Spacer
Assessment : 2012 - 2013 : Educational Programs :
Forensic Chemistry BS

5 Goals    5 Objectives    5 Indicators    5 Criteria    5 Findings    5 Actions


GOAL: Deliver A Curriculum Appropriate For Understanding Fundamentals Of Chemistry

Objective  
Demonstrate Understanding Of Fundamentals
Chemistry is an intensely sequential discipline. Students must master the material at an average level of understanding in the first semester course (general chemistry I) before they are allowed to attempt the second semester course (general chemistry II). The same is true for each of the first five semester courses in the sequence (general chemistry I, general chemistry II, organic chemistry I, organic chemistry II and physical chemistry I).

The fundamental concepts covered in general chemistry I and II include:
uncertainty in measurement, dimensional analysis, atomic and electronic structure, ionic and molecular formulas, nomenclature, stoichiometry, thermochemistry, bonding theories, valence shell electron pair repulsion theory, properties of gases, intermolecular forces, properties of solutions, kinetics, equilibrium, acid-base chemistry, oxidation-reduction chemistry, chemical thermodynamics and electrochemistry.

Indicator  
ACS General Chemistry Test  
All forensic chemistry majors will be invited to take a nationally standardized test over general chemistry (written by the American Chemical Society Division of Chemical Education Examinations Institute) near their completion of general chemistry II. In order to encourage participation, the highest individual score is guaranteed scholarship money for a future semester, and additional scholarship monies will be scaled to percentile performance on the examination.
Criterion  
ACS General Chemistry Examination Score  
Sixty percent of forensic chemistry majors are expected to score within one standard deviation of the mean or higher than one standard deviation above the mean on the ACS standardized general chemistry exam. The major weakness in 2010-2011 was the low number of majors who took the exam. We are working to motivate more students to take the exam.
Finding  
ACS General Chemistry Result  
Of the five students that took the exam (67 were invited to do so), four (80%) scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher on the ACS standardized general chemistry examination.  The criterion was met and exceeded overall.  For forensic chemistry majors (excluding chemistry majors), three students took the exam (48 were invited to do) and all of them scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher.  Thus the criterion was met and exceeded for the forensic chemistry majors.  Overall, the participation rate for the academic year was 5/67 = 7% (and 2/19 = 11% for chemistry majors and 3/48 = 6% for forensic chemistry majors).  We need to keep working on ways to encourage and allow participation in this exam.
Actions for Objective:

Action  
Fundamental Knowledge  
We think sitting for the ACS General Chemistry exam for chemistry and forensic chemistry majors as they finish CHEM 1312 (General Chemistry II) is important.  We think that the scholarship money is a good incentive but were surprised at the very low level of partipation this year. We still want to have increased participation.  We were so surprised at the low level of participation that we emailed all of the students to find out why the participation was low (even though we had notified them more than once of the exam).  The response to the email was poor, but a higher turnout might be achieved with an additional testing time.  In an attempt to raise the level of participation, we will offer the exam twice in the fall.  Depending upon the result, we will offer the exam two or more times in the spring.


GOAL: Deliver A Curriculum Appropriate For Understanding Organic Chemistry

Objective  
Demonstrate Understanding Of Organic Chemistry
Organic chemistry is covered in the second year of a chemistry degree.  It follows a year of general chemistry and precedes physical chemistry.

Students will demonstrate competent knowledge of the topics covered in organic chemistry I and II which include: hydrocarbons (alkanes, alkenes and alkynes), aromatic systems, functional group chemistry (including the chemistry of alkyl halides, ethers and various carbonyl compounds), stereochemistry, and carbohydrate chemistry.

Indicator  
ACS Organic Chemistry Test  
A nationally standardized test over organic chemistry (written by the American Chemical Society Division of Chemical Education Examinations Institute) will be given to all chemistry majors who take organic chemistry II at Sam Houston State University.  This test is given as the final examination for the course.
Criterion  
ACS Organic Chemistry Examination Score  
Seventy-five percent of chemistry majors are expected to score within one standard deviation of the mean or higher than one standard deviation above the mean on the ACS standardized organic chemistry examination. We will closely follow the performance of forensic chemistry majors who scored slightly lower than chemistry majors in 2010-2011.
Finding  
ACS Organic Chemistry Result  
Eleven chemistry majors and 29 forensic chemistry majors took the exam during the academic year.  Six of the chemistry majors (6/11 = 55%) and 12 of the forensic chemistry majors (12/29 = 41%) scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher on the ACS standardized organic chemistry examination.  Overall, the rate was 18/40 = 45%.  The criterion was not met overall for these students, nor was it met for the either group. In examing the pattern of scores for the students, we note that the scores appear to be correlated to the instructor.  That is, in some sections of the course the criterion is met for each group and it is met overall, yet in other sections very few students scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher.  While it might be tempting to attribute these results to differential teaching, the students are not randomized in the course sections. The sections that fill up the fastest during advance registration are the sections that have the lowest performance on this exam.  Those students who did not meet the criterion will repeat CHEM 2325 (organic chemistry II) since this area was identified as needing improvement.
Actions for Objective:

Action  
Organic Chemistry  
Compared to last year, some aspects have improved, but others are less promising.  However, the data is limited.  This academic year there were five sections of CHEM 2325 (organic chemistry II) offered in the fall and spring semesters, and we have data for all of the sections, accomplishing last year's action in this area.  As noted in the finding, those sections with the poorest performance were the sections that filled up the most quickly during advance registration.  We will assess the students' performance on an ongoing basis and will pay particular attention to instructor correlations.


GOAL: Deliver A Curriculum Appropriate For Understanding Instrumental Analytical Methods In Chemistry

Objective  
Demonstrate Understanding Of Instrumental Analytical Methods In Chemistry
The modern analytical laboratory makes extensive use of electronic instrumentation for the analysis of chemical samples.  Our Instrumental Analytical Chemistry course (CHM 4440) is designed to introduce students to and have them learn the importance and use of spectrophotometric, chromatographic, and mass spectrometric analytical instrumental methods and computers in analytical laboratories.  The course's laboratory component includes a focus on complex technical writing and use of the scientific literature. Students must master this material to meet the objective.  Dr. Thomas Chasteen has been the instructor for all sections of CHM 4440 for more than a decade. (Note--the course number has changed from 440 to 4440)

Indicator  
Examinations In Instrumental Analytical Chemistry  
All students in Instrumental Analytical Chemistry (CHEM 4440) are required to master the electronic, sampling, schematic, and computational fundamentals of modern analytical instrumentation as evaluated by 80-minute written tests requiring essays, laboratory data evaluation, and calculator-based computation.  There are three tests and a final examination in this course.  The testing of this knowledge and its application is standardized within the department across all sections.
Criterion  
80% Of Chemistry Majors Meeting Expectations  
Eighty percent of chemistry majors are expected to score within one standard deviation of the mean or higher than one standard deviation above the mean on the four examinations in this class. In 2010-2011, students tended to do slightly worse on the third exam which addressed complex reagent mixtures, HPLS schematics and nondispersive versus dispersive IR spectrometers. We are eager to determine whether the performance on the third exam requires intervention or is just statistical variability.
Finding  
Performance On CHEM 4440 Exams  
On the first and final exam, 29 of the 34 students (85%) scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher.  On the second exam, 28 of the 34 students (82%) scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher.  On the third exam, 27 of the 34 students (79%) scored within one standard deviation of the mean or higher.  Overall the criterion was met.  The exam with the highest test average was again the third exam--clearly intervention is not needed.
Actions for Objective:

Action  
Monitor Instrumental Analysis Performance  
We will assess student performance in CHEM 4440 on an ongoing basis.  Clearly we are seeing year to year variations in student performance, and this is to be expected.  We raised the criterion from 75% to 80% this year, and since our students met the criterion on all but one exam (and the exam where 79% scored within one standard deviation of the average or higher was the test with the highest average score), we will check the appropriateness of the criterion next year and perhaps raise it for the 2014-2015 academic year.


GOAL: Deliver A Curriculum Appropriate For Mastery Of Advanced Chemistry Topics

Objective  
Demonstrate Mastery Of Advanced Topics In Chemistry
The material learned by the third year in the chemistry curriculum is refined and supported theoretically in Physical Chemistry I (CHEM 4448).  The successful student will demonstrate a mastery of the advanced topics presented in this course.  These topics include quantum theory, wave functions, the dipole approximation, electronic configuration, molecular structure, molecular orbital diagrams, symmetry, group theory, and the application of these topics to X-ray, ultraviolet, visible, infrared, Raman, and magnetic resonance spectroscopy.  All sections of CHEM 4448 have been taught by Dr. Darren Williams since his arrival at SHSU in 2004. (Note--the course number has changed from 448 to 4448)

Indicator  
CHM 4448 Final Examination  
CHEM 4448 is required of all chemistry majors. The final examination in Physical Chemistry I (CHEM 4448), written by Dr. Darren Williams, is recognized by the faculty of the Department of Chemistry as being comprehensive and covers all of the advanced topics listed in the objective statement.  Dr. Williams is the sole instructor of CHEM 4448 at SHSU having taught all sections of CHEM 4448 since his arrival on campus in 2004.  All students are required to complete the final examination. Examples of final exams are on file and secured within the Department of Chemistry and may be viewed by contacting Dr. Williams directly at williams@shsu.edu.
Criterion  
75% Of Chemistry Majors Scoring At Least 60%  
Seventy-five percent of chemistry majors are expected to demonstrate a mastery of at least sixty percent of the material (score 60%) on the comprehensive final examination.
Finding  
Physical Chemistry Final Exam Results  
Once again, more material was covered in CHEM 4448 than in previous years, and thus, there was more on the final exam.  Of the 30 students who took the final, 93% of them made at least 60% on the final exam.  The criterion was met.
Actions for Objective:

Action  
Physical Chemistry Action  
Since the data show, for example, on the molecular orbital theory examination that there is a wide variation in student performance from year to year (since 2007), yet the instructor's presentation and coverage of the material has changed to a lesser degree, it does not appear to be fruitful to focus on individual year variation in these numbers.  This is true for other aspects of the course as well--that there is wider variation in student performance from year to year than instructor variation.  We will assess student performance in this area on an ongoing basis.


GOAL: Deliver A Curriculum With Appropriate Written And Oral Communication Skills Developed

Objective  
Demonstrate Adequate Written And Oral Communication
Students will demonstrate the ability to present to an audience of their peers a talk (seminar) based on their own research or research that has been reported in the scientific literature

Indicator  
Chemistry Seminar Presentation  
All chemistry majors are required to take CHEM 4100 "Chemical Literature Seminar".  Students typically do so in their senior year.  One of the requirements of this course is giving an oral PowerPoint presentation over either their own research or research from the published chemical literature, to the other students in the class.
Criterion  
Acceptable Peer-Review Rating  
All chemistry majors are required to receive an acceptable peer-rating on a required research presentation.  Within the course, each student evaluates all other student presentations.  The rubric is the last page of the syllabus. In 2010-2011 we found that peers tended to rate presenters rather highly. We hope to see more helpful feedback after providing additional instruction in constructive feedback.
Finding  
Seminar Presentation  
CHEM 4100 used anonymous student evaluation forms for the first time in the fall of 2012 (19 students) and again in the spring of 2013 (12 students) in an effort to substantially improve the depth and quality of student comments.  The instructor's form evaluating the student is signed.  Attendance was taken on a separate, passed-around sheet.

All of the students received an acceptable peer-rating on their presentation.

The working hypothesis was that the process of providing written student comments required for each student's talk might be hindered by the fact that the comment authors were, heretofore, required to sign their comment forms. Expected improvements might be written comments that are more in-depth, thorough, or comprehensive with concrete suggestions of how the talk could be improved. These types of comments have appeared sporadically in the past and this effort was aimed at making the comment sheets more useful to the student speakers at semester's end when they picked up their packed of comments along with the course grade.

The results from fall 2012 and spring 2013 were unchanged from before. The hypothesis proved incorrect. Anonymity is not a major limitation of student commenting in CHEM 4100 seminar.
Actions for Objective:

Action  
Seminar Actions  
Changes proposed for the next academic year will be more time added at the course onset discussing the comment critiquing process. More specifically, an example student comment sheet with example comments/critiques will be distributed to the students and discussed. The expected improvements from an increased focus on the critiquing process might be written student comments that are more in-depth, thorough, or comprehensive with concrete suggestions of how the talk could be improved.



Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement"

This year presented a new challenge, and as the year comes to an end, another challenge has presented itself.

The challenge that came crashing in last summer and permeated the year was the move to BANNER and Degree Works (for advising).  A very practical issue with the conversion to Banner is our ability to count and track majors.  In the old Legacy system, it was easy to do a report of both official majors and unofficial majors (and minors too) on the 12th class day.  Official majors were those that had signed a declaration of major form and unofficial majors were those that had not.  The 12th class day is the official "census" day for the semester.  In the Legacy system, a student could change their unofficial major online at any time.

With BANNER, students can indicate a possible major when they first apply to the University, but after that they cannot change it online.  They must fill out a paper form.  This particularly impacts forensic chemistry majors.  As incoming freshmen, many of the students think that all forensic topics must reside in the College of Criminal Justice, so they indicate that they are CRIJ majors.  This leads to a decrease in the apparent number of forensic chemistry majors especially at the freshman level.

In the fall semester of 2011, the reporting aspect of BANNER (COGNOS) wasn't in place by the 12th class day.  In fact, it wasn't really in place at the end of the fall semester.  This means that we do not have 12th class day figures for majors.  When the report is run after the 12th class day, the current (at whatever point the report is run) data are used, so if a student changes their major from some type of chemistry major to something else, they would not be counted.  Of course, if they change to a chemistry major, they would be counted.  Typically, however, we have considerably more students changing from chemistry to something else.

For the past five fall semesters, number of majors in chemistry and forensic chemistry were:  2007, 80 chemists, 159 forensic chemists (239 total); 2008, 88 chemists, 169 forensic chemists (257 total); 2009, 102 chemists, 177 forensic chemists (279 total); 2010, 108 chemists, 214 forensic chemists (322 total); and 2011, 110 chemists, 154 forensic chemists (264 total).  Is the drop from 2010 to 2011 real?  The spring data helps (for the past 5 years as well):  2008, 79 chemists, 136 forensic chemists (215 total); 2009, 79 chemists, 141 forensic chemists, (220 total); 2010, 95 chemists, 163 forensic chemists (258 total); 2011, 95 chemists, 188 forensic chemists (283 total); and 2012, 105 chemists, 201 forensic chemists (306 total).  Thus we can tell that the apparent fall 2011 drop in majors is most likely a problem with when the data is collected--end of term versus 12th class day, and that, in general, our enrollments are still growing.

Not only is this difficulty related to the number of majors, it also relates to the identification of chemistry and forensic chemistry majors in our courses.  This is an issue particularly for general chemistry and organic chemistry where our assessments target these majors.

Hopefully the COGNOS reporting for majors will no longer be a problem, and the fall 2011 major numbers are an aberration.

The conversion to BANNER also caused issues with course prerequisites and the enforcement of those prerequisites.  The legacy system rosters would flag students who did not meet the prerequisites.  The BANNER system does not, which makes it harder to check to make sure that students who do not meet the prerequisites are removed from the course.

The change that is looming large in the summer of 2012 is the revision of the core curriculum.

With the changes in databases in the past year, and the absence of data for some of the organic results, definite conclusions for the past year's data are hard to reach.  The best thing for us to do is to assess the situation on an ongoing basis, and try to increase participation in the general chemistry ACS exam.
Update on Previous Cycle's "Plan for Continuous Improvement"

In regard to the general chemistry test, we contacted students multiple times about the exam which resulted in the lowest turnout yet (no one took the test in the fall).  We followed up by asking students why and got an anecdotal response that more opportunities to take the exam would help.

We collected more complete data for the organic chemistry classes.

We raised the criterion from 75% to 80% for instrumental analysis.

We continue to assess the situation in physical chemistry.

We modified the student evaluation forms for seminar, making it possible for students to preserve their anonymity in making comments about others.
Plan for Continuous Improvement

In order to gather more data we will offer the ACS exam over general chemistry at two different times in the fall semester.  Depending upon these results, we may do the same in the spring semester.

In the area of organic chemistry, we will monitor student performance on the standardized final and check instructor correlations.  It may be appropriate to shift instructors.

In the area of instrumental analysis, we will monitor student performance through another cycle and see if raising the criterion is appropriate.

We will continue to monitor student progress in physical chemistry.

For the seminar, sample critiques and comments will be presented to students in hopes that more informative comments can be elicited.


Sub Content Box

Sam Houston State University
Huntsville, TX 77341
(936) 294-1111
1-866-BEARKAT