GenChem
General Chemistry Redesign
Department of Chemistry
University of Arizona
ABOR
Learner-Centered Education
2009
GenChem
Developers
Chemical Education Committee
Steve Brown
Andy Grall
Anne Padias
John Pollard
Vicente Talanquer
Wayne Wesolowski
Support
Graduate Teaching Assistants
Teaching Service Office
Prep Room
The Problems
GenChem
In the summer of 2007, our team started working
in the redesign of the two-semester General
Chemistry sequence for science and engineering
majors to address the following problems:
 Weak correlation between the lecture and the
laboratory courses.
 Lack of consistency among the different instructors.
 Limited contact between TAs and lecture instructors.
 Use of traditional lecture format to teach the courses.
 Very large discussion sections (~150 students).
 Lack of systematic, valid, and reliable assessment
tools.
GenChem
The Proposal
1. Combine the lecture-lab courses into one.
Course
(4 credits)
Lab/
Discussion
~288
Instructor
TA
 Better correlation (same students in lecture and labs;
clear association of TAs and instructors);
 More effective discussions;
 More efficient use of instructors’ and TAs’ time;
GenChem
The Proposal
2. Homogenize the curriculum and the assessment
practices among all course sections.
Lecture
Common
Diagnostic
Exam
Common
Guiding
Notes
Unit
1
Unit
2
Unit
3
Common
Final
Exam
Unit
4
Common Partial Exams
Common online
homework
system
Lab
Common report structure, practicals, and rubrics.
The Proposal
GenChem
3. As mandated by the ABOR-LCE initiative, create a
more leaner-centered environment in which
students take more ownership in their own
learning (active participation).
 Collaborative small group work;
 Guided inquiry activities and experiments;
 Whole class interactions.
GenChem
Timeline
Pilot Test
Spring 2008  Off-sequence First Semester
CHEM 151 (3 lecture sections).
Full Phase I
Fall 2008  On-sequence First Semester
CHEM 151 (7 lecture sections).
Off-sequence Second Semester
CHEM 152 (2 lecture sections).
Full Phase II
Spring 2009  CHEM 151/CHEM 152
GenChem
Products
Lecture
 Redesigned sequence; trimmed content;
 Common power point guides for first semester;
 On-line homework problem sets;
 Common diagnostic and four midterm exams;
Laboratory
 Revised/Adapted experiments;
 Common power point lab/discussion guides;
 Additional experiment notes;
 Revised lab manual;
 Common midterm and final practical exams;
GenChem
Impact on Learning
Total # of
Students
Diagnostic
Final Exam
ACS
Traditional
2006-2007
3703
46.7%
(SD = 17.7)
54.0%
(SD = 16.3)
Reformed
Spring-Fall 08
2128
43.8%
(SD = 14.8)
59.3%
(SD = 15.1)
CHEM 151
Total # of
Students
Final Exam ACS
Traditional
2006-2007 (off-sequence)
540
45.2%
(SD = 7.69)
Reformed-Pilot
Fall 2008 (off-sequence)
346
49.9%
(SD = 11.6)
CHEM 152
GenChem
Impact on Performance
Percent Grade Distribution (CHEM 151)
40
35
30
%
25
Reformed
20
Traditiona
15
10
5
0
Reformed
A
B
22.75
36
C
D
E
I
W
20.79 8.631 6.485 0.381 4.959
Traditional 19.31 27.17 23.81 10.45 11.42 1.353 6.492
Average Grade: 67.1% to 70.7%
GenChem
Impact on Performance
Percent Grade Distribution (CHEM 152)
40
%
30
20
10
0
A
B
C
D
E
I
W
Reformed 17.718 36.637 26.126 8.1081 4.8048 0.3003 6.3063
Traditional 16.262 21.238 26.092 10.922 14.442 2.1845 8.8592
Average Grade: 64.4% to 68.1%
Improved Retention
GenChem
Failing Rates
From 11.4% to 6.5% in CHEM 151.
From 14.4% to 4.8% in CHEM 152.
Withdrawal Rates
From 6.49% to 4.96% in CHEM 151.
From 8.86% to 6.31% in CHEM 152.
We have not been able to assess the impact of the
transformation on drop rates in a reliable way given
the types of enrollment data collected by the UA.
Impact on Cost Savings
GenChem
Major cost savings were associated with the
reduction in the number of course planning and
student contact hours for faculty and lecturers.
 Planning and assessment time reduction:
Common set of lecture notes, lab presentations,
and multiple choice exams.
Contact hours reduction: Graduate teaching
assistants are now responsible for teaching the
discussion sessions for the General Chemistry
courses (integrated into the laboratory time).
Pedagogical
Improvements
GenChem
 A variety of on-line interactive simulations were
made available to instructors and students to
facilitate in-class activities and discussions.
 Laboratory activities were modified to create more
opportunities for students to design experiments.
 In-classroom collaborative group activities were
created/adapted and incorporated into the common
weekly lecture and laboratory notes.
 Development and implementation of common
midterm and final exams based on a common set of
learning objectives for the two courses.
Implementation Issues
GenChem
 Team work highlighted the importance of having
regular academic meetings to discuss different
ideas and points of view about how to best teach
the different topics.
 The development team has faced challenges in how
to train and better support the work of new
instructors and graduate teaching assistants who
were not involved in the development of the
project. The team recognized the importance of
assigning course leaders who could help support
the work of everyone involved.
Implementation Issues
GenChem
One of the major lessons learned during the
implementation of the project is the central role that
graduate teaching assistants play in the
implementation and success of the new model.
Observations of student work in the laboratory
suggest that the seamless integration of experimental
work and discussion sessions is a challenge for most
graduate teaching assistants. The development team
is currently discussing and exploring different options
to solve this problem.
Sustainability
GenChem
The Department of Chemistry at the
University of Arizona fully supports
the changes that were implemented
and is committed to provide the
resources needed to sustain the
project. At this moment, all of the
General Chemistry courses offered
by the Department are being taught
following the new format.