Article Sidebar

Submitted
September 29, 2023
Accepted
December 4, 2023
Published
April 25, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 32 Download : 0

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study investigates the effect of Supplemental Instruction (SI) on students’ motivation and learning outcomes in an introductory Organic Chemistry course for non-majors. SI, conducted by experienced facilitators, offers a range of academic support for students that may include reviewing challenging concepts, working through practice problems, and answering student questions. To assess the impact of SI in this Organic Chemistry course, we measured several parameters: student engagement during SI sessions, exam scores and final course grades, as well as self-reported motivation levels at both the beginning and end of the semester. We performed a linear regression analysis and observed a positive correlation between SI participation and improved performance on certain exams for SI participants. Further analysis showed that student motivation alone could be driving these improvements. These results suggest that while SI may be beneficial for some students, greater emphasis should be placed on ensuring that students are motivated to learn difficult concepts.

Keywords

Supplemental Instruction Organic Chemistry learning motivation

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Guyot, M., Hsu, S. ., Nizomov, J., Antonenko, P. ., & Habenicht, S. (2024). Examining How Supplemental Instruction Impacts Students’ Motivation in Organic Chemistry. IJCER (International Journal of Chemistry Education Research), 8(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.20885/ijcer.vol8.iss1.art2
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. D. R. Arendale, "History of supplemental instruction (SI): Mainstreaming of developmental education," in Histories of Developmental Education, D. Lundell and J. Higbee, Eds. Minneapolis, MN, USA: Center for Res. on Dev. Edu. and Urban Lit., General College, Univ. of Minnesota, 2002, pp. 15–28.
  2. P. J. Allen et al., "Evaluating the effectiveness of supplemental instruction using a multivariable analytic approach," Learning and Instruction, vol. 75, p. 101481, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2021.101481.
  3. C. Anfuso et al., "Investigating the impact of peer supplemental instruction on underprepared and historically underserved students in introductory STEM courses," Intl. J. STEM Edu., vol. 9, no. 1, p. 55, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1186/s40594-022-00372-w.
  4. K. Skoglund et al., "Impact of supplemental instruction participation on college freshman retention," The Learning Assistance Review, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 115–135, 2018.
  5. N. A. Bowman et al., "Does supplemental instruction improve grades and retention? A propensity score analysis approach," J. Experimental Edu., vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 205–229, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1080/00220973.2021.1891010.
  6. D. T. Goomas, "The impact of supplemental instruction: Results from an urban community college," Community College J. Res. and Pract., vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 1180–1184, May 2014, doi: 10.1080/10668926.2013.854182.
  7. I. I. Salame, "The impact of supplemental instruction on the learning achievements and attitudes of organic chemistry students," Interdisciplinary J. Environ. and Sci. Edu., vol. 17, no. 2, p. e2232, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.21601/ijese/9330.
  8. K. A. Rath et al., "Impact of supplemental instruction in entry-level chemistry courses at a midsized public university," J. Chem. Edu., vol. 89, no. 4, pp. 449–455, Dec. 2011, doi: 10.1021/ed100337a.
  9. O. Barth, "The effect of supplemental instruction on educational accomplishments and behaviors of organic chemistry scholars," Water and Environ. Sustain., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 30–36, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.52293/WES.1.1.3036.
  10. I. I. Salame and S. Nazir, "The impact of supplemental instruction on the performance and attitudes of general chemistry students," Intl. J. Chem. Edu. Res., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 53–59, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.20885/ijcer.vol3.iss2.art1.
  11. D. Johnson, "Supplemental instruction in first-year chemistry courses: efficacy and gender balance," Ed.D. dissertation, Dept. Edu. Lead. and Pol. Anal., E. Tenn. State Univ., Johnson City, TN, USA, 2020.
  12. A. R. Paloyo et al., "The effect of supplemental instruction on academic performance: An encouragement design experiment," Econ. Edu. Review, vol. 55, pp. 57–69, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.08.005.
  13. V. Paideya and R. Sookrajh, "Student engagement in chemistry supplemental instruction: Representations of learning spaces," S. African J. Higher Edu., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 1344–1357, 2014.
  14. J. L. Terrion and J. L. Daoust, "Assessing the impact of supplemental instruction on the retention of undergraduate students after controlling for motivation," J. College Stud. Retention: Res., Theo. & Pract., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 311–327, Nov. 2011, doi: 10.2190/CS.13.3.c.
  15. J. Channing and N. C. Okada, "Supplemental instruction and embedded tutoring program assessment: Problems and opportunities," Community College J. Res. and Pract., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 241–247, Feb 2019, doi: 10.1080/10668926.2019.1575777.
  16. L. T. Tien et al., "Implementation of a peer-led team learning instructional approach in an undergraduate organic chemistry course," J. Res. in Sci. Teach., vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 606–632, Aug. 2002, doi: 10.1002/tea.10038.
  17. S. M. Glynn et al., "Science motivation questionnaire II: Validation with science majors and nonscience majors," J. Res. in Sci. Teach., vol. 48, no. 10, pp. 1159–1176, 2011, doi: 10.1002/tea.20442.
  18. R. M. Ryan and E. L. Deci, Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. New York, NY, USA: Guilford Publications, 2017.
  19. J. Brophy, Motivating students to learn, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Routledge, 2004.