Different Courses, Different Impacts: Unequal Benefits of Learning Assistants in General Chemistry I vs II
-
David J. Weiss [1] ; Joseph A. Wagoner [1] ; Kailene Black [1] ; Aidan Burke [1] ; Jake Marcotte [1] ; Laurel Hartley [2]
-
[1] University of Colorado Colorado Springs
University of Colorado Colorado Springs
Estados Unidos
-
[2] University of Colorado Denver
University of Colorado Denver
Estados Unidos
-
- Localización: Journal of chemical education, ISSN 0021-9584, Vol. 103, Nº 2, 2026
- Idioma: inglés
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
-
Resumen
Learning Assistants (LAs) are widely used to improve student outcomes in STEM, but their impact may vary across course levels and student populations. This multisemester, quasi-experimental study directly compared LA-supported and non-LA-supported sections of General Chemistry I and II, taught by the same instructor using identical assessments at a public R2 institution. Student performance (exam scores, DFW rates, GPA) and affective outcomes (self-efficacy, sense of belonging) were assessed using validated instruments. Results showed that LAs significantly improved exam scores, reduced DFW rates, and increased GPA in General Chemistry I while producing minimal gains in General Chemistry II, where students entered with higher preparation. Growth in self-efficacy was the strongest GPA predictor. LA programs appear most effective in early gateway STEM courses, where building self-efficacy boosts performance and persistence.
