The aims of teaching laboratories is an important and ever-evolving topic of discussion amongst teaching staff at teaching institutions. It is often assumed that both teaching staff and students are implicitly aware of these aims, although this is rarely tested or measured. This assumption can lead to mismatched beliefs between students and teaching staff and, if not corrected for, could lead to negative learning gains for students and become a source of frustration for teaching staff. In order to measure and identify this gap in a manner that could be readily generalised to other institutions, a single open question – ‘What do you think the aims of doing a practical chemistry course are?’ – was distributed to students and teaching staff at two Australian universities and one UK university. Qualitative analysis of the responses revealed that students and teaching staff held relatively narrow views of teaching laboratories, particularly focusing on aims more in line with expository experiences (e.g. development of practical skills or enhances understanding of theory). Whilst some differences were noted between students at the three institutions, the large amount of similarities in their responses indicated a fairly common perception of laboratory aims. Of the three groups, academics actually held the narrowest view of teaching laboratories, typically neglecting the preparation of students for the workforce or the simple increase in laboratory experience the students could gain. This study highlights gaps between the perceptions of students and teaching staff with regards to laboratory aims alongside revealing that all three groups held relatively simplified views of teaching laboratories.
Many examples exist in the chemical education literature of individual experiments, whole courses or even entire year levels that have been completely renewed under the tenets of context-based, inquiry-based or problem-based learning. The benefits of these changes are well documented and include higher student engagement, broader skill development and better perceived preparation for the workforce. However, no examples appear to have been reported in which an entire school's teaching laboratory programme has been significantly redesigned with these concepts in mind. Transforming Laboratory Learning (TLL) is a programme at Monash University that sought to incorporate industry inspired context-based, inquiry-based and problem-based learning into all the laboratory components of the School of Chemistry. One of the ways in which the effect of the programme was evaluated was through the use of an exit survey delivered to students at the completion of seven experiments that existed before the TLL programme as well as seven that were generated directly by the TLL programme. The survey consisted of 27 closed questions alongside three open questions. Overall, students found the new experiments more challenging but recognised that they were more contextualised and that they allowed students to make decisions. The students noted the lack of detailed guidance in the new laboratory manuals but raised the challenge, context and opportunity to undertake experimental design as reasons for enjoying the new experiments. Students' perceptions of their skill development shifted to reflect skills associated with experimental design when undertaking the more investigation driven experiments. These results are consistent with other literature and indicate the large scale potential success of the TLL programme, which is potentially developing graduates who are better prepared for the modern workforce.
Educators around the world have been challenged to adapt their teaching and pastoral care rapidly in response to the coronavirus pandemic. In this article, we, the academic members of the Chemistry Education and Communication Research Theme (CECR) from the School of Chemistry at the University of Sydney, reflect on the challenges and successes over the course of this most unusual semester. We have included discussions on the specific tools and techniques we employed, in light of the available literature, across the range of modes in which we teach, including lectures, tutorials, and laboratories. As many of us prepare to begin or continue teaching, we hope the experiences and lessons we have learned can offer some assistance to our disciplinary colleagues around the world.
How students behave and learn in the teaching laboratory is a topic of great interest in chemical education, partly in order to justify the great expense of teaching laboratories. Much effort has been put into investigating how students think, feel and physically act in these unique learning environments. One such attempt was made through the generation and utilisation of the Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory Instrument (MLLI). This 30 question survey utilised Novak's theory of Meaningful Learning to investigate the affective, cognitive and psychomotor domains of the student learning experience. To date, this survey has been used to great effect to measure how students’ perception of their own feelings and actions will change over the course of a semester. This study reports the use of a modified MLLI survey to probe how the expectations of students change over their undergraduate degree. To increase the generalisability of the outcomes of the study data was gathered from four universities from Australia (Monash University, the University of New South Wales and the University of Sydney) and the UK (the University of Warwick). Students were found to start their university careers with very positive expectations of their teaching laboratory experiences. Their outlook became somewhat more negative each year that they were enrolled in the program. A further modified MLLI survey was presented to teaching associates and academic staff. Teaching staff were shown to have far more negative expectations of the students’ feelings and actions, with academic staff more likely to believe that students do not undertake many items of positive meaningful learning. Overall, this study highlights the large gap between the expectations of teaching staff and students which, if left unaddressed, will likely continue to cause great frustration for both teaching staff and students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.