Evaluating the value and effectiveness of a zero credit, compulsory,
undergraduate seminar course in Physics and Astronomy
Eugene Wong, John deBruyn and Jeff Hutter
Department of Physics & Astronomy, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
Abstract
Introduction: An undergraduate seminar course has been instituted into the Physics & Astronomy
curriculum at Western for over ten years to supplement the standard curriculum. The formal course
description states that it is “a forum for students to meet the second, third and fourth year students and
faculty in an informal setting. We will discuss research areas, practice giving and critiquing talks, and
provide information on careers.” This seminar course meets one hour per week over the Fall and Winter
terms, and carries zero credit, but is compulsory for graduation. There is no grade involved and
students receive pass or fail based on class attendance. Recently, we evaluated the value and
effectiveness of this course from the undergraduate students’ perspective through an extended survey.
Method: A university research ethics board approved survey of students enrolled in the 2010-2011
undergraduate seminar course was conducted. A total of 21 questions were constructed, 7 of which
were free form textual answers, 3 were multiple choice with optional texts for explanations, and the
remaining 11 were multiple choice questions. These questions were designed to obtain background
information (2), contextualize the seminar course with students’ learning experiences with courses
taken inside and outside the department (4), directly seek input about the seminar course (4),
presentation, writing and project opportunities (4), potential summer projects/courses (4) and overall
undergraduate preparation (3). We designed the questions to have minimal overlap, but phrased some
questions differently to provide us an opportunity to perform consistency checks.
Results: Among the total enrolment of 76 students (34 second year, 27 third, 15 fourth), 25 (33%)
responders (12 second year, 8 third, 5 fourth) completed the survey. The majority of students (72%)
rated the quality of the Physics & Astronomy courses as “good” to “excellent”. The majority (80%) of the
students rated the seminar course as “worthwhile” to “very interesting” and 73% rated the course as
being of “some value” to “very useful”. In comparison, 94% of the students rated our second or third
year lab as better than “worthwhile” and 95% deemed the lab course to be of “some value” or “very
useful”. Forty four percent of the students strongly agreed that the seminar course opened up their
minds and enhanced their interests in the field, and 64% stated that they enjoyed learning without
having to worry about grades. Approximately a third of the students stated that they learned valuable
lessons that addressed their needs and the course also helped them identify areas of limitations. They
were neutral to the fact that this course enhanced their critical thinking skills and creativity. Thus far in
their program, a large majority (86%) of students had 3 or fewer chances to make presentations, and
68% have written fewer than 5 articles/theses/projects/proposals (not counting lab reports). The
students felt that their preparation for their future endeavours was “good” to “excellent” in 52% of the
cases, adequate (36%) and not adequate (12%).
1
Discussions: While the majority of students enjoyed the seminar course (from their comments), there is
potential for improvements, for example, to match the value and usefulness of that of the physics lab
courses. Also from the students’ comments, the seminar course succeeded in building a community.
The results of this survey resonated with our own impressions.
Conclusions: The seminar course succeeded in the first aim in providing an informal forum for the
students to meet with each other and the faculty members. There needs to be some improvements (at
least in the 2010-2011 term) in order to fine tune the mixture of talks and events. This seminar course
does provide an opportunity to add a new dimension to the students’ training and its value in filling the
void in the undergraduate curriculum was demonstrated in the present survey.
Contact:
ewong4@uwo.ca
Eugene Wong, PhD, FCCPM
Associate Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Western University
London, Ontario
Canada
2
Introduction
An undergraduate seminar course was conceived to supplement the standard core curriculum and has
been incorporated into the Physics & Astronomy (P&A) curriculum for over ten years. The formal course
description states that it is “a forum for students to meet the second, third and fourth year students and
faculty in an informal setting. We will discuss research areas, practice giving and critiquing talks, and
provide information on careers.” Recently, we evaluated its value and effectiveness from the
undergraduate students’ perspective through an extended survey. The results of this survey are
presented here.
While that the traditional formal Physics & Astronomy curriculum is ideal for preparing students for core
competency (mathematical rigours, way of thinking, understanding, knowledge application), students
are missing opportunities in practicing in what has come to known as the soft skills (oral and written
communication, time management, teamwork, innovation, learning from mistakes, ethics, social
awareness and professionalism). These soft skills are a stepping stone to developing students’
leadership skills. While these skills benefit students, they are not taught explicitly in the core courses.
Our undergraduate seminar course can emphasize creativity and innovation, taking precedence over the
mechanics of problem solving. In fact, this is the sort of environment that enhances students’ education:
learning for the sake of learning, rather than to excel in taking exams. We wish to provide the time and
space to allow students to be creative, and improve their enjoyment in learning, while expanding their
minds.
One objective of this course is to enhance students’ soft skills, and fill the gaps in the already heavy
undergraduate curriculum. The seminars are usually talks given by invited speakers from within the
department, the university, industry or externally. For example, in 2010-2011, Invited speakers
included a university career councillor, an instructor from a communication course, a physicist from
industry, and researchers from Medical Physics, Ivey School of Business, Planetary Science, and
Philosophy of Science. Last but not least there was a semi-formal conference organized by the
undergraduates for the undergraduates.
This seminar course meets one hour per week over the Fall and Winter terms and carries a zero credit,
but compulsory for graduation. There is no grade involved and students receive pass or fail based on
class attendance. Is this additional commitment beyond the already full course load valued by the
students? We attempt to answer this question with the present extended student survey.
Method
A university non-medical research ethics board approved survey of students enrolled in the 2010-2011
undergraduate seminar course was conducted (REB #18010S). A total of 21 questions were constructed,
7 of which were free form textual answers, 3 were multiple choice with optional texts for explanations,
and the remaining 11 were multiple choice questions. A portion of the surveyed questions were
provided by the undergraduate chair that was part of a survey performed within a review of the
undergraduate program. We designed the questions to have minimal overlap, but phrased some
3
questions differently to provide us with an opportunity to perform consistency checks. The survey was
completed on a voluntary basis, and was performed during the last month of the seminar course.
In particular, the questions were designed to:
A. obtain background information (2):
a. consent and
b. year of study
B. contextualize the seminar course with students’ learning experiences with courses taken inside
and outside the department (4):
a. quality of courses within the Department of P&A
b. quality of departmental courses compared with others students have taken at the
university
c. best P&A courses
d. worst P&A courses
C. directly seek input about the seminar course (4 questions, one with six parts):
a. comparison of seminar course with second or third year lab course
b. six questions regarding enlightenment, interests, critical thinking, learning without
grades, creativity, addressing needs, identification of limitations.
c. three favourite things about the seminar course in 2010-2011
d. suggestions for improvements
D. presentation, writing and project opportunities (4):
a. number of presentations made
b. number of articles/theses/projects/proposals written other than lab reports
c. comparisons of experiences: presentation, writing, problem solving and creativity
d. participation in projects for skill enhancements
E. potential summer projects/courses (4) (not relevant to the present evaluation), and
F. overall undergraduate preparation (3):
a. plans after completion of BSc
b. readiness for their future endeavours
c. areas for improvement
The full survey questions can be access at http://polldaddy.com/s/4B46AC1B0A4310D2 which was the
tool the students used to complete the survey. Below, we will present the survey results relevant to
answering the question regarding the effectiveness of the seminar course.
Results
Among the total enrolment of 76 students (34 second year, 27 third, 15 fourth), we had 25 (33%)
responders (12 second year, 8 third, 5 fourth) who completed the survey.
The majority of students (72%) rated the quality of the Physics & Astronomy courses as “good” to
“excellent” (Figure 1) and all but one student (96%) rated the departmental courses as better than or
“about the same” compared to other courses at Western (Figure 2). As shown in Figure 3, 44% of the
4
students strongly agreed that the seminar course opened up their minds and enhanced their interests in
the field, and 64% stated that they enjoyed learning without having to worry about grades. 36% of the
students stated that they learned valuable lessons that addressed their needs and the course also
helped them identify areas of limitations. They were neutral to the query about whether this course
enhanced their critical thinking skills and creativity.
The majority (80%) of students rated the seminar course “worthwhile” to “very interesting” and 73%
rated the course as having “some value” to “very useful” (Figure 4). In comparison, 94% of the students
rated our second or third year lab as better than “worthwhile” and 95% deemed the lab course to have
“some value” or “very useful”.
A large majority (86%) had 3 or fewer chances to make presentations, and 68% had written
articles/theses/projects/proposals (not counting lab reports) fewer than 5 times. Figure 5 and Figure 6
tabulate the results of number of presentations or written exercises for each student, grouping them in
their year of study.
Figure 7 shows the free-form comments from the students about the seminar course.
Of the students surveyed, 42% planned to attend graduate school after their undergraduate degree and
a quarter of them (26%) are undecided. The remainder intend to seek jobs (16%), attend teacher’s
college (9%) or obtain another undergraduate degree (7%). The students felt that the preparation their
education prepared them for their future endeavour was “good” to “excellent” in 52% of the cases,
adequate (36%) and not adequate (12%).
Discussions
The limitation of this study is that only one third of the participants filled out the survey. This could
have a selection bias toward those who are more “vocal”. On the other hand, we have a relatively even
representation across the second, third and fourth year students. While the majority of students
enjoyed the seminar course (from their comments), there is potential for improvements, for example, to
match the value and usefulness of that of the physics lab courses. Also from the students’ comments,
the seminar course succeeded in building a community, and letting them meet each other. The results of
this survey resonated with our own impressions.
While the present instructor did not design the course, the ideals of such course were clear. Students
are human beings, and at university age, they possess the best qualities of youthfulness: curiosity,
adventure, energy, adaptability, and tremendous innate capacity for learning. As teachers, we wish to
nurture students to develop their core competency, passion, independent thinking, self-directed and joy
of learning, appreciation, creativity, dreams, engagement with society. Having a course such as the
seminar course to help balance students’ learning from their core courses is a step in the right direction.
The seminar course gave students opportunities to explore, autonomy for students to take risks, room
to make mistakes and learn from them.
5
An appropriate route to develop these skills is through project-based courses, or courses with a project
component. In light of the multitudes of courses that a full time student is required to take during the
Fall and Winter term, projects for students can be in the form of summer courses or better yet, projectbased summer positions. As such, we had four questions that were not presented here, soliciting inputs
from students’ view on summer courses and job opportunities.
Conclusions
The seminar course succeeded in the first aim in providing an informal forum for the students to meet
with each other and the faculty members. There needs to be some improvements (at least in the 20102011 term) in order to fine tune the mixture of research talks, students’ presentation and feedback
opportunities, and information on careers in a way that would match the quality of other physics and
astronomy intensive core courses such as the laboratory courses. This seminar course does provide an
opportunity to add a new dimension to the students’ training and its value in filling the void in the
undergraduate curriculum was demonstrated in the present survey.
Acknowledgements
E.W. acknowledges funding from Western University’s Faculty Scholar for carrying out this work.
6
Figure 1: Results of students’ rating of the courses within the Department of Physics & Astronomy.
Figure 2: Results of students’ rating of courses offered within the Department of Physics & Astronomy with respect to
courses offered outside the department at the university.
Figure 3: This table tabulated the results of ratings specific to the undergraduate seminar course.
7
Figure 4: Comparison between second and/or third year Physics Lab course to the seminar course in terms of interests and
perceived value.
Number of presentations made
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Second year
Third year
Fourth year
Figure 5: Bar chart tabulating the number of times each student had the opportunity to make a presentation during the
course of their program.
16
Number of
article/thesis/project/proposal
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Second year
Third year
Fourth year
Figure 6: Bar chart tabulating the number of times each student had the opportunity to write an
article/thesis/project/proposal other than a lab report during the course of their program.
8
9
Figure 7: Free form comments from students regarding their (top 3) favourite events of their seminar course.
10