INFORMATION TO USERS T h e m ost advanced technology has b e e n used to p h o to g ra p h and reproduce this m anuscript from the microfilm m aster. U M I films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type o f com puter printer. Tlie quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy subm itted. B roken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and im proper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event th at th e au th o r did not send U M I a com plete m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright m aterial had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. O versize m aterials (e.g., m aps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning th e original, beginning at the u pper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each o rig in al is also p h o to g ra p h e d in one exposure an d is in clu d ed in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. H igher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UM I directly to order. U n iversity M icrofilm s International A Beil & H o w e ll In form ation C o m p a n y 3 0 0 N orth Z e e b R o a d . A n n Arbor. Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1 3 4 6 U S A 313 761-4700 8 0 0 521-0600 Order N um ber 9028660 P er ce p tio n s an d p ractice: A c h a r a cter iza tio n o f th e first tw o yea rs o f u n d erg ra d u a te in str u c tio n in c h e m istr y in M ich igan sta te -su p p o r te d colleges a n d u n iv ersities Krieger, Albert George, Ph.D. Michigan State University, 1990 C opyright © 1 9 8 9 by K rieger, A lb ert G eorge. A ll rights reserved. UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICE: A CHARACTERIZATION OF THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF UNDERGRADUATE INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY IN MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES By Albert George Krieger A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Educational Administration 1989 ABSTRACT PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICE: A CHARACTERIZATION OF THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF UNDERGRADUATE INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY IN MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES By Albert George Krieger The purpose of this study was threefold: (1) to develop an Interview Survey Instrument based upon the recommendations given by the Committee on Professional Training of the American Chemical Society as the guidelines apply to the first two years of undergraduate education in chemistry as well as selected aspects of a quality education that had been identified by recent nationwide studies; (2 ) to develop an Interview Perceptions Instrument to determine the perceptions held by practicing professors of chemistry about the quality of instruction in chemistry at their own state-supported institutions as well as at other statesupported institutions of higher learning in Michigan; and (3) to use these instruments to analyze the similarities and the differences of the curricula in chemistry in Michigan state-supported colleges and universities that offer a minimum of two years of courses in professional chemistry that conform, more or less, to the guidelines established by the Committee on Professional Training of the American Chemical Society. The Items and the item responses were written and Albert George Krieger quantified to reflect a wide range of unique curriculum situations in the target population of state-supported colleges and universities in Michigan. Va li dat ion for the Interview Survey Instrument was provided by a panel of practicing professors of chemistry. Reliability was determined by the Kuder-Richardson Formula #20. The Interview Survey Instrument and the Interview Perceptions Instrument were administered randomly to a stratified-bysize selection of six state-supported two-year colleges and six state-supported universities. Although significant differences were found in the faculty and the organization of the instructional units, no significant difference was found between the overall instructional programs in the first two years of professional chemistry in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and the universities. The study revealed that the large majority of instructors of first- and second-year chemistry in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and universities were adequately informed about the details of instruction in chemistry in other similar institutions to draw conclusions similar to those drawn by this study. wide range of contact hours in lecture and laboratory were reported by the institutions in the study. A Tuition and fees were examined to identify the range in tuition and fees levied. A high of $193 per-semester-hour $20.50 per-semester-hour were reported. and a low of The Course Placement Score used by the majority of the state-supported Albert George Krieger two-year colleges was found to be the ASSET scores while the state-supported universities were found to favor the use of the ACT scores. The Survey Instrument could be used by institutions seeking to identify the status of the instructional program in chemistry as well as used to identify weak features in their instructional program. However, research is necessary to provide benefit/cost weighting to the Instrument scores. i Copyright by ALBERT GEORGE KRIEGER 1989 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to the many people who have given generously of their time and talents throughout the duration of this study. thank Dr. I wish to Eldon Nonnemaker, my advisor and doctoral committee chairman, whose guidance, encouragement, and valuable suggestions have made this a meaningful experience. I am also grateful to Drs. Robert Craig, Keith Anderson, and Kenneth Harding, members of my doctoral committee, who have given me encouragement and support. For their cooperation and helpful suggestions in the validation of the survey instrument, my thanks go to Drs. Harry Eick, John Henderson, David Johnson, Michael Rathke and Gary VanKempen. For the courtesy, patience and valuable time given me during the interview survey by the many participants, extend my sincere appreciation. Finally, I am grateful to my dear wife, Margaret, for her patience and understanding. I TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................... vi LIST OF T A B L E S ............................................ ix LIST OF A P P E N D I C E S ....................................... xii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION .................................. Purpose of the S t u d y ..................... Background of the S t u d y ................... Importance of the S t u d y ................... Instrument Design ......................... Definition of Terms ....................... Analysis ................................... Hypotheses ................................ Procedures in Data C o l l e c t i o n ............ P o p u l a t i o n ................................ S a m p l e ..................................... Instruments Used inthe Study ............ A s s u m p t i o n s ................................ Limitations of the S t u d y ................ Organization of the T h e s i s .............. II.REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .................... Recent Evaluations of the Undergraduate E x p e r i e n c e ............. Evaluation of Departmental Curricula . . Recent Activities of the Committee on Professional Training of The American Chemical Society . . . . Writing Across the Curriculum ............ Undergraduate Research .................. Testing and Academic Placement ......... Summary . . ................................ III. 1 1 1 3 5 7 8 8 10 11 11 11 12 12 13 14 15 21 23 24 28 31 35 M E T H O D O L O G Y ................................... 36 Purpose of the S t u d y ..................... P r o c e d u r e .................................. 36 36 vii Chapter Page Survey Item Development .................. Survey Item Response Development . . . . ......... Survey Item Content-Validation Survey Item Response Improvement . . . . The P o p u l a t i o n ............................ Selection of An Appropriate Test of S i g n i f i c a n c e ....................... Reliability of the Interview Survey I n s t r u m e n t ............................ The S a m p l e ................................ S u m m a r y ..................................... IV. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE STUDY 37 38 40 41 42 45 46 46 47 . Analysis of the Interview Survey . Instrument R e s p o n s e s ................ Organization of the Instructional U n i t .............................. Instruction in First-Year Chemistry . Instruction in Second-Year (Organic) C h e m i s t r y ......................... Faculty .............................. Facilities and Instructional Resources Overall Evaluation of the Instructional Program ............ Analysis of the Interview Perceptions Instrument Responses ................ Analysis of Tuition and F e e s .............. Analysis of Credit-Hours and Contact-Hours Analysis of Institutional Use of Course Placement Tests ..................... V. SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ....................... 49 49 49 54 64 72 76 79 81 83 86 89 91 Development of the Survey Instruments . . The S t u d y ......................... L i m i t a t i o n s .................. Findings and Conclusions .................. D i s c u s s i o n .............................. Implications for Education ................ Suggestions for Future Research ......... 91 92 94 94 103 108 109 .............................................. Ill A P P E N D I C E S ................................................ 117 BIBLIOGRAPHY viii LIST OF TABLES Table IV-1. Page ORGANIZATION OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT I V - 2 . INSTRUCTION IN FIRST YEAR CHEMISTRY IV-3. . . 50 ... 54 INSTRUCTION IN SECOND YEAR (ORGANIC) C H E M I S T R Y ............................... 64 IV-4. F A C U L T Y .................................. 72 IV-5. FACILITIES AN D INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCES IV-6 . IV-7. IV-8 . IV-9. B-l B-2 . . 77 OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ................................... 80 COMPARISON OF PERCEPTIONS AND TOTAL .............................. SURVEY SCORES 83 INSTITUTIONS OFF ERING TWO YEARS OF CHEMISTRY RANKED BY TUITION AND ESTIMATED TUITION AND F E E S ....... 85 SUMMARY TABLE: MEAN CONTACT HOURS IN LECTURE AND LABORATORY IN TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY OFFERED BY MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPO RTE D TWO -YEAR COLLEGES AND U N I V E R S I T I E S ........................ 87 POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STA TE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: SMALL-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES LESS THAN 2,500 STUDENTS . . POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: MEDIUM-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES GR EATER THAN 2,500 BUT LESS THAN 7,000 S T U D E N T S .............. 126 ix 125 Table B-3 B-4 B-5 B -6 1-1 1-2 1-3 Page POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO -YEAR COL LEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF PROFE SSIONA L CHEMISTRY: LARGE-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES G R EATE R THAN 7,000 STUDENTS 127 POPULATION OF MIC HIGA N STATE-SUPPORTED TWO -YE AR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF PROFE SSI ONAL CHEMISTRY: SMALL-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UN IVE RSITIES LESS THAN 5,000 STUDENTS . 128 POPULATION OF MIC HIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO -YEAR CO LLE GES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TW O YEARS OF PROFE SS ION AL CHEMISTRY: ME DIUM-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITIES GREATER THAN 5,000 AND .............. LESS THAN 10,000 STUDENTS 129 POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COL LEG ES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF PROFE SSI ONAL CHEMISTRY: LARGE-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITIES GREATER THAN 10,000 STUDENTS ................................... 130 TUITION AND TOTA L TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUIT ION AND FEE RATES: SMALL-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES ................................... 170 TUITION AND TOTAL TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUI TIO N AND FEE RATES: MED IUM-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES ................................ 171 TUITION AND TOTAL TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUIT ION AND FEE RATES: LARGE-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES ................................... 172 TUITION AND TOTAL TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUITION AND FEE RATES: SMALL-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITIES 173 x Page TUITION AND TOTAL TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR TW O YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUIT IO N AND FEE RATES: MEDIUM -S IZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITI ES .............................. 174 TUITION AND TOTAL TUITION AND FEE COSTS FOR T W O YEARS OF INSTRUCTION BASED UPON 1988-1989 TUI TIO N AND FEE RATES: L ARGE -S IZ E STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSITIES 175 CREDIT HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: SMALL-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES .................................. 176 CREDIT HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: MED IU M-S IZ E STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES .................................. 177 CREDIT HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: LARGE-SI ZE STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COL LE GE S .................................. 178 CREDIT HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: SMA LL- SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVE RSI TIES .............................. 179 CREDIT HOURS AN D CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: MED IU M-S IZ E STATE-SUPPORTED UNIV ERS ITIES .............................. 180 CREDIT HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS FOR TWO YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY: LARGE-SIZE STATE-SUPPORTED UNIVERSIT IES .............................. 181 COURSE PLACEME NT TESTS USED BY MICHIGAN S TA TE -S UPP ORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: ST AT E- SU PPOR TE D TWO-YEAR COLLEGES . . . 182 COURSE PLACEM ENT TESTS USED BY MICHIGAN ST ATE -S UP PORTE D TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES: S TA TE -S UPP ORTED UNIVERSITIES ........... 183 xi LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Page STATEMENTS OF VALIDATION FROM THE VA LIDATION PANEL FOR THE VALIDATION OF THE SURVEY I N S T R U M E N T ..................... 117 IDENTIFICATION OF THE POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STA TE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TWO YEARS OF ....................... PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY 125 TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO SURVEY STUDY PARTICIPANTS ................................... 131 D. REVISED SURVEY INSTRUMENT 132 E. PERCEPTIONS INSTRUMENT ........................ 160 F. SURVEY DATA BASED UPON REVISED SURVEY I N S T R U M E N T ..................................... 161 G. PERCEPTIONS D A T A ............................... 168 H. REVISED PERCEPTIONS D A T A ..................... 169 I. TUIT ION AND FEES LEVIED IN MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AN D U N I V E R S I T I E S .............................. 170 CREDI T HOURS AND CONTACT HOURS IN TW O YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY IN MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AN D U N I V E R S I T I E S .............................. 176 COURS E PLACEMENT TESTS USED BY MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES ................................... 182 B. C. J. K. xii ..................... CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was threefold: develop an Interview Survey Instrument; Interview Perceptions Instrument; and (1) to (2) to develop an (3) to use the interview instruments to analyze the similarities and the differences of the curriculum in chemistry^- in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and universities in Michigan which offer a minimum of two years of courses in professional chemistry. Background of the Study The transferability of courses in professional chemistry taken at state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities and transfered to other institutions of higher education has ap peared to be based primarily upon the limited course desc rip tions found in college and university catalogs and upon the choice of textbook or textbooks used at the colleges. It might ^The curriculum in chemistry will be evaluated primarily on the basis of: Committee on Professional Training, Criteria and Evaluation Procedures for U nd e r ­ graduate Professional Education in C h e m i s t r y , American Chemical Society, Fall, 1983. 1 be assumed that course descriptions do not differ greatly from college to college 2 but at least three variables affect the superficial des cription of the instructional sequence: 1 ) some institutions have separated the lecture component of instruction from the laboratory component of instruction and the two components are offered as separate courses;. 2 ) semester length courses are offered in some institutions while other institutions utilize term-length instructional units; and 3) there are a variety of instructional sequences utilized by the institutions which may provide essentially similar over-all instructional experiences but differ in the pa rtic ula r course titles and de s c r i p t i o n s . The Criteria and Evaluation Procedures for Under­ graduate Professional Education in Chemist ry were developed by the Committee on Professional Training of the American Chemical Society to pr ovide a cu rricul um guide for a fouryear curriculum in Chemistry; but not all state-supported universities in Michigan that offer a major concentration of studies in Chemistry offer an ACS -approved cu rri cul um.3 addition, In two-year colleges nation-wide have just begin to examine or reexamine their chemistry curriculum with the aid of curriculum guidelines developed to evaluate existing 2 This assumption was examined. 3 ■Committee on Professional Training 1986 Annual Report", American Chemical Society, Chemical & Engineering News, 65, (May 18, 1987), 59-66. 2 local chemistry curricula. 4 The curriculum guidelines permit examination of the initial two-years of professional education in chemistry with appropriate considerations given to the differences in financial support experienced by state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities. A primary thrust of the new guidelines has been to insure that the instruction in professional chemistry taken at two-year colleges will dove-tail with the subsequent instruction taken in baccalaureate-degree- granting institutions. Importance of the Study Enrollments in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges increased by more than 73 percent between 1970 and 1981; and the enrollments in these two-year colleges in 1981 comprised more than 40 percent of the total student enrollment in Michigan institutions of higher e d u c a t i o n .5 While this increased student enrollment in state- supported two-year colleges may have been due partial ly to the rapid increase in the growth of Michigan two-year colleges during that period, the shift in student e n r ol l­ ments from four-year institutions to two-year institutions 4 ACS Society Committee on Education, Task Force on ACS Involvement in the Two-Year College, Guidelines for Chemistry & Chemical Technology Programs in Two-Year Colleges, Experimental V e r s i o n , American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, February 1987. 5 . Michigan Community College Association, The Impact of Community Colleges On Michigan and Its E c o n o m y , Lansing, Michigan, 1981. 3 has had' the potential of creating increased articulation problems for those students who have sought high-quality instruction in professional chemistry in their local statesupported two-year college. This has been particularly true if the local two-year college has had real or suspected deficiencies in the chemistry curriculum. This problem was the focus of a study at a recent conference;® and 7 recommendations have been made to alleviate the problem. By the Fall of 1985, the enrollment in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges had grown to comprise nearly 46 percent of the total state-wide undergraduate g enrollment of all institutions of higher education. It became apparent that there was a real need for more information concerning the relative strengths and weaknesses of the instruction in professional che mis try offered to students in Michigan's state-supported two-year colleges as compared to the instruction in pro fessional chemistry offered to students in Michigan's state-supported universities. The data gathered by this study should be useful in alleviating the lack of common knowledge ^Society Committee on Education, Critical Issues in Two-Year College C h e m i s t r y , Invitational Education Conference, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1985. 7 Mary L. Good, The Next 25 Years in Chemistry and Chemical Education; A Perspective for Two-Year Colleges, Two-Year College Chemistry Conference, W i ll ia m Rainey Harper College, Palatine, IL, April 25, 1986. g Annual Survey of Colleges; Fall Enrollment 1985, College Entrance Board, New York, 1986. 4 concerning the status of instruction in the professional chemistry curric ulum in the first two years of the u n d e r ­ graduate studies whether the instruction is received in a state-supported two-year college or a state-supported university. Instrument Design In light of the above-mentioned need for information concerning the details of instruction in professional chemistry in state-supported two-year colleges and statesupported universities in Michigan, a major purpose of this study was to develop an interview survey instrument and an interview perceptions instrument. The interview survey instrument had to be capable of eliciting information in sufficient detail to permit a comprehensive evaluation of the quality of instruction in professional chemistry in a wide range of college environments. Further, if the interview survey instrument, with its selected indices and scales, was shown to be capable of obtaining valid and reliable data, an analysis of the data obtained with the interview survey instrument would not only reveal a differentiation of the currricula studied but would also insure the measurement of aspects of criteria that would be of singular importance to the foundations of quality instruction in a particular institution. The interview survey instrument that was constructed 5 included m t e r v a l - s c a l e items, 9 where appropriate, to evaluate easily quantifiable indices of qua lity instruction and ordinal-scale items3-0 to measure less quanti fia ble indices of quality instruction. The indices were based primarily upon the criteria developed by the Ame rican Chemical Society for the four-year chemistry curricula but applicable to two-year colleges. The interview survey instrument was subdivided into the following subsections: Organization of the Instructional Unit; First-Year Chemistry; (Organic) Chemistry; 1) 2) Instruction in 3) Instruction in Second-Year 4) Faculty; and 5) Facilities and Instructional Resources. The interview perceptions instrument was constructed with a one-to-five lesser-qua)ity/better-quality forcedchoice scale format to elicit the perceptions about instructional programs in professional ch emis try at other state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan. A standardized interview procedure was developed to optimize objectivity of all measures made. Initial use of the interview instruments then clarified the usefulness of the instruments as well as yielded an initial estimate of the reliability of the instruments. Face validity and 9 Mary J. Allen and Wendy M. Yen, Introduction to Measurement T h e o r y , Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1979, 188. 10Ibid, 184. 6 logical validity were determi ned by a careful definition of the domain of measures as found in the selected indices of defined quality instruction. Content validity was determined by submitting the interview survey instrument and the interview perceptions instrument to a panel of practicing professors of chemistry for expert determination. Definit ion of Terms The following terms and definitions were used throughout this study: ACS— American Chemical Society Two-Year C o lle ge s— co mmu nity colleges and junior colleges Small-size Two-Year C o l l e g e — less than 2,500 students Medium-size Two-Year C o l l e g e — less than 7,000 students but greater than 2,500 students Large-size Two-Year C o l l e g e — greater than 7,000 students Small-size u ni ve rs it y— less than 5,000 students Medium-size un iv e r s i t y — less than 10,000 but greater than 5,000 students Large-size uni ve rs ity— more than 10,000 students Professional C h e m i s t r y — that set of courses of instruction in the chemistry curriculum intended for chemistry, science and engineering majors as well as pre-medical, pre-dental and pre-pharmacy students, i.e. general inorganic chemistry and organic chemistry. Instruction in Professional Che m is tr y— selected measures of the curriulum, facilities, and the chemistry faculty 'that are utilized in providing the desired lecture, library and laboratory experiences deemed the minimum requirements for quality professional training in chemistry by the ACS. 7 Analysis As previously mentioned, was to select the purpose of this study indices of instructional qua li ty from the ACS's Criteria for Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry, to develop interview instruments incorporating these indices, and to use these instruments to evaluate the instruction in professional chemistry in a sample of the population of state-supported two-year colleges and universities that offered a minimum of two years of instruction in professional chemistry. Since the sample taken from the population of interest for this study was not large, the statistical measure of significance chosen was the t-test. concentrated on determining in which ways This study it could be determined that the instruction in professional chemistry differed in the state-supported two-year colleges and universities and in which ways the instruction was similar in the institutions studied. Hypotheses As previously mentioned, the purpose of this study was to develop an interview survey instrument and an interview perceptions instrument and to use these instruments to determine the extent to which the chemistry instructional programs in professional chemistry in the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities were alike. The most specific hypotheses tested are as follows: 8 Ho^: There is no significant difference between state-supported colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in the Organi zatio n of the Instructional Units (which include the che m is tr y discipline). H o 2 : There is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in Instruction in First-Year Chemistry. Ho^: There is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in Instruction in Second-Year (Organic) Chemistry. H o ^ : There is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in their respective Faculties (of Chemistry). HO 5 : There is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Mic higan in their respective Facilities and Instructional Resources. HOgj There is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Mic higan when all aspects of a quality education as measured by the interview survey instrument are compared. 9 Procedures in Data Collection An initial examination was undertaken to determine the population of state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities that offered two years of instruction of professional chemistry. This population of state-supported institutions identified as having offered two years of professional chemistry was then stratified as small-size, medium-size and large-size institutions as described in the Definition of Terms section. experimental An interview survey instrument and an experimental interview perceptions instrument were constructed incorporating the selected indices of instructional quality. The experimental interview survey instrument and the experimental interview perceptions instrument were then evaluated by conducting an interview-evaluation in a randomly-selected state-supported two-year college from the population of state-supported two-year colleges as well as a randomly-selected state-supported university from the population of state-supported universities. These initial interviews were utilized to evaluate the appropriateness of the indices, of indices, for the addition, subtraction and modification and for the modification of item scales. The modifications to the instruments were made to insure that the indices and scales of the instruments permitted the quantification of the breadth and depth of information available about the instructional experiences in the chemical education programs and to insure that a meaningful analysis could be made. Population The population studied was all of the statesupported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities in Mic higan that offer two years of instruction in professional chemistry. Sample The sample of the population of state-supported twoyear colleges studied consisted of six state-supported twoyear colleges with two samples each randomly-selected from the stratified population of small-size, medium-size, and large-size state-supported two-year colleges. The sample of the population of state-supported universities" evaluated in this study consisted of six state-supported universities with two samples each randomly-selected from the stratified population of small-size, medium-size, and large-size statesupported universities. Instruments Used in the Study In addition to the interview survey instrument developed to measure criteria identified in Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry Criteria and Evaluation Procedures, and the interview perceptions instrument developed to measure per ceptions about instructional programs in chemistry at other institutions, the Guidelines for Chemistry & Chemical Technology Progams in Two-Year Colleges were used insofar as the two criteria guidelines 11 evaluated the first two years of instruction in profe ssi onal chemistry. Assumptions The study of the first two years of instruction in professional che mistry was based upon the following assumptions: (1) The information necessary to determine whether there was a difference in the selected set of indices of instructional quality that measure curriculum, educational experiences and environments found in compared institutions of higher education could be adequately obtained by an interview method of evaluation; (2) Accept ab le educational measurements were developed using the procedures followed in this study; and (3) The information necessary to determine whether there was a difference in instruction in professional chemistry in institutions of higher education would be obtained from a representative sample of the institutions of interest by random-s ele ction from the total population of statesupported two-year colleges and state-supported universities which have been stratified by total student enrollment. Limitations of the Study This study was limited to a sample of statesupported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan that offered a minimum of two years of instruction in professional chemistry. Further, the conclusions drawn from the study directly apply only to that population of state-supported two-year colleges and statesupported universities in Michigan that offer a minimum of two years of instruction in professional chemistry. This study may have also been limited by the particular choice of indices of instructional quality which were selected to measure the curriculum, facilities and the chemistry faculty that have been utilized in providing the desired lecture, library and laboratory experiences that are the minimum requirements for a program of quality professional training in chemistry as recommended by the Committee on Professional Training of the ACS. Organization of the Dissertation The general organization of the dissertation is as follows: Chapter II reviews the literature relative to the curriculum of instruction in professional chemistry and the need for evaluation of that curriculum; Chapter III describes the procedures used in developing and evaluating the indices of instructional quality and the ratio-scale items used to quantify the indices of the interview instruments; Chapter IV includes the analysis and interpretations of the study; and Chapter V reports the findings and conclusions of the study. 13 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Several aspects of instruction in chemistry, and undergraduate education in general, which are directly related to this study are: recent studies of the integrity of the undergraduate curriculum; an upgrading and reevaluation of the undergraduate chemistry curriculum by the Ame rican Chemical Society; a new emphasis upon "writing across the curriculum;" a recognition that research is a desirable part of the undergraduate experience; renewed efforts to pro perly place students in academic courses commenserate to their abilities; and the development of an appropriate chemistry curriculum evaluative instrument. This chapter is organized into the following sections: (1) Recent Evaluations of the Undergraduate Experience; (2) Evaluation of Departmental Curricula; (3) Recent Activities of the Committee on Professional Training of the Ame rican Chemical Society; (4) A synopsis of the "Writing Across the Curriculum" movement; Research; (5) Undergraduate (6 ) Testing and Academic Placement; and Summary. 14 (7) Recent Evaluations of the Undergraduate Experience A panel established by the National Institute of Education released a report^ which called upon colleges and universities to revitalize liberal education and to set higher standards for graduation. The report, written from a set of values and goals shared by the study group, made a series of recommendations for improving the quality of undergraduate education in order to enhance the learning and personal development for the greatest number of students of all ages. Under the heading of The Warning Signals, the panel noted that: "Accreditation standards for undergraduate programs often stand as barriers to the broad understanding we associate with liberal learning. For example, the guidelines of one professional accrediting associa­ tion confine one-half to two-thirds of a student's baccalaureate program to courses in two areas." The panel made a set of seven recommendations by which to increase student tion. involvement in their own educa­ These included such ideas as involving students in faculty research projects, independent study, classes held in the field, organizing group projects that utilize computers to analyze raw data, and student-written computer software specifically written for analysis of the raw data collected in a project. The underlying contention was that ^•Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education, Involvement in L e a r n i n g : Realizing the Potential of American Higher E d u c a t i o n , National Institute of Education, The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXLX (October 24, 1984), 35. 2I b i d . , 36. 15 students are more apt to learn content if the students are actively involved in the discipline. 3 Eight additional recommendations were made by the panel for the rea lization 4 of high expectations. This included the expectation that each institution should examine and adjust content and delivery of the curriculum to match the knowledge, skills and abilities the institution expects the students to develop, as well as the utilization of appropriate tests and measures of the knowledge, skills and abilities to be developed to insure public recognition that what assessed is college-level learning. is being In addition, the same recommendations reemphasized the desirability of integrating research as an active form of learning into the curriculum. In recognition that accreditation agencies play a part of conditions necessary for excellence, recommended 5 the panel that: Accrediting agencies should hold colleges, community colleges, and unversities accountable for clear statements of expectations for student learning, appropriate assessment programs to determine whether those expectations are being met, and sytematic efforts to improve learning as a result of those assessments. 3 I b i d ., Recommendations 2 & 3, 41. 4 Ibid., Recommendations 11 & 12, 43. 5 Ibid., Recommendation 24, 47. 16 Another study® of national importance is the study commissioned by the Association of American Colleges to examine the present state of curricula in American colleges and universities that lead to the bac cal aureate degree. The committee studied the baccalaureate curricula, made recommendations for improvement, and called upon the aca­ demics to take the lead in restoring the coherence and 7 reputation of the degrees. Nine elements and recommended as minimum requirements: abstract logical thinking, literacy: writing, reading, (6 ) Values; (1 ) inquiry; and critical analysis; (2 ) speaking and listening; understanding numerical data; (5) Science; were identified (3) (4) historical consciousness; (7) Art; multicultural experiences; and (8 ) International and (9) study in depth. The recommendations for reform were em phasized by cautioning against the utilization of 'old' solutions such as esta b­ lishing prescribed survey courses in literature and science, nor by the strengthening of distribution requirements, nor by adding multidisciplinary general education courses, but instead by suggesting that writing ability is a desirable outcome of the baccalaureate degree and is the responsibil ­ ity of all faculty, not just members of the English g Committee on Redefining the Meaning and Purpose of the Baccalaureate Degrees, Integrity in the College Curriculum: A Report to the Academic C o m m u n i t y , Association of American Colleges, The Chronicle of Higher Education XXLIX (February 13, 1985), 12. 7 Ibid., Minimum Requirements, 13. 17 d e p a r t m e n t .8 Further, the report suggests 9 that: The quality of the environment can be measured by emphasis on opportunities for active learning and evidence that students and faculty are engaged in a joint enterpr is e of discovery and growth. . . . that students should undertake a variety of pedagogical approaches . . . seminars, lectures, research, field study, tutorials, theses. Great efforts were expended by the panel effort to convey what they mean by much emphasis that 'study in depth' 'a course of study,' 'major,' in an 'study in depth' with supercedes the notion of not merely 'subject matter.' Instead the report represents the essense of a baccalaureate education as the ability to argue about interpretations drawn from e v i d e n c e .10 Lastly, the report treats the problem of * ac cou nt ab ility11 with the charge that: The professors are fundamentally responsible and therefore charged with designing and monitoring the mechanisms of assessment. ...without some accurate sense of the progress with students are establishing skills and ma sterin g capacities defined by the mi n i ­ mum req uired curriculum, a faculty can only guess at how well it is doing its job. Further, the report uses the term 'scandalous' to depict the absence of institutional and social acc o un t­ ability on the part of American higher education . . . for 8I b i d . , 24. 9 I b i d ., 24. 10I b i d ., 26. 11I b i d . , The Pro bl em of Accountability, 18 28. their lack of knowledge as to whe th er the institutions are actually doing what they pub li ca ll y say they are doing. Even more recent is the analysis of the survey taken by Sigma Xi in their New Agenda Project with an appraisal of existing college and university curricula, societal demands upon science, the present the problems of governmental and foundation research funding, and the changing nature of the scientific process. 12 disagree about many things, Although scientists can and do there was a 95% agreement within the respondents of the survey 13 with the proposition that: The word science is often invoked as if it meant a particular 'thing' compris ed of scientists, public and private laboratories, publications, and govern­ ment agencies. For me, however, 'science' connotes a process or procedure for making inquiries about our world and for evaluating the hypotheses these inqui­ ries generate. Ethical conduct and public understanding of the limitations of science was another concern expressed by scientist-respondents to the survey. Still another respon­ dent called for commitment to an ethical standard and a public commitment to the protectio n of life and of society. "The reference to ethical standards also serves as a reminder that integrity in research and in reporting scientific findings is vital not merely because scie­ nce is an interdependent activity in which mutual trust among scientists is essential, but because public trust in science has to be maintained. 12 . Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society, A New Agenda For S c i e n c e , New Haven, CT 1987, iii. 13 Ibid., 7. 1 4 I b id. , 16. 19 A concern was expressed about the adequacy of school and college curricula to generate sufficient numbers of future scientists. This concern was not just about the training of future scientists, but also about the education that provided the basis of knowledge and understanding of those who would not felt that it is not themselves become scientists. It was sufficient that the educational program be adequate to train the scientifically-inclined student, but also to prevent scientific illiteracy in the general public. . . . if graduate students in adequate number and quality are to be available, this requires that they acquire and maintain an interest in science much earlier in their education . . . the future of scientific research depends on an educational process that can justifiably be described as "K through Ph.D. Illuminated by these studies cited, the liberal arts and the baccalaureate curricula may perhaps be summarized by: . . . an approach to education that encourages individuals to think of learning as an activity that can take place at any time and in a wide variety of situations. In this sense, then, we are advocating the importance o f gpeople learning from life and throughout life. 15I b i d . , 25. ^ K n a p p e r , C., "What Should Future Teaching be Like?" The Teaching P r o f e s s o r , 2, (February 1988), 1. 20 And a criticism of existing curricula: We are very good at teaching students how to solve problems for which we already know the answers. The challenge is to teach them strategies.for tackling the problems we've yet to solve. Evaluation of Departmental Curricula The department in a college or university may perhaps be seen as a microcosm of the larger institution, and in that sense, Acc red itation 18 the Evaluative Criteria for by a regional accrediting association do apply. 1. The institution (substitute departmental curricula) has clear and publicly stated purposes, consistent wit.h its mission and appropriate to a postsecondary educational institution. 2. The institution (substitute department) has effectively organized adequate human, financial and physical resources into educational and other programs so that it is accomplishing its immediate purposes. 3. The institution (substitute department and curricula) is accomplishing its purposes. 4. The institution (substitute department and curricula) can continue to accomplish its purposes. Dressel, et a l ^ offers the study outline developed in connection with departmental reviews at Michigan State University, but also cautions that departmental reviews can neither justify excessive resources appropriation nor 1 7I b i d . , 2 . 18 Commission on Institutions of Higher Education, A Handbook of A c c r e d i t a t i o n , North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, Chicago, IL 1984, 14. 19 Dressel, P., Johnson, F. & Marcus, P., The Co nfidence Crisis: An Analysis of University D e p a r t m e n t s . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1970, 156. 21 provide a simple formula which would enable every department to rank nationally. Using an approach to evaluation that transcends the discipline, D r e s s e l 20 makes assurances that neither the discipline nor the student should be the sole basis for curriculum planning and evaluation by emphasizing measurable behavioral objectives. If students are expected to develop a degree of independence in pursuit of learning, reach a satisfactory level skill in communication, demon­ strate sensitivity to their own values and those of their associates, become capable of collaborating with peers in defining and resolving problems, be able to recognize the relevance of their increasing knowledge to the current scene, and seek continually for insightful understanding and organization of their total educational experience, these outcomes must be specifically s t a t e d . (this writer's emphasTs). Hutton 21 has questioned whe the r colleges can continue to afford high quality laboratory instruction at the undergraduate level while P i c k r a l 22 has reported the results of a national survey on the present use of chemical instrumentation in undergraduate chemistry in four-year colleges and universities. Expensive instrumentation and typically extensive student laboratory requirements in 20 Dressel, P., Handbook of Academic Evaluation: Assessing Institutional Effectiveness, Student Progress, Professional Performance for Decisio n Making in Higher E d u c a t i o n . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1978, 303. and 2^Hutton, W., "Report of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Chemical Education: Undergraduate Laboratory Instruction;" Journal of Chemical Education, 56 (JanCary 1979 ), 8 . 22 . Pickral, G., "The Laboratory Use of Chemical Instrumentation in the Undergraduate Chemist ry Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, 60 (December 1983), A338. 22 chemistry have been period ic ally reviewed when funding of chemical programs are viewed as too expensive. Recent Activities of the Committee on Professional Training of The American Chemical Society The American Chemical Society Committee on Professional Training revised the criteria for evaluating undergraduate programs the guidelines. in chemistry 23 with the release of The principle changes in the guidelines lie in the increased emphasis on computer literacy, information retrieval and with upper-level opportunities for selfinstruction programs. Additionally, g u i d e l i n e s ^ were in the process of being developed for chemistry and chemical engineering tech­ nology programs in two-year colleges. The experimental version of the guidelines for the two-year college followed in their essence the guidelines developed for the b a cc a­ laureate-granting colleges and universities, ision for the differences in funding, and missions of the two-year colleges. but made pr o v­ non-research faculty Perhaps the most recent change in the guidelines for baccalaureate-granting 23 Committee on Pro fessional Training, Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry: Guidelines and Evaluation P r o c e d u r e s . Ame ri can Chemical Society, Fall 1983. 24 ACS Society Committee ACS Involvement in the Tw o-Y ear Chemistry & Chemical Te ch nol ogy Colleqes: Experimental Version, 1987. 23 on Education, Task Force on College, Guidelines For Programs Tn Two-Year American Chemical Society, institutions was the r e l e a s e ^ journals in four classifications: general usage; list of recommended (1 ) required journals of (2) publications readily available; pr iority journals; and (3) top (4) highly recommended journals. The minimu m library holdings were considered to be journals in the first two catagories and an additional twenty titles from the third and fourth categories. These are new guidelines as the 1983 Criteria was non-specific as to the choice of titles. colleges 26 The recommendations for the two-year were non-specific by title but did recommend that there be ten current chemistry and related science periodicals. Writing Across the Curriculum "Writing Across The Curriculum" educational movement is a wide-spread intended to improve writing skills throughout the curriculum and is not restricted to previous examples of writing science papers for an English class. Instead, the movement is characterized by the emphasis upon the desirableness of writing as a means of expression and upon an improvement of writing style throughout the 25 Committee on Professional Training, "Recommended Journals," CPT Newsletter, American Chemical Society, Spring 1987, 2. 26 l o c . c i t ., Task Force on ACS Involvement Two-Year College, 32. 24 in the curriculum. Perhaps one of the better de f i n i t i o n s 2^ of "writing across the curriculum" is the following: Writing across the curriculum is a common sense concept that expresses what an undergraduate education should offer in the realm of training for literacy: many opportunities to write in all courses, serious attention to wri tte n work by instructors in all courses, a var iety of writing experiences... short papers, quick papers, unhurried papers, reports, critiques, narratives. Like writing, other avenues to literacy... reading and speaking and listening . . . should find outlets and encouragement across the curriculum. A survey of the literature revealed no less than fourteen articles in the Journal of Chemical Education expressing concern about the problem that students majoring in chemistry, and perhaps other sciences and disciplines as well, graduate with underdeveloped writing skills. Of these articles, Stacy 28 and Zimmerman 29 have identified specific weaknesses, while Burkett and Dunkle offered guidelines for improvement 30 in writing style. 27 Committee on Redefining the Meaning and Purpose of the Baccalaureate Degrees, Integrity in the College Curriculum: A Report to the Academic C o m m u n i t y , Association of American Colleges, The Chronicle of Hiqher Education, XXLIX (February 13, 1985), 24. 28 Stacy, J., "The Communication Crisis," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 53 (September 1976), 537. 29 • Zimmerman, S., "Writing in Chemistry," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 55 (November 1978), 727. 30 Burkett, A. & Dunkle, S., "Technical Writing in the Undergraduate Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, 60 (June 1983), 469. 25 Potera 31 made general comments about the problem. Additional papers by Carlisle and K i nsing er 32 and as well as by Pyle 34 Mel hado 33 suggest methods for additional writing experiences, primarily by adding courses to the curriculum; *3 r and Varnes and Wetmore, Werner, 38 Steiner, 39 n Goodman and Bean, and Bailey and Merkowicz <• r Olmsted, 40 all 31 Potera, C., "The Basic Elements of Writing a Scientific Paper: The Art of Scientific Style," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (March 1984), 246. 32 Carlisle, E. & Kinsinger, B . ,"Scientific Writing," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 54 (October 1977), 632. 33 Melhado, L., "Chemical Composition," Journal of Chemical Ed uc a t i o n , 57 (February 1980), 127. 34 Pyle, J., "Contemporary Chemical Essays: Dealing With the Writing Problem in a Freshman Chemistry Course," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 59 (November 1982), 959. 35 Varnes, A. & Wetmore, D., "A Novel CommunicationsSkills-Based Approach to the Instrumental Laboratory," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 52 (December 1975), 801. 36 Goodman, W. & Bean, J., "A Chemistry Laboratory Project to Develop Thinking and Writing Skills," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (June 1983), 483. 37 Olmsted, J., Ill, "Teaching Varied Technical Writing Styles in the Upper Div ision Laboratory," Journal of Chemical Educ a t i o n , 61 (September 1984), 798. 38 Werner, T., "Reflections on the Emphasis of Communication Skills in the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, 63 (February 1986), 140. : 39 Steiner, R., "Chemistry and the Written Word," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 59 (December 1982), 1044. 40 Bailey, D. & Merkowicz, L., "Chemistry and English: A New Bond," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (June 1983), 467. 26 suggest modifications of existing courses. Rosenthal^ however, made specific recommendations about how to improve the quality of laboratory reports after analysis of the difficulty of the various portions of the reports. Listing, definition and chronology were determined to be low-level. Medium-level difficulty were summary, classification and compare/contrast. argument, Analysis and along with scientific argument, were found to be at the highest level of difficulty. The recommend ati ons were 1 ) to avoid short reports which would preclude an introduc­ tion section, an experimental method section, and a theory section as omitting these sections would lose an opportunity to write as well as to fully comprehend the experiment, and 2 ) to avoid using prepared data tables as the use of such tables eliminated the medium-level task of data organization. Although Rosenthal was primari ly concerned with the improvement of the upper division chemistry laboratory report and the opportunity to develop good writing skills, it seems plausible to this resear ch er to expect that good writing skills might be developed lower division laboratory reports as well. in the Rosenthal suggests that explicit expectations and usable guidelines for form and content need be provided to the s t u d e n t s .42 41 Rosenthal, L., "Writing Across the Curriculum: Chemistry Lab Reports," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 64 (December 1987), 996. 42I b i d . , 998. 27 Returning again to the problem of public under ­ standing of the methods of science, it would appear that if the goals of "writing across the curriculum" were partially achieved, some of the concerns of the scientific community might be relieved. identified 43 Part of the probl em has been as: We have very few spokesman who can communicate with the public on their level of understanding and at the same time can understand scientists and the scientific process . . . and some scientists who have assumed the role of 'interpreters* are part of the problem because they tend to present a dramatic and oversimplified view. Undergraduate Research A new emphasis has been placed upon providing opportunities for undergraduate participation in research projects and although the practice has not yet become wide spread, the number of publications and papers being presented with undergraduates as co-authors is increasing. The Council on Undergraduate Research sponsored a conference 44 at Colgate University in 1985 and was overwhelmed by the unexpected numbers of interested scientists, college presidents and deans. Although there are detractors to the movement to include undergraduates in scientific research, professor of chemical engineering 43 . Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society, A New Agenda For S c i e n c e , New Haven, CT 1987, 15. 44 Worthy, W., "Undergraduate Research Gaining a Hiqher Profile," Chemical & Engineering News, 63 (August 19, 1985), 17. 28 Prasad Dhurjati 45 is enthusiastic. He says: Undergraduates bring a fresh perspective to his work. They are naive enough to ask questions that people who have been in the field a long time don't think to ask. The more people lose the ability to ask questions, the less likely they are to stumble on ideas. And a reader4® reSp0nded to the above article with: . . . it comes as no surprise that these students are fully capable, interested, and willing to parti cip ate in a meaningful research experience . . there is no substitute for allowing undergraduates to participate in a real research experience . . . it cannot be taught in a classroom or explained in a seminar. It must, however, be a worthwhile research endeavor, which does not mean washing testtubes in a scientific laboratory or copying library articles for a prof essor . . . In other papers, Doyle 47 outlined the historical arguments for- and against- undergraduate research but also indicated sources of funding for undergraduate research; and Yoder and Spencer 48 analyzed and reported the numbers of undergraduate research papers that have been published or presented. Sacco 49 was skeptical of undergraduate research 45 Mangan, K., "Undergraduate, Professors Collaborate on Research at More and More Colleges," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXIII (May 27, 1987), 1. 46 Gaisky, A., "Involving Students in Research Projects," The Chronicle of Higher Education, XXXIII, 1, 1987), 3T. (July 47 Doyle, M., "Research as Chemical Education," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (October 1984), 854. 48 Yoder, C., & Spencer, J., "The Status of Undergraduate Research," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 64 (February 1987), 163. 49 Sacco, A., "Undergraduate Research: Myth or Reality," Chemical Engineering Education, 15 (Summer 1981), 121 . 29 and reported that only about fifteen per-cent of the research was publishable. Pep pa s 50 and K r a n t z 51 were somewhat more supportive of undergraduate research and pointed out several benefits. Volk, 53 Sanzone, and Belliveau and O'Leary 54 52 Sequin and outlined the wide variety of research topics pursued as undergraduate research at their institutions, as well as how they treated their chemistry research projects as liberal arts subjects. Additionally, Powers and Black 55 reported that faculty- student research played an effective role in the training of cc undergraduate students. Spencer and Yoder reported on surveys of undergraduate research in the last decade. 50 Peppas, N., "Student Preparation for Graduate School through Undergraduate Research," Chemical Engineering E d u c a t i o n , 15 (Summer 1981), 135. 51 Krantz, W . , "Undergraduate Research in Chemical Engineering," Chemical Engineering Education, 15 (Summer 1981), 137. 52 Sanzone, G., "Undergraduate Research in Chemistry," Journal of Chemical Education, 54 (September 1977), 1977. 53 Sequin, M., & Volk, S., "D.SEA," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 63 (February 1986), 144. 54 .Belliveau, J., & O'Leary, G., Jr., "Establishing an Undergraduate Research Program," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (August 1983), 670. 55 Powers, J., & Black, D., Jr., "Research in the Undergraduate College, Journal of College Science T e a c h i n g , V (January 1976), 171. 55Spencer, J., & Yoder, C., "A Survey of Undergraduate Research Over the Past Decade," Journal of Chemical Education, 58 (October 1981), 780. 30 Goodwin 57 reported on a successful synthesis project that provided specific undergraduate research experience as pursued at his institution while B u n n e t t58 and P lad ziewicz5 ^ and Mi l l s **0 reported on surveys and symposiums on und er ­ graduate research as che mical education. graduate research is not yet widespread, deal of interest Although under ­ there is a great in including such an opportunity in the undergraduate chemist ry curriculum. Testing and Academic Placement The attempts to diagnose failures and to predict success of freshman students history. in chemistry has a long M a r t i n 61 at Purdue University studied the performance of more than one thousand students enrolled in •freshman chemistry and did an analysis to determine the 57 Goodwin, T., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: The Total Synthesis of Maytansine," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 511. 58 Bunnett, J., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: The Education of Butchers and Bakers and Public Policy Makers," Journal of Chemical Ed uc a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 509. 59 Pladziewicz, J., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: Factors Important to the Maintenance of Und er graduate Research Programs," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 515. 60Mills, N., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: Undergraduate Research from the Perspective of a Young Faculty Member," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 513. 61Martin, F., "A Diagnostic and Remedial Study of Failures in Freshman Chemistry," Journal of Chemical Education, 19 (June 1942), 274. 31 factors that might cause failures in chemistry, as well as the ultimate failure to obtain a baccalaureate degree in eight semesters. His analysis of student failures in chemistry revealed that those students who failed in chemistry also failed in other subjects such as English and mathematics as well. His recommendation was to require those students who had failed in freshman chemistry to pass the elementary courses in English and mathematics before the student could repeat the chemistry course. His analysis of the student failures did not permit prediction of student success but did outline the procedures for remedial coursework. Brasted Hadley, 63 et a l ®2 a t Southern Illinois University and at the University of Minnesota studied the relationship of high-school preparation to college chemistry grades. Both papers recognized the wide diversity of high- school courses offered in their states, but found that highschool preparation in physics, chemistry and mathematics to be of great importance to success in the college chemistry course. Brasted, in particular, was strongly against offering remedial-level courses to those students who came unprepared for the college-level course in chemistry. 6? Hadley, E., Scott R., & Van Lente, K., "The Relation of High-School Preparation to College Chemistry Grades," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 30 (June 1953), 311. 63 Brasted, R., "Achievement in First Year College Chemistry Related to High School Preparation," Journal of Chemical Education, 34 (November 1957), 562. 32 Hovey and Krohn 64 reported on their efforts to develop a screening examination to be administered to entering freshmen at the University of Toledo to preclude the registration of underprepared students in beginning chemistry courses. This exa mination later became known as the Toledo Chemistry Achievement Test and is available to institutions of higher education from the Division of Chemical Education of the American Chemical Society. The particular importance of this paper is that it reports an effort to predict success and failure prior to students actually taking the first course in chemistry. Coley 65 found the Toledo Chemistry Achievement Test scores to be of less value in predicting success in freshman chemistry than the grades obtained in a prerequisite chemistry course. also found that ACT 66 scores correlated better with freshman GPA's than with specific course grades. by Paul. 67 He This was confirmed A conclusion drawn from their work was that each institution must develop its own unique prediction equation and methods. 64 Hovey, N., & Krohn, A., "Predicting Failures General Chemistry," Journal of Chemical Education, 35 (October 1958), 507. in 65 Coley, N., "Prediction of Success in General Chemistry in a Community College," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 50 (September 1973), 613. 66 The American College Testing Program, Using the ACT Assessment On C a m p u s , Iowa City, IA 1984. fi 7 Paul, A., "Factors Affecting Student Performance in General Chemistry," Journal of College Science Teaching, VII (May 1978), 301. 33 go Pickering, and Andrews 70 go Ozsogomonyan and Loftus, and Andrews all reported on the relative usefulness of using SAT Mathematics scores in predicting success in fresh ­ man chemistry at their respective institutions. Critics^ of standardized tests, such as the SAT Test and the ACT Test have made charges of "racial bias" and "unfairness" but Carmichael, et al 72 reported that SAT scores had the highest correlation with success chemistry at Xavier University, in freshman a predominately black institution of higher education. A follow-up study 73 indicated that SAT scores continue to be utilized for selection of prospective students by selective colleges and universities. 68 Pickering, M., "Helping the High Risk Freshman Chemist," Journal of Chemical Education, 52 (August 1975), 51 3 . 69 Ozsogomonyan, A., & Loftus, D., "Predictors of General Chemist ry Grades," Journal of Chemical Education, (March 1979), 173. 56 70 Andrews, M., & Andrews, L., "First-Year Chemistry Grades and SAT Math Scores," Journal of Chemical Education, 56 (April 1979), 231. 71 ____________, "Critics and Defenders of Standardized Tests Weigh 'Tr uth-i n- Te st ing 1 Bills in New York," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXII (May 28, 1986), 13. 72 Carmichael, J., Jr., Sr. Bauer, J., Sevenair, J., Hunter, J., & Gambrell, R., "Predictors of First-Year Chemistry Grades for Black Americans," Journal of Chemical Ed u c a t i o n , 63 (April 1986), 333. 73 Jacobsen, R . , "Selective Colleges Use of SAT is Unshaken by Controversies," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXII (July 2, 1986), 1. 34 Summary The review of the literature concerning the first two years of undergraduate chemistry instruction reflects, to a great extent, the same concerns that colleges and universities have expressed for the undergraduate experience in general: a meaningful curricula; increased opportunities for allowing undergraduate students to become involved in their own education; a new emphasis upon literacy; opportunities for undergraduate research; and an unbiased means of course-placement that will optimize successful completion of their chosen course of study. An interview survey instrument to evaluate chemistry curricula was developed which integrated elements of the reviewed literature with the particular requirements set forth by the American Chemical Society for the curriculum of the first two years of professional chemistr y offered in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and statesupported universities. 35 CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to analyze the similarities and the differences of the curriculum in chemistry in state-supported two-year colleges and statesupported universities in Michigan that offer a minimum of two years of courses in chemistry which lead to a b a c c a ­ laureate degree in chemistry as approved by the American Chemical Society. Procedure This study was developed in several distinct phases: a) survey instrument item development in which the universe of information that would be useful in a comparision of the instructional programs was reduced to a manageable subset of that universe; b) survey instrument item response phase in which the range of expected responses to the survey items were identified and placed into five levels of absence/ presence, non -c ompliance/compliance or least-desireable/ most-desireable conditions; c) a perceptions instrument development phase in which possible questions concerning perceptions were reduced to a single question addressing the perception regarding the details of the chemistry curriculum 36 at other institutions; d) a surveys content-val idation phase during which the completed surveys were submitted to a panel of five practicing professors of chemistry who was asked to determine whether the questions and responses provided were sufficiently diverse to discern similarities as well as differences in instructional programs; e) the survey instruments improvement phase during which responses to survey questions were modified to include a greater range of responses and additional questions were added to the survey instruments; f) the identification of the population of state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities that offered two years of chemistry leading to an approved baccalaureate degree with an emphasis of study in chemistry; g) selection of appropriate statistical tests to analyze the data; and h) determina ti on of the reliability of the paper-and-pencil informational survey instrument. This chapter is organized into the following sections: instrument 1 ) survey instrument item responses; item development; 2 ) survey 3) survey item content- validat ion; 4) survey instrument item response improvement; 5) determination of the population; appropriate tests of significance; 6 ) selection of 7) sampling phase; and 8 ) determination of the reliability of the survey instrument. Survey Item Development The general approach taken in developing the survey instrument questions was to make a co mprehensive list of aspects of instruction deemed important by a) this 37 researcher's experience as a classroom instructor, the aspects and b) identified by the Committee on Professional Training of The American Chemical Society and those aspects deemed important by recent studies of undergraduate education. ified, From the list of aspects of instruction ident­ those aspects that might make useful or interesting comparisons but might be difficult to substantiate were eliminated from further consideration. line-item analysis of departmental organization) Thus, salaries and (or other unit of budgets were eliminated from those aspects of college and university organization that would be studied. A decision was made to develop a 1 to 5 degree scale of nonconformity/conformity, absence/presence or no n ­ desirable/desirable conditions. The 1 to 5 degrees on the scale could be constructed to represent doubling quantities. With a 1 score as an absence (zero) and 2 as a one score, a 5 score could represent 24 , that is sixteen times the 2 score. It was expected that this ordering, or similar ordering, would satisfy the expected responses to the survey instrument items. Survey Item Response Development The development of the range of anticipated item responses followed the pattern that whenever there were multiple combinations of possible survey item responses, first step taken was a ranking of the item responses from non-compliance to full compliance or absence to multiple levels of presence. The second step taken was an 38 the evaluation of inclusive responses of the 1 to 5 ranking scale. Recognizing that the grouping of responses might be biased and might not permit the detection of the differences or similarities that might occur between or within levels of institutional instructional programs, regrouped into a checklist form. the responses were The sum of the checklist responses was transformed into a 1 to 5 ranking scale. This process was repeated as necessary to permit maximum diversity of item responses. The survey items were then collected into five catagories: 1 ) organization of the instructional unit; instruction of first year chemistry; second year (organic) chemistry; 2) 3) instruction of 4) faculty; and 5) facilities and instructional resources. Such items of interest as the identification of the textbooks used did not lend itself rea dil y to ranking or ordering. textbook(s), For that survey item, an identification of the author(s) and publisher(s) adequate by this researcher. was assumed to be From the outset of the study, the survey instruments were intended to be essentially interview survey instruments so as to preclude possible misunderstandings of individual survey item questions or of the survey item responses. The Perceptions Instrument was intended to identify the interviewee's overall perception of the program of instruction of the first two years of chemistry at statesupported two-year colleges and state-supported universities 39 in Michigan. The same perceptions question was directed at each of the stratified groupings of small-size two-year colleges, medium-size two-year colleges, year colleges, large-size two- small-size universities, medium-size universities and large-size universities. Examples of institutions were provided for each stratification and five levels of response were provided for each perception question. These responses ranged from "somewhat lesser quality" at the lower end of the scale to a "somewhat better quality" at the higher end of the scale. Interviewees were not asked to differentiate between the instructional programs in chemistry at institutions of the same stratification size-level as the interviewee's institution. Survey Item Content-Validation The Interview Survey Instrument and the Interview Perceptions Instrument were submitted to a panel of five practicing professors of chemistry to determine the content validity. The panel members were specifically requested to respond to two questions: 1) Is the breadth of questions adequate to discern similarities and differences in instruc­ tional programs of the target population? and 2) Are the possible responses to the questions sufficiently diverse so as to adequately discern absence/presence of instructional features and also to discern similarities/differences in the instructional programs? Each member of the panel was provided with the survey instruments and a set of definitions of content validity, and construct v a l i d i t y ^ ^ The specific comments of the Validation Panel may be found in Appendix A. The scale chosen for use on the Interview Perceptions Instrument was intentionally designed to force a response choice. There was some concern on the part of the validation panel in not including an optional opinion" or similar response. "no This researcher chose not to include such an option as that would defeat the forced response design. This researcher made the assumption that every interviewee possessed a perception about the program of instruction in chemistry at the other institutions whether the perception was based upon some evidence, assumption, reputation. an or alternatively upon an institution's Therefore, every interviewee was expected to reveal his/her perceptions about the other institutions but was not expected to reveal the particular basis for the perception. Survey Item Response Improvement Responding to the comments made by the panel of experts who commented upon the validity of the survey items and the item responses provided, modificati ons incorporating those suggestions were made to the survey instruments. Improper nomenclature of the laboratory equipment ^L. J. Cronbach, "Test Validation," in Educational M e a s u r e m e n t , Robert L. Thorndike, Ed., Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1971, 446. was remedied and additional survey items were added that clarified the original survey items. Item responses were refined to reflect the concerns of the validation panel members. A state-sup por ted two-year college and a statesupported university were randomly selected for a preliminary use of the survey instruments to determine the suitability of the survey items and item responses, to obtain an estimate of the actual on-site time requirements, and the feasibility of administering Part IV Facilities & Resources, by mail. After the preliminary tests, the principal change in the administration of the Interview Survey Instrument was to decide to send the entire Interview Survey Instrument to the interviewees. Early reception of the Interview Survey Instrument permitted the interviewees ample time to examine the questions and responses prior to the actual on-site interview. In each case, the interviewee made preli mi na ry responses to the survey questions along with their own questions about the intent of the survey questions and responses. The Population The total populat io n of state-supported two-year colleges and state-su pported universities that offered two years of chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with an emphasis in chemistry was determined by obtaining an institutional catalog and schedule of classes from each of the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported 42 universities in Michigan. and class schedules, By examination of the catalogs it was determined which of the state- supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan offered two years of instruction in professional chemistry, and to thereby identify those institutions and their instructional programs as the target population of this study. (See Appendix B.) The institutions identified as offering instruction of two years of professional chemistry were then stratified into small-size, medium-size, and large-size two-year colleges and small-size, medium-size and large-size universities as defined in Chapter I of this study. The baccalaureate-degree-gra nting programs at the University of Michigan at Flint and the University of Michigan at Dearborn were considered in this study to be independent of the instructional program at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor. Therefore, the former institutions and their instructional programs were classified as medium-size state-supported universities for sample selection and analysis purposes. The resulting total population of institutions of interest to this study included five small-size state-supported two-year colleges, seven medium-size state-supported two-year colleges, large-size two-year colleges, universities, ten two small-size state-supported seven medium-size state-supported universities and six large-size state-supported universities. Additional e x a m i n a t i o n .of the catalogs and class 43 schedules of the colleges and universities permitted a close scrutiny of the course credits, as well as examination of the tuition and fees structures utilized to fund instruction by all of the institutions in the target population. The American Chemical Society2 has re Commended that a total of 180 contact hours be devoted to lecture and recitation, and 240 contact hours be devoted to laboratory instruction in the first two years of instruction in professional chemistry. Examination of the college and university catalogs perm itted a scrutiny of the credit and contact hours allotted to lecture, recitation and laboratory instruction. With an examination of the entire target population of state-supported two-year and state-supported universities offering instruction in professional chemistry, a more detailed comparision was made possible than that offered by examination of only a selected sample of the institutions. Those institutions whose instruction in chemistry differed greatly from the recommendations made by the American Chemical Society for lecture and contact hours were readily determined. Fee and tuition structures differ somewhat from institution to institution, and so a generic sixty-two semester hour curriculu m was created for full-time chemistry 2 ACS Society Committ ee on Education, Task Force on ACS Involvement in the Two-Year College, Guidelines for Chemistry & Chemical T ech nology Programs in Two-Year Colleges: Experimental V e r s i o n . American Chemical Society, 1987. 44 students to permit easier comparisons. If only the costs « of part-time instruction in chemistry was examined, the unequal weights of registration fees and other fees collected at the institutions might create a seriously flawed evaluation of the actual costs incurred by more probable full-time students at these institutions. Estimated costs for sixty-two semester hours of instruction (the first two years of study leading to the baccalaureate degree) were determined based solely upon tutition and fees for resident students as determined by the respective institutional guidelines. The estimated costs do not include the expenses a full-time student would incur for books, supplies, room and board, nor for any of the many other costs incurred by students. The estimated costs should not therefore be used for any comparisons that would require a more comprehensive estimation of total costs. Selection of An Appropriate Test of Significance The Interview Survey Instrument was divided into five sections. Each section of the Interview Survey Instrument yielded a score that was used to determine a mean score for the six state-supported two-year colleges and a mean score for the six state-supported universities surveyed in the sample of institutional instructional programs in chemistry. A t-test for independent samples was used as the method employed for tests of significance based on the following: 1) the sample was small and included only six 45 programs of instruction in chemistry at state-supported twoyear colleges (as well as an equal number of programs of instruction at state-supported universities); 2) the standard deviations of the scores were readily calculated; and 3) the population of the instructional programs of chemistry as measured by the survey instrument questions were assumed to be normally distributed. In each case, the t-test was used to determine whether there was a significant difference between the mean of the scores obtained from the sample of state-su pported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores obtained from the sample of state-supported universities. Reliability of the Interview Survey Instrument An internal-consistency reliability coefficient 3 (alpha) of the Interview Survey Instrument was determined to be 0.897 from the scores obtained from the one hundred nineteen interview survey questions responded to by the twelve institutions that participated in the study. The Sample A random selection of two institutions from each of the stratified groups of state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities was made. This resulted in a total sample size of six state-supported two-year 3 Robert L. Ebel, Essentials of Educational M e a s u r e m e n t , Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972, 420. 46 colleges and six state-supported universities. These institutions were then contacted to arrange for a visitation that would not be hurried, but equally would not intrude upon the patience nor valuable time of the repr ese ntativ es of the surveyed institutions. Upon receipt of an oral acceptance to participate in the interview, a statement of participant rights was mailed to the interviewees, as well as the Interview Survey Instrument, which was expected to be examined prior to the actual interview. Upon receipt of written consent, the Interview Survey Instrument was then administered to the participants. Upon completion of the Interview Survey Instrument, the Interview Perceptions Instrument was admi nistered to the participants. A decision was made to adm in iste r the Interview Perceptions Instrument AFTER the administration of the Interview Survey Instrument so that the participants of the survey would have a clear sense of the instructional aspects they were being asked to compare. Summary An Interview Survey Instrument was developed to evaluate selected aspects of the educational program of instruction of the first two years of pro fessional chemistry in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and statesupported universities. A second instrument, an Interview Perceptions Instrument was developed to identify the interviewee's perceptions concerning the instructional program in chemistry at their own institution as compared to 47 the instructional pro gra m in chemistry at other institu­ tions. The survey items and item responses for both survey instruments were improved and validated by an expert panel of practicing professors of chemistry who were knowledgable of instruction in chemistry. Two institutions were randomly selected from each of the three stratfied-bystudent-enrollment groups of state-supported two-year colleges and sta te-supported universities. A total of twelve institutions were surveyed from the total number of twenty-two state-supported junior/community colleges and fifteen sta te-supported universities offering two years of instruction in professional chemistry that leads to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry. Raw data were recorded for the survey questions, and the l-to-5 scores were modified to be inclusive of the data collected after the survey was completed. T-tests were used as tests of significance to compare the programs of instruction in che mistry at the state-supported two-year colleges and sta te-supported universities in Michigan. A coefficient of reliability for the Interview Survey Instrument was determined to be 0.897. The Revised Interview Survey Instrument and the Interview Perceptions Instrument may be found in Appendices D and E. The data collected by the two instruments may be found in Appendices P, G and H. 48 CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATIONS OF THE STUDY This chapter is organized into the following sections: Responses; 1) Analysis of the Interview Survey Instrument 2) Analysis of the Interview Perceptions Instrument Responses; 3) Analysis of Tut ition and Fees; 4) Analysis of Credit Hours and Contact Hours; and 5) Analysis of Institutional Use of Course Placement Tests. Analysis of the Interview Survey Instrument Responses. The Interview Survey Instrument responses were analyzed and interpreted by addressing the five categories of the Interview Survey Instrument: a) Organization of the Instructional Unit; b) Instruction in First Year Chemistry; c) Instruction in Second Year (Organic) Chemistry; d) Faculty; and e) Facilities and Instructional Resources. addition, the total scores obtained from the Interview Survey Instrument were analyzed to compare overall similarities and differences of the instructional programs of the state-supported two-year colleges and the statesupported universities. Organization of the Instructional Unit Eight survey questions addressed aspects of The Organization of the Instructional Unit 49 (OIU) and the In potential OIU scores ranged from a low of 8 to a high of 40. The derived OIU scores for the state-supported twoyear colleges in the sample ranged from 12 to 24 with a mean of 17.5. The derived OIU scores for the state-supported universities in the sample ranged from 12 to 37 with a mean of 30.2. (See Table IV-1.) Ho^: There is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of the Organization of the Instructional Unit at the 0.05 level of confidence. TABLE IV-1 ORGANIZATION OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT State-Supported T w o- Ye ar Colleges Scores 12,24,17,17,15,20 Mean Score 17.5 Standard Deviation Sample Size Critical Value: +/- 4.1 n = 6 975^0 (OIU) State-Supported Universities 31,18,30,37,35,30 30.2 +/- 6.6 n = 6 = 2 *23 A two-tailed t - t e s t 3- of independent samples was used to determine whet her the mean of the OIU scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the Glass, Gene V., and Julian C. Stanley., Statistical Methods in Education and P s y c h o l o g y , Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1970. 50 mean of the OIU scores obtained from the state-supported universities were significantly different. The null hypothesis was rejected. t„ Ca XC • = 4.02. A significant difference was found between the mean of the OIU scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the OIU scores obtained from the state-supported universities at the 0.05 level of confidence. (Refer to Appendix D for the survey questions and to Appendix F for the the institutional responses.) Upon examination of the responses to Questions 1 and 2 (Ql/ Q2), the responses universities were more indicated that state-supported likely than the state-supported two- year colleges to have independent departments of chemistry and to have clearly definable financial support addressable through budgetary line items. Additionally, because the administrative organization in the state-supported two-year colleges typically merged the chemistry discipline with a wide range of other related, instructional disciplines, or seemingly unrelated funding for equipment capital outlay equipment, repair and maintenance of equipment, as well as routine acquisition of expendable laboratory and lecture supplies, was uncertain. Course Placement (Q3) was addressed by four of the six state-supported universities by use of a chemistry pretest, but not at all by any of the six state-supported two-year colleges surveyed. Course placement, as a p r e ­ requisite for entry into the courses comprising the first 51 year of chemistry, was found to be a function of the counseling staff in these state-supported two-year colleges. The extent to which the institution's provided student personnel services, or administrative assistance in de t e r ­ mining proper course placements was not studied in this survey. Tutoring (Q4) was not given a high priority in any of the twelve institutions in the sample. Not disclosed by the responses to Q4 was the observation that one of the state-supported two-year college chemistry departments actively discouraged the use of tutors primarily because the selection and control of the tutors was effectively out of the administrative control of the instructional department. Student Opportunities for Professional Activities (Q5) was found totally lacking in five of the six statesupported two-year colleges, while the state-supported universities reported a variety of student opportunities such as attendance and participation in departmental seminars, college seminars, Student Affiliate Chapters. and American Chemical Society This great difference in student opportunities between the two types of institutions was assumed to be from a perceived lack of "sense of control" of the "department's life" by members of departments in state-supported two-year colleges. Professional/Career Counseling (Q6) comparisons fared somewhat better than the Student Opportunities comparisons, with all institutions providing at some level 52 opportunities for career counseling. Additionally, five of the six sta te-supported universities sponsored an American Chemical So ciety Student Affiliate Chapter on their respective campuses, while none of the six state-supported two-year colleges had such provision. The responses to the question on Student Opportunities for Research (Q7) was revealing. It might have been expected that student opportunities for chemical research would have been the domain of the state-supported universities, but two of the six state-supported u n iv er s­ ities in the survey of institutions had no provision for student chemical research in the first two years of chemistry, while one of the six state-supported two-year colleges did provide such an opportunity. This particular state-supported two-year college was also the only institu­ tion of the twelve institutions included in this study that was participating in the American Chemical Society's Project S e e d , a funded project designed to provide summer research opportunities for minority students. Two of the six state-supported two-year colleges and two of the six state-supported universities did not provide any student rec ognition awards (Q8). The Chemical Rubber Publishing Company has for many years made available a free copy of the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics with a small certificate) Student (along to award to the Outstanding in Freshman Chemistry in each participating institution. Most of the institutions made CRC student 53 recognition awards with the awareness that such awards could be an incentive to student performance as well as a recognition of student performance. Instruction in First Year Chemistry Twenty-five questions (Q9-Q33) in the survey address aspects of Instruction of the First Year of Chemistry (IFYC) with potential scores ranging from a low of 25 to a high of 125. The IFYC scores obtained by the state-supported two- year colleges ranged from 66 to 77 with a mean of 70.7 while the IFYC scores obtained by the state-supported universities in the sample ranged from 55 to 77 with a mean of 63.2. (See Table IV-2.) H o 2: there is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of Instruction of the First Year of Chemistry at the 0.05 level of confidence. TABLE IV-2 • INSTRUCTION IN FIRST YEAR CHEMISTRY Scores Mean Score Sample Size Critical Value: State-Supported Two-Year Colleges State-Supported Universities 66,77,77,70,66,68 57,63,59,68,55,77 70.7 Standard Deviation (IFYC) +/- 5.1 n = 6 >975t 10 = 2.23 54 63.2 +/- 8.2 n = 6 A two-tailed t-test of independent samples was used to determine whether the mean of the IFYC scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of IFYC scores obtained from the state-supported universities were significantly different. t „ 3. C d XC hypothesis was not rejected. = 1.90. The null No significant difference was found between the IFYC mean scores at the 0.05 level of co n f i d e n c e . Examination of the survey question responses revealed striking similarities between the two- and fouryear institutions: two of the six state-supported two-year colleges and two of the six state-supported universities surveyed reported that (Q9) the first-year chemistry course had prerequisites that were published publications, in institutional but that the institutions did not adher to the prerequisites in course placement of students. All of these institutions reported that the course prerequisites were routinely waived by non-departmental personnel. An additional four institutions reported that the course prerequisites were published and firmly enforced. Yet, an additional four institutions reported that the course prerequisites were published in institutional publications, but only the course instructor could waive the prerequisites to the course. The first-year chemistry course pr e­ requisites generally require the successful completion of two years of algebra and one year of chemistry in high school. 55 In the scheduling course, (Q10) of the first-year chemistry three of the twelve institutions had morning-only schedules, and an additional four institutions had morning- and/or evening schedules. The remaining five institutions had schedules that included morning, afternoon and evening instruction. consistent. Instructional methods (Qll) were quite Seven of twelve institutions used a lecture- recitation instructional format, and five of twelve institutions used a lecture-without-recitation instructional format. The selection of the course textbook (Q12) for the first-year of chemistry instruction was made by the course instructor or a team of instructors institutions. in eleven of twelve In only one institution was the course textbook selected by a coordinator. A variety of textbooks were found to be used in the sample of institutions surveyed: General Chemistry by Ebbing (Houghton-Mifflin) (three); Chemistry and Chemical Reactivity by Katz and Purcell (Saunders) (three); Chemistry by Zumdahl (Hea th )(t w o ) ; General Chemistry by Brady & Humiston (one); General Chemistry by Whitten and Gailey (one); Chemistry by Sienko and Plane and General Chemistry by Petrucci (Saunders) (McGraw-Hill) (Macmillan) Pertaining to the course description Year Chemistry in the college catalog, (Wiley) (one); (one). (Q13) of First- ten of the twelve institutions in the sample reported that the course descriptions were brief and had but few to some details. It might be assumed that evaluation of transfer credits 56 includes a somewhat more detailed and critical evaluation than a perusal of the course descriptions found in the institutional catalog of courses. The basis for recognition of, or acceptance of, course credits presented for transfer to other institutions was not a part of this study. Lecture Behavioral Objectives (Q14) were utilized by two of the six state-supported two-year colleges, while not used at all by any of the six state-supported universities. A common, often-heard report, was that everyone seemed to be willing to use someone else's behavioral objectives or to use the textbook's behavioral objectives, willing to write their own. but no one seemed Most of the participants reported that they expected the students to become aware of the behavioral objectives found in their course textbook. The first-year chemistry lecture class sizes (Q15- Q16) ranged from thirty to one-hundred-twenty students in state-supported two-year colleges with a mean class size greater than sixty students. State-supported universities generally had classes just twice as large in number of students as the state-supported two-year colleges. There appeared to be very little difference in the total number of tests/quizzes/finals (Q17) administered in the first-year chemistry classes. State-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities alike utilized between five and eight measurements of lecture material comprehension each semester. 57 Three of the seven institutions that administered a comprehensive final examination for the first year of chemistry used the American Chemical Society's Cooperative Examination for General Chemistry, and the other four institutions used an institutionaly adopted authored examination. The remaining five 'in-house' institutions did not utilize a comprehensive final exa mination at the end of the year's work in chemistry. The reasons for utilizing or not utilizing a standardized comprehensive examination was not examined in this survey, but was assumed to be related to the presence or absence of an examinations week college/universi ty academic calendar. in the The question concerning Required Use of Chemical Literature (Q18) revealed that only four of twelve institutions in the sample expected first-year chemistry students to utilize a chemistry handbook for reference use, while none of the institutions made use of any chemical journal references in their instruction. There was no observed difference in the use of the chemical literature between the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities in the institutions surveyed. Published Laboratory Behavioral Objectives for laboratory instruction (Q19) were utilized by only one institution of the twelve institutions surveyed, but there was little difference in the intended laboratory experiences survey. (Q20) as described by the participants in the (See Question 20 in Appendix D for the detailed 58 desired laboratory experiences.) student numbers in the laboratory Maximum capacity of (Q21) ranged from twenty to thirty-one students with no differences reported by the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities. laboratories The mean numbers of students in the (Q22) were slightly smaller but ranged between sixteen and thirty-one students in both state-supported twoyear colleges and state-supported universities. This students-per-lab information conforms closely with the data collected in a recent nation-wide study 2 of large graduate- degree-granting universities. The Student/ Facu lty Ratio in the laboratory (Q23) was similar in both state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities with reported ratios in the range of sixteen to thirty-one students/faculty instructor. The large state-supported universities which utilized teaching assistants (under some supervision) reported a ratio greater than thirty-one students/faculty member. At the beginning of the first-year chemistry laboratory instruction, almost equal numbers (five of twelve) institutions used fill-in laboratory reports of the (Q24) as required written laboratory reports or laboratory journals (six of twelve). Only one institution reported the use of computerized fill-in laboratory reports. 2 Rund, J. V., P. C. Keller and S. L. Brown, "Who Does What in Freshman Lab? A Survey," Journal of Chemical Education, 66 (February 1989), 161. 59 Laboratory Report Requirements existent at five institutions, (Q25) were no n­ but three institutions required that the laboratory reports conform to a particular format. The most common requirement of the seven remaining institutions was for an analysis of the errors in the experiment performed. Spelling errors and use of significant figures were important aspects of laboratory report writing as reported by five institutions. Only one institution required the use of statistical methods in the writing of the laboratory reports at the beginning of the year. Most interviewees that complained about the lack of ability of students to express themselves reported that they did identify misspelled words and awkward sentence struc­ tures on the laboratory reports but, uniformly the interviewees indicated that they did not consider these breaches of writing ability in the final determination of the laboratory report grade. Instructor expectations for laboratory reports at the end of the year (Q26-Q27) differed little from the instructor expectations at the beginning of the year. Despite the experience gained in report-writing by the students over a period of two semesters, the survey of the institutions revealed that the skills gained in report writing by the students were not treated as develop­ mental in nature by the institutions surveyed. This survey did not examine the means used in grading the laboratory reports, nor whether instructors, teaching assistants or graders were involved in the grading of the laboratory 60 reports. Writing (Q28) is not an exp ectation in the first- year of chemistry in either the state-su ppo rted two-year colleges or the state-supported universities in the sample of institutions surveyed. Only one institution supported two-year college) made one or more writing assignments (a state- in addition to the required laboratory reports. It was observed, however, that the state-supported universities began to address this expectation in the student's junior year at the university. Evaluation of the Laboratory Experience (Q29) was found to be primarily determined by the scores obtained on laboratory reports or the journal scores uniformly across all institutions surveyed. But nine of twelve institutions surveyed used at least two additional methods of evaluation in determining the laboratory grades. included unknowns identification, instructor, and observation by or by the use of a laboratory-practical test. Two institutions (both state-supported universities) composite of laboratory report scores, instructor, These methods used a observation by unknowns indentification and a laboratory practical test score in determining the laboratory grades. The question on Structured Laboratory Instruction (Q30) permitted the determination of a quasi-consensus of the relative importance of particular laboratory experiences. Eleven of the twelve institutions in the study considered descriptive chemistry, acid-base titrations, qualitative analysis and thermodynamic 61 experiments to be of prime importance. institutions considered synthesis, to be of next importance. Nine of the separation and analysis A third grouping found seven institutions that included det erm ination of constants, periodic properties, theoretical models and experiments in kinetics in their list of important laboratory experiences. Of lesser importance in the first year chemistry laboratory experience was statistical treatment of data, redox titrations, EDTA titrations and structural determinations. These latter experiments were used by only four of the institutions surveyed in the study. There was little difference in these experiments selected for first-year chemistry students to per for m as reported by the statesupported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities. The survey did not include questions concerning the authorship or publishers of the experiments selected for use in the first year chemistry laboratory. Computer Usage (Q31) as part of the instruction in first year chemistry was completely lacking in two institutions. Seven institutions allowed students to use computers for tutorial purposes, and five institutions permitted students to use computers for computational purposes. Two institutions encouraged students to use computers for data collection, and three institutions used computers for experimental simulations. Only two institutions had provision for student-use of spreadsheet software on computers. Despite this seemingly wide-spread 62 use of computers in chemistry, of the institutions surveyed, the state-supported two-year colleges were more likely to include the use of computers in instruction of chemistry than were the state-supported universities. Assigned student research (Q32) in first-year chemistry leading to a paper or a bibliography was completely lacking in all of the institutions surveyed in the sample. Required Use of Safety References completely lacking the sample. (Q33) was in seven of the twelve institutions in Three institutions used one safety reference and the remaining two institutions made use of two sources of safety information. Safety data references used by the institutions as rep orted by the interviewees included the Merck Index-3 ^ ana Material Safety Data Sheets that are provided by man uf acturers and suppliers of chemical 4 products. The Michigan Right-To-Know Law does not directly address a requirement that students be made aware of the sources of information that describe the hazards of the chemicals they may encounter in the chemical laboratory. However, instructors and student employees of instructional institutions are covered by this law. 3 Company, The Merck Index, 1983. 10th Edition, Rahway, NJ: Merck & ^ Act No. 154 of the Public Acts of 1974, with sections 5, 11, 31, and 63 ammended by Act No. 51 of the Public Acts of 1980. 63 Instruction in Second-Year (Organic) Ch emistry Twenty-five survey questions aspects of instruction in second-year (I S Y C ). (Q34-Q58) (organic) chemistry The survey questions are similar, identical, address the though not to the questions that address the instruction of the first-year of chemistry. The potential scores for this section ranged from a low of 25 to a high of 125. The scores obtained by the state-supported two-year colleges ranged from 73 to 89 with a mean score of 79.2. The scores obtained by the state-supported universities ranged from 65 to 90 with a mean score of 73.3. HOg: (See Table IV-3.) there is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of Instruction in SecondYear (Organic) Chemistry at the 0.05 level of confidence. Table IV-3 INSTRUCTION IN SECOND-YEAR (ORGANIC) State-Supported Two-Year Colleges Scores 80,81,75,89,77,73 Mean Score 79.2 Standard Deviation +/- 5.7 Sample Size n = 6 Critical Value: 975^0 CHEMISTRY (ISYC) State-Supported Universities 73,66,78,90,65,68 73.3 +/- 9.5 n = 6 = 2.23 A two-tailed t-test of independent samples was used 64 to determine whether the mean of the ISYC scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the ISYC scores obtained from the state-supported universities were significantly different. The null hypothesis was not rejected. tC alc = No significant difference was found between the mean of the ISYC scores obtained from state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the ISYC scores obtained from the state-supported universities at the 0.05 level of confidence. Adhering to the prerequisites for the second-year of chemistry (Q34) was found to be much less of a problem for all institutions than was experienced for the first-year course in chemistry. This prerequisite for the second-year (organic) chemistry generally included the successful completion of the first-year chemistry course. .year (organic) variations chemistry courses had limited scheduling (Q35) surveyed. The second- in seven of the twelve institutions The second-year chemist ry course was generally scheduled either in the morning or in the afternoon, but at least three institutions had both morning and afternoon/ evening schedules for the course. The lecture method without a separate recitation class was the instructional method second-year (organic) (Q36) of choice in the chemistry course as reported by nine of the twelve institutions surveyed. The remaining three institutions used a lecture-recitation format of instruction. 65 Eleven of the twelve institutions reported that the course instructor or team of instructors selected the textbook year (Q37) to be used in the instruction of the second- (organic) chemistry course. The textbooks favored by the institutions surveyed include: Morrison and Boyd by Solomons (Allyn & Bacon) (Wiley) Org an ic Chemistry by (five); Organic Chemistry (four); Organic Ch em ist ry by Wade (Pr ent ice-Ha ll) (one); Introduction to Organic Chemistry by Streitweyer and Heathcock (Macmillan) Chemistry by Carey (McGraw-Hill) (one); and Organic (one). organic chemistry course descriptions The second-year (Q38) described in the institutional publications were found to be consistent with the first-year chemistry course descriptions, and were brief descriptions with but few details. Lecture Behavioral Objectives (Q39) were not any more popular in the second-year chemist ry courses than in the first-year chemistry courses. But four of six state- supported two-year colleges used extensive behavioral objectives in their lectures as compared to only one of the state-supported universities surveyed. class capacities Maximum lecture- (Q40) ranged from thirty to greater than two-hundred-forty or more students. The mean class capacity reported for the state-supported two-year colleges was in the one to thirty students range while the mean class capacity for state-supported universities was in the sixty to one hundred twenty students range. These numbers reflect the cla ss room facilities at 66 these institutions, as well as the method(s), whereby the institutions schedule multiple class sections. Lecture Class Sizes Actual Mean (Q41) were app roximately fifteen students in the state-supported two-year colleges and about ninety students in state-supported university lecture classes. There was little difference in the number of tests/quizzes/final examinations administered second-year chemistry course, (Q42) in the and all institutions used between six and eight measurements each semester to determine student achievement. There was an even split of six of the twelve institutions surveyed that administered a comprehensive final examination. Every institution that administered such a final examination reported the use of the American Chemical Society's Coo perative Examination in Organic Chemistry. were, however, The state-supported two-year colleges less likely to administer a comprehensive examination in the second-year chemistry course. Although the students in the second-year chemistry course now had a year of experience in chemistry, students in the second-year chemistry course had few requirements for the Use of the Chemical Literature (Q43) much beyond the extent to which the literature was used during the firstyear chemistry course. There was little difference in this expectation as reported by the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities. Without any substantial change from the instruction in the first-year 67 chemistry course, nine of twelve institutions surveyed reported that they did not publish laboratory behavioral objectives surveyed, (Q44). Of the remainder of the institutions two of the state-supported two-year colleges and one of the state-supported universities used behavioral objectives in their laboratory instruction. There was little difference in the reported goals of the student's laboratory experience in chemistry institutions surveyed. (Q45) among the twelve The laboratory goals in order of importance as reported by the survey participants were: (1 ) Recognize the hazards and unique problems of chemical safety and carefully observe moder n safety practices; accurate and complete experimental records; (2) Keep (3) Use effectively and with understanding a good selection of modern instruments, including IR, UV and NMR spectrometers and gas chromatographs; manipulations; (4) Perform quantitative (5) Assess the reliability of the results; (6 ) Write good reports; and (7) Plan experiments through use of literature. Maximum Laboratory Class Capacities (Q46) did not vary greatly between the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities. collective concern, class instructors, But there was a on the part of most of the laboratory to keep the organic chemistry laboratory class-size somewhat smaller than the first-year chemistry class-size. The primary reasons for reducing the organic laboratory class-size by the institutions were reportedly 68 . the increased possibilities of explosion and exposure to hazardous chemicals encountered by students in the organic chemistry laboratory. Eleven of twelve institutions reported having mean organic laboratory class-sizes twenty-three students. (Q47) of between one and The state-supported two-year colleges had mean laboratory class-sizes at the lower end of that range while state-supported universities reported mean class-sizes near the ca pac ity of the laboratory. Student/Full-Time-Faculty Ratio (Q48) The in the organic chemistry laboratory was report edl y eight to fifteen students in the state-supported two-year colleges and about twice that number in the state-supported university laboratories. An exception were the large universities that used teaching assistants laboratories. (TAs) extensively in the These TAs were supervised by full-time faculty but the student/f ull -time-fa cul ty ratio in these institutions was at least twice as large as the ratio in the universities not using teaching assistants in the laboratory. Nine of the twelve institutions reported that students wrote laboratory journals or wrote reports at the beginning of the year (Q49). Of the nine institutions, three had zero or only one requirement for the reports written. The remaining six institutions reported having between two and four journal/written report requirements (Q50) at the beginning of the year. 69 These laboratory report requirements included, reported, use of significant figures, spelling, report form. in order of importance and proper The state-supported universities were more likely to require the inclusion of error analysis and statistical analysis of the year, (Q51) in the laboratory reports. At the end ten of the twelve institutions reported having students writing journals or formal reports, but there had been no increase in the expectations concerning the quality, nor the number of details to be included in the reports written (Q52). Only three institutions made additional formal writing assignments (Q53) to the students. Ten of the twelve institutions in the survey of institutions reported that the laboratory experiences in organic chemistry were evaluated more methods which (Q54) by a combination of three or included laboratory report grades, identification of laboratory unknowns, and general observations of the laboratory instructnr. Structured Laboratory Instruction (Q55) The question on found complete agreement by all of the institutions surveyed on the importance of including elements of synthesis, and analysis in the laboratory experience. separation A consensus of most of the institutions also included structure determination and product ratio determination in the laboratory schedule. Less commonly found were experiments regarding kinetics or determinations of thermodynamic properties. university) Just one institution (a state-supported reported the teaching of micro-techniques 70 in the laboratory. Computers used in teaching organic chemistry were limited to tutorial use in four institutions, collec tio n and tutorials in one institution, was reported by six institutions. (a st ate -supported university) for tutorials, computations, spreadsheet analysis. (Q56) data and zero usage One of the institutions reported the use of computers data collection, and for There was no discernible difference in computer use in organic chemistry between the statesupported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities surveyed. Eight of the twelve institutions in the study gave no Ass ign ed Student Research chemis try class students. institutions, (Q57) to their organic Of the remaining four two state-supported two-year colleges and two state-supported universities gave assigned student research that included library research for a bibliography. The maj ori ty of institutions were not requiring the use of their library resources in their second-year chemistry courses. At the end of two years of instruction in chemistry, two institutions did not have required student use of safety references (Q58), while six tions surveyed) (one-half the total of institu­ had a required use of only one source of safety information concerning the use of chemicals. survey participants The indicated that the student's primary source of safety information was the laboratory manual. 71 Faculty Eight questions (Q59-Q66) address aspects of the Faculty and potential response scores ranged from a low of 8 to a high of 40. The derived Faculty scores for the state-supported two-year colleges ranged from 14 to 24 with a mean of 19.8. The derived Faculty scores for the state- supported universities in the sample ranged from 23 to 36 with a mean of 32.2. (See Table IV-4.) Table IV-4 FACULTY Scores State-Supported Two-Year Colleges State-Supported Universities 19,21,21,14,24,21 33,23,35,36,33,33 Mean Score 19.8 Standard Deviation Sample Size Critical Value: 975^0 32.2 +/- 3.3 +/- 4.7 n = 6 n = 6 = 2.23 H o 4 ; there is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of Faculty at the 0.05 level of confidence. A two-tailed t-test of independent samples was used to determine whether the mean of the Faculty scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the Faculty scores obtained from the state-supported 72 universities were significantly different. The null hypothesis was rejected. tc a ic = 5 *39. A significant difference was found between the mean of the Faculty scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the Faculty scores obtained from the state-supported universities was at the 0.05 level of confidence. Chemistry faculty numbers (Q59) in state-supported two-year colleges ranged from one to six persons while the state-supported universities reported that faculty numbers ranged from six persons to several times that number. faculty numbers at the lower end of the scale, With state- supported two-year colleges reported having difficulties in providing the variety of chemistry courses they would like to offer, and also, of the institutions two-year colleges) instructors in scheduling of those courses. Four (three of the four were state-supported surveyed did not utilize part-time (Q60) for their professional sequence chemistry courses, while the state-supported universities were quite likely to employee from two to more than seven part-time instructors. The part-time instructor numbers do not include teaching assistants or graduate students. All of the state-supported universities had min imum requirements of the Ph.D degree for their full-time chemistry faculty (Q61). But the state-supported two-year college faculty in the survey tended to possess MS degrees or MS degrees with additional coursework completed. One state-supported two- year college had employeed a BS degreed faculty person who 73 was working on a part-time basis toward the MS degree. Few state-supported two-year college faculty possess the Ph.D degree. On the basis of the survey, it appears that the two-year college faculty generally do, with few exceptions, have the appropriate degrees as recommended by the American Chemical Society and regional accreditation agencies. The degrees possessed by part-time faculty lecturers (Q62) paralleled the degrees held by the full-time faculty lecturers in both the state-supported two-year colleges, well as the state-supported universities. as There was no difference between the academic credentials of the full-time laboratory faculty (Q63-Q64) and the academic credentials of the part-time laboratory faculty, either in the statesupported universities or the state-supported two-year colleges. Ph.D degrees were held by part-time laboratory instructors in the state-supported universities while MS degrees, or MS degrees with additional coursework completed, were held by the part-time laboratory instructors state-supported two-year colleges. in the In some cases, the part-time instructors in the state-supported two-year colleges had higher academic degrees than were po ssessed by the full-time faculty at those same institutions. Faculty loads (Q65) varied consi der ably from institution to institution and ranged from fifteen to more than twenty contact-hours in the state-supported two-year colleges. The state-supported university chemistry faculties reported faculty loads with a range from ten to 74 more than twenty c o n t a c t - h o u r s . Institutions had varied formulas in use to determine the faculty loads. Some of the institutions had a per-se me ste r faculty-contact-load expectation, and other institutions expected the faculty load to be averaged over the college academic year. One state-supported university reported a formula that was used to determine the chemistry faculty load that included factors for large student numbers in the lecture courses. There appeared to be no provision for a zero contact hour faculty load at any of the institutions surveyed but there were provisions for reducing the faculty load on the basis of temporary administrative assignments. Membership in the American Chemical Society for the full-time faculty (ACS) (Q66) was one hundred percent for the state-supported university chemistry faculties, but ranged from zero to one hundred percent with the full-time chemistry faculties of the state-supported two-year colleges. From this study, it can be seen that the state- supported universities consistently have Ph.D requirements for their faculty; the state-supported university chemistry faculty have lower average faculty teaching loads; and the state-supported university faculty are more likely to be members of the American Chemical Society. In addition, the state-supported university faculty were more likely to be teaching only courses in chemistry. Several two-year chemistry faculty reported that the low numbers of chemistry faculty with membership in the ACS was due to the high cost 75 of ACS membership. There were a considerable number of state-supported two-year college faculty members who were teaching "other than chemistry" courses as part of their faculty teaching load. Neither faculty rank nor institutional tenure provisions were examined in this survey to determine whether these two aspects of academic life were factors that affected faculty teaching loads. Facilities and Instructional Resources. Fifty-three questions (Q67-Q119) addressed aspects of Facilities and Instructional Resources (FIR)/ and the potential FIR scores ranged from a low of 53 to a high of 265. The derived FIR scores for the state-supported two- year colleges ranged from 90 to 135 with a mean of 112.7. The derived FIR scores for the state-supported universities in the survey sample ranged from 100 to 159 with a mean of 131.5. (See Table IV-5.) H o 5 : there is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of Facilities and Instructional Resources at the 0.05 level of confidence. A two-tailed t-test of independent samples was used to determine whether the mean of the FIR scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the FIR scores obtained from the state-supported universities were significantly different. The null hypothesis was not rejected. t . CalC = 1.72. No significant difference was found between the mean of the FIR scores obtained from state-supported two-year colleges and the mean 76 Table IV-5 FACILITIES AND INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCES State-Supported Two-Year Colleges Scores 109,105,109,128,135,90 Mean Score State-Supported Universities 141,100,127,159,116,146 112.7 Standard Deviation Sample Size Critical Value: (FIR) 131.5 +/- 16.3 +/- 21.5 n = 6 n = 6 >975t 1() = 2.23 of the FIR scores obtained from the state-supported universities at the 0.05 level of confidence. An examination of the survey questions and the data obtained for Facilities and Instructional Resources revealed 1) the laboratory equipment available at an institution, 2) whether the students at that institution had access to the equipment during the first two years of chemistry, as 3) the relative numbers of students ratio) (student/equipment that utilized each piece of equipment laboratory setting. Generally, as well in the the state-supported universities had a wealth of equipment, but the equipment was not always available for use by the students during the first two years of instruction in chemistry. State- supported two-year colleges reported difficulties in funding some of the recommended organic chemistry instrumentation, 77 such as a NMR spectrometer that the state-supported universities generally possess. On balance, however, whatever equipment that was possessed by a state-supported two-year college was used in a lower student/equipment ratio than used in the state-supported university laboratory. The chemical literature collections possessed by the statesupported universities were found to be greatly superior, diversity as well as in actual volume numbers, in to the chemical literature collections possessed by the statesupported two-year colleges as reported in the survey. American Chemical Society The (ACS) has recommended that a university will possess an extensive chemical literature collection as part of an ACS accreditation of the baccalaureate degree program. 5 An ACS accreditation for two-year colleges proposed and is presently being studied. has been The recommended chemical literature collection for the proposed two-year college ACS accreditation is much less extensive than the recommendation made to the uni ver sity/baccalaureate-degreegranting institution. In either case, however, the ACS recommendation for the institutional chemical literature collection greatly exceeds the actual use of the chemical literature in the first two years of chemistry as reported by the state-supported two-year colleges and the 5 ACS Accreditation of Two-Year Chemistry Programs, Two-Year College Chemistry Conference, Newsletter, Division of Chemical Education, American Chemical Society, 1989. 78 state-supported universities surveyed in this study. Overall Evaluation of the Instructional Program. In two sections of the survey, the mean score obtained from the scores of the state-supported university chemistry programs was found to be significantly different than the mean score obtained from the scores of the statesupported two-year college chemistry programs at the 0.05 level of confidence. Those sections were: The Organization of the Instructional Unit; and Faculty. The overall scores from the institutions surveyed were then examined to determine whether the total scores obtained from these institutions resulted in mean scores that were significantly different. The one hundred nineteen questions addressing The Overall Evaluation of the Instructional Program (OEIP) resulted in a potential score with a low of 119 and a maximum possible score of 595. The total derived OEIP scores for the state-supported two-year colleges ranged from a low of 282 to a high of 327 with a mean of 306.7. The total derived OEIP scores for the state-supported universities ranged from a low of 280 to a high of 410 with a mean of 342.0. HOg: (See Table IV-6.) there is no significant difference between the mean scores that measure aspects of the entire two years of professional chemisty at the 0.05 level of confidence. A two-tailed t-test of independent samples was used to determine whether the mean of the OEIP scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of 79 the OEIP scores obtained from the state-supported universities were significantly different. The null hypothesis was not rejected. fcC alc = No significant difference was found between the mean of the OEIP scores obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the OEIP scores obtained from the state-supported universities at the 0.05 level of confidence. Table IV-6 OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM State-Supported Two-Year Colleges Scores 296,318,299,318,327,282 Mean Score 306.7 Standard Deviation State-Supported Universities 345,280,339,410,314,364 342.0 +/- 17.0 +/- 44.2 n = 6 n = 6 Sample Size Critical Value: (OEIP) 975^0 = 2 *23 On the basis of the scores that measure the overall evaluation of the instructional programs in the first two years of chemistry, it may be concluded that the chemistry instuctional programs varied as much within the types of institutions as the instructional progams varied between the types of institutions, to the extent of the measures selected in this survey instrument. 80 Analysis of the Perceptions Instrument Responses. The data collected with the Perceptions Instrument resulted in a total of sixty (12 x 5) individual perceptions about the program of instruction in chemistry at the interviewee's institution as compared to other institutions. This data was collected in the form of ranking the local program as compared to the other institutions on the basis of facilities, opportunities. faculty, equipment and student (See Appendi x E for the Interview Perceptions Instrument and Appendix G for the raw data.) The data was then revised to reflect the ranking of the other institutions as compared to the local program of instruction. An example may clarify: if institution A ranked their program as of "slightly less quality" grade) (a 2 as compared to institutional type B, the data was revised to read that institutional type B was of "slightly better quality" A. (a 4 grade) than the program at institution (See Revised Perceptions Data in Appendix H.) The analysis of the total survey scores in the previous section has indicated that there was no significant difference in the mean scores that measure the Overall Evaluation of the Instructional Program obtained by the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities at the 0.05 level of confidence. The analysis of the perception ratings proceeded by ignoring the rankings of (2) "slightly lesser quality," the same quality" and (3) "essentially (4) "slightly better quality." 81 These forty-seven perceptions, from the total of sixty, agree with the general conclusions drawn from the t-test of signif­ icance. That is, that there is no significant difference in the mean scores that measure the overall evaluation of the instructional programs. Next examined were the perceptions made by institutions that perceived the quality of instruction in chemistry at the "other" institutions to be of "somewhat better (1) "somewhat lesser quality" or (5) quality." By comparing an institution's total survey score to the mean of the total survey scores of the "other" institutional-type, the perceptions and the total survey scores for each institutional-types were compared to determine whether the scores were different at the 0.05 level of confidence. (See Table IV-7.) There are thirteen perceptions and accompanying total score comparisons to examine in Table IV-7, and all of the listed perceptions differ from the conclusions that must be drawn from the t-test of significance. The Perceptions Instrument was not designed to identify any differentiation in the basis for the perceptions held by the individuals and institutions surveyed. Because forty-seven of sixty perceptions agreed with the t-test of significance, one might conclude that adequate sources of information were available for use in forming perceptions about the quality of instruction in chemistry that students receive at the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported 82 universities in Michigan. Table IV-7 COMPAR ISO N OF PERCEPTIONS AND TOTAL SURVEY SCORES INSTITUTIONS PER CEIVED OF BY SSTYC SSTYC MSTYC LSTYC MSSU LSSU LSSU SSTYC SSTYC MSTYC LSTYC SSSU MSSU < < < < < > < < < < < < < LSTYC SSSU SSSU SSSU SSSU SSSU MSSU LSSU LSSU LSSU LSSU LSSU LSSU Critical Value INSTITUTIONAL MEAN TOTAL SCORE SCORE 307 307 309 305 375 339 339 307 307 309 305 313 375 < < < < < > < < < < < < < 327 345 345 345 345 345 410 314 364 364 364 364 364 t , SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT? 1.77 3.36 3.80 1.77 0.86 0.24 2.87 0.62 5.04 5.98 2.61 1.57 0.32 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO .975fci = 12 .71 Analysis of Tuition and Fees The academic catalogs and schedules of classes were obtained from all of the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan that offered two years of professional chemistry. These documents were then analyzed to identify the manner in which the institutions levied tuition and fees at student registration to partiall y meet the costs of the institution's operation. During the 1988-1989 academic year, there was a range from $20.50 to $196.00 per semester hour in tuition charged in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and 83 universities. Furthermore, there were a battery of fees identified that students encountered as they pursued their goal of a college education: contact-hour fees, user-fees, registration fees, high-cost- laboratory fees, glassware-breakage fees, parking fees, health fees and general fees. Registration fees each semester/ter m were as high as $100 without regard to the number of courses enrolled, alternatively, or registration fees were levied on a per credit hour basis. To make reasonable comparisons of tuition and fees data, it was necessary to convert all qua rter-hour tuition and fee rates to a semester-hour basis. Generally, the costs charged to students are on a registration plus tuition plus high-cost-contact-hour fee plus other fee(s) basis. But at least one state-supported two-year college charged students on a contact-hour charge plus fees/semester hour plus other fees basis. The relative tuition institutions charged the students was difficult to compare directly because of the wide-spread practice of raising fees, or by the addition of new fees in an effort to postpone the raising of the tuition rates. (A summation of the institutional tuition and fees may be found in Appendix I.) In Table IV-8, the state- supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities are ranked by the nominal tuition charged to students as well as by estimated costs of two years hours) of tuition and fees. (sixty-two semester Students attending the 84 Table IV-8 INSTITUTIONS OFFE RING T W O YEARS OF CHEMISTRY RANKED BY TUIT IO N1 AND EST IM ATED TUITION AND FEES. Institution UM-Ann Arbor Ferris State U Michigan Tech U UM-Dearborn Grand Valley State U Michigan State U UM-Flint Wayne State u Saginaw Valley State Grand Rapids JC Western Michigan U Central Michigan U Lake Superior State Oakland U Eastern Michigan U Oakland CC Northern Michigan U St. Clair Co. CC Macomb Co. CC Northwestern Michigan C Delta College Mott CC Jackson CC North Central Michigan Schoolcraft CC Wayne Co CC Mid-Michigan CC Muskegon Co CC Lake Michigan College Bay De Noc CC Washtenaw Co CC Alpena CC Southwestern Michigan C Lansing CC Kellogg CC Kalamazoo Valley CC Gogebic Co CC Monroe Co CC Tuition $19 3 . 0 0 2 84.00 82.50 80.00 76.00 73.88 73.00 60.50 54.50 54.00 54.00 52.00 51.88 51.00 50.75 49.00 44.25 35.00 35.00 34.50 34.25 34.00 33.00 30.50 30.25 30.00 30.00 30.00 29.00 29.00 29.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 24.50 23.00 22.00 20.50 Tuition Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 .5- T3 10 .5-T 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .5-T 18 .5-T 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 -T 27 -T 27 -T 30 -T 30 -T -T 30 33 -T 33 -T 33 -T 35 36 37 38 Tuition Tuition & Fees & Fees For 62 Rank Sem. Hrs $7800 3900 5400 4200 4800 5300 3400 4000 3800 3400 3800 3600 3300 3600 3400 3200 3100 2600 2400 2400 2200 2300 2500 2200 2000 2000 2000 1900 2100 1800 1800 2500 1800 1800 1800 1500 1600 1400 2Nominal Tuition per Semester Hour 1988-1989. Additional credits at $119.00 per Semester Hour. Tied Ranks. 85 1 7 2 5 4 3 13 -T 6 8. 5-T 13 -T 8. 5-T 10.5-T 15 10.5-T 13 -T 16 17 18 21.5-T 21.5-T 24.5-T 23 19.5-T 24.5-T 28 -T 28 -T 28 -T 30 26 33 -T 33 -T 19.5-T 33 -T 33 -T 33 -T 37 36 38 institutions that charge the higher tuition rates generally pay relativ el y few additional fees. And students attending the state-supported two-year colleges that charge tuition between twenty-seven and thirty-five dollars per-semesterhour may pay, in addition, two to four fees. The practice of levying fees, tuition, permits in addition to institutions to collect monies comparable to levying higher tuition rates. The practice also allows institutions to publicize a lesser tuition rate when comparisons are made between institutions. Analysis of Cr edi t-Hours and Contact-Hours The sta te-supported two-year college and statesupported university catalogs and schedules of classes were examined to determine the course-credits and contact-hours students would be expected to encounter as a fulltime student pursuing the first two years of professional chemistry. The descriptions of courses in state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities, though meagre, were found to be somewhat more stable than the tuition and fees rates that change annually. However, at least one institution, the state-supported University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, is redesigning the curriculum of the first two years of chemistry at that campus. And Michigan State University may well redesign their chemistry curriculum if the institution changes from a quarter-hour basis to a semester-hour basis. Not withstanding, pending changes in curriculum, Appendix J contains a these description of the credit-hours and cont act -hours students encounter when studying the first two years of professional chemistry in Michigan's state-supported two-year colleges and universities. In Table IV-9 may be found a summary of Table IV-9 SUMMARY TABLE MEAN CONTACT HOURS IN LECTURE AND LABORATORY IN TWO YEARS OF INSTRUCTION IN CHEMIST RY OFF ERE D BY MICHIGAN STA TE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES Number of Institutions Mean Total Lecture Hours Small-size Two-Year College 5 202.8 176.4 Medium-size Two-Year College 8 231.9 193.9 Large-size Two-Year College 10 222.5 203.3 Small Size University 2 217.5 172.5 Medium Size University 7 226.6 171.1 Large Size University 6 243.8 222.2 Type of Institution Grand Mean Hours 38 220.7 +/- 45.9 87 Mean Total Laboratory Hours 193.2 +/- 44.0 all of the Michigan sta te-supported two-year colleges and universities that offer two full years of the professional chemistry sequence. Excluded from the IV-9 Summary Table are those institutions that do not offer the entire sequence of chemistry courses, courses. or do not regularly schedule those In the examination of the courses, that a student could enroll it was found in four chemistry courses in one institution and in as many as twelve chemistry courses in another institution while receiving ess entially the same education. In the first institution, ation and laboratory were combined while at the latter institution, the lecture, re ci t­ into a single course, the lecture, recitation and laboratory were offered as separate courses with different identifying numbers. Those institutions operating on a quarter-hour basis have at least one and one-half times the number of courses that semester-hour based institutions schedule in two years of study. institutions, Taken as a group of the data indicates that the American Chemical g Society Recommendation of 180 contact hours in lecture and recitation, and 240 contact hours in the laboratory for the first two years of chemistry, remains a recommendation, and institutions do not adhere to the guidelines closely. ^ACS Society Committee on Education, Task Force on ACS Involvement in the Two -Year College, Guidelines for Chemistry & Chemical Technology Programs Tn Tw.o-Year C o l l e g e s , American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1988, p8. This document superceded the Experimental Version of 1987 but is not substantially different from the latter document. 88 Examination of Table IV-9 reveals that the Grand Mean Hours in le ctu re/lecture-recitation exceeds the ACS recommendation, while the Grand Mean Hours in laboratory are less than the ACS recommendation. Many of the institutions provide fewer hours of instruction, and this may reflect the student-institutional transfer patterns. Problems arise when students begin their undergraduate studies at one institution and then transfer after a year or so to another institution. The total credit hours earned may not be lost in the transfer process, but credit for individual courses may not be granted by the other institution. Analysis of Institutional Use of Course Placement Tests Course placement year in first-year chemistry and second- (organic) che mistry was examined by questions included in the Interview Survey Instrument in this study of Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and universities. Q3, Q9 and Q34 in Appendix D . ) In addition, (See the institutional catalogs and schedules of classes were examined to identify the screening test(s) used by the institutions to place students in courses other than firstyear or second-year chemistry. (See Appendix K for Course Placement Tests used in Michigan state-supported two-year colleges and universities.) ASSET is widely used in the state-supported two-year colleges for general course 7 ASSET, The Ame rican College Testing Program, City, IA. 89 Iowa placement of entering first-year students. The ASSET test, after a few years of use, becomes standardized to the student population served by that state-supported two-year college by correlating a student's ASSET test scores to the grades received by the student in specific first-year entry courses. The ASSET Test was not designed for use as a course placement screening test for the first-year of chemistry. Q The Toledo Test is used by only a few institutions in Michigan but was once widely used as a screening test in universities to determine whether students were academically prepared to enroll in the first year of professional 9 chemistry. The California Test was released in 1989 for use in first year chemistry course placement and may replace the Toledo Test but national norms for the California Test are not yet available. Many institutions use locally- authored departmental screening tests for chemistry placement. Other institutions use high-school grade-point- average and high-school chemistry course completion as an individual-by-individual basis for course placement without the use of any particular screening test. The ACT score continues to be the most wide-spread test score used for course-placement in Michigan's state-supported universities. g Toledo Chemistry Placement Examination, Division of Chemical Education, American Chemical Society. 9 California Chemistry Diagnostic Test, Division of Chemical Education, American Chemical Society, 1989. 90 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Development of the Survey Instruments One major purpose of this study was to construct a reliable and valid Interview Survey Instrument with the capabi lit y to measure selected indices of quality instruction of the first two years of undergraduate instruction in chemistry. A second purpose of the study was to construct an Interview Perceptions Instrument for use in identifying the perceptions held by professors of chemistry about the first two years of undergraduate instruction in chemistry at "other" universities as compared to their own program of instruction in chemistry. The third purpose of the study was to use the Interview Survey Instrument and the Interview Perceptions Instrument to gather data that permitted the analysis of and identification of the similarities and the differences of the curriculum in chemistry in Michigan state-supported twoyear colleges and universities. The analyses included a study of the perceptions held by the instructional staff at participating institutions about the programs of instruction at "other" institutions. Questions were written, and responses to the 91 questions were quantified, instructional unit, b) c) to examine a) organization of the instruction in first-year chemistry, instruction in second-year (organic) chemistry, d) faculty, and e) facilities and instructional resources. Validation of the survey instruments was obtained by submission of the survey instruments to a panel of practicing professors of chemistry. The Interview Survey Instrument questions and responses were improved by a trial use of the instrument. Additional modifications to the Interview Survey Instrument were made after all of the data from the survey became available. The internal-consistency reliability of the Interview Survey Instrument was determined to be 0.897. The Study The entire population of state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan was examined to identify the smaller population of institutions that offered two full years of professional chemistry that led to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis of study in chemistry. This sub-population of the state- supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities was then stratified, on the basis of student population, into five small-size state-supported two-year colleges, seven medium-size state-supported two-year colleges, large-size state-supported two-year colleges, state-supported universities, ten two small-size seven medium-size state- supported universities and six large-size state-supported universities. The validated and improved Interview Survey Instrument was used to identify the variety of instructional practices of a ran domly-selected sample of two statesupported two-year colleges and a randomly selected sample of two state-supported universities from each of the stratified-by-size institutional groups. The sample of institutions examined in this study comprised a total of twelve institutions with six state-supported two-year colleges and six state-supported universities participating. The population of institutions, sample was randomly selected, from which the totaled twenty-two state- supported two-year colleges and fifteen sta te-supported universities that offered two years of instruction in professional chemistry leading to the bacc alaureate degree with a major emphasis in the study of chemistry. sample size of twelve institutions is not large, Whil e the the sample does comprise thirty-two percent of the instructional programs in the population of state-supported two-year colleges and universities studied. The statistical necessity of having equal-sized groups for the analysis precluded any increase in the sample size. The Interview Perceptions Instrument was administered to the interviewees, Interview Survey, after comple tion of the to determine how instructional programs at other state-supported two-year colleges and universities in Michigan were perceived by the participants of the study. 93 Limitations The following limitations to the study were recognized: 1 ) the conclusions drawn from the study may directly apply only to the populat ion of state-supported two-year colleges and universities in Michigan that offer a minimum of two years of instruction in professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry; 2 ) the study may be limited by the particular choice of indices of instructional quality which have been selected to measure the curriculum, facilities and the chemistry faculty that are utilized in providing the desired lecture, library and laboratory experiences that are the minimum requirements for a quality professional training in chemistry as determined by the Committ ee on Professional Training of the American Chemical Society. Findings and Conclusions The following null hypotheses were tested: Ho^: there is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in the organization of the instructional units. When the mean of the scores for the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores for the state-supported universities were compared, a significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. The state-supported universities were generally found to have independent departments of chemistry with a department chair from within the department, 94 and a departmental budget that had specified line items designed to provide necessary financial support to the instructional program. In contrast, the state-supported two-year colleges were found to have mul ti-disciplinary departments whose department chairs often were not chemists, and the departmental/divisional budgets often did not have line item support specified for use in the chemistry discipline. H O 2 : there is no significant difference between the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities in Michigan in instruction in first-year chemistry. When the mean of the scores for the state- supported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores for the state-supported universities were compared, no significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. Many areas of commonality between the state- supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities were found in the examination of the details of the instruction in first-year chemistry: 1 ) both types of institutions had similar prerequisites for the first-year course in chemistry that included completion of high-school chemistry and two years of high-school mathematics; 2 ) both types of institutions experienced the similar practice of the waiving of the prerequisites for the first-year of chemistry by counseling staff; 3) both types of institutions reported the similar pattern of course textbook selection by committee; 4) both types of institutions used the same textbooks titles; 5) institutional catalog course 95 descriptions were equally minimal and lacking of detail as reported by the two types of institutions; little difference 6 ) there was in the number of tests, quizzes and examinations administered and both types of institutions reported the use of between five and eight evaluations each semester; 7) there was no difference in the required use of the chemical institutions; literature between the two types of 8 ) the intended laboratory experiences did not differ between the two types of institutions; 9) no difference was found in the maximum number of laboratory student stations reported by the two types of institutions; 1 0 ) there was a similar lack of an expectancy about the development of student writing skills in both types of institutions; 1 1 ) both types of institutions had relatively similar methods of evaluation of a student's laboratory experience that relied primarily upon evaluation of student reports; 1 2 ) both types of institutions used computers for tutorial use in first-year chemistry instruction; and 13) both types of institutions reported a similar lack of required use of safety chemical references by students in the laboratory. The list is long but does indicate the great extent to which instruction in first-year chemistry is similar in state-supported colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan. The principal differences between the instructional programs in the two types of institutions were identified as the much larger size of the lecture classes in the state-supported universities and the 96 common use of teaching assistants state-supported universities. instructional programs, in the laboratories of the The differences in the however, were found to be small in comparison to the greater number of similarities in the instructional programs as measured by the Interview Survey Instrument. H o 3 : there is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in instruction in second-year (organic) chemistry. When the mean of the scores for the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores for the state-supported universities were compared, no significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. Many areas of commonality between the state- supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities were found in the examination of the details of the instruction in second-year (organic) chemistry: 1 ) both types of institutions had similar prerequisites for the second-year course in chemistry that included a successful completion of the first-year course in chemistry; 2 ) both types of institutions had a similar pattern of course textbook selection by committee; 3) little difference in the use of textbook titles by both types of institutions; 4) institutional catalog course descriptions were equally minimal and lacking of detail; 5) there was little difference in the number of tests, quizzes and examinations administered, and both types of institutions reported using 97 between six and eight evaluations each semester; 6 ) no difference was found in the required use of the chemical literature between the two types of institutions; intended laboratory experiences did not differ; 7) 8 ) there was no difference in the maxi mum laboratory student capacities in the two types of institutions; 9) there was a similar lack of an expectancy for the development of student writing skills in both types of institutions; 1 0 ) both types of institutions had relatively similar methods of evaluation of a student's laboratory experience that included an evaluation of laboratory reports, identifications, unknown compound and student skills in the laboratory; and 1 1 ) both types of institutions reported a similar lack of required use of safety chemical references by students in the laboratory. The list is again long but does indicate the great extent to which instruction in second-year chemistry is similar in state-supported colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan. The principal differences between the instructional programs in the two types of institutions were identified by the much larger size of the lecture classes in the state-supported universities, common use of teaching assistants state-supported universities. instructional programs, and the in the laboratories of the The differences in the however, were again found to be small in comparison to the greater number of similarities in the instructional programs, as measured by the Interview 98 Survey Instrument. H o 4 : there is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in their respective chemistry faculty. When the mean of the scores for the state- supported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores for the state-supported unversities were compared, a significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. state-supported universities The in the study were found to require the Ph.D degree as the minimum requirement for employment, while the chemistry faculty in state-supported two-year college chemistry departments often held MS degrees or less. In addition, the state-supported university faculty in the survey had lower faculty-teaching loads and were more likely to be members of the American Chemical Society, the professional society of chemists. Ho^i there is no significant difference between state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan in regard to their respective facilities and instructional resources. When the mean of the scores for state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the scores for state-supported universities were compared, no significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. State-supported universities were more likely to possess a wide variety of laboratory instrumentation, but the first-year and second-year chemistry students at those 99 state-supported universities had limited access to the instruments. The laboratory -st udents/faculty-members ratios were found to be higher in the state-supported universities than in the state-supported two-year colleges. This was particularly true in those state-supported universities that used teaching assistants atory. in the labor­ The state-supported universities typically had superior chemical literature collections in volume numbers as well as in the variety of journal/book titles. HOg: there is no significant difference between the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities in Michigan when all aspects of a quality education in professional chemistry/ as measured by the Interview Survey Instrument, are compared. When the mean of the total scores of the survey instrument obtained from the state-supported two-year colleges and the mean of the total scores of the survey instrument obtained from the state-supported universities were compared, no significant difference was found at the 0.05 level of confidence. As the instructional prog ram in the first two years of chemistry at each institution was surveyed, the unique details of the instructional program at each institution were recognized. In summary, the instructional programs in the first two years of chemistry at the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities in Michigan, as measured by the Interview Survey Instrument, .had greater 100 similarities than differences in the instructional programs in chemistry. Forty-seven of sixty perceptions about other institutions were found to be "about the same quality" or "slightly better quality" or "slightly lesser quality." These summed perceptions (78%) agree with the statistical measures that there is no significant difference in the instructional programs examined at the 0.05 level of confidence. The remaining thirteen perceptions about other institutional programs of chemistry instruction that were of "somewhat lesser quality" or of "somewhat better quality" were examined for significant differences using a t-test. These perceptions exhibited the greatest differences; the examination of the scores, would have the greatest and in the tests of significance likelihood in determining whether significant differences existed. When the mean scores for those institutions were compared for significant differ­ ences, none were found at the 0.05 level of confidence. One might conclude, majority on the basis of the data, (in a 78:22 ratio) that the of the faculty who participated in the study were knowledgeable and held informed perceptions about the programs of instruction in chemistry at other institutions. The tuition levied at the state-supported institutions that offer two years of professional chemistry was found to vary from a low of $20.50 to a high of $193.00 per semester-hour. Since the programs of instruction for 101 the first two years of instruction in the state-supported two-year colleges and the state-supported universities were not found to be sign ificantly different, as measured by the survey instrument, then it may be assumed that students can receive economical instruction in chemistry in their local state-supported two-year college if that institution offers two full years of professional chemistry. The analysis of contact hours expected of students to spend in lecture and in the laboratory in the first two years of instruction in chemistry revealed a wide range of contact hours. The number of credit-hours and contact- hours required of students in the state-supported two-year colleges may be related to the expected/intended senior institutions to which the students would transfer their course credits. study. This, In general, however, was not examined in this the data revealed that larger state- supported two-year colleges have greater numbers of contacthours in lecture and laboratory than do the smaller statesupported two-year colleges. Similarly, the larger state- supported universities have greater numbers of contact-hours in lecture and laboratory than do the smaller statesupported universities. The analysis of the institutional use of course placement test scores revealed that admissions officers of the state-supported universities placed great credence on the grade-point-average earned by students in high-school studies as the basis for acceptance/rejection to the state- 102 supported universities. But these same state-supported university officials used the student ACT scores as the preferred test scores used for course placement. The state-supported two-year colleges in Michigan have "open access" policies and do not select/reject the students who choose to attend these institutions. The ASSET scores were found to be used extensively by the statesupported two-year colleges in Michigan; but there were individual state-supported two-year colleges that preferred to use student ACT scores for course placement. Course placement of students into the first-year of chemistry was found to vary from institution to-institution in this study. While the Toledo Test was previously widely used, current use of the test has revealed a diminished predictive validity of the test scores in predicting success in the first-year of chemistry in both state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities. Discussion On the basis of the data collected in this study, it could be assumed that some of the differences identified in the section on Organization of the Instruction Unit of the Interview Survey Instrument could be reduced. While the faculty in the instructional units within the statesupported two-year colleges may not be able to effect a change in the departmental/divisional organization, other aspects of the "life" of the department could be addressed. Even if the department is too small to support a seminar 103 program in chemistry, a seminar program in science might very well be feasible and affordable even in the smallest of the state-supported two-year colleges. In addition, the innovation of announcing a chemistry award for the "Outstanding Student in First-Year Chemistry" and perhaps even an "Outstanding Student in Second-Year Chemistry" might go far in encouraging students to excel. A wide variety of observations were made while administering this study of the instructional programs in chemistry at the state-supported two-year and statesupported universities in Michigan. Not all of the observations made could be made to fit into the structure of the Interview Survey Instrument. Most, though not all, of the interviewees expressed strong sentiments about how they perceived that their respective institutional admi ni st ra ­ tions were not concerned about the need to provide for routine laboratory equipment maintenance funding in the development of the institutional/instructional unit budget. At one state-supported university there were twenty of twenty-two Spectronic-20 Spectrophotometers that were non­ functioning. And at a state-supported two-year college, two of three Infrared Spectrophotometers were not functioning. In each case, the instruments had not been repaired because the instructional unit/departmental budget did not include line items designated for such repairs. In some cases the budgetary constraints were reportedly due to the institution's pattern of grouping instructional 104 disciplines into multi-disc ipl inary divisions, and by not providing discrete departmental budgetary line items for the maintenance of equipment. The interviewees volunteered the observation that the instructional disciplines in those divisions were made to compete with each other for the limited funds that were made available on a non line item basis. Interviewees again volunteered that from this mix of instructional disciplines, the chemistry discipline could only rely upon those designated monies collected, such as laboratory fees. Question 56 (Q56) of the Interview Survey Instrument examined the use of computers (organic) chemistry. in the teaching of second-year (See Appendix D for questions and Appendix F for the institutional responses to the questions.) There was no discernable difference found in computer-use in the instruction of second-year chemistry between the state-supported two-year colleges and the statesupported universities. organic chemistry, But if the uses of computers in as measured by the institutions surveyed, was representative of the common use of computers state­ wide, then questions arise: computers on these campuses? Was there a shortage of Was there a shortage of computer software appropriate for organic chemistry? Were the organic chemistry faculties resistant to the idea of using computers? Do the organic chemistry faculties lack the skills to use and incorporate computers and computer software into their instructional programs? 105 The Interview Survey Instrument was not designed to provide answers to these un -anticipated questions. Questions 18, 28 and 32 of the Interview Survey Instrument examined the practice of assigning report and research writing assignments, chemical literature, And Questions 43, same practices courses. as well as the use of the in the first-year chemistry courses. 53 and 57 of the instrument examined the in the second-year (organic) chemistry The survey question responses revealed that neither the stat e-supp ort ed two-year colleges nor the statesupported universities had placed library-type research and writing experiences very high in the priorities of the instructional design(s) of those courses. the ch emistry depa rtments colleges, It may be that in the state-supported two-year and the state-supported universities alike, find that most students enrolled in the chemistry courses of interest in this study do not intend to make chemistry their major emphasis in their quest for the baccalaureate degree. Thus, although the instructional designs of these courses were to prepare chemists and other science-oriented professionals, the courses were really general education, the greater sense, in for possibly a majority of the students. Why have the state-supported universities deferred these across-the -cu rricul um writing experiences until the junior year of the student's studies? And why have the instructional programs in chemistry in the state-supported two-year colleges in this study apparently neglected these 106 writing experiences? A recent study of "goals in teaching" confirms the observation that only a minority of science faculty consider the development of effective reading and writing skills to be an essential teaching g o a l . 1 All of the state-supported two-year colleges and the st ate -supported universities in this study reported that co urs e-placement (Questions 3, 9 and 34) and provisions for student-tutoring (Question 4) existed on their compuses. But in the interviews, all of the participants of the study indicated that both the course-placement into the chemistry courses and the institutional commitment for studenttutoring contin ued to be variable from year to year, and these instructional support services were not firmly established in the institutional support services organizational structure. The questions on scheduling of the first-year chemistry course (organic) (Q10) and scheduling of the the second-year chemist ry course (Q35) revealed that in the survey of state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities, students at those institutions would find it very difficult, if not impossible, on a part-time basis. to attend the institutions These institutions normally scheduled the first-year chemistry and second-year chemistry courses primarily for the larger group of full-time students 1Cross, K. P., & Angelo, T. A., "Faculty Members As Classroom Researchers," AACJC Journal, 59 (April-May 1989), 23-25. 107 that attend those institutions during the day-time hours. Undergraduate research was found to be of increasing importance in the design of undergraduate instructional programs nationwide (see Chapter II). The participants surveyed in the state-supported universities reported that undergraduate research was an important aspect of instruction at their institution, but was also limited only to very outstanding first- and second-year students and to upper class students. No provision had been made, nor was planned for the future, for research opportunities for "less than outstanding" undergraduate students in the majority of the state-supported two-year colleges and universities that participated in this study. Implications for Education The Interview Survey Instrument is a validated survey instrument designed to measure aspects of instruction in the first two years of professional chemistry in the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities, of 0.897. and the instrument has a calculated reliability A state-supported institution could make use of the instrument to assist instructional program, in an evaluation of a chemistry and would be an aid in identifying those areas of the instructional program in the first two years of professional chemist ry that may require improvement. Not only do the Interview Survey Instrument questions incorporate the recommendations made by the American Chemical Society, but the questions also reflect 108 the recommendations and concerns made by the recent national studies of the undergraduate curricula identified in Chapter II of this study. The questions in the survey instrument have not been wei ghted of expense. in terms of importance nor interms Each institution would need to determine the priorities as to which areas of concern about the instructional program should be addressed first. Suggestions for Future Research In recognition that the questions in the survey instrument have not been weighted; and that not every question bears equal importance, it would be of value to determine a weighting system that might incorporate cost/ benefits that would provide the user(s) of the instrument a means of determining the priorities for correcting deficencies that an institution/department might address over a period of time. Another suggestion for research would be to investigate the variety of underlying instructional designs inherent in the variety of chemistry course sequences found in the state-supported two-year colleges and state-supported universities offering two full years of professional chemistry. Some of the institutions allow concurrent enrollment in the laboratory course while the students are enrolled in the lecture course. Other institutions prefer that the students do not enroll in the laboratory course until after the students complete the lecture sequence of courses. 109 Lastly, computers the incomplete incorporation of the use of into the instructional prog ram in the second-year (organic) chemistry in the state-supported two-year colleges and universities might be investigated to identify the underlying causes, and further, 110 to suggest remedial action. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Books ACS Society Committee on Education, Task Force on ACS Involvement in the Two-Year College, Guidelines For Chemistry & Chemical Technology Programs in Two-Year Colleges: Experimental V e r s i o n , Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1987. ACS Society Committee on Education, Task Force on ACS Involvement in the Two-Year College, Guidelines For Chemis try & Chemical Technology Programs in Two-Year C o l l e g e s , Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1988. Allen, Mary J. and Wendy M. Yen, Introduction to Measurement T h e o r y , Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1979. College Entrance Board, Annual Survey of Colleges: Fall Enrollment 1 9 8 5 , New York: College Entrance Board, 1986. Commiss ion on Institutions of Higher Education, A Handbook of A c c r e d i t a t i o n , Chicago, IL: North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, 1984. Committee on Professional Training, Undergraduate Professional Education in Chemistry: Guidelines and Evaluation P r o c e d u r e s , Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, Fall 1983. _________ , "Recommended Journals," CPT N e w s l e t t e r , Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, Spring 1987, 2. Cronbach, L. J . , "Test Validation," in Educational M e a s u r e m e n t , Robert L. Thorndike, Ed., Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1971, 446. Dressel, Paul L., Handbook of Academic Evaluation: Assessing Institutional Effectiveness, Student Progress, and Professional Performance for Decision Making in Higher E d u c a t i o n , San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1978. _________ t F. Craig Johnson and Phillip M. Marcus, The Confidence Crisis: An Analysis of University D e p a r t m e n t s , San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1976. Ill Ebel, Robert L., Essentials of Educational M e a s u r e m e n t , 2nd ed., Englewood Cliffs, N J : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1972 Glass, Gene V . , & Julian C. Stanley, Statistical Methods in Education and P s y c h o l o g y , Englewood Cliffs, N J : Prentice-Hall Inc., 1970. Good, Mary L., The Next 25 Years in Chemistry and Chemical Education: A Perspective for Two-Year C o l l e g e s , Palatine, IL: Two Year Chemistry Conference, Wil li am Harper Rainey College, April 25, 1986. Michigan Community College Association, The Impact of Community Colleges Qn Michigan and Its E c o n o m y , Lansing, MI: Michigan Community College Association, 1981. Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society, A New Agenda For S c i e n c e , New Haven, CT: Sigma Xi, 1 9 8 7 . ’ Society Committee on Education, Critical Issues in Two-Year College C h e m i s t r y , Invitational Education Conference, Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 1985. The American College Testing Program, Using the ACT Assessment on C a m p u s , Iowa City, IA: The American College Testing Program, 1984. Periodicals Andrews, M., & Andrews, L., "First-Year Chemistry Grades and SAT Math Scores," Journal of Chemical Education, 56 (April 1979), 231. Bailey, D., & Merkowicz, L., "Chemistry and English: A New Bond," Journal of Chemical Education, 60 (June 1983), 467. Belliveau, J., & O'Leary, G. Jr., "Establishing an Undergraduate Research Program," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (August 1983), 670. Brasted, R., "Achievement in First Year College Chemistry Related to High School Preparation," Journal of Chemical Edu c a t i o n , 34 (November 1957), 562. Bunnett, J., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: The Education of Butchers and Bakers and Public Policy Makers," Journal of Chemical Education, 61 (June 1984), 509. 112 Burkett, A. & Dunkle, S., "Technical Writing in the Underqraduate Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, 60 (June 1 9 8 3 ) , 4 6 9 . Carlisle, E. & Kinsinger, B., "Scientific Writing," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 54 (October 1977), 632. Carmichael, J., Jr., et. al, "Predictors of FirstYear Chemistry Grades for Black Americans," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 63 (April 1986), 333. Coley, N., "Prediction of Success in General Chemistry in a Co mmunity College," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 50 (September 1973), 613. Committee on Professional Training, "1986 Annual Report," American Chemical Society, Chemical and Engineering N e w s , 65 (May 18, 1987), 59-66. Committee on Redefining the Meaning and Purpose of the Baccalaureate Degrees, Integrity in the College Curriculum: A Report to the Academic C o m m u n i t y , Association of American Colleges, The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXLIX (February 13, 1985), 12. Cross, K. P., & Angelo, T. A., "Faculty Members As Classroom Researchers," AACJC Journal, 59 (April-May 1989), 23. Doyle, M., "Research as Chemical Education," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (October 1984), 854. Gaisky, A., "Involving Students in Research Projects," The Chronicle of Higher Education, XXXIII 1, 1987), 31. (July Goodman, W . , & Bean, J . , "A Chemistry Laboratory Project to Develop Thinking and Writing Skills," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (June 1983), 483. Goodwin, T., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposion: The Total Synthesis of Maytansine," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 511. Hadley, E., Scott, R . , & Van Lente, K., "The Relation of High-School Preparation to College Chemistry Grades," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 30 (June 1953), 311. Hovey, N., & Krohn, A., "Predicting Failures in General Chemistry," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 35 (October 1958), 507. 113 Hutton, W . , "Report of the Fifth Biennial Conference on Chemical Education: Undergraduate Laboratory Instruction," Journal of Chemical Education, 56 (January 1979), 8. Jacobsen, R . , "Selective Colleges Use of SAT is Unshaken by Controversies," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXII (July 2, 1986), 1. Jaschik, S., "Critics and Defenders of Standardized Tests Weigh ' T r u t h - i n-T es ti ng 1 Bills in New York," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXII (May 28, 1986), 13. Knapper, C., "What Should Future Teaching be Like?" The Teaching P r o f e s s o r , 2 (February 1988), 1. Krantz, W . , "Undergraduate Research in Chemical Engineering," Chemical Engineering Education, 15 (Summer 1981), 137. Mangan, K., "Undergraduate, Professor Collaborate on Research at More and More Colleges," The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXXIII (May 27, 1987), 1. Martin, F., "A Diagnostic and Remedial Study of Failures in Freshman Chemistry," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 19 (June 1942), 274. Melhado, L., "Chemical Composition," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 57 (February 1980), 127. Mills, N., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Education— A Symposium: Undergraduate Research from the Perspective of a Young Faculty Member," Journal of Chemical Ed u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 513. Olmstead, J., Ill, "Teaching Varied Technical Writing Styles in the Upper Division Laboratory," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (September 1984), 798. Ozsgmonyan, A., & Loftus, D . , "Predictors Chemistry Grades," Journal of Chemical Education, (March 1979), 173. of General 56 Paul, A., "Factors Affecting Student Performance in General Chemistry," Journal of Colleqe Science Teachinq, VII (May 1978), 301.------------------------ -------------------Peppas, N., "Student Preparation for Graduate School through Undergraduate Research," Chemical Engineering Education, 15 (Summer 1981), 135. 114 Pickering, M., "Helping the High Risk Freshman Chemist," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 52 (August 1975), 513. Pickral, G., "The Laboratory Use of Chemical Instrumentation in the Undergraduate Che mistry Curriculum," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 60 (December 1983), A338. Pladziewicz, J., "Undergraduate Research as Chemical Educ ati on— A Symposium: Factors Important to the Maintenance of Undergraduate Research Programs," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (June 1984), 515. Potera, C., "The Basic Elements of Writing a Scientific Paper: The Art of Scientific Style," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 61 (March 1984), 246. Powers, J., & Black, D., Jr., "Research in the Undergraduate College, Journal of College Science T e a c h i n g , V (January 1976), 171. Pyle, J., "Contemporary Chemical Essays: Dealing With the Writing Problem in a Freshman Chemistry Course," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 59 (November 1982), 959. Rosenthal, L., "Writing Across the Curriculum: Chemistry Lab Reports," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 64 (December 1987), 996. Rund, J. V., Keller, P. C. & Brown, S. L., "Who Does What in Freshman Lab? A Survey," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 66 (February 1989) 161. Sacco, A., "Undergraduate Research: Myth or Reality," Chemical Engineering E d u c a t i o n , 15 (Summer 1981), 121 . Sanzone, G., "Undergraduate Research in Chemistry," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 54 (September 1977), 1977. Sequin, M . , & Volk, S., "D.SEA," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 63 (February 1986), 144. Spencer, J., & Yoder, C., "A Survey of Undergraduate Research Over the Past Decade," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 58 (October 1981), 780. Stacy, J., "The Communication Crisis," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 53 (September 1976), 537. Steiner, R., "Chemistry and the Written Word," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 59 (December 1982), 1044. 115 Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education, Involvement in Learning: Realizing the Potential of American Higher E d u c a t i o n , National Institute of Education, The Chronicle of Higher E d u c a t i o n , XXLX (October 24, 1984*77 35~ ' Varnes, A., & Wetmore, D., "A Novel CommunicationsSkills-Based Approach on the Instrumental Laboratory," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 52 (December 1975), 801. Werner, T., "Reflections on the Emphasis of Communications Skills in the Undergraduate Chemistry Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, 63 (February 1986), 140. Worthy, W . , "Undergraduate Research Gaining a Higher Profile," Chemical and Engineering News, 63 (August 19, 1985), 17. Yoder, C., & Spencer, J., "The Status of Undergraduate Research," Journal of Chemical E d u c a t i o n , 64 (February 1987), 163. Zimmerman, S., "Writing in Chemistry," Journal of Chemical Education, 55 (November 1978), 727. 116 APPENDIX A STATEMENTS OF VALIDA TION FROM THE VALIDATION PANEL FOR THE V AL ID ATION OF THE SURVEY INSTRUMENTS MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF NATURAL SCIENCE EAST LANSING • MICHIGAN • 48824-1)22 DEPARTMENT OP CHEMISTRY TELEPHONE (J17) 355-9715 CHEMISTRY BUILDING FAX (517) 353-1795 I have reviewed the document written by Albert G. Krieger: " Sur ve y Instrument for PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICE: A CHARACTERIZATION OF THE FIRST' TWO YEARS OF U ND ERG R A D U A T E I NS TR UC TI ON IN C H E M I S T R Y IN M I C H I G A N S T A T E - S U P P O R T E D COLLEGES AND UNIVE RS IT IE S," for the p u r p o s e of a s s i s t i n g in its validation. My p e r s p e c t i v e is primarily from that of a major research institution. Section I relates to the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the i nstructional unit. This section is excellent. The breadth of q u e s t ion s and the po ssible responses are a d e q u a t e to discern both the diffe re nce s and s im i l a r i t i e s among the ta rg e t e d in st ru c t i o n a l programs. S ec tion Ila relates to First on L ab o r a t o r y experience. Year C h e m i s t r y and includes a section The ques ti on s and al lowed r e s p on se s in this section, subject to the s ugg es ti on s and comments o u t l i n e d separately, permit d i f fe re nc es and s im i l a r i t i e s in in st ru cti on al p ro g r a m s to be d e t e r m i n e d pr ovided the target p o pu la ti ons are clearly defined. They do not permit a p p r o p r i a t e d el in ea ti on if all first year stu de nt s in a unit must be treated as a block and r e s p o n d e d to in one s u rv ey instrument. Section lib relates to s e c o n d year chemistry. We have two levels of seco nd year courses w i t h d i f f ere nt emphases. The laboratory of each series is indep en den t and different. As ind ica te d above for the previous section, the s u r v e y d oc ument s h o uld be co mpleted for each series to be meaningful. W i th in that constraint, questions and responses seem ad equate to all ow bo th differentiation and d is cr im i n a t i o n Part III addresses faculty. All q u e s t ion s and discriminating; r es ponses are adequate. contract hours are i n a de qu ate for (57). Section IV relates but (57) are excellent R e s p on se s related to to facilities. M5U it am Affirmatiua Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 117 Various q u e s t i o n s rela te to instru me nt s ava il ab le in the unit. A major ins ti t u t i o n will most likely have every piece of equipment, but in moat caaea the e q u i p m e n t will not be a v a i l ab le on a per lab basi3 at either the first or second year level. However, the equ ip me nt may be demonstrated as appropriate or simu la te d by computer, and Honors st ud e n t s will have access to the equipment, g e n e ra ll y on a hands-on basis. If the surv ey instrument is co m p l e t e d on the basis of a "program" rather than a "unit", this section of the do cu m e n t m a y be adequate. If it is only c o m p le ted on a "unit" basi3, I am u n su re that it will discriminate. Harry A. Eick, Ph.D. P r o fe ss or of C h e m i s t r y Mic h i g a n St a t e U n i v e r s i t y Ph.D. in c h e m i s t r y aw a r d e d J an ua ry by State 118 Un i v e r s i t y of 17, Iowa 1989 A. S p r in g A r b o r C o lle g e • Spring Arbor. Michigan 49283 • (517) 750-1200 December 2, 1988 Mr. Albert G. Krieger Chemistry Department Jackson Community College 2111 Emmons Road Jackson, MI 49201 Dear Al: I have examined the survey instrument you have devised for characterizing the first two years of instruction in chemistry. I have organized my comments for each part to answer the questions concerning breadth, discernment, diversity and differences. I. II. Organization of Instructional Unit— The eight questions posed in this section should give information to discern similarities and differences between institutions. I might suggest an additional question dealing with professional activities of the faculty. Suggested examples might be: part-time consulting or research, simmer research activities, workshops or seminars. First Year Chemistry— The questions posed in this section cover a broad range of items from prerequisites to specific details concerning course content. The breadth of topics covered is good. I would add in either #18 or 26 questions concerning qualitative analysis which seems to be making its way back into the curriculum at many institutions. Second Year Chemistry— You might add something more specific about qualitative analysis in #39 or 47. III. IV. Faculty— You could add something about faculty development activities. Facilities and Instructional Resources— A good addition to this section might be the specific use and the number of computers used for data collection, tutoring, word processing, and data analysis. 119 I am impressed with the breadth of questions you have in the survey. The questions have been worded and the responses phrased in such a way that the similarities and differences between instructional programs will be identifiable. The selection of responses should help you discern differences and similarities. I believe you have a sound survey instalment and wish you success as you administer it and analyze the results. Best wishes and success as you come down the stretch. Sincerely, Professor of Chemistry Ph.D. in Chemistry, 1966 Louisiana State university DAJ/sk 120 C C JACKSON COMMUNITY COLLEGE JACKSON COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2111 Emmoni Road • Jackaon, Michigan 49201 (517) 787-0800 November 30,1988 College of Education Michigan State University I have reviewed the Survey Instrument prepared by Mr. Albert Krieger. Based on my seventeen years of teaching experience I find that the questions will provide information that are related to those traits that will allow characterization and comparison of the first two years of the chemistry programs at two- and four-year undergraduate institutions. Particularly, the questions cover the full breadth of factors that contribute to the students’ experience in the chemistry program. I am especially pleased to find that questions deal with class organization and scheduling, behavioral objectives, student access to equipment and literature, and methods of assessing student performance in laboratory as well as in lecture. Many hypotheses can be constructed on the relative importance of these factors to a program’s excellence and this data will provide the means of validating the hypotheses. I also find that the possible responses to the questions is sufficiently diverse as to both provide options for all possible instructional program configurations and to reveal differences among those programs. I look forward to seeing the results of Mr. Krieger’s survey and the conclusions he draws from its data. John Henderson Professor of Chemistry PhD, Organic Chemistry The Johns Hopkins University BOARD O F TRUSTEES GaorgaB. Pottar Chairman L o i s M . F r a n k lin T ro a ta a Batiy W. Oolan Saeratary Micftaai J. Baughman Vte»C>utrman Robart L. Johnson Truskaa Mark K. Rosanfaid Truata* 121 Victor 9. C u m T r«M uw Or. C iydaS. LaTarta CaUaga PmiO«rt L A N S I N G C O M M U N I T Y C O LLEGE S C I E N C E DEPARTMENT MEMO TO: A l b e r t G. Krieger FROM: Gary VanKempen RE: V a l i d a t i o n of R es e a r ch Instrument DATE: J a n u a r y 3, 1989 I have c o m p l e t e d my e va l u a ti o n of the instrument that y ou are p l a nn i ng to use in your research project. My overall c om m e nt s are gi ve n below. I also made some not at io ns on the i n st r um en t itself to w h i c h y ou should refer. As I u n d e r s t a n d it, you are hoping to use this inst ru me nt to assess and comp ar e the overall q u al i t y of freshman and s op homore C h e m i s t r y p r o g ra ms at s t at e - su p po r t e d two-year vs f ou r-year i n s t i tu ti o n s in M i c h i g a n and also to relate this to intructors' p e r c e p t i o n s of the q u a l i t y of their i ns t it ut io n c o m pa r e d to others. The i n st r u m en t seems to have two parts: one major part w hi c h a ss es se s the actual c ha racter of a p r og r a m and one min or part w h i c h asks the ins tr u c to r to d e s cribe his or her p erceptions. R e g a r d i n g the m a j o r c h a r ac t er i z a t io n part, I feel that these q u e s t i o n s will p ro vide a broad d e s c r i p t i o n of the C h e m i s t r y p r o g r a ms in our state. I was unable to think of any a dd i t i o na l areas that you could include in this section. I b e li e ve that the f iv e- c h o ic e items are s uf f ic i en tl y d i ve rs e to c ha r ac t er i z e and comp a r e each i n st it ut io n' s program. One area that I think you should be careful about is the i n t r o d u c t i o n of your own bias about the factors that c on tr i bu t e to a q u a l i t y program. For most questions, a "five" repr es en ts high q u al i t y and a "one" low quality. On a few q u e s t i on s you mi gh t get some a rg u m en t about the ordering. For example, is it bet te r for a facu lt y c om mittee to choose a text book or a specific inst r u c to r? A l s o is the number of faculty a meas ur e of q u a l i t y or the f ac u l t y to student ratio or the full-time to p ar t- t im e ratio? I d on ' t feel that this is a p ro b le m w it h the i nstrument but only s o m e t h i n g to w a t c h for in the evaluation. 122 R e g a r d i n g the p e rc ep ti o ns part of the instrument, I feel that the scale d e fi n i t i on s are a de q u a t e exce pt for the i n cl us io n of an "I don't k n o w ” choice. I found mys el f w a n t i n g to choos e that one in a couple of cases. R e g a r d in g the b r e a d t h of qu estions, X wond er if it w o u l d be useful to e x pa n d this part of the i n str um en t to include qu es ti o n s which deal with sp ecific a s p ec ts of the p r o gr am s as you did in the major part of the instrument. For example, you mi g h t ask h ow the amount of i n s tr u me n t a t io n in an i ns tr u ct o r ' s i ns titution compares w it h that in other institutions. This, I think, will give you a better u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the p e r c e p ti on s people have about the various institutions. I hope you will find this v a li d a t i o n s t at e m en t h el pful as you pursue this inter es t in g study. I will be a nx io us to hear about your results. G ar y W. VanKempen, A s s o c i a t e L an sing C o m mu ni ty College Ph.D. C he m is t r y and E d u c a t i on P r ofessor of Chemistry, M i c h i g a n State U n iv e r s i t y 123 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY EAST LANSING • MICHIGAN • 48924-1322 COLLEGE OF NATURAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY TELEPHONE (317) 353-9713 CHEMISTRY BUILDING FAX (317) 333-1793 January 12, 1989 The College of Education Michigan State University To Whom It May Concern: The following is intended as a validation statement concerning a survey instimment "Perceptions and Practice: A Characterization of the First Two Years of Undergraduate Instruction in Chemistry in Michigan State - Supported Colleges and Universities" by Albert G. Krieger. In my opinion, the breadth of questions and the possible responses with respect to chemistry laboratory courses are fully adequate to achieve the stated goals of the survey instrument. With respect to the lecture portion of chemistry courses, of the following questions should be considered: I think some 1. What portion of the text is actually assigned to the students for reading? 2. What types of examination questions are given (multiple-choice, essay, fill in the blanks, etc.)? 3. What are the primary sources of examination questions (lecture, hand-outs, textbook, etc.)? 4. What out-of-class (homework) problems, if any, are assigned? 5. What is stiructure of recitation (active student participation, mini-lecture, problem solving by teaching assistant, etc.)? 6. Who teaches recitation (professor, graduate students, undergraduates)? 7. What training do teaching assistants receive? Sincerely, Michael Rathke Professor of Chemistry Michigan State University (Ph.D. - Chemist:^, 1968, Purdue University) MSUis m Affirmosit* Action/Efnnl Opportunity Institution 124 APPENDIX B IDENTIFICATION OF THE POPULATION OF MICHIGAN STATE-SUPPORTED TWO-YEAR COL LEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OFFERING TW O YEARS OF PROFESSIONAL CHEMISTRY Population of Michigan State-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Offering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Small-Size State-Supported Two-Year Colleges Less than 2,500 Students Colleges Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Alpena CC Yes Yes Bay De Noc CC Yes Yes Glen Oaks CC None None Gogebic CC Yes Yes Highland Park CC None None Kirtland CC Yes None Mid-Michigan CC Yes Yes Montcalm CC None None North Central Mich Yes Yes West Shore CC Yes None Identified Population of small- size state-supported two-year colleges offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Alpena Community College, Alpena, MI 49707 Bay De Noc Community College, Escanaba, MI 49829 Gogebic Comm uni ty College, Ironwood, MI 49938 Mid-Michigan Community College, Harrison, MI 48625 North Central Michigan College, Petosky, MI 49770 125 Table B-2 Population of Michigan State-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Offering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Medium-Size State-Supported Two-Year Colleges Greater Than 2,500 But Less Than 7,000 Students Enrolled College Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Jackson CC Yes Yes Kellogg CC Yes Yes Lake Michigan C Yes Yes Monroe Co CC Yes Yes Muskegon CC Yes Yes Northwestern Mich Yes Yes Southwestern Mich Yes Yes St. Clair Co CC Yes Yes Identified Population of medium-size state-supported two-year colleges offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Jackson Community College, Jackson, MI 49201 Kellogg Community College, Battle Creek, MI 49016 Lake Michigan Com munity College, Benton Harbor, MI 49022 Monroe County Com munity College, Monroe, MI 48161 Muskegon Community College, Muskegon, MI 49443 Northwestern Michigan College, Traverse City, MI 49684 Southwester Michigan College, Dowagiac, MI 49047 St. Clair County Community College, Port Huron, MI 48060 126 Table B-3 Population of Michigan Sta te-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Offering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Large-Size State-Supported Two- Yea r Colleges Greater Than 7,000 Students Enrolled College Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Delta College Yes Yes Grand Rapids JC Yes Yes Henry Ford CC Yes Only 1 semester Kalamazoo V CC Yes Yes Lansing CC Yes Yes Macomb Co CC Yes Yes Mott CC Ye$ Yes Oakland CC Yes Yes Schoolcraft Yes Yes Washtena w CC Yes Yes Wayne Co CC Yes Yes Identified Population of large-size state-supported two-year colleges offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Delta College, University, Center, MI 48710 Grand Rapids Junior College, Grand Rapids, MI 49502 Kalamazoo Valley Community College, Kalamazoo, MI 49009 Lansing Community College, Lansing, MI 48914 Macomb Community College, Warren, MI 48093 Mott Community College, Flint, MI 48503 Oakland Community College, Farmington, MI 48024 Schoolcraft College, Livonia, MI 48152 Washtenaw Community College, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 Wayne County Community College, Detroit, MI 48201 127 Table B-4 Population of Mic higan State-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Off ering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Small-Size State-Supported Universities Less Than 5,000 Students University Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Lake Superior State U Yes Yes Saginaw Vall ey State U Yes Yes Identified Population of small-size state-supported universities offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the bac ca laureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Lake Superior State University, Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49783 Saginaw Valley State University, University Center, MI 48710 128 Table B-5 Population of Michigan State-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Offering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Medium-Size State-Supported Universities Greater Than 5,000 And Less Than 10,000 Students Enrolled University Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Central Mich U Yes Yes Ferris State U Yes Yes Grand Valley SU Yes Yes Michigan Tech U Yes Yes Northern Mich U Yes Yes U of M-Dearborn Yes Yes U of M-Flint Yes Yes Identified Population of medium-size state-supported universities offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Central Michigan University, Mount Pleasant, MI 48858 Ferris State University, Big Rapids, MI 49307 Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI 49401 Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931 Northern Michigan University, Marquette, MI 49885 University of Michigan at Dearborn, Dearborn, MI 48128 University of Michigan at Flint, Flint, MI 48503 129 Table B-6 Population of Michigan State-Supported Two-Year Colleges and Universities Offering Two Years of Professional Chemistry: Large-Size Sta te-Supported Universities Gr eater Than 10,000 Students Enrolled University Professional Chemistry 1st Year 2nd Year Eastern Mich U Yes Yes U of Michigan Yes Yes Michigan State U Yes Yes Oakland U Yes Yes Wayne State U Yes Yes Western Michiga n U Yes Yes Identified Population of large-size state-supported universities offering two years of professional chemistry leading to the baccalaureate degree with a major emphasis in chemistry: Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI 48917 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824 Oakland University, Rochester, MI 48063 Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202 Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49001 130 APPENDIX C TRANSMITTAL LETTER TO SURVEY STUDY PARTICIPANTS Perceptions and Practice: A Cha ra cterization of the First Two Years of Und er graduate Instruction in Chemistry in Michigan State-Supported Colleges and Universities. A doctoral study conducted by Albert G. Krieger at Michigan State University. Michigan State University requires wr itten consent of all individuals par ticipating in research to insure that participants in re sea rch are aware of their rights of privacy and to insure knowledge of the limits and intent of the research. Your participation in my research will consist of oral, wri tt en and evidential responses to a set of interview questio ns based upon a survey instrument that I have developed in an effort to assess the instructional practices in the first two years of college/university undergraduate instruction in chemistry. The overall intent is to make multiple comparisons/contrasts of the instruction provided in small/medium /la rge-size d two-year statesupported community /junior colleges and sma ll/ medium/l arg e­ sized state-supported universities. In addition, I am seeking to assess the perceptions of the overall quality, as you see i t , of the program of instruction at your institution as compared to these other types of institutions. It is understood that the interview will take approximately one-and-a-half to two hours, and that a participant may discontinue the interview at any time without recrimination. All responses and data collected will be treated with strict confidence, and neither the interviewee nor the institution will be identified in the study nor in the appendices of data. Your institution will be identified only as a part of an stratified group of institutions, but will not be identified as to whether or not your institution actually participated in the study. If you wish, within the restrictions identified above, the results of the comparisons made will be made available to participants upon request. I understand the intent of the study and my rights provided, and do freely consent to participate. (Signature of Interviewee) (Date) Name of Interviewee __________________________ Name of Institution 131 APPENDIX D REVISED SURVEY INSTRUMENT INTERVIEW SURVEY INSTRUMENT for PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICE: A CHA RACTER IZA TION OF THE FIRST TWO YEARS OF UNDERGRADUATE INSTRUCTION IN CHEMISTRY IN MICHIGAN STATE-SUP POR TED COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES Revised Ver sio n Albert G. Krieger College of Education Michigan State University 132 Organization of Survey Instrument: I Organization of Instructional Unit II Instruction of First Year Chemistry III Instruction of Second Year IV Faculty V Facilities and Instructional Resources 133 (Organic) Chemistry I OR GANIZAT ION OF INSTRUCTIONAL UNIT (1) Organization of department( i.e., biology & chemistry /chemistry /chemistry & physics /other... Title ________________________________ 1 2 3 part of smaller than division division but greater than two disciplines 4 two depts + two depts + dept chair is dept chair from "other" is from discipline chemistry chem dept + dept chair is from chem (2) Financial Support Separate line items for Chemistr y Department? combined line combined separate combined combined line items, line items line items line items, items, part of smaller than two depts + two depts + chem dept dept chair is dept chair + dept division division but greater than from "other" is from chair is two disciplines discipline chemistry from chem (3) Remedial/Lower level instruction: 1 2 3 absence low level low level of low course is course is level available, available, c o u r s e , counseling counseling absence is avail­ is avail­ able, no of able, no counseling, screening testing or testing. Comments: • 134 4 low level course is available, counseling and advising is available, testing and screening 5 low level course is available, counseling and adv­ ising is available, placement based upon chemistry pretest (4) Provisions for Tutoring: 1 no provision for tutoring 2 3 tutors "other" unit volunteer on regulates, non-paid "other" unit basis authorizes, paid basis 4 5 "other" unit dept regulates, regulates, dept authordept izes, paid authorizes, basis paid basis. (5) Student Opportunities for Professional Activities: Checklist: ___ Departmental Seminars ___ College Seminars ___ Community 1 None 2 1 of above 3 2 of above 4 3 of above 5 4 of above (6 ) Students and Professional/Career C o u n s e l i n g : Checklist: Academic Advisors, ___ Counselors, ___ S e m i n a r s , ___ ACS Student Affiliate Chapter 1 None of above 2 1 of above 3 2 of above 4 3 of above 5 4 of above (7) Provisions for Individual or Group Student Chemical Research with or without college credits. 1ST TWO YEARS ONLY Student Res earch/chemistry students students 1 0 students 2 3 4 1-3 4-6 7-9 students students students all numbers on an annual basis 135 5 104students (8) Student Recognition/Awards Checklist: First Year Award (CRC?) Second Year Award 1 3 2 None 4 2 Awards 1 Award II 3 Awards 5 4 Awards First Year Chemistry (9) Prerequisites: 1 None 3 2 published not adhered published, adhered to 4 published, adhered to, waiver by Chair 5 published adhered to waiver by instructor. 10) Lecture schedule: 1 2 3 4 AM or PM or EVE AM or PM AM + EVE or PM + EVE AM + PM or AM + EVE 5 AM + PM + EVE (11) Instructional Method Options: Checklist: ___ lecture, ___ ; lecture-recitation, ___ independent study ___ video ___ Computer (PLATO) 1 one option 2 two options 3 three options 4 four options 5 five options (12) Selection of textbooks: 1 assigned by "outside" authority 2 selected by Chair 3 selected by Coordinator 136 4 selected by team of instructors 5 selected by instructor Textbook Used: Title _________ Edition Author ____ Comments: Publisher (13) Catalog description as compared to course description: College/University course transfer comparisons. 1 2 Catalog brief has no description, description few of iourse details. 3 4 brief brief description , description some more detail detail 5 Catalog description is complete (14) Lecture Behavioral Objectives: BO*s written in operational terms, publish ed and shared with students. 1 None 2 3 4 items 8 items 4 16 items 5 32 items (15) Maximum Lecture Class Sizes: 1 241-480 students 2 3 121-240 students 61-120 students 4 31-60 students 5 1-30 students (16) Mean Lecture Class Sizes: 1 241-480 students 2 3 121-240 students 61-120 students (17) Evaluation of Lecture: Comments: 4 31-60 students 5 1-30 students Number of tests/quizzes/final 1 2 3 4 1 2 3-4 5-6 137 5 7-8 (18) Required Use of Chemical Literature: Checklist: Handbooks Journals Chemical Abstracts Database (local) Database (electronic, off-campus) 1 0 use 2 1 uses 3 2 - End of Course Evaluation: Standardized Examination? 4 3 uses No 4 uses Yes 5 5 uses _________________________ ---------- First Year Chemistry Laboratory Experi ences --------(19) Laboratory Behavioral Objectives: BO's written in operational terms, published and shared with students to include: Perform quantitative manipulations Assess the reliability of the results Plan experiments through use of literature Handle statistical analysis of data Use effectively and with understanding a good selection of modern instruments, including, for example, visible spectrometers, and pH meters. Recognize the hazards and unique problems of chemical safety and carefully observe modern safety practices. Keep accurate and complete experimental records Write good reports (Manuscript Requirements?) Other? 1 None 2 1-2 items 3 3-4 items 138 4 5-6 items 5 7-8 items (20) Intended Laborator y Experiences: Perform quantitative manipulations Assess the re lia bil ity of the results Plan experiments through use of literature Handle statistical analysis of data Use eff ectively and with understanding a good selection of modern instruments, including, for example, visible spectrometers, and pH meters. Recognize the hazards and unique problems of chemical safety and car efu lly observe modern safety practices. Keep accurate and complete experimental records Write good reports (Manuscript Requirements?) Other? ___________________________________________________ Other? 2 1 None 3 1-2 items 3-4 items 4 5-6 items 5 7-8 items (21) Maximum Laboratory class sizes: 1 36 + students 2 3 32-35 students 28-31 students 4 24-27 students • 5 20-23 students (22) Mean Laboratory Class Size: 1 32+ students 2 3 16-31 students 8-15 students 4 4-7 students 5 2-3 students (23) Student/Full-time Faculty Ratio in Laboratory: 1 Only TA 2 32+ 3 4 16-31 8-15 Students/FT Faculty---- 139 5 1-7 Evaluation of Laboratory E x p e r i e n c e : (24) 1 None (25) Student Laboratory Reports at BEGINNING of year. 2 3 fill-in forms 4 computerized fill-in report wr itten reports or 5 word processor reports Journals Report Requirements: Manuscript Requirements (any Journal?) _____________ ______ Spelling is checked ' Use of Significant Figures Error Analysis Statistical Analysis Graphs 1 2 None 1 3 2-3 ------- Requi rem ents --------- 4 5 4 5 (26) Student Laboratory Reports at END of year. Comments: 1 None (27) 2 3 fill-in forms computerized fill-in report 4 written reports or Journals 5 word processor reports Report Requirements: Manuscript Requirements (any Journal?)____________________ Spelling is checked Use of Significant Figures Error Analysis Statistical Analysis Graphs 1 2 None 1 3 2-3 ------- Requirements--------- 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 (28) Additional Writing Assignments: 1 2 0 1 3 2 3 additional assignments 140 (29) Methods of evaluating the laboratory experiences: Labora tory reports Unknowns identification Labora tory Practical Ob servation by Instructor Lab-Practical, paper-and-pencil 1 1 method 2 3 4 2 methods 3 methods 4 methods 5 5 methods (30) Structured Laboratory Instruction: Checklist: (Check all that apply) Descriptive Chemistry Periodic Properties Statistical Treatment of Data Development of Theoretical Models Deter min ation of Constants Acid-Base Titrations EDTA Titrations Redox Titrations Synthesis Separation Qu ant itative Type Analysis Structure Identification and Determination Chemical Kinetics Determina tion of Thermodynamic Properties Qua litative Analysis Other 1 8 items 2 3 9 items 10-11 items 4 12 items 5 13 items (31) Com puter Usage O p t i o n s : Checklist: (Check all that apply) ___ Tutorial ___ Co mputational ___ Data Collection ___ Simulation ___ Spreadsheet 1 none 2 1 use 3 2-3 uses 4 4 uses 5 5 uses (32) Assigned Student Research: 1 None 2 3 library research for bibl. library research, bibl, + paper 4 library research, individual research, bibl. + paper (33) Required Use of Safety References Checklist: (Check all used) Merck Index MSDS Safety Database Other 1 0 None 2 1 use 3 2 uses 5 library research, team research, bibl, + paper • • 4 3 uses 5 4 uses III SECOND YEAR OF CHEMISTRY - ORGANIC CHEMISTRY (34) P r e r e q u i s i t e s : 1 None 2 published not adhered to 3 published adhered to 4 5 published published adhered to adhered to waiver by waiver by Chair instructor (35) Lecture schedule: 1 2 AM or PM AM or PM or EVE 3 AM + EVE or PM + EVE 142 4 AM + PM or AM + EVE 5 AM + PM + EVE (36) Instructional Method Options: Checklist: lecture, lecture-recitation, independent study video Computer (PLATO?) 1 one option 3 2 two option three options Textbook in U s e : Name Publisher 4 5 five options four options Author (37) Selection of textbooks: 1 assigned by "outside" authority 2 selected by Chair 3. selected by Coordinator 4 selected by team of instructors 5 selected by instructor (38) Catalog description as compared to course description: College/University course transfer comparisons. 1 2 Catalog brief has no description, description few of course 3 brief description, some details. 4 5 brief Catalog description description more is complete detail detail (39) Lecture Behavioral Objectives: BO's written in operational terms, published and shared: 1 0 items 2 3 4 4 items 8 items 16 items 5 32 items C lass Size: (40) Maximum Lecture i 1 2414students 2 121-240 students 3 61-120 students 143 4 31-60 students 5 1-30 students (41) Mean Lecture Class Size: 1 2 241+ students (42) 3 121-240 students 4 61-120 students Evaluation of Lecture: 31-60 students 2 3 4 1 2 3-4 5-6 (43) 1 0 used 1-30 students Number of Tests/Quizzes/Fina l 1 End of Course Evaluation: Standardized Examination? 5 No 5 7-8 Yes Required Use of Chemical Literature: Checklist: Handbook Journals Chemical Abstracts Database (floppy disk/hard disk) Database (electronic access) 2 1 used 2 - 3 4 used 4 used 3 144 5 5 used Laborat ory Experience (44) Laboratory Behavioral Objectives: BO's written in operational terms, published and shared with students to include: Perform q ua ntitativ e manipulations Assess the rel iab il it y of the results Plan experiments through use of literature Handle statistical analysis of data Use effe ctively and with understanding a good selection of modern instruments, including, for example, IR, UV, mass and NMR spectrometers, and gas and liquid chromatographs Recognize the hazards and unique problems of chemical safety and car ef ully observe modern safety practices. Keep accurate and complete experimental records Write good reports (Manuscript Requirements?) Other? 1 0 items (45) 3 4 1-2 items 3-4 items 5-6 items 5 7-8 items Intended La bor atory Experiences: Perform quant ita tive manipulations Assess the reli ab il it y of the results Plan experiments through use of literature Handle statistical analysis of data Use effectively and with understanding a good selection of modern instruments, including, for example, IR, UV, mass and NMR spectrometers, and gas and liquid chromatographs Recognize the hazards and unique problems of chemical safety and carefull y observe modern safety practices. Keep accurate and complete experimental records Write good reports (Manuscript Requirements?) Other? 1 2 0 items (46) 2 1-2 items 3 3-4 items 4 5-6 items 5 7-8 items Maximum Laboratory Class Sizes: 1 36+ students 2 3 32-35 students 28-31 students 145 4 24-27 students 5 10-23 students (47) Mean Laboratory Class Sizes: 1 36+ students 2 3 32-35 students 28-31 students 4 24-27 students 5 1-23 students (48) Students/Full-Time Faculty in Laboratory: 1 TAs Only 2 4 3 32+ 16-31 ---- Students/Full-Time 5 8-15 Facu lt y ---- 1-7 Evaluation of Labora tor y Experience: (49) Student Laboratory Reports at BEGINNING of year. 1 None 2 fill-in forms 4 3 computerized fill-in report written reports or Journals 5 word processor reports (50) Report Requirements: . Manuscript Requirements (any Journal?) ___ Spelling is checked ___ Use of Significant Figures ___ Error Analysis ___ Statistical Analysis 1 2 None 1 3 4 5 2-3 4 5 A C V ^ U li. d l l C H U d (51) Student Laboratory Reports at END of year. Comments: 1 None 2 fill-in forms 3 computerized fill-in report 146 4 written reports or Journals 5 word processor reports (52) Report Requirements: Manuscript Requirements (any Journal?) Spelling is checked Use of Significant Figures Error Analysis Statistical Analysis 1 2 None 3 1 2-3 --------Requirements------- 4 5 4 5 4 5 3 4 (53) Additional Writing Assignments: 1 2 3 0 1 2 ---- Additional Assignments- (54) Methods of Evaluation the Laboratory Experience Checklist: (Check all that apply) ___ Laboratory Reports ___ Unknowns Identification ___ Laborato ry Practical ___ Observ ati on by Instructor ___ Lab-Practical, paper-and-pencil 1 2 1 method 2 4 3 methods 3 methods • • 5 4 methods 5 methods (55) Structured Laboratory Instruction: Checklist: (Check all that apply) ___ Synthesis ___ Separation ___ Analysis ___ Structure Identification and Determination ___ Chemical Kinetics ___ Determina tio n of Thermodynamic Properties ___ Determination of product ratios Other? 1 one item 2 3 two items three items 147 4 four items 5 five items (56) Computer Usage: Checklist: (Check all that apply) Tutorial Computational Data Collection Spreadsheet Analysis 1 1 none 2 uses use (57) 1 None 3 uses 4 uses Assigned Student Research: 2 3 library research for bibl. library research, bibl, + paper library library research, research, individual team bibl+paper bibl+paper (58) Required Use of Safety References; Checklist: (Check all used) Merck Index MSDS Safety Database Other 1 2 None 1 3 2 of the above IV (59) 1 1-2 4 5 3 4 Faculty Fulltime Faculty Numbers in instructional unit: 2 3 4 3-4 5-6 7-8 5 9+ (60) Parttime Faculty N u m b e r s : 1 2 3 4 1-2 3-4 5-6 148 5 7+ (61) Mean Fulltime Faculty (Lecture Instruction) 1 2 3 BS (64) Mean Parttime Faculty 1 NA 4 5 EdS PhD (Lecture Instruction) 2 Degrees: Degrees: 4 >MS 5 PhD (Laboratory I n s t r u c t i o n ) D e g r e e s : 3 4 5 MS >MS PhD (Laboratory Instruction) Degrees: 2 3 4 5 BS MS >MS PhD 5 (65) Fulltime Faculty Teaching loads: 1 22-24 contact hours 2 3 4 19-21 contact hours 16-18 contact hours 13-15 contact hours 0-12 contact hours (6 6 ) Fulltime Faculty Membership in the ACS: 1 0-20% 2 3 4 40% 60% 80% 149 5 100% V Facilities and Instructional Resources (67) Electronic/Mechanical Single-Pan 2 1 no equipment (6 8 ) have equipment no usage 3 have equipment used by technician NA/32+ 2 have equipment used by instructors / 3 no equipment have equipment no usage 1 NA/32+ 2 no equipment 1-3 (0.O O l g ).B a l a n c e s : 4 have equipment used by technician / have equipment used by instructors 5 have equipment used by students Pieces: 3 4 5 16-31 8-15 4-7 ---- S t u d e n t s / 0 .001-g Ba lan ce ---- (71) Electronic/Mechanical Single-Pan 1 5 4-7 Ba lan ce --- 3 (70) Laboratory Section of have equipment used by students 4 16-31 8-15 --- S t u d e n t s / 0 .0001-g 2 5 pieces: (69) Electronic/Mechanical Single-Pan 1 Balances: 4 Laboratory section of 1 (O.OOOlg) 2 have equipment no usage (O.Olg) 3 have equipment used by technician 1-3 Balances: 4 have equipment used by instructors 5 have equipment used by students (72) Laboratory Section of ___ / __ _ Pieces: 1 NA/32+ 2 3 4 16-31 8-15 4-7 --- S t u d e n t s / 0 .01-g Bal an ce---- 150 5 1-3 (73) Elec tro nic/Mechanical Single-Pan no equipment have equipment no usage NA/32+ 4 have equipment used by technician (74) Laborat or y Section of have equipment used by instructors 5 have equipment used by students Pieces: / 4 3 2 1 Balances: 3 2 1 (O.lg) 16-31 8-15 4-7 --- S t u d e n t s / 0 .1-g Balance---- 5 i-3 (75) pH meters: 1 no equipment 2 have equipment no usage have equipment used by technician (76) Labora to ry Section of 1 NA/32+ 4 3 2 / have equipment used by instructors 5 have equipment used by students Pieces: 4 3 16-31 8-15 ---- Students/pH Mete r---- 4-7 5 1-3 (77) Recording IR Spectrophotometers: 1 no equipment 2 have equipment no usage have equipment used by technician (78) Laborat ory Section of 1 NA/32+ 2 4 3 / 3 have equipment used by instructors have equipment used by students Pieces: 4 16-31 8-15 4-7 ---- Students/IR Spe ctrophotometer---- 151 5 5 1-3 (79) Recording visible Spectrophotometers: 1 no equipment have equipment no usage have equipment used by technician (80) Laboratory section of 1 NA/32+ 4 3 2 have equipment used by instructors have equipment used by students Pieces: / 4 3 2 5 5 1-3 16-31 8-15 4-7 ---- Students/Re cor ding VIS Spectrophotometer- (81) Recording UV Spectrophotometers: 1 no equipment 3 2 have equipment no usage have equipment used by technician (82) Laboratory Section of 1 NA/32+ 4 2 / have equipment used by instructors no equipment 3 4 NA/32+ 5 16-31 8-15 4-7 Students/ Recording UV Spectro pho tometer---- 2 have equipment no usage 3 2 / 3 have equipment used by instructors 5 have equipment used by students Pieces: 4 16-31 8-15 4-7 Students/B ench-Typ e VIS Spe ct rop hotomete r---- 152 1-3 (Spectronic-20 or 4 have equipment used by technician (84) Laboratory Section of 1 have equipment used by students Pieces: (83) Bench-type VIS Spectrophotometers: other) _______________________ 1 5 5 1-3 (85) Bench-type UV Spectrophotometers: 2 1 no equipment have equipment no usage have equipment used by technician (8 6 ) laboratory Section of 2 1 4 3 / have equipment' used by instructors 4 3 I w