The Challenges and Value of Undergraduate Oral Exams in the Physical Chemistry Classroom: A Useful Tool in the Assessment Toolbox

The COVID-19 pandemic illuminated challenges with assessment, especially in online environments that threaten academic integrity. In the wake of the pandemic, faculty in higher education were seeking alternative assessments that meet the assessment goal(s) of their classroom. Even though the COVID-based disruptions are diminishing, higher education continues to experience ongoing upheaval related to new technology, such as ChatGPT, requiring ongoing reevaluation of our assessment practices. Upon reflecting on our assessment goals, we explored oral exams as a potentially valuable tool in the assessment toolbox in Physical Chemistry I and II courses at two institutions. In analyzing the course evaluation data at both institutions, we found consistent themes in student-perceived challenges, student-perceived value, and instructor-perceived value. Students had an overwhelmingly positive response to the oral exam experience and recommended their continued use in spite of their perceived challenges. Students found the oral exams challenging due to the stress and anxiety of verbal presentation and the depth of understanding required to answer questions verbally. In response to these challenges, students adjusted their study habits to incorporate studying in groups, verbally speaking out loud, utilizing spaced practice methods, and focusing on understanding concepts and equations instead of relying on memorization of material. Considering the challenges and required adjustment in study habits, students still overwhelmingly recommend using oral exams because they recognize the value of communication and teamwork in their future careers. In addition to student value, the instructors found value in oral assessments, despite the challenges with time commitments, validity, reliability, and fairness. We believe oral assessments in undergraduate chemistry curricula warrant further investigation as a useful tool in the assessment toolbox. © 2023 American Chemical Society and Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Unidos Hablemos de: Engaging Hispanic Patients in Patient Centered Outcomes Research and Clinical Effectiveness Research (PCOR/CER)

Rationale: Historically, Hispanics are underrepresented in research which reduces the generalizability of research findings. Patient engagement in research can support more relevant research through better alignment with patients' and clinicians' real-world needs and concerns. A virtual conference series for the Hispanic community was held to gain insights to better engage Hispanic patients in research. Methods: A Patient Advisory Group (PAG) comprised of Hispanic patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and/or asthma and a Faith-based leader developed a six-month virtual series (objectives, platform, theme, agendas, and identification of presenters), pre-and-post knowledge surveys, polling questions, and session evaluations. Based on the PAG feedback, messaging, promotion and handouts were offered in English and Spanish. Results: Between October 2021- March 2022, 2200 people attended over the 6 virtual sessions. Attendees identifying as Hispanic patients or caregivers increased by 6.7%, and 19% requested content in Spanish. Overall knowledge was gained for sessions 2-6. 66.4% of attendees agreed they would be willing to be a research subject in an asthma study, while 15.6% did not agree and 18% would if their doctor thought it was a good idea. When asked about willingness to be a patient partner/advisor for an asthma study, 77.6% agreed, while only 3.2% did not agree and the remaining 20% were either unsure or participation would depend on whether their doctor thought it was a good idea. Conclusions: This bilingual virtual series engaged patients/caregivers to learn about COVID-19 and asthma, and tools used to participate in research with the goal to increase representation of Hispanics in research.

It is your fault: workplace consequences of anti-Asian stigma during COVID-19

Purpose: As COVID-19 cases rose in the US, so too did instances of discrimination against Asians. The current research seeks to understand and document discrimination toward Asians in the US specifically linked to the global pandemic (study 1). The authors test hypotheses based in social categorization and intergroup contact theories, demonstrating perceived pandemic blame is a mechanism for discrimination (study 2). Design/methodology/approach: In study 1, the authors survey Asians living in the US regarding experiences and perceptions of COVID-19-related discrimination. In study 2, a two-time point survey examined whether participant perceptions of pandemic blame toward China predict discriminatory behavior toward Asians. Findings: Study 1 demonstrated that 22.5% of US-residing Asians report personally encountering pandemic-related discrimination. Study 2 indicated that COVID-19 blame attributions toward China predicted anticipated hiring bias and increased physical distancing of Asians at work, associated with higher levels of US identification. Research limitations/implications: The findings have theoretical implications for research on blame and stigmatization, as well as practical implications regarding bias mitigation. Originality/value: The present studies advance understanding of event-based blame as a driver of prejudice and discrimination at work and suggest organizations attend to bias mitigation in conjunction with uncertainty reduction communications in challenging times. © 2021, Emerald Publishing Limited.

Measure of medical workers stress using fuzzy inference system: A case study by 2019-NCOV medical staff

Background: A new type of coronavirus is now around the world. At present, all countries in the world are trying to stop the spreading of this virus. Wuhan pneumonia is the seventh kind of coronavirus, which is called “2019 new coronavirus”. There are currently six known human coronaviruses, four of which are less pathogenic, and the other two are severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS). The new coronavirus (2019-nCoV) that caused the outbreak was listed as the seventh species. Because the symptoms of this virus are similar to SARS and MERS, medical staff and experts have been very cautious about this epidemic for the past two months. Due to this unexpected and unprecedented event, everyone was tense. Based on this situation the authors propose an idea to measure the work/stress levels of these front-line workers. Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to measure the working pressure of frontline medical staff. It can be used as a reference for future psychological testing or decompression to improve work efficiency. Method: The concept of “fuzzy logic” was first proposed by Zadeh. The main goals were to study uncertainty and imprecision that can be solved by fuzzy logic. It can simulate human language and thinking to efficiently deal with a question. The author uses four influencing factors as the membership function and rule base of “fuzzy inference” as follows: 1. Professional Attitude: Work performance and attitude;this also includes professional skills and knowledge. 2. Human Relationships: Coexistence between colleagues;has good relationships, will get more help if they are active. 3. Emotional Quotient: Management and control of emotions;this includes crisis process and response capabilities. 4. Work Pressure: Professional burnout or enthusiasm. A low degree of work enthusiasm may be expressed as high professional burnout. If (Professional Attitude = Good) and (Human Relationships = Poor) and (Emotional Quotient = Moderate) then (Non-Work Pressure = Moderate). For example: if a staff member has a perfect work attitude and a poor relationship with a colleague, their emotional quotient is moderate and their professional enthusiasm is moderate. It also means the work pressure is moderate, because their burnout is equal to enthusiasm. Thus, we think the medical worker's pressure is medium. Results and Conclusion: Medical Staff must deal with the major force of public opinion. This implies the management of interpersonal relationships. In this article, the authors use the fuzzy inference system to establish working pressure from a rule base. However, we still cannot analyze the relationship between the working conditions of health care workers, work stress and interpersonal conflicts among colleagues. We hope that this exploration will be included in future work to make up for the lack of this research.