Students’ perceptions of common practices, including some academically dishonest practices, in the undergraduate general chemistry classroom laboratory

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1142-1150 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Christopher Smith ◽  
Adrian Sepulveda

In this study 635 general chemistry I and general chemistry II students completed a 40-item Likert-scale survey on their opinions of various practices, including some academically dishonest practices, that might occur in the general chemistry laboratory. The practices surveyed were focused on areas including preparation before coming to the laboratory, getting help with the pre-lab assignments, various decisions made by the teaching assistant or laboratory instructor, getting help with the calculations and questions required by the laboratory report, and various methods of obtaining data in the laboratory. An exploratory factor analysis of the results was conducted to identify the underlying factors in the survey, and the scores of the general chemistry I and general chemistry II students along these factors were compared. The findings were generally consistent with results in the literature, but also provided implications for students’ enculturation into chemistry and science as they progressed through their general chemistry coursework.

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 399-411
Author(s):  
K. Christopher Smith ◽  
Valeria Alonso

In this study a survey was developed to investigate students’ engagement during general chemistry laboratory sessions. Aspects of engagement surveyed included cognitive, behavioral, and emotional engagement, and the survey items were focused on activities during the pre-laboratory introduction, laboratory procedures, and data collection. Exploratory factor analysis of the results was conducted to determine the various underlying factors in the survey, and the scores of the general chemistry laboratory students along these underlying factors were compared. The findings supported the various dimensions of engagement reported in the literature.


Author(s):  
Sara Altowaiji ◽  
Rakahn Haddadin ◽  
Priscilla Campos ◽  
Shannon Sorn ◽  
Lizbeth Gonzalez ◽  
...  

Chemistry laboratory experiences provide students the opportunity to engage all three domains of learning: psychomotor, cognitive and affective. However, they are often stressful environments where students are expected to quickly learn new laboratory techniques, and collect data in a short amount of time. In principle, providing additional preparation activities should help students be better prepared to successfully complete the lab. These activities should lead to more meaningful interactions with the lab instructor and better performance on lab outcomes. In this study, we report the usefulness and effectiveness of online preparation activities for students that include video lectures demonstrating the labs that the students will participate in, and preparation questions that mimic data analysis for the lab. These online prelab activities were implemented in the second semester general chemistry laboratory at a large Hispanic serving institution in the southwestern United States. Over three semesters, students enrolled in this course were surveyed using the Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory Instrument (MLLI) to assess their lab expectations as well as author generated post-lab surveys to assess the usefulness of the prelab activities. Additionally, lab instructors were surveyed on their perception of the efficacy of the additional preparation activities. Findings suggest that both students and instructors agree that having access to these materials as a part of a portfolio of resources, including the lab manual, help them better prepare for the lab. Although students’ expectations on the cognitive domain decreased after a semester of instruction, questions related to comfort with lab equipment show improvements in the affective domain for students with access to the additional preparation activities. Lastly we found that both students and instructors see a lot of value and benefits in having these types of prelab activities available as a way to help prepare students for the upcoming laboratory sessions. In general, the potential benefits that prelab activities had on students outweigh the modest effort to create these materials.


2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (311) ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Tarka

Abstract: The objective article is the comparative analysis of Likert rating scale based on the following range of response categories, i.e. 5, 7, 9 and 11 in context of the appropriate process of factors extraction in exploratory factor analysis (EFA). The problem which is being addressed in article relates primarily to the methodological aspects, both in selection of the optimal number of response categories of the measured items (constituting the Likert scale) and identification of possible changes, differences or similarities associated (as a result of the impact of four types of scales) with extraction and determination the appropriate number of factors in EFA model.Keywords: Exploratory factor analysis, Likert scale, experiment research, marketing


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document