Interactive

Having now been charged with the holy task of lecturing, I have begun to realize that assembling content is quite time-consuming. It leaves little creative time to develop my presentation of the material, knowing that my “progress” as a professor is gauged on my teaching skills (not on my ability to recall the pKa of water…15.7). My formal training in teaching (as is the case for most science Ph.D.’s) is effectively nil, and, in all sincerity, I’m not complaining. I believe my peers recognize my struggles as a fledgling prof, which prompts many of them to invite me to watch them teach.

Recently, I had the opportunity to observe a history lecture, which is no doubt a far cry from the molecular orbital theory. But I rationalized that good teaching has intrinsic qualities that work in any class (regardless of the subject).

After taking some time to digest my observations, my wife was curious to know what I learned.

I thought for a moment. “Mexico’s Independence Day is September 16, not May 5.”

She giggled. “No, I meant about the teaching style.”

The professor had gone in many different directions, and I tried to narrow down what I liked the most. “I think enjoyed how the professor encouraged student interaction. I wish I could apply more of that in my classes.”

Chemistry isn’t exactly an interactive or (even) team sport. But why not try something different? An increasing number of disciplines are pushing detailed content back on the students while using lecture time to reinforce concepts, provide a birds-eye-view of course content, and engage the class through interactive exercises. Notice how I didn’t say “flip through slides” or “derive equations.”

What can be done about creating more interactive science lectures? Here’s an excellent article about delivering effective medical school lectures (published by the US Agency for International Development, c. 1996). The authors suggest beginning lectures with an open-ended question (to be answered at some point in the lecture), a video clip, or an exercise in “think-pair-share.”

Personally, I plan on visiting more classrooms and looking for new ideas that I can incorporate into my lectures.

An Introduction to Research Ethics (Part II)

A few days back, I wrote about my attempt to expose my undergrads to the concept of research ethics. It was a very interesting exercise, and I plan on doing it again next semester.

The class (approximately 10 students) was broken off into three groups, and each group was given a scenario pertaining to research ethics and questions to consider during the class discussion portion. A typical example of a scenario is as follows:

Student XYZ is asked to perform an experiment, and his/her advisor expects there to be a linear relationship between the independent and dependent variables. After the experiment, several data points do not fit the linear trend.

In this case, students are asked to consider A) re-measuring all of the data, B) re-measuring only the outlier cases, or C) ignoring the data points that don’t fit. When polling the class, the overwhelming majority appeared to have recognized the prudence of doing something about the non-linear data points (albeit the bare minimum…i.e., option “B”). Interestingly, several former analytical chemistry students noted that the non-linear points might be statistically insignificant, a notion verified through a G-test (kudos to me for actually teaching them stats last semester!!).

As the authoritarian figure, I emphasized the importance and responsibility of reporting the “true,” objective answer and the consequences for doing otherwise. I was surprised to see that students had not considered that scientific misconduct could damage your professional reputation, a concept I tried to illustrate by talking about the Bell Labs incident, although it was heavily based in physics, not chemistry.

Furthermore, most students didn’t realize that a Ph.D. could be invalidated; having learned this in grad school, I’m not very surprised. Nature published a very interesting article a few years back about scientists who were implicated in scientific misconduct cases (Nature 2007, 445, 244-245), many of whom have been stripped or his/her Ph.D. Perhaps, I’ll work several of these instances into future iterations and/or seminars about this topic.

In any case, ethics is an ongoing area of research (at least for me).

Apparently Medium Doesn't Matter

I stumbled onto this gem while searching for chalk-talk teaching methods.

Shallcross, D. E.; Harrison, T. G., “Lectures: Electronic Presentations versus Chalk and Talk – a Chemist’s View,” Chem. Ed. Res. Pract. 2007, 8, 73.

Overview: From the findings of several questionnaires and interviews, the authors contend that the “method of delivery (i.e., PowerPoint vs. chalk) has no significant impact on learning outcomes.” Moreover, they maintain that preparation plays a central role in lecturing.

My thoughts: I’ve personally witnessed that students are less focused and more likely to sleep when they’re shown a PowerPoint presentation in a warm, dark lecture hall. My classes usually involve chalk, though I'm beginning to work PowerPoint in...especially in cases where I have to present data, show an instrumentation diagram, or need to illustrate a periodic trend.

An Introduction to Research Ethics (Part 1)

During a group meeting in grad school, a member reported her recent laboratory findings to the rest of us. At one point in the talk, she reported a significant increase in product yield (nearly 40%) when she switched solvent systems. My PI spoke up. “How many milligrams of product do you have,” he asked.

“Two or three hundred,” she confidently responded.

“And it’s pure?”

“Yes.”

“And you have clean proton and carbon spectra?” Silence. “You don’t have data?” Silence. “What good is the experiment, if you can’t prove that you’ve made the product?” Silence. “You cannot report findings unless you have data. Why don’t you know this?”

Great question. Or better yet, where does the disconnect lay when it comes to ethical research behavior? Is it a gap due to cultural or language issues (she was from a different country)? Is it just plain ignorance? Is it simply a blatant disregard for acceptable behavior?

I’ve mentally wrestled with these questions for a few years, and I’ve arrived at several conclusions:

1. Ethical behavior begins in the home. We learn a lot of our initial ethical perception from our parents/guardians/influences.
2. Learning to do the right thing is (or should be) perpetuated in grade school. Students learn that stealing is wrong, honesty is the best policy, and the Golden Rule supersedes all.
3. Professional ethics lies in the beginning of professional training/development. For example, a police officer is taught when it's acceptable to use deadly force at his academy or barracks whereas a restauranteur learns how best to treat his customers in business school or during on-the-job training.

This semester, I am teaching a course in research chemistry, an opportunity to expose undergrads to exploring "uncharted waters" as scientists. But, before getting our hands wet (so to speak), I have planned an interactive lecture on research ethics. I aim to encourage discussion for a number of ethical situations ranging from reporting false data to laboratory safety (instances compiled from Kovac's The Ethical Chemist - see left).

Stay tuned for more developments, as research ethics is a personal area of interest.