Advertisement

Investigating Divergent Outcomes in Organic Chemistry I

  • Milushka Elbulok-CharcapeEmail author
  • Leigh McCallen
  • Gail Horowitz
  • Laura A. Rabin
Article
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

In the USA, Organic Chemistry I is a gateway course for undergraduate students seeking careers in medical- and health-related fields. Estimates of failure and withdrawal rates are approximately 40% at some large, public institutions and higher for specific segments of the student population, such as ethnic minorities, those of low socio-economic status, and non-traditional students. We applied a multi-layered contextual model of student success to investigate various factors contributing to the academic success of undergraduate students in Organic Chemistry I. Participants were 20 undergraduate students formerly enrolled in Organic Chemistry I at an urban, 4-year public institution located in the northeastern USA. Using semi-structured interviews, we examined students’ divergent academic outcomes, as well as internal, proximal, and distal variables relating to positive academic outcomes. Results suggest that at-risk students’ success in Organic Chemistry I is facilitated by support from qualified mentors, availability and utilization of academic resources, and proficiency in science. We discuss these results within a contextual framework and offer practical suggestions for educators.

Keywords

Student success Higher education At-risk students Underrepresented students Organic chemistry 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their gratitude to Teresa Ober and Catherine Colleary for their support of this project.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The authors complied with all ethical standards while conducting this research study (including but not limited to obtaining informed consent prior to research activities, etc.).

References

  1. Archer, L., Dewitt, J., Osborne, J., Dillon, J., Willis, B., & Wong, B. (2009). “Doing” science versus “being” a scientist: Examining 10-11-year-old schoolchildren’s constructions of science through the lens of identity. Science Education, 94(4), 617–639.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20399. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2010). Is science me? High school students’ identities, participation, and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 564–582.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20353. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Authors’ Institution (2015). Retrieved from: http://www.urlauthorsinsitution.pdf
  4. Bailey, M. J. & Dynarski (2011). Gains and gaps: changing inequality in U.S. college entry and completion. National Bureau of Economics Research Working Paper Series. http://www.nber.org/papers/w17633
  5. Barr, D., Gonzalez, M., & Wanat, S. (2008). The leaky pipeline: factors associated with early decline in interest in premedical studies among underrepresented minority undergraduate students. Academic Medicine, 83(5), 503–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bembenutty, H. (2008). The scholarship of teaching and learning corner. Teaching of Psychology, 35(4), 363–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cappella, E., & Weinstein, R. S. (2001). Turning around reading achievement: predictors of high school students’ academic resilience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(4), 758–771.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-O663.93.4.758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlone, H., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of successful women of color: science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 1187–1218.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cartrette, D. P., & Bodner, G. M. (2010). Non-mathematical problem solving in organic chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 643–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chang, M. J., Eagan, M. K., Lin, M. H., & Hurtado, S. (2011). Considering the impact of racial stigmas and science identity: persistence among biomedical and behavioral science aspirants. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(5), 564–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chemers, M., Zurbriggen, E., Syed, M., Goza, B., & Bearman, S. (2011). The role of efficacy and identity in science career commitment among underrepresented minority students. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 469–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen, X. (2013). STEM attrition: college students’ paths into and out of STEM fields (NCES 2014–001). National Center for Science Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  13. Cole, D., & Espinoza, A. (2008). Examining the academic success of Latino students in science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Student Development, 49(4), 285–300.Google Scholar
  14. Connor, H. & Tyers, C. (2004). Why the difference? A closer look at higher education minority ethnic students and graduates. DfES publications.Google Scholar
  15. Cook, E., Kennedy, E., & McGuire, S. (2013). Effect of teaching metacognitive learning strategies on performance in general chemistry courses. Journal of Chemical Education, 90, 961–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cromley, J., Perez, T., Wills, T., Tanaka, J., Horvat, E., & Agbenyega, E. (2013). Changes in race and sex stereotype threat among diverse STEM students: relation to grades and retention in the majors. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38, 247–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dagley, M., Georgiopoulos, M., Reece, A., & Young, C. (2016). Increasing retention and graduation rates through a STEM learning community. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 18(2), 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Doerschuk, P., Bahrim, C., Daniel, J., Kruger, J., Mann, J., & Martin, C. (2016). Closing the gaps and filling the STEM pipeline: a multidisciplinary approach. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 682–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eddy, S. L., & Hogan, K. A. (2014). Getting under the hood: How and for whom does increasing course structure work? CBE – Life Science Education, 13, 453–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107–115.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Espinosa, L. L. (2011). Pipelines and pathways: women of color in undergraduate STEM majors and the college experiences that contribute to persistence. Harvard Educational Review, 81(2), 209–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Esselman, B. J., & Hill, N. J. (2016). Integration of computational chemistry into the undergraduate organic chemistry laboratory curriculum. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(5), 932–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Flynn, A. B. (2015). Structure and evaluation of flipped chemistry courses: organic & spectroscopy, large and small, first to third year English and French. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 16(2), 198–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grove, N., Cooper, M., & Cox, E. (2012). Does mechanistic thinking improve student success in organic chemistry? Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 850–853.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed200394d.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Günersel, A. & Fleming, S. (2013). Qualitative assessment of a 3D simulation program: Faculty, students, and bioorganic reaction animations. Journal of Chemical Education, 90, 988–994.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300185h.
  26. Harackiewicz, J., Barron, K., Tauer, J., & Elliot, A. (2002). Predicting success in college: a longitudinal study of achievement goals and ability measures as predictors of interest and performance from freshman year through graduation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 562–575.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.3.562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harackiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Tibbets, Y., Giffen, C. J., Blair, S. S., Rouse, D. I., & Hyde, J. A. (2014). Closing the social class achievement gap for first-generation students in undergraduate biology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 375–389.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hashemnezhad, H. (2015). Qualitative content analysis research: a review article. Journal of ELT and Applied Linguistics (JELTAL), 3(1), 54–62.Google Scholar
  29. Hazari, Z., Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2013). The science identity of college students: Exploring the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 82–91.Google Scholar
  30. Henary, M., Owens, E., & Tawney, J. (2014). Creative report writing in undergraduate organic chemistry laboratory inspires nonmajors. Journal of Chemical Education, 92, 90–95.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed5002619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Horowitz, G. (2010). It's not always just about the grade: exploring the achievement orientations of pre-med students. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(2), 215–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hrabowski, F. A., III. (2014). Institutional change in higher education: innovation and collaboration. Peabody Journal of Education, 89, 291–304.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2014.913440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hunter, A. 2016, April 9th. STEM switching reconsidered: Why do undergraduates leave STEM majors and where do they go? Paper presented at the 2016 annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved august 2016 from the AERA online paper repository.Google Scholar
  35. Jackson, K. M., & Suizzo, M. A. (2015). Sparking an interest: a qualitative study of Latina science identity development. Journal of Latina/o Studies, 3(2), 103–120.  https://doi.org/10.1037/lat0000033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006, July). What matters to student success: a review of the literature. National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student Success.Google Scholar
  38. Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 540–563.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2008.11772116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kurbanoglu, N. (2013). The effects of organic chemistry anxiety on undergraduate students in relation to chemistry attitude and organic chemistry achievement. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(2), 1648 130–138.Google Scholar
  40. Lafarge, D., Morge, L., & Méheut, M. (2014). A new higher education curriculum in organic chemistry: What questions should be asked? Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 173–178.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300746e.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lakhan, S. E. (2003). Diversification of US medical schools via affirmative action implementation. BMC Medical Education, 3(1), 6.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-3-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lee, C. (1991). Achieving diversity: issues in the recruitment and retention of underrepresented racial/ethnic students in higher education: a review of the literature. Alexandria, VA: National Association of College Admission Counselors.Google Scholar
  43. Lewis, S. E. (2011). Retention and reform: an evaluation of peer-led team learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 88, 703–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lopez, E., Nandagopal, K., Shavelson, R., Szu, E., & Penn, J. (2013). Self-regulated learning study strategies and academic performance in undergraduate organic chemistry: an investigation examining ethnically diverse students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(6), 660–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lopez, E., Shavelson, R., Nandagopal, K., Szu, E., & Penn, J. (2014). Factors contributing to problem-solving performance in first-semester organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 976–981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lu, C. (2015). Finding los científicos within: Latino male science identity development in the first college semester. Journal of College Student Development, 56(7), 740–745.  https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lynch, D., & Trujillo, H. (2011). Motivational beliefs and learning strategies in organic chemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1351–1365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Malcolm, L. E., & Dowd, A. C. (2012). The impact of undergraduate debt on the graduate school enrollment of STEM baccalaureates. The Review of Higher Education, 35(2), 265–305.  https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2012.0007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Malik, K., Martinez, N., Romero, J., Schubel, S., & Janowicz, P. A. (2014). Mixed-methods study of online and written organic chemistry homework. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(11), 1804–1809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Malinak, S., Bayline, J., Brletic, P., Harris, M., Iuliucci, R., Leonard, M., ..., Sunderland, D. (2014). The impact of an “organic first” chemistry curriculum at a Liberal arts college. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 994–1000Google Scholar
  51. Merolla, D. M., & Serpe, R. T. (2013). STEM enrichment programs and graduate school matriculation: The role of science identity salience. Social Psychology Education, 16, 575–597.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-013-9233-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Micari, M., & Pazos, P. (2012). Connecting to the professor: impact of the student– faculty relationship in a highly challenging course. College Teaching, 60, 41–47.  https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2011.627576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Moog, R. S., & Spencer, J. N. (2008). POGIL: An overview. Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL), 994, 1–13.Google Scholar
  54. Mosher, M., Mosher, M., & Garoutte, M. (2012). Organic mastery: an activity for the undergraduate classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 646–648.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ed200015v.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. National Science Foundation. (2013). Women, minorities, and person with disabilities in science and engineering: 2013. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation.Google Scholar
  56. National Science Foundation, STEM Education Data. (2014). Retrieved from: https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/sei/edTool/data/college-11.html
  57. Nitri, D. W. (2001). Access to higher education for nontraditional students and minorities in a technology-focused society. Urban Education, 36, 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Olitsky, S., Loman Flohr, L., Gardner, J., & Billups, M. (2010). Coherence, contradiction, and the development of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(10), 1209–1228.  https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Palmer, R. T., Maramba, D. C., & Dancy, T. E., II. (2011). A qualitative investigation of factors promoting the retention and persistence of students of color in STEM. The Journal of Negro Education, 80(4), 491–504.Google Scholar
  60. Perna, L. W., & Jones, A. P. (2013). The state of college access and completion: improving college success for underrepresented groups. New York: NY: Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Perna, L. W. & Thomas, S. L. (2006). A framework for reducing the college success gap and promoting success for all. National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student Success. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/ gse_pubs/328.
  62. Perna, L. W., & Thomas, S. L. (2008). Theoretical perspectives on student success: understanding the contributions of the disciplines. ASHE Higher Education Report, 34(1), 1–87.  https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.3401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Reay, D. (2004). Education and cultural capital: the implications of changing trends in education policies. Cultural Trends, 13(2), 73–86.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0954896042000267161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rein, K., & Brookes, D. (2015). Student response to a partial inversion of an organic chemistry course for non-chemistry majors. Journal of Chemical Education, 92, 797–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Roksa, J. (2005). Double disadvantage or blessing in disguise? Understanding the relationship between college major and employment sector. Sociology of Education, 78(3), 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Samara, N. A. H. (2016). Effectiveness of analogy instructional strategy on undergraduate student’s acquisition of organic chemistry concepts in Mutah University, Jordan. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(8), 70–74.Google Scholar
  67. Sandy, J., Gonzalez, A., & Hilmer, M. J. (2006). Alternative paths to college completion: Effect of attending a 2-year school on the probability of completing a 4-year degree. Economics of Education Review, 25(5), 463–471.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2005.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Santamaría Graff, C., McCain, T., & Gomez-Vilchis, V. (2013). Latina resilience in higher education: contributing factors including seasonal farmworker experiences. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 12(4), 334–344.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1538192713494212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Singell, L. D. (2004). Come and stay a while: does financial aid effect retention conditioned on enrollment at a large public university? Economics of Education Review, 23, 459–471.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2003.10.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stull, A. T., Gainer, M., Padalkar, S., & Hegarty, M. (2016). Promoting representational competence with molecular models in organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(6), 994–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Swarat, S., Drane, D., Smith, H. D., Light, G., & Pinto, L. (2004). Open the gateway: increasing minority student retention in introductory science courses. Journal of College Science Teaching, 34(1), 18–23.Google Scholar
  72. Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  73. Tobias, S. (1990). They’re not dumb, they’re different: stalking the second tier. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.Google Scholar
  74. Trogden, B. G. (2015). ConfChem conference on flipped classroom: reclaiming face time—how an organic chemistry flipped classroom provided access to increased guided engagement. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(9), 1570–1571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Trujillo, G., & Tanner, K. D. (2014). Considering the role of affect in learning: monitoring students’ self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and science identity. CBE- Life Science Education, 13, 6–15.  https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tsui, L. (2007). Effective strategies to increase diversity in STEM fields: a review of the research literature. The Journal of Negro Education, 76(4), 555–581.Google Scholar
  77. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (2015). Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
  78. Upadhyay, B. (2009). Narratives, choices, alienation, and identity: learning from an elementary science teacher. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4, 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wilson, Z., Mcguire, S., Limbach, P., Doyle, M., Marzilli, L., & Warner, I. (2014). Diversifying science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM): an inquiry into successful approaches in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 91, 1860–1866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Yeager, D., & Dweck, C. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: when students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Zeineddin, A., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2010). Scientific reasoning and epistemological commitments: coordination of theory and evidence among college science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(9), 1064–1093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Zhang, Y. & Wildermuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content by. In: B. M. Wildemuth, Ed., Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science, Libraries Unlimited, 1–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Educational PsychologyGraduate Center, CUNYNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Bard High School Early College NewarkNewarkUSA
  3. 3.Psychology DepartmentBrooklyn College, CUNYBrooklynUSA

Personalised recommendations