Pedagogy

How instructors decide to structure their class, their pedagogy, can have a big impact on student learning. There is a large body of research that suggests that instruction that requires students do stuff during class, active learning, improves student’s learning. These active learning techniques are based on Learning Theories developed by cognitive science.

The decisions instructors make about what pedagogy to use is informed by the individual instructor’s Approach to Teaching and their view of how learning happens.

Student’s make decisions about how they are going to approach the learning in a class, these decisions are the Student’s Approach to Learning. These decisions can differ from one subject to another. How a student decides to approach a class has an impact on how well they learn the material.

Measurement

Things we want to measure in CER are not directly observable. Instead we can make observations (questions, interviews, etc..) and based on a person’s responses, we can infer information about the latent trait that “caused” the responses.

The methods used to develop the questions that generate the person’s response are in the field of Instrument development.

The observations from the instruments need to be transformed in meaningful measures of the latent trait through a Rasch Modeling process.

The results of any measurement need to be checked to make sure they represent the latent trait we want to measure (validity) and that they are doing so in a precise way (reliability).  This is done using techniques from Psychometrics.

Development of Measures of Student’s Understanding of Core Chemistry Concepts

The development of these measures is based on the Building-block approach (Wilson, 2005).

The ultimate goal is to develop instruments that give interpretable results about what a student knows and what they don’t. The development of these instruments utilizes both qualitative (phenomenography) and quantitative research techniques. Qualitative data comes from student-think aloud interviews that probe student understanding of the core concept. These interviews are analyzed within a phenomenographic framework. The resulting “categories of experience” are used to develop items for the instrument. Student responses to the instrument are analyzed using Rasch Modeling. The use of Rasch Modeling provides information about the difficulty of the item and the ability of the students that are on the same measurement scale. This makes the scores interpretable since the scores are directly related to the items position on the construct map.

This work is currently focused on topics in first-year general chemistry. Once these tools are developed, they can be used to evaluate the effect of instructional methodologies on student learning.

Additional projects, described, below are ones that have been initiated in collaboration with undergraduate students specific interests.

Where Do Experts and Novices Look When Solving a Chemistry Word Problem (Jessica Vogl in collaboration with Dr. VandenPlas)

This project used eye-tracking technology to explore differences in experts and novices gaze patters when answering conceptual multiple-choice chemistry questions. 

An Investigation in the Awareness of Desirable Difficulties in Undergraduate Chemistry Courses (Emily Uhl)

This project investigated the study habits of chemistry students. Specifically, the students use of "Desirable Difficulties" was measured using a questionnaire. Faculty interviews were done to assess faculty knowledge of "Desirable Difficulties". 

Building a Research Tool: Development and Validation of the Bonding, Structure, and Properties Assessment (BSPA) (Christina Billman, Jordan Fruchey)

This work has been using the Wilson Building-Block Model to develop an assessment of student understanding of structure and bonding. This project makes use of both qualitative methods and quantitative methods. Once developed this instrument can be used to evaluate teaching innovations.

Investigating the Role of Textbooks in Student Learning of Chemistry    (Kristen Simon, Jordyn Betz, & Lacey Hamilton)

This project is using qualitative methods to determine how the nature of the course content and the instructor influences student usage of textbooks. The ultimate goal of this work is to develop an instrument to assess the role textbook use has in student learning of chemistry.

• Regis Komperda, Thomas C. Pentecost, and Jack Barbera (2018) "Moving beyond Alpha: A Primer on Alternative Sources of Single-Administration Reliability Evidence for Quantitative Chemistry Education Research." Journal of Chemical Education Article ASAP. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00220
• Thomas C. Pentecost, Sarah Weber, & Deborah H. Herrington (2016). “Using particulate diagrams to deepen students’ chemistry knowledge.” The Science Teacher 83(5), 53-58.
• Thomas C. Pentecost. (2014). “Introduction to the Use of Analysis of Variance in Chemistry Education Research”. In Tools of Chemistry Education Research, Bunce, D. Cole R. Eds. ACS Symposium Series Vol 1166, pp 99-114. doi: 10.1021/bk-2014-1166.ch006
• Thomas C. Pentecost, & Jack Barbera. (2013). “Measuring Learning Gains in Chemical Education: A Survey of Methods.” Journal of Chemical Education, 90 (7), 839-845.
• Pam Scott & Thomas C. Pentecost. (2013) “What happens when a chemistry laboratory curriculum changes”. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42 (3), p 82-88
• Thomas C. Pentecost, Laurie S. Langdon, Margaret Asirvatham, Hannah Robus, & Robert Parson, (2012) “TA Training that Integrates Pedagogy and Content.” Journal of College Science Teaching. 41(6), 68-75
• Deanna M. Cullen, Thomas C. Pentecost (2011). “A Model approach to the electrochemical cell: An inquiry Activity.” Journal of Chemical Education, 88 (11), p 1562-1564 (DOI: 10.1021/ed101146u)

• Pentecost, T. C., Raker, J. R., Murphy, K.M., American Chemical Society National Meeting (255^th), American Chemical Society, New Orleans, LA, “Task complexity measures and item response theory parameters: How are they related”, (2018). (Poster)
• Pentecost, T.C., Raker, J.R., Murphy, K.M., American Chemical Society National Meeting (255^th), American Chemical Society, New Orleans, LA. “Investigation of general chemistry assessment item stability: same items, different form – what changes?” (2018) (Talk)
• Uhl, Emily^*, Pentecost, T. C., Student Scholars Day, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI, “An Investigation in the Awareness of Desirable Difficulties in Undergraduate Chemistry Courses”, (2017). (Poster)
• Pentecost, T.C. 24^th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO, “CheapeR, PrettieR, and ShaReable: Introduction to R for Chemistry Education” (2016). (Workshop)
• Pentecost, T. C. Chemistry Education Research & Practice Gordon Research Conference, Gordon Research Conference, Lewiston, ME. “Misconceptions as levels of understanding: Development of the Bonding, Structure, and Polarity Assessment (BSPA)”, (2015). (Poster)
• Vogl, J.^*, VandenPlas, J. R., Pentecost, T. C. 23^rd Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI, “Analysis of reading patterns during multiple-choice problem solving in chemistry” (2014). (Poster)
• Henderleiter, J., Pentecost, T. C., GreenUp:  2013 Michigan Green Chemistry and Engineering Conference, GVSU, GVSU, Eberhard Center, "Putting the Green in Next Generation Science", (2013). (Talk)
• VandenPlas, J. R., Vogl, J.^*, Pentecost, T. C., American Chemical Society National Meeting (246th), American Chemical Society, Indianapolis, IN, "Assessment instruments as research tools: An eye-tracking study of expert and novice chemistry problem solving”. (2013). (Talk)
• Pentecost, T. C., 246th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, American Chemical Society, Indianapolis, IN, "Use of a construct map and Rasch analysis in assessing student understanding of chemistry concepts". (2013). (Talk)
• Henderleiter, J., Pentecost, T. C., Green Chemistry Workshop, GVSU, Green Chemistry Clearinghouse, GVSU, "GC in NGSS and in current lesson plans", (2013). (Talk)
• Pentecost, T. C., Barbera, J., Chemistry Education Research & Practice Gordon Research Conference, Gordon Research Conference, Newport, RI, "Measuring learning gains in chemical education using Rasch modeling", (2013). (Poster)
• Pentecost, T. C., Barbera, J., Ohio River Valley Objective Measurement Seminar, Lexington, KY, "Advantages of Rasch analysis using pre and post assessments in determining changes in students’ conceptual understanding". (2013). (Talk)
• Welti, S.^*, Maki, K.^*, Pentecost, T. C., Student Scholars Day, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI, "Comparison of How Textbooks and Lectures Teach Problem Solving in Chemistry", (2013). (Poster)
• Pentecost, T. C., Barbera, J., “Measuring students’ conceptual understanding using pre and post assessments and the Rasch model” 22^nd Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, (2012). (Talk)
• Pentecost, T. C., Henderleiter, J., “Atoms First at Grand Valley State University: The how and why”, 22^nd Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, (2012). (Talk)
• Simon, K.^*, Pentecost, T. C., “Role of the Textbook for Students in Organic and Analytical Chemistry” 22^nd Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, (2012). (Poster)
• Betz, J.^*, Hamilton, L.^*_, Pentecost, T.C., “The Role of Textbooks: Does the Course Content or Faculty Member Matter?” 22^nd Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA, (2012). (Poster)
• Pentecost, T.C., “The effect of instructional decisions on student approaches to learning in chemistry” 2010 Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Academy – Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, May, 2010. (Talk)
• Pentecost, T.C., “A Learning Progression for Structure and Bonding in Chemistry” 239^th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, San Francisco, CA, March, 2010. (Talk)

Return to Pentecost Main Page