Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [The University of Manchester Library]On: 08 October 2014, At: 10:24Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Science & Technology LibrariesPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wstl20
Cooperative Learning UsingChemical LiteratureSara J. Penhale a aa Wildman Science Library , Earlham College ,Richmond, IN, 47374, USAPublished online: 20 Oct 2008.
To cite this article: Sara J. Penhale (1998) Cooperative Learning Using ChemicalLiterature, Science & Technology Libraries, 16:3-4, 69-87
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J122v16n03_05
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Cooperative Learning Using Chemical Literature
Sara J. Penhale
SUMMARY. In cooperative learning, studcnts work togcther in small groups to accomplish a common goal. In chemistry courses, this approach has been used primarily to enhance learning in large lecture courses and in the laboratory. This article describes how cooperative learning can be used with course assignments that re- quire students to use the chemical literature. Since both collaboration among scientists and reliance on the literature of their ficld are central to the scientific enterprise, these assignments are one way of fostering behaviors necessary for success in this field. [Arlicle copies available for a f e e j o a ~ TIre Huworlh Doc~mw~f Delivery Service: 1-800-342- 9678. E- mil address: ge/i~fo@hawor/I~.co~~~
INTROD UCTZON
In cooperative learning, students work together in small groups to accomplish a conunon goa1.l Chemistry educators have extended the use of this pedagogical technique far beyond the standard chem- istry laboratory exercise, where for decades students at the same lab bench have labored together over the identification of a set of un- knowns. Now, for example, laboratory groups conduct original re-
Sara J . Penhale is Science Librarian and Assistant Professor of Biology, Wild- man Science Library, Earlham College, Richmond IN 47374 (e-mail: sarap@ earlham.cdu).
[Ilnwonh co- indcx~~~g entry IIO~C]: "Coopeml~ve Lcnnvng Usmg Cllcrnlcnl Litelalu~c." Pcnhnle. Snn I. Co.vuhlished sl~nultancouslv In Scirnce & Rrhl~oloei , 1.1bo1icr Crhe I<nwonll PIPES. IIIC ) Val. - 16, No. 314, 1997, pp. 69-87; and: h c r ~ ~ i c o l Llh~n~,ior~.rhip: C11nllengc.r h d Oppomnirier (kd: ~\rleen N. Somerville) The I.laworL Ptcss, Inc., 1997, pp. 69-87. Single or ~nultiplc copies of this a~licle are avnilablc ror a fee from The Hawollh Docu~nent Delive~y Servicc [I-800-342-9678. 9:MI a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address: getin~oQhnwonl~.w~~~].
O 1997 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 69
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
70 Chemical Librariansl~ip: Challetzges and Opporfunilies
search in synthetic chemi~try;~ students seated near each other in a general chemistry lecture hall discuss questions posed by the lectur- er and respond as a unit;3 and study groups turn in homework assignments together and take quizzes as a group.4 Cooperative learning has become a well-defined technique that has proven to be effective in enhancing student performance, enriching students' in- teractive skills, and improving students' attitudes toward learninge5 It also appears to be particularly effective in enhancing the perfor- mance of female students6
Chemistry educators have a long-standing tradition of introduc- ing their students to the use of chemical literature. This has been documented from as early as the 1930s when students were admon- ished to use the library rather than waste valuable time and re- sources experimentally determining something that was already known.7 Now specificassignments requiring studentsto use chemi- cal literature are integrated into undergraduate c l a ~ s e s ; ~ indeed, entire courses may be based on primary literature rather than text- b o o k ~ . ~ Separate chemical information courses familiarize students with a broad range of 1iterature.l0 And as electronic forms of in- formation have become more prevalent, entire courses have been developed for teaching online searching" or online lessons have been integrated into courses at all levels in the chemistry curricu- lum. I
It is possible to create assignments that combine both cooperative leaming and the use of the literature. This approach has the advan- tage of having students emulate the activities of scientists. Introduc- ing students to such behaviors+collaboration on research projects, reliance on scientific literature, and communication with peers-has been advocated as a pedagogical approach that can enhance student interest and excitement in science. Teaching science in the spirit of science works.13
We have found this to be a successful educational approach at Earlham College. In this article, I present examples of cooperative learning exercises from chemistry courses at the college and then describe how students were taught to access the chemical literature they would need for their work. An overview of critical elements of cooperative learning follows.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale
COOPERQTIVE LEARNING USING CHEMICAL LITERATURE
AT EARLHAM COLLEGE
At Earlham. a small liberal arts college. there is a well estab- lished tradition of incorporating bibliographic instruction into courses throuehout the cur r i c~ lum. '~ Chemistrv facultv make ex- - tensive use of chemical literature-based assignments in their teach- ing. In each case, the faculty member and the librarian collaborate in designing the assignments and the bibliographic instruction that the students will need to successfully complete their work.
I will focus on three courses that have a cooperative learning assignment. In two of these coursesOrganic Chemistry I, taught by Dr Jan M. Fleicher and Dr. Thomas Ruttledge, and Biochemistry, taught by Dr. Ruttledge-student groups prepare reports based on a literature survey of a particular topic. While such reports have tradi- tionally taken the form of a term paper, these chemistry students present posters summarizing their findings-an innovative approach used in a number of science courses at ~ a r 1 h a m . l ~ In the last courseOrganic Chemistry 11, taught by Dr. Rut t ledg~tudents de- sign their own laboratory research projects using methodology gleaned from the chemical literature.
Organic Chemistry I Poster Preseritation
Organic Chemistry I is a beginning level chemistry course with an enrollment of about 80. It fulfills a general education require- ment for non-majors and serves as the introduction to the depart- ment's organic sequence for those students who will continue the study of chemistry. In this course, students form groups of two to four individuals and prepare posters to be displayed during a class session. Because the professors want this assignment to have the broadest appeal possible, the subject of each group's poster can be any topic related to chemistry of personal interest to the group. The professors provide a list of examples of chemistry topics reported in the popular press, but students are allowed to choose whatever subject they like. They pick such topics as asbestos, alcohol and its effect of the body, and the Ebola virus.
For this assignment, each group prepares a visually appealing
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
72 Cl~en~ical Librarianship: Clrallet~ges arid Opportunities
poster that communicates critical information about that topic. An individual should be able to walk away from that poster after a five minute viewing knowing something of interest and relevance about that subject. Students use a minimum of 3-4 articles from non-tech- nical scientific journals such as Science News or Scientific Anzeri- can, or articles from popular periodicals such as Newsweek or the New York fitnes. Guidelines for how to prepare an effective poster are given to the students (see Appendix A.)
A one-hour class session is used for the poster presentation. Everything is set-up prior to the beginning of the period. During the class session, students stand by their posters as the professors come by for a review of their work. Students elaborate on the content of their posters or respond to specific questions posed by the profes- sors. During the rest of the period, students circulate around the display area viewing the work of others in the class, preparing to answer one or two exam questions that will be on the content of the posters. Ultimately one question is asked: "Choose any poster other than your own and explain what you learned about the topic."
The poster project is worth 100 points out of the course total of 800 points; it is the equivalent of one course exam. The project grade is based on the poster's visual appeal and information con- tent, plus how well the group as a whole responded to questions during the poster session. All group members receive the same grade.
Biochenristry Poster Presentation
Biochemistry is a junior-senior level course taken by 15-20 chemistry majors or minors. The overall structure of the poster assignment is similar to the one described above, although the topic and type of sources used is different. In this case, the students prepare a poster on any drug (medical or illicit) of interest to them, using primary scientific literature to explain the mode of action of the drug. When these posters are displayed, several other profes- sors from the Chemistry and Biology Departments are invited to attend and question the students. There are two exam questions relating to the poster session. Each question identifies a specific poster and requires the student to explain the mode of action of the drug.
The poster project is graded slightly differently than in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale 73
introductory level course. Students turn in written comments about each poster's quality and the ability of the group members to elabo- rate on the content of their poster (see Appendix B). The faculty member takes this feedback into account when assigning a grade to the project. In addition, students are asked to evaluate the work of others in their group (see Appendix C). If someone appears not to have been carrying his or her own weight in the project, that indi- vidual's grade will be lower than that of other group members.
Organic Citeinistry ZZ Self-Designed Laboratory Projects
Organic Chemistry I1 is a laboratory'course taken mostly by chemistry majors and minors. Students work in self-selected groups of two to four. They complete four to five "canned" exercises which primarily serve the purpose of introducing them to the use of variety of laboratory instruments. Concurrently, the student groups work on four self-designed projects that require them either to synthesize a particular compound or to isolate a particular sub- stance. For example, one of these self-designed projects is to isolate caffeine from at least three brands of a type of comrnerical product, such soft drinks or caffeine stimulant pills, and to compare their caffeine contents. Another is to synthesize DEET (diethyltolua- mide, an insect repellent). Students can receive extra credit if they cany out a study demonstrating the effectiveness of the DEET they made. No directions are provided for how to cany out these proj- ects; thus, students must search the chemical literature for the syn- thetic or analytical methods they will use.
Performance in the course is evaluated on the basis of written reports for the "canned" exercises and self-designed projects and on class participation. All group members are given the same point grade for the write-ups. The maximum grade on the write-ups as a whole is 300 points. There is a maximum of 200 points for individ- ual laboratory participation. This latter grade is based on two sources of feedback: the professor's observation of each student's attendance and involvement level in the laboratory, plus written evaluations that each student makes of hislher own participation plus that of the other group members (see Appendix C). Thus, if someone is reported by hislher peers not to have carried hislher
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
74 CI~emical Librarianship: Challe~~ges and Opporlra~ilies
weight in the group laboratory projects, the participation grade of that individual will be lower than other group members.
USING COOPERATIVE LEARNING TECHNIQUES TO TEACH STUDENTS HOW TO ACCESS
THE CHEMICAL LITERATURE
In each of the courses just described, students are taught how to find the literature needed for their assignments in a bibliographic instruction session taught by the librarian, the professor, and the undergraduate teaching assistants. The instruction takes place dur- ing a regularly scheduled laboratory after groups have formed and topics have been selected. In this way, as students are learning techniques of finding literature, they are beginning the library work for their project. This has proven to be a highly efficient approach for a number of reasons. First, an entire laboratory section of stu- dents can be taught at one time; second, students utilize their newly acquired search skills before they forget them and find it necessary to ask the librarian to repeat the lesson; and finally, beginning to work during class time puts students within reach of help during the initial stages of research when roadblocks frequently occur.
In the introductory level organic chemistry course taken by non- majors, students are expected to use non-technical sources. An excellent database for this purpose is General Science Index since it indexes general science periodicals, such as Science News and Scientijic American, in addition to a limited number of core journals from each scientific discipline. Minimal instruction is needed for students to learn how to use the CD-ROM version of this index because of its user friendly interface. Students only need to learn Boolean operators and the truncation symbol.
In the other two courses, however, students need to use technical scientific literature to complete their assignments. These students are introduced to secondary sources, such as Fieser and Fieserk Reagents for Otganic Synthesis16 or Organic Syntheses. l 7 In addi- tion, they learn to locate primary journal articles by searching CA Search and Medline through DIALOG, Knight Ridder Information, Inc. We use DIALOG'S Classroom Instruction Program (CTP), a service designed for teaching students how to do their own online
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Petlhale 75
searching that provides access to a wide range of databases for a substantially reduced rate.
Online training occurs in a computer lab equipped with 20 temi- nals; more than enough for all the groups in a laboratory section. Students sit in their groups in front of computer terminals and each group searches together. The librarian begins by describing the databases to be searched, basic online search commands, and prin- ciples of developing a search strategy. After the class works through a sample search simultaneously, groups begin searching for in- formation on their own topics. The librarian, professor and student teaching assistants circulate around the room, answering questions, viewing search results, offering advice, and trouble shooting as needed. In approximately sixty minutes of online search time, groups collect most of the citations that they need. Groups can search again at another time, if necessary.
Teaching online searching to groups in a laboratory setting al- lows for a good deal of cooperative learning within each group. This was demonstrated in two research studies conducted in science classes at Earlham College. In one of these, students in an introduc- tory chemistry course for nonscience majors used DIALOG to search newspapers and newswire databases for stories on air pollu- tion, global warming, and energy-related topics.18 In the other, biology majors used a number of scientific databases on DIALOG to find primary research literature explaining the cellular basis of particular diseases.lg In each course, students were asked to whom they turned for assistance with the following aspects of online searching: using DIALOG commands, selecting and combining search terms, evaluating the relevancy of retrieved items, refining the search strategy, and understanding the content of the retrieved online text. More students relied on their classmates than on either thc faculty member of the librarian for everything except DIALOG commands and the use of search terms.
There are other merits in having students work in pairs or groups at a terminal. It is one way of co ing with problems, such as: limited numbers of computer terminals2E and monetary constraints."
In summarizing the Earlham experience, cooperative learning has become an effective approach for teaching students how to access the chemical literature. Students are using this literature to complete projects such as poster presentation and self-designed
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
76 Chentical Librarianship: Challenges and Opporttmilies
laboratory work. These projects are completed collaboratively by small groups of students. Thus, the success of these course assign- ments as pedagogical exercises derive from the benefits of both cooperative learning and student use of scientific literature.
FACTORS TO CONSIDER WHEN DEVELOPING COOPERATIVE LEARNING EXERCISES
Advocates of cooperative learning point out a number of factors critical to its successhl implementation:22
I . Group Size and Coarpositiort
Educators recommend two to six as the limits to group size in cooperative learning. At Earlham College, three to four seemed to be the optimum number: enough to generate ideas and share the work yet not so many that it became easy for a group member to "hitchhike" on the work of the others.
In teaching online searching, we have found that pairing students in the training sessions has significant advantages over students working alonc-cven in courses where the final project is done on an individual basis. The maximum number of students who can work at a terminal depends in part on the physical layout of the computer facility. Three or four seems to be the upper limit to the number of students who can crowd in front of a computer terminal and all still see it.
Group composition is a somewhat more complicated issue. Most experts recommend that faculty assign students to groups in order to assure heterogeneity with respect to sex, ethnicity, and ability. In particular, it is advisable to prevent the formation of homogeneous groups composed entirely of weaker students.
Yet at a small institution like Earlham College, students typically know each other and want to form their own groups. Furthermore, students generally are more comfortable at the outset with groups they have selected, hence work begins in earnest more quickly. In the experience of our faculty members, letting students sort them- selves out did not necessarily lead to homogeneous groupings. This didn't happen in the introductory level chemistry course, for instance, perhaps because students picked groups early in the se-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale 77
mester before they were able to assess the potential ability of others in the class. Even in the advanced classes where students knew each other from past experience, it was not always the case that students self-selected in a manner that left the weaker students to fend for themselves. Further, faculty found that performance on a coopera- tive learning exercise could not be predicted solely on the basis of the academic strength of the individuals in the group. In some cases, apparently "weaker groups" performed as well or better than "stronger groups. "
Weaker students and weaker groups are both served well when online searching instruction is provided in a group setting. When students are seated together in front of a computer, those who quickly grasp how to search serve as peer teachers to their slower group members. Furthermore, if a group as a whole is having diffi- culty, both the librarian and chemist are present to assist with either the mechanics of searching or the chemical subject matter.
2. Group Dyrrantics
Group dynamics is another feature that is central in the minds of experts in cooperative learning. While faculty might assume that students have the requisitive interactive skills to carry out a group task, students may not have experience in applying these skills in a classroom learning situation and they may need guidance in meth- ods of working effectively together. A number of approaches can be used. In group discussions, for instance, it may help to assign roles for a group leader, a recorder, and a gatekeeper whose function is to assure that all group members find it possible to join the dialogue.23 In lab groups, someone may be designated the project director with the duty of overseeing the development and implementation of the project plan.24
Earlham faculty have been learning about student group dynam- ics through experience. Initially, faculty had minimal involvement in orchestrating how well the groups did-or didn't-function togeth- er. They found that, even when left to chance, groups may work well together. On the other hand, in some courses a few groups faltered or self-destructed. The faculty noted that when problems arose, group members found it very hard to confront each other directly, and they were reluctant to approach the faculty member for
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
78 Chemical Librariatiship: Challenges atld Opportut~ifies
advice. Consequently, the faculty developed the group evaluation form now in use through which group members evaluate the con- tributions of each other and of themselves to the group's work (see Appendix C). This form is distributed at the beginning of coopera- tive projects, alerting students to the fact that it matters to the faculty member how they interact within their groups. It may prompt the students to seek faculty intervention if necessary and at least provides a mechanism for taking into account the level of responsibility shown by individual members.
3. Positive Interdependence
Cooperative learning exercises should be designed to require positive interdependence: group members should need each other to complete the communal work. Furthermore, students should be responsibile for the learning of the others in the group. In other words, they should perceive that they "sink or swim togethern25 and thus be motivated to work together. For instance, in a laboratory section being conducted in a cooperative learning format, each lab group was collectively given a "pretest" covering typical mistakes and misconceptions relating to the experiment at hand. All group members had to achieve competency before the group's lab work could begin.26
In the Earlham examples, positive interdependence was fostered by the overall magnitude of the assignments-and the array of skills needed for their successhl comoletion. Both the oosters and the laboratory projects relied on conceptual and analytical abilities, as well as the manual skills needed to physically make the poster or carry out the experimental work in the lab.
Even learning how to do online searching involves a number of components that can be mastered well by a group. Among these are typing, catching on to DIALOG commands, conceptualizing search terms and how to combine them, and judging the relevancy of the items retrieved. Students learning to online search together routine- ly call out to their group members when one of them makes a typographical error or fails to use a command properly. And as a group they can discuss whether or not their search strategy is re- trieving the sort of items they need.
Earlham chemistry professors also relied on their grading scheme
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penkale 79
to communicate the "sink or swim together" nature of the coopera- tive work. Group members all received the same grade for the overall project, although an additional grade was sometimes given to reflect the work of the individual.
4. I~rdividual Accountability
Students working cooperatively should still be held accountable for their own individual learning on the project and in the course. This is for their own educational benefit, but also to reduce the temptation to sit back and let other group members do all the work. A number of mechanisms have been used to ensure this. For instance, if group members are expected to report to the class the results of a discussion or experiment they have just completed, a faculty member may randomly select which group member will make the presentation.27 Earlham faculty used this approach during the poster presentations by asking questions of each student.
Admittedly, assigning group library work runs the risk of having a group divide up the task such that not everyone is involved in finding the literature and reading it. The only mechanism in place in the Earlham examples is that the faculty and librarian observe group behavior during the online session when students are learning to search and locate their literature. Our presence encourages students to all be engaged in the activity, and if someone appears not to be attentive, he or she can be asked to take a turn typing, which of necessity increases their involvement at least at that level.
Grading schemes can also be used to highlight the necessity for individual accomplishment and individual contribution to group effort. In grading cooperative projects, Earlham faculty give an individual grade, in addition to the group grade. The individual grade was based on peer evaluation by group members as well as faculty observations (see Appendix C). Some educators recom- mend, in fact, that only a small percentage of a student's overall grade depend on the cooperative learning aspect of the course.2* They feel this is necessary to ensure individual accountability. This might run the risk, however, of undermining the importance of the collaborative work.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
80 Cheaical Librarianship: Challenges and Opportunities
5. Emphasis on Leartting Rather Thati Completion of a Task
This last element might well be listed first since no amount of attention to orchestrating group work will matter if the students see the cooperative effort as just a task or busy work rather than as a challenging exercise that leads to real learning. Bibliographic instruction librarians know this full well. Students typically don't like learning how to use the library for its own sake; they are motivated to use the literature when it is needed to fulfill their professor's demands. Scheduling the bibliographic instruction ses- sion for the course should take this into account. Groups should form and they should have decided on their topics before coming to the online search session.
In the Earlham chemistry courses, the professors feel the most effective way to create an assignment which encourages learning over task completion is to give the students a good deal of choice in what they do. The introductory poster project left the topic selection open to the field of chemistry as a whole, the advanced level course allowed students to pick any drug they wished, and the laboratory project allowed them to design their own approach to reach the goal set by the instructor. In all cases, faculty felt choice was a critical element in the success of the assignment.
EARLHAM FACULTY REFLECT ON COOPERATIVE LEARNING EXERCISES
USING CHEMICAL LITERATURE
Earlham chemistry faculty feel that having students learn to ac- cess and then use published literature is a successful exercise for a number of reasons. First, students acquire skills in accessing litera- ture that will be of use to them in their personal lives or in advanced work. Second, they gain experience in trying to communicate in- formation to others. Using the poster as the medium for expression of what they learned proved to have a number of advantages. For students in the introductory class, the assignment was felt to be less intimidating than writing a paper, even though in the professors' opinions it is a much more difficult task to explain material in such a succinct fashion. For the advanced chemistry majors, the exercise exposes them to a means of communication that has become in-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhole 81
creasingly common at professional conferences, particularly for undergraduate participation in these events. In addition, for both groups, questioning students during the poster session required the students to exercise oral skills as well, but in a format much less intimidating than a formal oral presentation would have been.
Finally, students' overall engagement with the course subject matter is stimulated by the opportunity to direct their own learning by picking topics of personal interest to them. This is particularly true in the laboratory where students often perceive "canned" labs to be boring tasks to be accomplished rather than as something to learn. In fact, the faculty member was prompted to add a self-de- signed component to the laboratory when challenged by students who questioned, "Why don't you ever let us do something in lab that we want to do?" Earlham faculty have found that when stu- dents are allowed to exercise control over what they are learning and how they are learning, their performance often exceeds the professor's expectations. For instance, students opting to demon- strate the effectiveness of the DEET they synthesized spent several days developing a research design, and then perfecting the design through repeated trial and error.
The students had an ever greater level of control over the subject matter of the poster projects. For instance, in the introductory level course, the professors decided the most important outcome of the assignment was to have the students experience the empowerment that results from using the literature to find out about something of personal interest. Thus, even when a group's topic strayed from a strictly chemical topic, they were allowed to pursue it. In the Bio- chemistry class poster project, allowing the students to select any drug they wished resulted in most groups selecting a medication that one of them or a family member was taking.
Having students work cooperatively is an essential element of these assignments. First, from a practical standpoint, there are a number of factors which make these assignments feasible on& as group projects. The high enrollment in the introductory organic course-about 80 students-makes it impractical for the faculty to grade individual poster projects. In addition, the magnitude of work involved in preparing a poster-including research, writing, and physical production-is too much for one individual. In the laborato- ry course, cost of materials dictates that students work in groups.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
82 Chet~lical Librarianship: Challe~lges a~rd Opporlunilies
But more significantly, the faculty find that student learning is enhanced when they work cooperatively in groups. These assign- ments call for a diversity of skills that are not equally developed in all individuals. Thus, a student who is good at reading the literature and designing a laboratory experiment may have very poor skills in the laboratory itself. At the online search terminal, one student may be better than another at developing an effective search strategy. In situations like these, the faculty observe that students who are stron- ger at a particular task help the less capable ones learn the task. Grouping students also lessens the overall disparity in the perfor- mance of class members. Weaker students are helped by stronger ones. Giving these students a lift improves their morale and their confidence to proceed in the study of 'chemistry. Even the stronger students benefit from giving assistance to others-teaching is a good way to learn.
HOW WIDELY APPLICABLE ARE ASSIGNMENTS WHICH INCORPORATE BOTH COOPERATIVE LEARNING
AND THE USE OF THE CHEMICAL LZTEZUTURE?
Are these examples from Earlham College so peculiar to this one institution that they have limited applicability? A review of the litera- ture reveals that such activities are underway at a number of institu- tions, usually in the form of laboratory projects designed by groups of students after they have searched the chemical literature. Students in the Integrated InorganicIOrganic Laboratory course at James Mad- ison University worked in small groups to develop and implement a synthesis for a compound of relevance to the ongoing research of chemistry faculty members.29 At the University de la Republica in Uruguay, students in an analytical chemistry were asked to optimize an analytical method commonly used in industry.30
Despite these examples, it is also easy to find many instances of missed opportunities of combining cooperative learning with work in the library. Students engaged in cooperative learning exercises are not asked to find and use the chemical literature even though it might be possible to incorporate this into the assignment. On the other hand, there are assignments requiring the use of the chemical literature where all work is done on an individual basis. And most online searching is taught to individuals rather than pairs or groups.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale 83
The merits of cooperative learning and of introducing students to the chemical literature argue for the development of assignments that include both. Chemistry students become more engaged, they learn more effectively, and they emulate the activities of the profes- sionals in the discipline.
AUTHOR NOTE
Sara J. Penhale, Earlham graduate, received an MS in Zoology from Miami University and an MLS from Indiana University.
REFERENCES
I . Tim Kerns, "Should We Use Cooperative Learning in College Chemistry? Examining the History of a Common Pedagogical Tcchniquc," Jorrrnal of Col- lege Science Teaching 25 (1996): 435-438.
2. Donna S. Amenta and John A. Mosbo, "Attracting the New Gcneration of Chemistry Majors to Synthetics Chemistry Without Using Pheromones," Jotrn~al of Chemical Education 71 (1994): 661-664.
3. Thomas A. Holme, "Using the Socratic Method in Large Lecture Courses. Increasing Student Interest and Involvement by Forming lnstantancous Groups," Jo~rrnal of Chemical Educalion 69 (1992): 974-977.
4. R. C. Dougherty. C. W. Bowen, T. Berger, W. Rees, E. K. Mellon, and E. Pulliam, "Cooperative Learning and Enhanced Communication. Effects of Stu- dent Performance, Retention, and Attitudes in General Chemistry," Jotrmal of Chemical Education 72 (1 995): 793-797.
5. M. W. Caprio, "Coopcrativc Learning-the Jewel Among Motivation- Teaching Techniques: Forming Positive Associations and Attitudes About Sci- ence to Motivate Student lntcrcst and Improve Lcarning," Joiirttal of College Sci- ence Teaching 22 (I 993): 279-28 I.
6. Melanie M. Cooper, "Cooperative Chemistry Laboratories," Jorrrnal of Chetnical Education 71 (1994): 307.
7. Kenneth A. Kobe, "Class Exercises in the Industrial Chemistry Course. I. Topic Reports on Literature Survey," Journal ofChemica1 Gdrrcalion 10 (1933): 679-68 1.
8. H. Beall, "Litcrature Reading and Out-of-Class Essay Writmg in Gencral Chemistry," Journal of Chemical Education 70 (1993): 10-1 I ; James H. Burness, "A General Chemistry Final Exam Bascd on the Chemical Literature," Journalof Chemical Education 73 (1996): 1120-1 122.
9. Larry G. French, "Teaching Organic Synthesis. An Advanced Organic Chemistry Course thnt Uses the Primary Literature," Jorrrnalo/Chetnical Educa- tion 69 (1992): 287-289; Lewis E. Fikes, "Advanced Organic Chemistry: Learn-
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
84 Chenlical Librarianship: Challenges and Opportunities
ing from thc Primary Literature," Journal of Chemical Education 66 (1989): 920-92 1.
10. Fred J. Matthews, "Chemical Literature. A Course Cornposcd of Tradi- tional and Online Searching Techniques," Journal of Chemical Education in press; George Gorin, "An Approach to Teaching Chemical Information Retriev- al," Journal of Chentical Education 59 (1982): 991- 994; Gary Wiggins, "The Indiana University Chemical lnformation Center Program of Chemical Literature Instruction," Journal of Chentical Education 994 (1982): 994-997.
11. Henry 1. Abrash, "A Course in Chemical lnformation Retrieval," Journal of Chemicul Educalion 69 (1992): 142-146; Patricia A. Thomson, JefFrey J. Jen- kins, and Donald R. Buhler, "Teaching Online Data Systems to Graduate Students of Toxicology," Journal of Chemical Education 72 (1995): 324-326.
12. Howard M. Dess, M. Kesselman, and G. M. Muha, "lntroducing On-Line Searching of Chemical Abstracts in the Undergraduate Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education 67 (1990): 946-947; Ron C. Cooke, "Undergraduate Online Chemistry Literature Scarching," Journal of Chemical Education 71 (1994): 867-871; Sara J. Penhale and Wilmer J. Stratton, "Online Searching Assignments in a Chemistry Course for Nonscience Majors," Journal of Chemical Educarion 71 (1994): 227-229.
13. L. B. Jenkins and W. B. MacDonald, "Science Teaching in the Spirit of Science," Issues in Science and Technology 5 (1989): 60-65.
14. Larry Hardesty, Jamie Hastreiter, and David Henderson (eds.), Biblio- graphic Instrrrction in Practice: A Vibrrte to the Legacy of Evan Ira Farber. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The Pierian Press. 1993.
15. Evan Farber and Sara Penhale, "Using Poster Session in Introductory Sci- ence Courses: An Example at Earlham," Research Straregies 13 (1995): 55-59; Amy Mulnix and Sara Penhale, "Modeling thc Activities of Scientists: A Litera- ture Review and Poster Presentation Assignment," American Biology Teacher in press.
16. Fieser and Fieserk Reagents for O~ganic Synthesis. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1967-prcscnt. Seventeen volumes in this series have been pub- lished to date; Fieser and Fieserk Reagents for Organic Synthesi: Collective 111- dex for Volumes 1-12, New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1990.
17. O~ganic S)~nrheses. Ncw York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1921-present. This is an annual compilation of tested synthetic methods; Organic Synllieses Collec- tive Volumes. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1932-present. Every ten years, a Collective Volume provides revisions for the previously published annual vol- umes. Eight have been published to date; O r p i c Syntl~eses Collective Volumes I-VIII Cumulative Indices. New York: John Wilcy & Sons, Inc. 1995. This vol- ume revises the indices of the presently published Collecfive Volrrnres.
18. Penhale et al., "Online Searching," 229. 19. Mulnix et al., "Modeling Scientists." 20. Dess et al., "Introducing On-Line Searching," 946. 21. Thomson et al., "Teaching Online," 324.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale 85
22. Jim Cooper and Randall Mueck, "Student Involvement in Learning: Coop- erative Learning and College Instruction," .Jotrrnal on Excellence in College Teaching 1 (1990): 68-75; Melanie M. Cooper, "Cooperative Learning: An Ap- pfoach for Largc Enrollment Courses," Journal of Chemical Education 72 (1995): 162-164; Caprio, "Cooperative Leaming," 279.
23. James P. Birk and Martha J. Kurtz, "Using Cooperative Learning Tech- niques to Train New Teaching Assistants," Journal of Chemical Education 73 (1996): 615-616.
24. Theresa C. Varco-Shea, Jeanne Darlington, and Marilyn Turnbull, "Group Project Format in First-Semester General Chem Lab," Jorrrnal of Chentical Education 73 (1996): 536-538.
25. Cooper, "Cooperative Learning," 163. 26. Frascr F. Fleming, "No Small Change: Simultaneously Introducing Coop-
erative Leaming and Miscroscale Experimenst in an Organic Lab Course," Jo~rr- r i d of Cher~~ical Education 72 (1995): 719-720.
27. Michael R. Ross and Robert B. Fulton, "Active Learning Strategies in the Analytical Chemistry Classoom," Journal of Chemical Education 71 (1994): 141-143; Janet S. Anderson, david M. Hayes, and T. C. Werner, "The Chemical Bond Studied by 1R Spectroscopy in Introductory Chemistry: An Exercise in Cooperative Learning," Joun~al of Chemical Educafiorl72 (1995): 653-655.
28. Cooper, "Cooperative Chemistry Laboratories," 307; Cooper and Mueck, "Student Involvement," 69.
29. Amenta et al., "Attracting New Generation," 66. 30. Victor Demczylo, Jorge Martinez, Arlette Rivero, Eleonara Scoseria, and
Jose' Luis Serra, "Research Projects for Undergraduatc Students: A More Re- warding Approach to Analytical Chemistry Courses," Jounial of Chentical Education 67 (1 990): 948-950.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
86 Chetnical Librarianship: Challenges and Opporlunilies
APPENDIX A: POSTER PROJECT GUIDELINES
You are being asked to create and produce a scientific poster that communicates information to the viewer. Since this is a visual medium, there are a few things you will want to notc at thc outset that may hclp with the organization of the poster:
1. The poster size should be manageable, some recommend a 3' x 5' maximum. We do not specify a maximum size, but remember that a large poster can be intimidating.
2. The poster should have text/figures big enough to be read by the aver- age person at a distance of 3-4'. The title should be larger than this-easily seen at 6'. A catchy phrase below the title to grab people's attention (it must directly relate to the poster!) is sometimes helpful.
3. Many pcoplc usc colors, arrows or numbers to signify the direction of flow in the poster. This is very important as some posters are read top to bottom, others are read left to right, etc. Bc creativc in this category, it can really add to the visual appeal of the poster.
4. Use color logically in your poster. For instance, use it to accentuate important points, group data together, show the flow of information, etc.
5. Do NOT use full 8I/z1' x I I " pages of written text on the poster. People will not stay to read pages and pages of text. Break up the text or commu- nicate ideas with figures rather than text. This helps make the poster more appealing to the passersby so that they are more likely to stop and talk.
6. When you have complcx graphs, such as lnultiple plots on the samc axcs, use color to distinguish data. This works better than tiny figures with symbols attached to each plot.
7. Make sure the complete story is told where possible and include addi- tional references for those who are intcrcstcd.
8. Be creative and have fun! This is a chance to express yourself and the data in a way that will draw maximal, yet effective attention. But do not substitute style for substance - you can have both!
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
Sara J. Penhale 87
APPENDIX B: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING POSTERS
We ask that you keep these points in mind when viewing other posters:
1. Was the information there? 2. Was it decipherable and easy to follow? 3. Most importantly, did you learn from the poster? 4. What could have made it better in your opinion?
APPENDIX C: GROUP EVALUTION
Your name: Other group members:
1. Please describe the strengths of your group as a whole. 2. Please describe the weaknesses of your group as a whole. 3. Please offer your opinion of each other individual in your group in
terms of his or her level of involvement, the quality of that involve- ment, and participation in planning, executing, and writing up the experiments.
4. Please evaluate yourself according to the criteria listed in number three above.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
The
Uni
vers
ity o
f M
anch
este
r L
ibra
ry]
at 1
0:24
08
Oct
ober
201
4
