CSIE Introduction & Philosophy

CSIE: Undergraduate Program

INTRODUCTION.

Faculty begin identifying the potential for research scholarship in undergraduate students through feedback and interactions during traditional coursework. An experienced faculty member can recognize characteristics of an inquiring mind that has also synthesized and extrapolated information and concepts in a way that is different from "only" learning the lesson well. In laboratory or other practicum tasks (including writing and other forms of performance), faculty and experienced graduate student instructors are attuned to recognizing the potential for scholarly ability.

These recognition events are a direct consequence of the kinds of tasks presented to an undergraduate student. Recognizing the potential for research scholarship arises from tasks in which this aptitude can be demonstrated. While this aptitude does not necessarily couple with ultimate ability or even ambition on the part of the student, it is a nonetheless ubiquitous practice for instructors to "be on the look-out" for scholarly potential. It is important to reiterate that this recognition can be done in an informed way, where rich information about the thinking and practices of a student are personally known to an instructor, or in less informed ways, where disconnected information (such as high examination scores) is the only referent.

Ultimately, students who are indentified for their scholarly potential are given opportunities to pursue independent work. A common practice in undergraduate research is to carefully monitor the degree on engagement and insight a student brings to his or her laboratory practice, and continue to adjust the challenge upwards for those who demonstrate skill development. Participation in undergraduate research can culminate in a number of activities that all emulate the trappings of research scholarship: a written thesis that is subjected to review and revision, local presentations in a variety of formats (written publication in an undergraduate journal, poster sessions, oral presentations), as well as comparable participation in all of the traditional professional venues.

EXTENDING TO THE SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING.

In order to be able to identify the potential for teaching scholarship in undergraduate students, there must be opportunites in the traditional curriculum structure to demonstrate this ability. Faculty or other observers must be skilled enough to recognize the attributes of this potential relative to a student's ability to simply "perform well." Ultimately, opportunities must be created that extend this potential into independent experiences, to document and present the results from these activities, and to contribute to the professional culture of scholarly teaching to the same degree that undergraduate research contributes to its own culture.

The opportunities that are currently available for students in the undergraduate chemistry program at the University of Michigan are listed below. Links to projects with their own web sites are provided under "Program Title." Brief descriptions are also available for all of the projects ("X"), and these include links to more detailed information. "Degree of Responsibility" is a rough indication of how much independence is associated with the teaching activity (nominal, moderate, high, highest).

Program Title		Year Developed	Eligible Participants (1=first-year)	Degree of Responsibility
The Jason Project	X	1998	4+ (with prior SSG experience)	highest
Lecturer I	X	1998	4+ (with prior USI experience)	highest
Structured Study Group (SSG) Leader	X	1994	3, 4, 4+	high
Undergraduate Student Instructor (USI)	X	1994	3, 4, 4+	high
Instrumentation Room Instructor	X	1991	1-4 (prior course experience)	moderate
Peer-Led Study Group (PLSG) Organizer	X	1998	2-4 (prior course experience)	moderate
Volunteer Peer-Led Study Group (PLSG) Leader	X	1993	1-4 (prior course experience)	moderate
Structured Study Group (SSG) Participant	X	1994	1	nominal

Curriculum development and implementation may or may not involve a research component. In the projects outlined below (left), undergraduate students were involved in tasks more tradiationally associated with independent study and research projects involving education. Another consequence of our conceptualization of the Scholarship of Teaching within the mission of higher education is the Scholarship of Service and its intersection with teaching. We propose that generating documentable systems of service in a way that is informed and subject to review can also represent scholarship in our system of higher education.

Research/Teaching Opportunities		Service/Teaching Opportunities
(Co)Authors on publications related to Education	X	Undergraduate Student Organizations	X
Collaborators on Research & Development Projects	X

The Jason Project

Beginning in May-June, 1998, the School of Dentistry offered a "pipeline" (early intervention) program for 15 first- and second-year college students who were (a) drawn from a national pool of candidates, (b) identified as among underrepresented populations pursuing careers in the health sciences, and (c) potentially at-risk in their basic science courses. Unlike post-baccalaureate programs offered to graduates who have already performed unsatisfactorily, the primary goal of this program was to intervene early in the process in order to create a climate of confidence (self-efficacy) about learning in the basic sciences before difficulties occur.

We used this program as an opportunity to examine and document a key aspect of our emerging concept of teaching scholarship as a professional development activity. Under the direction of Professor Brian P. Coppola, students with at least one year of experience as Structured Study Group (SSG) leaders are assigned multiple tasks: (1) the design and delivery of an early intervention program in a basic science, (2) the administration of a program in which the student creates and implements this chemistry program within a formal framework of reflective practice, and (3) the documentation of both of these in an HTML format that results in a course portfolio which can be read as a multiple narrative.

During the 5-week program, "pipeline" students receive instruction in chemistry, physics, and biology. Beyond sessions in these subject areas, there are also workshops in general academic skills and in professional development (in dentistry) that are organized by the Dental School. Pre- and post-tests in the three basic science subject areas were used as part of the assessment program.

In 1998, Mr. Jason K. Pontrello provided the first intervention program in chemistry. The overall project now bears his name, and his work is documented as the First Edition of The Jason Project.

Relevant links:

The Jason Project, an HTML-based multi-narrative course portfolio
"The Jason Project: Documenting and Assessing the Scholarship of Teaching." Brian P. Coppola and Jason K. Pontrello; a paper presented at the 1999 National Association for Research in Science Teaching Meeting, March 29, 1999, Boston, MA.
"The Jason Project: An Early Intervention Program in Chemistry for At-Risk College Students." Jason K. Pontrello and Brian P. Coppola; ; a paper presented at the 1999 National Association for Research in Science Teaching Meeting, March 29, 1999, Boston, MA.

Lecturer I

Description forthcoming

Structured Study Group (SSG) Leader

Description forthcoming

Undergraduate Student Instructor (USI)

Description forthcoming

Instrumentation Room Instructor

Description forthcoming

Peer-Led Study Group (PLSG) Organizer

First, the PLSG program. A challenge for some first-year students on a campus our size is how to make productive contact with other students. For all students, once they find each other and set a time to study and learn together, how do they (and do they) negotiate an agenda for their meeting time? How do students get past the "blind leading the blind" problem that ultimately appears once the subject gets more challenging? We (and others) believe in the value that an experienced learner can bring to the learning of others. We have sought to facilitate the formation of study groups.

Peer-Led supplemental instruction programs have proliferated in the country during the last decade. Links to some of the noteworthy examples are provided below. My own inspiration for the PSLGs was my experience as a graduate student in the University of Wisconsin's GUTS (Greater University Tutorial Service) program. The "match-making" service outlined below was directly drawn from the GUTS model.

Each term, we provide our Science Learning Center with a group of undergraduate student organizers to help coordinate the formation of study groups and to work with a faculty member on the design of the study group options. This process serves about 15-20% of the classes, and except for the undergraduate students, it is run on a volunteer basis. The Science Learning Center maintains two databases. The first is a list of students who want to get help forming a group. They sign up, leaving their names, contact information, and available times. The second is a list of students, at least one term removed from the course, who want to volunteer to lead a study group. They leave the same information. The Center and the undergraduate students perform the implied "match-making" service: They collect groups of 6-8 students with the same schedule, match them to available leaders, and reserve rooms at the appropriate time. The groups are then notified and given the appropriate information. The graduate student is a resource person for the leaders, holding office hours to review issues related to the groups. We also encourage the groups to develop agendas for their meetings as part of the process of coming together. The undergraduate student organizers work with me to provide a menu of options. This organizational role can also be fulfilled by a graduate student, and the Science Learning Center has adopted this model for the other courses it serves.

To date, I have selected undergraduate students who have been Structured Study Group (SSG) participants to take on these organizational roles. They have had at least one term's experience, and usually a year, in structured group work. I intend for these students to use their experience as group members to help organize the work of others. Bring an organizer does not preclude their participation as PSLG Leaders.

The work of the PSLG organizers involves the following:

attribute 1
attribute 2
attribute 3
attribute 4

Relevant links:

The University of Wisconsin-Madison Greater University Tutorial Service (GUTS)
Worcester Polytechnical Institute
CUNY Workshop Chemistry
University of California-Berkeley
University of Texas (Uri Tresiman)

Volunteer Peer-Led Study Group (PLSG) Leader

Description forthcoming

Structured Study Group (SSG) Participant

Any given Fall Term at the University of Michigan, approximately 1600-1800 mainly first-year students take an introductory chemistry course. This population is divided into two groups by two mechanisms: placement and program. Students who score at a 70th percentile ranking (ca. 600-700 first term, first-year students) are advised but not required to enroll in Structure and Reactivity, a two-term first-year course based on the subject matter of modern mechanistic organic chemistry. Chemistry 210, the first-term lecture course, is accompanied by a laboratory course, Chemistry 211. In the second term, there are two versions of the Chemistry 215 lecture course: the normal, large course offering, and a section of about 100 self-selected students who elect a more research- and project-oriented course. In the case of this research-oriented section, the second-term laboratory course, Chemistry 216, is a fully integrated component.

The Structured Study Group (SSG) program is an honors option for first-year chemistry students which began in 1994. Designed on the principles of reciprocal teaching, peer instruction and peer review, the SSG program involves upperclass undergraduate students as facilitators and leaders for 2-hour meetings where groups of 15-20 first-year students discuss and review literature-based written work that they have done prior to each session. The overriding design of the weekly tasks places students in the role of teachers, to read critically and provide explanations based on the information at hand as a way to promote improved learning. The SSG option is available to students in both Chemistry 210 and Chemistry 215. In the special, research-oriented section of Chemistry 215, all of the students are required to participate in SSGs, the work in which is a fully integrated component of the course.

In mid-August, 1994, my undergraduate research student and frequent co-author, Douglas S. Daniels, spent an afternoon and designed the fundamental framework for the SSGs. It is crucial, I think, to inform curriculum design with the experience of students in the instructor's role. Faculty can guide the process because of their familiarity with educational systems, but students bring an expertise that diminishes in faculty with each passing term: the expertise of the new learner. In 1998, I worked with Jason K. Pontrello (a member of Doug's SSG in 1994-95, an SSG Leader with two years of experience, and the first major revision of the SSG curriculum

Relevant links:

A brief primer on reciprocal teaching and the role of explanation on learning, by Brian P. Coppola
An introduction to the SSG program, from: Coppola, B. P.; Daniels, D. S. "Structuring the Liberal (Arts) Education in Chemistry", Chemical Educator 1996, 1 (2): S 1430-4171(96)02018-3. Avail. URL: http://journals.springer-ny.com/chedr
Examples from the SSG curriculum in Chemistry 210, including student work
1. Fall, 1998 Introduction and Table of Contents (including .pdf version of entire curriculum)
2. The "Peer Review and ReDo" process and "Advice about Creating Quizzes"
3. First SSG meeting: Peer Teaching, Library Assignments, Drawing Structures
4. First SSG assignment: Constructing Molecules & Predicting Properties
5. Second SSG meeting: Mechanisms and Peer Review
6. Reflections on the SSGs by Brian P. Coppola
7. Reflections on participating in Chemistry 210 SSGs from the SSG leaders as juniors and seniors
8. Reflections on the Chemistry 210 SSGs from students in the Chemistry 215 course
9. Reflections on the Chemistry 210 SSGs from past students (sophomores, juniors and seniors)
Examples from the SSG curriculum in Chemistry 215, including student work
1. example of a
2. example of b
3. example of c
4. example of d
Examples from the SSG curriculum in Chemistry 215 (research-oriented section), including student work
1. example of a
2. example of b
3. example of c
4. example of d
Summary of performance results related to SSG participation
1. exam scores
2. student surveys
3. student reflection
4. explanation skills
Examples from the Structure and Reactivity student guide ("Learning Tips for Students," Brian P. Coppola, in Seyhan N. Ege, Roberta W. Kleinman, and Peggy K. Zitek "Study Guide for Organic Chemistry, Structure and Reactivity, 4th Ed." Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999; pp. xiii-xxii)
Reflection and Advice to Instructors of Introductory Chemistry ("Lessons from Teaching Structure and Reactivity at the University of Michigan: Advice to Faculty," Brian P. Coppola, in Seyhan N. Ege, Brian P. Coppola, Roberta W. Kleinman, and Peggy K. Zitek "Instructors Manual for Organic Chemistry, Structure and Reactivity, 4th Ed." Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1999; pp. 9-24)