This project evaluates several interventions, such as training teaching assistants and POGIL-activities, to improve tutorial attendance among students within a second-year chemistry bachelor’s course. Moreover, this project investigates the impact of student group composition (random vs. self-selected) on student engagement and exam performance.

Background information

This project was carried out in the context of a second-year chemistry bachelor’s course that consists of a portion on inorganic chemistry, and a portion on solid-state chemistry. The tutorials allow students to practice with problem sets and are designed according to Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL), as this approach was favorably received by students in a former SoTL-project. Despite the positive reception, students expressed frustration with the mandatory attendance policy. This project therefore aims to find out how you can promote tutorial attendance without making attendance mandatory. Several interventions were tested: using POGIL class activities, posting class materials until the end of the week, and training the teaching assistants of the tutorials in group facilitation strategies.

What is Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL)?

Activities designed according to POGIL allow students to explore models, develop concepts and extend those concepts to new contexts. Characteristic for POGIL are scaffolded worksheets that students use, and collaboration in randomly assigned groups of students. Click here for the original SoTL-project on the effect of POGIL in a chemistry bachelor’s course.

Aims

This project aims to answer the following research questions:

• Is the tutorial attendance in the inorganic portion of the course higher compared to the solid-state portion of the course, given the interventions implemented in the inorganic tutorials?
  • If so, is this the result of a particular intervention?
• Does working in randomly assigned groups lead to increased behavioral and cognitive engagement, relative to self-selected groups?
  • If so, does this translate into improved exam performance on the inorganic portion of the exams?

Project description

To answer the first research question, tutorial attendance data was collected in both the inorganic and the solid-state tutorials. At the end of the course, student interviews were conducted to see if any of the interventions had a specific impact on attendance, and what factors influenced attendance. To measure student engagement in the inorganic tutorials and thus answer the second research question, data was collected through student self-reports on the Activity Engagement Survey and observation of student groups. Student exam performance was considered to see how group work setup influences exam scores, and how that relates to the levels of (reported and observed) engagement.

Results & Conclusion

While the tutorial attendance was similar for both the inorganic and solid state tutorials during the first tutorial (60% and 67%, respectively), by the end of the period, tutorial attendance remained consistent around 60% for the inorganic section but had dropped to 40% for the solid state section. Student interviews did not give clear insight into which of the factors influenced this attendance trend. In terms of type of group work, we again found that social engagement was higher for self-selected groups, but no clear pattern emerged for emotional, cognitive, or behavioral engagement in relation to type of group work.

References

• Lindsay, E., & Evans, T. (2021). The use of lecture capture in university mathematics education: A systematic review of the research literature. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 34, 911-931.
• Brewer, E. W., & Burgess, D. N. (2005). Professor’s Role in Motivating Students to Attend Class. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 42(3).
• Büchele, S. (2021). Evaluating the link between attendance and performance in higher education: the role of classroom engagement dimensions. AEHE, 46(1), 132-150.
• Naibert, N., & Barbera, J. (2022). Development and evaluation of a survey to measure student engagement at the activity level in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 99, 1410-1419.
• Sinha, S., Rogat, T.K., Adams-Wiggins, K.R., & Hmelo-Silver, C.E. (2015). Collaborative group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 273-307