Measuring Meaningful Learning in the Undergraduate General Chemistry

and Organic Chemistry Laboratories: A Longitudinal Study

Abstract
The Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory Instrument (MLLI) was
developed to measure students cognitive and affective expectations and
experiences for learning in the chemistry laboratory. Previous cross-sectional
studies in both general and organic chemistry laboratory courses have shown
trends where cognitive expectations go unfulfilled, and affective expectations and
experiences are diverse among all students. On the basis of these previous
findings, a longitudinal study was carried out to explore how students ideas about
laboratory learning change over two years of chemistry laboratory instruction.
The data were analyzed using multiple visualizations, inferential statistics, and
cluster analysis. Findings from this study supported previous findings from the
cross-sectional studies.
Background
The background of this journal is the researcher want to know students
cognitive and affective expectations and experiences for learning in the chemistry
laboratory using the Meaningful Learning in the Laboratory Instrument (MLLI).
(MLLI) is a novel assessment tool designed to measure students cognitive and
affective expectations and experiences across a semester of an undergraduate
chemistry laboratory courses.
Method
This research took place at a midsize liberal arts university in the midwestern
United States. The GC laboratory course is a two-semester sequence with both
courses offered on and off sequence (during the fall and spring semesters). The
OC laboratory course is also a two-semester sequence, but the first semester is
only offered in the fall, and the second semester is only offered in the spring of
the academic year. Both GC and OC offer separate courses for the chemistry
majors and for the nonchemistry majors.
The data collection of this research is the MLLI was administered six times
over two years using Qualtrics Survey software. Starting in general chemistry, the
MLLI was administered during the first week of the fall semester prior the start of
the laboratory experiments to measure students expectations for learning (pre).
The MLLI was then administered at the end of the fall semester (post) and end of
the spring semester (postpost) to measure students experiences regarding their
laboratory work in the first semester and second semester GC laboratory courses,
respectively. The same administration format was followed for organic chemistry.
IRB approval was obtained prior to the start of data collection.
Students were asked to give their university email addresses to match their
responses over the two years. (After students responses were matched, the data
file was stripped of identifiable information prior to analysis to ensure the
confidentiality of the participants.) The matching of students responses allowed
for direct comparison of students expectations and experiences over the two
courses and six points of data collection. During the 20132014 and 20142015
academic years, 268 students took the MLLI at least once as a GC student and at
least once as an OC student. This manuscript will focus on the responses of the
students who took the MLLI all six times (N = 61). While analysis presented in
this manuscript could also examine the students with missing data, the goal of this
study was to examine those students who did take the MLLI all six times across
the two chemistry laboratory courses. A power analysis was conducted to know
whether sizable, significant changes over time could be detected with a sample of
N = 61. By using the free G*Power software, the necessary sample size to detect a
significant medium effect with a power of 0.8 over six different measurements
was calculated to be 20.32. Thus, the decision was made to move forward with the
sample size of 61 to examine how these students cognitive and affective
perceptions of laboratory learning changed over time. This sample of 61 students
was 75% female (greater than the course enrollment of approximately equal ratio
male to female) and 80% white (similar to the university profile).
 After the datas are collected, it would be analyzed. The first step in the
analysis was calculating the descriptive statistics for each MLLI scale (cognitive,
affective, and cognitive/affective) for each time point. And then, To analyze how
the students responses changed over time, separate repeated-measures (RM)
ANOVA models were performed for each MLLI scale.
Finding
Findings from this study supported previous findings from the cross-
sectional studies. In addition, it was found that students reset their expectations
for organic chemistry laboratory, meaning they indicated high expectations for
learning despite unfulfilled expectations in their general chemistry laboratory.
Conclusions
In comparison with our cross-sectional studies, there are some similar pieces of
evidence and some new information generated uniquely by the longitudinal study.
The reset is apparent in both the cross-sectional and the longitudinal where
students have high expectations in OC despite reporting low experiences in GC.
In the previous studies, there were no differences between courses, only
significant differences over time. Thus, students were reporting high expectations
for GC that went unmet and then setting the same high expectations for OC only
to go unmet again. The unique information offered from the longitudinal study
shows the continued decrease in the second semester of lab for both cognitive and
cognitive or affective. For cognitive, there was a larger change from pre to post
for both GC and OC than from post to postpost. For cognitiveor affective, the
larger change was from post to postpost for both GC and OC. In both cases,
students started the course with high expectations for both cognitive and cognitive
or affective scales that went largely unmet during both semesters of lab.
Additional research is needed to understand why students reset their
expectations for OC despite their previously unfulfilled expectations for GC.
 ENGLISH TASK

Submitted to fulfill the task of

English For Academic Purposes

LECTURER:
Dr. ANDREAS PRIYONO BUDI PRASETYO, M.Ed

By:
NUR ALAWIYAH (0402516059)

SCIENCE STUDY PROGRAM (CHEMISTRY)

GRADUATE PROGRAM
SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY
2016