MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Facilitated Study Groups for Undergraduate Organic Chemistry: Experience from a Large Public Canadian University

2023· article· en· W4381189815 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto ScarboroughUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationCooperative learningInclusion (mineral)Psychological interventionChemistryMedical educationPedagogyTeaching methodMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Undergraduate organic chemistry courses have a reputation for being difficult among students in biological and physical sciences programs. Due to the extensive problem-solving, visualization, and depiction of chemical structures/reactions required, students may perceive learning such content as similar to learning a new language. Several interventions such as course-integrated tutorials or discussion sessions have aimed to assist students. Another effective approach that chemistry educators might consider is Supplemental Instruction (SI), a well-established program that emphasizes student-driven learning whereby student SI leaders facilitate discussions to help students arrive at solutions while also developing effective communication and study skills. A type of SI, Facilitated Study Groups (FSG), established by the Centre for Teaching and Learning at the University of Toronto Scarborough (UTSC) in 2009, were introduced regularly into organic chemistry courses in 2012. This program provides semester-long optional small-group peer learning sessions, each of which corresponds to a course lecture. The aim of this paper is to provide comprehensive coverage detailing the structure of the organic chemistry FSG program, peer facilitation strategies employed, quantitative/qualitative synthesis of student outcomes indicating program uptake. We consistently find significantly higher grades and significantly lower attrition rates for students who regularly attend FSG sessions in comparison to those who do not (n=16 semesters). Given the growing diversity of undergraduate classes in terms of approaches to learning, language, and cultural barriers (international students, English second-language learners, learning and psychosocial disabilities), our FSG sessions seek to foster inclusion amongst our heterogeneous pool of attendees. Here, we describe strategies that tailored FSG sessions to a diverse group of undergraduate students as suggested by a sizable percentage of the class availing themselves of this resource and by a narrative synthesis of end-of-term surveys. Together, we demonstrate successful adoption of an SI-based model for organic chemistry and present a practical framework that includes pedagogically informed session strategies and cost estimates to guide design of similar programs for post-secondary students at other institutions.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.265 · 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