MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188413469 · doi:10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00549

Student Satisfaction with Synchronous Online Organic Chemistry Laboratories: Prerecorded Video vs Livestream

2021· article· en· W3188413469 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultimediaChemistryChemistry educationComputer sciencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it