Measuring the impact of incorporating systems thinking into general chemistry on affective components of student learning

Recently, there has been an increased interest in incorporating systems thinking content into various chemistry classrooms. One promise of systems thinking is that students will be able to connect typical chemistry concepts learned in lectures with real-life situations through context-rich instruction. Such experiences may impact affective factors related to learning such as motivation and attitude of students. These factors have often revealed negative orientation for students in chemistry courses, where the majority of students are externally motivated, whereas intrinsic motivation is positively correlated with students’ course performance. A modified Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS) and the short version of the Attitude towards the Subject of Chemistry Inventory (ASCIv2) were used to assess whether a systems-thinking instructional approach resulted in changes in students’ motivation and attitudes in general chemistry. Pre- and post-survey data suggest that a first-semester chemistry course that incorporates systems thinking does not induce significant positive changes in students’ motivation. End of the semester motivation and attitude levels were correlated with students’ ACS exam scores, where students with higher levels of intrinsic motivation showed better performance on the ACS exam. Although the results obtained in this study were not optimistic, they suggest several areas of study within systems thinking instruction as potential areas to improve both instruction and student reception of the systems thinking components of instruction.This is a manuscript of the article Published as An, Jiwoo, Glen R. Loppnow, and Thomas A. Holme. "Measuring the impact of incorporating systems thinking into general chemistry on affective components of student learning." Canadian Journal of Chemistry 99, no. 8 (2021): 698-705. doi: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjc-2020-0218. Copyright 2020 Canadian Science Publishing. Posted with Permission

Isolation of RNA from a Mixture and its Detection by Utilizing a Microgel-Based Optical Device

In this investigation, we show that RNA can be separated from a solution containing DNA and RNA and the isolated RNA can be detected using poly (N-isopropylacrylamide-co-N-(3-aminopropyl) methacrylamide hydrochloride) microgel-based optical devices (etalons). The isolation of RNA was accomplished by using hairpin-functionalized magnetic beads (MMPDNA) and differential melting, based on the fact that the DNA–RNA hybrid duplex is stronger (i.e., high melting temperature) than the DNA–DNA duplex (i.e., low melting temperature). By performing concurrent etalon sensing and fluorescent studies, we found that the MMPDNA combined with differential melting was capable of selectively separating RNA from DNA. This selective separation and simple colorimetric detection of RNA from a mixture will help lead to future RNA-based disease diagnostic devices

Science education in three acts: Act 2-...the Universe(ity),... (The Term)

Transformation and change. These are central concepts in the ways in which chemists think and contribute conceptually to other sciences and other human endeavors. In learning, threshold concepts are those that enable an entirely new perspective on a discipline, one that brings a deeper, perhaps transformational, understanding. Post-secondary institutions are not immune to change and transformation. Indeed, post-secondary science education, with its traditional competitive, pedantic/didactic overtones, has been undergoing such a transformation. There are a number of factors driving this transition, including student perspectives on higher education; regional, national and international changes in standards; deeper understanding of learning in science from research; and changing funding, information, political, and regulatory environments. This changing landscape presents both opportunities and challenges for higher education. This ignite presentation will start with brief audience questions on the goals of higher education. A broad discussion of these changes in teaching post-secondary science, the factors driving them, the barriers and areas of resistance, and possible future paths will be discussed within the Canadian context. In other words, what are the thresholds that must be crossed for more effective science teaching and learning? In addition to raising issues, this talk will be peppered with personal anecdotes from the speaker\u27s three-year stint as Associate Dean, Learning and Innovation in a Faculty of Science at a large, research-intensive university to illustrate the challenges and opportunities in teaching innovation

Science education in three acts: Act 3-...and Everything (Final Assessment)

Criticality – skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc. . Scientists are trained to bring critical thinking to their problem-solving; their research design, methodology, data and interpretation(s); and to others\u27 work. In fact, the goal of a PhD is to make an original contribution to scientific knowledge, while also learning the skills of critical analysis. But, do we bring that same level of critical thinking, scholarly reflection, and concepts of evidence to our teaching? Do we teach to engage, motivate and even inspire, or do we simply put as much content as we can into our classes? Although changing in recent years, the sad fact is that those of us teaching in most post-secondary institutions were never trained in pedagogy or the science of learning before we started teaching in our discipline. Many of us know nothing about learning outcomes, nor how to align those with pedagogy and assessment. In this ignite talk, which will be equal parts rant and enthusiastic solutions, I will demonstrate the wide gulf between our methods of teaching and assessment, and the ultimate goals we have in science education, and provide examples of how this gulf can be bridged with a simple change in perspective through some simple activities. Through these examples, participants will see activities that can be translated to their disciplines in ways that encourage student curiosity and engagement, promote critical thinking and problem-solving strategies, and encourage a more process-oriented perspective on science

Science education in three acts: Act 1-Light, ... (First Day)

Light, more generally, electromagnetic radiation. It permeates our universe at many different wavelengths: ultraviolet, radio, X-ray, visible, infrared, gamma and cosmic ray. It permeates our first-year university science course topics, whether in the form of the quantum model, trigonometric functions, seismicity, or biological adaptation. It permeates our language, filling in as a synonym for understanding. It permeates life as one of our senses, perhaps one that we rely on the most to obtain information about and interact with our environment. It even permeates poetry and literature, religion and mythology. This ignite presentation will range across the scientific disciplines and demonstrate how a different perspective on light, the visible wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation, arises in each. In particular, the evolution of the visual process will be used as an exemplar scientific model. This metaphor of light will then be applied to the first day class in university sciences and math to set a trajectory of possibility, curiosity and engagement. In the process, hard questions will be asked about alignment between our course goals, curriculum and pedagogy. By seeding non-intuitive questions throughout this presentation, I will give participants new perspectives on light, science, and science education, and demonstrate new ways in which light can be used to give students a deeper understanding of scientific culture, norms, and processes within a first-year university context in any scientific discipline. It will also give instructors a new perspective on the teaching of science

Interdisciplinary science boosts to affective domain learning and student engagement

Undergraduate interdisciplinary science programs exist, in one form or another, at many Canadian post-secondary institutions. However, data is only recently becoming available on the effectiveness of these programs in achieving their stated outcomes. Even sparser is the research on these programs for achieving affective domain learning goals, known to promote life-long curiosity and a civil society. This talk will present the results obtained from two multi-year research programs: one in SCI 100, an interdisciplinary science first-year undergraduate experience, and one in Science Citizenship, a project-based upper-class undergraduate course. Mixed-methods research was used, including pre/post student surveys, instructor and student focus groups, alumni interviews and correlation between SCI 100 grades obtained and grade point averages in later years, with the initial research goal of measuring the efficacy of these two learning experiences. However, by probing student expectations, experiences and perceptions, critical aspects of the learning pedagogy and curriculum were identified that supported affective domain learning and led to higher student engagement. Not too surprisingly, the results show that both the interdisciplinary nature of these courses (curriculum) and the nature of how the activities were structured (active and/or discovery learning, group work, and student choice of topics) all contributed to internalization of a scientific value system and greater internalization of learning motivation. The correlation results will be discussed in terms of the effectiveness of SCI 100 for future learning in science