1 Introduction and background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant effect on chemistry education (and all areas of education) beyond students and student learning; everyone associated with higher education has had to adapt, and are still adapting, with how to provide quality learning experiences in the new normal. This includes a renewed focus by many on diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice issues, further emphasised by current events in the United States, including, but not limited to the Black Lives Matter movement. In terms of chemistry education, a special issue of the Journal of Chemical Education that focused on the chemical education community’s response to COVID-19 addressed many curricular issues and challenges, and more importantly how those issues and challenges were addressed and overcome [1, 2]. One area that was significantly affected by the pandemic was professional development activities. Our professional development activities, conferences, workshops, etc. were cancelled or postponed. New means for connecting with fellow educators were needed. DeKorver et al. [3], for example, offered a content analysis of messages in a Facebook group focused on sharing resources and supporting fellow chemical educators in the early days of the shift to remote learning across the globe. In addition, virtual socials for chemists, chemical educators, and chemical education research graduate students and postdoctoral researchers were formed. Given the multi-institution, collaborative work that was ongoing prior to the start of the pandemic, many faculty members had the technology and pedagogical tools to use to do their work (e.g., video conferencing technology, email, social media); however, the severity of our collective experience still gave way to searching for new ways to connect to do our community work, including professional development. Following the pandemic, the longevity and sustainability of these new communities will be tested. Will virtual communities and activities fade away as we seek a post-pandemic normal?

As members of the Interactive Online Network of Inorganic Chemists (IONiC), we are sharing in this paper a professional development initiative that emerged in July 2020, shortly after the start of the pandemic, and how that initiative has become an ongoing mainstay for our community of practice. We coined that initiative “Supporting Learning with Interactive Teaching: a Hosted, Engaging Roundtable (SLiThEr)”. We are also sharing how the initiative is a natural response to the values of our community situated in the broader chemical and STEM education communities, and how our initiative and similar initiatives could be further supported and studied to understand how they contribute to meaningful professional development and educational change [4,5,6]. We hope that the approach and results described within will encourage other groups in education to create similar professional development activities for their communities.

1.1 Communities of practice

A professional Community of Practice (CoP) is a group of people that come together as a community to learn and grow, connected by shared interests, goals, concerns, and/or passions; Wenger [7] coined the term in 2002 and has since evolved and grown the concept to describe, “a learning partnership among people who find it useful to learn from and with each other about a particular domain. They use each other’s experience of practice as a learning resource, and they join forces in making sense of and addressing challenges they face individually or collectively” [8]. CoP’s, are defined by their domain (shared interest that the group focuses on), their community (interactions of members), and their practice (the accumulated knowledge shared by members). For CoP’s to be successful, they must have events, artifacts, and learning projects. Events bring the members together to develop relationships, artifacts are products developed by CoP members during events (e.g., documents, tools, stories), and learning projects are those that deepen the members’ knowledge and push their practice forward [9].

As described above, this project is a product of the Interactive Online Network of Inorganic Chemists (IONiC), a professional Community of Practice. For IONiC, the domain encompasses both inorganic chemistry and chemistry education more broadly, the community are the various chemistry educators/members of IONiC, and the practice describes the overall knowledge developed, shared, and disseminated amongst members.

IONiC has a successful history of hosting professional development workshops and creating open-access education materials shared broadly on the Virtual Inorganic Pedagogical Electronic Resource (VIPEr) website: www.ionicviper.org [4, 10]. However, the pandemic significantly impacted our community causing us to seek out new ways to continue our growth and learning. In the project described herein, we discuss Supporting Learning with Interactive Teaching: A Hosted, Engaging Roundtable or SLiThEr’s, a continuing learning project developed by the IONiC CoP that has developed artifacts/resources and community connections, addressing critical needs during the initial response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the loss of professional development opportunities. Furthermore, given that successful CoP’s participate in brokering and boundary interactions (i.e., formal and informal sharing of CoP knowledge and artifacts with other CoPs and interested parties), this paper provides an opportunity to disseminate our successful approach and provide an example for other communities to consider ways in which to maintain professional networks and opportunities virtually, while sharing community knowledge for broader impact [9].

1.2 How was IONiC positioned to support the creation of SLiThEr’s?

IONiC defines itself as a Community of Practice: Our domain is inorganic chemistry. We develop community through workshops (from half-day to multi-day), cohort-based course transformation experiences, symposia at conferences, and in-person social events at Spring American Chemical Society (ACS) National Meetings. Our practice is teaching chemistry, both inorganic chemistry and across the postsecondary undergraduate chemistry curriculum; we share and disseminate curricular materials and our teaching experiences through the VIPEr website. Since the inception of IONiC and VIPEr, over 1700 faculty members and another 1300 people across the globe are registered VIPEr website users. A team of sixteen “Leadership Council” members and sixteen additional IONiC members facilitate day-to-day website activities and broader IONiC community activities. IONiC meets Wenger’s community of practice criteria [7, 11].

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, IONiC was in its fourteenth year of existence. Thus, IONiC was uniquely positioned to address the disruption to learning and normal teaching practices. However, as noted above, it was not until the initial dramatic shift to remote learning occurred (March to July, approximately four months into the pandemic) before the first idea of a virtual gathering was implemented. While there is a defined IONiC Leadership Council, a key feature of IONiC is adoption of a distributed leadership model. This means that with the many facets of IONiC, at times depending on activity (such as organizing a workshop) or time of year, individuals serve as de facto leaders. Except for the IONiC Leadership Council members who are principal investigators of our National Science Foundation-funded initiatives, and who are responsible for grant activities and oversight of associated monies, leaders emerge as ideas of new initiatives are fostered [4, 12]. This is best exemplified with the inception of SLiThEr’s described above. The IONiC community supports faculty members seeking to lead new initiatives to improve inorganic chemistry education writ large.

Although current IONiC leaders are always eager to start new initiatives, we are purposeful about expanding and promoting sustainability within our leadership. The first SLiThEr was hosted by author C.N. with author K.A.G. presenting. Based on the success of that SLiThEr, C.N. and K.A.G. sought to explore how SLiThEr’s could be a mainstay program for IONiC. Since then, authors C.N., K.A.G., M.A.C., M.T.H., S.E.S., K.A.S., and M.P. have served on “Team SLiThEr” offering organizational and hosting support, recruiting facilitators and panelists, and preparing and posting SLiThEr recordings on YouTube.

In addition to a preexisting community and leadership model that supports the emergence of new initiatives, IONiC as a Community of Practice is distinct in that it is not focused on a single pedagogy or curriculum. While IONiC members have furthered discussions of the inorganic chemistry curriculum, that work can be summarized as embracing the variations and differences in what and how inorganic chemists teach [6, 16, 17]. IONiC positions itself as a community that meets its members where they are; much in the same way that we, as educators, are called to meet our students where they are when they enter our classroom. Both out of availability, and purposefully, SLiThEr topics have focused on discussion topics deemed important amongst the SLiThEr leadership and the IONiC community on our Discord server; thus, it is an important note that “relevant” and “timely” were used to described SLiThEr’s by respondents to the evaluative survey.

The long-term success of IONiC has been in the community’s agility in responding to member’s needs [4, 12]. At inception, IONiC was focused on community and shared resources; the work to build the VIPEr website and create content was funded through a CCLI Phase 1 NSF grant. Next, IONiC’s work shifted to multi-day workshops focused on translating inorganic chemistry research into curricular materials; this work was funded through an IUSE NSF grant. Currently, IONiC is focused on helping VIPEr Fellows transform their inorganic chemistry lecture courses through a two-year, cohort-based professional development experience; this work is funded through an IUSE NSF grant. Much of the current grant work has also shifted to supporting faculty members teaching in remote learning environments and engaging with VIPEr Fellows through virtual means, more so than before the COVID-19 pandemic. As IONiC considers its next iteration, SLiThErs and virtual professional development opportunities, both synchronous and asynchronous, provide new opportunities to engage faculty members seeking to improve teaching and learning in postsecondary chemistry courses.

2 Methods

Supporting Learning with Interactive Teaching: A Hosted, Engaging Roundtable (SLiThEr) sessions were approximately one-hour discussions held virtually in real-time after which a recording of the session is posted on YouTube for asynchronous viewing (see Table 1 for a listing of all SLiThEr’s as of April 30, 2022). Each SLiThEr had one or more facilitators who make a presentation (varying from ~ 5 min introducing a discussion topic to a formal seminar-style ~ 45 min presentation) followed by a question and answer session and/or group discussion. Facilitators were members of the VIPER community who volunteered to lead the discussions based on personal experiences and expertise. Participants register for the event through posts on social-media platforms (e.g. X [formerly Twitter] and Facebook) and on the IONiC Discord server; Zoom links are emailed directly to registrants and are also made available to unregistered participants via our Discord server. SLiThEr hosts have used their institutional and personal Zoom accounts for these events. Registrants are aware that sessions will be taped and publicly posted; directions are provided as to how to engage with the SLiThEr if attendees do not want to appear in the recording.

Table 1 Summary of SLiThEr’s
Full size table

2.1 Evaluation of SLiThEr’s

To evaluate SLiThEr’s, a survey was sent to registered attendees; data collection was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Colorado State University Pueblo on September 15th, 2021. Evaluative data were collected between October 1st, 2021, and January 6th, 2022; these data were collected after and encompass the first twenty-two SLiThEr’s. The entirety of the registered IONiC VIPEr user list and all registered SLiThEr attendees were sent the link to complete the evaluative survey; the VIPEr user list was intended to capture those persons who only watched the YouTube videos and did not attend a live SLiThEr (i.e., asynchronous participation).

Questions asked on the evaluation survey focused on (1) contextual and demographic information (e.g., How many SLiThErs have you viewed? What is your employment status? What role(s) have you participated in during SLiThErs? Race and ethnicity), (2) key information about the alignment of SLiThErs with members’ professional goals and impact on their practice (e.g., Overall, what are your goals when viewing SLiThErs? Did the SLiThErs you viewed meet your goals? Describe any changes to your approach to teaching due to the topics discussed in any of the SLiThErs), and (3) ways to improve the experience moving forward (e.g., Do you have any suggestions for improving this type of event? What topic(s) would you find most helpful for future events? Overall how would you rate your experience with SLiThEr presentations?).

Data were analyzed using a combination of descriptive statistics and thematic analysis [13]. The research team collectively reviewed the data using group discussion to identify patterns in responses/themes that crosscut responses. Such group-focused analysis helped ensure that the resulting themes rose above any noise and were the result of collective discussions and agreements. Specifically, the research team explicitly focused on (1) participants’ goals for attending and participating in SLiThErs, (2) the ways they changed their teaching practice(s), and (3) the components/features of SLiThErs that should be preserved. These three overarching evaluation ideas guided the design of the survey and our collective analysis/evaluation, described below.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 SLiThEr: supporting learning with interactive teaching: a hosted, engaging roundtable

At the time data were collected, thirty-four SLiThEr’s had been facilitated addressing a range of general topics (see Table 1). While the most frequent topics have been teaching and assessment focused, topics have also included mental health, job skills, and diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice. SLiThEr topics are chosen by the team (i.e., authors C.N., K.A.G., M.A.C., M.T.H., S.E.S., K.L.S., and M.P.) after identifying topics of interest to the IONiC community and considering who could facilitate such a session. We have also been approached by persons interested in presenting to our community. SLiThEr’s are scheduled, in general, every two to three weeks towards the middle of the fall, spring, and summer academic terms, avoiding the first and last weeks of a typical semester term. The goal is to provide timely, of interest SLiThEr’s that support IONiC’s goal of improving inorganic chemistry education.

For readers who have not participate in or viewed a SLiThEr, we provided a detailed summary of three SLiThEr’s as context:

Converting your labs to be virtual (SLiThEr #1-July 7th, 2020). Kyle Grice (DePaul University). In the first SLiThEr, K.A.G. explained his online laboratory course format and style (a course taught in a spring-quarter that occurred entirely after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic), and described how the course was developed with a very quick turnaround. Thus, K.A.G. had a different experience than those who transitioned and finished their semester-terms; his entire term was remote. In order to provide time for K.A.G. to go in and record videos of laboratory experiments, students were given assignments related to finding references, using the SciFinder database of chemical literature, and using a reference management system. Students were also given information about spectroscopic techniques. K.A.G. then showed an example laboratory page on his course management system, with how the videos and lab data were presented to students, and how things were created to be centralised and accessible to students. The presentation portion of the SLiThEr (~ 28 min) was followed by discussion that lasted almost as long. SLiThEr participants asked questions about how students viewed the online course, and also about how to put together the materials for the course. Participants shared resources and software that they were using and challenges they were experiencing at their own institutions when they pivoted to fully remote instruction. We note that the “chat” feature was used extensively to share resources and links to those resources. Author C.N. noted a collection of laboratory data on the IONiC website that he and others had curated as a collection (Virtual Experiments 2022).

Inclusivity in inorganic courses and beyond (SLiThEr #15-February 4, 2021). Abby O’Connor (The College of New Jersey) & Benny Chan (The College of New Jersey). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, discussions around diversity, equity, and inclusion were taking place across college campuses; however, the pandemic brought these discussions into the classroom as faculty struggled to provide equitable and inclusive learning experiences virtually. In this SLiThEr, Benny Chan and Abby O’Connor of The College of New Jersey (TCNJ) discussed how they and their department collaborated with a sociology colleague to better understand the trends in grade distributions and learning among underrepresented groups in General Chemistry and Inorganic Chemistry courses at TCNJ. Their discussion focused on achieving a more inclusive classroom by employing a theory of change to practice, to facilitate a high-structure guided practice (HSGP) learning model [14]. In particular, they discussed how General Chemistry and Inorganic courses were now more inclusive by better understanding the obstacles students faced and continue to face, gaining empathy for their students’ situations, and continually evaluating assessments through student feedback. This gradual growth in understanding helped build inclusivity into their courses as students and faculty were encouraged to share their experiences and develop a shared language of values and an understanding of their responsibilities. This led to increased student engagement. Chan and O’Connor noted that the culture shift required engagement at all levels: student, faculty, administration, and programming.

Chan and O’Connor also discussed in this SLiThEr how purposeful pedagogical practices increased inclusivity [15]. This change in approach to content delivery, student engagement, and a focus on fundamental skill building also helped to increase student performance. During the ensuing discussion, one participant asked how the presenters may respond when others question the “rigor” of their courses when they have such high passing rates. In a thoughtful and deliberate response, O’Connor noted that her assessments have remained the same (i.e. recycled questions) over the years, but now students are being given the opportunity to learn and build the skills necessary to perform better.

Landing that job at a PUI (SLiThEr #19—April 29, 2021). Pius Adelani (St. Mary’s University), Mitch Anstey (Davidson College), Anne Bentley (Lewis & Clark College), Kate Buettner (Gettysburg College), & Brett McCollum (Mount Royal University). The idea for this SLiThEr came from the Spring 2021 American Chemical Society (ACS) Virtual National Meeting wherein as part of a Division of Inorganic Chemistry social event, author C.N. was asked to host an event focused on teaching at a predominantly undergraduate institution (PUI). Having recently led a tenure-track search, he was motivated to talk about the “dos” and “don’ts” in an application package. Not wanting to talk to a screen alone, author C.N. turned to the IONiC Discord channel to solicit volunteers to participate in a panel. Impact of the panel was somewhat limited as invitations only went to people registered for the ACS meeting (potentially cost prohibitive to many); and, given ACS conference policies there would be no lasting record of the event. As one of the themes of SLiThEr’s is inclusivity, author C.N. wanted to do a similar event as a SLiThEr. All but one of the original panel participants eagerly agreed to participate; one of the original participants was unable to participate due to scheduling conflicts.

Panellists introduced themselves and offered their perspective on “What is important in your application packet?” and “How do you frame a statement on diversity, equity and inclusion?” Questions and insights from participants contributed greatly to the overall quality of the SLiThEr. In particular, questions focused on aspects of research projects and startup funds led to tremendous interactions between the participants and the panellists. At the conclusion of this SLiThEr, the panellists remained on the Zoom call to offer participants a chance to ask questions that were not part of the recorded event.

3.2 How SLiThEr’s came into existence

IONiC, the organizing community for SLiThEr’s, is a chemical education Community of Practice founded to improve the teaching and learning of inorganic chemistry. The history of IONiC is detailed elsewhere [10]; however, it is important for context to note that IONiC emerged from a need: inorganic chemists, particularly at predominantly undergraduate institutions, are isolated, often the only inorganic chemist at their college or university. Therefore, a community was needed that extended beyond a single institution for inorganic chemists to discuss and wrestle with the challenges specific to teaching within their discipline. While community-created content is made freely available through the Virtual Inorganic Pedagogical Electronic Resource (VIPEr; www.ionicviper.org) website, it is often not how inorganic chemists come to know of IONiC. It is the community that draws faculty members in and keeps those chemists returning and contributing to further the vision of IONiC [4, 11].

In-person workshops and social activities at national and regional meetings of the American Chemical Society are a cornerstone of IONiC’s mission to build and sustain community. IONiC leadership, at the same time, have been planning and collaborating via virtual meetings since the community’s inception (circa 2006); Zoom, Skype, Google Hangouts, etc., were commonplace to IONiC leadership and community members who had participated in sessions preparing them for in-person workshops. After IONiC began their National Science Foundation funded VIPEr Fellows program, a Discord server was started in Summer 2019 to promote engagement between Fellows and project leadership in between workshops and in real-time as the Fellows transformed their inorganic chemistry courses. At the same time, leadership of IONiC moved their work from individual Skype chats to a structured section of our Discord server with channels organized for each of the broader IONiC teams, projects, workshops, and shared interests (e.g. IONiC Cooks and Bakes, DEIJ, etc.). In January 2020, the Discord server was advertised to the whole IONiC community and members quickly flooded discussion channels sharing ideas and experiences, asking questions and responding to each other. We share this history to highlight that these activities all occurred before the COVID-19 pandemic forced our teaching, learning, collaboration, professional development, etc. to move to virtual environments.

Like many, when the move to remote instruction occurred in March 2020 in the United States, the IONiC community and leadership had a goal to finish the semester as best we could. Where space used to be held for IONiC, including our social events at Spring American Chemical Society Meetings (of which the Spring 2020 meeting was cancelled), we focused on our students and our teaching. When the dust settled, author K.A.G. offered to have an “ask me anything” session about virtual inorganic chemistry laboratories; K.A.G. teaches at a quarter-system school and taught the entirety of the Spring 2020 term online. The goal of the “ask me anything” was to provide a virtual forum (something that had become the ‘new normal’) for faculty to reflect upon what had happened and consider how we could move forward. A cloud of uncertainty as to what post-summer 2020 instruction would look like was also weighing on the minds of faculty members as to how to best prepare for the next academic year.

When 45 people showed up for the first SLiThEr on July 7, 2020, IONiC leaders quickly put together a team of community members to further capitalize on the desire for faculty members to gather, share about their teaching experiences, listen, and reflect on their experience as educators. The continued value of this first SLiTHEr is also evident in the fact that the YouTube video of it has now been viewed over 492 times. At this point, though, SLiThEr’s were nameless; we insert this here to emphasize a fun dimension of our community, that the choice of names needed to convey the emerging initiative as well as be spelled using symbols from the periodic table, and snake themed (we even have a “mascot” snake stuffed animal named Flo)! Officially, “Supporting Learning with Interactive Teaching: A Host, Engaging Roundtable” is the name; however, colloquially, these sessions are simply SLiThEr’s. As listed in Table 1, there have been 482 total attendees in real-time, and SLiThEr recordings have been viewed over 3000 times through the IONiC VIPEr YouTube channel.

3.3 Evaluation of SLiThEr’s

To evaluate SLiThEr’s, a survey was sent to the entirety of the registered IONiC VIPEr user list and all registered SLiThEr attendees; the VIPEr user list was intended to capture those persons who only watched the YouTube videos and did not attend a live SLiThEr. A total of 41 people responded to the survey, having participated in, or viewed one or more SLiThEr’s, and provided consent for their data to be used. Of respondents, 22% (n = 9) have only viewed or participated in one SLiThEr, while 37% (n = 15) have viewed or participated in five or more SLiThEr’s. This suggests that there is a core set of participants routinely engaging with SLiThEr’s; additionally, 13 respondents reported having presented as well as participated in SLiThEr’s, suggesting that participants are seeking to engage with SLiThEr’s beyond passive consumption or participant-level engagement. It is important to note that 39 of the 41 respondents reported prior engagement with IONiC activities including attending in-person IONiC workshops and symposia, presenting at IONiC symposia, registering as a user on VIPEr, publishing content on VIPEr, or subscribing to the Discord server or IONiC VIPEr YouTube channel.

Of the respondents, 10 are at the rank of assistant professor, 9 at associate professor, and 16 at full professor; one respondent is in a visiting/adjunct role, four are graduate students or postdoctoral researchers, and one respondent did not report a title/rank/role. Thirty respondents are at predominantly undergraduate institutions, four respondents are at master’s granting institutions, six are at doctoral granting institutions, and one is at a two-year associate degree granting institution. Regarding courses taught (note respondents could select more than one): 34 teach inorganic chemistry, 32 teach general chemistry, 11 teach organic chemistry, 8 teach chemistry courses for non-majors, 4 teach analytical chemistry, 4 teach physical chemistry, 2 teach biochemistry, and 2 are currently not engaged in teaching.

Respondents were also asked where they heard about SLiThEr’s: 26 heard from the VIPEr website, 22 from Discord, 9 from the IONiC VIPEr Facebook page, 15 from the IONiC VIPEr X (formerly Twitter) account, 13 from a colleague, and 11 from the IONiC email newsletter.

As part of the evaluative survey, respondents were asked to articulate their goals for engaging with SLiThEr’s through an open-ended item; four broad goal areas/themes were reported. The first goal category/theme focused on participants themselves as instructors. This included becoming a more knowledgeable and aware educator about the possibilities of different pedagogies and assessment tools. Specifically, a direct goal for becoming a more “engaging instructor” was discussed. Respondents also described consuming SLiThEr content to “gather” useful resources and ideas. SLiThEr’s were described by respondents as self-improvement, professional development opportunities.

The second goal category focused on participating in, and engaging with, peers and the IONiC community. Respondents stated that they were looking to learn from “those in similar situations”, and those “I trust” when reflecting on their teaching and considering how to improve their courses. For some respondents, this was getting to know others, learning more about the IONiC community, and finding ways to engage further and connect with others outside the context of a SLiThEr.

The third goal category focused on students. Improving student learning is a central goal of IONiC, and this goal was shared by respondents. This focus on improving student learning was implicit in their goals to become better educators and engage with the IONiC community and fellow chemists. Understanding “the student experience” was explicitly mentioned by a respondent; this is directly related to SLiThEr #14 which focused on making sense of the student experience in the context of remote learning. We should note that the aforementioned SLiThEr had two undergraduate students as presenters; thus, attendees heard directly from students about their experiences.

Lastly, the final goal category focused on academic job searching. These goals are directly related to SLiThEr #19 in which a panel of recent applicants discussed their experiences job searching at predominantly undergraduate institutions (see Table 1 and the description of this SLiThEr provided above). Respondents noted that creating and improving their application materials was their primary goal in attending a SLiThEr. Reported by someone in a faculty position, improving and reflecting on their “teaching philosophy”, a key component of the job application packet, was a goal for attending a SLiThEr.

Respondents were also asked to report any changes made based on SLiThErs. There were three broad types of changes reported: In the first theme, respondents reported trying little things out in their courses; this suggests that there were not wholesale reinventions of their courses, but that SLiThEr engagement provided context for making small tweaks to their courses. There was an affective dimension to this as well, as some respondents reported that witnessing the changes made by others (including both the struggles and joys in the context of those changes) provided the motivation and a spark of courage to make changes in their own courses.

In a second theme, respondents discussed reflecting on the learning experience, particularly asking students to self-reflect on their learning experience. Respondents used the words “consider”, “ponder”, “think”, “understand”, and “learn” to describe change; thus, awareness was a level of change espoused by SLiThEr attendees. Specific areas of potential changes mentioned included flipped classrooms (beyond when remote learning is required), specifications grading, and use of open education resources (e.g., LibreText).

In the third theme, respondents reported that SLiThEr’s support changes they were already making in their courses; thus, the engagement with SLiThEr’s was a means to validate their changes and to engage with others making similar changes. One respondent also noted that a SLiThEr was used for context in convincing their department to make changes to multiple courses; this suggests that SLiThEr’s can have impact beyond individual attendees. We use a respondent’s words to sum up this type of change: SLiThEr’s are “tools to help me carry out the changes I want to make.”

To understand what SLiThEr components should be preserved, respondents were also asked to convey their “favorite” SLiThEr from SLiThEr’s #1–22 and their favorite part(s) of the SLiThEr format and presentations. The four most selected SLiThEr’s as “favorites” were “Symmetry @ Otterbein”, “Inclusivity in Inorganic Courses and Beyond”, “Flipping Your Classroom”, and “Flipping Undergraduate Inorganic Chemistry: Effect on Diversity and Inclusivity”. When asked to select from a list of broad categories, respondents selected these the most as helpful foci for future SLiThEr’s included “Course management (Flipped Classroom Practices, Inclusive Course Design, etc.)”, “Assessment Practices–Oral Assessment, Specifications Based Grading, and Alternative Grading Schemes”, “Teaching Resources – Lab Experiences”, and “Student Motivation and Engagement”.

There were three broad themes related to the format and presentations that should be preserved moving forward: First, respondents appreciated the variety of topics that were “relevant” and “timely.” Topics were presented by “regular people solving problems,” as described by a respondent. Topics were described as focused, yet broad enough for many to engage in post-presentation discussion.

Second, the discussion component was highlighted by several respondents. Each SLiThEr has some amount of time devoted to question and answers, including opportunities for attendees to share their experience and expertise. Respondents noted that these ensuing conversations were “informal,” “causal,” “conversational,” “easy to participate in,” and “frank.” Through these discussions, attendees heard “different perspectives”, by interacting and networking with people beyond their respective institution. Respondents described the discussion as having a supportive and community tone that welcomed attendees to contribute.

Third, respondents appreciated the availability of recorded versions of SLiThEr’s on YouTube. This provided a means to engage (or re-engage) with SLiThEr’s beyond the synchronous gathering. A respondent noted that it was nice to “sit and listen” to the discussions.

Lastly, respondents were also asked to share suggestions for improving SLiThEr’s and similar types of events. There were five broad themes: Theme 1: multiple respondents requested that the times and days of the week be varied for the synchronous, live SLiThErs. This includes a request to consider other time zones; additionally, a respondent requested that holding SLiThEr’s in the evenings or on the weekends be considered.

Theme 2: respondents wanted to know at the beginning of a term when SLiThEr’s would be held, including topics and presenters; respondents wanted to be able to plan their term, week, or day accordingly to make time to attend SLiThEr’s. Respondents suggested that such prior planning may result in more people per session, which was considered a positive for the discussion portion of each SLiThEr. A respondent also requested a form on the VIPEr website to submit topic and presenter suggestions for SLiThEr’s.

Theme 3: there was a request for post-SLiThEr resources including the availability of slides from the presentation portion of each SLiThEr.

Theme 4: the panel discussion format was noted by several respondents. This suggests that respondents are eager to hear from more peers and have considerably more opportunity to interact with presenters and each other. There was a suggestion to have moderated panels where preset questions were asked before questions were asked by attendees. Respondents were eager to discuss big topics including what should and should not be taught in an inorganic chemistry course, a topic suggested by a respondent. Lastly for this theme, there was a suggestion that an “in-person” version of SLiThEr’s be held at conferences; as a note, this was later done in conjunction with an IONiC workshop on August 4, 2022 (see Table 1), a SLiThEr held after the evaluative survey had been administered.

Theme 5: several respondents reiterated that recording SLiThEr’s and making them publicly available is good; however, they wanted to have a non-recorded component where even more frank and open conversations could be had.

4 What’s next for SLiThEr’s?

The evaluative data presented in the preceding section has reaffirmed the central goals for our SLiThEr activities and provided motivation for changes to and expansion of our SLiThEr offerings.

First, we are resolved to keep SLiThEr’s focused on time-sensitive, relevant topics. We are committed to being flexible in choosing topics and recruiting facilitators that are valuable at the moment and responsive to community needs. In a way, serendipity plays a large role in this process wherein a question will be asked on our Discord server that will prompt someone to share their expertise in a way that evolves into asking that person to lead a SLiThEr on their area of expertise. We hope to find ways to balance our “in the moment” approach with a more formalized schedule of SLiThEr offerings for persons wishing to plan their academic term in advance and set aside time on their calendars to attend SLiThEr’s. While the timing of SLiThEr’s is dependent on the facilitator (and to some extent host), we intend to be more purposeful about expanding the days and times of SLiThEr offerings.

Second, we are committed to recruiting SLiThEr facilitators beyond members of the IONiC community. We note that the SLiThEr on mental health was led by a mental health expert, the SLiThEr led by students on their experience in remote learning environments, and the SLiThEr applying green chemistry principles to inorganic chemistry laboratories, in particular, all allowed for growth and expanding the knowledge and skills base of our community. A key task of SLiThEr leadership is to identify and be responsive to individuals interested in presenting and engaging with the IONiC community.

Lastly, and what may not be apparent from a person exclusively engaging with SLiThEr’s via YouTube, we are committed to providing recorded and non-recorded components of our SLiThEr offerings. As noted in the description of an example SLiThEr in this paper, time was set aside after the recording was completed for participants to ask questions about the job search process; this provided participants space to explore more targeted and challenging aspects of the job search process, without any concern that their questions would be shared beyond the conversation. In addition, we note that the mental health-focused SLiThEr also had a non-recorded component that was valuable for participants to share more personal experiences. We will continue to be intentional about advertising when such non-recorded question and answer periods will be offered.

4.1 What is the overall impact of SLiThEr’s?

As scientists, we can be eager to determine the impact of a particular change initiative or professional development activity; we want to infer causality between an initiative (e.g., attendance at a SLiThEr) and change (e.g., adoption of flipped classroom pedagogies). However, attributing an action in our teaching to a specific professional development opportunity is difficult. As our evaluative survey results suggest, attendees were already engaged in change, reflection and improvement; SLiThEr’s, for some, were confirmatory for ongoing change activities. For others, SLiThEr’s planted seeds of possibilities that are not yet viable or realized. Change happens in a context [17, 18]; respondents championed hearing from others about their experience and suggesting that we consider ways to increase dialogue and discussion amongst SLiThEr attendees and the larger IONiC community.

Gess-Newsome’s [18] teacher-centered systemic reform (TCSR) model has been used several times in the chemistry education literature to describe instructional practices and evaluate change initiatives in given contexts [19, 20]. The TCSR model is comprised of three groups of mutually associated factors that influence enacted teaching practices (i.e., what an educator does in the classroom): Personal factors address demographics, types and years of experience, pedagogical preparation, and continued learning efforts (e.g., attendance at teaching focused conferences or workshops). Contextual factors include classroom settings, departmental and institutional norms, disciplinary norms, and accreditation requirements. Teacher thinking comprises beliefs about teaching and learning espoused by the instructor. Thus, enacted teaching practices (i.e., often the intended outcome of professional development activities) is confounded and mediated by a host of influences [20, 21] that muddy the direct causal relationship we are searching for in evaluating the impact of SLiThEr’s.

To that end, we offer a different perspective from which to evaluate and conceptualize SLiThEr’s and the broader work of IONiC: Brookfield’s reflective practice model [22]. Brookfield suggests four lenses from which to consider our teaching: our autobiographical experience, our colleagues’ experience, our student’s experience, and the theoretical literature.

IONiC as a community is rooted in the experiences of our members; we start with the faculty member and the context in which they are educators. The autobiographical experience has thus been central to SLiThEr’s both from the standpoint of facilitators sharing their experience and participants engaging with the facilitators and each other. The existence of SLiThEr’s is thus a visible outcome–an intentional space for IONiC members to frame and communicate their experiences. To use Brookfield’s terminology, participants found SLiThEr’s as an experience to make sense of and further their autobiography; SLiThEr’s provide a needed context for self-improvement.

Because SLiThEr’s are designed to be interactive, participants are exposed to, and can reflect upon and react to their colleagues’ experiences (i.e., other participants’ experiences). SLiThEr’s are a space to learn from the achievements and struggles of our community and those outside our community (e.g., mental health professionals, the green chemistry community). IONiC is a community of chemistry colleagues, albeit at different institutions. SLiThEr participants noted the importance of interacting with each other through the sessions, stating that they valued that participants were “in similar situations” and were viewed as “trusted” colleagues. This provided a dynamic wherein participants were willinging to engage in ways that may be different from how they engage with colleagues in their own departments.

Next is the experience of our students. We have already highlighted the SLiThEr facilitated by students of IONiC community members. But, the voice of students and “the student experience” has been an intentional focus of a broader array of SLiThEr offerings. For example, SLiThEr’s on assessment and flipped classrooms include understanding the student perspective and using that perspective to understand how such pedagogical strategies are more student-centered and inclusive. As noted in the evaluative results above, at least one SLiThEr participant implemented a more reflection-oriented culture in their classroom, asking students to reflect on their learning experiences.

Last is the theoretical and empirical education research literature. While this may be the least intentional reflective lens of SLiThEr’s en masse, the role such education research literature has in the IONiC community is expanding with more intentional scholarship on our work [4, 23,24,25,26]; a reader will note that a SLiThEr was recently offered on how to begin engaging with chemical education research (see Table 1), a SLiThEr that occurred after administration of our evaluative survey. Ultimately, IONiC, through SLiThEr’s and other activities, has an opportunity to be more purposeful about engaging with (and contributing to) the education research literature.

In summary, claiming that SLiThEr’s have impacted ‘X’ number of courses and ‘Y’ number of students is difficult to determine. Even more so, trying to situate the impact of SLiThEr’s on the choices a given participant has made to enact particular teaching practices is further limited. However, when centering the impact of SLiThEr’s on promoting reflective practice [22], we have a firm basis to consider how SLiThEr’s are structured to promote consideration of educators, their colleagues and students, and the education research literature. Thus, we assert with certainty that SLiThEr’s have positively impacted our community and, by extension, the students we serve.

5 Conclusion and implications

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, members of the Interactive Online Network of Inorganic Chemists started a virtual professional development program, SLiThEr’s, that has become a mainstay in our community’s initiatives. To date, fifty-eight “Supporting Learning with Interactive Teaching: A Hosted, Engaging Roundtables” have been held on a range of relevant and timely topics, both in light of the need for remote learning pedagogies during the pandemic and now addressing the broader needs of the IONiC community. Where there have been reports from many communities that have grown in the midst of the pandemic, many with specific goals pertaining to virtual labwork [27] and interrogating existing social structures [28], our approach was focused on engagement of our existing community and maintaining the support of our network in the isolation of the Pandemic. Evaluation of SLiThEr’s gave opportunity to consider the impact of the professional development activities, chart the next phase of SLiThEr’s, and reflect on how SLiThEr’s emerged within, fit within, and further the mission of IONiC to improve inorganic chemistry education. Additionally, evaluation of SLiThEr’s gave the opportunity to connect our evaluative intent and results to the education research literature on instructional change.

Themes and patterns from our evaluation survey provide context for continuing our work, but also insights and implications for other communities interested in developing their own virtual learning projects/professional development opportunities. First and foremost, flexibility is key. Our community members reported hearing about SLiThErs from a variety of sources and significantly valued asynchronous participation via publicly available recordings. Such recordings also serve as CoP artifacts that provide boundary interactions for other CoPs and interested parties. Secondly, the variety of content and formats resonated with members; the themes of variety of topics/foci (teaching, students, etc.), the variety of formats (seminar style, discussion-based, panel), and the variety of engagement (synchronous and asynchronous) were all emphasized in the data. Finally, meeting attendees “where they are at” by emphasizing contextualized and personalized reflection seems paramount. These ideas were embedded in the themes of participants wanting to try small things in their courses (i.e., making small changes), learning from meaningful others they can “trust” and are in similar situations/contexts, and wanting opportunities to engage directly with reflection and discussion. We hope these lessons learned and our example virtual professional development opportunities provide insights for other disciplines, contexts, CoPs, etc. to consider ways to maintain or increase connectivity, learn, and grow in their teaching practice, as we move forward in this new normal.