[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-332190-105":59,"doc-detail-332190-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","assessment-of-general-chemistry-course-unit-level-liaison-for-dept-of-physical-science","Assessment of General Chemistry Course - Unit Level Liaison for Dept. of Physical Science","","Assessment of the CHEM 201 General Chemistry course documents the evolution of unit-level evaluation methods led by Sam ar Ayesh and later Allan Wilson. Early reliance on an ACS standardized exam revealed students scored below national averages and struggled most with specific topics, prompting a stoichiometry-focused assessment. Limited performance suggested stronger conceptual coverage was needed. In 2019–2022, the liaison developed learning activities, expanded course-level SLOs from 16 to 56, classified outcomes using Understanding by Design (critical, important, desirable), and implemented multiple-choice assessments with online and in-person delivery, collecting and analyzing SLO-level results.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/assessment-of-general-chemistry-course-unit-level-liaison-for-dept-of-physical-science/332190/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/assessment-of-general-chemistry-course-unit-level-liaison-for-dept-of-physical-science/332190.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Pentious","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-23","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":52},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What problem did the ACS standardized exam results reveal for CHEM 201 students?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The results showed students’ scores were slightly lower than national averages and identified topics where students struggled most, based on question performance comparisons.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why did the team change assessment strategy toward stoichiometry and conceptual understanding?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"A new stoichiometry-focused assessment produced limited encouragement because many students used incorrect algorithmic procedures, indicating a need for more conceptual stoichiometry questions.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How were course learning outcomes (SLOs) developed and classified for the assessment plan?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The team examined CHEM 201 course SLOs, expanded them from 16 to 56 by mapping textbook topics to faculty-taught concepts, then classified SLOs as critical, important, or desirable using Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design definitions.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},332190,1790376163,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":52,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":36,"preview_page_count":4},1374404730887,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","Assessment of General Chemistry Course  \nSamar Ayesh, Ph.D.  \nUnit Level Liaison for Dept. of Physical Science  \nPrevious Assessment for Chemistry in the Department  \nI remember when I first joined the Physical Science department as an adjunct in fall of 2009, I was asked by the Chair at that time to use one of the ACS (American Chemical Society) Standardized Exam as a Final Assessment for my CHEM 201 course. I was told to leave the Scantrons and all the scratch paper in a folder in his office. I wasn’t sure what, if anything, was done by the data collected.  \nTwo years later, I joined as a full time and I kept using the same assessment. I was giving the exam, using the grades as a final exam and putting them aside. Unfortunately, I never examined the results in detail nor did the department. Sometimes I would quickly glance at the results to check which question was missed the most. I always wanted to dig deeply but never seemed to have the time.  \nFast forward to 2017, when Allan Wilson became the first Assessment Liaison for the Physical Science Department. He was able to analyze the data of this ACS assessment from several semesters. The results showed that our students’ scores are slightly lower than the national averages (our students answered, on average, 19 questions correctly out of 40, compared to 24 nationally) . The results also showed us in detail the topics that students struggled in the most.  \nThis led Allan to design a new assessment that focused on stoichiometry. It consisted of 3 stoichiometry questions with a range of difficulties. Results of this new assessment were not very encouraging since a big portion of students used the wrong algorithmic procedure to solve a“typical” question. It implied that students might benefit from more conceptual stoichiometry questions – questions that they cannot solve mathematically and must use a conceptual understanding instead.  \nMotivation for a New Plan, 2019-2020  \nIn fall 2019, I took over the Assessment Liaison role for the Chemistry courses within the Physical Science department. Based on all the great work that Allan did, it was clear to me and others teaching CHEM 201 that student learning seems to be missing some important component. The results of the ACS assessment clearly indicated the areas that students are challenged. So I designed several “Learning Activities” which were meant to engage students in exploring the big ideas and concepts in order to develop the desired understandings, knowledge, and skills that they should come away knowing by taking CHEM 201. These activities were meant to be used in the classroom, so I am hoping to use them once we go back to face-to-face instruction. In the meantime, they will be share them with all faculty teaching CHEM 201 in order to use them in their classroom and get initial feedback.  \nEstablishing Goals, 2020-2021  \nIt is clear to us faculty teaching Chemistry 201, that student learning seems to be missing some important component. I decided to examine the course SLOs more closely. The first steps towards an effective assessment plan is to establish goals and develop specific measurable learning outcomes. It is very important to first determine what we faculty expect students to learn. The master syllabus for the course shows only 16 student learning outcomes. So this semester I used the survey that Allan designed earlier, in which he went through each chapter of our textbook, asking if this topic or that concept was being taught, and created a specific SLO for every topic that faculty taught. This came to 56 SLOs covering 13 chapters. I e-mailed the list to the faculty who typically teaches the course (a total of 6 faculty, both FT and adjuncts) . I asked them to read the entire list and tell me which of those 56 they do not teach.  \nUsing Wiggins and McTighe's \"Understanding by Design\", I asked the faculty to classify the SLOs as critical, important, or desirable, based on the following definitions.  \n• Critical ","cbCaitPY4uBkO2nh","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaitPY4uBkO2nh","pdf",353256,16,"English","# Assessment of General Chemistry Course\n## Previous Assessment Using the ACS Standardized Exam\n## Motivation for a New Plan (2019-2020)\n## Establishing Goals (2020-2021)\n## Designing and Conducting the Assessment (Spring 2021-Summer 2022)\n## Data Analysis","[{\"question\":\"What problem did the ACS standardized exam results reveal for CHEM 201 students?\",\"answer\":\"The results showed students’ scores were slightly lower than national averages and identified topics where students struggled most, based on question performance comparisons.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the team change assessment strategy toward stoichiometry and conceptual understanding?\",\"answer\":\"A new stoichiometry-focused assessment produced limited encouragement because many students used incorrect algorithmic procedures, indicating a need for more conceptual stoichiometry questions.\"},{\"question\":\"How were course learning outcomes (SLOs) developed and classified for the assessment plan?\",\"answer\":\"The team examined CHEM 201 course SLOs, expanded them from 16 to 56 by mapping textbook topics to faculty-taught concepts, then classified SLOs as critical, important, or desirable using Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design definitions.\"}]","Assessment of General Chemistry Course - Unit Level Liaison for Dept. of Physical Science | PDF",1789997265]