A BLENDED LEARNING PROJECT IN GENERAL CHEMISTRY FOR UNDERGRADUATE LEVELS IN CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY DEGREES

Transcription

1 A BLENDED LEARNING PROJECT IN GENERAL CHEMISTRY FOR UNDERGRADUATE LEVELS IN CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY DEGREES J. Donoso, J. Ortega-Castro, B. Vilanova, J. Frau, F. Muñoz Department of Chemistry. University of the Balearic Islands. Palma de Mallorca (SPAIN) Abstract Incorporation of the Spanish University System to European Higher Education Area has been a substantial change in the way of understanding the teaching-learning process. In this new context, it is expected for the students to get used to work in an autonomous way (ECTS) and for the professors to effectively help and advise the student and supervise their work in the context of every particular scientific subject. The University of the Balearic Islands (UIB) is concerned to this challenge of adaptation of the lessons from grade to the new important methodological requirements. This paper presents an educational project of blended learning suitable for the subject General Chemistry in the studies of Chemistry and Biochemistry degrees. It is part of a much larger project: Campus Extens Project, an integrated semipresential educational project at UIB, since it uses model systems for student to work inside and Outside the university campus. Campus Extens uses the Moodle platform for the management of on-line educational process. This communication explains what the use we have made of the various facilities of the Moodle tool for the educational process: generation of web pages, resolution of questionnaires, use of forums, creation of wikis, etc. Finally we present data on the level of student success and briefly compared with results obtained by students in similar courses that use a different teaching methodology. Keywords: higher education, blended learning, general chemistry. INTRODUCTION Incorporation of the Spanish University System to European Higher Education Area has been a substantial change in the way of understanding the teaching-learning process. In this new context, it is expected for students to get used to work in an autonomous way (ECTS) and for professors to effectively help and advise the students and supervise their work in the context of every particular scientific subject. The University of the Balearic Islands (UIB) is concerned to this challenge of adaptation to the new important methodological requirements of the new degrees courses. According to the higher educational area framework established by the European Union and the Spanish educational laws, the learning outcomes and competences, both generic and subject-specific, in the new Chemistry Degree Programme (UIB) are those suggested by the European Chemistry Thematic Network [1]. Some of these learning outcome and competences, mostly generic competences, are difficult to achieve by using exclusively face-to-face educational methodologies, as it has been traditional in the Spanish university educational system. New pedagogical models that change the emphasis from teaching-centred to student-centred in learning paradigms and new theories of learning (social constructivism and brain-based learning) are enabling the emergence or new learning and teaching models that take advance of the new online environments and of the recent developments in personal computers. Although blending of face-toface instruction with some other types of non-classroom technology-mediated delivery have been practiced within secondary schools and universities in the last four decades [3], is just in these last years that new educational projects focused on blended learning are widespread in universities and other similar higher educational institutions. Educators and investigators in educational methodologies agree that the term blended learning refers to courses that combine face-to-face classroom instruction with online learning [3]. In a brochure of promising practices in online learning, J. Watson states that Blended learning combines online delivery of educational content with the best features of classroom interaction and live Proceedings of EDULEARN10 Conference. 5th-7th July 2010, Barcelona, Spain ISBN:

2 instruction to personalize learning, allow thoughtful reflection and differentiate instruction from student to student across a diverse group of learners [4]. The advantages of blended learning mode on both, purely face teaching and virtual teaching methodologies, have been widely studied and documented in different educational contexts [3-6]. So, and bearing in mind the above mentioned European Tuning Educational Project and the set of competences, skills and learning outcomes that graduates in Chemistry and Biochemistry must achieve, we have we have launched a blended-learning project for the subject of General Chemistry for that undergraduate level in Chemistry and Biochemistry degrees. The project seeks to build upon the good practices of face-to-face teaching methodologies and resources of fully ICT-learning projects on-line. It is inserted in a larger integrated semipresential educational project, the UIB s Campus Extens Project [7]. Campus Extens uses the Moodle platform [8] for the management of on-line educational process. This paper explains what the use we have made of the various facilities of the Moodle tools for the educational process (generation of web pages, resolution of questionnaires, use of forums, creation of wikis, etc). Likewise, it highlights the importance of the "textbook" as a fundamental tool for structuring course contents, both conceptually and for troubleshooting. Finally it presents data on the level of success of the students and briefly compares them with results obtained by students in similar courses whith different and more classical teaching methodologies. GENERAL CHEMISTRY IN THE CHEMISTREE DEGREES (UIB) Chemistry is not only a basic or pure science subject, but it has a fan of important applications in various industries and in biotechnological and environmental matters. General Chemistry is programmed in the first year of the Chemistry and Biochemistry degrees. A satisfactory educational planning must take into account that graduates chemists and biochemist must have a good broadbased educational training in the subject in order to acquire the right level of learning outcomes and specific competences as well as some other general competence, such as communication and teamwork. According to the Tuning Educational Project [1], Learning outcomes are statements of what a learner is expected to know, understand and be able to demonstrate after completion of a learning experience and competences represent a dynamic combination of cognitive and metacognitive skills, knowledge and understanding, interpersonal, intellectual and practical skills, and ethical values In the degree in Chemistry, the contents of the General Chemistry course is divided into two consecutive subjects, Chemistry I, which lists the most basic contents (introduction to chemistry) and Chemistry II, that includes the more specialized content with a important background of physics and mathematics. Teaching-learning methodology in Chemistry I course has been exclusively traditional, without using any kind at all online technologies. On the other hand, teaching-learning process for the course Chemistry II has been developed by using a blended learning methodology as explained later, as explained below. The following paragraphs provide a brief description of the General Chemistry II Course. The objectives, learning outcomes and competencies described are in relation to a much wider set, corresponding to the full degree qualification. Technical Characteristics Extension: 6 ECTS As in other courses, the extension is measured in the student workload based European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS). The credits can only be awarded when the learning outcomes have been met. Objectives: The primary objective of this course is to enable students to acquire the general knowledge of chemistry they need to deal successfully with more specialized aspects of Chemistry, Analytical Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, Inorganic and Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry. Learning outcomes

3 Have basic knowledge on the composition of matter, structure of atoms, periodic properties, the bond and the structure of molecules and how they interact each other to give rise to the macroscopical aggregation states of substances. Have basic knowledge of thermodynamics and chemical kinetics. Main thermodynamic functions that control the spontaneity and equilibrium in chemical reactions. Temporal progress of the chemical transformations in terms of reaction rates and their dependence on temperature and concentration of reactants. Have basic knowledge on the structure and reactivity of the most common inorganic and organic chemicals. Have basic knowledge on the structure and reactivity of the most important biological molecules and macromolecules. Cognitive abilities and competences Specific (Chemistry-related) SC-1 Ability to demonstrate knowledge of chemical terminology: nomenclature, terms, standards and units SC-2 Ability to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of essential facts, concepts, principles and chemical theories, including Structural Chemistry, Chemical Thermodynamics and Chemical Kinetics SC-3 Ability to apply such knowledge and understanding to the solution of simple qualitative and quantitative chemical problems SC-4 Understand and be able to explain the physical and chemical bases of biochemical processes and techniques used to investigate them SC-5 Understand the principles that determine the three dimensional structure of molecules, biological macromolecules and supramolecular complexes, and be able to explain the relationship between structure and function. SC-6 Competences in the evaluation and interpretation of chemical information and data. Generics GC-1 Ability to, at an intermediate level, understands, speak and write in English. GC-2 Have the basic skills to handle commonly used software, including access to bibliographic databases and other types that may be of interest in Chemistry and Biochemistry. GC-3 Have numeric and calculation skills, including aspects such as error analysis, order-ofmagnitude estimations, and correct use of units. GC-4 Capacity for data management and generation of information / knowledge (effective and efficient use of ICT and other resources). GC-5 Ability to effective and efficient resolution of problems demonstrating principles of originality and self-direction. GC-6 Interpersonal skills, relating to the ability to interact with other people and to engage in teamworking. GC-7 Ethical commitment Thematic Content The thematic contents are grouped in several homogeneous teaching units (TU) TU1. Atomic and molecular electronic structure. TU2. Aggregation states of matter. TU3. Principles of chemical thermodynamics. TU4. Introduction to electrochemistry TU5. Chemical kinetics TU6. Introduction to organic chemistry

4 TEACHING-LEARNING METHODOLOGY General Chemistry II takes part of the UIB s Campus Extens Project [7], a blended-learning educational programme that incorporates the use of telematics in the university educational process. Campus Extens uses the Moodle platform [7] as the Learning Management System (LMS). Moodle has an important set of teaching-learning resources and activities. It is particularly useful to define groups and work in virtual spaces. The most useful tools in this course have been: Internal Generation of Web Pages Insertion of several kinds of documents and files Advanced file upload Online activities Questionnaires Generation of Wikis Besides it is especially useful to handle partial scores and qualifications and follow the real work of every defined group and student. Table 1 and 2 show the programmed teaching-learning activities, some of them are centred in the teacher and others are centred on the students. The description column is a summary of the activities and shows the blended learning character of the methodology. Table 3 shows the approximate time spent on each activity, taking into account the full extent of the subject. Table 4 is a summary of the criteria in the assessment of the learning outcomes and related competences. Table 1. Teaching-learning activities in the classroom Type of Activity Name Group Description Professor lectures Lectures BG Lectures of the teacher in person. Tools: blackboard. Physical molecular models. Power Point presentations. Simulations and other kind of computer programs, when required Problemlearning based Seminars SG Students work in small groups to solve numerical problems or laboratory cases. The professor supervises their work and suggests keys and/or possible solutions, if necessary. lectures numerical problem solving Practical problems MG On the blackboard the teacher shows how to solve numerical problems related to numerical or theoretical concepts previously explained. Students show how they have resolved other issues previously raised Written periodical test Periodical test BG Written exam about an hour and a half hours to check the degree of knowledge acquired by students. Are held regularly every two months. Written final test Final test BG Final written exam about three hours to check the final learning outcome. BG: Big group. The whole group, approximately a hundred students MG: Medium group. Approximately 35 students SG: Small group. Approximately 15students working in subgroups of four or five students

5 Table 2. Teaching-learning activities outside the classroom Type of Activity Name Description Individual autonomous study and work In groups autonomous study and work Individual study Work in groups Individual student work on the theoretical concepts, exercises and solved problems in the lectures. Resources: textbook. Specific information obtained through the Campus Extens website. Other online specific resources (problems solved, simulations, computer software, etc.) The students work in groups to find out solutions to particular problems or/ to make reports on specific chemistry subjects: laboratory problems, technological, industrial, environmental, etc. In Campus Extens, the professor can construct virtual working spaces for the students. Resources: textbook. Specific information obtained through the Campus Extens website. UIB s Library: paper and on-line journals Table 3. Workload of the teaching-learning activities Name Time (h) ECTS % Lectures Seminars Practical problems Periodical test Final test Individual study Work in groups Total Table 4. Learning outcome assessments Methodology Competences Score (%) Short test and questionnaires. Moodle: Questionnaires SC-1;SC-2;SC-3;SC-4; SC-5; SC-6 15 Solution of numerical problems and laboratory cases Moodle: Advanced upload SC-1;SC-2;SC-3;SC-4; SC-5; SC-6; GC-3; GC-4; GC-5 10 Discussions on scientific themes: SC-6; GC-1; GC-4; GC

6 industrial, technological Moodle: Discussion Forums environmental, Short descriptions and reports individually and in groups Moodle: Wikis Discussions on scientific themes and solutions of numerical problems in groups in the classroom Written periodical test Written final test SC-6; GC-1;GC-4;GC-6 SC-3; SC-4; GC-5; GC-6; GC-7 SC-1;SC-2;SC-3;SC-4; SC-5; SC-6; GC-3 SC-1;SC-2;SC-3;SC-4; SC-5; SC-6; GC RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Since the academic year has not yet completed, not all the results given below are final. However, with the exception of the final exam, most of the educational activities planned have been made, so that most of the results produced and the conclusions drawn, be considered final. Figures 1, 2 and 3 show the statistics of the scores obtained by students in three of the activities scheduled for the final results. Figure 1 depicts the number of who have achieved each of the ratings by making short online questionnaires. Questionnaires have an approximate duration of 45 minutes and during run time the student has at its disposal all sorts of reference books and databases. The average score is 5.9 and the maximum of statistic distribution is clearly focused on the six, which is a satisfactory outcome, exceeding the required score for passing. Figure 2 illustrates the same function as in Figure 1, but here we evaluate the success of the students to solve numerical problems and / or laboratory cases. The students have three or four days to solve the exercises and during this time has at its disposal all the scientific documentation they need. Clearly the results are excellent. The average mark is 6.8, although the statistical distribution is quite strange, without a clear maximum value and a clear deviation towards the upper part of the variable. Figure 1. Distribution function of students in front of the score obtained for the learning activity: online short questionnaires in Chemistry II

7 Figure 2. Distribution function of students in front of the score obtained for the learning activity: solve numerical problems or laboratory cases in Chemistry II Finally, Figure 3 shows the results obtained by students in partial written exams. These tests is about 90 minutes long and during this time, the students can not consult any text, and they only can access to very basic information (periodic table of elements, thermodynamic tables, etc.). Clearly, the scores are much worse. 4.0 average score is nearly two points lower than that obtained in the activity of short questionnaires and almost three points lower than the resolution of numerical problems. This result clearly indicates that the level of self-sufficiency achieved by most of the student is poor. This result is indicative of the degree of autonomy and self-sufficiency achieved by the student to solve problems and new situations. The final exams have not yet been carried out, so we can not evaluate which is the final effort by the student to overcome the last element of evaluation and get the final marks. We have estimated what would be the final results, assuming the current average obtained by each student would remain in the final examination, which need not be true. The results are shown in Figure 4. In this figure also are shown the results obtained for the same group of the student in the subject Chemistry I. This figure also shows the results obtained by the same group of students in the course Chemistry I. The average mark obtained by students in Chemistry I (4.3) is slightly lower than estimated by us for the course Chemistry II (5.0) and the distribution function is quite similar for the two subjects at the extremes of variable, i.e. to score very high and very low. Figure 3. Distribution function of students in front of the score obtained for the learning activity: periodical written exams in Chemistry II

8 Figure 4. Distribution function of students in front of the final results obtained in Chemistry I and II. However, it is noted that the results are somewhat different in the central area. Clearly the number of students in the area between 4 and 6, and especially between 5 and 6 is greater in the subject Chemistry II than in Chemistry I. As mentioned above, the teaching methodology used in Chemistry I was completely traditional and not used any tools or online resource. The data seem to suggest that a higher incidence of online educational resources will be beneficial in the educational process of students with average marks. This finding is very interesting from our point of view. Finally, we also provide some data on the use that students make the virtual spaces of the discussion forums and other online collaborative spaces. About 95% of the students attended and participated, with varying enthusiasm, in the seminars and practical problems activities at the classroom, but only 64% participated some time in the forums of opinion and in the development of wikis. 23% of the students made contributions in these activities at least three times and only 3% of students expressed really active, constantly bringing new ideas and suggesting topics for discussion. These numbers are indicative of the scepticism of our students toward virtual collaborative spaces and network technologies. In summary, the teachers who launched the project object of this paper is firmly convinced of the benefits of a flexible learning methodology on purely traditional. However, we are faced with students who are not used to this type of approach in secondary schools. Our new student in the first course, have a very noticeable lack of initiative and are accustomed to be guided and firmly supervised. The students have been taught to solve "a problem" in particular, but not "the problems" and, certainly, they show a clear lack of resources to cope with new situations. The comparative results in Figure 5 suggest a benefit of the methodologies used in this project, especially in the average student. Acknowledgements: We want to thanks Fernando Tur and Joan Perelló, teachers of the subject Chemistry I, their valuable assistance in discussions and comparison of both teaching-learning methodologies. REFERENCES [1] Tuning Chemistry Subject Area Brochure. European Chemistry Thematic Network. [2] D.P. Buckley. In pursuit of the new learning paradigm: Coupling Faculty Transformation and Institutional Change. EDUCAUSE Review. Volume 37. Number pp: [3] C.D. Dziuban, J.L. Hartmand and P.D. Moskal. Blended learning - EDUCASE. Reseach Bulletin. Volume Issue 7. March 30, pp:

9 [4] J. Watson. Blended learning: the convergence of online and face-to-face education. In Promising practices in online learning. NACOL. North America Council for online learning. [5] A. Heinze and C. Procter (2004). Reflections on the use of blended learning education in a changing environment. Univ. of Salford. Salford, Education Development Unit, Available on-line: [6] March, G,E., Mc Fadden, Anna C. y Price, B.J (2003) Blended instruction: adapting conventional instruction for large clases. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration (VI) number IV, winter [7] Campus Extens Project. University of the Balearic Islands. UIB. [8] Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment