1. Targeting Diverse Learning Needs with a Buffet Redesign Model
Klaus Woelk
Associate Professor
Interim Chairman of Chemistry
Missouri S&T
Rolla, MO

3. My Fall Semester 2009 Class General chemistry (189 students)
86% freshman, 9% sophomore, 5% other
Engineering students (82%)
29% mechanical and aerospace, 12% electrical and computer, 12% civil and environmental, 12% chemical, 6% metallurgical and ceramics, 6% architectural, 9% other, 14% undeclared
Non-major science students (9%)
47% biology, 41% computer, 12% other
Chemistry students (6%)
Others (3%)
mostly undeclared

4. Why redesign a course?
Improve student learning in changing environments
online society
millennium students
“No Child Left Behind” generation
Save money in times of budget constraints
same work done with less faculty or with less expensive instructional personnel
more students per section

5. First Round of Redesign (2004) Measures to enhance student engagement and participation in large classrooms
Clickers (preparedness, learning, understanding)
ongoing assessment, instant automated feedback
Daily homework (graded quickly)
time on task, ongoing assessment, prompt feedback
Assigned daily reading, required note preparation
time on task

6. Increase in Student Performance

7. Second Round of Redesign (2007-2010) --- Replacement Model ---
Second Round of Redesign ( ) --- Replacement Model ---
(2007) Daily homework (graded quickly)
MasteringChemistry (graded instantly)
(2009) Recitation Quizzes
15-minute MasteringChemistry -based quiz
developed own database of test questions
(2010) Assigned daily reading, required note preparation
3-minute MasteringChemistry -based reading quiz
Cost Savings (~ $4,700)
Before: 11 Undergraduate Graders (~ $13,000)
delay between submission and return of graded work
inconsistent grading
After: 1 Graduate Assistant (~ $8,300)
administering MasteringChemistry

8. Third Round of Redesign (2011-2013)
Third Round of Redesign ( )
Missouri Course Redesign Initiative
Missouri Governor
Missouri’s public four-year institutions
National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT)
Improve learning outcomes
Reduce instructional costs
Redesigning large-enrollment, multi-section courses
Using technology-supported active learning strategies

9. Third Round of Redesign (2011-2013) Changing the course structure
Third Round of Redesign ( ) Changing the course structure
Traditional
up to 1200 Students annually
6 courses, 48 recitation sections
6 instructors
12 TAs + 6 PLAs (Peer Learning Assistants)
Redesigned
3 courses, 24 collaborative learning centers
2 instructors
6 TAs + 6 PLAs

10. Third Round of Redesign (2011-2013) --- Buffet Model ---
Third Round of Redesign ( ) --- Buffet Model ---
Lectures
Face to face
Online synchronous g
Active Learning
Collaborative learning centers
Online modules
Online learning modules
Discipline specific
Extra credit
Students must develop study plan, discuss with instructor

11. Third Round of Redesign (2011-2013) --- Buffet Model ---
Third Round of Redesign ( ) --- Buffet Model ---
Lectures
Face to face: clickers (Turning Technologies), text messaging
Online synchronous: ResponseWare (Turning Technologies), text messaging
Active Learning
Collaborative learning centers, peer learning, peer evaluation
Online modules, individualized feedback
Online learning modules
Discipline specific
Extra credit
Students must develop study plan, discuss with instructor
Lectures
Face to face
Online synchronous g
Active Learning
Collaborative learning centers
Online modules
Online learning modules
Discipline specific
Extra credit
Students must develop study plan, discuss with instructor

12. Course Structure (Fall Semesters, traditional)W Th F
8-8:50
Lecture A
Recitations A1, B1, C1, D1
Recitations A5, B5, C5, D5
9-9:50
Lecture B
Recitations A2, B2, C2, D2
Recitations A6, B6, C6, D6
10-10:50
Lecture C
Recitations A3, B3, C3, D3
Recitations A7, B7, C7, D7
11-11:50
Lecture D
Recitations A4, B4, C4, D4
Recitations A8, B8, C8, D8
Afternoon and evening
recitation quizzes
voluntary collaborative learning centers

13. Course Structure (Fall Semesters)W Th F
8-8:50
Learning Centers
E1, F1, G1, H1
E3, F3, G3, H3
9-9:50
Lectures
A (f2f), C (so)
10-10:50
B (f2f), D (so)
E2, F2, G2, H2
E4, F4, G4, H4
11-11:50
Afternoon and evening
common exams
voluntary collaborative learning centers

14. Face-to-face Lectures Engaging students inside the classroom

15. Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom
Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom

16. Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom
Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom

17. Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom
Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom

18. Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom
Synchronous Online Lectures Engaging students outside the classroom

19. Student-Centered Learning in Collaborative Learning Centers

20. Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education*
Adopted by the UM Board of Curators for the
UM Strategic Action Plan ”A Design for the Future” (1999).
Faculty Members are urged to:
Encourage Student-Faculty Contact
Encourage Cooperation Among Students
Encourage Active Learning
Give Prompt, Frequent, Informative Feedback
Emphasize Time on Task
Communication High Expectations
Respect and Encompass Diverse Talents and Learning Styles
* modified slightly from: Chickering and Gamson (AAHE Bull. vol 39(March), 3-7, 1987)

21. “Online” doesn’t mean “left alone”
Intrusive Intervention
Intense monitoring of first two week performance
Academic alerts
LASSI (Learning And Study Strategies Inventory)
Study Plan
Possibility to change buffet options
Accountability
MasteringChemistry diagnostics
Optional Assistive Instructional Tools
Course discussion board
Office hours
LEAD (Learning Enhancement Across Disciplines)

22. LEAD Collaborative Learning Centers

23. LEAD Collaborative Learning Centers
Active Learning …
… in a non-threatening environment

24. Outcome vs. Number of Sessions Attended
This is for Section AA only. I have not completed charts for the other sections.

25. Total Number of Students Per Session
This is the total number of students who swiped-in on a given day. The small group at the end of the semester were attending unofficial sessions which Mr. McDowell hosted. Nearly 180 students strong at its peak, it shows much demand.

26. Average Seat Time per Student
This is the average amount of time (in minutes) spent per student at the LEAD session on a given date. One of the things of note is that the average seat time is much higher than what was required to obtain a bonus point. Also, the small group at the end is again Mr. McDowell's group of diehard faithfuls.

27. Acknowledgements Next Generation Learning Challenges
The Missouri Learning Commons: Redesigning Gateway Courses at Scale
Missouri S&T General Chemistry Redesign Team
Harvest Collier, Vice Provost for Undergraduate Affairs, Professor of Chemistry
Stephen Clark, Professor of Mathematics, Assistant to the Provost
Emmalou Satterfield, Assistant Teaching Professor of Chemistry
Angie Hammons, Manager of Instructional Design Services
Julie Phelps, Instructional Designer, eLearning Specialist
Amy Skyles, Instructional Technology eLearning Specialist
Dan Cernusca, Instructional Design Specialist
Diane Hagni, Program and Project Support Specialist
Additional Support
Travis McDowell, Chemistry Graduate Student
Johnathan Harper, Chemistry Graduate Student
Peris Carr, Chemistry Graduate Student
Barbara Wilkins, Instructional Designer, eLearning Specialist
Malcolm Hays, Instructional Developer, eLearning Expert

28. Success tomorrow depends on choices today.
unknown author

29. Video clips from the redesigned Missouri S&T general chemistry course are available at: