“…The DFW rates for fall semesters decreased from above 45% before PLTL was implemented to below 20% in 2008. The withdrawal rate also decreased from above 25% to less than 10% (Varma‐Nelson & Banks, ). A survey of 412 students in fall 2007 showed that 56.3% of them believed PLTL was significantly helpful to their study of chemistry and 26.9% believed it was helpful.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Grounded in PLTL methodology, cPLTL situates the small groups' problem‐solving discussions in a synchronous online setting rather than face‐to‐face environment, transforming the university's first‐semester general chemistry course to an optional hybrid course, in which cPLTL students attend the same face‐to‐face lecture as their classmates, but elect to participate in synchronous online workshops rather than face‐to‐face workshops (Mauser et al, ; McDaniel et al, ; Varma‐Nelson & Banks, ; cPLTL.iupui.edu). In cPLTL, six to eight students and a trained peer leader participate in the virtual workshop session by logging into a web‐conference, such as an Adobe Connect meeting.…”
This quasi-experimental, mixed methods study examined the transfer of a well-established pedagogical strategy, Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL), to an online workshop environment (cPLTL) in a general chemistry course at a research university in the Midwest. The null hypothesis guiding the study was that no substantive differences would emerge between the two workshop settings. Students in the PLTL (n ¼ 220) condition were more satisfied with their workshop and earned statistically significantly higher course grades, yet earned comparable standardized final exam scores. They also had lower incidence of students' earning D or F course grades or withdrawing from the course (DFW rates) than students in the cPLTL setting (n ¼ 175). Interviews with 10 peer leaders and 2 faculty members, as well as discourse analysis of workshop sessions, revealed more similarities than differences in the two conditions. The final exam scores and discourse analysis support the null hypothesis and use of both face-to-face and synchronous online peer-led workshops in early science courses. #
“…The DFW rates for fall semesters decreased from above 45% before PLTL was implemented to below 20% in 2008. The withdrawal rate also decreased from above 25% to less than 10% (Varma‐Nelson & Banks, ). A survey of 412 students in fall 2007 showed that 56.3% of them believed PLTL was significantly helpful to their study of chemistry and 26.9% believed it was helpful.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Grounded in PLTL methodology, cPLTL situates the small groups' problem‐solving discussions in a synchronous online setting rather than face‐to‐face environment, transforming the university's first‐semester general chemistry course to an optional hybrid course, in which cPLTL students attend the same face‐to‐face lecture as their classmates, but elect to participate in synchronous online workshops rather than face‐to‐face workshops (Mauser et al, ; McDaniel et al, ; Varma‐Nelson & Banks, ; cPLTL.iupui.edu). In cPLTL, six to eight students and a trained peer leader participate in the virtual workshop session by logging into a web‐conference, such as an Adobe Connect meeting.…”
This quasi-experimental, mixed methods study examined the transfer of a well-established pedagogical strategy, Peer-Led Team Learning (PLTL), to an online workshop environment (cPLTL) in a general chemistry course at a research university in the Midwest. The null hypothesis guiding the study was that no substantive differences would emerge between the two workshop settings. Students in the PLTL (n ¼ 220) condition were more satisfied with their workshop and earned statistically significantly higher course grades, yet earned comparable standardized final exam scores. They also had lower incidence of students' earning D or F course grades or withdrawing from the course (DFW rates) than students in the cPLTL setting (n ¼ 175). Interviews with 10 peer leaders and 2 faculty members, as well as discourse analysis of workshop sessions, revealed more similarities than differences in the two conditions. The final exam scores and discourse analysis support the null hypothesis and use of both face-to-face and synchronous online peer-led workshops in early science courses. #
“… Second-year BME student experience Typical delivery Virtual delivery BME Orientation Videos for common program questions One-minute research faculty videos Team-based virtual scavenger hunt Face-to-face during the first laboratory of the fall semester ( Zoom ) videoconferencing and breakout sessions ( Miro ) team-based scavenger hunt, video repository, etc . Student Collaboration Space 8 Study group meeting space design project workspace, club information Physical room in the engineering building ( Miro ) study group sign up, mentor-mentee chains, office hour postings PLTL (Peer-Led Team Learning) 13 Weekly problem-solving sessions led by third- or fourth-year BME students Face-to-face in laboratory (some will continue face-to-face) ( Zoom ) videoconferencing and breakout sessions ( Miro ) ice breakers, problem-solving Team Building in Technical Communications Weekly updates by students between BME and Technical Communication courses Face-to-face update in lecture ( Zoom ) videoconferencing and breakout sessions ( Miro ) icebreakers, updates Ethics: Animal Use in BME Research 4 Ethics discussion after animal dissection laboratory Face-to-face in lecture ( Zoom ) videoconferencing and breakout sessions Figure 2 Student teams will complete orientation activities using the Zoom and Miro platforms. The Miro board pictured above 9 will be used for an ice breaker activity, in which each student team meets in a Zoom breakout room while collaborating to complete their assigned Miro frame.…”
Undergraduate biomedical engineering (BME) programs challenge students with rigorous and multidisciplinary curricula that integrate concepts from the life sciences, mathematics, and engineering. Furthermore, BME curricula often incorporate active and team-based learning methodologies, in addition to more traditional engineering problem solving. 7 To succeed in such broad and challenging programs, students may depend on interactions with their peers, both in and out of the classroom. We have observed that the shared challenge of an undergraduate BME curriculum creates a strong sense of community among each cohort of students, and we fear that students who enter our program during the COVID-19 pandemic may miss out on the formative experiences that begin to build such a community. Among the downsides of remote and blended learning models is the lack of face-to-face interactions that contribute to a sense of community among students. Such models may introduce risks for students, as psychological sense of community has been linked to perceived cognitive learning, 10 persistence in degree programs, 12 course satisfaction, 6 and knowledge-sharing behavior. 15 Many studies have reported efforts to enhance student engagement and sense of community in online and hybrid courses. Greater sense of community has been linked to increases in computer-mediated communication among students, 3 instructor use
“…Historically, we have not used online homework systems in the introductory organic chemistry program at the University of Michigan (U-M). We opted instead to emphasize peer-based and peer-led options, which take advantage of our highly residential, campus-based environment . Moreover, most online e-homework systems are not aligned with the course assessments in our organic sequence: our exams require the students to answer open-ended questions about new and unfamiliar literature-based examples (Figure ).…”
Feedback-driven online homework systems
provide students with a
comprehensive set of practice questions that can accompany and enhance
other instructional resources. However, the available e-homework systems
do not contain content that aligns well with our course objectives,
provide too few questions in key areas, and use assessment format(s)
that do not match the ones used on our exams. Motivated to create
our own questions, we used this gap as an opportunity to engage students
in constructing and reviewing course-aligned content within a commercial
e-homework platform. The students successfully generated approximately
1,000 largely open-ended organic chemistry questions, some with mechanistic
and structural drawing capabilities, by modifying old exam questions.
The students’ questions spanned a variety of cognitive levels
that skewed, as intended, toward skill-building. According to our
assessment scheme, 75% of the questions were evaluated to be of the
highest quality. As a consequence, we advocate that collaborating
with undergraduate students in a “teaching team” can
be a broadly useful way for instructors to generate high-quality instructional
materials aligned with their course content.
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.
