After a decline which reached crisis point in the middle of the last decade, chemistry student numbers at UK universities have been growing consistently in recent years (1). The resurgence in interest in the discipline has been encouraged by a series of government-funded interventions to support ‘Strategically Important and Vulnerable Subjects’, which included the Royal Society of Chemistry’s (RSC) ‘Chemistry for our Future’ (CFOF) program (2) and the National HE STEM programme (3). The CFOF programme disbursed around $8M to UK universities between 2006 and 2009, part of which was used to support outreach activities designed to enthuse a new generation of youngsters about chemistry with the aim of encouraging wider uptake of related degree level courses (4).
Most of the remaining money was used to support curriculum development, primarily at university level.
56
Publication Date (Web): December 1, 2016 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch004
One significant strand of activity under CFOF was the appointment of a number of School Teacher Fellows, based on a model pioneered at the University of Bristol where a highly experienced secondary school teacher had been appointed to such a position to develop an outreach programme and build links between the university and local schools (5). It should be noted that in the UK, secondary schools typically serve students aged 11-18 (i.e. Years 7-13), although some regions differ in having 11-16 secondary schools and separate ‘Sixth Form Colleges’ to serve students aged 16-18. During the period 2007-2013, a total of 12 School Teacher Fellows were recruited by the RSC from secondary schools and placed in local university chemistry departments where they undertook a range of different projects based on local needs (6). The corresponding author of this chapter was also recruited to an equivalent post, funded through a separate strand of CFOF activity based on higher education curriculum development, with a particular focus on the school-to-university transition. Bearing in mind that there were fewer than 40 university chemistry departments across the country at this time, this significant cohort of School Teacher Fellows was able to have a broad impact in the sector (6). One of the main objectives set for these individuals was to help university staff to better understand the capabilities of incoming students based on their prior experiences at school level, and to tailor the delivery of university courses accordingly (7). In order to understand the value of utilizing school teachers in this way, it is important to briefly consider the nature of the education experienced by UK students during their time at secondary school.
The Impact of Testing and School Accountability on Student Preparedness for University Study
In the UK there is a National Curriculum (8), which is essentially a set of subjects and standards used by schools to ensure that children learn the same things, with some flexibility in subject selection at age 13/14. The National Curriculum covers schooling up to age 16, when the overwhelming majority of students sit GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) examinations in core compulsory subjects and any permitted options. After this, youngsters may elect to continue an academic education for a further two years, which typically involves the study of three or four subjects at A-level (Advanced level). There are numerous other educational options open to students at 16, but these will not be considered here since most students who progress to university to study chemistry come through the A-level route. Although there are several different A-level chemistry specifications available for teachers to select from, these differ little in terms of content (9) and as a result students arriving at university to study chemistry will have very similar subject backgrounds.
Another factor which acts to homogenize the pre-university experiences of UK students is the examination system, which sees youngsters assessed against national standards at periodic intervals between the ages of 7 and 16. Pupil performance data underpins school performance tables (rankings of schools, often referred to as ‘league tables’) which are published by the government (10) for scrutiny by members of the public, and draw attention from local and national media. Schools are also subject to regular inspections by OFSTED (Office for
57
Publication Date (Web): December 1, 2016 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch004
Standards in Education, Childrens’ Services and Skills), a government body responsible for ensuring a high standard of provision in state maintained schools along with other childcare services (11). The percentages of students achieving high grades in examinations are used by OFSTED inspectors in determining the effectiveness of a school and in judging its standing relative to other institutions.
Since schools are accountable for the performance of their students in such a quantitative fashion, there is great pressure on teachers to ensure that examination outcomes are maximized. The importance of high grades in determining the future success of an individual is also a driver for parental pressure and the student behaviours it underpins, pushing teachers to excessively focus lessons towards exam preparation. According to a recent study by Dorling, the UK, along with the US, leads the world in such “teaching to the test (12,13),” with detrimental long-term impacts on learning and capability.
Considering all of the above, it should be no surprise that many UK students arrive at university with a strong focus on grades and the importance of examination performance. As Dorling suggests (13), such an attitude is grounded in a rote-learning mentality and it is clear that this is not conducive to the long-term, meaningful learning required to master a complex discipline like chemistry (14). In order to be able to apply subject knowledge and skills to solve the challenging problems that chemists face daily, students need to develop a confident grasp of the discipline, and for many this requires something of a paradigm shift in their view of their studies and their approach to them, presenting a significant challenge to those responsible for curriculum delivery at university level.
The Transition to University-Level Teaching and Learning
Beyond the ubiquitous teaching laboratory, lectures remain a cornerstone of the teaching of chemistry at university level in the UK, and are usually supported by problem-solving sessions in the form of small group tutorials (typically 6-10 students) and/or workshops (typically 20-30 students) (15).
Lectures have previously been criticised as being outmoded and ineffective due to low levels of interactivity and the limited attention spans of the audience (16). However, it should also be noted that some authors, such as Matheson (17), have suggested that lectures can be effective at supporting learning if interactive elements are incorporated and there are opportunities for students to ask questions and consolidate understanding. This latter point is supported by extensive empirical evidence suggesting that active learning has a positive impact on student performance in comparison with traditional lecturing (18). Whatever the format of a lecture, the pace of delivery and sheer volume of content covered present great challenges to first year students, who may be accustomed to school lessons which were broken up into manageable chunks, with new learning being constantly reinforced by questioning and related activities. Another issue is the significant reduction in feedback provided at university level in comparison to that received at school, as previously reported by Yorke and Longden (19).
A reduction in direct teacher support and the accompanying expectation that students will independently make meaning of lecture material during subsequent
58
Publication Date (Web): December 1, 2016 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch004
private study significantly add to the challenges facing students in making the transition from school-to-university.
With the above in mind, it is not surprising that the issue of enhancing learning in lectures was one that was pursued by a number of the School Teacher Fellows mentioned previously (6). From the perspective of the corresponding author as a school teacher observing students in chemistry lectures in the early part of their time at the University of Southampton, it was clear that learning during many lectures was limited. In informal discussions with students, many suggested that their note-taking skills were insufficiently well-developed for them to be confident that they had an accurate record of what had been taught. Moreover, many students reported that lectures felt passive from their perspective and even when they had questions, they lacked the confidence to ask them in a large group setting. On the other hand, students frequently commented that they enjoyed lectures, particularly the fact that they were being taught by people who were renowned leaders in their field, and this chimes with previous suggestions that good lectures do have value in providing motivation and inspiration to those in the audience (20).
In order to promote learning in chemistry lectures at Southampton, clickers were used initially in the 2007/8 academic year as a means of introducing interactivity into lectures, and these were well-received by students and academics alike (21). However, one of the problems encountered was a lack of available time during lectures for clicker questions to be posed to students, particularly as there was little appetite for the removal of lecture content. This meant that the delivery of remaining lecture content was often rushed in order to accommodate the use of clickers, and explanations to answers tended to be covered in little detail. This had a detrimental impact on the value of using this technology, bearing in mind the comments of Beatty (22), who suggested that inserting “occasional audience questions into otherwise traditional lectures, to quiz students for comprehension, or to keep them awake” is “a waste of the system’s potential.” Nonetheless, clickers were used by numerous chemistry lecturers at Southampton over the next few years, normally in a manner which was intended to identify gaps in understanding which could then be addressed by rapid feedback. At the time of writing (academic year 2015/16), several academic colleagues in chemistry at Southampton are continuing to use clickers in their lectures, providing evidence of a long-term beneficial impact of the work of a School Teacher Fellow in this particular institution.
The work of other School Teacher Fellows placed at UK universities is also pertinent to this discussion. Turner experimented with the use of ‘starter’
activities at the beginning of lectures during her fellowship at the University of Manchester in 2011/12, setting the scene for the new material to be covered and making links to previous learning (23). Such starters are commonly used in school lessons in the UK, but the main problem reported by Turner was the difficulty of engaging 200+ students in such activities in order for them to complete the tasks in a timely fashion without impacting on the delivery of the lecture itself. Smith, who completed her fellowship at the University of Leicester in 2011/12, worked with academic colleagues to trial a number of approaches taken directly from the school classroom, including the use of individual whiteboards onto which students could draw diagrams and write equations before showing them to the
59
Publication Date (Web): December 1, 2016 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch004
lecturer, and sets of short questions for students to complete throughout the lecture to assist with self-monitoring (24). Smith also shared clear and specific learning objectives (25) at the beginning of lectures so students were clear on what they were learning, and also provided handouts outlining how new material related to previous learning. These approaches were well-received by students, but were not widely adopted by other colleagues for continued use after the completion of the fellowship, in part due to the time required both in terms of contact time and prior preparation of materials.
These examples indicate that one of the main impediments to the introduction of approaches aimed at enhancing learning in lectures is the lack of available time due to the pressures of content delivery. One solution would be to move away from the traditional model of lectures, perhaps using a flipped learning approach, as outlined by Bergmann and Sams (26). As the majority of chemistry lectures for students in their 1styear at the University of Southampton have been recorded since 2010 (27), it would be straightforward to repurpose taught modules so that the delivery of lecture content was entirely in the form of videos, releasing scheduled teaching slots for more active modes of delivery, an approach which had already been trialled locally (28). However, this is a challenge at a time when much of the existing teaching infrastructure (e.g. large lecture halls with tiered seating) is geared towards the lecture. Furthermore, when this idea was first proposed, colleagues expressed concern about the time required to develop material for modes of delivery other than the lecture, and many report a lack of confidence in their ability to do so due to their lack of experience in this area. As such, a compromise was sought whereby lectures would remain the primary mode of delivery for taught material, while allowing some time to be freed up in lecture slots by making portions of lectures available to students in video format prior to the scheduled teaching slot. Two different case studies where partial flipping was employed in this manner are outlined in the subsequent discussion.
The Rationale for Partial Flipping of Lecture Content
If a student’s working memory, i.e. their ability to handle, manipulate, and ultimately store their immediate experiences, is exceeded during a lecture, this will limit or inhibit their learning (29,30). This so-called high cognitive load is a real concern, especially for students with limited prior-knowledge of the underpinning concepts, and presents a barrier to deep learning during lectures.
An approach taken by Seery and Donnelly utilized cognitive load theory to reduce the strain on students’ working memory through the provision of pre-lecture resources (31). This work was informed by that of Sirhan and Reid (32), who reported the benefits of such approaches in reducing the cognitive load of learners during the lecture by providing an introduction to key terms in advance of the timetabled session. Seery and Donnelly’s approach (31) involved the creation of interactive resources in which information was presented using text and diagrams accompanied by a synchronised audio narration. In planning these resources, each lecture was examined to identify terms which would be unfamiliar to students in order that these could be defined and explained in the resource. Each resource included a quiz which was intended to reinforce understanding and boost
60
Publication Date (Web): December 1, 2016 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch004
confidence, with the marks being reported to the virtual learning environment (VLE) in order that they could make a summative contribution to the module’s assessment. Usage of resources was high, with the key outcome being that students who didn’t have prior knowledge of chemistry quickly caught up with those who had some experience of the subject, which contrasted with the situation observed in previous years. The success of this approach provided inspiration for the design and implementation of a partial flipping approach at the University of Southampton.
The combination of pre-lecture resources with interactive in-class activities is consistent with Bergmann & Sams’ model of flipped learning (26) whereby students acquire content knowledge out of class and then undertake activities in which they apply this knowledge during scheduled teaching time. Such an approach is becoming increasingly popular in chemistry and has been successfully applied in all areas of the subject (33). Of particular relevance to the second case study is work done on the application of flipped learning to organic chemistry teaching in separate studies by Christiansen (34) and Flynn (35). Eichler and Peeples have recently reported that the use of the flipped classroom model in the teaching of a general chemistry course genuinely leads an improved grade point average (36), and it is clear that this will be an area of great interest to chemistry educators and education researchers for a long time to come.