Investigating the trajectories of academic staff who identify as DBER scholars

One of the growing areas of research in Australia is the discipline-based education research (DBER) field. In 2012 a National Research Council report stated “[DBER is a] vital area of scholarship [with] potential to improve undergraduate science and engineering education” (National Research Council, 2012, p. 1), meeting recommendations given by the Chief Scientist of Australia (2014) to improve the education of STEM graduates. The primary intent of this study was to collect the motivations, journeys and trajectories of DBER researchers and find factors that can lead to supporting the growth and retention of these scholars. Given the regional differences in academic landscapes between continents, we have chosen to focus (for now) on the Australian DBER community. Additionally, we know representation within our teaching faculty has direct and measurable impact on the students themselves. As such, we have also explored the diversity of backgrounds of those who participated alongside their perceptions of the diversity seen within the Australian DBER community. To achieve the above aims, a series of interviews were undertaken with Australian academics who identify as being a part of the DBER community. The population represented was across a range of experience levels, from early career to senior, as well as multiple gender identities and varied academic pathways. In this presentation, the outcomes of analysing this data will be used to describe the types of academics that are becoming DBER researchers in Australia, as well as the initial motivations and pathways that have led them to this point in their careers. REFERENCES National Research Council. (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Office of the Chief Scientist. (2014). Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Australia’s Future. Australian Government, Canberra

Chemistry Discipline Day

Please join the RACI Chemistry Education Division (CED) for the 2022 ACSME Chemistry Discipline Day. The event will start with an introduction and outline of the CED and how this division currently serves the chemistry community in Australia. We will then facilitate round table discussions to develop ideas for the Chemistry Education Research (CER) community in Australia to ensure an updated and relevant framework for the CED is in place to support the teaching and learning of chemistry in Australia. This will include breaking out into groups to discuss audience derived topics with the intention of building collaboration opportunities and networking. This event will be of interest to secondary and tertiary chemistry educators, education focused and non-education focused chemistry academics, and undergraduate or postgraduate students with an interest in chemistry education

Self-Regulation Learning Theory: The effects of metacognitive scaffolding on student metacognition and motivation

Australian educational institutions are currently facing a decline in upper secondary science course enrolments and perform one-and-three-quarter school years lower in science compared to higher performing countries (Australian Council for Educational Research [ACER], 2018; Kennedy et al., 2014). Furthermore, increased access to information results in new demands of actively acquiring and adapting existing knowledge more rapidly, which increases the responsibility of educational institutions to promote the development of proactive learners, who practice “self-regulated learning” (OECD, 2003). The Self-Regulated Learning Theory (SRLT) argues that successful learners rely on internal regulatory skills and become self-sufficient through refining and regulating their cognitive, motivational, and metacognitive knowledge (Schraw et al., 2006). This study investigates successful learning through the SLRT, specifically focusing on Metacognition and Motivation knowledge and practices of senior secondary chemistry students in NSW. Throughout the course of a term, students engage with various data collection instruments (pre- and post- Metacognition and Motivation questionnaire, integrated Metacognitive Scaffolding Interventions in the form of reflection tasks, and post-intervention focus group interviews). This presentation will outline how Metacognitive Regulation and Motivation change, or stay the same, during a term. It will also give insight into student perceptions of their metacognitive practices and motivations. Finally, it will compare this knowledge with academic performance to consider the influences of cognition on the self-regulation of chemistry students. REFERENCES Australian Council for Educational Research. (2018). PISA 2018: Australian student performance in long-term decline. Australian Council for Educational Research - ACER. https://www.acer.org/au/discover/article/pisa-2018-australian-student-performance-in-long-term-decline Kennedy, J., Lyons, T., & Quinn, F. (2014). The continuing decline of science and mathematics enrolments in Australian high schools. Teaching Science, 60(2), 34–46. OECD. (2003). Learners for Life: Student Approaches to Learning: Results from PISA 2000. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/learners-for-life-student-approaches-to-learning_9789264103917-en Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning. Research in Science Education, 36(1), 111–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-3917-

Comparing the effectiveness of teaching methods with different types of experiments in the chemistry laboratory

Background: In an effort to improve upon the laboratory experience of students at the University of Tasmania, Australia, this study investigates the advantages and disadvantages of using different teaching methods. The unit studied was the foundation chemistry unit (KRA001) undertaken by students lacking the pre-requisites to enter into the first year general chemistry program at the University of Tasmania. Current laboratory experiments prior to this study most closely relate to the Expository style as a teaching method, and the teaching methods to be investigated in this study include pure Expository, Guided Inquiry, and Problem Solving. A total of four experiments were considered covering several experiment types including basic skills, separation by distillation, identification of an unknown organic acid, and fundamentals of acids, bases and buffers. Aims: This project intends to not only improve the laboratories currently used by the School of Chemistry at the University of Tasmania, but also provide insight into which teaching methods are most appropriate depending on experiment type. Design and methods: A range of experiments was selected to cover a variety of experiment types commonly observed within a foundation chemistry course. Each experiment was modified into three separate versions representing each teaching method. Each type of experiment was implemented in each semester of 2012 and 2013; e.g. in semester 3 of 2012, all modified laboratories employed the Expository teaching style. Three separate instances of data collection occurred in semesters 3 of 2012, and 1 and 2 of 2013. Additionally, three different types of data collection were used and these included the use of paper quizzes, surveys and reported grades for each student provided by their demonstrators. All data collected was deidentified and voluntary as per the ethics approval (H0012564) procedure upon completion of each experiment. Statistical analysis was completed using a one-way between groups ANOVA with post-hocs tests using SPSS. Results: Analysis of collected data is currently underway. In the comparison of the three teaching methods for each experiment, it is anticipated that significant differences should be observed giving an indication of the appropriateness of each teaching method to each experiment. It is further hypothesised that no one teaching method will be found superior across all experiments; rather certain teaching methods will be more appropriate for each type of experiment. Preliminary results indicated significant differences existed largely in the demonstrator awarded grades of students who completed the laboratory. All four experiments indicated one teaching method to be superior in terms of student achievement as observed by the demonstrators. In addition to this, students indicated a preference for different teaching methods in three of the four experiments for workload expectations. Conclusions: From observations of the implementation of the different experiments and the crude data, it has been observed that there are differences in the manner that students approach each teaching method and develop their understanding. This study will be extended for further iterations within the foundation unit in addition to considering experiments from first, second, and third year levels of chemistry subjects

An evaluation and redevelopment of current first year laboratory practices

Chemical education is an important area of research as it directly impacts upon the production of capable scientists This study involved evaluation and redevelopment of first year laboratory experiments in Chemistry 1 at the School of Chemistry, UTAS, with respect to the teaching styles implemented. The teaching styles focused on were expository, guided inquiry, and problem solving to be applied to two experiments. The aims of this study included the investigation into the engagement and input of both students and demonstrators, the understanding achieved by students through completion of the laboratory experiment, and the enjoyment of participating and completing the laboratory experiment. The underlying goal was the construction of a foundation for further research into the differences between teaching styles when applied to laboratory courses. The major outcomes of this study found that both problem solving and guided inquiry had greater success than expository in areas such as the engagement of students within the laboratory environment, and the students gaining a deeper understanding of the chemical concepts. In addition, expository and problem solving was found to have more acceptable workloads than guided inquiry. The greatest contribution of this study was the foundation for further study to be continued into this field of research

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

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

BUILDING INCLUSIVITY IN SCIENCE COMMUNICATION THROUGH MULTIPLE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

The development of science communication practice is often driven by the evolving needs and embedded values of a specific culture or country (Davies & Horst 2016). These differing perspectives are lost when we focus on Western histories of science and science communication. In the literature, and often in practice, this has resulted in the exclusion of non-Western and Indigenous histories of communicating scientific knowledge (Orthia, 2020). Similarly, science syllabi often privilege Western histories of science, with narratives of white male scientists dominating science history (Pringle & McLaughlin, 2014). These narratives are neither representative of the rich history of science nor the diversity of the student cohorts. Incorporating science history into curriculums can improve student engagement and understanding of concepts (Olsson et al., 2015), highlighting the importance of representing diverse histories. This presentation will explore multiple histories of science communication, including Western, non-Western, and Indigenous histories. It will challenge the ‘deficit to dialogue’ rhetoric by highlighting the broad landscape of science communication in Australia and globally. Finally, it will suggest some ways to broaden histories of science communication and acknowledge those that have been excluded in order to build towards a more inclusive future of science education and communication. REFERENCES Davies, S. R., & Horst, M. (2016). Science Communication. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50366-4 Olsson, K. A., Balgopal, M. M., & Levinger, N. E. (2015). How Did We Get Here? Teaching Chemistry with a Historical Perspective. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(11), 1773–1776. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed5005239 Orthia, L. (2020). Strategies for including communication of non-Western and indigenous knowledges in science communication histories. Journal of Science Communication, 19(2), A02. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.19020202 Pringle, R. M., & McLaughlin, C. A. (2014). Preparing Science Teachers for Diversity: Integrating the Contributions of Scientists from Underrepresented Groups in the Middle School Science Curriculum. In M. M. Atwater, M. Russell, & M. B. Butler (Eds.), Multicultural Science Education: Preparing Teachers for Equity and Social Justice (pp. 193–208). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7651-7_1

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

ACSME 2019 Special Issue – Editorial

The Australian Conference of Science and Mathematics Education (ACSME) has long had a strong culture of interdisciplinary collaboration and has provided an opportunity to share the experiences of our colleagues around Australia. As both long-time attendees, the lessons we have learned from our colleagues within chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics, and others have certainly influenced and inspired our own practice and research. More so than in previous years, 2020 has challenged us to rapidly innovate whilst dealing with anxious and uncertain times. So, it is especially refreshing to read about, and reflect on, successes and creativity in the tertiary, and secondary, education sectors - reinforcing the idea that we are one community and being one community is our strength. While this special issue was planned, and submissions received, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the three papers presented in this issue provide insight into three unique perspectives from our community. This includes the reflection of a group of academics, learning from one another on their path to improving their teaching practice and creating positive learning environments in their classrooms; an example of collaborative research between undergraduate students and academics exploring the potential of modern technologies, such as VR, in the chemistry classroom; and an investigation into how our students think, and importantly, how we can scaffold their learning to develop their scientific thinking skills both inside and outside the classroom. Looking ahead into future years and the uncertainty of what our classrooms will look like, we would like to extend an invitation to all within our communities to engage in scholarly learning and teaching innovations - which we encourage you to share with the community in our journal, IJISME. The ambitious leaps taken this year across the country, and worldwide, to find creative solutions to teaching online leaves us with the question - what will you be keeping as you plan for 2021 and onwards? Speaking from our own discussions in writing this, we are already identifying teaching innovations that are now being recognised as strengths around which we could centre our teaching in future years. We acknowledge and pay respect to the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation, the traditional owners of the land on which we research, teach, and collaborate at the University of Sydney and the University of New South Wales