ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 1 Research-based Teaching Workshops for Graduate Students at Research-Intensive Chemistry Departments Christopher Bauer, Univ. of New Hampshire Maureen Scharberg, San Jose State Univ. Dan Libby, Moravian College

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 2 Research-based Teaching Workshops for Graduate Students at Research-Intensive Chemistry Departments What did we do What interesting things happened How did we make that happen

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 3 Purpose Future faculty By-passed by much of curriculum innovation and dissemination activity May be more malleable in their thinking May be more ready to innovate relative to tenure clock

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 4 Settings Hosted by top research departments: 2 private, 1 public Not having existing strong program for future faculty or chem ed ~ 35 participants ~ 2:1 to 1:2 grad students/postdocs

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 5 Incoming characteristics of participants Learned in traditional lecture settings and on their own; very little group work Wide-variety of undergraduate institutions Career goals –non-natives: R1 institutions –natives: non-R1 blending research & teaching Some tutoring and outreach experience Few had formal training in how students learn chemistry

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 6 Outline of the day Out-of-field POGIL activity Read and reflect on research base and apply to POGIL model POGIL activity about Toulmin discourse analysis POGIL lab activity Clicker exploration of student misconceptions

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 7 Goals Informational Transformational Networking Outcomes from exit survey

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 8 Outcomes -- Informational Taking away a starter library (chem ed, cog sci, assessment, curriculum) Existence of a research literature on chem ed and group learning (“clueless”) Eyes opened about research on misconceptions and cognitive motivation First experience with student response system (clicker) technology

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper 41 9 Outcomes -- Transformational Initial comments focus on teaching. Afterwards about learning. Students may learn differently than me Group learning, with adequate structure, can be effective. Willingness to try in lecture or lab. “Being students learning unfamiliar material” essential to understanding value of POGIL and group roles

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Outcomes -- Networking Discussed career opportunities at R1, comprehensive, liberal arts institutions Met other colleagues from different research areas who are interested in teaching (mixing groups during workshop)

Out-of-field POGIL activity Organic/inorganic Physical Analytical/biochem “Interlaboratory Comparisons” analytical, Bauer Ana-POGIL “Chirality” organic, Straumanis book “The Ideal Solution” physical, Moog & Spencer book ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Seated in groups by research areas

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Out-of-field POGIL activity Critical Thinking Questions –Describe chemical concepts in activity –Describe structure of activity –Comment on role of instructor (“What instructor?”) –Identify two important skills other than chemical concepts that are developed

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper First Activity is POGIL on POGIL Exploration: doing a POGIL activity Concept invention: elicit structure then label it –process goals by cue or facilitation –content goals by guided inquiry Application: additional workshop activities have similar structural components

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Exploration of Research Base (jigsaw structure) Initial group reads excerpts on one topic –metacognition, constructivism, motivation, cooperative learning Topic explored via guiding discussion questions Re-organize: one member from each topic Work through a common set of questions on how theory backs up POGIL structure

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Exploration questions for “Cooperative Learning” group Name five characteristics of coop groups Walking into classroom, what clues would tell you it is designed for effective cooperative learning? “Social loafing”. Which of the five characteristics addresses this issue? Successful sports teams have high degree of positive interdependence. Explain. Three instances of non-cooperative groups: what characteristics are missing. Summarize what you have learned

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Debriefing discussion History of science education development Importance of theoretical grounding Support for GI and PO in instruction or POGIL specifically List of journals one can go to (their list doesn’t extend beyond JChemEd) LUNCH

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Applications: Toulmin argument analysis Given Data: Line structures of C 5 to C 10 n-alkenes and their boiling points Read four interpretations and rank quality. Examine Toulmin model (claim, data, warrant, backing) and apply to interpretations Revisit the ranking (more informed analysis)

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Applications: Parallel-processing laboratory Explore undergraduate experiment: How is boiling point related to structure? Student groups predict and rationalize order of bp for small set of assigned substances Experimental BP data are assembled and graphed Predictions compared with outcomes Inferences and discussion of intermolecular forces

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Misconceptions Questions from Mulford and Robinson, JChemEd 2002 Two questions challenge this group (heat, bond energy) – Mazur “peer instruction” choose, talk, choose again Four questions regarding gen chem students: predict most popular wrong answer (good) predict improvement over semester (overestimate)

ACS San Francisco Mar 2010 DivCHED Paper Next Steps One more workshop Six-month post-workshop survey Identify those preparing for faculty search for in depth interview