Student Satisfaction with Synchronous Online Organic Chemistry Laboratories: Prerecorded Video vs Livestream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The widespread transition to online teaching as a result of the global pandemic moved chemistry laboratory experiences online. At UBC’s Okanagan campus, organic chemistry laboratory instruction was delivered synchronously to maximize student interactions with their teaching assistants. Two methods of online delivery were employed: (1) students gathered with a teaching assistant via Zoom to watch a prerecorded video of the laboratory procedure and (2) students gathered on Zoom to watch a livestream of the teaching assistant performing the experiment in the laboratory. A single TA implemented both methods, one in each of two laboratory sections. Student satisfaction with the two delivery methods was compared using a survey and semistructured interviews. Overall, the livestream section received significantly more positive feedback in all aspects, including student investment, perceived conceptual gains, understanding of glassware and techniques, ability to make proper experimental observations, engagement in critical thinking and problem-solving, and general satisfaction with their online lab experience. However, students expressed the belief that the primary role of a teaching laboratory is hands-on experience with chemistry equipment and techniques and that their experience was lacking in this aspect regardless of the lab delivery method. Students described two principal advantages of the livestream delivery. One was the inclusion of opportunities to witness mistakes or unexpected outcomes and then having to take part in the development of a resolution to address those errors; such opportunities were absent for students watching a prerecorded and edited video with a predetermined conclusion. A second aspect was that waiting periods inherent in the live performance of an experimental procedure allowed for unstructured interactions among students and the TA, both to discuss the experiment and to simply socialize. Overall, students believed that neither pedagogy compared favorably to a traditional in-person teaching laboratory experience, but the livestream method proved to be a highly superior approach for a synchronous online laboratory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".