An Integrated Lecture-Laboratory Environment for General Chemistry

Bailey, Christina A.; Kingsbury, Kevin B.; Kulinowski, Kristen M.; Paradis, Jeffrey A.; Schoonover, Rod

doi:10.1021/ed077p195

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite the large laboratory and lecture courses not being explicitly linked in format or content (other than that they are both general chemistry courses), concurrent enrollment positively impacts student performance and retention in the lecture. These results beg the question as to what outcomes might be observed if the laboratory and lecture were explicitly aligned and taught synergistically, especially in light of studies that have reported advantages of integrated course structures (Bailey, Kingsbury, Kulinowski, Paradis, & Schoonover, 2000; Oliver‐Hoyo et al, 2004). Recall that in the studio‐style course, the laboratory and lecture were integrated and aligned in a five‐credit course, yet our results indicated no practical benefit in terms of final grades or withdrawal rates over concurrent enrollment in a nonstudio format.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laboratories have been a cornerstone in teaching and learning across multiple scientific disciplines for more than 100 years. At the collegiate level, science laboratories and their corresponding lectures are often offered as separate courses, and students may not be required to concurrently enroll in both. In this study, we provide evidence that enrolling in an introductory laboratory concurrently with the corresponding lecture course enhances learning gains and retention in comparison to students who enroll in the lecture alone. We examined the impact of concurrent versus nonconcurrent enrollment on 9,438 students' withdrawal rates from and final grades in the general chemistry lecture at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor using multiple linear and binary logistic regression analyses, respectively, at a significance level of 0.05. We found that concurrent enrollment in the lecture and laboratory positively impacts (1) the odds of retention in the lecture by 2.2 times on average and (2) final lecture grades by up to 0.19 grade points on a 4.0 scale for the lowest-scoring students according to university-level mathematics and chemistry placement exam scores. These data provide important results for consideration by curriculum advisors and course planners at universities that do not require concurrent enrollment in general chemistry as well as other science courses. In the face of current budget cuts that threaten to shorten or eliminate laboratory experiences altogether at multiple educational levels, this study demonstrates the value of laboratories in promoting science learning and retention. ß 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 49: 2012

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using laboratory activities to introduce concepts has been recommended by both the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Research Council (6, 10). The practice of coordinating laboratory activities with lecture topics has been shown to develop the understanding of concepts in both physics and chemistry (3,4,7,11).For practical reasons (class size, teaching load, laboratory space), the lecture and laboratory components may be taught as totally separate courses with the laboratory taught by a variety of instructors. Often, there may be no effort to correlate the laboratory and lecture aspects of the course.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Activity-Based Format Increased Student Retention in a Community College Microbiology Course

LUX¹

2002

Journal of Microbiology &Amp; Biology Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microbiology is offered each semester at the Allied Health Campus of Pearl River Community College. The evening course meets weekly for 16 sessions from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m. Most students enrolled in the course are in one of the seven associate degree allied health programs on the allied health campus. Among the challenges of teaching a course in this situation is retention of enrolled students. Although the course is required for most of the allied health programs on the campus, many students enrolled, attended class for a few weeks, and withdrew from the course. During the 1998-1999 school year the retention rates for students enrolled in the night microbiology classes for Fall and Spring semesters were 52% and 47%, respectively. The format for the 1998-1999 academic year was a conventional course with 2½ hours of lecture material followed by 2 hours of laboratory. Little or no effort was made to correlate laboratory and lecture topics. The course format for Fall 1999 was modified to (i) provide the laboratory component at the beginning of the time slot, (ii) tailor the lecture topics to relate to the laboratory component each night, and (iii) add an outside reading component. The laboratory served as an introduction to the lecture topic, and the lecture became more significant since it related directly to the laboratory experience. Following this format change the retention rate for the Fall 1999 semester increased to 80%. Laboratory exercises coordinated with and preceding lecture topics in an introductory microbiology course taught to allied health students in associate degree programs had a positive effect on retention of enrolled students. Learning scientific concepts should be an active, not a passive, process (6). A learning activity is most effective when it both precedes and relates to the introduction of a concept (1, 10). Using laboratory activities to introduce concepts has been recommended by both the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the National Research Council (6, 10). The practice of coordinating laboratory activities with lecture topics has been shown to develop the understanding of concepts in both physics and chemistry (3,4,7,11).For practical reasons (class size, teaching load, laboratory space), the lecture and laboratory components may be taught as totally separate courses with the laboratory taught by a variety of instructors. Often, there may be no effort to correlate the laboratory and lecture aspects of the course. While some college students are abstract learners with the ability to develop relationships between the hands-on activities in the laboratory and the concepts in lecture, other students, concrete learners, are not as successful in building these connections. A study of community college students in Mississippi demonstrated that this is a population of concrete learners rather than abstract learners (5). The failure to build the bridge between a laboratory exercise and the lecture concept diminishes the value of both the lecture and the laboratory exper...

show abstract

“…Variations on this style of course delivery have been implemented at a variety of institutions and in a variety of subject areas during the last few decades, including in Cal Poly chemistry and physics courses (Bailey, Kingsbury, Kulinowski, Paradis, & Schoonover, 2000; Kiste, Scott, Bukenberger, Markmann, & Moore, 2017). Early work, which established a framework for studio delivery, anecdotally reported very positive feedback from students and instructors, resulting in more widespread adoption and more rigorous evaluation of the approach (Altmiller, 1973; Apple & Cutler, 1999; Laws, 1991, 1997; Wilson & Jennings, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparable outcomes in studio vs. traditional delivery of an introductory soil science course

Rees

Winberry

2020

Natural Sciences Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studio‐style course delivery involves the integration of laboratory activities with lecture elements of the course, with the goal of increasing student learning and satisfaction through directly linking laboratory and lecture concepts while focusing on active learning. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of studio delivery of an introductory soil science class at California Polytechnic State University, we first redesigned the course to integrate appropriate technology and to align lectures with laboratory activities. We then offered multiple test sections of the course, including concurrent studio and traditional lecture/laboratory sections taught by the same instructor using the same materials and activities. Student learning was measured at the end of the course with exam questions, including sets with or without direct connection to laboratory activities. Student attitudes were evaluated with a survey. Few significant differences were found between studio and traditional sections, gender, grade point average, or major. Some students seemed to struggle with the extended time commitment for each meeting of the studio‐style section, but overall, results were very positive for both styles of delivery. Careful design and delivery of the course, including aligning lecture and laboratory materials and incorporating active‐learning strategies, resulted in a high degree of satisfaction with the course, with or without integration of the laboratory and lecture components.

show abstract

An Integrated Lecture-Laboratory Environment for General Chemistry

Cited by 30 publications

References 2 publications

Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention

Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention

An Activity-Based Format Increased Student Retention in a Community College Microbiology Course

Comparable outcomes in studio vs. traditional delivery of an introductory soil science course

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About