Promoting student interaction, engagement, and success in an online environment

Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-021-03178-x ABCS OF EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN ANALYTICAL SCIENCE Promoting student interaction, engagement, and success in an online environment Anna G. Cavinato 1 & Rebecca A. Hunter 2 & Lisa S. Ott 3 & Jill K. Robinson 4 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2021 Introduction Methods that engage students in the learning process are superior to didactic, lecture-based instruction [1–7]. Students must actively develop their capabilities to become more expert, often collaboratively, with ongoing guidance from a faculty member [3]. The use of small-group, active learning exercises in the classroom leads to improvements in academic achievement, better reasoning and critical thinking skills, increased retention of students, and improved relationships with faculty and other students [7–14]. However, a survey of nearly 6000 students and faculty after the initial phase of remote learning at Indiana University found few online classes were able to provide these types of interactive learning experiences. Students had fewer interactions with faculty and other students which led to increased difficulty in completing course assignments and a decreased sense of belonging in the university system [15]. Recommendations from this survey for future online courses included creating opportunities for communication between students and instructors and fostering a sense of community through virtual student-to-student interactions [15]. This contribution is part of a series featuring teaching analytical science during the pandemic in order to support instructors in preparing their courses. * Anna G. Cavinato 1 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Eastern Oregon University, La Grande, OR 97850, USA 2 Department of Chemistry, The College of New Jersey, Ewing, NJ 08628, USA 3 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, California State University, Chico, CA 95929, USA 4 Department of Chemistry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA Four instructors who use active learning in their face-toface classes will describe various ways to create collaborative virtual classes that engage students in the learning process. Solutions to various challenges to student engagement during remote learning will also be discussed. All instructors teach analytical chemistry and/or general chemistry at institutions ranging from large public universities to small or mid-sized primarily undergraduate institutions that serve significant numbers of low-income or first-generation college students. The strategies for remote active learning presented in this article were used in classes with enrollments between 20 and 50 students. Facilitating active learning and group work in a remote setting Freeman defines active learning as “engaging students in the process of learning through activities and/or discussion in class, as opposed to passively listening to an expert. It emphasizes higher-order thinking and often involves group work.” [6] However, an active learning class session does not consist entirely of small-group discussion. The role of the instructor in facilitating an effective learning environment is extremely important. The instructor often provides “mini” lectures to explain difficult concepts and when students present their group’s answer to the whole class, the instructor identifies and corrects misconceptions, elaborates more deeply on the topic, or poses additional questions. A major challenge for instructors is to adapt methods used for in person active learning to the online environment. A common method of including group discussion in a virtual class is to use video conferencing services such as Zoom to divide participants in breakout rooms. However, there are some major differences between facilitating active learning in person and online. Student discussions in Zoom breakout rooms are less efficient than in person. In the classroom, an Cavinato A.G. et al. instructor can pass out a worksheet and students can arrange their seating to easily share their answers both visually and orally. It is much more difficult for online students to display their solutions to other group members and conversation moves at a slower pace. Furthermore, it is challenging for the instructor to assess the understanding of the whole class as students work on the activities because the instructor can only interact with one group at a time. It is also more difficult for the instructor to make a quick clarification or provide a helpful hint when students are working in breakout rooms because it takes time to post an announcement and/or bring everyone back together in the main room. Therefore, students must have better advance preparation to tackle the group activity during virtual class than during an in-person class. Herein, we provide a description of different strategies and technological tools that enable us to implement effective virtual active learning. General chemistry courses A 25-student general chemistry class at Indiana University (IU) used a hybrid format with some students attending in person wearing masks and socially distanced and other students joining online. On a typical day, there were 15 students in person and 10 students joining the class using Zoom. The synchronous classes consisted of short lessons in combination with small-group problem-solving. Short lectures (5–10 min) were given on a topic and then students answered questions individually or in groups. Learning Catalytics, a personal response tool, was used to assess the understanding of the whole class. The polling feature in Zoom can also be used to deliver multiple choice questions or the instructor can display a question and students can submit text or numerical answers using the chat feature. Challenging questions frequently result in significant numbers of students with incorrect responses, which allows the instructor to identify misconceptions and provide useful feedback. When there is a wide distribution of responses, students are placed into groups to discuss the problem. Once the discussion is finished, one group is called upon to explain their answer. The student who speaks for each group is selected based on a simple question posed at the start of class such as “Who has the most pets?” These questions not only identify the speaker but also help students get to know one another. The instructor transcribes the answer on the screen and expands on the student’s explanation as needed. Ultimately, the correct solution is displayed for the whole class. Small-group discussion is most effective when students are comfortable with other group members, so it is recommended to only change the composition of groups once or twice during term. Students received a class participation score, which resulted in high attendance over the term. A 50-student general chemistry course at Eastern Oregon University (EOU) used both sync (...truncated)