Faculty perspectives of the undergraduate chemistry laboratory: Goals, limitations, and assessments.

摘要

A synthesis of literature is presented in which studies have suggested that laboratory has little to no effect on achievement, reasoning, critical thinking skills, or gaining insight into key scientific concepts. Chapter One concludes that well-designed studies to probe the complex dynamics of laboratory as a learning environment are needed.;The goal of this research is to characterize the diversity of faculty goals for the undergraduate chemistry laboratory, the array of strategies faculty implement in the name of those goals, and the assessments faculty utilize to measure the extent to which they meet those goals. Using a stratified random sampling procedure, faculty from differing chemistry disciplines, course levels, and types of institutions (community colleges, liberal arts institutions, comprehensive institutions, and research 1 institutions) were interviewed. Participants were divided into two groups: individuals who have been engaged in National Science Foundation (NSF) funded research to improve their laboratories (innovators), and individuals who have not received NSF funding (status quo).;Interview transcripts were analyzed using two theoretical approaches: grounded theory and assimilation theory (Chapter Two). Similarities and differences in open-coding analysis of goals for laboratory between innovator and status quo groups are presented as assertions and supported with data evidence (Chapter Three). Results of analysis using assimilation theory are also presented in a similar manner (Chapter Three). In addition, assertions resulting from analysis of laboratory assessments and problems and limitations to success in laboratory are also discussed (Chapter Three). A model representing movement along a continuum from "status-quo like" to "innovator like" is described (Chapter Three). Finally, implications of this research on the chemistry education community are described, along with advice for future researchers (Chapter Four).