In the spring and fall semesters of 1996 and 1997, a series of experimental modular general chemistry units, developed by the ModularChem ("MC2") and ChemLinks chemistry curriculum reform coalitions began to be implemented at participating institutions. A sample of ten classes was selected from among these early testings of the modular approach at institutions of different types (3 research universities, 3 liberal arts colleges, 2 community colleges, 1 comprehensive state university, and 1 historically-black college). For the purposes of obtaining student feedback and for comparison with more traditional approaches, a sample of students enrolled in these ten modular courses and in ten matched comparison courses were interviewed. (The findings from eight of these matched sets of interviews are reported here: a fuller report will be available later this year.)
A total of 292 students from the eight institutions were interviewed following the interview protocol available for download above. (Some interviews were one-on-one; others were conducted in focus groups.) All of the interview data gathered were transcribed verbatim, then coded in detail to capture the salient patterns/themes found in answer to interviewers' questions, and in observations and discussion of points raised by the students themselves. The findings described in this report are built up from almost thirteen thousand (N=12,993) coded elements (i.e., coded student comments). Some consortia participants have expressed interest in our methods of analysis, in part, because they can be used to analyze any qualitative data--including teaching notes and records--that are entered into a word processor.
The most important point to note in reading all the tables included in this report is that the students' responses are of three kinds. They reflect:
The themes/patterns thus generated were organized into the following hierarchy:
Finally, each group of comments in the detailed themes categories were further classified by whether they were positive, negative, or mixed in relation to the topic(s) which comprised the detailed theme. Thus, for example, within the aggregate category of student comments about their Learning Gains, one of the six summary themes was Cognitive Gains which had several detailed sub-themes including: overall understanding/sense of mastery; conceptual grasp; mental stretch. A student comment which indicated, e.g., that they felt comfortable working with the concepts would be recorded as "positive" or "gained" for the conceptual grasp category, whereas a comment indicating, say, a lack of confidence in dealing with the concepts would be counted as "negative," or "not gained."
The modular and comparison courses were then analyzed in terms of the percentages of positive, negative, and mixed comments aggregated at each level of the hierarchy. The total number of student comments in a given category can be thought of as a rough relative measure of how important the issues in that category were for students (in comparison to the issues in the other categories).
An added benefit of the research design is that it provides both comparative information as well as feedback as to how well both the experimental and traditional courses are working and/or in what areas improvements might be useful.
| First Level of Hierarchy | Course Category | =100% of N
N = no. of comments | |||
| Learning Gain: TOTALS | Modular | N=4046 | |||
| Comparison | N=3666 | ||||
| Pedagogy: TOTALS | Modular | N=2768 | |||
| Comparison | N=2513 |
However, when we aggregate at the second level (i.e., the level of Summary Themes), we do find differences between the modular and comparison courses (cf. Tables 1 and 2 in Sample results link below). In the Learning Gains category we find:
| Summary themes within the Learning Gains category | Course Category | =100% of N
N = no. of comments | |||
| Cognitive gains, knowledge/skills retention and transfer | Modular | N=1433 | |||
| Comparison | N=1301 | ||||
| Increased interest in chemistry and appreciation of its nature and methods | Modular | N=484 | |||
| Comparison | N=412 | ||||
| Sees real world applications of class content | Modular | N=367 | |||
| Comparison | N=279 |
Although the contrasts in cognitive gains and interest in chemistry are modest, it appears that the modular emphasis on "real world" applications was valued by many students.
We also see differences within the summary themes of the student comments concerning course pedagogy (cf. Tables 2 in sample results link below):
| Summary themes within the Pedagogy category | Course Category | =100% of N
N = no. of comments | |||
| Aspects of lab work | Modular | N=366 | |||
| Comparison | N=261 | ||||
| Relevance | Modular | N=288 | |||
| Comparison | N=215 | ||||
| Resources | Modular | N=151 | |||
| Comparison | N=97 | ||||
| Coherence (fit) | Modular | N=135 | |||
| Comparison | N=93 |
The less than favorable ratings received by the modular courses relating to coherence, resources, and lab suggest that some fine-tuning remains to be done with these experimental course modules. (However, the traditional courses might also benefit from some rethinking in terms of the coherence of their presentation to students and their lab design as well.) Meanwhile, the favorable rating of the modular courses in terms of "relevance" seems consistent with the real world application rating seen in the Learning Gains category. More detailed tables may be downloaded in the sample results section below.
