You are here:

First year chemistry laboratory courses for distance learners: Development and transfer credit acceptance

, , , , Thompson Rivers University

IRRODL Volume 14, Number 3, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press


In delivering chemistry courses by distance, a key challenge is to offer the learner an authentic and meaningful laboratory experience that still provides the rigour required to continue on in science. To satisfy this need, two distance general chemistry laboratory courses appropriate for Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) students, including chemistry majors, have been recently developed at Thompson Rivers University. A constructive alignment process was employed which clearly mapped learning outcomes and activities to appropriate assessment tools. These blended laboratory courses feature custom, home experimental kits and combine elements of online and hands-on learning. The courses were designed for flexible continuous enrollment and provide online resources including tutor support, instructional videos, lab report submission, and student evaluation. The assessment of students includes laboratory reports, safety quizzes, reflective journaling, digital photo documentation, and invigilated written and online practical exams. Emphasizing the quality and rigour in these distance laboratory learning experiences allowed both courses to be accepted for B.Sc. transfer credit by other institutions, an important criterion for students. This paper will outline the design and development process of these new blended laboratory courses, their course structures and assessments, and initial student results.


Brewer, S., Cinel, B., Harrison, M. & Mohr, C. (2013). First year chemistry laboratory courses for distance learners: Development and transfer credit acceptance. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 488-507. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved December 19, 2018 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Al-Shamali, F., & Connors, M. (2010). Low-cost physics home laboratory. In D. Kennepohl& L. Shaw (Eds.), Accessible elements: Teaching science online and at a distance (pp. 131-145). Edmonton, AB: AU Press.
  2. Bennett, S.W., Seery, M.K., & Sövegjarto-Wigbers, D. (2009). Practical work in higher level chemistry education. In I. Eilks & B. Byers (Eds.), Innovative methods of teaching and learning chemistry in higher education (pp. 85-102). Cambridge,
  3. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
  4. Boschmann, E. (2003). Teaching chemistry via distance education. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(6), 704-708.
  5. Bradley, J.D., Durbach, S., Bell, B., Mungarulire, J., & Kimel, H. (1998). Hands-on practical chemistry for all-Why and how? Journal of Chemical Education, 75(11), 1406-1409. Columbia Council on Admissions and Transfer. (2012a). How to articulate handbook-Requesting and assessing credit in the BC transfer system. Retrieved from
  6. Brouwer, N., & McDonnell, C. (2009). Online support and online assessment for teaching and learning chemistry. In I. Eilks & B. Byers (Eds.), Innovative methods of teaching and learning chemistry in higher education (pp. 123-152).
  7. Casanova, R.S., Civelli, J.L., Kimbrough, D.R., Heath, B.P., & Reeves, J.H. (2006). Distance learning: A viable alternative to the conventional lecture-lab format in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(3), 501-507.
  8. Domin, D.S. (1999). A content analysis of general chemistry laboratory manuals for evidence of higher-order cognitive tasks. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(1), 109-111.
  9. Downing, K.F., & Holtz, J.K. (2008). Online science learning: Best practices and technologies. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  10. Elliott, M.J., Stewart, K.K., & Lagowski, J.J. (2008). The role of the laboratory in chemistry instruction. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(1), 145-149.
  11. Harasim, L. (2011). Learning theory and online technologies. New York: Routledge Press.
  12. Heinze, A., Procter, C., & Scott, B. (2007). Use of conversation theory to underpin blended learning. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 1(1/2), 108-120. 14 | No 3 July/13 504
  13. Howell, S.L., Laws, R.D., & Lindsay, N.K. (2004). Reevaluating course completion in distance education: Avoiding the comparison between apples and oranges. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 5(4), 243-252. Retrieved from & I=154
  14. Jackson, M.D. (1998). A distance-education chemistry course for nonmajors. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(2), 163-170.
  15. Karadeniz, S. (2009). Flexible design for the future of distance learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 358-363.
  16. Kennepohl, D. (2007). Using home-laboratory kits to teach general chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 337-346.
  17. Mawn, M., Carrico, P., Charuk, K., Stote, K., & Lawrence, B. (2011). Hands-on and online: Scientific explorations through distance learning. Open Learning, 26(2), 135-146. Doi:10.1080/02680513.2011.567464
  18. Mayadas, A.F., Bourne, J., & Bacsich, P. (2009). Online education today. Science, 323(January), 85-89.
  19. Moore, J.L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). E-learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129-135. Doi:10.1016/J.iheduc.2010.10.001
  20. Oblinger, D.G., & Hawkins, B.L. (2005). The myth about e-learning. Educause Review, July/August, 14-15. Retrieved from
  21. Osguthorpe, R.T., & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227-233.
  22. Pickering, M. (1993). The teaching laboratory through history. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 699-700.
  23. Reeves, J., & Kimbrough, D. (2004). Solving the laboratory dilemma in distance learning general chemistry. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(3), 47-51. Retrieved from
  24. Reid, N., & Shah, I. (2007). The role of laboratory work in university chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 172-185.
  25. Schlosser, L.A., & Simonson, M.R. (2010). Distance education: Definition and glossary of terms (3rd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Vol 14 | No 3 July/13 506
  26. Thompson Rivers University Act. (2005). Province of British Columbia, Queen’s Printer. Retrieved from 0_05017_01
  27. Watson, J., Murin, A., Vashaw, L., Gemin, B., & Rapp, C. (2012). Keeping pace with K-12 online learning. Evergreen Education Group. Retrieved from
  28. Wiggins, G.P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  29. Williams, N.A., Bland, W., & Christie, G. (2008). Improving student achievement and satisfaction by adopting a blended learning approach to inorganic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(1), 43-50.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Earning College Credit While Cooking at Home: Designing an Engaging Cooking Laboratory Course for Learners at a Distance

    Lindsey Mills, University of Cincinnati, United States

    E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2018 (Oct 15, 2018) pp. 1269–1273

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact