Search

The undergraduate laboratory occupies a large fraction of science students’ time. Over 3000 students were asked to rate their laboratory learning experience using 12 metrics. 362 academics were asked to predict which of these 12 aspects of the student experience would correlate with the overall laboratory learning experience. Responses from academics in biology, chemistry and physics departments, and from the USA and Australia, are statistically the same. However, the correlation between these staff predictions and student results is poor. The student results are consistent with extant educational research, but it appears that these findings are not reaching those who are responsible for developing undergraduate laboratory courses. There is a great need for educational research to be made more accessible for academics who are trained in scientific, but not in educational research.

This article describes how the Advancing Science and Engineering through Laboratory Learning (ASELL) Schools program was developed. ASELL School's directive is to facilitate the embedding of inquirybased learning in secondary school classrooms through workshop-based teacher professional development (PD). The approach of ASELL Schools is to balance the lessons learned in education research with teacher voices and curriculum requirements in the design and implementation of teacher professional development. This has resulted in a unique workshop experience, where students and teachers work together on open-inquiry investigations. Afterward, teachers and students are separated for pedagogical sessions, and teachers are given time to discuss and share ideas. The discussion is focussed around the key ASELL Schools pedagogical tool, called the 'Inquiry Slider'. We outline an iterative process based on listening to teacher voices, which was used to develop the workshops. We also demonstrate that the Inquiry Slider is an effective pedagogical tool allowing teachers to focus and expand their efforts to bring more inquiry-based learning into their classrooms.

For nearly two decades, the Australian national project Advancing Science and Engineering through Laboratory Learning (ASELL), has been using an evidence based approach to improve undergraduate experiments. This paper presents the ASELL Students Laboratory Experience (ASLE) survey, administered to 2691 students in five disciplines: biochemistry, biology, chemistry, physics, and pharmacology. The 14 item survey probes students' perceptions of an experiment, practical or fieldwork. An exploratory factor analysis extracted two factors, 'experiment-based motivators' and 'course-level resources', and both factors correlate well with 'overall' learning experiences. Each survey item was also compared to the 'overall' learning experiences of the experiment, revealing the most critical elements of each experiment. The implications of this analysis, for practitioners is that the survey items in the 'course-level resources' taper off indicating that after an optimum value, further investment in these aspects do not necessarily influence student perceptions of their learning experiences. On the other hand, the survey items in the 'experiment-based motivators' behave differently in that they do not taper off indicating that further investment can influence experiences. How these factors relate to the overall experience suggest they correspond to the well-known two-factor theory of motivation.

Student experience surveys have become increasingly popular to probe various aspects of processes and outcomes in higher education, such as measuring student perceptions of the learning environment and identifying aspects that could be improved. This paper reports on a particular survey for evaluating individual experiments that has been developed over some 15 years as part of a large national Australian study pertaining to the area of undergraduate laboratories—Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory. This paper reports on the development of the survey instrument and the evaluation of the survey using student responses to experiments from different institutions in Australia, New Zealand and the USA. A total of 3153 student responses have been analysed using factor analysis. Three factors, motivation, assessment and resources, have been identified as contributing to improved student attitudes to laboratory activities. A central focus of the survey is to provide feedback to practitioners to iteratively improve experiments. Implications for practitioners and researchers are also discussed.

An assessment of the acylation of ferrocene laboratory exercise across three successive years resulted in a significant fluctuation in student perception of the experiment. This perception was measured by collecting student responses to an instrument immediately after the experiment, which includes Likert and open-ended responses from the student. Students in all three years identified technical benefits from the experiment. In Years 1 and 3, students also recognised the benefits of improving their conceptual understanding of organic chemistry. However, in Year 2, where background knowledge became a critical and limiting factor, all perception of conceptual understanding as an experiment objective was lost, and only recognition of technical development remained. Analysis of these data also indicated that students who have enough time to complete the experiment also perceive a measure of responsibility for their own learning, whereas time-poor students have an over-reliance on the laboratory notes and demonstrators. Addressing concepts such as these may be the triggers required for time-poor experiments to garner a positive student experience and maximise both the conceptual and technical benefits of the experiment.

This paper describes an educational analysis of a first year university chemistry practical called ‘Investigating sugar using a home made polarimeter’. The analysis follows the formalism of the Advancing Chemistry by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory (ACELL) project, which includes a statement of education objectives, and an analysis of the student learning experience. The practical requires students to accurately prepare solutions of known concentrations of a common consumer chemical (sucrose), and then investigate the interaction between these solutions and plane-polarised light. The instrument used is a ‘‘home built’’ polarimeter which students assemble, allowing them to recognise that scientific apparatus need not be mysterious in its operation or construction. Student feedback data were conducted using the ACELL Student Learning Experience (ASLE) instrument. Analysis of the data shows that overwhelmingly students rate the experiment as ‘‘worthwhile’’ or better. However, many also rate the experiment as ‘‘boring’’ or ‘‘uninteresting’’. By contrast, staff and student feedback at an ACELL experiential workshop rated the experiment very highly in terms of the ‘‘interest’’ criterion. In this contribution we discuss this alignment of staff and student perceptions of various elements, including ‘‘interest’’ and explore the correlation with the overall laboratory experience.

Most science educators and researchers will agree that the laboratory experience ranks as a major factor that influences students' attitudes to their science courses. Consequently, good laboratory programs should play a major role in influencing student learning and performance. The laboratory program can be pivotal in defining a student's experience in the sciences, and if done poorly, can be a major contributing factor in causing disengagement from the subject area. The challenge remains to provide students with laboratory activities that are relevant, engaging and offer effective learning opportunities. The Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory (ASELL) project has developed over the last 10 years with the aim of improving the quality of learning in undergraduate laboratories, providing a validated means of evaluating the laboratory experience of students and effective professional development for academic staff. After successful development in chemistry and trials using the developed principles in physics and biology, the project has now expanded to include those disciplines. This paper will discuss the activities of ASELL and provide a report about the first ASELL science workshop held at the University of Adelaide in April 2010, present some views of academic and student delegates, and make comparisons with other workshops.

Most researchers agree that the laboratory experience ranks as a significant factor that influences students’ attitudes to their science courses. Consequently, good laboratory programs should play a major role in influencing student learning and performance. The laboratory program can be pivotal in defining a student's experience in the sciences, and if done poorly, can be a major contributing factor in causing disengagement from the subject area. The challenge remains to provide students with laboratory activities that are relevant, engaging and offer effective learning opportunities. The Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory (ASELL) project has developed over the last 10 years with the aim of improving the quality of learning in undergraduate laboratories, providing a validated means of evaluating the laboratory experience of students and effective professional development for academic staff. After successful development in chemistry and trials using the developed principles in physics and biology, the project has now expanded to include those disciplines. This paper will discuss the activities of ASELL and provide a report about the first ASELL science workshop held at the University of Adelaide in April 2010.

the advancing chemistry by enhancing learning in the laboratory (ACELL) project aims to improve the quality of learning in undergraduate laboratories through two interlocking mechanisms. The first is to build a database of experiments that are both chemically and educationally sound by testingt them in a third-party laboratory, usually through an ACELL workshop involving both academic staff and students, to ensure that they work. The second mechanism provides personal and professional development for staff and students through a workshop process, and reinforced through on-going engagement with the ACELL community via the project website and experiment assessment and evaluation. The ACELL workshops include discussion of educational issues, both in abstract (through discussing laboratory learning in general) and concrete (through debriefing of each experiment tested) terms. This paper discusses the design of the ACELL project, and illustrates some of the successes of the staff and student personal and professional development aims.

The advancing chemistry by enhancing learning in the laboratory (APCELL) project is a well-established, multi-institution, collaborative project contributing to improvements in the quality of laboratory-based teaching and learning. ACELL is an expansion of the previous APCELL project and now encompasses all areas of undergraduate chemistry. It contributes to quality improvement in laboratory learning directly by providing a database of educationally sound, peer-reviewed, and student-tested undergraduate laboratory experiments. Testing of experiments is generally carried out at dedicated workshops, such as the one held in Sydney in February 2006, at which 33 experiments from 27 different Universities from Australia and New Zealand were evaluated. In addition, by contributing to the professional development of chemistry academic staff by expanding their understanding of issues surrounding student learning, by fostering the development of a community of pedagogically aware educators, and by providing tools for analysing and documenting teaching experiments, the ACELL project has the potential to catalyse the improvement of experiments not directly reviewed by the project. This paper reviews the evolution of ACELL, its current position, and provides some suggestions for future developments.