On-LineOn-LinePre- & Post-Laboratory Activities Pre- & Post-Laboratory Activities

for General Chemistryfor General Chemistry

Presented by Dianne Meador and William H. Fink, Department of Chemistry,

University of California, Davis, CA, 95616

On-Line ActivitiesOn-Line Activities

Prelab Activities• Theory

– Concepts interactively presented

• Procedures– Shown with Stills &

Videos

• Prelab Quiz– 100% achievement

required

Postlab Exercises• Data

– Verify range

• Calculations– Guide &

Confirm

• Questions– Multiple Choice– Essay

MotivationMotivationImproved educational experience in the Improved educational experience in the

laboratorylaboratory

• Familiarize students with equipment and chemistry.

• Focus students’ attention to the principles underlying the chemistry.

• Modernizing laboratories to increase student appeal.

ObjectivesObjectives

Prelab Activities

• Consistent preparation

• Efficient use of time

• Accountable

Postlab Exercises

• Reinforce educational goals

• Certify achievement of goals

• Scoring student performance

ParticipantsParticipants

Dean’s Office of Letters and Science, Mathematical and Physical Sciences

MediaWorks

Chemistry Department

Show & TellShow & Tell

Site Features

Prelaboratory Presentation

Quizzes

Post-laboratory

11 22

33 44

Trauma reportTrauma report

Technical AspectsEducational Aspects

Technical AspectsTechnical Aspects

Good• Accessing site

– MyUCDavis/Banner

– Flash & Quicktime downloading

– 71% reported no problems

• Using CD– Reducing Response time

off campus

– Low student usage • 66% reported no

problems

Bad• Early teething

problems– System failure to recognize

student

– Quicktime download site change.

– Browser diversity

• Student Familiarity with the technology– Too Little

– Too Much

Educational AspectsEducational Aspects

Student Survey– Yes much– More yes than no– SomewhatSomewhat– More no than yes– Not at all– NA

Survey Question No or Negative Response

Neutral or Positive

Response

Help understand experiment? 26% 74%Give confidence regarding the experimental procedures? 37% 63%

Require less assistance from the TA? 41% 59%Help perform experiment more efficiently? 39% 61%

Help understand safety? 16% 84%As useful as TA’s prelaboratory discussion? 37% 63%

Preference over TA’s prelab discussion? 50% 50%

Educational AspectsEducational AspectsGood• Prelab

– Reported better understanding of

• experiments compared to earlier courses.

• safety issues.

– Good compliance with prelab quizzes

• Postlab– Students who were having

difficulties with calculations were identified and given guidance.

Bad• Prelab

– Equal preference for in-class vs. on-line prelab presentation.

– Minimal improvement of independent lab performance

– Increase course management demands on TAs

• Postlab– Creativity of error by 800 students

kept us busy.

– Initial exercise design led to high student frustration level

FutureFuture

Redesigned the post-laboratory exercises.

– To include more feedback to student

– To increase robustness

– To tighten integration with lab course framework

The EndThe End