Chemistry 51-P Data The Benefits of a Preparatory Course Course - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

Aug 28, 2022 408 likes •613 views

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Chemistry 51-P Data The Benefits of a Preparatory Course Course Results Post-Survey Results Susan King 1 Future Work Kameryn Denaro 2 1 Department of Chemistry, UCI 2 Teaching and Learning Research Center,

SLIDE 1

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Chemistry 51-P

The Benefits of a Preparatory Course Susan King 1 Kameryn Denaro 2

1Department of Chemistry, UCI 2Teaching and Learning Research Center, UCI

August 3, 2016

SLIDE 2

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

SLIDE 3

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Data

Chemistry 51A-Fall 2015 1,248 students · 75 students took Chemistry 51P · 1,173 students did not take Chemistry 51P 3 instructors · Section C and D were taught by the same instructor

SLIDE 4

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

SLIDE 5

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Grade in Chemistry 51A

A B C D 1 2 3 4 Section Grade in Chemistry 51A No Yes 1 2 3 4 Chemistry Prep Course in Summer Grade in Chemistry 51A

· The medians are the same across Chemistry 51A sections. · The median is higher for Chemistry 51P students compared to those who did not take Chemistry 51P. · Outliers are denoted with a ◦.

SLIDE 6

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

Chem 51P No Yes A 2.51 2.82 n = 306 n = 29 B 2.39 2.85 Section n = 159 n = 13 C 2.77 2.87 n = 381 n = 19 D 2.76 3.27 n = 327 n = 14

SLIDE 7

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

1 2 3 4

Profile Plot

Section Average Grade Points A B C D Summer Prep No Yes

SLIDE 8

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

1 2 3 4

Section A

Summer Prep Course Average Grade Points No Yes 1 2 3 4

Section B

Summer Prep Course Average Grade Points No Yes 1 2 3 4

Section C

Summer Prep Course Average Grade Points No Yes 1 2 3 4

Section D

Summer Prep Course Average Grade Points No Yes

SLIDE 9

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Linear Mixed Effects Model using REML

Fixed effects: Value Std.Error t-value p-value Intercept 2.6150 0.0906 28.8787 0.0000 Chem 51P 0.3161 0.1167 2.7098 0.0068 Random effects: Section Residual Standard Deviation: 0.1710 0.9766

SLIDE 10

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

SLIDE 11

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Post-Survey Results

36 students took the Post-Survey (48% response rate) · 29 took Chem 1A, Chem 1B, & Chem 1C at UCI · 3 took general chemistry at another college · 3 passed the AP exam in high school and therefore skipped

ver Chem 1A at UCI

· 1 took some general chemistry at another college and some general chemistry at UCI

SLIDE 12

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 9 9 17 Percent 0% 3% 25% 25% 47%

Table : I was able to master the skills taught in this course.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 2 6 13 15 Percent 0% 6% 17% 36% 42%

Table : I was able to figure out how to do the most difficult material in this course.

SLIDE 13

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 5 6 24 Percent 0% 3% 14% 17% 67%

Table : Doing well in this course was important to me.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 1 9 4 21 Percent 3% 3% 25% 11% 58%

Table : Taking this course helped me to feel more confident entering Chem 51A.

SLIDE 14

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 2 2 12 8 12 Percent 6% 6% 33% 22% 33%

Table : Taking this course only helped me to perform better on the first midterm in Chem 51A.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 9 6 20 Percent 3% 0% 25% 17% 56%

Table : I had an easier time with Lewis structures and resonance structures than my classmates who did not take Preparation for Organic Chemistry.

SLIDE 15

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 4 13 3 15 Percent 3% 11% 36% 8% 42%

Table : Taking this course helped me to perform better overall in Chem 51A.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 21 4 7 2 2 Percent 58% 11% 19% 06% 06%

Table : Taking this course had no effect on my performance in Chem 51A.

SLIDE 16

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Post-Survey Results

Table : Student suggestions for improving the Chemistry 51P course

Suggestion Frequency Include more organic chemistry topics 11 Great as is 9 More written practice problems 8 Harder problems 4 Longer class length 2 Online interaction with other students 2 Discussion section 1 Condense online content 1 More feedback on assignments 1 Slower pace 1

SLIDE 17

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

SLIDE 18

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Future Collaborations with the TLRC

· Compare the students who took Chemistry 51P to those who did not based on performance in Chemistry 1A, 1B, and 1C grades · Use Institutional demographic data to build a more complex model · Modify the Chemistry Preparatory Course

SLIDE 19

Chemistry 51-P King & Denaro Data Course Results Post-Survey Results Future Work

Acknowledgements

· National Science Foundation, Grant Number: 1535300, 2015-2020 · Department of Chemistry, UCI · School of Education, UCI · Teaching and Learning Research Center, UCI · Mark Warschauer · Fernando Rodriguez · Lynn Riemer

Chemistry 51-P

The Benefits of a Preparatory Course Susan King 1 Kameryn Denaro 2

August 3, 2016

Table of Contents

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

Data

Chemistry 51A-Fall 2015 1,248 students · 75 students took Chemistry 51P · 1,173 students did not take Chemistry 51P 3 instructors · Section C and D were taught by the same instructor

Table of Contents

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

Grade in Chemistry 51A

· The medians are the same across Chemistry 51A sections. · The median is higher for Chemistry 51P students compared to those who did not take Chemistry 51P. · Outliers are denoted with a ◦.

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

Chem 51P No Yes A 2.51 2.82 n = 306 n = 29 B 2.39 2.85 Section n = 159 n = 13 C 2.77 2.87 n = 381 n = 19 D 2.76 3.27 n = 327 n = 14

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

Chemistry 51A: Average Grade Points

Linear Mixed Effects Model using REML

Fixed effects: Value Std.Error t-value p-value Intercept 2.6150 0.0906 28.8787 0.0000 Chem 51P 0.3161 0.1167 2.7098 0.0068 Random effects: Section Residual Standard Deviation: 0.1710 0.9766

Table of Contents

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

Post-Survey Results

36 students took the Post-Survey (48% response rate) · 29 took Chem 1A, Chem 1B, & Chem 1C at UCI · 3 took general chemistry at another college · 3 passed the AP exam in high school and therefore skipped

· 1 took some general chemistry at another college and some general chemistry at UCI

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 9 9 17 Percent 0% 3% 25% 25% 47%

Table : I was able to master the skills taught in this course.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 2 6 13 15 Percent 0% 6% 17% 36% 42%

Table : I was able to figure out how to do the most difficult material in this course.

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 5 6 24 Percent 0% 3% 14% 17% 67%

Table : Doing well in this course was important to me.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 1 9 4 21 Percent 3% 3% 25% 11% 58%

Table : Taking this course helped me to feel more confident entering Chem 51A.

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 2 2 12 8 12 Percent 6% 6% 33% 22% 33%

Table : Taking this course only helped me to perform better on the first midterm in Chem 51A.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 9 6 20 Percent 3% 0% 25% 17% 56%

Table : I had an easier time with Lewis structures and resonance structures than my classmates who did not take Preparation for Organic Chemistry.

On a scale of 1 - 5, how certain are you of the following? (1 = not at all certain; 5 = very certain)

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 1 4 13 3 15 Percent 3% 11% 36% 8% 42%

Table : Taking this course helped me to perform better overall in Chem 51A.

1 2 3 4 5 Frequency 21 4 7 2 2 Percent 58% 11% 19% 06% 06%

Table : Taking this course had no effect on my performance in Chem 51A.

Post-Survey Results

Table : Student suggestions for improving the Chemistry 51P course

Suggestion Frequency Include more organic chemistry topics 11 Great as is 9 More written practice problems 8 Harder problems 4 Longer class length 2 Online interaction with other students 2 Discussion section 1 Condense online content 1 More feedback on assignments 1 Slower pace 1

Table of Contents

1

Data

2

Course Results

3

Post-Survey Results

4

Future Work

Future Collaborations with the TLRC

· Compare the students who took Chemistry 51P to those who did not based on performance in Chemistry 1A, 1B, and 1C grades · Use Institutional demographic data to build a more complex model · Modify the Chemistry Preparatory Course

Acknowledgements

· National Science Foundation, Grant Number: 1535300, 2015-2020 · Department of Chemistry, UCI · School of Education, UCI · Teaching and Learning Research Center, UCI · Mark Warschauer · Fernando Rodriguez · Lynn Riemer