Student Evaluation of Peer-Led Peer Developed Laboratory Sequence

We an assessment instrument similar to the one described was in the supplement for Lorena Tribe & Kim Kostka article is, “Peer-Developed and Peer-Led Labs in General Chemistry” J. Chem. Ed. 2007, 84(6), 1031-1034. I set it up online on the Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) website There were six questions that asked about students appreciation of the project. It was scored on the SALG five-point scale from no help (1) to very much help (5). The average scores for all six questions were between moderate help (3) to much help (4). Twenty out of 22 students recommended this experience for next year. The students were given a chance to write comments on their overall appreciation of the sequence. A number of students had an increased appreciation of these labs over last semesters more traditional labs. “It was better this semester than last. I enjoyed the labs more and found it more interesting to pick the lab and design it.” The most common shortcoming of the labs was a lack of clarity about how what they were doing in lab related to the lecture material. “The labs did not really help me in understanding or translating information to classroom discussions and worksheets.” A related shortcoming was the common difficulty in developing a deep understanding of what the lab was demonstrating beyond simply being able to perform the techniques. “At some points (especially towards the end) people seemed not to really understand what was going on, and were simply following the directions on the handout.”


Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.
%d bloggers like this: