CL-1: Learning Through Technology (LT^2): Case Studies: University of St Thomas

Using Modules to Teach General Chemistry

Outcomes

To gather evidence of the effects of modules on student learning in Chem 111 (Fall 1998), Betsy and David used various sources:

UST's end-of-semester "generic" course evaluations;

a special end-of-semester General Chemistry survey;

data gathered as part of two evaluation studies (one by University of Colorado-Boulder, another by University of California-Berkeley) of modular chemistry; and

instructor observations (described below).

In addition, individual exams were modified to correspond with the modules, but final exams for modular Chem 111 remained the same as before.

Here are some of the findings that Betsy drew from the data above:

Final exam scores generally remained the same as "pre-module" courses, even though less content was covered.
It appears that "carry forward" (the transfer of knowledge) to the next class was much improved.
The increasing use of technology in UST classes reinforced to Chem 111 students that "everyone is learning to use technology" and that they need to learn to use it, too.
Using technology to teach was much easier with non-majors than majors, and with first-year students than with upper-division students.
Class participation increased, and absenteeism decreased in comparison with previous years.
Labs that linked to modular sections involved lab instructors (who do not teach the course) to a greater degree than labs not linked to modular sections.
Nearly all lab activities were new, and not all were tested thoroughly in advance. Fall semester labs in particular were not as prepared as instructors would have liked.
Class and lab instructors held a range of opinions about teaching with modules.