3.3. Implementation Strategies for Project-Based Learning Large Courses

3.3.1 Instructor Selected Projects and Budgeting

Small analytical chemistry courses frequently allow students to pick a project idea on the basis of their own interests. However, in large classes it is necessary for the instructor to select the driving question because the logistics and cost of numerous projects would be prohibitive. The use of a community partner for whom the work is being done lends credibility to an instructor selected topic. For example, five different compounds were chosen for analysis in the beer and each laboratory section performed these same five tests. In addition, all five student groups doing the same analysis selected only one procedure to minimize the cost of reagents and materials. Each group found a literature method as a homework assignment and during class time the teams met and decided on the best one. This was an excellent exercise in discussing the advantages and disadvantages of different techniques. The method was approved by the instructor approximately one month before the project start date to allow sufficient time for students to generate their own supply list. All orders were approved by the instructor. Refer to the “Assignments and Rubrics” section for the Literature Searching Assignment and Choosing the Best Method Group Assignment.

3.3.2 Team Selection and Grading

Students work in groups of three, and teams are selected by simply requiring students to work with individuals they have not worked with before. The responsibility of team management and distribution of duties lies with the students, although no formal roles are assigned. A contract outlining expectations for work ethic and shared responsibilities is developed by the group, and there have not been any major issues with teamwork. The group contract from can be found in the “Assignments and Rubrics” section. The same grade is given to each member of the group for the final product (scientific poster), as this best represents how teams function in the workplace. The students are also asked to evaluate each member of the group using a percentage score to indicate their contribution to the entire project. In most cases, the students agree that the work has been equally divided within a few percent. If this is the case, then everyone gets the same grade. If there is a larger discrepancy, certain group members receive a higher score than others. If there was a very large difference in the reported contribution, I would call these students in for a meeting to best understand the situation. Thus far, I have not had to do this.

3.3.3 Communication Between Student Groups Working on the Same Compound

In contrast to many small schools where students have open access to the laboratory, instrument use was limited to regularly scheduled laboratory sessions and collaboration between groups was essential to complete the project in a timely fashion. Troubleshooting time was decreased by communicating progress and solutions to problems between groups working on the same compound. For example, in a high-performance liquid chromatography analysis, the four substances did not completely separate even though the column and mobile phase were identical to those specified in the literature. Throughout the week, different mobile phase gradients were tested on the basis of results from earlier groups. The sharing of chromatograms greatly decreased the amount of time for method development and all groups contributed to the solution. A notebook for each different analysis was kept in the lab, and procedures and results were recorded every day. One team even set up a Facebook page so that information could be easily viewed by all members at any time! Students could readily appreciate the benefits of complete and thorough record keeping and became frustrated when other groups did not provide clear and helpful information. This type of collaboration occurs until the problems are worked out and then each group performs the analysis of samples on its own.

Furthermore, class time was used for sharing information and preparing the group portion of progress reports. A typical progress report requires each group to contribute data along with a brief discussion of the meaning. The groups working on the same compound then combine to summarize what was accomplished over the course of the week, describe experimental difficulties and how they were solved, identify which issues are still problematic, andplan future experiments. Each student gets a grade for his or her team’s individual contribution of data as well as a grade for the large-group questions.

3.3.4 TA Training

The extra instruction given to TA’s during the projects was minimal. The overall goal was to have the TA’s serve as mentors and share their expertise, yet step back and let students work out issues on their own. They were instructed not to jump in and solve the problem themselves, but to first ask students to come up possible reasons for the difficulty and potential solutions. Only then would they become part of the discussion and ultimately students would decide how to proceed. The TA is still the expert and would often need to assist students if they were performing instrument maintenance or a making a change in components or settings.

Another important aspect of TA mentoring is to make sure they are supportive as panic and frustration can result when progress is not occurring at a rapid pace. Students who are used to performing weekly experiments in which all the troubles have already been worked out feel they are failing when things do not go smoothly. It is important to reassure them that unexpected obstacles frequently arise in the lab and the main goal is learn from them. They must know that if their project takes a slightly different direction that is OK. The troubleshooting usually generates data and this can be presented on the poster. For example, the effect of signal averaging on noise or development of a new solvent program can be presented. If they do not have time to perform many replicate analyses due to experiment difficulties, this is acceptable as long as they have used their time well. There has never been a case where a group does not acquire enough data for a nice poster.