293070547.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INNOVATIONS IN PRACTICAL WORK AT THE TERTIARY LEVEL by ALASDAIR JAMES BRUCE WHAM, B.Sc. A Thesis submitted in part fulfil raent of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of Glasgow. Chemistry Department April, 1977 ProQuest Number: 13804115 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a com plete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 13804115 Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C ode Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 i A C K N 0 V/ LEDGE M ENT 8 I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the supervisors of this work, Professor D.Y/.A. Sharp and Dr. A #K. Johnstone, for their guidance and assistance throughout this research. I am particularly indebted to Dr. Johnstone v/hose advice and encouragement proved a constant and valuable inspiration. My thanks are also due to other members of the Science Education “Research group, in particular Mr. Norman Reid, for many valuable discussions, and to the students and staff of Glasgow University who part icipated in the material produced for this thesis, and to Glasgow University for their financial assistance. Finally, I would like to thank Mrs. M^ira Carter for preparing the typescript. ii ABSTRACT A survey of the aims, philosophy and assessment techniques in practical work since 1805 was carried out. Evaluation of the practical courses at Glasgow University revealed two main weaknesses in the present system. These were that the effectiveness of learning in the laboratory was low and that the student was given no opportunity to think for himself. A two stage laboratory model was devised to over come these weaknesses. Learning Stage Reinforcement Experience Stage The aim of the learning stage is to teach the skills unique to the laboratory such as manipulative skills and other ancillary skills such as graph drawing and to provide the student with practice in mastering the techniques. The aim of the experience stage is to reinforce the previously learnt techniques and to provide the student with an opportunity to think for himself in the laboratory. To evaluate practical work three types of assessment were used. The first method was that of self-report techniques where the student evaluates his own performance. Both questionnaire and interview approaches were used to collect this information and an interview schedule based on the two-stage laboratory model was developed. The use of paper and pencil tests to assess the students' knowledge of practical procedures was investigated and the results analysed. A third method of assessment which involved analysing student performance in the laboratory was developed to assess the effectiveness of two films. In the / In the learning stage of the laboratory model three approaches v/ere examined which were intended to increase the effectiveness of learning. These were, the development of two films, one on the use of the burette and the other on the use of the pipette, the introduction of pre-laboratory exercises and the adoption of a group participation approach to present selected experiments. In the experience stage two methods were examined. These were the use of open-ended experiments and, secondly, the use of projects. Suggestions for further work have been proposed which may lead to further improvement of practical cours and of assessment methods. iv CONTENTS Page No. Acknowledgements i Abstract ii Contents iv Chapter 1 A Review of the Aims, Philosophy and Assessment Techniques of Practical Y/ork 1 1.1 The Origins of Laboratory Instruction 2 1.2 Post-War Developments in Practical Y/ork 7 1.3 Developments in Practical Y/ork since I960 12 1.4 Assessment of Practical Y/ork 23 Chapter 2 A Review of Practical Work at Glasgow 29 ' University and Development of a Model to aid in the Design of Laboratory Courses 2.1 Different Approaches to Practical Worlc 30 2.2 A Description of the Laboratory Courses in Chemistry at Glasgov/ University 31 2.3 A Discussion about Problems with Practical Work in the first two Years 37 2.4 A Model for Laboratory Teaching 46 2.5 The Research Plan 53 Chapter 3 Self-Report Techniques 54 3.1 Introduction 55 3.2 Review of Questionnaire Techniques used in this Thesis 56 3.3 A Questionnaire Approach to Evaluating Experiments 59 3.4 An Interview-based Approach to Evaluating Experiments 61 Appendices to Chapter 3 72 Chapter 4 1 Paper and Pencil Techniques1 - Assessment of Practical Work by Written Examinations 79 4.1 Introduction 80 4.2 First Year Practical Examination December, 1975 87 Appendices / V Appendices to Chapter 4 92 Chapter 5 The Development and Assessment of Two Teaching Packages for Use in the Laboratory 93 3.1 Introduction 94 5.2 The Need for Teaching Packages on the Use of a Pipette and Burette 95 5.3 Design of Programmes 96 5.4 Assessment 96 Appendices to Chapter 5 106 Chapter 6 Pre-Laboratory Exercises 115 6.1 Introduction 116 6.2 First Year Pre-Laboratory Exercise 120 6.3 Second Year Pre-Laboratory Exercise 132 6.4 Discussion 148 Appendices to Chapter 6 151 Chapter 7 Group Participation Methods 164 7.1 Introduction 165 7.2 Trial Experiment using Staff 166 7.3 Trial Experiment using Demonstrators 174 Appendices to Chapter 7 181 Chapter 8 Open-ended Experiments and Project Work 188 8.1 Introduction 189 8.2 Open-ended Experiments 192 8.3 Phosphates in the River Kelvin - Mini-Project 199 8.4 Determination of Chlorine Content in the Clyde Estuary by Ion-Exchange 207 8.5 Comparison of the Phosphates* and ‘Chlorine* Projects 214 8.6 Citric Acid Project 215 8.7 Conclusions 224 Appendices to Chapter 8 225 Chapter 9 Discussion 254 9.1 Summary of this Work 255 9.2 Suggestions for further Work 261 References 263 Bibliography 268 1 CHAPTER 1 A Review of the Aims, Philosophy and Assessment Techniques of Practical 7/ork 2 CHAPTER 1 A Review of the Aims , Philosonhv and Assessment techniques of Practical Work 1*1 The Origins of Laboratory Instruction The origin of modern laboratory instruction * * is credited to Friedrich Stromever who at the* University of Gottingen in 1806 started the first teaching laboratory* His guiding principle^ was that chemistry could only really be learned through laboratory practice and that the students must be given an opportunity to carry out analyses on their own* From this sprang the method of using individual laboratory practice for learning chemistry. However, at the beginning of the nineteenth century only a few teaching laboratories were started. Notably the one begun by Liebeg in 1824 to whom many falsely credit the first teaching laboratory and the first student participation laboratory in America started by Amos Eaton^ at the Rensselaer Polytechnic institute in 1825* Eaton's philosophy was similar to Stromeyer’s in that he felt that the laboratory gave the student a chance to 'learn by doing'. In Britain the first laboratory for students was set up by Thomas Graham at the Royal Technical College in 1830* Practical classes at Glasgow University v/ere started by Lord Kelvin, then William Thompson, in 1845 in an old wine cellar.6 However, in Britain the growth of practical work is credited to Edward Frankland^ who throughout his life did much to encourage the introduction of laboratory instruction. Largely due to his efforts by 1876 there were one hundred and fifteen laboratories in operation in Britain, most giving instruction at a very elementary level. At the beginning laboratory work was restricted to / 3 7 to the instructor and his assistants and apart from a few pioneering institutions it was not until later in the nineteenth century that individual laboratory classes 8 9 in the sciences were generally available. 9 * It was as late as the 1890*s before there was a period of rapid growth in the establishment of 9 student laboratories. During this period of expansion educators in America advocated the individual laboratory method as a solution for the problems of the scientific age and as a. revolution in education. At this time universities such as Harvard made laboratory instruction a college entrance requirement and President Eliot at Harvard detailed a list of forty experiments in physics which should have been completed by a pupil wishing to be considered for admission. This list continued to be used right up until the middle of the twentieth century at many American institutions and became known as the 'Harvard 40f. Therefore, by the turn of the century individual laboratory instruction in science had been generally adopted. It was during this period, however, that the first criticism was voiced against individual laboratory instruction, and from then on up till the Second World War a debate raged in the literature about the particular merits of individual instruction where the student performed the experiments himself, usually from a detailed list of instructions, versus the demonstration method which Kiebler and Woody^ defined as a method where 'the instructor with the aid of one or more students, demonstrates the experiment and the students get its import through observation and discussion rather than through actual performance1. As early as 1900, Barber^ had questioned the effectiveness of the individual laboratory method in physics / 4 physics and chemistry.