Blending Online Homework and Large Class Tutorials to Provide Learning Support for Introductory Organic Chemistry

References

• Albright, S. C., Winston, W. L., & Zappe, C. J. (2009). Data Analysis & decision making with Microsoft® Excel (revised 3rd ed.). South-Western Cengage Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Anthonysamy, L., Koo, A. C., & Hew, S. H. (2020). Self-regulated learning strategies and non-academic outcomes in higher education blended learning environments: A one decade review. Education and Information Technologies, 25, 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bottino, R. M., Chiappini, G., Forcheri, P., Lemut, E., & Molfino, M-T. (1999). Activity theory: A framework for design and reporting on research projects based on ICT. Education and Information Technologies, 4(3), 279–293. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009692126355
   Google Scholar
• Chandra, V., & Fisher, D. L. (2009). Students’ perceptions of a blended web-based learning environment. Learning Environment Research, 12, 31–44.
   Google Scholar
• Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsp004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit.
   Google Scholar
• Eren-Sisman, E. N., Cigdemoglu, C., & Geban, O. (2018). The effect of peer-led team learning on undergraduate engineering students’ conceptual understanding, state anxiety, and social anxiety. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(3), 694–710. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00201G
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, D. K., & Yuan, F. (2020). How big are effect sizes in international education studies? CGD Working Paper 545. Center for Global Development, Washington, DC. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/how-big-are-effect-sizes-internationaleducation-studies
   Google Scholar
• Flynn, A. B., & Featherstone, R. B. (2017). Language of mechanisms: Exam analysis reveals students’ strengths, strategies, and errors when using the electron-pushing formalism (curved arrows) in new reactions. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00126B
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham, The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (1st ed., pp. 3–21). Pfeiffer.
   Google Scholar
• Hedges, L. V., & Hedberg, E. C. (2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(1), 60–87. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373707299706
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hite, R., & Thompson, C. J. (2019). Activity theory as theoretical framework for analyzing and designing global K–12 collaborations in engineering: a case study of a Thai–U.S. elementary engineering project. Journal of International Engineering Education, 1(1), 1–39.
   Google Scholar
• Jerez, O., Orsini, C., Ortiz, C., & Hasbun, B. (2021). Which conditions facilitate the effectiveness of large-group learning activities? A systematic review of research in higher education. Learning: Research and Practice. 7(2), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2020.1871062
   Google Scholar
• Jonasson, D. H. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student-centred learning environments. In D. H. Jonasson & S. M. Land (Eds.) Theoretical foundations of leaning environments (pp. 89–121). Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49(4), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulatunga, U., & Lewis, J. E. (2013). Exploration of peer leader verbal behaviors as they intervene with small groups in college general chemistry. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 576–588. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00081H
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.) Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 7–44). MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. B., Hanham, J., Kannangara, K., & Qi, J. (2021). Exploring user experience of digital pen and tablet technology for learning chemistry: Applying an activity theory lens. Heliyon, 7, e06020, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06020
   Google Scholar
• Liu, Y., Raker, J. R., & Lewis, J. E. (2018). Evaluating student motivation in organic chemistry courses: moving from a lecture-based to a flipped approach with peer-led team learning. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00153C
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lovatt, J., Finlayson, O. E., & James, P. (2007). Evaluation of student engagement with two learning supports in the teaching of 1st year undergraduate chemistry. Chemical Education Research and Practice 8(4), 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1039/B6RP90038K
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed400798t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Report by the US Department of Education, pp. 28–30.
   Google Scholar
• Mohamed-Salah, B., & Alain, D. (2016). To what degree does handling concrete molecular models promote the ability to translate and coordinate between 2D and 3D molecular structure representations? A case study with Algerian students. Chemical Education Research and Practice 17(4), 862–877. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00180C
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morsch, L. A., & Lewis, M. (2015). Engaging organic chemistry students using ChemDraw for iPad. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(8), 1402–1405. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, L. L., & Loudon, G. M. (2013). Case study using online homework in undergraduate Organic Chemistry: results and student attitudes. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300270t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reyneke, F., Fletcher, L., & Harding, A. (2018). The effect of technology-based interventions on the performance of first year university statistics students, African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2018.1477557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards-Babb, M., Curtis, R., Georgieva, Z., & Penn, J. H. (2015). Student perceptions of online homework use for formative assessment of learning in Organic chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(11), 1813–1819. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.5b00294
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards-Babb, M., Curtis, R., Ratcliff, B., Roy, A., & Mikalik, T. (2018). General Chemistry student attitudes and success with use of online homework: Traditional-responsive versus adaptive-responsive. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(5), 691–699. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00829
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert, J., Lewis, S. E., Oueini, R., & Mapugay, A. (2016). Coordinated implementation and evaluation of flipped classes andpeer-led team learning in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(12), 1993–1998. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.6b00395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinapuelas, M. L. S., & Stacy, A. M. (2015). The relationship between student success in introductory university chemistry and approaches to learning outside of the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 790–815. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smithrud, D. B., & Pinhas, A. R. (2015). Pencil−paper learning should be combined with online homework software. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(12), 1965–1970. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500594g
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, G. P., & McRobbie, C. J. (2013).  Eliciting metacognitive experiences and reflection in a Year 11 chemistry classroom: An Activity Theory perspective. Journal of Science Education Technology, 22, 300–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9394-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson,B. (2007). Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and confidence intervals for effect sizes. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 423–432. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20234
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Aalsvoort, J. (2004). Activity theory as a tool to address the problem of chemistry’s lack of relevance in secondary school chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1635–1651. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000205378
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar