Teaching Analytical Chemistry in the Time of COVID-19.

The best-planned syllabus was not ready for the Spring 2020 semester, and now the Fall 2020 semester approaches with a palpable sense of unease. Should we prepare for in-person, online, or hybrid teaching? – the answer is “yes”. Fortunately, we have the benefit of lessons from last semester, and an understanding that no matter how we prepare, agility is a necessity. Chemical educators are working hard to develop resources and prepare contingency plans.[1] With this in mind, the ACS Division of Analytical Chemistry reached out to faculty in the analytical community to discuss their views, plans for the Fall and to learn about resources, like the Analytical Sciences Digital Library (ASDL),[2] that can help.

While in-person classes are preferable, remote teaching can be a manageable alternative. Synchronous delivery of lectures provides opportunities to engage students using current best-practices in teaching. Jill Robinson (Indiana University) and Tom Wenzel (Bates College) found clever routes to use active learning in their virtual classrooms. Modern video conferencing and course management systems allow for random or instructor-assigned groups in breakout rooms. Robinson used the polling tool in Zoom to assess her students’ understanding of problems. When large numbers of students found a problem challenging, breakout rooms provided for lively group discussions. As assessing student understanding is key, in smaller classes, individual students report out on group discussions and compare their answers to other groups. In larger classes, a group reporter enters answers into Chat, allowing the instructor to identify student misconceptions and provide specific feedback during whole-class discussion. A rich active-learning community on the ASDL provides many exercises and questions suitable for small discussion groups.[3]

For David Harvey (DePauw University), the rapid shift in March 2020 from working with students in person versus at distance was jarring. Although not easy, the transition for lecture classes was relatively straightforward. This was not the case for lab work. Harvey noted, “Making measurements takes time, but if we cannot at this moment be in the lab, then we can capture that time and use it in different ways. Using an instrument simulator, for example, we can have students approach a new topic virtually—exploring how an instrument’s settings affect the data we collect—and then in class working to understand the relationship between those settings and the data.” Chris Harrison of San Diego State University shared similar sentiments, stating “Come Fall, the big challenge will be finding a way to meaningfully train and reinforce the lab skills that we expect for students in analytical chemistry. With less than half the regular lab time, I am aiming to teach my students the most important skills for an analytical lab, supplementing typical labs that are missed with take-home kits and simulated lab data.” Augustus Way Fountain of the University of South Carolina concurred, expressing, “I think we can safely say that lecture and recitation can be replaced with an online experience. However, the laboratory is where I have my greatest concern.” This Spring, Fountain found that the best approach was to record himself performing the laboratories, providing students with the data for them to analyze and report on. Fountain added, “Chemistry is as much hands-on laboratory skill as it is book knowledge. We can’t replicate the full laboratory experience remotely. Addressing this gap is where we really need to place our emphasis for labs in the Fall.”

One promising way to address the need for authentic hands-on lab experiments is to use research technologies, such as microfluidics, to safely deliver the lab experiences at home. In the MICRO project,[4] funded by HHMI, a collaboration between Skidmore College, Notre Dame, Oregon State, and University of Iowa, Kimberley Frederick and colleagues are developing laboratories that make use of paper microfluidic devices to deliver experiments that teach titrations, colorimetry, electrochemistry, and separations. Because the technology is inexpensive, safe, and rapid, students can have more autonomy to learn experiment development skills than they would in a traditional lab format and thus the laboratories are designed to be more inquiry-based. As Frederick stated, “Because of their flexibility, we are hopeful that microfluidic-based labs will do an even better job than some of the traditional glassware-based experiments for teaching our students how real analytical method development is done and will be useful beyond the pandemic crisis we are currently in”.

Thomas Spudich (Maryville University) noted, “We all have different constraints placed on us by our institutions, and there won’t be a one-size-fits-all solution. But, generally, we need to be able to adapt lab experiments for implementation at home.” Tom described an effort at ASDL, which includes several contributors to this editorial, to share laboratories and simulations that can be completed remotely. Supporting documents and handouts will allow for easy adoption and adaptation. The ASDL remote laboratories community[5] will eventually provide materials for general chemistry and high school chemistry and moderated discussion forums for educators as well.

Equity and engagement are critical aspects to consider when developing online laboratories. For Anna Cavinato (Eastern Oregon University) teaching General Chemistry lab was the most challenging. Cavinato was able to adapt a module she had previously published in the ASDL,[6] which provides experiments and data sets for nitrates, phosphates, and metals in water. As she reflects on her experience, Cavinato noted that a major challenge for her students was Internet access and encourages considering infrastructure limitations in rural areas so all students have an equal and inclusive remote educational experience. Engaging students under these circumstances can be difficult. Joel Destino (Creighton University) said, “While teaching last Spring, I wanted to see what kind of chemical analysis students could do at home. One student completed an optional assignment by developing an absorption-based external calibration method using a smartphone camera, kitchen utensils, food dye solutions, and image analysis software. Their results were encouraging, demonstrating the basics of method development can be taught with at-home experimentation.”

For the Fall 2020 semester, Joel and colleague Erin Gross are planning for a mix of at-home and traditional experiments for their Instrumental Laboratory course. Gross said, “We developed experiments that could be adapted for a portable, at-home kit experiment or project, centered on safe, real-life samples. One example is an amperometric glucose determination.[7] Electrochemical glucometers with a package of test strips can be purchased for under $20.” Gross noted this material will be available at the new ASDL remote lab portal.

In the coming semester, we have a chance to address some of the shortcomings encountered last Spring, but challenges remain. Striking a balance between the right content and constraints posed by remote learning is critical. Flexibility and awareness of how students learn best with resources they can access will be key to an engaging learning experience. Viable remote surrogates for the laboratory experience remain the most pressing need. The proverb–necessity is the mother of invention–feels especially apt for analytical laboratories. Fortunately, we do not need to invent alone. ASDL is a resource to keep in mind, and contributing to the remote laboratories project at ASDL, or engaging in discussion forums, is welcome. As we collectively prepare for Fall 2020, feel free to contact the sources in this editorial or the Division if we can help or answer questions.