Search for: All records

Research on student learning in organic chemistry indicates that students tend to focus on surface level features of molecules with less consideration of implicit properties when engaging in mechanistic reasoning. Writing-to-learn (WTL) is one approach for supporting students’ mechanistic reasoning. A variation of WTL incorporates peer review and revision to provide opportunities for students to interact with and learn from their peers, as well as revisit and reflect on their own knowledge and reasoning. However, research indicates that the rhetorical features included in WTL assignments may influence the language students use in their responses. This study utilizes machine learning to characterize the mechanistic features present in second-semester undergraduate organic chemistry students’ responses to two versions of a WTL assignment with different rhetorical features. Furthermore, we examine the role of peer review on the mechanistic reasoning captured in students’ revised drafts. Our analysis indicates that students include both surface level and implicit features of mechanistic reasoning in their drafts and in the feedback to their peers, with slight differences depending on the rhetorical features present in the assignment. However, students’ revisions appeared to be primarily connected to the peer review processviathe presence of surface features in the drafts students read (as opposed to the feedback received). These findings indicate that further scaffolding focused on how to utilize information gained from the peer review process (i.e., both feedback received and drafts read) and emphasizing implicit properties could help support the utility of WTL for developing students’ mechanistic reasoning in organic chemistry. 

Appealing to students' affect in academic settings, such as demonstrating chemistry's relevance to their life, is one strategy instructors may use to support students’ in learning. This study investigates the types of connections that students make to organic chemistry when responding to an open-ended writing assignment. Students enrolled in an introductory level organic chemistry course were asked to choose and write about an organic molecule they felt was important to their life, in doing so students wrote about the molecule's relevance to their life. Analysis of the writing was supported by semi-structured interviews with a subset of the students in which they discussed their approach to completing the assigment. Conclusions from this study suggest that students successfully made connections between their chosen moleucle and their life. Considered through the lens of relevance, students can both seek and find relevance in organic chemistry topics on a personal, societal, or vocational level; and therefore may reinforce their comprehension and appreciation of chemistry. 

Studies examining peer review demonstrate that students can learn from giving feedback to and receiving feedback from their peers, especially when they utilize information gained from the review process to revise. However, much of the research on peer review is situated within the literature regarding how students learn to write. With an increasing use of writing-to-learn in STEM classrooms, it is important to study how students engage in peer review for these types of writing assignments. This study sought to better understand how peer review and revision can support student learning for writing-to-learn specifically, using the lenses of cognitive perspectives of writing and engagement with written corrective feedback. Using a case study approach, we provide a detailed analysis of six students’ written artifacts in response to a writing-to-learn assignment that incorporated peer review and revision implemented in an organic chemistry course. Students demonstrated a range in the types of revisions they made and the extent to which the peer review process informed their revisions. Additionally, students exhibited surface, midlevel, and active engagement with the peer review and revision process. Considering the different engagement levels can inform how we frame peer review to students when using it as an instructional practice. 

Abstract Here, we systematically review research on teaching knowledge in the context of undergraduate STEM education, with particular attention to what this research reveals about knowledge that is important for evidence-based teaching. Evidence-based teaching can improve student outcomes in undergraduate STEM education. However, the enactment of promising evidence-based teaching strategies depends greatly on the instructor and potentially on the teaching knowledge they are able to deploy. The review includes an overview of prevalent teaching knowledge theory, including pedagogical content knowledge, mathematical knowledge for teaching, and pedagogical knowledge. We compare and contrast teaching knowledge theory and terminology across STEM disciplines in order to build bridges for researchers across disciplines. Our search for peer-reviewed investigations of teaching knowledge in undergraduate science, engineering and mathematics yielded 45 papers. We examined the theoretical frameworks used in each study and analyzed study approaches, comparing across disciplines. Importantly, we also synthesized findings from research conducted in the context of evidence-based teaching. Overall, teaching knowledge research is sparse and siloed by discipline, and we call for collaborative work and better bridge-building across STEM disciplines. Though disciplinary divergences are common in discipline-based education research, the effect is magnified in this research area because the theoretical frameworks are themselves siloed by discipline. Investigations of declarative knowledge were common, and we call for increased attention to knowledge used in the practice of teaching. Finally, there are not many studies examining teaching knowledge in the context of evidence-based teaching, but the existing work suggests that components of pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and content knowledge influence the implementation of evidence-based teaching. We describe implications for future teaching knowledge research. We also call on those who develop and test evidence-based strategies and curriculum to consider, from the beginning, the teaching knowledge needed for effective implementation. 

Reading and understanding scientific literature is an essential skill for any scientist to learn. While students’ scientific literacy can be improved by reading research articles, an article’s technical language and structure can hinder students’ understanding of the scientific material. Furthermore, many students struggle with interpreting graphs and other models of data commonly found in scientific literature. To introduce students to scientific literature and promote improved understanding of data and graphs, we developed a guided-inquiry activity adapted from a research article on snow chemistry and implemented it in a general chemistry laboratory course. Here, we describe how we adapted figures from the primary literature source and developed questions to scaffold the guided-inquiry activity. Results from semi-structured qualitative interviews suggest that students learn about snow chemistry processes and engage in scientific practices, including data analysis and interpretation, through this activity. This activity is applicable in other introductory science courses as educators can adapt most scientific articles into a guided-inquiry activity.