Alkene hydrogenation on reduced nickel A-zeolite catalysts.

The individual and competitive hydrogenation reactions of ethene, propene and isobutene over various nickel metal-loaded 4A zeolites have been investigated. The reaction kinetics were found to be similar to those found by other workers for alkene hydrogenation over pure nickel metal. Reactions were first order in hydrogen and zero order in alkene at lower temperatures. However, the order with respect to alkene increased towards unity as temperature increased and led to a decrease in apparent activation energy with increasing temperature. Activation energies generally became negative at temperatures greater than 170°C. The catalytic reactions often exhibited pronounced induction periods. The catalytic activity during this induction period and the length of the period varied with the catalyst and reaction temperature used. An explanation of some aspects of the results found in this work is proposed in terms of the presence of two different sets of catalytically active sites. One set of sites, residing in the zeolite pores, are more reactive towards the smaller alkene molecules and do not exhibit an induction effect. The other sites, which are responsible for the observed induction effect, are equally active towards all alkenes and are located either on the surface of the zeolite crystallites or on other amorphous material present in the zeolite samples used. The reaction sites are not always associated with the presence of nickel atoms as the parent zeolite, which contained no nickel, was also reasonably active for the hydrogenation reaction. 4A zeolite has been reported as being a good shape-selective catalyst if the active centres are located within the pore structure. However, the results obtained from competitive hydrogenation in this work indicate that no selectivity for ethene hydrogenation in the presence of propene or isobutene can be obtained at temperatures below about 130°C, as the larger alkenes block the zeolite pores

Giving students the choice of authentic assessments in the Chemistry laboratory

Incorporating authentic assessments into a laboratory program can improve students’ engagement and satisfaction whilst developing highly valuable employment skills (Schultz et al., 2022; Sokhanvar et al., 2021). It can promote a deeper understanding by having students translate their data and findings to a real-world audience of stakeholders – occasionally not from the scientific community (Jopp, 2020). Another assessment strategy is to empower students with a choice of assessments to complete. A choice of assessments can increase student motivation, confidence and engagement whilst reducing the anxiety around assessments (Patall et al., 2010; Garside et al., 2009). This promotes self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and can lead to improved academic performance (Jopp & Cohen, 2020). At The University of Sydney, students complete four experiments in their laboratory program during their first semester of first year chemistry. Each experiment has a different style of authentic assessment associated with it. Students are provided with the opportunity to select one of these four experiments (and its associated authentic assessment) to submit as their major laboratory assessment for the semester. At the end of semester, students (n = ~750) were questioned about why they had selected the assessment they submitted. In this presentation, we analyse how popular the different authentic assessments were amongst students and look at some of the motives behind why these assessments were selected. REFERENCES Garside, J., Nhemachena, J. Williams, J., & Topping, A. (2009). Repositioning assessment: Giving students the ‘choice’ of assessment methods. Nurse Education in Practice, 9(2), 141-148. Jopp, R. (2020). A case study of a technology enhanced learning initiative that supports authentic assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 25(8), 942-958. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2019.1613637 Jopp, R. & Cohen, J. (2020). Choose your own assessment – assessment choice for students in online higher education. Teaching in Higher Education 27(6), 738-755. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2020.1742680 Patall, E. A., Cooper, H., & Wynn, S.R. (2010). The effectiveness and relative importance of choice in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(4), 896. Schultz, M., Young, K., Gunning, T., & Harvey, M. (2022). Defining and measuring authentic assessment: a case study in the context of tertiary science. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(1), 77-94. Sokhanvar, Z. Salehi, K., & Sokhanvar, F. (2021) Advantages of authentic assessment for the improving the learning experience and employability skills of higher education students: A systematic literature review. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 70, 101030

Increasing engagement: adding industry and real-life contexts to your labs and workshops

BACKGROUND There is a push to increase the connection of teaching and learning materials to the real world (aka context-based learning or CBL) (Pilot & Bulte, 2006), increasing engagement by having the student work on real world examples as opposed to a theoretical focus. The original desired theories are present but within the lesson, rather than the sole focus (Gilbert, 2006). If the context within the lessons is industry focused, CBL can also improve workforce readiness as students are more familiar with workplace issues, processes, and communication styles. Connection to industry can be achieved through existing or purposely developed relationships between industry and higher education, or through using those external contexts without participation of a partner.   WORKSHOP We will provide training on how we approach both the industry focused (partnered and unpartnered) as well as the real-life focused version of CBL in the laboratory and workshops, respectively. As part of the two-hour session, we will first unpack several examples undertaken by the facilitators. During the final hour, we will help people brainstorm CBL ideas for their classes, up to and including helping them plan how to find industry linked resources or contacts into industry for help in developing the lessons.   REFERENCES Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the Nature of “Context” in Chemical Education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957-976. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702470 Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006). Why Do You “Need to Know”? Context‐based education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953-956. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069060070246

INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS IN USING VIRTUAL REALITY TO TEACH CHEMISTRY

Virtual Reality (VR) has become a much more common household commodity thanks to the proliferation of more affordable VR devices. Whilst its use in the gaming industry is becoming widespread, its application in pedagogical environments has only just started, particularly in chemistry. As such, whether VR will aid or hinder the teaching and learning of chemistry is currently a topic of research and debate (Won, Mocerino, Tang, Treagust & Tasker, 2019). This project generated a range of VR materials designed to support students learning undergraduate chemistry. The topics included stereoisomers, VSEPR theory and introductory organic chemistry (namely addition and substitution reaction mechanisms). The VR materials were tested with both students and teaching staff, with all data audio recorded using a think-aloud protocol. Preliminary and follow-up interviews were also conducted with all participants. The students’ conceptual understanding was tested with common theoretical questions and concept inventories both before and after either a VR lesson or a paper-based version of the same theories covered in the VR lessons. The results of these trials will be discussed and their implications on the use of VR in the teaching and learning of chemistry considered

COMPARING THE QUESTIONS IN ONLINE CHEMISTRY EXAMS TO PAPER-BASED EXAMS WITH THE USE OF BLOOMS TAXONOMY

Paper-based summative exams represent the main form of final assessment in many science courses worldwide and they are typically comprised of multi-choice questions (MCQs) and short-answer questions (SAQs). These SAQs can take the form of written explanations, drawings or calculations. However, this process was complicated in early 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic forced educators worldwide to switch to entirely open book electronic quizzes operated through a range of learning management systems. While online exams are not novel, their use on such a scale, with limited to no training for the teaching staff, was undeniably so. This study sought to investigate how the types of questions and the orders of thinking varied between 2019 (paper-based exams) and 2020 (online exams). The types of questions were generated prior to analysis through a process of individual categorisations and discussions to come to an agreement. The questions were also analysed through the lens of Bloom’s taxonomy to consider how the thinking processes, and by extension the order of thinking, may have changed. In addition, the potential relationships between the type of question and its order of thinking were also explored. This talk will cover these comparisons of exam questions in online and paper-based exams

Investigating the shift to online delivery of final exams and how this impacted the student experience

A closed-book and paper-based final examination is the most common summative assessment administered in universities around the world (Williams & Wong, 2009). However, with the COVID-19 pandemic occurring in early 2020, educators were forced to transition to open-book online final exams operated through a range of learning management systems (Dicks et al., 2020). Although online exams are not novel, their use in chemistry courses on such a large scale was undeniably so, with many students and staff having limited experience with them (Nennig et al., 2020). This study aimed to examine the impact of the online delivery of chemistry final exams, driven by the rise of a pandemic, on both the exam questions and the experiences of academics and students at The University of Sydney. Semi-structured interviews were conducted involving students who had taken both paper-based and online chemistry exams, as well as those who had taken only online chemistry exams. They were asked about their experiences and strategies used to complete exam questions. To date, only students have been interviewed, but interviews with academics will also be conducted. Thematic analyses were conducted on these student interviews, by first using inductive coding on one interview to generate a codebook that was applied to the rest of the interviews. While the exam questions were also analysed for exams written in 2019 (paper-based exams), 2020 and 2021 (online exams) as part of the study, this talk will focus on the experiences of students as extracted from the interviews, such as the various origins of stress when taking online exams and unique exam strategies employed in online exams. REFERENCES Dicks, A. P., Morra, B., & Quinlan, K. B. (2020). Lessons learned from the CoviD-19 crisis: Adjusting assessment approaches within introductory organic courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(9). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00529 Nennig, H. T., Idárraga, K. L., Salzer, L. D., Bleske-Rechek, A., & Theisen, R. M. (2020). Comparison of student attitudes and performance in an online and a face-to-face inorganic chemistry course. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.1039/c9rp00112c Williams, J. B., & Wong, A. (2009). The efficacy of final examinations: A comparative study of closed-book, invigilated exams and open-book, open-web exams. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00929.

Virtual Reality, help or hindrance? A case study of two undergraduate student-generated chemistry lessons

Virtual Reality (VR) has become a much more common household commodity thanks to the proliferation of more affordable VR devices. While its use in the gaming industry is becoming widespread, its application in pedagogical environments has only just started, particularly in chemistry. As such, whether VR will aid or hinder the teaching and learning of chemistry is currently a topic of research and debate. This project sought to generate VR materials designed to support students learning undergraduate chemistry, with the specific topics decided by undergraduate student researchers. This work was undertaken in the X-reality (i.e. VR and other forms of augmented realities) laboratories at the The University of Sydney. Preliminary materials were generated, and pilot tested with student volunteers who undertook pre- and post-questionnaires followed by an exit interview. The results of these trials showed that the VR experience did enhance student engagement and understanding, but only for more complex examples. The trial volunteers felt that ball-and-stick models were adequate for simple molecular representations. Nausea was noted as a significant issue alongside concerns around the inadequate response of the hand-held controls. This same issue made movement throughout the virtual environment difficult for several students. Lastly, the student researchers found generating the VR lessons to be challenging, noting a steep learning curve with regards to creating the environments

EMBEDDING CREATIVE EXERCISES TO PROMOTE LEARNING-CENTRED EXPERIENCES IN CHEMISTRY TUTORIALS

An ongoing universal challenge for chemistry education is combatting the historical “silo-ing” of content into distinct topics. One approach towards addressing this challenge is the use of open-ended activities and assessments to prompt students to access prior knowledge and connect concepts through the use of Creative Exercises (CEs) (Trigwell & Sleet, 1990). This study has adapted the CEs as described by Ye and coworkers (2019) to operate as a formative learning activity in first-year chemistry tutorials. Preliminary testing in 2018 anecdotally indicated students persisted in struggling to access prior or interdisciplinary knowledge when confronted with open-ended CEs. Reflecting on this experience, a longitudinal approach has been taken by implementing a portfolio-style approach to encourage students to build upon this through a semester. In addition to the portfolio addition, limited scaffolding being built to support tutors and students when undertaking tutorial CE activities. In this presentation, we will focus on the student-generated artefacts by analyzing the identified connecting concepts and provide insight into the next iteration of this study design for 2021

WHO DO THEY THINK THEY ARE? INVESTIGATING THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON CASUAL TEACHING STAFF

Casual academics teaching staff, such as tutors and laboratory demonstrators, play a vital role in our undergraduate teaching programs. Indeed, this casual academic workforce often forms the vast majority of the academic teaching staff at most universities, especially in the first-year units/courses. In particular, casual laboratory teaching staff possess several responsibilities such as, ensuring adherence to the health and safety policies, assessing student performance and output, developing undergraduate students' practical and transferable skills, mentoring and correcting misconceptions in theoretical understanding (Herrington & Nakhleh, 2003; Rodriques & Bond-Robinson, 2006). Literature suggests that there is a strong positive correlation between how students interact with their laboratory demonstrator and how these same students rank their interest in (and attitudes towards) their undergraduate science courses (Pentecost et al., 2012; Osbourne, Simon & Collins, 2003). What is unclear however: how do these casual academics perceive their own teaching roles and how does this influence both their own teaching practices and the learning environment experienced by the students? A recent study undertaken by Flaherty et al. (2017) showed the positive impact of psychological empowerment on both the self-efficacy of the teaching staff and its ability to create a more positive, student-centered teaching environment. Preliminary quantitative and qualitative data collected through questionnaires of laboratory teaching staff at Monash University and the University of Sydney have been collected investigating the perceptions of our casual teaching staff (George-Williams, 2019; Spreitzer, 1995; George-Williams, 2020), particularly towards their own teaching roles. The results of these studies will be discussed alongside potential future directions for this study. REFERENCES Flaherty, A., O'Dwyer, A., Mannix-McNamara, P. & Leahy, J. (2017). The influence of psychological empowerment on the enhancement of chemistry laboratory demonstrators' perceived teaching self-image and behaviours as graduate teaching assistants. Journal of Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18, 710-736. George-Williams, S. R. (2019) Unpublished results, Monash University. George-Williams, S. R. (2020) Unpublished results, The University of Sydney. Herrington D. G. & Nakhleh M. B. (2003). What Defines Effective Chemistry Laboratory Instruction? Teaching Assistant and Student Perspectives. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(10), 1197-1205. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes toward science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079. Pentecost, T. C., Langdon, L. S., Asirvatham, M., Robus, H., & Parson, R. (2012). Graduate teaching assistant training that fosters student-centered instruction and professional development. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(6), 68–75. Rodriques R. A. B. & Bond-Robinson J. (2006). Comparing Faculty and Student Perspectives of Graduate Teaching Assistants’ Teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(2), 305-312. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation. The Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465

Insights into Student Cognition: Creative Exercises as an Evaluation Tool in Undergraduate First-year Organic Chemistry

It is known that while students can be adept at recalling specific information, especially in end of semester summative exams, they can still often struggle to connect or link this information over different topic areas. In many cases, this issue is exacerbated by traditional assessments and teaching styles that focus on and reward students who have only interacted with the learning materials on a more surface level. Many attempts have been made over time to rectify this, with one such example shown in the use of Creative Exercises (CEs). CEs are open-ended tasks that allow students to connect as much prior knowledge as possible into one cohesive response, potentially developing a student’s ability to link and connect disparate topic areas and content. In this study, CEs were introduced into a large scale first-year course and focused on fundamental organic chemistry reactions for the first time (to the best of our knowledge). Students performed the CEs in groups, and the paper responses were collected over six weeks (N=945 in total). Analysis of these artefacts revealed that students did indeed struggle to connect information over subsequent teaching weeks. This inability to connect information was despite being encouraged to do so both by the tasks and the teaching staff. Additionally, while more ‘advanced’ students (as noted by prior performance) were noted to raise more topics in a given week, they were just as susceptible to ‘siloing’ the information as lower-performing students. Recommendations are made on the future use of CEs