Article

Cite This: J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111 pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

OrganicERs: Building a Community of Practice for Organic

Chemistry Instructors through Workshops and Web-Based
Resources
Alexey Leontyev,*,† Justin B. Houseknecht,‡ Vincent Maloney,§ Jennifer L. Muzyka,∥ Robert Rossi,⊥
Catherine O. Welder,# and Leyte Winfield∇
†
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota 58108, United States
‡
Department of Chemistry, Wittenberg University, Springfield, Ohio 45504, United States
§
Chemistry Department, Purdue University Fort Wayne, Fort Wayne, Indiana 46805, United States
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

∥
Chemistry Department, Centre College, Danville, Kentucky 40422, United States
⊥
STEM Division, Rowan College of South Jersey, Sewell, New Jersey 08080, United States
Downloaded via UNIV OF AVEIRO 00300 on July 13, 2020 at 12:27:15 (UTC).

#
Department of Chemistry, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, United States
∇
Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry, Spelman College, Atlanta, Georgia 30314, United States

ABSTRACT: This account reports building a community of practice for

organic chemistry instructors. With support from Chemistry Collabo-
rations, Workshops, and Communities of Scholars (cCWCS), a group of
organic chemistry faculty facilitated multiple workshops to introduce
active learning techniques to their colleagues across the country. A Web
site, organicers.org, has been developed to serve as a community hub to
aid faculty creating more student-centered environments in their
classrooms. It serves as a repository for useful materials such as active
learning questions, exams, syllabi, and lab experiments among others.
The community of practice for organic chemistry instructors interested in
active learning is expanding through participation and collegial support.
KEYWORDS: Organic Chemistry, Collaborative/Cooperative Learning, Internet/Web-Based Learning, General Public

C ommunities of practice are groups of people who share a

concern or passion about a practice and who advance in
their expertise by interacting on a regular basis.1 Such
communities of practice evolve through professional discourse
and collaboration.2 Communities of instructors (such as
Virtual Inorganic Pedagogical Electronic Resource: Interactive
Online Network of Inorganic Chemists,3 Physical Chemistry
On Line,4 Analytical Sciences Digital Library5) teaching similar
courses or using certain instructional methods (e.g., POGIL
Project,6 Peer-Led Team Learning,7 Flipped Learning Net-
work8) have recently been developed to create support
networks of practitioners and to facilitate sharing of instruc-
tional experiences and resources.
Among chemists, the community of physical chemistry
educators was the first to embrace the possibilities of online
resources to facilitate teaching with the launch of Physical
Chemistry Online (PCOL) in 1996.9 Analytical chemists were
next with the introduction of the Analytical Sciences Digital
Library (ASDL) in 2002.10 During the 2000s, the way people
interacted online changed rapidly; the term Web 2.0 was
popularized by Tim O’Reilly in 2004. This change in web
technology influenced the way that chemical educators
interacted in faculty learning communities. A group of
inorganic chemists met first in 2006,3 later launching the
© 2019 American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc.
ionicviper.org Web site (“Virtual Inorganic Pedagogical
Electronic Resource”) in 2008.11 Organic Education Resources
(OrganicERs) debuted as a community with the launch of the
OrganicERs Web site in 2013, along with the first Active
Learning in Organic Chemistry multiday workshop. The
timeline of subdisciplinary communities of practice is
presented in Figure 1.
Our vision for this community of organic chemistry
instructors grew from the trajectory set by other online
activities embraced by chemical educators. We were partic-
ularly inspired by the visible teaching model embraced by
VIPEr in their community of practice.12 We chose in-person
workshops on teaching organic chemistry as a means to
develop a community and facilitate the exchange of ideas. Over
the years the workshop topics were modified, and we improved
our skills at organizing and leading workshops to demonstrate
the active learning approaches that we encourage our
colleagues to embrace.
From 2013 through 2017, OrganicERs received support
from the NSF-funded Chemistry Collaborations, Workshops,
Received: February 4, 2019
Revised: September 12, 2019
Published: October 30, 2019
106 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111
Journal of Chemical Education
Figure 1. Chronology of chemistry-specific communities of practice.
and Communities of Scholars (cCWCS) to lead a multiday
workshop on Active Learning in Organic Chemistry (ALOC)
each summer. The Web site, organicers.org, went live prior to
the 2013 workshop where it began serving as the online home
for instructional resources and discussions. For the next several
years, a group of organic chemistry faculty members gathered
in hotels near hub airports to discuss pedagogical strategies
related to active learning. As a result of the Web site and
workshops, a community of practice of organic chemistry
instructors has emerged and continues to grow, impacting
more members and the way organic chemistry is taught.
The OrganicERs community began with a straightforward
goal that remains central to its purpose today: dissemination
and implementation of evidence-based instructional practices
(EBIPs) among organic chemistry instructors. We have
focused exclusively on organic chemistry because we recognize
that most chemists function in their own subdisciplinary silo,
and Roger’s diffusion of innovation theory13 notes that one of
the key inhibitors of diffusion are differences, particularly in
beliefs and education, between adopters and potential
adopters. We considered our subdiscipline-specific emphasis
the most rapid way to disseminate the use of EBIPs in organic
chemistry much as other communities of practice have done
for the physical, inorganic, and analytical subdisciplines.
Roger’s diffusion of innovation theory has also shaped how
we pursue this goal. The ALOC workshops are designed to
bring participants through the first three steps of the change
process (knowledge, persuasion, and decision) and prepare
them for the fourth and fifth steps (implementation and
confirmation). Throughout the workshops we highlighted the
relative advantage of active learning methods over traditional
lecture (for students and faculty), compatibility with our
subdisciplinary perspective, and the ease of trialing the
methods while reducing the perceived complexity in
accordance with Roger’s key characteristics of innovation.
We sponsor symposia at national ACS meetings and Biennial
Conferences on Chemical Education (BCCE) to provide
additional avenues for organic chemistry instructors to learn
about EBIPs, see examples of their implementation in organic
chemistry, and develop relationships with other adopters/
prospective adopters. Curricular materials on the Web site are
also an excellent resource as instructors implement EBIPs.
107
■
Article
ACTIVE LEARNING IN ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
(ALOC) WORKSHOPS
cCWCS supported five workshops on active learning in organic
chemistry from 2013 to 2017 (Table 1). The purpose of these
Table 1. Workshop Years, Locations, and Numbers of
Participants and Facilitators
Year Location Number of Participants (Facilitators)
2013 Charlotte, NC 24 (8)
2014 Denver, CO 25 (5, 1 of them new)
2015 Washington, DC 24 (5)
2016 Cincinnati, OH 22 (5)
2017 Atlanta, GA 24 (5, 2 of them new)
workshops was to develop a diverse and growing community of
organic chemistry instructors dedicated to expanding the use of
active learning methods in their own classrooms and
supporting others’ attempts to do likewise. The first session
of each workshop focused on informing participants about
active learning methods and persuading them that (1) strong
evidence exists supporting the efficacy of active learning
methods relative to traditional lecture and (2) these methods
are particularly consistent with the content of organic
chemistry. The purpose of subsequent sessions was to provide
participants examples of and experience with particular
pedagogies, techniques, and technologies (Table 2) such that
they could decide what to implement in their own classrooms.
Additional sessions aimed to prepare participants to plan for
their implementation and prepare to assess (conf irm) its
effectiveness.
Each instructional approach (Table 2, first column) was
introduced by one of the workshop facilitators describing how
they implemented the strategy. The purpose of these sessions
was to show participants the compatibility of these methods
with their teaching priorities. Participants were able to see, and
experience as learners, examples of the flipped classroom
(including Just-in-Time Teaching) with classroom polling and
collaborative problem solving. Instructors used the methods
they were describing to the largest extent possible; e.g.,
sessions about classroom polling had participants using
classroom response systems. These sessions included examples
of the techniques and technologies that were described more
fully in subsequent workshop sessions.
The purpose of sessions on techniques and technologies
used in each of the pedagogical approaches (Table 2, third
column) was to reduce the perceived complexity of implemen-
tation. The specific technologies discussed changed over the
years as development occurred, and we became more explicit
about classroom assessment techniques23 and collaborative
learning techniques18 in the 2017 workshop. After participants
had seen examples of how these techniques and technologies
were used, we briefly described, or helped them discover, best
practices for implementation. Participants then used the
techniques and technologies to create materials that they
could use in their classrooms. They often used these
techniques and technologies in conjunction with one another,
e.g., using the collaborative learning technique think−pair−
share to develop clicker questions. By the end of the
workshops, participants had experienced as learners and/or
developed instructional products for each session shown in
Table 2. We were more intentional about this connection
between what participants learned and what they did in the
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111
Journal of Chemical Education Article

Table 2. Instructional Approaches Presented at ALOC Workshops

Instructional
Approach Brief Description Examples of Sessions
Backward Instructors determine what it is they want their students to know and do, how they will Generating learning objectives, writing assessment
design14 assess learning, and finally how they will assist students in their learning. items, constructing classroom activities
Classroom Students answer questions posed by an instructor using classroom response systems. Clickers, Nearpod
polling15,16
Collaborative Students work together to solve problems, explain concepts to each other, or create a Think−Pair−Share, Jigsaw, Explain Everythinga
learning17,18 product.
Flipped Teaching method in which course content is delivered before class meeting times and class Wacom tablets, Doceri, SnagIt, Explain
classroom19,20 time is used for interactive learning. Everything,b Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT)21,22
a
For documented problem solutions by students. bFor creating instructional content by educators.

later workshops as we became more aware of the challenges

faced by potential adopters, such as lack of administrative,
financial, and learning design support. Finally, most of the
workshops contained a session aimed at helping prepare
participants to assess the effectiveness of their implementation.
This assessment is important primarily as a means of giving
them tools to continuously improve their teaching, and also to
provide conf irmation that their innovations were successful in
order to provide evidence to prospective adopters and funding
agencies.
Overall, 119 instructors have participated in the workshops
to date. A majority of them (61%) taught at 4-year institutions,
while 26% were community college instructors. A small
proportion (5%) were from Master’s granting institutions,
and 9% of participants were from Ph.D. granting institutions.
The workshops were open to organic chemistry instructors
who applied through the cCWCS Web site. Only 25, about half
of the number of applicants, were invited to participate in each
workshop.
The structure and the content of the workshops evolved
over the years. Similar to the analytical chemistry commun-
ity,24 we observed a need to add an extra day to our
workshops. The 2013 and 2014 workshops were 3 days long;
beginning in 2015 more content was added, and the workshops
expanded to 4 days to better suit the interests of the audience
and to provide more hands-on opportunities to interact with
different technologies.
At some workshops and BCCE symposia, workshop
participants and symposium presenters were given brightly
colored t-shirts (Figure 2) with the OrganicERs logo and
encouraged to wear them at BCCE to bring more awareness to
our growing community. We have anecdotal evidence that the
t-shirts helped us identify other community members at the
conference, especially at the socials. Sometimes these visual
aids led to small reunions of previous workshop participants. Figure 2. OrganicERs t-shirts given to workshop participants and
symposium presenters.
Other times we observed that the t-shirts helped shy

individuals identify other organic chemists with whom they
might be encouraged to strike up a conversation.
In addition to the multiday cCWCS workshops, we also held
half-day (3 h) workshops on the most fundamental topics at
the 2016 and 2018 BCCEs. The 2016 workshop, held in
duplicate, provided an overview of research-based STEM
educational practices following Nancy Kober’s Reaching
Students: What Research Says About Ef fective Instruction in
Undergraduate Science and Engineering.25 In 2018, we offered
two workshops to BCCE participants. One workshop covered
principles of backward design14 and Creating Signif icant
Learning Experiences.26 The other covered Collaborative
Learning Techniques18 and Classroom Assessment Techniques.23
108
■
ORGANICERS.ORG
Workshop participants were asked to upload their instructional
materials for both lecture and lab to the Web site, use the
forums for reflection on activities, and share their goals about
making changes to their courses. Despite early attempts to
initiate discussion in the forums on the Web site, most
discussion takes place in the Facebook group. Currently, the
site contains a collection of active learning activities (110
items), exams and quizzes (100 items), syllabi and learning
objectives (33 items), laboratory materials (30 items), course
assignments (40 items), and links to books, instructional
videos, and software that may be useful to instructors. Board
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111
Journal of Chemical Education
members review the uploaded documents before they are
shared on the Web site.
To become a member of the online community, one must
provide an email address that is affiliated with a higher
education institution and be identified by that institution as an
organic chemistry instructor. A member of the OrganicERs
Leadership Board reviews applications, and once the legitimacy
of the instructor is confirmed, membership is granted, which
provides access to the collection. All members of the
community, even those who did not attend a workshop, are
also encouraged to contribute their developed materials to this
collection.
In six years, the community has grown to more than 500
members, which is significantly larger than the 119 faculty
members who have participated in the five cCWCS-sponsored
ALOC workshops. A small portion (7%) of members come
from international institutions, but the vast majority represent
different US regions: Northeast (17%), Midwest (24%), South
(34%), and West (17%). A majority (53%) of members teach
at US-based 4-year institutions, 21% are from community
colleges, 4% are from Master’s granting institutions, and 16%
of members are from Ph.D. granting institutions.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the most popular page on the Web
site is the home page, welcoming new users to the site. The
second most popular web page (30.8k hits in January−May
2019) is All Resources, which includes both published materials
(available to all visitors) and curricular materials (available
only to registered community members). The most popular
curricular materials on the site in the past three months have
been Active Learning Questions (4,648 hits) and Exams &
Quizzes (4,629 hits). Faculty members appreciate knowing
how and what their colleagues at other institutions teach, and
the materials shared on our Web site facilitate that mutual
understanding. Faculty, especially those early in their career,
find instructor-provided resources that are not available to
students helpful in designing courses and assessments. We saw
that membership requests increased in frequency after an
article about OrganicERs in the 2014 CCCE Newsletter27 as
well as after our BCCE (2016 and 2018) and ACS (Spring
2019) symposia.
The OrganicERs Web site was initially hosted on the
Georgia Institute of Technology servers. It has since migrated
to Centre College, where it is hosted at no charge to the
OrganicERs community. The Web site is maintained on a
volunteer basis by Jennifer Muzyka. Thus, we have been able to
maintain this resource without grant funding.
■
CONTINUING IMPACT OF ACTIVE COMMUNITY
To keep the community vibrant and growing after the
workshops, we engage in a wide variety of activities, such as
organizing symposia at national conferences, highlighting
success stories in newsletters, and facilitating interactions on
social media.
Leadership Board
The Leadership Board, with assistance from cCWCS, has been
responsible for defining the goals of the community of practice,
designing and maintaining the Web site and Facebook group,
facilitating workshops, and organizing symposia at national
meetings. The Web site was developed by David Collard with
input from Jennifer Muzyka. Justin Houseknecht and Vincent
Maloney joined Muzyka on the Leadership Board in 2013.
Since then, the Board has grown to include nine organic
109
Article
chemistry faculty (including the authors of this paper) from
diverse backgrounds with a unifying desire to see active,
evidence-based instructional practices implemented more
broadly in organic chemistry. When individuals are asked to
serve on the Board, particular attention has been paid to
diversity of pedagogy, class size, and institution type. Board
members work in small groups to share responsibility for the
various functions of the community. We interact via email,
teleconference, and at national meetings such as BCCE. In the
future, the Leadership Board may expand to organic chemistry
instructors whose background and skills complement current
members and who have intentions to contribute to the
important work of this community.
Symposia at BCCE
At the 2016 and 2018 BCCEs, members of the Leadership
Board held multisession symposia titled Active Learning in
Organic Chemistry. In 2016, 34 papers were presented in 5 half-
day sessions. Former attendees of ALOC workshops presented
19 papers (56%) in this symposium. In 2018, 28 papers were
presented in four half-day sessions. Ten (36%) were presented
by former attendees of ALOC workshops. This indicates the
growth of the OrganicERs community and involvement of a
broader audience in dissemination of evidence-based ped-
agogies. For people who have participated in the workshops,
presenting at a symposium feels like a reunion. For people who
have not had a chance to attend a workshop, it is a great
opportunity to present their work to like-minded colleagues,
share their experiences implementing active learning, and learn
from others. We also held a Birds of a Feather lunch at BCCE
2018 which was attended by about 40 people. For the first
time, we held a full-day Active Learning in Organic Chemistry
symposium at the ACS meeting in Orlando in Spring 2019
with 21 presentations. We hope to offer symposia at future
BCCE and ACS meetings as well to engage a wider audience.
Newsletter
Since 2014, the OrganicERs community has distributed an
average of two electronic newsletters each year. Although the
content has varied, the newsletter has included announcements
concerning workshops and symposia, lists of upcoming
conferences, suggested readings of recently published articles
regarding organic chemistry education, and news about
OrganicERs. The heart of each newsletter consists of one or
two short articles describing what members have accomplished
with active learning in their classes. In some cases, these
highlight their recent publications in this Journal (recent
examples are Deborah Bromfield Lee on GoogleDocs as an
electronic laboratory notebook;28 Joshua Ring on Specification
Grading;29 Mary Lenczewski on a semiflipped classroom for
rural students;30 and James Shattuck on the effectiveness of a
partially flipped course31). In July 2019, the latest electronic
newsletter was sent to more than 450 organic chemistry
instructors. On average, about half of the recipients opened the
email containing the newsletter, and about half of those clicked
on links within the newsletter to read more about a topic. Both
in the newsletter and on the Web site, we include member
spotlights with updates from participants and members of the
broader community.
Facebook Group
A Facebook group was created in 2015 in response to
suggestions from members of the OrganicERs community to
promote conversations about teaching within the community.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111
Journal of Chemical Education
Currently, this group of more than 200 members is quite active
with discussions about teaching organic chemistry classes and
laboratories. Responding members provide valuable insights
from their practice. Some members of the Facebook group are
not members of the OrganicERs Web site community but
positively contribute to discussions. One can find the group by
searching “OrganicERs: Active Learning in Organic Chem-
istry” on Facebook.
ACS Symposium Series Book
To familiarize a broader audience with active learning
approaches in organic chemistry, we led an effort to publish
the ACS Symposium Series book titled Active Learning in
Organic Chemistry: Implementation and Analysis.32 The book
describes active learning strategies such as Peer-Led Team
Learning, Just-in-Time Teaching, classroom polling, Process
Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, flipped learning, and game-
based learning implemented in different institutional settings.
The chapters contain detailed descriptions of these approaches
and examples of materials used for implementation. Most of
the chapters include analysis of the effectiveness of reported
pedagogies.
Impact of ALOC Workshops
We surveyed former workshop participants (N = 119), and
while we only received responses from 23 participants
(response rate 19%), 91% indicated that they had presented
at a national or local conference as a result of their attendance
at an ALOC workshop, and 26% had published a peer-
reviewed paper related to the activities stemming from their
experience at workshops. Several respondents mentioned
receiving or being nominated for a teaching award. An article
by Houseknecht and colleagues33 describing the long-term
impact of the 2015 and 2016 workshops on instructional
beliefs and practice has been submitted for publication
elsewhere.
■ SUMMARY
Building a community of practice takes time, effort, and both
financial and human resources, but having a community of
practice is an essential step to disseminate successful
approaches to teaching. Organic chemistry classes are known
for high DFW (D, F, or withdraw) rates and benefit from
implementation of active learning techniques.20,34−37 For all
workshops, we have received overwhelmingly positive feedback
and successfully created meaningful connections between
participants that last beyond the conferences and workshop
sessions. The members of the Leadership Board also positively
benefit from leading the workshops as they continue to learn
and modify their own teaching approaches based on what they
hear from each other and workshop participants. We have
anecdotal evidence that having multiple workshop participants
from the same institution can accelerate the adoption of
effective instructional practices. It is also worth noting that
many junior faculty reported the implementation of active
learning strategies in their classroom shortly after attending the
workshop. Many instructors who attended the workshop were
the only organic instructor at their institution, and this
community gives them a way to collaborate with organic
chemistry instructors at other institutions. We have all greatly
benefited from being a part of this community both personally
and professionally and hope to continue to expand this
community of practice through professional discourse,
development of instructional resources, and collaborations.
110
Article
We plan to resume holding multiday workshops after we
acquire grant funding.
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
*E-mail: alexey.leontyev@ndsu.edu.
ORCID
Alexey Leontyev: 0000-0003-0219-709X
Vincent Maloney: 0000-0002-8289-0259
Jennifer L. Muzyka: 0000-0003-3948-3540
Leyte Winfield: 0000-0003-3719-5895
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank NSF-sponsored Chemistry Collabo-
rations, Workshops and Community of Scholars program
(cCWCS) for funding most of the activities mentioned in this
article and David Collard for his support in developing this
community.
■
REFERENCES
(1) Wenger, E.; McDermott, R.; Snyder, W. M. Cultivating
Communities of Practice; Harvard Business Review Press: Boston,
MA, 2002.
(2) Macklin, A. S. Communities of Practice. In Theoretical
Frameworks for Research in Chemistry/Science Education; Bodner, G.
M., Orgill, M., Eds.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2007.
(3) Reisner, B. A.; Eppley, H. J.; Geselbracht, M. J.; Jamieson, E. R.;
Johnson, A. R.; Smith, S. R.; Stewart, J. L.; Watson, L. A.; Williams, B.
S. Building an Online Teaching Community: An Evolving Tale of
Communication, Collaboration, and Chemistry. In Enhancing
Learning with Online Resources, Social Networking, and Digital Libraries;
ACS Symposium Series: Washington, DC, 2010; Vol. 1060, pp 309−
330. DOI: 10.1021/bk-2010-1060.ch016.
(4) Towns, M.; Sauder, D.; Whisnant, D.; Zielinski, T. J. Physical
Chemistry On Line: Interinstitutional Collaboration at a Distance. J.
Chem. Educ. 2001, 78 (3), 414−415.
(5) Kelly, R. S.; Larive, C. K. The Analytical Sciences Digital Library:
Your Online Resource for Teaching Instrumentation. J. Chem. Educ.
2011, 88 (4), 375−377.
(6) Farrell, J. J.; Moog, R. S.; Spencer, J. N. A Guided-Inquiry
General Chemistry Course. J. Chem. Educ. 1999, 76 (4), 570.
(7) Gosser, D. K.; Roth, V. The Workshop Chemistry Project: Peer-
Led Team-Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 1998, 75 (2), 185.
(8) Flipped Learning Network. https://flippedlearning.org/ (ac-
cessed Feb 4, 2019).
(9) Long, G.; Howald, R.; Miderski, C. A.; Zielinski, T. J. Physical
Chemistry Online: A Small-Scale Intercollegiate Interactive Learning
Experience. Chem. Educ. 1996, 1 (3), 1−17.
(10) Larive, C. K.; Kuwana, T. The Analytical Sciences Digital
Library: A Useful Resource for Active Learning. In Active Learning;
Mabrouk, P. A., Ed.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC,
2007; pp 188−198. DOI: 10.1021/bk-2007-0970.ch014.
(11) Benatan, E.; Dene, J.; Eppley, H. J.; Geselbracht, M. J.;
Jamieson, E. R.; Johnson, A. R.; Reisner, B. A.; Stewart, J. L.; Watson,
L. A.; Williams, B. S. JCE VIPEr: An Inorganic Teaching and Learning
Community. J. Chem. Educ. 2009, 86 (6), 766−767.
(12) Reisner, B. A.; Williams, B. S. Visible Teaching: Moving from a
Solitary Practice to a Community Endeavor. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87
(3), 252−253.
(13) Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New
York, NY, 2003.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104
J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111
Journal of Chemical Education Article

(14) Wiggins, G.; McTighe, J. Understanding By Design, 2nd ed.; (34) Tien, L. T.; Roth, V.; Kampmeier, J. A. Implementation of a
Assn. for Supervision & Curriculum Development: Alexandria, VA, Peer-Led Team Learning Instructional Approach in an Undergraduate
2005. Organic Chemistry Course. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2002, 39 (7), 606−632.
(15) MacArthur, J. R.; Jones, L. L. A Review of Literature Reports of (35) Wamser, C. C. Peer-Led Team Learning in Organic Chemistry:
Clickers Applicable to College Chemistry Classrooms. Chem. Educ. Effects on Student Performance, Success, and Persistence in the
Res. Pract. 2008, 9 (3), 187−195. Course. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83 (10), 1562−1566.
(16) Shea, K. M. Beyond Clickers, Next Generation Classroom (36) Crimmins, M. T.; Midkiff, B. High Structure Active Learning
Response Systems for Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2016, 93 Pedagogy for the Teaching of Organic Chemistry: Assessing the
(5), 971−974. Impact on Academic Outcomes. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (4), 429−
(17) Oliveira, B. R. M.; Vailati, A. L.; Luiz, E.; Böll, F. G.; Mendes, S. 438.
R. Jigsaw: Using Cooperative Learning in Teaching Organic (37) Fautch, J. M. The Flipped Classroom for Teaching Organic
Functions. J. Chem. Educ. 2019, 96, 1515. Chemistry in Small Classes: Is It Effective? Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
(18) Barkley, E.; Major, C.; Cross, P. Collaborative Learning 2015, 16 (1), 179−186.
Techniques: A Handbook for College Faculty, 2nd ed.; Jossey-Bass:
San Francisco, CA, 2014.
(19) Srinivasan, S.; Gibbons, R. E.; Murphy, K. L.; Raker, J. Flipped
Classroom Use in Chemistry Education: Results from a Survey of
Postsecondary Faculty Members. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2018, 19
(4), 1307−1318.
(20) Flynn, A. B. Structure and Evaluation of Flipped Chemistry
Courses: Organic & Spectroscopy, Large and Small, First to Third
Year, English and French. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. 2015, 16 (2), 198−
211.
(21) Collard, D. M.; Girardot, S. P.; Deutsch, H. M. From the
Textbook to the Lecture: Improving Prelecture Preparation in
Organic Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2002, 79 (4), 520−523.
(22) Houseknecht, J. B. Just-in-Time Teaching Organic Chemistry
with IPad Tablets. In The Flipped Classroom; Muzyka, J. L., Luker, C.
S., Eds.; ACS Symposium Series: Washington, DC, 2016; Vol. 2, pp
81−92. DOI: 10.1021/bk-2016-1228.ch005.
(23) Angelo, T.; Cross, P. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A
Handbook for College Teachers, 2nd ed.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco,
CA, 1993.
(24) Brown, I. L.; Wenzel, T.; Cole, R. Supporting Faculty in
Adopting Active Learning Pedagogies. In Best Practices in Chemistry
Teacher Education; Boesdorfer, S. B., Ed.; American Chemical Society:
Washington, DC, 2019; pp 135−148. DOI: 10.1021/bk-2019-
1335.ch011.
(25) Kober, N. Reaching Students: What Research Says About Effective
Instruction in Undergraduate Science and Engineering; The National
Academies Press: Washington, DC, 2014.
(26) Fink, D. Creating Significant Learning Experiences. An Integrated
Approach to Designing College Courses; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA,
2013.
(27) Houseknecht, J. B.; Muzyka, J. OrganicERs: A Growing Online
Community https://confchem.ccce.divched.org/
2014FallCCCENLP1.
(28) Bromfield Lee, D. Implementation and Student Perceptions on
Google Docs as an Electronic Laboratory Notebook in Organic
Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ. 2018, 95 (7), 1102−1111.
(29) Ring, J. ConfChem Conference on Select 2016 BCCE
Presentations: Specifications Grading in the Flipped Organic
Classroom. J. Chem. Educ. 2017, 94 (12), 2005−2006.
(30) Lenczewski, M. S. Scaffolded Semi-Flipped General Chemistry
Designed To Support Rural Students’ Learning. J. Chem. Educ. 2016,
93 (12), 1999−2003.
(31) Shattuck, J. C. A Parallel Controlled Study of the Effectiveness
of a Partially Flipped Organic Chemistry Course on Student
Performance, Perceptions, and Course Completion. J. Chem. Educ.
2016, 93 (12), 1984−1992.
(32) Active Learning in Organic Chemistry: Implementation and
Analysis; Houseknecht, J. B., Leontyev, A., Maloney, V., Welder, C.,
Eds.; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2019.
(33) Houseknecht, J. B.; Bachinski, G. J.; Miller, M. H.; White, S. A.;
Andrews, D. M. Effectiveness of the Active Learning in Organic
Chemistry Faculty Development Workshops. Chem. Educ. Res. Pr.
2019. Accepted.

111 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.9b00104

J. Chem. Educ. 2020, 97, 106−111