A semester-long research project for second-semester organic chemistry lab sections was developed. Student projects were based on preliminary data from faculty research that suggested the natural product neurolenin B to be a treatment for lymphatic filariasis. Students isolated neurolenins from the Central American plant Neurolaena lobata and proposed syntheses of previously unknown analogues using reactions learned in firstand second-semester organic chemistry. Using literature-based procedures, students ran reactions on neurolenins and analyzed their results by TLC and NMR spectroscopy. The semester culminated with a public poster session and final report using the Organic Letters template. Students in a total of 5 lab sections over 3 different semesters of the class completed this pilot course, and 15 sections in the same time span conducted traditional lab experiments. Qualitative and quantitative assessment data were collected to demonstrate the efficacy of the course. Students did not self-select into the pilot sections, were demographically similar to those in the traditional lab sections, and performed at the same level in the lecture portion of the course. Survey results from all students (traditional and pilot) were compared, and the students in the pilot sections showed higher levels of self-reported topic understanding, general motivation, and interest in organic chemistry.

This paper describes an evaluation of Smith College’s Achieving Excellence in Mathematics, Engineering, and Science Scholar program, developed to improve outcomes for underrepresented women in science. AEMES Scholars’ academic record data reveal benefits over time and relative to peers.

This paper presents a case study of faculty in a psychology department whose shared questions about pedagogy and learning informed a data-driven curricular review and revision using an open-ended assessment that privileged deep learning. This paper describes the development of this assessment and how its results across the arc of the major led to a revision of the department's curriculum, including the creation of new courses that focused on developing students' abilities to 'think like psychologists.' The study indicates that faculty intuitions of potential problems in student learning can be successfully assessed and then addressed through curricular changes.

This article presents a case study of faculty members in a psychology department whose shared questions about pedagogy and learning informed a data-driven curricular review and revision using an open-ended assessment that privileged deep learning. The authors describe the development of this assessment and how its results across the arc of the major led to a revision of the department's curriculum, including the creation of new courses that focused on developing students' abilities to “think like psychologists.” The study indicates that faculty intuitions of potential problems in student learning can be successfully assessed and then addressed through curricular changes.