Research in our lab is concerned with describing and understanding how students learn chemistry over long periods of time, how specific teaching practices influence student learning in chemistry, how scientists can learn from teachers to communicate science more effectively, and what is needed so that doing science and gaining scientific literacy will be more equally available to all students. The unifying feature of our work is that it is directed at improving equity and creating capacity for more students to have access to learning science.
We are currently involved in a multi-year, NSF-funded collaboration to study how students develop understanding of chemistry from grade 8 through undergraduate completion. Learning progressions are cognitive models that describe pathways of how the learning of ideas and abilities develops over time. Our Chemical Thinking Learning Progression is organized by the three main practices of chemistry (synthesis, analysis and transformation) instead of by the content of chemistry. It examines the development of students' chemical thinking during three primary activities in chemistry: sense-making through investigating the properties and behaviors of chemical systems, problem-solving through designing substances or processes to address modern problems, and evaluating and making decisions with regard to the social, economic and environmental costs and benefits of chemical products and activities. The project is describing learning progress along domain-general and chemistry-specific progress variables that include design, reasoning, and conceptual sophistication. Six chemical thinking threads comprise the learning progression, each focused on fundamental questions in chemistry: 1) chemical identity (how do we identify chemical substances?), 2) structure-property relationships (how do we predict their properties?), 3) chemical causality (why do chemical processes occur?), 4) mechanism (how do chemical processes occur?), 5) chemical control (how can we control chemical processes?), and 6) benefits-costs-risks (how do we evaluate the impacts of chemically transforming matter?).
Prof. Sevian co-leads this project with Prof. Vicente Talanquer (University of Arizona). In addition to undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral students in their research groups, six middle and high school teachers are on the research team (see the CTLP website for more info). Other collaborators include Prof. Heilen Arce (University of Costa Rica) and students in her research group.
In the current phase of the project, we are conducting literature reviews and developing instruments to uncover underlying implicit assumptions that guide and constrain how students think about chemistry. Through these, we are developing hypothetical learning progression maps and testing progress variables along which progress of learning may be measured. Validation of the learning progression is occurring in design-based research cycles, in collaboration with teachers and faculty. Validation of the Chemical Thinking Learning Progression is expected to help with understanding how to optimize curriculum, instructional materials, and instruction to support the reconceptualizations of student learning necessary for the evolution of learning along productive pathways in the learning progression.(Current Research Group Members: Steven Cullipher, Courtney Ngai; Current Collaborators: Vicente Talanquer, Heilen Arce; Research Group Alumni: Marilyne Stains, Gabriela Szteinberg)
[Current funding: NSF DRL-1222624, and AAAS WIRC@MSIs grant]
We have used a research-based instructional materials development cycle to create several green, inquiry-based lab experiments for use in university freshman and high school chemistry courses. These include a green stoichiometry lab, an acid-base equilibrium lab, a lab connecting solubility, equilibrium & periodicity, and a colligative properties lab. The equilibrium & periodicity lab was a collaboration with Prof. Jason Evans [Chemistry, UMass Boston]. (Research Group Alumni: Jose Amado, Kristen Cacciatore, Mitzi Sweeney, Trenton Woodham)
Drawing from developmental theory and cognition results, we hypothesize most undergraduate STEM curricula have an abstraction threshold at which point typical students’ current capacity for abstraction is not matched to the complexity of the problems being posed. This NSF-funded study seeks to determine in which undergraduate STEM curricula courses the abstraction threshold is most prominent in different majors (chemistry and electrical engineering, initially), ascertain relationships between cognitive processing exhibited by students and their course outcomes, and explore whether such thresholds are domain-general or have discipline-dependent nuances. The study applies Bloom's taxonomy to identify operational tasks expected by experts (faculty) on problems representing accountable disciplinary knowledge that students are expected to demonstrate in their courses, and applies a Representation Mapping analysis framework that distinguishes rule- and similarity-based reasoning, to account for degree of abstraction in students' problem solving approaches. Soon to be operational: please see STEM Abstraction website for further info. (Collaborator: Prof. Lance Pérez [Electrical Engineering, University of Nebraska-Lincoln]; Research Group Alumni: Sarah Auguste, Gabriela Szteinberg)
[Current funding: NSF DUE-1348722]
Active Chemistry is an inquiry-oriented high school curriculum whose development was funded by the National Science Foundation and which is published by It's About Time Publishing Company. Students participate in chapter-culminating performance tasks that require the use of chemistry to complete a challenge that is fun. The curriculum is in use in many school districts, including Baltimore, Seattle, Los Angeles and Denver Public Schools. We participated in writing six of the eleven chapters of the curriculum: Chemical Dominoes, CSI Chemistry, Soap Sense, Movie Special Effects, Fun with the Periodic Table, and Cool Chemistry Show. (Research Group Alumni: Kristen Cacciatore)
In a collaboration with Prof. Michael Rubner at MIT, we explored the use of ruthenium as a catalyst in multilayer thin film devices as adaptive functional materials. (Research Group Alumni: Soma Chattopadhyay)
K12-university partnerships are a promising vehicle through which to achieve education reform and improvement at both K12 and higher education levels. We have studied biographical and contextual factors that predispose, support and inhibit science and math faculty involvement in K12 service. (Research Group Alumni: Allison Skerrett)
Underrepresentation by specific demographic groups in STEM majors and careers is of continued concern as very little has changed in 30 years. We investigated which contextual factors play the largest roles in underrepresented minority students' journey through the STEM pathway, seeking to understand how teacher and instructional quality, organized STEM pathway support programs, students' study habits, and their course choices explain retention of students, as well as reasons they leave, along the STEM pathway from high school through graduation from a four-year university, with and without passage through community college. (Research Group Alumni: Shiqi Hao)
We designed feasibility and research studies to explore the educational value of MolySym's intelligent molecular modeling system for high school chemistry students. The study was supported by a Fast Track Phase 1/2 SBIR grant from the US Department of Education.