Learning from Experience:
An "Aesop's Activities" Approach
to Higher-Level Thinking Skills
in the General Chemistry Lab

a revised version of this page
(split into "discussion based labs"
and "Aesop's Activities") is in
a new location
 
by Craig Rusbult, Ph.D.

This website outlines a proposal for
using undergraduate general chemistry labs
to help students learn higher-level thinking skills.


1. What is an Aesop's Activities approach?

Aesop's Fables are designed to teach lessons about life.
By analogy, Aesop's Activities can teach
the higher-level thinking skills used in science.

Teachers should provide opportunities for experience,
and also help students learn more from their experience.

An Aesop's Approach to developing instruction,
motivated and guided by a general objective of
helping students learn how to think more effectively,
involves a goal-directed coordination of activities and methods:
1) define goals for education in terms of the skills
(and associated concepts) to be learned by students,
2) design activities that provide experience with these skills,
3) develop methods of teaching that help students learn more
by directing attention to "what can be learned" from their experience.

Educators should make decisions based on merit, not tradition, by examining every activity (old or new) and asking whether it performs a useful educational function.  But this radical attitude should be tempered by a recognition that -- when our objective is to achieve maximally beneficial results in a limited amount of time -- instead of aiming for a fresh beginning with a new set of goals, activities, and methods, often it is more practical and immediately productive to build on what already exists.  This approach, with a flexible overlapping of steps, begins with a goal-oriented analysis of activities now being used in labs:  a careful examination of these activities (in Step 2) stimulates productive thinking about goals (in Step 1), which inspires revisions or supplements to existing activities (in Step 2).  Step 3 is a logical extension of this analysis:  we just add reflection activities -- which encourage students to think about what is being done (Step 2) and what can be learned (Step 1) -- to the activities already being done in a lab.

{ comments:  I've had plenty of experience with Step 3 of this strategy for "building on what exists" while working as a Teaching Assistant in physics and chemistry, as I diligently searched the existing labs (selected by the department) for learning opportunities and for methods of directing students' attention to these opportunities.  /   A "building" approach is consistent with two practical principles for making educational reforms more appealing for widespread adoption:  the proposed reforms should be immediately productive, without requiring a long period of "delayed reoptimization" in which the teaching quality is temporarily lower than it was before the reform, and without requiring a large investment of development time (for adjusting the reforms to fit the local situation) or preparation time for teachers (so they can learn how to use the new methods effectively). }

    comment:  Most of the ideas I'll be describing will look familiar, due to a convergent agreement among many educators (including myself) about goals and methods for instruction, and because I have borrowed from and have been inspired by the work of others.  But I think you will also find some new ideas and fresh perspectives that will contribute "added value" to the educational community.



2. How can we help students
learn more from their experiences?

    2A. Reflection Activities
    reflection is "a fixing of the mind on some subject; serious thought; contemplation." (Webster's Dictionary)
    Activities that promote a minds-turned-on awareness (oriented either internally or externally) are the most important part of an Aesop's Approach to teaching and learning.
    Reflection activities can vary along a range from explicit to implicit.  A teacher can explicitly call attention to "what can be learned" from an experience, and explain why students should want to take advantage of this valuable opportunity.  Or a TA can implicitly direct student's attention to a learning opportunity by a simple request for action, such as discussing a question, that shifts a student from a minimally aware "going through the motions" mode to a more aware "active thinking" mode.

    2B. Discussion-Based Labs
    Discussion-based teaching (DB) provides an organizing structure that promotes interactions and learning.  To prepare for a DB lab, I split a lab into parts and develop mini-activities (observations, data analysis, questions,...) for each part.  When a group is ready to discuss Part 1, they call me over;  when everyone is satisfied that our discussion is over, the students move on to Part 2, and I make an X in the appropriate cell of a discussion grid:

 Student Groups


Lab

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

Part 1

    

X

        

Part 2

              

Part 3

              

Part 4

              

    When a group has X's for all parts, they're free to leave.  During a lab the teacher must improvise in an effort to achieve optimal pacing;  sometimes, so students don't have to wait for the teacher, two or more groups combine for a discussion.  { But if students must wait, they can talk with each other or begin work on the next part of the lab. }
    Most students enjoy DB labs because, compared with traditional labs in which they write reports and get feedback that is delayed and minimal, with DB the students have more learning and more fun, due to interactions with their teacher and with each other.  For similar reasons, DB labs are also fun for teachers.

    my experience:  I like DB labs a lot, due to the discussions and because I can spend less time on a boring, unpleasant task (grading lab books) and more time on a productive activity (preparing for labs) that is intellectually stimulating and enjoyable.  And the teaching is more satisfying because it is easy to give students immediate, customized, detailed feedback.  /   When I was a Teaching Assistant (TA) in a physics course with a policy of "no lab grading," during our lab-discussions I could focus my attention totally on teaching rather than judging, and students could focus on learning rather than being judged.  For example, I could ask and answer any question freely, thinking only about what was best for the students.  When I decided to withhold information my only motivation was pedagogical, and the purpose was to challenge students, to make them think, to let them play a more active role in their own learning.  I never had to worry about whether I was "giving away too much information" about a question that later would be used to assign grades.  It was a very freeing experience for me.

    DB labs are an effective way to provide frequent reflection activities for students.  But the quality of students' experience in a DB lab depends on interactions with their Teaching Assistant, so what happens when they get a TA with less ability, experience, or motivation?
    TAs who are socially fluent will have a great time with DB, and so will their students.
    For TAs who are shy the structure of DB makes interactions easier because, instead of wondering how to achieve a balance between ignoring students and bothering them with too much attention, students initiate conversations so they can get Xs in the grid.  Although these discussions are focused on ideas (chemistry concepts and thinking skills), this often leads to small-talk that produces social bonding, both student-TA and student-student.
    Yes, foreign TAs who are not skilled in English will be at a disadvantage, but  1) since these TAs typically solve the "balance problem" by ignoring students and avoiding conversations, the structure of DB will increase TA-student interactions;  2) DB will also increase student-student interactions, especially their discussions of ideas, and this can be intellectually stimulating even if the TA isn't verbally fluent;  3) DB leads to increased experience in listening and speaking; this practice will help foreign TAs improve their English language skills, which will improve their graduate school experience and their overall professional development.
    Although consistency in TA quality is a worthy goal, it is more important to focus on the pragmatic question of whether "the greatest good for the greatest number (including both students and TAs)" is promoted by discussion-based labs.

 



3. How can we help students gain experience
that is more enjoyable and educationally productive?

    Very few educators will dispute the main claim of Section 2, that we should encourage students to think.  This idea is not new, and neither are the basic ideas in Section 3 or in other sections.  But designing effective labs requires careful attention to important details, such as those examined in the remainder of this proposal.

    3A. Goal-Directed Analysis of Activities
Students gain experience by doing activities.  Opportunities for learning can be analyzed using an activity-and-experience grid,

 student activities


    science experiences  # 1  # 2 # 3   # 4  # 5
   A. generate experiments        yes  yes
   B. do physical experiment  yes  yes      yes
   C. hypothetico-deduction    yes yes    yes
   D. generate theories      yes    yes

    A grid shows multi-function activities (e.g., Activity #1 promotes experiences B and C) and repeated experiences (C occurs during 2, 3 and 5).  A grid can inspire a search for Aesop's Activities to help students learn each type of "science experience" skill.  The visual organization of information in a grid can improve our understanding of educationally functional relationships between activities, and can help us plan the sequencing and coordinating (with respect to the types of experience, levels of sophistication, and contexts) of activities within a course, to produce a mutually supportive synergism and a more effective environment for learning.

    activities/experiences could include a discussion, experiment, project or problem, a question (about methods, concepts, science-and-society issues, or...), case study (from history or current events), computer simulation, listening or reading,....   Students can observe, collect data, analyze data, make and use a graph, evaluate theories using hypothetico-deductive logic or retroductive inference, formulate a problem, analyze an existing experiment or design a new experiment, perform a literature search, examine a scientific paper, solve problems (simple or complex, algorithmic or improvisational), analyze a complex situation that involves conflicting goal-criteria, either apply or construct concepts, convert instructions (written or verbal) into action, or perform cognitive/physical skills such as filling and reading a pipet.
    Activities vary in length from a mini-activity to a coherent mega-activity composed of related mini-activities.

 

OPTIONS.  At this point you can move to any of these sections:
3B. Strategies for Solving Problems
4. Major Challenges for Lab Education (Motivation, Teachers, Exams)
5. The Process of Instructional Design (Cooperation, Opinions)
6. Examples of Aesop's Activities
7. My Personal Goals and
an in-depth discussion.

 

    3B. Strategies for Solving Problems
    I have developed models of Integrated Scientific Method (ISM) and Integrated Design Method (IDM) that can be used to analyze instruction, or to help students understand the relationships between the aspects of creativity and critical thinking that are coherently combined in the problem-solving methods used by scientists and designers.

    The methods of science (in ISM) are a special case of a more generalized method (in IDM) for designing a product, strategy, or theory.  For example, here is the way IDM describes the process of designing a system of labs:  we first define goals (the "learning outcome" characteristics we want for the labs);  then we develop ideas for labs, do mental experiments (to generate predictions about outcomes) or do actual experiments (to generate observations of outcomes);  compare predictions with goals or compare observations with goals;  adjust ideas (and maybe goals) in an effort to achieve a match between predictions/observations and goals.

Here is a visual representation of Integrated Design Method:

 
 

    4. Major Challenges for Lab Education

    4A. Student Motivation
    intentional learning occurs when students invest extra mental effort, beyond what is required to fulfill schoolwork tasks, with the intention of pursuing their own cognitive goals.
    Intentional learning is a problem-solving approach to education because a student's goal is to transform a current state of knowledge (and skill) into an improved future state.  This requires introspective access to the current state of personal knowledge, foresight to envision a useful state of improved knowledge in the future, a decision that this goal-state is desirable and worth pursuing, a plan to transform the current state into the goal-state, and a motivated willingness to invest the time and effort required to reach this goal.
    expectations for transfer:  Students who are not chemistry majors may be motivated when they realize, because a teacher calls it to their attention, that similar problem-solving methods are used in a wide range of fields (in science, engineering,...) so they can transfer skills from chemistry to their own field.

    Intentional learning is activated when a forward-looking student wisely asks, What can I learn now that will help me in the future?  An essential function of education is to motivate students so they want to learn.  Motivation can be intrinsic (to enjoy an interesting activity), extrinsic (to perform well on an exam), and personal (to improve the long-term quality of life).  Hopefully, students will discover that thinking is fun, and they will want to do it more often and more skillfully!



    4B. Teaching Assistants
    In many schools, one challenge is to get consistently good teaching from TAs who have a wide range of ability, experience, and motivation.
    preparation:  The goal is to help TAs (in weekly discussions,...) be maximally effective with minimal investment of their time.  { an added bonus: While TAs are learning more about scientific thinking skills, in an effort to teach these skills, this can improve their own thinking skills, which will be useful when they do scientific research in grad school and later in life. }
    feedback:  Due to their contact with students, TAs are experts on what is happening in labs and how this can be improved.
    policies:  When designing labs and deciding course policies, an important goal is to make life more pleasant and productive for TAs.


    4C. Exams to test Thinking Skills
    To determine lab-grades, we can use conventional criteria -- quality of techniques (pipeting,...), labwork (including experiments with accountability that is qualitative and/or quantitative), discussions (or oral exams), and written reports -- plus written exams.  A written lab-exam should contain a variety of questions, including some that test higher-level thinking skills.
    A set of problems to test higher-level thinking skills should:  differentiate between levels of mastery by including problems that vary in difficulty;  provide an accurate measure of thinking skills;  measure the appropriate skills -- the ones we're trying to teach. { i.e., there should be a high correlation between success on problems and a mastery of the skills/knowledge being emphasized in labs }
    Achieving these goals is a challenge, and we must ask whether the "benefit per student per hour invested in making new problems each semester" is worth the effort and cost.  Why do we need new problems?  Because all questions from old exams should be available to all students, to improve the justice in grading by eliminating the advantage for students with access to test files from a fraternity, sorority, dormitory, instructional center, or athletic department.  If several sections share the same labs and the same new problems, all students should take a written lab-exam at the same time to prevent a leaking of information from those who see the exam earlier.  Also, TAs should not see the new problems before the exam;  TAs should "teach to the exam" by knowing the general type of exam questions (similar to those on previous exams), but if they know the specific questions there will be unavoidable ethical dilemmas about what to teach.

    comment:  These criteria (differentiating between levels,...) are the usual goals in professional test design.  For example, scholars constructing the American Chemical Society Exams (for the overall course, not for just labs) are trying to satisfy similar criteria, and they seem to be doing this fairly well.

 

 

    5. The Process of Instructional Design

    5A. Cooperation
    The process of instructional design is inherently complicated, requiring the careful consideration of many interrelated factors.  It is even more complex in a large university where ideas are coming from course instructors and TAs, a lab director, coordinator, and support staff.  Typically there is a diversity of opinions about goals, activities, and methods, so it is impossible to please everyone.  The best solution is to recognize the need for flexibility and cooperation, and agree that a reasonable objective is to aim for an optimal balancing of our alternative visions for education.


    5B. Opinions
    Here are a few of my opinions, held with varying degrees of confidence:

    The main goal of labs should be to help students learn thinking skills, with teaching chemistry concepts as only a secondary goal.

    Students should have an opportunity to learn in a variety of ways:
    DIRECT learning by reading or listening can be effective when techniques of actively constructive "reception learning" are explained and emphasized, but the most important factor is whether students are motivated to learn.
    ACTION learning should be the main focus of labs, with students learning by doing.
    INQUIRY learning can be very effective, especially for promoting active thinking and motivation, but only when it is done well.  Otherwise, it will be frustrating for students and teachers.  The key to effective guided inquiry is achieving a "balance of mystery" so a problem is not too easy or too difficult.  The levels of difficulty and activity can be adjusted by carefully controlling the information that is provided and withheld, and by providing scaffolding and coaching for intellectual and/or emotional support.
    COOPERATIVE learning in groups offers many valuable benefits, but sometimes (especially for experience using lab equipment) students should work individually.

    an opinion with a lower degree of confidence:
    We should consider the possibility that decreasing the emphasis on grading may increase the quality of learning.  For example, discussion-based labs offer many educational advantages, but a DB-grid that is totally filled with X's provides no basis for distinguishing among students when assigning grades.  /   a question:  If labs are part of a general chemistry course, what are the options for weighting the lab grades within this course?  1. less weight than is traditional,  2. more weight than is traditional.
    Discussion-based labs can be used with any of these grading policies, but in my experience they seem to be more compatible with 1.  { Yes, I know this suggestion is controversial, and I'm flexible about the question of course-grading policies. }
    Is there a direct relationship between accountability and motivation?  If lab grades count less when course grades are determined, will this hinder learning in lab?  Maybe.  Or maybe not, because:  a. Course exams can be designed to test the concepts and skills being learned in labs.   b. We can tell students that labs will affect their course grade more than usual if they have been uncooperative in attitudes or actions.  { During DB-labs, almost all of my students have been consistently cooperative. }   c. Internal motivation can exist even if there is no external accountability;  during labs I emphasize that, because students will be rewarded for thinking in their professional careers (and in life as a whole), learning how to think more skillfully has a high intrinsic value.  { Yes, I know there are counter-arguments for each of these points. }
    One option that may be very useful is related to "a" above.  We can base a large part of the lab grade on lab exams (using in-lab "practical exams" and/or written exams), and use DB-labs to help students prepare for these exams.

 

 

    6. EXAMPLES OF AESOP'S ACTIVITIES

    Observation-Based Thinking Skills
    Experimental activities can help students learn to use observation-based logic and to make mental connections between levels of thinking: macro, micro, and symbolic.  As a secondary benefit, students also learn concepts.  The following example shows how a routine procedure can become a minds-on opportunity for learning.

not: This section has been expanded and moved to a new location, Thinking Skills in Labs - Chemistry Examples with the sections below, and more:

    USING QUESTIONS TO INSPIRE ACTIVE THINKING: ...

    REVERSED TRENDS: ...

    CONVERTING PHYSICAL MODELS INTO MENTAL MODELS: ...

    QUESTIONS ABOUT AIR: ...

    AUTOMATED SUBTRACTIONS: ...

    A MYSTERIOUS TREND: ...

    CONCEPTUAL PICTURES: ...

    COPPER AND NITRIC ACID: ...
 

    BASIC SKILLS FOR DATA ANALYSIS: ...

    THE PROCESS (LOGICAL AND SOCIAL) OF SCIENCE: ...

 

    HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE LOGIC:   A handout for a homework assignment explains the basic principles of mass spectrometry and provides mass-spec graphs for students to analyze for practice.  Then they play detectives by using another graph to determine the structure of a C3H7Br compound.  To solve this problem, students must use HD logic:  invent two competitive theories about the structure, use each theory to predict the corresponding graph, compare these two if-then predictions to see where they differ, do a reality check by observing the actual graph, compare predictions with observations, and draw a conclusion.  Surprisingly few students could finish the entire process of HD, even after they were given an explicit step-by-step procedure.  Obviously, students need more experience with this thinking skill that is the foundation of scientific method.

    THE LOGIC OF LE CHATELIER:   Students change the amounts of aqueous complex ions -- cobalt with water (pink), and cobalt with chloride (blue) -- by adding NaCl or water, and by changing the temperature.  A handout, developed by myself and Jacquie Scott (former lab director at UW), calls attention to essential ideas by asking students to use hypothetico-deduction:  they use observations (is the color pink, blue, or an intermediate purple) to estimate the position of equilibrium, decide how this position changes during each step, then compare these observations with predictions based on Le Chatelier's Principle.  For the T-changes, they use retroduction to decide whether the reaction is exothermic or endothermic.  Many concepts and skills can be learned during this lab.  But without the handout to direct their attention and promote organized active thinking, most students would miss many of these opportunities for learning.

    CALIBRATION LOGIC:   Using data I provide, students graphically "calibrate" a new weighing scale based on readings from an old scale that we assume is accurate.  Then they do flame tests for solutions of LiCl, Sr(NO3)2, KCl, CaBr2, and NaNO3, and use logic to decide which chemical (assuming the cause is a single species) produces each color.  { For calcium bromide a deductive conclusion is impossible, but a rational inductive guess can be made. }  In a second run, students do flame tests on unknown solutions.
    questions:  In your detective work on the solutions, what assumptions did you make?  { Is the stockroom telling us the truth with their bottle labels? }   Does a violet flame prove the solution contains KCl?  { Could it be KBr or a substance not contained in the known solutions?  This illustrates the asymmetry of if-then logic: "if KCl, then violet" is not the same as "if violet, then KCl." }   Could we ever conclude with certainty that "if violet, then K"?  { What additional information is needed?  Is certainty possible in science? }   If students observe a flame that is red and violet and green, what can they conclude?  { We shouldn't place restrictions on theorizing. }   Does a yellow-orange flame always indicate Na+ in a solution?  { This lets us talk about false positives and false negatives. }
    Finally, students compare the two experiments:  the weighings (in two runs) and flame tests (in two runs).  Between the first and second runs of each experiment, what is constant or changing, and what is known or unknown?  What are the similarities and differences in the logic used during the weighings and flame tests?  { This lets us discuss the usefulness and limitations of analogies. }

 

    GUIDED INQUIRY LABS:
    During guided inquiry instruction the teacher, like a writer of a good mystery story, should aim for a level of difficulty that is "just right" so students will not become bored or frustrated.  Ideally, students will succeed, and will feel genuine satisfaction because in succeeding they overcame significant challenges.
    The level of challenge can be adjusted by preparation before a problem begins (by giving students prior experience with similar problems, by selecting the problems to be solved, and by controlling the information that is provided and withheld) and by coaching during the process of problem solving (by observing students, and providing guidance by asking questions, directing attention, and promoting reflection).
    A related website describes two examples of inquiry instruction:
    1) an in-depth analysis of an innovative genetics course (from my PhD dissertation, using a model of Integrated Scientific Method as the framework for analysis), and
    2) an outline of a lab activity in which students design an experiment.  { This detailed analysis of the lab will be condensed, at some later time, and the condensed version will appear on this home-page. }

 

 

    7. My Personal Goals

    This website describes a proposal, not a finished project.
    Regarding this proposal, my professional goals are to find:
    1) lively discussion and constructive feedback,
    2) collaborators who want to develop creative ideas for labs, and
    3) a position in a chemistry department working on instructional development, possibly in an "educational support staff" role;  my main priority is to work with people who share my enthusiasm for the type of education described here.
 

    A brief resume follows.
    degrees:  BA in Chemistry from Univ of California at Irvine, MS in Chemistry from Univ of Washington, MA in History of Science from Univ of Wisconsin (in Madison), and PhD in Science Education (Curriculum & Instruction) from Univ of Wisconsin.
    academic awards:  Was selected by the American Chemical Society as "The Best Chemistry Student" two times, first for all high schools of Orange County, CA, and then for U.C. Irvine.  Received NSF Fellowship for graduate study in chemistry.
    My doctoral dissertation synthesizes ideas (mainly from scientists and philosophers, but also from sociologists, psychologists, and historians) into a model of scientific method, and applies this model for the integrative analysis of innovative inquiry teaching.  The main ideas are summarized in a website, Using Design Method & Scientific Method in Problem-Solving Education.
    For more details, see an informal "about the author" page.

 

The educational proposal outlined here (and presented in a poster session
at a national meeting of the American Chemical Society, March 21, 1999)
is explored more deeply on the main page.


TOP OF PAGE

all rights reserved for all material in this website,
copyright 2000 by Craig Rusbult

if you have any comments or questions, or
if you're interested in working on this project,
please contact me:  craigru178@yahoo.com
craigru178@yahoo.com

the URL of this home-page is
http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~crusbult/methods/lab-99i.htm

current homepage (April 2000) for "Thinking Skills in Labs"

METHODS FOR SCIENCE AND DESIGN

LINKS TO MY PAGES ABOUT THINKING, LEARNING, AND TEACHING