Scott N. Goldie, PhD - SVSU Teaching Experience

During the Fall 2000 and Summer 2001 semesters I taught the Basic Chemistry (CHEM 101) Class at Saginaw Valley State University in University Center, MI. Basic Chemistry was an introduction to general chemical principles but particularly emphasized periodic properties, fundamental chemical calculations, formulas, equations, bonding and nomenclature. The course was recommended for students not adequately prepared for General Chemistry and/or did not need the General Chemistry sequence. Basic Chemistry 101 was a four credit class, with four contact hours and no recitation or laboratory component. CHEM 101 was not applicable toward major or minor credit.

The text used was Basic Chemistry, 7th Edition, by G. William Daub and William S. Seese, which was the text adopted by the department. I personally, found Introductory Chemistry, 3rd edition, by Charles H. Corwin (Prentice Hall) to be preferable, based on the explanations, examples and writing style and level. I used the resources for Corwin's Introductory Chemistry to supplement those of Daub and Seese's Basic Chemistry.

The Fall 2000 semester was a typical 15 week semester, consisting of 39 students, 67% had either freshman or sophomore class standing. Students in pre-professional programs, Computer Science, or Criminal Justice consituted a slight majority (58%) of the students. I had a retention rate of 85%, and assigned final grades to 33 students.

The Summer 2001 was an accelerated course, meeting for the first seven weeks of the summer. I retained 93% of the 41 initial enrollees. Upperclassmen accounted for 49% of the class, and the predominant degree program was Elementary Education. The accelerated nature of the Spring class caused me to change the structure of the calendar. Instead of a series of brief quizzes and several examinations, as in the Fall semester, I decided to use slightly longer quizzes and one final examination.

A typical unit of study consisted of a lecture component, where I drew from the resources of different text books to present complex concepts in as clear a manner as possible. I used color overheads from several sources, lecture outlines, problem solving examples, and personal experiences to accomplish this. After showing and explaining the concepts, the unit moved to higher student involvement. A series of in-class assignments, that were voluntary and not graded, were distributed so that the students had an opportunity to work example problems, similar to homework problems and examination questions, under my supervision. Some students took the opportunity, with my encouragement, to form small study groups to work through the problems, and then use me as a resource when they encountered difficulties. I used the opportunity to engage students that I could see were having trouble with the concepts, or students who indicated that they would appreciate some individualized instruction.

The unit concluded with a quiz. The quizzes during the summer accelerated semester was a bit deeper in depth and breadth, since there were no examinations, save for the final comprehensive examination. In both semesters, the intent of the quiz was to familiarize students with the types of questions that they may encounter on examinations, to emphasize the importance of independent practice through solving of homework problems, and to measure concept mastery, in an intermediate sense, before the examinations that counted more toward the final grade.

Examinations were inclusive of several chapters, and questions consisted of problems, short answer, multiple-choice, true and false and essay questions, similar to the quizzes distributed through the semester. Feedback was important, and I returned the graded examinations at the next class meeting, or at the most, one week after the examination date.

Examples of these in-class assignments, examinations and quizzes are available below. Examination keys with brief explanations are also available, as it helps to show the thought processes that I had when I checked the students performance. All documents on this page are in Adobe Acrobat Reader format (PDF.)

Faculty Course Evaluations are available in PDF below. The evaluation measures student opinion in instructor involvement, student interest, student-instructor interaction, course demands, and course organization. The University likes to see figures below 2.0 in categories regarding instructor involvement, student interest, student-instructor interaction and course organization. According to University standards, a value of 3.0 in terms of course demands is indicative of an intellectually challenging course. I met or surpassed expectations in instructor involvement, 1.57 +/- 0.62, student interest, 1.81 +/- 0.77, student-instructor interaction, 1.79 +/- 0.74, and course organization, 1.77 +/- 0.63, along with course demands, 3.61 +/- 0.93. Additional student comments are available upon request.