution properties (vapour pressure, conductivity, and colligative properties), solubility, and liquid-liquid
systems/emulsions in Semester 2. The average enrolment is 100–140 students. The workflow was rolled
out for the first time in 2015 and in its modified form — after the evaluation — in 2016. In 2017 and 2018,
it has been used in both first and second semesters. It has now been used for four years, totalling six
semesters of implementation.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |63

Teaching
Teaching methods involve interactive lectures with significant flipping and active learning components
(McLaughlin et al., 2016; White et al., 2016; White et al., 2015), problem-solving sessions, and laboratory
classes. During the first week of academic year, all students participate in an induction workshop. Activity
1 involves filling out a metacognition and self-regulation inventory (Yuriev et al., 2017).

Activity 2 is a group discussion of a chemistry-unrelated task:

You are a member of a group of people organising a music festival on the outskirts of Melbourne. You are
in charge of catering and your first job is to produce a budget with a restricted bottom line. How do you go
about doing that?

This task was inspired by those described by Randles and Overton (Randles and Overton, 2015). It is new
to students, quite unexpected, and open-ended. It does not require any specific scientific expertise, but
does prompt them to comment on their problem-solving approaches. Students brainstorm the scenario
in small groups and then share their plans and decision making with therest of the class.Their suggestions
usually cover the processes involved in problem solving: identifying the challenge (understanding),
finding the relationships between the variables, such as costs, and the unknown, such as the balanced
budget, (analysis), assembling and organising the required information (planning), doing the calculations
(implementation), and checking that the budgetisindeedinthe black (evaluation). Commonly, one specific
term in the problem statement (bottom line) is not known to many students, who ask for clarification.
Such requests present an ideal teaching moment for drawing students’attention to the importance of the
understanding step, when solving problems (“Is the meaning of all terms clear?”). This activity is designed
to make the process of problem solving visible, to urge students to monitor what they do when they solve
problems (problem-solving behaviour described by Herron, 1996a), and not to disregard the early stages
of problem solving: understanding, analysis, and planning.

Modelling instruction is used in lectures and problem-solving sessions, where at least one of the problems
allocated to each class period is worked through interactively, using explicit workflow prompts and colour
coding of the problem-solving stages (Figure 4).

Practice
During the semester, tasks of various difficulty are undertaken by students. While some are simple
algorithmic tasks, others have added levels of complexity. The most common elements of complexity
have to do with data: either necessary data not being provided in the problem statement or data being
provided that is not required for solving the problem. These complexity elements are authentic and
require students to identify what information is required to solve the problem and to source it if necessary.
Further complexity is introduced when students are required to generate multiple methods for solving
the same problem.

When students practice problem solving, it is important to emphasise the aspects of the process as outlined
in the workflow (Table2, Figure 1). Specifically, students are encouraged not to skip Understanding, Analysis,
and Planning phases. It is very important to advise and support students in executing the Evaluation
phase, particularly by instructing on effective checking strategies. Wherever possible collaborative
problem solving is used to expose students to alternative ways of thinking. All these elements of practice
are appreciated by students as discussed below in the Results section.

Assessment
Students are provided with regular constructive feedback on their problem-solving activities. For each

64|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

topic, students undertake low-stakes assessments: a quiz and an assignment. The quizzes largely involve
calculation questions with numeric answers, and are graded by the virtual learning environment. For the
assignments, students submit a solution for one of the tasks allocated for a given topic. The assignments
are assessed by the academic or teaching associates with focus on the problem-solving process: explicit
reasoning, methodical and organised fashion in which workings are presented, including, where
appropriate, formulas, unit conversions, etc. The feedback is provided to students via a simple single-row
rubric comprising:
e No submission: no points
e Workings not sufficiently shown or serious flaws; missing units or steps, flawed logic: 0.5
points
e Workings are shown and in enough detail and none or almost no flaws: 1 point

After both assessments, the outcomes are reviewed by the academic, and class-level feedback is provided
to students, reflecting on common errors and the process required to solve the problems. This cycle of
practice and assessment sends a very important message to students: in order to succeed, they have to
engage in and explicitly demonstrate their reasoning when solving problems. Even if a correct answer is
obtained, students do not get full points unless their solution clearly shows their thinking.

Sodium hypochlorite, NaClO, is the active ingredient of many bleaches. Calculate the ratio of the
concentrations of CIO and HCIO in a bleach solution having a pH adjusted to 6.50 by the use of
a strong acid.

Do you understand what this problem describes? Is the meaning of all terms clear?
Sodium hypochlorite is a salt of weak acid (HCIO) and dissociates fully in the aqueous solution:
NaCIO – Na’ + CIOT
Na' + H2O €- NaOH + H'

CIO + H2O = HCIO + OHT

Therefore, there are both CIOT (basic, b) and HCIO (acidic, a) forms are present in the solution. They
originate from the same source – the salt.
Let's analyse what's going on. The ratio of the concentrations of these forms (b/a) depends on the excess of
OHT or Hº. Adding more OHT shifts the equilibrium to the left and increases b/a; adding more Hº shifts the
equilibrium to the right and decreases b/a. In this case, the pH is adjusted to 6.50 by the use of strong acid.
The relationship between the pH of the solution and the b/a ratio of the two forms of the weak acid is the
Henderson-Hasselbach equation:
b
pH = pka + logi
What is known? pH = 6.50

What is required to be determined? b/a

What additional information may you need? pKa (HCIO) = 7.53

What are you planning to do next? Establish the relationships between the data and the unknown(s):

b - 10ph- pKa
Ol

Implement.

; F 106.50-753 = 0.093

Evaluate: Should there be any units? No, the ratio is unit-less.

Figure 4: Example of problem solving with modelling instruction

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education ||65

Results

Evaluation of the problem-solving workflow

The study to evaluate the problem-solving workflow was approved in accordance with institutional
guidelines regarding education research. The study was explained to students before they were invited to
participate. Their participation in the metacognitive awareness inventory was anonymous.

The workflow was evaluated by using several types of evidence: feedback from the face-validity survey
of academics, qualitative student comments from focus groups and end-of-semester reflections, and
quantitative scores from the metacognitive awareness inventory. All evaluation findings have been
previously described by usin detail (Yuriev et al., 2017) and are briefly summarised below.

Student perspectives on adopting the workflow fell into two main categories. Students either claimed
that they already use a similar approach to problem solving or reported that they have fully or partially
adopted the workflow. A small group of students reported that following the workflow was confusing.

Specifically, students commented on problem-solving processes and learning experiences in problem

solving sessions. They noted the importance of the Understand phase for the subsequent steps and the
value of having strong conceptual knowledge for the success of this step. Such aspects of the Analysis
phase as relationships between concepts, restructuring the problem, and focusing on the data and the
goals were recognised as being critical. In addition, students shown an appreciation for slowing down for
the Plan phase, noting the consequences of the lack of planning and the value of a well written-out plan
for later revision. Such appreciation is a significant mature judgement. Slowing down to plan a solution
is referred to in psychology as type 2, or deliberate, reasoning (Evans, 2012) and is a productive feature
of chemical problem solving (Rodriguez et al., 2018). With respect to the Evaluate phase, students noted
the specific checking strategies and the need to evaluate more regularly. Students observed that the
workflow helped them to commence, progress, and complete the problem-solving tasks.

This quote eloquently captures the trajectory of developing the problem-solving skills, as influenced by
the workflow:
I have realised the importance of understanding exactly what a problem is asking and planning my
solution. Instead of jumping straight into solving problems, I now more and more take the time to identify
what I do and don't know and the process I need to go through to solve it. I used to just plug things into
equations but I now have a greater understanding of why I am calculating something in this way and
appreciating how something is derived. It not only means I am more likely to answer correctly but forces
me to fully understand what I am doing and why, so this knowledge can be applied to many situations,
including unfamiliar ones.

The collaborative nature of the problem-solving sessions gave students regular opportunities to see how
other students approach the same problem. They talked about others’ way of thinking and strategising
and, significantly, emphasised different ways of thinking rather than using different algorithms. They
also indicated that the enhanced understanding of concepts, disambiguation of misconceptions,
consolidation of ideas, and complementarity were the effects of collaboration on problem solving.
Students acknowledged the benefits of working with more knowledgeable peers and of learning by
teaching to those less proficient. Finally, some students demonstrated a mature appreciation of the fact
that learning problem-solving process and improving relevant skills is a process in itself.

Not all student comments were positive. Adopting the structured approach to problem solving clearly

66|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

required a change in some students’ learning strategies. However, the majority of negative comments
revealed their makers’ grade motivation, rather than intrinsic motivation, as well as somewhat simplistic
view of what problem solving is. In particular, it is not uncommon for students to see the efficiency of
solving a problem fast as a goal in and of itself. For example, one student was exhorting the virtues
of preparing for class, which is of course a laudable notion, but then concluded that as a result of said
preparation they “did not have to waste time rereading and trying to understand the questions”. Another
commented that solving problems together with others was “inefficient because everyone has their own
way to solve the problems, so a lot of time was spent discussing rather than writing”. Such ideas indicate a
need for further conversation with students to emphasise the value of re-reading questions and peer
discussions as problem-solving strategies.

Quantitative results of the metacognitive awareness inventory shown consistent increases in scores for
all measures: the overall scale, the knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition sub-constructs,
and their constituent categories (Yuriev et al., 2017). These increases are in agreement with students’
qualitative comments, reported above. For example, the increased planning scores align with students
appreciating the negative consequences of skipping the planning stage.

Analysis of student written work

Findings presented above resulted from collecting and analysing student self-declared anonymous
responses to the inventory (quantitative) and reflections (qualitative). Conclusions that can be drawn
from such evidence are limited since anonymous responses cannot be used to correlate with student
performance. Furthermore, this evidence is limited to student self-reported opinions and therefore
inherently is not objective. To overcome these limitations, we initiated the analysis of the relationship
between student problem-solving processes (demonstrated in their written work and through think
aloud interviews) and the success of their problem-solving attempts. Specifically, we have mapped exam
solutions of 74 students, against the phases of the problem-solving workflow to develop the problem
solving profiles characteristic of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Several problems were
selected for the analysis, based on the following requirements: quantitative nature, combination of
concepts and multiple solution steps, more than one possible pathway to the correct answer. The initial
findings of this analysis are shown below.

A model solution was developed for each problem, containing different variants of how phases of the
process could be represented. All co-authors have independently coded student work, allocating zero,
half, or a full point for each phase depending on student workings. Several rounds of meetings were held
to discuss and refine coding to achieve 100% agreement.

Representative results for two exam problems (thermodynamics and chemical kinetics, listed below) are
shown in Figure 5.
1. Thermodynamics problem: Predict the boiling point of water on the top of a mountain
of height 5500 m, where the atmospheric pressure is 0.5 atm. Support your answer with
appropriate reasoning and calculations. Explicitly state assumptions that you have made in
solving this problem.
2. Chemical kinetics problem: Imexon is a substance that is being studied in the treatment of
some types of cancer, including pancreatic, lung, breast, prostate, melanoma, and multiple
myeloma. The kinetic properties of Imexon were investigated in a pressurized metered
dose inhaler (MDI), using 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFA-134a) as a propellant and ethanol
as a co-solvent (International Journal of Pharmaceutics 340 (2007) 223–229). The following
information was obtained for the degradation reaction of Imexon:

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |67

 • Using the data provided, carefully determine the activation energy for the degradation
reaction of Imexon.
• Comment on the reliability of the result obtained above and how it could be improved.
• Using the data provided, suggest appropriate storage conditions for this formulation.
Support your suggestion with relevant calculations.

The thermodynamics problem had extra complexity in that students were expected to identify what
additional information was required (molar heat of vaporisation) and look it up in a textbook appendix.
They were also expected to realise that they need to use the normal boiling point of water as additional
data.

Students were divided into successful and unsuccessful based on whether they were able to obtain the
correct answer. Successful problem solvers did indeed attend to earlier stages of problem solving with
greater frequency and paid greater attention to analysis and planning. More than double the number
of students in this category presented analysis and planning in full detail, compared to the unsuccessful
students: 84% and 63% vs. 40% and 29%, respectively, for the thermodynamics problem; 68% and 63%
vs. 32% and 12%, respectively, for the chemical kinetics problem. These findings are similar to those
of Bannert et al., where they observed most successful students to demonstrate greater frequency of
self-regulated learning events: orientation, planning, deeper information elaboration, monitoring, and
evaluation (Bannert et al., 2014).

Unfortunately, both categories of students in the present study have largely failed to demonstrate
the evaluation aspect of problem solving. In the thermodynamics problem, students were required to
determine the boiling point of water at the pressure of 0.5 atm. The correct answer (81 °C or 354 K) would
have to be compared to the normal boiling of water to conclude that the result is as predicted, that is
below 100 °C. Very few students (including only 9% of the successful category) made such a comment
explicitly (Figure 5 (top panel)). Exemplified in Figure 6 (top panel) are the solution workings that include
clear and detailed elements of understanding, analysis, and planning, careful implementation including
dimensional analysis, correct answer, but no evaluation. More disturbing are workings that do not attend
to the process, result in wildly wrong answers, but still do not include any evaluative statements (Figure
6 (bottom panel)).

Notably, a greater fraction of successful students engaged in evaluation and reflection in the second
problem (Figure 5 (bottom panel)), where they were explicitly asked to comment on the reliability of the
obtained result and to use it to suggest appropriate storage conditions for the formulation. In this case,
35% of successful students made evaluative comments, however only 8% of unsuccessful students did so.

68|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

Figure 5: Mapping of student problem-solving solutions to the phases of the Goldilocks Help workflow: U (understand),
A (analyse), P (plan), I (implement), E (evaluate). Colour coding represents the level of depth shown in student workings:
black, full workings; grey, partial; white, none. The stacked columns show percentage of students in each of the two
categories that had full, partial or no elements of each phase in their workings

Bottom
Top panel:
panel: chemical kinetics
thermodynamics problem,
problem,
nunsuccessful =42,25,
nsuccessful
n = 32;
n unsuccessful = successful
= 49

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |69

 Figure 6: Examples of student workings

70|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

Discussion

Novice problem solvers are defined as those with low metacognitive self-regulation abilities (Chan
and Bauer, 2014) and potentially reduced functional M-capacity, limited scientific reasoning, and lower
working memory (Johnstone and Al-Naeme, 1991; Niaz, 1996;Tsaparlis, 2005).These students will manifest
difficulties when starting their problem solving (false starts) or getting stuck along the way (dead ends).
These students will benefit most from engaging with the Goldilocks Help problem-solving workflow.

Novice problem solvers need support in developing the metacognitive habit of self-questioning and in
asking themselves appropriate questions during problem solving. With that in mind, the workflow was
designed for students to incorporate the appropriate prompts into their problem-solving schema and,
with sufficient practice and growth in experience, to internalise them. A novice student would not know
what to ask themselves, since they don’t know what they don’t know. A less experienced instructor also
often does not know how to prompt a student without either giving away the answer or simply throwing
the question back to students, may be just by restating it. The workflow prompts mirror an experienced
instructor: what would s/he ask students in class if they were to get stuck? How would s/he move them
along without giving away the direction? The workflow provides these prompts to students, so they can
use them when an instructor is not available, or arms a less experienced instructor with an appropriate
approach to guide students.

We have identified three main categories of student engagement with the workflow: students who found
it useful, students who already used a similar approach to problem solving (or at least thought so), and
students who claimed the workflow to be confusing or lengthy. This third group is the most problematic.
It is the type of students who give up when they find a particular way to solve problems to be too time
consuming (Bunce and Heikkinen, 1986). They may also be the ones with low functional M-capacity,
scientific reasoning, and working memory (Tsaparlis, 2005). Engaging and persuading these students
takes time and effort. What is necessary is breaking it down and emphasising the steps of the problem
solving process: gathering information, analysis, planning, and reflective evaluation. Explicit explanation
and demonstration of what the steps entail, through modelling instruction, will demonstrate to these
students that it does not have to be too hard.

Our results show that while students are aware of the monitoring and reflective strategies, as indicated by
the problem-solving metacognitive awareness inventory and qualitative comments (Yuriev et al., 2017),
they do not engage in these strategies sufficiently. With respect to the written work analysed here (Figure
6), it is not unreasonable to suggest that some of the successful students may well have made an evaluative
comment to themselves and simply did not write it down. However, our observations in class and during
think-aloud interviews (manuscript in preparation) indicate that this lack of making an evaluative
comment is representative of what students actually do (or rather do not do) when solving problems. It
has long been recognised that most students lack the habit to reflect on or evaluate the outcome (Herron
and Greenbowe, 1986; Van Ausdal, 1988). Even when students solve problems successfully, they could be
observed not using reflection as a problem-solving route (Rodriguezet al., 2018). Analysis of the laboratory
reports using the ELIPSS problem-solving rubric showed that almost 40% of students did not make any
judgement of reasonableness of their solution, while only 3% made a judgement categorised as relevant
and correct (Cole et al., 2018). Randles and Overton have found, in repeated extensive studies, that novice
problem solvers rarely use evaluation when attempting open-ended problems, and when they do try
to evaluate, they do so in a shallow fashion (Randles et al., 2018; Randles and Overton, 2015). Using an
extended problem solver classification, the majority of successful students in the present study could be

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |71

classified as transitional from novice to expert: they demonstrate some expert practices, but are deficient
in their reflection. For example, we noted that when students were explicitly asked to either comment on
the quality of the result or to use it for another stated purpose (as in the chemical kinetics problem) they
did engage in evaluation to a greater extent.

The limitations of this study relate to the setting.The workflow was implemented in an authentic classroom
setting with the cohorts of students taught by one of the authors (E.Y.). As a result, we were not able to
use an experimental control vs. treatment design. Beyond practical difficulties, such a design would not
have been ethical. Therefore, independent variables (such as prior academic ability) were not controlled
and external factors (such as teaching approaches in parallel units of study) could not be accounted for.

Implications And Adaptability

Your context
• Does your course include explicit training for generics skills, such as problem solving? If
so, how can you integrate the problem-solving workflow described here with the existing
approaches? Arethere opportunities to incorporate the process thinking into your teaching,
for example in problem-solving sessions, projects, or laboratory classes?
• Do you team-teach? Are your colleagues implementing or open to experimenting with
active learning strategies, particularly with respect to problem solving?
• What is the practice for training of teaching associates in your course? Do they contribute to
the development of teaching materials? Are they interested in pedagogy?
• What are your assessment practices? Do you focus on algorithmic thinking and reward only
correct answers or do you encourage students to engage in demonstrating their reasoning?

The single most important aspect of implementing any teaching innovation is to align teaching and
learning activities with the assessment. If assessment practice contradicts stated goals, the misalignment
will quickly result in students figuring out what really matters to those assessing their work. In the case of
developing problem-solving skills, holisticassessment practices should reward students for demonstrating
their problem-solving process, including explicit reasoning and reflection. Instruction should be adaptive
and provide scaffolding where it is needed most — less successful students need support to direct their
problem solving towards productive pathways — whereas successful students should be encouraged to
engage more in evaluative practices.

From a practical standpoint, implementation of the problem-solving workflow is cost-effective and does
not require any additional resources nor training for the academics. However, an effort is required to train
teaching associates in both the theory behind the approach and its practical application. They should be
encouraged to refer to the problem-solving process in tutorials and workshops and to encourage students
to monitor their problem solving, particularly planning, analysis, and evaluation.

Particular attention is needed to what happens in the interactive lectures and in collaborative problem
solving sessions. Our experience is that students, particularly those who need it most, often resist using
the workflow as they consider it extra work. To overcome this resistance and get students to buy in, it is
useful to expose students to problems and instruction, where they can see explicitly how the workflow can
help them out of dead ends and false starts in their problem solving. In the interactive lectures, students
should first be given an opportunity to tackle the problems, while the academic is walking around and

72|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

discussing problems with students. Following that, modelling instruction should take place which goes
beyond worked examples since it focusses on the aspects of problem solving, not just on solving a
particular problem. In collaborative problem-solving sessions, students should work in small groups of
4–5 and, at the end of each class, a presenter from each group can deliver a workshopped solution to the
whole class. During this short presentation (3 minutes), students can share their approaches and again
are encouraged to focus on the process of solving the problem, and not just on the answer. Both types of
classes present instructors with multiple opportunities to discuss the whys and hows of solving problems
in a logical and scientifically appropriate manner.

Conclusions

This chapter describes the design and implementation of a scaffolding approach to support structured
problem solving in physical chemistry. We have demonstrated the shift in students’ beliefs in their
abilities to use productive strategies to achieve success in problem solving: planning (goal setting and
allocating resources), information management (organising and summarising), monitoring (assessment
of own strategy use), debugging (correcting comprehension and performance errors), and evaluation
(analysis of performance and of the chosen approaches). We have also shown that while many students
can successfully regulate their problem solving though planning and analysis, they are not as effective
in employing monitoring, debugging, and evaluation. This finding contrasts with students’ qualitative
comments, which suggest that they value these strategies. Therefore, we propose that it is important to
constructively align teaching and learning activities with assessment that explicitly encourages students
to engage in demonstrating their reasoning during problem-solving, as well as other reflective and
evaluative practices.

The initially designed problem-solving workflow was intended for use in general and physical chemistry
units, and has now been implemented in analytical and formulation chemistry units (without any
modifications). We have also developed and implemented versions for use in spectroscopy, organic
chemistry, physiology, and pharmacology units. In the future, we aim to evaluate their effectiveness in
these specific areas.

We have now collected an extensive data set containing hundreds of samples of student written work,
generated over a period of 5 years. This set contains rich data which will be mapped against the problem
solving process as presented in the Goldilocks Help workflow and the problem-solving metacognitive
awareness inventory. In addition to established qualitative analysis methods, we are planning to employ
process mining approaches (Bannert et al., 2014) to carry out detailed frequency analyses.

Acknowledgements

We are indebted to Prof. Tina Overton for sharing her knowledge, expertise, and passion. We would like
to thank Monash University for providing Winter and Summer Academic Scholarships for SB and KV. This
project was in part supported by Monash Education Academy Small Grants and a Teacher Accelerator
Award to EY.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 73

References
Bannert, M., Reimann, P. and Sonnenberg, C. (2014), “Process mining techniques for analysing patterns and
strategies in students' self-regulated learning”, Metacognition and Learning, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp.161-185.
Belland, B. R. (2011), “Distributed cognition as a lens to understand the effects of scaffolds: The role of transfer of
responsibility”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 577-600.
Bodner, G. and Domin, D. (1991), “Towards a unifying theory of problem solving: A view from chemistry”, in
Smith, M. (Ed), Towards a unified theory of problem solving: views from the content domain, Hillesdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erblaum Associates.
Bodner, G. M. (2003), “The Nyholm Lecture - Problem solving: The difference between what we do and what we
tell students to do”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 7, pp. 37-45.
Bodner, G. M. (2015), “Research on problem solving in chemistry”, in Garcia-Martinez, J. and Serrano-Torregrosa,
E. (Eds), Chemistry education: Best practices, opportunities and trends, Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH
Verlag GmbH and Co. KGaA, pp. 181-201.
Bodner, G. M. and McMillen, T. L. B. (1986), “Cognitive restructuring as an early stage in problem solving”, Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 23 No. 8, pp. 727-737.
Bunce, D. M. and Heikkinen, H. (1986), “The effects of an explicit problem-solving approach on mathematical
chemistry achievement”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 23, pp. 11–20.
Chan, J. Y. K. and Bauer, C. F. (2014), “Identifying at-risk students in general chemistry via cluster analysis of
affective characteristics”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No.9, pp.1417-1425.
Cohen, J., Kennedy-Justice, M., Pai, S., Torres, C., Toomey, R., dePierro, E. and Garafalo, F. (2000), “Encouraging
meaningful quantitative problem solving”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 77, pp. 1166-1173.
Cole, R., Lantz, J. and Ruder, S. (2017), “Enhancing learning by improving process skills in STEM”, available at:
http://elipss.com/ (accessed 14th October 2018).
Cole, R., Lantz, J. M., Reynders, G. J. I. and Stanford, C. (2018), “Enhancing learning by assessing more than content
knowledge”, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, Paper #22684.
Davis, E. A. (2000), “Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE”, International
Journal of Science Education, Vol. 22 No. 8, pp. 819-837.
Drummond, H. P. and Selvaratnam, M. (2008), “Students’ competence in intellectual strategies needed for solving
chemistry problems”, South African Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 61, pp. 56-62.
Elby, (1999), “Another reason that physics students learn by rote”, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 67, S52-7.
A.
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2012), “Dual-process theories of deductive reasoning: facts and fallacies”, in Holyoak, K. and
Morrison, R. (Eds), The Oxford Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, New York, NY: Oxford University Press,
pp. 115-133.
Flavell, J. H. (1979), “Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry”,
American Psychologist, Vol. 34, pp. 906-911.
Frank, D. V. (1986), “Implementing instruction to improve the problem-solving abilities of general chemistry
students”. PhD, Purdue University.
Ge, X. and Land, S. M. (2003), “Scaffolding students' problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using
questionprompts and peer interactions”, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 51, pp.
21-38.
Gulacar, O., Eilks, I. and Bowman, C. R. (2014), “Differences in general cognitive abilities and domain-specific skills
of higher- and lower-achieving students in stoichiometry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 7,
pp. 961-968.
Gulacar, O., Overton, T., Bowman, C. R. and Fynewever, H. (2013), “A novel code system for revealing sources of
students’ difficulties with stoichiometry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14, pp. 507-515.
Harper, K. A. (2005), “Student problem-solving behaviors”, The Physics Teacher, Vol. 44, pp. 250-251.

74|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing problem-solving skills in physical chemistry

Henderson, C., Yerushalmi, E., Kuo, V. H., Heller, P. and Heller, K. (2004), “Grading student problem solutions: The
challenge of sending a consistent message”, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 72, pp. 164-9.
Herron, J. D. (1996a), Problem solving, The chemistry classroom, ACS, Washington, DC, pp. 63-82.
Herron, J. D. (1996b), Teaching problem solving, The chemistry classroom, ACS, Washington, DC, pp. 83-104.
Herron, J. D. and Greenbowe, T. J. (1986), “What can we do about Sue: A case study of competence”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 63, pp. 528-531.
Johnstone, A. H. and Al-Naeme, F. F. (1991), “Room for scientific thought?”, International Journal of Science
Education, Vol. 13, pp. 187-192.
Mason, D. S., Shell, D. F. and Crawley, F. E. (1997), “Differences in problem solving by nonscience majors in
introductory chemistry on paired algorithmic-conceptual problems”, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, Vol. 34 No. 9, pp. 905-923.
McLaughlin, J. E., White, P. J., Khanova, J. and Yuriev, E. (2016), “Flipped classroom implementation: A case report
of two higher education institutions in the United States and Australia”, Computers in the Schools, Vol. 33,
pp. 24-37.
Niaz, M. (1996), “Reasoning strategies of students in solving chemistry problems as a function of developmental
level, functional M-capacity and disembedding ability”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 18,
pp. 525-541.
Nyachwaya, J., Warfa, A. R. M., Roehrig, G. H. and Schneider, J. L. (2014), “College chemistry students’ use of
memorized algorithms in chemical reactions”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 15, pp. 81
93.
Overton, T., Potter, N. and Leng, C. (2013), “A study of approaches to solving open-ended problems in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14, pp. 468-475.
Overton, T. L. and Potter, N. (2008), “Solving open-ended problems, and the influence of cognitive factors on
student success”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice Vol. 9, pp. 65–69.
Overton, T. L. and Potter, N. M. (2011), “Investigating students' success in solving and attitudes towards context
rich open-ended problems in chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12 No. 3, 294
302.
Pea, R. D. (2004), “The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for
learning, education, and human activity”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 13, pp. 423–451.
Petcovic, H. L., Fynewever, H., Henderson, C., Mutambuki, J. M. and Barney, J. A. (2013), “Faculty grading of
quantitative problems: A mismatch between values and practice”, Research in Science Education, Vol. 43
No. 2, pp. 437-455.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., García, T. and McKeachie, W.J. (1991), A manual for the use of the motivated strategies
questionnaire (MSLQ), National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning,
Ann Arbor, MI:University of Michigan.
Polya, (1945), How to solve it; a new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton, NJ: Prinston University.
G.
Pushkin, D. B. (1998), “Introductory students, conceptual understanding, and algorithmic success”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 75, pp. 809-810.
Randles, C., Overton, T., Galloway, R. and Wallace, M. (2018), “How do approaches to solving open-ended
problems vary within the science disciplines?”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40 No. 11,
pp. 1367-1390.
Randles, C. A. and Overton, T. (2015), “Expert vs. novice: Approaches used by chemists when solving open-ended
problems”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 811-823.
Reiser, B. J. (2004) “Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student
work”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 273-304.
Rhee, R. J. (2007), “The Socratic method and the mathematical heuristic of George Pólya”, St. John's Law Review,
Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 881-898.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |75

Rodriguez, J.-M. G., Bain, K., Hux, N.P. and Towns, M. H. (2019), “Productive features of problem solving in chemical
kinetics: More than just algorithmic manipulation of variables”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
Vol. 20, pp. 175-186.
Scherer, R., Meßinger-Koppelt, J. and Tiemann, R. (2014), “Developing a computer-based assessment of complex
problem solving in Chemistry”, International Journal of STEM Education, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 2-15.
Selvaratnam, M. (2011), “Chemistry students’ competence throughout their BSc course in some problem-solving
strategies”. South African Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 64, pp. 44-48.
Skemp, R. R. (1979), Intelligence, learning, and action: A foundation for theory and practice in education, Chichester:
Wiley.
St Clair-Thompson, H., Overton, T. L. and Bugler, M. (2012), “Mental capacity and working memory in chemistry:
algorithmic versus open-ended problem solving”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 13, pp.
484-489.
Taber, (2002), Chemical misconceptions: Prevention, diagnosis and cure, Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry.
K.
Tsaparlis, G. (2005), “Non-algorithmic quantitative problem solving in university physical chemistry: a correlation
study of the role of selective cognitive factors”, Research in Science & Technological Education, Vol. 23,
pp.125-148.
Van Ausdal, R. G. (1988), “Structured problem solving in kinematics”, The Physics Teacher, Vol. 26 No. 8, pp. 518
522.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978), “Interaction between learning and development”, in Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S.
and Souberman, E. (Eds), Mind in society the development of higher psychological processes, Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 79-91.
White, P. J., Larson, I., Styles, K., Yuriev, E., Evans, D. R., Rangachari, P. K., Short, J. L., Exintaris, B., Malone, D. T.,
Davie, B., Eise, N., Naidu, S. and McNamara, K. (2016), “Adopting an active learning approach to teaching
in a research-intensive higher education context transformed staff teaching attitudes and behaviours”,
Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 35, pp. 619-633.
White, P. J., Larson, I., Styles, K., Yuriev, E., Evans, D. R., Short, J. L., Rangachari, P. K., Malone, D.T., Davie, B., Naidu,
S. and Eise, N. (2015), “Using active learning strategies to shift student attitudes and behaviours about
learning and teaching in a research intensive educational context”, Pharmacy Education, Vol. 15, pp. 116
126.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S. and Ross, G. (1976), “The role of tutoring in problem solving”, Journal of Child Psychology
and Psychiatry, Vol. 17, pp. 89–100.
Yu, K. C., Fan, S. C. and Lin, K. Y. (2015), “Enhancing students' problem-solving skills through context-based
learning”, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 1377-1401.
Yuriev, E., Capuano, B. and Short, J. L. (2016), “Crossword puzzles for chemistry education: learning goals beyond
vocabulary”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 532-554.
Yuriev, E., Naidu, S., Schembri, L. S. and Short, J. L. (2017), “Scaffolding the development of problem-solving skills
in chemistry: guiding novice students out of dead ends and false starts”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 486-504.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008), “Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological
developments, and future prospects”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 166-183.
Zoller, U. (2000), “Teaching tomorrow's college science courses - are we getting it right? Preparing students
to become informed and responsible participants in the decision-making process”, Journal of College
Science Teaching, Vol. 29, pp. 409-414.

76|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 6 A pre-arrival summer school to solve
the maths problem in chemistry

Dudley E. Shallcross
School of Chemistry, University of Bristol
D.E.Shallcross@bristol.ac.uk

Mathematical tools beyond pre-16 courses such as calculus are required in any chemistry
undergraduate course. In many institutes in the UK and abroad, students can enter an
undergraduate degree without knowledge of these tools. How is this maths problem
solved? If students have a post-16 mathematics qualification does the problem go away?
Nearly all undergraduate chemistry courses contain a supplementary mathematics course
for students but still note that problems persist. Assuming that courses are staged so that
mathematical tools are introduced ahead of requirement in the chemistry degree, there are
two key principles that must be recognised for a maths course to be effective. First, it turns
out that students with or without post-16 mathematics qualifications can struggle because
their mathematical knowledge is locked up in a mathematical context and they cannot
translate that knowledge into a chemical context. Therefore, using chemistry contexts that
the students will understand to see the relevance of the mathematics aids cognition of the
mathematics dramatically and already sets it in the right context. Second, the mathematics
is a tool to allow greater understanding of the chemistry, therefore, whilst we may want
the students to understand the deeper meaning of a mathematical concept such as a
vector space, this is not always necessary to master and apply the mathematical tool. As
the students’ chemical knowledge matures this may prompt a deeper understanding and
appreciation of the mathematics. In this chapter I look at the essentials of a mathematics
course that will solve the maths problem; first through a mathematics summer school run
before students enter university and second through a context based weekly problems
class. In both cases, problems authentic to chemistry are key.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

I first met Professor Overton at a “Solving the maths problem in HE” day-long meeting that she
had convened for physical scientists. This is an area that she has championed, and I have had
many conversations with her about this over the years. Students need maths tools beyond GCSE
(pre-16) but A Level or post-16 mathematics does not guarantee that students have the requisite
missing mathematics skills and more importantly they cannot apply them in a chemistry context.

To cite: Shallcross, D. E. (2019), “A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 77-88.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |77

Introduction

A chemistry degree requires quantitative as well as qualitative approaches and a paradox arises in many
institutes. Such higher education institutes require a mathematics qualification, usually at pre-16 level
(such as a GCSE in the UK) for entry onto a degree programme, but this qualification is insufficient for the
incoming student to complete the degree programme (Shallcross and Walton, 2007). The qualification
covers basic numeracy and algebra and may contain some basic statistics but is insufficient to allow
students to engage with topics that require calculus, matrices or vectors for example (Shallcross and Yates,
2014).

How can we solve this mathematics problem? One way is to insist that incoming students have a higher
mathematics qualification, such as an A Level in the UK. However, such an approach still poses some
problems. First the pool of students that would now be able to enter a chemistry degree programme
would be greatly reduced and for some higher education institutes a degree in chemistry would not
attract enough students to be viable. Second, the post-16 qualification in mathematics itself may still
not cover all mathematical material required to allow students to cope with the mathematics required
for a degree in chemistry (Shallcross and Walton, 2007; Shallcross and Yates, 2014). Third, if students did
cover all (or most of) the mathematics required before entering higher education (for example Further
Mathematics at A Level in the UK) they may find that their mathematics knowledge may be locked up in
a context that does not allow them to use it in the contexts encountered in Chemistry (Shallcross, 2006;
Scott, 2012).

Scott (2012) has demonstrated that students with a post-16 mathematics qualification could answer a
series of mathematical problems but when those same mathematical problems were posed in chemistry
contexts the same students struggled to answer them. How was that possible? Scott (2012) argued that the
students were using known algorithms to answer the mathematical problems but did not recognise the
same algorithms applied in the chemistry (word) problems. Work done as part of a review for the Higher
Education Academy (HEA), involved a survey of some 600 UK Chemistry undergraduates (Shallcross and
Yates, 2014). This showed that there were four broad classes of responders:
1. Those that had achieved a C grade in GCSE mathematics felt totally unprepared for the
mathematical elements of the chemistry degree and didn’t feel able to catch up, irrespective
of whether a course was run for them (Grade C was the lowest passing grade at the time of
the survey in a pre-16 mathematics qualification; and now equates to A Level 5 in the new
UK GCSE).
2. Those that had achieved higher grades at GCSE were able to cope with the mathematical
demands of the chemistry degree if there was support, such as in an in-house mathematics
course. However, if that mathematics course was run by the mathematics department in
that institute then students felt it was much harder to cope and some commented that it
was hard to translate the mathematics across.
3. Those that had a post-16 mathematics qualification and attended an institute that required
pre-16 level qualifications, found that the in-house mathematics course was good revision
of material they had already encountered, and new mathematics material could be
understood, especially if it was presented in a chemistry context.
4. A small group of students who had achieved high grades at mathematics at post-16 level
who attended institutes that required these qualifications found themselves struggling with
the mathematics presented, either in the degree programme or in bespoke mathematics
courses. Here, students found it hard to see how the new mathematics being taught and

78|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry

even mathematics that they had already learned could be taught using unfamiliar chemistry
contexts. In many cases, the chemistry context was something the student wouldn’t
encounter for one to three years in time. The context confusion expressed by the students
supports the findings of Scott (2012).

Teaching on a Year 1 in-house mathematics course for students without post-16 qualifications for several
years showed that the first term was still problematic for these students. Eventhough the course contained
several contact hours per week and was chemistry context-based, the students took time to settle in.
The fact that they had not studied mathematics formally for at least two years exacerbated the problem.
To address this, a pre-arrival summer school was developed. The summer school concept grew out of
discussion with students taking the in-house course, where they expressed the need to have an intensive
session at the start of the first term or at a pre-university summer school.

We decided to triala pre-university summer school so that there would be an intensive (week-long) course
that would refresh the students’mathematical skills but using chemistry contexts (from pre- and post-16).
There are practical reasons to favour a summer school:
• the blocked time in a summer school would allow us flexibility in terms of access to
laboratories and other teaching spaces (which may be booked at the start of term or in
fresher’s week);
• it would allow teachers on the course to block time and be available throughout, again
timetable commitments at the start of term make availability a potential problem.

The content of the summer school drew from the first term of the in-house course but contained direct
connections with practical sessions, such as data generation. We also hoped that student’s attending
would be able to focus on this course in the summer school format and not be distracted by start-of-term
activities and that it would provide the impetus that they needed to start the year more confidently.

Design and Implementation

The approach described to address difficulties relating to mathematical content in chemistry programmes
focusses on the introduction of pre-university summer schools for students without post-16 mathematics
(Shallcross et al., 2011). They were comprised of four workshops and four practical sessions (Table 1). In
workshops, a tutor would introduce atopic for no more than 20 minutes and then there would be problems
to solve with four tutors (two academics and two postgraduates) available to help students work through
them. This would be followed by a short plenary where common mistakes were discussed. Then a new
topic would be introduced and the workshop would continue. In all these sessions there was an emphasis
on providing a relevant (here chemical) context to the mathematics introduced, something noted by
several researchers as being a key to effective cognition of mathematical tools (Boaler, 1993; Bouvier,
1985; Brown et al., 1989; Edmonds and Ball, 1988; Hutchinson, 2000; Lave, 1988; Vygotsky, 1978; Yates,
1988; Yates, 2002). Practical sessions comprised of three session in the teaching laboratories and one in a
computer laboratory. These sessions were designed to allow students to apply basic mathematics used
in the laboratory, such as yield and purity, moles calculations, logarithms, graph plotting, the exponential
function, and to collect data to be used in calculus sessions. Practical sessions also helped divide the week
between working through problems and activity in laboratories.

The timetable used involved two workshops, four practical sessions, and two more workshops — the

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |79

latter used as an introduction to calculus. The chemical problems in workshops were drawn from A Level
chemistry topics and included thermochemistry, electrochemistry, gas laws, liquid mixtures (for example
eutectic mixtures), and equilibria. These problems generated algebraic equations and this allowed
students to revise the algebra that they knew at the end of pre-16 courses. By mixing the sessions so that
the mathematical principles were discussed first and then some pure mathematical examples were given
followed by equivalent ones drawn from chemistry, students not only recapped their mathematics but
also their chemistry too. The practical sessions included some more complex titrations, requiring more
sophisticated mathematical analysis, kinetic experiments (as a function of temperature) that generated
data for use in the workshops on calculus, and a synthesis that led to UV/vis spectrophotometric analyses
and generated data for Beer Lambert analyses.These sessions generated results that could be interrogated
with respect to uncertainty analysis and allowed some basic statistics to be covered in workshop sessions.

The first practical session introduced basic statistics and error analysis, incorporating the following two
activity prompts:
1. Using a high sensitivity balance, weigh out 30 fun size chocolate bars and compare
measurements, calculate the mean and standard deviation and compare with the stated
weight and with other students.
2. In pairs, weigh out and prepare a standard solution and carry out a series of titrations
to determine the concentration of an unknown solution. Analysis of the results, with
an uncertainty analysis were carried out and comparison with other groups. Are there
statistically significant differences in the analyses and if so which one(s) are correct?

There was a short welcome and introduction to the course on the Monday and a short multiple-choice
test using hand-held voting pads, providing instant feedback. This test was repeated at the end of the
course. Some example materials are available in the Supplementary Information.

Table 1: Timetable and outline content of pre-university summer school

Session Type Outline

Basic algebra, orders of magnitude, rearranging (chemistry
Monday PM Workshop based) equations, applications to chemistry

Tuesday AM Workshop Further algebra, indices, functions (log, exp, trigonometry)

Tuesday PM Practical Basic statistics, error analysis with some applications

Wednesday AM Practical Practicals to emphasise error analysis and basic algebra

Use of Excel in physical chemistry (simulating spectra,

Wednesday PM Practical functions etc.)

Practicals to supportand
the idea of the exponential function
Thursday AM Practical (Beer-Lambert Law) rates of reaction

Thursday PM Workshop Introduction to calculus (gradients of graphs and functions)

Friday AM Workshop Further calculus, differentiation and simple integration

80|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry

Results of Implementation

We ran such summer schools for three years (funded by the Royal Society of Chemistry from 2008–
2010). The summer school ran from 2 pm on the Monday until 1 pm on the Friday in the second week of
September, which in our case is at least two weeks before the start of term. The morning sessions ran from
9.30am to 1 pm and the afternoon session ran from 2 pm to 5 pm with both sessions having a 30 minute
break. All students applying to Bristol to read chemistry who did not have A Level mathematics were
invited to attend (around 200 students) the summer school regardless of whether they were eventually
coming to Bristol to read for a degree and the typical number of attendees was 30. There was a male bias,
with approximately 65% male and 35% female in any cohort. Over the course of the three years of summer
schools, students went on to start a degree in chemistry at 21 UK universities including Bristol. The Royal
Society of Chemistry’s Chemistry for Our Future project (Tunney, 2009) covered accommodation at a
reduced rate, breakfast, lunches, teas and coffees, and administrative support, resulting in an approximate
cost of ~£175 per student. The students covered the cost of their own evening meals, transport to and
from Bristol and had free evenings throughout. We ran an interactive quiz during the introduction
and welcome to the course and repeated this at the end of the course during the final plenary using
electronic voting devices which gave instant feedback. At the end of the summer school we also asked
the students to rate the various aspects of the course and the course as a whole. The results of this survey
are summarised in Table 2.

In general, the feedback was extremely positive. The statistical component was improved in the second
and third year of the summer school following feedback—students wanted to have more time to practice
the calculations — and no negative recommendations were made.The Excel component varied from year
to year, with the second year comprising students who were markedly more proficient in the use of Excel
than the other two years. In other analyses, students’ confidence improved significantly in rearranging
equations, converting between units, percentage error calculations, graph plotting with correct error
bars, and using appropriate significant figures. The students enjoyed having practical sessions, with many
feeling unconfident about practicals before the summer school. Indeed, many had done very little practical

Table 2: Post summer school responses from participants at all summer schools
as to whether each topic was useful or not

Topic Strongly
Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Disagree

Algebra 68 22 0 0 0

Statistics 35 37 15 3 0

Practical 49 35 6 0 0

Excel 34 42 13 1 0

Calculus 66 24 0 0 0

Recommend 86 4 0 0 0
Summer School

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |81

work before university. In the pre- and post-mathematics tests, all students improved from 26% to 96% in
algebra and from 0% to 80% in calculus. These students had done no calculus before the summer school.

Those students that continued their studies at Bristol undertook an in-house (run by the School of
Chemistry) mathematics course in their first year. Although all students without A Level mathematics were
invited to the summer school, typically about 25% attended. While examination results are not the only
and certainly not the most definitive indicator of improvement, we compared the cohort who attended
the summer school with all those who attended the first year in-house course and also with the whole
cohort. The results of the first and second year exams in all subjects in chemistry at Bristol for these 40
students were collected and analysed, inter-compared and compared also with the rest of the students in
the cohort for all three years. For each of the years, students from the summer school gained higher marks
on average than their fellow in-house mathematics course attendees; in the in-house mathematics course
(typically 8% higher), Year 1 (12%) and Year 2 (4%) physical chemistry and Year 2 theoretical chemistry
(12%). Although it could be argued that these students chose to attend the course and were therefore
more motivated than the non-attendees, there was no evidence that these students were predisposed
to be better. Indeed, apart from the first cohort, the marks in Year 1 and Year 2 organic chemistry and
inorganic chemistry were the same within the combined uncertainty. We also did not observe significant
differences in A Level grades between attendees and non-attendees, although it is interesting to note that
on mathematics GCSE grade alone the attendees were weaker than the non-attendees and this may have
been a contributory factor to their willingness to attend over those that did not.

Comparing both cohorts with the whole Year 1 and Year 2 chemistry cohort yielded interesting results.
All in-house students were close to the average in physical chemistry in Year 2, with the summer school
students slightly above average. In theoretical chemistry, the non-summer school group were slightly
below the average but the summer school students were only matched by those students who were on
the chemical physics course, requiring high grades at A Level or equivalent in Mathematics, Physics and
Chemistry. In Year 1 physical chemistry, summer school students were near the top of the year, with non
attendees just below the average.

We interviewed all the Bristol students who attended the summer school at the end of Year 1, after their
examinations and asked them to comment on the usefulness of attending the summer school. Here are
some common themes that emerged from these discussions:
The summer school allowed us to make friends ahead of arriving at University and that helped to get us off
to a good start.

It was good to experience Halls of Residence ahead of time and to spend a week getting used to Bristol.

It was very useful to go through the algebra at the start of the course and revise all the stuff we had learned
at GCSE but had forgotten in the last two years.

The mixture of academics and postgraduates was good and the relaxed style was good. All the algebra we
covered was important in year 1 chemistry. We were worried about calculus and still have problems but
going through the basics and using chemical examples made it easier to understand.

The laboratory sessions were fun, they broke up the week and looking back, it was a good way to reinforce
the mathematics we were covering.

These comments highlight that for students without post-16 mathematics, their mathematical knowledge
has been dormant for two years and an intensive refreshment had a very positive impact. Other important

82|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry

issues that the summer school addresses are building confidence in attending university, building some
early friendships, helping the students to familiarise themselves with the city and supporting confidence
in practical work.

The introduction of calculus—first graphically then mathematically—inthe context of chemical examples

such as rates of reaction seemed to work well too. Students at the summer school were particularly
anxious about this topic and the summer school did do a good job in demystifying this topic. The focus of
the summer school was to refresh the mathematical expertise of those who attended and boosted their
confidence, rather than transform them into brilliant mathematicians. Many students reported that they
felt better prepared for the chemistry and mathematics courses in Year 1 and they carried that through to
Year 2. The attendees at the summer school were the first group from this cohort to excel in the theoretical
chemistry course in Year 2. The Year 2 physical chemistry course is not just mathematical but also builds on
physics concepts too and that maybe a reason why the students do not excel there too.

In Year 2, all students were invited to physical chemistry workshops where we worked through physical
chemistry problems. The students were given a worksheet on the topic of differentiation (Figure 1), which
consisted of two questions asking what the differential of a number of functions were, followed by a third
question asking the students whether certain functions ψ were suitable solutions to the equation d2ψ/
dx2 = kψ. I was fascinated to see that many students could rattle through Questions 1 and 2 but were
perplexed by question (3). A typical encounter was;
Lecturer: Do you understand what the question is asking?
Student: Erm, sort of..
Lecturer: So what would you do to the first function ψ given, ψ = cos 2x?
Student: Not sure.
Lecturer: Okay, what is d2/dx2 (cos 2x)?
Student: Err, –2sin2x…–4cos2x?
Lecturer: Okay, so does d2/dx2(cos 2x) = kψ
Student: Wellyes.
Lecturer: What is k?
Student:–4, is that it?
Lecturer: Yes.
Student: That’s easy.
Lecturer: Yes it is.

Both sets of students who attended the in-house course struggled with Question 1 and 2 on the sheet,
whereas those with post-16 mathematics did not (as observed). However, the reverse is true of the students
for the remaining questions on the sheet.Those that attended the in-house course were comfortable with
these questions and knew how to work them out, the students with a higher mathematics qualification
struggled. Maybe they had a year without mathematics themselves but conversations with them
suggested that it was a case of translation (for example see Scott, 2012). They could not recognize the
same mathematics they had mastered at A Level, but given the first two questions on the sheet it was
interesting to understand why these students struggled.

Discussion

Foster and Tall (1996) reflect on the fact that less successful mathematics students will tend to cling to
known procedures and have a rigid view of symbols, whereas successful students develop flexible ways
of using them. Gray and Tall (1993) and Saxe (1991) argue that so-called poor mathematics students are

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |83

 A knowledge of calculus is essential for understanding Chemistry and this sheet is designed to refresh
your knowledge. Questions 3 and 5 below are directly from the Quantum Concepts and Chemical
Interactions courses and you will find many other applications.
1. Find dy
dx
for the following:

y = 3x y = x2 – 5x + 6 y = cos xy = sin 6x
y = e–x y = 27 y = ln x

2. Find for all the aboved2y.dx2

3. The Schrödinger equation, is used to describe the quantum mechanical behaviour of atoms
and molecules at a microscopic level. For the simplest systems (say a free electron) it looks
something like this:
d2ψ
dx2 = Eψ
where E is a constant (the energy). The task in quantum mechanics is to find a function that
fits this equation, rather than a single value. Investigate whether the following functions are
solutions of the above equation, (i.e. do they satisfy the equation):
ψ = cos kx
ψ = k/x
k is a constant that you can choose to fit the equation.

4. An important application of derivatives is to investigate the shape of functions, in particular

to find the positions of maxima and minima, as the first derivative of a curve is zero at these
points. Find the position of the maximum/minimum in:
y = x2 – 5x + 6
y = –4x2 – 3x + 1
You can distinguish between a maximum or a minimum by looking at the sign of the second
derivative: d2y > 0 for a minimum,d2ydx2 < 0 for a maximum and d2ydx2 = 0 for a point of
dx2this test for the two functions above. (As a general rule it helps if you have an
inflection. Try
idea what the function you are working with looks like, in which case it may be obvious
whether you are dealing with a maximum or a minimum).

5. The Lennard-Jones potential is one commonly used model for how the forces acting between
two atoms varies with distance. It gives the potential energy as:

where r is the distance between the atoms and σ and ε are constants that depend on the atoms
involved. What would this predict the equilibrium distance to be, i.e. where is the minimum
of this function? If you have time (This can be quite tricky; there is a graph sketching
session later):Try and sketch the functions in questions 4 and 5. You already have some
information, and you should also consider what happens for x very large (both +∞ and –∞),
at x = 0 and y = 0.

Figure 1: Second year workshop in general physical chemistry, run over 2 weeks on the topic of differentiation

84|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry

simply doing a harder version of mathematics by not seeing the relationships and patterns. Boaler (1993)
and Lave (1998) would argue that even students who perform well in maths courses sometimes cannot
translate their mathematical knowledge to a new context such as a chemical problem very easily. Skemp
(1976) suggests that procedural approaches used in prior learning is a factor. What is ultimately far better
would be a relational approach to teaching, where students develop schema that allow them to be able
to move from the starting point to the end point via numerous routes. Both the summer school and the
first year mathematics in-house course were designed to develop a range of schema.

In addition, all problems come out of a chemistry context. Students on this mathematics course often
seem to find a new lease of life being taught mathematics (a subject they have generally found difficult
or have avoided beyond GCSE) in the context of a subject they have generally excelled in; chemistry. We
have not converted these students into outstanding mathematicians but we have opened up to them
representations in mathematics (Bodner and Domin, 2000) that they can use more effectively than those
they have learned in school. For example, a classic problem in algebra is the notion that the letters chosen
are arbitrary (Sutherland, 1991) and the general ability to recognise underlying mathematics when
presented in word form (Nunes and Bryant, 1996).

More data are needed without doubt to convince that a summer school can have an impact. However, there
is enough evidence from the analysis of this project to suggest that it could be very effective, not only as a
refresher course, but also as a way to allow new students to get a head start and become familiar with their
university setting ahead of time, and to make new friends early. Such additional aspects were emphasised
as being important in the end of year interviews. The latter aspect argues for a physical summer school
compared with a virtual (online) or web-based course for students to follow pre-university, although there
is evidence that these are also successful (Engelbrecht and Harding, 2005a; 2005b). However, successful
web-based courses require a considerable investment of time in development (for example see Trouche,
2004) to be appropriate and so any concept of saving time and resources by running an online course
will only occur after some time compared with a face-to-face run course. Run as a coordinated regional or
national program, a series of mathematics pre-university summer schools around the country may have
a considerable positive impact on physical sciences teaching in the UK. Without further funding it has
not been possible to run more summer schools beyond this program, but is something that should be
considered by HE funding bodies.

Implications and Adaptability

The following points are worthy of consideration for those who wish to adopt/adapt the general approach
described in this article.

• Resource implications: The in-house course for students with GCSE Mathematics only
that students went onto after the summer school is staff heavy, requiring two lectures/
workshops a week, a link lecture for context work and drop-in sessions. If the cohort is large
this is a significant undertaking. The summer school, depending on size could also be a staff
heavy week and without sponsorship it is unlikely that students would be able to attend.
The success of the summer school is the intensive face-to-face interaction. However, an in
house course could be run with online videos, supported by smart worksheets (e-enabled
sheets) that contain hints and assisted examples.Therefore, the emphasis on time is on face
to-face interactions with students during open workshops or via responding to a supporting
online forum. The in-house course was examined by unseen exam, but a new course could

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 85

 be assessed by on-line tests (with automatic marking) and assessed coursework that can be
marked by a wide range of markers.
• Authenticity: For the course to be effective the problems need to be authentic, by that
we mean that the chemistry problems need to at an appropriate level so that they do not
confuse the students (that is, do not use examples from courses in later years). However,
more general chemical science problems can work well.
• Knowledge and skills:There is no doubt that students acquire knowledge and skills that they
use in future years of the degree. If the material were in the form of videos and supporting
materials then the students would make more use of it.
• Student peer review: The successful in-house course already provided us with materials
that we knew would work. However, feedback from this cohort was collected but it was the
feedback from these students at the end of the first and second year of the summer school
that was very helpful as they reflected back on the usefulness of the summer school.
• Assessment:The summer school assessment is via an online quiz at the start and at the end
and does not count towards any credit. There was no formal marking but students were
keen to complete all items of work. On the final day students were still working past 5 pm
and had to be encouraged to leave.
• The wider teaching team: The in-house course was taught by physical chemists only; if the
number of physical chemists is low in the department this would be a problem. Whilst the
course is very good it makes the course and its content very physical chemistry based in
terms of examples and content. However, in an online version, all staff could be invited to
participate with good problems from all areas of chemistry. The set up of the course means
that any staff member can support the course and it means that the course has wider
ownership (Lea and Street, 1998).
• Student response to feedback: The intensive summer school provides feedback to the
student straightaway. The students soon get into the habit of asking questions.
• Evaluation: The students all pass the course if they engage with the material. In the latest
version the time that they spend on the course material can be logged and the number of
attempts they make to pass the material and the more time they spend on the material the
smaller the number of attempts required to pass each component.

Conclusions

Students do need mathematical tools beyond that of pre-16 courses and so in-house courses have
been established to address this for students without post-16 mathematics. We have run week long
pre-university mathematics summer schools for a subset of these students who attend the university of
Bristol. Our analysis shows that the summer schools are very well received, have a demonstrable impact on
student confidence and performance in mathematical chemistry but also inspire confidence in practical
work and help the students to get off to a good start. However, it emerges that students with post-16
qualifications should not be regarded as equipped for a degree in chemistry. They too need support to
use the mathematical skills that they have and many of this cohort fail to recognise the same mathematics
taught in a new context.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

86|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A pre-arrival summer school to solve the maths problem in chemistry

References
Boaler, J. (1993), “The role of contexts in the Mathematics classroom: Do they make Mathematics more “Real”?”,
For the Learning of Mathematics, Vol. 13, pp. 12-17.
Bodner, G.M. and Domin, D.S. (2000),“Mental models: The role of representations in problem solving in chemistry”,
University Chemistry Education, Vol. 4, pp. 24-29.
Bouvier, A. (1985), “On strategies for teaching”, For the Learning of Mathematics, Vol. 5, pp. 2-11.
Brown, S.J., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989), “Situated Cognition and the culture of learning”, Educational
Researcher, Vol. 18, pp. 71-81.
Edmonds, B. and Ball, D. (1988), “Looking for relevance: can we let them decide?” in Primm, D. (Ed), Mathematics,
Teachers and Children, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK, pp. 126-128.
Engelbrecht, J. and Harding, A. (2005a), “Teaching undergraduate mathematics on the internet. Part 1”,
Educational Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 58, pp. 235-252.
Engelbrecht, J. and Harding, A. (2005b), “Teaching undergraduate mathematics on the internet. Part 2.”
Educational Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 58, pp. 253-276.
Foster, R. and Tall, D. (1996), “Can all children climb the same curriculum ladder?”, Mathematics in Schools, Vol. 25,
pp. 8-12.
Gray, E. and Tall, D. (1993), “Success and failure in Mathematics: the flexible meaning of symbols as process and
concept”, Mathematics Teaching, Vol. 142, pp. 6-10.
Hutchinson, J.S. (2000), “Teaching Introductory Chemistry using Concept Development Case Studies: Interactive
and Inductive Learning”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 4, pp. 3-9.
Lave, J. (1988), Cognition in practice, Cambridge, University Press, Cambridge.
Lea, M.R. and Street, B.V. (1998), “Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach”, Studies
in Higher Education, Vol. 23, pp. 157-172.
Nunes, T. and Bryant, B. (1996), “Mathematics under different names”, in Children doing Mathematics, Blackwell.
Malden, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 96-113.
Saxe, G. (1991), Culture and cognitive development: Studies in mathematical understanding, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Scott, F.J. (2012), “Is mathematics to blame? An investigation into high school students’ difficulty in performing
calculations in chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 13, pp. 330-336.
Shallcross, D.E. (2006) “Seeing what to do: Moving between abstract mathematical techniques and applied
problem solving, case studies from chemistry students”, M.Ed. Dissertation, Bristol University.
Shallcross, D.E. and Walton, G. (2007), “What’s in a grade? The real meaning of mathematics grades at GCSE and
A Level”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 3, pp. 73-76.
Shallcross, D.E., Allan, N.L. Shallcross, K.L., Croker, S.J., Smith, D.M., May, P.W., Price, G.J. and Harrison, T.G. (2011),
“Solving the maths problem in Chemistry: the impact of a pre-university maths summer school on year
1 and year 2 Physical and Theoretical Chemistry”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol.
7, pp. 58-62.
Shallcross, D.E., and Yates, P.C. (2014), Skills in mathematics and statistics in chemistry and tackling transition,
Higher Education Academy, York, U.K.
Skemp, R.R. (1976), “Relational understanding and instrumental understanding”, Mathematics Teaching, Vol. 7,
pp. 20-28.
Sutherland, R. (1991), “Some unanswered research questions on the teaching and learning of algebra”, For the
Learning of Mathematics, Vol. 11, pp. 40-46.
Trouche, L. (2004), “Managing the complexity of human/ machine interactions in computerized learning
environments: Guiding students’ command process through instrumental orchestrations”, International
Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, Vol. 9, pp. 281-307

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |87

Tunney J. (2009), “A legacy for chemistry education”, New Directions, Vol. 5, pp. 7-11.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978), Mind in Society, London: Harvard University Press.
Yates, P.C. (1998), “Improving student’s data analysis skills in the laboratory”, University Chemistry Education, Vol.
2, pp. 37-39.
Yates, P.C. (2002), “Mathematics in context”, Education in Chemistry, Vol.39, pp. 78-80.

88|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 7 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active
learning approach in higher education

SimonJ. Lancaster, Dennis F. Cook and William J. Massingberd-Mundy

School of Chemistry, University of East Anglia
S.Lancaster@uea.ac.uk

The aim of this chapter is to outline how peer instruction can serve as a pragmatic
compromise between the limitations of traditional lectures and more resource-intensive
active learning methodologies such as problem-based learning. Peer instruction is a
flexible and scalable approach that employs technology to maximise engagement and
relies on instructor-guided peer-to-peer discussion to enhance learning. Peer instruction
has proven a popular and effective means of introducing active learning to the lecture
theatre environment and it is an approach that is endlessly adaptable and applicable to
any chemistry context. We have shown how co-production of questions with students can
surface hitherto unknown misconceptions and ease question authoring. The challenges
of meaningful evaluation of lecture theatre practices are discussed and the application of
concept inventories to determining learning gain is introduced. We examine the conflict
between effectiveness and student perception. The challenge for the educator is finding
enough time for construction of conceptual understanding amidst the expectation of
content transmission. Peer instruction with judicious lecture flipping and curriculum review
are suggested as potential solutions.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (Simon Lancaster)

Prof Tina Overton was the leading European chemistry education researcher when I was taking
my first tentative steps in the field. Tina is and has always been extraordinarily generous with
her time, her advice, and her references. I may have struggled to reproduce her insight but I have
always sought to duplicate her collegiality. Tina is a mentor, an inspiration, and a role model.
Through her exemplary practice she has taught an entire community the route to impact. Our
ambitions have been heavily influenced by Tina’s studies in problem-based learning and the
development of expert thinking in the chemical sciences. Ourobjectives are to teach those same
problem solving skills through more scalable pedagogies. It is apparent that the art of question
design unites all active learning practitioners. I owe the licence to bring creativity to question
authoring to Tina.

To cite: Lancaster, S.J., Cook, D. F. and Massingberd-Mundy, W.J. (2019), “Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning
approach in higher education”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in
Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 89-104.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 89

Introduction

Chemistry higher education practice is a spectrum of teaching approaches from the didactic monologue,
in which the lecturer reads out facts from their slides, to problem-based learning which involves dynamic
student-led sessions solving authentic problems, subtly influenced by timely interventions from their
academic guide. A switch from lecturing to problem-based learning requires a radical change in approach
and often entails additional dedicated resources (Beltet al., 2002). Herein we describe a pragmatic solution
with a considerably lower activation barrier for the introduction of active learning into hitherto traditional
lecture courses. We believe that peer instruction presents a happy medium on the spectrum of teaching
approaches. In the introduction we position peer instruction as an active learning pedagogy developed
from a social constructivist framework. We show how it can utilise the affordances of flipped teaching in
turn facilitated by lecture recording.

Flipped teaching
In the science education literature, peer instruction is predominantly encountered as a lecture theatre
practice associated with flipped teaching. In essence, flipped teaching seeks to move the transmission of
information out of the classroom, freeing contact time for constructive development of understanding and
application through active learning. Flipped teaching is a concept, not a recipe, and there are many modes
of implementation. Our approach has been to employ lecture recordings (screencasts) from previous
years as preparative materials assigned to students before the face to face session. Assigned reading is a
common alternative. Where preparation for face to face is coupled with interactive web resources, Just
in-time-teaching aims to ensure the contact sessions reflect the needs of the students (Novak et al., 1999).
Seery has comprehensively reviewed flipped teaching in chemistry higher education and charted its
evolution from teacher’s intuition to an evidence-supported practice set within a theoretical framework
of cognitive load theory and self-determination (Seery, 2015). Flipped teaching is a significant change
in the student experience over the traditional lecture course. One of the themes of this chapter is the
balance between the benefits of active learning and the perception of additional demands upon learners
in preparing for the active learning. The necessity for similar compromises have been reported in related
studies. Smith found that students were reluctant to see screencasts exceed seven minutes (Smith, 2013).
Fautch found that students took time to adjust to flipped teaching (Fautch, 2015).

Lecture recording
We have been recording lectures at UEA since 2007 and, like others, find the practice is popular with
students(Read,2012).We had concerns aboutthe uses to which our studentswere putting theserecordings,
particularly binge-watching in the run-up to examinations. In response we developed interactive video
highlights, which we termed Chemistry Vignettes (Lancaster, 2014). Larger scale studies have shown a
fascinating discipline-dependence upon patterns of recording viewing, with chemistry students less
likely than mathematics students to view recordings as a means of consolidating understanding after
lectures (Sarsfield, 2018). There is no compelling evidence that provision of lecture recording discourages
attendance, nor that it improves learning outcomes. If lecture recording is to have a positive impact on
higher education it will be through facilitating active learning. We choose to use the expression lecture
recording and not lecture capture very deliberately. Technology can record what happens in the lecture
theatre. It cannot capture the learning experience.

Active learning
We subscribe to the definition of active learning as any pedagogy that seeks to put learners in control of
constructing their knowledge rather than depending upon them passively absorbing it (National Research

90|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

Council, 2000). Most studies of active learning pedagogies have focussed on demonstrating effectiveness
against conventional measures such as assessment results (Freeman et al., 2014). The actual interactions of
active learning tend to be regarded from a social constructivist perspective (Wood, 2018). Constructivism
is a theory of learning founded on the premise that students build on their existing abilities (Bodner,
2006). We have found the notion of a zone of proximal development, where students can achieve more
and benefit more from interaction with a (more knowledgeable) peer very helpful in guiding our practice
(Bishop and Verleger, 2013). Adherence to this model ensured that we posed challenging questions in
what is described below as the sweet spot, that divided our students and collectively challenged them,
rather than succumbing to the temptation to pose straightforward questions that simply reviewed their
existing knowledge.

Peer instruction
Peer instruction was developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s for physics education at Harvard by Eric
Mazur (Mazur, 1997). He was responding to the familiar sense of frustration we feel when observing that,
despite our best efforts, students are simply not grasping the underlying concepts. Mazur initially used the
term peer instruction just to describe the interaction between neighbouring students. His methodology
was to give a short presentation on a key point and to immediately follow that with a ConcepTest in the
form of multiple choice questions, as described in Figure 1.

their
Short neighbours
or (1-2
pre-lecture
Students min)
material
convince
presentation Students
(1 min)
Multiple
questionrespond
choice
posed answers
Reflect on class
Students think
Students respond
(1 min)

Explanation of
correct answer
(2-3 min)

Figure 1: Mazur’s ConcepTest, the practice of peer instruction (adapted from the list in Mazur, 1997)

In active learning, how one proceeds is always dictated by the behaviour of your students and there is a
suggested pattern of response in peer instruction (Figure 2) (Lasry et al., 2008). It is the relative flexibility
of peer instruction amongst active learning pedagogies that has proven so attractive to us and others
(Schell and Butler, 2018). After the initial student response, ideally there will be a spread of answers. If
every student was correct initially, there would be no opportunity for learning and nothing productive
to be gained by a discussion. Indeed, that students have been drawn to the distractors confirms that the
distractors reflect common misconceptions and present them for discussion. If conversely, there were
very few correct answers, this would suggest there would be too few students with the correct conceptual
understanding to carry the argument during a discussion between students. If that happens the faculty
member would normally seek to explain the conceptafresh.This effective range of student responses was
termed the sweet spot by Mazur (1997). The boundaries are a little arbitrary, but the sweet spot will be
approximately 30–70% with the correct answer for a typical four option multiple choice question.

Concept inventories
A concept inventory is a pedagogical research instrument, typically multiple choice, intended to determine
a student’s conceptual understanding in a given field (Bretz, 2014). While not perfect, we contest that

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |91

 Figure 2: Responding to the student answer distribution (adapted from Lasry et al., 2008)

concept inventories are the best available measures. A typical concept inventory is developed over an
extended period through a rigorous process consisting of at least three development phases. The process
begins with consultation, particularly but not exclusively with students, exploring threshold concepts
and surfacing misconceptions. A set of draft questions focussing on concepts and utilising common
misconceptions are prepared. The second phase invites experts in the field to confirm the validity of the
questions. Do they really explore the facet of the discipline intended? Only then are the inventoriestested
for statistical reliability against very large panels of students. It has been suggested that these measures of
statistical reliability should be repeated for each new context in which the concept inventory is deployed
(Komperda et al., 2018). However, given the relatively small class sizes in most UK chemistry departments,
this will rarely be possible. The demands of concept inventory preparation mean that there are relatively
few and that new ones are generally authored by well-resourced chemistry education groups in the US.
There the largest general chemistry classes are closer to A Level standard than first year in an English
university, which can restrict applicability to UK chemistry higher education.

Our context and the rationale for wholescale implementation of peer instruction
Our aim was to utilise our lecture recording archiveto flip a first year inorganic chemistry course employing
peer instruction in the face-to-face sessions. The impact of the teaching change was to be determined
through comparison of assessment results, the application of a concept inventory and student evaluation.
The School of Chemistry at the University of East Anglia (UEA) is a research-led department delivering
bachelors and integrated masters degrees in Chemistry and Chemical Physics and contributing to degrees
in Biochemistry and Natural Sciences. The Year 1 module enrolment is approximately 120 students. They
will have a Chemistry A Level or an equivalent qualification on admission. The Year 2 inorganic chemistry
class has about 80 students.

External drivers — the Teaching Excellence Framework

Our wholescale adoption of peer instruction across the entire topic of descriptive inorganic chemistry
was prompted by the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). TEF is an English government-conceived
attempt to provide students with an indication of the quality and value of their degree programmes. The
methodological challenges associated with this endeavour have been exhaustively debated (Evans, 2018).
The first fulliteration (TEF2) was at institutional leveland relied upon six highly contested metric measures
and a supporting statement. In parallel, a number of research projects were hastily commissioned to try to

92|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

establish what was meant by the expression learning gain and how it might be practically measured since,
learning gain was among the TEF criteria. UEA secured funding to look at the practicalities of applying
grade point averages, self-efficacy and concept inventories to measuring learning gain (Arico et al., 2018).
Our contribution was to lead on concept inventories.

Design and Methods

The design of this study evolved out of existing practice and is a path we envisage others recognising and
being able to tread, particularly as institutional lecture recording becomes widespread. In parallel to the
adoption of lecture recording, the lead author has been experimenting with the use of audience response
units (clickers) since 2007. Adoption of a simple flipped model was an obvious next step. The previously
recorded lectures were provided online for content transmission. The time freed up in the lecture theatre
was utilised for more polling. At this point, we were not practising peer instruction, since we were neither
consciously aiming to pose exclusively conceptual questions nor aiming for a particular initial answer
distribution. We began on a small scale, in 2012, flipping three lectures on main group organometallics
with Year 2 undergraduates. This was a modest endeavour with the focus on improving engagement in
an area that had hitherto been regarded as descriptive and factual in nature. Most students viewed the
recordings in advance. The exercise was well received, as gauged by the standard module evaluation
process. Given the very small proportion of the module flipped and relatively small cohort size of about
80 students, we did not look for an influence on examination marks.

In the context of chemistry higher education at the time, these lecture theatre experiments were regarded
as innovative. However, neither lecture recording nor flipping perse can be regarded as pedagogies. Also
we were working in the absence of either a theoretical framework or a strategy for evaluation beyond
examination marks and student perception. In addition, we were increasingly frustrated by the lack of
conceptual understanding revealed by the written answers of ostensibly academically able students in
their assessments. We sought to enhance genuine understanding and to develop the ability to solve
unseen problems.

We were aware of Overton’s outstanding contributions in problem-based learning but were intimidated
by the gulf between those approaches and our own (Overton and Randles, 2015). It was a demonstration
and discussion of the practices of the Physics Education Group at Edinburgh that proved pivotal for us
(Bates and Galloway, 2012).

We embarked upon a programme of refining our polling practice to incorporate the principles of peer
instruction. Initially, the pace of change was relatively slow with a few more lectures being flipped each year.
Having embraced the conceptual focus, we evolved the nature of the relevantassessment components in
parallel. There was no significant change in the student mark profile. The module evaluation statistics also
remained essentially constant throughout this period of incremental change. We were acutely conscious
that we had no convincing (local) evidence for the impact of our pedagogical innovations. TEF puts the
onus on departments to gather exactly that sort of evidence.

Ethical considerations
The evaluative aspect of the investigation introduced ethical considerations. The implementation of
a new teaching approach is the prerogative of the module organiser and teaching team and does not
require ethical clearance. However, the wish to see as many students as possible complete the concept
inventory through the instigation of an opt-out as opposed to an opt-in approach and to report those

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |93

results certainly merited ethical scrutiny. Approval was obtained for the UEA learning gain project as a
whole. The ethics committee had some reservations about students completing a concept inventory for
which they would not obtain personalised feedback and would need to inform us if they did not want
their results to be included. This was countered through a two-pronged strategy:
1. stressing that determining how to teach more effectively on a Year 1 module would benefit
students on the remainder of their course;
2. offering to present generic feedback to students who requested it. In the event no student
did request feedback on the concept inventory.

The ethical dimension contributed to a wider attempt to engage the students in a discussion about why
we were teaching in this fashion. We presented the evidence for the effectiveness of active learning to our
students. In practice no students questioned the approach until the module evaluation stage and nobody
took the opportunity to opt out of the study.

Students were instructed to view screencasts of lectures focussing on content delivery recorded during
the preceding academic years. The erstwhile lectures were then replaced on a one-for-one basis by peer
instruction active learning in the lecture theatre. There was no net change in face-to-face contact hours.

Peer instruction with lecture flipping

In the 2015/16 academic year we committed to fully flipping a 12 lecture course surveying main group
inorganic chemistry. This comprised approximately a third of a Year 1 Module called Bonding, Structure
and Periodicity. The students had two peer instruction sessions a week (at 9 am and 11 am on a Tuesday
morning) for a period of six weeks. They were instructed to view two screencasts of approximately 30
minutes each. The screencasts were divided into chapters but we chose to keep the material as one video
rather than sub-dividing into multiple shorter recordings. The proximity of the two timetable slots is far
from ideal but was outside of our control. The choice of this component of the degree programme was
driven by the teaching of the lead author and crucially the availability of a suitable concept inventory for
evaluation of learning gain. There is substantial, but not perfect, overlap between the concepts explored
in the course and the concept inventory used (the Bonding Representations Inventory, described below).

Peer instruction questions

The question being posed should require students to understand or apply the concept and not simply
to recall the correct answer. Furthermore, we aim to set the question in Mazur’s sweet spot; not too
easy and not too hard. We believe that the way to advance active learning pedagogies is through open
educational practice and the sharing of question resources. We hope readers contribute their questions
on the same basis that we have provided ours (see Supplementary Information). New lecturers should
certainly consider approaching those they know who practise active learning pedagogies and teach in
their area for question sharing.

The peer instruction questions posed on this course were a collaboration between the module organiser
and an undergraduate project student.The student contributed through reviewing questions prepared by
the module organiser and authoring additional questions. It proved invaluable to have two perspectives
on the questions. We coded the questions against Bloom’s taxonomy, making a critical judgement as to
whether they were addressing concepts through understanding or application. In practice, these were
the two domains of Bloom’s taxonomy our questions tended to address. Our ambition was to move
our students away from their dependence on recall. Table 1 presents the cognitive domain of Bloom’s
taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002) and the student-developed examples we used to guide this process.

94| Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

Table 1: The cognitive domain of Bloom’s taxonomy with examples

(for peer instruction, the questions would be configured as multiple choice)

Tier Description Example

Remember earlier.something they Define effective nuclear charge
were toldrepeat
Students

Understand know andinterpret

Students
given. whatthey
information theyare How is effective nuclear charge
dependent on atomic number
across a period?
Apply generalcases.
in specific How does hydrogen bonding
Analyse Students
interpretations
use their
influence the boiling point of
water?
of information, Calculate the electronegativity
Evaluate pieces
Students
conclusion onrelate
can a topic.
multiple
to reach Which of these compounds
difference in the following bonds.
What do you deduce about the
nature of these bonds?
to reach value
Students can use
need to their
makeanalysis
judgments Plan an experiment to test a
would best catalyse the following
reaction?

Create
something new. hypothesis

Since the practice of peer instruction is such, if the instructor succeeds in pitching the question in the
sweet spot for the cohort, each question may consume up to ten minutes of class time. Given that the
nominal one hour slot equates to 50 minutes of teaching time, we prepared anything up to ten peer
instruction questions. If the question is too easy then its takes up very little time. If too hard, the peer
instruction methodology suggests that the instructor will provide some guidance (Figure 2). Rarely, due
to time constraints, we will concede that we have included a concept too many for the teaching session.
If deemed crucial to the course we will return to it at the next session. The awareness that active learning
brings means occasionally having to acknowledge that the class have failed to grasp an idea.

The assessment is through two coursework exercises and a final examination. The latter in part examines
the material delivered through flipping and taught through peer instruction. In parallel to a change in
the way that we teach the module, with a greater emphasis on conceptual understanding over factual
recall, we have refined the assessment to reflect that focus. The questions require the exercise of problem
solving skills and conceptual insight and are designed not to be answerable simply by recall of examples
from the notes.

The Bonding Representations Inventory (BRI) was developed to quantify student misconceptions
about covalent and ionic bonding (Luxford and Bretz, 2014). Permission to use the BRI was granted by
the authors on the strict understanding that the questions would not be permanently released to the
students and the questions would not be published on the internet. Such precautions are necessary to
avoid students preparing explicitly for the instrument as a conventional test and rote learning the answers
or encountering the answers during routine study.

Students were asked to complete the BRI in the very first session of the entire module. They were then

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |95

asked to complete exactly the same inventory at the end of the module. In neither case were the students
given advance warning that there would be a test. The scripts for the first sitting were locked away until
the second sitting and both sets were marked anonymously by a student intern.

Evaluation methods
The question we used to guide our evaluation of the peer instruction implementation was“Can weevidence
learning gain associated with a peer instruction taught chemistry class?”. There are therefore two facets, the
practicalities of large scale delivery of peer instruction and the application of concept inventories, to
measuring learning gain therein. In addition to the BRI, the module was evaluated through our normal
mechanisms. It was subjected to a module-level evaluation. The questions posed are set centrally and
modelled on the National Student Survey (Office for Students, 2018).

The BRI was taken at the beginning (pre-) and end of the module (post-). Clearly the scope to illustrate
learning gain depends on the initial result attained by an individual student in their pre-test. If a student
does very well in the pre-test, they have little headroom to demonstrate a learning gain. For this reason a
normalized learning gain (g) is calculated according to equation:

with the example showing the learning gain calculated when the pre-test score is 66% and the post
test score is 76%. The numerator gives the absolute improvement in the student's score on the BRI. The
denominator is a correction factor, which accounts for the available headroom. The theoretical maximum
normalised gain is 1.0. This would occur if a student answered all questions correctly on the post-test,
having answered none correctly in the pre-test. If the student makes no improvement between tests then
their learning gain will be 0. It is possible for a student's performance to deteriorate. In this case, their
normalised gain will be negative. The formula accentuates the impact of students who perform well on
the pre-test and badly in the post-test: since their headroom is low, even a small deterioration can result
in large negative gains (g has an upper bound of +1.0 but a lower bound of –∞). Having calculated the
individual gain for each student, the mean normalised gain, <g>, is simply the mean g for all students
in the class. It follows that one or two poorly performing students can have a large impact on the mean
learning gain. Despite these points, this is the most common measure of learning gain and is much more
indicative than simply quoting absolute differences (Galloway, 2016).

Discussion

Module evaluation survey

Module evaluations are a notoriously poor measure of teaching effectiveness (Braga et al., 2014).
Evaluation data is not included in this study to gauge the academicbenefits of either of the peer instruction
delivery strategies discussed herein. However, the reception of our teaching by the study body and their
perception of teaching practices matters, not least because it is a metric in the UK National Student Survey
and TEF. Therefore, it needs to inform our pedagogical strategy. The module evaluation data presented
below is exclusively that for the main author (SJL) on the first year chemistry module, Bonding Structure
and Periodicity during the 2015/16 and 2016/17 academic years. We acknowledge the very low rates of
uptake of the online evaluation process (approximately 25%) and the methodological flaws in taking an
arithmetic mean of ordinal (Likert scale) data. It is nevertheless this mean that is often used to inform
internal discussions about student perceptions at our and other institutions. We have complemented the
mean with the somewhat more defensible aggregation of agreeing and strongly agreeing responses,

96|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

which is the NSS methodology.

Evaluation results
Although there were over 100 students enrolled on the module, the numbers who completed both sittings
of the BRI from which a learning gain could be established was closer to 80. The numbers completing
the evaluation were considerably lower still. A mean normalized learning gain, <g> = 0.19, was found,
which represents a statistically significant improvement in the performance of our students on the BRI
instrument. This was coupled with an average final examination mark of 66% and a standard deviation of
18%. In the previous year the average mark was 63% and the standard deviation 20%. Both of these are
consistent with an academically successful trial of the fully flipped mode of delivery.

The module evaluation results, however, gave cause for concern. Despite there being several questions
about each individual lecturer, the results would typically be very similar for each field and remarkably
consistent given the small sample sizes from one year to the next. The results for “The lecturer responded
well to student needs at an individual and group level”and “The lectures were well organised and the taught
material was well presented”were the worst this lecturer had ever had with means of 3.97 and 4.1
respectively. The institutional trigger point for corrective action was set for a mean of 4.0. Qualitative, free
text comments indicated that 5% of students felt sufficiently strongly to criticise the flipped style. Similar
numbers were moved to write positive comments. The objections were limited to a minority, but where
student satisfaction levels of >90% are required, this is an essential consideration. In the supplementary
section wereport the results of a follow up study in the 2016/17 academic year, where we chose not to flip
but instead tried to free up time for peer instruction by reducing the content in the curriculum.

Table 2: Module evaluation for Year 1 — peer instruction with lecture flipping

Tier NA SD D N A SA “Mean” Median NSS %SA

The lecturer was
knowledgeable 0 0 0 0 7 22 4.76 5 100 76
The lecturer was
0 0 0 1 6 22 4.72 5 97 76
enthusiastic
The lecturer responded
well to student needs at
an individual and group 0 2 2 3 10 12 3.97 4 76 41
level
The lectures were well
organised and the
taught material was well 0 1 1 5 9 13 4.1 4 76 45
presented

The first six columns (NA–SA) are the number of responses: NA – Not applicable, SD – Strongly disagree, D – Disagree, N
– Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Strongly Agree.The NSS is the percentage who Agree or Strongly Agree.%SA is the percentage
who Strongly Agree. The number of respondents is 29 of a total class of 107.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |97

Recommendations for Implementation

We recommend a staged progressive implementation of peer instruction. The greatest impact on the
lasting conceptual understanding of your students will be achieved through a flipped approach which
combines transmission, construction and consolidation teaching components. In this section we present
a three year plan (Figure 3) to reach towards this point from the beginning of an academic career. A more
experienced HE teacher with existing resources could reduce the time required dramatically by moving
directly to the second or third year of implementation.

Figure 3: Timeline for staged implementation of peer instruction

In the first year the practitioner will be familiarising themselves with the content and concepts of the
module. In practice, it will often be a case of delivering the lecture notes of their predecessor. During this
first year we encourage reflection on the important themes of the module. We advise you to capture the
spontaneous questions you pose to the class.

In the second year the lecturer may be in a position to reduce some of the content, having reflected
on its importance to the module. If that has been possible there will be an opportunity to introduce a
small number of peer instruction questions alongside the transmission. This is effectively the model we
describe in the Supplementary Information. However, the principal implementation objective of the
second year is the preparation of the transmission materials. Where your institution has lecture recording
infrastructure this will be simplified, however it is possible to employ portable microphones and software
to make personal recordings. We strongly encourage editing of the resulting files: simply tidying up the
soundtracks can cut many minutes. Studies on massive open online courses (MOOCs) advise to keep
individual videos as short as possible (5–20 minutes) suggesting division of hour long lectures (Anderson
et al., 2015).

In the third year, the lead academic will have a series of resources that they can direct their students
to view in advance of every face-to-face session. The success of peer instruction is dependent upon
students being prepared and having a measure of familiarity with the material being taught. However,
asking students to view videos on topics they already feel confident with can be counterproductive. If
we ask them to view materials in advance when they do not feel they need to then they may not be
prepared to do solater in a course when they definitely do need to. We have had some recent success with
quizzes that guide students as to whether they need to view materials in advance. The instruction to the
student (Figure 4) is therefore to take the online quiz on the virtual learning environment and to view the
instruction materials where advised to in the feedback. We refer to this as tailored flipping. All students are
directed to attend the face-to-face peer instruction sessions. The principal challenge for the HE teacher in
the third year of implementation will be preparing peer instruction questions.

98|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

Figure 4: Instructions to students on how to direct their own learning

Authoring suitable questions for peer instruction

For those with a well-established lecture course, the most daunting aspect of implementing peer
instruction should be question authoring. Authoring peer instruction questions is a highly reflective
process that first requires the extraction of the conceptual kernel of the material being taught. It is not
straightforward to compose truly conceptual questions pitched such that they are not too easy and not
too hard for cohorts which may themselves be quite diverse. Despite the cohort diversity, our observations
suggest the pattern of answering remains remarkably consistent between years. The more effective the
question is at exposing a classic misconception, the more likely that it will be a perennial challenge. Figure
5, is conceptually a straightforward question. However, it often proves necessary to remind students of
the fundamentals of electrostatics before the class reach the sweet spot. Questions that did not challenge
the class in the first year were not employed in the second year. Question authoring is likely to be an
iterative process in which you are constantly revising and updating materials throughout your career. In
the first instance we recommend you set aside at least a couple of hours perface-to-face session to collate
and prepare appropriate questions.

Figure 5: An example peer instruction question (simulated results)

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |99

Our aim was to have 8–10 conceptually challenging questions for a 50 minute teaching session. Other
approaches to student co-production of multiple choice questions might include using custom question
authoring platforms such as PeerWise (Galloway, 2015).

Face-to-face sessions
Peer instruction has a prescribed structure but it is an endlessly adaptable approach. For instance, if it
transpires that the distribution of student answers is not in the sweet-spot, the instructor can intervene
with conceptual pointers. If after the first round of peer-to-peer discussion the cohort have not moved to
a clear and correct consensus, the instructor can make a guiding intercession, always stopping short of
simply presenting the answer and invite a second round of discussion. We have had considerable success
with a variation in which possible answers to a question are sourced from the students themselves.
The stem of the question is posed but instead of a multiple choice format a free test response mode is
used. This is a tremendously powerful means to surface hitherto unknown misconceptions. The student
sourced answers can then be fed into a multiple choice format to address all misconceptions through
peer instruction.

There are many solutions to the practical issue of how to poll students. The trend is away from issuing
students with their own clickers towards apps running on their own devices. This avoids the logistical
challenge of distribution but will test the Wi-Fi capacity of your teaching space.

Your context
The following are some considerations to think about regarding implementation in a local context:
• What is the level of active learning on your degree programme? If the majority is taught
by traditional lecturing, peer instruction will be a progressive addition. If you have a strong
ethos of problem-based learning, it might be regarded as regressive.
• Are there parts of your degree course that you regard as conceptual in nature but where
students take a strategic rote-learning approach focussed solely on exam preparation?
These are ideal candidates for implementation of peer instruction.
• Do you have a compulsory institutional lecture recording policy? Do you have the freedom
to utilise archive recordings to facilitate a fresh pedagogy?
• Do you have an institutional solution for student response (for example, clickers, or a polling
app subscription)?
• Do you have the will and the freedom to take a critical look at your curriculum and question
whether coverage is really more important than lasting understanding?
• Is your teaching environment sufficiently similar to the rest of the developed world’s STEM
settings that you can accept the evidence for active learning without piloting and move
directly to implementation?
• If you change the way you teach, should you change the way you assess, or at least the
nature of the questions you pose in your assessments? That is, are your assessments tuned
to recognise improvements in enduring conceptual understanding?
• Will you attempt to bring your students with you through an open and frank discussion of
the pedagogical approach being implemented?
• What additional staff time do you need to develop the peer instruction activities and/or
tailor your course to provide time for them?
• Is there scope to involve students in the development of questions (and answers)? Would
that develop the metacognitive and pedagogical skills of the students?
• Is there a trusted instrument for the evaluation of learning gain in the area in which you are
working that you might wish to employ (for example a concept inventory)?

100|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

• Are your evaluation mechanisms attuned to the possibility of active learning? For instance,
are teaching sessions exclusively described as lectures? What are you doing to evolve
student expectations?
• What is the balance of priorities in your institution, between the effectiveness of
departmental or institutional pedagogy in imparting enduring conceptual understanding,
and the student-evaluated learning experience?

Conclusions

Peer instruction provides aflexible, scalable approach to large group teaching, rooted in social constructive
theory and with an impressive evidence base and long pedigree. What has become apparent to us is that
the challenges facing the designer of problem based learning activities and the author of conceptual peer
instruction questions are very similar. Indeed, one can consider peer instruction as a stepping stone for
academics and students alike towards problem based learning (Cortright et al., 2005).

We concur with previous studies that conclude that conceptual understanding is enhanced in a fully
flipped peer instruction module. However, we find student satisfaction is poorer and this is of at least equal
importance in the UK HE environment. Our attempt to determine whether we can retain the conceptual
learning gain while requiring less preparation time by students was inconclusive but the peer instruction
without lecture flipping was certainly more popular among learners. The aim of this chapter was not to
produce compelling evidence in favour of the teaching of chemistry in higher education through active
learning generally and peer instruction specifically. We readily acknowledge that the power of the study is
limited by single faculty member engagement and the statistical value by the size of the student cohort.
Ample evidence is provided by meta-reviews of studies from across the STEM disciplines (Freeman, 2014).
Instead we have sought to show how peer instruction can be implemented in a first year chemistry
setting and modified to strike a balance between the competing priorities of student satisfaction and
engendering conceptual understanding.

To that end we continue to seek to refine and propagate peer instruction. We have discussed the use of
free text response to elucidate the full range of harboured misconceptions. We have also alluded to the
possibilities of platforms like PeerWise to involve students in developing questions and vastly increasing
the available pool. Facile access to conceptual questions at the right level for our student cohorts is the
single most important factor for successful and effective implementation of peer instruction. Therefore,
we advocate for questions to be widely shared amongst the community of chemistry educators as open
educational resources. Most of those used in the study presented here are available under creative
commons licenses through Slideshare (Lancaster, 2018) and are listed in the Supplementary Information.
Therange of modules on which weemploy peer instruction illustrates not justits flexibility and adaptability
but, with enrolments between 30 and 230 students, its scalability. The turn to your neighbour delivery of
peer instruction means a single instructor can deliver an active learning class to as many students as can
fit in the lecture theatre.

A refrain we often hear when discussing teaching is that colleagues’ more-or-less conventional lectures
already incorporate the sort of active learning that peer instruction engenders. The first question is how
they can be confident that most of the class are actively engaging in the absence of facilitating technology.
The second is how much time is set aside for student engagement. At UEA we are currently employing
Wood’s framework for interactive learning in lectures (FILL) methodology to quantify how much of these
lectures allow for active learning (Wood et al., 2017). We are also extending this to explore how the

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 101

temporal reality of peer instruction compares to the perception of the faculty and students involved.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Anderson, M., Agger, J. Ashworth, S., Lancaster, S. and O’Malley, P. (2015), “Massive Open Online Chemistry”,
Education in Chemistry, Vol. 52, pp. 14–17.
Arico, F., Gillespie, H., Lancaster, S., Ward, N. and Ylonen, A. (2018), “Lessons in learning gain: insights from a pilot
project”, Higher Education Pedagogies, Vol. 3, pp. 249–265.
Bates, S.P. and Galloway, R. (2012), “The inverted classroom in a large enrolment introductory physics course: a
pdf
case(accessed
study.” HEA15th
STEM
February
Conference
2019).
2012, available at https://www2.ph.ed.ac.uk/~rgallowa/Bates_Galloway.

Belt, S.T., Evans, E. H., McCreedy, T., Overton, T. L. and Summerfield, S. (2002), “A problem based learning approach
to analytical and applied chemistry”, University Chemistry Education., Vol. 6, pp. 65–72.
Bodner, G. M. (2006), Theoretical Frameworks for research in chemistry/science education, Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NJ.
Bishop, J. L., Verleger, M.A. (2013), “The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research”, ASEE National Conference
Proceedings, Atlanta, GA.
Braga, M., Paccagnella, M. and Pellizzaric, M. (2014), “Evaluating students’ evaluations of professors”, Economics
of Education Review, Vol 41, pp. 71–88.
Cortright, R. N., Collins, H. L. and DiCarlo S. E. (2005), “Peer instruction enhanced meaningful learning: ability to
solve novel problems”, Advances Physiological Education, Vol. 29, pp. 107–111.
Evans, C., Kandiko Howson, C., Forsythe, A. (2018), “Making sense of learning gain in higher education”, Higher
Education Pedagogies, Vol. 3, pp. 1–45.
Fautch, J. M. (2015), “The flipped classroom for teaching organic chemistry in small classes: is it effective?”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 179–186.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. and Wenderoth, M. P. (2014), “Active
Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics”, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 111, pp. 8410–8415.
Galloway, K. W. and Burns, S. (2015), “Doing it for themselves: students creating a high quality peer-learning
environment”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice., Vol. 16, pp. 82–92.
Galloway, R. and Lancaster, S.J., (2016), “Learning Gains”, Education in Chemistry, Vol 53, pp. 26–29.
Goodhart, C., (1981). "Problems of Monetary Management: The UK Experience", in Courakis, A. S. (ed.), Inflation,
Depression, and Economic Policy in the West, pp. 111–146.
Krathwohl, D.R, (2002), “Revising Blooms Taxonomy an Overview”, Theory Into Practice, Vol. 41, pp. 214–216.
Komperda, R., Hosbein, K. N. and Barbera, J. (2018), “Evaluation of the influence of wording changes and course
type on motivation instrument functioning in chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
19, pp. 184–198.
Lancaster, S.J. and Read, D. (2013), “Flipping lectures and inverting classrooms”, Education in Chemistry, Vol 50,
pp. 14–17.
Lancaster, S.J. (2014), “Beyond the presentation: student authored vignettes”, Education in Chemistry, Vol 51, pp.
18–21.
Lancaster, S.J. (2018), Slideshare, available at: https://www.slideshare.net/SimonJLancaster (accessed 30th Sept
2018).
Lasry, N., Mazur, E. and Watkins, J. (2008), “Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college”, American

102 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Peer instruction as a flexible, scalable, active learning approach in higher education

Journal Physics, Vol. 76, pp. 1066–1069.

Lowery Bretz, S. (2014), “Designing Assessment Tools To Measure Students’Conceptual Knowledge of Chemistry”,
Tools of Chemistry Education Research, pp. 155–168.
Luxford, C. J. and Lowery Bretz, S. (2014), “Development of the Bonding Representations Inventory ToIdentify
Student Misconceptions about Covalent and Ionic Bonding Representations”, Journal of Chemical
Education, Vol 91, pp. 312–320.
Mazur, E. (1997), “Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual”, Physics Today, Vol. 50, pp. 68–69.
National Research Council (2000), How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition,
National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Novak, G. M., Patterson, E.T., Gavrin, A. D. and Christian, W. (1999), Just-in-Time-Teaching: Blending Active Learning
with Web Technology, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Office for Students (2018) About page, available at: https://www.thestudentsurvey.com/about.php (accessed
30th Sept 2018).
Overton, T. L. and Randles, C. A. (2015), “Beyond problem-based learning: using dynamic PBL in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 251–259.
Read, D. and Lancaster, S.J. (2012), “Unlocking video: 24/7 learning for iPod generation”, Education in Chemistry,
Vol 49, pp. 13–16.
Sarsfield, M. and Conway, J. (2018), “What can we learn from learning analytics? A case study based on an analysis
of student use of video recordings”, Research in Learning Technology, Vol. 26, doi:10.25304/rlt.v26.2087.
Schell, J. A. and Butler, A. C. (2018), “Insights From the Science of Learning Can Inform Evidence-Based
Implementation of Peer Instruction”, Frontiers in Education, Vol. 3, Article 33.
Seery, M. K. (2015), “Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 758–768.
Smith, J. D. (2013), “Student attitudes toward flipping the general chemistry classroom”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 14, pp. 607–614.
Wood, A. K., Galloway, R. K., Sinclair, C. and Hardy, J. (2018), “Teacher-student discourse in active learning lectures:
case studies from undergraduate physics”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 23, pp. 818-834.
Wood, A. K., Galloway, R. K., Donnelly, R. and Hardy, J. (2016), “Characterizing interactive engagement activities
in a flipped introductory physics class”, Physical Review Physics Education Research, Vol. 12, pp. 010140-1
010140-15.
Wood, A. K., Galloway, R. K., Hardy, J. and Sinclair, C. (2014), “Analyzing learning during Peer Instruction dialogues:
A resource activation framework”, Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, Vol. 10 No. 2,
pp. 020107-1-020107-15.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 103

104|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 8 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended,
problem-solving tasks in chemistry

Gwendolyn Lawrie,† Kelly E. Matthews‡ and Lawrence Gahan†

†Schoolof Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences and ‡Institute for
Teaching and Learning Innovation, The University of Queensland
g.lawrie@uq.edu.au

Students enrolled in large Year 1 chemistry courses often do not identify with the reason
that chemistry is included in their program of study. This lack of relevance can fuel
disengagement, low motivation and shallow approaches to learning. To address this, we
applied research-informed instructional design to develop and implement collaborative,
open-ended, inquiry-based, problem-solving tasks in very large (> 1300 students) Year 1
chemistry cohorts. The strategies that were adopted as part of an instructional framework
included: open problem solving, real-world contexts, collaborative group work (resource and
social interdependency), and peer review as well as embedding opportunities for students
to demonstrate learning outcomes and skills that are recognised graduate capabilities.

Extensive formal evaluation of student learning outcomes, learning processes, and

environments involved collecting qualitative and quantitative data. It was found that
students experienced significant learning through working collaboratively with their peers
in real-world contexts that enabled them to identify the role that chemistry plays in scientific
problem-solving. This innovative approach to instructional design triggered a journey of
iterative adaptation based on evidence and unexpected insights into how students had
engaged in working collaboratively towards solving open-ended problems. In this chapter,
we will share the four core elements of the instructional design framework along with
examples of its translation into new contexts including multiple modes of assessment of
student-generated communication of their group’s solution to a problem.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

One of the team (Lawrie) visited Tina in Hull in 2011 to seek her expertise on engaging students
in the different stages of open problem-solving and to discuss our collaborative group task.
Tina encouraged us to keep moving forward with the initiative but also inspired us to build in
the quantitative aspect which required the students set boundaries or constraints to enable a
solution. The core instructional framework for these collaborative problem-solving tasks has
also evolved to integrate some of Tina’s own problems, such as “How many daily oral doses for a
human could be isolated from the clippings of one yew tree?”

To cite: Lawrie, G., Matthews, K. E. and Gahan, L. (2019), “Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in
chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina
Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 105-122.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 105

Introduction

Challenges in teaching large Year 1 general chemistry courses

“I don’t see why I have to study chemistry!”This represents an annual anthem of large numbers of students
who are typically enrolled in large Year 1 general chemistry courses because their program of study (such
as engineering or dental science) includes chemistry. This simple statement when amplified by a large
number of student voices develops into a significant teaching challenge for chemistry instructors in terms
of catering for student diversity in interest, academic ability, career aspiration, and prior experiences. A
lack of personal relevance has a significant impact on student engagement and is associated with low
motivation to learn (Zusho et al., 2003). Attempts to assist students to connect to a professional identity
through learning activities that feature thinking like an engineer or thinking like a scientist are often
flawed because identity is not a fixed construct and may be fluid depending on the context that students
are placed in (Sadler, 2009). For these reasons, situated learning represents a powerful framework for
instructional design where socioscientific issues (SSIs) employed in learning environments can “encourage
high levels of student participation, collaboration and mutual respect”(Eastwood et al., 2013, p1055). Situated
learning is a theoretical perspective that proposes that students begin knowing and learning through
participation in environments where they engage with individuals that form communities (Sadler, 2009).
SSIs are contemporary challenges that bring together scientific, cultural and social perspectives that
involve discourse, ethical reasoning and developing consensus positions (Eastwood et al., 2013). Examples
of socioscientific issues include climate change and genetic engineering.

Students working collaboratively with peers on real-world challenges can develop shared construction
of understanding at a nexus of contextual, conceptual and social factors (Albe, 2008). Instructors of very
large (typically over 1000 students) classes face significant challenges in implementing collaborative small
group tasks, particularly when these tasks involve real world, open-problem solving. Applying innovative
approaches to embedding interdependency and peer review as pedagogical strategies that underpin
successful group work represents an important strategy. In this chapter we share the development
and outcomes of an instructional framework that scaffolded an intervention in a large Year 1 chemistry
course to address the challenges described above. The original initiative was implemented in 2010 and
was iterated and improved for three years before being adapted into new courses and modes of group
assessment.

Interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks

Interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks (IS-IT) were built through constructive alignment between
intended learning outcomes, assessment and learning environments (Biggs, 1996; Wiggins and McTighe,
1998). Constructive alignment is a well-established approach that involves deciding on the intended
learning outcomes first (detailed in Table 1 for IS-ITs). The second step is then to consider what form of
assessment will measure students achievement of these learning outcomes. The final step involves the
design of learning activities that will enable students to construct meaning hence the term constructive
alignment. A diagram illustrating the constructive alignment of assessment with the intended learning
outcomes and learning activities for the IS-ITs is provided in Supplementary Information for this chapter
along with assessment criteria.

The learning outcomes listed in Table 1 strongly align with the Australian tertiary chemistry minimum
threshold learning outcomes (CTLOs) (Pyke et al., 2014). Specifically, the IS-ITs aimed to provide students
with an opportunity to: understand ways of scientific thinking; articulate aspects of the place and
importance of chemistry in the local and global community; synthesise and evaluate information from

106 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

Table 1: Intended learning outcomes in the instructional design of an interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks (IS-ITs)
developed by the authors (Gahan et al., 2011).

Skill Description
thinking
Interdisciplinary Analysis of real-world scenarios to extract the chemistry concepts while
recognising the connections to other disciplines
Discrimination between theories and hypotheses, while translating
Scientific reasoning
between microscopic and macroscopic processes
Scientific Fluent communication in a chemical language: structures, equations and
communication symbols
Integration of data with logical arguments including graphical displays, and
Quantitative reasoning
application of algorithmic relationships to quantify variables

Information literacy Information retrieval and validation

Visualisation Construction of conceptual models of chemical structures and processes

Team work Effective work within a team

Global citizenship Development of social and ethical responsibility

a range of sources; demonstrate the cooperativity and effectiveness of working in a team environment;
communicate chemical knowledge by articulating an argument; and demonstrate a capacity for self
directed learning.

Core design elements of the interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks

An instructional design framework (Figure 1) was developed for the IS-ITs that had been deeply informed
by core educational research underpinning each of four integrated elements: real-world scientific
challenges; collaborative small group work (with embedded interdependence); open problem-solving;
and feedback through peer assessment and review.

Figure 1: The four key elements that underpin the instructional framework that informs the task designs described in this
chapter, representing the application of a research-based design methodology

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 107

Each element is informed by a vast body of knowledge that is too extensive to summarise here so key
articles are cited in order to direct the reader.
• Real-world scientific challenges engage students in recognising the role and relevance of
chemistry in their own lives and in real-world contexts, fostered through developing informal
reasoning and reflective judgement skills (Sadler, 2004; Zeidler et al., 2009). Socioscientific
thinking skills involve the generation and justification of a stance supported by evidence in
response to complex issues that lack defined solutions (Sadler, 2004; Sadler, 2009).
• Collaborative small-group work is universally recognised as a high-impact pedagogical
strategy prevalent in active learning environments (both face to face and in online learning
environments). Interdependence, which can take one of several forms, is a prerequisite
of effective group work (Johnson, et al., 1991; Smith et al., 2005; Johnson and Johnson,
2009). Group work is often not popular amongst tertiary students, however, there is strong
evidence that the benefits for learning outweigh the negative perceptions (Springer et
al.; 1999; Phipps et al., 2001). A large, contemporary body of research exists that elicits the
affordances of small-group pedagogies supported by technology to enable assessment of
student outcomes (Goodyear et al., 2014).
• Problem-solving in chemistry ranges between highly structured familiar concept questions
that have a single correct answer (for example multiple-choice questions, MCQs) to highly
unstructured problems where there is no single correct answer. Eight types of problem
(Table 2) have been recognised dependent on the level of scaffolding provided to students
and the outcomes of the problems (Johnstone, 1993).
Table 2: Johnstone’s (1993) levels of problem-solving

Type Data Method/Strategy Outcome/Answer

1 Given Familiar Given
2 Given Unfamiliar Given
3 Incomplete Familiar Given
4 Incomplete Unfamiliar Given
5 Given Familiar Open
6 Given Unfamiliar Open
7 Incomplete Familiar Open
8 Incomplete Unfamiliar Open

Whilst MCQs would be classified as Type 1 problems, the IS-ITs presented problems that
have ill-defined goals, there was no provision of data and students applied unfamiliar
methods hence they represented a Type 8 problem (Overton and Potter, 2008). Open
problem-solving in chemistry is recognised as an instructional strategy that supports the
development of students’ quantitative reasoning and communication skills (Overton and
Potter, 2008; Overton et al., 2013; Overton and Randles, 2015; Randles and Overton 2015;
Randles et al., 2018; Reid and Yang, 2010).
• Feedback gained through peer assessment and peer review offers the opportunity to engage
students with richer feedback and reflection on their own thinking especially when they
review the work of other students (Nicol et al., 2014). Involving students in the provision
of peer feedback increases the quantity and variety of feedback that an individual student
receives (Topping, 1998) and engages them in the process of applying assessment rubrics.
• Working in groups in collaborative problem-solving is a ubiquitous high-impact pedagogical

108 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

practice in active learning environments and often involves context-based problems

(Hmelo-Silver, 2004).

Methods and Design

In this section, we describe the process of the implementation of the IS-ITs in practice, integrating the four
core elements. An adaptation of the original IS-ITs for a different cohort of students and additional modes
of assessment is also shared here to demonstrate the flexibility in the application of the instructional
design to new contexts.

Real-world scientific challenges

The IS-ITs required that students worked collaboratively towards developing a consensus response to
an open-ended problem or challenge question, known as a metaquestion. 27 scenario contexts were
authored by discipline experts to encompass the range of programs represented in the cohort (this
resource book is available to readers online, Lawrie et al., 2011). It was hypothesised that Year 1 students
might exhibit a level of professional identity related to their aspired careers; for example Bachelor of
Dental Science students would choose the Teeth scenario and Bachelor of Engineering students would
opt into challenges such as Exploration of Distant Worlds. Each scenario was framed as a description of
the real-world context, a meta-question and four separate information quests (dot point stimuli) that
were allocated to each of the four separate members in a group. An example of one scenario, Chocoholics
Anonymous, is provided in Figure 2.

Figure 2: An example of the individual quests (IQs) and meta-question in one scenario

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |109

To enable authentic peer review of reports in every scenario, the number of groups was capped to 15 in
each making sure every scenario had more than four groups working in it. Students were warned that
the more popular scenarios might fill up quickly so this introduced some urgency in group formation and
enabled identification of scenarios that appealed to students.

Implementation of interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks

The IS-ITs were designed to be delivered overa whole semester for a class of 1359 Year 1 chemistry students
enrolled in 40 separate programs of study (primarily STEM and health related), additional demographic
data are available (Lawrie et al., 2014). No formal class time was allocated to the IS-ITs therefore students
worked independently on the task and managed their own group’s progress towards each deadline. The
task structure (detailed in Table 3) has potential to be easily modified to enable delivery over a shorter
time period involving formal class time allocated for group work.

The interdependence between students within each group was achieved by the individual quest (IQ)
phase of the task, students perceived that it was compulsory to contribute separate information retrieved
by individual students for them to successfully respond to the metaquestion (Gahan et al., 2011; Lawrie
et al., 2014). Group reports were peer marked by at least 16 students in the same scenario applying an
assessment criteria sheet, the average report score was then moderated by the instructor for issues such
as reduced group size, disengaged students and report structure. The assessment criteria for peer marking
of group members and reports are provided in supplementary information for this chapter.

In very large classes, the management of group work, peer assessment and peer review is achieved
through technology — an online bespoke task management platform (iCAS, interactive collaborative
assessment system) was developed to manage the IS-ITs (Lawrie et al., 2014). The task could also be
facilitated by combining separate tools that facilitate each aspect of the process including platforms that
enable collaborative file-sharing, content creation and discussion, combined with peer assessment and
peer review tools. Several options are provided in the Supplementary Information.

After the first iteration of the task in 2010, the suite of scenarios offered was altered annually in an attempt
to improve engagement (Table 4) and to address variation in the cohort composition and number of
students.

Adaptation of the original IS-IT design to introduce new assessment

Evaluation of the original task in terms of the key elements of the instructional design framework (Figure
1) generated substantial evidence that the task had been successful, however, it was felt that two of
the intended learning outcomes (quantitative reasoning and scientific communication) would benefit
from further attention in task design. This triggered an adaptation of the assessment and activities to
involve engagement of students in quantitative open problem solving, where each group was required
to seek and generate scientific data to justify their reasoning. Overton’s open-problem solving exemplars
(Overton and Potter, 2008; Overton and Potter, 2011) were adapted as a stimulus for this evolution of the
IS-ITs complemented by new challenges that were created to engage specific cohorts of students (Table
5). It should be noted that the Overton group (Overton and Potter, 2008; Overton et al., 2013; Randles
and Overton, 2015) initially researched individual approaches to problem-solving. However, in the current
study, students are working collaboratively which aligns with dynamic problem-based learning strategies
(Overton and Randles, 2015).

In 2013, a written report was retained as the assessment format for the new quantitative, scenario-based,
open-ended, problem-solving tasks. In 2015, the mode of assessment was transformed into a student

110 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

Table 3: IS-IT implementation schedule

Task Phase Week Student Actions Instructor Actions & Resources

and
formation
selection
Scenario
group Make scenario descriptions and meta-questions
available. Decide how many scenarios and how
for of
one many groups are available in each. Provide a
Quests
Individual
(IQs) 1–3 within
Select
Negotiate
of
information
sign
theinto
four
agroup
scenario
groups
and and
individual
retrieval
nominate
four.
group sign-on facility. Group membership either
chosen by students or assigned by instructor.
Optimise group membership and assign
unsubscribed students.

Provide the dot point stimuli in the quests for

each scenario. Set expectations of task.Establish
a collaborative file-sharing and discussion forum
for each group.
quests.
Collaborative
construction
ofreport
a group 4–6 of
submit
This IQ
Complete
evidence
online
module.
with
consensus
and
thethe indata
antothe
metaquestion
other
involves
peers
teamwork
report
Collaborate
information
response and
integration
optional
establish
document.
or
report.
to Provide supporting resources for successful
group work and a frequently asked questions
document. Manage any group function issues
(conflicts or disfunction). Actively seek any
emerging engagement issues by asking students
to report “missing in action” group members.
Follow up with disengaged students and note
the groups that require moderation due to
reduced size at the end of the task. Adapt task
for groups where one or two members withdraw
from the course.
Internal
ReviewPeer 7–9 Apply
the
contribution
professional
criteriaoftoeach
markof
Provide forum or documentation for peer marks
and comments submission. Calculate an average
and justification score for each student based on student marks.
required.
their
mark team members. Ais
Moderate for reduced group size and evidence
of issues in group function or workload.

External
ReviewPeer 10–11 Students individually
mark and
required.
the
foursame
other
the reports
scenario. A is
justification
groupsfor
within Provide submission forum for student marks for
reports and comments. Calculate an average
score for each group’s report based on student
marks.

moderation
andMarks
release 14 (or
revision
12–13
week) Moderate individual student’s final marks based
on report marks and peer assessment applying
any adjustments or penalties.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 111

Table 4: Scenarios offered annually after the first implementation in 2010, an ‘X’ indicates that the scenario was not offered
in this particular year. Indicators show most popular scenarios () and least popular scenarios ();
n = number of students enrolled

Scenario (n = 1310)
2011 (n2012
= 667) 2013
(n = 937)
1. A Drop of Life
2. A Family Affair  X X
3. A Pandora's Box of Oil X X
4. A Sugar Rush   
5. Algae: From LittleThings Big Things Grow  X
6. Alternative Energy X
7. Bodybuilding: Biomaterials as an Elixir for Future Humanity X
8. Bottom(s)-up! A New Approach to Cancer Treatment  X
9. Chemistry to Get Your Teeth Into 
10. Chocoholics Anonymous   
11. Cleaning up Green with Bioremediation  X X
12. Copper Ore Concentrate Spill at Wharf X X X
13. Detect Me Not X
14. Exploration of Distant Worlds: Mars X
15. Fermentation Fever  
16. Immunity: Good vs Evil   X
17. In the Shadow of the Mushroom X
18. Methane: Friend or Foe?  
19. Paper Mate? X X
20. Survival in the Death Zone: The Ocean Floor X
21. The Limits of Global Food Production   X
22. The Pharmaceutical Journey X
23. The Return of the King X X X
24. Walk Like a Eukaryotic Cell X X
25. Waste Not Want Not  X 
26. We Are What We Wheat X X
27. What Are You Drinking?   

112|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

Table 5: Scenarios and quantitative challenge questions posed in open problem-solving tasks
in Year 1 chemistry service courses

Scenario (Source) Challenge Question

Student cohort: Engineering & Science
Assessment format: Group report

with
enough
aircraft,
You are fact
bethat
thetravelling in
recirculation
to seated Japan
next containing
to order
cells to
toprovide
to ago
chemist
skiing.who
breathable
potassium
You are unlucky
boresairyou
on an
dioxide What mass of potassium dioxide would
be needed on a Boeing 747 for this flight
between Brisbane and Tokyo?

are used. (Overton and Potter, 2008)

Taxol
given isto
bloodyew
from inused asis
a3tree
rat,
hours. aan
clippings.
(Overton
treatment and
effective
A dose
for
dose,of and
1 mg
Potter,
cancer. is
Itof
can
2008)
cleared
taxol, from
whenthe
be extracted How many daily oral doses for a human
could be isolated from the clippings of
one yew tree?

has
The
between
been and
andoceans
50 ppt.
rivers5seriously considered
contain many
Extraction of gold
levels of
times.
dissolved
from goldand
(Overton
seawaterof Approximately how many kg of gold are
present in the world oceans?

Potter, 2011)

their emissions
Termites
emissionsmake
and, ain the future,
efficiently.
significant it might be possible
(Authors)
contribution to globaltomethane
capture How many termites would be required to
produce sufficient methane to boil 4 litres
of water on a natural gas camping stove?
Student cohort: Pharmacy & Dentistry
Assessment format: 2–3 minute group video

blood
from
Taxol isto
givenyewinused asis
a3tree
rat,
hours. aan
clippings.
(Overton
treatment
effective
A dose
&for of and
dose,
Potter, mgis
cancer. Itof
1 2008) can
cleared
taxol, from
whenthe
be extracted How many daily oral doses for a human
could be isolated from the clippings of
one yew tree?

for
chewing
Research
health
sapodilla gum
thousands
through of
indicates
ischewing
made
years the
tree (Manilkara
thatfromgum
there was
sugar-free
zapot).
a are gum.
synthetic
(Authors)
positive
extracted
gum inthe
Contemporary
benefits
base,
fromhowever,
oral What area of land would be required to
support a plantation of trees that could
provide enough natural chewing gum for
the residents of Brisbane to protect their
teeth for one year?

as
through
expensive
are
People
opposed caged
connoisseurs
drink
the
coffee
to ofprepared
is its
digestive
coffee either
cats).
system
flavour.
for of
(Authors)
from
its
Some wild
ofcivet
beans the
that
astimulatory cat
rarest
effect
have and
or they
most How long would it take a wild civet cat to
(free-range
passed
produce enough beans required to deliver
sufficient caffeine in a cup of coffee that
provides the kick-start to the day for a
normal adult?

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 113

generated video explanation of the group’s consensus strategy and their solution to the problem. Video
explanations proved to be especially useful as they ensured that all group members participated to some
extent, aligning with previous findings that video-supported student explanations encourage deeper
engagement with chemistry concepts (Lawrie, 2015). Videos also build students digital literacy skills
which aligns increasingly blended learning environments with their social worlds.

Students were orientated into quantitative open-problem solving tasks by explicitly stating the following
intended learning outcomes:
• Authentic assessment provides students with challenges and learning situations that
develop their skills that will be valued by potential employers. In recent years there has been
a shift to providing students with 21st century graduate skills that not only build upon the
traditional understanding of core concepts and content, but also include: problem-solving
skills, critical thinking and creativity, communication skills, collaborative skills, self-direction,
information and digital literacy and the ability to utilize 21st century tools including digital
media.
• To provide you with the opportunity to begin developing some of these skills, we have
developed a collaborative problem-solving task that you will complete, in groups of three,
outside class time. Real-world problems tend to be ill-defined, complex, and messy so an
important skill is the ability to define the variables and propose a solution. The end product
will be submission of your group’s communication of your solution and the rationale/
process that you took to arrive at that solution. You will be provided with multiple resources
to help your group work effectively to gain individual skills.

Assessment criteria (provided in Supplementary Information) required students to explain their rationale,
including any assumptions and constraints that enabled them to reach a solution to their problem. They
were also required to include an example calculation in their video explanation as well as at least one form
of graphical display of quantitative data (graph, table or chart) to support their rationale. These stated
expectations aimed to deter students from searching on Google for the answers because they had to
explicitly justify their own assumptions and constraints.

Evaluation of the IS-ITs

Design-based research or DBR (Anderson and Shattuck, 2012; Wang and Hannafin, 2005) is a powerful
paradigm that describes the research-informed instructional design of innovative learning environments
and assessment tasks. In applying DBR, instructorsdraw on empirical evidence of theefficacy of pedagogies
and strategies, then adapt or innovate into their own environments and learning contexts, and collect
their own evidence through application of a recognised methodological framework. The characteristics
of DBR are that it is pragmatic, grounded, interactive, iterative, flexible, integrative, and contextual (Wang
and Hannafin, 2005).

The development of the IS-ITs was an example of DBR and required a structured evaluation framework
to formally measure the effectiveness of the learning environments, learning processes and learning
outcomes (Phillipset al., 2012). All data collection and storage procedures during the IS-IT project activities
(2009–2012) were approved by the institutional ethics committee for research involving human subjects
(2009001480) and informed consent for participation was gained from individual students. Quantitative
scales (detailed in Gahan et al., 2011 and provided in Supplementary Information) were applied in the
form of online questionnaires delivered at the beginning (pre-) and after conclusion (post-) of a semester.
Descriptive statistical analyses (independent and paired dependent t-tests) and reliability (Cronbach’s
alpha value) were determined on data filtered for consent and completion. Qualitative data were collected

114|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

both in the form of open response questions in the post-questionnaire and focus group interviews.
The adaptation of IS-ITs into quantitative problem-solving tasks involving new modes of assessment was
informally evaluated — only data relating to assessment outcomes are shared in support of our claims.

Presentation and Discussion of Results

Engagement in solving interdisciplinary inquiry-based challenges: what scenarios worked?

Personal relevance and choice are powerful motivators for engaging students in learning chemistry
particularly those who find it difficult to recognise how chemistry connects to their own lives or studies.
Scientific literacy involves informal reasoning in socioscientific contexts (Sadler, 2004). It was observed
that 70% of the dental science students formed groups in the Chemistry to Get Your Teeth Into scenario
and 57% of the health science students opted into three scenarios that addressed nutrition and health
(A Drop of Life focussed on milk; A Sugar Rush focussed on sugar and Chocoholics Anonymous focussed on
designing healthy chocolate). Otherwise, apart from minor biases (12% of pharmacy and 11% of medicine
students opted into Pharmaceutical Journey and 12% of engineering students opted into Alternative
Energy), clustering of students in scenarios during sign-on was not generally observed to be linked to
their program of study.

In contrast, exploration of the composition of groups within each scenario indicated that students had
often aggregated in a group with peers from the same program and focus group interviews revealed that
group membership was motivated by social factors such as friendship groups or peers in their colleges of
residence (unpublished data).

The question “what scenarios do individual students find interesting to work within?” could be answered
through the data analytics gained from the bespoke task management technology platform which
provided insight into the relative popularity of each of the different scenarios. The sequence of group
formation was recorded chronologically when each was created across the whole suite of scenarios, hence
the groups that formed first had the lowest group number (ID). The most popular scenarios filled up to
the cap of 15 groups first and a plot of the group ID numbers by each scenario enables the visualisation
of the relative scenario popularity (Supplementary Information). The five most popular scenarios were: A
Sugar Rush, Bottom(s)-up! A New Approach to Cancer Treatment, Chocoholics Anonymous, Immunity: Good
vs Evil, and What Are You Drinking. The five least popular scenarios (according to late group ID creation
and the number of groups in total) were: Cleaning up Green, Copper Ore Concentrate Spill, The Limit of
Global Food Production, The Return of the King, and We Are What We Wheat. The less popular scenarios were
typically filled by less engaged students, many of whom were assigned to the groups and scenario by
the instructor since they had not voluntarily opted into the task and other scenarios were full. The impact
of low engagement and instructor intervention in student enrolment in these scenarios was further
reinforced by the lower average marks for reports submitted by students in these five scenarios, the class
average was 83.7± 16.7% (Figure 3).

In 2011–2013, the less popular scenarios were not included as offerings (Table 4) and, due to course
restructures, the course enrolment became smaller with fewer programs involved (medicine, dentistry,
pharmacy and health science students were enrolled in two new service courses in 2012 and 2013). A
Sugar Rush, Chocoholics Anonymous and What Are You Drinking continued to be in the top five scenarios
annually. Environmental and global challenge scenarios typically remained amongst the least popular.
The Walk Like a Eukaryotic Cell task was removed as students found it difficult to identify the underlying
chemistry concepts in this context.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 115

 Figure 3: Average score for the group reports in each scenario for the first implementation of this task in 2010
(Note that each group’s report score was an average based on review by multiple students)

What became very evident during the multiple iterations of this task was that the most popular scenarios
related directly to student’s own lives and thus appeared to have strongest personal relevance whereas
the least popular scenarios were typically global scale issues that involved an intractable problem to solve,
such as feeding a future population or dealing with contamination of natural environments. These least
popular tasks challenged students to reason about complex problems and the combination of different
personalities within groups also required consideration of alternative points of views — the reluctance to
engage in complex cognitive thinking about issues that require effortful thinking is known to be difficult
for adolescents (Anderman et al., 2012).

Collaborative group work and interdependence: was group work useful?

The impact of participating in IS-ITs was evaluated, students were asked to complete an open-ended item
in the post-course questionnaire at the end of semester: “What has been the most useful thing about the
IS-IT task?”. Their written responses were inductively coded into ten themes (Figure 5) with 318 of the 855
respondents (37%) of students citing the experience of collaborative group work as being most useful. 171
(20%) students found working on real world challenges most useful while only 57 students (7%) indicated
that they gained nothing useful from their experience. There is a particularly strong alignment between
several of these student generated themes and four of the intended learning outcomes that formed the
basis of the instructional design (interdisciplinary (real-world) thinking; scientific reasoning; information
literacy and team work) for the IS-ITs (Table 1).

The most highly cited theme indicated that students had recognised the value of working collaboratively
in small groups with their peers, either directly or indirectly, through the process of peer review in relation

116|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

Number of Students
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Collaborative group work

Real world context

Learnt more generally

Miscellaneous

Writing/Research/ICT skills

Chemistry concepts

The IQs

Peer Learning

Course marks

Nothing

Figure 4: Number of students that referenced each theme in response to

the “most useful thing that they had learnt from the IS-ITs” (note: IQ’s are individual quests)

to learning.This is a significant finding since the instructional design had carefully considered the effective
formation of groups based on earlier work where group function had been less successful (Lawrie et al.,
2010). Many students cited reasons that align with what instructors hoped would be affordances of this
high-impact pedagogy (Colbecket al., 2000), the following are representative responses:

The most useful thing about the IS-IT task would have to be the opportunity for students from different
degrees/backgrounds to collaborate and complete an extensive research assignment. The aspect of
teamwork was strongly emphasised by the layout of the IS-IT task, for instance, the necessity to "integrate"
individual IQs, and hence, this task was an effective exercise in teamwork.
Dental Science student

The most useful thing that I have learnt was working together as a team and how to let other people do
things to help because I'm that sort of person where I tend to take over things if they aren't up to where I
want them to be. For this taskI had to take a step back and let the team members work at their own pace.
Biotechnology student

It helped me to understand that to promote effective group work, communication has to be effective and
group members have to be prepared before meeting up to avoid waste of other people's time. Anyway, it
also helped me to understand more in depth of some concepts related to the lectures.
Pharmacy student

Just working in a group, doing a task. It helps you make friends and gives you practice in working in groups,
because sure enough you will be doing it a lot in the workforce
Dual Engineering/Science student

The iCAS task was useful in making me realise that you should pick your group members much more
carefully and don’t trust your friends in pulling their weight
Science student

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 117

Enhanced scientific communication skills: is the assessment mode important?
The transition into using video submissions by groups enabled an element of creativity for some students,
however, the majority of groups submitted a video that comprised a narrated PowerPoint. Peer review
was retained in the adaptation of the IS-ITs because it provides a highly effective mechanism for provision
of formative and summative feedback—particularly because students valued seeing how other students
approached the same problem that they had solved in the original tasks. Peer review also developed
students’critical appraisalskills, of quantitative problem solving—this was evidentin students recognising
what was missing in peer groups’strategies. An example of one student’s peer review feedback is:
While the basic calculations were done it was lacking various aspects to properly answer the meta
question. The whole concept of utilizing a gas stove was disregarded and therefore the question was not
completely answered. … Once again conceptual understanding was not fully addressed. The assumptions
made were also not in enough depth to cater for unknown factors such as reaction completion and this
therefore carried into the calculations and results which makes the depth of understanding questionable.

It was observed that a low report/video score typically represented a case where a group’s solution
contained a major flaw in logic or communication.

Implications and Adaptability of the Tasks

We recommend that instructors pay attention to what students were required to report as their answer:
• It was found for the original IS-IT task written reports that many groups opted to simply glue
their individual IQ information together as separate sections — it is important to explicitly
include integration of this information as the highest level in the assessment criteria.
• In quantitative problem-solving, it is important to tightly define the units for the answer. For
example, the question posed as“what area would be required”elicited answers for the area of
a plantation involving a range of units including acres, hectares, km2 and m2 (Supplementary
Information). In contrast, the question posed as “how many termites” generated a numerical
response which was more easily assessed. Remarkably, despite a range of problem-solving
strategies groups’ solutions were typically within the same order of magnitude with just
under half the groups reaching a value of between 1 × 107 and 9 × 107 (Supplementary
Information).

Questions that arise for your own practice based on each of the key-findings presented in this chapter are:
• It was found that students engaged best with topics related to their immediate lives — can
you introduce an activity or assessment using contextualised open-problem solving that
helps them make these connections?
• 37% of students valued the experience of group work as the most important learning
outcome from the IS-ITs and pre-/post-perceptions showed that overall, doing collaborative
work had little influence on students thinking about group work. Two meta-analyses of
literature to identify the impact of group work on learning in STEM disciplines show that
there is an indirect positive effect on student academic achievement (Springer et al., 1999;
Kalain et al., 2018). Does this encourage you to introduce group work to enable other
positive learning outcomes for your students?
• Students who were late to engage in the task ended up in groups that did not function well
and often achieved the lowest scores reflecting that they were perhaps disengaged overall
— what strategies might work in improving their learning experience?
• The framework supported students in demonstrating skills in effective cooperation and
group work environments — is there anywhere in your course or curriculum that you

118|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

can design your own task by applying the four elements? There is an emerging focus on
developing curricula that embed systems thinking in chemistry education (Matlin et al.,
2016; Mahaffy et al., 2017) where students connect chemistry concepts to their place in
interconnected global contexts through multiple learning experiences — the approach
taken in this chapter has potential to align with systems thinking.

Conclusion

The original blended, collaborative learning initiative described as IS-ITs has been translated to inform
design at three other institutions and has been included as one of 27 international case studies of learning
excellence and innovation by the UK Higher Education Authority (HEA, 2016). The subsequent successful
adaptation of the IS-IT instructional design to incorporate different types of problems and additional
modes of assessment has demonstrated the flexibility of the combined elements in the core framework
(Figure 1).There is strong evidence that if these four elements are retained to foster collaborative, scenario
based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks, instructors can readily scaffold their own version of the tasks
in their own contexts.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Albe, V. (2008), “When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations
intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue”, Research in Science
Eduction, Vol. 38, pp. 67-90.
Anderman, E.M., Sinatra, G.M., and Gray, D.L. (2012), “The challenges of teaching and learning about science in
the twenty-first century: exploring the abilities and constraints of adolescent learners”, Studies in Science
Education, Vol. 48, pp. 89–117.
Anderson, T. and Shattuck, J (2012), “Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research?”,
Educational Researcher, Vol. 41, pp. 16–25.
Biggs, J. (1996), “Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment”, Higher Education, Vol. 32, pp. 347–364.
Colbeck, C.L, Campbell, S.E. and Bjorklund, S.A. (2000), “Grouping in the Dark”, The Journal of Higher Education,
Vol. 71, pp. 60–83.
Eastwood, J.L., Sadler,T.D., Sherwood, R.D., and Schlegel, W.M.(2013),“Students’participationinaninterdisciplinary,
socioscientific issues based undergraduate human biology major and their understanding of scientific
inquiry”, Research in Science Education, Vol.43, pp. 1051–78.
Gahan, L., Lawrie, G., Matthews, K., Adams, P., Long, P., Kavanagh, L. and Weaver, G. (2011), IS-IT Learning? Online
interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry tasks for active learning in large, first year STEM courses. Final report
Australian Learning and Teaching Council, Australia.
Goodyear, P., Jones, C., and Thompson, K. (2014), “Computer-supported collaborative learning: Instructional
approaches, group processes and educational designs.” in Handbook of research on educational
communications and technology, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 439–451.
HEA (2016), “Learning Excellence: A summary analysis of 26 international case studies. Higher Education Academy
commissioned report”, available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/learning_excellence_
summary_v2.pdf (accessed 23 Oct 2018).
Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2004), Problem-based learning: How and what do students learn?”, Educational Psychology

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 119

 Review, Vol. 16, pp. 235–66.
Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Ortiz, A.E., and Stanne, M. (1991), “The impact of positive goal and resource
interdependence on achievement, interaction and attitudes”, Journal of General Psychology, Vol. 118, pp.
341–7.
Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. (2009), “An educational psychology success story: social interdependence
theory and cooperative Learning”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 38, pp. 365–79.
Johnstone, A. H. (1993), “Introduction”, in Wood, C. and Sleet, R. (Eds), Creative Problem Solving in Chemistry, The
Royal Society of Chemistry, London.
Kalain, S.A., Kasim, R.M., and Nims, J.A. (2018), “Effectiveness of Small-Group Learning Pedagogies in Engineering
and Technology Education: A Meta-Analysis”, Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 29, pp. 20–35.
Lawrie, G. (2015), “Video Blogs: A vehicle to support student-generated representations and explanations in
chemistry”, in Student generated digital media in science education: learning, explaining and communicating
content. Hoban, G., Nielsen, W., and Shepherd, A., (Eds) Routledge, New York, pp. 95–107.
Lawrie, G. A., Matthews, K. E., and Gahan, L. R. (2010), “Forming groups to foster collaborative learning in
large enrolment courses”, in 16th UniServe Science Conference: Creating ACTIVE minds in our Science and
Mathematics students, Sydney, Australia: Sydney University, pp. 66–71, available at: http://ojsprod.library.
usyd.edu.au/index.php/IISME/article/view/4672/5472 (accessed 3 October 2018).
Lawrie, G., Gahan, L., Matthews, K., Adams, P., Kavanagh, L., Long, P., Weaver, G. and Cusack, R. (2011), Handbook
of scenario resources for inquiry learning in STEM: IS-IT Learning? Online interdisciplinary scenario-inquiry
tasks for active learning in large first year STEM courses. Surry Hills, Sydney, NSW, Australia: Australian
Learning
Handbook_2011.pdf/(accessed
and Teaching Council10(ALTC),
Februaryavailable
2019). at: https://ltr.edu.au/resources/CG9_1112_Gahan_

Lawrie, G., Gahan, L.R., Matthews, K.E., Weaver, G., Bailey, C., Adams, P., Kavanagh, L., Long, P., and Taylor, M.
(2014), “Technology supported facilitation and assessment of small group collaborative learning in large
1st year classes: IS-IT Learning?”, Journal of Learning Design, Vol. 7, pp. 120–135.
Mahaffy, P.G., Holme, T.A.; Martin-Visscher, L., Martin, B.E., Versprille, A., Kirchhoff, M., McKenzie, L., and Towns, M.
(2017), “Beyond “Inert”Ideas to Teaching General Chemistry from Rich Contexts: Visualizing the Chemistry
of Climate Change (VC3)”. Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94, pp. 1027–1035.
Matlin, S. A., Mehta, G., Hopf, H., and Krief, A. (2016), “One-world chemistry and systems thinking”, Nature
Chemistry, Vol. 8, pp. 393–8.
Nicol, D., Thomson, A., and Breslin, C. (2014), “Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review
perspective”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol.39, pp. 102–122.
Overton, T. and Potter, N. (2008), “Solving open-ended problems, and the influence of cognitive factors on
student success”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 9, pp. 65–9.
Overton, T. and Potter, N. (2011), “Investigating students’ success in solving and attitudes towards context-rich
open-ended problems in chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 294–302.
Overton, T., Potter, N., and Leng, C. (2013), “A study of approaches to solving open-ended problems in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14, pp. 468–75.
Overton, T.L., and Randles, C.A. (2015), “Beyond problem-based learning: using dynamic PBL in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 251–9.
Phillips, R., McNaught, C., and Kennedy, G. (2012), Evaluating e-learning: Guiding research and Practice, New York,
Routledge.
Phipps, M., Phipps, C., Kask, S. and Higgins, S. (2001), “University students’ perceptions of cooperative learning:
Implications for administrators and instructors”, Journal of Experiential Education, Vol. 24, pp. 14–21.
Pyke, S., O'Brien, G., Yates, B., and Buntine, M. (2014), Chemistry Academic Standards Statement – revised, available
at: http://chemnet.edu.au/sites/default/files/u39/CHEMISTRY_Academic_Standards_Accreditation_Trial.
pdf (accessed 23 October 2018).

Randles, C.A., and Overton, T.L. (2015), “Expert vs. novice: approaches used by chemists when solving open

120 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Collaborative, scenario-based, open-ended, problem-solving tasks in chemistry

ended problems”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 811–23.
Randles, C., Overton, T., Galloway, R., and Wallace, M. (2018), “How do approaches to solving open-ended
problems vary within the science disciplines?”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 40, pp.
1367–90.
Reid, N., and Yang, M.-J. (2010), “The Solving of Problems in Chemistry:The more open ended problems”, Research
in Science & Technological Education, Vol. 20, pp. 83–98.
Sadler, T.D. (2004), “Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research”, Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 41, pp. 513–36.
Sadler, T.D. (2009), “Situated learning in science education: socio‐scientific issues as contexts for practice”, Studies
in Science Education, Vol. 45, pp. 1-42.
Smith, K.A., Sheppard, S.D., Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. (2005), “Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom
based practices”, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 94, pp. 87–101.
Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., and Donovan, S.S. (1999), “Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in
science, mathematics, engineering and technology: A meta-analysis”, Review of Educational Research, Vol.
69, pp. 21–51.
Topping, K. (1998), “Peer Assessment between Students in Colleges and Universities”, Review of Educational
Research, Vol. 68, pp. 249–276.
Wang, F. and Hannafin, M.J. (2005), “Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments”,
Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 54, pp. 5–23.
Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998), Understanding by Design, Merrill Education/ASCD College Textbook Series,
Alexandria, Virginia.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., and Callahan, B. E. (2009), “Advancing reflective judgment through
socioscientific issues”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 46, pp. 74–101.
Zusho, A., Pintrich, P.R. and Coppola, B. (2003), “Skill and will: the role of motivation and cognition in the learning
of college chemistry”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 25, pp.1081–1094.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 121

122|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 9 Context- and problem-based learning
in chemistry in higher education

Dylan P. Williams
Department of Chemistry, University of Leicester
dpw10@leicester.ac.uk

This chapter will provide an overview of the introduction of context- and problem
based learning (C/PBL) approaches in chemistry teaching in the UK and Ireland. This will
be illustrated using examples from the University of Leicester’s introduction of these
approaches in the early stages of the chemistry degree programmes at Leicester. The impact
of this initial implementation was measured through student interviews and comparison of
student performance with previous years. Later implementations used problems designed
by multidisciplinary author teams based at Leicester. The impact of these implementations
on student perceptions of skills development was measured inspired by the work of Overton
and Hanson.

The introduction ofC/PBLat Leicester helped improve students’awareness of the importance

of transferable skills development without negatively influencing performance in chemistry
assignments. Ongoing research and evaluation has shown that, as part of an employability
strategy, C/PBL activities have contributed to high employability levels of Leicester
chemistry graduates and have contributed to improvements in student perceptions of skills
development. This work has created a suite of C/PBL resources which are freely accessible
via the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Learn Chemistry platform. The insight provided by this
work has also helped academics at other institutions adapt these resources to suit their own
local contexts. Guidance is provided in this chapter on how this can be achieved.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tina was instrumental in introducing C/PBL approaches in the UK and Ireland. Some of Tina’s
published resources (such as A Dip in the Dribble and The Pale Horse) are amongst the first
chemistry-based C/PBL published outside of North America. Tina was instrumental in the
introduction of the approach at other institutions and went on to explore how the approach
could be further developed (for example by researching Dynamic PBL approaches and
Internationalisation in C/PBL).

To cite:Williams, D. P. (2019), “Context- and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 123-136.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 123

Introduction

Development of key workplace skills in chemistry undergraduates

Research in the early years of the 21st century revealed the existence of a disconnection between the
skills that chemistry graduates were leaving university with and those that were most commonly required
by chemistry graduates in their professional roles (Overton and Hanson, 2010). Graduates and graduate
employers reported the underdevelopment of a number of key workplace skills including communication
skills (written and oral), organisational skills, the ability to solve open ended problems and the ability to
work effectively as part of a heterogeneous team with different skills sets and experiences (Overton and
Hanson, 2010). At the same time, there were calls to develop new teaching and learning approaches that
would allow the development of constructivist learning experiences for undergraduate chemists (Eilks
and Byers, 2010). Constructivism is a learning theory that stresses the active nature of learning processes.
Learners are said to construct knowledge by making meaning of new ideas in the context of their previous
understanding or experience (Bodner, 1986).

In order to address these demands, a variety of different educational approaches were developed
including innovative open-ended approaches to practical work (Graham et al., 2008, Ram, 1999), team
based learning (TBL) (Evans et al., 2016) and problem and context based learning (C/PBL) approaches
(LaForce et al., 2017, Overton, 2007).

Context- and problem-based learning

Context-based learning (CBL) approaches to learning chemistry are based on the reversal of conventional
approaches to learning the subject; that is, starting with submicroscopic and representational domains
(Chittleborough and Treagust, 2007, Gilbert and Treagust, 2009, Taber, 2013). Instead they start with an
engaging context to drive the student learning experience (Overton, 2007). Problem-based learning (PBL)
is a closely related approach which presents CBL-style contexts in the form of open-ended, ill-defined
problems (Overton, 2007). Students typically work on these problems in small teams and the assessment
of these types of problems can take a diverse range of forms (Raine and Symons, 2005). Due to the parallels
between these two approaches, they are often discussed together. For the rest of this chapter, the term
context- and problem-based learning (C/PBL) will be used to describe learning and teaching approaches
that can be classified by either of these definitions.

The first reported use of C/PBL in higher education occurred in medicine teaching in Canada and the
United States in the 1960s (Wood, 2003, Woods, 2000). The approach was particularly well suited to
medicine due to the vocational nature of this degree programme (Wood, 2003). The implementation of
the approach in other discipline areas slowly gained momentum in the later stages of the 20th century,
such as in engineering education (Bédard et al., 2012). The C/PBL approach can facilitate the integration
of workplace skills development in the curricula of university level degree programmes (Carvalho, 2016,
Williams and Lo Fan Hin, 2017). As a consequence of this broad applicability, the approach has recently
been exploited in degree programmes in a range of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics) disciplines (LaForce et al., 2017).

Context- and problem-based learning with chemistry undergraduates

The use of C/PBL approaches in the teaching of undergraduate chemistry had already been reported
in North America by the start of the 21st century (Dods, 1996, Ram, 1999). C/PBL approaches tend be
student centred (Maurer and Neuhold, 2012) with an emphasis on the process of arriving at a solution to
an open-ended problem which is often based on a scenario of relevance to professionals in the specific

124|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

discipline area (Raine and Symons, 2005). The adoption of C/PBL approaches in chemistry has facilitated
the integration of team activities in chemistry curricula (most implementations involve students working
in small teams of between 4–6 members). Previous research had also shown that adoption of these
approaches can enhance student engagement in their subject area (Belt, 2009, Blumenfeld et al., 1991,
Bredderman, 1983).

The assessment of these activities is typically aligned with the professional expectations of graduates in
the discipline area. The C/PBL approach can be a particularly effective way to embed the development of
communication and organisation skills as well as professional values in the core chemistry curriculum and
to give students the opportunity to gain experience of working in heterogeneous teams in a chemically
relevant context. Student learning in C/PBL sessions is typically facilitated in a way that supports their
development and gives them the confidence to develop their own innovative solutions to problems
(Raine and Symons, 2005).

The earliest documented implementations of the C/PBL approach in chemistry teaching in the UK and
Ireland occurred in the early 21st century (Belt et al., 2002, Kelly and Finlayson, 2007, Summerfield et al.,
2003). A Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) funded initiative resulted in the development of a series of open
ended case-studies based on themes including industrial chemistry (The Titan Project), environmental
chemistry (A Dip in the Dribble), the role of chemistry in sports science and forensic science (The Pale
Horse) (Overton, 2007). These resources remain freely available on the RSC’s Learn Chemistry platform
(Royal Society of Chemistry, 2018). By using engaging contexts focused on these professionally relevant
contexts, these early problems succeeded in supporting student learning by giving them an opportunity
to think carefully about how the subject applies in areas of relevance to society (Overton, 2007). The open
publication of the resources developed in this early stage of implementation catalysed an increase in
interest in the approach, which ultimately resulted in further RSC funded initiatives to develop a library
of C/PBL resources that could be used by practitioners throughout the sector. The success of these early
implementations of C/PBL in chemistry teaching in the UK has led to a number of innovative adoptions of
the approaches.These include the development of dynamicapproaches to PBL which allow a team’s route
through a PBL problem to be defined by decisions made at various stages of the problem solving process
(Overton and Randles, 2015).

Initial implementations of C/PBL at Leicester

The first implementations of C/PBL approaches in physical science teaching at Leicester were focused
on the degree programmes offered by the Department of Physics and Astronomy (Raine and Symons,
2005). After initial success in the physics degree programmes, a new interdisciplinary science degree
programme, iScience, was established which adopted a research-led teaching philosophy. This research
led approach was facilitated by a series of modules based on C/PBL approaches.These modules were truly
interdisciplinary in nature (the problems required students to think carefully about the overlaps between
the different core science subjects and to apply these ideas to authentic research questions) (Raine and
Symons, 2005). Much of this early work on the physics and iScience degree programmes inspired the later
implementation of C/PBL approaches in chemistry at Leicester.

Methods
Setting for the C/PBL development and implementation
C/PBL resources have been used throughout the undergraduate chemistry degree programmes at the
University of Leicester. The chemistry degree programmes typically recruit up to 120 students per year.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 125

The entry requirements for the chemistry degree programme at Leicester means that it can be assumed
that students join the programmes with a good entry level understanding of the subject (by having a good
A Level grade in the subject or a suitable equivalent). Some C/PBL resources have been developed for use
with the entire cohort whereas other, more specialised, resources may only be used for students enrolled
on particular modules (for example students on our Pharmaceutical Chemistry degree programme have a
number of custom modules which are not taken by chemists studying our other degree programmes). A
summary of C/PBL resources developed for chemistry students at Leicester is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: C/PBL resources developed for chemistry students at Leicester

Chemistry of Energy Chemistry and Food Chemistry’s Frontiers Learn on the Move
Security
Nature of problem
the nation
number
aStudents
strategy
nation for
technologies
specific
sustainable
development
by energy
and the
on of
ofanew
work
requirements EUof the
considering
small and
interns
Studentsatare
laboratory an
adulteration
scenario
drink of food in
investigating
analytical
placed
summer in
the
Students
three
designed
nature
chemical toproblems
short
of work
geochemistry onand
nanotechnology,
interdisciplinary
biology
research
highlight Students must enter a
university competition
to produce and
evaluate a learning
resource for students
in the opening stages
of their degree
programme

Level
Year 2 Year 1–2 Year 1–2 Year 1 (induction)
Disciplinary areas
magnetic
Nuclear interface
Organic
Physical
Engineering
physics chemistry
chemistry
materials)
chemistry-
(e.g. Analytical
Organic
Polymer
interface
Chemistry-biochemistry
chemistry
chemistry
chemistry with physics
andinterfaces
(nanotechnology),
Chemistry’s
geology biology Students choose their
specific area of focus
but the chosen area
must align with a topic
from a Year 1 General
Chemistry module
Deliverables
Press
Writing
Developing
calculating
CO2 release
conference
research
estimated
a model
paper Plans
Formalofreports
for pitch
Building
investigations
Delivering
laboratory
a website/wiki
a business plans
Radio interview
Museum
Experimental
guide Submission of
developed learning
resource
Written report
describing design and
output of new evaluation processes as
power generating well as key findings
approaches
Running a C/PBL induction
Research has stressed the importance of providing students with a suitable introduction to C/PBL at the
start of a course (Jansson et al., 2015). An induction activity called Learn on the Move is used to introduce all
new chemistry students at Leicester to the C/PBL approach as well as to the other members of the teams
they will work with on other activities (Williams, 2017). This activity takes the form of a design competition
which requires teams to design, develop, and evaluate a small educational resource that could be used
by first year students in the opening semester of a chemistry degree programme (Williams, 2017). The

126|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

discussion trigger questions that teams were asked to consider were designed to encourage students to
think carefully about the different types of learning experiences they had previously encountered and to
think about what had been particularly effective for them and why. Teams had to think carefully about
how to produce a resource that met the learning needs of a diverse target audience and the limitations
imposed on them by the nature of the activity. Teams were told that the resource had to be portable
enough to be used on the bus commute from the halls of residence to the central campus and had to
allow users to have a meaningful learning experience on the timescale of the 20 minute journey.

Example of how to implement C/PBL: The Reality of Nutrition

The implementation of C/PBL approaches will be discussed in the context of an example activity The
Reality of Nutrition. The following section will include a suggested time plan for this activity along with
discussion of the practical steps that need to be taken to prepare, run, and assess the activity. The full
activity (including a detailed tutor guide) has been published as an open educational resource as part of
the RSC’s Learn Chemistry platform (Royal Society of Chemistry, 2018).

Context of The Reality of Nutrition

The Reality of Nutrition is a 20-hour long student activity which involves up to 3.5 hours of contact time
and up to 17 hours of group work. The Reality of Nutrition was designed to address inaccurate and negative
portrayals of chemical biology in the popular media. The activity was designed to provide Year 1 or 2
chemistry students (with a limited experience of biology) with learning experiences at the frontier of the
chemical and biological sciences. The activity is based around problems that require students to critically
evaluate the presentation of scientific topics in the media.

The scenario
The activity is divided into two related sections. The first section requires students to proof-read a guest
editorial in a nutrition and health journal published by a learned society. The guest editorial is written
by a nutritionist who has achieved fame as television presenter. The editorial has been seeded with a
number of factual inaccuracies and questionable statements. The students must engage with the peer
review process and decide how to communicate the decision back to the guest editor. The next step of
the activity depends on the peer-review decision that the students make: the chief editor will require that
students write a two page article about the structure and function of proteins for the next issue if they
choose to publish the guest editorial in its current form. If the students choose to correct the editorial they
will need to provide the guest editor’s legal team with a full justification for the changes. If the students
decide that the guest editorial does not meet the standards of the journal, they will need to write a full
explanation of why this is the case to the chief editor.

The second section of the problem is based on a radio interview given by the same media nutritionist
involved in the previous section. The radio station was concerned about the accuracy of some of the
statements made in the interview so it has invited representatives of the learned society to appear in the
next episode of the programme to respond to questions from listeners. This assessment takes the form of
a role-play where students participate in a radio interview. A suggested time plan for running the activity
is shown in Table 2.

Preparation for the activity

Table 3 presents an overview of the tutor preparation required in advance of running the activity. The first
stage is to ensure that all programme and module documentation is updated to reflect the new teaching
and learning methods, the new assessment approaches and any new intended learning outcomes. This
may need to be done a long time in advance of the start of the activity (the precise timing will be defined

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 127

 Table 2: Suggested time plan for The Reality of Nutrition

Topics Transferable Skills Assessment Feedback

Week 1
(60–90 minutes)
Proteins Team working A letter of response to the In session:
Enzymes Group discussion editor giving details of the For students who publish
Enzyme Kinetics Independent learning decision made regarding the the editorial including some
Critical thinking publication of the editorial. or all of the errors — a copy
Decision making of the email from the chief
Written A two-page magazine article editor which includes the
communication for publication in a magazine complaint from the reader
read by biochemists at complaint.
a range of levels: from For students who correct
interested A Level students Dr Sally’s editorial — a copy
to practicing chemistry, of the email from Dr Sally’s
biology and biochemistry legal team.
researchers. This response
should include an analysis of Before next session:
the kinetic data provided. Receive brief written
formative feedback on
article prior to the next
session.
Week 2 (1)
(60–90 minutes)
Nucleic acids Group discussion To take place in next session. In session:
and DNA Independent learning Students should use part Provide verbal feedback
Fatty acids Planning of this session to prepare on the students’ group
and lipids Oral communication material for the radio debate/practise interview.
Polysaccharides Time management interview (either in the Encourage the students to
and form of a podcast or a live answer questions which
carbohydrates interview
audience ofgiven in front of an
peers. allow the students to correct
statements made by the
interviewer.
Week 2 (2)
(20–30 minutes)
Nucleic acids Team working A mock radio interview to Students receive formal
and DNA Oral communication respond to the information feedback on the podcast/
Fatty acids Time management provided by Dr Sally in the interview.
and lipids previous programme (either
Polysaccharides in the form of a podcast or a
and live interview given in front
carbohydrates of an audience of peers).

128 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

Table 3: An overview of the key steps that need to be taken before running a C/PBL activity

Activity Timescale Details

and
Update
documentation
module
programme Timescale
local institution
defined by Ensure that the learning and assessment activities
are accurately described in module and programme
documentation and intended learning outcomes are
updated to align with the new activities.
Arranging suitable Timescale defined by Flat learning spaces are required that can be
slots and
learning spaces
timetable local institution configured in a cabaret format to allow students to
work in teams of 5–6. Ensure that times and locations
of sessions are clearly communicated to students.
Train facilitator
teams Within
start ofathe
month
activity
of the Provide facilitators with an overview of the aim of the
learning experience and a definition of the format. Run
an example C/PBL experience. Ask facilitators to reflect
on the experience and contrast this with their other
learning experiences. Provide feedback to facilitators.
Createon
space
upload
documentation VLE and In
aalldedicated
the
relevant need to be
sessions
throughout
advance of C/PBL
— updated
this
the will Typically, documentation is released on a session-by
session basis so setting up timed release of relevant
documentation is helpful.

activity

by your institution’s regulations). Once these changes have been approved by the institution and the
relevant documentation has been updated, suitable flat learning spaces need to be booked and the
details need to be embedded in the timetable and publicised to students. We have found that flat learning
spaces that can be configured in a cabaret format to allow students to workin teams of 5–6 works well. We
give careful consideration to how many teams can effectively work in a learning space. This may require
some experimentation but the primary aim is to ensure that noise levels are sufficiently low that teams
can effectively discuss their solution to the problem.

In order to prepare staff and postgraduates for C/PBL facilitation, a training programme was developed
that emphasised the differences between C/PBL facilitation and other forms of teaching (such as
knowing when not to intervene in student planning and discussion). This was achieved by developing
an introduction to the teaching approach delivered by a member of academic staff experienced in the
approaches. This was followed by a hands-on activity whereby trainee facilitators were assembled into a
C/PBL team and asked to work through an unseen problem of the type used in the course (wetypically use
a part of a problem published on the Learn Chemistry platform). The trainees were then asked to reflect
on the experience and to consider how best to apply this experience in supporting student learning. This
reflection process was supported by a discussion with experienced facilitators who provided feedback
to the trainees. In the period leading up to the start of the activity (typically one to two weeks before the
start), student documentation is made available on the virtual learning environment (VLE).

Running C/PBL sessions

The Reality of Nutrition includes two contact sessions (60–90 minutes) for teams to plan and discuss the
problem solving process in small teams. A suggested structure for a 60 minute session used to open a C/
PBL activity is shown in Table 4.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 129

 Table 4: Suggested structure for a 60 minute session to open a C/PBL activity

Timings Activity
0–10 minutes Welcome students to the session and make a brief introduction if needed
10–15 minutes Time for students to read problem and write individual summaries
15–25 minutes Sharing individual summaries and agreeing on an overall group summary (fill
in S on SET sheet)
25–50 minutes Group discussion of problem — encourage groups to discuss what format and
topic they want to focus on (fill in E and Ton SET sheet)
50–60 minutes Group reflection — what progress has been made and what remains to be
done?

The contact sessions should take place a week apart inflatteaching spaces. Each of these contact sessions
are facilitated by members of staff or trained postgraduates. We have found it most effective to allocate
no more than two groups per facilitator. In order to support teamwork between the contact sessions,
students are provided with a VLE link to the study-room booking system that allows them to book
additional meeting sessions on an ad hoc basis.

In order to support students learning through these C/PBL activities, a structured problem solving
approach was developed that scaffolds the learning process in a way that allows students to retain control
over the creative aspects of the process. Students were provided with a number of trigger questions to
prompt and focus team discussion (see Supplementary Information for a full example of a short C/PBL
activity). These questions were often intentionally open-ended in order to avoid leading students to one
particular end-point. In addition to this, students were asked to record notes from each group meeting
using a simple three section form (Figure 1) inspired by the Maastricht Seven-Step strategy (Maurer and
Neuhold, 2012). Teams start the process by writing an agreed group summary of the problem/activity
(S section). Teams then document their existing knowledge and skills (E section) related to the problem
(thus, requiring them to audit the collective knowledge and skills set at the start of each activity) and to
list the tasks that need to be completed in order to be able to produce a response to the problem/activity
statement (T section). This latter part of the form acts as a de facto action list.

The third contact session for this problem was dedicated to the assessment of the second section (radio

Figure 1: The three section for used to help students record their problem solving approach (Williams, 2015)

130|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

interview) of the activity. This time could be used to allow students to record the interview or to act the
interview out in front of an audience.

Assessment of the activity

The assessments for all Leicester C/PBL activities are authentically aligned with the problem scenario. The
assessment of The Reality of Nutrition was designed to support the development of subject-specific skills
and knowledge alongside key workplace skills and experiences such as teamworking, communication
skills and time management skills. A broader aim of this activity is to help raise students’ awareness of the
issues that scientists face when communicating scientific topics to a range of audience types including
the media and the general public.

Marking criteria for C/PBL problems have to be flexible enough to accommodate the diverse range of
submissions that students will submit. PBL activities are typically marked separately for scientific content
and presentation due to the different skill sets being assessed. As example set of marking criteria for a Year
1 activity is shown in Supplementary Information. The marking criteria for all C/PBL activities are made
available to students at the start of the activity.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Evaluation methods
During the initial implementation phase at Leicester, the impact of the C/PBL activities on engagement
with other elements of the course was evaluated by comparing student performance in a number of
midterm tests and laboratory assessments with performance in the two preceding academic years. This
was supplemented by student and instructor interviews and questionnaires on the impact of the C/PBL
experience on skills development. It was found that student performance in these activities during the
first two years of C/PBL at Leicester was entirely within the expectations of the course convenors based on
performance in previous years (Williams et al., 2010). In addition to this, the effectiveness of the approach
in supporting student social integration into higher education were evident; for example, there was a
positive impact on retention in the early stages of the programme (Williams et al., 2010).

Measuring the impact of C/PBL on perceived skills development

As described in the introduction, one of the primary motivations of embedding C/PBL approaches in
the chemistry degree programmes at Leicester was to enhance the workplace skills development
of undergraduate students in a subject-relevant context. At the end of the year one C/PBL module in
the 2014/15 and 2015/16 academic years, students were asked to rate their confidence in a number of
different skills and activities (Williams and Handa, 2016) based on their experiences in the C/PBL module.
A five point Likert scale was used and the Very Confident and Confident responses were combined to allow
a confidence level to be reported for each of the skills or activities (Table 5).

Table 3: Student confidence levels (expressed as percentages) after completion of year one C/PBL modules in 2014/15 and
2015/16 academic years (n = 114). Students were asked to rate their confidence in these areas based on their experience of
C/PBL (Williams and Handa, 2016)

Communication
Oral Communication
Written Teamwork solving
Problem Scientific
method Record
keeping
77.3% 92.4% 95.8% 89.9% 68.1% 77.3%

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |131

Students were also invited to respond to free-text response questions asking them to list the three skills
that they felt were developed most by doing C/PBL. Students were also asked to describe their own
personal development during this module. The most common responses to these question on skills
development were in agreement with the responses to the Likert-scale question shown above (problem
solving skills, time management skills, working in teams and oral communication skills were the four most
common responses). The descriptions of personal development revealed that students appreciated the
opportunity to develop the skills described above, reflected in statements like“PBL is a great way to bond
with people.”(Year 1 student, 2015/16) and to develop their independent learning skills:
I learnt to never give up when a hard question comes up but to research and ask others for help. I thought it
was a great way of learning and finding scientific information out for ourselves.
Year 1 student, 2014/15

C/PBL also gave students an opportunity to apply and communicate scientific concepts learnt in lectures:
Ifeel like the group work was helpful inreinforcing the key ideas of the science learnt in CH1000(Introductory
Inorganic and Physical Chemistry module) and presenting them in a more interesting and relevant way.
Year 1 student, 2014/15

Some student comments highlighted the perceived limitations of the groups which included comments
on group size and peer contributions:
I think the groups should be smaller as it was difficult to include everyone and some people ended up doing
more work than others.
Year 1 student, 2014/15

It was also clear that some students expected C/PBL activities to be aligned entirely to material covered in
lectures running at the same time:
I think it would be better if only the things that are covered in the lectures are included in PBL.
Year 1 student, 2015/16

Some students appreciated the fact that the C/PBL helped to develop their understanding of the subject
beyond the scope of the core lecture module:
I liked the fact that some of the problems required you to know certain topics that hadn't yet been covered.
Year 1 student, 2015/16

Evaluation of C/PBL induction activity

The student response to the use of a C/PBL induction activity was extremely positive. Students were very
engaged with the process of developing learning resources:
Creating something that we can use ourselves that compliments [sic.] the course was a very useful
experience.
Year 1 student, 2016/17

Many of the teams planned their evaluations very carefully in order to generate meaningful data from
their pilot groups (one group compared responses to their draft resource from students at university and
a local school). Teams prepared questionnaires and/or interview questions to facilitate data collection
and to ensure that all pilot participants provided a comparable set of responses. This activity helped to
welcome students to the learning community as the final resources were showcased to other students and
there were opportunities for students to feedback on each other’s work. A Dragon’s Den style pitch was
integrated into the activity in 2018 to formalise this process. A wide range of different types of resources
was submitted for this activity including card games, apps, booklets, and videos.The coverage of topics in
these resources spanned the range of topics covered in a typical Year 1 general chemistry module.

132 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

Students were asked about their experience of this induction activity using a questionnaire based on
Likert-type responses indicating level of agreement with a series of statements and a small number of
open-ended questions. Over 75% of respondents (n = 168) in the 2016/17 and 2017/18 academic years
agreed that the problem gave them an opportunity to meet new friends, discuss scientific topics with
their peers, reinforce their existing subject knowledge, and work on developing a project plan (Williams,
2018). Interestingly, less than 50% of respondents agreed that this activity gave them an opportunity
to discuss science with a facilitator. This may reflect the fact that the students were confident that they
understood enough chemistry to be able to develop a suitable resource without needing to engage with
the facilitator about the topics. This may be a reflection of that fact that one of the entry requirements for
the chemistry degree programmes at Leicester is a good performance in A Level chemistry or equivalent.
Responsesto Likert-type and openendedquestionsboth demonstrated that studentsfelt the development
of teamwork skills was the single most useful aspect of this problem (Williams, 2018). This was a positive
result for the module team as all subsequent C/PBL based activities in the chemistry degree programme
at Leicester are based on teamwork so preparing students for this at a very early stage of their education
had obvious advantages. Students also fed back that they felt the problem didn’t provide much scope for
developing their understanding of new scientific topics (the module team agreed with this as the activity
was intentionally designed not to do this) and that there may have been some issues with the timescale of
the problem (too much to do in too short a period of time). In response to this feedback, future iterations
of the activity incorporated statements to clarify the nature of the problem to help students form realistic
expectations of what they would get out of the activity.The problem timescale was also revised to include
an optional drop-in help session and the deadline was extended (and moved to a week where there were
no other deadlines).

Facilitator reflection on this activity has been very positive and the activity has provided new opportunities
for cross-year collaboration. As an example of the last point, a card game based on naming organic
molecules developed by Year 1 students in previous years has subsequently been further developed and
refined by Year 3 students who have researched the effectiveness of these resources in undergraduate
teaching.

Implications and Adaptability: Your Context

Many of the C/PBL resources developed for the chemistry degree programmes at the University of
Leicester have been subsequently used in other higher education institutions. Based on discussions with
academics at these institutions and my own reflections, a number of recommendations are listed below
for someone implementing a C/PBL activity for the first time:
• Think carefully about how C/PBL can work within the context of your programme. What
topic areas are most suitable for these approaches to learning? Can existing resources be
used or do new resources have to be developed (and, if so, who needs to be involved?). At
Leicester, we have found making use of an interdisciplinary team of academic and industrial
co-authors to be a highly productive approach.
• Do all necessary preparation in advance of the start of the activity (Table 2). It is helpful to
run training sessions for colleagues and/or postgraduate facilitators.
• It can be helpful to run an induction activity before making full use of C/PBL. This allows
students to familiarise themselves with the specific characteristics of this approach to
learning.
• Consider what additional student development opportunities are offered by the adoption
of these approaches. At Leicester, this approach has helped to enhance the development of

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 133

 workplace skills by chemistry students.
• Think carefully about scheduling and allocation of facilitators to sessions. C/PBL approaches
can be very labour intensive if careful consideration isn’t given to how best to facilitate
sessions.
• Evaluate your implementation of C/PBL. It may be appropriate to ask a third party to help
convene discussions with participants about their experience. An adapted version of the
questionnaire used by Overton and Hanson (2010) could be used to measure student
perceptions of skills development.

Conclusions

The Leicester experience has shown that C/PBL approaches can be effectively integrated into
undergraduate chemistry teaching in a way that facilitates student skills development and helps develop
student engagement with the subject. Concerns over the efficiency of the approach were overcome
through careful planning of the amount of contact time required to support student progress and by
making use of trained postgraduates to support the facilitation process. C/PBL approaches have been
used at Leicester in a number of very different contexts since the initial implementations but the use of a
common problem solving strategy has helped to provide continuity between different C/PBL activities and
to support the learning and development journey of students through the programme. In recent years, a
number of skills focused C/PBL activities have been introduced in Year 1 of the programme. Some of these
C/PBL activities were designed to be implemented widely and are available on the RSC’s Learn Chemistry
website. These activities have created new opportunities to support student creativity at the early stages
of their degree programme and to facilitate student involvement in student-staff partnerships. These
approaches have also helped to introduce students to collaborative working practices and independent
learning within a scaffolded framework.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Bédard, D., Lison, C., Dalle, D., Côté, D. and Boutin, N. (2012), “Problem-based and Project-based Learning in
Engineering and Medicine: Determinants of Students’ Engagement and Persistance”, Interdisciplinary
Journal of Problem-Based Learning, Vol.6, pp. 7-30.
Belt, S.T., Evans, E. H., McCreedy, T., Overton, T. L. and Summerfield, S. (2002), “A problem based learning approach
to analytical and applied chemistry”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 65-72.
Belt, S.T. (2009), “Impacts of assignment in problem-based learning: A case study from chemistry”, New Directions
in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 16-21.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E. Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M. and Palincsar, A. (1991), “Motivating Project
Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 26 No. 3-4,
pp. 369-398.
Bodner, G. M., (1986), “Constructivism: A Theory of Knowledge”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 63 No. 10, pp.
873-878.
Bredderman, T. (1983), “Effects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative
Synthesis”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 499-518.
Carvalho, A. (2016),“The impact of PBL on transferable skills development in management education”, Innovations

134|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Context-and problem-based learning in chemistry in higher education

in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 35-47.

Chittleborough, G. and Treagust, D. F. (2007), “The modelling ability of non-major chemistry students and their
understanding of the sub-microscopic level” Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp.
274-292.
Dods, R. F. (1996), “A Problem-Based Learning Design for Teaching Biochemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 73 No. 3, pp. 225.
Eilks, I. and Byers, B. (2010), “The need for innovative methods of teaching and learning chemistry in higher
education – reflections from a project of the European Chemistry Thematic Network”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 233-240.
Evans, H. G., Heyl, D. L. and Liggit, P. (2016), “Team-Based Learning, Faculty Research, and Grant Writing Bring
Significant Learning Experiences to an Undergraduate Biochemistry Laboratory Course” Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 1027-1033.
Gilbert, J. K. and Treagust, D. F. (2009), “Introduction: Macro, Submicro and Symbolic Representations and the
Relationship Between Them: Key Models in Chemical Education”, in Gilbert, J. K. and Treagust D. F. (Eds.)
Multiple Representations in Chemical Education, Springer Netherlands, pp. 1-8.
Graham, K. J., Johnson, B. J., Jones, T. N., McIntee, E. J. and Schaller, C. P. (2008), “Designing and Conducting a
Purification Scheme as an Organic Chemistry Laboratory Practical”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 85
No. 12, pp. 1644.
Jansson, S., Söderström, H., Andersson, P. L. and Nording, M. L. (2015), “Implementation of Problem-Based
Learning in Environmental Chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 12, pp. 2080-2086.
Kelly, O.C. and Finlayson, O.E. (2007),“Providing solutions through problem-based learning for the undergraduate
1st year chemistry laboratory”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 347-361.
LaForce, M., Noble, E. and Blackwell, C. (2017), “Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Student Interest in STEM
Careers: The Roles of Motivation and Ability Beliefs”, Education Sciences, Vol. 7 No. 4.
Maurer, H. and Neuhold, C. (2012), “Problems Everywhere? Strengths and Challenges of a Problem-Based
Learning Approach in European Studies”, 2012 APSA Teaching and Learning Conference.
Overton, T. (2007), “Context and problem-based learning”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol.
3 No. 6, pp. 7-12.
Overton, T. and Hanson, S. (2010), “Skills required by new chemistry graduates and their development in degree
programmes”, York: Higher Education Academy - Physical Sciences Centre, available from: https://hydra.
hull. ac.uk/assets/hull:4544/content (accessed 4 February 2019).
Overton, T. L. and Randles, C. A. (2015), “Beyond problem-based learning: using dynamic PBL in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 251-259.
Raine, D. and Symons, S. (2005), “PossiBiLities a Practice Guide to Problem-based Learning in Physics and
Astronomy”, York: Higher Education Academy - Physical Sciences Centre, available from: https://www.
heacademy. ac. uk/system/files/ps0080_possibilities_problem_based_learning_in_physics_and_
astronomy_mar_2005. pdf (accessed 4 February 2019).
Ram, P. (1999), “Problem-Based Learning in Undergraduate Instruction. A Sophomore Chemistry Laboratory”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 76 No. 8, pp. 1122.
Royal Society of Chemistry (2018) “LearnChemistry”, available from http://www.rsc. org/learn-chemistry/
resource/listing?searchtext = CPBL&eMediaType = MED00000009 (accessed 4 February 2019).
Summerfield, S., Overton, T. and Belt, S. (2003), “Peer Reviewed: Problem-Solving Case Studies”, Analytical
Chemistry, Vol. 75 No. 7, pp. 181A-182A.
Taber, K. S. (2013), “Revisiting the chemistry triplet: drawing upon the nature of chemical knowledge and the
psychology of learning to inform chemistry education”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14
No. 2, pp. 156-168.
Williams, D. P. (2015), “Problem Based Learning Approaches to Teaching Chemistry”. In: Blessinger, P and Carfora,
J. M. (Eds) Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Programs: A

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 135

 Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 93-112.
Williams, D. P. (2017), “Learn on the Move: A Problem-Based Induction Activity for New University Chemistry
Students”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 12, pp. 1925-1928.
Williams, D. P. (2018), “Measuring the Effectiveness of an Open Ended Team-Based Induction Task”, New Directions
in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 13.
Williams, D. P. and Handa, S. (2016), “Chemistry Student Perceptions of Transferable & Workplace Skills
Development”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 16.
Williams, D.P. and Lo Fan Hin, S. (2017),“Measuring the Impact of Context and Problem Based Learning Approaches
on Students’ Perceived Levels of Importance of Transferable & Workplace Skills”, New Directions in the
Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 12.
Williams, D. P., Woodward, J. R., Symons, S. L. and Davies, D. L. (2010), “A Tiny Adventure: the introduction of
problem based learning in an undergraduate chemistry course”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 33-42.
Wood, D. F. (2003), “Abc Of Learning And Teaching In Medicine: Problem based learning”, BMJ: British Medical
Journal, Vol. 326 No. 7384, pp. 328-330.
Woods, D. R. (2000), Helping your students gain the most from PBL, McMaster University, available from https://
www.tp.edu.sg/staticfiles/TP/files/centres/pbl/pbl_donaldwoods. pdf (accessed 4 February 2019).

136|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning
10 in higher education chemistry

Christine M. O’Connor
School of Food Science and Environmental Health,
Technological University Dublin
christine.oconnor@dit.ie

The aim of this chapteristo introduce context-based learning (CBL) approaches to chemistry
modules and activities to enhance student engagement in chemistry programmes. The
chapter gives an overview of a context-based learning (CBL) themed approach to curriculum
development. CBL models are described as developed by the Chemistry Education Research
Team (CERT) in Technological University Dublin. The context-based approach to third
level chemistry education is pivotal in students making a connection with their selected
programme of choice, notably in Year 1 of science programmes. The objective of designing
context-based modules is to motivate students.

The CBL modules are shared as exemplars to encourage others to try this approach in their
subject discipline as the themes discussed here are just a few examples. The second year
mini-projects and Learn Chemistry resources are mentioned as part of this chapter as an
example of how to build on the Year 1 context-based learning module. The examples of CBL
modules in this chapter have been employed by other academics in other institutions. The
resources discussed are to inspire others to develop context-based resources, activities, and
learning environments.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Early in my career I started attending international chemistry education conferences in Europe
and internationally. I attended the European Chemistry Thematic Network (ECTN) newly
appointed university chemistry teaching staff summer school in Malta, in which Tina was one
of the academic advisers. Tina gave us a master class in facilitating workshops. Tina’s evidence
based approach and pragmatic style always encouraged me to be more innovative in my
approach to chemistry education. Tina is inclusive, approachable, encouraging, and always
supportive of the Chemistry Education Research Team in TU Dublin and the events they have
hosted. Tina is an excellent inspirational female role model of the international chemistry
education research community.
To cite: O’Connor, C. M. (2019), “Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 137-150.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 137

Introduction

The quality of how students are taught at third level, along with their lived student experiences, has
life-long implications. In 2018, most of the students entering third level education are born in the 21st
century. Now, we are compelled to reimagine a curriculum designed for an industrial age and modernise
it for a digital age. We have students entering roles that did not exist previously and this will continue
into the future. In order to prepare graduates for the digital age and working in global teams, we must
create opportunities for them to develop; individual resilience, critical thinking skills, and mental agility.
Developing active, more agile learners by developing know-how, rather than, know-what, is one solution.
Context-based learning (CBL) is a pedagogical approach to focus on the learning activities rather than
teaching in higher education. CBL allows students to role-play real world scenarios and build confidence
in their problem solving skills, in the comfort of their class or laboratory with their peers.

There are many examples of contextualisation of the chemistry curriculum at third level (Overton, 2007;
Gilbert, 2007; Gutwill-Wise, 2001; King et al., 2008; Ültay and Çalık, 2012; Belt and Overton, 2007; Bennett,
2003; Belt et al., 2005; Schwartz, 2007). These range from project based laboratory designs to case study
approaches to teaching chemistry. Previous research on students making connections between chemistry
concepts and real-world context have suggested that students’ motivation and interest in the subject
was improved (Gilbert, 2007; Gutwill-Wise, 2001; King et al., 2008; King, 2012; Ültay and Çalık, 2012).
Creating situations for students to apply their learning to a real world scenario creates a more memorable
learning event for the student but also emphasises the relevance of the curriculum in an applied manner.
Furthermore, models used for the development and evaluation of context‐based curricula have provided
an evidence base to extend this approach (Gilbert, 2007; King, 2012; Fung, 2017). The purpose being to
engage, motivate and retain chemistry students at third level.

Designing curriculum and assessment strategies for third level education in the 21st century has
drastically changed over the years. (Overton et al., 2009) Over the past few decades chemistry degree
titles have become more career focused in a number of third level institutes to attract students into
specialised courses. However, students in Year 1 of their degree programme are generally co-taught with
other degree programmes the core science subjects of chemistry, physics, biology, maths and computing.
Annual feedback from Year 1 science students highlighted an appetite for degree specialisation topics to
assist the students in identifying with their degree programme discipline. This often led to problems with
student engagement and retention.

Traditionally in Year 1 science programmes, students have been delivered introductory organic, inorganic
and physical chemistry which for many may have been a new language, as they had not studied the
discipline previously. Some students had studied chemistry at second level and felt this was just a repeat
or revision of what they already knew, or thought they knew (Regan et al., 2011). The students, when
entering third level, are enthusiastic to learn about the course they came to do, such as environmental
science, medicinal chemistry, pharmaceutical chemistry, nanotechnology, food science, environmental
health, or forensic analysis. Insight into future learning pathways and career opportunities are a means of
connecting the student with their programme from a very early stage. Taking a context-based approach
allows the chemistry curriculum to be covered while creating opportunities to allow students to identify
with their chosen interests.The examples presented in this chaptertake a social constructivist approach to
building confidence of individuals. Students are introduced to a programme specific CBL module in their
first year of the curriculum. In subsequent years further opportunities are presented to students through
CBL to prepare them for work-placement/internship or student exchange in later years and also their

138|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry

capstone research project in final year. The merits of context-based learning (CBL) in chemistry higher
education will be discussed along with approaches that have been developed.

By definition context-based learning (CBL) is a pedagogical methodology that emphasises the social
context of the learning environment. For the purposes of the examples presented here CBL is viewed
as creating real world situations, scenarios, and experiences for the student to develop their scientific
knowledge either in a class or laboratory environment. The use of a context-based approach to teaching
has its advantages (O’Connor and Hayden, 2008) as it helps the students identify with their specialisation
and their class group. Overton et al. (2009) outlined the advantages and perceived disadvantages of
context and problem-based learning (PBL). Advantages included the possibilities of application to
real world scenarios and subsequent student motivation and engagement, as well as the approach
facilitating development of problem-solving and critical thinking skills. Disadvantages include concerns
about covering the curriculum, the cognitive load of students, and whether students could apply their
knowledge to applications outside of context.

Methods and Design

In the early 2000s degrees in my institution, a degree in Forensic and Environmental Chemistry was
launched which was soon followed by Medicinal Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Science
with Nanotechnology. The titles of the degrees reflect the subject matter to be covered, however in Year 1
many students did not see or hear of the specialised subject as they were being co-taught with students
from a variety of programmes in class. To address this issue, we incorporated a context-based approach
to the curriculum. There are two approaches that can be considered when designing a context-based
approach; (i) introducing degree specialisation context-based learning module(s) or (ii) reviewing your
laboratory practicals to introduce a CBL/PBL approach.

Designing a CBL Module

Translating the traditional curriculum content into a context-based approach raises the following
questions:
• What is the subject matter and how can it be related to societal/research issues?
• What are current hot topics in this area?
• What are the fundamental principles underlying the subject matter?

In order to source contextual material, typical sources include current textbooks, relevant journal articles,
reviews and communications, research databases, news articles, and professional body websites. Fink has
presented five principles to ensure good course design which may also be applied to best practice in
individual module design (Fink, 2013).

Implementation of CBL
For the implementation of CBL modules and learning activities there are a few considerations to be made.
The mode of lecturer changes from an instructional role to a facilitator. It would be recommended that
the workshops as described in the examples given are, if possible, accompanied by another staff member
or postgraduate demonstrator to assist facilitation of CBL/PBL activities, bring different perspectives
and expertise to discussions, and decrease over-reliance on one individual to deliver the module each
year. A module handbook is good practice which clearly maps out the flow of the module, schedule
of workshops, and activities and identifies where the workshops will take place (classroom, computer
laboratory, chemistry laboratory). Students should also be informed of the preparatory work they must

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 139

do prior to each workshop. For large groups, workshops may have to rotate. The recommended class
size for CBL/PBL workshops is 16 students per staff member. This number allows for timely formative and
summative feedback. One area that requires some thought as part of planning is how to risk assess the
practical activities if they are student-led. One way to resolve this issue is to prepare risk assessments for
the practical activities when piloting laboratories and then make it part of the students’ assessment that
they risk assess the procedures they plan to use.

Assessment of CBL
How the assessment is aligned to the learning outcomes is key to driving the learning of the module
(Biggs, 1999). Design the assessment to allow for timely feedback, choosing suitable modes of assessment
taking into account the class size. The methods employed for curriculum design and assessment strategies
have changed in third level chemistry education in the 21st century (O’Connor, 2006). For over a decade
the driving factors have been recognised as being a shift in focus from the curriculum to the student
(Biggs, 2002). Donnelly and Fitzmaurice (2005), advised that it is unlikely that one mode of assessment
will capture all of the learning outcomes of a module hence, a variety of assessment strategies should be
considered.

The model adapted for the modules described in this chapter is probably best described by Driscoll
(2002) where blended learning has been referred to as “the combination of face-to-face teaching with on
line activities or the mixture of instructional approaches”. Amaral and Shank (2010) have recognised the
positive impact of taking a blended learning approach as they found it to enhance student learning and
retention in large first year science classes. Their emphasis was on the design and implementation of
digital learning materials embedded in blended learning class guides to support student learning in large
classes. Marshall and Nykamp (2010) have reported the use of a case study approach promoting group
work and engagement involving active-learning assignments’ covering basic science topics and clinical
course material with pharmacy students.

The modules presented in this chapter for example are assessed by group presentations, individual
writing/computer assignments, debating, laboratory or technical reports, reflective writing through wikis,
blogs, and virtual learning environments (VLEs). Assessments should be selected to capture the learning
outcomes of the module, drive professional development of the individuals but also reflect how the
student would have to present the results in a real world setting.

Active learning
The context-based learning modules allow students to become much more active learners. Active
learners, as described by Gutwill-Wise (2001), are students having an opportunity to engage with their
peers to solve problems or complete a task. Passive learning is the result of a more didactic approach
where the academic is seen to transfer the knowledge to the class group. Gutwill-Wise (2001) studied the
impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses by implementing a change
in two components of the chemistry classroom, content and pedagogy. In CBL scenarios, the students are
required to role-play professional chemists to address problems, propose solutions, and apply what they
know, shifting the emphasis from the promotion of rote learning and the end of module exam (Seery,
2015). Ellis and Gabriel (2010) reported the development of CBL resources for mixed ability foundation
science students and the results suggest that the impact of the CBL approach is greater for those students
with less experience or interest in chemistry. The context-based modules will be presented under two
themes: degree specific context-based learning (introducing a specialisation) and context-based practical
activities (Figure 1).

140|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry

Degree Specific Context-Based Learning

Without rewriting the whole curriculum of Year 1 chemistry or subsequent years, a degree specific context
based module may be developed to allow Year 1 students to connect with their programme of choice.The
examples given here are 5 ECTS (European credit transfer system) credit modules out of a total of 60 ECTS
for the year.

Forensic science CBL

Designing forensic science case studies for a first year curriculum to create a series of laboratory learning
resources and introduce the degree theme was initiated to engage learners in the first year of their degree.
The module structure comprised of 12 lectures and six 2-hour laboratory sessions. Assessment included
weekly continuous assessment quizzes (35%), a group presentation (35%), and weekly laboratory reports
(30%). Each practical was designed as an individual forensic case, with students placed in groups of three.
The groups were provided with prior lectures on techniques to be used, a press release, a letter from
the Head of Section of a forensic laboratory, standard operating procedures (SOPs) on how to complete
techniques, and labelled evidence samples. The student is assigned the role of the forensic scientist. An
overview of some of the experiments are below, and the resources are available on the Learn Chemistry
website.

Forensic practical 1: The fingerprint laboratory

A simple introduction to a forensic science practical activity is the fingerprint laboratory. Students are
tasked with solving the case through scientific evidence in the first year laboratory. A basic fingerprinting
set with black and fluorescent fingerprint powders is used to create a set of standard prints. Students are
tasked with reproduction and comparison. The activity can be extended to shoeprints. Concepts such as
materials chemistry, fluorescent and non-fluorescent materials, and articulating confidence in results can
be captured as part of this laboratory.

Forensic practical 2: Identification of poisons laboratory

The first year chemistry curriculum usually entails the identification of inorganic compounds through a
series of solubility, chemical, and flame tests. For the poisons laboratory evidence is presented to students
as a series of known compounds and the unknown inorganic salts (the poison) should match to one of
the known compounds. Each group are given a different poison to identify. Through a series of tests with
solvents, chemicals, and flametests the students will have to identify what they conclude the poison to be
and how they reached their conclusion. Concepts such s-, p-, and d-block elements, inorganic salts, and
chemical reactivity can be captured as part of this laboratory. Risk assessment and occupational exposure
levels (OELs) could also be discussed with chemical safety data sheets.

Forensic practical 3: Forgery of inks lab

Thin layer chromatography (TLC) is a technique that is a requirement of first year and subsequent years
of a chemistry curriculum. TLC of inks is a colourful experiment but not very exciting for most first year
students who may have carried it out before in second level. However, if it is a forged signature on a bank
cheque or legal document then the context is much more interesting. Through a series of pens collected
from the alleged forger, the ink can be extracted from the piece of evidence and tested against the pens
to look for a match. Concepts such as chromatography, solid phase/liquid phase, solvent polarity and
retention time, and extraction techniques can be brought into this case study. A summary of the three
forensic practical workshops are given in Table 1.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 141

Medicinal chemistry CBL
A context-based approachtomedicinal chemistry for first year students can be useful to introducestudents
to their specialisation. The focus of this context-based approach is moving towards a student centred,
learner-driven environment in which the student learns about a topic as a co-creator of their content (Eilks
and Byers, 2009; Ryan, 2013). Blended learning modes to teach chemistry have been incorporated into the
learning and teaching of chemistry in a variety of models for specific subject disciplines (Williams et al.,
2008). The medicinal chemistry module presented here is designed to embed transferrable professional
skills and to create an environment in which the students could experience being a professional medicinal
chemist, whilst learning chemistry. Examples of medicinal chemistry workshops and their relevant
activities are presented in Table 2. The workshops consist of classroom activities, computer laboratory
work, and synthetic chemistry laboratories. The whole module is underpinned by a module handbook
which clearly maps out the schedule, learning activities and assessment requirements and rubric for
each workshop. The module also has face to face lectures over the semester which complements the
workshops. Full details are in the resources available on Learn Chemistry.
Table 1: Summary of forensic CBL practical activities

The Fingerprint
Laboratory A series of different pieces of evidence (four different surface types) are provided
Use four different fingerprinting methods to obtain fingerprints
Compare it to some standards, say whether they matched, and their confidence
Relate this back to the case study and solve the case
Students are provided with different samples of a compound that was found in
a suspect’s pocket and they are required to identify it (different sample for each
Identification of
group)
Poisons Laboratory
Use chemical tests and flame photometry, and again match it back to the case to
solve the crime
Forgery of
LaboratoryInks Cheques are provided that were alleged to be forged
Required to extract the ink from different sections of the cheque and examine if
there was a mismatch
Use TLC techniques

A similar resource for introducing nanochemistry into the curriculum is available on Learn Chemistry
(Small materials to solve big problems). For an approach to advanced medicinal chemistry CBL, integration
of the RSC Learn Chemistry resource Molecules against malaria is a case study created to introduce
students to the design and development of antimalarial compounds such as 4-aminoquinolones. The
case study is very student centred and challenges students to discuss the impact of malaria on society
and why we require new compounds to tackle this problem. It also brings in the concepts such as
mode of action, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics and structure activity relationships (SARs) of
4-aminoquinolones.

Context-based practical activities

The teaching methodology used in the examples given in this theme are context/problem-based learning,
designed to increase student engagement by using real world contexts/samples. Unstructured problems
are presented to students who must work in small groups (three or four students) in the laboratory to
come up with solutions or informed suggestions. The development of valuable transferable skills such as
communication, team working and problem solving are the observed benefits of this approach.

142|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry

Table 2: Examples of medicinal chemistry workshops

induction
Moduleand
information
retrieval Using a module handbook, discuss the learning objectives of the module and how
they will be assessed. Discuss the modes of assessment, timelines and schedule
of activities for the semester. Use this session to navigate the students through
library resources and databases.
Abstract
writing In this session expose students to reading journal articles. Bring in papers relevant
to medicinal chemistry perhaps one of your own recent publications and allow
pull
students to read the paper and out what they see are the main points of the
paper. Request the students to review the abstract on the paper to see if all of the
points they mentioned are covered. As an assignment the students will be given a
paper/scientific article and are required to write an abstract for it. Use articles from
Chemistry World to open discussions.
Ethics and responsible research integrity are great topics for discussion with
medicinal chemistry students. Give some examples of when things have gone
wrong and the social impact that arose.
Debating: Explain to the students in advance of this session about debating (all
Ethical debate
statements must be clearly factual) and that they will be split into groups for
and against a topic. Topics such as animal testing in drug discovery lend well
to this format. Allow students a few weeks to gather their arguments, elect a
spokesperson and note takers.
This is a computer based laboratory where each student is given a list of known
pharmaceutical drug names (anything from Aspirin to Taxol). The students are
Chemical required to select three structures from a list of compounds to draw using a
drawing and chemical drawing package and to highlight chiral centres and functional groups.
software Following this activity, they are required to use ChemSpider and other software
packages packages to learn more about the individual therapeutic compounds, what they
are used for, mode of action, side effects etc. The students are required to submit a
fact sheet on each of the three compounds they have researched.
Synthesis of Students are required to make a known over the counter medicine as part of the
Paracetamol module. The synthetic practicals are an opportunity to reinforce concepts and
and Aspirin calculations such as; moles, limiting reagents, melting points, and percentage
(laboratory) yield, along with the importance of purity.
For small class groups, it is feasible for a pharmaceutical plant to host a visit. For
Guest Lecturer larger groups you can ask a medicinal chemistry lecturer from another university
or industry to come to speak on their research or a past graduate who is now working in a
visit relevant industry. Give students a worksheet to complete during plant visit/guest
lecturer to encourage them to engage further and ask questions.
Split the class into small groups of 3–4 students and give them a compound
such as Artemisinin, Taxol, Tamoxifen, Benazepril, or Lexapro. Ask the students to
prepare a group presentation. The students should include the history of where
the compound came from, the structure of the compound (which they must
Group
draw) noting any significant functional groups or chiral centres, what it is used for,
Presentations
mode of action, who makes it, the brand name, population using it, and cost. The
presentations should be carried out in front of the class and ask the class to carry
out peer feedback based on the presentation skills (what worked and what needs
to be improved).

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 143

Mini-projects
CBL chemistry mini-projects were designed for second year students at third level. The mini-projects,
previously reported by Mc Donnell et al. (2007), was very much inspired by previous work published
by Belt et al. (2005). The title of the projects frames the content of the mini-project and the students
are given a case study with a real world scenario and samples to analyse. The students must research,
plan, and choose experiments to solve the case. As a group the students must present their technical
findings with their scientific evidence. Some of the case studies allow for student sourced samples such as
water samples, cosmetics, or sunscreens. Examples of the mini-projects and relevant laboratory learning
activities are depicted in Table 3.

Environmental chemistry CBL

The Learn Chemistry resource Pollution detection and remediation practical activity is a context-based
approach to environmental chemistry. The design of the activity is one large case study with students
taking on the role of an environmental chemist and having five weeks of laboratory sessions to drive their
approach to remediation strategies for polluted water in a pond.

The pollutant is malachite green and the students are tasked with being the scientific consultant on
the project reporting evidence and proposing solutions to the local authorities. The learning activities
required of the students as part of this practical case study include:
• Plan the experiments (using literature review and library search)
• Quantify malachite green pollutant in pond by UV/vis spectroscopy
• Investigate the effect of using an adsorption material as a strategy for cleaning up the
pollutant
• Study photocatalysis as a remediation strategy
• Compile a report for the local authorities
• Present the results of the study to peers and tutors

Green chemistry CBL

The Learn Chemistry resource Faster greener chemistry? Catalyst synthesis and evaluation, is designed with
the students taking the role as a professional synthetic chemist employed in a campus company to carry
out contract laboratory work for a large pharmaceutical company. Each student group (three students)
are given a fictional letter from the company to investigate the preparation and characterisation of a
catalyst using green chemistry principles. The students are required to work as part of a team to:
• Prepare a Mn-salen complex using a two-step synthesis and characterise the compound
• Assess the efficiency of the catalyst in a reference reaction (epoxidation of stilbene)
• Carry out a cost benefit analysis and environmental impact study of the process and of
alternative procedures
• Plan experiments to be carried out
• Prepare a professional report for the company
• Present their results and recommendations as a group to colleagues and academic staff
• Manage the project using a wiki

A Programme-Based Social Constructivist Model

The keyto the CBLapproach is using a blendof learning and teaching strategies to enhance the professional
skills of the students which is driven by the assessment of the module and the pedagogical approach
(O’Connor, 2015). CBL allows for opportunities to revise basic chemistry concepts that are incorporated

144|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education


Table 3: Examples of mini-project titles and their relationship to the syllabus reproduced from Mc Donnell et al., 2007
Mini-Project Title
Do the forensic tools on CSI
(crime scene investigation) really wool, carpet, threads also paint chippings (if you can get examples
exist?
Investigation of sunscreen and their
sunglasses protection
(Abney and Scalletar, 1998)
Investigation of the calorific
value of crisps
Who killed Mrs. Bernhard
Schreider?
(Grove and Bretz, 2005)
Can the active pharmaceutical
ingredients in a range of
analgesic products be extracted,
separated and characterised?
Can the lipids in cheese be
extracted and analysed?
Fluorescent chemicals: analysis
and applications
How are analyses of trace
metals, dissolved oxygen and
fluorine content in natural and
potable water performed?
What are the chemicals in
cosmetics?
What are the spectroscopic
properties of dyes used in the
food and pharmaceutical
industries?
Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry
Summary of activity
TLC, microscopy, forensic methodology using fibres such as hair,
from re-sprayed cars or surfaces, they prove interesting).
UV/vis analysis methods, Beer-Lambert Law. Students can bring in
sunscreens (cheap and expensive brands/ in and out of date)
to investigate their absorption profiles in the UV/vis. This can also be
done using sunglasses.
Calorimetry, thermochemistry. Taking full fat, low fat and crisps
at children a bomb calorimeter can be used to study the
targeted
calorific content.
Colligative properties, solubility, microscopy, flame photometry,
chemical tests. Using inorganic salts a series of fictional poisons can
be selected for students to determine the unknown poison.
TLC, solvent polarity, recrystallisation, drug formulation of common
drugs such as Aspirin, Ibruprofen.
Saponification, TLC, extraction. Look at various cheese brands and
makes to study in groups and share results with class.
Spectroscopy (UV/vis and fluorimetry), Beer-Lambert Law, confocal
microscopy. Fluorescent compounds can be studied at different
Lambert law, emission
concentrations (for example
studies and cellular
fluorescein [Ru(bpy)3]2+ to study Beer
or uptake.
Atomic absorption, volumetric analysis, chemical and biological
oxygen demand tests, ion selective electrodes. Students can be
encouraged to bring in their own water samples from home, college,
rivers and lakes. Tabulate the data from all sources to cross compare
heavy metal content, dissolved oxygen content from the variety of
sources.
Light microscopy, extraction methods, TLC, fluorescence. Taking
lipsticks, handcreams and other student sourced materials the
students can study the chemicals in their everyday products and
discuss what function the chemical has in the product, for example
antimicrobial, softening, or hardening textures etc.
UV/vis, Beer Lambert Law, dilution factors, serial dilutions, molar
extinction coefficients, infrared, Raman, and 1H NMR spectroscopy.
Examples of dyes used are erioglaucine, erythrosin and sunset
yellow. This makes for a very colourful laboratory! Challenge the
students to find their molar extinction coefficients and compare to
literature data. Using the molecular structure they can use IR, Raman
and NMR to interpret functional groups. This activity would take
several weeks of labs.
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 145
in an early stage chemistry curriculum, such as calculating limiting reagents, percentage yields, molar
extinction coefficients and concentrations, and identification of functional groups and chiral centres while
embedding professional transferrable skills. The revision of basic chemistry concepts is useful to students
at all stages of the chemistry curriculum to reinforce fundamentals of chemistry and build confidence.

Building a social constructivist programme model for programme teams to develop context-based
learning/active learning opportunities into their degree programme would encourage programme
development as part of the annual monitoring quality processes. Prins et al., (2018) have presented an
activity-based instructional framework to transform the authentic practice of modelling human exposure
and uptake of chemicals in consumer products. The findings from the study revealed that activity based
instructional frameworks were well received by users and leads to the construction of high quality context
based materials. Recent studies by Sevian et al., (2018) are looking at the specific aspects of the contexts
in CBL activities that drive student learning. Fung (2017, p5) has created a framework for a connected
curriculum which promotes the integration of research and inquiry based learning in the curriculum.

The rationale for taking a social constructivist approach (Vygotsky, 1978) to building memorable learning
activities for students, is to allow students to develop as part of a team, learn the technical language and
terminology, and build empathy and trust with their peers. The contexts can be anything from simple
chemistry experiments to blue-skies research, once they create relatable situations that will allow students
to make a meaningful connection to a chemistry topic. However, context is merely a backdrop for student
learning. By looking at a programme holistically, the pivotal learning activities driving the programme
learning outcomes and graduate attributes may be identified clearly, an example of which is portrayed in
Figure 1.

Generally, at university level, the chemistry curriculum is taught as a series of modules covering the core
content and laboratory programme that has been clearly mapped out through a series of lectures and
laboratory manuals at every stage. For many students their final year is often the first opportunity to carry
out an independent individual research project. Students are often perplexed at where they should start
and what they need to do in the laboratory. One observation of students taking CBL modules in early
stages of their degree is that they are much more self-assured when commencing their final year project.
Figure 3 shows an overview of a programme looking at the development of the laboratory skills over the
four stages but also looking at the added-value CBL (Overton and Potter, 2011; Belt and Overton, 2007;
Bennett, 2003) work placement/ work based learning (Overton et al., 2003; Lemanski et al., 2010) and
project based learning brings to the curriculum. There is a real opportunity to use programme level CBL
models for course development, student engagement and marketing of programmes. There is evidence
to show that this should enhance the student experience, engagement and retention at a programme
level (King, 2012). In a recent study by Majid and Rohaeti (2018), statistical evidence was reported to
support that CBL influences student achievement and attitude to learning chemistry.

Implications and Adaptability

In the examples given, wikis have been mentioned to manage group work, these may be replaced for
blogs or websites. However the wikis are useful intracking individual contributions to the project. Another
method for identifying individual contributions to a group project is to ask them to write a one page
reflection on their contribution to the project which will give them an individual mark.

An observation when implementing the module is the dependence on the staff that facilitate context

146|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry

Figure 2: Example of context-based learning opportunities over stages of a degree programme

based learning modules. It should be recognised that there is a learning curve for the technical staff and
academic staff in moving to a context-based approach to delivery. Communication and preparation is
essential to facilitate non-recipe style activities in laboratories. School management should also be
consulted with regard to resourcing, scheduling and room availability.

Professional development for CBL design and development

Gilbert (2007) has reviewed the different models of context-based learning and King (2012) has carried
out an extensive international review of the context-based chemical education programmes currently
delivered at second and third level. King mentions that, although there are up to 20 years of positive
feedback on the enhancement of student engagement and motivation as a result of CBL, teachers are
still reluctant to take on this approach. Professional development of the teachers has been proposed
as a solution. Gutwill-Wise (2001) also captured feedback from students in relation to negativity due to
dependence on the instructor delivering the module and the level of training they have had in relation
to ChemConnections CBL modular approach. De Jong (2006) reported that there is little evidence of
enhancement of understanding of concepts such as compounds, elements, and chemical reactions
taking a CBL approach, but enhanced student engagement was observed. De Jong (2006) suggests that
the contexts must be carefully selected but teacher training is also key to adapting this pedagogical
approach. The individuals who designed and implemented the examples of CBL modules in this chapter
have all received third level qualifications in learning and teaching.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 147

Conclusion

The context-based learning approach is a move away from teaching isolated facts and allowing students
to connect what they have learned to solve social, economic, and global problems relevant to their world.
Historically, the chemistry curriculum was designed to cover content that was required for the following
year of the programme.The approaches to CBL module design models presented in this chapter could be
adapted to prepare bespoke modules on different subject matter at all levels of a degree course once the
learning outcomes and assessment are aligned to the appropriate student level. The CBL modules can be
drivers of students’ professional development.

The literature shows the added-value of context-based learning in the engagement, motivation and
retention of students on chemistry programmes at both second and third level. The dependence of the
context-based learning experience on the individual facilitating the learning activities is recognised. The
need for professional development for teachers and academics is identified in order to build capacity and
confidence in context-based learning as there are so many free resources available to use internationally.
Looking at programmes holistically to identify the CBL building blocks through a social constructivist
approach and sharing models of CBL programme design in chemistry at third level would promote
integration of CBL. Context-based learning is a mechanism for students to become confident in their
discipline area and develop their problem solving skills. It gives the students insight into how they as
individuals can make an impact as a scientist from an early stage of their education.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge the work of the Technological University Dublin Chemistry
Education Research Team, especially Dr Sarah Rawe, Dr Claire Mc Donnell, and Dr Michael Seery who led
the development of the modules presented in this chapter.

Supplementary Information
The Learn Chemistry resources described in this chapter are free to download from the RSC website:
http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry.

References

Abney, J. and Scalettar, B. (1998), “Saving Your Students’ Skin. Undergraduate Experiments that Probe UV
Protection by Sunscreens and Sunglasses”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 757-760.
Amaral, K. E. and Shank, J. D. (2010). “Enhancing student learning and retention with blended learning class
guides”, Educause Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 4.
Belt, S.T., Leisvik, M. J., Hyde, A. J. and Overton, T. L. (2005), “Using a context-based approach to undergraduate
chemistry teaching – a case study for introductory physical chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 6 No.3, pp. 166-179.
Belt S. and Overton, T. (2007), “Context-based case studies in analytical chemistry”, in Marbrouk, P. A. (Ed.), Active
Learning: Models from the Analytical Sciences, American Chemical Society, Washington.
Bennett, J. (2003), “Context-based approaches to the teaching of science. In Bennet, J. (Ed.) Teaching and learning
science: A guide to recent research and its applications, London: Continuum, pp. 99-122.
Biggs, J. (2002), “Aligning the curriculum to promote good learning”, Constructive Alignment in Action: Imaginative

148|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Approaches to context-based learning in higher education chemistry

Curriculum Symposium, LTSN Generic Centre.

Biggs, J. (1999), “What the Student Does: Teaching for Enhanced Learning”, Higher Education Research &
Development, Vol. 18, pp. 57-75.
de Jong, O. (2006), “Making Chemistry Meaningful. Conditions for Successful Context-based Teaching”, Educación
Química, Vol. 17, pp. 215–221.
Donnelly, R. and Fitzmaurice, M. (2005), “Designing modules for learning”, in O'Neill, G., Moore, S. and McMullin,
B. (Eds.) Emerging issues in the practice of University Learning and Teaching, Dublin, All Ireland Society for
Higher Education (AISHE).
Driscoll, M. (2002), “Blended learning. Let’s get beyond the hype” e-Learning, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 1–4.
Eilks I. and Byers B. (2009), Innovative methods in teaching and learning chemistry in higher education, RSC,
Cambridge.
Ellis, R. and Gabriel, T. (2010), “Context‐based learning for beginners: CBL and non‐traditional students”, Research
in Post-Compulsory Education, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 129-140.
Fink, L. (2013), Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses, John
Wiley & Sons, San Francisco.
Fung, D. (2017), A connected curriculum for higher education, UCL Press, London.
Gilbert, J. (2007), “On the nature of “context” in chemical education”, International Journal of Science Education,
Vol. 28 No. 9, pp.957-976.
Grove N. and Bretz S. (2005), “Sherlock Holmes and the case of the raven and the ambassador’s wife: an inquiry
based murder mystery”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 82, pp. 1532–1533.
Gutwill-Wise, J. P. (2001), “The impact of active and context-based learning in introductory chemistry courses:
An Early Evaluation of the Modular Approach”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 78 No. 5, pp. 684-690.
King, D. (2012), “New perspectives on context-based chemistry education: using a dialectical sociocultural
approach to view teaching and learning”, Studies in Science Education, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 51-87.
King, D., Bellocchi, A. and Ritchie, S.M. (2008), “Making connections: Learning and Teaching Chemistry in Context”,
Research in Science Education, Vol. 38 No. 3, 365-384.
Lemanski, T., Mewis, R. and Overton, T. (2010), “An introduction to the recent literature on approaches to work
based learning”, New Directions, Vol.6, pp. 3-10.
Majid, A. and Rohaeti, E. (2018) The Effect of Context-Based Chemistry Learning on Student Achievement and
Attitude, American Journal of Educational Research. 6, 6, 836-839.
Marshall L.L. and Nykamp D. (2010), “Active-learning assignments to integrate basic science and clinical course
material”American Journal of Pharmacy Education, Vol. 74 No. 7, article 119.
McDonnell, C., O’Connor, C.M. and Seery, M.K. (2007), “Developing practical chemistry skills by means of student
driven problem-based learning mini-projects”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp.
130-139.
O'Connor, C. M. and Hayden, H. (2008), “Contextualising nanotechnology in chemistry education”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 35-42.
O'Connor, C. (2006), “Designing curriculum and assessment to promote effective learning in chemistry in higher
education”, Level 3, Vol. 4 No. 1, article 8.
O’Connor, C. (2015), “A practice-led approach to aligning learning theories with learning and teaching strategies
in third level chemistry education”, Irish Journal of Academic Practice, Vol. 4 No. 1, article 7.
Overton, T. (2007), “Context and problem-based learning”, New Directions, HEA Physical Sciences.
Overton, T., Byers, B. and Seery, M. (2009), “Context and Problem-based Learning”, in Eilks I. and Byers B. (Eds.),
Innovative Methods of Teaching and Learning Chemistry in Higher Education, RSC, Cambridge.
Overton T.L. and Potter N.M. (2011), “Investigating students' success in solving and attitudes towards context
rich open-ended problems in chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 294-302.
Overton, T., Belt, S, and Summerfield, S. (2003), “Launch-a-lab: Encouraging chemists to prepare for employment'”

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 149

 Enhancing Student Employability, LTSN Physical Sciences.
Prins, G., Bulte, A. and Pilot, A. (2018), “Designing context-based teaching materials by transforming authentic
scientific modelling practices in chemistry”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40 No. 10, pp.
1108-1135.
Regan, A., Childs, P. and Hayes, S. (2011), “The use of an intervention programme to improve undergraduate
students’ chemical knowledge and address their misconceptions”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 219-227.
Ryan, B. (2013), “Flipping Over: Student centred learning and assessment”, Journal of Perspectives in Applied
Academic Practice, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 30-39.
Schwartz, A.T. (2007), “Contextualized Chemistry Education: The American experience”, International Journal of
Science Education, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 977-998.
Seery, M.K. (2015), “Putting chemistry into context”, Education in Chemistry, November.
Sevian, H., Dori Y. and Parchmann, I. (2018), “How does STEM context-based learning work: what we know and
what we still do not know”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40 No. 10, pp. 1095-1107.
Ültay, N. and Çalık, M. (2012), “A Thematic Review of Studies into the Effectiveness of Context-Based Chemistry
Curricula”, Journal of Science Education Technology, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 686-701.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978), Mind in Society, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Williams, N.A., Bland, W. and Christie, G. (2008), “Improving student achievement and satisfaction by adopting
a blended learning approach to inorganic chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 9,
pp. 43-50.

150 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds
11 through learning chemistry

Natalie M. Rowley
School of Chemistry, University of Birmingham
N.M.Rowley@bham.ac.uk

In order to develop learner independence and enhanced employability skills, inquiry-based

learning (IBL) was introduced into the first year of our undergraduate chemistry curriculum
in 2007. Prior to adopting this methodology, research was conducted into how best to
incorporate IBL within our curriculum, which in turn led to our School’s first MPhil in chemical
education research in 2009 and publication of our full findings (Lucas and Rowley, 2011).
Therefore our implementation was evidence-based and the initial delivery contributed to
the body of research in this field.

The IBL delivery replaced traditional lectures and workshops on interpretation of spectra
(mass spectrometry, infrared spectroscopy and 13C and 1H NMR spectroscopy) and
comprised four group-based IBL scenarios, of increasing complexity. These were delivered
over the first six weeks of our first year undergraduate chemistry curriculum, after which
students received lectures on the spectroscopic techniques. This approach proved to be
popular with the students, scalable (it was initially introduced to a cohort of 84 students and
was subsequently used with cohorts of up to about 150 students) and was used for nine
years as a successful method of encouraging a deeper understanding of this area of study as
well as developing employability skills. This chapter will describe the IBL approach adopted
and its effective delivery over a number of years, including its scalability to incorporate an
increasing cohort.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tina was pivotal and an essential contributor to this work. She (and another colleague, Mike
McLinden from our School of Education at Birmingham) helped me in the supervision of our
Masters research student, Tim Lucas, in this field, as I had no prior experience of research in
chemistry education — without her guidance, mentoring, and support, this research would not
have taken place. Tina remains an inspiration, mentor, and friend as I continue my journey into
new areas of chemistry education.

To cite: Rowley, N. M. (2019), “Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.),
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 151-164.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 151

Introduction

This section introduces inquiry-based learning (IBL)/enquiry-based learning (EBL) as well as the closely
related teaching methodologies problem-based learning (PBL) and context-based learning (CBL)—these
acronyms are sometimes collectively described as xBL. The reader is directed to some excellent examples
of the numerous research studies in the use of these techniques as well as resources available online from
the Centre for Excellence in Enquiry-Based Learning (CEEBL) (http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/) and
the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Learn Chemistry website (RSC). These produce a strong evidence base for
the effectiveness of the use of student centred learning approaches and heavily influenced our decision to
introduce IBL into our undergraduate chemistry curriculum as a mechanism to further develop a number
of key graduate employability skills.

What is inquiry-based learning?

Inquiry-based learning embraces a wide-range of learning approaches, driven through a process of
inquiry, in which students are actively involved in the learning process. The Centre for Excellence in
Enquiry-Based Learning (CEEBL) at the University of Manchester was a Centre for Excellence in Teaching
and Learning (CETL) between 2005 and 2010 and the associated website has been archived and is still
currently accessible online (http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/). This site is a very useful starting point
for those new to IBL as it gives detailed guidance for those involved in the development, facilitation and
assessment of IBL courses as well a range of case studies. The site succinctly and effectively describes the
characteristics of IBL:
• Learning is essentially student centred, with an emphasis on group work and use of library, web
and other information resources;
• Lecturers become facilitators, providing encouragement and support to enable the students to
take responsibility for what and how they learn;
• Students reach a point where they are not simply investigating questions posed by others, but
can formulate their own research topics and convert that research into useful knowledge;
• Students gain not only a deeper understanding of the subject-matter, but also the knowledge
development and leadership skills required for tackling complex problems that occur in the real
world.

Student centred learning approaches — evidence from the literature

The literature contains numerous studies in the use of E/IBL (e/inquiry-based learning) (for example, see
Gormally et al., 2009) as well as closely related teaching methodologies such as problem-based learning
(PBL), (for example, see Boud and Feletti, 1998) and context-based learning (CBL) (for example, see Pilot
and Bulte, 2006).This chapter does not aim to review these but, for those considering implementing one of
these student centred learning approaches, the reader is directed to the Enhancing Employability section
in the higher education resources area of the Royal Society of Chemistry’s Learn Chemistry website (RSC),
as a number of excellent context- and problem-based learning (C/PBL) resources are available, including
a set authored by Overton and colleagues: A Dip in The Dribble, Launch-A-Laboratory, New Drugs for Old,
Tales of the Riverbank, The Pale Horse, and The Titan Project (Belt et al., 2002).

Due to the strong evidence base in the literature regarding the effectiveness of IBL (and related
methodologies) in developing learner independence around the time of our research (Summerfield et
al., 2003; Belt and Overton, 2006; Overton et al., 2009; Kelly and Finlayson, 2009; Mc Donnell et al., 2007;
McGarvey, 2004; Williams et al., 2010 and Bennett and Forster, 2010), it was decided to pilot this teaching
methodology within our school to enable our students to further develop a number of key graduate

152|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

employability skills such as problem solving, oral and written communication, as well as interpersonal
and time management skills. This approach therefore aligned well with a number of the professional
skills within the UK QAA Benchmark Statement for Chemistry (QAA, 2014) as well as studies which have
explored student, graduate and employer perceptions of a number of generic skills which need to be
acquired by graduates in chemistry (Hanson and Overton, 2010; Sarkar et al., 2016; Galloway, 2017; Hill et
al., 2019).

Design and Implementation

In this section I will first discuss the design factors which we needed to consider, in order to introduce
IBL as a means to try to further develop our students’ graduate employability skills, in such a way as to
maximise the potential for an effective delivery. These included the timing and area of study, a pilot study
(as we were proposing to incorporate IBL in what we perceived to be a significant area of the curriculum)
and our subsequent full scale implementation. The discussion will then describe aspects of detail such
as optimum group size and composition, the learning space needed for successful delivery of the IBL
methodology, and the importance of informing both the students and staff involved how and why the
course was to be delivered using the IBL approach; in particular emphasising the importance of effective
facilitation in IBL delivery. The IBL implementation will then be described, including how and when it was
delivered and assessed, the IBL scenarios implemented, and the subsequent delivery of lectures after the
IBL workshops had been completed.

Setting for inquiry-based learning development and implementation

The University of Birmingham is a member of the Russell Group, which represents leading UK universities
that are committed to maintaining the very best research, an outstanding teaching and learning
experience, and unrivalled links with business and the public sector (https://russellgroup.ac.uk/). In the
School of Chemistry we offer a range of three year (BSc) and four year (MSci) degree programmes and the
size of our first year cohort of chemistry undergraduate students has grown significantly over the past
decade — from 84 students when we conducted our initial research into the introduction of IBL in 2007
to around 150 currently.

After surveying the literature and careful consideration of our undergraduate curriculum, it was decided
that the most appropriate place to introduce the IBL methodology into our undergraduate chemistry
degree programmes was as part of a core first year module, starting during the first week of the first year
of the degree programme, which included the interpretation of mass, infrared, 13Cand 1H NMR spectra to
determine the identities of unknown compounds. A number of factors influenced this decision:
• most students had prior knowledge of the spectroscopic techniques from their pre
university studies so, through working in groups, could build on their existing knowledge
and learn from their peers;
• spectroscopic interpretation leant itself well to a real-life context — an important factor in
the production of engaging IBL scenarios;
• it was felt that Week 1 of Year 1 was an ideal time to foster learner independence before
students became used to a lecture based delivery style.

Prior to this implementation, the course on spectralinterpretation had previously been taughtforanumber
of years in a traditional manner — six 1-hour lectures covering the basics of the four main spectroscopic
techniques: mass spectrometry, infrared spectroscopy, 13C NMR spectroscopy and 1H NMR spectroscopy,
accompanied by six 2-hour workshops, focused on the interpretation of the associated spectra, which

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 153

were delivered in parallel. This was delivered as part of an introductory 10 credit core chemistry module
on structure, isomerism and spectroscopy which comprised a total of 16 hours of lectures, two hours
of embedded class workshops, and 12 hours of spectroscopy workshops. It was recognised that it was
vitally important that students acquired the ability to interpret spectra at an early stage in their chemistry
degree programmes, and so any change in the teaching approach used to develop these skills had to be
considered very carefully. It was for this reason that we decided that an initial small scale pilot was needed
prior to a full scale implementation.

Pilot study
An initial pilot study was conducted with 12 Year 1 chemistry student volunteers who had already
completed the traditional delivery of the spectral interpretation course. An icebreaker and an IBL scenario
were piloted along with a questionnaire which was to be used for evaluative purposes in the full study.
The scenario involved analysing waste water from a fictional university laboratory and was created in
accordance with guidance from PossiBiLities: A Practice Guide to Problem-based Learning in Physics and
Astronomy (Raine and Symons, 2005, also available online). Students were placed in the role of graduate
chemists working in teams for a fictional commercial laboratory that analysed samples. The infrared and
mass spectra for use in this (and subsequent) scenarios were obtained from the Spectral Database for
Organic Compounds (SDBSWeb: https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/sdbs/cgi-bin/cre_index.cgi). The 1H and 13C
NMR spectra were simulated using the CambridgeSoft ChemDraw Ultra program (version 11.0). These
sources were chosen as it was important to provide clean and clear spectra of pure compounds, to
enable easier interpretation. The questionnaire piloted was based on an IBL evaluation survey produced
by Moore (2006, 2007) and included Likert-style questions (Likert, 1932) as well as a number of open
ended questions. The findings from the pilot study were positive for the icebreaker, IBL scenario and
questionnaire and so it was decided to implement the IBL delivery in full as a research study.

Full scale IBL implementation — design considerations

The full scale IBL approach involved inverting the traditional teaching delivery method: students learnt
how to interpret spectra through problem solving in six 2-hour workshops before receiving any lectures
on the techniques. The findings of Kirschner et al. (2006) relating to cognitive load theory were taken into
consideration and care was taken to try to ensure that the IBL scenarios would not place too high a load
on working memory. It was therefore very important that most students had some prior knowledge of
the spectroscopic techniques from their previous studies in chemistry. Thus the IBL exercises were not
discovery learning with no prior knowledge to build upon, but, through facilitation, students received
guided instruction to help them to build on their existing knowledge.

Group size and composition

Group size and composition were recognised as being two very important factors in trying to ensure a
successful delivery of the IBL methodology. Groups of six students were believed to be optimal, as this
did not place too much demand on any individual, but also ensured that all group members needed to
be actively engaged and to work in collaboration with one another in order to achieve the goals which
were to be set through the IBL scenarios. In terms of composition of the groups, it was recognised that
collectively each group of students needed to have a degree of confidence in their ability to interpret
spectra from all of the techniques which were to be used. In order to achieve this, students were grouped
according to their responses to a questionnaire, which had been completed prior to the start of the IBL
delivery, in which they had self assessed their confidence both in their understanding of how each of the
spectroscopic techniques worked and in their ability to interpret spectra from each of the techniques (see
Supplementary Information). It was, however, recognised that the students’ responses to these questions
represented their perceived understanding and not necessarily their actual ability. Based upon these two

154|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

considerations the class of 84 students were placed into 14 groups of six.

Learning space
Another critical factor which was considered in trying to optimise the delivery of the IBL methodology
was the learning space used. The face-to-face IBL sessions were delivered in a large flat room with
movable tables and chairs but which also included projection facilities. It was important to be able to relay
information to the class as a whole through the projection facilities, but, of even greater importance, was
the need for students to be able to sit around tables in their groups and for those facilitating the sessions
to have easy access to each group. Therefore a traditional tiered lecture theatre would not have been an
appropriate learning space for these activities and finding a flat room, with movable chairs and tables, of
sufficient capacity to accommodate an entire year group can be a significant challenge.

Facilitation
Delivery of IBL sessions requires a very different style of interaction with students from those used
traditionally and so it was essential to ensure that both staff and students were aware of what to expect
and how the sessions were to be facilitated. During IBL sessions students ask questions on any areas
of difficulty, but the facilitators must not give students the answers directly. Instead the facilitators, in
discussion with the student group, need to establish, through appropriate questioning, at what level the
students are regarding solving the problem, and then give appropriate guidance to enable the students
to deduce for themselves what actions they need to take in order to get closer to determining the answer.
This approach feels counter intuitive, both to staff and students, but it is essential in helping the students
to develop independent problem solving skills and strategies. Further details and guidance on facilitation
can be found in Raine and Symons (2005, also available online) and in Goldring and Wood (2009, also
available online (http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/). Four postgraduate facilitators and a member
of staff were used to facilitate our IBL sessions comprising 84 students. Our facilitators were not linked
to specific groups — floating facilitation was used. The postgraduate students were given guidance
regarding effective IBL facilitation in a meeting before their first session.

IBL delivery
The IBL delivery took place during the first six weeks of the students’ first year of their chemistry degree
programme. The students spent two hours per week in face to face IBL workshops during which new
scenarios were given out and preliminary support was given. The students had to complete the work
required each week outside of the workshops (there was, deliberately, too much to complete within the
two hours) which meant that each group needed to meetup(virtually or facetoface) and to work together
to complete the tasks in order to hand in their reports at the start of the subsequent IBL workshops. Once
the work had been handed in, verbal feedback was given to the students so that they could gauge how
well they had performed. Their hand-written group reports were then scanned and marked electronically
(using a tablet PC) and feedback was posted online to each group, in their virtual learning environment
(VLE) discussion area, within 24 hours. In addition, a model answer guide was posted online. This
arrangement meant that students could use their group feedback, along with the model answer guide, to
improve their performance for each successive scenario.Throughout all of the IBLscenarios, students also
had access to online discussion boards to allow them to communicate easily with each other outside of the
sessions. A helpdeskthread was included so that students could contact staff if necessary. The discussion
boards were also used to give the groups rapid feedback on each component of the assessment.

Assessment procedure
The IBL activities were assessed through a variety of means, initially formative and then summative
(Table 1). As much of the IBL delivery was group-based, a small component of the marks was attributed

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 155

 Table 1: Continuous assessment components of assessment of spectroscopic interpretation
taught by IBL followed by lectures
Assessment Component Nature of Assessment Group Contribution
Waste Dispoal Formative —
Down the Drain Group Report (2.25%) Peer Assessment (0.25%)
Carbonyl Conundrum Formative —
Reaction Dilemma Individual Report (4.5%) Peer Assessment (0.5%)
Assessed Worksheet (Post IBL Individual (5%)
and post lectures) —

to peer assessment, reflecting (as a percentage) the average mark an individual received based upon
the percentages indicated by the other group members. The peer assessment marks were moderated
to ensure that the marks were appropriate. These combined assessments contributed 12.5% to the
continuous assessment component of the module and the students were also examined on the material
as part of the end of year examination of the module.

The first IBL workshop placed students into their groups with each group comprising six students. The
students participated in an icebreaker and received introductory information explaining to them why the
IBL technique was being used, what skills it would help them to acquire and what to expect during the
sessions. The students then had to produce a set of group rules which outlined how they would function
effectively as a group in order to complete the forthcoming tasks. They had to post their group rules online
in their group discussion area of the VLE. In addition, students were given advice on how to problem
solve, action planning and netiquette. The students were also encouraged to discuss their knowledge and
comprehension of the spectroscopic techniques and their associated spectra so that they could establish
their group’s prior knowledge in each of the techniques.

Each of the groups were then given two sets of spectra to practice their spectral interpretation, the answers
to which were handed in at the start of the following session. Although students were given data sheets
which indicated the regions of the spectra where characteristic features appear, they were given no other
information to aid their interpretation of these spectra. Within their groups the students were expected to
know (or to find out) about the molecular ion peak and fragmentation peaks in mass spectra, the regions
and characteristic appearance of common functional groups in infrared spectra, the chemical shifts and
numbers of peaks in 13C NMR spectra and the chemical shifts, splitting, and integration of signals in 1H
NMR spectra. Students were required to use the spectra to identify the unknown molecules, and to submit
a group report for each compound giving the structure and full reasoning of their conclusions based on
their interpretation of the various spectra (see Supplementary Information).

This was carried out so that, after appropriate feedback at the start of each session, students could begin
to self-assess their actual individual skills in spectral interpretation (as opposed to their perceived skills) as
well as the areas of strength and weakness of the combined knowledge of the members of their group.This
self-establishment of the effective starting position of the groups in terms of strengths and weaknesses of
the pooled knowledge was seen as an essential first step in the IBL process.

The four IBL scenarios

Waste Disposal Scenario (Week 2)
The first scenario placed the groups of students in roleasteams of graduate chemists in a fictional analytical

156|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

department. Each group received a memo from their boss saying that unlabelled chemical waste had
been found in some disused laboratories and that their help was needed to identify the waste to enable
safe disposal (see Supplementary Information). The spectra of the compounds were those of common
laboratory solvents to help the students with their laboratory studies at a later date. There were 16 sets
of spectra in total and each group had a different subset of eight of these. The infrared and mass spectra
for use in these scenarios were obtained from the Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBSWeb:
https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/sdbs/cgi-bin/cre_index.cgi), with key peaks numbered which the students
needed to identify. The 1H and 13C NMR spectra were simulated using the CambridgeSoft ChemDraw
Ultra program (version 11.0) as their purpose was to provide a means for the students to practice their
interpretation skills. In addition, the decision to provide more sets of spectra than group members was
deliberate, in order to prevent a divide and conquer approach (Duch, 1996) and to encourage the students
to work together and to learn from one another and not for each group member to work individually.
Students were required to use the spectra to identify the unknown molecules, and to submit a group
report giving full reasoning of their conclusions based on their interpretation of the various spectra (see
Supplementary Information).

Down the Drain Scenario (Week 3)

The second scenario was an adaptation of the pilot IBL scenario. The groups received another memo from
their boss informing them that dead fish had been found in a nearby river due to unknown chemical
waste. The students had to use the spectra provided to determine the identity of the pollutants. Again,
each group of students had eight sets of spectra (each a subset of a total of 16 sets of spectra). The 16
compounds used in this scenario were specifically chosen as they were compounds which students
would encounter later on in their practical chemistry course. This scenario required the students to carry
out exactly the same activities as the previous scenario, but the group assessment contributed to the
continuous assessment component of the module and the students also had to submit a form assessing
the contribution of the work conducted by their peers.

Carbonyl Conundrum Scenario (Week 4)

The memo received for this scenario informed students that a report, which had been submitted a few
weeks previously on an unrelated case, had been misplaced. The only information that was recovered was
24 spectra and the identity of the six compounds to which the spectra belonged, but these needed to be
matched as they had accidentally been mixed up.The six molecules consisted of three pairs of compounds,
with each pair of compounds comprising very similar structures thereby giving closely related spectra.
This meant that students needed a higher level of sophistication in their spectral interpretation in order
to complete this task successfully. No report was required for assessment of this scenario — the groups
were required to submit their conclusions as to which spectra belonged to which compound through an
online quiz in the VLE.

Reaction Dilemma Scenario (Weeks 5 and 6)

This scenario was more complex than the previous three and ran over two IBL sessions. Students were
also given authentic spectra to introduce them to true-to-life spectra which they would encounter later in
their practical work. Students were provided with an email from a fictional postgraduate student, asking
for their help in interpreting the spectra of the product from a reaction — the reduction of benzamide to
benzylamine. However, the spectra of the product which the students received corresponded to benzyl
alcohol and not benzylamine. Students were told that the second stage of the postgraduate student’s
reaction, using this product, had failed. Students were then asked to contact the fictional postgraduate
student, via email, with their interpretation of the spectra and explanation of what had gone wrong in
the reaction. The process ultimately led to the students discovering that the wrong reactant had been

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 157

supplied (this was, depending upon which group the students belonged to: benzaldehyde, benzoic acid,
methylbenzoate, ethyl benzoate or propyl benzoate, each of which reduce to give benzyl alcohol).

If groups had mistakenly identified the first product as being correct (benzylamine), they did not get to the
next stage of the scenario after their initial email, but were directed back to the original spectra to check
their interpretation. The second stage of the problem required students to identify the actual (incorrect)
starting material which had originally been used. Once they had correctly assigned this and deduced how
this gave rise to the initial product, from the postgraduate student’s reaction, they were introduced to the
final part of the problem, which asked them to determine if the student had now obtained the correct
product, benzylamine, after re-running the reaction with the re-supplied (and this time correct) starting
molecule.

Students were asked to complete an individual report, along with peer assessment (based on the
contribution of their peers to the group work). The individual report gave a reflection of the individual
student’s competence in spectroscopy, as well as dispelling any notions that students not doing any work
were achieving the same mark as students who did the majority of the work. It was only after the IBL
sessions had been completed that students received five 1-hour lectures to consolidate what they had
learnt about spectral interpretation and also to reinforce their learning with the underlying theory behind
each of the techniques.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Evaluation of the IBL delivery

The research study aimed to examine the experiences of the Year 1 chemistry students as a result
of learning spectral interpretation through the new IBL approach and was an MPhil research study in
Chemical Education, the findings of which were published in full (Lucas and Rowley, 2011). There were
two principal questions:
1. How does student perceived confidence change, if at all, as a result of their experience in
using IBL in the spectroscopy course?
2. What are the students’ attitudes towards the processes of IBL and how do these change
through the course?

Students’ perceived confidence

In order to evaluate the first of these questions, students were asked to complete a questionnaire on
two occasions during the learning process. The pre-IBL questionnaire was completed during induction
(a week before beginning the IBL course, hence was essentially based upon their prior knowledge of
the techniques). This information was primarily used to group the students appropriately based on
their perceived confidence in each of the techniques (see Supplementary Information). At the start of
the IBL delivery students were informed that the IBL approach was being trialled as part of a research
study (indeed one of the postgraduate facilitators was the researcher) and that completion of all
questionnaires which we were using for evaluation purposes was entirely voluntary and that the data
would be anonymised. Subsequently the same questionnaire was reissued post IBL, but before the start of
the lectures (see Supplementary Information). The data gathered enabled an examination of the changes
in students’ perceived confidence in understanding how each of the spectroscopic techniques worked
and in their ability to interpret the associated spectra. Overall the results indicated that the students
were positive about the IBL learning experience. The findings suggested that the students began with
quite high (perceived) confidence in all of the spectroscopic techniques, with the exception of 13C NMR

158|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

spectroscopy and generally they gained in confidence through the IBL process. It should be noted that,
at the time of this study, many students indicated that they had little knowledge of 13CNMR spectroscopy
from their previous studies. It was found, in the area of interpreting spectra, that a few students indicated
a decrease in confidence, perhaps as a result of over-estimating their ability initially. A statistical analysis
was not possible as the sample size was too small (n = 38 to 42).

Students’ attitudes
The second question was evaluated through Likert-style (Likert, 1932) and open ended questions in a
mid-IBL questionnaire (see Supplementary Information) and in a questionnaire which was issued after
completion of both the IBL sessions and the lectures (see Supplementary Information). The questionnaire
was based on that of Moore (2006, 2007) and was the same as that which had been trialled in the pilot
study. Again, it was made clear that the questionnaires were part of a research study and that completion
was entirely voluntary and that the data would be anonymised. A number of the processes of IBL were
explored through these questionnaires. These included: the learning process, difficulties and demands,
memorization and application, enjoyment, and roles in the learning process.

Overall there were very few changes in responses between the mid-IBL and post-IBL/post-lecture
questionnaires. This suggested that attitudes formed early on remained relatively stable. A statistical
analysis was not possible as the sample size was too small (n=30to 32).The open ended questions revealed
a more detailed insight into students’attitudes towards the IBL processes and suggested that the students
found it to be extremely valuable. When asked about the positive aspects of the course comments such
as “working as part of a team”, “developing communication skills”, “problem solving individually as part of a
team”appeared on numerous occasions. The negative aspects of the course indicated by students related
mainly to the timing of the IBL sessions (constrained by the timetable to be 4 pm to 6 pm on Fridays) and
difficulties in some groups with unequal student participation.

In order to gain a deeper insight into the students’attitudes, two focus groups were conducted with six first
year students who volunteered to participate. The focus groups were designed to provide opportunities
to askin-depth questions and to probe attitudes, often difficult using a survey (Cohen et al., 2018).The aim
was to discuss what students had found in an unthreatening atmosphere. The focus groups followed a
semi-structured format (Reid, 2006). A series of well-defined questions were used, with plenty of time left
for open discussion, depending on the way the students reacted. Two focus groups were held, both with
the same six students and interviewer but at different times. The first focus group explored the following
topics in depth: group working, VLE discussion boards, the IBL scenarios, views on IBL itself and facilitation.
The second focus group explored one issue only — the students’perceived difference between the terms
difficult and challenging — as an analysis of the questionnaire data had suggested that the students
perceived these terms differently. The focus groups were led by an experienced interviewer (external to
the School of Chemistry) and an anonymised transcript of the interviews was provided for analysis.

The findings relating to group work were consistent with those from the questionnaires — on the whole
these were positive although a few groups did not function as well as others as a result of unequal student
participation. The focus group participants indicated that they preferred to communicate by mobile
phone or to meet face-to-face in between IBL scenarios rather than use their group discussion boards in
the VLE. The students commented that the IBL scenarios were starting to become repetitive towards the
end of the sessions. Although the settings differed and the scenarios became gradually more complex,
the tasks were essentially the same. Most of the students indicated that they would rather have had the
lectures before or in parallel to the IBL sessions. However, this would have detracted from the collaborative
learning opportunity afforded through the group problem solving. It was of interest to note that students

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 159

saw a need for both the IBL and lectures, reflected in comments such as:
with EBL, we are learning to read spectra, but with the lectures welearnt about the background knowledge
and how they work.

definitely more interesting than lectures — you’re in a group, you’re interacting, you’ve got the postgrads
there.

A potential area of concern for the facilitators was if the students had been frustrated by not being given
direct answers to their questions, as, instead, students were guided towards the correct answer (after the
facilitator had established where the student/group was in terms of understanding). Reassuringly the
findings from the focus group indicated that the students had not been frustrated by this, with one of the
students commenting:
I think it’s better when someone gives you the answers in a way that you’re actually learning from it rather
than ‘this is wrong, that’s the answer’. I personally like to know how I got to that answer, so that’s quite a
good way.

The students also commented that the postgraduate demonstrators were generally very helpful, with one
student stating that:
one postgrad was giving us clues, he wouldn’t just give us the answers, which I thought was quite good.

A particular finding was of interest — analysis of the questionnaire data suggested that the students saw
the term challenging differently from difficult. This was probed through a second focus group through
which it was evident that students perceived challenging as something which requires some thought:
“how far you can stretch yourself”. Conversely difficult was perceived in a more negative way: “something
you struggle with more”. The focus groups gave the overall impression that the students had found the IBL
to be a highly positive experience.

Implications and Applicability

As a result of this study, spectroscopy was delivered via IBL to our Year 1 chemistry undergraduate students
for nine years, during which time the cohort increased from the original 84 students to yearly averages
of around 150 students, thus providing an opportunity to assess the scalability of the approach. The
significant increase in student numbers presented challenges to the original format of delivery, primarily
interms of a suitable learning space. We were fortunate to have an additional large flat room with movable
tables and chairs adjacent to the original room used. This enabled us to begin the IBL sessions in the
original room, giving feedback on the previous session and instructions for the current session’s activities
to the entire cohort, and then the groups were distributed between the two rooms to enable space for the
students and facilitators to work and to reduce the overall noise levels created by the discussions within
the groups.

We felt it important to maintain the group size and composition used in the initial study, as a result of
which we had about 24 groups of six students to facilitate. This required an additional postgraduate
demonstrator (bringing the total to five) as well as the member of staff and also resulted in a shift to fixed
facilitation for the postgraduate demonstrators, with each postgraduate student facilitating four or five
groups, but the member of staff remained a floating facilitator during the sessions, as well as providing
online facilitation to the groups via the VLE in between sessions. Clearly the time to mark and provide
online feedback within 24 hours to twenty-four groups compared to the original 14 groups proved to be
more challenging, though it was still achievable. The overall assessment was modified with the increased
number of students to have all components of the continuous assessment group-based (Table 2).

160|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

Table 2: Modified continuous assessment components of assessment of spectroscopic interpretation taught by IBL
followed by lectures with larger cohorts

Assessment Component Nature of Assessment Group Contribution

Waste Dispoal Formative —
Down the Drain Group Report (4.5%) Peer Assessment (0.5%)
Carbonyl Conundrum Online Group Assessment (2.5%) —
Reaction Dilemma Group Report (4.5%) Peer Assessment (0.5%)
It is of interest to note that, although many other factors may have been contributing, for example
increasing entry grades of new students, differences in actual questions set, increased feedback through
the IBL technique etc., the end of year examination question on spectroscopic interpretation, whose
format remained the same, saw a 20% increase in mark average for several years (from about 60% to
about 80%) after switching to the IBL mode of delivery (and where no other change had been introduced).

IBL delivery of spectral interpretation, in the format described here, was delivered for a final time in the
2015/16 academic year within our School. This was due to a review and update of our undergraduate
chemistry curriculum, as a result of which the modular structure was modified and the learning outcomes
of the various components of the new modules were redefined. It was felt that a broader and more
advanced understanding of the various spectroscopic techniques and skill in spectral interpretation was
now required, which would not have been achievable through the format of the IBL delivery described
here. A summary of the results of our findings and experience of IBL delivery, as detailed above (IBL
workshops delivered before lectures) is presented in the following SWOT analysis:

Strengths
• Develops key employability skills (such as oral and written communication, interpersonal,
time management, and problem solving skills) as well as a fundamental knowledge of
aspects of chemistry
• Helps staff and students to get to know one another better and is excellent for staff-student
and student-student interactions

Weaknesses
• Students need some prior knowledge of the area of study for the methodology to work
and careful group management to ensure that there is appropriate knowledge within each
group to enable cooperative learning
• An in-depth, detailed knowledge of an area of study is not likely to be achieved through this
methodology (for this, a more traditional approach of lectures, delivering theory and specific
content, accompanied by practice, through tutorials or workshops would be expected to be
more effective)

Opportunities
• Good method to introduce context-based learning, through which key knowledge and the
ability to problem solve can be related to real-life situations
• Unanticipated benefit was the formation of positive social interactions within groups, some
of which lasted well beyond the IBL delivery (we heard examples of friendships formed
through the IBL groups which remained throughout degree programme and beyond)
• Anecdotal comments suggested that students remembered this material for much longer
than material taught in lectures as they were having to learn and work through problems

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 161

 themselves rather than just being told information and given answers directly
• Over time almost all of the postgraduate facilitators had experienced IBL first hand
themselves, having completed their undergraduate studies with us and so had a good
understanding of how to facilitate effectively and its advantages to the student learning
process (some of the postgraduate demonstrators specifically requested to be assigned to
IBL workshop facilitation as they felt that the methodology was very effective)

Threats
• Need appropriate learning spaces; large flat rooms with movable tables and chairs but
which also include projection facilities — finding appropriate venues, especially for large
cohorts, can be a significant challenge
• Time intensive in terms of time required to create new, realistic and effective IBL scenarios in
the topics to be taught to enable learning to the depth of understanding required (although
links have been included within this chapter to examples of existing resources which may
be appropriate as presented or easily modified to enable effective learning in a variety of
areas)
• Time intensive also when considering delivery (face-to-face and online) and assessments,
especially for large cohorts. This can be managed to some extent by group assessment but
then students are not receiving feedback on an individual basis
• Requires additional support to facilitate large numbers of groups
• Essential that all involved, both staff and students, understand that facilitation will not
allow students’questions to be directly answered — it just takes one person to give a direct
answer to a question which could, as a result, undermine the students’ learning process!

Your Context

The prompts below are provided to encourage readers to reflect on how the IBL activities discussed in
this chapter could be adapted to their context. Before implementation of IBL scenarios, you are advised
to consider the following:
• What are the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to embedding
IBL in your Department/School and have you identified adaptations that could enhance the
strengths and opportunities?
• What are the knowledge skills and attributes that your students could develop if IBL is
implemented?
• How and when will students be consulted/informed in advance of and during
implementation?
• What additional resources would be required to implement IBL (staff and student time,
amendments to course documents, materials, rooms etc.)?
• How can the resources already available from, or links to additional resources, such as those
on the RSC website (RSC) included within, the chapter be modified to suit your context?
• How will you evaluate the implementation of this IBL approach?

Conclusion

In summary, it was clear that the majority of students had a positive experience of the IBL methodology
and that they had appreciated working in groups and the opportunity to interact with their peers
(although some students were frustrated by unequal participation within their groups at times). Students

162|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing inquiring minds through learning chemistry

also indicated that they felt that their transferable skills and their ability to learn independently had been
enhanced. Their attitudes towards the IBL processes seemed to be formed at an early stage, and, once
formed, they remained relatively stable. The majority of students were confident in the various areas of
the spectroscopy course after the IBL sessions and the findings indicated that IBL has the potential to
increase students’ perceived confidence in spectroscopy, especially for those students who are the least
confident before the IBL sessions. However, as the same study was not carried out to examine traditional
teaching methods (lectures and supporting workshops) it is not possible to draw any conclusions as to the
effectiveness of the IBL methodology compared to a traditional approach.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the University of Birmingham for funding this research through a Learner
Independence Project and Timothy Lucas for his work on his MPhil in Chemical Education upon which this
chapter is based. We are appreciative of advice and support from Professor Norman Reid, Professor Tina
Overton and Professor Mike McLinden. We are grateful to Professor Derek Raine and Dr Sarah Symons for
their feedback on the scenario used in the pilot study, to Dr Liam Cox for his help in devising the Reaction
Dilemma scenario, and to Dr Alison Davies for running the focus groups. We would also like to thank the
students in the School of Chemistry who participated in this study.

References
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), A Dip in the Dribble, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), Launch-a-Laboratory, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), New Drugs for Old, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), Tales of the Riverbank, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), The Pale Horse, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S., Overton, T. and Summerfield, S. (2002), The Titan Project, RSC, Hull.
Belt, S. and Overton, T. (2006), Case Studies for Undergraduate Chemistry Courses, RSC, Cambridge.
Bennett, J. and Forster, T. (2010), “IR Cards: Inquiry-Based Introduction to Infrared Spectroscopy”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 73–77.
Boud, D. and Feletti, G. (1998), The Challenge of Problem-based Learning, Second Edition, Kogan Page, London.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2018), Research Methods in Education, Eighth Edition, Routledge, Oxford
and New York.
Duch, B. (1996), “Problems: A Key Factor in PBL”, available at: https://www1.udel.edu/pbl/cte/spr96-phys.html
(accessed 6 March 2019).
Galloway, K.W. (2017), “Undergraduate Perceptions of Value: Degree Skills and Career Skills”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 435-440.
Goldring, L and Wood, J. (2009), “A Guide to the Facilitation of Enquiry-based Learning for Graduate Students”,
available
(accessedat:
6 March 2019).
http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/resources/evaluation/documents/guide_to_fac_v6.pdf

Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B. and Armstrong, N. (2009), “Effects of Inquiry based Learning on Students’
Science Literacy Skills and Confidence”, International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,
Vol. 3 No. 2, article 16.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T. (2010), Skills Required by New Chemistry Graduates and their Development in Degree

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 163

 Programmes, Higher Education Academy UK Physical Sciences Centre, Hull.
Hill, M.A., Overton, T.L., Thompson, C.D., Kitson, R.R.A. and Coppo, P. (2019), “Undergraduate Recognition of
Curriculum-related Skill Development and the Skills Employers are Seeking”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 68–84.
Kelly, O. and Finlayson, O. (2009), “A HurdleToo High? Students’Experience of a PBL Laboratory Module”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 42–52.
Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J. and Clark, R.E. (2006), “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work:
An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential and Inquiry-Based
Teaching”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 75–86.
Likert, R. (1932), “A Technique for The Measurement of Attitudes”, Archives of Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 140, pp. 5–55.
Lucas, T. and Rowley, N.M. (2011), “Enquiry-based Learning: Experiences of First Year Chemistry Students Learning
Spectroscopy”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.12 No. 4, pp. 478-486.
McDonnell, C., O’Connor, C. and Seery, M. K, (2007), “Developing Practical Chemistry Skills by Means of Student
driven Problem Based Learning Mini-projects”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp.
130–139.
McGarvey, D.J. (2004), “Experimenting with Undergraduate Practicals”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 8 No.2,
pp. 58–65.
Moore, I. (2007), “An Evaluation Survey for EBL”, available at: http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/resources/
evaluation/evaluation_survey.rtf(accessed 6 March 2019).
Moore I. (2006), “Towards an Evaluation Strategy: Frameworks for Evaluating the Impact of the CEEBL”, External
Education Consultation Document for CEEBL, Centre for Excellence in Enquiry-based Learning, The
University of Manchester, Manchester.
Overton, T.L., Byers, B. and Seery, M.K. (2009), “Context- and Problem-based Learning in Higher Level Chemistry
Education”, in Eilks, I. and Byers, B. (Eds.), Innovative Methods of Teaching and Learning Chemistry in Higher
Education, RSC, Cambridge, pp. 43–59.
Pilot, A. and Bulte, A.M.W. (2006), “Why Do You “Need to Know” Context-based Education”, International Journal
of Science Education, Vol. 28 No. 9, pp. 953-6.
QAA (2014), ”Subject Benchmark Statement: Chemistry (Master’s)” available at: https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/
qaa/subject-benchmark-statements/sbs-chemistry-14-masters.pdf?sfvrsn = f290f681_18 (accessed 6
March 2019).
Raine, D. and Symons, S. (2005), PossiBiLities: a Practice Guide to Problem-based Learning in Physics and Astronomy,
Higher Education Academy Physical Sciences Centre, Hull.
Reid, N.(https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/ps0080_possibilities_problem_based_learning_in_
physics_and_astronomy_mar_2005.pdf)
(2006), Getting Started in Pedagogical Research in the Physical Sciences, Higher Education Academy UK

Physical Sciences Centre, Hull.

RSC, Learn Chemistry Higher Education Resources: Enhancing Employability http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/
collections/Higher-Education/he-resources/enhancing-employability (accessed 6 March 2019)
Sarkar, M., Overton, T., Thompson, C. and Rayner, G. (2016), “Graduate Employability: Views of Recent Science
Graduates and Employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3, pp. 31-48.
Summerfield, S., Overton, T. and Belt, S. (2003), “Problem-Solving Case Studies”, Vol. 75 No. 7, pp. 181A–182A.
Williams, D.P., Woodward, J.R., Symons, S.L. and Davies, D.L. (2010), “A Tiny Adventure:The Introduction of Problem
Based Learning in an Undergraduate Chemistry Course”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
11 No. 1, pp. 33–42.

164|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced
12 when students learn stereochemistry

Nimesh Mistry
School of Chemistry, University of Leeds
N.Mistry@leeds.ac.uk

The aim of this work is to identify issues that occur when students translate between 2D
and 3D representations of molecules and use this information to improve the teaching
practice of stereochemistry. In order to achieve this, diagnostic tests were designed and
have been implemented with students. Quantitative and qualitative analysis were used
to inform changes to the teaching approaches being taken. The diagnostic tests showed
that students have flaws in their ability to visualise molecules in 3D, leading to common
mistakes. This made us aware that, for the students in our study, issues arise when trying to
teach them 3D concepts using 2D methods. Students need to be taught effective strategies
to overcome these problems when trying to visualise molecules in 3D, and be taught
algorithmic strategies that are often used by experts.

As a result, we concluded that students should be taught to use 3D visualisation with

molecular models or 3D computational structures. An example of the resulting change in
practice will be discussed. This is an online tool that allows students to practice drawing
Newman projections and chair conformations to represent dashed-wedged structures
provided by dragging groups to the correct positions. We also have suggested some
algorithmic approaches which are used by experts, and could help those students who
struggle with 3D visualisation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study of
stereochemical thinking amongst students in the United Kingdom. The methodology we
have developed to diagnose and address these issues is novel and can be used in other
higher education institutions.

To cite: Mistry, N. (2019), “Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learn stereochemistry”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 165-180.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 165

Introduction

The importance of stereochemistry

Stereochemistry is fundamental to understanding the structure and properties of molecules in 3D
(Hoffman and Laszlo, 1991). It explains why different spatial arrangements of atoms can lead to molecules
with different appearances, smells, and toxicities (Hoffman and Laszlo, 1991), and is fundamental to
understanding why biological molecules such as proteins and sugars are able to carry out their functions
(Voet and Voet, 2010). The principles of stereochemistry are built upon further in organic chemistry to
explain why chemical reactions can favour one pathway over another (Clayden et al., 2012).This knowledge
can then be used by chemists to synthesise bioactive molecules as single stereoisomers (Caner et al.,
2004).Therefore, the topic of stereochemistry forms part of most, if not all, introductory organic chemistry
courses.

Through this topic, students are introduced to new ways of representing molecules that convey
stereochemical information.The most common of these are Newman projections and chair conformations.
For students to be able to reason and solve problems with stereochemistry, they must be able to transfer
between dashed-wedged (skeletal) representations, Newman projections, and chair conformations — a
process known as representational translation (Cooper and Stowe, 2018, Graulich, 2015). For anyone that
teaches stereochemistry or a topic that builds upon stereochemistry, there are some useful studies in the
literature of how students and instructors approach representational translation. These are summarised
below.

Strategies used to translate between representations

Research has shown that students and experts can apply either an imagistic or an algorithmic strategy in
representational translation (Kozma et al., 2000). Imagistic (visual/spatial) reasoning occurs when visual/
spatial skills are used to perform mental rotations and manipulations of molecules — in other words,
thinking in 3D. Algorithmic (analytic) strategies are in effect when rules and trends are used instead of
visual/spatial processes. Both strategies can be just as effective at producing the correct translation.

Students are often told by instructors to use molecular model kits to aid their understanding of
stereochemistry. There are three ways in which these can help students develop representational
competence (Stullet al., 2016). Firstly, model kits can be used to offload the cognitive burden of visualising
a molecule in 3D for the entirety of the task which is beneficial to the working memory. Secondly, they can
help students understand how different representations are connected to each other by building more
complete mental models (Mohamed-Salah and Alain, 2016). Thirdly, models can integrate new knowledge
with existing knowledge (such as steric and repulsive forces) which can lead to more ways of using and
retrieving that information.

Students who use model kits during instruction are more successful at performing representational
translation than those who never use model kits, proving that they help students to scaffold their visual/
spatial skills in the long term (Stull et al., 2016). Both physical and virtual models (such as those available
on the website www.ChemTube3D.com) have been shown to be equally effective (Stullet al., 2012; 2016).
However, simply providing students with a model kit does not improve visual/spatial competence (Stull, et
al., 2012). Instructors must guide students on how to use models to achieve representational competence
(Padalkar and Hegarty, 2015; Stullet al., 2016).

166|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Differences between experts and novices

Whilst instructors may promote the use of imagistic strategies when teaching stereochemistry, and
encourage the use of models, experts themselves prefer to use algorithmic strategies (Kozma and Russell
1997; Steiff and Raje 2007). Steiffet al. (2012) showed that students primarily use imagistic reasoning but
the proportion of students who adopt algorithmic approaches increases over time as their expertise in
representational competency develops. Students who have weaker visual/spatial skills are more likely
to adopt algorithmic approaches and end up achieving the same level of competence as students who
use imagistic strategies. Teaching students to use algorithmic approaches can also be more effective
than teaching students to perform mental rotations (Lopez et al., 2014). Therefore, it has been suggested
students should be encouraged to learn to use algorithmic strategies rather than visual/spatial strategies
(Vlacholia et al., 2017).

Using diagnostic tests to further understanding of student representational translation

The existing literature has provided great insights into how students approach stereochemistry problems
for instructors to consider in their teaching. However, the scope and the methodology that has been
conducted so far leaves certain knowledge gaps in relation to how students perform representational
translations.

The large proportion of studies have used MCQ-style instruments to diagnose representational
competency. For example, in one study, students were asked to match the correct Newman projection to
a dashed-wedged diagram by selecting one of four possible Newman projections that has been shown
in the question (Steiff et al., 2012). This method of performing a representational translation does not
correlate with how students will be asked to perform a translation in class and beyond. Instead, students
and experts often have to draw their own structures. MCQ-methodology only diagnoses students’
interpretations of a whole translation, whereas in reality students may find some components of the
translation more problematic than others. Asking students to draw their own representation would allow
us to determine this.

Another gap in the existing research was that it mostly focused on students’ability to translate 2D dashed
wedged structures to 3D Newman projections (Steiffet al., 2012; Mohamed-Salah and Alain, 2016; Stullet
al., 2016). There has been very little research into how students translate 2D dashed-wedged structures to
3D chair conformations, yet this is an important part of the curricula for introductory organic courses and
is required to understand how reactions such as the E2 elimination occurs selectively in cyclic molecules.

Aims of this Work

Diagnostic tests are a useful way of determining what your own students’ understand and can do. They
can be used alongside the literature to support the claims made from other studies, highlight that in your
own context students learn differently, and provide additional insights. As mentioned earlier, the existing
chemistry education literature presented some limitations of how students draw Newman projections and
chair conformations due to the methodology used to research how students perform representational
translations.

Using a diagnostic test, I wanted to investigate how students translate between 2D dashed and wedged
structures and their 3D diagrams (Newman projections and chair conformations) by studying the
translations they draw themselves. This approach provides more information than using an MCQ format.
I also wished to investigate which aspects of drawing Newman projections and chair conformations

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 167

from 2D structures (and vice versa) students find difficult so that teaching strategies, both visual/spatial
and algorithmic could focus on these aspects. The research questions that informed the design and
implementation of the diagnostic test were as follows:
1. What aspects of drawing Newman projections and chair conformations do students find
difficult?
2. What aspects of translating back to 2D structures do students find difficult?

For this remainder of this chapter, I will present how a diagnostic test was developed to establish the
difficulties students experience when performing representational translation and can be applied to teach
students effective methods of drawing Newman projections and chair conformations. I will also discuss
how the results of the diagnostic test led to the development of an online tool to support student’s ability
to perform types of translations. The use of the diagnostic test as a teaching tool will also be described. By
showcasing the use of this test and how to implement its finding, I hope to encourage readers to adopt
the test for their own practice and suggested strategies for teaching stereochemistry.

Methods

Stereochemistry diagnostic test

A diagnostic test that was implemented is presented in Table 1. It contains four items (or questions)
involving representational translation between 2D and 3D diagrams of molecules. Each item contains a
specific stereoisomer that students need to translate accurately. The purpose of item A is to determine
if students could correctly draw the Newman projection of an acyclic stereoisomer by looking along a
particular bond. Item B asks students to perform the reverse operation. Both items also require students
to rotate the carbon-carbon bond of the Newman projection into a more favourable conformer. This
determines if students can also apply stereochemical reasoning when drawing Newman projections.
Items C and D concern the translations of dashed-wedged structures and chair conformations. Item C
requires students to use stereochemical reasoning with chair conformations to consider the relative
stability of two chair conformations and how substituents change during a ring inversion (flip).

The test was administered to three cohorts of chemistry, medicinal chemistry and natural science students
at my own institution who were taking a course with stereochemistry being a particularly relevant topic.
The first cohort were students in Year 2 who had been taught a series of lectures on stereochemistry. This
diagnostic test was given to these students in the final lecture (post-instruction). The second and third
cohorts were students in Year 4, taking an asymmetric synthesis course. These students had been taught
stereochemistry two years previously but needed a working knowledge of stereochemistry for this course.
The second and third cohort completed the diagnostic test in the first lecture of the asymmetric synthesis
course (delayed instruction). Ethical approval was granted by the ethical review board at the author’s
institution before the tests were used. During the lecture, the test was distributed so each student was
randomly assigned one item from the test and was given ten minutes to provide an answer. This was to
ensure that a cross-section of student responses could be obtained with little impact on their class time.
Students were made aware that the survey was not compulsory and that the that the option to either
provide their name or remain anonymous. They were also made aware that the test had no bearing on
their course grade.This led to some students not choosing to complete the survey, resulting in an unequal
number of responses for each item being obtained from a given cohort. To encourage participation, this
test was also used as a formative teaching tool. Feedback on the combined cohort responses was given
to all students, and students who had included their name and email address, which was optional, also
received feedback on their own answers.

168|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Table 1: The four items/questions that comprise the stereochemistry diagnostic test

Item Type Question Translation

A Dashed-to
wedged
projection
Newman given
stable
Draw the Newmanthe
bondconformation.
given
Newman
interactions
by projection
projection
arrow.
Identify any
be
ofunfavourable
Ainalong
its most
thatRe-orientate
to
occur. the
your

D
C
B to Chair
conformation
projection
Newman
Dashed-
wedged
todashed-
chair Highlight
inthe
thestructure
anyNewman
given unfavourable
into a more
projection of B, re-orientate
favourable
interactions Newman
that occur

projection, then convert the structure into its 2D

Draw both
‘’dashed and wedged’’
possible chair conformations
format. of

cyclohexane C. Indicate which isomer is the more

stable
Draw and
thegive
2D ‘’dashed-wedged’’
an explanation forstructure of D
your reasoning.

towedged
conformation
dashed- showing the correct stereochemistry at the
substituted carbons. Show how you translated
from the chair to the 2D structure you’ve drawn.

As the course instructor for both courses, I used the results to aid my teaching to the participants of
the study. The results from the post-instruction cohort were used to design a future workshop based on
their strengths and weaknesses. The results from the delayed instruction cohorts were used to ascertain
prior knowledge and ability for the asymmetric course. Teaching of this course was adapted based on the
students’ strengths and weaknesses. A total of 92 responses were completed from the three cohorts. The
number of responses per item and per cohort are summarised in Table 2.
Table 2: Responses per cohort and per item for the stereochemistry diagnostic test

Item (post-instruction)
Year 2 2017 (delayed-instruction)
Year 4 2017 (delayed-instruction)
Year 4 2018 Combined

A 12 6 7 25
B 8 7 7 22
C 9 5 7 21
D 10 7 7 24

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 169

 Table 3: Codes used for scoring answers to items A–D

Code Aspect Description

A6
A5
A4
A3
A2
A1 Bond
Stereochemistry
Antiperiplanar
Newman
Rotation
Gauche
direction draws a Newman projection
drawn from the direction indicated by the arrow
draws the correct stereochemistry on both front and rear carbons
identifies unfavourable gauche/steric interactions
same structure given after rotating the carbon-carbon bond
has the tertiary butyl and phenyl groups antiperiplanar
B5
B4
B3
B2
B1 Dashed-wedged
Stereochemistry
Rotation
Gauche
Plane identifies unfavourable gauche/steric interactions
same structure given after rotating the carbon-carbon bond
draws the correct stereochemistry on both left and right carbons
matching translation of Newman projection to dashed-wedged
representation
draws dashed-wedged with methyl and t-butyl groups in plane
C5
C2
C1
C7
C6
C4
C3 Axial
Ring
Chair
Equatorial
Translation
dashed-wedged
Orientation
Stability
group
flip
group
from draws both chair conformations
ring flips chairs and substituents
draws axial group at correct angle
draws equatorial group at correct angle
identifies more stable chair conformation
correct stereochemistry of substituents

correct orientation of groups around the ring

D4
D3
D2
D1 Orientation
Alcohol
Methyl
Vinyl translates alcoholstereochemistry
translates vinyl group stereochemistry
translates methylstereochemistry
correct orientation of groups around the ring
Evaluation of the diagnostic test responses
A mixture of quantitative and qualitative analysis can be used to analyse the diagnostic test responses.
Quantitative analysis can be applied to arrange the results into clusters as described in the paragraph that
follows and thus highlight the scale of students successes and difficulties. Qualitative analysis of each
cluster can be used to gain deeper insight into why students had difficulties in certain areas over others.
To facilitate analysis, codes have been generated for each item to reflect the individual aspects of
representational translation required, which are given in Table 3. A score of +1 is given for correct
application of the code in an answer, and –1 for incorrect use which can then be tallied for each response
to give a total score. Ranking student responses by score reveals clusters of correct and incorrect responses
corresponding to different codes/aspects of representational translation. Analysing responses within each
cluster qualitatively involves checking to see whether students are providing the same or very similar
answers. This allows general trends and problematic areas to be identified.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

The responses obtained when the stereochemistry diagnostic test was implemented with the three
cohorts described are presented and discussed here. These results are then discussed in terms of the value
of the diagnostic test and how it was used to inform teaching strategies and resources that can be used to
aid the teaching of stereochemistry.

170|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Student successes and difficulties with Newman projections (items A and B)

For both items involving the use of Newman projections, a majority of students were able to draw the
Newman projections, identify gauche interactions and rotate carbons to minimise torsional strain. This
suggests that the majority of students understand the concepts of conformational analysis that are
understood through the perspective of Newman projections.

As can be seen in Table 4, for item A, 52% (13/25) students were able to provide a fully correct answer.
The aspects of translation where students made errors were with bond direction, stereochemistry, and
correctly rotating the carbon-carbon bond. Translating the correct stereochemistry of the dashed-wedged
structure to the Newman projection was the most common error that students made (28%, 7/25). Groups
which were in the plane of the paper were translated correctly (so that they were opposite each other),
whereas dashed and wedged groups were the ones that were switched.

Stereochemistry also featured as an error when rotating the original Newman projection (20%, 5/25).
Here the students correctly interpreted the dashed and wedged bonds in the first Newman projection
but then changed the stereochemistry when rotating the carbon-carbon bond. The final type of error
was from students who drew the Newman projection from the opposite bond direction (16%, 4/25). This
could have occurred because students were used to drawing Newman projections from this direction and
couldn’t adapt, or it could be due to the fact they didn’t notice that the question asked for a particular
bond direction to be used.

For item B, where students were performing the reverse translation, the correct answer was given by
63% of students (14/22) — as shown in Table 5. This suggests students find it easier to go from Newman
projection to 2D dashed-wedged structures than 2D dashed-wedged to Newman projection. As with item
A, when students did make errors it was due to switching stereochemistry (23%, 5/22) and incorrectly
preserving stereochemistry when rotating the carbon-carbon bond (14%, 3/22).

Student successes and difficulties with chair conformations (items C and D)

Student responses to item C provided 33% (7/21) fully correct answers showing that this question proved
to be the most challenging (Table 6). All students were able to draw the ring as a chair conformation
and flip the substituents correctly (axial to equatorial and vice versa) when inverting the chair. A high
proportion of students identified the conformer with the tertiary butyl group as being more stable when
that substituent was in an equatorial position.

Incorrect stereochemistry of the substituents was given in 14% (3/21) of responses. The most common
error was the relative orientation of the two substituents around the chair conformation (52%, 11/21).
The alcohol should have been anti-clockwise relative to the tertiary butyl group, but was drawn clockwise
instead. With the given stereochemistry of the two groups, these students had drawn the enantiomer of
molecule C instead. It could be possible that the students were drawing the chair as if they were viewing
the cyclohexane from behind the plane of the paper. This would lead to the alcohol being clockwise to
the tertiary butyl group, but the original stereochemistry being opposite to what these students drew.
These groups of students have been consistently taught to draw the stereochemistry of cyclohexane
substituents as if they viewing them from above, therefore my analysis has assigned this as an orientation
error rather than a stereochemistry error. Supporting evidence was provided by students answering item
D. The students performing the reverse translation were following the top face-wedged/bottom face
dashed rule in their translations.

For item D, fully correct answers were given by 54% (13/24) of students and errors related to translating

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 171

 Table 4: Numbers and percentages of respondents assigned to each cluster for Item A of the diagnostic test,
based on what they could do and the error made

Responses (n = 25) Answer Description

52% (13) Fully correct answer

28% (7) Incorrect stereochemistry on the front carbon

20% (5) Newman projection of the opposite bond direction

16% (4) Stereochemistry switch during rotation of carbon-carbon

bond

Table 5: Numbers and percentages of respondents assigned to each cluster for Item B of the diagnostic test,
based on what they could do and the error made
Responses (n
= 22) Answer Description

63% (14) Fully correct answer

23% (5) Incorrect stereochemistry

20% (3) Stereochemistry switch after bond rotation

172|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Table 6: Numbers and percentages of respondents assigned to each cluster for Item C of the diagnostic test,
based on what they could do and the error made
Responses (n
= 21) Answer Description

33% (7) Fully correct answer with anticlockwise orientation of

substituents

52% (11) Incorrect (clockwise) orientation of substituents

14% (3) Incorrect stereochemistry of one of the substituents

Figure 1: Mapping strategy used by successful students for items C and D

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 173

 Table 7: Numbers and percentages of respondents assigned to each cluster for Item D of the diagnostic test,
based on what they could do and the error made
Responses (n
= 24) Answer Description

54% (13) Fully correct answer

25% (6) Equatorial groups in the plane

21% (5) Incorrect orientation of the substituents

the correct stereochemistry (Table 7). The translation of the equatorial methyl group was a more common
error (25%, 6/24) than for the axial substituents (21%, 5/24). Students who translated the methyl group
incorrectly drew this group in the same plane as the cyclohexane. There were fewer errors translating the
correctorientation of the three groups (13%, 3/24) than for item C.

It is interesting to note that successful students for both item C and D revealed mapping strategies
to correctly orientate the groups around the ring (Figure 1). Another strategy to draw the correct
stereochemistry by correct students was drawing implicit hydrogens before performing the translation.
These findings reveal two possible strategies could be taught to other students who were unsuccessful
with their translations.

Comparison between cohorts

In all items, no cohort effects were observed. Students from each cohort were able to provide correct
answers, use the same successful strategies and gave the same common errors. Some cohorts were more
successful than others on particular items, but the number of responses from each cohort is too low (5–9
responses) to be able to measure any statistical significance.

174|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Findings from the diagnostic test

It should be noted that the author had provided instruction to these students on how to translate
stereochemistry for chair conformations and Newman projections using both imagistic and algorithmic
reasoning. These diagnostic test results show that whilst most students can translate the majority of the
chemical information from a dashed-wedged structure to a Newman projection or chair conformation,
there are some aspects of the translation that these students find more difficult than others.

The majority of students can successfully draw Newman projections and chair conformations and
extract stereochemical information provided in these representations through their ability to rotate
Newman projections and flip chairs into more favourable conformations. This is a welcome result as
the stereochemical information given in these alternative diagrammatic representations is the reason
why chemists use them. Correctly translating stereochemistry of dashed and wedged bonds to either
Newman projections or chair conformations seemed to be a source of difficulty for a number of students,
and indicates some of the difficulties students face with using an imagistic strategy.

A possible contributing factor in stereochemistry errors could have been the lack of explicit hydrogens in
the dashed-wedged structures in the diagnostic test. Implicit hydrogens on organic structures have been
shown to lead to student errors in organic mechanisms (Caspari et al., 2018). Because convention does
not require dashed and wedged hydrogens to be given for skeletal representations, students must adopt
strategies that consider their presence when drawing both Newman projections and chair conformations.

However, there was a notable discrepancy for correctly drawing thestereochemistry of axial and equatorial
substituents. Students seemed to be able to visualise the stereochemistry of axial groups as they point
up or down compared to equatorial groups pointing to the side. This finding implies that students were
using imagistic reasoning in their translations. Axial groups point above and below the ring so they are
easier to mentally rotate into dashed and wedged positions, whereas equatorial groups are more difficult
to consider because they point towards the side of the ring. It is possible that flawed imagistic reasoning
of equatorial groups led to a misconception that these groups would be in same plane of the ring. This is
exemplified by the fact all the students who made equatorial stereochemistry errors made this same error
in their translations.

Switching the stereochemistry around a carbon after a Newman projection translation was an unexpected
error (Table 3). Preserving thestereochemistry after a bond rotation is arguably easier than for a translation
so the presence of this error indicates a lack of visual/spatial skills by students.

The evidence from the number of students orientating chair substituents incorrectly suggests that
students’mental models for translating dashed-wedged structures to chair conformations are incomplete,
and they possess insufficient knowledge of appropriate algorithmic strategies. This is supported by my
own lack of instruction to these students of how use strategies to correctly orientate groups around a
cyclohexane ring. The use of mapping by students who were successful reveals a strategy that can be
taught to students who struggle with this aspect of the translation.

Generally, students found it easier to translate a Newman projection or a chair conformation to a dashed
wedged structure (63% and 54% correct respectively). Stereochemistry errors were seen in some student
responses but were lower compared to their respective translations in the opposite direction. It is unclear
why this would be the case but it appears that drawing Newman projections and chair conformations is a
more challenging proposition for novice learners.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 175

To summarise, the results of the diagnostic test showed the following.
• Students understood the concepts of stereochemical information given in Newman
projections and chair conformations.
• Students perform better at drawing 2D dashed and wedged structures from Newman
projections and chair conformations than vice versa.
• Many students struggled to correctly translate the correct stereochemistry indicating
difficulties with using an imagistic strategy.
• Students struggled with the correct orientation of groups around a cyclohexane ring.
• Mapping strategies by successful students showcased a strategy that could be used to help
other students overcome the problems highlighted above.

Implications and Adaptability for Teaching and Learning Stereochemistry

I have presented a diagnostic stereochemistry test that can provide insights into how students deal
with translating various common stereochemical representations, including dashed-wedged, Newman
projections and chair conformations. As outlined in the Methods section, the diagnostic test requires only
ten minutes of class time and it can also be used as a formative learning activity.

From the results obtained, it is clear my students found some aspects of representational translation
more difficult than others. As instructors of chemistry, it is important to take these into consideration, and
develop instructional strategies that will help students avoid or address these errors. In conjunction with
the relevant literature, we have used these results to develop both imagistic and algorithmic approaches
that could help our students improve their representational competence. I believe these approaches
could be applied in other higher education institutions as it is likely that students at other institutions
may experience similar challenges when performing these translations.

Helping students develop imagistic approaches

The diagnostic tests revealed the need to teach students effective imagistic strategies to translate the
correct stereochemistry. Teaching students to draw implicit hydrogens, as used by successful students,
could help more students draw correct Newman projections and chair conformations by making the
stereochemistry of a given carbon clearer (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Adding implicit hydrogens before the translation could be an effective strategy
for drawing the stereochemistry correctly

Another imagistic strategy is to teach students to draw an intermediate sawhorse projection so the
structure rotated more gradually towards its Newman projection (Figure 3).This approach works by helping
to offload the cognition of performing a mental rotation into more manageable chunks. This strategy has
been suggested by Hutchinson (2017), although no evidence was presented of how successful it is.

176|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Figure 3: Using an intermediate sawhorse projection to be able visualise rotation to a Newman projection
(adapted from Hutchison, 2017)
As mentioned earlier, virtual models can help students offload cognition when performing mental
rotations. I have worked with colleagues at Leeds to develop online tools to aid students’ ability to
correctly translate the stereochemistry of dashed-wedged structures to Newman projections and chair
conformations (Figure 4). They both assist students who use an imagistic strategy to build a mental picture
of a Newman projection or chair conformation with an associated 3D virtual model. The work of Stull et
al. (2016) has also influenced the design of this tool. The easier levels have accompanying virtual models,
to scaffold students’ ability to mentally visualise and rotate molecules. Further scaffolding is achieved
with a feature that allows students to click on an atom or bond in the model and see the equivalententity
highlighted in the dashed-wedged structure. On submitting a response, students are informed which
part of the translation is correct and incorrect. The student can then revisit and resubmit with the aid of
the model — in effect, using model-based feedback to develop visual/spatial skills. The tools are open
educational resources which will be used in classes and are available for students to use in their own time.

Figure 4: Screenshots of an online tools designed to help students translate between dashed-wedged structure, Newman
projections (https://www1.chem.leeds.ac.uk/nmr/Stereochemistry) and chair conformations
(https://www1.chem.leeds.ac.uk/nmr/Ring/)

Helping students develop algorithmic approaches

In addition to teaching students to adopt imagistic approaches to representational translation, the
results from the diagnostic test have led to the consideration of algorithmic approaches as well. One
such algorithmic strategy for drawing Newman projections is to teach students cues for how relative
stereochemistry should be preserved. For example, the syn relationship of two groups should lead to
a Newman projection with the groups on both sides (Figure 5). A similar strategy for drawing chair
conformations could be used for the relative orientation of axial and equatorial groups. Teaching students

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 177

 Figure 5: Algorithmic strategies to correctly translate relative stereochemistry

to use such rules could help to offload the cognition that can occur from relying too heavily on mentally
visualising structures in 3D.

The results from the diagnostic test revealed that mapping is a successful algorithmic strategy for drawing
the correct orientation of substituents around a cyclohexane ring. This had not been explicitly taught to
students before, yet this is a strategy that some students had learnt to use to achieve success. Teaching
students to use this strategy more formally would hopefully lead to more students adopting this strategy
(Figure 6).

Figure 6: Encouraging students to use mapping strategies could help students achieve greater success in their translations

Your Context

The prompts below are provided to encourage readers to reflect on how the stereochemistry diagnostic
test and online teaching tool discussed in this chapter could be adapted to their context. Those who
implement the test and online tool are encouraged to contact the author afterwards to update me on
your findings and any adaptations you have made. Before implementation of the test and/or learning tool,
consider the following:
• What are the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to embedding
this stereochemistry diagnostic test in your department/school and have you identified
adaptations to your context that could enhance the strengths and opportunities?
• What are the knowledge and skills that your students could develop from applying the
stereochemistry diagnostic test and/or online learning tool?
• Can the diagnostic test and/or online learning tool be used as formative assessments?
• How and when will students be consulted/informed in advance of implementation?
• What additional resources would be required to implement this diagnostic test and/or
online learning tool (staff and student time, amendments to module descriptors, materials,
space etc.)?
• How will you evaluate the implementation of this diagnostic test and/or online learning
tool?

178|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Diagnosing and addressing the issues faced when students learnstereochemistry

Conclusions

In this chapter, I have discussed the implementation of a stereochemistry diagnostic test that focuses
on translation between dashed-wedged, Newman and chair representations among three student
cohorts, which have also been used as formative teaching tools. I have shown that student errors with
representational translation relate to certain aspects which mostly, but not exclusively, involve translating
the correct stereochemistry at the particular carbon. Difficulties are greater when translating dashed
wedged representations to Newman projections or chair conformations. When teaching students how
to develop representational competence, attention needs to be given to ensure they avoid making these
errors. The results of the diagnostic test has led to some suggested imagistic and algorithmic strategies
to help students overcome the common errors identified, which includes the development of an online
stereochemistry learning tool. Whilst experts predominantly use algorithmic reasoning, students will
still use imagistic reasoning whilst their expertise is developing, so both types of strategies have been
suggested. Future work will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of these instructional strategies.

References
Caspari, I., Kranz, D. and Graulich, N. (2018), “Resolving the complexity of organic chemistry students’ reasoning
through the lens of a mechanistic framework”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 4,
pp. 1117-1141.
Caner, H., Groner, E., Levy, L. and Agranat, I. (2004), “Trends in the development of chiral drugs”, Drug Discovery
Today, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 105-110.
Clayden, J., Greeves, N. and Warren, N. (2012), Organic Chemistry, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Cooper, M. M. and Stowe, R. L. (2018), “Chemistry education research – from personal empiricism to evidence,
theory and informed practice”, Chemical Reviews, Vol. 118 No. 12, pp. 6053-6087.
Graulich, N. (2015), “The tip of the iceberg in organic chemistry classes: how do students deal with the invisible?”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 9-21.
Hoffman, R. and Laszlo, P. (1991), “Representation in chemistry”, Angewandte Chemie International Edition in
English, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Hutchison, J.M. (2017), Improving Translational Accuracy between Dash–Wedge Diagrams and Newman
Projections. Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 7, pp. 892-896.
Kozma, R. B. and Russell, J. (1997), “Multimedia and understanding: expert and novice responses to different
representations of chemical phenomena”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 34 No. 9, pp. 949
968.
Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J. and Marx, N. (2000), “The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry
laboratory and their implications for teaching”, Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 105-144.
Lopez, E. J., Shavelson, R. J., Nandagopal, K., Szu, E. and Penn, J. (2014), “Factors contributing to problem-solving
performance in first-semester organic chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 7, pp. 976-
981.
Mohamed-Salah, B. and Alain, D. (2016), “To what degree does handling concrete molecular models promote
the ability to translate and co-ordinate between 2D and 3D molecular structure representations? A case
study with Algerian students”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 862-877.
Padalkar, S. and Hegarty, M.(2015), “Models as feedback: developing representational competence in chemistry”,
Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 107 No. 2, pp. 451-467.
Steiff, M. and Raje, S. (2007), “Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science”, Learning and Instruction,
Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 219-234.
Steiff, M., Ryu, M., Dixon, B. and Hegarty, M. (2012), “The role of spatial ability and strategy preference for spatial

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 179

 problem solving in organic chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 89 No. 7, pp. 854-859.
Stull, A. T., Hegarty, M., Dixon, B. and Steiff, M. (2012) “Representational translation with concrete models in
organic chemistry”, Cognition and Instruction, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 404-434.
Stull, A. T., Gainer, M., Padalkar, S. and Hegarty, M. (2016), “Promoting representational competence with
molecular models in organic chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 994-1001.
Vlacholia, M., Vosniadou, S., Roussos, P., Salta, K., Kazi, S., Sigalas, M. and Tzougraki, C. (2017), “Changes in visual/
spatial and analytic strategy use in organic chemistry with the development of expertise”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 763-773.
Voet D. and Voet, J. G. (2010), Biochemistry, 4th Edition. Wiley, New York.

180|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the
13 transition to higher education

Suzanne Fergus
School of Life and Medical Sciences, University of Hertfordshire
s.fergus@herts.ac.uk

The aim of this work is to encourage and increase student engagement within a Year 1
chemistry module and support students in more meaningful learning of chemistry as they
transition to higher education. PeerWise — a freely available online platform for creating
and answering multiple choice questions — was implemented as an assignment in Year 1
to produce student-generated content. An initial workshop activity to scaffold question
writing afforded students the opportunity to create, analyse and synthesise questions with
the additional challenge of coming up with plausible distractors, which is a new approach to
their learning. Engagement with the online system was high with contributions, particularly
answering questions, going beyond the minimum requirement.

PeerWise was evaluated from data analytics within the platform and also from student
feedback on this activity. There was evidence of deep learning approaches and critical
evaluation from students which was supported and enabled through the use of PeerWise.
The use of the student-generated repository as a revision tool after the assignment deadline
demonstrates the usefulness and value of PeerWise for student learning. Some students did
not engage with PeerWise beyond the assignment deadline due to time constraints and the
perceived lack of authority in student-generated content. This approach is very versatile and
can be used within many contexts.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tinahas been atremendousrole model, particularly when Istarted to explore chemical education
in my research activities. Her positivity, enthusiasm, and encouragement helped me to continue
with a shared endeavour to make chemistry learning more meaningful for my students and
question any approach using the same rigour we demand from scientific research.

To cite: Fergus, S. (2019), “Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education”, in Seery, M.K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.),
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 181-194.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 181

Introduction

Challenges on transition into higher education

The first-year transition into higher education provides a considerable challenge both academically and
socially for students. This includes adjusting to living away from home, balancing part-time employment
responsibilities and adapting to the newer concepts of becoming independent learners who are
responsible for their own personal learning in partnership with academics but without the constant
direction from a teacher (Yorke, 2000). The increase in the diversity of the student population has been
in place in the UK since the 1990s and similar trends are observed in many other countries. This widening
participation encompassing more mature students, international students, students with a disability,
students from under-represented groups (such as black and minority ethnic), and students who are first
in the family to attend university, has a definite impact on student identity and ultimately on retention.
Scanlon et al. (2007) propose that the context and process of student identity is formed from the nexus of
situated interactions with lecturers and other students.

In the context of the first-year student learning experience, success is best evaluated in terms of how the
students (from a variety of diverse backgrounds) adjust to the demands of their first year. This is typically
measured by engagement (such as attendance, completion of curriculum requirements) and performance
(grades) which can highlight at risk students and stimulate further action, such as meeting with an
academic tutor, or completing a reflective action plan (Yorke, 2006). Engagement also encompasses
non-academic and social aspects of the student experience. Student engagement is developed from the
dynamic interplay between the student and the institution interms of activities that support learning and
also include self-efficacy, well-being, and belonging (Kahu and Nelson, 2018; Krause and Coates, 2008)

Approaches to learning
The level of engagement and the student’s approach to learning are linked (Yorke, 2006). Students can
adopt strategic, deep, or surface approaches to learning. A surface level approach is one where the student
focuses on learning and remembering the contents they study, whereas a deep level approach is one
where the student focuses on the message and the meaning of the contents they study. A strategic level
approach is one where the student focuses on achieving the best grades possible. Some are motivated
by their own competitiveness to do better than their peers, while others are driven by a strong desire to
succeed.

A study by Marton and Saljo (1984) showed that such deep and surface approaches relate to the qualitative
differences in learning outcomes. The deep approach relates to high quality learning outcomes and the
surface approach relates to lower quality outcomes. It is important to consider the approaches to learning
when designing assessments so that it is difficult for a learner to adopt a surface approach and perform
satisfactorily. This was considered in designing the PeerWise assignment. I asked myself“how can Iensure
that the students must think more deeply and make sense of their chemistry learning within this assessment
design?”

Effective assessment
Assessment in higher education (HE) focuses on challenging students throughout their studies, enabling
them to acquire the knowledge, skills, and attributes to equip them for a rapidly changing and complex
world and ensure they have the confidence to thrive as global citizens in the 21st century (Boud and
Falchikov, 2006). The resulting drive is towards assessments that require more meaningful tasks and
help to embed generic employability skills, referred to as authentic assessments (Darling-Hammond and

182|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

Snyder, 2000). Within this development, to ensure that students are empowered the feedback cycle as
defined by Carless and Boud (2018) is “a process through which learners make sense of information from
various sources and use it to enhance their work or learning strategies” is highly important. When thinking
to adopt PeerWise, I considered how the students would obtain feedback on their work as the feedback
cycle promotes meaningful learning. The peer feedback design within PeerWise allows for constructive
feedback and places the students centrally in the learning process.

The function of assessment has evolved in HE to include both a summative approach (assessment of
learning) and a formative approach (assessment for learning) (see Nicoland Macfarlane-Dick 2006; Carless,
2007; Brown, 2005) to promote and enhance learning.The PeerWise assignment was designed to function
as a learning activity as well as an assessment activity.

Bloom’sTaxonomy(Bloom and Krathwohl, 1956)is a six-levelclassificationsystemthatusesstudentlearning

behaviour to infer the level of cognitive achievement.The levels are considered hierarchical whereby each
level is subsumed by the higher levels; therefore, a student functioning at the application level has also
mastered the topic at the knowledge and comprehension levels. Although it is a hierarchical framework,
it is not a prescriptive model. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy was coordinated in the 1990s with changes
in the three broad categories of terminology, structure and emphasis (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001).
Figure 1 illustrates and provides a summary of the six revised levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. The surface
approach to learning as described previously demonstrates the lower order level of remembering. The
goal for effective assessment design is to promote the higher order levels such as creating, evaluating, and
analysing where appropriate. PeerWise enables students to engage beyond simple recall, and this in my
opinion is one of the principal attractive features of PeerWise.
Remembering: Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling
relevant knowledge from long term memory.
CREATING EVALUATING ANALYZING Understanding: Constructing meaning from oral,
written, and graphic messages through interpreting,
exemplifying, classifying, summarizing, inferring,
comparing and explaining.
Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through
APPLYING executing, or implementing.

Analyzing: Breaking material into constituent parts,

UNDERSTANDING determining how the parts relate to one another and to
an overall structure or purpose through differentiating,
organizing and attributing.
REMEMBERING Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and
standards through checking.
Creating: Putting elements together to form a
coherent or functional whole; reorganizing elements
into a new pattern or structure through generating,
planning, or producing.
Figure Bloom’s Taxonomy revised version (based on Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001)
1:

Multiple-choice questions as a method of assessment

Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are frequently employed within assessment as an efficient method
to provide rapid feedback. There are criticisms that the use of MCQs promotes recall and memorization
and does not test for higher level cognitive processes (McCoubrie, 2004). MCQs are constructed with a
stem or question followed by a series of answers of which one is correct, and the remainder are incorrect

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 183

distractors. It is important that students are introduced to the attributes of a good quality MCQ and
how to construct a question that does not focus on simply recognising the correct answer. Creating a
good quality MCQ is a challenging task as not only should the question be designed to test profound
understanding of course material but it should include incorrect yet plausible distractors that arise due to
misconceptions or common mistakes (Galloway and Burns, 2015). A workshop activity as described in the
methods section illustrates how I support my students with writing good quality MCQs.

PeerWise
PeerWise is a freely available online tool that enables students to create and produce their own MCQs
with appropriate distractors and an explanation to accompany the correct answer (PeerWise, 2018a).
This approach facilitates student centred learning reflecting the shift from a transmission didactic mode
of learning to active learning with learners taking more responsibility in the learning process (Luxton
Reilly and Denny, 2010). All the questions submitted by the students registered to a PeerWise course
are available for all students within that specific learning community. Other students cannot see the
contents of a PeerWise course. Students can answer the questions for self-assessment and have access
to the explanations provided for their own learning and understanding. They evaluate the questions by
rating the quality on a scale from 0–5, categorising the difficulty (easy/medium/difficult), and also posting
a comment. This functionality creates an opportunity for peer review and peer feedback. As the PeerWise
system requires students to create their own MCQs, which utilises the remembering and understanding
of knowledge and applying this information to a question, this was deemed an attractive feature to build
into a Year 1 assessment in my institution. Online quizzes (written by staff) provided to students would
not develop the higher cognitive skills of peer analysis and evaluation, not to mention the extensive staff
resource involved.

One of the concerns I had when considering adopting PeerWise was in relation to students doing a copy
and paste of questions and not creating their own. The requirement to generate an explanation helps
mitigate such a shortcut; even if a student does copy a question from elsewhere, they still need to explain
the answer which requires them to think more deeply. Students can flag a question to a staff member if
they think it may be incorrect and also flag any inappropriate behaviour. The gamification functionality of
PeerWise with the badging system and leader board is an attractive in-built feature to promote student
engagement.

Student engagement with PeerWise

Student engagement within PeerWise demonstrated by the number of questions authored, questions
answered, and comments written is consistently reported to be well above the minimum requirement.
For example, on a first-year computer programming course, with a requirement to create a minimum of
two questions and answer a minimum of ten questions, Denny et al. (2008) found on average students
submitted 2.6 questions, answered 34 questions and provided 707 comments. This is evidence to show
that PeerWise facilitates peer discussion and interaction. Similar findings have been established in other
studies across a range of disciplines, for example, in chemistry (Galloway and Burns, 2015; Ryan, 2013) in
biochemistry (Bottomley and Denny, 2011) in physics (Bates et al., 2012), in physics, chemistry and biology
(Casey et al., 2014) in medicine (Walsh et al., 2018) and in veterinary science (Rhind and Pettigrew, 2012).

PeerWise and attainment

Interms of the impact of PeerWise on exam performance, positive correlations between students’PeerWise
activity and exam performance are reported (Denny et al., 2008; Denny et al., 2010; McQueen et al., 2014).
Comparing PeerWise to other active learning tools, Tatachar and Kominski (2017) found that, despite no
significant differences being established between a case-based application group and a PeerWise group

184|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

on pre- and post-tests, the PeerWise group exam performance was superior to that of the case-based
application group on two of the five individual post-test questions.

A large-scale study in physics, chemistry, and biology across three research-intensive UK universities
(Hardy et al., 2014) found a modest but statistically significant positive correlation between students’
PeerWise activity and their examination performance. Interestingly, students of lower and intermediate
ability showed benefit from the online engagement activity in terms of their end of module examination
marks. Walsh et al. (2018) determined that question writing frequency correlated most strongly with
summative examination performance (Spearman’s rank: 0.24, p < 0.001). Hancock et al. (2018) concluded
that engagement with PeerWise in a large first year molecular biology course resulted in an average mark
improvement of 4%, which was inclusive of all students in the cohort.

Quality of multiple choice questions

Purchase et al. (2010) examined the extent to which academic ability influences the quality of questions.
Quality was determined in respect of the clarity of the question stem, the feasibility of the distractors, the
extent of the explanation and whether the question contained any errors. Students were divided into
four quartiles based on prior academic performance and the higher quartiles generally produced better
quality questions. Galloway and Burns (2015) and Bates et al. (2014) evaluated question quality using the
cognitive domain levels of the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (see Figure 1). Both studies found that a large
number of questions classified were of high quality, requiring more than just a factual recall and used
plausible distractors with valid explanations.

Methods

Context for implementing PeerWise

At the University of Hertfordshire, Year 1 students study chemistry as a fundamental topic underpinning
the Pharmaceutical Science and Pharmacy degree programmes. A significant number of students struggle
with the transition into HE and the previous strategies adopted at A Level (or equivalent for example,
foundation course in chemistry) to learn chemistry are often not satisfactory in Year 1 of university. Many
students adopt a surface approach that does not promote meaningful learning and I have observed
that the priority to memorise leads them being overwhelmed and increased stress. Although there is a
prerequisite for A Level chemistry, there are varying levels of competencies within the cohort in terms
of their fundamental chemistry knowledge and understanding. Student feedback has highlighted that
some students became less engaged during the academic year as they perceived the course content
to be very similar to A Level. They fall into the “I know” trap, something that I suggest shuts down their
learning where attending to information ceases and hence halts the learning process. The challenge from
a learning and teaching perspective is to create an inclusive environment for such a mixed ability cohort,
supporting those students who find chemistry a challenge in the first year and stimulating and stretching
those students who perceive it to be just like A Leveland risk disengaging from the module and becoming
bored. PeerWise provides a means to address both, it encourages the stronger performing students to
challenge their knowledge and understanding of chemistry concepts through creating good quality
MCQs with challenging distractors. PeerWise also provides a resource for students who find chemistry
challenging as they can use the repository of MCQs to test their knowledge and understanding and
obtain feedback.

Design and implementation of a PeerWise assignment

The PeerWise system was introducedinaYear 1 foundation chemistry module co-taught to pharmaceutical

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 185

science and pharmacy undergraduate students, all of whom had studied chemistry previously at A Level.
A 1-hour workshop on writing multiple choice questions (MCQs) was delivered to students in weeks 2–4
of the academic year to introduce and scaffold the PeerWise activity. The workshop materials are available
in the Supplementary Information. During the workshop, non-chemistry questions were introduced to
explore the structure of a good quality MCQ, followed by chemistry specific questions. The final aspect
of the workshop involved students working in small groups (2–3 students) creating an MCQ followed
by a group evaluation. Together, they discussed suggestions on improving the quality of the MCQ. This
format was adopted from Bates et al. (2012) in order to adequately support students in using the online
collaborative PeerWise platform. A screencast was prepared using Camtasia software to explain the
registration process on PeerWise. This was shown to the students during the workshop and was available
to view through the in-house VLE platform. Other screencasts on help topics that students may have
queries about (for example, including images in questions, searching for questions on PeerWise) are
available on the PeerWise web site (PeerWise, 2018b). There is also the PeerWise online community for
educators where resources and publications are shared as a potential source of support and information
(PeerWise, 2018c). There is some preparation work required by the lecturer in advance of introducing
PeerWise. Table 1 summarises the Table
key action1: points
Lecturer required
Preparation forPeerWise
with lecturer preparation.

Action Point Further Information

Register for account
Instructor PeerWise
Set up astudents
course for your
Contact PeerWise and request an Instructor account (https://
peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/join/). You can check if your institution is
registered to PeerWise by searching on the PeerWise homepage.
This is the unique course where your students will be working
together on PeerWise. I used the module name and year e.g. MSR
2018 as the course name so it is clear to students.

the
Populate
student course with
numbers
theidentification In the Administration view of your course created, select manage
"administrator" and "student" access. Then “Edit Student Identifiers”
and simply copy and paste your list of identifiers into the text box
area.
number
Decide ofthe
that students
criteria; number
on of questions
questions
will that
assignment
author, This information should be clearly indicated to students in the
PeerWise assignment information (see Supplementary Information)
and explained in the workshop.

students will answer, and the

number of comments required
topics or
Consider
own
MCQs based
if students
topics onchoose
students will create
independently
assigned their Identify the topics and allocate specific topics to students. If students
can choose their own topics independently, clarify which topics are to
be included.

Students were provided with an assignment information guide which is available in the Supplementary
Information. Students were required to create two questions, answer five and comment on three questions.
I decided to assign students their two chemistry topics. I wanted to ensure that there would be a good
spread of MCQs available in the question bankrepository and that students could not avoidtopics that they
might find more challenging, such as hybridisation. Each student was assigned two topics, a numeracy
based option and a chemistry theory-based option, and there was no choice. Due to my programme

186|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

regulations, there is a fixed number of summative assignments allowed so the PeerWise assignment was
formative and therefore did not contribute to the overall module mark. Others introduce PeerWise as a
low-stake assessment with a small proportion of marks (2–5%) associated. With a summative PeerWise
assignment, consider how you will assign credit to students. A participation mark (where all students who
complete the assignment receive credit) may not be viewed as fair by students as it does not capture the
quality of student efforts. The game-like elements (such as badges, points, and leader boards) in PeerWise
can be used to assign credit to students. The reputation score which is displayed near the top right corner
of the main menu accumulates points as students make their contributions. There is detailed information
on the PeerWise community page (PeerWise, 2018d) on how the scoring algorithm works.

Figure 2 illustrates the assessment timeline for the first semester. Students are also provided with an
assessment matrix (Supplementary Information) at the beginning of the year which shows the range
of assessments and the week of submission to help students manage their workload. The assessment
matrix is also highly informative for staff in planning assessments across the semesters and ensures that
assessments are not bunched together (for example, multiple assessment submissions across different

Low stakes assessment

Workshop
PeerWise PeerWise Assignment High stakes assessment
In-Class Test

2 4 6 8 10 12
feedback feedback

Figure 2: PeerWise assessment timeline (in weeks) in Semester 1 (September–December)

modules or courses in the same week of the semester).

Semester timeplan
The introduction of the PeerWise assignment was considered in relation to the assessment outline for
Semester 1 (Weeks 1–12). It is important that students are provided with feedback opportunities from
low-stake assessments that feed-forward to subsequent high-stake assessments (as shown in Figure 2).
The PeerWise assignment submission was due in Week 10, which provided the students at least seven
weeks to register and complete the assignment. Each student was assigned two chemistry theory topics
that would be covered in lectures during Weeks 2–11 and would form the content to be assessed in an
in-class test in Week 12.

Role of academic staff

In relation to the intervention from academic staff during the PeerWise assignment, the expectation was
for staff to assume the role of observer and deal with any administration or academic queries directly.
Student engagement on PeerWise was monitored during the 6-week timeframe of the assignment with
an email reminder at Week 6 for non-registered students. The registration status of students was checked
manually from the instructor view in the PeerWise dashboard and it was important to ascertain if there
were any issues that prevented successful registration.

Evaluation of the PeerWise assignment

A mixed-methods approach was adopted to evaluate the PeerWise activity using both quantitative
methods (analysis of user data on PeerWise, closed questions in an online questionnaire) and qualitative
methods (open questions in an online questionnaire and focus groups). An online questionnaire (see
Supplementary Information) was administered focusing on three sections; demographic information,

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 187

general perceptions on the use of PeerWise/workshop, and its impact on chemistry learning. As internet
surveys suffer from low response rates, participants were emailed regarding the online survey with a
follow up reminder after three weeks. The user data on PeerWise can be obtained from the instructor view.

The closed questions were analysed by reporting the percentages and number of responses to each
question. The open question comments were read several times to identify broad themes. The work was
conducted following ethical approval in line with institutional guidelines.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

PeerWise engagement with assignment criteria

With the introduction of PeerWise, it was observed that 95% of our cohort engaged successfully. A total
of 237 students (cohort A) registered on PeerWise and a summary of the student participation is shown
in Table 2. Also shown in Table 2 are two academic cohorts (B and C) for two different academic years on
the same programme of study that participated in this PeerWise assignment. Each cohort superseded
the expectations of the minimum levels of engagement (writing two questions, answering five and
commenting on three) except cohort Casthey authored two questions below the expected total number.
It is evident that answering questions in each cohort is much higher in comparison to questions authored
and comments written. Each cohort answered more than twice the expected number of questions.

Cohort A showed higher overall activity which is attributed to the larger class size. One of the primary
objectives with this PeerWise approach is to help increase student engagement within a module and
develop an active online community of support. It is clear that the majority of students adhered to the
assignment criteria and created the prescribed two questions. This was a very encouraging result as
creating MCQs is not a straightforward task even when the topic appears easy.
Table 2: Comparison of the minimum expected levels of PeerWise engagement
with actual levels of engagement in each cohort

Population
Cohort/ Questions Authored
(Expected/Submitted) Questions Answered
(Expected/Submitted) Comments Written
(Expected/Submitted)
A/237 474/481 1190/5890 714/1267
B /143 286/292 715/2022 429/605
C/130 260/258 650/1556 390/469

Engagement over the semester

Considering student engagement over the assignment timeline, Figure 3 represents the number of
questions contributed per day for cohort A. Not surprisingly, the majority of questions were contributed
within the last two days of the assignment deadline. A similar trend was observed with cohorts B and
C in different academic years. Student engagement was highest with answering questions. As can be
seen from Figure 4, which illustrates when students answered questions; this included periods after the
assignment deadline, in the weeks leading up to the in-class test and end of year examinations. This level
of activity demonstrates the usefulness of the system as an exam preparation aid.

PeerWise as a revision tool

From the online questionnaire, 56.7% (34 students) indicated using PeerWise for revision whereas 43.3%
(26 students) didn’t engage. Positive aspects included “very good, it helped a lot with the week 12 exam”

188|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

Figure 3: The number of questions contributed on the PeerWise system during the timeline period by
students in cohort A (PeerWise assignment deadline was Nov 30th and the in-class test was Dec 13th)

In-Class test

PeerWise

Resit
Exams Exams

Figure 4: The number of questions answered on the PeerWise system during the academic year by
students in cohort A

and“a great opportunity to test your chemistry knowledge and study progress before the test”. Students could
focus on areas that they wanted to practice further and assist their understanding. One commented:
For the topics I wasn’t sure and confident about my knowledge, Ijust went to the PeerWise and the questions
are categorised, so I could find the questions that I wanted and also the answers have comments, that was
really helpful for me because I understood some difficult points.

There were also comments which recognized the potential of PeerWise as a revision tool but highlighted a
lack of available time as a barrier:“very good and useful, if I had timeI would have used it formy in-class test as
revision” and “it is a great resource for revision. If week 11 and 12 were less busy, I would have used it”. Students
also questioned the quality of the work produced by other students. “I didn’t really trust people with the
questions so no I didn’t really use it”. The students wanted reassurance that the answers and explanations
were correct:
Because the student made it I wasn’t sure was it the correct answer or not...if not many people answered it
or the answers were different, I wasn’t sure which one was right.

Challenging aspects of the PeerWise assignment — time commitment and registration

A total of 62 students responded (response rate 26%) to the online questionnaire distributed to cohort
A and were identified in the survey response as male (n = 27) and female (n = 35). The aspect indicated
as most challenging was creating MCQs (63%). This was also reflected during the preparatory workshop
when students expressed their surprise at how creating MCQs on fundamental topics was more difficult
than initially expected. The second most challenging aspect indicated was answering questions (17%)
followed by commenting on questions (6%). A total of three students indicated registering on PeerWise
as the most challenging aspect. A number of students were required to email the lecturer as their student

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 189

registration numbers were not included in the identifiers list due to late registration on the course.
When these details were updated, no further email requests were received regarding registration. The
technological requirements of PeerWise have not been found to be difficult for students. Initially, I used
a video to show registration but now the students register in the workshop on their smart phones and
we go through the steps together. This has been found to be more efficient and is the approach I would
recommend. The challenge in creating questions was also raised in focus group discussions:
It wasn’t that easy to be honest, it took me 4 or 5 hours, I thought it was easy to write MCQs but it isn’t
because the alternative answer shouldn’t be too easy and that’s what took the time.

Online community and learning

The development of an active online community of support was created from the assignment criteria.
During the focus groups, students said that they appreciated the positive feedback and interaction from
their peers: “It was cool when someone appreciates you have put in a lot of effort”. Students commented
on the badges functionality in PeerWise that provided motivation to engage further with answering
and commenting on questions. The badges and comments directly impacted the online community of
support: “it made me earn more badges as well and then people started commenting about my question and
that gave me another badge, it was really good”. The majority of queries or errors were resolved by students
themselves within the online community. As the lecturer, I did moderate questions occasionally, but
students did not raise flags and there was no inappropriate behaviour.

Effect of the PeerWise assignment on learning chemistry

From the survey, 63% of students selected answering MCQs as the most beneficial aspect of PeerWise.
Comments included specific reference to aspects of learning chemistry: “helped me to think about the
concepts that I can use in chemistry” and “I really did learn what dipole moment is because of PeerWise”.

Some students answered questions to challenge their strengths and weaknesses whereas for others“it is
easy to just choose the easy questions and not attempt the more challenging ones”. This links to the differences
between performance goals where the focus is achieving the required outcomes avoiding any exposure
of weaknesses in comparison to learning goals which foster a deep approach that some students have
adopted (Dweck, 2000). To optimise the extent to which students challenge themselves, incorporate these
aspects in the workshop when introducing PeerWise. Emphasise how you suggest students use PeerWise
and give examples of both good and poor practice, so it is clear to students what is expected from them.

Engagement with writing questions

Students were assigned two topics and to ensure fairness, fundamental topics that were covered in detail
during A Level (for example, percentage yield calculations) were matched with more challenging topics
(for example, resonance). The students commented on having two topics, stating that there was one
which they found easier than the other. It is important to consider the prior knowledge of the student
cohort and the topics to be covered ahead of implementing the PeerWise assignment.

Benefits of asking MCQ questions

The additional research and reading on topics was reported by a student in relation to writing a good
question “you have to do a lot of research on that certain topic so it not only helps other people it also helps
yourself”. This indicates the deeper approach to learning that resulted for some students. Students
challenged themselves to create good distractors and this aspect supported their chemistry learning.

190|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

Evaluation of workshop and scaffolding implemented

The workshop activity on understanding how to create good quality MCQs and clear information
regarding registration were identified as beneficial. This structured approach aligns with good practice
in assessment-for-learning (Nicol and Macfarlane-Dick, 2006) whereby students engaged well with the
assessment criteria and it was important for managing student expectations.

Findings on self-regulation and the transition to the higher education learning environment
The transition to HEinvolves the development of independent learners who self-regulate their progression
and learning. There was indication that PeerWise did enable some students to consider self-regulation,
with one commenting that “it allows me to identify my own strengths and weaknesses”. There wasn’t a high
level of interaction beyond the assignment deadline. One reason was that there was no requirement to
do this and PeerWise requires an online community to function optimally. Another perceived barrier was
confidence regarding the quality and accuracy of the questions and explanations as noted previously.

Implications and Adaptability

When considering how PeerWise could fit within your programme design, the preparatory workshop
on writing MCQs (see Supplementary Information) is very important. Although PeerWise is a relatively
easy technology to implement, establishing expectations with students and enabling a pre-assessment
dialogue is essential. This isn’t a case of setting up PeerWise and expecting it to just work for your students
on its own. The assessment criteria should capture the outcomes identified for your students. If you are
introducing PeerWise as a formative exercise or a low-stake assessment, then clarify the subsequent
assignments that the PeerWise activity feed-forwards to. This helps with student motivation and
engagement as they can see what is in it for them.

Conclusion

I have successfully implemented PeerWise over a number of iterations to encourage student engagement
in Year 1 and this level of engagement has been consistently high. The PeerWise process of creating,
answering and commenting on questions supports meaningful learning. The bank of questions
generated have been used by students as a revision tool after the assignment deadline. Some students
did not engage with PeerWise beyond the assignment due to time constraints and a lack of confidence in
student-generated content.

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Paul Denny, University of Auckland (creator and developer of the PeerWise system) for his
continuous help and support with my many queries and providing additional user data when requested.

References
Anderson, L. W. and Krathwohl, D. R. (2001), A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s
Taxonomy of educational objectives, Longman, New York.
Bates, S.P., Galloway, R.K. and McBride, K.L. (2012), “Student-generated content: Using PeerWise to enhance
engagement and outcomes in introductory physics courses”, in Proceedings of the 2011 Physics Education
Research Conference.
Bates, S.P., Galloway, R.K., Riise, J. and Homer, D. (2014), “Assessing the quality of a student-generated question
repository”, Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research, Vol. 10, pp. 020105-1-020105-11.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 191

Bloom, B.S. and Krathwohl, D.R. (1956), Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals,
by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain, Longman, New York.
Bottomley, S. and Denny, P. (2011), “A participatory learning approach to biochemistry using student authored
and evaluated multiple-choice questions”, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol.39, pp. 352–
361.
Boud, D. and Falchikov, N. (2006), “Aligning assessment with long‐term learning”, Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 399-413.
Brown, S. (2005), “Assessment for Learning”, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, pp. 81–89.
Carless, D. (2007), “Learning‐oriented assessment: conceptual bases and practical implications”, Innovations in
Education and Teaching International, Vol. 44, pp. 57–66.
Carless, D. and Boud, D. (2018), “The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback”,
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 1315–1325.
Casey, M.M., Bates, S.P., Galloway, K.W., Galloway, R.K., Hardy, J.A., Kay, A.E., Kirsop, P. and McQueen, H.A. (2014),
“Scaffolding student engagement via online peer learning”, European Journal of Physics, Vol. 35, p. 045002.
Darling-Hammond, L. and Snyder, J. (2000), “Authentic Assessment of Teaching in Context”, Teaching and Teacher
Education, Vol. 16, pp. 523-545.
Denny, P., Hamer, J., Luxton-Reilly, A. and Purchase, H. (2008), “PeerWise: Students Sharing Their Multiple Choice
Questions”, in Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Computing Education Research, ICER ’08.
ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 51–58.
Denny, P., Hanks, B. and Simon, B. (2010), “PeerWise: replication study of a student-collaborative self-testing web
service in a U.S. setting”, SIGCSE 2010, ACM, USA, pp. 421-425.
Denny, P., Luxton-Reilly, A. and Simon, B. (2009), “Quality of student contributed questions using PeerWise”,
Eleventh Australasian computing education conference (ACE 2009), pp.55–64.
Dweck, C.S. (2000), Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development, Psychology Press, New
York.
Galloway, K.W. and Burns, S. (2015), Doing it for themselves: students creating a high quality peer-learning
environment. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 82–92.
Hancock, D., Hare, N., Denny, P. and Denyer, G. (2018), “Improving large class performance and engagement
through student-generated question banks”, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 46, pp.
306-317.
Hardy, Bates, S.P., Casey, M.M., Galloway, K.W., Galloway, R.K., Kay, A.E., Kirsop, P. and McQueen, H.A. (2014),
J.,
“Student-Generated Content: Enhancing learning through sharing multiple-choice questions”,
International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 36, pp. 2180–2194.
Kahu, E.R. and Nelson, K. (2018), “Student engagement in the educational interface: understanding the
mechanisms of student success”, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 37, pp. 58–71.
Krause, K. and Coates, H. (2008), “Students’ engagement in first‐year university”, Assessment and Evaluation in
Higher Education, Vol. 33, pp. 493–505.
Luxton-Reilly, A. and Denny, P. (2010), Constructive evaluation: a pedagogy of student-contributed assessment.
Computer Science Education, Vol. 20, pp. 145–167.
Marton, F. and Saljo, R. (1984), “Approaches to Learning”, in Marton, F., Hounsell, D. and Entwistle, N. (Eds.), The
Experience of Learning, Edinburgh, Scottish Academic Press.
McCoubrie, P. (2004), “Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: a literature review”, Medical Teacher,
Vol. 26, pp. 709–712.
McQueen, H.A., Shields, C., Finnegan, D.J., Higham, J. and Simmen, M.W. (2014), “PeerWise provides significant
academic benefits to biological science students across diverse learning tasks, but with minimal instructor
intervention”, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 42, pp. 371–381.
Nicol, D.J. and Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006), “Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven

192|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Using PeerWise to support the transition to higher education

principles of good feedback practice”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 31, pp. 199–218.
PeerWise (2018a). https://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/?nop (accessed 11th Sept 2018)
PeerWise (2018b). https://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/docs/index.php (accessed 11th Sept 2018)
PeerWise (2018c). https://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/docs/community/ (accessed 11th Sept 2018)
PeerWise (2018d).
(accessed https://peerwise.cs.auckland.ac.nz/docs/community/scoring_for_fun_and_extra_credit/
31st Jan 2019)

Purchase, H., Hamer, J., Denny, P. and Luxton-Reilly, A. (2010), “The quality of a PeerWise MCQ repository”, in
Proceedings of Twelfth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2010).
Rhind, S.M. and Pettigrew, G.W. (2012), “Peer generation of multiple-choice questions: student engagement and
experiences”, Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, Vol.39, pp. 375–379.
Ryan, B.J. (2013), “Line up, line up: using technology to align and enhance peer learning and assessment in a
student centred foundation organic chemistry module”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
14, pp. 229–238.
Scanlon, D.L., Rowling, L. and Weber, Z. (2007, “‘You don’t have like an identity … you are just lost in a crowd’:
Forming a Student Identity in the First-year Transition to University”, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol. 10, pp.
223–241.
Tatachar, A. and Kominski, C. (2017), “Assessing a traditional case-based application exercise and a student
question creation exercise on student performance and perceptions”, Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and
Learning, Vol. 9, pp. 689–697.
Walsh, J.L., Harris, B.H.L., Denny, P. and Smith, P. (2018), “Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions,
question quality and association with summative performance”, Postgraduate Medical Journal, Vol. 94, pp.
97–103.
Yorke, M. (2006), “Student engagement: deep, surface or strategic?”, Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education
Conference: Griffith University, Gold Coast Campus, Australia.
Yorke, M. (2000), “Smoothing the transition into higher education: what can be learned from student non
completion”, Journal of Institutional Research, Vol. 9, pp. 35–47.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 193

194| Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 14 Student-led interviews to develop
employability skills

James W. Gaynor
Department of Chemistry, University of Liverpool
J.W.Gaynor@liverpool.ac.uk

This chapter describes how to encourage students to enhance their future employability
in two ways: (i) by engaging with the chemical industry, or other future study/employment
options of their choosing, and (ii) to enhance their commercial awareness. This was
partnered with enriching their understanding of interview and assessment centre scenarios
through research into recruitment processes using wide ranging, freely available, resources.
Students were placed into small groups based on their future aspirations and completed a
research-based project acting in the role of a recruiter. Each group developed a company/
university/charity name and description, and advertised a job for a soon-to-be graduate
chemist. Each group planned, delivered, and evaluated a 50 minute interview session for
their peers, with all students additionally acting in the role of an interview candidate for
another group.

Students collated their research into four group assignments and the scope of student
directed group themes was wide ranging. These aligned with the variety of roles graduate
chemists can undertake. While students resisted a little to group work activities, their
subsequent opinion of these activities has been positive with personalization of the
assignment generally well received. As a research-based project, assessment focusses on a
variety of skills, and not the content, allowing for this task to be adapted to a wide variety
of contexts. Developing employability skills is commonplace in chemistry curricula, but
formally embedding interview technique development alongside commercial awareness
does not have a precedent, and thus offers an alternative method for developing such skills.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Whilst the activity outlined within clearly has been shaped by Tina Overton’s prior work,
her influence cannot be constrained so easily. Ever since sitting next to Tina at an event she
coordinated for new and aspiring lecturers, Tina’s friendly attitude, collegiate and no-ego
approach to education, and her willingness to help, makes her an inspiration and role model to
not only me, but others in the sector.

To cite: Gaynor, J.W. (2019), “Student-led interviews to develop employability skills”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.),
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 195-208.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 195

Introduction

Rationale
Our programmes have traditionally had explicit generic skills courses for all Year 1 and 2 students. These
encompass quantitative key skills development, molecular modelling and a variety of activities aimed at
developing written and verbal communication. Prior to the 2018-19 academic year, the Liverpool four-year
MChem and three year BSc programmes started to deviate in content and structure at the start of Year 3
with only our BSc students continuing to take a dedicated course focussed on employability development.
This was equivalent to 7.5 credits at Level 6 of the Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) Frameworks for
Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) of UK degree-awarding bodies (QAA, 2014). Activities included
short weekly lecture reviews, reflective activities, curriculum vitae (CV) development, careers surveys, and
application preparation exercises. The Year 3 course was redesigned for 2014/15 and whilst some of the
previous activities were retained, particularly the reflective elements, we introduced an underlying theme
of peer review which is partly outlined below. With our mixture of established methods and new peer
review aspects of the course, our additional employability provision for Year 3 BSc students was praised
during Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) reaccreditation in 2015. We decided to modify our programmes
across all years to enhance our key skills training and students commencing on our programmes from
2016/17 followed our new key skills provision; this has culminated in all Year 3 students, both MChem and
BSc, taking a modified version of the 7.5 credit employability module from 2018/19.

In terms of identifying employability skills, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) suggests that
employable graduates require proficiency across four skill categories including self-reliance, people skills,
general employment skills, and specialist skills (2009). These are considered to be generic to all careers
and professions and a variety of accrediting bodies in the UK have their own generic skills requirements.
Chemistry programme accreditation by the RSC (2012) also encourages the importance of developing
professional and transferable skills within curricula and these build upon subject specific statements
outlined by the QAA (2014). These guidelines can be interpreted in many ways and higher education
institutions have flexibility in how to implement these important requirements.

The CBI (2016) have highlighted that an underrepresented employability skill in the typical graduate
profile is business and customer awareness — herein referred to as commercial awareness. Whilst year in
industry programmes, summer placements, and other work experience offer excellent opportunities for
students to develop such skills, these opportunities are often limited and only available to a selection of
students. Offering the majority of students the ability to develop these skills falls back on universities and
departments to facilitate. Some great resources have been developed in a chemistry context, through the
RSC Learn Chemistry resource in partnership with the Universities of Leeds and Birmingham (Pugh, 2017).
One of the resources developed included chemistry careers in small to medium enterprises (SMEs) and
offers students the opportunity to develop skills they may not otherwise find elsewhere in a chemistry
curriculum. Some earlier work by Overton and co-workers developed a whole suite of resources focussing
on analytical chemistry, aimed at developing a wide range of transferable and employability skills (Belt, et
al., 2002; Belt, et al., 2003; Summerfield, et al., 2003). Whilst the focus at the time was not on commercial
awareness, many of the case studies do enhance these skills. The Titan Project encourages students to
consider the wider aspects of industrial chemistry, and New Drugs for Old asks students to assess a drug’s
commercial viability. These projects have subsequently been used to help internationalise a chemistry
curriculum, an important aspect of any business (Overton and Bradley, 2010).

Another of the aforementioned case studies was Launch-a-lab (Belt and Overton, 2004) where students

196|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

take on the role of a management team who prepare a job advertisement, conduct interviews with their
peers and hire a candidate. Embedding interview skills into the curriculum may be commonplace, but
lacks much prevalence in the education literature; which is surprising considering the job interview
is a barrier that every graduate needs to cross and is a fundamental skill to develop. Whilst some job
interview related activities, such as presentations, curriculum vitae preparation, etc., are common place in
education, placing the student into the role of the interviewer is less common (Whittle, 2016). However,
some underlying educational principles do suggest this is a valid approach to take. For example, peer
assessment and self-assessment help develop a variety of skills suitable to the real world; the ability to
reflecton ones performance and critically analyse that of your peers can be a part of a working environment
(Griffiths et al., 1996). Additionally, there is some evidence that suggests students who ask transformative
questions are showing some re-structuring or re-organisation of their understanding (Teixeira-Dias et al.,
2005; Pedrosa de Jesus et al., 2006; Pedrosa de Jesus et al., 2012). There seems to be an inherent link
between students who can ask good questions and how well they answer questions, as outlined with
work based around the PeerWise learning tool where students are both question setter, assessor and
recipient (Ryan, 2013; Galloway and Burns, 2015). It is therefore logical to suggest that students acting as
the interviewer could help enhance such interview skills.

Developing a wide range of employability skills is considered to be a major contemporary challenge in

higher education with Kahn and O’Rourke (2005) advocating inquiry-based learning (IBL) methods as
a suitable approach. There are vast and varied examples of IBL practices in chemistry education with
examples such as: using topical scenarios to enhance spectroscopy teaching (Lucas and Rowley, 2011)
or induction activities as a way of building learning communities (Williams, 2017; Williams, 2018). Project
work is considered a key IBL process and also enhances research-connected teaching, a key local driver in
our institution. All chemistry programmes have an element of projects — typically research focussed in
the final year—but research-connected teaching can come in many forms, with Griffiths (2004) describing
research-based teaching where the process of research/inquiry is the focus over specific content.Therefore
project-based learning can also be considered a research-based approach and fits well in an employability
course (Fry et al., 2009) which aims to promote student engagement and allow personalisation of study.
All IBL techniques put students learning at the centre of the teaching activity, promoting a deep approach
to studies and enhancing life-long learning (Kirby et al., 2010).

Aim and Objectives

The work of Overton and coworkers and the Launch-a-lab exercise described above inspired this work.The
aim was to give students the opportunity to develop interviewing skills whilst engaging with aspects of
the chemical industry. Whilst the initial brief has widened recently to include academia and non-chemical
industries, the two initial overriding aims were the following.
1. Embrace the CBI’s evaluation that graduates lack commercial awareness by encouraging
students to engage with various aspects of the chemical industry in a self-directed manner.
2. Encourage students to look into recruitment processes, including assessment centre
activities as well as traditional panel interviews, by engaging with the plethora of resources
online which are aimed to help students prepare for the vast array of interview types.

This was achieved through a formal group activity which was introduced into a Year 3 (FHEQ Level 6)
employability based module where students worked in small groups to develop appropriate material and
then act as the interviewer. Formal summative assessment was entirely for the interviewing group (herein
referred to a interviewers or groups), but all students were required to apply for jobs of another group,

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 197

prepare accordingly, and act as the interview candidate (herein referred to as candidate) in an entirely
formative manner.

Methods and Design

Implementation and timeline: Overall requirements of the group work

Students are placed into groups of 4–6 students and a course tutor is responsible for two paired groups.
For the purposes here, the focus is on examples where the groups have worked in the context of the
chemical industry, but group themes cover wider topics (see below). The overriding aim for the group
is to plan, deliver and evaluate a 45–50 minute session based around the recruitment process assuming
the group are working as a recruiter of soon-to-be chemistry graduates. The default approach of groups
is to prepare an interview scenario or an assessment centre type activity (although students do have
the flexibility to come up with something else and facilitate a session that is not strictly an interview;
something that not yet been tried by our students). Summative assessment takes place for the group
acting as the interviewers, but students are also required to act as a candidate for their paired group to
allow their paired group to be assessed appropriately.

Each group decides the theme for their company/university/charity, etc., and develop a name and logo
as appropriate. Additional documentation are prepared for the students who will act as their candidates
(specificdetails discussed inthenext section). Groups meet with their tutors twice prior to delivery to shape
various aspects of their session and also added into their timetable are four one-hour sessions throughout
the project to assist with planning. These planning sessions do not have a tutor or location specified but
are essential to ensure all group members are available. Students need to prepare meeting minutes for
some of these unsupervised sessions. Table 1 outlines the general timeline for the project, outlining key
activities for the students, tutor, and course coordinator. The overall students and tutor guidelines for
planning, preparing, and delivering the session are available in the Supplementary Information.

Implementation: Documentation
Groups need to prepare three key pieces of documentation, outlined below. The company description
and job advert must be released to their interview candidates as a minimum, but each group can decide
whether they want to release the rest. Other documentation may be used which depends entirely on the
group.These might include a bespoke application form, a literature paper to review, or psychometrictests.
1. Company description/technical aspects of the interview: A short 1-page brief about the
company/university/charity, etc., is produced. Groups must include something technical in
their interview so are asked to include some reference to this in their company description.
Topics considered to be technical are determined by the group and their tutor, but the most
popular example is to include analytical techniques that are new to them (a technique not
taught extensively as part of the wider syllabus).This gives both interviewers and candidates
the opportunity to learn the theory behind techniques such asthermogravimetricanalysis or
rheology. Including such information in the company description alerts their candidates to
prepare for questions on such techniques, and builds on the idea of commercial awareness
(also see later section on the collation of research).
2. Job advertisement: The group decides on a role and writes an advertisement. The group
are encouraged to look around recruitment sites for how vacancies for similar jobs are
worded. As part of the advertisement, a group can indicate the type of interview that will
be conducted, or ask for specific requirements of their candidates before the session, such
as a covering letter, completion of an application form, prior reading on a technical subject,

198|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

Table 1: Timeline of implementation for group interviews

(Week numbers refers to a 12 week semester — full information/guidance in Supplementary Information)

Week Main Activity Responsibility

Over
Summer with the instruction
Appropriate of tutorial
numberthat all students areable
roomsare to attend
booked with all
tutors
tutorials.
assigned, Coordinator

0–1 During
Students
group
A
choices.
survey
work
module
isare
set up
discussed
e-mailed and students
introduction (30–60
for collation
ask of
to themes
think about
suggest
minutes), their
withthemes
students
general
future the
forprinciples
selecting
career
groupof
plans.
1st–3rd
work.
the Student and
coordinator
Student and
coordinator

Student and
coordinator
1–2 Group
Courseallocations
coordinatorare
liaises
completed
with timetabling
based on preferences.
team with timetable changes. Coordinator

Coordinator
3 Full
groups
Groups
specifics of their company/university/charity,
introduction
meeting,
complete and
to
introductory
group
discussion (one
of initial
workresearch,
hour),
chat in person/online,
ideas.
give out guidance, facilitate
etc. think of Student and
coordinator

Student

4 evidence (one hour

Tutorial 1 some initialtotal, 25 minutes per group) to brainstorm ideas and
research. Student and
tutor
4–5 Further group research to finalise plans and documentation needed for
interviews. Student

6 2 (one hour
documentation
Tutorial total, 25 minutes per group) to finalise all plans and
needed. Student and
tutor
7 Documentation is released using a blog tool within the virtual learning Student and
environment. coordinator
7–8 Students
documentation to act asby
prepareprepared antheir
interview group. by accessing the
pairedcandidate Student

their
Groups prepare for delivery of their session by receiving applications from
candidates. Student

9 session. 3 (50 minutes per group) for group delivery of their interview
Tutorial Student and
tutor
9–12 The groups
Peer
and as
evaluation: their complete
an interviewee.
evaluate
Students session and
peer
compare
evaluation forasassessment
acting an interviewer Student

Student
purposes.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 199

 watching a relevant video, etc. As long as the suggestions are sensible in the eyes of the tutor,
they will be allowed. However, two restrictions include: (i) the interviewers cannot ask for a
CV as students should not be required to share their CV with peers; and (ii) the interviewers
have to include all the members of their paired group as interview candidates and cannot
shortlist them prior to interview. Whilst this does lack authenticity, the requirement for
students to act as a candidate is an important learning experience.
3. Assessment criteria and feedback forms: From their research about what employers look for in
graduates, the group must develop what they believe to be an appropriate set of assessment
criteria to use during their session to help justify who they would hire. This is consistent with
larger companies who require a paper trail as justification for hiring a particular candidate.
Less authentically, but important in terms of feedback, the group prepare a feedback form
that is given out to their candidates after the interview.

Implementation: Planning and delivering the session

Groups are given the freedom to run the interview as they wish following a set framework. Groups are
told to assume the only facilities in the room are white boards and are encouraged not to build in audio
visual (AV) equipment as a core component. Our tutorial rooms without AV often have moveable furniture
which allows the interviewers to modify the room as appropriate. Interviewers are encouraged to find
their allocated room in advance and include its features, such as shape, size, etc., into their planning.

The role of the tutor is to ensure that a plan is deliverable within the time frame and to ensure that
groups do not use a particularly aggressive form of interviewing that may lead to embarrassment for
any individual. Groups are told to be considerate of other cultures and also complete the session within
the room provided. As previously mentioned, an ethos of inclusivity is encouraged and all members of a
paired group must act as a candidate.

While presentations are an important recruitment tool, groups are not allowed to ask their candidates
to prepare a presentation on PowerPoint, as this is covered elsewhere in the course, but is also linked to
restrictions in room facilities.

With this framework in place, the session types are highly variable ranging from simple panel interviews,
highly dynamic pieces of group work activities, speed dating type scenarios, situational judgement
activities, and psychometric tests. Figure 1 shows a group delivering parallel individual interview stations
prior to a group situational judgement activity.

Figure 1: A group delivering a section of their interview as parallel individual interview stations
during the latest iteration of the course

200|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

Evolution of the group themes

Up until 2016-17, the Destination of Leavers in Higher Education (DHLE) survey was given to all graduates
six months after graduation with our more recent DHLE results showing that over 50% of BSc and MChem
graduates move into further study. Of those in work, over half of BSc graduates and approximately one
third of MChem graduates are not directly in the science sector. The past two iterations of the course has
embraced this, expanding the remit beyond the chemical industry and allowing students to personalise
the course by developing commercial awareness skills, and an understanding of interviews styles,
in sectors relevant to them. In the latest iteration of 125 students, approximately half of groups were
focussing on the chemical industry or wider science industries, but the other half focussed on potential
MSc/PhDs, teaching, graduate medicine, accounting/finance, and fashion. Most students were given
their first preference but up to ten students who were interested in law, management, or marketing were
redistributed to their second/third choice theme.

Collation of research
Accompanying the planning and delivery of their session is a lot of research which is collated and
submitted by each group. Four group assignments are used as outlined below, but they do vary from year
to year taking on board student feedback. Guidelines to students and assessment rubrics are available in
the Supplementary Information.

Assignment 1: Commercial awareness (deadline week 7)

The group is required to look into their sector more closely and delve into any aspect that interests the
group. Groups are completely free to write about anything they wish, with the research and how they
convey information forming the assessment. Linking this directly to the technical aspect of their interview
is time efficient, but not essential. Examples of topics/questions generated by groups include:
• Discussing how a particular new technique works
• Offering case studies on certain companies
• Discussing how certain industries work
• Discussing the types of chemical company (suppliers/manufacturers; users; researchers
• What is an SME and how does it (and its priorities) compare with a global company?
• How do start-up companies get funding?
• How do investors work?
• What is cost modelling?
• What does GLP/GMP mean?
• What is the process for a new chemical to get to market?
• The importance of intellectual property, licensing and confidentiality

Assignment 2: Email a specialist (deadline week 8)

Linked to the previous point, the CEO of a University of Liverpool spin out company (Liverpool ChiroChem)
has spoken to our students over the past four years. It is all too common for students to send e-mails to
companies, recruitment agencies, prospective academic supervisors, etc., that are extremely colloquial
in their language and lack concise and specific information. This task requires students focussing on
the science sector to e-mail the CEO with a professional e-mail to request information about the sector
they are interested in. The CEO then gives feedback on these e-mails and incorporates the questions
into the presentation. In the most recent iteration of the course, a colleague in the Liverpool Careers &
Employability team has also acted in this capacity to receive e-mails from groups who are focussing on a
different sector to the chemical industry.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |201

Assignment 3: Skills audit poster (deadline week 11)
Groups generate a recruitment poster which could be given out if their company/university/charity
were taking part in a recruitment fair. Alternatively, groups could prepare a poster entitled, “Thinking of
getting into...”a particular sector, offering guidance and the skills/experiences needed. Students then peer
assessed the posters.

Assignment 4: Group evaluation (deadline week 12)

After the final delivery of their sessions, groups are required to meet up and reflect on the session,
essentially leading to a conclusion. Groups consider their own delivery but also the delivery of their paired
group for whom they acted as candidates. Groups consider whether the assessment criteria they decided
to use during the interview arrives to the same conclusion on who to hire as they feel should be hired.

Assessment
As a research-based group project, the content is not the focus of the assessment. By writing the
assessment criteria carefully, all students can be assessed using consistent criteria regardless of the scope
of the project content. The in-class tutorials and collation of research equate to 35% of the course. The
specific weightings of certain aspects of this group work are contained within Table 2 with the tutor
assessing the tutorials and Assignments 1 and 4. Assignment 2 is assessed by the course coordinator and
specialist whilst Assignment 3 is predominantly peer assessment with course coordinator moderation.

Table 2: Breakdown of assignments, assessment criteria used in rubrics and weightings in the module
(full rubrics are available in the Supplementary Information)

Score
Activity activity Assessment criteria and weighting Weightinginmodule
Tutorials 90
for Tutorial 1 (/10)

Tutorial 2 (/10)
Session
Tutorial style,
3 professionalism
delivery
creativity,
& timerisk taking(/40)
(/10)
keeping (/10)
15%

Documentation (company description, advert, etc.) (/10)

Commercial 1:
Assignment
Awareness Commercial awareness/Getting technical (/15)
30 Spelling, grammar, readability (/5)
7.5%
Referencing (/5)
Evidence of peer review (/5)
2:
Assignment
Email a specialist 12 Following
Email quality(/10)
guidelines (/2)
2.5%

Assignment
Skills 3:
audit poster 10 on peer
attractive
Based the poster was and how informative/
evaluation 5%

Group evaluation (/15)

Assignment 4:
30 Spelling, grammar, readability (/10) 5%
Group evaluation
Group roles/work individual reflections (/5)

202|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Student engagement and feedback

During the first five years of implementation, over 350 students have participated with almost total
engagement with the tutorial/interview aspect of the group project. There is greater variation in students
not contributing an equitable amount of effort on the collation of research activities but this is accounted
for in peer evaluation process. WebPA has been the tool of choice for peer evaluation, with WebPA factors
ranging from 1.31–0.54 across the years.

Feedbackfrom students has been mixed, but mostly positive, with the common negative comments linked
to group work more generally (such as: group members not contributing; reliance on others to get good
marks; etc.). End of course questionnaires have run yearly but only during 2014/15 was there specific focus
on this activity, but with poor completion rates (13 students). All students agreed that their group worked
well as a team, nine students believed designing and planning the session enhanced their individual
learning/understanding of what employers look for in candidates and 11 students believed delivering the
session, and completing a group evaluation, enhanced their individual learning/understanding of what
employers look for in candidates. Fewer students thought being interviewed helped them but anecdotal
evidence suggests students find being interviewed the aspect of the activity they worry about most, as it
is out of their control. This reinforces the importance of ensuring all students act as an interview candidate
in some way. Some additional headline outputs and issues raised over the last few years are contained in
Table 3.

Tutor engagement and feedback

Numerous tutors have been involved over the years, expanding to ten tutors covering 12 groups in the

Table 3: Some headline outputs from the free answer comments to various end of course questionnaires,
along with attempted/possible solutions
Issues raised Attempted solutions
Issues with the length of the guidance
document. Students are told there has to be a framework and this
has been more clearly articulated over the years.

The size
their
make of the
session is room
highly
a difference to allocated
variable and
delivery. can
to deliver We have little control over this locally but liaise with
timetabling.

thereand
keeping
Interview
feel delivery:Some
is too
attention to students
much focusdetail.
on time- Communication needed that careful planning, and
attention to detail, feeds directly into key aspects of job
applications.

that
Grouptheassignments:
group assignments are variable Possible communication issue. The peer review and peer
Some comments
assessment contained in both of these assignments
in
the
awareness
iteration
terms of
groupofposter and
the course).
assignments
usefulness,commercial
particularly
(from current is a key aspect (and also new additions in this latest
iteration). To rectify this, the commercial awareness
assignment could be converted to an individual
assignment and rationale clearly conveyed to students.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |203

current iteration. Tutors are all academic staff members but postdoctoral research staff who wish to gain
experience teaching could also be included. The roles of staff vary from teaching focussed to research
focussed and an initial concern was colleagues adapting to a research-based IBL type activity considering
there is littleIBLin our wider curriculum.Staffengaged well with the process with some feedbackincluding:
The students engage very well with the peer-to-peer interviews, producing quality documents which have
been delivered to A Level sometimes exceeding those in real life situations. The benefits the students gain
are numerous — working in a team to achieve a goal, organising minuted meetings, performing agreed
tasks and reporting back on them, developing equitable assessment criteria, interview preparation and
practice—to name but a few. From a tutor’s perspective, it has often been enjoyable to see the enthusiasm
and inventiveness shown by the students as they develop the interview scenarios, and only some gentle
guidance is needed from the tutor to achieve successful outcomes.
Neil Berry, Head of Department and course tutor for four years

Adapting to Your Context

Considering the research-based focus of this work, the material provided could be easily adapted
for a wide variety of settings, including other disciplines and at different levels. Whilst the collation of
research activities encourages students to properly focus on the development of their sessions, the actual
session development and delivery equates to 1–2 credits, so could easily be implemented into a Key
Skills module. If this group project is to take place in the final year of a programme, it should run during
Semester 1, otherwise students can’t draw on their experiences in applications for graduate roles, which
often start during this time. Below are some considerations if setting up this activity, and also suggestions
of alternative approaches which have been previously implemented or considered.

Introductory session — encouraging buy-in from students and tutors

Ensure there is a clear rationale for completing the work and why a group project is great experience for
developing employability skills. Student buy-in from the start is essential and initial resistance to group
work has been seen so course coordinator enthusiasm for the process is important. A range of staff can
act as tutors but care must be taken to ensure the process is not too time consuming. The guidance to
staff (Supplementary Information) should be as concise as possible using an executive summary. Consider
including a checkpoint list of what tutors need to do each week for them to populate their calendars (this
was a suggestion from a new course tutor during the latest iteration).

Personalisation/scaffolding
Whilst the sessions could run well with all groups looking at the same sector, if the aim is to allow students
to personalise their choice then a larger class size helps ensure 8–12 students may share a similar interest.
Hold a scaffolding session to let students give the course facilitator the themes and allow students to
offer preferences. Having a good relationship with the timetabling team also helps as last minute changes
are inevitable. For this reason, if this course runs in a semester where there are lots of optional modules
elsewhere in the curriculum, this could be problematic.

Group size
Whilst groups smaller than four and groups larger than six have not been tested in this context, larger
groups would not be advised. Smaller groups could work very well, but there is an implication to staffing
requirements.
Ensure all students act as candidates/do not allow short-listing
As previously mentioned, allowing students to experience being both an interviewer and candidate is an
important learning experience.Therefore do not allow the interviewers to shortlist their applicants before

204|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

interview.

Do not assess the interview candidates

Whilst all students acting as an interview candidate is important, allowing summative assessment of
candidates (peer and/or tutor) is challenging for three reasons.
1. There needs to be a consideration of students with disability support statements who
need extra time/support in assessed scenarios. Assessing such students when acting as the
interviewer is less problematic, as the group can support such students and plans can be
put in place, but this is not the case when the student acts as a candidate for another group
as each group running an interview will have different assessment criteria.
2. Linked to the previous point, ensuring consistency of assessment of candidates is impossible.
3. The course tutor focussing on the both the interviewers and candidates is a lot to keep track
of in assessment centre type scenarios.

Timeline considerations
The timeline above is our current model but it has varied over the years. Some key points involve:
• Ensuring two weeks between Tutorial 1 and 2 is important since it gives students time to
formulate their plan properly between seeing their tutor. An alternative approach is having a
single two-hour session where students arrive with mostly completed drafts of the required
documentation and a properly formulated plan. A two-hour session can be split into four
blocks, with one sub group seeing the tutor in the first and third blocks and the second sub
group seeing the tutor in the second and fourth blocks with modifications being made in
the gaps. This does work well when the group has come well prepared. On the rare occasion
where a group are less proactive in advance, this single 2-hour block is not ideal.
• Ensuring three weeks between Tutorials 2 and 3 is essential. It allows the course coordinator
to get all documentation collated and released, allows students acting as candidates time
to complete whatever requirements they are asked for and submit them, and allows the
interviewers to look at their candidates’ submissions.

Include creativity in your assessment

Whilst highly subjective, for the first iteration of the course that didn’t state this, students had a tendency
to stick to a simple panel interview as it was the safe choice. Whilst panel interviews have their merits,
modern recruitment techniques are far more dynamic so encouraging students to be creative certainly
encourages deeper consideration.

Managing time
The workload of the course coordinator is not excessive, but is time heavy in Weeks 1–3 whilst students
make their selections, groups are formed and timetables need altering. Students have commented that it
is hard to find meeting times, so timetable sessions for them.

Other group assignments/submission routes

Various modes of submission for the group assignments have been tested, including: the use of an online
blog/wiki as part of the virtual learning environment, essentially leading to a group website; a group
report that is bound and submitted; and individual assignment submissions (current iteration).There is no
clear preferred strategy from a student perspective as attempts to stagger group submissions throughout
the project lead to students suggesting there are too many deadlines, whereas submission at the end via a
group portfolio/wiki results in students not spreading the workload out leading to assessment bunching.
Local arrangement need to be considered.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |205

Conclusions and Future Work

The CBI states that commercial awareness is a key employability skill lacking in a typical graduate skills
profile. The need for such skills is echoed by many key recruiters of chemistry graduates whose websites
regularly state phrases like business interest, commercial acumen and ability to work as part of a
collaborative team. Highly employable graduates will have enriched their employability credentials by
participating in industrial placements, study abroad, work experience or summer placements. For those
not able to complete such activities, having a part-time job, or undertaking charity work, or participating
in useful extra-curricular activities is the next best approach. However, ensuring that all students have
some opportunity to further enhance employability through their studies, beyond what students can do
themselves, is the responsibility of academic departments.

Additional inquiry-based methods have been introduced into our chemistry curriculum, allowing students
to complete an employability focussed, research-based group activity as part of our key skills provision.
Students work with a tutor to develop an interview setting for some of their peers and also act as an
interview candidate for another group of students, offering an experience from both sides of the process.
This promotes commercial awareness through personalised research into an employment/future study
sector of interest to the individual student whilst also investigating the variety of recruitment processes
they may soon experience. The activity spans Semester 1 of Year 3, a key time for final year BSc students
and good preparation for penultimate year MChem students, to whom this was delivered for the first time
in the current iteration.

In the ever changing landscape of graduate recruitment, video interviewing is become a forerunner in
the first/second round interview stage for lots of graduate recruiters and should be considered in future
iterations of the course outlined here. At Liverpool, we have training access to a sector leading video
interviewing tool that students engaged with for the first time this year; incorporation of video interviewing
into this group work, in a not yet decided manner, is perhaps inevitable in future years, although this will
face resistance from students. Whilst students are grouped based on their preferences, a limitation is that
students are told which job to apply for. Whilst it is communicated well that the group delivering the
interview are the focus of assessment, a second alternative approach is also being investigated where
the interview delivery sessions would be spread over two ~90 minute sessions where all students and
tutors were available. The cohort could be divided into two with all students acting as facilitators in one
half and candidates in another. Students could be given a completely free choice of which jobs to apply
for, creating an extra level of personalisation currently not seen and further enhancing the open-ended
nature of this work.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Belt S., Evans E., McCreedy T., Overton T. and Summerfield S. (2002), A problem-based learning approach to
analytical and applied chemistry, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 6, pp. 65-72.
Belt S. and Overton S. (2004), Developing Employability Skills, Grice D. and Gladwin R. (Eds.), University of Hull:
LTSN Physical Sciences Centre (Higher Education Academy), pp. 8-9.
Belt S., Overton T. and Summerfield S. (2003), “Problem solving case studies in analytical and applied chemistry”,

206 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led interviews to develop employability skills

New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, pp. 12-15.

Confederation of British Industry (2009), Future fit: Preparing graduates for the world of work, Universities UK.
Confederation of British Industry (2016), The Right Combination: CBI/Pearson Education and Skills Survey 2016,
available via: http://www.cbi.org.uk/cbi-prod/assets/File/pdf/cbi-education-and-skills-survey2016.pdf
(accessed 3rd February, 2019).
Fry H., Ketteridge S. and Marshall S. (2009), A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Enhancing
Academic Practice, New York and London: Routledge.
Galloway K. W. and Burns S. (2015), “Doing it for themselves: Students creating a high quality peer-learning
environment”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 82-92.
Griffiths R. (2004), “Knowledge production and the research–teaching nexus: The case of the built environment
disciplines”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 29, pp. 709-726.
Griffiths S., Houston K. and Lazenbatt A. (1996), Enahncing Student Learning Through Peer Tutoring in Higher
Education, Coleraine: University of Ulster.
Kahn P. and O’Rourke K. (2005), Understanding inquiry-based learning, Handbook of enquiry and problem-based
learning, CELT, NUI Galway.
Kirby J. R., Knapper C., Lamon P. and Egnatoff W.J. (2010), “Development of a scale to measure lifelong learning”,
International Journal of Lifelong Education, Vol. 29, pp. 291-302.
Lucas T. and Rowley N. M. (2011), “Inquiry-based learning: experiences of first year chemistry students learning
spectroscopy”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 478-486.
Overton T. L. and Bradley J. S. (2010), “Internationalisation of the chemistry curriculum: two problem-based
learning activities for undergraduate chemists”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 11, pp.
124-128.
Pedrosa de Jesus H., Almeida P. A., Teixeira-Dias J. J. C. and Watts M. (2006), “Students’questions: building a bridge
between Kolb’s learning styles and approaches to learning”, Education and Training, Vol. 48, pp. 97-111.
Pedrosa de Jesus H., da Silva Lopes B., Moreira A. and Watts M. (2012), “Contexts for questioning: two zones of
teaching and learning in undergraduate science”, Higher Education, Vol. 64, pp. 557-571.
Pugh S. (2017), “Teaching career skills to undergraduates”, Education in Chemistry, Vol. 54, pp. 12-15.
QAA, Subject benchmark statements: Chemistry, http://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/subject-benchmark
statements/sbs-chemistry-14.pdf?sfvrsn = 99e1f781_14 (accessed 3rd February, 2019)
QAA, UK Quality Code for Higher Education. Part A: Setting and Maintaining Academic Standards, https://www.qaa.
ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/qualifications-frameworks.pdf (accessed 3rd February, 2019)
Royal Society of Chemistry, RSCAccreditation of Degree Programmes, http://www.rsc.org/Education/courses-and
careers/accredited-courses/bsc-accreditation.asp (accessed 3rd February, 2019)
Ryan B. J. (2013), “Line up, line up: using technology to align and enhance peer learning and assessment in a
student centred foundation organic chemistry module”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
14, pp. 229-238.
Summerfield S., Overton T. and Belt S. (2003), “Problem-Solving Case Studies”, Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 75,
181A-182A.
Teixeira-Dias J. J. C., de Jesus H. P., de Souza F. N. and Watts M. (2005), “Teaching for quality learning in chemistry”,
International Journal of Science Education, Vol.27, pp. 1123-1137.
Whittle L. A., Help Students Develop Vital Interviewing Skills in Your Classroom, http://www.edudemic.com/
interviewing-skills-classroom/ (accessed 3rd February, 2019)
Williams D. P. (2017), “Learn on the Move: A Problem-Based Induction Activity for New University Chemistry
Students”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94, pp. 1925-1928.
Williams D. P. (2018), “Measuring the Effectiveness of an Open Ended Team-Based Induction Task”, New Directions
in the Teaching of Physical Sciences. Vol. 13.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |207

208 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Implementing community engaged learning
15 with chemistry undergraduates

Claire McDonnell and Vanessa L. Murphy

School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Technological
University Dublin
claire.mcdonnell@dit.ie

In this chapter, we share what we have learned from implementing community engaged
learning (CEL) activities with chemistry undergraduates since 2007. CEL involves learners
in a real world project in partnership with a community group. A genuine community need
should be addressed and the aim is that the community partner and students both benefit.
Students gain academic credit for learning outcomes achieved, including reflection on their
experiences. The main focus is on a Junior Scientist Badge activity in which our students
workin groups to prepare for and implement hands-on science activities with young people
(8–12 years old) from under-represented socioeconomic groups with an interest in science.
We discuss implementation including initial contact with a potential community partner,
assessing both the process and product and providing reflective prompts to learners.
Practical considerations such as managing group work, chemical risk assessments and child
protection requirements are also addressed. There are often resource implications but we
provide insights on our sustainable model that has evolved.

We have found that these activities assist development of our students’ problem-solving,
teamwork, organisation, digital literacy and scientific communication skills (Mc Donnell
et al., 2011). We suggest modifications that could be made to adapt the activity. CEL is
implemented for chemistry mainly the US (and is often called service learning) and we hope
to encourage and promote wider uptake.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (Claire Mc Donnell)

As well as being a leader in chemistry education research, Tina has always taken the time to
warmly welcome and encourage those just beginning to explore this discipline. At the first
chemistry education conference I attended in 2004, I experienced this first hand and it had a
very significantimpact. Since then, Tina’s focus on the value of using real world ‘messy’problems
and on the development of students’ key personal and professional skills has been a guiding
influence on me, as has her emphasis on using teaching and learning approaches with a sound
evidence base and conducting innovative, carefully planned chemistry education research.

To cite: McDonnell, C. and Murphy, V. L. (2019), “Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates”,
in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton,
Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 209-224.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 209

Introduction

Community engaged learning (CEL) projects involve student-community engagement. Other terms often
used to describe the same approach are community-based learning and service-learning. The essential
characteristics are that:
1. students receive academic credit for their work as relevant learning outcomes will be met;
2. equal weighting is given to student & community needs; and
3. the student is required to reflect on their experience (Boland, 2013; Mc Donnell, 2015).

A high impact educational practice

CEL is recognised as a high-impact practice because it has been shown to increase student retention and
student engagement (Kuh, 2008).The main source of data used to establish this was the National Survey of
Student Engagement in the United States and it has been found that the benefits are greater for students
from communities which are traditionally under-represented as well as those who enter higher education
with lower academic performances from second level. CEL has been shown to have a strong positive
effect on engagement in deep approaches to learning as well as on self-reported practical, personal
and general gains (Kuh, 2008). These activities also raise awareness among learners of the contribution
their profession can make to society and in the workplace. Another consideration is that the challenge
of developing assessments for the range and complexity of skills required of 21st century graduates can
often be effectively addressed by the authentic learning environment of a CEL project (Steinke and Fitch,
2007).

The type of projects implemented with chemistry students can often be classified as involving
environmental analytical chemistry or outreach to schools (Mc Donnell, 2015). However, projects that
relate to some other areas have been reported and include students preparing information leaflets on
health issues for a local homeless shelter (Harrison et al., 2013), developing exhibitions in museums
(Donaghy and Saxton, 2012; Sutheimer, 2008), and measuring fat levels in fast foods (Hosten et al., 2011).

Guidelines and resources for getting started

There are a range of resources that can be consulted, some discipline-specific and some general. The
Campus Compact (2019) and Talloires Network (2019) websites are useful and feature general guidelines
as well as case studies that relate to specific subject areas. Campus Engage (2019) is the Irish body that
supports Irish higher education institutions to embed, scale and promote community engagement and
their website has several useful how-to guides (such as McIlrath and McDonnell, 2014) as well as a range
of case studies. Information that focuses on science education can be accessed on the Science Education
for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities website (SENCER, 2019). In addition, Mc Donnell (2015)
includes a review of chemistry CEL projects up to 2015.

Several models for planning and implementing CEL projects have been developed.The PARE (Preparation,
Action, Reflection and Evaluation) model for course planning is an example (Bandy, 2019). Welch (2010)
devised a rubric to facilitate conceptualisation, implementation, and assessment and applied the
mnemonic OPERA which refers to five stages; enumerating objectives, exploring community partnerships,
identifying the type of community-engaged learning students will be engaged in, facilitating reflection
and assessing to what extent learning objectives were met. McEwen and Mason O’Connor (2013) provide
recommendations for building capacity among staffin HEIs so that effective community engagement can
take place.

210|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

Curriculum design considerations

The logistics of incorporating community engaged learning into a curriculum have been studied by
Boland (2013) and she has identified five curriculum design options that can be applied. These are:
• adapting an existing stand-alone module
• adding a new module to a range of electives
• developing a new stand-alone module
• developing a new generic module that is available across the institution
• integrating a module across several programmes for a multidisciplinary project

When initiating a pilot CEL project, the recommended option is the first one described by Boland — to
identify suitable activities already in place that could be modified. Possible examples include assignments
that use case studies or existing outreach activities undertaken that do not receive academic credit (Mc
Donnell et al., 2011). Sutheimer (2008) has provided very effective guidelines for simple short projects in
chemistry for those just beginning to implement community engaged learning.

Community engaged research

Working with a community partner can often lead to a related community engaged research project also
(Beckman et al., 2011). Equally well, a research project may involve a different community partner. As a
result of our interaction with the Students Learning with Communities office in TU Dublin for community
engaged learning, we were made aware of projects that were relevant for consideration as final year
research projects. This has led to final year project students testing the quality of soil from community
gardens by determining lead as well as nutrient content. Another project in collaboration with the Garda/
Police Road Safety Unit involves testing alcohol levels in urine and breath samples to raise awareness that
legal limits for driving can be exceeded the morning after alcohol was consumed (McDonnellet al., 2011).

In this chapter, we describe our Junior Scientist Badge community engaged learning project. We provide
a summary of the range of CEL projects we have implemented before focussing on the Junior Scientist
Badge activity in more detail.

Methods and Implementation

Our setting —Technological University Dublin

The School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, TU Dublin, offers degrees in Analytical Chemistry,
Chemical Sciences with Medicinal Chemistry and Science with Nanotechnology (chemistry stream) and
caters for approximately 400 full time undergraduate students. Our student experience includes the
application of chemistry to real world problems, interaction with external experts and an emphasis on
technical skills as well as research and enquiry skills. CEL is an important element in accomplishing these
objectives.

The community partner we work with for the Junior Scientist Badge project is the Core Youth Service,
Inchicore, Dublin. They are an independent community-based youth service and provide non-formal
education and support as well as a range of indoor and outdoor activities to support young people from
their local area to grow and develop to their full potential.

Overview of our CEL projects

We have implemented a number of CEL projects for chemistry in our School since they were first
introduced in 2007 andTable 1 presents a summary of these to give an indication of the wide applicability

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |211

 Table 1: Summary of our community engaged learning projects implemented since 2007
Junior Scientist Slice of Science project Chemistry support for Safety audits in small to
Badge project (see (see Supplementary secondary school students medium size enterprises
Supplementary Information) (Mc Donnell et al., 2011) (Mc Donnell et al., 2011)
Information)
Summary
Students develop hands Students implement Undergraduates work on Students perform safety
on activities so that an hands on science curriculum experiments with audits incorporating
after school group (8-12 activities in primary secondary school students chemical risk assessments
year olds) can earn a schools & after school & organise a visit to the in small organisations
science badge. These projects, & also university tailored for them. (e.g. swimming pools,
take place off site & are organise a visit to the hairdressers, garages)
followed by a visit to the HEI with interactive
university demonstrations
Module name (undergraduate stage)
Workplace Regulations Professional Skills (early Professional Skills (early stage Regulation & Chemical
& Community Engaged stage undergraduate) undergraduate) Control in the Workplace
Learning (early stage (late stage
undergraduate) undergraduate)
Contact and learning hours & assessment weighting of this activity in the module
15 contact hours (5 x 3 hour workshops) plus approx. 20 independent learning hours. 8 contact hours plus
40% of a 5 ECTS module — the CEL activity is considered to be equivalent to the approx. 40 independent
laboratory component of other modules. learning hours. 60% of a 5
ECTS module.
Assessed components and weighting within the CEL activity
• Participation & weekly group update on discussion • Participation & • Plan (group) 10%
board (group) 25% discussion board (group) • Report (group)25%
• Lesson plans (including risk assessments), hands 25% • Presentation (group)
on sessions & feedback from community partners • Poster and/or 40%
in youth project or school (group) 30% presentation (group) • Reflective piece
• Individual reflective piece 20% 40% (individual) 25%
• Individual project blog 25% • Reflective piece
(individual) 20%
• Project diary (individual)
15%
Learning outcomes (On completion of this module, the student will be able to..)
• Demonstrate understanding of course content by • Design an online • Apply the
development of suitable demonstrations & hands resource on a school knowledge attained
on activities for presentation in the community chemistry syllabus to undertake
• Develop their problem-solving, teamwork, topic & prepare a‘lab a chemical risk
organisation, digital literacy & communication manual’ on an assigned assessment of a
skills experiment specific chemical
• Reflect on the content & effectiveness of their • Provide assistance in process in a small
community-based learning project the school with the lab to medium sized
experiment & during enterprise
visit to the HEI & reflect
on the project

212|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

of this approach. The first activity listed, the Junior Scientist Badge project, is the focus of this chapter
and was first introduced in 2016. Please contact the authors or consult the references and supplementary
information provided if you would like further information on one of the other projects.

Implementing the Junior Scientist Badge activity

The initial idea for this project came from work being done in Kalamazoo College in the United States to
promote science to young girls by supporting the local girl scouts to work towards a chemistry badge
(Stevens-Truss, 2015). There is significant potential to apply the Junior Scientist Badge model as it can be
undertaken within any STEM degree and could be implemented with Guide or Scout units and science
clubs in local schools as well as community youth groups as we have done. There may also be the
potential to explore linking the work for the badge as well as support by those who have earned it for
peers in following years to a national youth achievement award (for example the Gaisce President’s award
in Ireland or the Duke of Edinburgh award in the UK).

We have prepared timelines in Tables 2 and 3 as a guide to the stages involved in implementing a Junior
Scientist Badge activity. As shown in Table 2, the semester before the project begins, it is important
that contact with potential community partners and arrangements to address child protection policy
requirements take place. Table 3 presents the activities undertaken once the undergraduate students
begin the CEL project. In our case, five timetabled sessions of three hours each were available. A laboratory
space was booked for the first 4 weeks so that the hands-on activities could be practiced.
Table 2: Timeline showing stages involved in preparing for a Junior Scientist Badge project the semester before it is
implemented
Stage of Academic Tasks to be Undertaken
Year
Semester before Make contact with the community partner(s)
Junior Scientist Badge • Check that they would like to get involved/continue.
project begins • Answer any questions they may have and look for their input on
what will work well.
• Agree provisional dates and format for interaction between
the young people they work with and your students (see the
section that follows on how to identify a community partner and
establish a partnership agreement).
Semester before Address Child Protection and Insurance Requirements
Junior Scientist Badge • Provide forms to undergraduate students for checks required to
project begins allow them to work with young people under 18.
• Allow anyone who would prefer not to work directly with
children to make contact with you so that their situation can be
discussed confidentially. They can be assigned a role that involves
planning activities and supporting their peers instead if it is
agreed this is the preferred option.
• A risk assessment for the visits to the community partner and by
the young people to your institution should be completed. This
should include information on the chemicals that it is expected
will be in use. As the undergraduate students may add some
other demonstrations, this will need to be revisited during the
next semester.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |213

 Table 3: Timeline showing stages involved in implementing a Junior Scientist Badge project (5x3 hour sessions)

Week Tasks to be Undertaken

Week 1 Planning & preparation
• Explain what the project involves — distribute student handbook and students
from the previous year are invited in to share their advice & reflections.
• Students are assigned to groups of 4.
• Students trial inquiry-based activities in preparation for their visit to the community
partner and select activities for the return visit to the university. These trials are
written up in lab report format in a blog.
After the face to face session
• Students prepare risk assessments and request materials needed for the next
session.
• Students individually select a demonstration they would like to trial for the Science
Circuit and post a link on the discussion board.
• Students post weekly group updates to the online discussion board.
Feedback provided
• Formative feedback on risk assessment and on demonstration selected.
• Read group updates and check individual blogs are up to date.
Week 2 Planning & preparation
• Students in group 1 continue to trial inquiry-based activities in preparation for their
visit to the community partner in week 3.
• Students in group 2 trial activities in pairs for the Science Circuit for the visit by the
young people onsite in week 5.
• Students write up the trials in lab report format in a blog.
After the face to face session
• Students prepare lesson plans & risk assessments as required.
• Students post weekly group updates to the discussion board.
Feedback provided
• Formative feedback on lesson plans and risk assessments.
• Read group updates and check individual blogs are up to date.
Week 3 First session visiting community partner (additional supervisor required to accompany
them)
Group 1 students and supervisor travel by public transport or taxi to community
partner.
• Group 1 implement Part 1 of Royal Society of Chemistry Global Experiment on
Vitamin C (RSC, 2013); calibration and initial testing of cooked & uncooked fruit and
vegetables.
Planning & preparation
• Group 2 trial inquiry-based activities in preparation for their visit to the community
partner in week 4 and write them up in lab report format in a blog
After the face to face session
• Students prepare lesson plans & risk assessments as required.
• Students post weekly group updates to the discussion board.
Feedback provided
• Formative feedback on lesson plans and risk assessments.
• Read group updates and check individual blogs are up to date

214|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

Week Tasks to be Undertaken

Week 4 Second session visiting community partner (additional supervisor required as someone
needs to accompany students to the community partner site)
• Group 2 students and supervisor travel by public transport or taxi to community
partner.
• Group 2 implement Part 2 of Royal Society of Chemistry Global Experiment on
Vitamin C (RSC, 2013); comparison of different fruits & vegetables, effect of aging &
country of origin.
• Students help with adding results to RSC website.
Planning & preparation
• Group 1 trial activities in pairs for the Science Circuit for the visit by the young
people onsite in week 5 and write them up in lab report format in a blog
After the face to face session
• Students prepare lesson plans & risk assessments as required.
• Students post weekly group updates to the discussion board
Feedback provided
• Formative feedback on lesson plans and risk assessments.
• Read group report and check individual blogs are up to date.
Week 5 Science circuit hosted in the university & presentation of badges
• Students organise 7 stations (lasting 10 minutes each) with hands on activities on
key aspects of the primary science curriculum (e.g. heat, light) with worksheet to be
completed.
• Lunch provided for visitors in the canteen and then, Junior Scientist certificates,
mugs and badges are presented.
• Staff from youth project asked to complete an evaluation form (see Supplementary
Information)
Post activity Submission of final assessment components
• Students complete their blog and reflective summary and submit them
electronically within a week of completing the project.
• Notes made by staff on any changes recommended by students in their reflections
that it is felt could and should be implemented.
Debrief with community partners
• Communication to establish if it is intended to continue the partnership into
the next academic year and if there are any changes recommended for the next
iteration.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |215

Access to a computer room was also available if students wanted to carry out some research related to
their hands on activity or to work on their risk assessment, lesson plan or group report. For the final week,
when the young people visited the university, a classroom with flexible furniture (chairs and individual
desks) was rearranged so that there were seven or eight stations that made up a Science Circuit.

Identifying a suitable community partner and establishing a partnership agreement

As mentioned previously, there are many potential community partners for this type of activity (Guide
or Scout units, science clubs in local schools, community youth groups). Our approach is to identify a
group in a community that is classified as underserved if possible so that we are providing an opportunity
that would not otherwise be available to them. In our institution, we can draw on the assistance of our
Students Learning with Communities office (SLWC, 2019) to help identify potential partners. Most higher
education institutions (HEIs) will have a community outreach or engagement office which can assist in this
way. Even if this is not the case, making direct contact with local publicly funded primary schools, youth
projects or Guide or Scout units should be relatively straightforward. We have obtained a commitment
that our transport costs will be covered (50% from our School and 50% from our Directorate). The costs
involved are not excessive but having secured this funding helps considerably with logistics. The only
other costs incurred are for the lunches for visiting young people and the mugs and badges presented
to them. As this activity helps fulfil our School’s engagement/public outreach responsibilities, funding is
made available.

Depending on student numbers, several community partners may be required. We apply a ratio of one
supervisor to a maximum of 16 students in our laboratory sessions and we have found that working
with a group of 16 students per 1 community partner is an effective model for us. Therefore, groups 1
and 2 referred to in Table 3 are usually made up of 8 students and are subdivided into 2 groups of 4.
Part of the planning process for the CEL project is the completion of a learning/timeline agreement with
the community partner (Burns and Randles, 2014). This is very helpful in ensuring that expectations are
managed and it is clear what the anticipated outcomes will be. The agreement used by the Students
Learning with Communities (SLWC) office in TU Dublin (see Supplementary Information) provides
a description of the project, including the main aims as well as contact details, important dates and
the method of dissemination of outcomes as well as the format of student reflection. It is strongly
recommended that this is a component of the preparation stage of any CEL activity. Figure 1 shows the
badges and mugs used in the project as well as our students assisting with the RSC global experiment in
the youth service premises.

Figure 1: Badges and mugs provided to participants (on left) and

TU Dublin students assisting young people with the RSC Global Experiment (on right)

216|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

Further interaction to support participants

The aim of the Junior Scientist badge is to provide an opportunity for those with an interest and a natural
curiosity about the world to learn more about science when facilities may not available elsewhere. It is
also anticipated that the project may encourage some participants to begin to consider higher education
as an achievable goal by allowing them to become familiar with a university campus and to interact with
our undergraduates, a substantial number of whom will have similar backgrounds to theirs.

We are anxious to ensure that this is not a once-off interaction and participants will be encouraged in the
future to work on a project for exhibition in the SciFest science fair in TU Dublin, to mentor their peers in
following years and to participate in Transition Year work experience with us.

Assessment methods
Assessment methods are aligned to the learning outcomes and teaching and learning activities (Biggs,
2002) as shown in Table 4.There are four components involved and they are each described in this section.
This design ensures that both the product and process are assessed and that there are individual and
group components.
Table 4: Alignment of assessment components to learning outcome for the Junior Scientist Badge project
Assessment Components
Learning outcomes
that Align
development
Demonstrate
activities for presentation
understandingin the
of course
of suitable demonstrations
community
content by
& hands-on Lesson plans (including risk
assessments)
Feedback from community
partners in youth project
Develop theirdigital
organisation, problem-solving,
literacy & communication
teamwork, skills Group progress updates
and participation in weekly
preparation sessions
Blog
Final reflective summary
Reflect
community-based learning
on the content & effectiveness
project of their Blog
Final reflective summary

Group progress reports and participation in weekly preparation sessions (25% weighting)
The discussion board set up in the institutional VLE is used by groups to post progress updates each week
by a set deadline, usually the day before the next face to face session. A different person from the group
is expected to post the report each week and it should be between half a page and a page long.
of four 1.
It should summarise what happened when the group met / were in contact during that week to review
2. Guidance is made available by providing the headings below (the first two will not apply in week
progress.
1):
3. Progress since the last report
Obstacles encountered and how issues were resolved
4. Goals for the next week
A list of actions - who is doing what and when
5. A list of any materials needed for the demonstration / activity to be practiced that need to
be available in the lab for the next session.
In week 1, in order to become familiar with using the discussion board and provide information that will

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |217

be helpful, each student is asked to post up a link to an online resource that provides information on a
science activity for primary school children and say why they think it is useful to their project. A list of
relevant websites and other sources of information are available in the student handbook (Supplementary
Information). Participation in the preparation sessions is factored into the group report assessment mark
and can be used as the basis to reduce an individual group member’s markifit has been clearly established
that they were not contributing to the same extent as the rest of the group and were not communicating
effectively with the group. This sanction has not had to be applied very often as students tend to bear
in mind that there is a real world consequence if they do not contribute effectively to the project. These
measures tend to ensure that there are not issues with one person in a group not pulling their weight. It is
recommended to students that they try to deal with any problems themselves initially but they are made
aware that they can follow up with a staff member if they are notable to resolve them.

Individual blog/project diary (25% weighting)

A project diary in the form of a blog is kept by students over the duration of the project to provide a record
of the work done over each week, both during and outside the lab sessions, including research to find
information.The blog should also contain images from experimental work/practice sessions etc. Guidance
on setting up the blog is provided in the first session. Global experiment activities and demonstrations
carried out in the lab are written up in the blog as any experiment would be recorded:
• Aim
• List of materials
• Reference source for procedure
• A description of the steps performed so that the demonstration/activity can be repeated
• Observations/suggestions for changes if repeated

Blogs are checked each week by the lab supervisor to ensure that they are being compiled on an ongoing
basis. At the end of the project, the blog is printed and handed into the laboratory supervisor for final
grading.

Lessonplans (including risk assessments), handouts and feedbackfrom staffinyouth project(30% weighting)
Each group is required to complete a lesson plan and risk assessment for the Global Experiment session
that they will run. A lesson plan template is provided on the virtual learning environment (VLE) as is an
example of one that has been completed for a Slice of Science session (Supplementary Information). It
captures what the students and young people will be doing at each stage of the activity as well as an
estimate of how long each stage is likely to take. The lesson plan should usually have been completed
one week before the Global Experiment session takes place. A shorter lesson plan is prepared for the
hands-on activity planned for the Science Circuit in the final week when the young people visit us. In
this case, the group of 4 divide into two subgroups of 2 and each subgroup should have planned a ten
minute activity. A risk assessment is submitted as part of the lesson plan and guidelines are provided
(Supplementary Information). Students will sometimes decide to prepare their own materials to help to
explain the concepts that underpin the activity/demonstration and consideration is given to these when
allocating a mark for the lesson plans, as well as the feedback from the staff in the youth project on how
effective the sessions were from their perspective (Supplementary Information).

Individual reflective piece (20% weighting)

Unlike some other disciplines, chemistry undergraduates are not often asked to reflect on their feelings,
attitudes and personal experiences. Also, their lecturers also may not have much experience of guiding
students through this process. Providing prompts and questions to reflect onto students is recommended.
Also, academic staff may be able to seek training from academic development staff or their community

218 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

engagement support office or consult an experienced peer or colleague. The What, So what? Now what?
framework to guide reflection developed by Rolfe et al. (2001) is useful. An added benefit is that learners
have had the opportunity to consider the resulting skills and knowledge they have developed before they
enter the employment market.

The reflective summary students are required to prepare describes the team effort, each individual’s
contribution and reflections on the project. It is submitted a week after the project is complete and
should be between 300 words and 600 words. It is incorporated as the final blog post. In order to provide
some structure and align to the anticipated learning outcomes (see Tables 1 and 4), a series of prompts
are provided and learners are asked to ensure that their reflection addresses them (Supplementary
information).

The reflective piece is assessed based on the following criteria:

• Content:60% (note that there are no right or wrong opinions but a student must make sure
that they address all of the prompts and that they discuss them to a reasonable depth)
• Coherence, accuracy, and structure: 30%
• Presentation: 10%

To ensure that responses are honest, it has been found that it is important to specify that marks awarded
are not reduced if criticism or negative comments on the community engaged learning project are
incorporated, but that depth is an important consideration. For example, if it is stated that there was an
issue, sufficient detail needs to be given to explain how it arose and whether it is likely to take place in the
future. Suggestions on how the issue might be addressed should also be provided.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

The implementation of the Junior Scientist badge project has been evaluated using two main sources
of data. These were the reflective pieces prepared by our students on completion of the project and the
evaluation forms completed by the coordinators of the community partner youth project.

From a review of the reflective pieces, it was observed that students had to overcome some initial
challenges, including making sure that their group was working effectively. However, by the time they
had finished the activity, they recognised the contribution the project had made to their development
of transferable skills and to their understanding of civic engagement. The youth project coordinator
evaluation forms returned an ‘excellent’ rating for our students in all 7 categories. Comments on the form
included:
Our group really enjoyed it. Thanks to all involved!

The programme was well-designed and interesting. The students interacted very well on the young peoples’
level engaging them in the activities and keeping them interested.

Previous iterations of related community engaged learning projects which involved developing hands on
demonstrations for secondary school students were evaluated using additional sources of data (student
grades and pre- and post-student evaluation questionnaires, self-assessment/review undertaken by the
staff involved on the CEL activities) and the findings have been reported (Mc Donnell et al., 2011). These
included learners’descriptions offeeling a sense of responsibility to ensure they did not let anyone down,
their enjoyment of working towards an identified common goal in a group and their sense of having a
clearer perception of the professional roles their qualification in chemistry would lead to. In addition, it was

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |219

found that scientific communication, teamwork and digital literacy skills were developed. Other authors,
Mason O’Connor et al. (2011), have shown that community-engaged learning provides an opportunity
to develop citizenship, employability and problem-solving skills, as well as resilience and self-motivation.

Implications and Adaptability

We believe that this approach has the opportunity for application in many HEIs and have categorised
some of the aspects of implementation that could be modified to align with other curricula and academic
calendars below.

Learning hours
The information provided has been tailored to the number of learning hours available in the context of the
implementation with our students. You may have less than 15 direct contact hours (5 × 3 hour sessions)
available. In this case, it might be possible for example to implement a similar Junior Scientist Badge
project using three groups of undergraduate students who work on the project for 6 direct contact hours
(3 × 2 hours). One group would implement the first session on the Global Experiment science inquiry
activity, the second group would implement the follow up activity and the third group would implement
the Science Circuit activity on site in the HEI. The assessment requirements would need to be reduced but
it would be important to maintain the requirement for reflective writing.

Choice of science investigation activity

We implement the RSC Global Experiment on measuring vitamin C levels in foods because it allows
the opportunity to upload results afterwards and compare them to those obtained in other locations
worldwide. Also, there are thorough guidelines and safety hazards have been minimised.There are several
other RSC global experiments that could be implemented as alternatives or you or your colleagues may
have some science inquiry based activities that you already implement for public engagement that could
be applied instead.

Number of students
One limitation that may arise if people are considering adopting this approach is having a large number of
students in their cohort. We recommend that 16to 20 students per instructor is the limit applied. Also, there
can be logistical considerations to do with how many students a community partner can accommodate
on a visit. A second group of 16-20 students could perhaps work on a Junior Scientist Badge project with
another community partner, or with another group of young people within the same youth project. It
could also be possible to make this project available as an optional activity to a larger group of students.

Real world context

Community engaged learning projects may not always run as planned. The real world context means that
you cannot anticipate all events and situations are messier. In our opinion, this is a valuable aspect of the
learning experience as students gain experience by helping with troubleshooting any problems that arise.

Potential to collaborate with primary school education students

Overton and Overton (2015) implemented an interdisciplinary project in which chemistry students
worked with primary science education students to develop and implement engaging science outreach
activities for primary school students. We applied the same approach in 2015 for our CEL project and the
collaboration was very effective (Murphy and McDonnell, 2016). We would recommend this approach be
considered if it is feasible as both groups of students can learn a great deal from each other — chemistry

220 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

students gained insights on lesson planning and communicating with young people and the primary
education students gained confidence to implement hands on science demonstrations.

Sustainability and resource implications

The model we have described in this chapter has proved to be sustainable. The involvement of two staff
members is an important element as, when one of us was on secondment for several years, the CEL
activity could continue. Community engaged learning does require a time commitment but it is not
any more time-consuming than other active learning pedagogies. As with any change being introduced,
initial implementation will require additional planning and revision of module descriptors. Examples of
ways in which the workload can be shared include requesting that academic colleagues contribute some
time on a rotational basis (for example accompanying students to the youth project in weeks 3 and 4)
and building in a separate CEL project which allows past participants to act as teaching assistants. If the
community partner selected is a scouting organisation, there is greater flexibility when interacting with
them as evening and weekend sessions are possible.

Technology can contribute to sustainability by facilitating remote interactions with community partners
that are located a considerable distance away (Saitta et al., 2011). Esson and Johnston (2010) have
implemented an innovative and resourceful project in which impact is maximised. Undergraduates
from their college worked with secondary school students to teach them the principles and methods
relevant to a particular hands-on chemistry experience. These younger students then acted in turn as
peer mentors to teach others in their own schools. The programme has also been implemented as a pilot
project in which college students worked with younger middle school students and they then became
peer mentors in primary (elementary) school outreach activities. This peer mentor approach could also
be implemented within a Junior Scientist Badge project. The embeddedness of CEL in the curriculum and
an academic’s orientation towards civic engagement have been shown to be indicators of sustainability
(Boland, 2013).

As was mentioned in the introduction in relation to the guidelines from Boland (2013), if you are thinking
of implementing community engaged learning, the recommendation is to start with a module / activity
where you already have something in place that could be modified (for example a case study). The relevant
activity will often be one that focusses on the development of graduate attributes/employability skills.
Once this had been successfully implemented, you will have the basis to extend the existing activity or
initiate new CEL projects.

Your Context
The questions below are intended as prompts to encourage you to reflect on the information presented
on community engaged learning in this chapter and to consider how this approach might be adaptable
to your context.
• Where in your syllabus is there a module that focuses on developing employability/
transferable skills (teamwork, communication, organisation, digital and information
literacy), and is there an assignment within this module that could be modified to involve
working in partnership with a community group?
• Do you have the buy in of your Head of School/Department and other relevant stakeholders
(technical staff, other colleagues)? Have you explained to them why this has been shown to
be a very effective pedagogical approach and outlined the benefits?
• Has someone else implemented something similar, perhaps in a different STEM subject?
If they are located nearby, can you ask to be there when they first introduce the project
to their students (this is a very effective way of you finding out about the project but not

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |221

 needing to take up additional time of the contact you have made)
• What additional resources would be required to plan for and implement this change (time,
staff, materials, space etc.)?
• Do you need to source some seed funding for the time required to modify the existing
course materials and/or to support any minor expenses the project will entail (for example
taxi or public transport fares, lunches for visiting group of young people, junior scientist
badges/mugs)? There are often some community funds advertised in local papers that
could be considered.
• Who can help you to identify a suitable community partner such as a youth project/scout
group/school that is in need of support (for example engagement or public outreach staff)?
• How many contact hours and how many independent learning hours are available? How
many students are in the cohort? Have you planned accordingly?
• Have the risk assessments and child protection vetting checks required been planned for?
• Have you worked out a schedule for planning and preparing, implementing and then
evaluating your community engaged learning activity?
• What assessments are appropriate? How will it be ensured that the process and the product
and the individual and the group effort are considered?
• How will groups be assigned and how many students will be in each group? What are the
steps to be taken by group members if there are issues with working together effectively?
• Will students be consulted in advance of implementation? Once the activity begins, what
information do learners need to be provided with to communicate what is required of them
and the rationale for using CEL?
• How will you publicise the project (for example your School/Department website/
newsletter/Twitter account/local newspaper for the community partner)?
• How will you evaluate the implementation of this approach?

Conclusion

The aim of this chapter was to provide sufficient information on a community engaged learning Junior
Scientist badge project to allow readers to decide whether they wish to implement a similar activity
themselves. Timelines indicating the planning required the semester before implementation as well as
the stages involved while implementing it in our institution were provided. Guidance on how the activity
could be modified to deal with larger student cohorts or less contact hours have been discussed. Also, an
example of extending the project so that participants ultimately mentor other younger school children is
presented. We have been implementing community engaged learning activities for 12 years and would
strongly recommend it as a high impact activity to be built in to the curriculum. This approach engages
academic and technical staff and students, develops important science communication and teamwork
skills among learners (as well as civic responsibility), addresses the need of a community partner and
generates positive public relations at a local and institutional level.

Future workplanned involves extending community based learning activities acrossall of our programmes.
We hopeto implementaproject to undertake some air pollution monitoring in Dublin city in collaboration
with schools modelled on the UCLChemAirPoll project devised by Prof Andrea Sella (2019). We have also
implemented a relatively small scale CEL project with first years in 2019 as a result of a project suggestion
from a community partner. Our year 1 medicinal chemistry students are preparing information fact sheets
to be made available in an open prison on drugs (both prescription and illicitly produced).

222|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing community engaged learning with chemistry undergraduates

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Students Learning With Communities office, technical staff, and all students
who have been involved in the Junior Scientist Badge project in TU Dublin.We are also grateful to Campus
Life, the School of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences and the College of Sciences and Health for
funding.

References

Bandy, J. (2019), ‘Community engaged teaching step by step’, available at: http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/teaching
guides/teaching-through-community-engagement/community-engaged-teaching-step-by-step/
(accessed 12 March 2019).
Beckman, M., Penney, N. and Cockburn, B. (2011), ‘Maximizing the impact of community-based research’, Journal
of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 83-104.
Biggs, J. (2002), ‘Aligning the curriculum to promote good learning’, paper presented at the Constructive Alignment
in Action: Imaginative Curriculum Symposium, LTSN Generic Centre.
Boland, J. (2013), ‘Curriculum development for sustainable civic engagement’ in O’Farrell, C and Farrell, A. (Eds.),
Emerging Issues in Higher Education III: From capacity building to sustainability, EDIN, Athlone, pp. 210-224.
Burns, K. and Randles, E. (2014),‘Campus Engage Guide on Community Based Learning and Research Agreements’,
available at: http://www.campusengage.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Community-based-LR
Agreements-WEB.pdf (accessed 2 March 2019).
Campus Compact (2019), website available at: https://compact.org/resources/ (accessed 12 December 2018).
Campus Engage (2019), website available at: http://www.campusengage.ie/ (accessed 8 March 2019).
Donaghy, K.J. and Saxton, K.J. (2012), ‘Service learning track in general chemistry: giving students a choice’,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 89, pp. 1378-1383.
Esson, J. and Johnston, W. (2010), ‘Extending the impact of service-learning: teaching K-12 peer mentors’,
Proceedings of the 21st Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, University of North Texas, United States.
Available at: http://www.bcce2010.org/program_schedule/TuesdayAfternoonProgram.pdf (accessed 18
November 2018).
Harrison, M.A., Dunbar, D. and Lopatto, D. (2013), ‘Using pamphlets to teach biochemistry: a service-learning
project’, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 90, pp. 210-214.
Hosten, C.M., Talanova, G., and Lipkowitz, K.B. (2011), ‘Introducing undergraduates to the role of science in public
policy and in the service of the community’, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12, pp. 388
394.
Kuh, G. D. (2008), High-impact educational practices: what are they, who has access to them, and why they matter,
Association of American Colleges and Universities, Washington DC.
Mason O’Connor, K., Lynch, K. and Owen, D. (2011), ‘Student-community engagement and the development of
graduate attributes’, Education + Training, Vol. 53, No. 2/3, pp. 100-115.
McDonnell, C. Ennis, P. and Shoemaker, L. (2011), ‘Now for the science bit: implementing community-based
learning in chemistry’, Education + Training, Vol. 53, No. 2/3, pp. 218 – 236.
McDonnell, C. (2015), ‘Innovative community-engaged learning projects: from chemical reactions to community
interactions’, in García-Martínez, J. and Serrano-Torregrosa, E. (Eds.), Chemistry Education : Best Practices,
Opportunities and Trends, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co., pp. 345-374.
McEwen, L. and Mason O’Connor, K., (2013), ‘Building staff/faculty capacity for university–public/community

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |223

 engagement’, Survey Report, University of the West of England, Gloucestershire.
McIlrath, L. and McDonnell, C. (2014), ‘Campus Engage Guide on Community Based Learning’, available at: http://
www.campusengage.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Community-Based-Learning-WEB.pdf (accessed 2
March 2019).
Murphy V. and McDonnell, C. (2016), ‘Conference presentation on interdisciplinary science education project’,
vicephec-2016-vmurphy-cmcdonnell
available at: (accessed 2 December 2018).
https://www.slideshare.net/clairemcdonnell5/interdisciplinary-science-ed-project-

Overton, D. and Overton T. (2015), ‘Primary Discoveries’, Education in Chemistry, November.

RSC (2013), ‘Royal Society of Chemistry Global Experiment 2013’, available at: http://www.rsc.org/learn
chemistry/collections/experimentation/collaborative-chemistry/chemistry-week-2013 (accessed 2
December 2018).
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D. and Jasper, M. (2001), Critical reflection for nursing and the helping professions: A user’s
guide, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
Saitta, E.K.H., Bowdon, M.A. and Geiger, C.L. (2011), ‘Incorporating service-learning, technology, and research
supportive teaching techniques into the university chemistry classroom’, Journal of Science Education and
Technology, Vol. 20, pp. 790-795.
SENCER (2019), ‘Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities website’, available at: http://
sencer.net/resources/ (accessed 8 November 2018).
Sella, A. (2019), UCLChemAirPoll project information, available at: https://iris.ucl.ac.uk/iris/browse/
profile?upi=ASELL29 (accessed 8 November 2018).
SLWC (2019), Students Learning With Communities website, available at: http://www.dit.ie/ace/
studentslearningwithcommunities/ (accessed 12 November 2018).
Steinke, P. and Fitch, P. (2007), ‘Assessing service-learning’, Research & Practice in Assessment, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 1-8.
Stevens-Truss, R. (2015), ‘Kalamazoo College Chemistry Department Outreach events - Girl Scout Chemistry
Badge’, available at: https://reason.kzoo.edu/chem/faculty/regina/op/ (accessed 12 November 2018).
Sutheimer, S. (2008), ‘Strategies to simplify service-learning efforts in chemistry’, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 85, No. 2, pp. 231-233.
Talloires Network (2019), website available at: https://talloiresnetwork.tufts.edu/resources/ http://www.
campusengage.ie/ (accessed 8 December 2018).
Welch, M. (2010), ‘O.P.E.R.A.: A first letter mnemonic and rubric for conceptualizing and implementing service
learning courses’, Australian Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 76-82.

224|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 16 Implementing inquiry-based learning
activities in chemistry education

Jane Essex
School of Education, University of Strathclyde
jane.essex@strath.ac.uk

This chapter looks at the potential role of open-ended problems, both within a problem
based learning context and in other contexts, in promoting learning by chemistry students.
It contrasts problem-based and other inquiry-based approaches with the requirements for
very precise evidence of success in an education system that is held highly accountable to
funders and regulatory bodies.Whilst educators feel that giving verifiable learning outcomes
is increasingly required of us in an age of performativity and managerialism, some of us
were ourselves motivated by the prospect of meeting a checklist of learning intentions.

I will outline two examples which show how it was possible to reconcile the need to
demonstrate that learning had taken place with a complex open-ended activity and
importantly, to evaluate the impact of such activities. The approach exemplifies the
processes outlined in Barron’s (1998) framework for problem-based learning, which is
described in this chapter. I will describe how these experiences have influenced my own
teaching in a range of contexts. The chapter will conclude with guidance on how people
might generate suitable tasks to enhance their teaching whilst ensuring that essential
learning about chemistry is not compromised.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

At every stage of my career in higher education, I have been inspired by Professor Tina Overton’s
work to use context-based learning and enquiry approaches to learning. Hearing about her
pioneering work at Hull University when Iattended Variety in Chemistry Education conferences
gave me the confidence to try out similar approaches. As this chapter shows, my approach has
evolved and, in turn, influenced my own teaching practices and that of colleagues. I concur with
Tina that it is possible to reconcile the learners’ needs with meaningful inquiry-based learning
and to demonstrate the positive impact of such activities.

To cite: Essex, J. (2019), “Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C.
(Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 225-236.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |225

Introduction

Limitations of traditional approaches to chemistry education

Chemists are very accustomed to analysing chemistry content in terms of Alex Johnstone’s (1991) three
levels of representation, describing material in macroscopic, sub-microscopic, and symbolic terms.
However, we commonly fail to acknowledge that these levels of representations are a manifestation
of a formal and abstract notion of science, which communicates fixed truths in a way that is objective
and verifiable. This knowledge, by extension, is curated by experts who are then able to judge others as
correct or inaccurate in their understanding. Such a position leads to learners failing to take ownership of
the knowledge and simply relying on the expertise being trotted out at the right moment and that the
wet chemistry experiment is a slow way to reach answers which are already well known to the teacher.
This is the sense of futility and learner disempowerment which Johnstone (1991, p.80) captures when he
describes practical work as the “long way to the sink”.

Inquiry and exploration as essential elements of science and chemistry education

What we do not show nearly so often is that aspect of our subject that is tentative and exploratory, almost
playful (McComas,1998).This is equally scientific; indeed, Isaac Newton is alleged to have described himself
as “a boy playing on the seashore”. Concerns over performativity frequently override the ample evidence to
support the use of context-rich and exploratory approaches, including problem-based learning (Dochy et
al., 2003; Wilder, 2015), as a vehicle for good learning.Thus, external performance pressures drive teachers
to the transmission teaching of accepted facts, rather than supporting the construction of meaning by
their students. This approach gives the educator — be they a teacher or lecturer — a sense of security of
coverage through uniform exposure to material, irrespective of the level of comprehension that is instilled
or the ability of students to apply their learning (Ball, 2003).

Different approaches to developing inquiry-based learning

Accepting that inquiry and exploration are important scientific skills and provide valuable stimulation of
students’ thinking, there is also the argument that these are the transferable skills which are needed in
the workplace. The role of these skills in preparing students for real-life problems, is made explicit when
they are deployed in problem-based learning (PBL). This lack of a single answer distinguishes PBL from
both the type of assessment commonly associated with teacher-led transmission teaching (Wilder, 2015)
and also from the related approach of problem solving, which seeks to find a defined solution (O’Dowd,
2009). Apart from the open-ended nature of the problem posed, PBL is also characterised by the locus of
control of the learning. In common with other types of inquiry-based learning (Aditomo et al., 2013), PBL
affords the learner control over their learning as they work towards a resolution of the problem whilst
the educator acts as a facilitator of the self-directed learning. The model of learning inherent in PBL is
social constructivism and the learner is conceptualised as filling in learning gaps as they are identified
while in pursuit of a solution to the problem, by activating prior knowledge and building connections to
the new content. Learners are intended to work collaboratively, both to define and resolve the problem,
hence the process and the outcomes depend on the problem-solvers’ collective expertise (University
College Dublin, no date; Mazorodze and Reiss, 2018). Beyond the synergy of the learners in developing
their expertise, their active engagement in the process of knowledge creation is reflected in the better
understanding, improved retention, and greater transferability of the content (Rogoff, 1990). However,
the aims of PBL are more than just content acquisition, but also the development of skills and affective
engagement with the problem. Such skills typically include communication and collaboration, decision
making, problem-solving, critical thinking, and the capacity to learn independently (Overton and Randles,
2015; Rogoff, 1990; Wilder, 2015).

226|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education

The final distinguishing feature of PBL is that context is an integral part of it. This is one of the reasons
that it may engender higher levels of learner engagement, since the learning is seen as relevant (O’Brien
and Tam, 2008). Context may also contribute to a higher level of cognitive load in the task. The additional
demands of considering contextual factors: selecting those which are relevant; understanding how
they intersect with scientific theory; all contribute to a higher processing demand. However, they can
also provide relevance and thereby enhance engagement (O’Brien and Toms, 2008). Another potential
risk is that concepts may become situated in a specific context and not transferred to novel situations
(de Regt, 2004). Nevertheless, the use of authentic problems provides a stimulus for learning in which
factual knowledge, cognitive and metacognitive strategies, experiences, belief systems, and social factors
interact (Rogoff, 1990). The diversity of acceptable approaches or answers or — as it would be termed by
psychologists, the high number of interacting elements — raises the cognitive demand of the activity
considerably (Paas et al., 2003). However, offsetting this increased demand is the engagement provided
by the context and the preliminary practical activities (O’Brien and Toms, 2008).

Two other closely related but distinct forms of context-rich learning have been identified in addition to
the better-known PBL. These offer similar engagement through real-life applicability, and are intended
to shift the learning focus from content to process. They differ, however, in terms of the level of learner
autonomy and desired learning gains. Case-based learning involves the use of selected case studies to
exemplify target concepts. Students work on the application of concepts they have learnt to a given
context, answering questions which have been set by their teacher/lecturer (Aditomo et al., 2015).

Project-based learning provides the opportunity to work, over a sustained period, towards a defined end
product, with learners having the ability to respond to emerging opportunities and problems as they
work towards the externally imposed goal (Barron et al., 1998). The question or problem needs to be
relevant, in order to provide motivation for learning, but the criteria for success, which are held to be
key in determining deep learning (Barron et al., 1998) must also be sufficiently open that the product or
outcome is not pre-determined. The learners need to have choice over how to respond to the task but
not so much choice that they can avoid engaging with the core concepts of the discipline (Thomas, 2000).
However, if learners are not to be drawn away from the focus of the work, the educator needs to guard
against the task being too open (Blumenfeld et al., 1991).

By contrast, case-based learning provides a more structured approach to learning, with the emphasis
being on the application of known principles to novel contexts. It can be viewed as a guided inquiry
method, in which the educator helps to direct the learning. Because of the level of direction, it may be
seen as providing some of the affective benefits of inquiry-based learning whilst ensuring coverage of
intended content. The process of collaborative analysis extends and consolidates learners’ knowledge
(Aditomo et al., 2005). Despite the reduced flexibility of approach and outcome, context-based learning is
still held to develop skills in analytical thinking and reflective judgment (Kolodner et al., 2003).

If we wish to offer the benefits of working with rich problems (by using authentic problems to engender
the use of higher order thinking skills), in the current climate of performativity, we need to consider
how to provide evidence that such approaches do indeed engender secure learning. We also need to
consider how we can make such opportunities more available to our learners and how we can assess
their learning during them appropriately. These two foci — the creation of learning opportunities and
how we can demonstrate that such learning has occurred — are what the following account revolves
around. The three activities described have been selected to exemplify possible mechanisms by which the
authenticity and challenge of inquiry-based problems may be presented to learners.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |227

Methods

The data gathering process in the evaluations conformed with the requirements of the British Educational
Research Association’s (2014) guidelines in doing no harm to research subjects. Specifically, ethicality was
upheld by ensuring the primacy of the subjects’opportunities to learn above the gathering of data for the
study. All data was anonymised to protect the reputation of subjects. Participation was voluntary and they
could still participate in the activities if they declined to contribute data.

Investigating the use of additives to bread

This is an example of project-based learning used as STEM outreach, in which the outcome is either to
identify which of five loaves is made from uncontaminated flour or to explain whether it was easy to
tell by examination. This was conducted in the vicinity of a museum’s Victorian bakery, which provided
contextual relevance, while bread is a staple food item, which adds personal relevance. Five sets of
dough were prepared using adulterants common in Victorian days, sawdust, chalk, bone meal and alum
(potassium aluminium sulfate). Part of the dough was baked, and the loaves were available for visitors to
look at, smell and handle, alongside the dough (for further details, see Essex, 2017 and resources in the
Supplementary Information).

The loaves were distinguishable, but not readily, and many visitors thought the bread adulterated with
alum looked better than the unadulterated loaf. This indicated that the task was sufficiently challenging
and underlined the fact that judgements could be made using various criteria. The visitors were observed
to relate the tasks to their own experience of bread and bread-making, and to stimulate inter-generational
conversations in the family groups. Referring to Barron’s framework (Barron et al.,1998):
1. The setting of learning-appropriate goals: the two goals were found to be engaging and
sufficiently challenging.
2. Providing scaffolds: in this case, oral prompts and responses to questions raised by the
visitors by the science communicator.
3. Providing multiple opportunities for formative self-assessment: In this case the assessment
wasn’t self-directed, but carried out by reference to the science communicator who
evaluated their suggestions as to which loaf was unadulterated.
4. Developing social structures which promote involvement and a sense of agency: this is achieved
in this instance by organising group discussions regularly, throughout the teaching
sequence. In addition, students are invited to ask any supplementary questions they may
have and to carry out independent research as they are working.

No formal evaluation of the impact of the activity was conducted, regrettably, but were the activity to be
repeated, audio recordings of visitor conversations would provide a valuable indicator of the associated
learning. With hindsight, photographic evidence of visitors’ responses, in combination with audio
recording or field notes on conversations, would have been invaluable, as they would have enabled me
to assess their learning behaviours retrospectively, as I had done in another project. (Essex and Haxton,
2018). Barriault (1999) developed a taxonomy of indicators of involvement with outreach activities, based
upon the observable behaviours of participants.This taxonomy gave rise to an auditing tool used to assess
the impact of learning activities (Barriault and Pearson, 2010). The three categories of learning behaviour
described are:
1. Initiation: The learner shows tentative engagement with the activity, sufficient to gain an
outline idea of the concepts being taught.
2. Transition: The learner shows a positive affective response to the activity and a sustained

228|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education

engagement with the activity.

3. Breakthrough behaviours: are those that demonstrate the value of the learning opportunity
to the learner. Such behaviours also demonstrate the desire to explore the concepts being
expostulated by the activity further.

Two ways in which this work has impacted on my future teaching is that it reinforced my belief that multi
sensory stimulus material is highly engaging, and inclusive for diverse audiences. It also demonstrated
the value of social groups in promoting engagement with science learning (Archer and de Witt, 2012).
This could be family or community groups, so that students share some aspect of their work with their
community, or it could be using student friendship groups for some tasks.

Evaluating Fritz Haber’s life and learning about nitrogen chemistry

This example illustrates a project-based learning approach with a defined output. It is offered here as a
readily transferable activity, requiring no more than a teaching topic, a socio-historic link to the content
and routine teaching materials. However, in using a historical case to provoke the application of chemical
knowledge to new contexts, it has some elements of a case-based approach. The following approach was
designed, using the four steps for project-based learning described by Barron et al. (1998):
1. The setting of learning-appropriate goals: here, this is to recognise the contribution of two
people to the development of the means to synthesise ammonia.
2. Providing scaffolds: in this case, a series of chemistry mini-studies with links made between
the chemistry of the substances and the historical story.
3. Providing multiple opportunities for formative self-assessment: which is done by re-visiting the
intended product after each episode of chemistry learning.
4. Developing social structures which promote involvement and a sense of agency: this is achieved
in this instance by organising group discussions regularly throughout the teaching sequence.
In addition, students are invited to ask any supplementary questions they may have and to
carry out independent research as they are working.

A synoptic teaching sequence on the chemistry of nitrogen was devised, which included activities
illustrating the shapes of nitrogen-containing entities, the nitrogen cycle, amines as chelating agents
and the Biuret test for protein, titration to make fertiliser, and the thermodynamics of the production of
ammonia (See Supplementary Information). Reference to the Haber-Bosch story is made at each stage of
the teaching sequence: for example, hydrogen cyanide is one of the molecules for which they are asked
to predict the shape. It is introduced as the product of Zyklon, which was used in the death camps but
had been devised by Haber’s former PhD student as a fumigant to kill agricultural pests. Clara’s deep
opposition to her husband’s development of the use of poison gases, including chlorine as a weapon in
World War 1 is also mentioned at this point. Likewise, the technician Carl Bosch’s crucial contributions to
the high-pressure apparatus are described when the anthropogenic nitrogen cycle is compared to the
natural one.

For evaluation, students were asked to note down as many positive and negative aspects of learning the
nitrogen chemistry in a socio-historical context as they could think of and to post these on a washing line
(in our case, string suspended between two clamp stands!) of which one end represented a very negative
impact on learning and the other represented an entirely positive impact on learning. The responses
along each quarter of the line were collated and thematically coded (Braun and Clarke, 2006) for both of
two teaching groups who had equivalent teaching inputs. The tally of themes coded for in the comments
and the degree of positive or negative impact, as represented by the quartile in which the comment was
placed, are shown in Table 1.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |229

 Table 1: Summary of evaluation of context-based learning about nitrogen;
numbers of comments are shown, along with exemplar comments
Theme/quartile 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total

Relevance be
andGives
used
underlying
life
shows 13
inhow
context
some toreal
it
chemistry
realthe
life
can 10
‘everyday’
chance
Gives more
tochemistry
discuss
of a interest inneed
2the context
understanding/
Pupils an If the topic
5 doesn’t 30

interest the child,

they may switch off
for the whole of the
lesson
emotional
response
Interest/ more
when put
Really context
engaging
interesting
into
1 realandlife May in
interest 6themore
take subject 0 There are2examples 9

of using science for

bad things which
could make some
pupils afraid of it
side
subject
of the
different
Shows a science
more asfamiliar
Students
and
approachable
4something
will see Integrating
–make
allowing
connections
3 pupils
learning
to 0 9
Could 2lead to
distraction

across the curriculum

Quality of
learning deeper
Linking
childrenchemistry
together.
understanding
2toHelps
gain a It would
at
understand help
the macroscopic
level
3 chemistry
pupils get
Science element
science
lost 6– lesson
still is
might
a Some chemistry
6 17

skills or knowledge
may be lot due
to the superficial
thinking
Impact
the teacher’s
role on 0 their
and
Keeps
learning
toes,
constantly
teachers
2engaged
(CPD)on 8
knowledge
Requires
subject of the
2aarea
broad Very4time
consuming to
prepare

awareness
Career Givescareer
possible
2 ideas
future Shows future
1 work 0 0 3

opportunities
Impact
strategies
on
manage-
learning
ment/
lesson Can initiate1 discussion into
can
you
Can feel
theexplore
the
class
build
lesson
would
2the sohelp
flexibility
whatever
mostyou 7
so
Toothat
many
grasp
superficially
the
you
2concepts
concepts
can only More able
2 pupils
can dominate the
activity

Total 23 27 16 24 90

The balance of responses was positive; interestingly six of the eight themes were associated with both
positive and negative potential impacts. Relevance was the overwhelming factor in the positive evaluation
of context-based learning; where this was seen as problematic it was because of perceived difficulties
associated with finding or researching relevant contexts. Three other factors were viewed overall as
positive outcomes of context-based learning, though predominantly placed in the second quartile, were

230|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education

interest, quality of learning and the demonstration of different aspects of the subject. The possibility of
raising career awareness was an unexpected response, but one which was raised as a potential benefit in
three responses. Only seven responses directly talked about the impact of using extraneous material on
the learning of chemistry that is needed for assessment purposes, but another six comments talked about
distraction or a dilution of learning. The other aspect which was discussed mainly in negative terms was
the demand placed upon the teacher, both in terms of additional preparation and the demands placed
upon their subject knowledge. This is likely to be of particular concern to novice teachers who fear that a
lack of expertise may undermine their authority. However, the impact on the management of lessons were
mentioned seven times in total and the responses were almost evenly distributed across the quartiles,
suggesting that this was not seen as a reason either to use or avoid CBL, but rather a consideration.

Investigating the soil chemistry of Glasgow

This activity corresponds to a problem-based learning having a poorly defined problem with real world
relevance. Students could (and did) deploy a wide range of strategies to investigate the problem and
various, inter-connected but distinct, responses were given. The work was carried out with student
primary teachers, based in the city of Glasgow, who were not science specialists but had opted to study
an optional module on science education. Based on data about the levels of iron in the soil in the Glasgow
area, showing the levels at different points in the city (see Supplementary Information), students were
asked to suggest possible reasons for the varying concentrations. Having been shown a simple wet test
for iron concentration, and tested three soil samples with different levels of iron in them, they were then
asked to plan and carry out an investigation into one of their suggested explanations. Amongst the
investigations devised were the following.
1. A quantitative analysis of the data provided on iron levels, looking for a correlation between
distance from the nearest major roads and the measured concentration of iron.
2. As above, but focusing on the distribution of iron relative to former shipbuilding sites.
3. An internet search on sources of iron in the environment and uses of iron.
4. An investigation of iron levels in different plant materials commonly found in the city to see
whether preferential concentration by certain plants could have contributed to the pattern
of distribution observed.
5. An investigation into the solubility and suspendability of rust in different solutions to
ascertain the contribution of water-borne iron to the observed patterns near some rivers.
6. Testing of rocks found in the greater Glasgow area to see whether weathered rocks might
have discernibly different levels of iron.

To manage the development of this thinking, it was important that the feedback from the different groups
was ordered in such a way as to support stages of response to the problem. Since the presence of heavy
industry, specifically shipyards, was the major determining factor, the other investigations were asked
to present after this one. The other groups’ work provided partial explanations for the migration of iron,
secondary to its release in the shipyards, whilst Investigation 6 contributed to an understanding of the
growth in iron production around the city. The PBL approach, combined with a guided plenary, provided
a rich account of the origins of the iron in the soil. It also raised further questions for future consideration,
which suggested that the learning had been multi-faceted and ongoing.

Because many of these students were not confident about their scientific knowledge or their ability to
carry out an investigation, I have realised that additional support needs to be available (but not offered
so promptly as to de-skill students during the early, orientation, and preliminary planning stage). For
this activity, in addition to offering some suggested research questions, I have now devised a series of
exemplar prompt questions such as:

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |231

 What will represent the factor under investigation?
How will you know whether your factor made any difference?
What measurements will you make?

Implications and Adaptability

All of these studies show that learning can be demonstrated to have taken place during open-ended
rich learning activities, using very diverse indicators. This has three important implications. Firstly, we
need to challenge pressures for a highly systematic curriculum which may make for easier auditing but
which comes at the cost of reduction in authenticity, which can be very motivating. Related to this, we
need to consider how to assess learning in ways which do not compromise the experience of learning. So
the gathering of responses to formative assessment items, non-intrusive observation and assessment of
outputs are either non-intrusive, or integral to the learning process.

Secondly, the use of open-ended problems can elicit engagement and stimulate the use of higher order
thinking skills, as well as other transferable skills. These skills included selecting relevant observations,
problem-solving, communication, team working, devising time-efficient protocols, literature searching
and evaluation. Despite the knowledge demands, learning could take place during authentic inquiry
if commensurate support is available to co-investigators, regardless of their level of expertise and
irrespective of whether the staff know the right answer.

Thirdly, and arising directly from the first point, is that inquiry-based tasks, which cannot be met with a
simple, algorithmic response, turn the educator from a source of knowledge into a co-enquirer, able to
model possible approaches. This has benefits for the students who are empowered, and for the educator,
who can be a facilitator, rather than the source of expertise. The shift in responsibility may be a further
attraction of the approach, as learners cease to be passive recipients and to be afforded agency in their
own learning. It is important to note that this shift in responsibility to learners does not diminish the
responsibility of the educator, rather that it shifts it to other parts of the process.The educators now has to
devise suitable tasks, an appropriate assessment process and, above all, be ready to respond to a myriad
of possible responses.

More challenging to achieve is the educator genuinely not knowing the answer. This may be good for
learners, but uncomfortable for educators. One colleague has built upon this insight to change laboratory
work with undergraduates, and now does not give demonstrators the answers, only essential hazard
information. (The identities are available in a sealed envelope in case of emergency.) More generally, we
need to challenge ourselves to think more, and talk about, possible answers rather than simply the answer.
The role of context in enhancing tasks and introducing elements of complexity and tension is a key
finding of this work, and one with near-universal applicability. The examples described also underline
the fact that context can add relevance and value to the science learning. For educators who might be
unsure how to develop contextualised learning, their local or regional museums are a good starting point.
Education officers, whilst often not science specialists, will be keen to develop inter-disciplinary projects
and draw upon others’ science expertise! The additives to bread activity is fairly location independent, as
bread-making is ubiquitous. As local context is the most relevant and engaging, so local connections to
the problem should be sought, if at all possible.

The final, and possibly most challenging, point arising from the use of the open-ended problems is that
students need to be supported to give them the courage to be wrong or contested. They are likely to feel

232 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education

that they are not getting what they expected. They have become accustomed to a high stakes assessment
culture, with many assessment items being closed in nature and superficial, in a drive to make learning
visibly concrete (Holloway and Brass, 2018, p379). This situation is likely to be exacerbated in the UK by
the government’s current predilection for a knowledge-rich curriculum (Gibb, 2017) and the associated
recall tasks, so the role of open-ended tasks in preparing them for the uncertainties of the real world may
never have been more timely.

Your Context

The prompts below are provided to encourage readers to reflect on how the different types of inquiry
based learning activities discussed in this chapter could be adapted to other learning contexts. There is
no conceivable teaching context in which the use of inquiry-based learning in a relevant context cannot
be carried out. Rather it is a case of identifying context and defining suitable problems to stimulate the
inquiry. Remember that, not only do you need to be an authority on the context, it will enhance learning
if you’re not!

Before implementation of an inquiry-based learning activity, you should consider the following;
• What are the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats related to embedding
this open-ended activity in your department/school and have you identified adaptations
that could enhance the strengths and opportunities?
• Who else is deploying similar approaches, maybe in other parts of the institution, or another
institution entirely, who could act as amentor? Perhaps you could shadow them undertaking
the work or perhaps you could co-create resources that both of you would find useful.
• What are the knowledge skills and attributes that your students could develop, and which
would you want them to develop, if an inquiry-based learning approach were applied?
• What sort of learning intentions would arise from the aims you have identified?
• How would you prepare students for the implementation of an approach which may appear
to jeopardise their entitlement to be directly taught?
• What additional resources would be required to implement an open-ended learning activity
(staff and student time, amendments to course documents, materials, rooms, transport if a
site visit is required etc.)?
• Are there context-specific support needs or opportunities? Examples include an education
visitor, a venue web site, free pre-visits for educators.
• How will you evaluate the practical implementation of this open-ended learning activity?
• Will you evaluate solely on the strength of learning intentions achieved, or might you look
at wider aims, such as interest or ideas for future work?

Conclusion

The deep learning that can arise from open-ended and rich questions, especially those set in a real-world
context was demonstrated in all three case studies. The role of context appears to be have been a key
element in their success. Many of the positive outcomes previously documented as arising from PBL
and inquiry learning were replicated in these studies, using a range of non-standard indicators, closely
related to the learning intentions of the activity. The benefit of such an approach is offset by the much
higher burden which it places on educators to structure suitable tasks and who must have a very secure
knowledge in order to appraise the very diverse responses. Despite these costs, the study indicates the
benefits of using the approaches described, which are reproducible in other settings and with other

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |233

subject content. Learning is a multi-faceted change and educators should defend their right to use
indicators of learning that are appropriate to the activity and learners.

The next stages in the development of my own use of inquiry-based learning is to consider how to
scaffold learning for students who lack relevant scientific knowledge or prior experience of working in the
open-ended way that most inquiry-based learning requires. As part of this I would like to explore further
the potential impact of using mixed knowledge/experience groups. I would also be interested in the
developing mechanisms, such as early self-assessment early on in the enquiry, through which participants
could be assigned to appropriate supplementary resources and support in an individualised way. Beyond
that, I would like to explore how best to support educators in identifying suitable contexts for inquiry
based learning and utilising them effectively to enhance deep learning.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References

Aditomo, A., Goodyear, P., Bliuc, A.-M. and Elis, R.A. (2013), “Inquiry-based learning in higher education: principal
forms, educational objectives and disciplinary variations”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 38 No. 9, pp.
1239-1258.
Archer, L. & De Witt, J. (2012), “Science Aspirations, Capital, and Family Habitus: How Families Shape Children’s
Engagement and Identification with Science”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 49 No. 5, pp.
881–908
Barriault, C. (1999), “The science center learning experience: a visitor-based framework”, The Informal Learning
Review, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp.14–16.
Barriault, C & Pearson, D. (2010), “Assessing Exhibits for Learning in Science Centres: A Practical Tool”, Visitor
Studies, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 90-106.
Barron, B.S., Schwartz, D.L., Vye, N.J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L. and Bransford, J.D. (1998), “Doing with
Understanding: Lessons from Research on Problem- and Project-based learning”, Journal of Learning
Sciences, Vol. 7 No. 3 and 4, pp. 271-311.
Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M. and Palinscar, A. (1991). “Motivating Project
Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, supporting the Learning”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 26 No. 2
and 3, pp. 369-398.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”, Journal of Qualitative Research in
Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 77-101.
British Educational Research Association (2014), “Ethical guidelines”[online], available at: https://www.bera.
ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/BERA-Ethical-Guidelines-2011.pdf (accessed 28 September 2018).
de Regt, H. (2004), “Discussion note: Making Sense of Understanding”, Philosophy of Science, Vol. 71 No.1, pp.
98-109.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P. and Gijbels, D. (2003), “Effects of problem-based learning: a meta
analysis”, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 13, pp 533-568.
Essex, J. (2017). “Chemical Legacy”, available at: https://chemicallegacy.wordpress.com/2017/12/04/the-story
of-a-staple-bread-for-the-workers-and-money-for-its-makers/ (accessed 10 January 2019).
Gibb, N. (2017). “The importance of knowledge-based education”, available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/nick-gibb-the-importance-of-knowledge-based-education,
(accessed 12 January 2019).
Holloway, J. and Brass, J. (2018), “Making accountable teachers: the terrors and pleasures of performativity”,

234|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Implementing inquiry-based learning activities in chemistry education

Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 361-382.

Kolodner, J., Camp, P.J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B. Gray, J. Holbrook, J. Puntambekar, S. and Ryan, M. (2003), “Problem
Based Learning Meets Case-Based Reasoning in the Middle School Science Classroom: Putting Learning
by Design into Practice”, Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 12 No.4, pp. 495-547.
McComas, W.F. (1998), The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies, Kluwer Educational
Publishers.
Mazorodze, R. and Reiss, M.(2018), “Raising attainment in post-compulsory physics through collaborative
problem solving”, School Science Review, Vol. 99 No. 369, pp. 96-104.
O'Brien, H.L. and Toms, E.G. (2008), “What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user
engagement with technology”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 59 No.6, pp. 938 – 955.
O’Dowd, A. (2009),“Medical students need problem solving training to improve patient safety”, available at:
https://www.bmj.com/content/338/bmj.b186.full (accessed 3 September 2018).
Overton, T.L. and Randles, C.A. (2015), “Beyond problem-based learning: using dynamic PBL in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 251-259.
Paas, F., Renkl, A. and Sweller, J. (2003), “Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments”,
Educational Psychologist, Vol. 38 No.1, pp. 1–4.
University College Dublin (no date), available at: http://www.ucdoer.ie/index.php/Education_Theory/
Constructivism_and_Social_Constructivism_in_the_Classroom (accessed 12 January 2019).
Thomas, J.W. (2000), ”A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning”, available at http://www.bie.org/index.
php/site/RE/pbl_research/29 (accessed 10 January 2019).
Wilder, S. (2015), “Impact of problem-based learning on academic achievement in high school: a systematic
review”, Educational Review, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 414-435.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |235

236|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 A sustainable peer assisted learning
17 scheme for chemistry undergraduates

Gita Sedghi
Department of Chemistry, University of Liverpool
G.Sedghi@liverpool.ac.uk

Bridging the gap between school and university is a longstanding issue in HE institutions,
requiring students to adapt to university life and a different educational environment. In
2012, a peer assisted learning (PAL) scheme was designed and implemented to support Year
1 undergraduate students in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Liverpool,
and the scheme has been running since. Ongoing modifications of our PAL scheme over the
past six years has resulted in an approach that is delivering significant impact on students’
experiences and academic performance, with students reporting the positive impact of the
scheme on their learning.

The aim of this chapter is to offer guidance to staff who wish to design and implement a PAL
scheme, with an emphasis on considering how best to tailor the system to the requirements
of their programmes. Our strategies to support the implemention of a PAL scheme
are distinctive. At the core of our design ensuring sustainable adoption is the ongoing
involvement of students as partners throughout the process. We point to observations
to help address the common issues experienced by many institutions, including low
attendance and low number of students volunteering to become leaders.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tina inspired me to develop my career. The Variety in Chemistry Education meeting was the first
educational conference Iattended as a teaching fellow. Her presentation, as well as the fruitful
discussionswehadoverchemistryeducation afterwards,inspiredmetosecurefunding formy first
proposal. Her valuable advice helped me achieve my first HEA funding and I gained confidence
and motivation to build upon my first teaching innovation, which resulted in several successful
teaching activities including peer assisted learning in our department. Tina’s approaches to
problem-solving skills were appreciated by and inspired Liverpool exchange students studying
at the Monash University in Australia; hence her practice enhanced our students’ experiences
in study abroad. Tina has been an inspirational mentor and has influenced my career in many
ways.

To cite: Sedghi, G. (2019), “A sustainable peer assisted learning model for chemistry undergraduates”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 237-248.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |237

Introduction

In the Department of Chemistry at the University of Liverpool, we observed an increased number of Year 1
chemistry students who withdrew from our programmes in the academic year 2010/11 due to difficulties
in adapting to university life and their programme of study. As the leader of a Year 1 maths module, I was
asked to identify and tackle the underlying issues. I organised student focus groups and interviews to
identify the issues and to find possible ways of improving student retention. One significant finding was
that course withdrawals were mostly related to issues of students’ confidence in their ability to learn the
subject material.

Transition from school to university is a complicated issue, which involves several stakeholders. However
the literature shows that peer assisted learning (PAL) has a positive impact on students’ progression
(Ferriera, 2018) and confidence (Chanet al., 2016), which results in improved retention (Congoset al., 1998).
PAL — a student-to-student academic support scheme — originated as supplemental instruction (SI) in
the United States. The rationale for the development of SI originated from a desire to increase retention
rates, and also provide additional support to students who might be struggling for a variety of reasons,
whether through lack of academic skills, or maybe through having been out of the education system for a
while (Arendale, 2002). Also known as peer assisted study sessions (PASS), PAL has been implemented in
a number of universities in the UK (European Centre for SI-PASS, 2018).

My objective was to implement PAL as a way of developing students’ confidence and commitment to
learning (Hammond, 2010). Several departments had attempted to implement PAL at our university but
had failed soon after putting the scheme into practice. I secured funding through the National Higher
Education Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Programme, which allowed me to carry
out research on different schemes in the UK in order to design and implement a sustainable model.

In this chapter, I will explain the different stages of planning and implementing the scheme in our
department to guide staff in other HE institutions to tailor a similar system to the requirements of their
programmes. Ongoing evaluation of PAL in the Department of Chemistry has resulted in a number of
alterations to the scheme during the past six years of implementation. The modifications to the system
including the rationale for the decisions made will be explained to help colleagues in other HEinstitutions
to implement a similar scheme and to keep it sustained over many years.

Design of PAL Scheme

The programme was initially adapted from the model operated at Bournemouth University. Colleagues
from the Universities of Sussex and Bradford were chosen as critical friends and their PAL schemes were
also studied in detail, in order to inform developments at Liverpool. I completed PASStraining delivered by
the Teaching and Learning Support office at the University of Manchester (http://www.pass.manchester.
ac.uk/). This training helped me to understand, plan, implement and evaluate the PAL scheme, as well as
with the subsequent training of senior undergraduates to introduce them to the scheme and different
techniques used to facilitate discussions in a small group of undergraduate students.

Planning
The first step was to ask for student volunteers to contribute to the planning stage which resulted in a
team of 10 students from different study years to discuss our future PAL. After communicating the vision
and objective of the project, the following aspects of the scheme were discussed with students. The main

238|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates

decisions arrived at from these discussions with students and the reasons behind them are outlined below.
• Study subjects: After discussing the pros and cons of potential modules to be supported by
PAL, it was agreed to begin the scheme with the Year 1 maths module, which was considered
as a high risk subject for chemistry students.
• Number of sessions and their regularity: After discussing several possibilities with colleagues in
other HE institutions, we decided on delivering a single one-hour weekly session. Chemistry
students’ busy timetable was another reason to organise only one session per week.
• Session delivery: Sessions are delivered in rooms which enable students to work in groups of
4–10. An advantage of delivering PAL in a single large room is that participants can be more
readily allocated to roughly equal-sized groups.
• Timetabling: Earlier research shows the importance of timetabling when attendance
is optional (Hammond et al., 2010). Although attending PAL in our department is not
compulsory, showing it on their timetable indicates that students are expected to attend.
• Staff and students’ responsibilities: Previous research on the UK’s schemes showed the
importance of academic involvement in student engagement with PAL even when the
universities’ professional services coordinate the scheme (Furmedge et al., 2014). Academic
staff involvement is one of the key elements to keep students engaged with PAL (Huang
et al., 2013-14). In the initial development, I was in charge of writing the maths session
plans which was the module we associated the scheme with. However, as it grew to other
modules, the PAL leaders took over preparing and delivering the materials, seeking advice
from the relevant academic staff (module leaders) when required.
• Leader recruitment and training: Leader training is a crucial key stage in planning PAL. An
experienced member of staff is required to train student leaders on how to conduct a
session and facilitate discussions without actual teaching. Two members of the University’s
Educational Development Division took on the role of training our first group of leaders. After
observing this training, I realised the importance of gaining sufficient skills to train leaders,
thereforeI signed up for SIand PASS Supervisor Training delivered by the UK National Centre
for PASS. The training gave me essential knowledge and skills to train future leaders.
• Target students: The outcome of the focus groups led us to design PAL sessions that could be
useful to everyone, and not solely to focus on those who were struggling (Arendale, 2014).
Focusing on poorly performing students risks attendance when students do not like to be
categorised as such by participating in the sessions.

Implementation of PAL scheme

Our PAL scheme was launched in the academic year 2012/13, after a year of planning. Each key stage in
planning and implementing PAL is crucial, therefore bypassing a stage is not advised. Sufficient time must
be taken to carefully plan and implement each step. The key to successfully running a sustained scheme
is ongoing reflection and evaluation in order to modify the scheme as time goes on with most changes
being made almost immediately. Table 1 shows the checklist and approximate timeline for implementing
PAL. The main aspects that need to be considered at each stage of PAL implementation are presented
below.
1. Assignment of the academic coordinator: Having an academic coordinator to work in
partnership with students in order to tailor PAL to the requirements of specific programmes
is vital. An academic member of staff who knows the programme and students’requirements
needs to commit to the scheme. Once a suitable and sustained scheme is in place, the
academic coordinator can spends less time year after year, as experienced students will take
over most responsibilities.
2. Publicising PAL to higher year students: Publicising PAL in the first year of launching the

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |239

 scheme is very important. I prepared eye-catching posters and leaflets to introduce the
scheme and its benefits, and a leader handbook which contained detailed information
about PAL, its benefits and leaders’ responsibilities. An example of publicising material is
available in the Supplementary Information. To begin, I needed to recruit 25–30 leaders to
facilitate discussions in small groups of 6–8 participants.
3. Recruiting student leaders: I followed a formal recruiting process by asking students to fill in
the application forms to apply for PAL leadership roles. The application form asked students
to reflecton why they were interested in the scheme and whatskills they required to become
good leaders. Although PAL leaders needed enough subject knowledge, their commitment
and the reason they gave for taking up the role were my main selection criteria to shortlist.
A PAL Leader application form is available in the Supplementary Information.
4. Timetabling: Finding a weekly slot in which all Year 1–3 students were available was a real
challenge. A large room with enough round tables to allow students to work in small groups
was booked and the weekly sessions were timetabled for the whole academic year.
5. Training leaders: A day-long PAL leader training session was organised in Welcome Week
and was delivered by two experienced staff from the Educational Development Division.
The purpose of the sessions is to give students an understanding of facilitating instead of
teaching and to introduce them how the system works. Training material is available in the
Supplementary Information.
6. Assigning leaders: An online booking system was set up and Year 1 students were asked to
book the session should they wish to attend. Students were given a deadline to book each
session which gave me sufficient time to assign enough PAL leaders based on the number
of student participants.
7. PAL module: A Chemistry PAL module was created in our virtual learning environment (VLE)
to give the scheme academic standing and to facilitate communication. All Year 1 students
and PAL leaders were enrolled onto this module. PAL leaders were registered as instructors
on the VLE, which gave them the authority to add to and amend session plans.
8. Session plans: Since we started our pilot with a maths module, I provided the leaders with a
list of topics to be discussed in each session. Year 1 students were encouraged to ask their
own questions to open up the discussions and not to rely on session plans.

Evaluating the PAL programme

Ethics approval was obtained to undertake a two-year ongoing evaluation of the scheme. Regular
evaluation of the scheme provided the opportunity to detect any issues, to find areas of improvement,
and to adapt the scheme to the needs of students as quickly as possible. It is important to get feedback
from both leaders and participants. Student coordinators organise the surveys and collate the data from
participants and leaders. The academic coordinator accesses the collected data and student feedback
through regular meetings with the student coordinators.

To evaluate the PAL programme for participants, various methods were used at different times during
an academic year. Online anonymous questionnaires consisting of both multiple choice and free text
questions were administered at the end of each semester. In addition, PAL leaders regularly liaised with
participants to gain more informal feedback, with mid-semester feedback collated via an anonymous
questionnaire. Therefore, leaders took part in collating regular feedback and also suggesting and
implementing any action that may be required. Examples of evaluation questionnaires for both leaders
and participants are available in the Supplementary Information. In addition to the questionnaires, a focus
group often Year 1 students was organised in order to gain more detailed evaluation evidence. Additional
feedback also came from staff-student liaison committee (SSLC) meetings.

240|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates

Table 1: Checklist and approximate timeline a year before and on PAL scheme
Activity Timeline
Year Prior to Implemenation
Assignment of the academic coordinator Oct – Nov
Target subjects and relevant lecturers Nov – Dec
Publicising PAL to higher year students Mar – Apr
Recruiting student leaders Jun – Jul
Timetabling Aug
Year of Impementation
Leader training
Assigning leaders Welcome Week
PAL module
Publicising PAL to lower year students Oct
Session plans Nov – Jun

To evaluate the PAL programme for PAL leaders, I organise at least two meetings during each semester
with PAL leaders to gain formative feedback and discuss any issues that have arisen for them as PAL
leaders. Leaders also complete anonymous end of year evaluation questionnaires which covered areas of
the training they received, as well as organisational issues. This questionnaire process was supplemented
by a focus group of three leaders.

A typical session in practice

In my role as the academic coordinator, I provide student coordinators with the list of PAL leaders and
subject leaders, in addition to the subjects which leaders have signed up for. Hence, student coordinators
allocate each weekly session to one or two subjects and also assign enough leaders to facilitate group
discussions, depending on the subject(s) delivered.

A week before each PAL session, student coordinators email Year 1 students to let them know of the
subject(s) delivered, so participants have the opportunity to prepare their questions around the relevant
topics in advance to the session. Student coordinators email the session plans prepared by subject leaders
to leaders five days prior to a PAL session, which gives enough time to leaders to get ready for delivery of
materials. Should the leaders notice any mistakes in session plans, there is sufficient time for corrections
and revising the materials.

Student coordinators attend PAL sessions to supervise the organisation and delivery of group discussions,
but also to step in, should any unexpected issues be raised; for example, a lack of enough leaders to
deliver a subject, possible mistakes in session plans, etc. Student coordinators monitor group discussions
and receive feedback from both leaders and participants when required. Attendance is monitored by
scanning student ID cards and leaders start the session by asking students to bring up their own questions.
Our experience shows that not many participants prepare their questions in advance. They prefer to work
through session plans and ask any questions they have during a session.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |241

Discussion

Our experiences of PAL in the past six years show the importance of staff-student partnership in planning,
implementing, and coordinating the scheme. PAL is a scheme run by students for students. Ongoing
evaluation of the scheme to identify the issues, to find the best solutions, and to improve the system as
soon as possible is a key factor for sustainability of the system. Getting feedback, feeding forward the
feedback, and taking a quick action in order to resolve the issues and to improve the scheme are crucial
strategies to keep students motivated.

Overall, our evaluations of the scheme during the past six years have shown the positive impact on
students’ experience, both the leaders and participants and benefits (Sedghi et al., 2015) are comparable
to those reported by other authors (Sudhakar et al., 2016). Although there are still students who withdraw
from the course due to lackofability or interestin chemistry fewer students optout chemistry programmes
because of lack of confidence in learning maths or other challenging subjects. Former research shows that
Informal group discussions on challenging subjects (Makola, 2017; Dancer et al., 2015) and sharing higher
year students’ experiences of studying the same subjects have raised lower year students’ confidence
(Keenan, 2014; Snyder and Chisenga, 2017) and improved student retention. PAL leaders, subject leaders
and coordinators find the scheme extremely useful to enhance their own learning of the subject and to
improve their employability skills. Our findings are in line with previous research that PAL enhances the
leaders’ employability skills (Jones et al., 2012), critical thinking, transferrable and leadership skills (Micari
et al., 2010) which is the result of leaders’ reflection on their own learning, and their practice on different
ways of explaining the subject material to lower year students.

Table 2 shows the number of leaders for three consecutive years. On average 50% of Year 2 leaders and
30% of Year 3 leaders come back the following year. The average number of leaders opting in and out
of the scheme varies year to year depending on a number of factors, including students leaving the
department for a year/semester to undertake placements and study abroad, as well as the number of
students in a cohort.

Although attending PAL is optional, wemonitor the attendance as part of the evaluation of the scheme.The
analysed data follows the typical behaviour of a reduction in attendance as the year progressed especially
in the second semester. While there is a link between attending PAL and overall student attendance in
lectures and workshops, there are other factors contributing to the poor attendance in this semester,
mainly due to a timetabling issue, which leaves students with a short break if they were to attend PAL.

The initial aim of implementing PAL was to reduce the number of student withdrawals in Year 1 due to
lack of confidence and inability to adapt to the new educational environment. The qualitative analysis
of the focus groups show that PAL has developed students’ confidence with the course. Although every
year some chemistry students withdraw from the course, the number of students dropping out due to
the lack of confidence in their ability and the fear from challenging subjects has reduced. A number of
Table 2: Number of leaders for three consecutive years (typically 150 per student cohort)

Year Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total

2015/16 50 33 13 96
2016/17 58 25 20 103
2017/18 47 24 7 78

242|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates

Figure 1 – Current structure of PAL, and communication links between coordinators and leaders

studies show the positive impact of PAL on undergraduate students’ grades including chemistry and
mathematics (Parkinson, 2009).

Implications and Adaptability

In the Methods section of this chapter, I introduced the step by step processes I applied for planning and
implementing PAL in my institution. The key points at every stage are highlighted to ensure a successful
system is established which sustains over years. The guidance notes and procedures have been proved
successful in implementing PAL in five other departments with the University of Liverpool in addition to
other HE institutions — Dublin Institute of Technology (now TU Dublin) and Durham University — which
shows the practicality of using the same strategies in different departments and institutions. However, it is
important to keep in mind that each scheme must be tailored to the requirements of specific educational
environments. In this section, modifications that have been made to our PAL programme since its
introduction are described. These changes are based on feedback provided from student participants,
leaders and staff, as well as my own observations. The intention is to show how the process should be one
of continuous evaluation and enhancement and to demonstrate areas of flexibility within PAL that can be
considered when implementing it in another higher education institution.

Summary of roles
Our currentstructure of PALconsists of an academic coordinator, two student coordinators, andtwo subject
leaders for each module, and 80–90 leaders. Figure 1 shows the PAL structure and the communication
links between coordinators and leaders. The academic coordinator is a member of staff who coordinates
the PAL team including student coordinators, subject leaders, and leaders.They deliver leader training and
organise monthly debriefs with student coordinators. They oversee the scheme to make sure everything
runs smoothly and step in when needed. Other duties include liaison with the lecturers whose modules
are supported by PAL to ensure the quality of session plans, regular evaluation of the system, and quick
alterations if required.

Student coordinators are Year 4 students who are experienced as PAL leaders. Their duties are to liaise with
all the leaders and participants in the scheme, to assign each session to one or two subjects, to allocate
enough leaders to each session, to get leaders to prepare the session plans in time, to inform the academic
coordinator of any issues or suggested changes, to observe PAL sessions, and to collect attendance data
for both leaders and student participants.

Subject leaders areYear 3 experienced leaders who organise the preparation and updating of session plans
and liaise with the student coordinators regularly. Leaders are Year 2–4 students who have completed the

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |243

PAL training.They prepare for and facilitate PAL sessions in the subject areas of their interestand expertise.

Lessons learned – outcomes from evaluations and subsequent modifications

As a result of the evaluations and follow-up changes during the past six years, our scheme has transformed
significantly. The identified issues, the alterations made and the reasons behind the modifications to the
system have been explained under the headings below to enable staff to make informed decisions when
implementing PAL and to tailor the scheme to the requirements of their programmes.
1. Staff and students’ responsibilities: Although the role of an academic coordinator is crucial in
planning, implementing, and coordinating the scheme, their responsibilities will be reduced
year after year as experienced PAL leaders take over most of the duties. This member of
staff must commit to coordinating of the scheme for the first couple of years until enough
experienced leaders are ready to take over the responsibilities.
2. Scope of modules dealt with: After a semester running the scheme, student representatives
in the Student-Staff Liaison Committee stated that Year 1 students felt more confident with
the maths module covered by the scheme. Therefore, they requested an extension to cover
more chemistry modules. Consequently, the PAL programme expanded over years to cover
all Year 1 modules and some challenging Year 2 modules.
3. Development of PAL coordinator role:The community of our leaders which has been built up
over years includes Year 2 – 4 students. Having two years’ experience of leadership, some
proactive Year 4 PAL leaders who are quite familiar with every aspect of the scheme take over
coordination of PAL. Therefore, the scheme offers leaders the opportunity of progressing to
becoming a student coordinator.
4. Target subjects and relevant lecturers: Relating each session to specific subject(s) and
announcing this to students in advance is important to structuring the sessions. Students
are asked to get their lecture notes and any subject related questions ready for the sessions.
Due to it being a student centred learning scheme, PAL does not usually affect the lecturers’
teaching load. However, it is essential to get lecturers on board, so the topics to be discussed
in each session relate to recent teaching materials. In fact, PAL alleviates staff workload, as
their challenging course material will be discussed in PAL sessions. This will result in less
time spent on answering student enquiries either by email or in person. While leaders do
not teach the course materials, they facilitate group study sessions, so subject knowledge is
a key criteria when recruiting leaders.
5. Assigning leaders: Allocating a sufficient number of leaders to each session has always
been a challenge. Our strategy has been to assign a sufficient number of leaders to the
first couple of PAL sessions which all Year 1 students usually attend. Experience shows that
most students find PAL useful and continue to participate. However, the attendance drops
gradually after the first couple of weeks until it becomes steady.
6. Training leaders: The aim of the training is to give students an understanding of facilitating
discussions without teaching and to introduce the structure of the scheme. The training
needs to be interactive, using, for example, role plays to show the job of student facilitators.
A training session for new leaders is held in the Welcome Week each year. In addition,
I organise another training session for all year leaders delivered by student coordinators.
The aim of this training is to give the student coordinators the opportunity to introduce
themselves to their team of leaders, to explain their coordinating styles and to come up
with a solid plan for working as a team towards their goals. I pair new leaders with more
experienced ones to begin their work with should they wish to.
7. Publicising PAL to lower year students: We host an introductory lecture on PAL and its
benefits in the beginning of the first PAL session delivered by student coordinators. Since

244|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates

students are expected to go to their timetabled sessions, they attend the first PAL session.
Should students find the first session useful they make an informed decision to attend PAL.
Therefore, the first session should be organised very carefully in terms of both the content
and delivery. A key factor is to timetable it after a couple of weeks of teaching when there is
enough taught material to be covered in PAL. Should the first session be arranged in Week
1, it is less likely to have sufficient challenging concepts to be discussed in groups.
8. Session plans: Evaluation of the scheme showed that while participants appreciated the
opportunity of asking their questions, they found more structured sessions helpful. As a
result, we changed the PAL delivery by giving students the opportunity to ask their questions
in the beginning of each session followed by a structured session plan to help leaders to
facilitate discussions and to keep their groups engaged. Our findings from focus groups and
Student Staff Liaison Committee representatives show that students value the informality
of PAL but appreciate the organised sessions which are structured for the convenience of
participants. Session plans are prepared by either the lecturers or PAL leaders.
9. Recognition of good practice: PAL leaders enhance their confidence, leadership and
communication, and hence employability skills. Consequently, they receive excellent
reference letters from academics to apply for further studies or future employment. Since
our students’participation in PAL is on a voluntary basis, their activities are included in their
Higher Education Achievement Record (HEAR) within three separate profiles as student
coordinator, subject leader, and leader.

Your Context

The prompts below are provided to encourage readers to reflect on how the peer assisted learning
programme discussed in this chapter could be adapted to their context. Before the implementation of a
PAL programme, consider the following;
• What are the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to embedding
this PAL programme in your Department/School and have you identified adaptations to
your context that could enhance the strengths and opportunities?
• What are the advantages of implementing PAL to your Department/School and staff?
• Who will be academic to commit to coordinating PAL?
• What are the knowledge and skills that your students (participants and leaders) could
develop if a PAL programme is applied?
• How and when will students be consulted/informed in advance of and during
implementation?
• What additional resources would be required to implement a PAL programme (staff and
student time, availability of course materials, rooms, timetabling etc.)?
• How will you evaluate the implementation of this PAL programme?

Conclusion

The key points for implementing a successful PAL scheme in any higher education institution are to tailor
the scheme to the requirements of each programme, develop a staff-student partnership, structure and
organisation of sessions, and incorporate ongoing evaluation. A well-organised scheme needs suitable
strategies and procedures in place to recruit leaders, to deliver leader training, to introduce the scheme to
participants, to timetable the sessions, to prepare curriculum matched session plans, and to evaluate its
effectiveness and make modifications as required.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |245

Our evaluation of the PAL scheme demonstrates the many benefits. Both the student leaders and student
participants’ learning experiences were enhanced. Year 1 students appreciate PAL as valuable support at
university which raises their confidence, helps them to adapt to university life and study, and supports
them with challenging subjects. As a result, PAL improves students’ experience and retention. Leaders
appreciate PAL as it enhances their employability, transferable and leadership skills. It also consolidates
their learning of the subject material and enhances their interaction with academics which gives them
an understanding of the university educational environment. Leaders’ critical thinking and independent
learning are enhanced as the result of the reflection on their own experiences at university while
supporting lower year students with their studies.

The success of the scheme has led to requests from staff and students to extend it in order to support
higher year students, including postgraduate taught students. The scheme currently covers inorganic,
physical, and organic chemistry, and Maths for Year 1 students, in addition to the revision sessions for
some of Year 2 modules and introductory sessions to practical chemistry for international students.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Arendale, D.R. (2002), “History of Supplemental Instruction (SI): Mainstreaming of developmental education”,
in Lundell, D.B. and Higbee, J.L. (Eds.), Histories of developmental education, Center for Research on
Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, General College, University of Minnesota, pp. 15-28.
Arendale, D.R. (2014), “Understanding the peer assisted learning model: Student study groups in challenging
college courses”, International Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 1-12.
Chan, N.N., Phan, C.W., Aniyah Salihan, N.H. and Dipolog-Ubanan, G.F. (2016), “Peer assisted learning in higher
education: roles, perceptions and efficacy, Social Sciences and Humanities”, Pertanika Journal of Social
Science and Humanities, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 1811-1822.
Congos, D.H. and Schoeps, N. (1998), “Inside Supplemental Instruction Sessions: One Model of What Happens
that Improves Grades and Retention”, Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, Vol. 15, No. 1,
pp. 47-61.
Dancer, D., Morrison, K. and Tarr, G. (2015), “Measuring the effects of peer learning on students’ academic
achievement in first-year business statistics”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 40, No. 10, pp. 1808-1828.
European Centre for SI-PASS (2018) “Status report for European SI/PASS/PAL-programmes“, available at: https://
www.si-pass.lu.se/en/sites/si-pass.lu.se.en/files/status_report_european_v4_web.pdf (accessed 18
January 2019).
Ferreira, J. (2018), “Facilitating the transition: doing more than bridging the gap between school and university
geography”, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 372-383.
Furmedge, D.S., Iwata, K. and Gill, D. (2014), “Peer-assisted learning – Beyond teaching: How can medical students
contribute to the undergraduate curriculum?”, Medical Teacher, Vol. 36, pp. 812-817.
Hammond, J.A., Bithell C.P., Jones L. and Bidgood P. (2010), “A first year experience of student-directed peer
assisted learning”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 201-212.
Huang, T.K., Pepper, M.P.J., Cortese, C.L. and Rogan, S. (2013-14), “Faculty and academic staff perceptions,
experiences, and expectations of the PASS Program: A case study”, Journal of Peer Learning, Vol. 6, pp.
118-132.
Jones, N., Torezani S. and Luca, J. (2012), “A peer-to-peer support model for developing graduate students’ career

246 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 A sustainable peer assisted learning scheme for chemistry undergraduates

and employability skills”, Intercultural Education, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 51-62.
Keenan, C. (2014), “Mapping student-led peer learning in the UK”, available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/
system/files/resources/peer_led_learning_keenan_nov_14-final.pdf (accessed 18 January 2019)
Makola, Q. (2017), “Peer-assisted learning programme: Supporting students in high-risk subjects at the
mechanical engineering department at Walter Sisulu University”, Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, Vol.
5, No. 2, pp. 17-31.
Micari, M., Knife Gould, A. and Lainez, L. (2010),“Becoming a leader along the way: Embedding leadership training
into a large-scale peer-learning program in the STEM disciplines”, Journal of College Student Development,
Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 218-230.
Parkinson, M. (2009), The effect of peer assisted learning support (PALS) on performance in mathematics and
chemistry, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 381-392.
Snyder, C. and Chisenga, R. (2017), “Impact of a pre-clinical skills course with peer assisted learning (PAL) on
preparedness and confidence levels of medical students in Africa”, Christian Journal for Global Health, Vol.
4, No. 1, pp. 3-12.
Sudhakar, A., Tyler, J. and Wakefield, J. (2016), “Enhancing student experience and performance through peer
assisted learning”, American Accounting Association, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 321-336.
Sedghi, G. and Lunt, T. (2015), “The development and implementation of a Peer Assisted Learning programme at
the University of Liverpool”, Learning Development in Higher Education, Special edition, pp. 1-17.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |247

248 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Developing business and employability
18 skills for undergraduate chemists

Christopher M. Pask† and Samantha L. Pugh‡

†School of Chemistry and ‡Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences,

University of Leeds
S.L.Pugh@leeds.ac.uk

Theaimofthisworkistoprovideamechanism to improve businessacumenandemployability

of chemistry undergraduates. The approach taken was to integrate context-based learning
modules into the undergraduate chemistry degree programme in each of the three years of
the programme. All of the modules involved a group-based project and were assessed by a
group written submission, a group presentation and an individual assessment.

The outcomes of the modules, in terms of student satisfaction and evidence gleaned from
individual reflections suggested that the students improved their transferable skills and
increased their commercialawareness through undertaking the modules. Alloftheresources
for the Year 1 and 2 modules are freely available on the RSC’s Learn Chemistry platform, and
the Year 3 module is available under a Creative Commons licence by contacting the authors.

There are a number of considerations for others wishing to adopt or adapt such a model.
These include: space in the curriculum; readiness of students to engage in group-based
activities; and willingness of colleagues to buy into such an approach to learning. In our
context, the modules were optional for chemistry students and were not inter-dependent.
There are many excellent examples of context and problem-based learning in chemistry.
The originality of this approach comes from the specific focus on business acumen and the
progression from year to year.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tina has been instrumental in our careers in STEM Education. We were heavily influenced by
both her context and problem-based learning approach to developing employability, and
informed by the Hanson and Overton HEA publications on employability skills in Chemistry/
Physics Graduates. In more recent years, we’ve had the pleasure of working with Tina directly.
She has been, and continues to be an incredible mentor and role model.

To cite: Pask, C. M. and Pugh, S. L. (2019), “Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists”, in Seery, M. K.
and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press,
Dublin, pp. 249-264.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |249

Introduction

A chemistry undergraduate curriculum is typically characterised by a large quantity of subject knowledge,

development of problem solving capability, and competence in laboratory skills. However, a seminal study
by Hanson and Overton (2010) surveying recent graduates and employers discovered that whilst the
technical knowledge-rich components were dominant during a degree, it was the transferable skills such
as teamwork and communication that were most valued by both employers and recent graduates. Whilst
students’ transferable skills were developed during their degree, traditionally this was often undertaken
as a stand-alone skills module or through co-curricular activities such as societies and volunteering.
However, these approaches are problematic in several ways. Students may not consider their transferable
skills development as a core part of their learning, they may not take the module seriously (Tomlinson,
2012), and if skills development is through co-curricular activities, there is no guarantee that all students
have the inclination or the capacity to participate, leading to inequity (Stuartet al., 2011).The development
of transferable skills is explicitly cited in the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) accreditation requirements
(RSC, 2017). If transferable skills development is essential to chemists then it must be an integral part of a
chemistry degree programme (Tomlinson, 2012). For this reason, embedding development of these skills
into an undergraduate chemistry curriculum is the focus of this chapter.

Embedding employability
It can be argued that employability should be a cornerstone of any degree programme (Smith, 2016).
There are several definitions of employability, but the authors’ preferred definition is that given by Yorke
(2006):
a set of achievements–skills, understandings and personal attributes–that makes graduates more likely to
gain employment and be successful in their chosen occupations, which benefits themselves, the workforce,
the community and the economy.

This definition makes a distinction between employability and employment; employability is concerned
with students developing a range of skills and competencies that will prepare a student to compete in
the job market. There are issues with directly correlating employability and employment, as the ability for
students to secure a job is also dependent on external factors such as the economy, graduate geographies
and the buoyancy of the job market, although graduates generally have better career prospects (Office
for National Statistics, 2017). Degree programmes should concern themselves with ensuring that students
develop the skills and attributes that will equip them to compete in the graduate employment market.

Context- and problem-based learning

In recent years, there has been a shift towards embedding skills development into chemistry degree
programmes, often through context-based learning (CBL) (Belt et al., 2005) or through problem-based
learning (PBL). An article by Overton and Randles (2015) cites many examples of where PBL is used in
chemistry education.The former teaching approach has alonger history at secondary school level (Bennett
and Holman, 2003). The benefits to students of these approaches are two-fold. Firstly, undergraduate
students see that their transferable skills are an integral part of their development into becoming a
professional chemist, and secondly, they are more likely to be motivated and take the learning seriously
because it is an embedded part of the programme. The value of context- and problem-based learning is
well established in the literature (Seery, 2015). In addition, setting the context as a commercial chemical
environment can provide students with the opportunity to develop commercial awareness, a competence
that is regularly cited as lacking by employers recruiting graduates (Wilkinson and Aspinall, 2007). A study
by the Institute of Directors (IoD), a community of UK business leaders, found that 90% of IoD members
believed that education in general should do more to prepare students for work, particularly in terms of

250 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

leadership, teamwork, and communication skills (Institute of Directors, 2007). It is widely recognized that
employers want chemistry students to have more than just their subject knowledge (Pugh, 2014; Smith,
2016).

Methods

In this section, we outline our approach to embedding employability into an undergraduate chemistry
curriculum. We will discuss how we implemented context-based learning activities designed to develop
employability skills into years one, two and three of the degree programme. In each case, we will discuss
module design, learning outcomes and assessment, and set out the practicalities of delivery of such
modules.

Curriculum design
The approach taken at the University of Leeds was to create a 10credit module corresponding to 100 hours
of learning (out of 120 credits per year) in Years 1, 2, and 3 of the undergraduate chemistry programme. All
three modules adopted a context-based learning approach, with active learning. The aim was to develop
the following transferable skills and attributes:
• Communication
• Information retrieval
• Team work
• Persuasive skills
• Commercial awareness

These skills represented the greatest deficit between the degree programme and the graduate attributes
that employers regularly cite as essential (CBI/UUK, 2009). The approach taken was based on a module
developed by one of the authors of this chapter (Pugh) in the Department of Colour and Polymer
Chemistry in 2005 (University of Leeds, 2007), which took students through the various stages of
commercial development to take a new product to market.The modules were developed out of sequence,
starting with Year 2 in 2010, supported by the National HE STEM Programme. Our Year 3 module was then
developed (supported by the Higher Education Academy) before revising the existing Career Planning for
Chemists module (with support from the RSC). The module was revised as it lacked any teamwork, and
it was also an opportunity to introduce careers in small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), an often
overlooked sector for graduates.

The modules were designed to introduce students to the commercial functions of the chemical industry,
and develop transferable skills, thus enhancing employment prospects by aligning students’ experience
with what is required by industry (CBI/UUK, 2009; Parker and Pulham, 2012). Although the context is
chemistry, much of what students learn is transferable to situations outside of chemistry. Lectures are
not the best format to address these issues so the modules are delivered as a form of student managed
learning. The modules were also designed to provide an authentic learning experience.

Authentic learning is a term that is used to describe learning by doing (Pearce, 2016) that takes place in a
realistic, or simulated real-world context. Four components of authentic learning are (Rule, 2006):
1. Problems that mimic the work of professionals;
2. An aspect of inquiry or open-ended learning;
3. Students engage in a community of learning;
4. The students direct the learning.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |251

Authentic learning with opportunity for creativity can increase motivation for students by giving them
ownership of the process and autonomy in their work (Herzberg, 1966; Pink, 2018).

Teaching format
The modules all comprise of a series of team-based workshop sessions. Students are provided with a
scenario or brief that they work through, in groups, via a series of tutor-facilitated discussion workshops
and self-study activities. Through these sessions, students explore how organisations work and how
to achieve an objective as a team. Employers identify teamwork as a key transferable skill, however
conventional chemistry degrees provide limited opportunities for true teamwork. Another important
aspect that the modules develop is self-reflection. In all years, the students write a reflective essay at the
end of the module, which forms part of the final assessment. Employability is not just about providing
students with opportunities to develop skills, but also empowering students to be able to articulate their
skills through critical reflection (Harvey, 2005).

Assessment methods and alignment to learning outcomes

Despite progress in the diversification of assessment in higher education, in many chemistry departments,
unseen written examinations are perceived as the default assessment, and often there is a need to justify
deviation from this norm. The assessments used in all three context-based learning modules consist of
three elements: a group report, a group presentation, and individual reflection. The relationship between
skills learning outcomes and assessment for the modules can be seen in Table 1.
Table 1: Alignment of skills learning outcomes with assessment tasks for the three employability modules

Learning outcome (skills) Report

Group Presentation
Group Individual
reflection
Team working x x
Verbal communication and presentation skills x
Written communcation and presentation skills x x
Time management and organisational skills x x
Information searching x
Critical thinking x x
Self-reflection x
Creativity x x
Enterprise x x

One of the key learning outcomes for each of the modules is the ability to workin a group. Asking students
to take collective responsibility for the report ensures that they work as a group on its production. It is not
necessary for all members of the group to undertake the same role within the group. Some students will
be stronger at research, some at writing, and others at organising the team and collating the information.
This is an authentic way of working and should be encouraged. If each student had to submitan individual
report, the teamwork would not be as important, and it could be challenging for the students to avoid
collusion. The aim is to encourage collaboration. Any differences in contribution to the team effort are
addressed by the peer allocation of marks.

Similarly, the students are asked to present as a group, and the whole group need to take responsibility for
the performance. Presenting as a group requires additional skills to individual presentations as the group
need to ensure consistency whilst avoiding duplication.

252 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

The reflection is an individual piece of work because it concerns their individual experience and is
personal to the student. Two students within the same team could have very different experiences
depending on their capabilities, preferred ways of working, previous experiences, and the team dynamics.
Reflective writing is not common in science curricula but is an essential skill for the future in terms of job
applications/interviews and in identifying one’s own areas for further development. There is the potential
to use the reflective essays to triangulate the data from the peer assessment, although we have not used
it in that way and tend to take the reflection on face value. Reflection is a valuable way to capture and
help students to make sense of the learning from the process. The portfolio and presentations only assess
the final output from the project, whereas the most valuable part of the learning is the ongoing process.

Peer assessment is used for the group report. The main purpose of peer assessment is that it creates a
sense of fairness among the students; those that make a good contribution to the group effort receive a
good mark, and those that do not contribute well are penalised (Gibbs, no date). Lejket al. (1996) found
that although peer assessment had an impact on student behaviour in group work, in reality it had little
impact on final marks. However, the converse was true in a study by Chen and Warren (2000) where a
third of students received a final grade different to that awarded for the group submission without the
peer component applied. In practice, the tutor needs to moderate the peer assessment, ensuring that
the students have acted fairly and can justify the marks that they allocate. A summary of each of the
modules, their main feature and the assessment methods are summarised in Table 2. The Year 1 module
will be described in sufficient detail so that readers should be able to adapt it to their own context. The
other two modules are not presented with the same level of detail, however references are provided and
supplementary material is available either from Learn Chemistry or upon request.
Table 2: Summary of assessment methods used in each module
Module name Year Main Feature Assessment method
Career Planning for Chemists 1 of
Set meeting minutes, group
Chemistry careers in
presentation, reflective essay,
Chemisty: Idea to Market 2 SMEs Portfolio for product
peer evaluation

Chemistry: Making an Impact 3 Newdevelopment

New
business start-up
product presentation,
Formal
development,
business plan,
reflective
group
group
presentation, reflective essay,
peer evaluation

and entrepreneurship essay,

peer evaluation

Year 1: Career Planning for Chemists module, with embedded CBL group project
The Career Planning for Chemists module is a longstanding module, delivered by the careers service
exclusively for chemistry students in the University of Leeds. In 2015/16, an additional element was
embedded into the module to broaden students’ commercial awareness, particularly with respect to
careers in SMEs. SMEs had been identified as a career opportunity deficit, with most students being
unaware of the career opportunities available in this sector. The learning outcomes for the whole
module, alongside the assessment methods, are provided in Table 3, however this chapter focuses on the
embedded CBL group project, as it forms a part of the Business Skills for Chemists suite of modules. 50%
of the module mark is allocated to the CBL project. The project was created with support from the RSC, to
address a lack of awareness among chemistry undergraduates regarding careers in SMEs. During the CBL
group project, students are given an overview of what SMEs are, plus the challenges and opportunities

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |253

 Table 3: Module learning outcomes and assessment methods for Year 1 Career Planning for Chemists module
(the learning outcomes from the module that are addressed by the project are indicated by *)

Module name Assessment method

Appreciate the pressures and opportunities facing SMEs in the
Presentation
chemical and allied industries*
Research and present information on SMEs* Set of minutes
Appreciate the nature of work for people working in SMEs* Reflection
Appreciate the benefits and challenges of working for an SME* Reflection
Work as a team on project and understand your own role in team* Minutes and reflection
Present information clearly and succinctly* Presentation and minutes
Understand the skills that might be required for working in an SME
and evaluate these against your own skills set* Reflection

Increase your awareness of your skills, interests and personal

CV and reflection
characteristics*
Develop practical techniques for interviews, presentations, and group
Formative activities
work*
Increase your enterprising skills* Formative activities
Have a greater awareness of the opportunities for skills development* Reflection, formative activities
Know how to develop your skills profile Formative activities
Understand the range of opportunities to gain work experience Formative activities
Have an insight into the range of opportunities available to you at the
end of your course Formative activities

Develop a CV and Cover Letter CV and letter

Understand the range of ways in which the Careers Centre can help
you in your
degree career planning and development at all stages in your
programme Formative activities

that they may face. Supporting videos from alumni working within SMEs were also created.

Tasks and assessments linked to the Year 1 CBL group project

From a cohort size of approximately 50, students are randomly split into teams of 4–6 students and they
have to imagine that they are employed by an SME. There were two tutors assigned to the 50 students.
Throughout the module, students meet weekly for two hours. Within the module, the students have
three structured, two-hour sessions held every four weeks, to work on their projects and they are also
expected to meet outside of the sessions to work on the project. The other weeks include sessions on
CV and application letter writing, assessment centres, meeting alumni and career planning, typical of a
conventional careers module. It would be possible to split the time allocation for the activities differently,
to fit with the rest of the programme.The schedule that we followed is given in Table 4.

During the introductory session for the project (which is usually week 2 of the module), the students
are given a presentation on what SMEs are, how they operate and the challenges and opportunities
that are available to such businesses. During this session, students are also introduced to their first task.
Their first task as a team is to choose an existing SME in the chemical sector as their imaginary employer.

254|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

Table 4: Overview of the Career Planning for Chemists module (the CBL activities are indicated by *)

Week Indicative workshop content (2 hr) Week Indicative workshop content (2 hr)
1 Introduction to the module:
and and
Objectives
Group allocations
expectations
ice breaker
7 Social media for careers
Overview of the assignments
2 Introductiontoan
Introduction
Researching
Property tothe
SMEs andproject:*
employer/company
group Intellectual Study week for group project:*
Second batch of emails distributed to
8 students
Group session to discuss the emails
Introduction to Reflective Writing
3 Work experience:
Benefits, and opportunities available
9 Visiting employer session
Deadline for deciding on a company to
use for the assignment
4 Study week for group project:*
Introduction to Project Management
First batch of emails distributed to
students 10 Interview skills practice session

Group session to discuss the emails

5 Employer session 11 Project presentations
6 CV writing workshop 12 Deadline for handing in coursework

The students search the internet, firstly identifying companies that operate in the chemical sector, and
secondly they need to ascertain whether the business is an SME. The value in this task is that they increase
their awareness of the types of businesses that can be regarded as part of the chemical industry, and are
therefore potential future employers. It also helps students to consider what constitutes the chemical
industry. We focus on the UK, as the introduction focuses on businesses in the UKjurisdiction, however this
approach could take an international perspective, or be adapted to other regions. Once they have chosen
a company, they have to write a one-page summary addressing what is the nature of the company, their
location, how large they are and why they have selected that particular company. This is then submitted
to the tutor. They typically have three weeks to complete the first task.

When students are completing group tasks, it is advisable to allow a longer period of time than for
individual work, as they can struggle to find times to meet together to work on their task. A nominal mark
is assigned to the summary, although its main purpose is to force the students to make a decision and to
prevent them from changing their minds about their choice of company once they see the next task. In
the conventional curriculum, there are few times when students have to make judgements and decisions
and where there is no predetermined right answer. During the supervised and private team meetings for
the project, students are expected to take minutes. These minutes are submitted at the end of the project
as their group report. Students are given guidance on taking effective minutes as this is a valuable skill to
develop. Students are encouraged to assign a chair and secretary for each meeting, and to rotate the roles
around the group (although this is not enforced). The minutes from this module are assessed in terms of
understanding of business, coherent writing, follow-up on actions, decisions justified, and appropriate
level of detail.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |255

During the second session, students are introduced to project management, from the perspective of a
set of tools and techniques that they can use during their project. This includes mind-mapping, Gantt
charts and understanding how to specify a project to achieve a shared vision. The next task, which is
set during this session, is an in-tray exercise. The students are expected to be able to complete this task
during the two-hour structured session. Students are presented with a range of emails (some fictitious
and some authentic opportunities) from other organisations and businesses offering various services and
products that could be of value to their business. These include trade shows, equipment demonstrations,
funding calls, legal/professional services and training courses. For each opportunity, the team has to
decide if the opportunity is of value to their business, and the ultimate aim is to choose one opportunity
and then present it to their line manager (enacted by the module leader). The opportunities are usually
delivered to the students in two tranches, and in two structured two hour sessions, although these could
be distributed differently. We have chosen to give all the students the same range of opportunities, but
there are sufficient opportunities written to enable each team to be given a different set of opportunities.

At the end of the module, the students present their chosen opportunity to the person acting as their
line manager, justifying their decision. They have to provide a compelling argument, which is typical of
a workplace situation, and during the process they will have had to reach agreement as a team. They are
expected to capture this process through their minutes, and they are explicitly told this at the start of
the exercise. They present their findings as a team, but only have five minutes allocated. There is also the
opportunity for questions from the room. The final piece of assessment is a 500 word reflection on their
experience of the project. They are asked to discuss the skills they have developed, any challenges faced
and how they overcame them, and also consider whether a career in an SME might be for them.

Year 2: Chemistry: Idea to Market module

Chemistry: Idea to Market has been running continuously since 2012 at our university, and has been
designed to give students an insight into the commercial side of the chemical industries through context
based learning. The module aims to introduce students to the fact that chemical ventures require an
understanding of project management, intellectual property and marketing, and also the difficulties in
translating chemical reactions to run on a multi-tonne scale. We are also developing students’ skills in
team working, communication and presentation, time management and organisation, critical thinking,
creativity and self-reflection.

Students are assigned into groups and each group is assigned a case study, designed by experts from
industry. Although each case study covers a different industry (shipping catalysts, printing inks, consumer
goods, water treatment), the main elements of the case studies remain the same; students are currently
working for a large, multinational company and have been tasked with opening up a new, albeit related,
area of business for the company. They are instructed to examine not only the technical solution to the
problem, but to investigate the market landscape, intellectual property considerations and logistics
associated with manufacture or delivery of the solution on a large scale. At the end of the module, students
must deliver a presentation to their board of directors in support of their business decision.

At the beginning of the module, from a class of typically 50, students are randomly assigned into groups
of 5–6 students; this is done to more accurately reflect life in industry where you may be unable to choose
your team. In the first five weeks, learning is supported through a series of two-hour, tutor-led workshops.
We have found it to be particularly beneficial to invite speakers from industry to deliver these workshops,
as students respond more favourably when material is being delivered by an expert in the field rather
than one of their chemistry lecturers. In the latter part of the module, students work almost exclusively
in their groups, with little input from the module team, to develop their idea into a commercially viable

256 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

proposal. A typical schedule for the module is given in the Supplementary Information.

An important part of the module is peer feedback and assessment. In the latter stages of the module,
students deliver their draft presentation to another group.They assess each other against the presentation
criteria and give feedback on how to improve things in time for the final presentation. Anecdotally
students find this session very useful, not only for the feedback provided for their presentation, but also
for many it is their first experience of actually giving feedback.

Year 3: Chemistry: Making an Impact module

Chemistry: Making an Impact has been running since 2014, and was intended as a follow-on to Chemistry:
Idea to Market, although this is not a prerequisite.The module builds on the skills and concepts introduced
at Year 2 and introduces the idea of chemistry being used to make an impact, through societal or
environmental benefit, by focusing on the global challenges outlined by the RSC (RSC, no date).

Students are randomly assigned into groups of around 5–6 students from a class size of approximately 20
students, with one tutor. Each group is tasked with coming up with an idea for a chemistry related business,
based around one of the global challenges (environment, energy, food, health, water) and build a business
plan around this idea. This is perhaps the most difficult part of the module, given the sheer breadth of
chemistry available to students and their limited experience with chemistry being used in the real world.
Once students have that initial focus, they usually find the task of developing a business idea much easier.
The elements of the business plan are introduced during the early stages of the module through a series
of two-hour, tutor-led workshops. As much of the material being presented is outside the comfort zone of
most chemists, we again utilise external speakers in delivering the material, particularly around subjects
such as market research and marketing, and finance. During the latter stages of the module, students’
work is almost exclusively self-directed in their groups, with little input from the module team, although
tutors are always on hand for any questions or issues. At the end of the module, each group must deliver
a presentation to academics and industrialists acting as an investment panel in a Dragons’ Den style pitch.
Assessment is again purely coursework based comprising the group presentation, the business plan, and
an individual reflective essay. A typical schedule for the module is given in the Supplementary Information.

Evaluation
Evaluation of the student experience takes many forms. Here, we will discuss two aspects: official module
feedback, and a summary of the findings from an in-depth study of three students who took all three
modules. Three students who had completed all three of the modules and were just about to graduate
volunteered to take part in a focus group and to also have their reflective essays analysed, to provide a
more qualitative evaluation of the value of the modules. This work complied with ethical requirements
for research in our institution. The purpose of this study was to understand what they thought they had
learned through taking the modules, both at the time (through the reflective essays) and in hindsight
(during the focus group discussion).

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

A number of sources have been examined in the findings section of this chapter. These include formal
module feedback, qualitative analysis of three students, anecdotes from reflective essays and reflections
from the module team. An overview of the module metrics is provided in Table 5.
Module surveys
For the Year 1 module, students perceived the more practical aspects of the module such as CV writing as

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |257

more useful to them than the CBL Group Project. In the first year of running the module, at the start of the
module the majority of students did not know what an SME was, and 100% of the cohort increased their
knowledge as a result of taking the course (Pugh, 2017).Within the project, they perceived the presentation
as the most useful aspect, then writing minutes and the reflection as the least useful. Perhaps there should
be more focus on the value of reflection for personal development in the longer term.
Table 5: Information for the three Business Skills for Chemists modules

Module per
No.year
students
of First year of
implementation Adopted by other institutions

Career Planning for Chemists 50 2014/5 Yes

Chemisty: Idea to Market 40–50 2012/13 In part
Chemistry: Making an Impact 15–20 2013/14 Yes

The first year of running the Year 2 module was challenging, interms of students understanding the nature
of the task. Over the past five years, the module team has made annual improvements to the module,
moving overall satisfaction with the Year 2 module from 80% to 100%. Feedback is generally good across
all categories, although there are always issues regarding guidance. We have tried to address this every
year by trying to be a lot clearer about what is required from the students. Often, the feedback received
through the reflective essays is much richer and more useful than feedback obtained from module surveys.

For Year 3, the feedback has been better across all categories, and 100% overall satisfaction is achieved
consistently. However, it is worth noting this is typically a self-selecting group of students who have
already taken the Year 2 module, so they know what to expect. The cohort is typically a lot smaller too
(usually 15–20 compared to 40–50) so it is easier to build a relationship with the students and spend some
more time with them. The extra year of maturity helps as well, as the students seem more willing to build
a relationship with the tutor.

Qualitative analysis of focus group and student essays

Three students took part in a case study, and each of their three reflective essays were analysed. As the
students’ reflections progressed, they became increasingly reflective and reflexive, drawing more upon
their previous and wider experiences. Students valued the opportunity to identify their strengths and
weaknesses through reflection. The group of students identified that they had developed the following
skills across the suite of modules:
• Teamwork, organisational skills, presentation skills, communication
• Time management, professionalism, decision making
• Research skills, planning, problem solving
• Confidence, lateral thinking, change in attitude, reflection
• Business acumen, networking, leadership

All students identified features of authentic learning and of having collective ownership of their projects;
this was particularly evident in the way they described their projects during the focus group discussions.
The students appreciated the opportunity to interact with people from industry and said that it had
helped with their career decision-making. They found working in a team both challenging and enjoyable
in equal measures, but thought it was a valuable experience for their future careers. They also enjoyed
having ownership over the project, although they found decision-making challenging. It should be noted

258|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

that this particular group of students might not be representative of their peers (Pugh, 2019). They had
chosen to take all three modules because they had enjoyed the preceding one, and had volunteered to
take part in a focus group, suggesting that they might be more engaged than some of their peers.

Tutors’ observations
Since their inception, there has been close working between the members of the module team for the
Year 2 and Year 3 modules (same team of three colleagues for both). Informal conversations and more
formal module reviews have elucidated the following observations.

During the first year of running the Year 2 module, students really struggled to understand what was
required intermsoftheassessment, and module feedbacksufferedasaresult.Thismodule was significantly
different from any other on their degree programme, where delivery was primarily didactic and all the
content knowledge was given to them. These modules were the first time that they had to make decisions
about where to take their learning and make judgements about the value of the information they were
finding.

When students give their presentations at the end of the modules, their level of professionalism is
impressive. Many of the students even come dressed in smart attire, bring mock-ups of products, and
provide information pamphlets to the audience. Some groups create websites or social media campaigns.
There is clear evidence that the students are fully engaged in the module and regard it as an authentic
learning experience (Pearce, 2016). Giving students autonomy and purpose in their learning can be very
motivating (Herzberg, 1966; Pink, 2018).

Anecdotally, there is evidence that the Year 2 module has helped students to secure a year in industry.This
can be attributed to two factors. Firstly, they have a greater understanding of the chemical industry and
the different roles within it, and secondly, they have an excellent example of when they have worked in
a team to deliver a product to talk about at interview. Whilst it is impossible to attribute student metrics
to any one module, a correlation could be made between students taking these modules and year in
industry success. However, it is difficult to prove that the relationship is causal.

An unexpected benefit of students writing reflective essays is that it provides the tutors with an incredibly
rich source offeedback about the module, rendering the conventional module feedback forms redundant.
The assessment rubric for the reflective essays asks students to reflect on their own skills development,
their contribution to the team, their experiences, how it has impacted on their career thinking, and to
also be deeply critical and reflective. In the briefing session about reflective writing, students are strongly
encouraged to be honest in their evaluation. If they haven’t enjoyed their experience, or didn’t get very
much out of it, they should say so, but then also reflect on why they thought that was the case. They are
told that a bad experience won’t lead to a bad mark, but the most important aspect is that they reflect well
on why they felt the way they did. Some of the best pieces of reflection have referred to bad experiences.
Some students comment that they are starting to reflect in a formalway on other aspects of their learning,
which is a really positive step.

Implications and Adaptability

Considerations for embedding employability into your own context

There is evidence from our own practice that the embedding of business awareness and transferable skills
into a chemistry context is valuable to students. This has been evident from the numerous references

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |259

made in reflective essays to success in securing a year in industry, and the number of unsolicited emails
from former students. The challenge is fitting it into the curriculum, which is traditionally very busy. The
solution in our context was to make the module one of the optional choices in each of the years of study.
This means that students have the flexibility to decide how much business awareness they wish to develop,
alongside the many transferable skills that have been identified. The downside to this approach is that
some students (and potentially up to 50% of them) do not take any of the modules and therefore will not
have the opportunity to develop these skills to the same extent. A benefit of introducing the modules as
optional means that any initial issues can more easily be addressed before rolling out the module to the
whole cohort. Additionally, only students that either have a keen interest in the subject matter or in the
teaching approach will choose the module, so motivation, in theory, should be higher. Another solution
could be to specify that the students need to take at least one of the modules during their degree.

Group work challenges

Another issue that might need to be overcome is student perceptions on the challenges of group work.
Many students, and particularly those that are high performing in traditional assessments (exams, essays),
may be wary of group work as they perceive that their peers might let them down, thus jeopardising their
marks. There are a couple of potential solutions to this challenge. The first is to introduce peer allocation
of marks — students assign a mark to each other based on their contribution to the group effort. We
have employed WebPA (Loughborough University, no date) for this purpose. It is freely available online
and can also be embedded into virtual learning environments, although other alternatives exist. Ideally,
all students within a group should receive the same mark. However, if students do not contribute fairly,
they will be penalised by the peer mark, but must also provide an explanation when this is the case.
Students tend to perceive this as fair. A second solution is to introduce low-stakes group work early on
in the programme, or as formative tasks, so that students become more comfortable working in a group.

Making the case to programme teams

Some colleagues could be sceptical of the value of such modules. There is clear evidence from returning
students who have spent a year in industry that this is a valuable endeavour. Also, alumni can be excellent
advocates of this approach (whether they took the modules or not). We found setting up an industrial
advisory board to support the development of these modules was very helpful interms of practical advice
and help with creating resources and endorsement for the approach taken (Pugh and Grove, 2014).The UK
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) chemistry benchmarkstatements (QAA, 2014) and the RSC accreditation
framework (RSC, 2017) are also excellent sources of support for the approach. In both cases, transferable
skills and professional development are essential learning outcomes for graduate chemists, and therefore
must be addressed within the curriculum to meet accreditation requirements.

Engagement with external experts

In order to increase the value of the module to students, we have collaborated with external speakers
extensively in the delivery of the modules. Experts are teaching students, in the same way as they would
expect to be taught chemistry by an expert. This increases the authenticity and credibility of the modules,
which the students appear to value. Our university careers service has been of enormous help during
the development of these modules, particularly for the Year 1 and Year 3 modules. Similarly, the alumni
network is an important resource, which should not be overlooked. All of our external speakers in the Year
2 module are alumni of the university, who genuinely enjoy the opportunity to give something back to
the university.

Logistical considerations
From a practical point of view, if running modules at both Years 2 and 3, we would encourage arranging

260|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

both presentation events for the same day. The same panel of judges can be used for both modules and
we have had success in organising an end of module event in which students, staff and judges can interact
and network in a relaxed and informal setting. Industrial contacts and alumni databases are a good place
to find such people. The students really value the exposure to industrial visitors.

Your context
If you are considering embedding employability into your chemistry curriculum through context-based
learning, you may wish to ask yourself the following questions:
1. What are the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to embedding
a context-based employability module in your department/school and have you identified
adaptations that could enhance the strengths and opportunities?
2. What are the knowledge, skills, and attributes that your students could develop if a context
based employability module is implemented?
3. How and when will students be consulted/informed in advance of and during
implementation?
4. What additional resources would be required to implement a context-based employability
module (staff time, quality assurance processes, suitable rooms, guest lecturers etc.)?
5. How can the resources already available from the chapter authors be modified to suit your
context?
6. How will you evaluate the implementation of this context-based employability approach?

Conclusion and Future Plans

This chapter sets out a mechanism for integrating employability and business acumen into an
undergraduate chemistry degree programme using context-based team learning. The students are able
to identify and articulate their skills development through the use of reflective writing. They also benefit
from a more authentic learning experience. Some of the challenges of adopting such an approach, in
particular staff and student buy-in, are addressed and the evidence provided within this chapter should
also provide a body of evidence for the merits of such an approach.

As with any learning and teaching approach, we are constantly seeking to enhance our practice. A new
case study on drug re-profiling has been created in partnership with a student for the 2018/19 academic
year. This was based on a resource on Learn Chemistry developed by colleagues at the Universities of
Warwick and York (Taylor and Lowe, 2014) and is available upon request from the authors under a Creative
Commons licence.

Another potential area for development, which proves logistically difficult, is to make the modules more
interdisciplinary. Bringing in students from a wide range of disciplines would be an even more authentic
learning experience. If the significant challenges of trying to integrate programmes that have congested
timetables can be overcome, this would provide a step change in our provision.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge their co-workers in the development and delivery of the modules:
Patrick McGowan, Stephen Maw, Caroline Williams, Christopher Hone, Ben Hetherington, Kairen Skelley,
and Richard Doyle at the University of Leeds and Tina Overton (formerly University of Hull) and Paul Taylor
(formerly University of Warwick) now both University of Leeds. In addition we acknowledge the Chemistry

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |261

Industrial Advisory Board of the University of Leeds, and other external contributors to the modules and
the National HE STEM Programme, the Higher Education Academy, the RSC, and the University of Leeds
for their financial support and role as critical friend.

Supplementary information
All resources for the Year 1 and Year 2 modules are freely available on the RSC Learn Chemistry Platform
(Year 1: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resource/res00002283/c-pbl-chemistry-careers-in-smes;Year
2: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resource/res00000948/chemistry-idea-to-market). The resources
for Year 3 are freely available by contacting the authors.

Some of the resources will need local contextualisation, particularly regarding access to other resources (for
example local library resources on topics such as intellectual property). Resources exist to enable delivery
of all of the workshops. However, it is really valuable to bring in people who are employed in industry,
working in the particular fields, such as process chemists, marketers, patent lawyers, entrepreneurs, and
project managers. Having an external speaker who is willing to present using their company-branded
resources makes the experience even more authentic for the students. Comments in the reflective essays
and course feedback suggest students really value the external speakers. However, available resources
provide back-up if external speakers are unexpectedly unavailable.

References
Belt, S., Leisvik, M. J., Hyde, A. J. and Overton, T. L. (2005), “Using a context-based approach to undergraduate
chemistry teaching – a case study for introductory physical chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp.166-179.
Bennett, J. and Holman, J. (2003), “Context-Based Approaches to the Teaching of Chemistry: What are they and
what are their effects?” in Gilbert, J., De Jong, O., Justi, R., Treagust, D. and Van Driel, J. (Eds.), Chemical
Education: Towards Research-Based Practice, pp.165-184, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
CBI /UUK (2009) “Future fit: Preparing graduates for the world of work,” p8 https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/
policy-and-analysis/reports/Pages/future-fit-preparing-graduates-for-the-world-of-work.aspx (accessed
1st March 2019).
Cheng, W. & Warren, M. (2000) “Making a Difference: Using peers to assess individual students’ contributions to a
group project”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 243-255.
Gibbs, G. (no date), “The assessment of group work: lessons from the literature,” ASKe, Oxford Brookes University,
http://owww.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsld/group_work/brookes_groupwork_gibbs_dec09.pdf
(accessed 1st March 2019).

Hanson, S. and Overton, T. (2010) “Skills required by new chemistry graduates and their development in degree
programmes.” Higher Education Academy, http://bit.ly/1odEZP2 (accessed 1st March 2019).
Harvey, L. (2005), “Embedding and Integrating Employability,” New Directions for Institutional Research, Vol. 128,
pp. 13-28.
Herzberg, F. I. (1966), Work and the Nature of Man, World Publishing Company, Cleveland.
Institute of Directors (2007), “Institute of Directors skills briefing – December, Graduates’ employability skills,”
116 Pall Mall, London SW1Y 5ED, http://docplayer.net/14250289-Institute-of-directors-skills-briefing
december-2007.html (accessed 1st March 2019)
Lejk, M., Wyvill, M. and Farrow, S. (1996), “A survey of methods for deriving individual grades from group
assessments.”Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp 267-280.
Loughborough University (no date), WebPA, http://webpaproject.lboro.ac.uk (accessed 1st March 2019).
Office for National Statistics (2017), “Graduates in the UK labour market: 2017” https://www.ons.gov.
uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/

262|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing business and employability skills for undergraduate chemists

graduatesintheuklabourmarket/2017 (accessed 1st March 2019).

Overton, T. L. and Randles, C. (2015),“Beyond problem-based learning: using dynamic PBL in chemistry,”Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp.251-259.
Parker, K. and Pulham, C. (2012),“Commercial Skills for Chemists: Introduction & Overview,” Tutor Guide, RSC
Learn Chemistry, http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resource/res00000953/commercial-skills
introduction-%20overview#!cmpid = CMP00001402 (accessed 1st March 2019).
Pearce, S. (2016), “Authentic Learning: What, Why and How? E-Teaching: Management Strategies for the
Classroom,” Australian Council for Educational Leaders, April, Vol. 10, http://www.acel.org.au/acel/ACEL_
docs/Publications/e-Teaching/2016/e-Teaching_2016_10.pdf (accessed 1st March 2019).
Pink, D. H. (2018) Motivation: The surprising truth about what motivates us, Canongate Books.
Pugh, S. (2014), “Getting down to business,” Education in Chemistry, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 18-21.
Pugh, S. L. and Grove, M.J. (2014), “Establishing Industrial Advisory Boards through a Practice Transfer Adoption
Model,” New Directions in Physical Sciences, Vol 10, No. 1, June, pp. 20-25.
Pugh, S. (2017), “Teaching career skills to undergraduates,” Education in Chemistry, Vol 54. No. 1, available at
https://eic.rsc. org/feature/teaching-career-skills-to-undergraduates/2500262.article (accessed 1st
March 2019).
Pugh, S. L. (2019), “A longitudinal view of students’ perspectives on their professional and career development,
through optional Business Skills for Chemists modules, during their Chemistry degree programme,”
in Schultz, M., Schmid, S., Lawrie, G. A. (Eds.), Research into practice in chemistry education: Selected
contributions from the 25th IUPAC International Conference on Chemistry Education 2018, Springer, (due
June 2019).
QAA (2014), “Subject Benchmark Statement: Chemistry” https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/subject-benchmark
statements/sbs-chemistry-14.pdf?sfvrsn = 99e1f781_14 (accessed 1st March 2019).
RSC (2017), Accreditation of Degree Programmes, http://www.rsc.org/images/Accreditation%20criteria%20
2017-%20update%20july%2017_tcm18-151306.pdf (accessed 1st March 2019).
RSC (no date), “Tackling Global Challenges” available at: www.rsc.org/campaigning-outreach/global-challenges/
(accessed September 2018).
Rule, A. (2006), “Editorial:The Components of Authentic Learning,”Journal of Authentic Learning, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp.
1-10.
Seery, M. (2015), “Putting chemistry in context,” Education in Chemistry, Vol. 52, available at: https://eic.rsc.org/
feature/putting-chemistry-in-context/2000106.article (accessed 1st March 2019).
Smith, D. (2016), “Designing Skilful Chemists,” Education in Chemistry, Vol. 53, available at: https://eic.rsc.org/
feature/designing-skilful-chemists/2000081.article (accessed 1st March 2019).
Stuart, M., Lido, C., Morgan, J., Solomon, L. and May, S. (2011), “The impact of engagement with extracurricular
activities on the student experience and graduate outcomes for widening participation populations,”
Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 203-215.
Taylor, P. and Lowe, N. (2014), “Drug Reprofiling scenario” in Business Skills and Commercial Awareness, RSC Learn
Chemistry, available at: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resource/res00000964/business-skills-and
commercial-awareness-for-chemists# (accessed 1st March 2019).
Tomlinson, M. (2012), “Graduate Employability: A Review of Conceptual and Empirical Themes”, Higher Education
Policy, Vol. 25, pp. 407-431.
University of Leeds (2008), Department of Colour Science Annual Review, Learning and Teaching, May, p7.
Wilkinson, D. and Aspinall, S. (2007), “An exploration of the term ‘Commercial awareness’: What it means to
employers and students”, NCGEResearch Report 005/2007, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship,
pp. 9-10.
Yorke, M. (2006) “Employability in higher education: what it is – what it is not”, Learning and Employability Series
1, Higher Education Academy, p8.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |263

264|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Undergraduate screencast presentations
19 with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Katherine J. Haxton
School of Chemical and Physical Sciences, Keele University
k.j.haxton@keele.ac.uk

The aim of this work is to describe the use of screencast presentations with first year
undergraduate chemistry students to enable presentations to take place without significant
timetable demands. I also describe self- and peer-assessment protocols that include tutor
moderation and opportunities for students to reflect on their performance. A series of
exercises and evaluations were carried out to establish assessment criteria and investigate
key issues.

It was found that screencast presentations are an effective means of including a presentation
assessment in large cohort classes. The format allows students the chance to review and
reflect on their performance, and this is enhanced by conducting self-and peer-assessment.
Reflection takes place in an assignment that develops several skills deemed important by
employers of chemistry graduates including digital literacy.

The self- and peer-assessment regime outlined here is broadly applicable to other
assessments. The use of screencasts to offer more opportunities to practice presentation
skills is applicable to many other contexts. Screencast or video presentations offer a possible
alternative to in-person presentations to overcome timetabling issues, build skills including
reflection and digital literacy, or to provide a viable alternative for disabled students or those
for whom in-person presentation represents significant challenges.
Influence of Professor Tina Overton
Prof. Tina Overton has been a significant influence on my career, from running the New Lecturers
in the Physical Sciences course, through interactions at Variety in Chemistry Education and on
to ‘Getting Started in Pedagogical Research’, the precursor to Methods in Chemistry Education
Research. Tina made a career in chemistry education, something that fascinated me greatly
as a new lecturer, seem possible and she generously provided the tools to get started through
publications and courses. This project was done as part of my MA in Learning and Teaching
in Higher Education, a course I don’t think I would have attempted had it not been for Tina’s
influence.

To cite: Haxton, K.J. (2019), “Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment”, in Seery, M. K. and
McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press,
Dublin, pp. 265-282.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |265

Introduction

In this chapter, I will describe an assignment asking first year English chemistry undergraduate students
to produce five minute screencast presentations and will reflect on its evolution over seven years with
the aim of making recommendations for implementing this type of activity in other institutions. I also
describe the assessment regime used which comprises self- and peer-assessment that includes tutor
moderation and opportunities for students to reflect on their performance.

Presentations as a valuable skill

A 2007 study of chemistry graduates found that just over 80% rated presentation skills as useful or very
useful however just over 60% of those surveyed felt that these skills were well or very well developed
in their degree programme (Hanson and Overton, 2010). These findings were supported more recently
by Galloway (2017). Skills development may be embedded within specific modules or in stand-alone
modules in professional development such as that described by Galloway (2017). The 2008 Review of the
Student Learning Experience in Chemistry (Gagan, 2008) indicated that chemistry departments regularly
embed transferrable skills such as presentation skills into curricula however the survey does not quantify
the extent to which skills are developed. Presentations are a valuable and authentic form of assessment
and enhance the diversity of assessment in courses (O’Neill, 2011; Ritchie, 2016). Typically, they are a time
consuming assessment format requiring significant contact time and staffing resources. To maximise the
benefit from providing an assessment, students should:
• be sufficiently motivated to take the assessment seriously;
• be able to perform to the best of their ability and circumstances;
• have an opportunity to reflect on their performance in the context of their peers.

Presentations may be broken down into several components and this assignment addresses several of
these (Table 1). Motivation may be intrinsic or extrinsic: the topic is interesting to the student, or the
assessment is worth sufficient marks to make it worthwhile (Black and Deci, 2000). Performance anxiety
may be related to the degree of preparedness or stress experienced when contemplating presenting to
a group of peers/staff. The introduction of a presentation in Year 1 was seen as the starting point for
developing presentation skills throughout the chemistry degree programmes at Keele University.

Reflection is challenging when presenting in person although lecture capture and video solutions have
been proposed to allow students to review their performance (Smith and Sodano, 2011; Ritchie, 2016).
Key issues around using lecture capture and video technology relate to training students and tutors in
the technology and editing to produce the final product, access to equipment and editing suites, and
engagement for students with visual or hearing impairments. Performance rights and legal implications
also require consideration (JISC, 2019). Howeverthese can be mitigated by limiting the sharing of the video/
screencast, and advising the student on appropriate levels of security such as obscure URLs or password
protection. Ritchie (2016) used lecture capture technology to provide an opportunity for students to carry
out self-assessment on their presentations before performing the presentation again, demonstrating
their ability to act on their reflections and noted an increase in performance when this took place. A cycle
of self- and peer-assessment was implemented to encourage reflection on the presentations.

Screencast presentations
The screencast presentation assessment discussed here overcomes many of these issues by allowing
students to create a presentation screencast in private to a standard that they are happy with, thus
removing the performance anxiety that may be experienced. Choice of topic within a theme allows

266|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Table 1: Tasks that must be completed by a student prior to giving an in-person presentation or submission of a screencast

In-person presentation Screencast presentation

Identify topic for presentation Identify topic for presentation
Identify suitable software
Carry out research Carry out research
Produce annotated
reference list bibliography/ Produce annotated bibliography/
reference list
Produce visual aids Produce visual aids
Rehearse presentation Record presentation
Give presentation to audience Produce and upload presentation in
suitable format
Complete self-assessment after
watching screencast

students to select an aspect that is personally interesting to them which may enhance intrinsic motivation,
and the screencast format permits students to review their work at any stage in the assessment procedure.
This adds requirements onto the students: the need to identify appropriate software; to record the
presentation; and to submit it in an appropriate format. This can, however, be made an additional and
valuable opportunity to develop digital literacies rather than being viewed as a barrier. Production of
screencasts or videos has become common place in chemistry teaching through the increasing popularity
of lecture capture (Haxton, 2016b), screencasts (Haxton and McGarvey, 2011; Mohorovičić, 2014) and
online lectures (example: Khan Academy https://www.khanacademy.org/science/chemistry) which apply
technology to communicating to students by tutors resulting in fairly passive engagement on the part of
the students. Other initiatives such as student produced screencasts or videos have been reported by Ryan
(2013) and Lancaster (2015). Tutor confidence in finding and using appropriate technologies may limit the
use of screencasts in teaching. However this need not limit the use of technology by students. Sharpe
and Beetham (2010) suggest a developmental model for effective e-learning that comprises four stages:
functional access, skills development, practice and choice of technology, and creative appropriation.
Figure 1 implies that allowing students to make choices about which technologies they use to complete
an assignment provides the greatest opportunity for development towards creative appropriation. Telling
students which tools to use barely rises out of the functional access stage.

Self-assessment
Self-assessment is a critical part of any learning process, whether done informally or formatively by a
reflective student prior to submission of work, or formally required as a contribution by atutor (MacDonald,
2011). Reflection is generally held to be the link between assessment, feedback, and improved learning.
Sargeant states that three processes are involved: performance is assessed, feedback is provided to the
students, and feedback is acted on by the student (Sargeant, 2006 as seen in Sargeant et al., 2008). It
can be challenging to get students to access and act on feedback, particularly if the links between past
and current assignments are ambiguous. Self-assessment provides a formal means through which this
reflection can be encouraged or structured, and may be carried out on submission, after peer-assessment,
or after receiving feedback and a grade. Self-assessment is subject to some issues concerning reliability
(students under- or over-estimating their abilities); bias, as both Langan (2005) and Pope (2005) report
that females tend to rate themselves lower than males; and achievement as lower academic achievers
may rate themselves higher than higher academic achievers (Boud et al., 1999; MacDonald, 2011). Clear

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |267

 •

Figure 1: A developmental Model of Effective E-learning adapted

Figure 1: A developmental model of effective e-learning adapted from Sharpe and Beetham (2010)

assessment criteria and ensuring a shared understanding of the assessment criteria are strongly linked
to better results whether it be better learning or closer correlation with peer and tutor marks (Orsmond,
1996; Miller, 2003). Carrying out self-assessment after peer-assessment may give students a broader sense
of how their performance correlates to that of their peers.

Peer-assessment (and bias)

Peer-assessment is widely held to have benefits for student learning including enhanced problem solving
ability, improving reflection, and development of self-motivation skills (Sivan, 2000). Criticism of peer
assessment relates primarily to its incorporation into summative assessment with bias and inconsistency
in marks being the two most prevalent issues (Magin, 2001; Magin and Helmore, 2001). Several studies
designed to investigate these effects led to inconclusive or contradictory results (Magin, 2001). Peer
assessment activities can occur across the range of assessment types but are particularly prominent in
group work where the focus is on participation and may be facilitated by software such as CATME (Loughry,
Ohland and Woehr, 2014). Peer-review as a form of peer-assessment has been evaluated in the engineering
context where students complete work, review their peers’work, then apply the same assessment criteria
to their own work. This allows students to gain directly from the process of peer-review as they learn to
be more objective about their own work when evaluating their peers, while acknowledging that the peer
feedback they receive may be of limited use (Nichol, 2014). More broadly, recommendations to improve
validity and reliability include involving students in the development of assessment criteria (Dochy et
al.,1999; Sivan, 2000; Smith et al., 2002; Stefani, 1994; Orsmond, 1996; Orsmond et al., 2000) or moderation
with a defined difference in marks acting as the trigger to the moderation process (Stefani, 1994). Peer
assessment was selected as a valuable component of this assignment because it mimics an intrinsic part
of in-person presentations: being judged by the audience.

268|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Methods/Design

In this section I will discuss the setting and scope of the screencast presentation assessment as well as
how the screencast presentation with self- and peer-assessment can be implemented and evaluated.

Setting for the screencast assignment development and implementation

Keele University is a small English University with a range of combined honours and single honours
chemistry and medicinal chemistry programmes. Many students study combined honours, coupling
chemistry or medicinal chemistry with a second subject. In 2011/12 all students were on the combined
honours Bachelors route (BSc). By 2017/18 around half of the cohort was studying for single honours
chemistry degrees, either BSc or integrated Masters (MChem). As can be seen in Table 2 the size of the Year
1 cohort has varied considerably but is typically around 70 students.

The presentation assignment was initially implemented to replace a class test and develop a wider range
of skills. Due to timetable constraints, it could only occupy the same contact time as the class test — one
hour. This assignment was compulsory for students and reassessment was offered to students who did
not submit. Reassessment was assessed only by tutor assessment.
Table 2: Evolution of assessment; threshold mark is the minimum mark required to pass the assignment
(All modules are 15-credits reflecting 150 hours of effort)

Year module
% of Threshold
Mark Submissions Topic

2011/12 10 20 33 Inorganic Chemistry (list of possible

topics given and topics approved
before submission)
2012/13 15 40 68 General
2013/14 15 40 53 General
2014/15 15 40 78 Chemistry of Space
2015/16 15 40 99 Chemistry goes to the Movies
2016/17 15 40 114 Chemistry for the Future
2017/18 20 0 59 Chemistry without Carbon

Timing of screencast assignments with self- and peer-assessment

A major consideration in implementing this assessment is selecting the best time of the semester to begin.
The cycle of 1st self-, peer, and 2nd self-assessment takes several weeks (Table 3). This had to be designed
to take into account institutional guidelines for late work (accept if submitted up to seven days late but
cap mark at 40%) and so several delays of one week were introduced before the next phase. Three weeks
were allowed for from the assessment briefing (typically a one-hour introduction session to presentation
skills, the assessment cycle and the task — see Supplementary Information) to first submission of the
screencast and Self-Assessment 1. This assignment was designed to be largely agnostic of material being
covered in lectures. Two weeks were allowed for peer-assessment and students were asked to complete
Self-Assessment 2 after completing all the peer-assessments and watching their own presentation once
more.

Selection of format and software

A key aim of the assignment was for students to find and use appropriate software for the task. Detailed

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |269

 Table 3: Structure of assignment (see Supplementary Information for further details)

Week Task
1 Assessment briefing session (one-hour contact time)
4 Phase 1: Submission of presentation and Self-Assessment 1
5 Seven-day late deadline for presentation and Self-Assessment 1
6 Phase 2: Peer-assessment begins
8 Submission of peer-assessment and Self-Assessment 2
9 Seven-day late deadline for peer-assessment and Self-Assessment 2
10 Marks moderated by tutor and returned to students with peer-feedback

assessment guidelines that included some straightforward software suggestions and requirements for
submission were produced. However, it was ensured that there was sufficient flexibility for students to
innovate if they chose to. This shifted responsibility for providing technical support from the instructor to
the students and removed the need for the instructor to be an expert user of software. The presentation
had to be submitted as an MP4 file that could be played through the virtual learning environment (VLE)
or as a URL to a non-password protected site such as YouTube. A degree of privacy is possible with
YouTube as URLs are obscure and it is possible to set up a pseudonymous account. More recently, sharing
through GoogleDrive has been used. In order to make use of trial versions of software or free online tools,
presentation were limited to five minutes in length and guidance given on how to mark presentations that
went over this limit. Care must be taken to avoid recommending trial versions of software that produce
outputs with watermarks or in a low-resolution format. It is considered appropriate to instruct markers to
disregard watermarks or low-resolution formats, however this can be a challenge for students carrying
out peer-assessment.

Proprietary file formats can be a significant access issue and it is recommended that submissions are
checked before peer- assessment commences, or that wording is put in assessment guidelines to make
it very clear that if the markers cannot view the presentation, they cannot mark it, and the responsibility
to fix it lies with the submitter. Generally students were allowed to fix minor issues after the deadline
that were reasonable to overcome (for example, technology, format or access issues such as password
protection). It is useful for the tutor overseeing the assessment to demonstrate a small degree offlexibility.
Clear guidance on the use of video segments produced by other people in the presentation is required
and typically I recommended less than 10% of the total length of the video.

Presentations have been submitted as narrated PowerPoint, talking-head videos, animations, and
occasionally as PowerPoint slides with an audio file attached. To simplify assessment, all presentations
were required to include an audio and a visual component — submitting an audio only file or submitting
only visual aids such as slides was penalised.

Copyright and plagiarism

The independent research element to the assignment has been enhanced in recent years by requiring
an annotated bibliography in addition to the presentation, as well as references on the slides. This
assignment is an excellent introduction to copyright and other issues around fair usage as the use of
images, animations, videos, and music obtained online is common. Students may need reminding that it is
a form of plagiarism to copy the style and content of videos found online without appropriate attribution.
Clarification needs to be given as to whether things like presentation software templates should be
referenced, and how to use open-source images ethically.

270 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Assessment
Development of assessment criteria
In the first and second years of implementation, the one-hour assessment briefing session included an
exercise to determine what the students valued when assessing presentations. This was removed in later
years as the assessment criteria were refined and clarified. This is not an essential part of implementing
this assignment and different approaches to achieve the same goal of developing shared understanding
of the assessment criteria could be used. An alternative would be to have students apply pre-designed
assessment criteria to an online science presentation or, for the brave, to a segment of a lecture!

The assessment criteria development exercise involved asking the students to consider scientific
presentations they had viewed or showing a video of a presentation, and asking them to reflect on
what the most important aspects were either individually or in small groups. This revealed interesting
differences in responsibility between different types of markers. The prompt questions were:
• When evaluating your own work, what do you think are the three most important things to
assess?
• Think about presentations you have seen on science topics, what are the most important
aspects to you?
• If you listen to a presentation, are different things important?
• What do you think your peers should assess when they watch/listen to your presentation?
• What do you think you should assess when they watch/listen to your presentation?
• What do you think you should assess when you watch/listen to your own presentation?
• What do youthinkyour tutor should assess when watching or listening to your presentations?

I analysed the responses to these prompts by thematic analysis, a process of grouping together similar
answers and determining which are the most common. (Haxton, 2016a; Nowell et al., 2017) I assumed
that the most common responses reflected the aspects the class as a whole gave greater importance
to. I used these to derive the key marking scales for self-, peer-, and tutor analysis in the first year of
implementation. These were updated in the second year of implementation when the exercise was rerun.
In the subsequent five years, the assessment criteria were updated to be more explicit giving clearer
guidance to the students when applying them. This was found to be beneficial in encouraging students
to make wider use of the whole mark scale.

Assessment criteria
An introduction talk was given in which the standards and expectations for the assignment were described
(see Supplementary Information). This included information on the required reference format, the length
and style of the presentation, the intended audience of the presentations (Year 1 university chemistry
students at the very start of their studies), and a guide to the assessment phases.

Marking criteria were based on a series of Likert style scales, initially 1–5, but then incorporating 0 to
account for non-completion of certain aspects, and moving to 0–10 in later years to allow greater
differentiation in the marks. (Table 4). Students were asked to give feedback in three broad categories:
1. What did the presenter do well?
2. What could the presenter improve on?
3. Any other comments?

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |271

 Table 4 (a): Marking scales for each type of assessment; initially a 5-point scale was used but to allow for greater
differentiation, a 10-point scale was developed
(1 was described as poor,5 was described as average, and 10 was described as excellent)

Self-Assessment 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
How well do you think you have structured your
• • • • • • • • • •
presentation?
Are the key points of your presentation clear? • • • • • • • • • •
Have you covered all the aspects of your topic that
• • • • • • • • • •
you intended to?
Do you think your presentation is clear and concise? • • • • • • • • • •
Peer-assessment then Self-Assessment 2
How interesting did you find this presentation? • • • • • • • • • •
Was the presentation well delivered? • • • • • • • • • •
How relevant was the content of the presentation? • • • • • • • • • •
Was it clear that the presenter had done an
• • • • • • • • • •
appropriate amount of research into the topic?
Was the presentation well prepared? • • • • • • • • • •

Table 4 (b): Marking scale for tutor assessment; this was used for in the first year for all presentations,
and for reassessment in subsequent years
Component 1 2 3 4 5
Is the scientific content of the presentation accurate? • • • • •
Are the references appropriate? • • • • •
Is the content of this presentation suitable for the target audience
• • • • •
(A Level or equivalent)?
Originality • • • • •
Choice of format given topic • • • • •
Audibility (if appropriate) • • • • •
Clarity of explanations • • • • •
Clear point to presentation • • • • •
Quality of visual aids (if used) • • • • •
The need to be constructive in feedback was emphasised, and feedback free text boxes were available for
each peer-assessment element and for overall comments. Self-assessment 2 used the same form as the
peer-assessment and students wrote feedback to themselves as a form of reflection. This often involved
comparisons for each marking criterion to the other presentations they had assessed.

The breakdown of the final mark between self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment is given in Table 5. Self
Assessment 1 has generally been carried out through a GoogleForm, enabling a variety of question styles
to be used (see Supplementary Information). Peer-assessment and Self-Assessment 2 has varied between
GoogleForm and Blackboard’s Peer- and Self-Assessment tool. From the second year of implementation,
tutor assessment was removed and the grades produced from each assessment type were reviewed in a
spreadsheet and moderated.

272 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Table 5: Distribution of marks between different assessment formats for the screencast assignment;
the approach implemented from 2012/2013 onwards is recommended

Year Self- Peer assessment Self- Tutor

Assessment 1 Assessment 2 Assessment

2011/12 10% (average of 3–5

50%
students marks) 10% 30%

2012/13–
2017/18 15% (average of 3–5
70%students marks 15% Not
incorporated
with tutor moderation)
Moderation
The moderation process was designed to tackle any particularly low or high peer-assessment grades that
were outliers for each presentation (typically greater than 10% different to the average in peer-assessment).
Typical reasons for these grades were the peer-assessor being unable to access the presentation due to
software or hardware issues and giving a low mark (and noted in feedback), or work being marked by
friends who felt obliged to give a very high mark. Self-assessments have rarely been moderated as the
majority of students give a fair appraisal of their work. However one instance where a student awarded
themselves 110% was noted. The moderation process should be made clear to the students at the start
of the assignment and careful consideration should be given about whether to release both moderated
and unmoderated marks (allowing the peer feedback to be viewed in context) or only moderated marks.

Allocating peer assessors

If fixed groups are assigned for peer assessment, these should be allocated randomly or in a manner
that ensures a range of ability in the groups. There is also evidence to suggest that ensuring a good
gender balance in groups is important (Langan, 2005). Peer-assessment is open to bias and students with
unfamiliar accents may be penalised for clarity.This can be overcome by making it clear that presentations
are to be marked on quality of information conveyed. Implicitly assessing aspects such as audibility and
clarity of speech may be discriminatory against students with certain conditions or strong accents. Adding
these as explicit and distinct scales can allow for those marks to be discounted. This can be taken into
account during moderation if issues are known, but also should be cautiously discussed with the class
when the assignment is introduced — it should be possible to move beyond the superficial aspects of an
oral performance to focus on the quality of the information.

Self-assessments
Self-Assessment 1 is completed as the screencast is submitted. Self-Assessment 2 should be completed
after peer-assessment and with strong encouragement to the student to re-watch their work first.
Questions that encourage reflection on their performance in the context of their peers may be particularly
beneficial for some groups of students, allowing them to calibrate their output against that of others. This
was done by asking students to write feedback to themselves using the same form as peer-assessment.
This may help students develop greater assessment literacy.

Screencast topics
Each year, students were asked to produce a presentation on a given theme that related to their course
but was not directly dependent on any content being taught in it. This allowed the assignment to run
early in the semester. Topics ranged from Main Group Chemistry to Chemistry for the Future, The Chemistry
of Space, and Chemistry without Carbon (see Table 1). These were selected because they were broad

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |273

enough to enable the students to select an aspect of personal interest to them. In the first and second
years of implementation, I requested that students email me their topics for approval. This was to avoid
two students doing the same topic. I felt this was unnecessary with such broad topics — the students
rarely focussed on the same aspects even when selecting similar topics. Over the seven years, a small
range of topics were constantly selected:
• Explosive substances
• Poisonous substances
• Fireworks
• Drugs

These topics were often done poorly due to breadth, and to the presence of a lot of simplified information
online. Encouraging students to select topics that allow them to engage with primary scientific literature
was challenging. In 2017/18, the theme was Chemistry without Carbon and presentation topics included:
• Hydrogen fuel cells
• Transuranic elements
• The Auger process
• Hydrogen peroxide in aquaculture
• Transition metals in medicine

Evaluation methods and ethical considerations

During the action research phase of this project (the first two years of implementation), ethical approval
was obtained from the Student Project Ethics Board at Keele University (Haxton, 2016a). Action research is
a research method that involves planning, doing and reflecting in cycles (Acosta and Goltz, 2014). Students
were informed that the assessment was required but that participation in the research project aspect
was voluntary with no consequence to their mark. Students participating in the project consented to
their peer- and self-assessment feedback being analysed, for use of anonymous quotations from feedback
comments, and for their marks to be analysed after pseudonymisation. Subsequent data (module marks,
evaluation questionnaires) have been collected as part of the continuing evaluation and monitoring of
the assessment as a teaching activity. Evaluation questions were typically asked during Self-Assessment 1.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Student feedback
This has been a broadly successful assessment format over the past seven years. As part of the continuing
evaluation of the assignment, students were asked if they would have preferred to give an in-person
presentation to a small group over a screencast (Figure 2).There has never been a clear preference observed
across seven years with a reasonable number of student’s seeing the advantages to both formats. Common
reasons for preferring screencasts include the opportunity to perfect the presentation, confidence issues
with public speaking, or learning new skills. Reasons for preferring in person presentations often related to
obtaining and acting on instantaneous feedback from the audience throughout the presentation, being
able to project greater enthusiasm through body language, or having technical difficulties with software.

Assessment regime — application of technology

Theassessmentregime hasbeen complextoimplement.Noonetechnologicalsolutionthataccommodates
all preferred aspects has been found and compromises have been made (Table 6). For self-assessment,
completing a self-assessment form as the work is submitted is the most logical work-flow. GoogleForms
facilitates this well and allows easy sharing of files where the file creator retains rights to remove the work.

274|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Figure 2: Student responses to the statement “I would have preferred to give my presentation
directly to a small group of my class”
The hazard of this is that the work can be replaced after submission while retaining the same URL, giving a
student more time to complete the task. Many of the issues surrounding peer-assessment, particularly the
complex social dynamics of peer-assessing friends, may be mitigated by using the Blackboard Peer- and
Self-Assessment tool which ensures a random allocation of presentations to each marker. The drawbacks
of this tool are considerable and include (at the point of writing) no opportunity to revise assessment
deadlines once deployed, blank submissions being displayed for students who did not submit their work
on time, no easy means of accommodating university regulations regarding submission of late work
(for example seven days late) other than to make the formal deadline seven days later than desired, no
opportunity to customise the self-assessment aspect to expand the questions being asked, and no easy
way of moderating marks or editing feedback. The drawbacks were significant enough to stop using this
tool despite the ease of collating grades and feedback and returning to the students. These aspects should
be given consideration if planning an assessment of this type.

The difference between Self-Assessment 1 and two varies between students. In general, student marks
stay largely the same between self-assessments (Table 7). However a small number of students increase
their marks and justify it based on those they have peer assessed, and some students’decrease their marks.
Care must be taken with students who may be particularly critical of their own ability, seeing only flaws
and few positives. There are a number of instruments such as multiple-choice questionnaires developed
to assess self-efficacy and other learning attributes that could be used at the start of this assessment to
flag students who may be more likely to doubt their abilities heavily (Bauer, 2005). Moderation could be
introduced to self-assessment where students are awarding themselves marks significantly lower than
their peers. A final option if tutor assessment is being used, would be to use the 5% rule. If a student’s
self-assessment mark is within 5% of a tutor’s mark they are awarded the higher grade. If the difference is
greater than 5% they are awarded the tutor’s mark. This rewards and requires honest self-evaluation and
penalises those who award higher marks as self-assessment to boost grades (Leach 2012).

In the first year of implementation, two approaches to Self-Assessment 1 were tried. The first was to ask
students to award themselves a mark out of 20 for the presentation overall. This was compared to the
students awarding marks out of five for four separate attributes which were then combined into a mark
out of 20. Table 5 shows that the average marks did not differ significantly between the two models. From

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |275

 Table 6: Software options for submission/self- and peer-assessment

Feature GoogleForm Bb
Assessment
Self- and Peer-
Tool Comments

groups
assessment
Assigning
for peer- 4–6 of reciprocity)
Pre-assigned
mark other
riskstudents
each groups
(who
withof
all of 4–6
Random
set
student
students to grade
reciprocity)
marks
allocation
reducing of
risk
4–6
of
a different
(each Random allocation is
beneficial as it reduces the
chance of mutually high
marks being awarded

of returning
Easegrades to
students manual
Fairly
of all marks
tedious
compilation
and
— Inbuilt and easy Plan in advance how you
will return grades and
feedback
generating a format
suitable for return to
individual.
grades/feedback
moderating
Ease of Easy to manually
feedback or marks
edit Difficult to moderate
feedback. Moderating
grades required
downloading raw data and
processing manually
Ease of task
monitoring
completion manual
Difficult
consultation
— requiresof Easy

class lists
deadlines
deployment
questions/
Alteringafter Easy
complete
— owner has
control Impossible Bb Self- and Peer
assessment tool has
limitations that include
the inability to change
deadlines after deployment
and facilitate a 7-day late
deadline?
Facilitating
Assessment Self- Self-Assessment
Allows submission of the end of
1 with Allows Self-Assessment
peer-assessment
2 at Easy implement a 7-day
to
late deadline
presentation
the second year of implementation onwards, self-assessment by awarding marks for different attributes
was used as this most effectively mimicked the process of peer-assessment.

A decline in participation of 33% between Self-Assessments 1 and 2 was noted when Self-Assessment 2
was not part of the peer-assessment process. This is likely due to a range of issues including forgetting,
being tired of the assignment, or not seeing the value. Reminding the students that they were denying
themselves marks by not doing it was a useful prompt. In response to this, Self-Assessment 2 was
incorporated into the peer-assessment process.

In the first year, tutor assessment formed 30% of the markand, after reviewing the peer-assessment marks,
particularly that the range of marks awarded by the peer-assessors was reasonably consistent, this was
altered to tutor moderation (Table 3).

276 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Table 7: Average marks for all students in the first year of implementation for each element of self-assessment;
note decreased participation in Self-Assessment 2

Self 1a† Self 1b‡ Self 2†

n 45 45 30
Average (/20) 13.7 14.5 14.6
St. Dev. 2.3 2.4 2.2
†Students were asked to award themselves a mark out of 20 for their presentation.

‡Students were asked four questions (1–5 scale) which were then combined to give a mark out of 20.

Tutor assessment, when implemented, was focussed more towards accuracy and appropriateness. Tutor
assessmentis generally held to be the standard by which the other assessments are judged in the literature
yet studies comparing the reliability of marking between tutors indicate that there is substantial variation
(De Grez et al., 2012; Stefani, 1994).

Student discomfort with peer assessment

The mark schemes were changed in later years to reflect key aspects of presenting — particularly that
peer-assessment is a valid and authentic method for presentations as it is the audience that judges
the presenter. Anecdotally, students found participating in peer-assessment stressful both as assessors
and recipients of peer-assessment feedback. The removal of tutor-assessment caused some discomfort
among the students, particularly those who place more value on the tutor’s judgement over their peers’
(Pope, 2005). A persistent aspect of student feedback on this assignment has been discomfort with peer
assessment, and this has increased as the assignment has increased from 10 to 20% of a 15-credit module.
In addition to the marking scales, students were asked to give peer feedback. In the first year of
implementation, content analysis of this feedback (Figure 3) given by peer- and tutor-assessment was
performed.

The comments focused on presentation, content, and delivery. This mirrored what the students thought
in the assessment building exercise. Referencing style and format was commented on significantly. In
later years, referencing requirements were made more explicit as the chemistry programme at Keele
adopted a more cohesive approach to information literacy, culminating in co-submission of annotated

Figure 3: Content analysis of student responses to feedback during peer-assessment and feedback from tutor-assessment,
compared to question 1 in the assessment criteria building exercise

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |277

bibliographies to detail what information comes from each source in preparation for work in later years.
As a result, referencing and quality of information source has become a separate section in self- and peer
assessment. It is curious to note that in the assessment building exercise, 13% of comments indicated that
finding the presentation interesting was important for peers, but analysing the peer feedback, interest
was commented on 6% of the time.

Implications and Adaptability

This assignment has been developed, refined and evaluated over the past seven years. The processes
described in this chapter can be adapted to many contexts in other higher education institutions where
a means of improving and developing presentation skills, information and digital literacies are required
without a substantial commitment of contact time. The use of two rounds of self-assessment and related
peer-assessment to facilitate greater reflection could be applied in any assignment that uses peer
assessment. Screencast presentations permit students the opportunity to re-record and/or edit their work
until they are satisfied with the standard. Screencasts may provide a useful alternative assessment format
for students who are unable to carry out in-person presentations. There are several key aspects of this
assessment that can be applied to other contexts:
• use of screencast presentations
• use of self-peer-self-assessment regimes
• use of reflection within assessment regimes
• use of screencasts to support second marking

Your context
The points below outline key aspects to be considered by those exploring the adoption of a similar
approach:
• This assignment facilitates inclusion of presentations when very limited contact time is
available.
• How will you incorporate reflection and self-/peer-assessment to maximise learning
opportunities?
• You will need to have the confidence to allow/trust students to select the topic and software
to complete the task.
• Have you factored in the time involved for data compilation necessary to work within a
more complex grading/moderation scheme?
• The assignment has ranged from 10–20% of 15-credit (150 hours) module.
• While this assignment has had threshold marks of 0, 20, or 40%, the threshold mark can be
dictated by institutional policy.
• Evaluation is in-built into self-assessment questionnaires but fully anonymised before
analysis.
• Will you implement the collaborative assessment criteria development process initially
(underpinned by literature precedents)?

Conclusions

Screencast presentations are a convenient and constructive method of introducing more presentations
into busy timetables. In the seven years of this assignment, over 500 students have produced over 42 hours
of screencast presentations. Screencasts also facilitate reflection by the student through self-assessment
in the context of the work of peers. Having a recording of a students’ presentation can facilitate second/

278 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

double marking by tutors as required by university policies.

Students generally cope with the demands of using software and hardware to produce work of a high
standard. Self- and peer-assessment is effective with appropriate moderation, typically addressing marks
±10% of the average in peer-assessment. Moderation has rarely been applied to self-assessment.

Screencasts are particularly beneficial for students who suffer anxiety or low confidence in their
presentation abilities. Allowing students to focus on producing a presentation they are happy with
without the high stakes event of an in-person presentation is an appropriate first step in building up
confidence. Students give in-person presentations in later years, both individually and in small groups.
Most students are sufficiently confident in their ability to use computers, smartphones and appropriate
software to produce a screencast with minimum intervention from the tutor. Care must be taken to
suggest appropriate software and means of submission to mitigate any issues.

Discussion around good information sources, copyright and fair use of resources is essential. Annotated
bibliographies can help encourage students to engage more with the sources of information rather
than adding in additional references just to make the minimum requirements. It also makes it easier to
distinguish between references used for graphics and references used for content.

Future work in this area involves formalising the reflection process on feedback in later years by including
reflective exercises requiring students to re-read their feedback on this presentation before working on
their next presentation. Engaging with feedback is a key aspect for effective learning and for making good
use of staff time and resources used to provide feedback.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Acosta, S. and Goltz, H. (2014), "Transforming Practices", Health Promotion Practice, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 465-470.
Bauer, C. (2005), "Beyond "Student Attitudes": Chemistry Self-Concept Inventory for Assessment of the Affective
Component of Student Learning", Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 82 No. 12, pp. 1864.
Black, A.E. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous
motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self‐determination theory perspective”, Science Education,
Vol. 84 No. 6, pp. 740-756.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (1999), “Peer Learning and Assessment”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 413-426.
Dochy, F., Segers, M and Sluijsmans, D. (1999), “The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A
review”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 331-350.
Gagan, M. (2008), “Review of the Student Learning Experience in Chemistry”, Available at: https://www.
heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/chemrev_final.pdf (accessed 14 February 2019)
Galloway K. W. (2017), “Undergraduate perceptions of value: degree skills and career skills”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice Vol. 18, pp. 435-440.
De Grez, L. (2010), “Peer assessment of oral presentation skills”, Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, Vol. 2
No. 2, pp.1776-1780.
De Grez, L., Valcke, M. and Roozen, I. (2012), “How effective are self- and peer assessment of oral presentation
skills compared with teachers’ assessments?”, Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp.129

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |279

 142.
De Grez, L, Valcke, M. and Roozen, I.(2009), “The impact of an innovative instructional intervention on the
acquisition of oral presentation skills in higher education”, Computers & Education, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp.112
120.
Hafner, J. and Hafner, P. (2003), “Quantitative analysis of the rubric as an assessment tool: an empirical study of
student peer‐group rating”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 25 No.12, pp.1509-1528.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T.(2010), “Skills required by new Chemistry graduates and their development in degree
programmes”, Hull. Available at: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resources/business-skills-and
commercial-awareness-for-chemists/docs/skillsdoc1.pdf (accessed 14 February 2019).
Haxton, K. and McGarvey, D. (2011), "Screencasting as a means of providing timely, general feedback on
assessment", New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, No. 7, pp. 18-21.
Haxton, K.J. (2016a), Peer- and Self- Assessment of Presentations: What is really being assessed? (MA), Keele
University.
Haxton K.J. (2016b), “Evaluation of the use of Lecture Recordings in Chemistry Modules”, Journal of Academic
Development and Education, available at: https://jadekeele.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/jade-fifth
edition.pdf (accessed 5 March 2019).
JISC (2019), Recording lectures: legal considerations.” (2019), Jisc, available at: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/
recording-lectures-legal-considerations (accessed 5 March 2019).
Lancaster, S.J. (2014), "Beyond the presentation: student authored vignettes.", Education in Chemistry, available
at: https://eic.rsc.org/feature/beyond-the-presentation-student-authored-vignettes/2000067.article
(accessed 14 February 2019).
Lancaster, S.J. (2015), “Engaging Chemistry Students”, HEA Innovative pedagogies series, Available at: https://
www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/simon_lancaster_report.pdf (accessed 14 February 2019)
Langan, A.M. et al.,(2005), “Peer assessment of oral presentations: effects of student gender, university affiliation
and participation in the development of assessment criteria”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
Vol. 30 No.1, pp. 21-34.
Leach, L. (2012), "Optional self-assessment: some tensions and dilemmas", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 137-147.
Loughry, M.L., Ohland, M.W., and Woehr, D.J. (2014), “Assessing Tamwork Skills for Assurance of Learning Using
CATME Team Tools”, Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 5-19
MacDonald, K. (2011), “A Reflection on the Introduction of a Peer and Self Assessment Initiative”, Practice and
Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 27-42.
Magin, D. (2001), "Reciprocity as a Source of Bias in Multiple Peer Assessment of Group Work", Studies in Higher
Education, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 53-63.
Magin, D. and Helmore, P. (2001), "Peer and Teacher Assessments of Oral Presentation Skills: How reliable are
they?", Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 287-298.
Miller, P. (2003), “The Effect of Scoring Criteria Specificity on Peer and Self-assessment”, Assessment & Evaluation
in Higher Education, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 383-394.
Mohorovičić,S. (2014), “Creation and use of screencasts in higher education.”, 2012 Proceedings of the 35th
International Convention MIPRO, available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6240836/ (accessed
14 February 2019).
Nicol, D., Thomson, A. and Breslin, C. (2013), "Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review
perspective", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 102-122.
Nowell, L., Norris, J., White, D. and Moules, N. (2017), "Thematic Analysis", International Journal of Qualitative
Methods, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp 1-13.
O’Neill, G. (2011), “A Practitioner’s Guide to Choice of Assessment Methods Within a Module.”, Available at http://
eprints.teachingandlearning.ie/3266/ (accessed 14 February 2019)

280 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Undergraduate screencast presentations with self-, peer-, and tutor-assessment

Orsmond, P., Merry, S. and Reiling, K. (1996), "The Importance of Marking Criteria in the Use of Peer Assessment",
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 239-250.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S. and Reiling, K. (2000), "The Use of Student Derived Marking Criteria in Peer and Self
assessment", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 23-38.
Pope, N. (2005), "The impact of stress in self‐ and peer assessment", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,
Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 51-63.
Ryan, B. (2013), "A walk down the red carpet: students as producers of digital video-based knowledge",
International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 24-41.
Ritchie, S. (2016), "Self-assessment of video-recorded presentations: Does it improve skills?", Active Learning in
Higher Education, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 207-221.
Sargeant, J. (2006), “Multi-source feedback for physician learning and change”, available at: http://arno.unimaas.
nl/show.cgi?fid=5832 (accessed July 20, 2012).
Sargeant, J., Mann, K., van der Vleuten, C. and Metsemakers, J. (2008), "Reflection: a link between receiving and
using assessment feedback", Advances in Health Sciences Education, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 399-410.
Sharpe, R. and Beetham, H. (2010), “Understanding Students’ Uses of Technology for Learning.”, in R. Sharpe, H.
Beetham, & S. DeFreitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for the digital age: how learners shape their experiences,
Routledge Falmer, London, pp. 85-99.
Sivan, A. (2000), "The Implementation of Peer Assessment: An action research approach", Assessment in Education:
Principles, Policy & Practice, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 193-213.
Smith, C. and Sodano, T. (2011), "Integrating lecture capture as a teaching strategy to improve student
presentation skills through self-assessment", Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 151
162.
Smith, H., Cooper, A. and Lancaster, L. (2002), "Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Peer Assessment: A Case
for Student and Staff Development", Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp.
71-81.
Stefani, L. (1994), "Peer, self and tutor assessment: Relative reliabilities", Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19 No.
1, pp. 69-75.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |281

282 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Computational thinking in the
20 chemical sciences curriculum

Daniel C. Southam† and Brenda M. Rohl‡

†School of Molecular and Life Sciences and ‡Faculty of Science and

Engineering, Curtin University

d.southam@curtin.edu.au

We aim to support alternative approaches to the traditional chemistry curriculum that

develop computational thinking skills forecast to be necessary for future employability.
We undertook an exploratory cross-sectional survey of all commencing undergraduate
science students at Curtin University to ascertain their self-efficacy beliefs relating to digital
and information literacies and used these data to help inform changes to our chemistry
curriculum. The findings illustrate that students with higher digital literacy self-efficacy
beliefs are more likely to choose a degree that supports these beliefs, and this includes
chemistry and biochemistry majors at our institution. As a consequence of these observed
self-efficacy beliefs, we provide some practical and illustrative examples of how to adapt the
chemistry curriculum to better harness opportunities for development of computational
thinking. Ultimately, we aim to better prepare chemistry graduates by providing multiple
opportunities throughout an undergraduate program to support and further develop their
computational thinking and digital literacy skills necessary for future employability.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

The work of Hanson and Overton (2010) identified the disconnect between the skills of a
graduate chemist and those necessary for the early stages of employment. Subsequently, Tina
and her colleagues have demonstrated the value employers place on these skills (Sarkar et al.,
2016). Students’ skill development relating to critical thinking (Danczak et al., 2017) and inquiry
(George-Williams et al., 2018) has been integrated into chemistry curricula. The possibility that
a chemistry undergraduate curriculum can deliver on more than subject matter expertise, and
that student, graduate, and employer expectations of graduate skills should constructively align
(Hill et al., 2019 when modelling a natural system), is an impetus for curricular reform (Overton
and McGarvey, 2017). In this regard, Tina’s work has been very influential on the authors’ work
on graduate skills curriculum in their practice and research.

To cite: Southam, D.C. and Rohl, B. M. (2019), “Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum”, in Seery, M. K. and Mc
Donnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin,
pp. 283-300.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |283

Introduction

Technology-led disruption of the workforce is a pressing issue for future employability, with up to 47%
of the current US workforce (Frey and Osborne, 2017) and 40% of the Australian workforce (CEDA, 2015)
at significant risk of automation or mechanisation in the next 20 years. This creates a political landscape
where agility of the workforce is necessary, and the workforce must have the digital literacy necessary to
adapt and adopt technological advances.

Digital literacy is a core competency, often considered a plurality of literacies (Lankshear and Knobel, 2008,
p1) necessary for survival in the 21st century (Voogt et al., 2013). What is meant by digital literacy is often
not well-defined (Eshet-Alkalai, 2004) or applied consistently in the curriculum (Goodfellow, 2011) but
at its basest level it can be defined as the ability to use computers (Furber, 2012) and can be delineated
into affective, behavioural and cognitive domains (diSessa, 2000). There is a strong sense that our current
generation of students have a high level of behavioural utility with technology (Prensky, 2001), though
without the cognitive skills necessary to harness this fully for their future employability (Ghaith, 2010).

Here we will focus on these cognitive skills and use the term computational thinking to describe an
important element of digital literacy.This phrase was first coined by Papert (1996), often attributed to Wing
(2006, 2008) and is expressed by Aho (2012) as “the thought processes involved in formulating problems, so
their solutions can be represented as computational steps and algorithms”(Aho, 2012, p. 832). Computational
thinking is an important skill and key element of future graduates’ employability (Barret al., 2011).

Mandatory development of computational thinking in the curriculum is not new, having first been
proposed in 1962 by the American computer scientist Alan Perlis (cited in Guzdial, 2008). However, it is only
recently an emerging priority in K–12 schools’curricula in the United States (Grover and Pea, 2013), United
Kingdom (Furber, 2012) and Europe (Bocconiet al., 2016). To further advance a high level of computational
thinking some universities are exploring ways for students from outside traditional STEM disciplines to
develop computational thinking (Beacock, 2015; Wood and Bix, 2015). However, these courses are often
elective and may not be well integrated into the curriculum (Voogt et al., 2013).

We believe that all chemistry graduates should be innovators and creators, not mere consumers, of digital,
technological, and mechanical advancements. To achieve these goals, we propose that undergraduate
chemistry students develop their computational thinking in ways that enrich their disciplinary practices.
For some this will be by intensive and relevant skill development in coding, while for most this will be
a recognition of the value gained by engaging with the creative development of technology. For all
students this will provide an understanding of the opportunities presented by a digital economy as a key
graduate outcome.

Design and Procedures

We posit that commencing undergraduate students make their course selections on the basis of their self
efficacy beliefs (Bong, 2001), and beliefs relating to digital literacies will be formed much earlier in their
education as it becomes normalised in school curricula (Pajares, 1996). Consequentially, the courses that
support and enrich students’ high proficiency relating to digital literacy and deliver the purported skills
needed for the new work order are more likely to be selected into the future.

Integration of computational thinking into curriculum is one way to address the development of

284|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

these skills. However, before there is a broad-scale uptake of computational thinking in curriculum we
must better understand present students’ self-efficacy beliefs and differences that might emerge as a
consequence of their course selection. This creates a number of questions, which help guide this study:
1. What are the self-efficacy beliefs of commencing science students on constructs relating to digital
and information literacies?
2. Arethere are differences in the self-efficacy beliefs on the basis of sex or chosen major?
3. How do the findings from Questions 1 and 2 help inform any curricular developments relating to
computational thinking in the chemical sciences?

With some preliminary answers to these questions in mind, we propose a series of interventions in
curriculum that help support students’ self-efficacy beliefs as they progress through their chemistry
studies. These interventions are designed to provide multiple opportunities that deliberately contrast
with traditional approaches to subject matter and provide a grounding in computational thinking.

Theoretical background
Self-efficacy is an individual’s perceived capacity to attain specific performance or results (Pajares, 1996)
and is defined as a generative capability to blend emotional, social, behavioural, and cognitive sub-skills
to promote effective functioning (Bandura, 1997). Bandura (1993) defines the sources of these students’
beliefs from the perspective of self (mastery experiences), observation of others (vicarious experiences),
and the relationships to social norms. Positive self-efficacy beliefs are then attained on a successful
experience and the strength of these beliefs comes from sustained successful experiences (Hutchison
et al., 2013). Self-efficacy is thus theoretically grounded in social cognition (Bandura, 1991) and students’
subsequent behaviours can be viewed through this lens (Wang and Ha, 2013).

The theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) defines the integration of affective and social determinants
to form an intention that gives rise to explained behaviour. The affective determinants include attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceived control over the behaviour. Students’ intentions and behaviours then
permit progress towards goals, which students are likely to seek based on past success (Schunk, 1990).
Subsequently, students will seek increasingly challenging goals aligned with those previously attained
(Bong, 2001).

Goal setting and affective determinants come together with self-efficacy beliefs to permit a broad
framework within which digital and information literacies can be explored. The determinants from
the theory of planned behaviour are key factors for students’ self-efficacy beliefs that lead to studying
chemistry courses (Rice et al., 2012) and pursuing chemistry careers (Villafañe et al., 2014). Self-efficacy
belief has been shown to be an influential construct that promotes positive orientations towards college
chemistry courses (Ferrell and Barbera, 2015; Glazer, 2015; Mataka and Kowalske, 2015; Taasoobshirazi
and Glynn, 2009; Vishnumolakala et al., 2017) and careers (Hutchison et al., 2013; Zeldinet al., 2008). These
beliefs are formed at school (Woods-McConney et al., 2014).

Research design and instrumentation

This research study adopts a pragmatic paradigm (Creswell and Creswell, 2017) and utilises a mixed
methods sequential explanatory design (Ivankova et al., 2016) to address the research questions defined
above. Mixed methods sequential explanatory design utilises two distinct phases of data collection, firstly
quantitative and then qualitative. Exploring issues from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives
provides opportunities for evidence to be collected that is representative of a broad view, but also elicits a
rich narrative to inform and support quantitative findings (Onwuegbuzie and Leech, 2005).

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |285

A survey instrument on information and digital literacy was constructed from an existing instrument
designed to examine student’s self-efficacy beliefs of their information literacy (Serap Kurbanoglu et al.,
2006). The questions on information literacy were deliberately chosen as they were directly relevant to
the compulsory communications course in which these data were collected, and they were of interest to
the teaching team. The stem of each item begins “I feel confident and competent to…” and the item text
completes this sentence. This instrument comprises 28 items measured on a seven-point Likert scale with
the outer points labelled as almost never true (1) through to almost always true (7). Likert scale measures of
self-efficacy beliefs are generally acceptable for applied field research (Maurer and Pierce, 1998).

Sample items are given in Table 1, and the full instrument can be found in Supplementary Information 2,
which illustrates the types of desirable academic behaviours relating to information. To explore issues of
digital literacy items were adapted from the International Society for Technology in Education’s standards
for students (ISTE, 2007), which defines a series of outcome statements for schooling. The same stem and
scale were retained. Two items were added to determine the respondent’s self-reported sex and declared
major area of study. Lastly, to collect qualitative information, two open questions were added to probe a
student’s preferences for technology and in what areas help was most needed.

Data collection and analysis

Table 1: Sample items from the instrument

Construct Sample items

Information Literacy (1) Define the information I need
(8) Locate information sources in the library
(17) Evaluate internet sources
(25) Make citations and use quotations within the text
Digital Literacy (29) Apply technology to generate new ideas
(35) Engage online with learners of other cultures
(42) Collect and analyse data to make informed decisions
(48) Troubleshoot systems and applications
Demographics Sex
Degree major
Open Questions What do you most enjoy about using technology?
Where do you need the most help to use technology?

Data was collected from 559 first year science students at Curtin University during the first week of their
first or second semester compulsory communications course. Of these responses, 503 responses were
received with informed consent and all Likert scale items complete. An additional 894 comments were
provided to the two open-ended questions, which were used for subsequent analyses. Data was analysed
quantitatively using a series of probability and effect size measures and qualitatively using contentanalysis
of the transcribed student responses. A summary of the findings relevant to this work are provided here,
with a full discussion and analysis provided in the Supplementary Information.

Intervention
The design of our interventions were guided by the seven big ideas of computing as introduced in the US
AP Computer Science Principles curriculum (College Board, 2019), and discussed and described in Grover
and Pea (2013):
1. Computing is inherently a creative and human activity, with the artefacts produced enhanced

286 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

through computation.
2. Abstraction of data models processes and communicates solutions from humans to machines and
vice-versa.
3. Data and information createnew knowledge and computation allows management and interpretation
of these data.
4. Algorithms allow transformation of data to solve problems and visualise solutions.
5. Programming enables problem-solving and expression of solutions through computational artefacts.
6. Computers connected together through the internet affords new ways of communicating and brings
new societal challenges.
7. Computing is impacted on and is influenced by other scientific disciplines.

We used the seven big ideas to find new ways to express existing curriculum, rather than introduce new
concepts into the curriculum. Using each of these ideas and the premise that computational thinking
“…does not mean thinking like a computer scientist” (Barba, 2016) we have examined recent literature to
demonstrate these principles in a chemistry context.

Results
The sex of respondents was predominantly male (n = 384, 76.3%) compared to a minority of females (n =
103, 20.5%) and a smaller portion of respondents who chose not to declare their sex or who chose a non
binary sex (n = 16, 3.2%). The chemistry and biochemistry major students were predominantly male (n =
30, 65.2%) and overall represented 9.14% of respondents in this cohort. A brief discussion of the degree
major distributions and full data is provided in the Supplementary Information.

Quantitative data
To respond to the quantitative aspects of Research Question 1: the mean and standard deviation for each
Likert scale item was computed. The item responses were mostly neutral or positive and the top five and
bottom five items are illustrated in Table 2. Full data is provided in the Supplementary Information.

The top two items relate to using internet engines and sources to search for information, a fundamental
and somewhat ubiquitous skill. The next two top items demonstrate some key scientificuses oftechnology
to interpret visual information and to use computer systems to undertake research. Finally, the last top
item relates to understanding and using technology systems. The bottom four items relate to academic
behaviours, including using more traditional sources of information like libraries and writing research
Table 2: Top five and bottom five Likert scale items from the student responses (n = 503)

Q Sample items M SD
11
45
37
19
7 Use
Interpret
Understandtheand
electronic
internet
computer search
visual
systems
information
useinformation
tools
technology
to(such as
undertake
sources
(i.e.
systems
search
graphs,
research
engines,
tables,directories,
diagrams) etc.) 5.50
5.62
5.79
6.08
6.14 1.02
0.99
1.16
1.32
1.27
10
12
31
20
9 the
Explore
Use
Locate
Write
different
aresources
research
complex in (types)
librarykinds the library
catalogue
paper
problems of
using the library
libraries
using
computer models and simulations
catalogue 3.78
4.11
4.18
4.20
4.28 1.59
1.60
1.72
1.71
1.52

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |287

papers.

To partially respond to the quantitative aspects of Research Question 2:“Arethere are differences in the self
efficacy beliefs on the basis of disciplinary background or sex?”the Likert scale items were separated on the
basis of sex. Respondents who chose other were excluded from the quantitative analysis on sex to avoid
the heterogenous group potentially influencing the findings to reduce this sample to 487 responses. After
performing a Wilcoxon rank sum test, with a Bonferroni correction for the potential family-wise errors,
only two of the items were found to be significant and both had a small effect size, as illustrated in the
Supplementary Information.

To complete the analysis for differences the Likert scale items were separated on the basis of major. After
performing a Kruskal-Wallis H test, with a Bonferroni correction for the potential family-wise errors, there
were 20 items with significant differences. Of these, 14 had a medium effect size and these were all items
relating to digital literacy. These items are illustrated in Table 3.
Table 3: Significant (p<0.001) differences by major (Effect: medium†; large‡)

Q Sample items H(7) ε2 θ

40 Apply
39
38
36
33
32
31
30
29 Express
Explore
Identify
Employ
Use
Evaluate and
and
digital
technology
technology
complex to
creativity
digital
tools
predict
select
environments
to
problems
using
to
identify and
contribute
process and
appropriate
trends
generate
digital new
using
datatoand
toolsideas
define
digital
project to collaborate
technology
computer
media
report
problems
tools
teamsfor aand
results
models and
specific task
questions
with for
simulations
others 45.565
41.069
42.305
36.911
45.834
40.513
38.194
34.19 0.0908†
0.0818†
0.0843†
0.0913†
0.0807†
0.0761
0.0681
0.0735 0.223†
0.227†
0.238†
0.205†
0.219†
0.219†
0.233†
0.205†

47 Understand
46
45
41 Plan
Select
and
and and
investigation
Troubleshoot
manage
usesystems and applications
applications
use
a project
technology
using
effectively
systemsand productively
computer systems 81.101
41.716
66.401
42.684
38.111 0.0850†
0.0831†
0.0759
0.132†
0.162† 0.231†
0.210†

0.284†
0.225†
0.323†

Qualitative data
The qualitative data responding to the item “What do you most enjoy about using technology?” illustrates
themes relating to using technology to efficiently and easily find information using the internet. The
concept map of emergent themes (bubbles) and concepts (nodes) is illustrated in Figure 1. The most
significant theme was ‘use’ or ‘using’, and this theme was closely associated with themes ‘allow’, ‘ease’,
‘efficiency’, and ‘information’. The more distal themes of ‘learning’, ‘technology’ and ‘ideas’ emerge from the
allowances afforded by different technologies.

The qualitative data responding to the item“Where do you need the most help to use technology?”illustrates
similar themes to the comments students provided on their enjoyment of technology, but the context for
their comments shifts towards using technology for productive purposes, and these purposes become
more academic in their orientation. The concept map of these comments is given in Figure 2, where the
main themes are again ‘use’ and ‘using’‘software’ for ‘analysis’, ‘programming’ and sourcing ‘information’.

288 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

Figure 1: Concept map of themes emerging from responses to the question “What do you most enjoy about using
technology?” (n = 475)

Discussion

The descriptive items where students had a neutral or negative self-efficacy belief relate to behavioural
aspects of digital and information literacies, as intimated in previous research (Prensky, 2001). These skills
are one of the outcomes of the course in which these data were collected. It is not surprising to note these
students’ neutral or slightly negative self-efficacy beliefs at the beginning of the course in the first year
of their degree. The nature of these beliefs reinforces the curricular need to support development of key
academic skills as students transition from school to university (Kift et al., 2010).

The self-reported demographics of respondents, in part, explains some of the observations made and
is worthy to characterise before commencing to discuss differences between groups. Firstly, the sex of
respondents illustrates the majority male student population. This is indicative of the STEM workforce
at present in Australia, with only 16% of female graduates (Office of the Chief Scientist, 2016). It was

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |289

 Figure 2: Concept map of themes emerging from responses to the question “Where do you need the most help to use
technology?” (n = 419)
anticipated that differences in self-efficacy beliefs on the basis of sex would emerge, as has been reported
elsewhere (Weiser, 2000), even when usage (Jackson et al., 2008) and skills (Ritzhaupt et al., 2013) of
females is greater than that of males. However, in this sample at this time the differences have small effect
sizes and the two items emerging do not point to any especially interesting or influential differences in
this study.

The high proportion of computing studentsis of direct relevancetothis study, which providesa contrasting
view of student self-efficacy beliefs and the intimated impact this has had on their course selection. The
role of self-efficacy beliefs in course selection (Jansen et al., 2015), motivation to learn (Zimmerman,
2000), and success (Zimmerman et al., 1992) has been demonstrated. In this study, there were statistically
significant differences with medium effect sizes observed between the self-efficacy beliefs of students on
the basis of their chosen major for fourteen items relating to digital literacy, as summarised in Table 5. To
illustrate the principle the two items with the greatest effect sizes will be discussed.

Students with a higher self-efficacy belief of their ability to troubleshoot systems and applications (Item

290 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

47: H(7) = 81.10, p < .0001, ε2 = .16, θ = .32) were found to major in computing with a mean rank of 188
or surveying and geography with a mean rank of 249, rather than chemistry and biochemistry (mean
rank = 256), mathematics (mean rank = 265), other majors (mean rank = 280), physics (mean rank = 318),
agriculture (mean rank = 325) or environment and ecology (mean rank = 333).

By comparison, students with a higher self-efficacy belief of their understanding and use of these systems
(Item 45: H(7) = 66.40, p < .0001, ε2 =.13, θ = .28) were found to major in surveying and geography (mean
rank = 194), computing (mean rank = 200), chemistry and biochemistry (mean rank = 261), mathematics
(mean rank = 271), other majors (mean rank = 291), environment and ecology (mean rank = 299),
agriculture (mean rank = 329), and physics (mean rank = 335). This same trend in mean ranks of majors
was repeated for the other statistically significant items with medium effect sizes.

In all cases, chemistry and biochemistry majors have positive self-efficacy beliefs of their digital literacy
skills, just behind those of technical and computational majors like surveying and computing, and well
ahead of their natural and physical science peers. The origins of these beliefs are alluded to in their
open comments to the question “What do you most enjoy about using technology?”. The respondents
strongly identified that interacting with digital technology efficiently affords access to large quantities of
information, and this information provides potential for future developments:
easy access to lots of information, simple and effective to use (M, Biochemistry)
the vast possibilities and information at our fingertips (M, Chemistry)
the information you get from the research, you can apply it to everyday life (F, Biochemistry)

The creative potential for technology and the ability to use it as a tool, to solve problems and represent
these solutions was a common theme—particularly the potential fordata representation and visualisation:
developing new ideas and being able to express my creative side (M, Biochemistry)
limitless ways to create, display and research subjects (M, Chemistry)
the ability to easily solve complex problems as well as simulate and visualise abstract ideas (M, Chemistry)

This creative use of technology brought with it the potential to increase efficiency of processes:
It’s almost always easier than doing things by hand: calculations etc. (O, Chemistry)

Technology also provides a vehicle for communication and social interaction, as well as entertainment
and enjoyment:
the ability to communicate and interact with other people globally (M, Chemistry)
how it can connect people from all over the world (M, Chemistry)

When the same students answer the question “Where do you need the most help to use technology?” their
responsesidentify academic skills relating to referencing and citations (M, Biochemistry) to use technology
for research, writing, and presentation:
find legitimate resources online that give me the infoIneed (M, Chemistry)
referencing, ensuring I am gathering all the information I need in an efficient and suitable manner, correct
language (in certain areas) setting up reports and papers correctly (F, Biochemistry)

To achieve these academic goals, students want to know and understand that they are doing so
appropriately and accurately in an integrated manner:
using appropriate sources for research, using more applications for data analysis, developing research and
projects (F, Biochemistry)
how to effectively use research tools and programs to maximise my results. (F, Chemistry)

Beyond academic behaviours relating to the context within which these data were collected, the primary

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |291

concern for many students was “programming; complex digital projects using unfamiliar software” (F,
Biochemistry). The vacillation between the cognitive skills required for programming and the behavioural
utility of new and unfamiliar software was strongly evident:
specific applications I may not be familiar with (M, Chemistry)
complicated programming and communicating (M, Biochemistry)

The purpose of programming was two-fold, to design new programs and to use these to solve complex
data and simulate the outcomes:
designing programs and simulations (M, Chemistry)
for everything, especially to solve complex data (F, Chemistry)

Ultimately though, some students will always require help to navigate and troubleshoot technology in
adaptable and efficient ways to be successful in the workforce:
when there is a fault in the technology system (F, Chemistry)
I tend to find trouble using ‘shortcuts’ to get things done more fluidly and efficiently (F, Chemistry)

Intervention

Our degree structure requires students to take a course of programming in the foundation curriculum. At
present there is student choice over level and language, though most will choose the default course in
scientific computing using MATLaboratory. Increasingly, students are opting for a course centred around
more data driven languages, like Python, to prepare them to produce relevant computational artefacts.
At present, the chemistry and biochemistry student view from institutional teaching evaluations of their
foundation computing courses is relatively poor.The main complaint is the seeming disconnect with their
concurrent or subsequent experiences in their chosen discipline. They do not have the skills to identify
the relationship between context and conceptual understanding, which is an influential driver in student
learning (King, 2012; King et al., 2008) and achievement (King and Ritchie, 2013).

To illustrate the general principles, below are some incremental examples of ways that we have adapted
existing chemistry curriculum to changing student and employer preferences for new skills and
knowledge. We have taken four of the seven big ideas of computing (College Board, 2019; Grover and Pea,
2013) and the idea that computational thinking includes data processing, abstraction, algorithms, and
representation to adapt some existing concepts covered in our chemistry curriculum.

Data processing and abstraction

Data and information facilitate the creation of knowledge and understanding data and how to abstract
relevant data is a key skill. Abstraction reduces information and detail to focus on concepts relevant to
understanding and solving problems. However, chemistry curriculum often focusses on simplifying data
or representing stochastic processes as deterministic models. A good example of this is in kinetic models,
where it is possible to model these processes to illustrate the process of abstraction (Mira et al., 2003).

In the traditional approach, instructors may tend to overlook the complexity of the stochastic behaviour
to seek solutions to the chemical problem at hand by using steady state approximations. When modelling
a natural system such as a cell with very small volumes, the limitations of this method may obfuscate
more complicated stochastic behaviour, which impedes understanding of the chemical system of interest
(Gillespie, 2007).

In this particular intervention, students are presented with data from a system that follows a simple kinetic

292 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

model, but displays stochastic behaviour at volumes typically observed in microfluidic or cellular systems.
In this instance, we have selected a simulation that allows for modelling of various systems controlled
by volume and initial concentration to demonstrate the variability of stochastic behaviour. Simulators
are available for common software like Wolfram (Frezza, 2011), Matlab (Mira et al., 2003), and R (Pineda
Krch, 2010) and as stand-alone software (Lok and Brent, 2005); all based on the Gillespie stochastic model
(Gillespie, 1977).

Students are presented with a chemical system, for example a deterministicandstochastic simulation of a
reversible two-step reaction in Figure 3. Here, students collect data over various timescales, volumes, and
iterations to observe the impact of each on the stochastic behaviour of the chemical system. They model
the standard deviation of each probabilistic pathway for the chemical reaction relative to the deterministic
model and relate this behaviour to concentration and system volume.

The key outcome here is to demonstrate that some systems may appear stochastic, while others may
appear deterministic. In each case, these examples serve to demonstrate that real systems will generate
noise and that to accommodate a solution to the problem data must be abstracted and the model
generated through use of data processing using algorithms. In this circumstance, the algorithms are
twofold, firstly the probabilistic models underpinning the stochastic behaviour, and secondly the kinetic
model underlying this behaviour that describes the chemical system of interest.

Algorithms and representation

Algorithms are also tools for developing and expressing solutions to computational problems. For
quantitative problems these algorithms are obvious, and often include the traditional and familiar
mathematical models. However, for qualitative problems — such as those presented by synthetic
chemistry — the approach is traditionally based on human recall and manipulation of known reactions to

Figure 3: A deterministic and stochastic simulation of a reversible two-step reaction

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |293

plan a pathway to desired target compounds.

A recent research development has used graph theory to model synthetic pathways (Kowalik et al., 2012)
and optimise conditions (Gothard et al., 2012) for organic chemical reactions. Here graph theory is used to
define the concepts (called nodes) and the connections between them (called edges) to create a graph of
a subset of the known synthetic chemical reactions, and then use network analysis to probe and optimise
this graph. The traditional chemical approach to graph theory defines nodes as nuclei and edges as bonds
to model chemical structure (Trinajstic, 2018).

In this approach students search chemical reaction databases to build a series of possible reactants and/
or products. For example, in Figure 4 the desired product for the searching strategy was methyl salicylate,
a common undergraduate esterification, in our context performed at the first-year undergraduate level.
In the graph theory exercise, the students identify the possible reagents used to prepare this as their
products and any side products. These form the nodes in this graph. Once the nodes are constructed then
each reaction becomes a directed edge connecting the two nodes (reactant and product) and the weight
of this node is its reported yield.

The students optimise the resulting graph using RStudio (RStudio Team, 2016) or Gephi (Bastian et al.,
2009), for example using the ForceAtlas2 algorithm (Jacomy et al., 2014) to layout the nodes and edges.
The visual model can be further explored for communities (Blondel et al., 2008) and the node and edge
weights varied with degree of connectivity and the reported yields. Figure 4 demonstrates the dominant

Figure 4: Using graph theory to identify reagents to prepare methyl salicyclate

294 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

pathway for Fischer esterification and students explore alternative reagents to use in this preparation and
to discount wasteful reactions with unwanted side products. Other students also construct related graphs
using the desired product as their starting material, which can then be joined to create a larger graph.This
co-construction of a larger network then creates a graph that can be used as a classroom discussion on
the various pathways available to the synthetic chemist.

The use cases presented by Grzybowski and co-workers (Gothard, 2012; Kowalik, 2012) optimise and
apply network analysis algorithms to sensibly guide chemical processes. This development provides new
approaches to organic synthesis that can elicit different ways to present this information to students. This
approach to organic synthesis provides two primary outcomes, firstly to visually demonstrate the use of
optimization algorithms and network analyses to generate graphs, and secondly to utilise these graphs to
provide meaningful reaction pathways to achieve a successful synthesis.

Conclusion

In general, students who have chosen majors that require them to use technology are likely to have higher
self-efficacy beliefs and these majors include chemistry and biochemistry. When challenged, chemistry
and biochemistry student comments focus on using technology to obtain information, alongside creative
ways to use, visualise, solve and simulate these data. This suggests our current chemistry and biochemistry
majors in this context have a higher cognitive capacity to use technology creatively, and this must be
challenged in their studies to develop and grow this capacity. Subsequently, the chemistry curriculum
should support algorithmic and systems literacy and fluency to ensure ongoing relevance and it remains
a viable undergraduate course option.

To support computational thinking as an integral part of the chemistry and biochemistry majors we
have helped students understand the role of computation as a creative process and its relationship to
our discipline. This has been demonstrated by implementation of two simple adaptations to our existing
curriculum and utilisation of different techniques and tools that illustrate multiple approaches to solve
chemical problems.

Limitations and Further Work

The results of this study are limited in scope due the convenience sample of one cohort that may not
represent a broader student view of digital and information literacies. The findings may be unique
to this institution or this cohort of students, and caution must be exercised in extrapolation of our
observations. Secondly, we cannot know whether self-reported self-efficacy beliefs are related to actual
skills and knowledge, and further whether the differences observed are real or perceived. It must also be
acknowledged that the selection of instrumentation and addition of items lacks the required evidence of
validity or reliability to make certain claims (Arjoon et al., 2013).

Further work will be necessary to explore the observation between self-efficacy beliefs and course
selection in this context to test its generalisability and causality. This study cannot report on the complex
nature of student course selection or on the many potentially confounding variables that may (or may
not) come in to play. Likewise, the evidence will need to be collected about the reliability and validity of
instrumentation. However, this serves as a useful starting point to test these assertions that digital literacy
will be an influential factor in course selection and thus should be further developed as an integral part
of chemistry curriculum.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |295

Acknowledgments

This study took place on Noongar boodjar and we would like to acknowledge the traditional owners of
this land and pay our respects to Wadjuk elders; past, present, and emerging. We would like to thank the
students who graciously completed our survey, and colleagues who contributed their knowledge and
understanding — especially Teri Balser and Andrew Rohl who had early input into framing this topic.
Curtin University’s Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) has approved this study (HREC number
HRE2017-0674).

References

Aho, A.V. (2012), “Computation and Computational Thinking”, The Computer Journal, Vol. 55 No. 7, pp. 832–835.
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50
No. 2, pp. 179–211.
Arjoon, J.A., Xu, X. and Lewis, J.E. (2013), “Understanding the State of the Art for Measurement in Chemistry
Education Research: Examining the Psychometric Evidence”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 90 No. 5,
pp. 536–545.
Bandura, A. (1991), “Social cognitive theory of self-regulation”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 248–287.
Bandura, A. (1993), “Perceived Self-Efficacy in Cognitive Development and Functioning”, Educational Psychologist,
Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 117–148.
Bandura, A. (1997), Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control, W.H. Freeman, New York.
Barba, L.A. (2016), “Computational Thinking: I do not think it means what you think it means”, 5 March, available
at: http://lorenabarba.com/blog/computational-thinking-i-do-not-think-it-means-what-you-think-it
means/ (accessed 7 January 2019).
Barr, D., Harrison, J. and Conery, L. (2011), “Computational Thinking: A Digital Age Skill for Everyone”, Learning &
Leading with Technology, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 20–23.
Bastian, M., Heymann, S. and Jacomy, M. (2009), “Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating
Networks”, presented at the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, available at:
http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/09/paper/view/154 (accessed 5 February 2019).
Beacock, I.P. (2015), “New Stanford course brings Silicon Valley to the humanities classroom”, Stanford University,
6 January, available at: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/january/humanities-cs-class-010515.html
(accessed 7 January 2019).
Blondel, V.D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R. and Lefebvre, E. (2008), “Fast unfolding of communities in large
networks”, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, No. 10, p. P10008.
Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A. and Engelhardt, K. (2016), Developing Computational
Thinking in Compulsory Education — Implications for Policy and Practice, Joint Research Centre, European
Commission, Luxembourg.
Bong, M. (2001), “Role of Self-Efficacy and Task-Value in Predicting College Students’ Course Performance and
Future Enrollment Intentions”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 553–570.
CEDA. (2015), Australia’s Future Workforce?, Committee for Economic Development of Australia, Melbourne,
Australia.
College Board. (2019), “AP Computer Science Principles Course Details”, available at: https://apstudent.
collegeboard.org/apcourse/ap-computer-science-principles/course-details (accessed 7 January 2019).
Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D. (2017), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches,
5th ed., SAGE Publications.
Danczak, S.M., Thompson, C.D. and Overton, T.L. (2017), “‘What does the term Critical Thinking mean to you?’ A

296 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

qualitative analysis of chemistry undergraduate, teaching staff and employers’ views of critical thinking”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 420–434.
diSessa, A.A. (2000), Changing Minds: Computers, Learning, and Literacy, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004), “Digital Literacy: A Conceptual Framework for Survival Skills in the Digital era”, Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 93–106.
Ferrell, B. and Barbera, J. (2015), “Analysis of students’ self-efficacy, interest, and effort beliefs in general
chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 318–337.
Frey, C.B. and Osborne, M.A. (2017), “The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?”,
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 114, pp. 254–280.
Frezza, B.M. (2011), “Deterministic versus Stochastic Chemical Kinetics”, Wolfram Demonstrations Project,
available at: http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/DeterministicVersusStochasticChemicalKinetics/
(accessed 5 February 2019).
Furber, S. (2012), Shut down or Restart? The Way Forward for Computing in UK Schools, London.
George-Williams, S.R., Soo, J.T., Ziebell, A.L., Thompson, C.D. and Overton, T.L. (2018), “Inquiry and industry
inspired laboratories: the impact on students’ perceptions of skill development and engagements”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 583–596.
Ghaith, G. (2010), “An exploratory study of the achievement of the twenty-first century skills in higher education”,
Education + Training, Vol. 52 No. 6/7, pp. 489–498.
Gillespie, D.T. (1977), “Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions”, The Journal of Physical
Chemistry, Vol. 81 No. 25, pp. 2340–2361.
Gillespie, D.T. (2007), “Stochastic Simulation of Chemical Kinetics”, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry, Vol. 58
No. 1, pp. 35–55.
Glazer, N. (2015), “Student perceptions of learning data-creation and data-analysis skills in an introductory
college-level chemistry course”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 338–345.
Goodfellow, R. (2011), “Literacy, literacies and the digital in higher education”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol.
16 No. 1, pp. 131–144.
Gothard, C.M., Soh, S., Gothard, N.A., Kowalczyk, B., Wei, Y., Baytekin, B. and Grzybowski, B.A. (2012), “Rewiring
Chemistry: Algorithmic Discovery and Experimental Validation of One-Pot Reactions in the Network of
Organic Chemistry”, Angewandte Chemie International Edition, Vol. 51 No. 32, pp. 7922–7927.
Grover, S. and Pea, R. (2013), “Computational Thinking in K–12”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 38–43.
Guzdial, M. (2008), “Education: Paving the way for computational thinking”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 51
No. 8, pp. 25–27.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T.L. (2010), Skills Required by New Chemistry Graduates and Their Development in Degree
Programmes, Higher Education Academy Physical Sciences Centre.
Hill, M.A., Overton, T.L., Thompson, C.D., Kitson, R.R.A. and Coppo, P. (2019), “Undergraduate recognition of
curriculum-related skill development and the skills employers are seeking”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 20, pp. 68-84.
Hutchison, M.A., Follman, D.K., Sumpter, M. and Bodner, G.M. (2013), “Factors Influencing the Self-Efficacy Beliefs
of First-Year Engineering Students”, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 95 No. 1, pp. 39–47.
ISTE. (2007), “ISTE
PDF.pdf (accessed
Standards
7 January 2019).
Students”, available at: https://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-14_ISTE_Standards-S_

Ivankova, N.V., Creswell, J.W. and Stick, S.L. (2016), “Using Mixed-Methods Sequential Explanatory Design: From
Theory to Practice”, Field Methods, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 3–20.
Jackson, L.A., Zhao, Y., Kolenic III, A., Fitzgerald, H.E., Harold, R. and Von Eye, A. (2008), “Race, Gender, and
Information Technology Use: The New Digital Divide”, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 437–
442.
Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S. and Bastian, M. (2014), “ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |297

 for Handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software”, edited by Muldoon, M.R., PLoS ONE,
Vol. 9 No. 6, p. e98679.
Jansen, M., Scherer, R. and Schroeders, U. (2015), “Students’ self-concept and self-efficacy in the sciences:
Differential relations to antecedents and educational outcomes”, Contemporary Educational Psychology,
Vol. 41, pp. 13–24.
Kift, S., Nelson, K. and Clarke, J. (2010), “Transition pedagogy: A third generation approach to FYE - A case study
of policy and practice for the higher education sector”, The International Journal of the First Year in Higher
Education, Vol. 1 No. 1, available at:https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v1i1.13.
King, D. (2012), “New perspectives on context-based chemistry education: using a dialectical sociocultural
approach to view teaching and learning”, Studies in Science Education, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 51–87.
King, D., Bellocchi, A. and Ritchie, S.M. (2008), “Making connections: Learning and teaching chemistry in context”,
Research in Science Education, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 365–384.
King, D.T. and Ritchie, S.M. (2013), “Academic Success in Context-Based Chemistry: Demonstrating fluid transitions
between concepts and context”, International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1159–1182.
Kowalik, M., Gothard, C.M., Drews, A.M., Gothard, N.A., Weckiewicz, A., Fuller, P.E., Grzybowski, B.A., et al., (2012),
“Parallel Optimization of Synthetic Pathways within the Network of Organic Chemistry”, Angewandte
Chemie International Edition, Vol. 51 No. 32, pp. 7928–7932.
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (2008), “Introduction: Digital Literacies—Concepts, Policies and Practices”, in
Lankshear, C. and Knobel, M. (Eds.), Digital Literacies: Concepts, Policies and Practices, Peter Lang, New
York, pp. 1–16.
Lok, L. and Brent, R. (2005), “Automatic generation of cellular reaction networks with Moleculizer 1.0”, Nature
Biotechnology, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 131–136.
Mataka, L.M. and Kowalske, M.G. (2015), “The influence of PBL on students’ self-efficacy beliefs in chemistry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 929–938.
Maurer, T.J. and Pierce, H.R. (1998), “A comparison of Likert scale and traditional measures of self-efficacy”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 83 No. 2, pp. 324–329.
Mira, J., Fernández, C.G. and Urreaga, J.M. (2003), “Two Examples of Deterministic versus Stochastic Modeling of
Chemical Reactions”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 80 No. 12, p. 1488.
Office of the Chief Scientist. (2016), Australia’s STEM Workforce: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics,
Australian Government, Canberra.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Leech, N.L. (2005), “On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining
Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies”, International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 375–387.
Overton, T.L. and McGarvey, D.J. (2017), “Development of key skills and attributes in chemistry”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 401–402.
Pajares, F. (1996), “Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66 No. 4, p. 543.
Papert, S. (1996), “An exploration in the space of mathematics educations”, International Journal of Computers for
Mathematical Learning, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 95–123.
Pineda-Krch, M. (2010), “GillespieSSA: a stochastic simulation package for R”, available at: http://pineda-krch.
com/gillespiessa (accessed 5 February 2019).
Prensky, M. (2001), “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1”, On the Horizon, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 1–6.
Rice, L., Barth, J.M., Guadagno, R.E., Smith, G.P.A., McCallum, D.M. and ASERT. (2012), “The Role of Social Support
in Students’ Perceived Abilities and Attitudes Toward Math and Science”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 1028–1040.
Ritzhaupt, A.D., Liu, F., Dawson, K. and Barron, A.E. (2013),“Differences in Student Information and Communication
Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender”, Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 291–307.

298|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Computational thinking in the chemical sciences curriculum

RStudio Team. (2016), RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R, RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA, available
at: http://www.rstudio.com/.
Sarkar, M., Overton, T.L., Thompson, C. and Rayner, G. (2016), “Graduate Employability: Views of Recent Science
Graduates and Employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3.
Schunk, D.H. (1990), “Goal Setting and Self-Efficacy During Self-Regulated Learning”, Educational Psychologist,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 71–86.
Serap Kurbanoglu, S., Akkoyunlu, B. and Umay, A. (2006), “Developing the information literacy self-efficacy scale”,
Journal of Documentation, Vol. 62 No. 6, pp. 730–743.
Taasoobshirazi, G. and Glynn, S.M. (2009), “College students solving chemistry problems: A theoretical model of
expertise”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 46 No. 10, pp. 1070–1089.
Trinajstic, N. (2018), Chemical Graph Theory, Routledge, available at:https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315139111.
Villafañe, S.M., Garcia, C.A. and Lewis, J.E. (2014), “Exploring diverse students’ trends in chemistry self-efficacy
throughout a semester of college-level preparatory chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 114–127.
Vishnumolakala, V.R., Southam, D.C., Treagust, D.F., Mocerino, M. and Qureshi, S. (2017), “Students’ attitudes,
self-efficacy and experiences in a modified process-oriented guided inquiry learning undergraduate
chemistry classroom”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 340–352.
Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C. and Mishra, P. (2013), “Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked
world of the 21st century”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 403–413.
Wang, C.L. and Ha, A.S. (2013), “The theory of planned behaviour: predicting pre-service teachers’ teaching
behaviour towards a constructivist approach”, Sport, Education and Society, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 222–242.
Weiser, E.B. (2000), “Gender Differences in Internet Use Patterns and Internet Application Preferences: A Two
Sample Comparison”, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 167–178.
Wing, J.M. (2006), “Computational thinking”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 49 No. 3, pp. 33–35.
Wing, J.M. (2008), “Computational thinking and thinking about computing”, Philosophical Transactions of the
Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 366 No. 1881, pp. 3717–3725.
Wood, Z. and Bix, M. (2015), “New course will connect computer science, humanities”, Columbia Spectator, 4
February, available at: https://www.columbiaspectator.com/news/2014/11/18/new-course-will-connect
computer-science-humanities/ (accessed 7 January 2019).
Woods-McConney, A., Oliver, M.C., McConney, A., Schibeci, R. and Maor, D. (2014), “Science Engagement and
Literacy: A retrospective analysis for students in Canada and Australia”, International Journal of Science
Education, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 1588–1608.
Zeldin, A.L., Britner, S.L. and Pajares, F. (2008), “A comparative study of the self-efficacy beliefs of successful men
and women in mathematics, science, and technology careers”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol.
45 No. 9, pp. 1036–1058.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2000), “Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn”, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol.
25 No. 1, pp. 82–91.
Zimmerman, B.J., Bandura, A. and Martinez-Pons, M. (1992), “Self-Motivation for Academic Attainment: The Role
of Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Personal Goal Setting”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 663–676.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |299

300|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Student-led research groups for supporting
21 education research projects

Jenny L. Slaughter† and Lynne Bianchi‡

†Schoolof Chemistry and ‡Science & Engineering Education Research and

Innovation Hub, University of Manchester
jenny.slaughter@manchester.ac.uk

This chapter describes how to set up an education research group (herein referred as ERG)
to support students conducting education research projects in chemistry degrees. It shows
how session activities, framed by the Trajectory of Professional Development (TOPD) model
(Ralls et al., 2018; Patel et al., 2017; Bianchi, 2017), can create the opportunity for students to
move from individual participators in learning to collaborators in group practice.

The work described will show how regular meetings of staff and students’ which include
reflective activities enhance and enable:
• student collaboration, through group feedback and reflective discussions;
• student understanding of their own transferable skills and employability;
• student voice to decide on the nature of the group and its development;
• change from academic-led to student-led meetings.

Establishing and maintaining the group meetings offered benefits and posed challenges.
The practical, cultural, curricular, assessment, and academic implications are explored in this
chapter so that practitioners can consider these approaches in light of their own context.The
approach is independent of subject context and applicable to other teaching environments
where there is interest for students to transition from participating in academic courses to
collaborating and leading independent study.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Tina Overton’s work has highlighted concern amongst employers and recent graduates
regarding the preparedness of graduate chemists in terms of transferable skills. She has called
for higher education institutes to act upon this skills deficit. This work inspired our Educational
Research Group, which aimed to expand opportunities for transferable skills development and
enable students to identify their own skills development.

To cite: Slaughter, J. L. and Bianchi, L. (2019), “Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects”, in Seery,
M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach
Press, Dublin, pp. 301-314.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |301

Introduction

This chapter describes how to set up an education research group (herein referred as ERG) to support
students conducting education research projects in chemistry degrees.The approach described took place
in a UK Higher Education Institute (HEI). In English HEIs, undergraduate chemistry degrees are generally
awarded at two levels; a three-year Bachelors of Science, known as a BSc, and a four-year Masters, which
can be awarded as a Master of Science (MSci) or a Master of Chemistry (MChem).“Chemistry with”degrees
can be taken which include a year in industry or abroad and all degree programmes culminate with an
element of independent project workin the final year. In all cases, UKHEIs must provide aspects of project
work for final year chemists if they are to achieve accreditation of degree programmes from the Royal
Society of Chemistry (RSC, 2017).

Three key theories were used to inform the development of the ERG approach and activities within them.
Overton’s work highlights concern among employers and recent graduates regarding the preparedness
of graduate chemists in terms of transferable skills (Sarkar et al., 2016, Hanson and Overton, 2010). Her
work inspired the development of the ERG, with the aim of embracing and expanding opportunities for
transferable skills development. Within ERG sessions, activities would need to enable students to identify
their own skills development.The creation of a supportive environment to facilitate students’engagement
to move from passive participation in meetings to proactive collaboration drew on two key development
models. Using Tuckerman’s small group teaching (Tuckman and Jensen, 2010), activities were ordered to
enable increasing levels of student empowerment. Opportunities for the group to form, through informal
introductions, norm, through shared reflective practice, storm, through peer critique, and perform,
through group consultation, were developed sequentially. Bianchi’s (2017) Trajectory of Professional
Development (TOPD) model aided staff to identify key staging points within the group’s development,
offering a common language with which to refer to how the students were demonstrating collegiality and
engagement. Bianchi’s work focuses initially on the progression from pre-engagement to participation to
collaboration. What was key for staff was to consider the shift in approach that was required from them
and the students, when moving between these staging points, and the degree of facilitation and support
that was offered so as to enable students to progress to proactive and collaborative engagement with
each other.

The aim was to create a student-led research group for undergraduate students on MChem degree
programmes who were involved with education-focussed projects, which would:
1. improve practice and associated student outcomes, in developing employability and transferable
skills;
2. identify key barriers relating to student projects and introduce activities to address these areas of
challenge;
3. create a supportive environment where students were supported and empowered in moving from
participants to collaborators and leaders.

Method

Our experience has involved supervising staff, project students, and key teaching staff, including a School
Teacher Fellow (a teacher seconded from a local secondary school), the Director of Teaching and Learning
and a specialist in in-service teacher training and school engagement, from the Science and Engineering
Education Research and Innovation Hub (here in referred to as SEERIH). Permission was obtained from
students for use of quotes, minutes and grades offered in this chapter. Each student selected a project

302|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

that took place within the existing MChem course unit. Integration in this way required the students to
practice assessed skills, such as formal presentation, formal writing, planning, and time-management.
Academic staff also integrated key elements of knowledge, skills & group culture not developed elsewhere
in chemistry degree programme.

Prior experience of coordinating student-school based projects in two UK HEIs highlighted key questions
that needed consideration. The ERG sessions were developed in response to these issues.
1. How could students be supported to understand educational settings, so that outcomes were not
hindered by lack of knowledge of the context they were working in?
Group meetings brought in expertise from school teachers and teacher training specialists to develop
students’ knowledge of the school setting.
2. How could students benefit from heightened awareness and knowledge of qualitative research
methods, to sit alongside their quantitative and practical research skills?
Group discussions identified learning theories and qualitative methods appropriate to the projects and
knowledge was developed by the students through journal clubs.
3. What could be done to limit the sense of isolation students might feel when undertaking project
work outside of the university setting?
Meetings were scheduled to provide a regular opportunity for students to share experiences, seek support
from peers and review progress.

Table 1 summarises the intended learning outcomes of the course units and the drivers that prompted
these. Table 2 shows an overall timeline of the approach used. Details of the how the session activities
were implemented and the intended outcomes from the activities are given in the examples below.

Projects spanned September to May, with the group timetabled to meet every three weeks. Sessions were
designed to include formal and informal presentations, independent planning, and group work involving
constructive critique of peers’ research and sharing knowledge. Reflective activities encouraged students
to consider their own and other’s skills strengths and areas for development. Regular revisiting of skills
audit maps and reflective impact statements supported students to reflect on their development needs
and gains, and to articulate them in a supportive environment. Table 2 shows an overall timeline of the
approach used, with further detail of the session activities given below.

Example 1: Students collaborated with staff to lead and direct their own learning
Student leadership was actively promoted through their input as tutors, and acting as project supervisors.
To facilitate students as collaborators, staff undertook the same learning activities as students or were
given specific roles during meetings; for example both gave informal personal introductions to the group
and contributed personal reflections to the skills mapping audits.

Meetings were designed to balance the leadership roles of staff and students. An active decision to
ask staff to take the role of scribe encouraged them to take an openly supportive role, and limited the
opportunity for them to lead discussions. This gave more time for students to be in a position of leading
the talk within the group and offering their own suggestions to each other. As meetings progressed,
students were encouraged or asked to direct discussions. For example, where a students’ research was of
interest to the wider group, that student would be invited to contribute a workshop or presentation at a
later meeting, reinforcing the students’ role as ‘expert’ in the group. Students also chaired meetings, with
staff acting as minute takers and offering insight when invited to contribute by the student members.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |303

Table 1: Summary of the skills, knowledge and culture development opportunities for the ERG (HA is Hanson and Overton
(2010), RoP is reflection on practice, and CR is course requirements)

Development Intended Learning Outcomes Identified through

Area HA RoP CR
1. Skills 1. Verbal presentation, including the use of
2. PowerPoint in discussion with experts outside
Confidence x x

4.
3. of
Evidenced
Critical
field writing
defense
including evidenced use of
of conclusions x
x

qualitative data x x
5. Reflective evaluation of own and others
progress, including critique of project, writing,
2. Knowledge 1. qualitative
presentationevidence
Understanding etc.
project intended learning x

2.
3.
4. Research for
outcomesatand engaging
the school
forefront
Understanding
Techniques assessment learners
of chosen topic, as
landscape
criteria x
broader university teaching x
x

5. Techniques for
appropriate to chemistry
collecting, analyzing and using x

3. Culture 1.
2.
3. Sharing
Building
Encouraging to critique
information
truststudent eachplagiarism
without
ownershipother
of projects x
x

4. and group broader impact of own project

Appreciating x

5. and groupdirection for project, group and

Providing x

Example 2: Reflection activities related to personal skills mapping stimulated discussion about
personal strengths as an education researcher, encouraging the group to establish an open
culture of sharing and trust
All group members contributed to a discussion of the skills required to be a successful education project
researcher. The group’s contributions were then formed into a skills map (Figure 1). The skills map was
shared with students and staff after the meeting. All group members were encouraged to complete the
map before the next meeting. At the next session, students and staff shared their skills maps with each
other; staff members discussed their self-ratings first to role model the process and encourage trust and
openness within the group. A collective skills map was collated and revisited at three further points during
year.

Example 3 - Students in the ERG were offered formal learning in teaching and learning theories
and qualitative research methods
An early session involved students sharing individual questions and concerns about their project, which

304|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

Table 2: Timeline showing roughly the stages of implementation of the example session activities

Activities
Session Beginning
(0-3 months) (3 - Middle
6 months) End
(6 - 9 months)
Example 1 Establishing student-staff Maintaining student-staff collaboration
collaboration

Example 2 Initial reflection on personal

skills Revisiting and updating personal skills
maps

Example 3 and learningformal

Introducing theories and
teaching Using qualitative research methods

qualitative research methods

Example 4 Academic-led sessions Student’s critical
reflections used to Student-led sessions

structure following
ERG sessions
Example 5 - - Student’s in-depth
reflections on the
wider value of their
project

Figure 1: Exemplar results from Skills Audit — the solid line shows the first self-assessment,
and dashed line indicates subsequent self-assessment

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |305

were captured on a whiteboard by a staff scribe. A group discussion followed, with staff responding to
these concerns by raising key concepts and terms (such as constructivist, didactic, problem-based etc.)
and qualitative analytical methods (for example interviews, surveys, focus groups, etc). Table 3 shows
the topics captured from the initial student-led discussion and the summary of the group’s discussion, in
terms of terminology, starting point resources, and related points to consider. Topics were then pursued by
individual students. Staff offered starting points for the students’ reading, such as TED talks, and popular
press articles as opposed to original academic papers, based in sociology or psychology. A follow up
meeting was designated as a journal club, with the expectation that each group member would present
a summary of their findings. In this way each student led their own literature research. Feeding back to
the group through presentations created a shared resource of terms, references and definitions for use
throughout the projects.

Example 4: Reflection activities were designed to reflect on the positive, negative, and interesting
moments from their specific project research
A Plus-Minus-Interesting (PMI) grid (see Figure 2) was used at the end of the first semester to stimulate
consideration of these aspects, and particularly highlight the interesting happenings. These were of
particular significance in that they often led to the student considering further exploration of things that
had surprised or puzzled them. Subsequent group discussion provided stimulus for preparing agenda
items for future meetings that were responsive to students’ needs. For example, in Figure 2, the student’s
interesting point of how to defend an educational project against traditional assessment criteria led to
the sharing of draft reports and practice presentations allowing for feedback and direct linking to the
assessment criteria.

Figure 2: Reproduction of a student’s PMI Grid (spelling, grammar and punctuation reproduced from original)

306 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

Table 3: Topics from initial student suggestions and a summary of the group’s discussion around the topics, which acted as
starting points for literature review. Note: references quoted are not included here; details given exactly as summarised in
meeting minutes

Topics Summary of group discussion including

from initial useful terminology, references and related points to consider
discussion
How people Start with Bloom’s taxonomy (1956), note a revised taxonomy was published
learn by Anderson & Krathwohl (2001); see: http://thesecondprinciple.com/
teaching-essentials/beyond-bloom-cognitive-taxonomy-revised/
Also Vogotsky’s “zones of proximal development” and scaffolding for
learning, as well as Piaget’s “Theory of cognitive development”.
Note overlaps with How groups learn!

How groups Start with Tuckerman’s small group development (1965); consider also social
learn constructivism (collaborative learning through peer interaction) for example
Palinscar, 1998 or Grice’s cooperative principle (Grice, 1989).
See also Cox, Andrew M. (2005) What are communities of practice? A
comparative review of four seminal works. Journal of Information Science, 31
(6). pp. 527-540. Note overlaps with How people learn!

Analysing Consider qualitative research study design (Morse et al., 2002, Verification
qualitative data Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research and
Agostinho, 2005, Naturalistic Inquiry in eLearning Research).
Consider also coding and grounded theory (see http://
groundedtheoryreview.com/2010/04/02/the-coding-process-and-its
challenges/). Note overlaps with Surveys and question types!

Surveys & Consider Likert scales (Likert, 1932, see also https://www.simplypsychology.
question types org/likert-scale.html).
Consider also question types (see Andrew, 1980 or Braddocket al., 2008) and
electronic vs. paper surveys (Hayslett & Wildmuth, 2004, Pixels or pencils? The
relative effectiveness of Web-based versus paper surveys).
You may also wish to consider: Spradley, James P. (1980) Participant
Observation, Harcourt-Brace-Jovanovich, ISBN:0-03-044501-9. Note overlaps
with Analysing qualitative data!
Growth mindset See http://www.temescalassoc.com/db/el/files/2015/02/Growth-Mindsets
Lit-Review.pdf
Consider A Level growth mindset e.g. https://www.alevelmindset.com/
Note overlaps with Engagement & motivation!

Engagement & See: Principles for good practice in graduate and professional student
motivation engagement, Pontius & Harper, 2006.
Consider Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (1943, “A theory of human motivation”)
and impact on learners or “Motivational processes affecting learning”, Dweck,
1986). Note overlaps with Growth Mindset!

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |307

Example 5: Project final impact statements stimulated student’s in-depth reflections on the
wider value of the project, for themselves and others — including that beyond themselves and
the University
Impact statements were based on Guskey’s impact of professional development (Guskey, 2016), including
the four key areas: the impact on themselves as learners; on school teachers; on school pupils; and on the
widereducational community (see Figure 3). These were constructed as PowerPoint slides, which could be
used directly in a student’s final presentation.

Figure 3: Student final impact statement prompts

Findings

Quantitative data, including end of year grades, showed project outcomes were good with all students
achieving a project award in the upper second or first class degree classifications. Three key findings
emerge in response to the original project aims.

Aim 1 outcome: Students identified and articulated the impact their engagement in the group
had on their employability and transferable skills
Findings suggest that students were able to identify and acknowledge their own skills and how they had
developed over time. Creating and sharing the skills audit maps were found to have stimulated trust

308|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

building in the group, and in particular between staff and students. The periodic reflections, revisiting the
maps over time, were found to support students to identify the progress they had made and to identify
the transferable skills that they had confidence in applying to new areas of work. Students demonstrated
increased self-awareness and agency to articulate and discuss their skills and were found to bring their
maps into discussions during meetings without prompting. The maps provided a common language for
focused group, and shared reflection:
…lots of skills I have improved: communication through meetings, representing the university in schools;
being flexible when things don’t go as planned; organising in collaboration with otherpeople; independence
in a way I haven’t been before. Excerpt 1 from Group Meeting Minutes

Students noted not only the building of skills but also instances where they mapped a decreased use in a
particular skill and the relevance of that in practice. This led to discussions about Dunning-Kruger effects
and enabled them to understand how such effects might influence their own project analysis from a
personal and tangible perspective (Pazicni and Bauer, 2014; Dunning, 2011; Bell and Volckmann, 2011).
The following excerpt from Semester 2 meeting minutes offer insight into this:
Student A “I feel I’ve improvement in areas but when I revisited [the skills map] I had to shift skills down.”
Student B “I felt the same but I scored myself higher where I felt it was improved.”
Student C “I had gone down in some skills area.”
Student D “Yeah, in open-mindedness and inquisition. It’s interesting seeing starting point and what has
changed.”

There followed a group discussion of their weakest skills:

• Tenacity (everyone)
• Time management (Students B and D–StudentA found this an improved skill)
• Patience (Students A and B – patience with self; student C commented on the fact it depends on state of
mind and therefore whilst it is a useful indicator, it is mood and moment dependent).

This was followed by a group discussion of what they want to improve next:
Student A “Thinking outside the box, such as linking research and practice.”
Student D“Analytical mindset and inquisition, you know, being concise and critical but also interesting.
Student E “it isn’t on the skills map but we need to be creative (especially with resources) and it isn’t always
the easiest thing to do (more used to being analytical, precise etc.)”
Student B “I want to be creative now to build these skills–to have better outcomes for the end of the project
but also for myself as a person.” Excerpt 2 Group Meeting Minutes

Aim 2 outcome: Students demonstrated increased confidence to be constructively critical and

learn from mistakes
Critically questioning each other and offering constructive advice were increasingly observed and noted
in group meeting minutes during the lifetime of the ERG. Excerpt 3 demonstrates how students offered
critique and advice to support the development of each other’s projects.
Student Fdescribed developing video per-laboratories for schools.
Student G shared feedback on his experience of video demonstrators – issues with technical knowledge
of how to set up column or carry out technique. Advice would be to be prepared to repeat it a few times.
Student Gagreed to share his videos with student F.
Student H asked if there would be speaking over the video. If recording the voice as doing the video will be
difficult to map the two things together. This was acknowledged and there was a brief discussion of using
Camtasia to voice over video, to avoid this problem.
Student Gasked how the pre and postpracticals would be evaluated – what are you comparing the impact
of the pre-laboratories too?
Student Foutlined how she had observed practicals without it before Xmas.
Student Hasked if the fact the experiments are different will impact the validity of the results.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |309

 Student Facknowledged this limitation and that time and logistics inhibit this type of comparison.
Student I pointed to making a cross-comparison between the two practicals and resource and discussed
the ability of grounded theory coding to pick out key themes.
Student G discussed the difference between open and closed questions and how including open questions
could avoid missing commentaries that are not expected. Excerpt 3 from Group Minutes

The creation of a supportive environment through the group culture is evidenced by some fantastic
failures, an idea developed within the school sector over the past decade with the introduction of Carol
Dweck’s work on growth mindsets (Dweck, 2008). Adopting positive mindsets around things that don’t go
to plan, offers opportunity for understanding what didn’t work as opposed to examining that which did. In
this case, students felt sufficiently safe due to the established group culture and secure in the knowledge
that critical feedback could be offered in a constructive way, that positive judgements emerged out of
negative happenings (Excerpt 4).
Student G reporting on the progress of their project:
Student I asked if it isn’t a bit late to bring the direction of the project into focus.
Student Gadmitted that this is a potential weakness of his project but he also acknowledged that he has
spent this time learning what it is that needs to be done and how it should be structured. He now has the
benefit of knowing what needs to be assessed, who impacts it and how changes might be made effectively.
Excerpt 4 from Group Minutes

Using reflection as a constructive group activity helped facilitate a supportive group culture. Towards the
end of the group’s lifetime, students were well versed in reflecting on their own development, however,
they were less clear of the impact their project had on school teachers or the university community (see
Table 4). For this reason, students were encouraged to revisit their impact statements, as part of their
constructive criticism of their writing plans. Individuals sometimes offered negative impacts, such as
their impact on learners in the classroom leading to false positives in their analysis or negative impacts
on teachers offering their time to support projects. This facilitated group understanding, as concrete
examples enabled peers to understand the impact of their own project. Impact is not usually an assessed
aspect of final year research projects, nor is it met in other or earlier parts of the course. So it was important
to allow additional time for students to gain insight into the idea of impact.

Table 4: Comparison of student’s discussions of impact when re-visiting impact statements

(see
impact
Minutes,
Excerpt
Students 3).
from prior
Month
Figure
slide
had 6.to the
Educational
worked meeting
withGroup
the Excerpt from Educational Group
Minutes, Month 7.
Students were asked to work their
impact statements into their writing
plans prior to the meeting.
Student B “If the project
positively.”
impact studentworks then it should
understanding “Students confidently ask questions and for
clarification… [students] discuss their work
and talk through what they are doing.”
Student C this
“Impact on me? Notreally sure about
point.” “Extra challenge of dealing with ‘fluffy’data
has developed new skills. Stretching and
stimulating to consider myriad of non
physical variables. Findings have forced me
to ‘think outside the box’. Project also almost
entirely self-conceived and self-driven!”

310|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

Aim 3 outcome: Students demonstrated behaviours that moved them from participators in
learning to collaborators, and some leaders
Over the course of the ERG activity, findings suggest that students moved from participators in the
learning experience, whereby they would attend and absorb information from traditional seminars or
lectures, to active collaboration within the group. Using a collective approach to generating journal club
themes and disseminating information via the journal club enabled a large amount of knowledge to be
shared amongst the group, without individual students being over-burdened. It facilitated students as
collaborators, as their expertise in the topic grew, and were able to subsequently direct peers to useful
sources of information during later group meetings.

A change away from a traditional master-apprentice (academic-student) hierarchy was also seen through
shifting staff and student roles. Using reflective practice in PMI tasks supported students to reflect on their
own development needs and in turn, to use this reflection to decide the agenda for following meetings,
enhancing student-led learning. Staff also benefited from directed and specific roles, such as scribe for
a discussion or minute-taker for a meeting, which actively prevented them from moving into traditional
behaviours. As such, the learning process became one that was done with students, as opposed to
something that was done to students.

In Your Context

To evaluate the implications for practitioners and the adaptability of the ERG as an approach, the authors
used a key questions framework derived from Wiborg and Richardson (2010).

Question 1: What are the practical implications for an ERG in my practice setting?
Practical resources, such as space or equipment, are minimal and less than that of laboratory-based
research projects. There is, however, a greater demand on staff and student time. The social nature of the
group, its collaborative style, and its sequence of meetings require administration, planning, and follow
up by staff. Time is at a premium as discussions need the opportunity to develop, and as such academic
line-managers are encouraged to acknowledge the time commitments of staff attending group meetings.

Staff will need to consider the practical implications for students, such as considering how school visits
might fit alongside the academic timetable, allowing time for travel to schools as well as the optimum
time for group meetings to ensure all students can attend. The impact on students should not be
underestimated and staff would do well to identify pinch-points, for example where school terms clash
with university exams. While cost implications are minimal, some budget will be required to cover travel
costs to facilitate school-partner interactions and to allow students to attend events in the community
which might be of use. In this case, funding was elicited from a supportive charitable foundation.

There are some administrative issues which are worth considering at a very early stage. If students are
working in a secondary school setting, facilitating child protection checks at the very start of the semester
prevents unnecessary delays. In most cases these checks are offered as additional reassurance to school
teachers. Each university will have its own guidelines. Furthermore, some schools may require character
references from supervisors, so it is worthwhile completing these at the earliest possible time. Having
project ideas in place before projects begin is essential for recruiting students to projects and helping
students see the diversity of projects and what is involved. However, projects must beflexible to change,
as discussed later.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 311

Question 2: What are the cultural implications for my practice setting?
The style of group work requires academic staff to adopt a collaborative role, with students acting
increasingly as equals and peers. The removal of traditional teaching hierarchies requires staff to find a
balance between encouraging students to lead their own learning whilst maintaining high standards
of teaching quality, sharing expertise, and guiding students towards successful learning outcomes.
Encourage students to lead the group but be aware that this can only occur where staff are willing to
relinquish control. We would advise discussing the role of staff as a team very early, before projects begin.
Negotiate within the supervising team and come to an agreement on what roles members of staff will
have – and don’t be afraid to remind each other of the agreement during term.

Staff must support students to take ownership of the project. This can be facilitated by students and
project partners, working in the initial stages to develop a proposed project theme into something that
they both value, with support from the academic. Facilitating this school-student collaboration needs
careful consideration, expectations on both sides should be set to account for the lifetime of the project
and the time students will have to visit schools. It is important for staff to identify both the benefit and
impact for the host school at an early stage, so all project partners are aware of them.

Question 3: What are the curriculum and assessment implications in my practice setting?
Learning outcomes and assessment methods require adapting to allow for the group activity to be
recognised and rewarded, whilst maintaining subject-specificity in line with the undergraduate course.
The authors found that the assessment of presentations and reports suited existing modes of assessment,
but did not integrate the commentaries of school teachers. A possible way to approach this may be to
consult with teachers using electronic mail or to ask that they also attend presentations. Such additional
time commitments from all parties, guidance for commentaries, and careful moderation by academic staff
are all issues that need to be examined further. Notably, similar challenges have been addressed in similar
assessments, such as industrial placement projects.

Acknowledging the value of impact in research projects at this level is essential. This goes beyond the
current approach. Since impact statements are becoming a key contributing factor in successful grant
applications, we see no reason why this practice is currently omitted from our undergraduate projects.

Question 4: What are the academic implications?

The language, terminology, and contexts of education research are different and may pose challenges
to academic staff trained in the physical sciences. The benefit of cross-faculty working practices whereby
science-focused academic staff work alongside educational colleagues can support the shift from scientific
research methods to social science approaches.

Using a group discussion to generate themes and share learning within a journal club, between staff
and students effectively built a body of knowledge in a short space of time and supported student-led
learning. Due to time pressures and student familiarity with such topics, the authors found most benefit
when students were offered topical and practical resources, such as TED talks, and popular press articles
linked to relevant themes as opposed to original academic papers, based in sociology or psychology.

Despite being education-based projects, the focus of the students’ work was based in their subject
specialism (in this case chemistry). This is essential to ensure credibility, authenticity, relevance, and overall
maintainence of equity with projects undertaken by students completing bench chemistry projects.
Supportive project descriptions offered at the start of the course helped students clarify what previous
successful projects looked like.

312|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Student-led research groups for supporting education research projects

Adaptability and Transferability

Despite the identified challenges the ERG approach was found to be beneficial. The approach is
independent of subject and adaptable in other teaching scenarios where students transition from
participating in the course to collaborating and leading independent research. The same activities for
building group culture could be used. Key to adaptation would be acknowledging the knowledge and
skills development appropriate for the given context. The approach offers a broader approach to standard
teaching and could be used in other research group settings, such as where students are undertaking lab
based research, in earlier years for group work, or for industrial placement projects.

An ongoing challenge for any practitioner will be how to measure the effectiveness of this approach. To
this end it will require a progressive set of criteria to be developed against the required learning outcomes,
just as evidenced here in Table 1. Once established, these criteria can be used to facilitate planning and act
as a framework for evaluation.

We would caution practitioners against using project outcomes (such as grades and staff feedback)
exclusively.Whilst quantitative measures offerevaluation of success, student reflections and commentaries
are informative and enable practitioners to ask questions such as: what language did the students
use?; when did they use it? (Chatwin et al., 2012). Likewise, observation of the group can be useful but
needs careful planning to eliminate observer bias (Norcini and Burch, 2007; Grove and Overton, 2013).
However, observation can be useful as an evaluation tool, to answer questions such as: how did students
address each other?; did they look to staff for direction or were they comfortable to drive the discussion
themselves?; did they stay on task?; how often did staff have to step in or redirect the conversation?

Conclusion

The undergraduate ERG sought to use reflective practice to develop students as leaders and collaborators.
Establishing this within existing university frameworks, in particular those related to assessment regimes,
posed particular challenges. Despite challenges, students responded well and were observed to move
from passively engaged participants to proactively engaged collaborators in the learning process. They
described and developed their transferable skills such as open mindedness, tenacity and realism — skills
relevant to future employability and research of any type.

Reflective practice in this approach supported students to develop as leaders in their own learning. It
also supported staff to adopt a teaching style that embraced a culture of equity whereby they developed
knowledge with students, as opposed to giving knowledge to students. If practitioners want to do this,
they will need to establish reflective practice as a matter of course, through progressive formalised
activities which gradually demand more of the student and through sharing reflections of all members.
Staff will need to be prepared to relinquish control of both the project topic and their role in meetings.
Once in place, these activities can enable a culture which allows students to take part in assessing their
skills in an open and trusting manner.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the Primary Science Teaching Trust for supporting student travel
costs.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |313

References
Bell, P. and Volckmann, D. (2011), “Knowledge surveys in general chemistry: confidence, overconfidence, and
performance”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 88, pp. 1469-1476.
Bianchi, L. (2017), “A trajectory of the development of teacher leadership in science education”, Journal of
Emergent Science, Vol. 12, pp. 72-78.
Chatwin, S., Boyes, L., Fenlon, A., Grant, L., Greatbatch, D., Grove, M., Spicer, S. and Tolley, H. (2012), Evaluating
Your HE STEM Project or Activity, The National HE STEM Programme, Birmingham.
Dunning, D. (2011), “The Dunning–Kruger effect: On being ignorant of one’s own ignorance”, Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, Elsevier, New York.
Dweck, C. S. (2008), Mindset: The new psychology of success, Random House, New York.
Grove, M. and Overton, T. (2013), Getting Started in Pedagogic Research within the STEM Disciplines, University of
Birmingham.
Guskey, T. R. (2016), “Gauge impact with 5 levels of data”, SMEC2016 Organising Committee, 6.
Tuckman, B.W. and Jensen, M.A.C., (2010), “Stages of small-group development revisited”, Group Facilitation: A
Research and Applications Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 43-48.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T. (2010), Skills Required by Chemistry Graduates and Their Developement in Degree
Programmes, Higher Education Academy, UK Physical Sciences Centre in collaboration with and the
financial support of the Royal Society of Chemistry Education Division.
Norcini, J. and Burch, V. (2007), “Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31”, Medical
Teacher, Vol. 29, pp. 855-871.
Overton, T. and McGarvey, D. J. (2017), “Development of key skills and attributes in chemistry”, Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 401-402.
Patel, S., Demaine, S., Heafield, J., Bianchi, L. and Prokop, A. (2017), “The droso4schools project: Longterm
scientist-teacher collaborations to promote science communication and education in schools”, Seminars
in Cell and Developmental Biology, pp. 73-84.
Pazicni, S. and Bauer, C. F. (2014), “Characterizing illusions of competence in introductory chemistry students”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 15, pp. 24-34.
Ralls, D., Bianchi, L. and Choudry, S. (2018), “Across the Divide: Developing Professional Learning Eco-Systems in
STEM Education”, Research in Science Education, pp. 1-19.
RSC (2017), Accreditation of Degree Programmes, Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge.
Sarkar, M., Overton, T., Thompson, C. & Rayner, G. (2016) “Graduate employability: Views of recent science
graduates and employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3, pp. 31-48.
Wiborg, S. and Richardson, W. (2010), English Technical and Vocational Education in Historical and Comparative
Perspective: Considerations for University Technical Colleges, Baker Dearing Educational Trust, London.

314|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 22 Designing online pre-laboratory activities
for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Dino Spagnoli, Cara Rummey, Nikki Y. T. Man, Siobhán S. Wills, and

Tristan D. Clemons
School of Molecular Sciences, The University of Western Australia
dino.spagnoli@uwa.edu.au

Student preparation is essential for any successful learning. This is especially true in the
laboratory, which can be seen as a complex learning environment. Students are very familiar
with receiving information from online sources, with an increased amount of students using
their mobile devices as their primary source for information. Therefore, providing the pre
laboratory material via this medium is a growing trend intertiary institutions. In this chapter,
we describe the processes in designing and evaluating online pre-laboratory activities.
Moreover, we describe a very quick, free, and simple way to make any video interactive.
We illustrate the reasons for the approaches taken with responses from student surveys.
Students found the interactive pre-laboratory videos more beneficial to their preparation
and stimulated their curiosity for the laboratory. The approach we used could be applied to
any undergraduate chemistry laboratory program. The use of online pre-laboratory videos
can be particularly useful for students doing different laboratories on a rotation.

Introduction
Pre-laboratory Activities
The chemistry laboratory is a key part of the majority of undergraduate chemistry programs around the
world and this has been the case since its widespread adoption in the late 19th century (Reid and Shah,
2007). To maximise the value of laboratory sessions, students are often given information about the
laboratory in advance (Agustian and Seery, 2017, Reid and Shah, 2007). There have been many different
pre-laboratory activities and implemented strategies reported on in the literature with varying degrees of
success. An excellent review of this literature describing strategies used to understand chemical concepts,
laboratory skills and processes, or affective experiences can be found in the recent work of Agustian
and Seery (Agustian and Seery, 2017). In this introductory section we will focus on the previous work,

To cite: Spagnoli, D., Rummey, C., Man, N.Y.T., Wills, S.S. and Clemons, T. D. (2019), “Designing online pre-laboratory activities
for chemistry undergraduate laboratories”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A
Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 315-332.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |315

advantages and limitations of online pre-laboratory videos, quizzes and interactive activities.

Online pre-laboratory videos and quizzes

The use of technology, such as online videos and quizzes, in student learning is very common in tertiary
education. The majority of institutions use a learning management system (LMS) or virtual learning
environment (VLE) as the platform for students to access course material including lecture notes,
laboratorynotes, and test preparations, as well as messaging capabilities. University students are becoming
increasingly accustomed to retrieving information on their courses from an online platform (Browne et
al., 2006). Moreover, the majority of current university students have grown up with the internet and
computers as a major part of their lives. As a result of this familiarity, university students have a natural
aptitude for understanding and using new technologies (Camacho-Miñano and del Campo, 2016; Jones
et al., 2010). Due to this change in the learner, educators in chemistry are adapting their teaching practices
from a traditional lecture, tutorial and laboratory-based curriculum to an increasingly digital blended
approach (Seery, 2015). Over recent years there has been an increased amount of work and evaluation
of online videos as the primary source of pre-laboratory preparation in chemistry (Chaytor et al., 2017;
Spagnoli et al., 2017; Teo et al., 2014) and other scientific disciplines (Elmer et al., 2016; Gregory and Di
Trapani, 2012; Jones and Edwards; 2010, Lin et al., 2017).

Providing information to students beforehandabout the laboratory has many advantages, such as reducing
the likelihood of cognitive overload.This can impact students’abilities to achieve the intended laboratory
learning outcomes (Johnstone, 1997; Jones and Edwards, 2010; Winberg and Berg, 2007). Moreover, there
is an increasing amount of literature, which evaluates the impact of online pre-laboratory videos on
students learning (Stieffet al., 2018; Bortniket al., 2017). In a 2015 study, Nadelson and co-workers, showed
that students who have used a video based demonstration achieved greater post-laboratory quiz scores
than a control group (Nadelson et al., 2015). However, a recent study on the use of online pre-laboratory
videos and quizzes for a second year analytical chemistry unit showed no improvement in academic
performance in the laboratory reports. Despite this, the authors did report a positive effect on students
perceived learning, due to higher levels of preparation (Jolley et al., 2016). Rotation style laboratories
at upper level undergraduate chemistry laboratory are very common. The use of carefully designed
pre-laboratory videos can make students more autonomous and confident in conducting experiments
(Schmidt-McCormacket al., 2017). There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that the use of online
pre-laboratory videos and quizzes improves students’perceived preparation for the laboratory (Nadelson
et al., 2015; Whittle and Bickerdike, 2015). Students are able to watch the video at their own pace, replay
parts of the video that are unclear to them and identify areas of deficiency (Bell, 2010; Slemmons et al.,
2018). All of these factors contribute to students’ improved preparation for the laboratory.

Online interactive pre-laboratory videos

Although instructional videos have a great deal of merit, a substantial amount of research has evaluated
using of multimedia and interactive computer-based instructions as better modes of learning. The
rationale for this type of online variation on instruction is known as the multimedia principle (Butcher,
2014; Mayer, 2009). The multimedia principle states that people learn better from words and pictures
than from words alone. Mayer provides an excellent review article on other principles to consider when
designing multimedia for e-learning (Mayer, 2017). The addition of an interactive component to an online
video provides another functionality, which is becoming more accessible to academics as technology
improves. There has been a great deal of literature about the use of interactive online learning in other
environments. For example, the use of interactive features one-textbooks are said to improve the feeling
of participation, which can lead to increased motivation to learn (Ghaem Sigarchian et al., 2018). For
specific pre-laboratory activities, students completed the tasks in the laboratory in a shorter timeframe

316|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

and laboratory skills improved through the use of interactive computer-based instructions (Burewicz
and Miranowicz, 2006). The study of Burewicz and Miranowicz also found that the use of interactive
instructions, as opposed to paper instructions, lowered the number of errors or uncertain responses in
the laboratory work. The trends in the literature are clearly showing that the use of interactive online
videos or animations is more favourable to students than conventional paper instructions (D’Ambruoso
et al., 2018; Fung, 2015).

This chapter aims to provide evidence on our experiences in developing and evaluating pre-laboratory
videos, quizzes and interactive online videos. In the following methods and results sections, we provide
details on how to develop pre-laboratory activities and evaluation over a three-year period of action
initiated research. We provide items for you to reflect upon in your context, should you wish to adopt
this approach. This chapter finishes with some concluding statements, which includes our planned future
endeavours in this area.

Methods

Our context
The pre-laboratory videos and quizzes have been designed for the laboratory component of a Year 1
synthetic chemistry unit at the University of Western Australia. Students wishing to pursue a bachelor of
science with a major in chemistry or engineering science (chemical specialisation) are required to take this
unit. Each year this unitattracts around 400 studentsin its cohort.The unit coversessential basicknowledge
on atomic structure, chemical bonding, molecular geometry, stereochemistry and elementary reactions
of the major classes of organic molecules. There are six laboratories in this unit. Each laboratory session
is three hours in duration and a laboratory demonstrator (teaching assistant) provides all instruction and
assistance to the students in the laboratory. The titles of the laboratory experiments are:
• Acid/Base separation and recrystallisation techniques
• Molecular models
• Electrophilic aromatic substitution reactions
• The Reduction of benzophenone to diphenylmethanol
• Synthesis of carboxylic acids and esters
• Purification of carboxylic acids and esters

Development
The development of the pre-laboratory activities occurred in two distinct phases over a three-year period.
The first phase was to create 5–10 minute pre-laboratory videos, which were filmed, edited and uploaded
to the VLE. To accompany the pre-laboratory video, an information sheet was uploaded onto the VLE.The
information sheet contained all the experimental procedures that the students would need to complete
the laboratory. This information was also given in the laboratory manual and worksheets. A set of online,
mainly multiple choice, quizzes were created as the assessments for the pre-laboratory activities, and
accompanied the pre-laboratory video. In the second phase, we created an interactive video. We will
describe the approaches that we took to implement pre-laboratory activities into the unit.

Getting started: recording, editing and uploading videos

The videos were recorded using a simple camcorder, however, with the advancement in technology
capabilities over recent years, the camera and microphone of a mobile phone would suffice. The length
of the video was an important consideration. The video needed to be long enough to present enough
of the information needed to prepare the student for the laboratory. However, we hypothesised that if

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |317

the video was too long then it could be difficult to maintain the interest of the student. A 2017 study on
creating videos for an introductory physics undergraduate course suggests that the length is an important
consideration. Students accessing these videos only watched the video to its entirety half of the time. This
study also makes the observation that as the video length increased the fraction of students watching
all of the video decreased (Lin et al., 2017). This was also found in our results, where the total average
watching time was lower than the whole length of the video.

All of the videos were initially created with a very similar format.The videos were scripted and a storyboard
developed. Making a storyboard and a script is a very good approach to take, which will save a great
deal of time and cut down on the amount of reshooting and editing. The storyboard and prior planning
enables you to visualise each component of the video and make sure that it follows a logical flow. The
script will save you time by reducing the amount of mistakes that you make while filming and also ensures
that key concepts are addressed without the need for rambling or long segues.

A member of staff was filmed presenting the information (Figure 1). There are several advantages of
filming yourself in a pre-laboratory video. This is especially important if you are teaching in the laboratory.
Students appreciate seeing the person from the video in the laboratory. This is important in units that
have very large cohort size, where students can feel very isolated as they make that difficult high school to
university transition. The use of a talking-head has practical advantages as well. A talking-head is a shot of
a person’s head as they talk to the camera.This approach encourages less movement in your video. Videos
being streamed over the internet will have a much higher quality if the amount of movement in the video
is kept to a minimum (Hartsell and Yuen, 2006).

Laboratory equipment was filmed and edited to be in screen shots in the final video. Where possible,
narration in the laboratory was avoided. This is due to the poor sound quality as a result of the fume
hoods. Initially the videos focused less on the experimental procedure and more on the theory behind
the experiments. Reaction mechanisms or calculations were presented by filming a white board as the
information was written out for the students to follow (Figure 2).

The editing of the video can be performed with any of the free software that is available in Apple (iMovie)
or Windows (Windows Photos paired with Audacity works well for simple editing) operating systems. In
the production of our videos, however, we used two different pieces of software that were not free; Adobe
Premier Elements and Camtasia. Each software package allows the editing and exporting of videos with
essentially the same features. However, we personally felt that Camtasia was the easier of the two to use
for a novice. All additional materials, such as annotations and screen shots of laboratory equipment, were
included to aid the students through the pre-laboratory video (Figure 1).

Once the video has been filmed and edited, you are now ready to upload it to the VLE. We strongly
recommend that you upload the video to a YouTube channel that you administer. There are several
advantages to uploading a video to YouTube:
• It is a reliable platform.
• It is accessible on desktop and mobile devices.
• It has freely available analytics tools, which provides a quick and easy way to evaluate its use.
• The video can be embedded in the VLE systems for easy student access.

The final point is an important aspect to consider. A video which is embedded in the unit means that
students do not have to leave the VLE and go to an external website to view the video (Figure 3). The two
main VLE providers, Blackboard and Moodle, have this capability built-in to their systems.

318|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Figure 1: A screen shot from one of the annotated YouTube videos depicting the use of a talking head approach as well as
providing additional information on chemical symbols and technical information

Figure 2: A screen shot from one of the YouTube videos depicting the use of the white board to detail a reaction
mechanism. This allows students to follow the reaction as it is written out

Figure 3: Example of the pre laboratory video embedded in the blackboard VLE used for this study

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |319

Using YouTube analytics
The visibility of the videos on YouTube was set to unlisted. There are three visibility settings available
on YouTube; public, private, and unlisted. The public setting means that it is visible to everyone and will
appear on search engines. The private setting means that the video is only visible to the creator of the
video and viewers that the creator selects. The video will not appear on the creator’s YouTube channel or
search results. The practically of setting the visibility to private is non-sustainable, especially with large
undergraduate classes, because each viewer would have to be assigned access to the video. The unlisted
setting offers similar privacy to the private setting, where only viewers with the link will have access.
Therefore, embedding the video in the VLE ensured that only students enrolled in the unit had access
to the video. This allowed us to make use of the YouTube analytics to collect quantitative feedback on
the number of views and the specific sections of videos that were of interest to our students. We cannot
categorically say that the number of views each semester (Table 1) were only from students enrolled in the
unit, however, by setting the visibility to unlisted we can be sure that the overwhelming majority of views
were from our students. The number of views were far greater than the number of students enrolled in the
unit, which implies that students were watching, at least in part, the video more than once.

YouTube analytics also provides insight into the times in each semester that the video was viewed. The
number of views across the second semester, 2015, indicated, unsurprisingly, that the majority of views
took place the day before the laboratory (Figure 4). This trend was consistent throughout every pre
laboratory video in any semester. There is encouragement that there are not two lone peaks in Figure 4
(the laboratory is run over two days due to the size of the class). There is a general increase in views in the
week leading up to the laboratory. This implies that some students are taking the time in the week leading
up to the practical class to view the pre-laboratory video.

Designing an assessment: The online quiz

Given that this unit has a large cohort size, there are many practical advantages to creating an online
multiple-choice quiz to accompany the online video. The main advantages are that this type of quiz
provides an incentive for students to watch the online video, and it can be automatically graded, which
saves time for unit administrators. Most VLEs allow online quizzes to be easily created, maintained and
allow the opportunity for students to receive automatic feedback on their answers. The inclusion of
automatic feedback to any online quiz provides many good outcomes for students, including increased
learning opportunity (Chittleborough et al., 2007). The number of options in a multiple-choice question is

Table 1: YouTube analytics of the number of views of each pre-laboratory video across the first two years of the study

Video (370
Sem
enrolled)
1, 2014
students (328
Sem students
2, 2014
enrolled) (250
Sem students
1, 2015
enrolled) Sem 2, 2015
(231 students
enrolled)
Separation
Acid-Base 679 554 440 404

Models
Molecular N/A N/A 260 393

Chemistry
Aromatic 652 517 439 472

Reduction
Carbonyl of a 558 485 346 361

Acids and Esters N/A N/A 446 497

320|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Figure 4: Representative YouTube analytics plot of the views of Acid-Base Separation pre-laboratory video (Sem 2, 2015)

still a contentious issue in the literature, however, research suggests that two to three distractors and the
correct option is enough (Haladyna et al., 2002). The literature in this area has also recommended avoiding
the “all of the above” option (Harasym et al., 1998) and implausible options (Cheesman, 2009) in this style
of quiz.

There is a variety of different subjects that could be used as the content of a pre-laboratory multiple
choice question. In our experience a range of questions that focus on the practical part of the laboratory
as well as the theoretical background works well. Moreover, the quiz questions should be directly related
to either the laboratory procedure or the content of the online video. We will provide an example of a
practical and theoretical question and the type of instant feedback we provide to students (Table 2)
after they have answered a question, which includes either feedback for the correct answer or why the
incorrect answer is wrong. Providing this level of feedback is valuable for students, especially those who
do not know what they do not know, which is common with first year students (Table 2).

The short online quiz to accompany the online pre-laboratory video provides an incentive for students
to watch the video. This is particularly effective if the online quiz has a small weighting towards the final
grade. The following points should be considered when compiling an online quiz:
• Do not make the online quiz too long.
• Do not make the online quiz too hard.
• Align the questions with one of the learning outcomes of the laboratory.
• Align the questions to the content of the online video.

The points above will ensure that the video is watched and that students will complete the online quiz,
without overloading them with information and any undue stress.

Getting creative-building interactivity

An interactive component to the videos provides an active learning element, which is highly desirable.
A similar process preparing and designing the video was used. However, at distinct parts of the video we
wanted to give students a choice to make. The interactive video was edited using the Camtasia software.
We used the annotation tool within the YouTube website, which was free and easy to use, to create the
interactive video.The annotation tool allows the user to layer text and links to the already uploaded video.
We took two approaches; the first was to record individual videos and upload them all to the YouTube
website and the second was to upload one long video, which had each option placed one after the other.
In principle, both approaches are the same, where the annotation in the YouTube video was a link to either
a different video in the first case or a different position on the video timeline in the second.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |321

Table 2: Example of a practical and theoretical question for an online pre-laboratory quiz and the feedback on correct and
incorrect answers

Practical Question from Acid/Base separation and recrystallisation techniques lab:

After a crude product has been dissolved in a hot solvent, what is the purpose of filtering the solution for
the first time?
a) Any insoluble impurities are removed (correct answer)
b) The pure product is obtained in solid form from the filter funnel
c) To separate out the two liquids
d) To separate quinine from benzoic acid

Correct Answer Student Feedback: In recrystallisation, the crude productis dissolved in hot solvent, and the
hot solution if filtered. Any insoluble impurities are removed by this filtration step.
Incorrect Answer Feedback
• for answer b: This answer is not correct. Think about the step you will be taking and where you think
the impurities will be. Read on in the procedure. Do you keep the solid phase or liquid phase?
• for answer c: This answer is not correct. A separation funnel is used to separate out two liquids.
• for answer d: This answer is not correct. The aim of the experiment is to separate out these two
compounds. However, you can do this from the solubility of the two in different solvents. The step in
this question is concerned with purification of one of the compounds.

Theoretical Question from Electrophilic Aromatic Substitution Reactions lab:

Which of the mechanisms below is the correct mechanism pathway for an electrophilic aromatic
substitution reaction?

Correct Answer Feedback: This is correct. The pi bond in the benzene ring is acting as the nucleophile,
electron source, donating a pair of electrons to the electron deficient electrophile (E). A base (B) provides the
source of electrons that abstracts hydrogen from the carbon attached to the electrophile. Electrons from
the hydrogen bond move into the ring to reform the aromatic ring.
Incorrect Answer Feedback
• for answer b: This is not correct. The electron deficient species is trying to donate electrons. The arrow
indicates movement of electrons.
• for answerc: This is not correct. A hydrogen only has the electron that is used in a bond. It cannot push
an electron toward the base (B) as it does not have any electrons free.
• for answerd: This is not correct. Apositive charge indicates a position of electron deficiency. There are
no electrons free to move toward the hydrogen for abstraction to occur.

322|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Figure 5: A screen shot from one of the annotated YouTube videos depicting a choice students
could make on which funnel to use in their experiment

At the start of 2019, YouTube decided to stop the annotation tool on their site. The major limitation of the
annotation tool was that it could not be used on mobile devices, which strongly influenced their decision.
Therefore, to create the same interactivity in a YouTube hosted video, we recommend the use of the cards
tool. The cards tools works in a similar way to the annotation tool, as it allows you to send students to
another video or website and creates that interactivity. The cards tool has the advantage of being mobile
enabled and you can also introduce images as the card.

An example of a choice was the type of funnel to use in a vacuum filtration, a Büchner or a Hirsch (Figure
5). The students could make a choice and receive feedback on the outcome of their choice. This type
of freedom is seldom used in a first year undergraduate chemistry laboratory due to the recipe style
laboratory manual. Moreover, students are reluctant to make a choice in a laboratory, due to anxiety over
making a mistake, which could have an impact on their grades.

Questionnaires
A series of online questionnaires were developed to evaluate the impact of the online pre-laboratory
activities.The purpose of the questionnaire was to decide if the pre-laboratory activities could, in principle,
be used as part of students’ preparation for laboratories. At the end of the questionnaire, students
were provided with an opportunity to comment further on any aspect of the pre-laboratory activities
by submitting a response to a free text section of the questionnaire. We received 63 responses to this
questionnaire from a cohort size of 370 (17% response rate).

The second questionnaire, which was administered in the second semester, 2016, was developed with
the aim of comparing the new, interactive videos with the old, passive videos. The Acid-Base Separation
(Laboratory 1) and Molecular Models Laboratory (Laboratory 2) were passive, online pre-laboratory videos
developed in 2014. The Aromatic Chemistry Laboratory (Laboratory 3) had an online interactive video. In
the comparison, we wanted to delve deeper into the impact of an interactive video on not just preparation,
but also confidence to solve problems, stimulation of curiosity, and encouragement to learn. Similarly to
the questionnaire in 2014, students were also given an opportunity to provide additional comments on

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |323

their preference for interactive or passive pre-laboratory videos in the form of a free-text section at the
end of the 2016 questionnaire. We received 62 responses to this questionnaire from a cohort size of 232
(27% response rate). Participation by students was voluntary and students were provided with approved
participant information and consent forms, which outlined the potential risks and benefits of being
involved in the studies. The studies were conducted in accordance with UWA Human Ethics Approvals
RA/4/1/5939 and RA/4/8993.

Presentation and Discussion

This section of the chapter is to provide results of students’ responses to the survey questions, which
allows reflection on the approach we have taken. Based on our experiences we have highlighted
recommendations that educators wishing to adopt this approach should consider.

Students’ evaluation of the pre-laboratory activities

The aim of the surveys was to provide evidence that the students were using the pre-laboratory videos to
prepare for the laboratories. Students were first asked to evaluate how well the pre-laboratory video and
information sheet prepared them for the laboratory. Students indicated, with over 83% agree or strongly
agree responses, that both of these items prepared them for the laboratory practical. It is interesting to
note that the students still appreciated the information given in the laboratory manual, which is essentially
the laboratory procedure in a recipe format. Moreover, we are not advocating a completely online format
of the laboratory manual because students still find it useful to annotate the traditional printed laboratory
manual with their own notes to help them through the procedure.

Recommendation 1: A multi-media approach of online video, online pre-reading and printed

instructions is an effective way of providing students with both the theoretical background and the
practical procedure.

The pre-laboratory quiz was never designed to be a long and arduous assessment item. There were two
main purposes when we designed the pre-laboratory quiz. The first was to provide a small incentive for
students to watch the pre-laboratory video and to read the pre-laboratory information sheet. Therefore,
the pre-laboratory quiz was incentivised with 10% of the final mark for the laboratory assigned to this

Figure 6: Students indicated their level of agreement with whether they felt the pre-laboratory quiz was
A) too short and B) too easy (n = 63)

324|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

quiz. The second purpose was to provide an opportunity to get automatic feedback on the answers that
the students submitted. Therefore, for every question, students were told immediately if their answer was
corrector incorrect. After the due date of the online quiz, students were provided with the correct answer,
if necessary, and feedback on their answer. Students were then asked to evaluate the pre-laboratory quiz;
was it too short or too easy? (Figure 6).

For both of these statements, there was a mix of responses from students. A slight majority of student
responses indicated a neutral response, and more students disagreed than agreed with the statement.
Student responses to the statements, especially in regards to the ease and length of the pre-laboratory
quizzes, indicate that the design of the online quizzes served the purpose, which we intended. The
purpose of the online quiz was to provide a short assessment that provides an incentive for students to
watch the video.

Recommendation 2: Use the online assessment to provide an incentive to watch the online video
and provide instant feedback on the students’ answers.

The students provided an overwhelming positive response for the final question of the questionnaire,
which asked students if the pre-laboratory material helped them in their understanding of the laboratory.
From the 63 students that took part in the questionnaire, 87% responded with agree or strongly agree to
this statement. At the end of the questionnaire we provided students with an opportunity to elaborate on
any aspect of the pre-laboratory material with any additional comments. There were some very positive
responses:
The pre laboratory did emphasize on the particular reaction mechanisms and the pre laboratory video
highlighted the various equipment being used in order to prepare us for the laboratory. Thank you and
please continue having the prelaboratory material. I loved it:)

A student, without any prompt, even commented on the difference between the online deliveries of the
pre-laboratory material compared with the traditional method of using the laboratory manual:
I was a big fan of being able to do all of the pre laboratory online. It is a more efficient way than was
previously done where students had to do it in their book.

A student made reference to preparation being explicitly linked to confidence in the laboratory. This is
encouraging, as it has been shown in the literature that students show more confidence in the laboratory
when pre-laboratory activities were introduced (Teo et al., 2014).
I thought the prelaboratory concept was very effective, it helped me effectively prepare and organise myself
before laboratories and thus I was able to get in the laboratory, feel confident with the procedure and the
background of the laboratory (i.e. the mechanisms).

The first implementation of the pre-laboratory activities were filmed and edited with very little technical
support. It is important to note that all of the filming took place in the office of the laboratory coordinator
with a video recorder and use of a white board. There was no state of the art studio, sound, or lighting
involved. The students’ responses were very positive, even with this unsophisticated approach.

Recommendation 3: Do not wait to get the technical support to make a professional looking video.
Just do it! Talking to the students, via an online video is a very effective way of preparing the
students for the laboratory.

Students’ evaluation of the interactive pre-laboratory video

The evaluation of pre-laboratory activities in the second semester, 2016, was to compare the impact of an

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |325

 Figure 7: Student responses to the statement: A)“The video prepared me for the practical class.”;
B) “Preparing for the assessment activities helped my learning of the topic.”;
and C) “The pre-laboratory activities stimulated my curiosity for the practical session.”(n = 62)
interactive pre-laboratory video with passive pre-laboratory videos. The questionnaire was administered
to students through an online link on the VLE at the end of the third laboratory. Students had a week to
complete the questionnaire and it was closed before the start of the fourth pre-laboratory video, which
was also a passive video.There were two main areas where students felt that the interactive pre-laboratory
video was superior to the passive pre-laboratory video; preparation and stimulation of curiosity.

Students’ responses to the statement “The video prepared me for the practical class” were in much
higher agreement for the interactive pre-laboratory video (Laboratory 3) than the two passive videos
(Laboratory 1 and Laboratory 2) (Figure 7A). One of the motivations for designing an interactive pre
laboratory video was to stimulate the curiosity of students for the practical session. For Laboratory 3, 46%
of students thought that the video stimulated their curiosity a great deal or a lot, compared with only
26% for Laboratory 2 and 22% for Laboratory 1 at the same levels of agreement (Figure 7B). This result
indicates that providing a choice or a decision in the pre-laboratory video makes students think about the
consequences of their actions.

326|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Figure 8: Student responses to the statement: A)“I had access to adequate learning resources for the practical
session” and B) “I felt encouraged to learn by the learning activities provided.”(n = 62)

Figure 9: Student responses to the statement, “I was given adequate feedback about how well I was
doing in the pre-lab.” (n = 62)

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |327

Students also responded more favourably to the interactive pre-laboratory video compared with the
passive videos when we asked students the statement “Preparing for the assessment activities helped my
learning of the topic” (Figure 7C). In this statement the assessment activity was the online quiz, which
accompanied the online video. There is a clear difference in students’ perceptions of their learning when
an interactive online video was used with the online quiz as opposed to a passive video.

Students felt that they had the same access to learning resources from passive or interactive videos. The
responses of students to the statement“I had access to adequate learning resources for the practical session”
(Figure 8A) were very similar between Laboratory 1 and Laboratory 3. Moreover, Laboratory 2 had the
most positive feedback with 65% of students responding with “mostly” or “always” for this statement.
However, even though access to the resource was similar between types of pre-laboratory video, there
was a difference between the encouragements to learn from the video (Figure 8B). Laboratory 3 had 48%
of students respond with “mostly” or “always” to the statement “I felt encouraged to learn by the learning
activities” compared to 36% for Laboratory 1 and 38% for Laboratory 2.

Students felt that they had more adequate feedback with the interactive pre-laboratory video compared
with the passive pre-laboratory videos (Figure 9). Nearly half of the responses (47%) were for the “mostly”
or “always”responses to the statement‘I was given adequate feedback about how well I was doing in the pre
laboratory’. This is compared to 35% for Laboratories 1 and 2.

These results indicate that there is a preference towards an interactive component in videos, especially
when it comes to preparation and stimulation of curiosity for the laboratory. However, it is also relevant to
point out that any form of online pre-laboratory video and quiz is beneficial to the student.

Recommendation 4: The annotation and cards function in YouTube provides a quick and free
method of making a passive video into an interactive video, which stimulates students’ curiosity
and helps them prepare.

The creation of pre-laboratory videos and quizzes for students to view and complete before attending an
undergraduate laboratory has many strengths and benefits.The research study provides evidence that the
students used the online pre-laboratory video and quizzes to aid in their preparation for the laboratory.

In Your Context

This approach can be adapted for any year group at tertiary level chemistry, and can be performed using
intuitive, freely available software. Below are some bullet points, which may be important for you to
consider if you wanted to adopt this approach.

The strengths of using this approach:

• Do you have a number of different teaching assistants/laboratory demonstrators teaching in
your laboratories? This method allows a consistent message to help in student’s preparation
for the laboratories.
• Do you have laboratories run in a rotation schedule? This method allows for a consistent
pre-laboratory for a laboratory that is run over the whole of semester.
• Are your students based on a different campus to yours? Even though this is not a face-to
face approach, students on different campuses appreciate watching a recording of their
lecturer.
• Do you have access to a recording studio or technical support? The quality of the video does

328|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

not matter to students, therefore, as long as you have a clear learning objective, students
find this approach very useful.

There is an initial time commitment for staff to make and edit videos as well as create an online quiz.
However, the videos can be used for multiple years, as long as the laboratory does not change.

Conclusions

The aim of this chapter is to provide insight, based on our experiences, on the design of online pre
laboratory activities. This approach has some very obvious practical strengths for both educator and
student. The videos and online quizzes only need to be made once and can be used many times over.
The students are given a platform to prepare for their laboratories in a timely manner. However, there is a
time issue for both educator and student. The educator needs to put in the time to develop the resources
in the initial stages. The student also needs to include the time in their schedule to watch the video and
complete the quiz. However, if the online resources are mobile compatible, then students have even
more flexibility in their schedule. Future work in this field will be to research the types of interactive pre
laboratory activities. The approach we used was very simple, however, gamification theory can be used to
engage the students in the pre-laboratory activity (Dominguez et al., 2012).

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Isaiah T. Awidi and Mark G. Paynter from the Centre of Education Futures,
UWA, for help in developing the questionnaire used in the second semester, 2016. The Education Futures
Scholarship Program Grant Fund and the ChemNet Catalyst grant provided funding for this research.
Tristan Clemons is a NHMRC Peter Doherty–Australian Biomedical Fellow and we thank the NHMRC for
their support. We would like to thank the staff of CHEM1002 from 2014-2016 for allowing this research to
take place and to all the students for participating in this study.

References
Agustian, H. Y. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education:
a proposed framework for their design”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 518-532.
Bell, S. (2010), “Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future”, The Clearing House: A Journal of
Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, Vol. 83, pp.39-43.
Bortnik, B., Stozhko, N., Pervukhina, I., Tchernysheva, A. and Belysheva, G. (2017), “Effect of virtual analytical
chemistry laboratory on enhancing student research skills and practices”, Research in Learning Technology,
25.
Browne, T., Jenkins, M. and Walker, R. (2006), “A longitudinal perspective regarding the use of VLEs by higher
education institutions in the United Kingdom”, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 14, pp. 177-192.
Burewicz, A. and Miranowicz, N. (2006), “Effectiveness of multimedia laboratory instruction”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 7, pp. 1-12.
Butcher, K. R. (2014), “The Multimedia Principle”, in Mayer, R. E. (Ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia
Learning, second edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Camacho-Miñano, M.-D.-M. and Del Campo, C. (2016), “Useful interactive teaching tool for learning: clickers in
higher education”, Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 24, pp. 706-723.
Chaytor, J. L., Al Mughalaq, M. and Butler, H. (2017), “Development and Use of Online Prelaboratory Activities in
Organic Chemistry To Improve Students’ Laboratory Experience”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94,

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |329

 pp. 859-866.
Cheesman, K. L. (2009), “Writing/Using Multiple-Choice Questions to Assess Higher-Order Thinking”, in Lord, T.
R., French, D. P. and Crow, L. W. (Eds.), College science teachers’ guide to assessment, NSTA Press, Virginia.
Chittleborough, G. D., Treagust, D. F. and Mocerino, M. (2007), “Achieving Greater Feedback and Flexibility Using
Online Pre-Laboratory Exercises with Non-Major Chemistry Students”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.
84, p. 884.
D’ambruoso, G. D., Cremeens, M. E. and Hendricks, B. R. (2018), “Web-Based Animated Tutorials Using Screen
Capturing Software for Molecular Modeling and Spectroscopic Acquisition and Processing”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 95, pp. 666-671.
Domínguez A., Saenz-de-Navarrete J., de-Marcos L., Fernández-Sanz L., Pagés C., and Martínez-Herráiz J.J. (2013),
“Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes”, Computers & Education, Vol. 63,
pp. 380-392.
Elmer, S.J., Carter, K. R., Armga, A.J. and Carter, J. R. (2016), “Blended learning within an undergraduate exercise
physiology laboratory”, Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 40, pp. 64-69.
Fung, F. M. (2015), “Using First-Person Perspective Filming Techniques for a Chemistry Laboratory Demonstration
To Facilitate a Flipped Pre-Laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92, pp. 1518-1521.
Ghaem Sigarchian, H., Logghe, S., Verborgh, R., De Neve, W., Salliau, F., Mannens, E., Van De Walle, R. and
Schuurman, D. (2018), “Hybrid e-TextBooks as comprehensive interactive learning environments”,
Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 26, pp. 486-505.
Gregory, S.J. and DiTrapani, G. (2012), “A Blended Approach to Laboratory Preparation”, International Journal of
Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 20, pp. 56-70.
Haladyna, T. M., Downing, S.M. and Rodriguez, M. C. (2002), “A Review of Multiple-Choice Item-Writing Guidelines
for Classroom Assessment”, Applied Measurement in Education, Vol. 15, pp. 309-333.
Harasym, P. H., Leong, E. J., Violato, C., Brant, R. and Lorscheider, F. L. (1998), “Cuing Effect of "All of the above" on
the Reliability and Validity of Multiple-Choice Test Items”, Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 21, pp.
120-133.
Hartsell, T. and Yuen, S.C.-Y. (2006), “Video Streaming in Online Learning”, AACE Journal, Vol. 14, pp. 31-43.
Johnstone, A. H. (1997), “Chemistry teaching - Science or alchemy? 1996 Brasted lecture”, Journal of Chemical
Education, Vol. 74, pp. 262-268.
Jolley, D. F., Wilson, S. R., Kelso, C., O’Brien, G. and Mason, C. E. (2016), “Using Prelaboratory Video Demonstrations
and e-Quizzes To Imporve Undergraduate Preparedness for Analytical Chemistry Practical Classes”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93, pp. 1855-1862.
Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S. and Healing, G. (2010), “Net generation or Digital Natives: Is there a distinct new
generation entering university?”, Computers & Education, Vol. 54, pp. 722-732.
Jones, S. M. & Edwards, A. (2010), “Online Pre-laboratory Exercises Enhance Student Preparedness for First Year
Biology Practical Classes”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
18, pp. 1-9.
Lin, S.-Y., Aiken, J. M., Seaton, D. T., Douglas, S. S., Greco, E. F., Thoms, B. D. and Schatz, M. F. (2017), “Exploring
Physics Students' Engagement with Online Instructional Videos in an Introductory Mechanics Course”,
Physical Review, Vol. 13, p. 020138.
Mayer, R. E. (2009), Multimedia learning, second edition, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Mayer, R. E. (2017), “Using multimedia for e-learning”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 33, pp. 403-423.
Nadelson, L. S., Scaggs, J., Sheffield, C. and McDougal, O. M. (2015), “Integration of Video-Based Demonstrations
to Prepare Students for the Organic Chemistry Laboratory”, Journal of Science Education and Technology,
Vol. 4, pp. 476-483.
Reid, N. & Shah, I. (2007), “The role of laboratory work in university chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 8, pp. 172-185.

330|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Designing online pre-laboratory activities for chemistry undergraduate laboratories

Schmidt-Mccormack, J.A., Muniz, M. N., Keuter, E. C., Shaw, S.K. and Cole, R.S. (2017),“Design and implementation
of instructional videos for upper-division undergraduate laboratory courses”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 749-762.
Seery, M. K. (2015), “Flipped learning in higher education chemistry: emerging trends and potential directions”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 16, pp. 758-768.
Slemmons, K., Anyanwu, K., Hames, J., Grabski, D., Mlsna, J., Simkins, E. and Cook, P. (2018), “The Impact of Video
Length on Learning in a Middle-Level Flipped Science Setting: Implications for Diversity Inclusion”,
Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol.27, pp. 469-479.
Spagnoli, D., Wong, L., Maisey, S. and Clemons, T. D. (2017), “Prepare, Do, Review: A Model Used to Reduce
the Negative Feelings towards Laboratory Classes in an Introductory Chemistry Undergraduate Unit”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 26-44.
Stieff, M., Werner, S.M., Fink, B. and Meador, D. (2018), “Online Prelaboratory Videos Improve Student Performance
in the General Chemistry Laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 95, pp. 1260-1266.
Teo, T. W., Tan, K. C. D., Yan, Y. K., Teo, Y. C. and Yeo, L. W. (2014), “How flip teaching supports undergraduate
chemistry laboratory learning”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 15, pp. 550-567.
Whittle, S. R. and Bickerdike, S. R. (2015), “Online Preparation Resources Help First Year Students to Benefit from
Practical Classes”, Journal of Biological Education, Vol. 49, pp. 139-149.
Winberg, T. M. and Berg, C. R. (2007), “Students' cognitive focus during a chemistry laboratory exercise: Effects
of a computer-simulated prelaboratory”Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 44, pp. 1108-1133.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |331

332 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Developing scientific reporting skills of
23 early undergraduate chemistry students

Natalie J. Capel, Laura M. Hancock, KatherineJ. Haxton, MartinJ.

Hollamby, Richard H. Jones, Daniela Plana and David J. McGarvey
School of Chemical and Physical Sciences, Keele University
d.j.mcgarvey@keele.ac.uk

Our aim is to initiate the development of selected generic skills of early undergraduate
chemistry students by focussing on scientific reporting skills. To achieve this, we have
developed an approach that draws upon chemistry journal articles as paradigms of
professional conventions and practice, coupled with an assessment-feedback strategy
that spans a full academic year. The strategy incorporates many aspects of contemporary
thinking surrounding effective assessment-feedback practice, placing strong emphasis
on the development of students’ assessment and feedback literacy. The approach is
characterised by a series of iterative assessment-feedback cycles that are supported by
scheduled assessment briefing sessions coupled to a range of formative and collaborative
learning activities related to aspects of report writing. Having evolved the approach over a
number of years, we find that students recognise and appreciate its rationale, show good
engagement with the associated learning activities and, providing they fully engage across
the year, produce work that evidences acquisition of reporting skills to a high standard for
early undergraduate students. Its originality and value lies in its clarity of purpose, the early
exposure of Year 1 undergraduates to journal articles, the novel assessment and feedback
strategy, and the parallel, iterative development of a range of key skills including those
related to information retrieval, data communication and analysis. The approach is flexible
and adaptable to local contexts and different academic levels and scientific disciplines.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Professor Overton has had a profound and wide-ranging influence on the strong culture of
scholarship of teaching and learning and chemistry education at Keele. In particular, her work
on context-based and problem-based learning scenarios and activities, and on the generic skills
of chemistry graduates, has strongly influenced pedagogical practice and thinking at Keele.

To cite: Capel, N.J., Hancock, L. M., Haxton, K.J., Hollamby, M.J., Jones, R. H., Plana, D. and McGarvey, D.J. (2019), “Developing
scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry
in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 333-348.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education | 333

Introduction

Background: report writing in chemistry curricula

A ubiquitous (and traditional) component of undergraduate chemistry degree courses is report
writing, specifically the use of laboratory reports as a vehicle for reporting the outcomes of laboratory
experiments/investigations (Overton et al., 2015). However, the term laboratory report encompasses a
variety of styles and formats, ranging from prescriptive pro forma style reports to full write-ups (Kent
Waters et al., 2018). These may be hand-written or word-processed, and variable in terms of the generic
skills students are required to practice and demonstrate, and in how clearly the role of report writing in
developing such skills is communicated to students. The authenticity of certain styles of laboratory report
is therefore debatable because they are not generally emulated by professional chemists in academia or
other professional situations.

Student, graduate, and employer perceptions of various aspects of generic skills within chemistry
curricula have been the subject of a number of recent studies (Hanson and Overton, 2010; Sarkar et al.,
2016; Galloway, 2017; Hill et al., 2018). A (not unexpected) message that emerges from these is that all
stakeholders value generic skills, although perceptions of the relative usefulness of specific skills and the
extent to which they have been developed, or should be developed, is variable. Hanson and Overton
(2010) identify report writing skills, numeracy, and computational skills and interpretation of experimental
data as skills that UK chemistry graduates would have liked more opportunity to develop in their
undergraduate degrees. The findings of subsequent studies (Sarkar et al., 2016; Galloway, 2017; Hill et al.,
2018) confirm that, amongst numerous other valuable generic skills, these particular skills are perceived
as valuable for future employment.Therefore, it is important that report writing has value/credibility from
the student perspective. One way of achieving this is to emphasise the generic (professional) skills involved
within an authentic context. For this, we chose journal articles as they are one of the principal channels
by which scientific research outcomes are disseminated. Report writing that mirrors scientific journal
articles, supported by an appropriate assessment/feedback strategy, presents opportunities for students
to develop a range of generic skills (for example written communication, numeracy and computational
skills, data analysis, information retrieval, interpretation of experimental data, critical thinking). Although
we recognise that not all chemistry graduates are destined to author academic journal articles, the generic
skills acquired by mirroring these examples of professional practice are by their very nature translatable
to other scenarios and situations. Wetherefore view report writing as a professional competency that has
considerable potential as a vehicle for the introduction and development of a range of generic skills of
value to students in their future careers.

Assessment-feedback pedagogy
As pre-university students generally have little experience of report writing (Tilstra, 2001), it is important
to have an assessment and feedback strategy that initially makes the case to give authenticity for report
writing within the chemistry curriculum, then supports students in their development of the relevant
generic skills. As part of such a strategy, students need to know and understand what is required of them
and what criteria will be used to assess the standard of their work; this can be captured in the concept of
assessment literacy. In addition, students need to engage with feedback in all its forms to improve their
work, and to do this they need to develop their feedback literacy.

The UK Quality Code for Higher Education (2013) articulates eighteen indicators of sound practice that
provide the basis for effective assessment. Indicator 6 (developing assessment literacy) states:
Staff and students engage in dialogue to promote a shared understanding of the basis on which academic

334|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

judgements are made.

Engaging students, and making use of examples and/or self and peer assessment activities, where
appropriate, helps students to understand the process of assessment and the expected standards, and to
develop their assessment literacy.

The importance of dialogue in helping students develop their assessment (and feedback) literacy has
been identified as a key element of effective assessment feedback practice (Sadler, 1989; O’Donovan,
Price and Rust, 2004; Beaumont, O’Doherty and Shannon, 2011; Nicol, 2010; Yang and Carless, 2013;
Evans, 2016, Winstone et al., 2017; Carless and Boud, 2018). This is a fundamental aspect of our strategy
for developing students’ report writing skills. Indeed, Nicol (2010) identifies impoverished dialogue as an
important source of student dissatisfaction with assessment feedback:
Many diverse expressions of dissatisfaction with written feedback, both from students and teachers, are all
symptoms of impoverished dialogue. Mass higher education is squeezing out dialogue with the result that
written feedback, which is essentially a one-way communication, often has to carry almost all the burden
of teacher–student interaction.

In addition, there is increasing focus on students’feedbackliteracy and the need for students to proactively
engage with assessment feedback throughout their education (O’Donovan et al., 2004; Beaumont et al.,
2011; Nicol, 2010; Yang and Carless, 2013; Evans, 2016, Winstone et al., 2017; Carless and Boud, 2018):
There is increasing consensus that to be effective, feedback must be used and that learners’ engagement
with feedback processes is often poor (Winstone et al., 2017).

We are therefore conscious of the need to educate students about assessment and feedback and the
need to make dedicated time and space within the curriculum to achieve this. Merely providing written
guidance and marking criteria is insufficient; students must have opportunities to engage in learning
activities that help them understand assessment requirements and the interpretation and use offeedback.
This is particularly important with large class sizes when resource limitations restrict opportunities for
dedicated 1:1 or small-group support. We have therefore evolved an assessment-feedback strategy that
spans a full academic year and integrates many aspects of research surrounding effective assessment
feedback practice (Figure 1).

The strategy is characterised by dialogicassessment-feedback cycles incorporating a range of collaborative

learning activities and student use offeedback;atotal of eightscheduled hours areallocated for assessment
briefings, assessment literacy and feedback activities throughout the year. As explained above, chemistry
journal articlesform the basis of the authentic context, exemplifying professional practice and conventions
in terms of article structures, the purposes of different sections (for example Introduction, Experimental,
Results and Discussion etc.), writing styles, referencing formats, and presentation of chemical structures,
equations, chemical information and data.

Context
The development of report writing skills forms part of two Practical and Professional Skills modules that also
incorporate a range of other skills-centred learning activities and assessments (a group project, a practical
examination, maintenance of a laboratory diary, pre-laboratory exercises, COSHH risk assessments, etc.).

Our 1st year chemistry students carry out ~20 practicals (some are multiple session practicals), excluding
project work, and each of these is documented within laboratory diaries (assessed separately) including
full data analysis and interpretation. Report writing is a distinct activity from maintaining a laboratory
diary/notebook as reports require the context, method, findings, and conclusions of experimental

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |335

 Assessment guidelines
and marking criteria Assessment briefings

Collaborative learning activities

(e.g. engaging with marking criteria, use of
exemplars, scientific journal articles,
self/peer review of draft reports)

Assessment literacy Students’ use of

feedback
Figure 1: Principal components of the assessment feedback strategy

investigations to be distilled into a more concise format. Consequently, the focus on a small number of
specific reports is intentional and necessary.

We first introduced this general approach to developing students’ report writing skills in 2012/13, but
have refined it over the years in the light of experience and student feedback. What is presented here
largely reflects the most recent iterations of our approach from 2015/16 to 2017/18. Class sizes over a
number of years have varied between 80–110. In the following work, consent was obtained to use student
quotations (2nd semester 2015/16) to evaluate this work in keeping with the British Educational Research
Association (2014). Student feedback was given on anonymous questionnaires designed for service-level
evaluation of the teaching within the course with the option to indicate whether quotations could be
used in publications and presentations. Written consent was obtained for the reproduction of extracts
from the work of three students.

Design and Implementation

The outline framework of the approach is summarised below.

1. Students write laboratory report sections mirroring the principal sections (Introduction,
Experimental, Results and Discussion, Conclusion) of chemistry journal articles.
2. Students draw on their feedback from the sections to compile a draft full article/report
based on a chosen laboratory practical.
3. Students improve their drafts and submit their final laboratory reports.

Ourapproach,althoughdevelopedindependently,shares somefeatures in common withotherapproaches

described in the chemistry education literature (see, for example Tilstra, 2001; Berry and Fawkes, 2010;
Wackerly, 2018). Each assessment point is supported by scheduled assessment briefing sessions involving
a range of activities designed to help students assimilate the purposes of the assessment tasks and to
facilitate peer-to-peer and teacher-student dialogue. Figures 2 and 3 summarise the sequence of events
and the inter-relationship between the elements of the framework. A typical timeline is shown in Figure 4.
Selected materials used for the assessment briefing sessions are available as Supplementary Information.

The briefing sessions aim to enhance students’ assessment literacy and understanding of academic

336|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

S1: Lab report sections Early S2: Full lab report

• Explicit written guidelines
and markingbriefings
• Assessment criteria. that
include collaborative
learning activities (analysis
of exemplars, engaging with
marking criteria, comparison
with journal articles).
• Deadline spreading allows
feedback to be incorporated
into later report sections.
and
Peer-peer • Written guidance, briefing
Dialogue
Staff-Student sessions follow the same
model as for report sections
Mid S2: Draft full lab report
• Students include a summary of
how feedback has been used.
• Draft feedback session includes
collaborative activities.

End S2: Professional full lab report

Figure 2: The inter-relationship between the assessments and the supporting learning activities
(S1 is semester 1 and S2 is semester 2)

Assessment Lab Report Section Assessment Lab Report Section

Briefing Session 1 (Introduction) Briefing Session 2 (Experimental)

Each assessment is supported by written guidance and marking criteria, an assessment briefing
session (1 hr) incorporating dialogue/discussion and at least one formative activity. Assessment
submission is online via Turnitin with written feedback provided via Grademark.

Lab(Conclusion)
Report Section Assessment
SessionBriefing
4 Lab Report
(Results & Discussion)
Section Assessment Briefing
Session 3

The full laboratory report assessment (incorporating all the sections practiced in semester 1) is
supported by an assessment briefing session AND a draft report feedback workshop (2 hrs).
Student use of feedback is designed-in and explicit.

Briefing
Assessment
Session 5 Full Lab
(Draft)
Report Draft Full Lab
(feedback workshop)
Report Full Lab Report
(Final)

Figure 3: Sequence of events in the iterative assessment-feedback strategy

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |337

 Semester 1 (Sept-Dec)
AB1 AB2 AB3 AB4
Week Week Week Week Week
6 Week
7 Week
8 A2 A3 Week
1 2 3 4
A1 11
A4

Semester 2 (Jan-May)
AB5 WS

Week
1 Week
2 Week
3 Week
4 Week
5 Week
6 A5
(draft)) Week
8 A5 10
Week 11
Week Week
12

Figure 4: Typical assessment and feedback timeline. AB: assessment briefing session (1 hr); A1–5: assessment submission
deadlines; WS: draft full laboratory report feedback workshop
standards (Winstone et al., 2017). Feedback on the individual report sections feeds forward to subsequent
reports and the full report in the 2nd semester, where students have the opportunity to complete a draft
report that includes a summary of how they have acted on 1st semester feedback to improve their work.
A formative draft laboratory report feedback session involving activities such as self and peer-review and
student-student and student-tutor dialogue/discussion is then held followed by a period of about one
week for students to act on the feedback from this session to improve their work. Details of selected
sessions within the timeline are provided below (common to each is the use of chemistry journal articles
as exemplars and at least one formative activity). The mapping of laboratory report sections to general
and IT skills acquired is summarised in Table 1.

Assessment briefing session 1

The assessment-feedback cycle commences with an overview assessment briefing session (AB1, 1–2
hours). The session begins with an outline of the aims and rationale for developing students’report writing
skills and the assessment structure. This is followed by several exercises. The first of these, exercise AB1.1,
involves an interactive discussion in which students (in small groups) explore the characteristic features
of chemistry journal articles (sections and their purposes and formats/styles, writing styles, referencing
conventions, etc., see Supplementary Information). It should be noted that most pre-university students
are unfamiliar with academic journal articles, and this initial exposure is concerned with their principal
structural features and conventions rather than with the scientific content.
Exercise AB1.1: Students, working in groups, survey a selection of journal articles to identify common
features, principal sections, conventions and practice (followed by discussion).

After this general orientation, AB1 then moves to focus on the first laboratory report section, the
Introduction, which is based on the first practical the students complete at Keele. Exercise AB1.2 is therefore
specific to the this report section and its purpose is to get students thinking about what is appropriate and
relevant to include. Students are invited to discuss their ideas with their peers which are then summed-up
during a question and answer discussion with the tutor leading the session. Following this, students are
then invited to draft (individually) an outline structure for their section.
Exercise AB1.2: With peer-peer discussion, students draft an outline structure for an Introduction section for
the relevant chemistry practical.

338|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

Table 1: Skills mapping for the laboratory reports assessment programme.

General Skills IT Skills

Introduction • Scientific writing (style, • Word-processing skills
tone, language, format) (formatting, tables)
• Information retrieval • Formatting figures &
• Referencing captions
Experimental • Conventions of presentation • NMR processing software
(style, tone, language) • Word-processing skills
• Formatting numerical data, (formatting)
units and standard form
• Journal format for
presentation of
spectroscopy data
Results and • Numerical data analysis • Spreadsheets and charts
Discussion • for
and
Data
Drawing
conclusions
Describing,
appraising
Errors,
Information
Referencingmeaningful
(appropriate
dataspecifying
captions,and
presentation
units uncertainty
experimental
explaining
from
retrieval
figures, and
conventions
units)
datatables (Excel, linear and non-linear
graphs, presentation of
spectra)
• NMR processing software
(coupling constants;
integration etc.)
• Word-processing skills
(formatting, equation editor,
tables)
• Chemical Structure Drawing
(ChemDraw)

Conclusion • Summarising relevant • Word-processing skills

findings (formatting)
Full Laboratory • All of the above • All of the above
Report • Judgement concerning • More advanced spreadsheet
the inclusion, placing and skills (Excel, manipulation
effective presentation of of datasets through formula
information. entries, absolute cell
addressing)

Finally, in Exercise AB1.3, students working in groups are presented with exemplar Introduction sections
(one is high quality, the other less so) and are invited to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each.They
are then provided with the assessment guidance and marking criteria (see Supplementary Information)
and are asked to use them to grade the two reports against the marking criteria and write feedback on
strengths and areas for improvement. Both of these steps are supported by tutor-led discussion and
question and answer sessions. It is worth noting that there is a substantial body of literature on the use
of exemplars to enhance students’ assessment literacy (for example, see Carless and Boud, 2018 for a
discussion).
Exercise AB1.3: Students in groups contrast the strengths and areas for improvement of exemplar reports,
and use the marking criteria to write feedback comments/grade them.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |339

Throughout these exercises the aim is to gradually get students to assimilate the purpose of the
assessment and to gain a better appreciation of academic standards (“what constitutes ‘good’?” (Evans,
2016)). Following the session students have typically two weeks (Figure 4) to complete and submit their
Introduction section for marking and feedback.

Assessment briefing session 2

The second assessment briefing (AB2, 1 hour) focuses on the Experimental section of a laboratory report.
Of all sections, this is perhaps the least familiar to students and it is unlikely that they will have previously
written anything in the style required, nor had experience in reporting spectroscopic data in journal format.
A further complication is that the format of experimental sections varies across the sub-disciplines of
chemistry.The practical forming the basis of this laboratory report section is a synthetic organic chemistry
experiment that involves characterisation via 1H and 13C NMR, IR, UV/vis spectroscopy, TLC and melting
point. In AB2, chemistry journal articles (and also Royal Society of Chemistry journal guidelines) are again
used to illustrate the conventions of style and the level of detail required. We often find at this level that
students can struggle to grasp what is an appropriate level of detail, such that an experienced chemist
could repeat the work (for example, details of standard laboratory glassware are not included, but other
aspects such as temperature and reagent/solvent identities/quantities are). Exercise AB2.1 gives students
an opportunity to reflect on this, by first creating an experimental section from a laboratory diary extract
and subsequently comparing it to a model version conveyed via screencast.
Exercise AB2.1: Following examination of an experimental section from a research paper, students are
provided with a laboratory diary extract (from a different experiment, see Supplementary information) and
asked to draft an experimental section in journal format. A screencast is provided highlighting what this
experimental section should contain so they can compare this to what they have produced.

The primary aim of this session is to help students understand how to write the experimental section
for an organic synthesis practical in the style of a chemistry journal article. However, an additional (and
equally important) aim is to develop their ability to interpret an experimental section written in journal
format such that they are able to use it to undertake experimental procedures. This skill is applied by
students in the 2nd semester, where the procedures for some practicals are deliberately provided in the
format of a journal-style experimental section, rather than the conventional prescriptive instructions.

Assessment briefing session 3

The third assessment briefing (AB3, 1 hour) focuses on the Results and Discussion section. By the time this
session is held, the students have received feedback on their introduction sections and are working on
their experimental sections. The particular practical the students write this section for is The Synthesis and
Combustion of Biodiesel. This involves a straightforward transesterification, separation, characterisation
via IR and 1H NMR spectroscopy, calorimetry to determine the enthalpy of combustion of the synthesised
biodiesel, and comparison of findings with literature data. Once again, chemistry journal articles are used
as exemplars to highlight the principal features of a results and discussion section. Using a class question
and answer approach, students’attention is drawn to particular features of this major section of a research
paper such as the skills of the authors in conveying extensive and detailed information in a logical and
concise manner through judicious use of illustrations, graphs, reaction schemes, key equations, and
tabulated data. Tutors also use this opportunity to highlight relevant observations from having assessed
the students’first laboratory report section (the introduction section), and encourage students to take the
feedback they have received on board. The students’ attention is also drawn to signposting, where the
authors refer to figures, tables, schemes, and equations in the body text to enhance the communication
of background theory, results, and their interpretation. This stimulates discussion and common questions
(revealing areas that students express considerable uncertainty surrounding what is appropriate content

340|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

and what is superfluous). Common queries include “Do I need to show the mechanism?” and “Should I show
the mole calculations?”.

The writing of this laboratory report section requires students to practice and demonstrate a wide
range of new skills (see Table 1) including Chemical Structure Drawing using ChemDraw, processing and
presentation of 1H NMR spectra using appropriate software, presentation of IR spectra prepared in MS
Excel, use of tables in MS Word and use of MS Equation Editor.

Draft laboratory report feedback workshop (semester 2)

In semester 2 the students compile a full report incorporating all the sections they have had experience
of writing in the 1st semester, and also taking on board feedback from the 1st semester. Students are
given the opportunity to submit a full draft report (electronic submission), which is then followed by a
2-hour feedback workshop involving students working collaboratively in groups and in dialogue with
the lecturer on a selection of their peers’ (anonymised) reports and finally on their own report. The draft
laboratory reports are not marked, but the feedback session discussions with peers and tutors provides
rich and detailed feedback, which students are able to act on over the following week to prepare the final
version of their report (see Supplementary Information for example materials).

Student use of feedback

Students are invited to include statements in the draft report in semester 2 explaining how they have
used feedback from semester 1 to improve their work. Students are also invited to include a statement
explaining how feedback from the draft feedback workshop has been used to improve the final report
(see discussion section).

Discussion

The cycle of assessment and feedback with supporting formative activities presents opportunities for
early undergraduate students to commence development of a wide range of generic skills (Table 1). As
already noted, a key feature of our assessment and feedback strategy is the use of scheduled assessment
briefing sessions, the purpose of which is to enhance students’ assessment literacy. Student feedback
on the assessment briefing sessions has been very positive over a number of years, as is evident from
their comments (on module evaluations) citing, for example, the use of journal articles, exemplar reports,
opportunities for dialogue, and the benefits of having assessments explained in person. Almost 97% of
students responded“Yes”to the question“Have you found these sessions helpful?”(data from 2015/16), with
the remaining ~3% abstaining.

Laboratory report sections

In response to the question “What did you like about these assessments?”, numerous student feedback
comments alluded to the benefits of the staged approach of completing separate sections, such as
understanding the purpose of each section and getting feedback before tackling a full report. In addition,
reference to terms such as ‘“real world format”, “professional reports”, “scientific writing style”, and
“professional style” were quite frequent. In response to the question “What could be improved?” the most
frequent response was to provide no comment, but where comments were made they predominantly
related to requests for improved guidance and minor comments about consistency in feedback and
timeliness of feedback. Only a few (< 10%) students commented that they would have preferred to
complete a full laboratory report at the outset.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |341

Draft full laboratory reports
An indication of the level of engagement in this formative aspect of the assessment process is the high
proportion (~75% year-on-year) of the class submitting a draft report, despite it being entirely formative
and not a mandatory element of the assessment. Submission of a complete draft report (1500 words) is
specified as a prerequisite for participation in the draft report feedback session.

Draft laboratory report feedback session (~2 hours)

For our particular context these are parallel sessions led by the three members of the teaching team who
each have overall responsibility for one of three practicals (students have a choice of which practical to
write a full report on in Semester 2), each comprising, typically, 25–30 students. Students submit their
draft reports electronically and the feedback sessions take place approximately one week later. The final
laboratory report submission deadline is then a further week later, providing students with sufficient time
to improve their drafts.

Prior to the day of the feedback session the draft reports are surveyed by the tutor and anonymised
hard copies of the draft reports are printed and grouped into sets of 5–6 corresponding to the student
groups to be used. The feedback session commences with an induction in which the tutor outlines the
format and aims of the session, emphasising its feedback function and highlighting that feedback comes
from dialogue/discussion throughout the session and not just from written comments. The induction
is imperative for establishing clarity of purpose and trust, such that students feel comfortable in asking
questions and raising points for discussion.

Following the induction (see Supplementary Information for example materials) each group (5–6
students) is allocated a set of draft laboratory reports to review and discuss, none of which are authored
by members of the group, although all members of the group have completed a draft report on the same
practical. Each group is also provided with copies of the assessment guidelines and marking criteria for
reference (these having been discussed previously at the laboratory report assessment briefing session,
AB5, Figures 2–4). The student groups are then invited to review, discuss and identify examples of good
practice and areas where class discussion would be deemed beneficial. They are also reminded to reflect
on their own work whilst reviewing the work of their peers. During these group discussions the tutor
circulates amongst the groups, answering questions, prompting discussion and periodically pausing to
commence a class discussion on some of the key areas identified by the students.

In our experience, although students are a little reticent to begin with, a meaningful and engaging
discussion soon emerges in which wide-ranging aspects of report writing and the scientific background
to the practical are discussed. Students are permitted to provide feedback annotations on their peers’
reports, but they are asked to discuss this with the tutor in advance to ensure the feedback is appropriate
(and also whether it may be shared more widely with the class). One important point that emerges from
the peer review and discussion is that there are alternative valid approaches to reporting the outcomes
of the same practical, and that this requires individual judgement. Part-way through the session and
discussion sets of laboratory reports are exchanged between groups, such that each group has sight of a
new set of their peers’reports. With the discussion focussing on substantive issues of report writing, there
is in fact very little discussion of marks/grades except that reference is made to the language used in the
marking criteria/descriptors to place its meaning in context. Towards the end of the session, draft reports
are returned to their authors and a general discussion and feedback session is held during which students
are invited to note down key actions they will take to improve their final reports. The vast majority of
students rate the draft report feedback session highly (Figure 5).

342|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

50
45
40
e
snops 35
30
er 25
% 20
15
10
5
0
POOR FAIR SATIS GOOD EXCELLENT
Figure 5: Student response profile to the question: “How do you rate the draft laboratory report feedback session?”
In response to the question “What did you like about the draft laboratory report feedback session?”, the
vast majority of students indicated they found the session useful/helpful and significant numbers were
specific in referring to understanding standards and guidelines and mentioning the value of viewing the
work or their peers:
I was able to see what standard I should write my papers
Very useful, I changed a lot of my laboratory report because of it
It was really constructive and helpful
Helped me improve my laboratory report, found the session very useful
It was very helpful. Peer reviewing other laboratory reports was much more helpful than I thought it would
be
Looking at other people’s reports and seeing how my own could be improved
Got good feedback on my draft and had an opportunity to see other people’s reports
Gained ideas from peer-marking
That you get a different read of someone else’s report on the same topic

In response to the question “How could the draft laboratory report feedback session have been improved?’”
the desire for more personalised feedback was evident from some student comments and there were also
a small number of comments conveying dissatisfaction about the quality of written feedback from fellow
students. In response to the question “Did you use the feedback from the draft laboratory report feedback
session for your final laboratory report?” over 95% of the students who attended the session said they did
use the feedback.

Student responses to Semester 1 feedback

Most students included a paragraph in their draft full laboratory reports to explain how they had used
previous feedback on the laboratory report sections from the first semester, although the substance of
their narratives was variable. Of course students’ narratives outlining how they have used their previous
feedback reveals something about what students receive from the feedback and how they interpret it,
and this is an area wearekeen to explore in more depth in future work. The explicit prompting of students
to revisit and make use of previous feedback is an acknowledgement of well-documented complexities
surrounding engagement with feedback, feedback recipience, and its effectiveness (Price et al., 2010;
Winstone et al., 2017). Examples of paragraphs showing the use of feedback from student draft reports
are shown in Figure 6.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |343

 Figure 6: Examples of student narratives on the use of previous feedback

344|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

Students’ final laboratory reports

The final laboratory report (1500 words) represents the culmination of the assessment-feedback cycles
for the development of 1st year chemistry students’ report writing skills, and at this stage students
have the opportunity to display the whole range of skills they have learned during the year. The level
of skills development is clearly evident from the individual work of students, but inevitably there is a
range of skills development with a small number of students displaying more limited development of
their reporting skills over the year, whilst the majority of students show good evidence of development.
Examples of students’ final laboratory reports exemplifying the high standards of reporting skills some
students are able to demonstrate (for 1st year undergraduates) are available in the Supplementary
Information, showing clear evidence of the skills articulated in Table 1. They demonstrate students’ skills
in the formatting and concise professional presentation of equations, tabulated scientific data, spectra
and graphs, observing professional conventions. They also show evidence of referencing skills, skills in
chemical structure drawing, observing conventions for an experimental section, data processing and
analysis using MS Excel, writing, and making professional judgements about the inclusion/exclusion and
placing of information.

Implications and Adaptability

The following points are worthy of consideration for those who wish to adopt/adapt the general approach
described in this article:

• Resource Implications: The approach requires scheduled timetable slots for assessment
briefing sessions and for formative activities. It is unlikely to be successful if adopted by one
or two individuals in isolation, and so it is desirable to establish a teaching team that crosses
sub-disciplinary boundaries.
• Shared Values/Understanding of the Teaching Team: The importance of shared values
and understandings of the curricular objectives amongst the teaching team cannot be
overstated (Stewart et al., 2016).
• Programme Level Outcomes and Authenticity: The authenticity of the assessment tasks is
an essential feature of the overall approach (Tilstra, 2001), as students need to recognise
and accept that the skills they are to develop are relevant to their success on the degree
programme and for their future careers.
• Student Peer Review: In early iterations of our work we had students peer-assess and provide
feedback on draft laboratory reports (semester 2) during the draft report feedback session.
With experience we have refined this, because students being novices can often give
inappropriate advice. Our practice has evolved to encourage students to highlight areas
for feedback, which are then discussed and debated with the whole class. Any student
comments to be written on a peer’s work are discussed with the tutor.
• Knowledge and Skills: The acquisition of knowledge and skills is supported by careful design
and selection of high quality intellectually challenging laboratory practicals, robustness of
the marking criteria, the internalisation of these by students, and their consistent application
by markers.
• Assessment: In earlier iterations of our approach all report sections and the final report were
graded with individual feedback. However, our practice has evolved to incorporate more
formative assessment of selected report sections, providing feedback through scheduled
whole-class feedback sessions.
• Involvement of Students: The teacher-student and student-student dialogue is highly

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |345

 valuable for identifying and resolving areas requiring clarification, but also for highlighting
alternative valid approaches to aspects of report writing and exercising individual
judgement. The dialogic aspects are beneficial for staff and students.
• Student reflections on/responses to feedback: This is an important aspect of our assessment
and feedback strategy that has developmental opportunities for students and tutors in
terms of their feedback literacy; not only should students reflect and act on feedback, but
tutors should also reflect on their feedback practice in the light of how students respond to
it (Mutch et al., 2018). It is straightforward to incorporate this aspect into any adaptation of
the overall approach.
• Evaluation: In our experience the overall success of the approach is best judged holistically,
by monitoring engagement with the activities, obtaining student feedback on the elements
of the approach and finally from the overall quality of the work produced by students at the
end of the report writing programme.There is of course a lot of flexibility in the design of the
activities and the overall approach.

Conclusion

Over several years we have developed a structured dialogic assessment-feedback cycle approach to foster
the development of the report writing skills of Year 1 undergraduate chemistry students. The emphasis
on authenticity (chemistry journal articles) and the development of generic skills is an important feature
of our approach in terms of students’ perceptions of the activities as credible/relevant. The authoring of
separate report sections allows students to focus on the purposes and characteristics of each section
and is viewed as a valuable feature of the approach by the vast majority of students. This approach also
allows a structured programme of scheduled assessment briefing sessions combined with appropriate
student centred formative activities for developing students’ appreciation of academic standards and
assessment literacy. Our practice reflects recent thinking regarding effective assessment and feedback
practice, particularly the use of assessment-feedback cycles and opportunities for dialogue, although we
recognise the constraints associated with a large cohort of students (~100) in making this effective for
every individual student. Whilst recognising that a spectrum of reporting skills development is evident
across the cohort at the end of the Year 1, it is rewarding as teachers to witness the development of
these skills, some to a high level (for undergraduates at this stage), as a direct result of our assessment
and feedback practice. However, a small number of students remain unreceptive to the teaching and the
feedback and show limited skills development. In terms of the learning activities students participated in
within the various sessions, the use of exemplars and opportunities to view peer reports were identified
as useful/helpful features of these sessions. Requiring students to include a short narrative explaining
how they have used previous feedback to improve their work in the compilation of the full draft report
is a useful prompt for them to re-visit previous feedback, but it is an area that we intend to explore in
more detail in future since we have not, at this stage, analysed in detail the themes students extract from
written feedback and the extent to which these concur with the feedback intended by the teachers.
Certainly some of the student narratives are rather superficial/vague and/or have an inappropriate focus,
suggesting feedback literacy is an area for future investigation.

In conclusion, we advocate the use of assessment-feedback cycles supported by assessment briefing

sessions, written guidance and marking criteria and activities to develop assessment literacy as an effective
approach for the development of reporting skills and which is adaptable to other areas of generic skills
development. We also emphasise the importance of authenticity and a shared understanding amongst
the teaching team of the curricular objectives.

346 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing scientific reporting skills of early undergraduate chemistry students

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Beaumont C., O’Doherty M. and Shannon L. (2011), ‘Reconceptualising assessment feedback: a key to improving
student learning?’, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 36, pp. 671–687.
Berry, D. and Fawkes, K. L. (2010), ‘Constructing the components of a laboratory report using peer review’, Journal
of Chemical Education, Vol. 95, pp. 76-83.
British Educational Research Association (2014), Ethical guidelines, (https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2014/02/BERA-Ethical-Guidelines-2011.pdf?noredirect = 1 accessed November 2018).
Carless D. and Boud D. (2018), ‘The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback’,
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol.43, 1315-1325.
Evans C., (2016), “Evans’ Assessment Tool: Implementing a research-informed integrated assessment framework”,
University November
(accessed of Southampton,
2018). UK, available at: http://www.port.ac.uk/media/Media,194787,en.pdf

Galloway, K.W. (2017), “Undergraduate perceptions of value: degree skills and career skills’”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 435-440.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T. (2010), Skills required by new chemistry graduates and their development in degree
programmes, available at: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/resources/business-skills-and
commercial-awareness-for-chemists/docs/skillsdoc1.pdf (accessed November 2018).
Hill, M.A., Overton T. L., Thompson, C. D., Kitson, R. R. A. and Coppo, P. (2019), “Undergraduate recognition of
curriculum-related skill development and the skills employers are seeking’”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 20, pp. 68-84.
Kent-Waters, J., Seago, O. and Smith, L. (2018), “A Compendium of Assessment Techniques in Higher Education:
From Students’ Perspectives”, available at: http://teachingexcellence.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/
uploads/2018/10/PUGHcompendiumcomplete.pdf (accessed, November 2018).
Mutch A., Young C., Davey T. and Fitzgerald L. (2018), “A journey towards sustainable feedback”, Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol.43 No. 2, pp. 248-259.
Nicol, D. (2010), “From monologue to dialogue: Improving written feedback processes in mass higher education”,
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 35, pp. 501–517.
O’Donovan, B. Price, M. and Rust, C. (2004), “Know what I mean? Enhancing student understanding of assessment
standards and criteria”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 9, pp. 325–35.
Overton, T., Johnson S. and Scott, J. (2015), Study and Communication Skills for the Chemical Sciences, OUP, Oxford,
UK
Price, M., Handley, K., Millar, J., and O’Donovan, B. (2010), “Feedback: all that effort, but what is the effect?”,
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 277-289.
Sadler, D. R. (1989), “Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems”, Instructional Science, Vol. 18,
pp.119-144.
Sarkar M., Overton, T., Thompson, T. and Rayner, G. (2016), “Graduate Employability: Views of Recent Science
Graduates and Employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3, pp. 31-48.
Stewart, A.F., Williams, A.L., Lofgreen, J.E., Edgar, L.J.G., Hoch, L.B. and Dicks, A.P. (2016), “Chemistry writing
instruction and training: Implementing a comprehensive approach to improving student communication
skills” Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 1, pp. 86–92.
Tilstra, L. (2001), “Using Journal Articles to Teach Writing Skills for Laboratory Reports in General Chemistry”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 78 No. 6, pp 762-764.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |347

UK Quality Code for Higher Education (2013), Chapter B6, ‘Developing Assessment Literacy’, available at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk//en/quality-code/the-existing-uk-quality-code/part-b-assuring-and-enhancing
academic-quality (accessed November 2018).
Wackerly J.W. (2018), “Stepwise Approach To Writing Journal-Style Laboratory Reports in the Organic Chemistry
Course Sequence”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87, pp. 57-61.
Winstone N. E., Nash R. A., Parker M. and Rowntree J. (2017), “Supporting Learners’ Agentic Engagement with
Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes”, Educational Psychologist, Vol.
52 No. 1, pp. 17–37.
Yang M. and Carless D. (2013), “The feedback triangle and the enhancement of dialogic feedback processes”,
Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp 285-297.

348|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 24 Teaching and assessing technical
competency in the chemistry laboratory

Michael K. Seery, Hendra Y. Agustian, and Thomas O. Lambert

School of Chemistry, University of Edinburgh
michael.seery@ed.ac.uk

Teaching chemical technique has a long history going back to Michael Faraday, but
assessment of chemical technique is comparatively rare in the modern teaching laboratory.
In this work we aim to share our approach on teaching and assessing laboratory techniques.
This is grounded in an exemplar-based approach incorporating the principles of formative
assessment; whereby students have a known standard, are able to compare their efforts to
the known standard, and are able to make appropriate adjustments to their work based on
the standard in advance of submission for final summative assessment.

We describe the implementation of our approach based on the three components —

providing an exemplar, facilitating peer review during activities, and assessment and formal
feedback — for laboratory competency sessions in Year 1 and Year 2 of our undergraduate
programmes. Techniques explored include glassware techniques such as titrations, setting
up distillations, preparing standard solutions, as well as instrumental techniques such as
UV/vis spectroscopy and gas chromatography.

We found that students tended to be highly prepared — likely prompted by the necessity
to record their demonstration — and that their levels of knowledge, confidence, and
experience improved as a result of the activities. We offer some guidance for others wishing
to implement a similar approach in their practice.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (Michael Seery)

I first met Tina at a Summer School for new lecturers in Malta and our relationship has remained
sunny ever since. Her pragmatic and no-nonsense approach were exemplary and student
interests were always at the heart of everything she advocated. She brought new and fresh
perspectives to mythinking on graduate attributes, problem solving, and in more recent years
her extensive work on laboratory education has been enormously influential to my practice. But
it is Tina’s example of a professional in the discipline of chemistry education that has shaped
much of my own career, and continues to do so.

To cite: Seery, M. K., Agustian, H. Y. and Lambert, T.O. (2019), “Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry
laboratory”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina
Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 349-362.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |349

Introduction

Learning technical skills in the laboratory

Laboratory work is recognized as a core component of the chemistry curriculum. Professional and Learned
Societies require that students must have hands-on experience of laboratory equipment and instruments
in order to learn chemistry and be prepared for future coursework and employment (ACS, 2015; RSC,
2015). Laboratory skills are not unidimensional. They encompass a range of skills and techniques
related to experimental work in the laboratory, such as analytical skills, manipulative practical skills, and
instrumental skills (Kirton et al., 2014), as well as soft skills, such as critical thinking skills, teamwork skills,
and written communication skills (Bruck et al., 2010).

While there is sustained interest in the teaching of experimental technique (DeMeo, 2001), assessment
of laboratory work is typically conducted by means of laboratory reports. This conventional approach to
assessment of learning in laboratory often results in low quality reports, due to lack of guidance and clear
expectations (Gragson & Hagen, 2010) and learner fatigue caused by the requirement to produce a large
number of laboratory reports (Carnduff and Reid, 2003, p. 23). More importantly, laboratory reports do
not directly assess students’ hands-on laboratory skills, which they actually have to perform for most of
their time in the laboratory. This necessitates an approach that directly assesses students’ laboratory skills
with the purpose of improving their performance in the laboratory as well as their understanding of the
corresponding chemical concepts.

Literature on direct assessment of laboratory skills tends to describe approaches such as post-hoc
assessment stations (Kirton et al., 2014), where students demonstrate a particular skill under formalized
testing conditions, or by proxy, where the purity or yield of a product is used as an assessment of laboratory
technique (Graham et al., 2008). Examples of assessment by observation have been reported in organic
chemistry (Chen et al., 2013). More recently, work describing the assessment of techniques using video
was reported (Hensiek et al., 2017; Hensiek et al., 2016; Towns et al., 2015). We have previously described
a modified use of these video assessment methods that incorporates preparation techniques and peer
review, with the intention of emphasizing formative assessment and incorporating preparative activities
(Seery et al., 2017).

As well as considering assessment of laboratory techniques, there is also a need to consider the learning
environment in the laboratory, and how students can master techniques. Laboratory environments have
long been known to impose a high cognitive load (Johnstone & Al-Shuaili, 2001; Johnstone et al., 1994;
Johnstone & Wham, 1982). It can be difficult for students to learn how to master skills and techniques
while simultaneously needing to complete their practical work on time, consider theoretical concepts, and
learn about processing data from the laboratory. As well as the number of considerations students need
to process in the laboratory, we argue that the relationship between these considerations also imposes
a difficulty, and describe the laboratory as a complex learning environment (Agustian & Seery, 2017).
Learning in a complex environment requires students to be able to master the individual components
so that they can draw them together for the additional challenge a complex scenario brings. Therefore
explicit consideration is needed with regards to teaching chemical techniques. Supporting learning in
complex environments can be achieved by provision of preparatory activities (Agustian & Seery, 2017).

Formative assessment
We use the model of formative assessment described by Sadler to consider how to help students learn
chemical technique (Sadler, 1989). Formative assessment is a means to provide students with the capacity

350 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

to close the gap between their current understanding and skills with the desired level or outcome.
According to Sadler, the formative aspects of formative assessment are:
1. that students have a clear concept in advance of pursing a task of the standard required;
2. that they are able to monitor the quality of their own work by comparing it to this standard;
3. that they have the means to modify their work to adjust it to the standard prior to final
summative assessment.

While discussing formative assessment, Hendry proposes the use of exemplars to represent required
standards, arguing against the “loading up” of feedback until after the task is completed by students, and
instead providing feedback on an ongoing basis as they complete the task (Hendry, 2013).

An exemplar-based approach
From the literature on laboratory education over the last four decades, it is concluded that pre-laboratory
activity tends to increase the efficiency of students’ laboratory work and reduce the time spent on
experimental tasks, resulting in improved understanding of laboratory tasks and fewer experimental
errors. Aligning these observations with the concept of exemplars, our approach to teaching chemical
technique relies heavily on providing exemplar information in advance of the laboratory session. This
is done to provide students with the intended standard that they will need to achieve. When in the
laboratory, students complete their work while comparing it to this standard with the help of peer review,
and can make improvements to their final piece of work submitted for assessment. Our exemplar-peer
review-assessment approach therefore aims to draw together guiding principles regarding learning in the
laboratory, pre-laboratory work, and the role of exemplars, and align them in a framework mapping on to
the guidance from Sadler regarding formative assessment. The framework is shown in Figure 1.

In this chapter, we describe the implementation of the exemplar-peer review-assessment approach for
technical and instrumental techniques needed in the laboratory based on our experience. We elaborate
on our understanding of the nature of preparative resources that students prefer, as well as consider some
affective aspects students consider when completing the activity. We illustrate this with some insight
from our own implementation and offer suggestions for those wishing to consider the assessment of
practical skills in their practice.

Design and Implementation

The context of our implementation is with students in their first and second year of a research intensive
university in the United Kingdom. All students involved are on a chemistry majors programme, with
class sizes of about 150. The activities we describe fit into one three-hour laboratory session. We ran the

Figure 1: The exemplar-peer review-assessment framework used in our approach

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |351

activity for the Year 1 students in their second week of laboratories after arriving at university. The Year
2 students completed their “experimental techniques laboratory” as one of the rotations of six in their
physical chemistry laboratory session. We describe the implementation of these below, and subsequently
illustrate how they ran, and some outcomes from evaluation.

Laboratory skills in Year 1 — titrations, distillations, and preparing standard solutions

Students in the first year of our chemistry programme complete one three-hour chemistry laboratory
a week for 11 weeks. A decision for those who wish to implement in their own practice will be whether
to have a dedicated session for a practical competency exercise, or whether to use spare time in the
laboratory, as was described in another similar approach (Hensieket al., 2016; Townset al., 2015).We opted
for a dedicated session, as it was felt that some students might struggleto find sufficient spare time in their
practical schedule to complete these competency tasks. In the case of Year 1 students, having a dedicated
session early in the semester meant that students had the opportunity to learn and receive feedback on
some core experimental techniques prior to their use in actual experiments in the subsequent weeks of
semester.

Our model is based on providing exemplar materials to students in advance, and for the techniques in
our case (titrations, distillations, and preparing standard solutions) we prepared four videos that students
were required to watch in advance. To give an indication of content, these videos are available to view at
the weblinks shown:
• A video describing titrations (http://bit.ly/skillstitrating)
• A video describing pipetting highlighting the use of volumetric pipettes which was an
ancillary component of the preparation for titrations (http://bit.ly/skillsvolpipette)
• A video describing the set-up and completion of distillation (http://bit.ly/skillsstandardsoln)
• A video describing the preparation of a standard solution, including the correct approach to
weighing a solid (http://bit.ly/skillsdistillation)

These videos were prepared by an undergraduate student who had previous experience with the
Chemistry Olympiad, and some postgraduate students with significant experience of laboratory teaching
(funded by a small university grant). Videos typically lasted from 4–7 minutes in length.

Students’ laboratory manuals included details about how the laboratory would run, along with a prompt
about watching videos in advance. In addition, laboratory teaching assistants were told to remind students
in the first week to prepare for the second week. Students also received an email reminding them to watch
the videos in advance of the practical session.

When students came into the laboratory, they worked in their pre-assigned pairs through the laboratory
activity. This was described in the laboratory manual, and structured around three peer-review sheets
(Supplementary Information), outlining what students should do in the laboratory for each technique, as
well as providing prompts for their peer to feedback on (see Figure 2 for an example). The main task was
to video the competent demonstration of each task. To do this, students would give their mobile phone
to their partner and then while their partner recorded them, they would demonstrate the technique. The
use of the student’s own phone to record the video emphasises the sense that they retain ownership of
the video.

An important point was that students narrate their technique as they completed it, explaining each step of
the process. This was a useful way of giving students practice at explaining chemistry techniques verbally,
and also made assessment much easier. Students could record their videos as often as they liked. After

352 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

Figure 2: Example of a peer review sheet for performing distillations

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |353

a recording, the peer could offer feedback using the sheets, but in practice we found that such feedback
tended to be verbal.

After the laboratory, students uploaded both videos to a video hosting platform, typically YouTube or the
University’s own platform, and submitted the links to specified assignment areas on the virtual learning
environment (in our case, Blackboard). This was reviewed by the teaching assistant using a rubric, and
once competency was demonstrated, a pass grade was awarded. The mark from the rubric was used to
generate the laboratory mark for students in that week, and interms of workflow, once the rubric was used,
the mark automatically entered the gradebook for students which hosted all of their laboratory marks for
their course (module). Figure 3 shows an example rubric for the titration technique. It is important to keep
the rubrics simple and short so that they can be used for correcting large numbers of submissions. The
choice of asking students to submit a link to an elsewhere hosted video was a conscious one; it meant that
students had ownership of the video themselves and could use it elsewhere as they wished (to show to
friends, or to use in internship applications).

Figure 3: Example of an assessment rubric for titrations

Laboratory skills in Year 2 — using the UV/vis spectrometer and the gas chromatograph
A similar approach was used in our second year. This was implemented one year after the first
implementation in first year, meaning that most students in the class had completed the first year version
described above. As part of their second year, students complete laboratory classes, including six 3-hour
laboratory classes over six weeks in physical chemistry. These experiments are completed on rotation, and
to incorporate our laboratory competency activity, one of the rotation experiments was an experimental
techniques class. This class covered use of the UV/vis spectrometer and gas chromatography (GC).
Following the approach taken in first year, students were told to view preparation materials in advance of
their scheduled laboratory class which included a video describing the basis and competent use of the
technique, along with some additional reading materials about the technique. These videos were also
prepared by undergraduate students working on summer placements.

In laboratory time, students had an opportunity to discuss the technique with a teaching assistant to

354|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

clarify any queries, and then proceeded to demonstrate the use of the technique to their peer, while
the peer recorded the student on the demonstrating student’s mobile phone as described above. The
demonstrating student had the chance to review the video, undergo a peer review with a provided
checklist, and once satisfied, proceeded onto the second experiment. Time permitting and not included in
this process, students also received an in-laboratory demonstration of the Karl Fisher titration apparatus
from the teaching assistant. The organization of the class meant that in any one three-hour session, there
were approximately 6–8 students allocated to this activity, which had a dedicated teaching assistant.
Students were required to complete this activity, but in this case there were no contributing marks from
the activity to their laboratory course grade.

Evaluation approaches
Ethical approval for all evaluations was granted in accordance with our university’s requirements. Students
were informed that completion of surveys or discussions about the technique had no bearing on their
assessment, and that they could opt not to engage with evaluation, or choose to withdraw afterwards
without penalty. No individual student is identifiable in our work. Where example videos of students are
shared, these are done after receiving written permission from the students to do so.

Detailed evaluation of the implementation with Year 1 students including access and use of materials,
students perception of their knowledge, confidence, and experience was carried out and has been
previously published (Seery et al., 2017); pertinent outcomes are shared here. A subsequent evaluation
of the implementation with Year 2 students was conducted, and aimed to explore some affective aspects
regarding the completion of this task. In this case, students were issued with a survey after completing
their laboratory work. As an incentive, students were told that three names from the submitted responses
would be selected and awarded a £20 retailer voucher. 52 students (40%) responded to the survey.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Access and use of videos

For Year 1, we studied closely the use of videos. As they are hosted on YouTube, some detailed analytics
are available, and are described in detail elsewhere (Seery et al., 2017). A key finding from that study is that
students in the main watch the videos in advance of the practical class, and once they had clicked on the
video tended to watch it almost to completion. Some drop offin watching occurred at the end of videos,
where the video demonstration ends and some slides appear regarding subsequent calculations or other
non-practical related considerations.

In Year 2, we surveyed students regarding their preparation. Students were provided with pre-laboratory
resources for both experiments, consisting of briefing documents and explanation videos. In general,
the majority of students stated that they used all of the resources available to them (85% for UV/visible
spectroscopy and 81% for GC). When asked which type of resource they preferred most, 71% prefer the
videos to information sheets whilst preparing for laboratory work. In addition, in Year 2, we asked students
about their perception of preparedness. Students were asked to which extent they felt prepared for both
experiments, on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (very prepared). More than three quarters of the students
felt well prepared (4 or 5 on Likert scale) for the UV/visible spectroscopy experiment (Figure 4). A small
number of students felt unprepared (2 on Likert scale) or not prepared at all (scale 1). The profile for the
GC experiment is slightly different from that of UV/visible spectroscopy (Figure 4). While more than one
third of the students felt well prepared (4 or Likert scale, 36%), only 2% actually scored very high (scale
5), as opposed to the previous experiment (35%). This is unsurprising, as students will have already had

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |355

 Figure 4: Students’ perception of preparedness for UV/visible spectroscopy (top) and GC (bottom) experiments

some familiarity with the operation of UV/visible spectroscopy, whereas this will be the first time they are
exposed to GC. In general, however, it can be said that students reported that they felt well-prepared for
both experiments.

Our findings indicate that students welcomed the opportunity to prepare for the experiment, echoing
the sense of preparedness we observed in our previous studies for students in earlier years. This extent
of preparation may reflect a desire by students to feel organized. In their work on exploring student
experiences and perceptions of control, Bretz describes how a student in their study had an increased
perception of control by feeling organized after the students were required to write procedural information
in their laboratory book (Galloway et al., 2016). While the task in the laboratory is different in our case –
just focusing on technique — the awareness of students in knowing they will need to demonstrate the
task may emphasize their desire to feel organized. The teaching assistant noted that the students were
generally well prepared and tended to progress well during the activity.

Improvements in knowledge, confidence, and experience

In the evaluation of our implementation with Year 1 students, we followed a protocol proposed by Towns
in analysing pre- and post-survey questions exploring students’ knowledge, confidence and experience
of the various aspects of each experimental technique (Hensieket al., 2016; Towns et al., 2015). For each of
the three techniques, we saw statistically significant shifts in the pre- to post-survey responses, showing
demonstrable increase in students’ knowledge, confidence, and experience of titrations, distillations, and
standard solutions (Seery et al., 2017). For distillations, this effect was most pronounced (most decrease
in choice of Likert scale 1 combined with most increased choice of Likert scale 5). In discussions with
students we found that while it was common for students to learn about distillations at school, they often
did not complete the technique in practice because schools did not have the appropriate glassware. For
titrations (biggest decrease in scale 3 and increase in scale 5) and standard solutions (biggest decrease in
scale 4 and increase in scale 5), shifts were less pronounced, but still significant, as students would have
been more likely to complete these techniques at school.

Affective aspects
After our survey of knowledge, confidence, and experience in Year 1, we subsequently moved to
considering some affective aspects of this work. This was in part in reaction to the growing interest in
affect in laboratory education research (Galloway et al., 2016) but also because that it was clear from our
implementations with both Year 1 and Year 2 students that students took the task of completing a video
demonstration very seriously. As mentioned, we found near universal preparation among all students
(even though there was no direct mark for assessment in the case of the Year 2 work) and students in

356|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

the laboratory tended to show themselves to be very well prepared and wanting to do a very thorough
demonstration – so much so that it was unusual for a student not to complete the activity successfully.

Students were asked whether they enjoyed the laboratory in general, and three quarters of them said
that they did. However, we were interested in particular about how students felt about demonstrating
the technique on video. Students were asked to select a word from a given list that best matched their
feelings about giving a video presentation. The responses showed that about 2/3 were associated with
some kind of negative feeling (such as being worried, nervous, uncertain, and bored), whereas one third
of them felt positive about the experiments (confident, relaxed, excited, and carefree). Suggested ways
of managing this in future include asking 1 or 2 students from the year ahead to come in and speak
about how they felt recording the video, prompting reflection on how this activity impacted on their
lab competency, and emphasising how these communication skills are required in the workplace when
training others or in interviews.

We wished to further explore confidence in techniques by asking whether they would feel confident
in explaining the technique to others. We categorized the audience in terms of peers (other students),
academic staff, and in a job interview. As with the perception of preparedness, students were less
confident about explaining the GC technique; only 1 in 5 students felt that they would be confident to
explain this technique in a job interview (Table 1). However, despite some apprehension in GC laboratory,
92% of students feel they are confident in applying these techniques to another experiment. Comparable
to other parameters for GC, students’ confidence in explaining techniques are lower. Only 19% are
confident in explaining to all three audiences (other students, academic staff, and in a job interview),
as opposed to 56% for UV/visible spectroscopy. This is likely due the fact that this technique would
have been very unfamiliar to them, and points to an important note for implementation, especially for
advanced techniques, in taking some more time with the preparatory materials to ensure students got
some opportunity to familiarize with the processes involved. We are working to improve the preparatory
materials to help improve confidence regarding GC. It should also be noted that at the time of this survey,
GC was not on our second year lecture course curriculum. Some further student perceptions and a video
example of a student completing UV/vis spectroscopy demonstration are available (Lykkeberg et al., 2017)

During our observations, students who expressed anxiety at the start of the session noticeably relaxed as
the session progressed and seemed to focus more on learning the actual techniques. When asked, students
felt that without the constant feeling they were being assessed during the learning of the techniques, they
could spend more time focused on understanding how each technique worked. Students also appeared
to find having a practice prior to the video being recorded allowed them to better organize and structure
everything they had been told/read during the preparation phase of the experiment. Group enthusiasm
Table 1: Student responses to question “Do you feel confident that you could explain these techniques to…”

UV/vis spectroscopy Gas chromatography

Not confident in explaining technique 2% 8%
Other students 15% 36%
Other students and academic staff 25% 29%
a job interview
Other students, academic staff, and in 56% 19%

Other combinations Academic staff only:2%, Other Academic staff only:2%

students, job interview:4%

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |357

was also very high during the course of the experiment and videoing one another seemed to encourage
teamwork and critical self-assessment of the group’s performance.

Assessment
Assessment of laboratory competency in our case is only feasible by viewing students’ videos after
the laboratory. In all cases we prepared a rubric to create a simple assessment protocol, meaning that
assessment of large numbers of videos is feasible. Laboratory teaching assistants (demonstrators)
corrected the video submissions for approximately 12–15 first years in each semester and six second
years (weekly for six weeks). As well as rubric score that is used to generate the laboratory mark for the
activity (in the case of our Year 1 students), assessment by this method meant that feedback could be very
individual regarding technique, highlighting to students specific instances where they had completed a
task incorrectly. In general the assessment process went well, with one exception: several students (up to
10%) set their video to private on their sharing platform, which meant that they couldn’t be viewed. This
required correspondence to tell them how to make it unlisted or public. We added further details to the
documentation in later years to ameliorate this problem, although it still persists, albeit to a lesser extent.

Digital badges
As students have provided digital evidence for their technical competency in the form of a video, we
opted to trial the issuance of digital badges. Digital badges are an emerging assessment method in
laboratory education. Previous work by Towns (Hensiek et al., 2017; Hensiek et al., 2016; Towns et al.,
2015) as well as our own work (Hennah & Seery, 2017; Seery et al., 2017), have reported the use of digital
badges to accredit individual experimental skills. Once students achieved a pass grade (3/5 in the rubric)
for a technique, they were issued with a digital badge in each of the relevant techniques (Figure 4). In
our VLE (Blackboard), these are called achievements, and the system can be automatically set up so that
achievements are released once a core score has been obtained (in our case 3/5). Students in the early
years of implementation had the option to push these badges from the VLE to an external environment
for hosting badges (such as the Open Badges backpack, backpack.openbadges.org). The purpose of
such websites is to allow learners accumulate badges from a variety of educational scenarios in one
place. However, changes to the architecture underpinning this badge transfer as a result of the Mozilla
Foundation divesting from Open Badges has meant that the link from Blackboard to external sites was not
operational in the last two years. However, students still receive their badges within the VLE.

Implications and Adaptability

We have implemented laboratory competency activities at large scale to groups of ~150 students in Year
1 and ~120 students in Year 2 undergraduate chemistry courses. After several years of implementation,
some core considerations for others wishing to adopt this approach in their own practice have been
compiled:
• Preparatory materials: at the heart of our approach is the provision of preparatory materials
to students, and in our case we relied on videos.These take sometime to develop, but given
the extent of their usage, it is worth while taking the time to prepare them to a high standard.
In our case we secured some small grants for university teaching and learning activities
to fund summer interns, but there is also the opportunity to find interested postgraduate
students, etc., who may be keen to work on activities that help them with their Associate
Fellowship of Higher Education application or similar. In our work, students preferred videos
over reading materials, and videos recorded in the laboratory that they will be working in
maximised the opportunity for advance preparation.

358 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

• Workingwithstakeholders:runningundergraduatelaboratoriesinvolvealotofstakeholders,
and it is important to work with course organisers in advance of implementation so that
laboratory manuals can be developed, as well as laboratory technicians to help prepare
documentation for technical development and confirm any breaks in the rules regarding
mobile phones in the laboratory. The approach described in this chapter is outside the norm
for typical university departments, and will need to be actively championed by whoever
wishes to implement it.
• Training: if the laboratory runs with the assistance of postgraduate demonstrators, training
will need to be included in their initial briefings to help them help with the implementation
of this approach. This involves explaining how the process works, managing students in
the laboratory as they complete the task, and explaining how the assessment process
works. These demonstrators will understandably be concerned with workload, especially of
assessment, and in our case rubrics were useful to help assuage those concerns. Correctly
implemented, demonstrators will likely be the biggest advocates, as they know more than
most about the need to develop students’ experimental skills!
• Troubleshooting: Common queries and issues arise in our implementation. The first
is the situation where a student does not want to be recorded. As part of our training,
demonstratorsare told to beencouraging of studentsintheir ability to do the demonstration,
but that if there is any indication that the student does not want to complete the activity
for any personal reason, they do not have to do so, and instead the activity becomes one
of demonstrating competency to the demonstrator rather than by recording. In our case,
after implementing with several hundred students, only one known case of this has arisen.
A second issue is unfortunately more common – students submit videos which are have
been set to private status and therefore cannot be viewed. It is important that however you
encourage students to submit videos, you give clear guidance on making sure that the video
is visible for the purposes of assessment, and that they can change the settings or remove
the video after assessment. We have been proactively prepared with phone chargers, etc. for
troubleshooting technical issues in laboratory classes, but in our experience, students tend
to sort out any of these issues on their own.

Limitations
The approach described has worked relatively smoothly in our institution for the last three years. It does
require the dedication of one laboratory session where students complete the competency activity in place
of a traditional laboratory exercise. Demonstrator training and the alternative approach for assessment
do need some consideration, as this is outside the normal practice of teaching and assessment that
demonstrators will be used to. It also requires resource to develop the preparatory materials, but some
appropriate generic resources may be available through other sources, such as the RSC practical section
on Learn Chemistry (RSC, no date).

Conclusions

The assessment of laboratory skills by video, utilizing exemplar videos to prepare students in advance
of their activity worked well in our application for both simple glassware techniques and instrumental
techniques. We found evidence that our approach led to improvements in experimental competency,
and in students’ perceptions of their knowledge, confidence, and experience of experimental techniques.
Students felt confident about their levels of preparation, but as the technique being demonstrated
becomes more complicated for them, careful thought is needed on how best to ensure they feel

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |359

prepared about the task. However, even in that scenario, the central goal of enabling students to develop
competency that they feel they can draw on in future tasks was achieved.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Prof Marcy Towns and her colleagues for their workshop on digital badging and
experimental assessment at Biennial Conference in Chemical Education (BCCE) in 2016 as well as her
publications cited here — these were invaluable in encouraging us to make the leap to using this kind of
assessment. We acknowledge the University of Edinburgh’s Principal’s Teaching Award Scheme and the
Principal’s Career Development Scholarships scheme which supported this work.

References
ACS (2015), ACS Guidelines for Chemistry in Two-Year College Programs, Washington DC: American Chemical
Society.
Agustian, H. Y. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education:
a proposed framework for their design”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 518-532.
Bruck, L. B., Towns, M. and Bretz, S. L. (2010), “Faculty perspectives of undergraduate chemistry laboratory: Goals
and obstacles to success”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87 No. 12, pp. 1416-1424.
Carnduff and Reid (2003), Enhancing Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratories: Pre-laboratory and Post-laboratory
Exercises, Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge.
Chen, H.-J., She, J.-L., Chou, C.-C., Tsai, Y.-M. and Chiu, M.-H. (2013), “Development and Application of a Scoring
Rubric for Evaluating Students’ Experimental Skills in Organic Chemistry: An Instructional Guide for
Teaching Assistants”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 90 No. 10, pp. 1296-1302.
DeMeo, S. (2001), “Teaching Chemical Technique. A Review of the Literature”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.
78 No. 3, pp. 373-379.
Galloway, K. R., Malakpa, Z. and Bretz, S. L. (2016), “Investigating affective experiences in the undergraduate
chemistry laboratory:Students' perceptions of control and responsibility”, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 93 No. 2, pp. 227-238.
Gragson, D. E. and Hagen, J. P. (2010), “Developing Technical Writing Skills in the Physical Chemistry Laboratory:
A Progressive Approach Employing Peer Review”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 62-65.
Graham, K. J., Johnson, B. J., Jones, T. N., McIntee, E. J. and Schaller, C. P. (2008), “Designing and Conducting a
Purification Scheme as an Organic Chemistry Laboratory Practical”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 85
No. 12, p. 1644.
Hendry, G. (2013), “Integrating feedback with classroom teaching”, in S. Merry, M. Price, D. Carless, and M. Taras
(Eds.), Reconceptualising Feedback in Higher Education, Routledge, London.
Hennah, N. and Seery, M. K. (2017), Using Digital Badges for Developing High School Chemistry Laboratory Skills.
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 7, pp. 844-848.
Hensiek, S., DeKorver, B. K., Harwood, C. J., Fish, J., O'Shea, K. and Towns, M. (2017), Digital Badges in Science: A
Novel Approach to the Assessment of Student Learning”, Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 46 No.
3, p. 28.
Hensiek, S., DeKorver, B. K., Harwood, C. J., Fish, J., O’Shea, K. and Towns, M. (2016), “Improving and Assessing
Student Hands-On Laboratory Skills through Digital Badging”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No.
11, pp. 1847-1854.
Johnstone, A. H. and Al-Shuaili, A. (2001), “Learning in the laboratory; some thoughts from the literature”,

360 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Teaching and assessing technical competency in the chemistry laboratory

University Chemistry Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 42-51.

Johnstone, A. H., Sleet, R.J. and Vianna, J. F. (1994), “An information processing model of learning: Its application
to an undergraduate laboratory course in chemistry”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 77-87.
Johnstone, A. H., and Wham, A. J. B. (1982), “The demands of practical work”, Education in Chemistry, Vol. 19 No.
3, pp. 71-73.
Kirton, S. B., Al-Ahmad, A. and Fergus, S. (2014), “Using Structured Chemistry Examinations (SChemEs) As an
Assessment Method To Improve Undergraduate Students’ Generic, Practical, and Laboratory-Based Skills”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 5, pp. 648-654.
Lykkeberg, A., Koniecczna, Z. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Using video demonstration and peer-feedback to develop
laboratory skills”, Teaching Matters Blog, available at: https://www.teaching-matters-blog.ed.ac.uk/using
video-demonstration-and-peer-feedback-to-develop-laboratory-skills/ (accessed 6 March 2019).
RSC (no date), Learn Chemistry Experimentation Hub, available at: http://www.rsc.org/learn-chemistry/collections/
experimentation/practical-chemistry (accesed 6 March 2019).
RSC (2015), Accreditation of Degree Programmes, RSC, Cambridge.
Sadler, D. R. (1989),“Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems”, Instructional Science, Vol. 18,
pp. 119-144.
Seery, M. K., Agustian, H. Y., Doidge, E. D., Kucharski, M. M., O'Connor, H. M. and Price, A. (2017), “Developing
laboratory skills by incorporating peer-review and digital badges”, Chemistry Education Research and
Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 403-419.
Towns, M., Harwood, C.J., Robertshaw, M.B., Fish, J. and O’Shea, K. (2015), “The Digital Pipetting Badge: A Method
To Improve Student Hands-On Laboratory Skills”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 12, pp. 2038
2044.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |361

362|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Overturning a laboratory course to develop
25 21st century skills

Angela Ziebell, Stephen R. George-Williams, Stephen M. Danczak,

Jared C. Ogunde, Michelle A. Hill, Katherine Fernandez, Mahbub Sarkar,
Christopher D. Thompson and Tina L. Overton
School of Chemistry, Monash University, Australia
chris.thompson@monash.edu

The aim of the Transforming Laboratory Learning program at Monash University was to
embed context and industry relevance across an entire undergraduate chemistry laboratory
curriculum. Over three years, connections with industry were established to seed and
develop ideas to augment existing activities, or recreate experiments in every subject. A
rigorous education research project ran concurrently to measure students’ recognition, and
development of skills at each stage of the chemistry major. This project also captured the
opinions and challenges faces by academic and sessional staff involved in delivery of the
program.

The research clearly indicated that individual activities appeared to result in more
engaged students, particularly where they were able to develop a wider range of skills
and articulate these through assessment tasks. Student themselves attributed this to
greater contextualisation and freedom to explore their own methods via the inquiry-based
activities. Many students reported a new perspective, seeing laboratory classes as preparing
them for the workforce, rather than just reinforcing their understanding of chemistry. This
chapter outlines the strategies that other chemistry departments might deploy to achieve
similar changes in their own curricula. The value of this work lies in how it has extended
smaller scale initiatives described in the literature to impact on an entire curriculum and the
underlying culture and purpose of laboratory learning in chemistry.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

This chapter describes the Transforming Laboratory Learning project, an educational initiative
implemented across an entire school, with a view to changing the culture of undergraduate
learning in the chemistry laboratory. This project was led by Professor Tina Overton, not long
after she was appointed as the inaugural Professor of Chemistry Education at Monash University
in Australia in 2014. As the lead in the primary theme of this chapter, we acknowledge the
extraordinary depth of her work undertaken at Monash over just four years.
To cite: Ziebell, A., George-Williams, S. R., Danczak, S. M., Ogunde, J. C., Hill, M.A., Fernandez, K., Sarkar, M., Thompson, C. D. and
Overton, T. L. (2019), “Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.),
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 363-376.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |363

Introduction

This chapter presents transferable ideas and concepts that we used in redeveloping the laboratory portion
of 17 difference chemistry classes/units within one university, under the banner of Transforming Laboratory
Learning (TLL).The point of this chapter is not to bombard the reader with detailed considerations. Instead,
we seek to give an overview of the important factors to consider when redeveloping laboratory classes.
Included are some pointers that we found worked for us in a large-scale redevelopment, and that we see
as transferable to other institutes or science specialties.

Design and implementation guidelines

The section below seeks to share strategies for embarking on a project such as TLL, drawing attention to
the initiation of such a project, and the importance of different relationships crucial to success. Obviously,
this includes academic colleagues, industry partnerships, and most importantly the students themselves.
Our aim was to develop an engaging, modern curriculum based on sound pedagogy and incorporating
context-based learning with opportunities for inquiry and varied assessment types. In particular, the
target was to bring work-integrated learning (WIL) into the classroom en masse to provide work-relevant
and authentic experiences to students. Industrial context has recently been used in the design a number
of new laboratory programs (Bingham et al., 2015; Erhart et al., 2015; Pilcheret al., 2015). When delivered
correctly, this approach allows all students to have many small WIL experiences in the classroom. This
approach can either compensate for an inability to place ever-growing cohorts of students in external
placements, or add to preparation students experience before embarking on such placements. As shown
in Figure 1, the aim was to include activities in the redeveloped laboratories that both improve student
engagement (Pringle and Henderleiter, 1999) and enhance the transferable skills graduates will require
in the workplace, but have been shown to be lacking in typical chemistry curricula (Bennett, 2002; Sarkar,
2016).

It is widely recognised that internships and work placement experiences are valuable to students (Cooper
et al., 2010; Crebert et al., 2014). Students better understand what they are learning and why, and it can
further develop students career aspirations and their motivation to complete their degree (Little and
Harvey, 2006). Importantly, work placements can help students successfully transition between the
university and the workplace, a process that has recently come under a lot of attention in Australia, along
with many other countries (Helyer and Lee, 2014).

We have relied largely on context-based learning, leveraging external relationships within the local and
international chemical industry, in order to bring an authentic context to as many activities as possible.
Once a real-world material/problem/compound has been identified, introducing inquiry into an activity
is straightforward, as is the introduction of authentic assessment. Work-like practices and procedures
can add to the experience, such as the use of standard operating procedures (SOPs) or submission of
industry appropriate reports in place of standard student reports. In line with our pragmatic approach to
education, some activities have been introduced without a direct connection to an industry partner as it is
highly unlikely that on a medium to large redevelopment you will be able to find partners for all activities.
In such cases, we have made use of the excellent existing accessible resources such as the Journal of
Chemical Education.

How to select which activities to redevelop

It is important to take a pragmatic approach to the activities redeveloped. During our redevelopment,
we took ideas from industry partners, the media, other laboratory courses, chemistry research literature,

364|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

Figure 1: Filling skills gaps while better engaging students

consumer products, research underway in our department, other tertiary science educators, education
researchers, and everyday life events. Inspiration is literally anywhere you care to look. However, not
everything needs to have context. For example, we left technical skill development activities as just that.
Initiate your project by analysing which of your activities are amenable to reconfiguration, rather than
blindly choosing from your pre-existing program, as you will inevitably find some chemistry topics are
more suitable to contextualisation than others. Importantly, you need to consider which activities generate
interesting tasks that match the multidimensional needs of your classroom (or laboratory management),
and the course structure. For example, you might be trying to include a variety of assessments in the class
or attempting to increase the number of transferable skills that are included (for example MS Excel use,
multimedia production, debating, public speaking, literature review, planning). Figure 2 summarises the
key points to consider when redeveloping and contextualising an activity. If there was a grand wish list
written at the start of the redevelopment process, you may not meet all of these items. However, it is likely
that during the process you have learnt why they cannot be met, and have either reassessed their value or
learnt more about how they might be incorporated in the future.

Where to find industry partners

There is no one place where you will find someone with whom to collaborate on designing all context
based learning activities. Start activating your networks and work out who people know, and in which
industries. This will be highly dependent on your department, local or national industry, specialty and the
subject for which you are finding a context. Do you have a business development manager that can inform
who your department has worked with? Do you have any staff members who are active in professional
groups which also include industry partners? Do you have a strong alumni community that you can reach
out to at department or institute level?Table 1 summarises sectors that we approached in order to identify
contexts for different chemistry specialities. An example of one of the transformed exercises can be found
in the Supplementary Information.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |365

At Monash, our strategy was to engage industry as partners in our project rather than just a source of ideas,
and we found they are more than happy to be approached by universities. After all, they have a stake in
protecting their industry by ensuring a good supply of highly, and appropriately trained graduates. If the
industry partner works with you to add a snapshot of their industry into a context-based learning activity,
students graduate understanding a little more about the partner’s industry. Industry partners are quick
to identify the value of working on real examples and problems and not purely theoretical exercises and
are generally keen to help introduce this type of learning. In two and a half years, we did not have a single
industry partner say they could not see the value in what we were doing.

It is essential to consider the local industries that you have to work with, and whom your students will
have as potential employers when they graduate. Local may mean state, country, or region depending on
geography and student demographics. You are simply trying to signpost how the chemistry is important
in industry, and the skills students are likely to be using in genuine graduate roles. Local companies
are the most likely people to employ your students. Because of this, and the ease of working with an
organisation in close physical proximity, they are the most likely to be willing to engage with you. The key
to recruiting industry partners is to actively and regularly seek relationships outside of the university. In
addition, although relationships are commonly built over time, key contacts change roles or industries
change their focus, so new partners are always needed.

A good approach is use conferences to talk to one or two potential industry partners, and follow up with
them when you return. Industry sector seminars or events are also very good places to meet potential
industry partners. Make the most of any opportunity that arises. An example from our experience was
that attending an Australian Society of Cosmetic Chemists on campus led to an industry partner who
consulted on a laboratory we were redeveloping, and subsequently also started a research project with
one of our academic staff members.

A generic but useful industry partner is any company that supplies you with equipment. These companies
have vast networks of contacts and it is their job to know what equipment or consumables each of their
customers uses and how. They will also have hundreds of application notes demonstrating the use of their
instruments on model samples. Do not underestimate the important consequent impacts of developing
good relationships with local industry contacts. These will improve your department’s ability to place
interns and to undertake industry-linked contract work or research.

Internal relationships — building staff engagement

At the same time as you are canvasing for industry partners and/or context, you need to be looking
internally. Who are the staff involved with the course and whom do you have to bring on board with
your venture? Every class and every activity is different. There are a large number of factors to consider
(see Table 2) including the logistical issues of number of students, cost of reagents, existing knowledge
of students, timing of laboratory classes, and availability of instruments. You also need to consider how
the activity lies inside the course, the relationship to other related subjects/classes, the personalities that
teach the course, the ability to (re)train teaching staff, and the casualization of your teaching staff. Most
situations will have benefits and weaknesses and you must analyse the situation and make best use of
what you have.
Making changes in an environment where the staff are largely casual can be characterised by a lack of
resistance to change because casual staff are not invested in the activity. Alternatively, it can be met with
apathy and a lack of enthusiasm for thinking through new ideas for the same reasons. Alternatively, long
term staff can be resistant to change because they prefer familiarity or have a sense of ownership for

366 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

What key
What are the What are the
fundamentals do
What is your candidate topics or
you want the
major logistical
technical topic? activities for challenges for this
students thinking activity/subject?
redevelopment?
about?

How can you best

and
How supportive
areexperienced
the staff? and
Is thewhat
staffisstable
history? their assess the needs of
Staff engagement the class and
communicate
suggestions?

exists?
What already What do
What is in the What is visible educational
literature? online?
experts in this field
present to their
students?

Can a relationship
Brain local be
(or
these
inthe
activity? activity
Do you or
be your
aand
workstorming
How
industry can
explored
fundamentals?
What
international)
context(s)
industrial
uses the that
How
cts
maximises
have
can
educational an
department/conta
engagement
relationship?
value?
built Can elements like
Who can
with?
you be built? Where
canyou get
context without a
partner?

inquiry and
transferable skills
be overtly
incorporated?

can Is
this
be activity?
assessment
authentic
there an
paired that
with You may
not,
brainstorm want
Ifcontextualized
activity.
why anot?to
more How does this
assessment mix
Assessment with others in the
unit/course for a
balance?

Are you going to

When are you How are you going
research the
Student going to ask the
students feedback
to communicate
engagement students about the the changes that
and compare after
laboratory classes? are happening?
redevelopment?

are you How are you going

How going What and when
to recruit
and make
worthwhile? it
students are the to
going students
trial? to get other
Testing teaching staff
involved?

Figure 2: How to redevelop and contextualise undergraduate laboratories

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |367

 Table 1:Sourcing companies/fields for different areas of chemistry

Area of Likely industry sectors An example from TLL

chemistry

Physical and pharmaceutical

producers/formulators/manufacturers,
personal
Food, cosmetics
care companies Water proofing fabric for an umbrella
(contact angle)

Materials or
construction
coatings, inchemicals,
Manufacturers/developers
specialising
cardboard,
tablets,
pigment orcompanies
advanced manufacturing
of paint/
superconductors,
dye, paper
plastics, Synthesise and assess a paint-base
- each group selects a different
recipe and compares (emulsion
polymerisation)

e.g. self-cleaning glass, solar panels, metal

organic frameworks
Analytical research or production
Environmental
equipment supply
testing,
companies,
pharmaceutical
companies,
food Bush medicine (drug discovery from
natural products, LCMS)

testing/production companies, brewers,

any large chemical production company,
food additives
Organic biocatalytic
manufacturers,
Pharmaceutical and vet drug
manufacturing
catalysis manufacturers,
developers/ Drug authenticity assessment
with quality report for submission
(behaviour in behaviour with change
in pH, pKa)
Medicinal manufacturers,
manufacturing and vet drug developers/
Pharmaceutical radiotherapy, biocatalytic Resin based combinatorial synthesis of
hydantoin (high through-put synthesis
and drug design)
Inorganic Anticancer treatments, metal-organic Macrobicyclic Cage Complexes for
frameworks, catalysis manufacturers Pharmaceuticals – products given to
an associated research group (cage
complexation and synthesis)

individual activities or even whole programs. However, staff can also be very excited about changes as
they may have been waiting for someone to come along to introduce improvements that they know have
long been needed. Ultimately, everyone can react differently and you can never take anyone’s reaction
for granted. Including staff heavily in redevelopment consultations is very important. However, it is also
important to explain that the multifactorial nature of the learning environment (especially laboratories)
means that not all suggestions can be incorporated.

A common type of improvement suggestion from teaching staff is one that will make a class faster or
easier for the students. Some of these opportunities are constructive; however, these “improvements” can
also be undesirable. For example, attempts to fast track techniques by preparing samples for students
beforehand, ensuring syntheses are “unbreakable”, or writing out methods step by step can sacrifice
learning opportunities and ultimately do not produce an authentic experience.

Some of this resistance can be overcome by explaining to staff the advantages and the body of literature

368|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

Table 2: Some factors to consider when redeveloping a laboratory class

Staff Ongoing or
Resources
Technical train staffof staff
knowledge
tocasual Technical knowledge of staff
Ongoing or casual
Resources to train staff

Equipment can
do you
Whatwill
How behave?
ityou buy? How old?
maintained? How user friendly is it?
How many replicates do you have?
Does it need to be shared?

Supplies Reuse/recycle
Disposal costs/savings
Expense Risk of delay on delivery
Import issues
Robustness

Safety canworkplace
What are you remove/reduce/replace?
practices? Balance between exposure and
practice with dangerous goods.
How can safety be better communicated? Can risks be engineered out?

Curriculum do you
subjects?
How
Whatdoes want towith
it interact other units/
cover? Order of topics
How do you want to assess
Prerequisites

that supports the changes and the methodology under which they are being undertaken. However, some
scientists may treateducational data and evidence differently to data in their own technical area. Research
evidence is easy to dismiss when you do not understand it, and it can be scary for academics to admit they
do not have all the answers when it comes to teaching, despite spending many years in the role.

Support from the leadership of the school/department is essential for signalling the committed to
redevelopment. If you believe your department has not been very vocal but is supportive, suggest some
ways the executive can raise the profile of the project so other staff understand their commitment by
having someone address the issue in a staff meeting, sending an email announcing the start of the project,
or posting an article in the faculty newsletter.

In reality, you will probably see a mixture of behaviour as different as the people you work with. It is
important for success, especially with more sizeable redevelopments, that you address staff’s different
concerns, but also determine where the line is at when you finish discussions and make a decision. We
encourage those who are embarking on this journey to consult widely and communicate thoroughly. You
will never be negatively impacted by people understanding the changes too well.

Students are your biggest advocates

It is vital that students are informed about thereasons and logicfor an industry-focused and contextualised
laboratory curriculum. This is particularly important in larger redevelopments. Students will not demand
to see your references, but they will appreciate knowing that the educational approaches are informed by
research, just as their technical topics are underpinned with science.

Each and every redeveloped laboratory exercise in the TLL project was piloted with a group of students

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |369

prior to implementation.We asked our participants to complete a questionnaire with a range of closed and
open-ended questions to gather their impressions and feedback. Trialling a laboratory with students and
teaching associates allows you to see if the activity is the correct length, if the workload is as you would
expect, if the pre-laboratory preparation activity has prepared the students, and if there are unexpected
gaps in knowledge or laboratory skills. It also enables determination of consumable usage, as well as
teaching associate preparation and their ability to shepherd students through the exercise.

In general, students want someone to be thinking about how they learn and how people teach them.
A subset of students will happily volunteer for trialling new laboratories and activities if the experience
is framed as an opportunity to improve their laboratories skills. To make this a more significant activity
or focus point, consider creating a group or club where participants can earn certificates or some sort
of benefit for their involvement. A small amount of financial support is needed to support student
participation as a sign of respect for their efforts. Options include lunches on trial days, mentoring sessions
for those who help out, invitations to write about the experience in school or faculty newsletters, or small
gift vouchers. Those very interested in education can be invited to seminar days on education innovations
if your institution has such events, or to school seminars when appropriate visitors talk.

These students will take what they learnt back to the classroom and be better students. Importantly, these
students will be advocates for the changes within the classroom, and activementors when attending a class
which they have previously trialled or helped make a resource for (such as an instrument demonstration
video). Such students are also often interested in taking up internships offered in the area of improving
laboratories and in research projects in later years.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

The research question that drove the Transforming Laboratory Learning (TLL) programme was:
What effect does Transforming Laboratory Learning have on the engagement, skill development and
workforce preparedness of Monash chemistry students and graduates?”.

A longitudinal mixed-methods approach was chosen to study this broad question over the three years
that the programme was implemented. In terms of the scope of the TLL programme implementation, and
the related research, the majority of activities from two units out of a total offive units were transformed at
second year (giving a total often activities transformed at second year). At third year, a lower proportion of
activities were transformed (from two out of a total of nine third year units, resulting in nine new activities).
Only minor changes were undertaken in the first year units, with only one new laboratory redeveloped
out of 15, and acknowledging this program already includes a mixture of scripted and guided-inquiry
activities.

The impact of the TLL programme has been researched at three different levels. Firstly, the effect of the
implementation of individual activities has been published in the literature (George-Williams et al., 2018a).
This was monitored through the use of a literature sourced survey (Russell, 2008) that was adapted to the
needs of this research. The survey asked 27 closed questions that focused on a range of topics such as the
students’ perceptions of the point of the activity, their own feelings of motivation, the challenge or ease
of the tasks undertaken and whether the teaching laboratory was well contextualised to the real world.
An additional three open questions allowed students to reflect on what skills they felt they developed,
what changes they would like to see made to the activities and whether or not they enjoyed the activity

370|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

(and why). Figure 3 summarises the overall findings from the responses of the students on the individual
activities that were transformed, compared with the prior equivalent unmodified activities. Overall, the
individual activities appeared to result in more engaged students that had developed a wider range of
skills and that were better able to articulate the skills that they had developed (which could potentially aid
them during interviews and job applications.

Whilst these were promising results, it was important to probe whether these findings were consistent
summatively, and in the longer term. As such, we conducted focus groups with students at the end of
units where more than half of the activities were significantly altered by the TLL programme (five units).
Pre- and post-focus groups were utilised to check for changes in student perceptions over time. The
findings have been published (George-Williams et al., 2018b) and appear to indicate that:
• Students’ engagement with the activities was variable and dependent on the perceived difficulty of
the course. However, in most cases, students reported increased engagement and regularly raised
the newly contextualised or inquiry-based activities.
• Students raised a much wider range of skills that they felt they had developed and routinely
mentioned experimental design.
• Students mentioned an appreciation for the wider variety of assessment utilised.
• In cases where large amounts of inquiry were introduced, issues with sessional teaching staff were
seen to rise.
• Students inconsistently raised the development of commercial awareness, implying a need for further
implementation of this element throughout the course.

Again, these were very positive results with regards to the aims of the TLL programme. However, these
gains were still only measured on an intermediate time scale (months) rather than a truly longitudinal
one (years). Hence, the third and final analysis of the TLL programme involved a higher level and longer
term view of the laboratory programme. Two surveys were utilised to measure the overall perceptions of
students with regards to the entire laboratory programme, specifically:

Figure 3. A summary of student responses comparing pre- and post-TLL activities

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |371

1.

2.

3. what they believed the aims of laboratories to be;

what they expected to be doing/feeling during a given laboratory;
4. how prepared they felt for the workforce on completion of three years of courses;
what skills they had developed;
5. what improvements they would like to see in the programme.

The results of these surveys (George-Williams et al., 2018b) indicated that:

• Students were more likely to raise the laboratory aim of preparing for the workforce after the TLL
programme.
• Students in their second year of their programme were also more likely to raise contextualisation in
the real world as a laboratory aim, but this was lost by their third year.
• Student expectations became more positive in the second year with students more likely to believe
that they would learn chemistry that was useful in their life and to be less confused by concepts
of instrumentation. However, third year students showed no change over time implying that any
positive gains were (again) lost over time.
• Students were less likely to raise the desire of inquiry-based learning after the implementation of
the TLL programme (suggesting they were more satisfied with the level of inquiry offered by the
transformed activities). However, issues with sessional teaching staff were seen to rise, believed to be
related to the increased guidance required by such staff in more inquiry focused tasks.
• There was no significant change in the number of students feeling more or less prepared for the
workforce and their perception of skills that they had developed remained unchanged (at the
completion of all three year levels).

These results would appear to suggest that without consistency of laboratory transformation over all year
levels, it is difficult to maintain all of the changes noted above in student perception achieved through
transforming individual activities and units. This highlights that whilst individual change (or unit level
change) is highly important and impactful, achieving long-term change that is maintained strongly over
time requires a more complete overhaul that deeply pervades each year level.

Conclusion

The Transforming Laboratory Learning project launched in 2016 has delivered a revitalised chemistry
curriculum at Monash University. In the period up to 2018, a total of 24 activities were redeveloped
consistent with our industry-focussed context-based pedagogical objectives. The strategy for achieving
this was very deliberate, and the key to its success has been the broad consultation of all stakeholders
including staff, students and our industry partners. However, projects such as TLL are never really
complete, as curriculum shifts over time, as does the needs of industry. Thus the legacy of this project has
not only been a change of the culture and staff attitudes around undergraduate laboratory learning, but
remains the rich network of industry contacts who now feel more engaged with the chemistry curriculum
at Monash University. This chapter serves as a guide for those seeking to embark on a similar journey at
their institution, and we believe the advice herein is a blueprint for success.

A reflection from Monash about Professor Tina Overton

Prof Tina Overton’s impact on the School of Chemistry at Monash University has been profound. Her
motivations of evidence based teaching practice, scholarship of teaching and her particular interest in
developing student inquiry and problem-solving skills were self-evident. Tina was also driven by a strong
desire to better prepare undergraduate students for the workforce. With these goals in mind and with the

372 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

assistance of Monash chemistry education specialist,Dr Chris Thompson, she set aboutbuilding a research
group, the Monash CERG Chemistry Education Research Group (Tina loves a good acronym). From its
humble beginnings with a single PhD student in 2015, the Monash CERG has (to date) boasted five PhD
students, two honours students, one post-doctoral research fellow, five interns, a host of undergraduate
project students, and one specialist education developer who was responsible for the transformational
laboratory learning project described in detail above.

Tina’s primary motivator is understanding and developing her students. To this end, she supported PhD
student Jared Ogunde, in investigating undergraduate students’ attitudes toward chemistry, chemistry
self-efficacy beliefs, career aspirations and learning outcomes. This project, a cross-sectional mixed
methods study with 1977 participants across Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, and the UK, aimed to
understand how student’s attitudes and beliefs affected their progression with chemistry (Ogunde, et al.,
2017). The project found that most undergraduates that chose to study chemistry did so because they
were either interested in it or because they enjoyed it, and that most were planning a career that uses
chemistry. The project also determined that students’learning experiences are critical: students who have
had bad learning experiences tend to develop negative attitudes and lose interest in chemistry. Likewise,
laboratory learning experiences can either motivate students to continue studying chemistry or to drop
chemistry course units. Finally, it concluded that students are likely to be motivated to progress with
chemistry course units if they can see connection between the course and their future careers. Each of
these insights emphasises the importance of transforming student laboratory experiences to enhance
learning and provide authentic work-related experiences, as discussed in the body of this chapter.

In line with Tina’s vision of developing students and preparing them for their future, Tina was interested
in developing their critical thinking skills. As with any evidence based practice, it was important to first
understand how students, teaching staff and employers of chemistry students perceived critical thinking.
PhD student Dr Steve Danczak conducted an open-ended qualitative study asking these groups “what
does the term critical thinking mean to you?”. It was found that the definitions of critical thinking focused
on themes of problem solving and analysis, but were nuanced relative to each participant’s context. For
example, teachingstaff focused more on critique and evaluation whereasemployersfocused on innovation
(Danczak et al., 2017). It was subsequently determined that any tools to measure the development of
chemistry students’ critical thinking skills was either too generalised in context or required extensive
chemistry knowledge. To this end, a chemistry critical thinking test, the Danczak-Overton-Thompson
(DOT) test was developed (Danczak et al., 2018). This test was evaluated for reliability and validity over
several iterations using a combination of statistical and qualitative methods.The instrument that emerged
from this research was a chemistry critical thinking test accessible by chemistry students at any level of
study, demonstrated the relationship between thinking critically and context, and that is suitable as a
discussion tool to facilitate undergraduate chemistry students’ critical thinking.

Tina’s drive to develop her students was further demonstrated by her championing research to identify
skill gaps amongst recent Monash University science graduates. To this end, she engaged Dr Mahbub
Sarkar and created an inter-disciplinary research project which concluded that many graduates
experienced a deficit in important generic skills when entering the workplace, including commercial
awareness, communication, teamwork, adaptability/flexibility, initiative, independent learning, ICT, and
mathematical skills (Sarkaret al., 2016). These findings not only helped inform the Transforming Laboratory
Learning program discussed in this chapter but, following additional research into relevant interventions
(Sarkar et al., 2017), provided the foundation for a new Monash science unit, Career skills for scientists. This
was launched by Tina and Dr Chris Thompson in 2018 with great success.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |373

Extending this work,Tinawas highly supportive ofdoctoral research by MichelleHillaimedatunderstanding
whether chemistry and other science students recognised they had the opportunity within their degree
to develop the transferable skills required by graduates and employers. On concluding that there were
significant gaps in student recognition of key requisite skills, as well as the value students placed on these
skills (Hill et al., 2018), Tina mentored Michelle in exploring several interventions that might assist science
students to identify development of, and articulate, the key transferable skills required in the workforce.
The impact of involving students in reflecting on skill development experiences they encountered during
their degrees was researched, as well as whether adding skills icons/badges to relevant course materials
assisted students to recognise skill enhancement opportunities.

Tina’s scholarship of teaching and passion for meaningful student learning are further exemplified by her
contributions to context-based learning (Belt et al., 2003; Belt and Overton, 2007). The aim of context
based learning is to integrate seemingly abstract discipline concepts with real-life applications thereby
providing“learning handles”for the students. Her context-based learning contributions for chemistry have
proven so effective that they have been adapted for biochemistry as well. Currently, Tina is supervising
PhD research by Katherine Fernandez on the effects of Context-based Undergraduate Biochemistry for
the Health Sciences (CUBHS) instruction on student perceptions of relevance, attitude and achievement.
The aim is to develop customised learning resources for clinical practice in the health sciences, namely:
nursing, pharmacy, psychology and medical laboratory science. The development of these context
based learning resources is a collaboration of chemistry and biochemistry academics with health science
students and professionals. The Transforming Laboratory Learning project which is the main subject of
this chapter and of which Tina was the visionary champion, is based on this same premise; the power of
providing context rich experiences to students to maximise their learning and engagement.

References
Belt, S., Overton, T.L. and Summerfield, S. (2003). Problem solving case studies in analytical and applied chemistry,
New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, No. 1.
Belt, S. and Overton, T.L. (2007), “Context-Based Case Studies in Analytical Chemistry”, ACS Symposium Series, Vol.
970, pp. 87-99.
Bennett, R. (2002), “Employers' Demands for Personal Transferable Skills in Graduates: a content analysis of 1000
job advertisements and an associated empirical study”, Journal of Vocational Education and Training, Vol.
54 No. 4, pp. 457-476.
Bingham, G. A., Southee, D. J. and Page, T. (2015), “Meeting the expectation of industry: an integrated approach
for the teaching of mechanics and electronics to design students”, European Journal of Engineering
Education, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 410-431.
Cooper, L., Orrell, J. and Bowden, M. (2010). Work integrated learning: A guide to effective practice: Routledge.
Crebert, G., Bates, M., Bell, B., Patrick, C. and Cragnolini, V. (2004), “Developing generic skills at university, during
work placement and in employment: graduates' perceptions”, Higher Education Research & Development,
Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 147-165,
George-Williams, S. R., Soo, J. T., Ziebell, A. L., Thompson, C. D. and Overton, T. L. (2018), “Inquiry and industry
inspired laboratories: the impact on students’ perceptions of skill development and engagements”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 19, pp. 583-596.
Danczak, S. M., Thompson, C. D. and Overton, T. L. (2017), “‘What does the term Critical Thinking mean to you?' A
qualitative analysis of chemistry undergraduate, teaching staff and employers' views of critical thinking”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, pp. 420-434.
Duignan, J. (2003), “Placement and adding value to the academic performance of undergraduates: reconfiguring
the architecture - an empirical investigation”, Journal of Vocational Education & Training, Vol. 55 No. 3, pp.

374|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Overturning a laboratory course to develop 21st century skills

335-350.
Erhart, S. E., McCarrick, R. M., Lorigan, G. A. and Yezierski, E. J. (2015), “Citrus Quality Control: An NMR/MRI
Problem-Based Experiment”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93, pp. 335-339.
Helyer, R., & Lee, D. (2014), “The role of work experience in the employability of higher education graduates”,
Higher Education Quarterly, Vol. 68, pp. 348-372.
Hill, M. A., Overton, T. L., Thompson, C. D., Kitson, R. R. A. and Coppo, P. (2019), “Undergraduate recognition of
curriculum-related skill development and the skills employers are seeking”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 20, pp. 68-84.
Little, B. and Harvey, L. (2006), Learning through workplacements and beyond, A report for HECSU and the Higher
Education Academy’s Work Placements Organisation Forum.
Ogunde, J. C., Overton, T. L., Thompson, C. D., Mewis, R. and Boniface, S. (2017), “Beyond graduation: motivations
and career aspirations of undergraduate chemistry students”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
Vol. 18, pp. 457-471.
Pilcher, L. A., Riley, D. L., Mathabathe, K. C. and Potgieter, M. (2015), “An inquiry-based practical curriculum
for organic chemistry as preparation for industry and postgraduate research”, South African Journal of
Chemistry, Vol. 68, pp. 236-244.
Pringle, D. L. and Henderleiter, J. (1999), “Effects of Context-Based Laboratory Experiments on Attitudes of
Analytical Chemistry Students”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 76, pp. 100-106.
Sarkar, M., Overton, T., Thompson, C. and Rayner, G. (2016), “Graduate Employability: Views of Recent Science
Graduates and Employers”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, Vol.
24 No. 3, pp. 31-48.
Sarkar, M., Overton, T., Thompson, C. and Rayner, G. (2017), “Undergraduate science students' perceptions of
employability: Efficacy of an intervention”, International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics
Education, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 21–37.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |375

376 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Introducing elements of inquiry in to
26 undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Patrick I. T. Thomson, Lauren McShannon and Samantha Owens

Department of Pure and Applied Chemistry, University of Strathclyde
patrick.thomson@strath.ac.uk

Inquiry-based laboratories are an emerging and popular way of teaching practical

chemistry. They lead students towards independent research by inspiring critical thinking,
curiosity, and a conceptual understanding of experimental processes. Inquiry laboratories
need a base of knowledge, usually built upon a foundation of expository experiments that
teach fundamental skills. As such, the first year of a teaching laboratory may well keep an
expository structure, even when later years embrace inquiry learning.

In this work, we have shown that elements of inquiry can be introduced lightly and early in
the curriculum, using the approach of Szalay and Tóth. In this work, a robust suite of existing
experiments has had elements of inquiry introduced with a series of small, standalone
modifications. Adaptation of existing experiments allows a tight control on the extent to
which a student pushes into unfamiliar territory — particularly important for introductory
laboratories, where unexpected results are likely to overwhelm or discourage. The modified
experiments confer many of the same benefits as an inquiry laboratory, such as students’
sense of independence and control. The approach works best when supported by pre
laboratory exercises, for calculations or procedure-writing steps.

The approach builds on prior work introducing inquiry into a school curriculum, and we
have shown that it can be used on a large scale in two different undergraduate teaching
laboratory environments. In our implementation, we placed a heavy focus on structured
support for students, and conducted numerical and written surveys of students and
postgraduate demonstrators to measure perceptions of the work.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (Patrick Thomson)

Tina was instrumental increating, and in continuing to shape, the UKchemistry higher education
landscape. Her work bringing context-based and problem-based learning to chemistry, and
acting as a wider advocate and trailblazer for chemical education, are the reasons my vocation
and my professional identity exist. This work would not be possible without the community she
fostered, who reflect her values in the welcome they give me and other newcomers.
To cite:Thomson, P.I.T., McShannon, L. and Owens, S. (2019), “Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry
laboratories”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor
Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 377-390.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |377

Introduction

The teaching laboratory is a distinctive feature of chemistry education, described as our “signature
pedagogy” (Shulman, 2005). Like the lecture, the teaching laboratory had remained relatively unchanged
from the advent of the discipline until the late 20th century; Berzelius or Curie would find little different in
most chemistry departments even relatively recently.

The core, and sometimes only, component of a teaching laboratory is the experiment: a self-contained
practical procedure designed to illustrate some principle, show some reaction, teach some technique,
and generate some data — all in a few hours. Although we call them experiments, they are more akin to
recipes: a series of steps, specified quantities of ingredients, a proscribed process, and a known output.
Generating this output in the desired quantity and quality is taken as a sign that learning has happened.

This traditional approach to laboratory education is referred to as the recipe-based or expository

experiment — and has settled into dominance for many pragmatic reasons. Expository experiments are
scalable and reliable: a few instructors can lead many students without unexpected twists and turns. They
are robust: execute the recipe with reasonable competence, and get the expected result. Robustness
arises over time, so it can be difficult to justify scrapping something that works. Robust experiments rarely
go wrong, minimising headaches for those running the laboratory and stress for our students. And they
serve to efficiently train students in many of the actions of practical chemistry.

When we ask whether expository laboratories teach chemical theory or experimental design, though, the
response can be weaker. It is likely that a student could follow a recipe without thinking about what they
were doing, while they were doing it. This failure to achieve meaningful learning happens for a number of
reasons, such as the desire to finish early — a desire we can be complicit in as instructors (DeKorver and
Towns, 2015).

To address this shortcoming, several innovative approaches to practical instruction have emerged
in the last few decades of chemistry education research, such as discovery, inquiry, or problem-based
learning (Domin, 1999, Kelly and Finlayson, 2007, McDonnell et al., 2007). Recently, Seery and co-workers
published a framework for learning in the laboratory, with a focus on experimental design — laying out a
progression towards independent research ability (Seery et al., 2019). Their framework (Figure 1) does not

Figure 1: Seery model for experimental design skills development (Seery et al., 2019, reproduced with permission)

378 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

prescribe one particular approach, but serves as a roadmap for the structured introduction of discovery,
inquiry, or problem-based learning elements into a laboratory course.

Within the inquiry approach, guided inquiry sits as a useful intermediate between authentic scientific
inquiry and inquiry-free exposition (Fayet al., 2007, Buck et al., 2008). Guided inquiry laboratories are
an emerging and popular way of teaching practical chemistry, and lead students towards independent
research by inspiring critical thinking, curiosity, and a conceptual understanding of experimental processes
(Mistry et al., 2016).

Guided inquiry laboratories address a common critique of expository labs: following a recipe leaves little
room for higher-order skills development, giving a jarring transition from novice to expert chemist in
later years of degree study (Figure 2, left) (DeKorver and Towns, 2015). Although a teaching sequence
will increase the complexity of the tasks being performed, or the complexity of the underlying chemical
theory, the same progression is often not seen in skills such as experimental design or theoretical-practical
linkages as advocated by Seery (Figure 1).

Guidedinquirylaboratories require afoundation of practicalknowledge,usually builtona dietofexpository

recipes designed to teach basic practical skills. Hence, the first year of a teaching laboratory often retains
an expository style, (Figure 2, middle) even when subsequent years embrace inquiry learning (Fayet al.,
2007, George-Williams et al., 2018, Bucket al., 2008). This can then give rise to a difficult transition when
students encounter inquiry learning for the first time. There has been some prior work on supporting this
transition in a general higher education context (Edelson et al., 1999), and in writing methods for guided
inquiry chemistry laboratories (Van Duzor, 2016).

In this chapter, we argue that elements of inquiry can be introduced early in a university curriculum, within
existing expository experiments (Figure 2, right) (Szalay and Toth, 2016). Szalay and Tóth showed that
guided inquiry experiments could be adapted from existing expository experiments taught in secondary
schools. They further demonstrated that these guided inquiry experiments would confer many of the
same benefits as a fuller inquiry-based curriculum, even if only used a few times in an academic year. We
were encouraged by this work and applied it to a first-year university teaching laboratory. The approach
of adapting existing expository experiments to add layers of inquiry has recently been used to great effect
on more advanced subject material by Seery in an upper-division physical chemistry laboratory (Seery
et al., 2019a). The following serves as a practical guide to adapting existing expository experiments into
elements of inquiry experiments, using our own work as case studies and documenting our approach for
others to follow.
ConventionalGuided inquiry
This approach
First year 0 0 1
0 2 2
1 3 3
Hons/MSc 5 5 5

First year Hons/MSc First year Hons/MSc First year Hons/MSc

Conventional Inquiry labs This approach

Figure 2: A comparison of higher-order thinking skills development in laboratory sequences

through the course of an undergraduate degree

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |379

Methods and Design

The implementation of our teaching approach followed a consistent pattern. Firstly, we selected a
laboratory procedure; either a newly-created or an existing expository experiment. Secondly, we identified
places where elements of inquiry could be added. Thirdly, we wrote or rewrote the experiments to
include elements of inquiry. Lastly, we deployed them within an existing course structure and conducted
evaluations. This was employed in two separate practical courses in two separate contexts (Table 1). One
new experiment on the topic of soap making was newly-created, with elements of inquiry included in the
design from the beginning. The experiment was then evaluated with a pilot group of volunteers. After
positive feedback, the experiment was deployed for all participants of a pre-entry summer school from
2017 onwards and also disseminated viaasecondary school CPD event. Our approach was then introduced
into a first year undergraduate teaching laboratory, where some existing expository experiments were
adapted to contain elements of inquiry and redeployed into the laboratory course.

Table 1: Summary of new and adapted experiments, deployed in two different laboratory courses over three years

Experiment topic New or adapted? Student level

Soap making New Pre-entry
Double salt synthesis Adapted Year 1
Electrolyte conductivity Adapted Year 1

Setting and Scope

The first course chosen for modification was the laboratory portion of a pre-entry summer school. About
20 students each year take this course, who have been made a conditional offer of undergraduate study.
Every student takes the same experiment at a pre-determined time and so laboratories are closely linked
to lecture material.

The second course chosen for modification was a first year undergraduate teaching laboratory. Like many
other institutions, this laboratory serves a large number of students for a single practical teaching session
each week, with up to 250 students across four sessions. Students attend the laboratory for a single 3-hour
long session each week for 16 weeks across two semesters. Due to equipment limitations the experiments
follow a rota, so there is limited scope for dependent sequences or lecture tie-in. Each week, students
conduct a short pre-laboratory exercise before attending, and complete a laboratory report or worksheet
after attending. Pre-laboratory exercises are a key component of supporting and extending laboratory
work and are another major quick win which can be slotted in to an existing laboratory course (Agustian
and Seery, 2017).

Uptake of pre-laboratory activities in our laboratory courses are near-universal for a number of reasons.
Pre-laboratories are given a mark weighting, providing a strong incentive for student engagement.
Time is spent at the start of the year laboratory induction on the value of pre-laboratory activities for
preparation — saving the student time overall. Pre-laboratory questions are only available the week
before the experiment, so they are fresh in mind. Lastly, staff and demonstrators make frequent in
laboratory references back to pre-laboratory activities. For both laboratory courses (Year 1 and pre-entry)
the experimental rota consisted of well-worn expository experiments, loosely aligned to lecture content.
The experiments covered a full range of the chemistry curriculum, although each individual experiment
had a distinct flavour that aligned with synthetic, analytical, or physical chemistry.

380 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Elements of inquiry
The inspiration for this approach came from work on introductory guided inquiry in the Hungarian
secondary school curriculum (Szalay and Toth, 2016). In this study, pupils ran an initial expository
experiment into chemical kinetics, then were asked to run repeated modifications of the procedure to
investigate a given hypothesis. This worked because the initial experiment was short, repeatable, and
amenable to modification.

What we have attempted to do in our approach is to build on this work, bringing it into tertiary education
and applying it to laboratory procedures that do not have the same structure of component repetition.
We have done this by adding elements of inquiry. These are small, self-contained modifications to pre
laboratory, in-laboratory, or post-laboratory work. The modifications we have deployed so far are shown
in Table 2, along with a brief description and where in the laboratory sequence they are used. Developing
these modifications required a careful consideration of student time constraints, with additional time
being freed up in some cases by moving calculations to out-of-laboratory activities.

Example elements of inquiry

One experiment on the topic of soap making contains two main elements: calculate reagent quantities
and unscramble procedure. In the first element, students are asked to calculate quantities of reagents for
making a bar of soap (Figure 3) having previously completed a short pre-laboratory exercise as a refresher
on esters and ester chemistry. This first element is purely calculation-based and could be delivered as a
pre-laboratory exercise, but students benefitted from having access to peers and demonstrators while
working on the problems. When students had calculated all the quantities, they then inserted them into
blanks in a scrambled procedure (Table 3). For the second element, students descrambled this procedure
and followed it to make a bar of soap.
Table 2: Examples of elements of inquiry

Modification Brief description Location in

laboratory
sequence
(pre/during/
post-lab)?
Calculate reagent quantities Exploration ofconcentration.
stoichiometry, volume, and Pre/During

Unscramble procedure The procedure

students need toisunscramble
given as a scrambled list, andit.
before following Pre/During

How many data points? Studentsmeasurements they make.

are asked to define the number of During

Selection of reagents Students

the suitability of distilled
are asked to makevs. atap
judgement
water for about
analytical
e.g. During

measurements.
Create your own synthesis Studentsonly asked to writeof
are combinations their
prior
own
techniques.
procedure, using Pre/During

Create your own analysis Students are

determine stoichiometry and
asked to write a balanced
concentration, and
equation, During/Post

conduct an analytical titration with appropriate

volumes of titrant and titrand.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |381

 Task 1: You want to make a 20 gram bar of soap, and you find a simple soap-making guide that
suggests a good blend of oils would be 70% by weight of sunflower oil, and 30% by weight of
coconut oil. How much of each oil would you need?
Sunflower oil: ___grams Coconut oil: ___ grams

Task 2: Each oil has a different saponification value (see the table on the previous page). What are
the saponification values of the oils you are using, when saponified with the base NaOH?
Sunflower oil: ______ Coconut oil: ______

Task 3: If the saponification value is the number of grams of base needed to react completely with
each gram of oil, then how much base do you need to react with each of the quantities of oils
calculated in step 1?
NaOH needed for ___ grams of sunflower oil: ___grams
NaOH needed for ___ grams of coconut oil: ___grams
Total NaOH needed for complete saponification: ___grams

Task 4: In practice, bars of soap are not made with an exact balance of oils and base, since any
slight excess of base would make soap unusable. Soaps are usually made with a slight deficit of 5%
of the total amount of base. Reduce the amount of base you calculated in step 4 by 5%.
Total NaOH used to make a usable bar of soap: ___grams

Task 5: The NaOH you are using is in the form of a 6 molar solution. What volume of this solution
do you need to use? You will need to calculate the number of moles required first, and use the
molecular weight you calculated in the pre-lab to finish the calculation.
Total moles of NaOH to be used: ___ moles
Total volume of 6M NaOH to be used: ___ mL

Task 6: Get all of your answers checked by a demonstrator before going to the next page.

Figure 3: example of the calculate reagent quantities element as used in a soap-making experiment

In another example, an existing expository recipe for the preparation of ammonium iron(II) sulfate
was replaced with two new tasks: balance the overall equation for the reaction and a create your own
analysis task (Figure 4). The given list of hints are a consequence of the need to present students with an
achievable challenge. Each hint addresses something that would be possible for a student to determine
experimentally or by literature search, but this would result in a variable or overwhelming experience that
would take longer than one laboratory session and potentially operate at a much higher level of inquiry
than intended. The second half of the experiment then uses create your own analysis by presenting the
students with a set of unbalanced redox half-equations for an appropriate titration, and asking them to
write an analytical procedure similar to one they have previously conducted. This entire sequence could
be more ambitious as it came in the second semester, after students had all completed a first semester that
introduced recrystallisation and titration analysis. Further examples of elements of inquiry in practice can
be seen in the Supplementary Information, with a full comparison of expository and reworked laboratory
manuals, demonstrator manuals, and student post-laboratory outputs.

Compared to even the lighter aspects of guided inquiry, these elements do not seem like major
modifications: for example, unscramble procedure requires only that students use some logical guesswork
about reasonable sequences of events. Students converge on a correct expository sequence, which they

382|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Table 3: Unscramble procedure from Study 1, synthesis of soap — students had to sort the steps in order, after filling in
quantities of reagents calculated in a previous step

Step Number Brief description

Grease two weighing boats by wiping with some sunflower oil on a piece of
paper towel. Pour the contents of the beaker equally into these two boats and
leave them on your bench overnight to finish reacting. A demonstrator will put
them safely aside until the next experiment that uses them.
Measure out ___ grams of solid coconut oil on a watch glass and add all of it to
the sunflower oil in the beaker.
Stir the mixture with a PLASTIC spatula for 15 minutes, or until the mixture begins
to thicken. Be sure to stir the mixture without splashing.
Using a 10 ml graduated pipette, carefully, measure ___ mL of the stock 6 molar
NaOH, and add it to the beaker containing your oil. (This step MUST be done in
the fume hood).
Gently heat the beaker of oils on a hotplate set to 50°C, in order to melt them.
Into a 100 ml beaker, weigh out ___ grams of sunflower oil (this is a liquid, so do
not weigh it directly over the balance.)

then follow as normal. A major aim of the work, though, is to give students a sense of challenge and
control whilst retaining the reliability of an existing experimental sequence, and this has been successful.
The approach is also adaptable to different teaching laboratory settings. In our implementation, two
separate laboratory courses were used, both of which consisted of 3-hour long single sessions. However,
the soap making experiment has been presented as 1.5-hour long teacher CPD session, and elements of
inquiry could easily be introduced to shorter or longer sequences.
follow a new experimental procedure (Figure 4).

Original expository procedure

Dissolve 5g of iron(II) sulfate in 12.5cm3 (do not use more than this) of dilute (bench) sulfuric acid. Add 5g of
ammonium sulfate and heat until it all dissolves. Cool in an ice bath. Filter off the pale green crystals on a
Buchner funnel. Draw air through the crystals until dry (about 15 mins). Finally, dry the crystals by pressing
between filter papers. Weigh and calculate the yield based on the weight of iron(II) sulfate used. Retain a
sample for inspection.
Adapted elements of Inquiry procedure
Ammonium Iron (II) Sulfate Hexahydrate can be prepared using only techniques you have already used in
semester 1. Using the balanced reaction formula, and existing techniques, write an experimental procedure for
preparing approximately 5 grams of this compound. Your procedure should incorporate the following pieces of
information and previous experimental findings. Consider each one carefully.
• As the reaction solvent, use bench dilute (1 molar) sulfuric acid.
• You should use no more than 12.5 cm3 of this reaction solvent.
• The starting materials should be fully dissolved in the reaction solvent. Hint: what technique have
you previously used to fully dissolve crystals?
The yield is substantially higher if two molar equivalents of ammonium sulfate are used.

FigureFigure
4: Original4:Original
versusversus
adaptedadaptedprocedureprocedureforformixedmixedsalt
salt
synthesis.synthesis;Thetheadapted procedureisalso is
adaptedprocedure supportedalso by a short
supportedbyashort
section of theoretical background that points students towards the need to use a recrystallisation-like procedure, in this
case, heating (see Supplementary Information for details)

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |383

Assessment
For the new experiment on soap making, assessment was based on successful calculations followed by
a successful unscrambling of the procedure prior to the start of experimental work (see Supplementary
Information for student manuals and marking schemes). The quality of the product was assessed in a
separate expository experiment, where the soap was assayed for solidity and pH after curing for several
weeks. For the adapted experiments, post-laboratory assessments largely followed the existing criteria
which judged yield and purity to determine success. For example, when synthesising a sample, 80% of
the marks come from sample yield and purity as with existing criteria, 10% from calculations, and the final
10% from a pre-laboratory exercise.

We were reluctant to include elements of in-laboratory assessment at the same time as an entirely new
approach, so some elements of inquiry that happened during a laboratory sequence were not assessed
directly. For example, when students wrote a synthetic procedure, this was checked by a demonstrator
before the students progressed.The procedure itself was not assessed, so that we had the ability to correct
it on-the-fly to ensure students had successful experiment and a positive overall experience.

Training of demonstrators
Laboratory teaching at our institution is supported by a team of demonstrators, and much has been
written about the importance of their training for non-expository laboratories (Wheeler et al., 2017a;
Flaherty et al., 2017; Wheeler et al., 2017b). We provided specific support for this new style of experiments
within the existing demonstrator handbooks (see Supplementary Information). An important aspect
here was providing reassurance to demonstrators that their students would not be overwhelmed, as we
observed a strong pastoral impulse to provide detailed hands-on coaching in the face of a new style of
challenge. This may come from our demonstrators’ own recent experience of a sharp transition into a
research environment.

Ethical considerations
Initially, student volunteers were recruited for a closed pilot run of new experimental procedures, with no
academic credit or financial compensation. In all cases, ethical approval was granted by a departmental
ethics board. Subsequent modified experiments were deployed directly into the curriculum. This could be
justified for a number of reasons:
• Changes to the laboratory based on literature precedent routinely happen without piloting.
• The pilot group reported none of the negatives which have been previously observed with
non-expository laboratories and inquiry learning (Wheeler et al., 2017b; Flaherty et al., 2017;
Dunlap and Martin, 2012; Edelson et al., 1999).
• The principal and co-investigators were present in the laboratory during the study to
intervene if students encountered unexpected difficulties.
• There was enough precedent in later iterations for a neutral or positive outcome that
depriving a control group of the intervention was difficult to justify.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Each iteration of our approach was supported by qualitative and quantitative survey data. For each new
or modified experiment, a student would follow the elements of inquiry procedure, then fill out a short
survey. For some of the experiments, we also surveyed the demonstrators who were responsible for
delivery of the teaching materials. Detailed survey results can be found in the Supplementary Information.

384|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Student feedback
The development of our approach was supported and guided by student survey feedback, taken either
from volunteers who were piloting experiments, or from students conducting one of the modified
procedures as part of the mainstream curriculum. Across all surveys, we found a consistent theme of
an increased sense of freedom, both quantitatively in numerical responses, and qualitatively in free
text comments. Even as first year undergraduates, participants were keenly aware of the gulf between
expository experiments and the world of graduate chemistry, for example one student reported that:
after my degree I won’t work using recipe based experiments […] guided inquiry experiments help
understand the reasons behind volumes/concentrate/other parameters used in an experiment.

A substantial number of students also positively commented on increased independence and the
requirement to think more, a situation that continues to be evident in informalin-laboratory observations
in subsequent years. The role of positive experience, the affective domain of learning, is an increasingly
prominent part of practical education in chemistry (Galloway et al., 2016) and we placed high importance
on affective characteristics.

Tutor and demonstrator feedback

Students in our laboratories are led closely by a single demonstrator; the same person each week. Because
of this structure, demonstrators often develop a close rapport with their students, and are valuable
contributors to the continual cycle of laboratory enhancement. However, most of our demonstrators had
previously earned an undergraduate degree in the same institution, and so had become accustomed to
a culture of expository experiments. As such, demonstrator feedback is a big part of developing robust
recipes but can sometimes view student challenge as a negative rather than an opportunity for learning.

Demonstrators were qualitatively surveyed about their perceptions of elements of inquiry before and
after delivering them to their groups of students. Pre-delivery, most respondents were concerned that
students wouldn’t be able to cope with the independent thinking required, but this changed after having
seen the students actually go through the work. This highlighted the need to give specialist guided
inquiry training and support to demonstrators.

New versus adapted

Initially, one new experiment was created from scratch to fill a gap in the curriculum of our pre-entry
summer school (Table 1). Soap making was used to explore the concepts of stoichiometry, esters,
concentration, and pH. An initial expository preparation was created from hobbyist recipes, then elements
of inquiry were added. The process of adding elements of inquiry was so rapid and convenient that it
served to lay the groundworkfor the next iteration of the approach, namely adaptation of existing recipes.
The experiments we adapted the following year were chosen partly for pragmatic reasons: those
particular experimental sequences were shorter, with students routinely finishing over an hour early. The
experiments consisted of an expository sequence to follow, with post-laboratory exercises focusing on
the analysis of data or yield and purity calculations. Elements of inquiry were added quickly, replacing
given procedures with pre- or in-laboratory calculations.

We found that adaptation was quicker and more efficient than creation, with two adapted experiments
(and associated evaluations) taking the same time as one newly-created. The time saving was mostly due
to using a robust existing procedure, whereas creation required several design iterations to arrive at a
reliable procedure to start from.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |385

Limitations and future improvements
One important drawbackwe identified early was the use of in-laboratorytime on non-laboratory activities.
One of the experiments was assessed on the day by a fill-in-the-blanks worksheet (see Supplementary
Information), and some students struggled to complete this by the end of the session.This experimentalso
required students to workout parameters for an analysis of their product, and this delayed the onset of the
analysis itself. The experiment in question was a candidate for modification as it was usually completed 90
minutes early, and all of this extra time was consumed by the new approach. In a subsequent iteration of
the design, calculations were supported by an additional pre-laboratory question and this has alleviated
the time pressure on the experiment itself.

One of the pilot studies used volunteer students who undertook an additional laboratory session,
unrewarded, so were not indicative of the typical student.The pilot study was used to test novel chemistry,
but we overlooked the potential for a pilot to also identify issues with student write-ups. When subsequent
adapted experiments were deployed directly into a live laboratory rota, we quickly identified issues with
time spent on calculations, and this awareness could have come from pilot groups instead.

Implications and Adaptability

The following serves as points to consider if you wish to introduce elements of inquiry into your own
teaching, following the approach we have described in this chapter so far.

Choice of laboratory course

Our approach was deployed into a course right at the outset of a chemistry degree, and benefitted from
lack of prior student expectation (Shulman, 2005). Year 1 is an ideal opportunity to establish the tone of
an educational environment, however implementation into a later year would work if your students have
studied a purely expository sequence up to that point.

Interaction with other laboratory courses

The approach is designed to introduce inquiry elements into an entry-level laboratory course. This would
be ideally suited to support a transition into existing mid- and upper-level courses that use inquiry,
discovery, or problem-based learning. The approach benefits from close interaction with the heads of
these laboratory courses. However, elements of inquiry can also serve as a driving force for innovation in
later years, as has been seen starting to happen in our institution.

Staff and demonstrator buy-in

In your laboratory, the day-to-day teaching may be facilitated by other staff members and/or postgraduate
demonstrators. They may be reluctant to move away from expository teaching, and elements of inquiry
may serve as a gentle introduction to alternative ways of teaching practical chemistry. We found that our
demonstrators’ own recent transition from recipe laboratories into authentic research provided ample
buy-in and they became valuable contributors in their own right.

Students as partners/researchers
All of the survey work and a large portion of procedure writing were conducted by two masters project
students, co-authors of this work and instrumental in bringing it to fruition. We also relied on volunteer
first year undergraduates to pilot one of the new experiments, and their unique perspectives further
shaped the approach. We would highly encourage working with students as partners wherever possible,
even when these students are not undertaking specialised education degree streams (Cantrill, 2018).

386|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Adapting your existing experiments

If an existing expository sequence teaches some essential skill and/or illustrates some essential principle,
it would be better to adapt rather than scrapping in favour of a new experiment—taking far less time and
preserving the robust elements of your established practical. Sequences which run short would be the
best candidates for modification initially, followed by experiments that would need elements removed
to make space. However, if there is a gap in your curriculum that would require the creation of a new
experiment, then incorporating elements of inquiry could be done at the same time.

Student skills development

Your students would start to develop many of the same skills that inquiry, discovery, or problem-based
learning laboratories are designed around: motivation, conceptual understanding, higher-order thinking
skills, problem-solving ability, experimental design, and other cognitive tasks in laboratory education
(Wieman, 2015). Crucially, Szalay and Tóth also found that lower-achieving students were more motivated
by student part-designed activities, and this may be particularly valuable to an introductory laboratory.
With first year students, affective experiences play a particular role in engagement, attainment, and
progression (Szalay and Toth, 2016; Galloway et al., 2016).

Assessing your students

When elements of inquiry are used to enhance existing experiments, then existing assessments can serve
as a basis for new ones. However, the majority of new assessment should happen outwith the laboratory,
split between a pre-laboratory quiz and a post-laboratory report. If you already use pre-laboratory quizzes,
these are ideal for assessing preparative calculations. Any new assessment based on an introduced
element of inquiry should avoid over-assessing a single task, or assessing a task that does not correlate
well with student attainment. For example, if a written procedure is checked by a demonstrator, some
features will then be shared by everyone who attends the laboratory. If a mark were to be awarded for a
correct procedure, then every student would obtain it, compressing the range of marks available.

Resourcing an implementation
As the approach uses existing expository experiments, there is no need for any new equipment, reagents,
teaching time, or timetabled contact hours in the deployment of the approach — only in creation of
new written material. Rewriting procedures to include elements of inquiry is a quick process: although
this work was the combined output of two undergraduate student projects, the majority of their time
was used to evaluate the approach. Modifying expository procedures to include elements of inquiry only
took a day or so for each procedure. As most elements of inquiry can be tested at a desk rather than a
laboratory, prototyping is rapid. A pilot study with student volunteers would still serve to highlight any
issues. This would require additional space or time in a laboratory, along with student volunteers and
ethical approval.

Evaluating an implementation
You could evaluate the success of your implementation in a number of ways, some of which we have
already presented here:
• A pilot study, to identify any unexpected bottlenecks in the modified procedures or
unexpected student anxieties;
• Surveys to measure student perceptions of freedom and control;
• Success of students in subsequent years of laboratory instruction, particularly with non
expository experiments;
• Testing students’ ability in experimental design.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |387

Conclusion

Elements of inquiry are short, self-contained modifications to laboratory procedures. They introduce
aspects of experimental design and student choice into an expository (recipe-style) sequence. They are
quick to introduce, and preserve the robust features of existing experiments. They confer an increased
sense of freedom and control, and boost students’ experimental design abilities. Students are better
prepared for a future practical curriculum that works towards independent research, whether this takes
the form of inquiry, PBL, or other innovative laboratory teaching practices. Future work will focus on
developing or discovering a greater variety of elements of inquiry, and evaluating their impact on student
preparedness for an inquiry learning sequence.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

References
Agustian, H. Y. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education:
a proposed framework for their design’”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 518
532.
Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L. and Towns, M. H. (2008), “Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate
laboratory”, Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 52-58.
Cantrill, V. (2018), “Students don’t have to stick to lab projects during chemistry degrees”, Education in Chemistry,
available at: https://eic.rsc.org/analysis/students-dont-have-to-stick-to-lab-projects-during-chemistry
degrees/3009101.article (accessed April 8th 2019).
DeKorver, B.K. and Towns, M.H. (2015),“General Chemistry Students’Goals for Chemistry Laboratory Coursework”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 12, pp. 2031-2037.
Domin, D. S. (1999), “A Review of Laboratory Instruction Styles”, Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), pp. 543-547.
Dunlap, N. and Martin, L. J. (2012), “Discovery-Based Labs for Organic Chemistry: Overview and Effectiveness”,
in Duffy-Matzner, J.L. & Pacheco, K.A.O. (eds.) Advances in Teaching Organic Chemistry: Vol. 1108, ACS
Symposium Series. American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 1-11.
Edelson, D.C., Gordin, D. N. and Pea, R. D. (1999), “Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through
technology and curriculum design”, Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 8 No. 3-4, pp.391-450.
Fay, M. E., Grove, N. P., Towns, M. H. and Bretz, S. L. (2007), “A rubric to characterize inquiry in the undergraduate
chemistry laboratory”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 212-219.
Flaherty, A., O’Dwyer, A., Mannix-McNamara, P. and Leahy, J. J. (2017), “Aligning Perceptions of Laboratory
Demonstrators’ Responsibilities To Inform the Design of a Laboratory Teacher Development Program”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 8, pp. 1007-1018.
Galloway, K. R., Malakpa, Z. and Bretz, S. L. (2016), “Investigating Affective Experiences in the Undergraduate
Chemistry Laboratory:Students’Perceptions of Control and Responsibility”, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 93 No. 2, pp. 227-238.
George-Williams, S. R., Soo, J. T., Ziebell, A. L., Thompson, C. D. and Overton, T. L. (2018), “Inquiry and industry
inspired laboratories: the impact on students’ perceptions of skill development and engagements”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 583-596.
Kelly, O.C. and Finlayson, O.E. (2007),“Providing solutions through problem-based learning for the undergraduate
1st year chemistry laboratory”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 347-361.
McDonnell, C., O’Connor, C. and Seery, M. K. (2007), “Developing practical chemistry skills by means of student
driven problem based learning mini-projects’”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp.

388 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Introducing elements of inquiry in to undergraduate chemistry laboratories

130-139.
Mistry, N., Fitzpatrick, C. and Gorman, S. (2016), “Design Your Own Workup: A Guided-Inquiry Experiment for
Introductory Organic Laboratory Courses”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 1091-1095.
Seery, M. K., Agustian, H. Y. and Zhang, X. (2019), “A Framework for Learning in the Chemistry Laboratory”, Israel
Journal of Chemistry, DOI: 10.1002/ijch.201800093.
Seery, M. K., Jones, A. B., Kew, W. and Mein, T. (2019a), “Unfinished Recipes: Structuring Upper-Division Laboratory
Work To Scaffold Experimental Design Skills”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 96 No. 1, pp. 53-59.
Shulman, L. S. (2005), “Signature Pedagogies in the Professions”, Daedalus, Vol. 134 No. 3, pp. 52-59.
Szalay, L. and Tóth, Z. (2016), “An inquiry-based approach of traditional ‘step-by-step’ experiments’” Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 923-961.
Van Duzor, A. G. (2016), “Using Self-Explanations in the Laboratory To Connect Theory and Practice: The Decision/
Explanation/Observation/Inference Writing Method”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 10, pp.
1725-1730.
Wheeler, L. B., Clark, C. P. and Grisham, C. M. (2017a), “Transforming a Traditional Laboratory to an Inquiry-Based
Course: Importance of Training TAs when Redesigning a Curriculum”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.
94 No. 8, pp. 1019-1026.
Wheeler, L. B., Maeng, J. L. and Whitworth, B. A. (2017b), “Characterizing Teaching Assistants’ Knowledge and
Beliefs Following Professional Development Activities within an Inquiry-Based General Chemistry
Context”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 19-28.
Wieman, C. (2015), “Comparative Cognitive Task Analyses of Experimental Science and Instructional Laboratory
Courses”, The Physics Teacher, Vol. 53, pp. 349-351.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |389

390 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 27 Developing student expertise
in scientific inquiry

Jennifer A. J. Burnham
Department of Chemistry, University of Sheffield
j.burnham@sheffield.ac.uk

The role of developing student expertise in scientific inquiry often falls on laboratory
work. Domin’s taxonomy of laboratory instruction styles has been expanded with more
detailed scrutiny of inquiry instruction. The most common form of laboratory teaching
is the confirmation style where students follow recipes to reproduce known results in a
straight-forward and resource-efficient manner. This style achieves few pedagogic goals of
laboratory education and inquiry-based instruction is better suited to the acquisition of the
skills, methodology, and procedures of scientific inquiry.

A guided inquiry instruction style improves on the confirmation style by reinforcing the
point of the experimental work, even though students will still to follow-the-recipe where
they can. Tutor support is needed when students apply what they know about the scientific
method to an experiment design task. In the absence of support, students are unable to
engage in scientific inquiry. With extensive support even novices can design and carry
out good experiment work. Advice for and examples of the implementation of inquiry are
provided to help the reader do this in their own teaching.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

Professor Tina Overton has been a hugely significant influence on all of my teaching fellow
life. I have drawn much inspiration from her work on problem-based learning (Overton, 2001;
2007) and the findings about the usefulness of different aspects of a chemistry degree course
(Hanson and Overton, 2010). She was the leader of the first workshop on educational research
I attended, and she is an inspiration and a role model for all chemistry teaching specialists, not
least Yorkshire-based female university teachers like me.

To cite: Burnham, J. A.J. (2019), “Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.),
Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp.391-404.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |391

Introduction

The role of developing chemistry students’ inquiry skills usually finds a place as part of the laboratory
curriculum. Laboratory work is considered to be a central component of studying chemistry. It can
serve many purposes including illustrating concepts and phenomena, teaching experimental skills,
and developing expertise in inquiry (Kirschner, 1992; Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Reid and Shah, 2007).
Historically, laboratory teaching involved an investigative approach giving experience of systematic
research (Hofstein and Lunetta, 1982; Reid and Shah, 2007) mirroring the apprenticeship served by a PhD
student training to be an experimental scientist (Stewart and Lagowski, 2003). In more recent years, the
emphasis in laboratory teaching has been put on the chemistry being performed (Meester and Maskill,
1995, quoted in Reid and Shah, 2007).

Classification of laboratory activities

Different authors have used the same terms to describe very different laboratory activities. Domin’s (1999)
taxonomy of laboratory teaching styles (Table 1) provides some clarity through a classification of activities
based on approach, procedure, and outcome. Fayet al. (2007) and Bucket al. (2008) have added to this
by breaking down the inquiry domain into different levels of inquiry (Table 2). There is some overlap
between the two classifcations: Domin’s expository style matches the confirmation style (inquiry level 0),
and his inquiry style encompasses structured to authentic inquiry (inquiry levels 1–3). The discovery style
can also be thought of as guided inquiry (inquiry level 1) because the classification in Table 2 does not
consider whether the outcome has been predetermined or not. Authentic inquiry, inquiry level 3 is seen
in scientific research where theory is used to develop experiments that allow development of new theory.
This chapter uses the descriptive terms from Tables 1 and 2 to describe different laboratory activities.

Table 1:Taxonomy of laboratory instruction styles (Domin, 1999)

Outcome Approach Procedure

Expository Predetermined Deductive† Given
Inquiry Unknown Inductive‡ Student generated
Discovery Predetermined Inductive Given
Problem-based Predetermined Deductive Student generated
†Deductive approach: students use specific examples of a phenomenon to illustrate an underlying principle.
‡Inductive approach: students develop an understanding of an underlying principle by studying a specific example
of a phenomenon.

Table 2: A classification of experiment by level and type of inquiry (Fayet al., 2007; Bucket al., 2008)
based on what is (☑) and is not (☒) provided to students

Problem/ Theory/ Procedure/

design Analysis Communication
Level question background Protocol format Conclusions

0: Confirmation
1: Structured Inquiry
1: Guided Inquiry
2: Open Inquiry
3: Authentic Inquiry
☑ ☑
☑ ☑
☑ ☑
☑ ☑
☒ ☒
☑ ☑ ☑ ☑
☑ ☑ ☒ ☒
☑ ☒ ☒ ☒
☒ ☒ ☒ ☒
☒ ☒ ☒ ☒

392 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

The confirmation instruction style

The confirmation or expository instruction style, inquiry level 0, is also called verification, recipe-following,
or cook-book work. These terms describe activities where students follow detailed instructions to practice
laboratory techniques and reproduce theoretical phenomena taught in lectures. The confirmation style
presents the laboratory as being subservient to theory and science as “a body of information which is
(and can be) verified and certain”(Kirschner, 1992). In confirmation laboratories, students are typically not
given the opportunity to develop expertise in scientific inquiry. Criticisms of the confirmation style are
not new (e.g. Wham, 1977) and almost all papers written about this style highlight its flaws. The published
criticisms include the following:
• Scientific inquiry is a complex procedure and the principles of the scientific method cannot
be learned “by osmosis”, students need to be taught how it is done (Garratt and Tomlinson,
2001);
• Applying set algorithms to solve problems is not really problem solving (Bodner, 2003);
• “Critical, independent, creative thinking is rarely expected or encouraged” or possible
(Stewart and Lagowski, 2003);
• Students learn to ask“what is the answer supposed to be?” rather than“what is the answer?”
(Allen et al., 1986);
• This type of practical often leadsto“boredom and apathy towards scientific work”(Kirschner,
1992);
• Exercises can be performed with little preparation and engagement by students (Domin,
1999; 2007);
• The goals the students have for their laboratory work (finishing early, avoiding mistakes) are
different to the pedagogicaims and intended learning outcomes of the work (DeKorver and
Towns, 2015) hence these are not achieved (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004; Abraham, 2011);
• Students do the majority of their learning after the practical session when they set about
completing post-laboratory assignments (Domin, 2007).

To sum up, confirmation exercises require low levels of cognitive engagement. Students are not involved
in experiment planning or design so the laboratory is an unrealistic portrayal of scientific inquiry. There
are low levels of student engagement, and little creative, critical or independent thinking is required.
Relatively little learning occurs, because students spend their time determining whether they have the
correct answer instead of thinking more deeply about what they are doing. The work lacks relevance to
real life. Nonetheless, the confirmation style of laboratory teaching persists.

Some educators have pragmatic reasons for adopting the confirmation instruction style which are rooted
in predictability. Where a procedure and outcome is known in advance, the practical exercise is easy to
plan for and can make the most of available resources. Inquiry-style work is inherently less predictable
and activities can be limited by the availability of equipment or chemicals (Seery et al., 2019; Tsaparlis
and Gorezi, 2007). Inquiry-style work also needs greater teaching support compared to confirmation
instruction (between 2–10 students per instructor (Tsarparlis and Gorezi, 2007; Keller and Kendal, 2017)
compared to 40 students per class (Cheung, 2011)). These factors can make large enough barriers to
implementation to dissuade teachers from inquiry laboratories (Cheung, 2011).

Some educators have pedagogic reasons for adopting the confirmation style. These are rooted in a
philosophy of teaching that considers the purpose of practical work is to illustrate chemistry learned in
class; that practical work should be subservient to learning scientific theory. Students learn less factual
(chemistry) knowledge when given tasks at higher levels of inquiry (Xu and Talanquer, 2013). The high
level of cognitive load required by novices operating at higher levels of inquiry impedes learning of

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |393

concepts and they can struggle to apply knowledge outside of the context of the inquiry or problem
(Kirschner et al., 2006).

Educators acknowledging the flaws in the confirmation style have tried different strategies to improve on
it. One approach is to use social interaction to enhance learning in laboratories, by embedding questions in
the laboratory instructions (Cox and Junkin, 2002) or using an argument-driven inquiry (ADI) instructional
model involving critique and peer-feedback of data-interpretation (Walker et al., 2011). Another approach
is to reduce the high cognitive load associated with laboratory work (Johnstone et al., 1994; Kirschner
et al., 2006; Reid and Shah, 2007; Reid, 2008) for example through carefully planned prelaboratory tasks
(see Agustian and Seery, 2017, for a review), dedicated skills enhancement sessions (Sedwicket al., 2018),
or experimental seminars for discussion, comparison, reasoning and modelling of results (Kirschner,
1992). Recontextualising knowledge where a subject is deeply fragmented is difficult (Luckett, 2009) and
reducing the cognitive load associated with recontextualisation can be achieved when each exercise is
presented in the same way (cf. Hall and Vardar-Ulu, 2013). However, reducing the cognitive load does not
prevent a typical student reverting to recipe-following where it is the quickest way of completing set tasks
(DeKorver and Towns, 2015).

Alternatives to the confirmation instruction style

The nature of the activities, the expectations of those involved, and the nature of the assessment all
impact on the learning environment in the laboratory (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004) and learning a process
like the scientific method is best done through practice (Abraham, 2011). “To change the experience, you
don’t need to change the experiment, just what you do with it” (quoted in Reid and Shah, 2007). For example,
confirmation exercises can be reworked as problem-based or guided inquiry tasks (see for example
McGarvey, 2004; Allen et al., 1986; Mohrig et al., 2007). Problem-based learning (PBL) is a subset of context
based learning in which learning occurs through the solving of a problem (Smith, 2012; Overton, 2007).
Students plan an experiment in order to solve the problem and learn about an aspect of the experiment
(McGarvey, 2004) and they engage better in PBL mini-projects than in confirmation laboratory classes (Mc
Donnell et al., 2007). As noted above, downside to this style is that the learning can be so entwined with
the context or problem that students struggle to apply the ideas in a different context (Kirschner et al.,
2006).

Inquiry-based learning provides opportunities for students to engage meaningfully in scientific

investigation (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004). Students can “discover” and explore a phenomenon for
themselves through laboratory work (Albright and Beussman, 2017; Bodner et al., 1998; Kulevich et al.,
2014) with lectures on principles occurring afterwards (Abraham, 2011; Allen et al., 1986). Resources
are easier to plan for where procedures are given or predictable (Seery et al., 2019) such as in lower
levels of inquiry work. These exercises have better student outcomes and better student feedback than
confirmation exercises (see for example Chatterjee et al., 2009; Sedwicket al., 2018). Spreading the inquiry
over several weeks allows time for risk assessment and chemical and equipment purchase enabling
students to engage in authentic inquiry (Quattrucci, 2018).

Scaffolding the stages of inquiry guides students through unfamiliar processes, reducing cognitive load,
helping students perform better (Morgan and Brooks, 2012), and enabling them to engage in inquiry
work (Quattrucci, 2018). Scaffolding is important because switching from confirmation exercises to
inquiry work can be difficult for students (Hall and Vardar-Ulu, 2013; Bruck and Towns, 2009). Examples
of scaffolding include thoughtfully-designed simulations that guide student inquiry of a concept (Moore
et al., 2013), and a prerequisite experiment design module for an inquiry laboratory module (Iimoto and
Frederick, 2011).

394 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

Methods

The university where I work has a strong research identity which shapes its teaching. The expectation is
that students will end their third year laboratory modules“research-ready” and equipped to undertake a
masters-level research project. In the first and second year, students on all chemistry degree programmes
follow a programme of confirmation exercises with little in the way of open-ended experiments. They
complete a set of exercises in inorganic, organic, or physical chemistry laboratories, before rotating
onto the next. There are typically 50 students in the laboratory with one academic and two or three
postgraduate laboratory teachers as well as a technician. This work is set in the second year inorganic
chemistry laboratory where students spend five weeks before moving on.

My aim is to develop students’ inquiry skills so that they are ready for open-ended experimentation
and research work in their final year. A curriculum is made up of three distinct components: knowledge,
skills, and subject-related attributes (Barnett, 2009; Barnett et al., 2001). I used this as a lens to analyse my
laboratory curriculum and found that the emphasis fell strongly on chemistry knowledge. The majority of
exercises allowed students to follow recipes without muchthought.The skills and attributes students were
developing focussed on survival and finishing the work in the allotted time rather than those desirable in
a chemist. My laboratory course was, therefore, not helping students become“research-ready”.

My work has looked at building inquiry into the teaching laboratory within and alongside the existing
confirmation style of instruction, without large cost implications. My first attempts tried experiments
with unknown outcomes. Students were given written instructions but no extra support. The work they
produced showed they were unable to experiment instead they were anticipating a correct answer and
had not engaged with the inquiry. Hall and Vardar-Ulu (2013) noted this too and Bruck and Towns (2009)
highlight the difficulty students have in changing from confirmation to inquiry work.This chapter descibes
observations from two subsequent attempts. A third attempt introducing open inquiry is described in
detail in Burnham (2013). These studies were granted ethical approval in accordance with institution
guidelines.

Presentation and Discussion of Findings

Reworking confirmation exercises as guided inquiry

The first step in introducing inquiry was to rework the confirmation exercises as structured/guided
inquiry exercises. The exercises were structured around a research aim or question to set a scientific
tone to the work (see Table 4 for an example). The post-laboratory assignments focused on addressing
the aim/question and asked for further work suggestions on how to continue. Questions were added
at points in the experimental instructions so that students would think about the chemistry they were
doing. Postgraduate laboratory teachers were tasked with engaging each student in a discussion about
the chemistry at least once during the laboratory session. The changes also included consideration of
the cognitive load of laboratory work. New pre-laboratory assignments focussed on the experiment
procedure and only included questions about theory required to understand it. Each exercise had the
same structure to minimise the cognitive load associated with unfamiliar layout. Finally, activities that
were superfluous to the research aim or question were removed to give students time to stop, think, and
reflect whilst doing their work during the laboratory class. It was hoped that the guided inquiry style of
these laboratory classes would model the scientific method and turn students into better experimenters.
Evidence from different sources was analysed in a hermeneutic spiral in order to form a description of
the student experience in the laboratory (Bodner, 2004; Shane, 2007). This showed that students did the

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |395

 Table 3: Interventions introduced to develop student expertise in inquiry
(*highlights approaches discussed in this chapter)

Intervention Description
Investigation into Interpretation the outcome of the acetylation of ferrocene using
of
the products of a spectroscopic data, written up as a report to allow for the unpredictable
reaction distribution of reaction products
Investigation into Interpretation of the outcome of the acetylation of ferrocene using
the products of a spectroscopic data, written up as a report to allow for the unpredictable
reaction distribution of reaction products
Reworking A common structure given to each exercise. Addition of a chemical research
confirmation aim/question. New prelaboratory activities focusing on experiment protocol.
exercises as guided Addition of inlaboratory discussion prompted by questions in the method
inquiry (Student and postgraduate laboratory teachers. Postlaboratory assignment using
Experience project)* the data from the laboratory to answer research aim/question. Superfluous
activities removed to free up time for thinking and reflection
Introducing Self-study task to learn about the scientific method before designing a
experiment design scientific investigation
exercises (Kitchen
Project, Be Creative
Lab)*
An open inquiry
experiment Students presented with the symptoms of an issue with a pro-cedure and
asked to design an investigation into the origin of the issue. Additional
experiment design workshop and extra facilitation provided during
experimental work (for details see Burnham, 2013)

required tasks. The pre-laboratory assignment focus was confirmed as being on the laboratory work rather
than the underlying chemistry. In the laboratory, students talked to each other about what they were
doing and they also asked the postgraduate laboratory teachers for help with the tasks. Students thought
about the chemistry when prompted by the questions in the text or discussion with postgraduates, and
postgraduates helped the students understand the chemistry they were doing. The post-laboratory
assignment helped students understand what they had done. When posed with the question “To what
extent do you understand the investigation having done the prelaboratory, the laboratory, and the postlab?”,
21% of respondents replied completely, 53% quite a lot and 26% somewhat or not really.

The aim or research question highlighted to students the point of what they were doing and the majority
understood the investigation by the end of the postlaboratory. Similarly to the confirmation exercises
investigated by Domin (2007), the post-laboratory assignment helped the students understand what they
had done. Including in-text questions and in-laboratory discussion helped the students understand what
they were doing just as in the findings of Cox and Junkin (2002) and the question driven pedagogy of
Teixeira et al., (2010). Students generally understood the point of what they were doing with respect to the
aim of the work, but their understanding was less outside of settasks. Some students were interested in the
chemistry they were doing whereas others were satisfied with cutting corners providing they completed
the required activities. Learning was therefore prompted by the required activities, and despite the intent
for students to engage in inquiry in the laboratory, the evidence suggested students were doing the
laboratory rather than engaging with it.

396 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

A strong theme was that they found these laboratory classes stressful. The stress was linked to the need
to complete set tasks within a given time frame. Students highlighted irritating behaviours in others
that impeded their progress in the laboratory and they felt under pressure when doing write-ups. This
stress was present even though, on average, 90% of students finished and left the laboratory before the
end of the allotted time. The student researcher suggested that finishing early was viewed as luck, not
as a reward for being efficient. Postgraduates who had done the previous course noted a more relaxed
atmosphere in the reworked sessions, however, the extra time to complete the activities appeared to have
gone unnoticed by the students.

The focus on an aim or research question was successful in imparting to students an awareness of the
chemical purpose of each exercise, but students in the reworked guided inquiry laboratory were still
recipe-following. This is unsurprising since DeKorver and Towns (2015) highlight that students will adopt
the most straightforward approach in the laboratory. Students wanted feedback that explains where
marks were lost, suggesting they were more concerned with individual assessments than the inquiry
theme of the course.
Table 4: The guided inquiry scaffolding used in an experiment by Armstrong et al. (2017)
Guided inquiry component Example
Research aim/question the structure of [RuH2(CO)(PPh3)3] using IR and NMR
spectroscopies.
Determine

Question in the experimental What is the purpose of the fourth equivalent of PPh3 in the reaction?
instructions

of
Questions
interpretation
results scaffolding the
and discussion Comment onas
NMR spectra the purity of your [RuH2(CO)(PPh3)3] using your IR and
evidence.

Conclusion and further work
suggestion
In three sentences, write a brief conclusion. Include what you learned
from your spectra, the structure you deduced and to what extent you
were able to achieve the research aim.
Suggest a change that could be made to the dihydride complex that
would move either the ν(MH) or the ν(CO) in the IR spectrum in order
to tell definitively which peak was which.

Introducing experiment design exercises

A second step in introducing inquiry into the undergraduate course was to introduce experiment design
exercises where students learned about the scientific method prior to designing an investigation. Smith
(2012) ascribes the passive nature of student learning in the laboratory to a lack of experiment planning
and Hanson and Overton’s (2010) report showed that recent graduates would have liked to have done
more experimental design during their degree course. Two interventions were trialled; the Kitchen
Project and the Be Creative Laboratory (BCL). In the Kitchen Project, students were asked to learn about
the scientific method before attending a tutor-led discussion of it. After the discussion, they designed,
executed, and reported on an investigation done in their kitchens (similar to Jones, 2011). In the BCL,
students were asked to learn about the scientific method and write a 500 word summary about it. They
then attended a workshop in which they designed an investigation or experiment based on a real-life
scenario; finding a use for fruit waste, designing a synthesis of a DMSO complex, investigating air-quality
in Sheffield, and investigating the impact of dimethicone entering the sewage waste stream. Students
were tasked with writing a hypothesis, designing experiments to test it, and writing a risk assessment for
their proposed investigation.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |397

The purpose of the preparatory scientific method tasks was to lead students into designing experiments
without extra teaching. The research question “what is the effectiveness of the scientific method task
in planning and reporting an experiment?” was used to design a simple evaluation of the interventions.
Data from the Kitchen Project showed that all students had engaged with the scientific method task and
subsequent small group discussion with a tutor. Data from the BCL indicated that students interpreted
the scientific method taskin different ways.There was no correlation between the amount of the scientific
method task done and the quality of the Kitchen Project investigations. This suggests that the group
discussion was useful in smoothing-out the differences between those who were very well prepared and
those who had achieved less. The varied interpretations of the scientific method task in the BCL indicates
that a tutor-facilitated discussion of the task is essential in ensuring all students have had the opportunity
to meet the required learning outcomes before proceeding to an experiment design task.

Tutor assistance was found to be necessary to help students identify experiment variables in both the
Kitchen Project and the BCL. Experiment designs were not uniform in quality. Although some showed
awareness of the importance of repetition of measurements to get accurate and precise results, others
were much less structured. Students in the Kitchen Project had completed the guided inquiry laboratory
programme the year before, but their need for help showed that the guided inquiry programme and the
scientific method task had not prepared them to be able to design an experiment unassisted. This agrees
with the finding from Garratt and Tomlinson (2001) that experiment design needs to be taught.

In general, students who spent more time researching, preparing and planning their experiment did
better quality investigations. These students had the same background as the students in my unsuccessful
attempts to introduce inquiry, which shows that any student has the potential to do good quality
experimental work if given the right support. The benefits of inquiry work can extend several years after
the intervention (Szteinberg and Weaver, 2013). A Kitchen Project participant with prior experience of
intensively-supported experiment design found that the scientific method task merely reinforced what
they already knew.

The BCL students appreciated the opportunity of doing some experiment design. It is noteworthy that
they wanted more experiment design, earlier in their degree course. This discrepancy may be the root of
the wish of graduates that more experiment design had been included in their degree courses (Hanson
and Overton, 2010).

Practical implications and adaptability

Scientific inquiry can be presented with different amounts of structure. Where resources are stretched,
structured or guided inquiry scaffolding can be added to confirmation exercises to give them a sense
of purpose. Tasking students to learn about the scientific method can feed into a class discussion of this
before they set about designing and executing an experiment. Confirmation exercises can be transformed
into open inquiry, problem-based inquiry, or authentic inquiry, where students set their own aims, design
and realise an experiment, and analyse the resulting data.

When implementing inquiry in your context, you will need to strikeabalance between the desiredoutcome
and the resources available to you. If resources are limited and you would like students to work with
purpose, you can rework confirmation laboratories with a structured or guided inquiry approach. If you
wish students to learnto about the scientificmethod, you can combine research into the scientific method
with facilitated discussion of this. Inquiry style instruction requires careful consideration of cognitive load

398 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

and suitable scaffolding of learning tasks to embed knowledge so that it can be applied outside of the
inquiry context. There is a wealth of advice in the literature to be considered when implementing inquiry
into the curriculum. Examples are given in Table 5 and you should consider the following when planning
inquiry style instruction:
• Ensure the students have a good theoretical knowledge base before starting laboratory
work (but not the answers their experiments will give, Bruck and Towns, 2009) and consider
introducing new techniques separately in skills-based laboratory classes (Sedwick et al.,
2018) or training sessions (Ford et al., 2008);
• Good facilitation is necessary because students who are familiar with one type of experiment
will assume that all experiment work is the same unless they are made to see otherwise
(Mohrig et al., 2007);
• Help students develop reasonable expectations of the success (or lack of) of inquiry work
(Bruck and Towns, 2009). Using errors arising from real-life experimental work provides
excellent learning opportunities about dealing with poor data (Davis et al., 2017);
• Tailor the scaffolding to the experience-level of the student because, although novice
students benefit from strongly-guided learning activities, these can disadvantage more
experienced students who have developed their own ways of doing things (Kirschner et al.,
2006);
• Ease students into inquiry by incrementally increasing the amount of freedom they are
given (Bruck and Towns, 2009). Introduce a learning stage before the experience stage
(Wham, 1977) so that students can perform a trial run on a model system before doing the
actual experiment (Newton et al., 2006);
• The experiment design process should be scaffolded and facilitated (Etkina et al., 2010) and
can be introduced outside of laboratory work (as with Iimoto and Frederick, 2011; Jones,
2011).

It is important to get buy-in to an inquiry-style of instruction from all participants; students, teaching
assistants and staff. Students need to understand the purpose of the inquiry work they are being asked
to do. They show a preference for a more structured level of inquiry if a topic is perceived to be difficult
(Basey and Francis, 2011). They believe they learn more and get higher grades in guided inquiry than
in open inquiry experiments (Chatterjee et al., 2009) but they may benefit from activities that they
have not liked (Sandi-Urena and co-workers, 2011). Basey and Francis (2011) noted that some teaching
assistants facilitated an open inquiry laboratory in the manner of a guided inquiry laboratory. Professional
development activities can assist teaching assistants to develop as facilitators rather than disseminators
of knowledge (Wheeler et al., 2017a; 2017b). Colleagues need convincing that barriers to implementation
are not insurmountable (Cheung, 2011). Student-directed project work is accompanied by significant
demands on chemical, equipment, and teaching resources (Keller and Kendall, 2017) which can be
optimised where activities are predictable (Domin, 1999). However, changing even one activity can benefit
students (Cacciatore and Sevian, 2009). In addition, changes increase engagement with laboratory work
(Mc Donnell et al., 2007) and the positive benefits extend for several years afterwards (Szteinberg and
Weaver, 2013).

Conclusions

Research and scientific inquiry are often reserved until the late stages of a degree programme. However,
these activities can be done by less experienced students, provided the research and inquiry processes are
appropriately scaffolded. The extended benefits of inquiry work will benefit final year research because

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |399

 Table 5: Examples of activities at different levels of inquiry (co-authors omitted for clarity)

Instruction style Examples

0: Confirmation Cacciatore (2009) – Parameters of recipe laboratory exercise compared with a
problem-based inquiry exercise
1: Guided Inquiry Albright (2017) – Example of a discovery (guided inquiry) exercise
Allen (1986) – How to turn a verification experiment into a guided inquiry
exercise
Bodner (1998) – Results of integrating discovery laboratories into the
curriculum
Ford (2008) – Using a mentor to guide students through the research process
Gaddis (2007) – Different ways of incorporating guided inquiry into the lab
Hall (2013) – Careful structuring of activities and introduction of new skills
week-by-week in a semester-long laboratory course
MacKay (2014) – Hypothesistesting using the Wittig reaction
Newton (2006) – Scaffolding a synthetic research project with a practice-run
making a model compound
Teixeira (2010) – Questions guiding interpretation of data and design of
subsequent experiments
Problem-based McDonnell (2007) – Multi-week group PBL projects
learning McGarvey (2004) – Examples of PBL laboratory exercises where students
design their own procedure to achieve certain experimental objectives
Smith (2012) – Outlining how to use PBL laboratory work in place of recipes
Torres King (2018) – A two week organic chemistry laboratory activity based
on catalysis
2: Open Inquiry Bertram (2014) – Multi-week group projects fostering research skills
Burnham (2013) – Student-designed investigations based on teaching lab
exercises
Herrington (2011) – Inquiry-based experiment on specific heat capacity
Martineau (2013) – Team-based experiment design and execution to achieve
authentic science
Mistry (2016) – Student-designed workup to separate organic molecules
3: Authentic Inquiry Etkina (2010) – Scaffolded investigative science learning environment
allowing students to develop scientific abilities as well as learning concepts
Quattrucci (2018) – Students identify problems and write experiments in areas
of chemistry of interest to them
Combination of Seery (2019) – Scripted exercises leading into student-driven [guided and
approaches open] inquiry work
Walker (2011) – Argument driven inquiry. Open inquiry coupled with
discussion and peer review sessions
Wham (1977) – Scripted exercises leading into discovery project work

400|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

the student will be familiar with scientific inquiry and experiment design and will therefore be a more
active contributor to their project. My results show the importance of good facilitation when students
design an experiment of their own, therefore, investment in teaching resource must be made in order to
realise learning outcomes associated with developing expertise as a researcher. The role of developing
students’ scientific inquiry skills does not need to be confined to the laboratory, but it is in the laboratory
where the benefits will ultimately be felt.

Acknowledgements

Data and insight in the Student Experience project was gathered by Dorothy Robertson, an MChem
research project student.

References
Abraham, M. R. (2011), “What can be learned from laboratory activities? Revisiting 32 years of research”, Journal
of Chemical Education, Vol. 88 No. 8, pp. 1020-1025.
Albright, J. C. and Beussman, D. J. (2017), “Capillary zone electrophoresis for the analysis of peptides: Fostering
students’ problem-solving and discovery learning in an undergraduate laboratory experiment”, Journal
of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 3, pp. 361-366.
Allen, J. B., Barker, L. N. and Ramsden, J. H. (1986), “Guided inquiry laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.
63 No. 6, pp. 533-534.
Agustian, H. Y. and Seery, M. K. (2017), “Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in chemistry education:
a proposed framework for their design”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 518
532.
Armstrong, C., Burnham, J. A. J. and Warminski, E. E. (2017), “Combining sustainable synthesis of a versatile
ruthenium dihydride complex with structure determination using group theory and spectroscopy”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 7, pp. 928-931.
Barnett, R., Parry, G. and Coate, K. (2001), “Conceptualizing curriculum change”, Teaching in Higher Education, Vol.
6 No. 4, pp. 435-449.
Barnett, R. (2009), “Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol.
34 No. 4, pp. 429-440.
Basey, M. and Francis, C. D. (2011), Design of inquiry-orientated science labs: impacts on students’ attitudes,
J.
Research in Science & Technological Education, 29(3), 241-255.
Bertram, A., Davies, E.S., Denton, R., Fray, M.J., Galloway, K.W., George, M.W., Reid, K. L., Thomas, N. R. and Wright,
R. R. (2014), “From cook to chef: Facilitating the transition from recipe-driven to open-ended research
based undergraduate chemistry laboratory activities”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences,
Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 26-31.
Bodner, G. M. (2003), “Problem solving: the difference between what we do and what we tell students to do”,
University Chemistry Education, Vol. 7, pp. 37-45.
Bodner, G. M. (2004), “Twenty Years of Learning: How To Do Research in Chemical Education. 2003 George C.
Pimentel Award”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 81 No. 5, pp. 618-625.
Bodner, G. M., Hunter, W.J. F. and Lamba, R. S. (1998), “What happens when discovery laboratories are integrated
into the curriculum at a large research university?”, The Chemical Educator, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 1-21.
Bruck, L. B. and Towns, M. H. (2009), “Preparing students to benefit from inquiry-based activities in the chemistry
laboratory: Guidelines and suggestions”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 86 No. 7, pp. 820-822.
Buck, L.B., Bretz, S.L. and Towns, M. H. (2008),“Characterising the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory”,
Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 52-58.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |401

Burnham, J. A. J. (2013), “Opportunistic use of students for solving laboratory problems: Twelve heads are better
than one”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 9, pp. 42-48.
Cacciatore, K. L. and Sevian, H. (2009), “Incrementally approaching an inquiry laboratory curriculum: Can
changing a single laboratory experiment improve student performance in general chemistry?”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 86 No. 4, pp. 498-505.
Chatterjee, S., Williamson, V. M., McCann, K. and Peck, M. L. (2009), “Surveying students’ attitudes and perceptions
towards guided-inquiry and open-inquiry laboratories”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 86 No. 12, pp.
1427-1432.
Cheung, D. (2011), “Teacher beliefs about implementing guided-inquiry laboratory experiments for secondary
school chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 88 No. 11, pp. 1462-1468.
Cox, A.J. and Junkin III, W. F. (2002), “Enhanced student learning in the introductory physics laboratory”, Physics
Education, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 37-44.
Davis, E. J., Pauls, S. and Dick, J. (2017), “Project-based learning in undergraduate environmental chemistry
laboratory: Using EPA methods to guide student method development for pesticide quantitation”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 4, pp. 451-457.
DeKorver, B. K. and Towns, M. H. (2015), “General chemistry students’ goals for chemistry laboratory coursework”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 12, pp., 2031-2037.
Domin, D. S. (1999), “A review of laboratory instruction styles”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 76 No. 4, pp.,
543-547.
Domin, D. S. (2007), “Students’ perceptions of when conceptual development occurs during laboratory
instruction”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 140-152.
Etkina, E., Karelina, A., Ruibal-Villasenor, M., Rosengrant, D., Jordan, R. and Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2010), “Design and
reflection help students develop scientific abilities: Learning in introductory physics laboratories”, The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 54-98.
Fay, M. E., Grove, N. P., Towns, M. H. and Bretz, S. L. (2007), “A rubric to characterize inquiry in the undergraduate
chemistry laboratory”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 212-219.
Ford, R., Prudenté, C. and Newton, T. A. (2008), “A model for incorporating research into the first-year chemistry
J.
curriculum”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 85 No. 7, pp. 929-933.
Gaddis, B. A. and Schoffstall, A. M. (2007), “Incorporating guided-inquiry learning into the organic chemistry
laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 84 No. 5, pp., 848-851.
Garratt, J. and Tomlinson, J. (2001), “Experiment design - can it be taught or learned?”, University Chemistry
Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 74-79.
Hall, M.L. and Vardar-Ulu, D. (2013), “An inquiry-based biochemistry laboratory structure emphasizing competency
in the scientific process: A guided approach with an electronic notebook format”, Biochemistry and
Molecular Biology Education, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 58-67.
Hanson, S. and Overton, T. (2010), Skills required by new chemistry graduates and their development in degree
programmes, Higher Education Academy UK Physical Sciences Centre, Hull, UK.
Herrington, D. G. (2011), “The heat is on: An inquiry-based investigation for specific heat”, Journal of Chemical
Education, Vol. 88 No. 11, pp., 1558-1561.
Hofstein, A. and Lunetta, V. N. (1982), “The role of the laboratory in science teaching: neglected aspects of
research”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 201-217.
Hofstein, A. and Lunetta, V. N. (2004), “The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first
century”, Science Education, Vol. 88 No. 1, pp. 28-54.
Iimoto, D. S. and Frederick, K. A. (2011), “Incorporating student-designed research projects in the chemistry
curriculum”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 88 No. 8, pp. 1069-1073.
Johnstone, A. H., Sleet, R.J. and Vianna, J. F. (1994), “An information processing model of learning: Its application
to an undergraduate laboratory course in chemistry”, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 77-87.

402 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing student expertise in scientific inquiry

Jones, C. D. (2011), “The kitchen is your laboratory: A research-based term-paper assignment in a science writing
course”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 88 No. 8, pp. 1062-1068.
Keller, V. A. and Kendall, B. L. (2017), “Independent synthesis projects in the organic chemistry teaching
laboratories: Bridging the gap between student and researcher”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94
No. 10, pp. 1450-1457.
Kirschner, P. A. (1992), “Epistemology, practical work and academic skills in science education”, Science &
Education, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 273-299.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. and Clark, R. E. (2006), “Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work:
An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based
teaching”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 41 No. 2, pp. 75-86.
Kulevich, S. E., Herrick, R. S. and Mills, K. V. (2014), “A discovery chemistry experiment on buffers”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 8, pp. 1207-1211.
Luckett, K. (2009), “The relationship between knowledge structure and curriculum: A case study in sociology”,
Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 441-453.
MacKay J. A. and Wetzel, N. R. (2014), “Exploring the Wittig Reaction: A collaborative guided-inquiry experiment
for the organic chemistry laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 5, pp. 722-725.
Martineau, C., Traphagen, S. and Sparkes, T. C. (2013), “A guided inquiry methodology to achieve authentic
science in a large undergraduate biology course”, Journal of Biological Education, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 240
245.
Mc Donnell, C., O’Connor, C. and Seery, M. K. (2007), “Developing practical chemistry skills by means of student
driven problem-based learning mini-projects”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp.
130-139.
McGarvey, D. J. (2004), “Experimenting with undergraduate practicals”, University Chemistry Education, Vol. 8, pp.
58-65.
Mistry, N., Fitzpatrick, C. and Gorman, S. (2016), “Design your own workup: A guided-inquiry experiment for
introductory organic laboratory courses”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 1091-1095.
Mohrig, J. R., Hammond, C. N. and Colby, D.A. (2007), “On the successful use of inquiry-driven experiments in the
organic chemistry laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 84 No. 6, pp. 992-998.
Moore, E. B., Herzog, T. A. and Perkins, K. K. (2013), “Interactive simulations as implicit support for guided-inquiry”,
Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 257-268.
Morgan, K. and Brooks, D. W. (2012), “Investigating a method of scaffolding student-designed experiments”,
Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 513-522.
Newton, T. A., Tracy, H. J. and Prudenté, C. (2006), “A research-based laboratory course in organic chemistry”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 83 No. 12, pp. 1844-1849.
Overton, T. L. (2001), “Teaching chemists to think: From parrots to professionals”, University Chemistry Education,
Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 62-68.
Overton, T. L. (2007), “Context and problem-based learning”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences,
Vol. 3, pp. 7-12.
Quattrucci, J. G. (2018), “Problem-based approach to teaching advanced chemistry laboratories and developing
students’ critical thinking skills”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 95 No. 2, pp.259-266.
Reid, N. (2008), “A scientific approach to the teaching of chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice,
Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 51-59.
Reid, N. and Shah, I. (2007), “The role of laboratory work in university chemistry”, Chemistry Education Research
and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 172-185.
Sandi-Urena, S., Cooper, M. M., Gatlin, T. A. and Bhattacharyya, G. (2011), “Students’ experience in a general
chemistry cooperative problem-based laboratory”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 12 No.
4, pp. 434-442.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |403

Sedwick, V., Leal, A., Turner, D. and Kanu, A. B. (2018), “Quantitative determination of aluminium in deodorant
brands: A guided inquiry learning experience in quantitative analysis laboratory”, Journal of Chemical
Education, Vol. 95 No. 3, pp. 451-455.
Seery, M. K., Jones, A. B., Kew, W. and Mein, T. (2019)“Unfinished recipes: Structuring upper-division laboratory
work to scaffold experimental design skills”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 96 No. 1, pp. 53-59.
Shane, J. W. (2007), “Hermeneutics and the meaning of understanding”, in Theoretical Frameworks for Research
in Chemistry/Science Education, Bodner, G. M., Orgill, M. Eds., Pearson Education Inc. Upper Saddle River,
N.J. USA.
Smith, C. J. (2012), “Improving the school-to-university transition: using a problem-based approach to teach
practical skills whilst simultaneously developing students’ independent study skills”, Chemistry Education
Research and Practice, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 490-499.
Stewart, K. K. and Lagowski J. J. (2003), “Cognitive apprenticeship theory and graduate chemistry education”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 80 No. 12, pp. 1362-1366.
Szteinberg, G. A. and Weaver, G. C. (2013), “Participants’ reflections two and three years after an introductory
chemistry course-embedded research experience”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 14 No.
1, pp. 23-35.
Teixeira, J. M., Nedrow Byers, J., Perez, M. G. and Holman, R. W. (2010), “The question-driven laboratory exercise:
A new pedagogy applied to a green modification of Grignard reagent formation and reaction”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 87 No. 7, pp. 714-716.
Torres King, J. H., Wang, H. and Yezierski, E. J. (2018), “Asymmetric aldol additions: A guided-inquiry laboratory
activity on catalysis”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 95 No. 1, pp. 158-163.
Tsaparlis, G. and Gorezi, M. (2007), “Addition of a project-based component to a conventional expository physical
chemistry laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 84 No. 4, pp. 668-670.
Walker, J. P., Sampson, V. and Zimmerman, C. O. (2011), “Argument-driven inquiry: An introduction to a new
instructional model for use in undergraduate chemistry laboratories”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.
88 No. 8, pp. 1048-1056.
Wham, A. J. B. (1977), “The Nature of Practical Work at the Tertiary Level, in Research for the Classroom and
Beyond”, A Report of the Chemical Society Education Division Symposium, University of Loughborough, July
1977, The Chemical Society, London.
Wheeler, L. B., Clark, C. P. and Grisham, C. M. (2017a), “Transforming a traditional laboratory to an inquiry-based
course: Importance of training TAs when redesigning a curriculum”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol.94
No. 8, pp. 1019-1026.
Wheeler, L. B., Maeng, J. L. and Whitworth, B. A. (2017b), “Characterizing teaching assistants’ knowledge and
beliefs following professional development activities within an inquiry-based general chemistry context”,
Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 19-28.
Xu, H. and Talanquer, V. (2013), “Effect of the level of inquiry of laboratory experiments on general chemistry
students’ written reflections”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 90 No. 1, pp. 21-28.

404|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory
28 programme for international delivery

Julie Hyde
Department of Chemistry, University of Sheffield
julie.hyde@sheffield.ac.uk

This chapter has been written as a result of personal experience in setting up teaching
laboratories in the UK and teaching non-English students, rather than using an evidence
informed approach. From experience, it is known that practical skills of Chinese students
entering university could be limited. The programme design needed to teach basic
introductory practical skills also develop students scientific chemistry language over three
years, so that these students can then travel to the UK where they are fully integrated with
the UK university cohort to complete the final of their degree year.

Following a carefully structured and planned programme in China delivered by UK staff,

these students were fully integrated with the UK cohort for the final year of their BSc at
the University of Sheffield, with minimal language support. Without teaching by UK staff
in China, such integration is not as successful and often students need to be taught as a
separate group when they come to the UK. Previous personal experience highlighted that
teaching scientific writing needed development over the three years, and the programme
described introduced scientific writing skills from the start of Year 1.

As well as curriculum development, it is important to consider the laboratory facilities in the

host country before teaching a laboratory programme in a different language in another
country. To enable the reader to set up their own joint laboratory programme, full guidance
and tips are given from experience throughout this chapter. This will inform about the kinds
of detailed practical requirements and guidance for chemicals and equipment that can be
given to the host University in good time before delivery.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton

I met Tina at my first Chemistry of the Local Sections (CLS) meeting in the 1990’s at Burlington
House in London, it was her first session as Chair of the CLS committee. Tina was friendly and
chatting to all of the delegates making everyone feel welcome, even newcomers like me. I found
her an inspiration then and still do now! I believe Prof. Tina Overton is more inspirational to
university education than she fully appreciates; Tina is a “trailblazer”.

To cite: Hyde, J. (2019), “Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C.
(Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 405-420.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |405

Introduction

In 2011, the University of Sheffield Chemistry started a joint (3+1) BSc chemistry degree with Nanjing
University of Technology in China. The chemistry content for the first two years of the UK degree are
delivered by Sheffield staff, via a flying faculty approach, involving staff teaching modules during two
week blocks over three years. This type of delivery abroad is known in other subjects (Szkornik, 2017). The
programme described here is different to others as the laboratory component is delivered in China by UK
staff.The first introductory year of the programme described is new while Years 2 and 3 were adapted from
Sheffield’s existing first and second year laboratories. I spend three months each year in China delivering
this practical programme.

The requirements of the laboratory programme is to develop the students required practical skills in three
years so that they become competent practical chemists before integrating with the third year students
at Sheffield. Practical laboratory chemistry is a significant and mandatory part of any UK Royal Society
of Chemistry (RSC) accredited chemistry degree. Designing the laboratory programme was a challenge
because prior to university, many students did very little or even no practical chemistry. Therefore the
overall approach to the curriculum was to develop a first year component for students that would teach
the basic skills, preparing them for more complicated techniques in their second and third year.

Methods

Initial preparations before China

As students have limited English language skills, careful planning is important. To design the new Year 1
programme, I selected a number of suitable high school/further education experiments (A Level/BTEC),
to develop students’ basic chemistry practical skills. These included all of the important laboratory skills
for organic, inorganic, and physical laboratories as well as for developing students’ thinking processes.
Six experiments were selected for Year 1 (Hyde, 2014) and trialled with some UK students prior to travel
to China. An example experiment is available in the Supplementary Information. However, there can be
difficulties with pre-planning. Although photographs of the laboratory had been sent to me, I was not
exactly sure what equipment was available until I went to deliver the laboratory for the first time in April
2012.

Information needed to be sent to the students via the virtual learning environment (VLE) prior to staff
travelling to China, including pre-laboratory activities, methods and results sheets, so students could
prepare for the first experiment before teaching started. Usually one or two students are appointed as
class monitors, and these students print documents for the whole class. Class monitors also liaise with
the class teacher and are very helpful in supporting the needs of their teachers. This is a typical Chinese
arrangement; there is always a monitor (who may change from year to year). It is a responsible position,
the students take on this role very professionally as their experience through this role can be added to
their CV.

Communication with students

When travelling to China for the first time in 2012, I was unaware that communication between staff
and students would be very different to the UK. Sheffield uses Google platforms, which like Facebook
and Twitter, are not easy to use in China. In China, WeChat is used for arranging meetings with teaching
colleagues, technicians, and other university contacts — even the Dean. The students set up a WeChat
group which is used to advise about work to be carried out, remind students of deadlines for pre-laboratory

406 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

activities, results sheets, and homework. It is easy to photograph a question, send it to the group and
have a WeChat discussion. Students ask specific questions about the chemistry through WeChat, this
can be either through the group, or individually. Some students text for personal guidance about course
progression and their future careers.

Pre-laboratory activities
Pre-laboratory activities need to be submitted for marking before each laboratory session. To prepare,
students are given a method sheet a week before each experiment to enable them to complete a
preparatory exercise to familiarise them with the chemistry and safety aspects related to the practical. In
the laboratory, all students are asked questions about the experiment during the introductory session.
Other teachers of non-chemistry international students have also found this style of preparation for the
students to be effective (Chalmers, 1997). Students are also given written guidance about the requirements
of a laboratory notebook, which is also explained carefully during the first laboratory session. Students
tended to be unfamiliar about the importance of keeping a laboratory notebook before this course.

Assessment
Assessment methods are of the same style and level as the laboratory in the home UK institution.
Attention to language requirements and diversity of these students is also an important consideration
when writing course materials and assessments. Each practical grade is comprised of marks from the pre
laboratory activity, the in-laboratory assessment and the results sheets. Staff marking guidance is very
comprehensive, scripts are moderated before returning work to students aiming to ensure consistency
from the team. International students must be pre-prepared for the assessment style when they arrive in
the UK, such preparative approaches have been used by other courses (Szkornik, 2015).

To assess students’ practical ability, in-laboratory marking was included from the start of the programme.
This relied upon work that was documented in their laboratory notebook, together with some techniques,
such as setting up a distillation. This mark is included in their final summative assessment grade for the
experiment. Results sheets are a simple proformas to be completed after each experiment. Each result
sheet has been developed and structured to enable students to gradually build up their writing and
analytical skills to be able to write a full report in their third year of study. The sections of the result sheet
are typically observations, experimental, results and discussions, conclusions and references. An example
results sheet for experiment 1 is available in the Supplementary Information.

Developing English language skills

As teaching delivery is totally in English, the preparation time before the laboratory is important for
these students. To help with language development, students are given quizzes for each experiment in
the form of a wordsearch. In all cases, the most complicated words were selected for each experiment,
students first need to complete the wordsearch, then define each of the words in English. This is helpful
for understanding and gaining confidence in English as students write out new words and phrases.

The programme uses an electronic Practical Skills Portfolio (PSP), described by Wright et al., (2018).
Students take a photograph during the laboratory of a practical activity. They are then required to write
about it using one or two short sentences. Each experiment has a specific PSP where students gradually
build up a collection of images and sentences about new apparatus such as a Buchner flasks and funnels,
observations such as an indicator colour change, or a new technique such as carrying out a distillation.
PSP skills are not re-tested throughout the 17 experiments, but students use their own PSP information to
refer to and help with their higher level experiments, as they can check back on prior skills development,
or to help revise and recall scientific language.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |407

Programme Structure

Overview of Year 1
The first lecture gives clear safety guidance aligned with those at Sheffield, where the students will
complete the final year of their degree. Different countries have differences in safety procedures so it is
also important to work within the host Universities guidelines, such as using a class register. With regards
to developing language skills, students were assigned to work in pairs. Typically students wanted to work
with their friends which resulted in stronger language pairs and weaker language pairs. Instead, students
were randomly mixed to improved both group dynamics and language learning. Pictures of chemical
apparatus with their English names are given to the group in advance of practical classes. Students are
tested on new and unusual apparatus names throughout the programme. During the introduction to each
experiment, students are individually asked names of different pieces of apparatus. With difficult words
it helps to get students to repeat names together as a group out loud, a delivery style more common in a
language class.

While hand marking pre-laboratory work is very time consuming, it quickly shows up specific language
issues and weaknesses in the students’ chemistry. This knowledge helped update course materials and
questions for future years. After three years, updating to an electronic answering and marking system on
the VLE was necessary as group size was getting large. Marked pre-laboratory exercises are returned at
the start of the practical session, where they are discussed in detail by asking each member of the group a
different question about the practical. This allows differentiation between stronger and weaker language
ability students. This exercise allowed the students to gain more confidence in speaking out loud in
English in front of a group they already knew well. Chinese students always stand up to answer a question
directed at them. It is very important for them to be as prepared as possible before attending class, so that
they will not feel embarrassed in front of their peer group. This style of preparation by Chinese students
has been reported by other workers in the field for non-chemistry students. (Hodkinson and Poropat,
2013; Hwang et al., 2002; Hwang, 1987; Li and Rivers, 2018).

Experiments
Experiments 1 and 2 are both titrimetric analysis, involving the demonstration of a full titration for one
experiment. The students and Chinese teaching colleagues were surprised at a full demonstration from a
class teacher — this is not typical in Chinese laboratories. Staff filmed my demonstrations at the start of
my practical sessions and different staff shadowed me to become trained in various techniques.

Experiments 3 is an organic synthesis and involves preparing a sample with very new techniques for
the students. Carrying out organic experiments are the most problematic for Chinese students as it is
rare they have the opportunity to carry out synthesis prior to university, and so each new skill requires
a demonstration. Using a Buchner funnel and flask, drying solids between filter papers, collecting and
weighing the product, labelling a sample bottle, and carrying out a melting point determination were all
very challenging to students.

Experiment 4 is an extraction of limonene and requires a simple distillation and the use of Quickfit
apparatus. Chinese students had never encountered Quickfit apparatus before. One difference is the
laboratories have oil baths to heat the reaction whereas most UK laboratories use heating mantles. For
the final report, students were asked to write an electrophilic addition mechanism to support the test to
identify the presence of a double bond. At this point in Year 1 the concept of curly arrows had not been
encountered so it was necessary to teach mechanisms during a feedback class.

408 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

Table 1: Year 1 experiments for the programme — for full details, see Hyde (2014)

Experiment Technique focus Scientific skills covered

Experiment 1
(Quantitative analysis)
Determination of the ethanoic acid
content in vinegar
Experiment 2
(Quantitative analysis)
Determination of the percentage of
copper in a (unknown) copper salt
Experiment 3
(Organic synthesis)
Recrystallisation of benzoic acid
and preparation of acetoxime from
acetone
Experiment 4
(Qualitative analysis)
Extraction of limonene from oranges
or lemons using steam distillation
Experiment 5
(Quantitative analysis)
Determination of the RMM of
an unknown organic acid using
a potentiometric titration and
chromatoraphy of inks
Experiment 6
(Analytical chemistry, instrumental
analysis)
Analysis of Congo Red by visible
spectroscopy
Titrimetric techniques,
preparation of standard
solutions using a liquid.
Titrimetric techniques for
redox systems, preparation
of standard solutions using
a solid.
Synthetic organic
techniques,
recrystallization, melting
points.
Use of quick-fit apparatus,
organic extraction,
Qualitative test tube
analysis.
Instrumental and
titrimetricanalysis.
Preparation of standard
solutions. Introduction
to chromatographic
techniques.
Preparation of volumetric
solutions, series dilutions.
finding λmax.
Observations, recording data,
calculations, simple conclusions,
looking up literature, referencing.
Observations, recording results
and data, error calculations,
discussions, conclusions,
references.
Literature comparisons. Introduce
writing a simple experimental
(See Supplementary Information).
Carry out a liquid IR, analysis of IR,
writing in experimental format,
organic mechanisms.
Data collection, graphs,
determination of organic
unknown. Literature comparisons.
Data handling and graphs,
calculations from experimental
results, discussions, conclusions.

Experiments 5 and 6 are oriented towards physical chemistry, where data is collected using a spectrometer.
The analytical preparation during the experiment was new, although some of the students had used a
spectrometer prior to these sessions. Chinese students are generally very capable numerically so data
collection and data handling made these the easiest experiments, although some students found
discussing the data in a different language difficult.

For practical work, students needed to use qualitative infrared (IR) and nuclear magnetic resonance
(NMR) spectroscopy to analyse their products. Students found it difficult to apply the theory to a practical
situation; both because of language issues as well as the actual identification of functional groups in IR
and simple splitting in NMR. As a result of these findings, a simple teaching programme was introduced
for basics of using IR and NMR which was continuously developed as the practical programme progressed
through teaching and feedback sessions.

Keeping a laboratory notebook is an important skill to develop from Year 1 which the students had not
used before. During Year 1, students felt the need to copy out the method sheet into their laboratory

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |409

notebook. A reason for this was probably due to their weak language skills at that point. With strong
guidance, their style started to change and many students adopted the more traditional flow chart or
bullet points by Years 2 and 3 (Christian, 1980).

During the first year of teaching in China, the feedback class was introduced as a result of marking students
results sheets. Students needed more guidance than just the laboratory session to help them improve
in their theory and writing skills, written feedback alone was not enough with their level of language.
After each results sheet has been marked, the team met to moderate and to find out the weaknesses
and strengths in students scripts before feedback sessions. These feedback sessions facilitate discussions
on problems and develop theory. Students can annotate their own marked work. Involvement from the
students is important so questions are asked throughout these sessions to individual students, involving
all students as well as having small and large group discussions. The sessions bring out useful language
development because frequently words need translating and explaining. Typically two or three Sheffield
staff will be team-teaching during these feedback classes where there are approximately 60 students, and
they were really valued by the students.

Experimental feedback
Points to discuss during the feedback session for Experiment 1 together with general comments for
Experiment 4, 5, and 6, are described below. There are many similarities to the type of feedback for all of
the experiments.
• Initially students did not appreciate they needed to actually write meaningful observations,
with many students writing just one word.
• Calculations were not set out clearly, the actual answer was written but there was no
indication of how this answer was achieved. Some students mentioned they were previously
encouraged to just record the final answer, making it easier for marking purposes as group
sizes are often very large. Typically we expect calculations to be set out and followed
through in the UK, with correct units and unit derivations as taught through our laboratory
programme.
• Results, Discussions, and Conclusions sections were initially seen as very confusing. Students
did not know what to write or what information to include in which section. Many students
wrote one word which may have been a colour, a final % of ethanoic acid in vinegar. One
of the biggest problems was that students loved to describe human error as part of the
discussions or conclusion. For example students would document the result was incorrect
because they spilt some chemical, or added some water to rinse the flask, or that the
apparatus might have been dirty. It is important to get the student out of such habits of
blame and bring to their attention the scientific reasoning for their experiments. One point
students mentioned was that the Mandarin translation of “discussion” and“conclusion”were
too similar for students to get a good feel of how these sections should differ.
• Comparisons of data to literature values was a very new concept to the students and they
did not include this in their report. It was not just a language issue, students were not
familiar with the type of information to include from previous chemistry classes they may
have taken.
• Writing references in the standard way was not previously taught, especially for texts and
journals. Often students could write an electronic reference but did not appreciate they
should include dates of accessing data; clear guidance was required. There are sources
for scientific writing training such as our own internal laboratory assistant and textbooks
(Overton et al., 2015).
• Experiment 4 involved extracting limonene, where students are asked for a basic electronic

410|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

addition mechanism together with simple qualitative identification by IR spectroscopy.

Both theories were new to the students. During the feedback sessions students needed to
be taught how to write a mechanism, introduced to the idea of curly arrows and how to
apply qualitative IR analysis. For IR, students need to know how to use spectra in analysing
compounds, the importance of annotating spectra, and comparing their results with
standard compounds on websites such as the use of spectral databases.
• Experiments 5 and 6 both involved data collection. Chinese students tend to be very good
numerically and the calculations were typically carried out well. Unfortunately students
were not as good at tabulating their data and often their graphs were not labelled correctly.
Details normally expected on graphs were not present; poor headings and units were
often left out. Support and guidance was given, there were language issues but more likely
previous educational experiences had not introduced these concepts.

It was evident that feedback and support was required throughout all three years of the laboratory
programme to develop students skills to enable them to write a full Wittig report. Such teaching
methodologies about the development of skills have been well documented (Overton et al., 2015).

Overview of Year 2
Year 2 builds on Year 1 skills and works through six of the more challenging experiments from Sheffield’s
Level 1 laboratory programme (Table 2). One issue that needed consideration was the restrictions of some
solvents in China, such as acetone and some petroleum ethers. Pre-laboratory activities, method sheets,
and results sheets were all of a similar format as introduced in Year 1. Pre-laboratory activities were given
online and worked through in class before the experiment started. Results sheets were more complex
with more reliance on qualitative spectroscopy and scientific writing skills. Reports required more detail
in the writing up, with some challenging questions.

Minor adaptations of the Sheffield documentation was crucial to allow students to understand new
procedures with their limited English at this time in their course. Replacing some of the more complicated
terminology with basic English helped language understanding, and all new techniques were
demonstrated. Students learnt many new techniques such as recrystallisation, thin layer chromatography
(TLC), use of rotary evaporation, and running their own IR. Demonstration of techniques is very important
to show these techniques. As well as initial class demonstrations, students are gathered together in small
groups to demonstrate new skills and use of unfamiliar equipment. Students continued take photographs,
answer questions, and document new techniques, observations, and equipment for their PSP.

Several feedback sessions included working through a series of spectroscopy questions to determine an
organic unknown which really helped. Students were invited in pairs to the front of the feedback class to
explain their identification of product unknowns and deductions to the group by spectroscopic analysis.
This activity also started to develop students’ presentation skills. All members of the group took part in
this activity over a few weeks.

From Year 1, students are expected to write their data in experimental format which they picked up fairly
well. Difficulties included writing in the past tense and collecting all data together to document at the end
of the experimental section.To bridge the gap from Year 1, students were given a pre-sessional homework
of three poorly written experimentals for an experiment they had already carried out. They were tasked
with comparing these to their own experimental, followed by discussion in pairs then via a group to look
at the correct experimental for this experiment.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |411

 Table 2: Year 2 experiments for the programme — for full details, see Hyde (2014)
Experiment Technique focus
Experiment 7 Working under inert
(Inorganic synthesis) conditions using solid
Air sensitive compounds of transition carbon dioxide, use of a
metals syringe to prepare a Cr (III)
complex
Experiment 8 Qualitative chemical tests.
(Inorganic synthesis) Synthetic techniques
Colour in transition metal chemistry for preparation Cr (III) of
complexs. Zn/Hg amalgam
reduction under nitrogen
Experiment 9 Synthesis of a solid
(Organic synthesis) organic, monitor by TLC
Oxidation using polymer bound using UV visualisation,
chromium trioxide CrO3 (fluorene to recrystallization, solvent
fluorenone) extraction, rotary
evaporation, sample
collection, melting point
Experiment 10 Synthesis of a liquid
(Organic synthesis) organic, monitor by TLC, IR,
Aldol reaction (Benzaldehyde to analysis of a liquid sample.
Benzylideneacetone) Sample collection of a
liquid
Experiment 11 Accuracy in preparing non
(Quantitative analysis) contaminated standard
Determination of an equilibrium solutions, series dilutions,
constant and complex stoichiometry visible spectrophotometer
by spectrophotometry (of Iron III
thiocynate complex)
Experiment 12 Following the kinetics
(Physical chemistry) of reaction using visible
Kinetics of reaction between crystal spectroscopy
violet and sodium hydroxide
Scientific skills covered
Yield calculations, discussions,
literature search of structures,
conclusions, references
Use results to determine an
electrochemical series. Analysis of
product, qualitative test results to
relate to results and discussions
Analysis of instrumental results, IR
and NMR, annotation of spectra.
Introduce writing an abstract
and an introduction, write an
experimental
Writing an experimental, analysis
of instrumental results, IR and
NMR in experimental format,
annotation of spectra
Data collections, use of computer
to analyse results and produce
graphs, calculation of Kc. Reading
a literature paper, relate to results,
standard deviation using class
results.
Data collection, preparation
of graphs using a computer,
determination of the
experimental order, conclusions,
literature references

Scientific writing continued to be developed with students writing abstracts and introductions together
with full experimental sections for the aldol and oxidation reactions. Although writing experimentals
was challenging, it was evident training was valuable right from the start of these students university
chemistry career.

Overview of Year 3
The final year again required careful planning for delivery. Experiments were selected from the Level 2
experimental laboratory at Sheffield. Year 3 involved the complexity of challenging experiments (Table
3), together with a full write up in journal style for the final experiment (the Wittig reaction). Planning for
this stage was most complicated, with column chromatography, work under inert conditions, use of high

412|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

boiling solvents for the Grignard, and the use of specialist glassware included in the curriculum. All final
year experiments needed to be carried out in fume cupboards. Organic and inorganic reactions were
carried out under inert conditions, and column chromatography and challenging analyses were a step up
from Year 2.

Although students previously acquired their own IR spectra, both NMR and optical rotation (OR) are new
at this stage. A guidance video in English was prepared for OR training. The incorporation of the PSP into
the programme from Year 1 really helped with practical revision as students had photographic evidence
and written explanations about techniques. The biggest challenge for Year 3 was submission and return
of reports, marking them in a short turn around time and then giving valuable feedback before students
were required to complete the next report. Our staff were spending one semester in China, meaning
students had two or three days to complete their general results sheet and one week for the final Wittig
report, which requires a journal style write up.

During the third year these students still face challenges with their English language ability. Laboratory
reports are not fully corrected for English language, although detailed guidance about scientific writing
and theoretical issues are delivered through teaching during feedback sessions. Pre-sessional work was
given on writing different parts of a full report. Students are given incorrect paragraphs for abstracts,
experimentals and conclusions to consider and correct, followed by detailed discussions during a
feedback session. Students are typically well prepared for these sessions. The students did well with their

Table 3: Year 3 experiments for the programme — for full details, see Hyde (2014)
Experiment Technique focus Scientific skills covered
The
(Inorganic
Experiment
active 13 of optically
separation
coordination
synthesis)complexes Synthesis
of
complexes,
rotation and
of
a series of
the
analysis by optical Data manipulations and
Nitartrate
separation
products
calculations using OR data. Write an
abstract

The
(Inorganic
Experiment 14 of ferrocene
acetylation
synthesis) TLCanalysisbybycolumn
chromatography,
Purification monitor by
NMR Write an experimental, results
and discussion, analysis and
interpretation of NMR spectra
reaction
Experiment
(Organic 15 of the Wittig
Stereochemistry
synthesis) acid
Full synthesis
then product ofto
hydrolysis the
give the
ester Full journal write up, no results
sheet proforma provided. Title,
abstract, introduction, results
and discussions, conclusion,
experimental references, appendix
Experiment
(Organic
Reaction
with an ester
of Grignard reagent
a16
synthesis) Synthesis under
conditions,
chromatography,
colourless compounds
flash dry inert
column
monitor
TLC Instrumental analysis and
documentation. Write experimental,
results, discussion, conclusion, and
references
(Physical
Kinetics ofchemistry)
17
t-butylchloride
Experiment hydrolysis of Monitor the hydrolysis
conductivity over time by Determine order, rate constant,
enthalpy and entropy of activation,
Relate results to confirm a
mechanism, compare with literature

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |413

final journal reports from the Wittig experiment. Most students had all the correct sections — abstract,
introduction, results and discussion, experimental, references, and appendices—producing a well written
constructed report. The standard of scientific writing was far higher than expected, with some students
preparing their report as if they were actually submitting a journal paper!

Following completion of their Year 3 exams, the students arrive in Sheffield during August, prior to starting
their final year. As an introduction to Sheffield, the students spend one month on an intensive English
course during August, followed by a one week laboratory course early September to familiarise them to
the Sheffield laboratories and carry out a few extra experiments in their new environment. During this
time they meet the new technical staff as well as graduate teaching assistants and staff who taught them
in China.The students are welcomed into the department with tours and get used to new instrumentation
such as running their own IR and NMRs.

Discussion

The outcome of this programme has been very positive. The laboratory programme started in 2012, with
seven years of students to date having successfully studied on this programme which has evolved over
time through reflections and development, progression to Sheffield has been very smooth. 100 students
have graduated with dual degrees from University of Sheffield and Nanjing University of Technology.
Students have progressed onto Masters programmes throughout the UK, abroad in France, USA, Canada,
Singapore, or back home in China. Several ex-graduates are currently studying for PhDs. Other students
have progressed into the chemical industry in China or are now teaching. The laboratory programme has
been very well received, an achievement for all staff involved. The structured programme and attention to
integration has really helped.

Development was a challenge. The numbers for the first two years of the programme were not large.
The workload started to be challenging when the group size went from 30 to 60 students. Initially we
considered that assessment and marking could be shared with Chinese colleagues, which was tried.
Although their spoken English was generally good, their written English tended not to be strong enough
to mark and correct Chinese students work and giving detailed feedback in English together with
correcting grammatical issues with the complexities scientific writing.

With a large group on the horizon for the third year of delivery, experienced Graduate Teaching Assistants
(GTAs) were recruited and trained to teach students whose English is limited. GTAs taught in two week
blocks. This experience allowed many of the GTAs to gain the Fellow of the Higher Education Academy
(FHEA) award. One ex-GTA, Dr James Wright, subsequently joined me on the teaching of this programme
full-time for the last three years from 2016. Another useful teaching addition was employing two graduates
from the Nanjing University of Technology programme, who were instructed to deliver in English.

Although students received English support classes in China, this was not comprehensive enough for
scientific writing. This has therefore become an important part of the laboratory programme. Students’
scientific writing skills develop well and is comparable or better than the students in Sheffield at the stage
of final year projects.

414|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

Adapting this approach in your context

Guidance tips are listed below about setting up a teaching laboratory to teach in China.

Pre-arrival tips
1. Practical skills for Chinese students at Year 1 can be aligned to students who study A Level/
BTEC courses at UK schools where success allows direct progression to university. Chinese
students are not skilled in practical techniques compared to those progressing from school
to university in the UK.
2. Check the chemistry taught before you design your course as the syllabus is typically
different. Chinese students have very little previous experience in practical analytical and
synthetic techniques, so give them lots of practice.
3. Visit the host university before delivery of the programme or obtain photos or video clips of
the laboratory facilities.
4. Meet or Skype your technician and relevant teaching staff before programme delivery.
Produce very comprehensive equipment and chemical lists and send them to the host
university for translation for the technician. Also, translate practical requirements and
experimental methods for the technician in good time as they are unlikely to speak English.
5. Learn some simple Mandarin, it helps with communication at your host university with staff,
especially your technician, even if you need to draw apparatus on the board in the end!
6. The most common form of communication in China is WeChat, used primarily for social
media, but also more professionally than we would use it in the UK. I would avoid using it for
formal documents such as references, visa documents etc. It is 100% reliable and powerful,
used in groups or individual chats, on the phone or computer. WeChat can be used in any
country to keep in touch with students and staff. It is useful to set up a WeChat account
before you travel to China.
7. To help keep in touch with your home institution and access my e-mails it is valuable to set
up VPN access with your university.

Getting set up tips

8. Experimental difficulty was planned to be gradual from Year 1 and 2, with the most
complex experiments for Year 3. Carry out experimental planning face to face with your
Chinese technician for the following year before returning to the UK. It allows time to trial
experiments and purchase new equipment before delivering the class.
9. Course materials in Year 3 are exactly the same as used in the home university as these
students need to be prepared to join home students in the fourth year of their degree.
10. Confirm how students access course materials in your partner university, each university will
use a different format.
11. In China, each year group has a class monitor who is a liaison between staff, technicans,
administration staff, and students. Class monitors print out class notes for everyone before
the class so students have a chance to translate them before the session. Class monitors
collect marking and give to the class teacher.
12. Chinese students adopt a Western name from primary school, so ask students to include it
on their work. It is very useful in getting to get to know students especially if your Mandarin
is limited and you don’t understand characters. Many students in a group have the same
Chinese surname so it is valuable to arrange work in alphabetical order via Western names.
The laboratory has been a valuable setting to discuss the value of names in relation
to considering future careers, many students change their names to something more

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |415

 traditional. It is notable that more students are sticking with their Chinese names so you
might need to practice your pronounciation skills!
13. Randomise mixing students to work with different partner pairs for each laboratory
experiment over the three years, this helps with group integration and dynamics. Run the
laboratory totally in English and get students to speak to their partners in English.
14. Initially give pre-laboratory activities as a handout for students to answer on paper, and then
transfer answers on-line in an electronic format for ease of marking electronically. Students
to bring their paper answers to class, direct a pre-laboratory question to each student, in
English, and give full feedback to help with understanding before the laboratory session.
15. Give out safety regulations before the first session for translation and reading. Discuss safety
regulations, the importance of registers and general safety. Know fire regulations and phone
numbers for the emergency services in your host university.
16. There are differences between the use of solvents in China, acetone is listed where quantities
used are recorded. Also acetone is restricted in order quantities and has special storage
requirements (as it is considered to be a drug precursor chemical) it cannot be used for
rinsing and drying. Ethanol can be used as much as required. Check regulations with your
host university. Some Year 2 and 3 experiments needed volatile low boiling solvents; for
example the Grignard reaction which needed to be delivered during a cooler part of the
semester because air conditioning can be limited in some parts of Southern China. Some
experiments might need adapting regarding the solvents used.

Running the lab tips

17. Demonstrate techniques at the start of a session and during a session whenever a new
technique is encountered. Demonstrations are excellent in poor language situations, they
give students confidence in what to do.
18. A video was used to record how to carry out an optical rotation was very useful. The visual
element gets over language issues. Subsequently some videos were recorded of chemical
apparatus and simple techniques, it is a good idea to subtitle them in Mandarin as well.
19. Give clear instructions about how to keep a laboratory notebook. Mark laboratory
notebooks during the practical session to give valuable verbal and immediate feedback (see
Supplementary Information).
20. Feedback sessions are valuable classes to give advice and support to students together with
feedback about their progress in the laboratory. Also develop general scientific writing skills
and chemistry concepts new to students during these sessions. Arrange students to sit in
alternate rows to allow staff to move round the class to give feedback to individual students.
21. Teach difficult and new theoretical concepts such as spectroscopic application of IR and
NMR and organic mechanisms which are typically not taught in high school during feedback
sessions.
22. Initially recording of observations was far too brief. Students did not really appreciate what
observations were. The concept needed explaining at the start of their course. The idea of
observations might have been more of a new word issue rather than the concept itself.
23. Results and discussion sections were initially challenging because students just listed results,
generally they did not write any suitable comments to discuss their findings or explain their
meaning. This led to students not appreciating the whole reason for the experiment. Start
development of this skill in Year 1.
24. Conclusions were poorly interpreted initially. Students were not able to conclude their
findings. Often students just repeated comments from the results and discussions. The
distinction between results, discussions, and conclusions was challenging to teach, so start

416|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

this development during Year 1.

25. References were written as “baidu.com” and “baike.baidu.com” (the Chinese equivalent to
Google and Wikipedia) and that was it! Also watch out for “zuoyebang.com” a homework
helper website for students to copy work from. Full guidance of how to write both text and
electronic references are taught from the start of the programme during Year 1. Students
are not aware that sites like Wikipedia should not be used as the source of the reference,
(Overton et al., 2015).

Developing English tips

26. Speak slowly and clearly particularly in Year 1. Write new words on the board and explain
their meaning. Get students to repeat difficult words after you, say them as a group. Increase
speaking speed during Year 2, and by Year 3 speak at a normal speed. Time taken to learn
English names of apparatus was very valuable.
27. Continue to teach apparatus names in English for all new equipment together with chemical
terminology throughout Year 2. Course materials are written to be more challenging not
only with the English language but in experimental complexity. Students are required to
carry out more challenging scientific writing in their final reports.
28. Your students are learning English and will be keen to help you with translation, it is a
valuable support so take their offer of help. Chinese students have a high respect for their
teachers, it is their pleasure to help out (McMahon, 2011).
29. Chinese students are keen to know their teachers. Accept their offer to eat with you at the
canteen, they will know all the latest dishes.They get a free English lesson in a social setting,
you get to know some of their culture.
30. Running social activities in China is valuable, so arrange a day out. Students are keen to
show you their city, you get to know each other. I arrange a traditional Christmas dinner
when they come to the UK. They are keen to attend, and it is good to spend time in an
informal setting.
31. I employed two Nanjing University of Technology graduates for laboratory sessions from
our programme who were asked to teach in English. This was useful as the students had
many questions for the graduates, not only about chemistry but also about life in the UK.

Developing scientific writing tips

32. For a successful programme, language development needs consideration. Course materials
need to be produced in clear basic English together with developing the scientific language.
Introduce students to new terminology during sessions. Their understanding is further
tested during feedback classes after the experiment had been marked.
33. The basics of scientific writing is introduced during the first year of laboratory study. By
starting scientific writing in Year 2 it was too late based on evidence from the trial in the first
year the programme was delivered. It is clear that three years of development is important
for these skills. Scientific writing is really hard for the Chinese students to grasp, especially
as they are still learning the language. Writing scientifically is hard even for students in their
own language with the different styles and tenses.
34. Writing an experimental in the past tense is very difficult compared to writing in the first
person. Initially students were introduced to writing experimentals in Year 2, but it was found
this skill needs to be introduced from Year 1. Experiment 3 was ideal to practice writing a
simple experimental technique, a structured proforma was developed which proved to be
valuable. An example is available in the Supplementary Information.
35. Start early with scientific writing, build on this skill throughout the whole three years of

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |417

 the course giving all supplementary materials in English and verbal feedback in classroom
sessions. Individually work on each of the sections of a full report to develop skills and
expertise. The language complexity was graduated over the three years of the programme.
Finally in resources, the first year used carefully selected sentencing, by the third year the
language was the same as for the equivalent year of the Sheffield students. This preparation
enabled students to successfully write a full journal style report, before starting their final
year in the UK, and their success was impressive.

Conclusions

This chapter provides the reader with details of how to set up a three year laboratory programme in
China. Preliminary guidance before travel, initial setting up, and important links with your host university
together with working with local staff is described. The practical content for each of the year groups
has been discussed with information about the techniques and skills students gain for each experiment
delivered over the three years which is documented in the tables. The chapter also summarises the
importance of development of scientific writing skills for non-English students starting at Year 1 and
continuing throughout the whole course. A brief comment is included about the value of social activities
in China also in the UK when they arrive for their final year. I have also pointed out that working with your
students who will be happy to support you and even act as translators is a valuable resource when you are
away from your home country. There are a number of useful tips for setting up your programme included
at the end of the chapter.

This is a successful programme to deliver away from your home country. The aim is to continue to update
and develop the programme and share my experiences with colleagues through a Royal Society of
Chemistry (RSC) TransNational Group (TNG) I set up. I am also keen to share my experiences through
national and international conferences together with publications. I would like the opportunity to take
this model into another University in China and set up another programme.

Supplementary Information
Supplementary information referred to in this chapter is available at: overtonfestschrift.wordpress.com.

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the following for their contributions to this work: Sheffield Chemistry HoD &
project lead Professor Michael DWard for giving methe opportunity to develop the laboratory programme
for NJTech in China; NJTech staff in China, Professor Haijian Shi (Karen), Li Hui Qi (Shirley, Technician);
Sheffield Level 3 undergraduate project students 2012 for experimental trials, Amy Cockram, Natalie
Dunn, Sarah Fischer, Rebecca Gambrill, Kristine Sanchez, Tanika Stewart, Emma Tolson, Alex Woodmass;
SheffieldTechnicians UK support, Richard Bottomley, Alison Smith, David Towers; Sheffield staff teaching
at NJTech; Dr James S. Wright for helping with teaching, course review and development 2014-2018, Dr
Tom Anderson teaching 2014; GTAs teaching at NJTech; James S. Wright (2014 & 2015), Jonny Simmons
(2014 & 2015), Tom Roseveare (2015), David Griffin (2016), Alex Fields (2016), Bethany J Crowston (2016 &
2017), Zoe Smallwood (2016), Emma Owens (2017), Matthew Watson (2017), Jenna Spencer-Briggs (2017),
Tom Hogg (2017), Sally Morton (2018), Sam Ivko (2018), Eren Slate (2018) for spending 2 weeks teaching
in the laboratory at NJTech in China; NJTech BSc graduates teaching in China; Tian Zhou (George), YuChen
Hu (Catherine) (2016)YuMei Zhu (May), XinYi Zhou (Aries) (2017), KangDe Chen (Eddie) (2018); Professor
David Read for introducing me to Practical Skills Portfolios.

418|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Design of a three year laboratory programme for international delivery

References
Chalmers, D. and Volet, S. (1997), “Common misconceptions about students from South-East Asia studying in
Australia”, Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 16, No.1, pp. 87-99.
Christian, G.D. (1980), Analytical Chemistry, Wiley, New York, 3rd ed. pp25.
Hwang, K.K. (1987), “Face and Favour: the Chinese power game”, The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 92, No.
4, pp. 944-974.
Huang, A. and Ang, S. and Francesco, A.M. (2002), “The silent Chinese: the influence of face and kiasuism on
student feedback seeking behaviours”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 1-27.
Hodkinson, C.S. and Poropat, A.E. (2013), “Chinese students’ participation: the effect of cultural factors”, Education
& Training, Vol. 56, No. 5, pp. 430-446.
Hyde, J. (2014), “Taking Laboratory Chemistry to China: A Personal View”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical
Sciences, Vol. 10, pp. 32-35.
Hyde, J. (2014), “Can you teach University Chemistry Abroad”? Chemistry in Sri Lanka, Vol. 31, pp. 18-19.
Li, L. and Rivers, G.J. (2018), “An inquiry into the delivery of a British Curriculum in China”, Teaching in Higher
Education, Vol. 23, No. 7, pp. 7850801.
McMahon, P. (2011), “Chinese voices: Chinese learners and their experiences of living and studying in the United
Kingdom”, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 401-414.
Overton, T. L. and Johnson, S. and Scott, J. (2015), Study and communication skills for the chemical sciences, Oxford,
UK, 2nd ed.
Szkornik, K. (2017), “Teaching and learning on a transnational education programme: opportunities and
challenges for flying faculty in Geography and related disciplines”, Journal of Geography in Higher
Education, Vol. 41, pp. 521-531.
Szkornik, K. and Cage, A. and Oliver, I. and Robinson, Z. and Stimpson, I. and Stott, K. and Ullah, S. and Waller,
R. (2015), “Preparing International students for the diversity of assessment in UK Higher Education”.
Pedagogic Research Institute and Observatory (PEDRiO), Special Publication Number 7, Including Assessment
in Practice, University of Plymouth, pp. 30-35.
Wright, J. and Read, D. and Hughes, O. and Hyde, J. (2018), “Tracking and assessing practical chemistry skills
development: practical skills portfolios”, New Directions in the Teaching of Physical Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 1.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |419

420 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 29 Working with graduate teaching assistants
to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

Aishling Flaherty,† Tina L. Overton,‡ Anne O’Dwyer,¥ Patricia Mannix

McNamara† and J.J. Leahy¶
†School of Education, University of Limerick, ‡Leeds Institute of Teaching
Excellence, University of Leeds, ¥Faculty of Education, Mary Immaculate
College, ¶Department of Chemical Sciences, University of Limerick
Aishling.Flaherty@ul.ie

Graduate students fulfil important teaching roles in the chemistry laboratory and working
with them to enhance their teaching practices should be a priority for faculty. Research on
graduate student teacher development has tended to prize a transmission model of teacher
education whereby information pertaining to what good teaching looks like is transmitted
to graduate students. This chapter describes alternative modes of graduate student teacher
development that contrasts the transmission model of teacher education.

Two separate studies developed, implemented, and evaluated two different chemistry
graduate student teacher development programmes accordingly. The first programme
sought to develop their teaching practices by enhancing their sense of psychological
empowerment while the second programme hinged upon the development of their
leadership skills as teachers. This research indicates how and why psychological
empowerment and leadership development can transcend as effective modes of chemistry
graduate teacher development. The theoretical underpinnings and findings of both
studies are synthesised to offer a description of a graduate student teacher development
programme that can be used to inform existing and future graduate student teacher
education programmes throughout higher education.

Influence of Professor Tina Overton (Aishling Flaherty)

I first met Professor Overton as a second year PhD studentata conference in Colorado. Following
a short time together, Tina took me under her caring wing and despite being thousands of miles
away in Melbourne, she pulled me up, showed me the way and continues to instill the right
amount of courage and confidence to be better. I will always look up to her, in every way.

To cite: Flaherty, A, Overton, T. L., O’Dwyer, A, Mannix-McNamara, P. and Leahy, J.J. (2019), “Working with chemistry graduate
teaching assistants to enhance how they teach in the chemistry laboratory”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C. (Eds.), Teaching
Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 421-434.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |421

Introduction

Chemistry graduate teaching assistants and transmission teacher education

Theresponsibility assigned to chemistry graduate studentstofacilitate learning in the laboratory demands
the affordance of sufficient, evidence-based teacher training. Efforts to develop chemistry graduate
students' teaching capabilities, amongst other teaching cohorts, can tend to prize a transmission model of
teacher education (Johnson and Golombek, 2002) whereby information about what good teaching looks
like is transmitted during teacher development programmes. For example, two of the most prominent
features of chemistry graduate student teacher development programmes involve participants modelling
successful teaching practices (Bond-Robinson and Rodriques, 2006; Kurdziel et al., 2003; Marbach-Ad
et al., 2012; Pentecost et al., 2012; Richards-Babb et al., 2014; Shannon et al., 1998; Wheeler et al., 2016;
Wheeler et al., 2015) and studying various learning theories such as guided learning, Bloom's taxonomy,
rote, and meaningful learning (Bond-Robinson and Rodriques, 2006; Kurdziel et al., 2003; Pentecost et al.,
2012; Wheeler et al., 2016; Wheeler et al., 2015).

In challenging the prevailing transmission model of chemistry graduate student teacher education,
two separate studies associated with this research developed, implemented, and evaluated two
different graduate student teacher development programmes accordingly. The Teaching as a Chemistry
Laboratory Graduate Teaching Assistant (TCL-GTA) programme hinged upon a construct of psychological
empowerment (Flaherty et al., 2017b) while the Transformational Leadership, Learning, and Teaching
(TLLLT) programme hinged upon a construct of transformational leadership (Flaherty and Overton, 2018).

Introducing the TCL-GTA programme: Power and empowerment

The literature that informed the design and implementation of the TCL-GTA programme stemmed from
the area of power and empowerment. At the root of empowerment is power and according to Nyberg
(1981):
The idea of power has lain more completely neglected in education studies than in any other discipline that
is of fundamental social interest.

Having power means that an individual has the ability to make a difference to the world (Lukes, 1986).
Giddens (1979) associates power and the concept of agency that entails:
events of which an individual is the perpetrator, in the sense that the individual could, at any phase in a
given sequence of conduct, have acted differently. Whatever happened would not have happened if that
individual had not intervened.

Therefore, an individual who can act to make a difference is deemed to be powerful. In the context of
graduate student teacher development, inherent contributions may be made towards the enhancement
of graduate students' teaching capabilities if they are viewed as conscious and knowledgeable beings
with the agency to make a difference to laboratory learning. Generating the appropriate conditions for
them to develop a sense of empowerment in their teaching roles should be prioritised by faculty.

Empowerment is a nebulous concept with many different interpretations. Empowerment can be

considered as “a belief in the power of people to be both the masters of their own fate” (Rappaport,
1987, p. 142), as a process seeking to nurture self-efficacy (Conger and Kanungo, 1988), or as a process
characterized by the affordance of opportunities for people to control their own destiny and to influence
the decisions that affect their lives (Zimmerman, 1995). However, for the purpose of this research, the
conceptualisation of empowerment portrayed by Ashcroft (1987) was embraced due to its roots in
educational research. Here, to empower means to "nurture belief in capability and competence" (1987, p.

422|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

145). Therefore, an empowered teacher or student is one who believes in their ability and capacity to act
in a sufficient, appropriate and effective manner.

While the empowerment of teachers has been examined at length at whole-school level in terms
of the empowerment of collective groups of teachers (Sweetland and Hoy, 2000), little research has
examined the empowerment of individual teachers (Dee et al., 2003; Lee and Nie, 2014). In terms of the
empowerment of individuals, psychological empowerment is a construct that manifests in four intrinsic
motivational cognitions of individuals: (i) impact, (ii) competence, (iii) autonomy and (iv) meaningfulness
(Spreitzer, 1995). Impact is the behaviour that an individual has to make a difference to influencestrategic,
administrative or operating outcomes (Ashforth, 1989). Competency is an individual’s belief in his or her
capability to perform activities with skill (Bandura, 1986; Gist, 1987). Autonomy is an individual's sense of
having choice in initiating and regulating actions (Deciet al., 1989). Meaningfulness is the value of a work
goal or purpose, judged in relation to an individual’s own ideals or standards (Thomas and Velthouse,
1990).

Introducing the TLLLT programme: Transformational leadership development

The literature that informed the design and implementation of the TLLLT programme stemmed from
transformational theory, specifically, transformational leadership, learning and teaching. Transformational
leadership involves leaders and followers engaging together “to advance to a higher level of morale
and motivation” (Burns, 1978, p. 20). Bass and Riggio describes transformational leaders as “those who
stimulate and inspire followers to both achieve extraordinary outcomes and, in the process, develop
their own leadership capacity” (Bass and Riggio, 2006, p. 6). The processes of leadership and teaching
are intrinsically similar. As with any teaching process that involves a teacher working with students to
develop shared insight and understanding, the leadership process is defined as “a process whereby an
individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northouse, 2012, p. 5). Therefore,
developing the transformational leadership skills of teachers may have rich affordances towards the
development of their teaching capabilities. Transformational teaching involves instructors assuming roles
as intellectual coaches to facilitate students’acquisition of key course concepts while enhancing students’
personal development and attitudes towards learning (Slavich and Zimbardo, 2012). Since this type of
teaching merges theories of transformational leadership and transformative learning, it was hypothesised
that the transformational leadership characteristics of teachers may be enhanced through embracing the
methods of transformational teaching as purported by Slavich and Zimbardo (2012).

Purpose
The purpose of this research was to investigate psychological empowerment and leadership development
as a means of catalysing chemistry graduate students in their teaching roles. This chapter will describe
the content, implementation, and evaluation of two teacher development programmes for graduate
students that hinged on various empowerment and leadership theoretical constructs. The theoretical
underpinnings and findings of both studies will then be synthesised to offer a description of a chemistry
graduate student teacher development programme that can be used to inform existing and future
chemistry graduate student teacher education programmes throughout higher education.

TCL-GTA Empowerment Programme

Programme Content
The main premise of the TCL-GTA programme was to enhance the sense of psychological empowerment
experienced by chemistry graduate students in their laboratory teaching roles towards the enhancement

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |423

of meaningful learning in the general chemistry laboratory (Flaherty et al., 2017b). In designing the
empowerment process (Figure 1), the following conditions of teacher empowerment which are linked
to enhanced student performance were nurtured; (i) collective responsibility, (ii) professional teaching
community, and (iii) authentic pedagogy to make decisions on intellectual standards (Marks and Louis,
1997). In line with insights provided by recent chemistry education research on Ausubel and Novak’s
theory of meaningful learning (Ausubel, 1968; Bretz, 2001; Galloway and Bretz, 2015; Novak, 2010), the
Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory (MLL) instructional model was designed to guide graduate students’
conceptualisation of how students learn meaningfully in the laboratory, as well as informing how they
instruct and interact with students in the laboratory.

Programme implementation
The TCL-GTA programme involved an opening seminar followed by a series of workshops (Figure 1).

Opening seminar
Generatingabeliefinthepossibleattainment of goals,anawarenessoffactors that influencetheattainment
of such goals as well as individuals efforts to fulfil these goals are characteristic features of psychological
empowerment (Zimmerman, 1995). Therefore, during the opening seminar of the TCL-GTA programme,
the programme facilitator presented graduate students with three areas of chemical education research.
These three areas of chemical education focused on identifying a problem, as a function of undergraduate
students’ learning difficulties in the chemistry laboratory (Bates, 1978; Hawkes, 2004; Hodson, 1990;
Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004), setting a goal of establishing a meaningful learning environment in the
chemistry laboratory (Bretz, 2001; Bruck et al., 2010; Galloway and Bretz, 2015; Galloway, Malakpa and
Bretz, 2015), and literature purporting to the positive impact that graduate students can have on the
laboratory learning environment (Bond-Robinson and Rodriques, 2006; Herrington and Nakhleh, 2003;
Lazarowitz and Tamir, 1994; Nicklow et al., 2007; Pickering, 1988; Ryan, 2014).

Workshops
Following the opening seminar, four consecutive two-hour workshops took place during the intervening
weeks between fortnightly general chemistry laboratory sessions. During the workshops, the graduate
students sat around a round table and openly discussed their ideas and opinions to each MLL question
based on one particular general chemistry laboratory session in line with the tenant of authentic pedagogy.
Diverse prior learning experiences and research expertise led each graduate student to develop different
answers to each of the MLL questions. Nevertheless, the programme facilitator encouraged graduate
students to strive to achieve the learning outcomes they felt were most important for the students to
achieve. The researchers believed that if graduate students were encouraged to pursue the learning
outcomes which felt most strongly about, there was a greater chance that graduate students may actively
pursue the achievement of such learning outcomes.

Programme evaluation
There were two strands to the evaluation of the TCL-GTA programme. The first strand evaluated the
influence on the TCL-GTA programme on the sense of psychological empowerment experienced by the
graduate students and how they perceived it to influence their teaching self-image and behaviours in the
laboratory (Flaherty et al., 2017b). The second strand evaluated the impact of the TCL-GTA programme
on the the number of cognitive questions, cognitive explanations, practical questions, and practical
instructions issued by each graduate student during, before, and after the programme (Flaherty et al.,
2017a).

424|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

The Problem The Goal The Potential

Impact Collective
Chemistry
Dimensions
Multiple of Meaningful for
UndergraduateStudents
Learning Students'
on
Graduate
Learning Professional
Community
TeachingResponsibility Make
AuthenticPedagogyto

Decisions

Opening Seminar Workshops

Figure 1: Process of enhancing graduate students’ sense of psychological empowerment during

the TCL-GTA programme opening seminar and workshops

TLLLT Transformational Leadership Programme

Programme content
The main premise of the TLLLT programme was to develop participants' transformational leadership
1.
characteristics as transformational teachers (Flaherty and Overton, 2018). Using a narrative inquiry
approach, the TLLLT programme set out to generate a space for participants to reflect and discuss how
2.
their experiences, perceived capabilities, self-efficacy beliefs, and attitudes towards teaching could
implicate and inform their adoption of transformational teaching methods (Figure 2). Transformational
3.
teaching methods include (Slavich and Zimbardo, 2012):
providing modelling and mastery experiences
4. intellectually challenging and encouraging students
establishing a shared vision for learning with students
5. personalising attention and feedback
creating experiential learning experiences
6. promoting preflection and reflection opportunities with students.

Programme implementation
The TLLLT programme involved an opening seminar followed by a series of workshops.

Opening seminar
In order for transformational leadership behaviours to be enhanced, the process must begin with an
examination of the implicit theories of ideal leadership that individuals have already acquired. Therefore,
the opening seminar began with a brainstorm discussion that involved graduate students discussing
their perceptions of effective PhD supervisors and laboratory instructors. In line with the internal change
theory (Boyatzis, 2006), this exercise was intended to make graduate students aware of their assumptions
of effective leaders, laboratory instructors, and teachers, to guide them in identifying characteristics and
roles to aspire to in their development as laboratory teachers, as well as opening their minds to different
perspectives held by other graduate students. Following this exercise, the programme leaders presented
TAs with literature pertaining to transformational leadership, learning, and teaching.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |425

 Promoting
ample Providing modelling
opportunities for and mastery
preflection and experiences
reflection

Creatingexperientiallessonsthattranscend Transformational
Teaching Intellectually
challenging and
lab of the
the boundaries encouraging students

attention and
Personalising Establishing a shared
feedback vision for a course

Figure 2: Questions used in Adopting Transformational Teaching Methods

Workshops
Following the opening seminar, four consecutive two-hour workshops took place on a weekly basis.
During the workshops, graduate students were organised into pre-determined groups of three to four
that included graduate students from similar science disciplines with diverse levels of experience. In the
first three workshops, graduate students were asked to brainstorm how they could potentially adopt
the methods of transformational teaching methods as a laboratory instructor. Following these small
group discussions, the graduate students were then encouraged to contribute their attitudes, ideas,
and opinions to whole class discussions that aimed to envelop the general consensus of how graduate
students envisioned their development as transformational teachers. In the final workshop, graduate
students were presented with various leadership scenarios in which they were asked to consider how
they could address each scenario in their capacity as a transformational leader. These scenarios included
leading more experienced individuals in dealing with a reduced financial budget and supporting an
unpopular agenda.

Programme evaluation
Narratives of the brainstorm discussions and post-programme semi-structured focus group interviews
were used to facilitate inquiry into how graduate students believed they could adopt the methods of
transformational teaching and how they believed their participation in the programme influenced the
learning environment in the laboratory.

426|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

Findings
Enhancing psychological empowerment
Prior to the TCL-GTA programme, low levels of psychological empowerment experienced by chemistry
graduate students in their laboratory demonstrator roles were apparent because they did not see
themselves as teachers responsible for enhancing undergraduate students’ laboratory learning
experiences. This poor sense of psychological empowerment manifested in their refrainment from
engaging with undergraduate students with the intention of enhancing their learning experiences.

The decision to address graduate students as “Graduate Teaching Assistants’” instead of “Laboratory
Demonstrators” proved to be very powerful as it implicated their sense of competency. As laboratory
demonstrators, the graduate students claimed to be somewhat competent in demonstrating the practical
aspects of laboratory sessions. However, they did not perceive to be competent as teachers due to a
number of factors that included a lack of appropriate preparation to teach, alignment of their research
fields to laboratory content, confidence, faculty expectations, language barriers, and high student
expectations for laboratory demonstrators to teach.

Issuing graduate students with a voice that was listened to and appreciated enhanced their sense of
autonomy. Prior to the TCL-GTA programme, the graduate students were hesitant to perceive a sense
of autonomy as laboratory demonstrators because they were unaware of whether it was within the
intentions of course leaders for them to do so. However, being encouraged to think of and voice their
opinions about what should be learnt in the laboratory affirmed their belief that they have the decision
of whether or not to engage with undergraduate students in the laboratory towards promoting learning.

Throughout the course of the TCL-GTA programme, the graduate students indicated a sense of
meaningfulness in their role but their reasons for such differed considerably both pre and post the TCL
GTA programme. Before the programme, the laboratory demonstrator role was important for reasons
that afforded them to develop their science communication skills and understanding of basic chemical
concepts. After the programme, the graduate teaching assistant role became a lot more important than
their laboratory demonstrator role as they realised the impact they could have on undergraduate students
as a teacher and not a demonstrator.

This process of empowerment also had a profound impact on increasing the level of verbal interaction
between graduate students and undergraduate students, evidenced by an analysis of 1,553 explanations,
1304 questions, and 651 instructions issued by graduate students, as well as 1543 questions which
undergraduate students asked graduate students (Flaherty et al., 2017a).

Enhancing transformational teaching and leadership

Generating a space for graduate students to discuss how they could adopt transformational teaching
methods instead of telling them how to adopt these methods was effective in promoting their
development as teachers. During their discussions, graduate students autonomously discussed the
importance of asking questions that required undergraduate students to synthesise and apply their
knowledge of various aspects of practical work in order to intellectually challenge and encourage
them in the laboratory. The importance of acknowledging and embracing a plethora of factors such as
cultural background, self-efficacy, prior knowledge, interest, well-being, and confidence when issuing
undergraduate students with formative feedback was discussed at length. Facilitating experiential
learning experiences for undergraduate students by emphasising the implicit life-long values that can be

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |427

fostered in the laboratory such as respect, honesty, and perseverance was identified as a key responsibility
for graduate students in the laboratory.

In order to explicitly convey to graduate students the effect which the TLLLT programme had on their
perceptions of their teaching capability and influence, the programme facilitators asked them to consider
the information, approaches and behaviours they could model in the laboratory both in the first and last
workshop. In the first workshop, their perceptions of such were concentrated on the practical aspects
of laboratory work such as maintaining safety, cleanliness, and time management. However, by the
end of the TLLLT programme, the graduate students began to identify other aspects of their laboratory
instructor role such as acknowledging effort, fostering enthusiasm and interest, being empathetic while
encouraging students to reason, question, and understand.

An unexpected theme throughout these discussions was graduate students’ need to talk about the
emotional toll that they harboured in their chemistry laboratory teaching roles. Ensuring all practical
activities are completed on time and in a safe manner, the stress experienced by both graduate and
undergraduate students in the laboratory and the pressure felt by graduate students to know all the
answers were all very real factors that were acknowledged to implicate learning in the laboratory.

Although graduate students acknowledged the opportunities they could create to promote reflection in
the laboratory, they required assistance from the programme facilitators in identifying how they could
promote preflection in the laboratory. Further, they also required assistance in probing undergraduate
students’ conceptual understanding in the laboratory and how to issue them with formative feedback
on such. During the post-TLLLT focus group interviews, graduate students discussed the factors that
influenced the learning environment in the laboratory following their participation in the programme.
These factors included developing broader conceptualisations of their roles as graduate students,
reducing the emotional toll they experience in fulfilling the graduate student role, growing together as a
community of leaders in the laboratory and as a result, witnessing changes in student behaviour.

Your Context

The theoretical underpinnings and findings of both the TCL-GTA Empowerment programme and the
TLLLT Leadership programme are now synthesised to offer a description of a graduate student teacher
development programme that can be used to inform existing and future graduate student teacher
education programmes throughout higher education. Here we describe a programme consisting of an
opening seminar and a series of workshops hinged upon empowerment and leadership theory.

Empowerment
In respect to empowerment theory, it should be endeavoured to identify and understand the factors
that limit graduate students' sense of empowerment as teachers. This research identified a number of
personal, training, and contextual factors that implicated graduate students' sense empowerment. The
personal factors included their sense of impact, competency, meaningfulness, and autonomy which
comprise the sense of psychological empowerment. The training factors that enhanced graduate
students' sense of psychological empowerment included nurturing authentic pedagogy in a professional
teaching community which had a collective responsibility for learning (Marks and Louis, 1997). The
contextual factors included undergraduate student behaviour, faculty expectation and encouragement
as well as the role titles used to address graduate students in their teaching roles. These are just some of
the factors that may influence graduate students' sense of empowerment in different ways and as such, it

428|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

is important to employ individualised approaches in endeavouring to enhance graduate students' sense

of empowerment. In order for this to be achieved, it comes as a recommendation to keep the ratio of
programme facilitators to graduate students as low as possible.

Leadership
In respect to leadership theory, it should be considered to explicitly develop graduate students as leaders
as a means of implicitly developing them as teachers. It comes as a recommendation to guide graduate
1.
students in enacting the four transformational leadership behaviours as teachers. These behaviours
2.
include (Bass and Riggio, 2006):
idealised influence
3. inspirational motivation
intellectual stimulation
4. individualised consideration.

Here, graduate students should be encouraged to embrace their roles as role models, exhibiting high
standards to their followers (undergraduate students) as per the traits of idealised influence behaviour.
Graduate students should seek to motivate and inspire their followers by establishing meaningful and
challenging work contexts as per the traits of the inspirational motivation behaviour. Graduate students
should seekto stimulate their followers by questioning assumptions,reframing problems, and approaching
problems in an innovative way asper the traits of the intellectual stimulation behaviour. Graduate students
should be encouraged to prioritise and pay special attention to the needs for achievement and growth of
their followers as per the traits of the individualised consideration behaviour.

Programme structure
This programme consists of a series of workshops in which graduate students work in small groups to
brainstorm ideas, comments and thoughts towards various teaching and learning questions.

Programme facilitator activities

• Coordinate the graduate students into small groups of up to five participants.
• Pose various questions (examples described below) to the graduate students.
• Visit each group to discuss their ideas, opinions, and thoughts to each question.
• Prompt and encourage those who are shy to contribute their ideas and opinions.
• Do not over-prescribe ideal teaching behaviours or characteristics.
• Emphasise the development of graduate students’ leadership skills as teachers.
• Ensure all answers are respected and valued.
• Hold whole-class discussions at the end of the workshops to summarise and write on aboard graduate
students’ ideas, opinions, and thoughts towards the questions.
• Record these responses to later collate into a laboratory teaching manual to be returned to graduate
students.

Opening seminar
During the opening seminar, the graduate students are posed a series of generic laboratory teaching and
leadership questions followed by a brief presentation of empowerment and leadership literature being
used to theoretically underpin the programme. (PowerPoint presentation available in Supplementary
Information).

Generic laboratory teaching leadership questions

• What are the characteristics and behaviours of ideal PhD Supervisors?

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |429

• What are the characteristics and behaviours of a leader you admire?
• How do the characteristics and behaviours of perceived ideals of PhD supervisors and leaders
compare?
• What are the characteristics and behaviours of effective laboratory teaching assistants?
• How do you influence the laboratory learning environment at a teaching assistant?

Proceeding weekly workshops

Following the opening seminar, the proceeding workshops sees graduate students engage with a series
of teaching and learning questions in specific chemistry laboratories that may take place at a particular
institution:

Learning Questions:
• What do you think is important for students to learn in this lab? (See MLL questions above)
• What do you think are the barriers to learning in this lab?
• What would meaningful learning look like in this lab?
• What skills can students develop in this laboratory which can help them after university?

Teaching Questions:
• What would good teaching/leadership look like in this lab?
• How could you fulfil the role as an effective teacher/leader in this lab?
• How would you know you taught/led effectively in this lab?
• How could you promote the development of the teaching capabilities of other graduate students
who are not participating in this programme?

Concluding workshop
The final concluding workshop sees graduate students returning to re-consider the questions posed in
the first workshop to gauge possible changes in their conceptualisation of their role and influence in the
laboratory. Graduate students may also be encouraged to reflect upon how the development of their
teaching and leadership skills may transfer to other contexts:

Generic Laboratory Teaching Leadership Questions:

• What are the characteristics and behaviours of effective laboratory teaching assistants?
• How do you influence the laboratory learning environment as a teaching assistant?

Skill Transferability Questions:

• How could your teaching skills be exercised in industry or other work contexts?
• How could your leadership skills be exercised in industry or other work contexts?

Limitations

There are some assumptions and associated limitations of this model of graduate student teacher
education.

Assumption 1: This model assumes that graduate students will already have a good idea of how and what
to teach in every chemistry laboratory.
Associated Limitation: This model does not prioritise the transmission of knowledge pertaining to what
good teaching looks like. As a result, graduate students will not receive much teacher-education or content
specific knowledge directly. Being encouraged to figure out solutions to these problems in a social context

430|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

may serve to indirectly develop graduate students' knowledge of such.

Assumption 2: This model assumes that problems related to student learning and the development of
graduate students’ teaching practices can be resolved following the implementation of this model.
Associated Limitation: This model cannot guarantee resolution of these problems. However, steps can be
taken towards their resolution by making participants aware of the nature of various teaching and learning
problems while nurturing their intrinsic motivation and ownership of seeing to their resolution.

Assumption 3: This model assumes that graduate students will be empowered following the
implementation of this model.
Associated Limitation: An individual cannot directly empower another individual. It is up to individuals
to empower themselves. Programme facilitators can however generate the conditions that have been
reported to be successful in enhancing the sense of empowerment experienced by other individuals.
Furthermore, empowerment research is inherently limited by psychology's emphasis on cognitive processes
and as a result, we are restricted to report on an individual’s sense of empowerment rather than reporting
on any actual increases in power (Riger, 1993).

Conclusions

Psychological empowerment and leadership development can transcend as effective modes of teacher
development that opposes the transmission approach of teacher education. By synthesising the findings
of the graduate student teacher education research, this chapter offers a description of a graduate student
teacher development programme that can be used to inform existing and future graduate student teacher
education programmes throughout higher education.

Just as Professor Overton has long been recognised as an empowering leader in the field of chemistry
education, nurturing such empowering leadership traits in graduate students for teaching and learning
in their capacities as future chemistry faculty should be considered important.

References
Ashcroft, L. (1987), “Defusing Empowering, The What and the Why’, Language Arts, 64(2), 142-156.
Ashforth, B. E. (1989), “The Experience of Powerlessness in Organizations”, Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 43(2), 207-242.
Ausubel, D. (1968), Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York.
Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New
Jersey.
Bass, B. M. and Riggio, R. E. (2006), Transformational Leadership, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New
Jersey.
Bates, G. (1978), “The Role of the Laboratory in Secondary School Science Programs” in Rowe, M. B. (Ed.) What
Research Says to the Science Teacher, National Science Teachers Association Press, Arlington, VA, pp.55-82.
Bond-Robinson, J. and Rodriques, R. A. B. (2006), “Catalyzing Graduate Teaching Assistants’ Laboratory Teaching
Through Design Research”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 83 No. 2, p. 313.
Boyatzis, R. E. (2006), “An overview of intentional change from a complexity perspective”, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 25 No. 7, pp. 607-623.
Bretz, S. L. (2001), “Novak’s Theory of Education: Human Constructivism and Meaningful Learning”, Journal of
Chemical Education, Vol. 78 No. 8, p. 1107.
Bruck, L. B., Towns, M. and Bretz, S. L. (2010), “Faculty Perspectives of Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory: Goals

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |431

 and Obstacles to Success’, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 87 No. 12, pp. 1416-1424.
Burns, J. M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York.
Conger, J. A. and Kanungo, R. N. (1988), “The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory and Practice”, Academy
of Management Review, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 471-482.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P. and Ryan, R. M. (1989), “Self-Determination in a Work Organization”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 4, p. 580.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B. and Duemer, L. (2003), “Structural Antecedents and Psychological Correlates of Teacher
Empowerment”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 257-277.
Flaherty, A., O’Dwyer, A., Mannix-McNamara, P. and Leahy, J. J. (2017a), “Evaluating the Impact of the ‘Teaching
as a Chemistry Laboratory Graduate Teaching Assistant’ Program on Cognitive and Psychomotor Verbal
Interactions in the Laboratory”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 94 No. 12, pp. 1831-1843.
Flaherty, A., O’Dwyer, A., Mannix-McNamara, P. and Leahy, J. J. (2017b), “The Influence of Psychological
Empowerment on the Enhancement of Chemistry Laboratory Demonstrators’ Perceived Teaching Self
Image and Behaviours as Graduate Teaching Assistants”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
18, pp. 710-736.
Flaherty, A. and Overton, T. (2018), “Transforming Teaching Assistants as Teaching Leaders”, Higher Education
Research & Development, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 1380-1394.
Galloway, K. R. and Bretz, S. L. (2015), “Measuring Meaningful Learning in the Undergraduate Chemistry
Laboratory: A National, Cross-Sectional Study”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92 No. 12, pp. 2019
2030.
Galloway, K. R., Malakpa, Z. and Bretz, S. L. (2015), “Investigating affective experiences in the undergraduate
chemistry laboratory:Students’ perceptions of control and responsibility”, Journal of Chemical Education,
Vol. 93 No. 2, pp. 227-238.
Giddens, A. (1979), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, University of California Press,
Los Angeles.
Gist, M. E. (1987), “Self-Efficacy: Implications for Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 472-485.
Hawkes, S.J. (2004), “Chemistry Is Not A Laboratory Science”, Journal of Chemical Education,Vol. 81 No. 9, p.1257.
Herrington, D. G. and Nakhleh, M. B. (2003), “What defines effective chemistry laboratory instruction? Teaching
assistant and student perspectives”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 80 No. 10, p. 1197.
Hodson, D. (1990), “A Critical Look at Practical Work in School Science”, School Science Review, Vol. 71 No. 256, pp.
33-40.
Hofstein, A. and Lunetta, V. N. (2004), “The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty‐First
Century”, Science Education, Vol. 88 No. 1, pp. 28-54.
Johnson, K. and Golombek, P. (2002), Teachers’ Narrative Inquiry as Professional Development, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Kurdziel, Turner, J., Luft, J. and Roehrig, G. (2003), “Graduate Teaching Assistants and Inquiry-Based Instruction:
Implications for Graduate Teaching Assistant Training”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 80 No. 10, p.
1206.
Lazarowitz, R. and Tamir, P. (1994), “Research on Using Laboratory Instruction in Science” in Gabel, D. (Ed.),
Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, New York: Macmillan, pp. 94-130.
Lee, A. N. and Nie, Y. (2014), “Understanding Teacher Empowerment: Teachers’ Perceptions of Principal’s and
Immediate Supervisor’s Empowering Behaviours, Psychological Empowerment and Work-Related
Outcomes”, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 41, pp. 67-79.
Lukes, S. (1986), Power, Washington Square, New York University Press, New York.
Marbach-Ad, G., Schaefer, K. L., Kumi, B.C., Friedman, L.A., Thompson, K.V. and Doyle, M. P. (2012), “Development
and Evaluation of a Prep Course for Chemistry Graduate Teaching Assistants at a Research University”,

432|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Working with graduate teaching assistants to enhance chemistry laboratory teaching

Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 89 No. 7, pp. 865-872.

Marks, H. M. and Louis, K. S. (1997), “Does Teacher Empowerment Affect the Classroom? The Implications of
Teacher Empowerment for Instructional Practice and Student Academic Performance”, Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 245-275.
Nicklow, J. W., Marikunte, S. S. and Chevalier, L. R. (2007), “Balancing pedagogical and professional practice skills
in the training of graduate teaching assistants”, Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and
Practice, Vol. 133 No. 2, pp. 89-93.
Northouse, P. G. (2012), Leadership: Theory and Practice, Sage, Los Angeles.
Novak, J.D. (2010), Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and
Corporations, 2nd ed., Routledge, New York.
Nyberg, D. (1981), Power over Power, Cornell University Press, New York.
Pentecost, T. C., Langdon, L. S., Asirvatham, M., Robus, H. and Parson, R. (2012), “Graduate Teaching Assistant
Training that Fosters Student-Centered Instruction and Professional Development”, Journal of College
Science Teaching, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 68-75.
Pickering, M. (1988), “Report on the NEACT Conference: ‘The Chemistry Lab and its Future’”, Journal of Chemical
Education, Vol. 65 No. 5, p. 449.
Rappaport, J. (1987), “Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community
psychology”, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 121-148.
Richards-Babb, M., Penn, J. H. and Withers, M. (2014), “Results of a Practicum Offering Teaching-Focused Graduate
Student Professional Development”, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 91 No. 11, pp. 1867-1873.
Riger, (1993), “What’s Wrong with Empowerment”, American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 21 No. 3,
S.
pp. 279-292.
Ryan, B. (2014), “Graduate teaching assistants; critical colleagues or casual components in the undergraduate
laboratory learning? An exploration of the role of the postgraduate teacher in the sciences”, European
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 2 No. 2, p. 99.
Shannon, D. M., Twale, D. J. and Moore, M. S. (1998), “TA Teaching Effectiveness: The Impact of Training and
Teaching Experience”, The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 440-466.
Slavich, G. M. and Zimbardo, P. G. (2012), “Transformational Teaching:Theoretical Underpinnings, Basic Principles,
and Core Methods”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 569-608.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995), “Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement, and
Validation”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 1442-1465
Sweetland, S. R. and Hoy, W. K. (2000), “School Characteristics and Educational Outcomes: Toward an
Organizational Model of Student Achievement in Middle Schools”, Educational Administration Quarterly,
Vol. 36 No. 5, pp. 703-729.
Thomas, K. W. and Velthouse, B. A. (1990), “Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of
intrinsic task motivation”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 666-681.
Wheeler, L. B., Maeng, J. L., Chiu, J. L. and Bell, R. L. (2016), “Do Teaching Assistants Matter? Investigating
Relationships between Teaching Assistants and Student Outcomes in Undergraduate Science Laboratory
Classes”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 54 No. 4, pp. 463-492.
Wheeler, L. B., Maeng, J. L. and Whitworth, B. A. (2015), “Teaching Assistants’ Perceptions of a Training to Support
an Inquiry-Based General Chemistry Laboratory Course”, Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol.
16 No. 4, pp. 824-842.
Zimmerman, M.A. (1995), “Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations”, American Journal of
Community Psychology, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 581-599.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |433

434|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education
 Developing reflective practice with
30 graduate teaching assistants

Christopher Randles
Department of Chemistry, Purdue University
randles@purdue.edu

The perspective of this chapter is to identify a non-prescriptive method of reflective practice

that could be used with graduate teaching assistants and has sufficient scaffolding to provide
them support, yet flexible enough to account for their own experiences whilst teaching.
Little research addresses the reflective practices of graduate teaching assistants despite
American institutions’ heavy reliance on this work force for delivering teaching contact
periods. Given such dependence on this workforce, it is essential we develop our evidence
base of reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants by evaluating the suitability of
different models of reflective practice.

This chapter discusses a study that adopted a phenomenographic multiple-case study

design and the Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice (VMRP) developed by Blair. The
chapter identifies that the VMRP is a valuable tool for understanding the reflective practices
of graduate teaching assistants. Whilst this chapter used a study with a small sample size,
the chapter demonstrates the complexity of reflective practice by identifying 13 cognitive
considerations, eight affective considerations, seven psychomotor considerations, and
eight conative considerations. Given the complexities associated with reflective practices
of graduate teaching assistants this chapter will provide suggestions that reflective practice
cannot be taught; rather it requires lived experiences to discuss the world-views held by
graduate teaching assistants in order to promote critical-reflection.

To cite: Randles, C. A. (2019), “Developing reflective practice with graduate teaching assistants”, in Seery, M. K. and McDonnell, C.
(Eds.), Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education: A Festschrift in Honour of Professor Tina Overton, Creathach Press, Dublin, pp. 435-451.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |435

Introduction

What is reflective practice?

Reflective practice remains one of the goals of educational practice whereby the “effective practitioner
attempts to understand the heart of their practice” (Bolton, 2010). Reflective practice is driven by the
principles of self-awareness, self-regard, and self-improvement, where the dynamics of intrapersonal
examination lead to a modification of one’s actions, thoughts, and feelings towards education. Using this
practice, it is hoped that educators develop through active engagement with their experiences. Whilst the
literature base for reflection in education is vast and broad — often rooted in the work of Donald Schön
and John Dewey—there remains no clear model of reflection to suit practitioners in the post-compulsory
education sector. Much of the literature focuses on data collection through reflectivejournals, diaries, and
interview conversations, which are fairly cumbersome methodologies and require significant investment
by practitioners. Practitioners in post-compulsory education and training (PCET) are encouraged to
become reflective practitioners however the nature of reflections differ considerably.

Models of reflective practice differ considerably and at times contradict each other: Larrivee suggested
that critical reflection is an indispensable aspect of practice that offers insight into essential practices that
might support their development (Larrivee, 2000). Larrivee further stated that the path to developing
critically reflective educators should be non-prescriptive. Teaching is a challenging occupation that calls
for an educator to “resist establishing a classroom culture of control” and engage in critical reflection that
remains responsive to the dynamic environment of the classroom and those within its guardianship.
Russell suggests that reflection can be developed through explicit questioning strategies that probe at
the specifics of teaching practice. They further suggest that using personal reflection-in-action in order
to interpret and improve one’s teaching of reflective practice to others (Russell, 2010). Wallace suggested
that reflective diaries can reveal practitioners’ preconceptions that practitioners impart onto those
they teach, which can be addressed once highlighted (Wallace, 2002). DeMulder and Rigsby learnt that
supporting teachers’reflective practice requires using a variety of pedagogical strategies, especially those
pedagogies that empower teachers to capitalize on their strengths and approaches to learning, and that
nurture new ways of knowing and learning (Demulder and Rigsby, 2003). This variety of approaches
differed depending on experience level and teaching level. Younger teachers required reflection to
support that their knowledge and experience equated to expertise, and encouraged them to develop a
strong professional voice. More experienced teachers found reflection beneficial to recognize experiences
with other team members: in other words experiencing events with other members reinforced and built
a learning environment that promoted reflective practice.

Issues with implementing reflective practice

Moran and Dallat have described reflection as a “complex and intellectually challenging activity” (Moran
and Dallat, 1995). While reflection is hard and often encounters hurdles, it can be supported by mentors
that stimulate reflective conversation. Mentorship is essential to reflective practice, but constraints like
lack of time, nature of the classroom and its culture can lead to a lack of support and collegiality between
practitioners and mentors to create a reflective environment (Moran and Dallat, 1995). Brookfield
highlights that educators may become uncomfortable with aspects of practice and with the outcomes
of their reflection (Brookfield, 1994). Brookfield reports that not only did educators feel uncomfortable
with their reflections, when they identified policies that needed addressing they felt viewed as trouble
makers. Reflection can also be affected by willingness to embrace change (Hussein, 2007). This is because
the process of reflection is not simply a mechanical process and as such sometimes requires educators
to be burdened with responsibilities they are notable to properly assume. Furthermore, many educators

436|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

are subject to factors beyond their control that can lead to feelings of loneliness, helplessness, and
meaningless (Cole, 1997), creating hostility from a person’s efforts to preserve and protect the individuality
of their practice. In a meta-analysis of the relationship between what is said in research and what is done
in practice, Marcos, Miguel, and Tillema found that, whilst models of reflection are intended to enhance
future practice, reflection typically led to the justification of current practice (Marcos et al., 2009).

In order to address these issues, models of reflective practice are commonly adopted. However, there are
inherent issues with any model of reflection; educators find it difficult to look back over their practice in a
critical manner and, when askedto reflectupon and analyzetheirpractice, they takevariousapproachesthat
may not address the root of their practice. Johnson highlights this situation, suggesting that practitioners’
accounts are not fixed and that they reflect from different perspectives including non-confessional
narratives, social justice issues, and challenges to commonly held assumptions (Johnson, 2002). Whilst
these different perspectives are warranted, there is a need for researchers to take the lead on proposing
contemporary literature theories that engage the personal voice for post-personal critical reflection,
allowing educators to adopt differing perspectives. Clinton questions issues with reflective practice, such
as imperfect representation, reflexivity, and how inner dialogue can lead to multiple interpretations of
events, which can lead practitioners to unwittingly give false accounts of their experiences (Clinton, 1998).
Although the importance of reflective practice is recognized, much of the literature on PCET is focused on
enhancing curricula (Elliott, 1996) and understanding educational objectives and outcomes (Child, 2009),
rather than an engagement with practitioner perspectives (Blair, 2011). Professional identities develop
in relation to organizational contexts (van den Berg, 2002), such as higher education and the type of
institution, and this impacts how practitioners construct their identities within a specific community. This
further affects their ability to reflect upon the impact of their identity on their practice in a useful manner.
Whilst it is true that institutions are creating more interdisciplinary and holistic education courses, the
PCET community are viewed to work in increasingly fragmented environments (research group) and with
various unconnected disciplines (different divisions and departments) that determine their prevailing
identity and qualifiers for teaching a course all coming together in one umbrella organization (for example
a university). Therefore, a coordinated effort for intra-practitioner aspects of reflection must occur at both
the environmental and the policy–practice interface (Blair, 2009).

The scale of the PCETwork-forcemeans that there is no clear understanding of professional identity within
large higher education organizations (Briggs, 2007) and therefore no clear model of practice. The varying
environmental domains in which educators work include lecture rooms, teaching labs, engineering
workshops, sports halls, surgeries, kitchens, and care homes. Furthermore, PCET educators adopt different
examination structures and different expectations and classifications of success. Their classes are made
up of different students with varying goals and attitudes towards learning. These varying conditions
make a model of practice for reflection very specific to the individual involved (Blair, 2011):“[the] way that
someone who teaches Beauty Therapy ‘thinks’ may be very different to the way someone who teaches
Motor Vehicle Studies ‘thinks’– and these thought processes may, in turn, differ from colleagues teaching
First Aid, Adult Literacy and Child Care”. Considering how personala model of reflective practice must be to
accommodate an individual’s identity, environment, and students, any model of reflection must therefore
account for the reflexivity, contextuality, and specificality of those adopting the reflective practice.

This chapter takes the process of reflective practice further by applying the Vitruvian model of reflective
practice (VMRP) to graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) at a research intensive institution in the United
States. This model purports to account for the issues of reflexivity, contextuality, and specificity, which are
inherently lacking in more structured models of reflective practice. GTAs are the workhorses of the PCET
sector with many large institutions requiring this labor force to teach recitations and laboratory sessions,

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |437

and yet very little is published in regards to their reflective practices. Recitations are direct contact periods
between GTA and typically 20 students. They are designed to facilitate smaller learning environments
where students can ask questions, get clarification on lecture content, learn how to solve problems, and
prepare for laboratory classes. Our guiding research question for this project is:
What are the considerations of graduate teaching assistant reflective practice that can be identified by
adopting the Vitruvian model of reflective practice when applied to graduate teaching assistants instructing
recitation and laboratory contact periods in general chemistry (freshman chemistry)?

Methods
This chapter combines case study analysis and the Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice (VMRP) to explore
the phenomena of said reflective practice of graduate teaching assistants in chemistry.

What is a case study?

Case study research is predominately bound by the constructivist paradigm that the truth of experiences
is relative and that it is dependent on the individual’s perspective. This paradigm:
recognizes the importance of the subjective human creation of meaning, but doesn’t reject the outright
notion of objectivity. Pluralism, not relativism, is stressed with focus on the circular dynamic tension
between subject and object (Crabtree & Miller, 1999, p. 10).

Constructivism builds upon the premise of a social construction of reality (Searle, 1995). The advantages
of these approaches are the interpretivist nature of the researcher, while still enabling participants to tell
their stories as sources of data (Crabtree and Miller, 1999). This data describes participants’views of reality
and enables the researcher to better understand the participants’ actions (Lather, 1992). A case study is
an investigation of characteristics through the collection of evidence within the setting of the case, and
involves the study of a case within a real-life situation (Yin, 2009). Although Stake states that case study
research is not a methodology but rather frames the bounds of the study (Stake, 1995), others present
case study research as a strategy of inquiry (Merriam, 1998; Yin, 2009). The case study approach should be
adopted when:
1. the focus of the study is on how and why experiences;
2. manipulation of the behavior of those involved cannot be influenced by the researcher;
3. contextual considerations need to be addressed; or
4. the boundaries between phenomena and context are not predictably clear (Yin, 2003).

For this chapter the research questions address the how and why of experiences through the Vitruvian
model of reflective practice.

Determining the case

Whilst defining the parameters of the research question are always important in research, case study
research must further consider the boundaries of what does and doesn’t constitute a case. The case can
be defined as, “a phenomenon of some sort occurring in a bounded context”. The case is, “in effect, your unit
of analysis” (Miles and Huberman, 1984). A case can be an individual, group, institution, or community.
For example, in education a case could constitute, the student (individual), a class (group), the chemistry
department (institution), or the chemical education research community (community). Each of these
examples could constitute a case, but studies could include multiple cases such as several students in
a class or chemistry departments across the state of Indiana. For this chapter, the case is defined as the
reflective accounts of a graduate teaching assistants instructing a laboratory and recitation contact period
to undergraduate students studying freshman chemistryata research intensive (R1) midwestern university
in the United States. Participants were recruited using purposeful sampling and seven participants with

438|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

varying experience with teaching volunteered to participate in the study. The only requirement for their
participation was that they were teaching a general chemistry course whilst participating in the study. The
backgrounds of the participants included graduate students who had previously been teachers, graduate
students in each of the chemistry divisions (organic, analytical, inorganic and physical/computational,
and chemistry education), and freshman and senior graduate students.

The purpose of the case

The purposes of this chapter is to investigate what GTAs consider when reflecting on their teaching
practice, and the suitability of the Vitruvian model to investigate that. Since this chapter seeks to identify
the variation between cases in order to holistically understand how graduate teaching assistants reflect
on their practice, the chapter adopted a multi-case approach, as outlined by Baxter and Jack (2008), where
the researcher explores differences within and between cases.

Framing the data collection and analysis

As previously stated, reflective practice is inherently complex, and commonly employed to justify current
practices instead of improving new teaching methods. Many reflective practice guidelines are overly
formulaic, encouraging participants to Q&A each section of the prescribed reflective documents. As such,
a synergized model that scaffolds educators whilst remaining reflexive to their experiences needs to be
adopted. The Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice was developed by Blair as a reflective practice for
pre-service teaching students (Blair, 2011). The model sought to address the issues inherent in reflective
practice, such as the intellectually challenging and prescriptive nature often adopted by many reflective
practitioners. The Vitruvian model of reflection scaffolds the reflective process by asking participants to
consider using four principles as they reflect. Those four principles are cognitive, affective, psychomotor,
and conative.
• The cognitive asks individuals to consider what has been learnt during the lesson. This might
be matched against the learning outcomes or curriculum criteria.
• The affective asks individuals to consider professional relationships within the teaching
environment. This would include the relationships developed between students, and
between an educator and their students.
• The psychomotor asks individuals to consider how you traverse the work space. The
psychomotor aspect is about the educator’s physical interaction with the environment
where they teach, including their position in the classroom, body language, and distance
between them and their students.
• The conative asks individuals to reflect upon the effort for the education period including
tasks prior, during, and after the session. Consideration might also be given to the amount
of effort students are perceived to have during the education period.

The Vitruvian model of reflection has been used for developing the teaching practice of trainee teachers
(Blair, 2011). It has also been used to evaluate fieldwork sites in biology (Blair and Deacon, 2015). Using
the Vitruvian model of reflection, we hope that teaching assistants in higher education will become more
knowledgeable of their teaching practice and more empowered to take control of their own teaching
practice development. In this chapter, the Vitruvian model will provide both the framework that scaffolds
the reflective practice, as well as the manner in which the reflective practice is analyzed.

Data collection stages

The data collection phase of the project was continuous, with participants providing data over a period
of 12 weeks. Figure 1 provides a flow chart of the process for data collection. Each box is explained below:

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |439

 • Participant teaches their contact period: participants were required to teach their students in
line with the codes of practice for teaching with the institution. They were asked to follow
the guidance of the professors responsible for that course. This was to ensure that the
research team were not prescribing a particular approach and preferred teaching style.
• Participant completes the reflective worksheet: participants were asked to complete a
reflective worksheet. The worksheet was two sides of A4 and had headings for each of the
four criterion of interest. If participants teach multiple contact periods a week (for example
they teach both a recitation and laboratory class), they were asked to choose which contact
period they would like to reflect upon. However, the contact period must remain the
same contact period each week for the duration of the project. The worksheets were to be
completed within 3 hours of the reflected period.
• Reflective accounts submitted to the research team: The reflective accounts were to be
submitted each week to ensure that participants were not submitting the same reflective
account each time. This was also to ensure the research team could monitor which
participants had submitted their accounts.
• Data Analysis: The data was analyzed after all the data has been collected. The process of
data analysis is explained below.

This process meant that each participant provided 12 reflective accounts of their practice across the
course of a semester. As such, there were 76 GTA reflections that constituted this study (one participant
stopped providing accounts, but allowed the data to be continued to be used).

Figure 1: Flow chart representing the process of data collection for the Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice worksheets

Data analysis stages

Once the participants had completed their teaching assignments the data was collated and a coding
scheme developed. The study developed codes by processing data through an adapted Bryman’s four
stages of qualitative analysis, identifying themes that emerged from the data as outlined in Figure 2. A
code is a single word or short phrase that “symbolically assigns a summative, salient, essence-capturing and/
or evocative attribute for a portion of language or visual data”(Saldana, 2016). Coding is the critical link
between the data collected and their intended meaning (Charmaz, 2001).

The four step process outlined in Figure 2 is modeled around Bryman’s four stages of qualitative analysis
(Bryman, 2008). Each stage is explained below:
1. Accounts read and overall character of reflection noted: The reflective accounts for each
participant were read and notes taken about the overall character of the data presented
by the participants. The reflective accounts were analyzed to decide if any initial themes
emerged.
2. Each reflection reviewed for themes: Having reviewed the data for the first time, the accounts
were studied again in greater detail to establish if any themes which the initial stages had
failed to identify. Key words that supported the emerging themes were highlighted.

440|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

3. Review themes and evaluate for redundancy: The codes were reviewed and themes were
eliminated that had been repeated. Similar themes were combined under umbrella
concepts. This process of collapsing similar codes is called a redundancy approach because
two codes that are similar are possibly redundant.
4. Assign definitions and interconnections between the codes: The final list of themes were then
given a shorthand code to represent the presence of a theme ready for the subsequent
coding processes.
5. Inter-rater coding of code definitions: The definitions for each code were shared with inter
rater collaborators who assessed the practicality and interpretation of the code definitions.

Figure 2: Flow chart representing the process of data analysis for the Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice worksheets

Once the code bank was created the validity of the data wastested using inter-rater reliability.The method
of inter-coding is used in qualitative research to ensure that there is agreement over interpretation of the
raw data (Saldana, 2016). It is also used to establish whether the definitions of the emergent themes
are sufficiently robust to identify their intended characteristic. Three coders (the author and two external
coders) took the same two randomly selected reflective accounts and coded them using the definitions
of the emergent themes as described in the results section. The transcripts were selected at random by
the principle researcher. The additional two coders were unaware of the participant’s identity for each
reflective account to ensure focus was on the coding system and not the participant. The coders were also
unaware whether the reflective accounts were from different or the same participant, or at which time
frame in project the reflective accounts were submitted. The coders independently read through each of
the reflective accounts and when a theme was observed the coder wrote the code corresponding to the
identified theme next to its location in the transcript. The coding process was completed independently
of each other to ensure no collusion. This data was then collected to establish whether themes in the
transcripts related to the codes they were assigned. A percentage agreement was given for each code
and for each reflective account. Once the percentage agreement had been determined the coders met to
discuss areas where disagreement with a coded theme occurred in order to refine the definitions for the
themes. The resulting themes are presented in Tables 1–4.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |441

Results and Discussion
The qualitative analysis of each of the reflective areas produced four tables of results, one for each theme
of the reflective model.The inter-rater coders agreed 82% of the time, with the greatest discrepancy being
agreement whether characteristics observed in each section should be considered under that descriptor.
An example is whether comments relating to frustration should be coded under the cognitive theme. The
research team agreed that whilst frustration relates to a behaviour rather than a cognizant component of
the recitation/laboratory contact period, the elements of frustration within the cognitive theme all related
to learning actions or tasks. As such, Tables 1–4 represent the agreed observed characteristics for each of
the four theme areas. There are 13 codes for cognition, eight for affective, seven for psychomotor, and
eight for conative. Each code is assigned a prefix related to the theme (for example cognitive: Co) and a
code (for example statements about scientific concepts: SaSC) to create the entire code Co-SaSC. Three of
the codes for cognition are divided into further sub-codes, denoted by + and – signs. These signs do not
signify a quality judgement or absence of a code, but instead describe a characteristic of the code.
• Table 1 shows the 13 codes and descriptions for the cognitive characteristics with an excerpt
from the graduate student reflections to demonstrate the presence of each code.
• Table 2 shows the eight codes and descriptions for the affective characteristics with an
excerpt for from the graduate student reflections to demonstrate each code.
• Table 3 shows the seven codes and descriptions for the psychomotor characteristics with an
excerpt for from the graduate student reflections to demonstrate each code.
• Table 4 shows the eight codes and descriptions for the cognitive characteristics with an
excerpt for from the graduate student reflections to demonstrate each code.

Despite Russell’s suggestion for explicit questioning (Russell, 2010) when conducting reflective practice,
the data collected through the Vitruvian Model of Reflective Practice is rich, qualitative data ideal for
case study research despite minimal scaffolding. This mirrors the work conducted by Larrivee (2000) that
suggests that developing critically reflective educators should be non-prescriptive.

Cognitive components
The participants in this study were highly aware of the cognitive components of their contact periods,
identifying the tasks each student was required to complete during the lessons (Co-APS). Most of the
participants identified tasks for laboratory class preparation or tasks relating to mathematics as topics
covered during recitation periods, and laboratory tasks were identified during laboratory periods. Whilst
these are to be expected when asking participants to reflect on themes relating to what student learned,
what was less expected was the awareness GTAs had about their teaching styles (Co-CTS), the progression
of their students during the course of the contact period (Co-SP), and why tasks are completed as a group
or as an individual (Co-GSA and Co-ISA).This follows the work by Blair, who identified that his participants,
whilst focused on cognition and activity, remained aware of the learners needs, desires, and levels of
engagement (Blair, 2011). This is further supported by the work of Demulder and Rigsby that suggests
that in order to empower educators, educators need to capitalize on their own strengths and learning
styles in order to develop new ways of knowing and learning (Demulder and Rigsby, 2003). In doing so,
GTAs, whilst considering the needs and desires of their students, are only adopting pedagogies that they
are comfortable implementing, increasing the importance of reflective practice to recognize how their
practice should develop. There was also a significant blend of statements on actions and tasks completed
(objectivity) and perceived behavioral traits (subjectivity).This demonstrated GTAs attemptstounderstand
students’ struggles with learning the content. Furthermore, there is a realization of the time restrictions
placed on GTAs to deliver the content. This is realized as frustration with one participant stating:
Maybe I will put them in groups and assign a problem to present. This is difficult to do with the limited
recitation time we have.

442|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

Table 1: Codes and definitions for the cognition characteristic (learning processes between the GTA and the students)

Theme Description (Code) Example

about
Concepts
Scientific
Statements the
concepts
GTAcontact period.were
writesstudents
statements
These are simply
indicating
requestedthe
tostatements
learn during
scientific of “The lab was focused on factors which effect the rates of
reaction.”

concept and not interpreted. (Co-SaSC)

the
Performed
Actions
Students
by students.
artefacts
These signify
that
Thesesupport
learning
could specific
actions actions during
studentcompleted
activities orby GTA “They practiced mixing solutions and calculating the
concentrations of reagents in solutions.”

contact period. (Co-APS)

on
Statements
Reflective
Actions
Student RSSA+
These
actions
negative
signify
signifies
performed
statements.by(Co-RSSA)
statements
positive of reflection
students
statements
whilst about the
RSSA-signifies
learning. “Based upon the questions I was asked and the lab reports I
received back many students didn’t fully read the report they
were meant to fill out. I was continually pointing out the same
error.”
TA Support
Actions
Students
that that
couldsupported
Statements
student
include
learning.
identify
artefacts
students in their
(Co-TASS)
actions
created GTA to
performed
by bysupport
learning. This
the TA “It tried to have them engage with the other groups for the
mistakes that I found continuously happening but some didn’t
seem to listen.”

Actions
Student
Individual that
by
to be
Thesetasks
individual
individually
are identified
were as learning
students. The as
completed
mentioned,student does
an completed
individuals.
rather
actions indication
not
(Co-ISA)
have “Most of the students, even though I tell them to work with
others or check their work with others, work individually. There
is not much group work going on even though Ioften suggest
it.”
Actions
Student
Group by
These
have toare
groups of students.
mentioned,
identified as learning
rather an indication
Specific students do not
actions completed
that tasks “I had [sic] repeat this many times and found that students
were not speaking to one another about the calculations or the
experiments that they were performing (even though a group
were completed as groups. (Co-GSA) was doing the same experiment next to them).”
Comments of GTA comments on their frustration of student “I learned that I become increasingly frustrated when we go
Frustration learning either as a result of student actions or by over material in class to help them in lab but, when we get to
GTA actions. (Co-CF) the lab, they look at the material as though it’s the first time
they are seeing it.”
Skills
Identifies be
concept that
GTAphrases like
identifies aproblem
the specific
students are
skill
solving,
rather thanThis
learning.
drawing graph
could
a ascientific “The students were meant to take Beers Law and use algebra to
determine the order.”

etc. (Co-IS)
Student Statements that recognize that students have “I refused to answer any of my[their] questions and waited
Progression learnt or not learnt something since the previous patiently/gave hints. This seemed to really help their learning
lesson. SP+ identifies positive progression. SP process.”
identifies negative progression. (Co-SP)
Change in Statements that identify a change in the way they “As I said last week, I encouraged more teamwork.”I also
Teaching are teaching either from the previous session or spent a considerable amount of time introducing them to the
Style within the same session. (Co-CTS) equations they would use and how to use those equations.”
Considers Statements that identify a students ability or “many students looked over the fact that the molecular
Student concerns with students ability to learn CSA+ formula of the known solution was different from the
Ability identifies
concerns with
a positive ability to (Co-CSA)
their learning. learn, CSA-identifies molecular formula of the reagent they were meant to
calculate.”
Reflection Statements that signify why the GTA provided “I answered the peoples questions who didn’t listen. As a result,
on Student particular support to the students. (Co-RSS) I may have-inadvertently-reinforced poor listening skills and
Support devalued communication with peers?”
Reflection Statements that signify GTA is reflecting on quality “I try to show them how to set up problems so they don’t get
on Quality of of student work rather than just the quality of their lost, like setting up a conversion problem. Many of the students
Student Work learning. This can include the quality in which don’t show any units and it is easy to get lost in their work.”
students are asking questions and the quality to
which the work was completed. (Co-RQSW)

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |443

 Table 2: Codes and definitions for the affective characteristics (relationships and rapport of students and GTA)

Theme Description (Code) Example

Peer-to-peer Statements that represent specific rapport actions “The students easily conversed and shared their understanding
Actions between students in the classroom/lab. (A-PPA) of dilutions.”
to-student
Assistant-
Teaching (A-TAPA) thethat
between
Statements teaching assistant
represent specific
andrapport actions
students. “I am working on knowing their names so I can talk to them
by name, but right nowI mostly address them by talking
specifically to them.”
Actions
Peer-to-peer Statements that represent specific rapport “Inoticed that some of my students were discussing the
Discussion developing conversations between students in sessions topics amongst each other. The discussion centered
the classroom/lab. (A-PPD) around whether the equation could be used for mono-protic or
di-protic acids.”
Teaching Statements that represent specific rapport “I find some students seem uninterested or tired in recitation
Assistant developing conversations between the teaching while others will quickly answer my questions.”
to-student assistant and students. (A-TAPD)
Discussion
Rapport Statements by the TA that reflect a overall strategy “About ¾ of the students seem to pay attention when I ask a
Strategies for developing rapport between either TA-student question to help them solve a recitation guide problem. Others
or student-student. This is the overall strategy and keep working on the guide. I try to wait when I ask a question
intention of the TA not specific actions that they so that multiple students have time to answer.”
conducted. (A-RS)
Relationship Statements of reflection directed at the type of “I need to work on praising them more and talk about how
Reflections relationships developed between TA-student and giving the wrong answer is alright.”
student-student. (A-RR)
Trust Statements that signify trust between TA-student “their work is more important to me than the correct answer
Reflections and student-student. (A-TR) because it allows me to see how they are thinking…”
Confusion Statements by the TA that reflect confusion of “I don’t understand my students unwillingness to participate in
action, discourse or agency. (A-C) group activities.”

Table 3: Codes and definitions for the psychomotor characteristic (how students and ta move and position themselves)

Theme Description (Code) Example

Moving Statements
educationalthat
space. (Ps-M)movement within the
convey “It is hard to move around the room since the room is setup
with desks in rows.”
GTA Position in aboutorthe
the classroom
Statements (Ps-TAP)position of the GTA
lab.specific “I start the class period at the front of the room.”

Positions
Student the
Statements about
classroom or lab. position of the students in
the(Ps-SP) “I found when they sat in groups, they moved the desks, which
helped me move around to groups a little easier.”
Peer-to-peer Statements about the position of students in “I ask my students on alternate rows to turn around and form
Positioning relation to other students. (Ps-PPP) groups instead forming groups as a row.”
Reason for
Moving the
Statements about
classroom or lab. purpose of moving around
the(Ps-RM) “I hand out the recitation guide and move around the room
based on questions.”
Reason
GTA for
Position Statements in
themselves about the purpose
a specific for(Ps-RTAP)
location. GTA positioning “I have a PowerPoint that tells them important information like
where to find the lab, when the exam will be etc.”
for
Peer-to-Peer
Reason student
Statements about the
positioning in purpose
the classroom
for theorstudent-
lab. “Ineed to have the students move their desks into groups to
work and maybe I can move around a little better.”
Positioning (Ps-RPPP)
Classroom/
Lab Layout The layout of the educational environment.
(Ps-CLL) “There isn’t much room between rows especially with students
backpacks in the rows.”

444|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

Table 4: Codes and definitions for the conative characteristic (effort of the students and GTA)

Theme Description (Code) Example

GTA Prior
Effort prior
taken to
bythe
Statements that to period.
thecontact
GTAindicate
prepare for theand
the(Cn-TAPE)
effort actions
contact period “Before teaching recitation, Igothrough and do the pre-lab,
read through the lab and complete the recitation guide.”

GTA During
Effort GTA to run the
Statements thatcontact
indicate the effort
period. take by the
(Cn-TADE) “This required less effort on my part, but more effort on theirs.”

Student Prior Statements that indicate the effort by the students “I feel very little effort was put into preparing for lab and as a
Effort to prepare for the contact period. (Cn-SPE) result, lab was incredibly difficult.”
Student Statements that indicate the effort by the students “Based off of the lab and the fact that many had difficulty
During Lab during the lab contact period. (Cn-SDLE) completing the analysis part of the lab, I have to assume that
Effort they are not putting as much effort into understanding the
material.”
Student Statements that indicate the effort by the students “The students were required to participate more because I
During during the recitation period. (Cn-SDRE) refused to answer my own questions.”
Recitation
Effort
GTA-Student Statements that indicate the effort to initiate “Trying to engagemy students in recitation is hard.”
Interactions interactions/conversation/actions between GTA
Effort student. This effort can be initiated by either party
in the relationship. (Cn-TASI)

Unbalanced Statements that indicate the unbalanced effort
GTA-Student required in preparation or engaging in the contact
Effort period. This can be lack of effort or higher effort by
either party in the relationship. (Cn-UTAS)
Frustration Statements that signify frustration with the effort
with Effort students are applying to the contact period and
Levels the work they are completing. (Cn-FEL)
“I feel like I am doing more work than the students in preparing
for lab.”
“This cause more strain on me during lab and more people
need my help to get through the lab creating a queue and
potentially frustrating me and the students.”

This follows from the work by Cole whose research identified that reflective practice can be affected by
factors beyond the control the practitioner (Cole, 1997).

Psychomotor components
Participants were also highly aware of their psychomotor components to their contact periods, identifying
the classroom environment (Ps-CLL), movement around the work space (Ps-M), and their own position in
the working environment (Ps-TAP and Ps-RTAP). This is shown through a participant comment about the
working environment:
It is hard to move around the room since the room is set up with desks in row[s]. There isn’t much room
between rows especially with students backpacks in the rows. There is also no room between the back wall
and the last desk or the row and the wallon the left side… I have to go to the front of the room to show them
on the board. I wish that there were multiple boards around the room.

Although participants were aware of their own actions and the environment, less reflection was observed
to the positioning (Ps-PPP and Ps-RPPP), movements (Ps-RM), and body language of the students. This is
clearly an area that needs to be improved upon to ensure that GTAs are aware of not only the effects of
the environment on themselves, but also its effects on the students. The importance of this awareness was
shown by a participant who acknowledged not just the importance of group work activities but also the
way it is facilitated by stating:
Ineed to have students move their desks into groups to work and maybe I can move around a little better.
It is an awkward room…

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |445

Affective and conative components
The areas where participants struggled the most was understanding the affective and conative themes
of the reflective practice model, which was typified by these boxes being less populated. In spite of this,
participants seemed to understand the importance of affective elements of practice by discussing how
they engaged students with tasks and the pedagogic approaches they felt developed rapport between
lesson stakeholders (A-RS). This is illustrated by a participant who stated:
The students are involved when I ask questions in recitation. However, they seem to shut down in lab… they
look to me for repetitious information. I don’t know what kind of rapport that would be, maybe respect?

During the following week’s reflections, another participant stated:

I feel like my rapport has gotten better with the students. They now answer my questions more as a game.
If they seem confused I give them hints until they understand and can answer.

This GTA is using their rapport with their students to enact a pedagogic shift, where students were initially
lacking independence to students now accepting her questions as guiding their learning. With conative
elements, most participants used this section to express their frustration about the level of work they
put in prior and during the contact period, but the lack of perceived effort put in by their students. The
examples in Table 4 reflect this well. This is demonstrated by a participant who stated:
The students were clearly not prepared for todays recitation. More than 5 people were coming late… they
did not have a clue of how to calculate yield% despite this concept has been taught in the lab for several
times…

Whilst this is to be expected, greater effort during professional development training to highlight the
importance of evidencing the effort students are using to complete the contact period both prior to and
during the session, should be suggested. The limited reflection on conative and affective components of
the model may be because “participants mainly focused on practice as a thinking and doing activity rather
than an emotional and exertive one that the experiences participants discussed were led by considerations of
cognitive and psychomotor processes” (Blair, 2011).

Impact of reflection on practice

Whilst the list of codes presented in Tables 1–4 are not exhaustive for GTA reflective practice, it does
give an indication to how rich the data from simply scaffolded reflective practice can be. Each of the
participants were given a briefing about how the instrument should be used, however, they were not
told requirements about what topics should populate each area. At times reflective practice can become
too prescriptive and justify current practice, yet each of the participants in this study identified areas they
wished to address in their future practice. This was seen with a participant who stated:
Ianswered the people’s questions who didn’t listen. As a result, I may have–inadvertently–reinforced poor
listening skills and devalued communication with peers?

The following week the same participant enacted changes based on this reflection stating:
As I said I would last week, I encouraged more teamwork.

Whilst this participant didn’t actually state they would encourage more teamwork in their previous
reflection, they did imply it was desirable.The participant’s second statement shows that they are trying to
enact their agenda for increased peer-communication through team work, demonstrating a willingness
to change their teaching practice and an understanding that their practice needs to change to support
their students. Hussein stated that reflection can be affected by the willingness of participants to embrace
change (Hussein, 2007). When participants are able to make the considerations demonstrated by the
participant above, they are capable of enhancing future practice instead of just justifying current practice

446|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

(Marcos et al., 2009). Although there was a willingness to engage with reflective practice, the degree
to which reflective practice occurred differed considerably based on prior teaching experience. GTA
members of the department’s Chemistry Education division clearly reflected in greater detail than their
wet lab-based colleagues, providing not only significant reflection on themselves, but considering how
their teaching affected their students. This demonstrates that not only is reflective practice essential to
enact teaching reform, but that prior expertise significantly alters the degree to which graduate teaching
assistants are able to reflect on their teaching practice.

There was also large difference in the quality of reflections between those GTAs with prior teaching
experiences (members of the chemistry education division and more senior GTAs) and those early career
teaching assistants (1st and 2nd year GTAs). The GTAs with prior teaching experiences were more likely
to consider their teaching environment including the perspectives and considerations of the students
(extrospective) as an extension of their own practice than the earlier career GTAs (introspective). Whilst
this is expected due to the complex nature of reflective practice (Moran and Dallat, 1995), it demonstrates
the importance prior experience and training has on not only the quality of graduate teaching assistants,
but also their reflective practice. This is especially important as GTAs form their identities as educators.

Study limitations
Whilst the project proved successful at providing rich detail about GTA reflective considerations
characteristics, there are limitations with its implementation, including sample size and location of study.
The sample of participants involved in this chapter was relatively small, and, whilst we adopted a case
study approach, it would be fallacious to state that we have exhaustively probed at GTA considerations.
However, the outcomes presented in this chapter demonstrate the richness of considerations that can
be identified from adopting the VMRP. Although the literature has demonstrated that the VMRP has
been adopted in pre-service teacher training and field research and was an effective probe into their
considerations, this research has extended the contexts where VMRP can be implemented to include GTA
reflections. It should be further noted that the study involved in this chapter was only conducted at one
midwestern research intensive institution in the United States; other institutions may observe different
characteristics for each of the four themes and a different degree of willingness to enact a change in
practice.

Furthermore, self-report data such as reflective diaries only allows researchers to access information that is
willingly provided by the participants. However, due to reflective practice being driven by self-awareness,
self-regard, self-improvement, and because its actions rely on interpersonal examination, methods other
than self-report seem inappropriate and prescriptive, restricting the educator from addressing and
responding to the needs of their own teaching practice.

Conclusions and Implications for Practice

The application of the Vitruvian Model of Reflective practice has demonstrated its suitability for
understanding the reflective practice of graduate teaching assistants, although the degree to which
reflections occurred differed considerably based on the prior teaching experience of the participants.
However, despite varying degrees of reflective practice, the non-prescriptive nature of the model still
enabled researchers and graduate teaching assistants alike to probe at the experiences of graduate
teaching assistants through extremely rich reflective data that was not solely linked to considering what
students learned. The inclusion of the psychomotor component required participants to consider not
only their position in the working environment, but also the purpose of that position and movement,

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |447

with GTAs demonstrating awareness on the importance of these psychomotor considerations. Whilst
the elements of cognition and psychomotor were more familiar to participants, asking participants to
consider the affective and conative components resulted in much less data. This may be because the
cognitive and psychomotor are much more tangible elements, whereas the affective and conative rely
heavily on emotion and perceived subjectivity.

Considerations of how to implement reflective practice with your GTAs as a teaching tool
There is no specific way that GTAs develop their reflective practice. Each GTA must find his or her own way
of reflecting. This is because whichever approach a GTA adopts it must involve a willingness to actively
engage with critical reflection in the classroom. As a GTA engages with the reflective process, they must
infuse their personal beliefs and values into their professional identity, questioning the goals, values, and
assumptions that guide their work. The more GTAs explore, the more they discover about themselves and
their teaching. The more they question the more they access new approaches and address complications
with their practice. The path to developing as a critically reflective GTA is not a prescriptive process and
cannot be resolved by training interventions. This is because the route cannot be pre-planned, it must be
a lived experience. Although the reflective capabilities for both trainee and established graduate teaching
assistants will vary considerably, it is important the GTAs continue to progress towards critical reflection.
Without engaging in critical reflection, GTAs remain trapped in a cycle of fixed judgements, assumptions,
and interpretations. Given this, how can we implement reflective practice in both trainee and established
GTAs?

Reflective practice encourages GTAsto examine their beliefs that are rooted in the assumptions GTAs make
and the expectations they have of their students.These beliefs can be expansive or limiting, but still shape
a GTAs identity. Challenging these beliefs, whilst essential, can shatter a GTAs identity, for example trying
to change a belief that a GTA must control their teaching environment can create a sense of vulnerability.
Any attempt to be reflective requires GTAs to reconcile feelings of frustration and vulnerability created by
challenging their worldviews. It is the responsibility of the GTA trainer and/or mentor to provide openings
for GTAs to recognize errors in their held beliefs. The different areas of the VMRP allow GTAs to critically
reflect in a non-prescriptive way that is scaffolded across the four areas; cognitive, psychomotor, conative
and affective domains. Addressing these four broad domains allows trainee and established GTAstofocus
their discussions into particular categories whilst still allowing for the flexibility of a non-prescriptive
framework. Although many reflective areas will overlap, the framework means that a GTA can reconcile
challenges to their world views under more discreet components rather than entire phenomena, making
the process more manageable. For example a GTA could tackle the way they position themselves in the
workspace (psychomotor) without having to think about what is being learnt (cognitive).

GTA trainers and/or mentors need to be comfortable that as GTAs begin to adopt critical reflection, they
will be dealing with tension as their core beliefs are challenged and become exposed. During this process
GTAs must change how they perceive their own thinking, and take responsibility for their own learning.
This means that, whilst reflecting, they must consider the perspective of others involved in the learning
process. The conative and affective elements off the VMRP seek to provide a platform where GTAs are
encouraged to challenge their held beliefs of their students, devoid of off the cuff remarks, and instead
address issues through multiple perspectives. For example, it is not sufficient to identify that students are
lacking the motivation; GTAs need to reflect on possible actions and behaviors that may foster this lack
of motivation considering the why, as well as the what and how of an interaction. This is the difference
between surface-level reflection and deep critical reflection. A further expectation is that if trainee GTAs
are expected to voice their vulnerabilities, then so should their trainers, trying to break apart the barrier
of judgment, that critical-reflection is a career length endeavor, and generate a community of practice to

448|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

support their development.

GTA trainers and/or mentors need to be prepared to change the way they perceive their role as trainers,
not responsible for developing pre-determined skills and outcomes, instead facilitating a personal
development process that addresses the needs and experiences of the GTAs they train. This includes
critical reflection. Trainers need to challenge and confront the personal beliefs held by GTAs not only about
their teaching and learning, but about human development and student effort. They need to prompt
GTAs to view, discuss and change the beliefs that limit their perspectives. The VMRP provides the platform
to initiate these discussions by focusing GTA trainers on the four domains. The VMRP has the opportunity
to challenge reflective statements, such as “my students are not putting in the same effort as me to prepare
for this class.” For this example, instead of focusing what and how they are not putting in the effort and
shifting more towards why. The model also provides opportunities for trainers to focus on initiatives and
discussion points about the four domains. Discussions can focus on the conative perspective GTAs have,
and provide a community of practice to share their beliefs.

GTA trainers that promote dissonance, support the development of reflective practice, and encourage
GTAs to confront the negative aspects of their teaching practice and ways of thinking. Promoting
experiences that unsettle the world views held by GTAs stimulates reflection. Out of conflict emerges
invaluable insight into their own practice. Promoting higher-order reflection is necessitated through a
balance between acceptance and empathy, and confronting limiting beliefs.

The generally held perspective is that without scaffolded training, trainee and established GTAs are unable
to engage in this desired higher-order reflection. However, when scaffolded appropriately, and within an
emotionally supportive learning environment, both trainee and established GTAs can deepen their level
of reflection. Ultimately reflective practice can not be taught as an academic endeavor, instead it is more
the culture, community, and professionalism in which you implement your reflective practice framework
and how you allow GTAs to express their opinions under the guidance of a trainer/mentor. A culture that
promotes and champions transparency with its experiences, recognizes vulnerabilities and provides a
safe environment for those vulnerabilities to be transformed promote opportunities to be reflective.

Future Work
The work presented in this chapter is a foundation for exploring the teaching practices of graduate
teaching assistants in higher education institutions and we invite others to probe and adopt this model
to explore the experiences with their own teaching assistants. In future work we hope to implement
this model to probe further at graduate teaching assistant practice and developing profiles of behavior
that highlight the distribution of GTA considerations. Developing these profiles of behaviors will help
us improve training opportunities for graduate teaching assistants in chemistry. We further hope to
improve the quality of reflective practice presented by graduate teaching assistants, especially from those
chemistry graduate teaching assistants in lab-based positions, particularly with a focus on the rapport
they develop with their students and the level of effort students provide during contact periods. We feel
that this approach may address the undertones of ‘us and them’ and actions and behaviors that lead GTAs
to become frustrated with the perceived effort their students contribute to class. We further hope that the
VMRP will become part of a greater program of teaching practice that can be used along with teaching
observation protocols.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |449

References

Baxter, P. and Jack, S. (2008), “Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice
Researchers”, The Qualitative Report, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 544–559.
van den Berg, R. (2002), “Teachers’ Meanings Regarding Educational Practice”, Review of Educational Research, Vol.
72 No. 4, pp. 577–625.
Blair, (2009), “A further education college as a heterotopia”, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, Vol. 14 No.
E.
1, pp. 93–101.
Blair, E. (2011), “Balanced reflection as a means of practitioner development in the post‐compulsory education
and training sector”, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 249–261.
Blair, and Deacon, A. (2015), “A holistic approach to fieldwork through balanced reflective practice”, Reflective
E.
Practice. Routledge, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 418–434.
Bolton, G. (2010), Reflective Practice, Sage, London.
Briggs, A. R. J. (2007), “Exploring professional identities: Middle leadership in further education colleges”, School
Leadership and Management, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 471–485.
Brookfield, S. (1994), “Tales from the dark side: a phenomenonography of adult critical reflection”, International
Journal of Lifelong Education, No. 1370, pp. 203–216.
Bryman, A. (2008), Social Research Methods, 3rd edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Charmaz, K. (2001), “Grounded Theory”, in Emerson, R. M. (ed.) Contempory Field Research: Perspectives and
Formulations, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, IL.
Child, S. (2009), “Differing relationships to research in higher and further education in the UK: A reflective account
from a practitioner perspective”, Research in Post-Compulsory Education, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 333–343.
Clinton, M. (1998), “On reflection in action: Unaddressed issues in refocusing the debate on reflective practice”,
International Journal of Nursing Practice, Vol. 4, pp. 197–202.
Cole, A. L. (1997), “Impediments to reflective practice: Toward a new agenda for research on teaching”, Teachers
and Teaching: Theory and Practice, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 7–27.
Crabtree, B. and Miller, W. (1999), Doing Qualitative Research, 2nd edn, Sage, London.
Demulder, E. K. and Rigsby, L. C. (2003), “Teachers’ voices on reflective practice”, Reflective Practice, Vol. 4, pp.
267–290.
Elliott, G. (1996), “Why is research invisible in further education?”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 22 No.
1, pp. 101–111.
Hussein, J. W. (2007), “Experience gained through engaging student teachers in a developmental reflective
process”, Teacher Development, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 189–201.
Johnson, G.C. (2002), “Taking up a Post-personal Position in Reective Practice: one teacher’s accounts”, Reflective
Practice, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 21–38.
Larrivee, B. (2000), “Transforming Teaching Practice”, Reflective Practice, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 293-307.
Lather, P. (1992), “Critical Frames in Educational Research: Feminist and Post-structural Perspectives”, Theory Into
Practice, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 87–99.
Marcos, J. J. M., Miguel, E. S. and Tillema, H. (2009), “Teacher reflection on action: what is said (in research) and
what is done (in teaching)”, Reflective Practice, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 191–204.
Merriam, S. (1998), Qualitative research and case study applications in education, Jossey Bass, San Francisco CA.
Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1984), Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods, Sage, Beverley
Hills, CA.
Moran, A. and Dallat, J. (1995), “Promoting reflective practice in initial teacher training”, International Journal of
Educational Management, Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 20-26.
Russell, T. (2010), “Can reflective practice be taught?”, Reflective Practice, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 403–414.

450 | Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education

 Developing reflective practice in graduate teaching assistants

Saldana, J. (2016), The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, 3rd edn, Sage, London.
Searle, J. R. (1995), The Construction of Social Reality, The Free Press, New York.
Stake, R. (1995), The art of case study research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Wallace, S. (2002), “No Good Surprises: Intending lecturers’ preconceptions and intial experiences of further
education”, British Educational Research Journal, Vol. 28 No. 1, 79-93.
Yin, R. K. (2003), Case study research: Design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Yin, R. K. (2009), Case study research: Design and methods, 4th edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education |451

452|Teaching Chemistry in Higher Education